Return to Baseball Leftovers

Can someone please explain...

Moderator: Baseball Moderators

Postby ajgnydc722 » Wed Jan 05, 2005 6:26 pm

FatGuyWithAMullet wrote:Phil Rizzuto.

That's true but I would have voted him in just to hear that HoF speech... :-b
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 4030
(Past Year: -37)
Joined: 11 May 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: THE EMPIRE

Postby Rirruto » Wed Jan 05, 2005 6:32 pm

You also have to remember that voters seem to play favorites on some players and look down on others...Kirby Puckett has always been looked at as some big fat teddy bear that everbody loved and Phil Rizzuto was pretty popular especially when he was still broadcasting. A guy like Albert Belle, no matter how amazing and talented he was, will never be seriously considered for the hall even though his numbers make Puckett look pathetic.
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Posts: 2499
(Past Year: -26)
Joined: 29 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Mezzanine Section 12 @ Shea

Postby GotowarMissAgnes » Wed Jan 05, 2005 6:37 pm

ajgnydc722 wrote:Pucketts career was shortened by injury? Mattingly's was worse than Puckett's. And Mattingly was better than Puckett on their best days.

Rings shouldn't make a difference to whether a guy gets voted in. It's not Mattingly's fault he was on a bad team, and there's no credit due to Puckett that he was surrounded by good players. I'm not saying Mattingly is a definate Hall of Famer, but how in the hell is he not considered when Puckett makes it first ballot?

We agree that teammates and rings should not make a difference. I think we also agree that Puckett was at best a marginal candidate.

But, Mattingly is not even close to being a candidate. Yes, he had three seasons that topped anything Puckett did. But the rest of his career was CRAP. He had one other good season, two average seasons, and 6 where he basically sucked. Yes, Mattingly had a higher peak performance (although we should recognize that hitting standards are significantly higher for 1B than they are for CF). But in those last 6 seasons, where Mattingly was hitting with an OPS on average just 3 percent above league average (which stinks for a 1B), Puckett was hitting 26 percent above league average, playing a more difficult position.

So, really, which is more HoF worthy--a short high 3-4 year peak followed by 6 years of stankiness, or 10 years of solid, very good performance? While I think the latter is at best borderline worthy, the first doesn't even deserve attention.
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy Expert
Posts: 5469
(Past Year: -47)
Joined: 12 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Happy Valley

Postby ensanimal » Wed Jan 05, 2005 6:39 pm

rodg12 wrote:That's something I would like to know as well AJ. THe only difference between them I can see is that Puckett has the two rings where Donnie has none. I think he definetely deserves to be in the Hall. He was one of the few dominant hitters of the 80s and the best defensive 1st baseman in the history of baseball. That, coupled with the dibilatating back injury, should be enough to get him in.

8-o :-?

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeHockey ModPick 3 Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 10428
(Past Year: -152)
Joined: 14 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Tim Horton's

Postby FatGuyWithAMullet » Wed Jan 05, 2005 6:57 pm

I will preface this by stating that I am an adamant Yankee hater, but I will attempt to be as impartial as possible.

Mattingly was a good player, and was one of the best for three years in the mid-'80s, but he didn't really have an outstanding HOF career - particularly for a 1st baseman. He was great for a few years, pretty good for another few years and then rather ordinary for several other seasons.

A 1st baseman who hit .307/.358/.471 (127 OPS+) with 2153 hits and 222 HR in 13+ years shouldn't be much of a candidate for Cooperstown.

When he retired his Most Similar player at 34 was Steve Garvey. In general, the Most Similar comparison according to Baseball Reference is Cecil Cooper, who hit .298/.337/.466 (121 OPS+) with 2192 hits and 241 HR. Other players on the list - Wally Joyner, Hal McRae, Kirby Puckett, John Olerud, Will Clark, Tony Oliva, Keith Hernandez, Jim Bottomley and Carl Furillo.

Only two are in the HOF - the aforementioned Puckett and Bottomley. Kirby got in because of his charisma, his postseason heroics and the fact that he was the premier CF in the game for a decade. Bottomley was a 1B in the '20s and '30s and the 1928 NL MVP, inducted by the Veterans Committee in 1974.

Out of all those similar 1B on the list, no others but one old-timer VC selection are in the HOF, so why should Mattingly go in?

If John Olerud retired tomorrow, he'd end up with a career line of .295/.399/.465 (130 OPS+), 2189 hits, 248 HR, and 1193 RBI. What makes Mattingly's career significantly stand out from what Olerud has done?

It's questions and topics like these that make me think we should have a HOF for the Very Good. Take what you want from that, but I believe the Hall should be an extremely exclusive club honoring only the best.

"Mr. Mattingly, please follow me to this roped off area. Keith Hernandez, John Olerud, Steve Garvey, Will Clark and Mark Grace are all waiting for you. Maybe we can find a dusty little corner in Cooperstown to honor you all together - if we could ever figure out who was who."
Minor League Mentor
Minor League Mentor

User avatar

Posts: 848
(Past Year: -2)
Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Uranus


Return to Baseball Leftovers

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests