I am Furious.
Okay Fellow RBIers I am at a complete loss ove Bert Blyleven getting denied yet again for getting into the hall. Here is just a few stats that make should make him an easy choice. I just can't beleive it.
*Won 287 games
*Career ERA was 3.31
*pitched 4970 innings
*3701 strikeouts
That should be enough right there but there's more, he is....
3rd all-time in strikeouts
22nd all-time in victories
9th all time in shutouts
8th all-time in starts
13th all-time in innings pitched
But wait....there is still more
Career Tidbits...
Miscellaneous All – Time Rankings: 35th in strikeouts per game (6.70), 62nd in games and 89th in complete games.
Had seventeen 10-plus win seasons including 10 consecutive from 1970-79...had ten 15-plus win seasons including 5 consecutive from 1971-75.
Had eight 200-plus strikeout seasons including 6 consecutive from 1971-76.
Of his 250 losses, seventy-four were decided by one run and forty-one were decided by two runs.
Had two 10-game win-streaks (1971-72 & 1989).
Had three career 11.0 inning performances.
Had ten consecutive complete games, June 6-July 24, 1985.
Opponents batted .247 during career.
Had a no-hitter on September 22, 1977 vs. California and threw 5 one-hitters, 9 two-hitters and 12 three-hitters.
Had fifty-one 10-plus strikeout games including a career-high 15 strikeout performance on August 1, 1986 vs. Oakland.
Became 20-game winner in 1973 at age 22, the 13th youngest pitcher in modern league history.
Made major league debut in 1970 at the age of 19, became the 25th teenager to win as many as 10 games in a major league season and was named American League Rookie Pitcher of the Year by The Sporting News.
Led the American League in shutouts three times (1973, '85 & '89),
innings pitched twice (1985 &'86), and games started (1985), complete games (1985) and strikeouts (1985) once.
Name American League "Comeback Player of the Year" by The Sporting News in 1989.
Twins All –Time leader in complete games (141), shutouts (29) and strikeouts (2,035).
I was a little pissed when hegot dissed again yesterday!!!!
I voted for him on my ballot, but unfortunately mine doesn't count. Andre Dawson, Don Mattingly, Jim Rice, and Bert Blyleven would ALL be in! Plus, the guy had a great Chris Berman nickname...Bert "Be Home" Blyleven!
When I think hall of famer, I think superstar. Eddie Murray and Gary Carter never were that as I saw it. Dale Murphy was probably the only superstar on that ballot. Maybe Sandberg. Stats can be misleading. Murphy and Sandberg were on some pretty bad teams. I always thought those guys were studs and the others were "solid players". Does anyone else agree with me? Was anyone ever really worried when Eddie Murray came to bat? I wasn't.
3,000 hits are automatic for Hall entry.
500 homers are automatic for Hall entry.
Murray had both. He wasn't a superstar for 2 main reasons. 1) he played in small market Baltimore for the majority of his career and they already had their superstar (Cal Ripken) 2) he didn't interact with the media, which made him seem like a prick.
I am sure that Eddie Murray was feared by opposing pitching. He got lots of hits, hit for power, and was a switch hitter!
500 HR are no longer an automatic bid. Murray is probably the last guy who can get away with it considering the huge volume of HR's being hit and the huge number of players approaching 500 hr. The bar has been raised for HR but 3000 hits is still an automatic bid
I think Murray wasn't a superstar because he never dominated the game.
While I respect both opinions of vgp and sucka, I have to agree to disagree. With respect to Murray not being more of a star...look at Derek Jeter. He is in NY, the largest of all markets and is considered a superstar. However, if you put his stats on Baltimore or Minnesota or any other small market team, he's just as underrated as Miguel Tejada (who has better stats than Jeter). Murray suffered the same fate. His numbers were between good and great for many, many years, but he was flying under the radar quite a bit.
As far as the 500 homer mark, I think it will still be a guaranteed pass for awhile for this reason, it shows consistency. Brady Anderson proved that anyone can hit 50+ homers in a season. However, hitting 500 in a career means that you had power for the duration of your career. I do agree that it doesn't mean as much now with the inflated power stats, but 500 homers is still a lofty goal for most major leaguers.
3,000 and 500 should still be a guaranteed pass along with 300 wins
EDFAN,
Here is why 500 hr will no longer be an automatic pass. Simply put, its not that impressive of a mark as it once was. Although it is still alot of bombs, it is MUCH MUCH easier to achieve. Here's proof...
*Of all the 17 players who have hit 500 hr or more, 15 have started their carreer BEFORE 1986. Only McGwire and Bonds have hit 500 after starting past 1986. 1986 is a benchmark year when MLB offenses started to go through the roof. Here is a list of players that will most likely hit 500 hr before the end of their careers....
Name/age/HR
Alex Rodriguez (26) 298
Manny Ramirez (30) 310
Mo Vaughn (34) 325
Jim Thome (31) 334
Larry Walker (35) 335
Gary Sheffield (33) 340
Mike Piazza (33) 347
Frank Thomas (34) 376
Jeff Bagwell (34) 380
Juan Gonzalez (32) 405
Ken Griffey Jr. (32) 468
Fred McGriff (38) 478
Rafael Palmeiro (37) 490
Sammy Sosa (33) 499
There will be some guys on this list that won't reach 500 hr or more due to retirement, injury, or crack. But it is very reasonable to assume that most, if not all, will eventually reach 500. But for argument's sake lets say only half of this list make (and clearly more than half will defintily make it). That gives us 8 new 500hr members. 15 of the 25 starteed their careers between 1900 and 1986 and 10 of the 25 who started aftrer 1986.
With the advent of the HR explosion 500hr is definitly not as statistically significant as it once was. This is not debatable considering the rate at which modern players achieve that number. Sports writers who vote for the hall of fame will undoubtly look at the overall career before giving a FIRST BALLOT induction. 500hr will always give you admittance to the hall, BUT Eddie Murray is the last 500hr player who will be given an automatic FIRST BALLOT pass, which is the highest honor the hall can give.
3000 still remains as an automatic pass.
well the next couple years are only going to get harder for people like sandburg, dawson, rice, etc. as some of you might of read on mlb.com, guys like boggs, mcguire, molitor, dennis eckersley, ripken, gwynn, and rickey henderson all in the next 5-10 years. i think most if not all of those guys will make it sooner or later. ripken is probably guaranteed his first ballot with over 3000 hits, 500 hrs, and that long game streak, plus he probably has a lot of fans on the BBWAA.
i also found interesting that pete rose got 18 write in votes (same as last year), which is more than 13 of the nominees and 12 of them combined. anyway, i hope sandburg and dawson make it next year.
go cubs
I'll agree with you there sucka. 500 is going to become more and more common, which means it's less impressive. I also agree that it won't mean a 1st ballot entry in the future, but that anyone who gets 500 homers will eventually get in. Nice research by the way ;)
Absoltley right! Eventually you'll get in with 500. Here's a list of who I think is a 1st ballot playing right now or not yet voted on...
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Randy Johnson
Greg Maddux
Tom Glavine
Sammy Sosa
Rickey Henderson
Cal Ripken
Mark McGwire
Tony Gywnn
...i probably missed a few. What do you guys think about Griffey Jr. as a 1st ballot right now????
Paul Molitor should be 1st ballot...next year I think, and as far as Griffey is concerned, if he had retired after his last year in Seattle, he'd have gone 1st ballot, but right now everybody only remembers the injured, whiny, no producing Junior of the Reds (I hate being a Reds fan right now!) I think your list is pretty comprehensive, except Glavine will have to have a few more solid years to be a 1st ballot man.
i dont think griffey will be a first ballot at all because he probably wont have any more good years in his career, it was all in the past. he might of gotten 50 or whatever homeruns in a season and is the only person to ever hit the warehouse at camden yards, but he will definitely not be first ballot.
I agree with your list, Sucka, except for Glavine. No way is that guy a 1st ballot. He'll be lucky to make the Hall at all. Once again, he is very good but never dominating. He benefited from being a #3 pitcher on a dominating team behind Maddux/Smoltz and thus racked up a lot of wins. I think he is around 220 or so. However, you left off A-Rod. When it is all said and done I think A-Rod will argueably be the best player EVER. IMO Mays holds that title now, however if A-Rod keeps stealing bases he may take hold of that dubious honor. Not to mention he will smash the all-time HR record before his career is done. Probably take it away from Sammy Sosa at that time.
But to get back to the Hall debate. I've already mentioned that you either are a Famer of you aren't. Why do you need more than one time to be inducted. In addition, why was Ozzie Smith a first ballot hall of fame inductee????? PLEASE, tell me why? He is the best defensive SS ever....yes. But the rest of his game was brutal (except for his SB's). A career .262 hitter, .337 OBP, .328 SLG. He never won an MVP, never led the league in SB's, actually never led the league in anything except Sac flies ('78 & '80), spectacular plays and flips. How does he make the Hall (1st ballot) and not Ryno??? Because Ozzie was a better interview? Ryno was the best defensive AND offensive 2B player ever!! What else did he have to do? If you had to start a team now and could pick Ozzie OR Ryno in their prime, who would you take? Not even a tough choice. That is why people get frustrated with the votes. I mean, 7 dickheads wrote-in Darryl Kile this year!!!!! The writers know shit and until they don't get to vote, this entire process will be convoluted.
Don't fool yourself into thinking that Sammy Sosa is going to break any home run records. His light has burned brightly, but his peak has come and gone. Sammy showed his true colors at the end of this season. He cared so much about hitting #500, that he choked for the last week or two of the season. I think it goes without saying that Sammy will get to 600, but I think he'll wash out or be busted for steroids (don't EVEN argue that he doesn't use!) before he challenges Hank (or Barry)
I agree with most of what you said Jason, but a couple points:
Quoteexcept for Glavine. No way is that guy a 1st ballot. He'll be lucky to make the Hall at all.
Now I officially don't understand the voting process, but Glavine will be in the HOF. I'm not the biggest Glavine fan out there, but he more than merely a 3rd fiddle. Definitely better than Smoltz over a career. He has two Cy Youngs, 8-time All-Star, 6 top3 Cy Young finishes and a World Series MVP, which is huge. If he gets to 300 wins (at 243 now), he's a shoo-in...
And Sandberg was not the best offensive 2B ever, Rogers Hornsby has him whooped there...
Vit,
Good A-rod call....he's on an unbelievable pace to shatter a lot of important records. Hopefully he won't pull a griffey.
You might be right about Glavine. He may need a couple more solid seasons with the Mets. However, 300 wins IS automatic first ballot status. But, he dosen't stack up to several pitchers of his era (maddox, clemens, johnson, pedro) in terms of dominance. And his postseason numbers aren't a bright spot either. So two or three more good seasons before I'll say he is a for sure 1st balloter
Your take on Sandberg is off the mark. He is not even close to numerous second basemen as far as an offensive threat. Alomar, Kent, hornsby, Lajoie, Morgan to name a few. And defensively, the list is pretty much the same. Ryno was a cool cat, but definitly not the best ever.
Here is a case for Ozzie smith to be a 1st ballot hall of famer.
* He changed the way shortstop played. He was the lawarence taylor of his position. Just like LT revolutioned the outside linebacker position with great speed and power, Ozzie changed the way shortsstop approached ground balls to the hole. He was the first shortstop to utlize the jump throw going to your right (i.e. Jeter's jump throw). He totally changed the way shortsstop played the feild. This was a MAJOR contribution to the game. He is the bar in which ALL shortstops of the modern era are measured against in terms of defense!
* He was easily the greatest defensive shortstop EVER. Most say that he was the greatest defensive player EVER. That is a big accolade. Of all the baseball players who have played MLB, Ozzie is considered the very best defensive player. And he played for 19 seasons!
*He won gold gloves from 1980 to 1992! 13 consecutive seasons. A MLB record!
*set a record of shortstop assists in 1980 with 621
*all-time assist leader at shortstop with 8,375 assists
*all time leader at turning double plays with 1,590
*second amoung shortstops on gmaes played 2,511
*second amoung shortstops in feilding percentage with .978
* Named to 15 All-Star teams
*Was one of the greatest ambassadors to the game of baseball. Everyone loved this guy and he gave back a tremendous amount to the game and to the communittee.
*1995 recipient of the Roberto Clemente award, the humanitarian award of Major League Baseball
*1994 recipient of the Branch Rickey Award, honoring Major League Baseball's outstanding individual who personifies "Service Above Self."
*1992 he was named the St. Louis Man of the Year, an award previously given only to business and civic leaders
*1983 he was given the NAACP Image Award for Sportsmanship, Humanitarianism, and Community Activities
*1986 was named to the Father of the Year Honors Group by the National Fathers Day Committee.
The Wizard proved that you can be deserving of 1st ballot status with your glove. Look at Eddie Murray, great offensive numbers but he was a DH alot of the time and not a defensive standout. The wizard is the exact opposite, BUT offense and great defensive at shortstop, in my mind can be comparable.
I totally agree with your take on Ozzie Smith, sucka!
A good way to think of his defense as more of a statistic:
Ozzie probably drove in 40 - 50 runs per year
With his outstanding defense (getting to balls that nobody else could) he probably prevented 40 - 50 (or more) runs per year.
This is comparable to Ozzie getting 80 - 100 rbi every year of his career.
When you think of it in those terms, he truely IS the greatest shortstop ever!
wow, that is some dedicated research. im convinced
Quick note on Glavine. If he doesn't hit 300 wins he isn't in the hall. He was on the best team of the 90's and a #3 pitcher in the rotation. Was Glavine better than Smoltz, probably, but he was behind him in the rotation. Therefore he benefited in facing the opposing teams #3 starter most of the time allowing him to rack up wins. The rest of Glavine's #'s really don't stand out. He wasn't dominating nor fearsome. It seems that the standards for the Hall are higher for pitchers. You need to be a dominating pitcher to really get consideration adn Glavine doesn't fit that bill. With that said, if he does hit 300 wins, he's in.
For you to say that Sosa will slow down anytime soon is Ludacris. So what he's stuck on 499. Bonds was too. He was anxious and therefore not performing correctly. He has averaged 58 HR's the past 5 seasons. No player in history can claim that feat. Sosa will break Aaron's record before he is 40! Bonds surely won't. With that said A-Rod will break Sosa's HR record in due time.
Hornsby's #'s are pretty good, we'll kind of ignore him. And Nap played in the 1800's impossible to compare. But Joe Morgan? Sandberg beat him in every offensive category, per season across the board except for SB's. Not to mention Sandberg played for some truly horrible teams and Morgan played for the Big Red Machine. Sandbergs offensive #'s are even more special because he batted 2nd in a terrible lineup. And he also won more gold gloves (9-5).
Jeff Kent is good but let's remember the juiced ball and steroids. You don't need to hit 60 HR's to be on 'roids. Not to mention he is hitting in the middle of an unbelieveable lineup with Barry Bonds. And Kent can't hold Ryno's water bottle when it comes to defense.
As far as Ozzie goes, I've already said that he is the best SS ever, no need to repeat that. But there are some point I'd like to highlight.
"He was the lawarence taylor of his position. Just like LT revolutioned the outside linebacker position with great speed and power"
--Really? I didn't know that LT had to run fly patterns. See, that is what makes baseball so great. You have to have that special balance of offense AND defense. Clearly Ozzie was special defensively, but someone forgot to teach him how to swing some wood.
"Ozzie changed the way shortsstop approached ground balls to the hole. He was the first shortstop to utlize the jump throw going to your right (i.e. Jeter's jump throw). He totally changed the way shortsstop played the feild."
--Once again, really? Ozzie did NOT 'invent' the jump throw. Ozzie was just able to do it better and with more consistancy. Players before him tried to do it but couldn't OR did them inconsistantly, due to their lack of ability. Ozzie had an uncanny ability and he capitalized on it. For example, Ken Caminiti can make that throw from his knees from third and Benito Santiago used to be able to make the throw from his knees from behind the plate. They did NOT 'invent' those plays. They are just able to perform them consistantly due to their defensive prowess. I'm sure everyone would like to play third like Ken, they just can't.
I found the following kind of comical that you would even include this in your arguement:
*Was one of the greatest ambassadors to the game of baseball. Everyone loved this guy and he gave back a tremendous amount to the game and to the communittee.
*1995 recipient of the Roberto Clemente award, the humanitarian award of Major League Baseball
*1994 recipient of the Branch Rickey Award, honoring Major League Baseball's outstanding individual who personifies "Service Above Self."
*1992 he was named the St. Louis Man of the Year, an award previously given only to business and civic leaders
*1983 he was given the NAACP Image Award for Sportsmanship, Humanitarianism, and Community Activities
*1986 was named to the Father of the Year Honors Group by the National Fathers Day Committee.
I'm glad the city of St. Louis named him man of the year and that Ozzie was a good father. What matters is what he did on the field. The media and public loved Ozzie. So Ryno didn't adore the media and wasn't a good story. So he gets penalized because of his lack of candor? Sandberg was a more complete ball player than Ozzie was. If defense was all that counts then you would agree with Mark Grace being in the Hall...let alone a 1st ballot entry. He is the best 1B of his generation and argueably ever. Not to mention his offensive numbers are better than Ozzie's. Of how about Omar Vizquel. Is he going to be in the Hall? He is the best SS of his generation. Actually, Vizquel has a better fielding % than Ozzie (.984 to .978). He also has comparable amount of put outs per season, less errors per season, more double plays per season. Ozzie does have more assists however. Then can one say that playing SS today is harder then in the 70's and 80's? One can put up a good arguement. The ball is juiced, the parks are smaller, the mound is lower, players are stronger and faster, more runs are scored, the bats are better, players have better conditioning secondary to creatine etc... Due to those facts, the ball is hit harder making routine plays more difficult. Players are faster forcing Vizquel to get rid of the ball faster. There are more runs scored, therefore more runners on base, thus forcing Vizquel to play at DP depth instead of his normal position making routine plays harder or impossible. Batting averages are up increasing the chances of error. If Vizquel can compare this well to Ozzie then maybe he will be in the Hall. But we all know that he won't be. Let alone a 1st time entry!
I'm not saying that Ozzie doesn't deserve to be in the Hall. He does. But not first ballot. In contrast Ryno did deserve first ballot for his incredible balance between offense and defense. He won 9 gold gloves and his offensive #'s were way before his time and batting #2 on pathetic teams make it all the more mind boggling.
BTW, I'm not a Ryno fan or even a Cub fan. Gantry/Lips/Mark/Potsie can back me up on that. I'm a baseball fan and it gets me REALLY hot when people make (Puckett) or don't make (Ryno) the Hall for political reasons. If Ryno was friendlier to the media he would have made it. It's a good thing Nick doesn't know that people are comparing Ryno to Ozzie...he would go over your houses and steal your RBI's, among other things.
I would love to see Jose Canseco prove that point. The media hates that guy. Hates him! But he is also very close to 500 HR's. I know he's retired and all but would love to see him come back and get 500. No way would he be first ballot HOF, because the writers hate him, even though 500 HR's and 300 wins is the threshold. If it wasn't for his injury's he could have been a GREAT one.
Interesting article by ESPN. Top 10 people not in the Hall. You guys may want to note who is #1.
http://espn.go.com/mlb/s/2003/0107/1488613.html
In addition. According to ESPN's Jayson Starck...not only did 7 moron's vote for Daryl Kile but 1 SUPER MORON voted for Danny Tartabull!!! lol
wow, how long did it take you to type all that
btw, dont knock the cubs as "pathetic". i agree they arent the best, but they arent pathetic. the royals, phillies, or brewers would be pathetic in my mind.
i read somewhere (this is for chicagoland people) that it is projected that one of the chicago teams (cubs, white sox, blackhawks, bulls, bears) will win a national championship in the next 5 years. sorry i dont remember where i read it from, but do you think this is possible? if anyone, i would say the bears. all they need is a quarterback. their defense has proven themselves, i just think they gave up this year. a-train is very good and edinger is very good as well. plus good wide recievers like marty booker and crew. they will have washington back also. maybe they can get brad banks or carson palmer as QB, miller and chandler cant do it.
Took me maybe 20 minutes.
The Phillies are pathetic? They are better than the Cubs. IMO, the Cubs are much much more pathetic than the teams you listed, for one reason. The Cubs are a HUGE market club that make a ton of money. The tribune company just doesn't want to spend it. And when they do spend it, they give a lot of money to BS players (i.e. Rick Aguilera, Bill Mueller, TODD HUNDLEY, Henry Rodriguez...shall I go on?). Look at the FA's they have picked up so far this off-season (Dusty Baker, Mike Remlinger, Troy O'Leary, Paul Bako, Dave Veres, Shawn Estes, Alfonseca). And they signed Alfonseca to a 5 mil per season contract!!! What a waste of money! With all the premium FA's out there they got nobody they needed. There best pick-up is a coach. They wouldn't even spend the cash to get Kent whom Dusty was pleading with the club to get. Kent even said that he would love to play with Dusty again. Oh well. the Cubs will be Cubs. Unlimited money, limited minds.
While the Royals and the Brewers are terrible teams they are small market clubs and have limited capabilities. BTW the Royals were actually a decent team last year. What is killing MLB is that there isn't a salary cap. Until that day, only big market teams will be able to compete. Look at Montreal, they have brought up all-star calibur players and then lose them when they are good because they can't afford them. Now they are shopping Vlad, Vidro, Colon, Vazquez.
And about your question...there will be zero championships here in Chi-town in the next 5 years. The Bulls suck, Cubs suck, Sox suck, Bears suck, Blackhawks are ok. I'd put my money on the Blackhawks before any of the other teams. BTW yes the Bears blow. There 13-3 season was the worst thing that could have happened to them. Because of that Jauron and Shoop stayed, when they would have been fired. I havn't seen more of a stubborn coach in sports history. Jauron continues to play Dez White, Chandler, Leon Johnson and won't play Marcus Robinson, David Terrell, Burris, Adrian Peterson). Peterson looked great in the limited time he played and may be something special but we would never know because he kept playing Leon Johnson for no reason. God does Jauron suck. The Bears are in for another rude season next year.
Brad Banks is too short to play in the NFL right now. He will need sometime as a back-up or in the CFL. Did you see him in the Bowl game. Yikes! Palmer will be #1, Bears won't get him. If the Bears were smart they would draft Leftwich and start him immediately. However, they will probably either move down, draft a defensive player and hope to get Dave Rigone in the 2n rnd. Just my take.
i forgot to mention a new coach, jauron does suck
they should of gotten bledsoe...
yes, the royals were ok last year, but thats about it, before that they were pathetic.
cubs lose some good players too, but not because of funding.
Vit,
In regards to Ozzie,
*You missed my point about LT. Completely. Following your logic about needing offense and defense to make the hall would exclude everyone who was a DH or pitchers for that matter. You don't need both, usually that's the case...but not everytime
*Below is a link to the baseball hall of fame's website. I have included the voting criteria that the sportswriters use when voting for a player.
http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers_and_honorees/rules.htm
Voting — Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.
I find it comical that you critized my opinion without even looking at the voting criteria writtern by the hall of fame...sportsmanship, charater, intergrity definitly are considered...
*Mark Grace by the way isn't the best defensive 1st baseman of his era. You missed JT snow who is much much better. Baseball experts would definitly back me up on this. Ozzie was always head and sholders above the rest, Mark grace wasn't even on top. Smith's defense was legendary, Grace's was very good.
*Ozzie's innovating play at shortstop became the institution. Trust me, Smith has more range than Omar (although Omar is bery good).
*Although he didn't invent the jump throw, no one else consistently used it simply because no one had to...they couldn't get to the balls necessary to use the throw. His style of defense, the way he took angles to the ball is who players are taught now.
*Your take about balls getting hit harder, players being faster, stronger, more runners on base, ect....just dosen't make any sense and has nothing to do with an argument involving Smith's hall status. Faster players running to first = better throwing arms found in shortstops, balls hit harder = more time to throw the runner out, stronger batters = more range for the shortstops. Your take about the increased abilities of hitters doesn't work because you didn't take into account the increased abilities of the shortstop. They balance each other out. IN my personal opinion, the shorstop position isn't harder in this era as opposed to the 80's.
IN regards to Ryno,
*Juiced Balls? Steriods? Unless you have some proof, that is an extremely weak argument agaist Kent. Very weak. Pure speculation.
*The ryno argument is a tricky one. If he had gotten in as a first ballot it wouldn't bother me. He has a good case to make it in one the first try but I understand why he only got half the votes. He was a great player and will go in on his next try. But he was no Joe Morgan. Sandberg may have had better offensive stats but Morgan was a better player/teammate. Ryno was not a leader. Morgan was. Not being a leader and always playing for a terrible organization is not a good combination, espically when your numbers do not blow people away. By the way, don't take my word for it. Take a poll from from people who are around MLB and ask them who they would rather have, morgan or sandberg. I guareentee the vast majority take Morgan. And there is a reason for it, morgan was a better player. Ask yourself this question, if sandberg was so deserving of first ballot status, why did he miss the 75 percet needed by such a large margin?
*Your right about sosa...that guy is amazing and he is not slowing down anytime soon.
*Glavine's postseason preformances hurt him in my book. Unless he's 300 i wouldn't first ballot him. He is off my list.
*kirby puckett as a first ballot is a total abortion. That really pissed me off.
You bring up some good arguments and I'll think about your Ryno argument. The MVP and the 9 gold gloves are impressive. As for the Smith argument, lets just agree to disagree on that one.
Pitchers are completely different than hitters. Pitchers don't need, nor are they expected, to be good hitters. Players need to be overall good palyers and Ozzie wasn't even close. But I'm done argueing about Ozzie, you aren't looking at the big picture and are biased...especially if you won't concede my Vizquel statement. Vizquel is just as good (numbers-wise) as Ozzie and has twice the bat. But maybe he can't speak english as well and isn't a father of the year. So I guess he doesn't to be first ballot as much as Ozzie.
Between Grace and JT Snow, Grace beats him in every category. Their FP% are a was at .996/.995. But, grace has 8,000 more put outs, 800 more assists, 500 more DP's in only 4 more years. Not to mention Grace has a career .305 BA to Snow's .263. Grace also lead the 90's in doubles (or maybe hits...I forget). SO yes Grace is better than Snow.
Juice balls is speculation? Hell no...fact. Look at Kent's #'s for the first 6 years or his career where he didn't hit more than 20 HR's. The last five years he hit LESS than 30 only once. Something has to give.
I thought we went over this. Ryno didn't get the 75% vote because he wasn't loved by the media. And guess who gets to vote...the writers. So because Ryno may have snubbed some jerk-off writer of a good story, he didn't get their vote for the Hall. It is ashame. And Ryno is no automatic next year either for the mere fact that the Eck and Molitor will be enshrined then, taking away more votes from Ryno. He will eventually get in.
And I think more people would vote for Ryno over Morgan. Once again, Ryno beats him in every offensive cat except SB's AND was a much better defensive player. How can you even say you'd rather have Morgan. Morgan was just on a better team. Period. Nice arguements SUCKA, but I can't concede to any of your points. :-)
it seems to me that most hall of famers spend 5 to 10 years in pergetory awiting ascension into baseball imortality. i thought ryno would be a first balloter because he revolutionized the second base position. berty blyleven's numbers are similar to the perm, don sutton's. like sutton, i think bertus will get in... its only a matter of time.
as for gary carter, (another perm) he was second only to johnny bench as far as catchers go during the seventies... his defense left much to be desired but unless your are ozzie smith, defense is overlooked.
* Since JT came to the national league in 1997, how many gold gloves has Mark Grace won? Answer is 0. How many has Snow won? Answer is 4 (97, 98, 99, 00). I wonder won is better defensively?
*One dimensional players can make it to the hall of fame 1st ballot. Just ask Eddie Murray.
*Sandberg dosen't beat Morgan in every offensive category
Joe Morgan Ryan Sandberg
Ab 9277 8385
runs 1650 1318
hits 2517 2386
strikeouts 1015 1260
BB 1865 761
on base % .392 .344
games 2648 2164
MVP's 2 1
You make a good argument for Ryno being a 1st ballot but I wouldn't have voted for him. You make a bad argument when you say he his better than Joe morgan. Their HR's & RBI's are very close and Ryno only has a higher ave by 14 points (i think) Morgan lead three different franchises to the post season. If you get a chance to talk with some writers or people around MLB (and not the local bar folk in chicago) ask them who they would pick. I guareente they pick morgan.
*Define "juiced ball". People say that the balls are wrapped tighter or dipped in a special mud but there has been no special proof. With all the media out there I am certain if they could physically prove there was a difference in balls they would have found it by now. And its not like its hard to find balls from the 1980's. I think you should have mentioned expansion teams, thinned out pitching amongst a greater number of teams, smaller ball parks when citing the offensive explosion found in the modern era. However, those are the conditions under which kent plays and that is why it is hard to compare players from different eras...because the conditions are so different. Comparing Morgan and sandberg is more applicable because their eras were a lot more simillar creating a more level playing in which to compare.
*I am done with the ozzie argument as well....were're just at odds over that one.
*This has been a good battle and I can see your a baseball guy like myself. By the way, which team do you root for?
Since I believe you are argueing a battle you can't win I'll just have to put my best shot out there. This may be long. However here are some more interesting bits on Sandberg before my statements:
Sandberg became the first player in the National League to win a Gold Glove in his first full season at a new position in 1983. He was in the all-star game from 1984-1993. He was the N.L. MVP in 1984. He played in a record 123 errorless games for an infielder other than a first baseman from June 21, 1989 to May 17, 1990. He is the first player ever to have a 40 home run season and a 50 stolen base season. He has a record .990 fielding percentage for a second baseman. He retired on June 13, 1994. He then anounced he would return on October 31, 1995. He got his first hit, a home run off of Pedro Astacio, on April 4, 1996. He became only the 10th player to hit 250 home runs and get 250 stolen bases. SECOND BASEMEN WHO RANKS AMONG THE TOP 5 2B IN 7 CATEGORIES AND THE TOP 10 IN 15. HOLDS THE MAJOR LEAGUE RECORD FOR MOST HR HIT WHILE PLAYING 2B--277. IN 1990, BECAME THE 1ST 2B TO LEAD THE LEAGUE IN HR SINCE 1925. ONLY 2B WITH BACK TO BACK 30+ HR SEASONS. LED 2B IN 8 CATEGORIES DURING 1980S, INCLUDING SLG, OPS, HR/100 OUTS AND RC/G. LED 2B IN 7 SINGLE SEASON CATEGORIES DURING 1980S AND 6 DURING 1990S. LED NL IN TOTAL BASES DURING 3 10-YEAR SPANS. HAD 6 YEARS WITH 100+ RUNS CREATED
OK Sandberg v.s. Morgan
BTW since you left out a very important fact between Morgan and Sandberg, I'll have to respectfully correct you. You see Morgan played 22 season and Sandberg 16. So Morgan does have some longevity however SAndberg retired at the top of his game and not because he was slowing down. Didn't Sandberg retire the first time due to an injury?? I think he did but I'm not sure because he only played in 57 games that year. Therefore, all stats need to be per season.
Then #'s look like this:
BA: Sandberg .285, Morgan .271
Runs: Sandberg 82, Morgan 75
Hits: Sandberg 150, Morgan 114
Doubles: Sandberg 25, Morgan 20
Triples: Sandberg 4.75, Morgan 4.36
HR's: Sandberg 17.6, Morgan 12.1
RBI's: Sandberg 66.25, Morgan 51.5
SB's: Morgan 31, Sandberg 21.5
BB's: Morgan 85, Sandberg 47.5
OBP: Morgan .293, Sandberg .344
SLG: Sandberg .452, Morgan .427
TB's: Sandberg 237, Morgan 180
DEFENSE:
Put-out's: Morgan 262, Sandberg 238
Assists: Sandberg 398, 316
ERRORS: Sandberg 6.8, Morgan 11.1
Fielding %: Sandberg .990, Morgan .981
Gold Gloves: Sanberg 9, Morgan 5
Again these are per season and Sandberg whips him in all the 'important' cats (i.e. BA, HR, RBI, RUNS, ERRORS, FP%). Morgan only wins in SB's, BB's, OBP and put-out's). BB's and OBP are just about the same since Morgan walked twice as much as Sandberg. That stat even makes Sandberg #'s more impressive because he actually had to get hits to get on base and not play his size as a crutch.
BTW, the difference in their BA's are not even close. You said "ONLY 14 points"....well 14 points in BA over the course of a career is HUGE. And Sandberg's BA is lower than it would have been if he either didn't retire the first time OR didn't comback since he batted career lows .244 and .264 in those 2 other seasons.
Morgan can't hold Sandberg's jock offensively and defensively it's a joke.
Morgan played with the likes of Johnny Bench, Tony Perez, Pete Rose, Dave Concepcion, George Foster, Ken Griffey Sr, Dan Driessen etc... This was a dominant team of the 70's. Compare Morgan's numbers between '63-71 and '80-84, when he wasn't with the Reds. Those #;s pale in comparison. Sandberg batted second in terrible lineups that consisted of Andre Dawson, Jody Davis, Keith Moreland, Ron Cey, Bob Dernier, Gary Matthews, Leon Durham, Vance Law, Dwight Smith, Jerome Walton, Mel Hall, (that is all that I can think of now). Big difference.
I can't believe you are making an arguement on players' #'s whom are so lopsided it's crazy. I'm getting the feeling that you are playing devil's advocate with me. If you are then good job, because you got me.
BTW, like I said I'm a baseball fan but I'll root for the White Sox and the Cards over other teams. Sorry not much of a Giants fan here.
1 more point. On the MVP topic (2-1). Remember that Morgan played on better teams. Hard ot win an MVP when your team sucks, although Dawson did do it. Better teams= more MVP's, worse teams= less MVP's.
Proof is in the pudding (below):
2002 MVP= Tejada...runner-up= A-Rod. What?!?! How did that happen? Oakland was good and Texas sucked, end of discussion.
A-Rod Tejada
BA .300 .308
Runs 125 108
RBI 142 131
HR 57 34
SB's 9 7
OBP .392 .354
SLG .623 .508
TB's 389 336
2002 MVP 0 1
It is crap but that is how it goes. Therefore MVP type seasons is a poor predictor of having better seasons or better careers.
If you want to know why Ryne Sandberg didn't make it in on the 1st ballot is because he "undid" his wonderful career in the minds of fans/voters in the last 2-3 years of his career. Keep in mind here that I have repeatedly said that I thought Ryno should be in on the 1st ballot, ok?!?
Ryne was going through some messy divorce in the last part of his career. His numbers were terrible and he retired...with great love from the fans!
Then, he made a mistake that Michael Jordan should have payed GREAT attention to....he came back. Ryne couldn't even hit like he used to during his "comeback" and was forced into retirement again...without love from ANYONE!
1993 CHI N 117 456 67 141 20 0 9 45 37 62 9 2 .309
1994 CHI N 57 223 36 53 9 5 5 24 23 40 2 .238
1996 CHI N 150 554 85 135 28 4 25 92 54 116 12 .244
1997 CHI N 135 447 54 118 26 0 12 64 28 94 .264
G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB CS BA
Pay close attention to the increased K's and decreased batting average. He probably would have been 1st ballot if he had just stayed retired the 1st time.
And please don't try to discount what I said based on Ryno's 25 homers in 1996. You've already discredited that arguement with the "juiced ball" and watered-down pitching theories, so I won't listen to it ;)
ED Fan I have to disagree on you with this statement as well. Your statement that Sandberg didn't get into the Hall because of the years after he retired is not true. The vat majoriry of athletes aren't good in the twilight of their careers. Look at Tim Raines for example. That old man is still trying to play to this day. He hasn't had a good year since 1993. There are hundreds of more examples available, but I will leave it at Raines for now. I'm sure SUCKS will give more examples and I'm sure he disagrees with you on that point too. While Sandberg's last two years made his BA decrease I don't think anybody took anything away from Ryno because of those two years.
I meant SUCKA...not SUCKS.
My argument was that Ryno was 1st ballot until hanging on too long. I don't think anyone would argue that Tim Raines was Hall of Fame material (let alone 1st ballot) before hanging on into the twilight and beyond into darkness
Vit,
Your tim raines take was hilarious!!!!!!!!!! AZnd your right, I do agree that Ryno did not hurt himself by coming back.
EDFan,
I have to disagree with your point that Ryno hurt his 1st ballot chances by making a comback after retiring, for two reasons. First, lets lok at it from a stats point of veiw. In your data provided you included 93' to 97' to show a drop off in stats. First of all, the 94' season is not a true sampling of a season's preformance because he only played 57 games and then retired. However the 96 and 97 show full seasons but still DO NOT tarnish his record. Ryno's career ab/h are as follows 8385/2386 for an ave of .285 If we take away the 96, 97 seasons we are left with 7384/2133 for an average of .289....a difference of four batting points. Honestly, a drop off of 4 points is not statistically significant to be left out of the hall on your first try.
Continuing along the stats route lets look at the two seasons in which he came back. ab/h 1001/253 for an ave of .253 He hit 37 hrs for an ave of 18.5 and hit 156 rbi for an ave of 78 per season. So ryno ave .253, 18.5, and 78 rbi's in his two twlight comeback seasons. But what were his yearly averages before he came back? Before his comeback he played 14 seasons, hit 245 hr and hit 905 RBI which was an average of 17.5 hr and 65 rbi. Conclusion, his power numbers were about the same. Basically Ryno actaully helped his HOF cause because he only lost 4 points off his average, kept pace with his power numbers, AND it brought him OVER 1,000 RBI's and GAVE him the 2nd baseman HR record. Those two improvements out do his extra 200 strikeouts.
The second reason can be found from a historical perspective. Did Jordan hurt his HOF bid by coming back to play for the wizards? Did it diminish his 6 titles or playoff performances. Is he seen as less dominate in his prime? Lets look at George Foreman or how about Mario Lemieux? Are their past accomplishment decreased because they decided to comeback? What about Reggie White coming back to play for the panthers or gren bay? Is he still not considered the greatest lineman? We can even look at athletes who played too long. What about Willie Mays as a Met or John Unitas as a Charger or Muhammed Ali getting beat by bums in hjis late 30's. My point in saying this is that no one who votes for any HOF reflects back to a players last couple of years. Instead they look at the periods where that player dominated or was at his best and for how long. IN my opinion Sandberg didn't hurt his cause, but it is an interesting topic.
Well, that's the best justification that I could give, because I was thinking that he'd have been in 1st ballot! I've been wondering about how he got snubbed and how Carter got in ever since it happened
ED- Read my previous posts and you'll discover the reason he didn't make the Hall on his first try. And probably won't on his 2nd either.
I read your posts. I didn't agree with you.
Who would've known that Sandberg is the cause of so much controversy. All I know is that the Phillies traded him with an old Larry Bowa to the Cubs for Ivan DeJesus. Maybe the worst trade of all time? I don't know if anyone remembers him, (unfortunately every Phillies fan does) but Ivan DeJesus might have been the worst starting shortstop in baseball history. Sucka, I'm sure you've seen the stats. He blew!
DeJesus, was not a big threat at the plate, but 15 seasons in the bigs doesn't make you the worst.
games 1371
ab 4602
runs 595
hr 21
rbi 324
seasons 15
SB 194
ave .254
hits 1167
obp .323
My vote goes to Al Pedrique....this guy was bad.
games 174
ab 449
runs 32
hits 111
HR 1
RBI 36
ave .247
obp. .298
i wonder what pitcher gave up his only HR?
I only remember the years he was in Philadelphia. My only lasting memory of him was of futility. He only stuck around until they could find another light hitting shortstop to fill the 8 hole. That being Steve Jeltz. Yes, the late eighties were very difficult years to be a fan. At least the Phanatic was funny.
steve jeltz!!! That;s some knowledge right there.
I'd give worst shortstop of all-time to the immortal, yet mediocre, Mario Mendoza!
G AB H HR R RBI AVG. K's OBP.
686 1,337 287 4 106 101 .215 219 .245
How this guy hung on for 9 seasons is beyond me! However, an interesting RBI note here...If you have ever made reference to a player's batting average being near the Mendoza line (near .200 for those who may not have heard it before) I read that George Brett is the one credited with coining that phrase.
Excellent excellent call
4 HR's. Not bad.
Quote from: sucka free on 01/14/03, 11:22:39 AMsteve jeltz!!! That;s some knowledge right there.
If you want a key comparison between terrible shortstops.....here are the 10 shortstops most comparable to Mario Mendoza, whom I said was the worst shortstop ever:
1. Jackie Hernandez (968)
2. Luis Gomez (963)
3. Fred Stanley (957)
4. Luis Alvarado (956)
5. Jim Mason (955)
6. Rick Auerbach (955)
7. Jack Heidemann (954)
8. Tim Johnson (952)
9. Dick Tracewski (952)
10.Steve Jeltz (950)
Note #10...seems Mr. Jeltz is in some really elite company!
Jeltz even had a nickname: The Jet
He even hit homeruns from both sides of the plate one game for two of his four homeruns that year.