HOF: Who Gets In Today?

[Thump]

Originally Posted by Sloopy45

Thump: "Do you think that the fact Donnie Baseball was on [censored]ty teams has something to do with his not getting more love for the HOF?"

Yes and no. Mattingly's career totals don't justify election to the HOF. Period. He's my favorite athlete of all time, and I'm the first person to say that.

However, going back to Bucktastic's example, what's the difference between Mattingly and Puckett? They have almost identical career numbers, they were both great players whose careers were cut short by injury, so what's the difference when one is a 1st ballot inductee and the other won't make it?

Its gotta be the fact that Kirby played on two World Series teams, had a walk-off WS home run, and played in two classic 7-game WS. That's the only difference I can see ..

"BTW, you do realize you can quote someone really easy by highlighting their text and just clicking on the quotation box icon on the top of the screen?"

Yes. I prefer to do it this way.

One thing I can't figure out about you is you talk against Yankee players an awful lot for being such a homer, this thread and the AL MVP thread are a few examples I can think of.

The one thing I will remember from now on when discussing baseball with you is something you said, something to the affect of, "I think with my heart not my head."

You realize you're not the most fun guy to get into a discussion with b/c you never admit any fault in your reasoning or rationale.

[Brutus1]

Originally Posted by tyrus3

If I ever change my mind about kids and marriage, I .

Read: If I can find a woman that will take me.






just a little joke.


Mattingly was the one Yankee you always liked. No matter how 'evil' the Yankees were, he was just a great player to watch.

[Sloopy45]

Thump: "One thing I can't figure out about you is you talk against Yankee players an awful lot for being such a homer"

That's the way New York fans are. We love the team, but we criticize adamently when its justified. I actually thought the opposite of what you're saying when I first got to college and would get into baseball conversations with Indians and Reds fans: I could never figure out why they never criticized their own team, and everything (no matter how bad) was just hunky-dory.

That's why guys like Ed Whitson, Rainbow Trout, Jeff Weaver, etc. got run out of NY. Its more the constant criticism of the fans more than the media.

There are a lot of guys who are beyond reproach and will never get criticized: Donny, Jeter, the Great Mariano, David Cone, Paul O'Neill, Bernie, etc. but everyone else is fair game.

"You realize you're not the most fun guy to get into a discussion with b/c you never admit any fault in your reasoning or rationale."

Nah, dude - I fully admit that my bias towards the Yanks and the AL skewes my rationale big time. But that's the way things are.

I also have my own views on baseball: for example, getting back to our previous discussion, I HATE the idea of the "Compiler" getting all the love from the HOF. I'm big on awards, accolades, and kudos being dumped on a player for his Prime years, not for the years when he hung on. I also love to look at and analyze stats, but I don't think stats tell anything when measuring a player.

[Thump]

Originally Posted by Sloopy45

Thump: "One thing I can't figure out about you is you talk against Yankee players an awful lot for being such a homer"

That's the way New York fans are. We love the team, but we criticize adamently when its justified. I actually thought the opposite of what you're saying when I first got to college and would get into baseball conversations with Indians and Reds fans: I could never figure out why they never criticized their own team, and everything (no matter how bad) was just hunky-dory.

That's why guys like Ed Whitson, Rainbow Trout, Jeff Weaver, etc. got run out of NY. Its more the constant criticism of the fans more than the media.

There are a lot of guys who are beyond reproach and will never get criticized: Donny, Jeter, the Great Mariano, David Cone, Paul O'Neill, Bernie, etc. but everyone else is fair game.

"You realize you're not the most fun guy to get into a discussion with b/c you never admit any fault in your reasoning or rationale."

Nah, dude - I fully admit that my bias towards the Yanks and the AL skewes my rationale big time. But that's the way things are.

I also have my own views on baseball: for example, getting back to our previous discussion, I HATE the idea of the "Compiler" getting all the love from the HOF. I'm big on awards, accolades, and kudos being dumped on a player for his Prime years, not for the years when he hung on. I also love to look at and analyze stats, but I don't think stats tell anything when measuring a player.

I appreciate your honesty but just wanted to let you know that may be why a lot of your discussions end up in [censored]ing contests.

But hey, at least you admit it.

[AKAKBUCK]

I also have my own views on baseball: for example, getting back to our previous discussion, I HATE the idea of the "Compiler" getting all the love from the HOF. I'm big on awards, accolades, and kudos being dumped on a player for his Prime years, not for the years when he hung on. I also love to look at and analyze stats, but I don't think stats tell anything when measuring a player.

This is that subjective problem of "I know greatness when I see it"

Then the problem is, how long does that "greatness" need to last? ie the "prime years?"

3? 5? 7? And what's a great year?

Top 5 in your league major categories, Top 10?

(I'm really starting to look down on the number of MVP's, Cy Youngs, or more specifically, lack there of... ie, I have a problem when baseball writers say, "I'm not voting for you for the hall of fame because you didn't win the MVP-- which I also didn't vote for you for."

I'm torn on compilers, because there is a body of work component...

fwiw, I was not happy about Puckett.

[Jaxbuck]

I have a an easy solution for those of you who don't like "compilers".....
quit paying attention to counting stats.

If two players have a comparable sample siaze of AB's look at the stat lines that actually tell you something not doubles, RBI's etc.

Also take out the bull[censored] about "if player x would have stayed healthy" There are so many guys who injury robbed of a super career its just not even funny.

Thirdly in the WC vs Dm debate what about ballparks? Mattingly played his career in a left handers dream park, WC played the majority of his in freakin Candlestick.

I hated Clark as a person and liked mattingly but when you look at this there is no way you can honestly say DM was "way, way, way" better than Clark unless you are just prone to making widley hyperbolic statements born out of blind homerisim(Sloop).

BA/OBP/SLG/OPS

Will Clark: 7,173 AB's .303/.384/.497/.881

Don Mattingly: 7,003 AB's .307/.358/.471/.829

If I'm the GM of a team today and I have the choice between player A with Clarks stat line and player B with Mattingly's I honestly would take player A although both were obviously fine players.

[Brutus1]

Which one had the better glove?