2008 Hall of Fame - Goose Gossage elected

[Guest]

I would have voted Blyleven, Raines & probably Trammell

[Derwood]

Dawson is definitely iffy. People say "if he hadn't ruined his knees on the astroturf...." but guess what, he did. You can't "what if" everyone with a questionable resume. Dawson is a career .323 OBP and .805 OPS (119 OPS+). His numbers are almost entirely SLG driven (his OBP in his MVP year was .328). I dunno, I'm not sold

[jersey cubs fan]

Dawson is definitely iffy. People say "if he hadn't ruined his knees on the astroturf...." but guess what, he did. You can't "what if" everyone with a questionable resume. Dawson is a career .323 OBP and .805 OPS (119 OPS+). His numbers are almost entirely SLG driven (his OBP in his MVP year was .328). I dunno, I'm not sold

 

I would agree.

 

Anybody read the Page 2 story by some made-up journalist giving the reasons for and against his votes?

[abuck1220]

Dawson is definitely iffy. People say "if he hadn't ruined his knees on the astroturf...." but guess what, he did. You can't "what if" everyone with a questionable resume.

 

yeah, some guy on local sports talk was making a case for rice by saying if he would have taken roids, his career wouldn't have been shortened by injuries...and he somehow deserves credit for that. first, they discredit one guy's resume because he may have done steroids, now they're boosting another's because he should have done steroids.

[TruffleShuffle]

I would have voted Blyleven, Raines & probably Trammell

 

i'm surprised that you're not sure about trammell. actually i'm surprised that anybody is unsure about him, which makes the 18.5% even more depressing.

[bhogg]

Longevity (or lack of) would probably keep me from voting for Rice.

 

I'd have went:

 

Gossage

Dawson

Trammell

Raines

Blyleven

[Guest]

I would have voted Blyleven, Raines & probably Trammell

 

i'm surprised that you're not sure about trammell. actually i'm surprised that anybody is unsure about him, which makes the 18.5% even more depressing.

I'm very selective about the Hall. I haven't looked up Trammell recently enough to be sure.

[BigbadB]

Longevity (or lack of) would probably keep me from voting for Rice.

 

I'd have went:

 

Gossage

Dawson

Trammell

Raines

Blyleven

 

Of the order of players you listed, mine would be in exact reverse. Of that group, I think Blyleven is most deserving.

[TruffleShuffle]

I would have voted Blyleven, Raines & probably Trammell

 

i'm surprised that you're not sure about trammell. actually i'm surprised that anybody is unsure about him, which makes the 18.5% even more depressing.

I'm very selective about the Hall. I haven't looked up Trammell recently enough to be sure.

 

higher WARP3 in fewer games than raines.

 

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/dt/trammal01.php

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/dt/raineti01.php

[haltz]

Trammell gets 625 all-time adjusted FRAR to make up half that value, which is useless beyond the fact that it's a bad measure of fielding. I think Trammell should get in, but this just illustrates how WARP is essentially a junk stat.

 

Sean Smith has him at +44 over his career defensively, and he's one of seven SS with 2,000 games played and an OPS+ over 110 or better. He's in pretty nice company with Wagner, Ripken, Appling, Yount (who played half his career in the OF), and Larkin. This list shows how rare it is to a) play 2,000 games mostly at SS, and b) to be an above average hitter while doing so. It's not perfect, maybe especially to compare this group of players, but unfortunately BRef won't be including EQA anytime soon.

[TruffleShuffle]

Trammell gets 625 all-time adjusted FRAR to make up half that value, which is useless beyond the fact that it's a bad measure of fielding. I think Trammell should get in, but this just illustrates how WARP is essentially a junk stat.

 

yes but he won 4 gold gloves (yeah i know) and was generally regarded as a very good defensive shortstop.

 

bill james has him with 318 win shares, which is roughly equivalent to ernie banks, ozzie smith and pee wee reese, who are hall of famers, and barry larkin, who will be a hall of famer. so i guess if you don't like WARP then that's fine, but i've yet to find a metric that suggests anything other than "alan trammell should be in the hall of fame."

[haltz]

yes but he won 4 gold gloves (yeah i know) and was generally regarded as a very good defensive shortstop.

I said I thought he was a good defensive SS and posted some numbers. That's not the point. Replacement levels for fielding and hitting within the same metric is silly. Has a shortstop ever even gotten a cup of coffee that hits like Cesar Izturis and is 25 runs worse with the glove?

 

Anyway, I totally agree on Trammell, just a minor point about comparing him and Rock with WARP.

[VladiRad]

I would have voted for:

Mark McGwire

Jack Morris

Bert Blyleven

[OleMissCub]

Mark McGwire

 

Regardless of the steroids issue, I still wouldn't put Big Mac in. His one dimensionality really bothers me. I know, I know, that one dimension is pretty impressive, etc., but it's just a personal quirk of mine that I like to have ballplayers be able to have at least 2 tools.

[treebird]

Mark McGwire

 

Regardless of the steroids issue, I still wouldn't put Big Mac in. His one dimensionality really bothers me. I know, I know, that one dimension is pretty impressive, etc., but it's just a personal quirk of mine that I like to have ballplayers be able to have at least 2 tools.

 

if you don't consider getting on base/selectivity a tool, you should.

[abuck1220]

Mark McGwire

 

Regardless of the steroids issue, I still wouldn't put Big Mac in. His one dimensionality really bothers me. I know, I know, that one dimension is pretty impressive, etc., but it's just a personal quirk of mine that I like to have ballplayers be able to have at least 2 tools.

 

i don't get looking at guys' "dimensions." i look at production...he was productive or he wasn't...between player A and player B, one is more productive than the other. you can say mcgwire was one-dimensional (which is not true, by the way), but he was really, really, really productive.

 

would you rather have a player who was kinda good at a bunch of things, or a guy who was super awesome at one or two things, and thus led to his team scoring a bunch more runs than the first guy? a guy with 15 homers, 20 steals, a good average and decent defense is likely to be way less valuable than a guy who hits 60 homers, walks a ton, and sucks at all that other stuff.

[Coach C]

Congrats to Gossage. I'll remember him as the guy that gave up the big bomb homerun to George Brett.

[OleMissCub]

would you rather have a player who was kinda good at a bunch of things, or a guy who was super awesome at one or two things, and thus led to his team scoring a bunch more runs than the first guy? a guy with 15 homers, 20 steals, a good average and decent defense is likely to be way less valuable than a guy who hits 60 homers, walks a ton, and sucks at all that other stuff.

 

I understand your points about average guys with lots of tools, but I'm talking about wanting my HOFers to be good at several different aspects of the game.

[haltz]

I understand your points about average guys with lots of tools, but I'm talking about wanting my HOFers to be good at several different aspects of the game.

How about first basemen that make runs happen at a historically prodigious rate? That do anything for you?

 

Should he have hit more grounders to the right side? Won more than one Gold Glove at 1B? Hit for a higher than league average BA? Swiped some bags?

 

He didn't make outs and his hits went for lots of bases. Those are the elements of runs scoring and he played an extremely offense-first position, with few guys who have multiple "tools."

 

So "your HOFers" need to help teams win games, but they have to diversify their methods?

[abuck1220]

would you rather have a player who was kinda good at a bunch of things, or a guy who was super awesome at one or two things, and thus led to his team scoring a bunch more runs than the first guy? a guy with 15 homers, 20 steals, a good average and decent defense is likely to be way less valuable than a guy who hits 60 homers, walks a ton, and sucks at all that other stuff.

 

I understand your points about average guys with lots of tools, but I'm talking about wanting my HOFers to be good at several different aspects of the game.

 

i want my HOFers to be good at one thing -- being good. i don't care how they get there.

[OleMissCub]

ok, fine, I'll drop it.

 

I guess I'll just have to hate him now for being a juice-pumping turdbird. Is that a good enough reason?

[haltz]

I don't think anyone put up a fight last time.

[Derwood]

i'm not sure how anyone can objectively look at Blyleven's stats and NOT vote for him

[OleMissCub]

i'm not sure how anyone can objectively look at Blyleven's stats and NOT vote for him

 

Because like, he never got 300 like, wins, man!!

 

/dummy sportswriters

[OleMissCub]

Concerning the Hall of Fame....did y'all know that Johnny Damon has a decent chance at 2000 runs and 3000 hits in his career? Right now he's sitting at 1281 runs and 2102 hits. Only five other guys have done that: Aaron, Mays, Cobb, Henderson, and Rose!

 

Can the HOF voters ignore that if he reaches it? He's just NOT a hall of famer in my mind, but the stats could be there if he stays healthy and plays for about 5-6 more years.