SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
|
Post by puzzler on Jan 24, 2024 13:53:58 GMT -5
I enjoy HOF talk, so curious who you all think the most egregious omissions are. For me (not counting PED guys), it's Bernie Williams. He had a .937 OPS in CF over an 8-year prime for one of the few dynasties we've seen. Anecdotally, the guy scared the living shit out of me every time he came up in a big spot. Better career road OPS than Todd Helton too and scored more runs per 162 games than Tim Raines! Two huge problems with Bernie Williams: he was not a good defender at a position where defense is a priority and less than 300 homers in the steroid era. He was a very, very good overall player, but not a hall of famer.
|
|
|
Post by jawnvalentin on Jan 24, 2024 14:05:29 GMT -5
Bernie's defense in CF was good enough to win a whole lot of games and championships. I feel like he gets penalized for the defense instead of rewarded for being an elite offensive player at a premium position.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 24, 2024 15:21:16 GMT -5
Anyway, Billy Wagner was a really good closer, and a Hall that includes Bruce Sutter and Trevor Hoffman probably has a place for Wagner. But it's wild to me how much love closers have gotten relative to their starting pitcher contemporaries. Like, Johan Santana's career had three times Wagner's innings, but his career is too short and he falls off the ballot in one year? Just nuts to me. Reliever and starter are different positions and should be evaluated differently. If you believe that the hall of fame should not include relievers…well… that’s the opinion the old timer writers had for many years. That opinion was definitely abandoned when they unanimously elected Marino Rivera. Edit: I’m not saying Wagner is Rivera, just that Rivera who is deserving of the hall, had different criteria applied to him than starters have applied to them. There are many pitchers not in the hall who compare to Johan Santana. He did not have the longevity usually needed to be a starter. While his peak was very good, it was not quite on the level of Addie Joss or Sandy Koufax. Is there a single reliever in baseball who you'd trade Jesus Luzardo for? George Kirby? Justin Steele? I'm not talking clear aces, relievers aren't even as valuable to teams making these decisions in the moment as solid #2 type dudes. I think the Hall of Fame voting should reflect that. An incredible one - Rivera, an Eckersley - would obviously qualify, but they have to be preventing runs on a scale that makes them equivalently valuable to a starter or full-time position player. Rivera had a 56.3 bWAR in 1,283 innings. Wagner's bWAR was 27.7. On value alone, before getting into any postseason stuff, that's like the difference between Vlad Guerrero and Mike Greenwell (not that you'll get any Mike Greenwell slander from me). I'm not saying that relievers shouldn't get into the Hall, I just think that, due to the difference in innings pitched, the bar needs to be very, very high. Rivera easily clears it. Bernie's defense in CF was good enough to win a whole lot of games and championships. I feel like he gets penalized for the defense instead of rewarded for being an elite offensive player at a premium position. There are a score of center fielders who have gotten the shaft from voters in recent years - Andruw Jones, Kenny Lofton, Jim Edmonds right off the top of my head... and Bernie Williams is the one you're landing on? I dunno man, I think you're giving Williams a ton of extra credit for being on teams that were great. Heck of a player, but I don't see it. His defense fell off very quickly as well.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 24, 2024 15:35:55 GMT -5
Put another way, should the greatest pinch hitter in MLB history be in the Hall of Fame? The best pinch runner? The best defensive replacement? If they were the greatest ever at their job, is that enough?
This is an example taken to an exaggerated extreme but I don't think being one of the best X ever is enough in and of itself.
|
|
|
Post by jawnvalentin on Jan 24, 2024 15:38:16 GMT -5
You may look at is as "being on a great team" whereas I would say he was a key reason the team was great. The only CF with 1200 runs, 1200 RBI, 2300 hits and an OPS over .850 are Bernie, Griffey, Mantle and Mays. Terrific postseason numbers as well, which I give major extra credit instead of discounting the "small sample size". I'm actually floored people don't think he's a Hall of Famer.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jan 24, 2024 16:05:51 GMT -5
You may look at is as "being on a great team" whereas I would say he was a key reason the team was great. The only CF with 1200 runs, 1200 RBI, 2300 hits and an OPS over .850 are Bernie, Griffey, Mantle and Mays. Terrific postseason numbers as well, which I give major extra credit instead of discounting the "small sample size". I'm actually floored people don't think he's a Hall of Famer. The classic 1200/1200/2300/.850 club?
Do you know who the only CFer in MLB history is with 2700 hits, 400 SB, and 200 HRs? Johnny Damon. Seems at least as impressive.
Ellis Burks had essentially the same career as Bernie Williams. In fact he, Williams, Duke Snider, Joe DiMaggio, Griffey, Mantle, Mays, Speaker, and Cobb are the only CF members of the 1200/1200/2100/.850 club. Heady company!
All three guys were right around 44 career fWAR. That's well short of the usual standard for the HOF. But if you think Williams deserves to be in, I don't see how you don't support all three - or at least Burks, who was almost a carbon copy of Williams as a hitter but had more baserunning and defensive value.
(Also, Williams' wRC+ and WPA in the postseason were slightly below his career norms.)
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Jan 24, 2024 16:12:02 GMT -5
If people are in a fighting mood: Ellis Burks was better than Bernie Williams or Jim Rice.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 24, 2024 16:12:52 GMT -5
You may look at is as "being on a great team" whereas I would say he was a key reason the team was great. The only CF with 1200 runs, 1200 RBI, 2300 hits and an OPS over .850 are Bernie, Griffey, Mantle and Mays. Terrific postseason numbers as well, which I give major extra credit instead of discounting the "small sample size". I'm actually floored people don't think he's a Hall of Famer. I mean, you're using runs and RBI which, by definition, depend on one's teammates.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Jan 24, 2024 16:30:11 GMT -5
Reliever and starter are different positions and should be evaluated differently. If you believe that the hall of fame should not include relievers…well… that’s the opinion the old timer writers had for many years. That opinion was definitely abandoned when they unanimously elected Marino Rivera. Edit: I’m not saying Wagner is Rivera, just that Rivera who is deserving of the hall, had different criteria applied to him than starters have applied to them. There are many pitchers not in the hall who compare to Johan Santana. He did not have the longevity usually needed to be a starter. While his peak was very good, it was not quite on the level of Addie Joss or Sandy Koufax. Is there a single reliever in baseball who you'd trade Jesus Luzardo for? George Kirby? Justin Steele? I'm not talking clear aces, relievers aren't even as valuable to teams making these decisions in the moment as solid #2 type dudes. I think the Hall of Fame voting should reflect that. An incredible one - Rivera, an Eckersley - would obviously qualify, but they have to be preventing runs on a scale that makes them equivalently valuable to a starter or full-time position player. Rivera had a 56.3 bWAR in 1,283 innings. Wagner's bWAR was 27.7. On value alone, before getting into any postseason stuff, that's like the difference between Vlad Guerrero and Mike Greenwell (not that you'll get any Mike Greenwell slander from me). I'm not saying that relievers shouldn't get into the Hall, I just think that, due to the difference in innings pitched, the bar needs to be very, very high. Rivera easily clears it. WAR is a volume state and a silly way to compare relievers and you know that. I might as well use the rate stats where even middling relievers blow starters out of the water. A better stat is WPA. Wagner has a better WPA than Santana. Whether he is a HOFer? Meh. I don’t care that much. But WPA better measures their impact on the game.
|
|
|
Post by jawnvalentin on Jan 24, 2024 16:32:51 GMT -5
If you want to argue that Ellis Burks was Bernie Williams without the rings, I think that's a decent comp. Ellis Burks was an awesome player. Clearly, winning matters more to me than many of you, which I'm cool with.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jan 24, 2024 17:02:41 GMT -5
Is there a single reliever in baseball who you'd trade Jesus Luzardo for? George Kirby? Justin Steele? I'm not talking clear aces, relievers aren't even as valuable to teams making these decisions in the moment as solid #2 type dudes. I think the Hall of Fame voting should reflect that. An incredible one - Rivera, an Eckersley - would obviously qualify, but they have to be preventing runs on a scale that makes them equivalently valuable to a starter or full-time position player. Rivera had a 56.3 bWAR in 1,283 innings. Wagner's bWAR was 27.7. On value alone, before getting into any postseason stuff, that's like the difference between Vlad Guerrero and Mike Greenwell (not that you'll get any Mike Greenwell slander from me). I'm not saying that relievers shouldn't get into the Hall, I just think that, due to the difference in innings pitched, the bar needs to be very, very high. Rivera easily clears it. WAR is a volume state and a silly way to compare relievers and you know that. I might as well use the rate stats where even middling relievers blow starters out of the water. A better stat is WPA. Wagner has a better WPA than Santana. Whether he is a HOFer? Meh. I don’t care that much. But WPA better measures their impact on the game. WPA is also a volume stat. I get the argument though in terms of impact on winning, and it's true that while relievers pitch fewer innings those they do pitch are often higher leverage. The issue is though, if Johan Santana were a reliever he would very obviously have put up elite WPA numbers there (as would most very good starters). You're punishing the starters for being too good to have to move to the bullpen.
|
|
|
Post by scottysmalls on Jan 24, 2024 17:14:55 GMT -5
I just noticed Utley only got 28% of the vote which seems way too low to me. He's an obvious hall of famer to me. I guess just the defensive value being under-cared for by the voters and lack of flashy counting stats holds him back. He's at least a very similar caliber candidate to Mauer/Helton.
|
|
|
Post by jawnvalentin on Jan 24, 2024 17:18:19 GMT -5
Utley is a Hall of Famer to me too. If you want to argue the peak was too short, I can see that argument. I think he was great enough for long enough, but I value peak over longevity.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Jan 24, 2024 17:34:32 GMT -5
I just noticed Utley only got 28% of the vote which seems way too low to me. He's an obvious hall of famer to me. I guess just the defensive value being under-cared for by the voters and lack of flashy counting stats holds him back. He's at least a very similar caliber candidate to Mauer/Helton. I agree, though it's not necessarily a terrible place to start. Scott Rolen got 10% his first year on the ballot and eventually got elected. Andruw Jones didn't break 10% until his third year on the ballot and now he's over 60%. A lot of voters apparently take a few years before they get around to considering defense.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Jan 24, 2024 17:36:41 GMT -5
Is there a single reliever in baseball who you'd trade Jesus Luzardo for? George Kirby? Justin Steele? I'm not talking clear aces, relievers aren't even as valuable to teams making these decisions in the moment as solid #2 type dudes. I think the Hall of Fame voting should reflect that. An incredible one - Rivera, an Eckersley - would obviously qualify, but they have to be preventing runs on a scale that makes them equivalently valuable to a starter or full-time position player. Rivera had a 56.3 bWAR in 1,283 innings. Wagner's bWAR was 27.7. On value alone, before getting into any postseason stuff, that's like the difference between Vlad Guerrero and Mike Greenwell (not that you'll get any Mike Greenwell slander from me). I'm not saying that relievers shouldn't get into the Hall, I just think that, due to the difference in innings pitched, the bar needs to be very, very high. Rivera easily clears it. WAR is a volume state and a silly way to compare relievers and you know that. I might as well use the rate stats where even middling relievers blow starters out of the water. A better stat is WPA. Wagner has a better WPA than Santana. Whether he is a HOFer? Meh. I don’t care that much. But WPA better measures their impact on the game. What's wrong with counting stats to evaluate someone for HOF inclusion? That's the point. Can someone have enough impact in 903 career innings to be a hall of famer? It's like evaluating a great hitter who was a DH or a defensive liability - you balance their overall impact. A short-outing reliever can certainly be a Hall-of-Famer. But I think you have to balance the impact of an 80-inning RP when starters at the time are throwing 180 innings. I'm not even really advocating for or against Wagner, just the idea that relievers go into their own box. I don't think you can really do that.
|
|
|
Post by tizzle on Jan 24, 2024 17:45:50 GMT -5
Did I hear right. that Engel Beltre made the Hall of Fame?
Man, that Gagne trade just seems worse and worse.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jan 24, 2024 18:27:59 GMT -5
If people are in a fighting mood: Ellis Burks was better than Bernie Williams or Jim Rice. Dropped gloves emoji.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Jan 24, 2024 18:34:58 GMT -5
WAR is a volume state and a silly way to compare relievers and you know that. I might as well use the rate stats where even middling relievers blow starters out of the water. A better stat is WPA. Wagner has a better WPA than Santana. Whether he is a HOFer? Meh. I don’t care that much. But WPA better measures their impact on the game. What's wrong with counting stats to evaluate someone for HOF inclusion? That's the point. Can someone have enough impact in 903 career innings to be a hall of famer? It's like evaluating a great hitter who was a DH or a defensive liability - you balance their overall impact. A short-outing reliever can certainly be a Hall-of-Famer. But I think you have to balance the impact of an 80-inning RP when starters at the time are throwing 180 innings. I'm not even really advocating for or against Wagner, just the idea that relievers go into their own box. I don't think you can really do that. I half agree: they *do* go in their own box in that we don’t simply say Rivera never had, say, a single complete fame like so many starters. They aren’t starters and can’t be judged against them. BUT…. we can say a lot about the difference makes their job easier (much the way I think a great defensive 1b is not as great as a great defensive SS… so Keith Hernandez won’t get in though Ozzie Smith will). That’s why I think closers should get in, but only when they are essentially generational. And Wagner wasn’t, in no small part because when it most mattered, he wasn’t good. I don’t think WAR is a great measure but their has to some sense that their lurking presence makes a huge difference. I never felt like Joe Nathan made a game 8 innings. Nor Lee Smith, Jeff Reardon, so many others. Mo and Eck? Yeah… pretty much 8 innings (even if both have highlight reel failures).
|
|
|
Post by yuchangclan on Jan 24, 2024 18:50:27 GMT -5
If people are in a fighting mood: Ellis Burks was better than Bernie Williams or Jim Rice. Once they let Harold Baines in, the argument for just about everyone got stronger. I’m still trying to figure out why Rice got in and Dwight Evans never did.
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Jan 24, 2024 19:05:47 GMT -5
"Most feared hitter in baseball"
|
|
|
Post by benogliviesbrother on Jan 24, 2024 19:06:55 GMT -5
"Most feared hitter in baseball" Actually a good friend of mine, and devoted Yankee fan, admitted to being terrified when Rice came up.
|
|
jimoh
Veteran
Posts: 3,990
|
Post by jimoh on Jan 24, 2024 20:51:43 GMT -5
If people are in a fighting mood: Ellis Burks was better than Bernie Williams or Jim Rice. Once they let Harold Baines in, the argument for just about everyone got stronger. I’m still trying to figure out why Rice got in and Dwight Evans never did. Two things that hurt Evans are 1) that he solidified people’s image of him as a so-so hitter early in his career before becoming better later (sort of the opposite of Rice), and 2) that he had better second halves than first halves so made fewer all-star teams.
|
|
|
Post by pedroelgrande on Jan 24, 2024 21:34:47 GMT -5
Did I hear right. that Engel Beltre made the Hall of Fame? Man, that Gagne trade just seems worse and worse. I was so mad when they traded our very own Barry Bonds.
|
|
|
Post by yuchangclan on Jan 24, 2024 21:55:50 GMT -5
"Most feared hitter in baseball" I’ve definitely heard that one before. And he probably was….for 4 or 5 years. I’m not hating on Rice. I grew up as a big fan of his, actually. But he doesn’t have any of the relevant stats to be HOF-worthy in my book. He was Albert Belle before there was Albert Belle. I’d put them both in the Hall Of Very Good.
|
|
|
Post by ephus on Jan 24, 2024 22:05:46 GMT -5
Congrats to Beltré, who I loved in his one season in Boston, and appreciated in all those years in Texas. But man oh man, I loved all the years we got to see JBJ in CF and that grand slam off an abuser in Houston that earned him an ALCS MVP.
|
|
|