Baseball Hall of Fame discussion

[Mal]

I don't think so. Pitchers pitched a lot of innings back then. A lot of tired pitchers. Plus, the specialization of relief pitching wasn't big then.

Nor was it in the mid-'70s. Pitchers were still throwing plenty of complete games over the first 2/3 of Rose's career. Relief pitching specialization has grown immensely in the last 20 years (all post-Rose) - probably more in that period than in the previous 50. Not to mention pitchers had the advantage of the dead ball during Jackson's playing career.

And for his career, how many more hits did Rose have over Jackson? It's not close. Rose in a landslide.

Yep, over 4000 hits. More than anyone. Of course, he's overrated.

So what? You are vasly overvaluing hits as a measurement of a player's offensive productivity. Please consider the bevy of much more important statistics Olyfan described, such as on-base percentage (which carries more importance when you're looking at singles hitters, as a walk is 80% as valuable as a single), OPS, and OPS+. Jackson crushes him in all of them. Compare Rose to Tony Gwynn, the next great high average guy to make the Hall. Other than in accumulation of various stats, Gwynn's the better hitter in practically every major statistical measure. So what if he played 4 less seasons and didn't get as many singles? He hit more doubles per season, more homeruns per season, got on base at a higher percentage, had a higher slugging percentage, consequently had a significantly higher OPS, and an OPS+ 14 points better than Rose's. You want to make an argument that Tony Gwynn's better than Joe Jackson? I sure don't, but it's pretty obvious he's better than Pete Rose.

By the way, I loved Bench and Morgan, but I think Rose had a better overall career.

No offense, but based on what? Hit totals again? Rose was a classic accumulator, statistically. He was a subaverage player at least his last 5 years in the league, but racked up another 750 or more hits while hanging on.

He's a Hall of Fame caliber player, sure, but somehow he's come to be perceived as scratching at the door of the Pantheon but for his gambling troubles. He's a middle of the road HOF'er. If you had a 5 tiered Hall of Fame, as Bill Simmons once pined for, he'd be in Tier 3 or possibly 4. Jackson would be Tier 2.

[rasputin]

Other than HR's, he is in that discussion.

Rice had 250 more hits than Killebrew, he hit .300 7 times, Killebrew never did nor did he really get close. Rice had 4-200 hit seasons. Again, Killebrew never had close to one. They scored about the same amount of runs and Killebrew only had 89 more RBI's for his career.

The average for a 162 game season Rice wins 97-85 in runs, 190 hits to 139, and 113 RBI's to 105. Killebrew wins 38 top 30 in HR's.

So Rice's career was very comparative to Killebrew's.

No, Rice is not in that discussion. He is not among the VERY BEST of all time in any statistic. Killebrew was and is.

[A-Tex Devil]

From people who saw Rose get over 4000 hits. And how many players have more hits than him?

And to say anyone is a far greater player than Rose is just laughable. If you want to consider Jackson better that's fine. But, let's not exaggerate

My 2 cents as far as someone being "far greater than Rose" --- if I am picking a 26 man roster of the best players over the last 50 years only, Pete Rose would not come close to making the team. He might not make the second team. (This is my team off the cuff, I am not saying this would be my team if I spent time on it, just how completely easy it would be to leave Rose off).

C Johnny Bench
1B Pujols
2B Morgan
3B Schmidt
SS A-Rod
OF Ricky Henderson
OF Mantle
OF Willie Mays
Bench: Brooks Robinson, Jeter, Pudge, Reggie Jackson, Lou Brock (for speed off the bench), Frank Robinson
12 pitchers.

Rose did one thing better than almost anyone -- singles, and he did it for longer than virtually anyone who ever played the game.

It's like the people who think that Nolan Ryan was one of the 5 or 6 greatest pitchers of all time. I LOOOOOOOOOVE Nolan Ryan, have a picture of him with me when I was 11. But he was a strikeout specialist, and a master of keeping fit, whose career lasted longer than most, inflating his numbers. If I had to pick a starting rotation from the last 50 years, I'd pick Bob Gibson, Sandy Koufax, Roger Clemens, Greg Maddux and Steve Carlton. Tom Seaver, Randy Johnson, and Nolan Ryan would likely be in the next 5.

Rose and Ryan were both first ballot hall of fame worthy players that specialized in one particular area, which should not be overlooked, but neither would be considered a best of all time other than in base hits and strikeouts respectively. At least Nolan's per season strikeout totals are up there if not the best. I imagine there are many players with better per season hit totals than Rose.

Again, just my 2 cents.

[rasputin]

My 2 cents as far as someone being "far greater than Rose" --- if I am picking a 26 man roster of the best players over the last 50 years only, Pete Rose would not come close to making the team. He might not make the second team. (This is my team off the cuff, I am not saying this would be my team if I spent time on it, just how completely easy it would be to leave Rose off).

C Johnny Bench
1B Pujols
2B Morgan
3B Schmidt
SS A-Rod
OF Ricky Henderson
OF Mantle
OF Willie Mays
Bench: Brooks Robinson, Jeter, Pudge, Reggie Jackson, Lou Brock (for speed off the bench), Frank Robinson
12 pitchers.

Rose did one thing better than almost anyone -- singles, and he did it for longer than virtually anyone who ever played the game.

It's like the people who think that Nolan Ryan was one of the 5 or 6 greatest pitchers of all time. I LOOOOOOOOOVE Nolan Ryan, have a picture of him with me when I was 11. But he was a strikeout specialist, and a master of keeping fit, whose career lasted longer than most, inflating his numbers. If I had to pick a starting rotation from the last 50 years, I'd pick Bob Gibson, Sandy Koufax, Roger Clemens, Greg Maddux and Steve Carlton. Tom Seaver, Randy Johnson, and Nolan Ryan would likely be in the next 5.

Rose and Ryan were both first ballot hall of fame worthy players that specialized in one particular area, which should not be overlooked, but neither would be considered a best of all time other than in base hits and strikeouts respectively. At least Nolan's per season strikeout totals are up there if not the best. I imagine there are many players with better per season hit totals than Rose.

Again, just my 2 cents.

I agree with you A-Tex. (Especially about Ryan, one of the most overrated players in the history of the game.) And I wouldn't have Rose on such a team. However, in fairness to Rose, his apparent worth goes down because you just don't have a position to slot him into comfortably. He started as a second baseman. Then moved to the outfield. Then to third. Then to first. (In part, this is because he wasn't a great fielder at any of these spots. Yes, I know he has a very high fielding average in the outfield, but that isn't an important stat). Rose moved all over the diamond to help his team, and that's to his credit. But he still doesn't get even a sniff at an all-time team.

[JasonEvans]

I agree with you A-Tex. (Especially about Ryan, one of the most overrated players in the history of the game.)

Wait a second, just so we are clear, Nolan Ryan was more than a strikeout specialist.

Look at his career stats and find me a season where his ERA was above 4.00. You'll only find it once... in his last season when he was 46 years old. That's one out of 26 seasons as a starter (I am omitting his 2 appearances at the age of 19 as a reliever in 1966). Sandy Kofax only played 12 seasons in his career and his ERA was above 4.00 in 3 of them.

Ryan's career ERA was 3.19
Steve Carlton's was 3.22

Greg Maddux had 9 seasons with an ERA over 4.00. His career ERA of 3.16 is just a sliver under Ryan's. The chemically enhanced Roger Clemens had 6 seasons with an ERA of higher than 4.00. His career ERA of 3.12 is also very similar to Ryan's.

The only thing that could even begin to hold Nolan Ryan back a bit from being right alongside these guys is his W-L record... and that is the one thing that a pitcher cannot control. Ryan was fated to play on some godawful teams.

In 1974, he was 22-16 for a California Angels team that was a wretched 68-94. He won a third of their games for them! Imagine how horrible their record would have been without him!?!? For almost his entire career with the Angels, they were well below .500.

He then went to a Houston team that was ok some seasons, but was mostly a .500 ballclub. His career concluded in Texas playing on teams that generally finished third or so in the standings. To me, it is quite telling that he played in the postseason only 5 times in his very long career and only once (the 1969 Amainz' Mets) did his team win a postseason series.

My favorite typical Nolan Ryan season was 1987. He lead the league in strikeouts and ERA (2.76) that year. He gave up a league leading 6.5 hits per 9 innings and had a sick strikeout to walk ration of 3.1-to-1. He finished 5th in the Cy Young voting.

Wanna know what his record was that year? 8-16. You read that right-- hius winning percentage was .333 while leading the league in ERA, K, K/BB ratio, and hits allowed. Folks that takes some work!! I doubt there has ever been a pitcher to finish in the top 5 in the Cy Young award voting while being 8 games under .500 too

Can someone please show me some evidence (other than W-L, which was out of his control) to show that Nolan Ryan was not just as good as Carlton, Clemens, Maddux, and the other "elite" pitchers of the past 30 years.

--Jason "his right arm is a perfect piece of human anatomy" Evans

[Olympic Fan]

Yep, over 4000 hits. More than anyone. Of course, he's overrated.

Far and away?!?! Did you see him play?

By the way, I loved Bench and Morgan, but I think Rose had a better overall career.

Angel, I think your post(s) are the perfect illustration of why I labeled Pete Rose one of the most overrated players in baseball history. You've locked on one stat -- his career hits -- and inflated his value to a ridiculous degree.

I'll repeat what I said before -- Pete Rose is a Hall of Fame quality player. He was a very good player for a very long time. But suggesting that because he got 4,256 hits that he was a greater player than Joe Jackson or Joe Morgan, is like arguing that Bert Blyleven and his 286 wins was a greater pitcher than Sandy Koufax, who only had 165 career wins. Mike Mussina with his 270 wins must be a greater pitcher than Pedro Martinez and his 210 wins.

Heck, Dave Kingman with his 442 home runs must be a greater player than Joe DiMaggio and his 361 home runs, right?

Angel, you are really messed up when it comes to eras -- to suggest that Joe Jackson faced weaker pitching (Yeah, Walter Johnson, Grover Alexander, Christy Mathewson, Cy Young -- well, he did get him at the tail end of his career, Three-Finger Brown, Smokey Joe Wood and the like) ... on what do you base that?

In the 10 years that form Jackson's prime, the league era was approximate 2.90 and the AL averaged less than four runs a game. Go back to 1908, when Honus Wagner hit .354 with a .415 OBP, a .542 SLUG and a .957 OPS -- in a league that had a .239 BA and a .306 SLUG average. The NL pitchers that year had a 2.35 ERA and allowed 3.3 runs a game (that's combined for two teams). In that era, pitchers could legally throw spitballs, shine-balls and emory balls. Ball would be pounded into mush, covered in grime, but would still remain in play.

In that context, it's pretty silly to suggest the pitching wasn't very good or that it was easier to hit -- the numbers show pretty clearly that it was the toughest period for hitters in baseball history (that would change dramatically in the early '20s -- the '20s and '30s would be the easiest offensive period in baseball history ... at least until the mid-1990s).

Of course you don't have to compare eras when you compare Rose with his teammates. During the era of the Big Red Machine, Joe Morgan didn't get as many hits as Rose, but he got on base more often, he had more extra base hits and -- here's the kicker -- he scored more runs (plus he drove in FAR more runs). Bench didn't get on base quite so often, but he had so much more power that he also created more runs.

Plus, Morgan and Bench had significantly more defensive value.

I give Rose credit for his longevity. And for his defensive flexibility -- he did play 2B, 3B, OF and 1B extensively and he was (like Derek Jeter at short) adequate, but not special at any of them.

I think it's a little overblown how he was celebrated for his "hustle". Enos Slaughter in the '40s and Hank Bauer in the '50s were players who also ran to first base on a walk and ran to and from their positions in the outfield. Both were probably better overall baserunners. Rose said he patterened his "hustle" on Slaughter's style.

Angel, I did see Rose and Morgan and Bench play ... The latter two were clearly and significantly better players.

PS Not that it means anything, but Bill James rates Morgan the 15th best player and the best second baseman (over No. 2 Eddie Collins and No. 3 Rogers Hornsby) in baseball history. He rates Bench the No. 2 catcher (behind Berra and just ahead of Campanella and Cochrane. Neyer gives Bench the edge over Berra, just ahead of Cochrane and Campabella.

[A-Tex Devil]

Wait a second, just so we are clear, Nolan Ryan was more than a strikeout specialist.

Look at his career stats and find me a season where his ERA was above 4.00. You'll only find it once... in his last season when he was 46 years old. That's one out of 26 seasons as a starter (I am omitting his 2 appearances at the age of 19 as a reliever in 1966). Sandy Kofax only played 12 seasons in his career and his ERA was above 4.00 in 3 of them.

Ryan's career ERA was 3.19
Steve Carlton's was 3.22

Greg Maddux had 9 seasons with an ERA over 4.00. His career ERA of 3.16 is just a sliver under Ryan's. The chemically enhanced Roger Clemens had 6 seasons with an ERA of higher than 4.00. His career ERA of 3.12 is also very similar to Ryan's.

The only thing that could even begin to hold Nolan Ryan back a bit from being right alongside these guys is his W-L record... and that is the one thing that a pitcher cannot control. Ryan was fated to play on some godawful teams.

In 1974, he was 22-16 for a California Angels team that was a wretched 68-94. He won a third of their games for them! Imagine how horrible their record would have been without him!?!? For almost his entire career with the Angels, they were well below .500.

He then went to a Houston team that was ok some seasons, but was mostly a .500 ballclub. His career concluded in Texas playing on teams that generally finished third or so in the standings. To me, it is quite telling that he played in the postseason only 5 times in his very long career and only once (the 1969 Amainz' Mets) did his team win a postseason series.

My favorite typical Nolan Ryan season was 1987. He lead the league in strikeouts and ERA (2.76) that year. He gave up a league leading 6.5 hits per 9 innings and had a sick strikeout to walk ration of 3.1-to-1. He finished 5th in the Cy Young voting.

Wanna know what his record was that year? 8-16. You read that right-- hius winning percentage was .333 while leading the league in ERA, K, K/BB ratio, and hits allowed. Folks that takes some work!! I doubt there has ever been a pitcher to finish in the top 5 in the Cy Young award voting while being 8 games under .500 too

Can someone please show me some evidence (other than W-L, which was out of his control) to show that Nolan Ryan was not just as good as Carlton, Clemens, Maddux, and the other "elite" pitchers of the past 30 years.

--Jason "his right arm is a perfect piece of human anatomy" Evans

I am a HUGE Nolan Ryan fan, and I do not think he's overrated. But he was wild, and walked his way out of lots of potential wins (I can remember this in the early 80s. Obviously not his prime, but he had a ton of walks for the Angels as well). Also, compare his ERA to the other pitchers of his era -- it's in line with Carlton, but not as good as Palmer, Seaver for instance. And I think we can all agree that having a 3.2ish or better ERA (Pedro, Maddux, Clemens) from 85-present is a lot more impressive than from '66-'92.

Nolan Ryan had way too many 7-8 walk games in his career for me to label him as "best." He was perhaps the most dominant single game pitcher in the modern era (see: 7 no hitters) but check out his walk and HBP stats. They are up there. It's a bit like calling Brett Farve the best QB of all time because he has the TD passing and yardage record. He's also thrown a crapload of intereceptions.

And I remember that 1987 quite well. Ryan was absolutely amazing that year and that carpet bagger John McMullen let him go either that year or the year after. Sad. Not only were the Astros bad, Ryan only pitched about 6 innings a game (which makes his K totals more amazing), so the bullpen would usually blow it for him, or the Astros would only get 1 or 0 runs.

[Olympic Fan]

Wait a second, just so we are clear, Nolan Ryan was more than a strikeout specialist.

Look at his career stats and find me a season where his ERA was above 4.00. You'll only find it once... in his last season when he was 46 years old. That's one out of 26 seasons as a starter (I am omitting his 2 appearances at the age of 19 as a reliever in 1966). Sandy Kofax only played 12 seasons in his career and his ERA was above 4.00 in 3 of them.

Ryan's career ERA was 3.19
Steve Carlton's was 3.22

Can someone please show me some evidence (other than W-L, which was out of his control) to show that Nolan Ryan was not just as good as Carlton, Clemens, Maddux, and the other "elite" pitchers of the past 30 years.

--Jason "his right arm is a perfect piece of human anatomy" Evans

Jason, while I agree with your premise that Ryan was a great pitcher and not just a strikeout artist, I think there is some evidence that he wasn't quite at the level of the pitchers you mention.

While ERA is a great stat (and is a much better gauge of a pitcher's performance than W-L record), it needs to be put in context. Just as we were talking about the impact era had on Honus Wagner's numbers vs. Alex Rodriguez's numbers, I think you have to factor era -- and parks -- when you compare ERA's.

Ryan played earlier than Maddux or Clemens and in a more pitcher friendly era. His ERA plus (the pitching equivilent to OPS plus) for his career was 111 (taken from Baseball Encyclopedia, which also factors park effect into ERA plus). That's good, but not great.

Maddux, whose ERA was just a touch lower, pitched in a more offensive era -- hence his ERA plus was 132. Clemens, facing an even tougher environment (the AL was a more run-productive league in the last 20 years) finished with a 3.12 ERA and a 143 OPS plus.

I'll give you Steve Carlton -- his 3.22 ERA translated into a career ERA plus of 115 -- just slightly better than Ryan. Note: Sandy Koufax had a 2.76 ERA and a 131 ERA plus ... and Koufax was only a great pitcher for five seasons. Tom Seaver, who played at almost the same time as Ryan (indeed, they were both members of the '69 Miracle Mets) finished with a 2.86 ERA and a 127 ERA-plus. Randy Johnson came along a little later and was a 136 ERA plus.

And Bert Byleven, who we've talked so much about in this thread, had a career 118 ERA plus -- better than Ryan or Carlton.

The most interesting thing about Ryan was that he remained a power pitcher into his 40s. In baseball history, there are plenty of guys who overpowered batters in their 20s and early 30s. At that point, almost all of them hit the wall. Either they quit (Don Drysdale is a good example, Allie Reynolds), suffered career ending injuries (Joe Wood, Koufax) or they learned to survive on guile (Tom Seaver, Bob Feller, Carlton).

The only two pitchers I can think of who still relied mainly on overpowering stuff into their 40s were Walter Johnson and Nolan Ryan.

That's not a bad duo.

[Blue in the Face]

No, Rice is not in that discussion. He is not among the VERY BEST of all time in any statistic.

He might be at the top of the heap in grumpiness.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/sweetspot...-was-n-t-.html

[rasputin]

He might be at the top of the heap in grumpiness.

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/sweetspot...-was-n-t-.html

Well, and it's interesting that Rice thinks things were better in the good ol' days when players weren't so interested in their individual stats. This is the same Rice who pouted and refused to bunt when ordered to do so.

[Olympic Fan]

I obviously love this stuff (as you can tell by the number of posts I’ve had in this thread).

Anybody mind if I take this discussion in a slightly different direction – but still related to the thread. In fact, a couple of guys have touched the subject I’m interested in when they talked about Todd Helton being a potential HOFer.

I agree that Helton is on track to become a Hall of Famer. I don’t think he’s there yet. The game I love playing is looking over the majors and picking the guys that have already compiled the credentials that lock them into the Hall of Fame.

For instance, as great as Albert Pujols is and as certain as I am that he’s going to end up in the HOF, he’s not yet a lock – for the single reason that this is merely his ninth season and 10 are required. And steroids aside, I’m not sure that when you look at David Ortiz numbers, that he’s in yet (of his 10 full seasons, he’s had five great years, four.average years and one subpar year ... the scary part is that the subpar year is this year). He’s just 33, so he can still bounce back, but right now, he’s got a career that looks a lot like Dale Murphy or Don Mattingly.

So who (among active players) is in and not just on pace to get in?

I see five pitchers who are locks – Randy Johnson, John Smoltz, Mariano Rivera and Trevor Hoffman ... plus Pedro Martinez. I know that Pedro has just 215 career wins, which is low, but he also has the seventh best winning percentage in baseball history (.685) and the second best ERA-plus (154!). He’ll make it.

Among non-pitchers, I don’t see as many locks at the moment.

Chipper Jones, for sure (the second best offensive third baseman in history) and Derek Jeter, plus I think Pudge Rodriguez.

That list should include Alex Rodriguez and Manny Rameriz, whose numbers certainly warrant first-ballot induction. I’m just not sure how the taint of their PED useage will impact them.

Now, my question is who am I missing? I’m doing this off the top of my head, so I may have overlooked somebody obvious. Does anyone want to make the case for Vlad or Sheffield or Giambi someone else?

[JasonEvans]

Now, my question is who am I missing? I’m doing this off the top of my head, so I may have overlooked somebody obvious. Does anyone want to make the case for Vlad or Sheffield or Giambi someone else?

It seems to me that you are asking if Vladimir Guerrero keeled over and died today with 400+ HRs, 2200+ hits, 1300+ RBIs, a career batting average of .322 (50th all-time), a career slugging percentage of .571 (13th best of all-time), a career OPS of .959 (21st best of all-time), and an MVP award plus 2 other top 3 finishes in the MVP race if he would be in the Hall of Fame someday.

The answer is yes... and it is not even close.

Of course Vlad will get to play at least 3 or 4 more years (he is currently 34) and will likely eclipse the 500 homerun barrier, which will make his case even stronger.

Sheffield, at age 40, is a lot closer to the end of his career. His numbers similarly look very impressive.

HR- 509 (24th all-time)
Hits- 2682 (62nd all-time)
Avg- .292
OPS- .908 (59th all-time)
Runs- 1635 (36th all-time)
RBIs- 1676 (24th all-time)
Walks- 1471 (19th all-time)

Though he never won the MVP, he was in the top ten in the voting 6 times and in the top three 3 times.

It may hurt Sheff a bit that he bounced around so much. When you think of him, which uniform do you picture him in? 6 years in Florida; 4 each in LA and Milwaukee; 3 with the Yankees (playing in NY will help his cause); 2 each with Atlanta, the Padres, and the Tigers; and now finishing up with the Mets. On the other hand, he played for a lot of very good clubs over the years, reaching the playoffs 6 times and winning a ring with the Marlins.

I think Sheff is in. He and Vlad will both get there on the first couple ballots. PEDs are the caveat though. Until we know these guys names are NOT on the list from 2003 (or whenever that secret list was done) then we have to withhold final judgement. Sheff, in particular, has been rumored to be among the possible steroid dudes. If it is revealed that he was doping then hsi chances of making the Hall plummet.

--Jason "these guy's numbers are less impressive because they play in the steroid era -- if Murphy had these numbers he'd be a lock" Evans

[Olympic Fan]

Duh, I made one glaring omission -- Ken Griffey Jr. is a HOF lock.

Jason, you make a good case for Vlad and Sheffield ... my only reluctance was that that their numbers were somewhat inflated in the era. I realize you could argue that steroids had a lot to do with that and neither has yet to be proved to be a user.

On the other hand, the high power numbers of this era are not totally due to PEDs -- small ballparks, new bat technology, body armor and a batter-friendly strike zone (it's impossible to pitch inside any more) have all led to an offensive explosion since the early 1990s. I'm not sure that 500 home runs is the magic number it once was (it once ranked with 300 wins and 3,000 hits as automatic election.

All that said, I agree that your case for Guerrero is compelling. I'm not quite as sure about Sheffield, especially since his career has been marred by a number of attitude issues (as recently as three days ago). That one is going to be interesting.

[Tom B.]

I'm not sure that 500 home runs is the magic number it once was (it once ranked with 300 wins and 3,000 hits as automatic election).

Heck, it wasn't too long ago that 400 home runs pretty much made you a lock for the Hall of Fame. Everyone who became eligible before 1992 and has 400 home runs or more is in. To this day, there are still only three players with more than 400 home runs who are eligible but haven't been elected -- Dave Kingman, Darrell Evans and Andre Dawson -- though that number is certain to go up in the near future. It's a testament to the magnitude of the offensive explosion in the last 15-20 years that not only is 400 home runs no longer a lock, 500 home runs probably isn't, either.

[JasonEvans]

All that said, I agree that your case for Guerrero is compelling. I'm not quite as sure about Sheffield, especially since his career has been marred by a number of attitude issues (as recently as three days ago). That one is going to be interesting.

Not sure if I made it clear, but I consider Vlad a much stronger candidate than Shef. I suspect that Vlad will be a first ballot HOFer when the time comes to vote. She may have to wait a few years.

--Jason "what hat will Shef wear? I think Marlin. What about Vlad? Expo or Angel?" Evans

[Jarhead]

Having only scanned over much of this thread, did anyone mention the shameful absence of Dick Groat in the Hall of Fame? Dick went straight from the Duke campus to the Pittsburgh Pirates as the starting shortstop, and later to the St. Louis Cardinals. He was instrumental in getting both teams to the World Series, and in his career played MVP level on defense and at the plate. My guess is that his stats are better than many other infielders already in the Hall.

[Olympic Fan]

Having only scanned over much of this thread, did anyone mention the shameful absence of Dick Groat in the Hall of Fame? Dick went straight from the Duke campus to the Pittsburgh Pirates as the starting shortstop, and later to the St. Louis Cardinals. He was instrumental in getting both teams to the World Series, and in his career played MVP level on defense and at the plate. My guess is that his stats are better than many other infielders already in the Hall.

As much as I'd like to support Mr. Groat, there is no way in hell that he's a Hall of Famer.

He was a decent defensive shortstop with above-average range. He did make a LOT of errors early in his career, but improved on that later and ended up with a career fielding percentage that was just slightly under the league average for his era. He had a better than expected double play rate in Pittsburgh, but a lot of that had to do with playing alongside Bill Mazeroski (the greatest double-play 2nd baseman in history) ... Groat's DP rate in St. Louis was barely above the league average.

Overall, he was a good defensive SS, but he wasn't Ozzie Smith or Rabbit Maranville. He never won a gold glove.

It's as a hitter that Groat falls short of HOF standards. He is a career .286 hitter whose entire offensive value is in his batting average. He didn't walk (a .330 OBP) and he had no power (he slugged .366). His career OPS (.696) was 89 percent of the league average in his era. That's not terrible for a shortstop, but it ain't HOF quality either.

Yeah, he won a batting title, hitting .325 in 1960 -- even then he only had a .766 OPS. He had 186 hits that year, but 154 were singles (26 doubles, four triples and two home runs) and just 39 walks. It was a strange MVP award -- he had an OPS plus of 110 and tied with catcher Smokey Burgess for the fourth best OPS on the team -- you wonder if there wasn't some racist element involved in that RF Roberto Clemente was a MUCH better hitter (.815 OPS), plus was the best defensive RF of his era (and some would argue, the best of all time). I know Clemente is sainted today, but at the time, he was as unpopular by the white press as Bonds or Albert Belle, considered an arrogant Latin and a malingerer who wouldn't play when he was hurt.

Groat's best year was actually 1963, when he finished 2nd in the MVP vote (and had a career high .827 OPS). But 1960 and 1963 were the only two years he finished in the top 10 of the MVP vote.

He was an excellent player, but it's really stretching things to call him a HOF candidate. Bill James rates him the 30th best SS in baseball history -- just behind Cecil Travis and just ahead of Jay Bell and Rico Petrocelli. James claims "he may have been the worst .286 hitter in the history of baseball."

That's not just James' opinion. In 1957, when Groat was in his physical prime, Sport Magazine wrote "he's a a step too slow to be a good shortstop" and rated him overall as the sixth best starting shortstop in the eight-team NL.

PS Interesting story ... during the winter meetings in 1959, the Pirates worked a straight up trade with the Kansas City A's -- Groat for a young KC outfielder. After about an hour of reflection, the two teams called off the trade. The next day, the A's traded Roger Maris to the Yankees instead. Groat stayed in Pittsburgh.

The next season, Groat and Maris both won MVP awards and were matched in the World Series. Funny how it works.

[rasputin]

Another name that hasn't been in the discussion here lately (unless I missed it) is Jim Thome. I don't view him as a HOF player, but he's got a lot of HR's.

[Mal]

Thome's candidacy will be very interesting when it comes up. I personally think he's a pretty underrated player, and may be worthy of induction but likely to fall just outside the Hall. His numbers compare favorably to Sheffield's in most respects, but I feel like he's generally held in lesser regard. He was terrifying in the late '90s/early '00's on the Indians, and drove some very good teams, but didn't get quite the attention he probably deserved in Cleveland (for instance, in 2002 he hit 52 homers, walked 122 times and had a 1.122 OPS, tops in the AL, only to finish 7th in MVP voting).

He's not only hit a ton of HR's (12th all-time now, I think, and well over 500), but if I'm not mistaken, he's close to if not in the top ten all time in BB's, as well. He'll finish with a lifetime on-base percentage over .400, and right now has a very nice career OPS+ of 147 (equal to that of Mike Schmidt). He has struck out an awful lot. And he's been a DH for a number of years now and I don't recall him having a stellar reputation with the glove at 1B when he was there.

He'll likely be seen as an accumulator who suffers by comparison with others of brief flowering in the era of crazy homerun hitting. In any given year, there's always someone ahead of him in most of the main counting stats. He never had that three year run of just monster stats all over the board to establish him as without question one of the top 2 or 3 hitters in the game at the time. Also, on-base percentage just doesn't drive voting writers the way a couple years with 150 RBI do (although Thome's over 1,600 career).

[JasonEvans]

Another name that hasn't been in the discussion here lately (unless I missed it) is Jim Thome. I don't view him as a HOF player, but he's got a lot of HR's.

I think he has a pretty decent HOF resume.

Hits - 2129
HRs - 564 (12th all-time)
RBI - 1560 (39th all time)
Walks - 1618 (10th all-time)
OB% - .405 (46th all-time)
Slug% - .558 (20th all-time)
OBS - .963 (19th all-time)
At-bats/home run - 13.585 (4th all-time)

Lets not talk about his defense though, ok?

He was never the most feared hitter in baseball, but he was probably considered the best 1B (offensively at least) in the game for a few years around 2001-2003.

If he plays just one more year, it seems very possible that he will get to 600 career homers. That's a huge freaking number (though McGwire and Sosa have taught us that it takes more than big HR #s to make the Hall in the PED era).

Do folks feel like Thome is at all tainted by PEDs? I don't think anyone will be shocked if they found out he was on the list of folks who tested positive, but he has (so far) remained clear of scandal and he's still putting up big power numbers today when he is operating in a must more stringent testing environment. Does that make his big numbers in the early 2000s seem more legit?

--Jason "there are gonna be a number of guys with major power numbers who come eligible over the next 5-7 years who may be real tough choices for the HOF voters" Evans