Quote:
Originally Posted by G1911
I think it was pretty clear who was considered better in the 1980's and 1990's, but that doesn't make it true and that doesn't mean either or both is HOF deserving.
Personally I would vote for neither. 127 and 128 OPS+ is good, but it's not really great for a 1B. Neither has any milestones or particularly HOF tier counting stats; rates are good but not exactly overlooked when the barrier is HOF level 1B performance. The defense argument for Hernandez is absurd; there are a tiny amount of players in the HOF for defense. 1B defense is not that valuable. Hernandez is very similar to Olerud except Hernandez has more fans and so every HOF thread becomes about Hernandez and Mattingly even if they don't meet the criteria of the thread  . |
You love to say that allowing Hernandez in the HOF would open the floodgates to people like Olerud (even though he had fewer accolades). Others point to Will Clark needing to be in if Hernandez gets in.
Well, if Mattingly gets in, then so do Albert Belle, Dale Murphy, Johan Santana, and pretty much anyone else who has had 4 exceptional years.
To be honest, I am ok with none of those guys getting in, including Hernandez. But for Packs to claim that Mattingly is more deserving than Hernandez for such reasons as the HOF voters have been kinder to Mattingly is incredibly weak.