PDA

View Full Version : HOF Player


Paulwny
09-13-2002, 07:34 AM
I heard this discussion last month and have changed my mind several times.
A player has a 15 yr. career. His lifetime stats. for his position show that he was an ave. fielder with ave. hr and rbi's. His lifetime ba is .285. However, in 2 of the years he hits .410 and .405, becoming the only player to hit > .400 since Williams.
Does he belong in the HOF ?

PaleHoseGeorge
09-13-2002, 08:24 AM
Yup. He ought to be in easy.

Please note, we're talking about hitting over .400, something nobody has done in 60 years. This is quite different than hitting 60+ homers which now happens practically annually.

The fact the player in question did it twice ought to cement his induction. However, I'm sure other mitigating circumstances would also be weighed by the objective sportswriters of America.

Does he talk to us and give us good copy?
Does he ham it up out on the playing field?
Does he do a good Chico Esquella impersonation? (Latin players only)

If so, we'll forgive anything, including assaulting his wife with a rum bottle.

:shammy
"You have to know how to play the game!"


Does he complain about his contact, even if it threatens to pay him like a rookie?
Does he talk to us, put his foot in his mouth, then get pissed off and stop talking to us when we make him look like a chump?
Does he play with a golf ball-sized piece of calcium in his foot, and never demand an apology from us or his teammates--though clearly he's owed one after what we wrote and said about him?
Does he agree to play 1B after chiding by over-weight/out-of-shape teammates, then seriously injure himself, then grimace in anger after each strikeout with boos raining down from Sox Fans who've already turned coat?

If so, not even Ted Williams' numbers would prevent us from revealing what shallow, ignorant people we truly are.

:hurt
{tear in the eye}

hold2dibber
09-13-2002, 08:25 AM
No way. Roger Maris isn't in - and I don't think he should be - despite the fact that he held the single season HR record for nearly 40 years. If Brady Anderson had hit 62 instead of 50 that one year when he had his career year and that record still stood, would he be HOF material? What if Luis Castillo this year had stretched his hitting streak to 60 games, would he belong in? In both cases, no way. A great career - not a great year or two, make one HOF material.

PaleHoseGeorge
09-13-2002, 08:28 AM
Originally posted by hold2dibber
No way. Roger Maris isn't in - and I don't think he should be - despite the fact that he held the single season HR record for nearly 40 years. If Brady Anderson had hit 62 instead of 50 that one year when he had his career year and that record still stood, would he be HOF material? What if Luis Castillo this year had stretched his hitting streak to 60 games, would he belong in? In both cases, no way. A great career - not a great year or two, make one HOF material.

Once is a fluke. Twice is a trend.

Somebody hits .400 twice? They're in.

hold2dibber
09-13-2002, 08:33 AM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Once is a fluke. Twice is a trend.

Somebody hits .400 twice? They're in.

But he's got a lifetime BA of .285 - that's much more of a a trend than 2 years. How crappy must he have been in those other years that despite hitting over .400 twice, he still has a lifetime BA of .285?

ma-gaga
09-13-2002, 09:15 AM
Originally posted by Paulwny
I heard this discussion last month and have changed my mind several times.
A player has a 15 yr. career. His lifetime stats. for his position show that he was an ave. fielder with ave. hr and rbi's. His lifetime ba is .285. However, in 2 of the years he hits .410 and .405, becoming the only player to hit > .400 since Williams.
Does he belong in the HOF ?

It depends.

When did he play? What position did he play? How many at-bats did he have when he hit >0.400? Was he considered the best player at his position? Did his team win?

It really all depends. Did he ever stand out? Did he change the game? There are a lot of unhearalded players out there that play for 14+ years that will never make the HOF. Mark Grace, Chili Davis... Every once in a while I'll look a player stat's up, and be amazed at how long they played, yet how average they were...

HOF should be for the best players. They should have a period of dominent excellence for a minimum of 7 years. They should have been able to carry his team. They should be above average the rest. I think Kirby Puckett is a boderline HOF'er. He should have NEEDED 2-3 more years of production, but the WS titles/heroics carried him in.

Give me some more info on the 'unnamed' player. Excuse my naitivity, but I don't know who you're talking about.

ma-gaga
09-13-2002, 10:01 AM
I'm reading this thread again. Is this a hypothetical situation?

ahh... that answers some questions. 2 years at >0.400, but lifetime = 0.285. I'm leaning towards 'no'. ok, I cranked out a basic spreadsheet to make this hypothetical work:

Season - BA
1 - 0.260
2 - 0.280
3 - 0.320
4 - 0.360
5 - 0.405
6 - 0.410
7 - 0.360
8 - 0.320
9 - 0.300
10 - 0.280
11 - 0.260
12 - 0.240
13 - 0.220
14 - 0.200
15 - 0.180

I get 7 peak years at above 0.300. 5 average years at average production (0.240-0.300), and 3 god-awful years (<0.220). Overall, this is pretty good now that I look at it. Unfortunately I think this guy is borderline. He needs one more tangible to get in.

all-star berths
WS championship, pennant winner
MVP

The >0.400 could be enough to carry him. Jeeze, I don't know, good question. I guess PHG is right, I think it would depend on his press savy. On his 'attitude'. On his team's standings. On something off the field. etc.,etc.

:)

voodoochile
09-13-2002, 11:00 AM
A lot of it will depend on how well he handles the press during his two runs at .400. Hitting .410 would be an amazing accomplishment in today's media frenzied world. His name would be remembered forever because he handled the stress, handled the constant media attention that would surely surround him for the final 2 months of each of his >.400 seasons and yet he did it not once but twice and managed to do it very solidly, no questions about squeeking in with a .4000003256 average, no sitting out the final game of the season to protect his average, etc.

Those two years especially if they came b2b as in Ma-Gaga's example would turn the player into an instant worldwide celebrity. If they were nice to the press during the run, they would eventually make the hall, though I don't know if they'd be first ballot - might depend on who they were running against.

Like was also said, I would need to know more peripheral stats to decide (especially if they hit for any power, how many hits they ended up with, RBI's, MVP's, Rings, leadership, etc.). Certainly hitting .400 twice is enough to get a foot in the door all by itself...

Paulwny
09-13-2002, 11:15 AM
[i]

Like was also said, I would need to know more peripheral stats to decide (especially if they hit for any power, how many hits they ended up with, RBI's, MVP's, Rings, leadership, etc.). Certainly hitting .400 twice is enough to get a foot in the door all by itself... [/B]


" His lifetime stats. for his position show that he was an ave. fielder with ave. hr and rbi's. His lifetime ba is .285. "

voodoochile
09-13-2002, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by Paulwny
" His lifetime stats. for his position show that he was an ave. fielder with ave. hr and rbi's. His lifetime ba is .285. "

What you expect me to actually read the WHOLE post? Come on, my attention span is about 10 seconds from all the TV I've watched in my lifetime.

:D:

Probably a job for the veterans committee. But, his name would definitely be remembered for a long long time and there would be a definite voting bloc that would want him in...

Dadawg_77
09-13-2002, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by ma-gaga
I'm reading this thread again. Is this a hypothetical situation?

ahh... that answers some questions. 2 years at >0.400, but lifetime = 0.285. I'm leaning towards 'no'. ok, I cranked out a basic spreadsheet to make this hypothetical work:

Season - BA
1 - 0.260
2 - 0.280
3 - 0.320
4 - 0.360
5 - 0.405
6 - 0.410
7 - 0.360
8 - 0.320
9 - 0.300
10 - 0.280
11 - 0.260
12 - 0.240
13 - 0.220
14 - 0.200
15 - 0.180

I get 7 peak years at above 0.300. 5 average years at average production (0.240-0.300), and 3 god-awful years (<0.220). Overall, this is pretty good now that I look at it. Unfortunately I think this guy is borderline. He needs one more tangible to get in.

all-star berths
WS championship, pennant winner
MVP

The >0.400 could be enough to carry him. Jeeze, I don't know, good question. I guess PHG is right, I think it would depend on his press savy. On his 'attitude'. On his team's standings. On something off the field. etc.,etc.

:)

He would probally get voted into the All Star Game at least three times, probally five and make it about six or seven times. Avg HR would be about 20-30 a year which gives him about 200 to 250 HRs. Probally doesn't K alot so the OBP% would be high, and thus his OPS would be high. Also there might of been something which caused his downfall at the end, an injury or what not. That would increase his chances of getting in, ie Kirby Puckett.

PaleHoseGeorge
09-13-2002, 07:05 PM
Originally posted by voodoochile
A lot of it will depend on how well he handles the press during his two runs at .400. Hitting .410 would be an amazing accomplishment in today's media frenzied world. His name would be remembered forever because he handled the stress, handled the constant media attention that would surely surround him for the final 2 months of each of his >.400 seasons and yet he did it not once but twice and managed to do it very solidly, no questions about squeeking in with a .4000003256 average, no sitting out the final game of the season to protect his average, etc....

Precisely. What ultimately decides whether a player is HOF material is all the peripheral stuff, not stats.

If Roger Maris had been the popular character Mickey Mantle was, there is no doubt he would have been inducted simply for hitting 61 homeruns and breaking Ruth's record. But he wasn't.

Today, Sammy "the hot dog" Sosa is a lock for the hall while many fans, including several on this board, think Frank's credentials (two-time MVP, Ted Williams-esque numbers for 8 straight seasons) still leave his HOF candidacy in doubt.

I'm reminded of what one wag suggested when Millie Vanilli won a Grammy for best new artist. He said, "Let's just have an award for best new hair, and get it over with."

RichH55
09-14-2002, 05:41 PM
If he were to make it in it would be emphasizing the "Fame" portion of the hall..........There would just have to be some horrible years thrown in there.....Sounds a bit like Joe Namath in Football ....hmmm

RichH55
09-14-2002, 05:43 PM
Thinking it over some more this guy you have created sounds a little something like Marris and/or Dale Murphy or even a Donny Baseball with better record type stats.....Though I'm just remembering here but didn't John Olreud make two concerted shots at .400? Just playing Devils Advocate but saying John(to put a face on the guy) did manage to hit .400 both those times, do you think he should have been a Hall of Famer? I honestly don't think I would vote for him

RichH55
09-14-2002, 05:44 PM
Here's one more scenario: If Mark Grace holds out to hit 3000 hits, talking Baines and Mike Morgan type dedication about refusing to retire...is he a HOFer in your book?

PaleHoseGeorge
09-14-2002, 06:08 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
Thinking it over some more this guy you have created sounds a little something like Marris and/or Dale Murphy or even a Donny Baseball with better record type stats.....Though I'm just remembering here but didn't John Olreud make two concerted shots at .400? Just playing Devils Advocate but saying John(to put a face on the guy) did manage to hit .400 both those times, do you think he should have been a Hall of Famer? I honestly don't think I would vote for him

Olerud flamed out months short of a .400 season average. He's not even worth mentioning.

George Brett is as close as anyone has come the last 60 years. He never did it even once. And yes, he is in the HOF.

Hitting .400 is off-the-charts difficult. That's why any player today that did it TWICE has got to be a HOFer--excepting for all the b.s. reasons the sportswriters might invent to keep him out.

Daver
09-14-2002, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Olerud flamed out months short of a .400 season average. He's not even worth mentioning.

George Brett is as close as anyone has come the last 60 years. He never did it even once. And yes, he is in the HOF.

Hitting .400 is off-the-charts difficult. That's why any player today that did it TWICE has got to be a HOFer--excepting for all the b.s. reasons the sportswriters might invent to keep him out.

1500 RBI is another "so called" lock for the hall,but Harold Baines may be the first player over that to not get in,because he was a DH for most of his career.

RichH55
09-14-2002, 07:29 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Olerud flamed out months short of a .400 season average. He's not even worth mentioning.

George Brett is as close as anyone has come the last 60 years. He never did it even once. And yes, he is in the HOF.

Hitting .400 is off-the-charts difficult. That's why any player today that did it TWICE has got to be a HOFer--excepting for all the b.s. reasons the sportswriters might invent to keep him out.

George Brett also produces plus power numbers, good defensive, great intangibles, and a lifetime BA of well over .285, so thats apples and oranges here

Tragg
09-15-2002, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by Paulwny
I heard this discussion last month and have changed my mind several times.
A player has a 15 yr. career. His lifetime stats. for his position show that he was an ave. fielder with ave. hr and rbi's. His lifetime ba is .285. However, in 2 of the years he hits .410 and .405, becoming the only player to hit > .400 since Williams.
Does he belong in the HOF ?

Yes; If you had said 60 homers, I'd say no. If you said was a .500 pitcher, for 13 years, but won 30 games for 2 seasons, I'd say yes as well.

RichH55
09-16-2002, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by Tragg
Yes; If you had said 60 homers, I'd say no. If you said was a .500 pitcher, for 13 years, but won 30 games for 2 seasons, I'd say yes as well.


I don't know....I do think longevity gets too much adulation(sp?) from the voters(Don Sutton anyone?), but playing more than 2 good/great years would help it my eyes.....I mean sure if you have a short career like a Sandy Koufax thats one thing, but if you play only two great years then there are certain to be question marks surronding you especially if the other years make your career numbers look very average....The Hall of Fame isn't really supposed to be a place for question marks

PaleHoseGeorge
09-16-2002, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
I don't know....I do think longevity gets too much adulation(sp?) from the voters(Don Sutton anyone?), but playing more than 2 good/great years would help it my eyes.....I mean sure if you have a short career like a Sandy Koufax thats one thing, but if you play only two great years then there are certain to be question marks surronding you especially if the other years make your career numbers look very average....The Hall of Fame isn't really supposed to be a place for question marks

I would counter that hitting .400 twice is at least as significant as anything Sandy Koufax achieved in his short career.

Ol Aches & Pains
09-17-2002, 07:34 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
Here's one more scenario: If Mark Grace holds out to hit 3000 hits, talking Baines and Mike Morgan type dedication about refusing to retire...is he a HOFer in your book?

Yes, Grace had the most hits and the most doubles (I believe) for the entire decade of the 90's. He had a great postseason performance in 1989. If he gets 3K hits, he should go in.

Dadawg_77
09-17-2002, 08:26 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I would counter that hitting .400 twice is at least as significant as anything Sandy Koufax achieved in his short career.

Koufax blew out his arm, if this guy has the same thing happen to him, he is in.

kermittheefrog
09-17-2002, 09:09 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
Precisely. What ultimately decides whether a player is HOF material is all the peripheral stuff, not stats.

If Roger Maris had been the popular character Mickey Mantle was, there is no doubt he would have been inducted simply for hitting 61 homeruns and breaking Ruth's record. But he wasn't.

Today, Sammy "the hot dog" Sosa is a lock for the hall while many fans, including several on this board, think Frank's credentials (two-time MVP, Ted Williams-esque numbers for 8 straight seasons) still leave his HOF candidacy in doubt.

I'm reminded of what one wag suggested when Millie Vanilli won a Grammy for best new artist. He said, "Let's just have an award for best new hair, and get it over with."

They're both no-brainer hall of famers.

RichH55
09-18-2002, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by PaleHoseGeorge
I would counter that hitting .400 twice is at least as significant as anything Sandy Koufax achieved in his short career.


Well I don't think this is Sandy Koufax we are talking about....Sandy didnt have downright terrible years that brought his numbers down, he just didnt have longevity...the .400 guy winds up with a .285 average in his career, so there are some downright awful years in there to make that average out

RichH55
09-18-2002, 04:21 PM
Originally posted by Ol Aches &amp; Pains
Yes, Grace had the most hits and the most doubles (I believe) for the entire decade of the 90's. He had a great postseason performance in 1989. If he gets 3K hits, he should go in.


Those decade numbers are such crap....purely a coincidence. What year in the 90s was Grace a top hitter/player? And why would holding on for a number get a guy in, it seems so foolish.....If Grace ends up with 2900 hits is he a HOFer? Since Emmitt Smith with get more yards in his career than Walter is he a better RB? And btw is that postseason performance in 1989 the one where the cubs got swept and didnt make the series?

Dadawg_77
09-18-2002, 05:46 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
Well I don't think this is Sandy Koufax we are talking about....Sandy didnt have downright terrible years that brought his numbers down, he just didnt have longevity...the .400 guy winds up with a .285 average in his career, so there are some downright awful years in there to make that average out

Those years were late in the player career, thus could of been caused by injury. In today's world Koufax would of pitched longer, due to improve medical treatments, but what would of happen if he lost his effectiveness.

RichH55
09-18-2002, 06:29 PM
Originally posted by Dadawg_77
Those years were late in the player career, thus could of been caused by injury. In today's world Koufax would of pitched longer, due to improve medical treatments, but what would of happen if he lost his effectiveness.


To go from two 400 years to .285 lifetime average is more than some bad at bats in your last year.....thats quite a few .250 years

Ol Aches & Pains
09-18-2002, 08:07 PM
Originally posted by RichH55
Those decade numbers are such crap....purely a coincidence. What year in the 90s was Grace a top hitter/player? And why would holding on for a number get a guy in, it seems so foolish.....If Grace ends up with 2900 hits is he a HOFer? Since Emmitt Smith with get more yards in his career than Walter is he a better RB? And btw is that postseason performance in 1989 the one where the cubs got swept and didnt make the series?

OK, if Grace ends up with 2900 hits, YES, he's an HOFer. How is it crap that he had the most hits in the 90's? How the hell is it a coincidence? It's consistency, it's maintaining a high level of play for 10 years. Just because a guy plays for the Cubs, that doesn't necessarily make him bad. He hasn't been bad in Arizona, has he? Plus, he's old now.

And by the way, no, they weren't swept in the 1989 playoffs, it went 5 games. Grace, in those 5 games, hit .647, 11 hits in 17 at bats, 3 doubles, a triple, a home run, and 8 RBI. The Cubs are a bad team that doesn't make the postseason very often, but that's hardly Mark Grace's fault.

I'll tell you what, I'm a Sox fan, but as a baseball fan, it's a lot easier to root for a Mark Grace than a spoiled crybaby like Frank Thomas.

RichH55
09-18-2002, 11:28 PM
Originally posted by Ol Aches &amp; Pains
OK, if Grace ends up with 2900 hits, YES, he's an HOFer. How is it crap that he had the most hits in the 90's? How the hell is it a coincidence? It's consistency, it's maintaining a high level of play for 10 years. Just because a guy plays for the Cubs, that doesn't necessarily make him bad. He hasn't been bad in Arizona, has he? Plus, he's old now.

And by the way, no, they weren't swept in the 1989 playoffs, it went 5 games. Grace, in those 5 games, hit .647, 11 hits in 17 at bats, 3 doubles, a triple, a home run, and 8 RBI. The Cubs are a bad team that doesn't make the postseason very often, but that's hardly Mark Grace's fault.

I'll tell you what, I'm a Sox fan, but as a baseball fan, it's a lot easier to root for a Mark Grace than a spoiled crybaby like Frank Thomas.


Sorry about being wrong about the sweep, it happens. He power numbers were also sub par, especially for a guy playing a "power" position. As for dedication to the game I recall that his offseason training program consisted of Coors more than the weight room.

And most importantly....a stat like "Most XX in a Decade" is simply a crap stat. Im not saying it doesn't make him consistent, but simply but stroke of luck does a player like Grace get most whatever in a decade due to certain players having careers that dont meet with their most productive years falling in that 10 year span. Now if you could tell me he was the best player, best firstbaseman in baseball for the 1990s that would be one thing. How about the year when he was the best player? No? How about how many years in the 1990s when he was with the Cubs when he was the best Firstbaseman in Chicago?

And watch how you phrase your arguments...I never called Grace a bad player, consistently near or over .300 if i recall, but I do not think he is HOF caliber. Not making the HOF and being a bad player are two totally different concepts. Grace's numbers IMO simply dont add up to a HOF career....Hey Kermit or anyone when you put Grace through that HOF rating system as to if they are good enough to make it or not, what does he rate?

ode to veeck
09-19-2002, 12:04 PM
Clearly, the "other" factors play a part here. Grace's come to play attitude will add to his votes, and the clutch hit that enabled the game 7 D-Back WS win over the hated (cept in NY) Yank-Mes last fall bookends some very memorable playoff work (only thing fans remember of the '89 NLCS is Giants won in 5 and Grace and Clark hit the s___ out of the ball, ~.650 each). Grace's got a pretty fair chance.

Personally, I think its a travesty Maris isn't in. Without steroids, his HR mark is 40+ years old and still counting, with maybe '94 Big Hurt being the only serious threat at it.

RichH55
09-20-2002, 12:25 AM
Originally posted by ode to veeck
Clearly, the "other" factors play a part here. Grace's come to play attitude will add to his votes, and the clutch hit that enabled the game 7 D-Back WS win over the hated (cept in NY) Yank-Mes last fall bookends some very memorable playoff work (only thing fans remember of the '89 NLCS is Giants won in 5 and Grace and Clark hit the s___ out of the ball, ~.650 each). Grace's got a pretty fair chance.

Personally, I think its a travesty Maris isn't in. Without steroids, his HR mark is 40+ years old and still counting, with maybe '94 Big Hurt being the only serious threat at it.


If Grace is a HOFer than I guess I just dont get the criteria for it then