Joe Gordon - HOF

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

I don't believe anyone could have really done their homework and said,Joe Gordon is the best player not enshrined yet and not still on the baseball writers ballot. For instance, a 2nd baseman named Cupid Childs has stats that would easily fall into the same class as Gordon. Childs got on base as good as anyone when he played and he scored a ton of runs,stole some bases and drove in his share of runs. Plus he compares amazingly well to Gordon defensively and they played basically the same amount of time. Has anyone ever stepped up and said Cupid Childs should be a hall of famer? Well if you think he should,you have a great case now,Joe Gordon wasn't any better than him. Gordon also has a few contemporaries at his position already enshrined while Childs just has Bid McPhee.


It really is a shame that the hall of fame can't get things right and it seems like everytime they do something now it highlights past mistakes. I'm not mad Joe Gordon is in the Hall, I am not one of those people who say only the best of the best should be in because there are too many forgotten great players who aren't in the hall because someone said something along the lines of "Joe Gordon should be in instead of Cupid Childs for no good reason other than I want him to be there"

[Archive]

Posted By: Ken McMillan

sucks that Santo didn't get in. What do these idiots that vote want??? You probably have to die first.

Kmac

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenny Cole

He was an all-star 9 of the 11 years he played, impressed the voters enough to win the MVP when Williams won the triple crown, was in the top 10 in MVP voting 5 times in 11 years, averaged close to 100 runs batted in a year over his career, hit for power when 2B didn't do that, could steal a bag every once in a while, scored 90+ runs 4 times (and 80+ 4 more), and (contrary to some posts above) was considered to be an absolute acrobat around the bag. He doesn't do too well on the black ink test, and is only mediocre on the gray ink test, but I suspect that's true for every HOF 2B not named Lajoie, Collins, Hornsby, Gehringer, Robinson, Carew (who was a much worse fielder than Gordon) or Morgan

I haven't looked at his fielding stats because they are pretty much irrelevant. Guys who are anchored to the bag can have good fielding stats and kill their team because they have no range and can't get to any balls. Guys with range, which I believe those who saw Gordon play would say he had, get the errors because they get to balls that others wouldn't be able to come close to. Gordon also played his home games in what were among the worst parks for right handed power hitters in that time.

Gordon was probably the best 2B of the 40s, with his only competition coming from Billy Herman. Head to head, he beat Doerr practically every year. When his numbers are considered in context, they aren't too bad.

His election doesn't give me too much heartburn. I wouldn't have picked him as the most deserving of the pre-'40s candidates, but he certainly doesn't drag the membership down

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

KENNY C....you are one really informed guy....DITTO to everything you said. And, I'll reiterate......

If Doerr and Mazeroski are in the HOF, then Joe Gordon belongs there, too. As a kid, I watched him
play and I'll say that Joe was impressive (even in his later years). His 1948 stats illustrate this......

GA = 144, AB = 550, Hits = 154, HR = 32, R = 96, RBI = 124, BA = .280



One of the last cards of Joe in a Yankees uniform.



I paid a penny for this exhibit card at the boardwalk in Asbury Park, NJ when I was a kid.






TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

............1947 BOND BREAD............................................1 948 Indians Photo pack.............................................. ..........1949 LEAF



..................1949 BOWMAN............................................ .................................................. ................................1950 BOWMAN



TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Stephen Mitchell

Howard has expressed my sentiments well, specifically:

"...Joe Gordon was considered a superstar while he was an active player. In his eleven seasons he was named by The Sporting News the top second baseman in the major leagues nine times..." and

"had it not been for two years lost to the war Gordon would have had a good shot of breaking the HR record for second baseman. In addition I would imagine that he lost a good number of HRs simply because he was a right handed hitter playing in Yankee Stadium."

That Joe Gordon was picked by The Sporting News (THE Baseball Paper) as THE All-Star Second Baseman for the MAJOR Leagues in 9 of his 11 seasons is powerful. Two years of military service must be honored, too, and not merely cited. (Check out Cecil Travis' record before and after WWII and see how much HOF support the late Senator shortstop receives.)

I'm very pleased for family, friends and the few ballplayers still living who knew Joe Gordon and salute his belated election to the National Baseball Hall of Fame.

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

Joe Gordon.

Good player.

Hall of Fame?

Here is a link which indicates over a 162 game season he would avaraged 25 home runs and 101 RBIs. Also a nine time all star. I will also listen to any defensive statistics:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/g/gordojo01.shtml





Thank You for the photo pack, Phil.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Being the best player at one's position in all of Major League Baseball for 9 of 11 years is more than most Hall of Famers can say.

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

Bringing up Gordon's 162 game average should lead anyone to check out Vern Stephen's avg

268 26 101 vs 286 23 111

Stephens was an 8 time all-star and had 3 rbi crowns yet he got less than 3 votes today?


These people have no clues when it comes to voting.

[Archive]

Posted By: boxingcardman

Say it ain't so...Joe?!?!?

Sic Gorgiamus Allos Subjectatos Nunc

[Archive]

Posted By: Jodi Birkholm

I must have something against second sackers with sub-HOF offensive stats. Ted, I backhandedly agree with you! Maz, Doerr and Gordon really don't belong! I obviously never saw these guys play, but I really think that each of these men have benefitted by having friends on the Committee, ergo Greg E's point. I know I have always been a better judge of third basemen than I have of second basemen, but I need some informed justification to convince me of the worthiness of these three fellows.

On a personal note, I know nothing of Maz' personality, have heard that Gordon was a decent guy, and it's safe to say that the entire collecting community knows what kind of man Bobby Doerr is.

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

My opinion is Gordon is not a Hall of Famer. However, the numbers I've seen here and elsewhere show his was a strong offensive second baseman. Second base is traditionally a fielder's position, where Gordon's type of offensive production is rare. His annual MVP votes show he was considered valuable by the sportswriters of the day.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jodi Birkholm

I understand what you say, and certainly feel that sportswriters from the pre-war era had much more astute eyes for a player's defensive capabilities. It's always struck me as odd that, in the past seven decades of televised ballgames, more emphasis hasn't been placed on defensive play. Far more was made of that aspect prior to when most fans could actually see such feats. Perhaps writers revered the acrobats of their time because it made their jobs so much easier to do! After all, there are only so many ways to describe a home run; the prosaic possibilities in describing a stellar catch are endless!

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

So as I understand it, the pre-1943 players are voted upon by a 12 man select committee of former players who are in the HOF. The select committee was established as a direct result of the cronyism which resulted in the Mazeroski vote. They showed their complete ignorance of players who played from 1900-1920. I read a while back that someone here flatly stated there would never be another HOFer from pre-1920 and I guess he was right.
The other thing that ticked me off was that for the fourth straight year, (I believe I read that somewhere), the 64 man surviving HOFers who comprise the veterans committee which votes on guys from 1944 on who ran out of time in the regular eligibility, failed to elect anyobody. Santo was very close, Oliva was close, Kaat was close, but no cigar.
Joe Gordon New York Yankee in.
Tony Oliva and Jim Kaat Minnesota Twins out.
Tell me again how players who play in New York don't have a built in advantage...

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

Bob, as soon as Gil Hodges is elected and Kirby Puckett kicked out of the HOF I'll agree with your argument.

[Archive]

Posted By: Ted Zanidakis

As I said previously, Bill Dahlen and Gil Hodges are long overdue to be in the HOF....and, I was hoping that they would have
been selected. Also, perhaps Santo, Oliva and Kaat are long overdue. In Santo's case, I think the lack of any post-season
play has hurt him.

Having said all that, and having seen Joe Gordon play, I'm quite happy with his selection to the HOF. And, I find some of the
responses here, to the contrary, somewhat amusing.

I have an advantage over most of you, in that I saw Jackie Robinson, PeeWee Reese, Phil Rizzuto, Bobby Doerr, Marty Marion,
and Joe Gordon play. And, I have a very good memory of the years from 1947 - 1957, when these guys covered their respec-
tive inside positions of the infield. They were in a class of their own......with their defensive and offensive contributions. It is
one thing to read about these players.....but, it's another thing to have seen them play. Videos are available of all the World
Series from 1941 on. I highly recommend viewing them to see these players in real action. Numbers in a BB encyclopedia don't
always tell the real story.

Yes, as Bob said, "cronyism" does have a lot to do with the selection process. HOF Committee members who were Joe Gordon's
peers, like Berra, Boudreau, Doerr, Feller, Kell, Kiner, Musial, Roberts, and Snider would understandably favor him.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

I'm still pulling for Blyleven. I find it hard to believe Ricky H. would be the only selection and there are sports writers out there who still hate Jim Rice for being "surly," so BB may have a legitimate chance.

Did anyone notice that although the veterans committee was allowed to vote for 4 candidates for the post 1944 players that the average numbers of votes cast per HOF voter was 3.3?

[Archive]

Posted By: Donavon Arabie

Anybody else notice the two SGC graded R303 Gordon's are now gone from ebay? They were just there yesterday (& have been on ebay for months) & now they are both sold.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jason L

After taking a day to ponder this new addition, I have to say, what else do we expect from a process that is designed to sift through the otherwise forgotten and previously un-decorated heroes of baseball past? The best that can happen is a marginal player is awarded entry.

I don't understand Santo's continued lack of support, unless it's true that everyone is afraid of Mike Schmidt's disapproval.

It's true that he lost HRs due to the war absence.
But I lost alot of HRs due to my not playing MLB baseball.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jeff Lichtman

I still can't understand how a guy who was the best player at his position in all of baseball for a decade is marginal. I think the prewar aficionados here just like to act curmudgeonly and complain about all the dead ball guys who belong in the Hall.