OK here's a question, who is the only pitcher to face both Rose and Ichiro?

Gotta be Jamie Moyer, right?

No.

Orosco?

Yes.:D

Still no answer, under 30 and 1500 hits...

Castro?

Your perfect record in this thread is over. Negative.

I'm pretty sure he meant Garvey. LOL

OK so we can add "didn't get many extra base hits or RBI" to the list of his drawbacks. That still doesn't get us anywhere near to outweighing the positives on his resume though. He was a leadoff guy, he stole more than 500 bases and scored more than 100 runs for eight seasons in a row, so obviously he was contributing something of exceptional value even if it didn't translate into a bunch of RBI


Just to be clear: getting a bloop single with a runner on base doesn't hurt your team. Its not as good as getting a double obviously, but is preferable to recording an out. A guy getting a bloop single 1/3 of the time in that situation is arguably preferable to a guy hitting a line drive to right 1/4 of the time.

Agree about the Boggs and Gwynn comparison being inaccurate.

I'm neutral about the hanging on at the end of the career for milestones since a ton of HOFers have done that. Its basically irrelevant to HOF consideration IMHO - even Ruth hung on longer than he should have.

Also, Ichiro's last years weren't entirely unproductive: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...-old-and-good/

His career WAR isn't spectacular by HOF standards, nor is it an outlier though as there are a lot of guys with much lower WAR already in, including some big names. His WAR just makes him an average HOFer but I don't think you can use it effectively to put him in the Hall of Very Good, given all the other stuff he has going for him. The numerous records, including important ones, the trailblazer role that he played as the first Japanese position player, and all the other stuff that is too well known to be worth repeating here.

I think the fact that he played his prime years in Japan just adds to his resume (or at the very least it does not detract from it), he actually played 7 seasons in Japan and won the batting title in each of them. I know they don't give much weight to NPB stats in making HOF decisions, but its an extremely impressive footnote to his career - he managed to squeeze periods of brilliant dominance into not just one but two major leagues.

I wouldn't rate him a first tier HOFer, but I think it's beyond any serious question that Ichiro should be in.

Will Manny Ramirez or Alex Rodriguez be enshrined in the HOF within the next 10 years?

Yes without a doubt

Without a doubt? It's been 6 years for Bonds. He's still very far away.

I disagree completely. How is Ben Johnson viewed today, 30 years after he lost his Olympic gold medal? How are the East German athletes from 40 years ago viewed today?

Yeah, McGwire has been eligible for more than a decade I believe, I do believe there will come a time when these guys will get in but I think it's very much uncertain right now.

None of you people who follow baseball can name the player under 30 with the most hits without looking it up?

I'll take a stab and say Trout...sure I'm wrong


You did mean active players, right?

Incorrect.

I cheated and looked it up. Quite a surprise, as is the guy who has a few more and is 30.

I used to set aside the junk wax cards of guys I figured had a shot at 3000 hits or 400+ HR. I should get the box out of the barn and list the names, it should be amusing.
I based it on a presumed career of 20 years averaging 150 hits a year. There were a lot of players reliably hitting 150 hits a year. Nearly none of them made 3000.

Yeah once you hit 33 or 34 or so it's hard to sustain. Look at Miggy.

Castro would have been my first guess, the guy who is 30 would have been my second. The right answer would have been third or lower.

New Baseball writers keep replacing the old guard....its without a doubt how the younger voters will decide to let either of the guys in. If you poll the current voting you will see what i mean.

Bonds is the greatest steroid player of all time and his vote total only grew 3 percent from 2017 to 2018. He's seen his total go up 20 percent in 6 years. If he maintains the same growth with the new guard, he'll still be off the ballot before he's in. So why would lesser cheaters get in before him?

5 or 6 years isnt enough time...still considered too soon..will move up exponentially as it get closer to the deadline...its like saying there were no trades in baseball on June 10, and the season had gone on for so many months so why would there be trades by deadline.

Things happen when a deadline occurs. If you are voted on the very last year nobody cares that you waited that long. So not having much of a vote means nothing right now for Bonds/Mcgwire that arent being voted in based on things outside the stats.

I don't know what that means. Over the next 4 years Bonds will fall off the ballot entirely. When he does, Ramirez will be in year 6 of 10 to stay on the ballot. His voting totals went down last year from 23% to 22%.

Three names immediately come to mind. Jose Altuve, Starlin Castro and Elvis Andrus. Castro has already been named, and is wrong, so it would come down to a guess between the other two. Both guys started really, really young, and, to my knowledge, neither have ever had an injury to keep them out of a large number of games (at least, until this year, when Andrus missed a block of games. The Dallas Morning News made a big deal about how it was the first time he ever went on the DL). Altuve is a much better hitter, though Andrus started to come into his own the past two seasons, hitting around .300.

Altuve leads the league/Majors in hits like every year (he's an automatic 200 hits each season, while I don't think Andrus has ever hit that plateau), so my gut tells me to go with him. But the "surprise" factor just referenced makes me think that Andrus is the guy.

I would have never thought of him if I didn't live twenty minutes from the Ballpark in Arlington.

In the post where I posed the question I said it wasn't Altuve. You have to read. :D

So yes, it's Andrus.

I used to do that to. Somewhere I think I still have a stack of Matt Nokes, Jerome Walton and Kevin Seitzer rookie cards that....call me optimistic...I am still hoping will be worth something someday.

My eyes are going? :D

If Markakis sticks around long enough to get to 3000 hits, then he’ll most likely also be in the range of 1300+ rbi and runs, 200+ homers, 600+ doubles, 1000+ walks with fairly low strikeout totals for his era, and a solid career slash line. He also was a solid defender with a great arm. Now I’m not sure if that is exactly a hall of famer, but if you showed those career totals along with 3000+ hits and didn’t provide a name or a list of accolades, then most people would atleast consider the person.

He's made all of one all star team, this year.

Nor is it the hall of greatest of the greats but the hall of fame. I never understood that argument. I for one am for a larger hall it is a museum there to tell the games history. so if you are a figure that contributes to the games history put them in. Allow the plaques to tell their level of greatness by their stats and their stories and contributions.

Let Juan Pierre be the cautionary tale and most likely mirror for Markakis. In 11 seasons between 2001 and 2011, Pierre amassed nearly 2,000 hits by age 33.

He then retired 2 years later at age 35 with only just over 2200 hits.

Juan Pierre was a singles hitter with speed. He had no power. He also couldn’t throw. Markakis is a more complete hitter and player and has been incredibly consistent over his career. He is the type of player that I think ages well. Never had a ton of power. So you don’t have to worry about that declining, and he’s always been a contact hitter with a good eye.he keeps himself in shape. I see him being an above average player for atleast 5 more years.

Why do you think that though? He'll be 39 years old in 5 more years. The only active players who aren't pitchers that are 38 or above are Adrian Beltre and Chase Utley. Beltre hasn't been able to stay on the field dating back to last season and Utley is a role player.

I think the all-time record for singles ratio is still the Phillies Roy Thomas. Thomas has lots of cool obscure records because all he ever did was hit singles and walk at an absurd ratio. He had 1,537 hits, 1,377 of which were singles, or 89.5%.

He also played in 110 games or more in only 9 seasons, but led the league in walks 7 times. He played in only 121 games in 1907, but still led the league. Not a Hall of Fame candidate, but a fun player.

Just a gut feeling i guess. Everyone thought he was declining in his last few years in Baltimore. Not many people thought he would have many good years left. Instead he went to Atlanta and has gotten better. His double totals the last 4 years are 38, 38, 39, and 37(so far this year). His RBI totals have gone up the last 3 years, and outside of 2015 his homer totals have stayed fairly consistent. 2015 wasn't a disaster year even though he only hit 3 home runs, he hit .296/370 and had 38 doubles and 181 hits.

The main reason I think he has a chance to get to 3000 hits and remain consistent for at least 5 years is he has remained very healthy for almost his entire career. He has played 155 games or better every season in his career except his rookie year (147) and one season that he got hurt (104). Players who stay healthy have more chances to accumulate stats such as hits. I just see him staying healthy and sticking around long enough to get there.

Does the Hall look at contributions outside of just the stats? Ichiro is pretty much a household name and he brought people to the ballparks, especially in Seattle. I remember shelling out some serious coin just to get standing room tickets to see Ichiro in 2001 when the Mariners were at Fenway. He is a lock IMO, regardless of how you slice and dice it.

And, Peter, I too have always considered Biggio as a top-tier player, and was pleasantly surprised to see how highly regarded he was in Bill James' work. Good stuff!

Nick Markakis and "the Hall of Fame" don't ever belong together in the same sentence unless he's visiting Cooperstown.

Agreed. He is an accumulator just at a much lower pace than Harold Baines let alone Eddie Murray.

Pete Rose

Is it Grich's .266 average that impresses you? He probably could have spent a few more years 'accumulating'. Whitaker 'accumulated' for 19 years as opposed to Biggio's 20, but I don't think another year would have helped much.

I really don't understand the whole Grich thing, past a point, that point being OK maybe he was a guy who was a bit better than his counting stats suggest, but a HOFer? Really?

I really don't understand the whole Grich thing, past a point, that point being OK maybe he was a guy who was a bit better than his counting stats suggest, but a HOFer? Really? Bobby Grich??????

Pete Rose?

Bit of an old post but this has the makings of an interesting conversation in itself.

Do you think its possible that a player could make the HOF based on his playing career without having ever appeared in an all star game (obviously limited to those who played since the All star game was introduced)?

I think Tim Salmon, Kirk Gibson and Eric Karros are the names that come to mind off the top of my head among "best careers of guys who never made an all star team" and they are not even remotely HOF worthy. At the same time though I think they could all reasonably qualify as members of the Hall of Very Good and to have put together decent careers like that without making an all star game suggests it might be possible for someone who, say, played a few more years than they did to amass enough hits or wins or home runs to meet the usual Hall cut offs.


It could happen two ways I think. One way is you have a guy who is consistently good but not great over a very long career and just piles up enough numbers to get the nod (Bert Blyleven comes to mind, having only made 2 all star appearances and never really having been considered among the top pitchers in the game for most of his career).

The second route would be a guy who has a lot of great seasons but is always overshadowed by an even bigger star at the same position whose career by coincidence happens to overlap with his. I'm not really sure who the prototypical player meeting this description would be, but probably there are a lot of first basemen out there who fit the bill.

But do you think this is even a possible accomplishment?

Fred McGriff

I think this is the answer. The all star game is great, majority of the time it shows the greatest players at that time. But it also turns into a popularity contest sometimes. It also doesn't show position weakness any given year. So basically one, a player can become extremely popular and just make the all star team every season, not because they are the best at their position that year, but because they are popular and get voted in. Or two, that specific position was weak that season and the person voted in was just the best of the bunch, not necessarily great. So an example, a mediocre second baseman who is just the best out of a bunch of mediocre players at 2B can have an all star appearance, meanwhile an outfielder having a great season gets beat out by a handful of other great OFs, doesn't get the all star appearance, even though he is a far superior player and has far better stats than the second baseman. It all depends what position you play and who else is playing that position that season. Not necessarily what you do personally, but what everyone else does as well. That is why all star appearances is a terrible way to judge players abilities or career accomplishments.