HOF Future Eligibles

[packs]

Really surprised Posada doesn't get more love. Other than Pudge and Piazza (both linked to PEDs), who was a better catcher during his era?

If you're the best player at your position in your era, that to me makes you a HOFer.

[z28jd]

I really hope they are done putting relievers in. I don't want to see Hoffman in, don't want to see Rivera in and no one that made a living pitching one inning. How many of these saves are 2-3 runs, or facing the bottom of a lineup?

There are guys that were real good pitchers putting in 3-4x more time on the mound because they were better pitchers. Hoffman, Rivera, Wagner and any current closer are failed starters at some point in their career. I think it's laughable they get consideration but a guy like Jim Kaat could be a good pitcher over 4500 innings and we consider guys with 1000 or so innings to be worthy.

Bruce Sutter being in kills me and he pitched for awhile when relievers actually had to work. Basically any post-LaRussa A's relievers are no for me. Craig Kimbrel could have 15 more seasons like he's already had, be the best one inning reliever by far and I wouldn't even consider him.

[packs]

I have no love for most relievers but come on. Mariano Rivera was one of the greatest pitchers of all time. How can you say he's not a HOFer?

Originally Posted by packs

I have no love for most relievers but come on. Mariano Rivera was one of the greatest pitchers of all time. How can you say he's not a HOFer?

Mariano Rivera is not in the same Category as Nolan Ryan, Tom Seaver, Steve Carlton, Cy Young , Sandy Koufax etc

[howard38]

Originally Posted by z28jd

I really hope they are done putting relievers in. I don't want to see Hoffman in, don't want to see Rivera in and no one that made a living pitching one inning. How many of these saves are 2-3 runs, or facing the bottom of a lineup?

There are guys that were real good pitchers putting in 3-4x more time on the mound because they were better pitchers. Hoffman, Rivera, Wagner and any current closer are failed starters at some point in their career. I think it's laughable they get consideration but a guy like Jim Kaat could be a good pitcher over 4500 innings and we consider guys with 1000 or so innings to be worthy.

Bruce Sutter being in kills me and he pitched for awhile when relievers actually had to work. Basically any post-LaRussa A's relievers are no for me. Craig Kimbrel could have 15 more seasons like he's already had, be the best one inning reliever by far and I wouldn't even consider him.

Mariano Rivera was not really a failed starter as he was only given the chance to start ten games as a rookie. Prior to that he had been a very good starter in the minors. He may have been given another chance to start in his sophomore year but he was so good as a reliever in the playoffs that he was made the Yankees set-up man instead.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by howard38

Mariano Rivera was not really a failed starter as he was only given the chance to start ten games as a rookie. Prior to that he had been a very good starter in the minors. He may have been given another chance to start in his sophomore year but he was so good as a reliever in the playoffs that he was made the Yankees set-up man instead.

Rivera was a solid minor league starter who was always old for the league he was in. His final full year in the minors he had good but not great numbers....only about a strikeout every other inning. Then he got lit up like a Christmas tree as a 25 year old starter in the majors. Perhaps not a failed starter but, at age 26 with a good arm but few quality pitches and solid but unspectacular minor league numbers as a starter....he was removed from that role. There was certainly a reason for it.

Tom C

[howard38]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

Rivera was a solid minor league starter who was always old for the league he was in. His final full year in the minors he had good but not great numbers....only about a strikeout every other inning. Then he got lit up like a Christmas tree as a 25 year old starter in the majors. Perhaps not a failed starter but, at age 26 with a good arm but few quality pitches and solid but unspectacular minor league numbers as a starter....he was removed from that role. There was certainly a reason for it.

Tom C

Of course there was a reason for it but the reason was not failure, which was my only point.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by howard38

Of course there was a reason for it but the reason was not failure, which was my only point.

The reason was they saw the high likelihood of him flaming out as a starter and figured his limited pitch selection and good arm lent itself to a role in the bullpen. They saw a flawed starter who likely would not help them much in that role. Flawed....failed....semantics really.

Tom C

[rats60]

Originally Posted by packs

Really surprised Posada doesn't get more love. Other than Pudge and Piazza (both linked to PEDs), who was a better catcher during his era?

If you're the best player at your position in your era, that to me makes you a HOFer.

So you think Jack Morris belongs in the hof? I don't think so. Being the best at your position over a period of time doesn't make you a hofer. Posada isn't even the best of his era. Piazza for the early part of his career, Joe Mauer for the later part.

[conor912]

I would be shocked if Posada didn't get in. Probably not first ballot, but soon thereafter. That team was so dominant for those 5-6 years that I think there'll be enough of a cry to push him in.

[packs]

Originally Posted by rats60

So you think Jack Morris belongs in the hof? I don't think so. Being the best at your position over a period of time doesn't make you a hofer. Posada isn't even the best of his era. Piazza for the early part of his career, Joe Mauer for the later part.

I know it's never been proven per se but Piazza is long suspected of PEDs.

Mauer had a good season in 2008 and a great one in 2009, and then played 82 games in 2011, when Posada retired.

It is not the same as Jack Morris. Posada was a switch hitting catcher with power who was great for a decade plus. That's special. There are maybe 2 or 3 great catchers at any given time, who usually burn out after a few good seasons. Sure guys might have a better year, but a better career?

[bcbgcbrcb]

The difference between Vlad and Killebrew, Sheffield, etc. is a .318 career batting average.

[Greg Sonk]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

The difference between Vlad and Killebrew, Sheffield, etc. is a .318 career batting average.

I'll assume this was directed at me since I brought them up in the same breath.

Batting average is not a stat which I believe to be very useful when compared to some others that we have at our disposal. However, I understand that many voters do, and as such, consider it relevant to the discussion. Without getting into sabermetrics, the best counter to this argument would be OBP, as we need a stat that has nothing to do with power and simply frequency of "success" at the plate. Here Vlad is then only .003 better than Killebrew and .014 worse than Sheffield. I would characterize that as very comparable. I would hope that we can avoid the walks do/don't matter argument in 2015.

Over their careers, you're talking about guys with very close OBPs and WRC+ of 136, 141, and 142, respectively. Career fWar actually has Vlad at 56.5 versus Sheffield at 62.4 and Killebrew at 66.1, which I must admit mildly surprised me, as I expected Sheffield to be slightly ahead of Killebrew rather than the reverse. Vlad's career was 6 years shorter than the other two, and all had roughly 3-4 elite (6+ fWAR) years.

I don't see a huge difference there at all.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by packs

Posada was by far the best of his entire era. Pudge and Piazza were cheating. No one was better.

Mauer had a good season in 2008 and a great one in 2009, and then played 82 games in 2011, when Posada retired.

So Posada plays steady, powerful baseball as a regular for 14 years but his entire era is eclipsed by Mauer's two good (one special) seasons?

Also we're talking about the best clean catcher in the league over a career. There are maybe 2 or 3 great catchers at any given time, who usually burn out after a few good seasons. It is not the same as Jack Morris.

Jorge Posada didn't even reach 1700 hits in his career. He was a vital part of some great teams but he was never considered the best at his position during his career. Ever. You can retrofit the "clean" tag however you may wish. You have no idea who did and who didn't. All we have are the stats and the memories of him as a player. He was always the fourth or fifth best hitter on his own team. Even in his best five year period he would have been considered, at best, the third best catcher in the game. His stats say he was not a Hall of Fame player. Really not close. Ted Simmons puts him to shame, and both were switch hitters. Simmons couldn't get 5% on his first ballot.

Tom C

[EvilKing00]

Griffey, vlad and chipper imo should get in 1st ballot

[rats60]

Originally Posted by packs

Posada was by far the best of his entire era. Pudge and Piazza were cheating. No one was better.

Mauer had a good season in 2008 and a great one in 2009, and then played 82 games in 2011, when Posada retired.

So Posada plays steady, powerful baseball as a regular for 14 years but his entire era is eclipsed by Mauer's two good (one special) seasons?

Also we're talking about the best clean catcher in the league over a career. There are maybe 2 or 3 great catchers at any given time, who usually burn out after a few good seasons. It is not the same as Jack Morris.

Mauer becomes the only catcher in baseball history to win 3 batting titles plus wins a MVP and 3 other top 8 finishes and he only had 2 good seasons? Mauer has an OPS+ of 133, higher than every catcher currently in the Hof. He absolutely has eclipsed Posada's career. After 11 seasons he's already at 46.3 war exceeding Posada's 44.7. His 7 year peak of 38.5 not only blows Posada away, but exceeds all time greats like Mickey Cochrane, Bill Dickey, Yogi Berra and Carlton Fisk. Mauer is easily the best catcher of 2004-2013.

As far as your claim that Piazza cheated, there is no proof. His 62% in the last election suggest that most writers don't believe it and his election to the hof is likely.

[Greg Sonk]

Griffey is the obvious top of the list of all players not yet inducted, given current voting patterns.

When you have voters refusing to consider Jeff Bagwell despite not being named in the Mitchell report, never failing a drug test, and used andro well before it was a banned substance, anyone in the Manny Ramirez situation has no chance, sadly. That takes out Pudge too. It also sinks Gary Sheffield, who is probably the biggest name I see missing from the discussion.

Posada will get in because WINS, but I wouldn't even take him over Edgar Renteria, who shouldn't sniff the Hall.

Vlad Guerrero is the most interesting one to me. I struggle with objectivity in his case because I've never had more fun watching a position player than I have watching one of his at bats. Realistically, he's very much in that Killebrew/Sheffield/etc group of borderline cases that needs something to push him one way or the other.

I would love to hear someone attempt a cogent argument that Trevor Hoffman of all people is a Hall of Famer and Pedro Martinez isn't. It can't be done. Pedro has exactly one possible strike against him, and it works even more strongly against Hoffman. Please note this isn't a shot directed at anyone other than the BBWAA, because at this point I have so little faith in them that I expect Hoffman to go in first (not that I would vote for him at all).

[t206blogcom]

Griffey Jr within the first 3 times being on the ballot. The rest - no way.

[Robextend]

There is no way Posada is getting into the HOF with 1,600+ hits and awful defense, I don't care how important he was to the Yankees. I think the days of any position player making the HOF with those kind of numbers are over.

[HRBAKER]

I agree, fine, fine player - not a HOFer.
KG Jr. and Vlad both yes.

[Touch'EmAll]

From deep down in my heart, honestly and no joke, I think Bo should be in the HOF.

[HRBAKER]

No, no chance.

[Shoebox]

But I don't think there is anyway it could happen.

Originally Posted by 100backstroke

From deep down in my heart, honestly and no joke, I think Bo should be in the HOF.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Robextend

There is no way Posada is getting into the HOF with 1,600+ hits and awful defense, I don't care how important he was to the Yankees. I think the days of any position player making the HOF with those kind of numbers are over.

Awful defense? You don't win that many rings as a team with awful defense behind the plate. Either way, I'm not saying I think he should be in, I'm saying I think he'll get in based on the team he was on. Phil Rizzuto got in strictly for being on the great Yankee teams in the 50's. His career numbers are a joke compared to the rest of the HOF. Compare his numbers to Posadas and they are freakishly similar, down to identical lifetime batting avgs. Posada even had more hits and did it from both sides of the plate. I'm not making an argument for him over anyone else, I'm just saying don't be surprised if/when he gets in.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by conor912

Awful defense? You don't win that many rings as a team with awful defense behind the plate. Either way, I'm not saying I think he should be in, I'm saying I think he'll get in based on the team he was on. Phil Rizzuto got in strictly for being on the great Yankee teams in the 50's. His career numbers are a joke compared to the rest of the HOF. Compare his numbers to Posadas and they are freakishly similar, down to identical lifetime batting avgs. Posada even had more hits and did it from both sides of the plate. I'm not making an argument for him over anyone else, I'm just saying don't be surprised if/when he gets in.

Posada was a very good hitter, but they won despite his defense...he was not known as a good defensive catcher.

It is tough to compare a modern day player to one that played half a century before him. And besides that, I believe there is many on this board that believe Rizzuto is truly not a hall of famer either. And if we are comparing the success of the two...Rizzuto has had at least double the world series wins as Posada. No argument in Posada's favor has been very convincing, I really don't think he gets in. You might as well say Jason Varitek deserves to get in too...

[dgo71]

Originally Posted by conor912

Phil Rizzuto got in strictly for being on the great Yankee teams in the 50's. His career numbers are a joke compared to the rest of the HOF. Compare his numbers to Posadas and they are freakishly similar, down to identical lifetime batting avgs.

The difference being that a completely biased Vets Committee, which does not exist in the same format anymore, elected Scooter to the HOF. If Posada was eligible in 1990 I'd say you're absolutely correct. But in today's voting format, Posada has no chance. Don Mattingly is more revered in Yankee lore than Posada, WS rings or not, and Mattingly will be lucky to scrape out 10% of the votes this year.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by conor912

Awful defense? You don't win that many rings as a team with awful defense behind the plate. Either way, I'm not saying I think he should be in, I'm saying I think he'll get in based on the team he was on. Phil Rizzuto got in strictly for being on the great Yankee teams in the 50's. His career numbers are a joke compared to the rest of the HOF. Compare his numbers to Posadas and they are freakishly similar, down to identical lifetime batting avgs. Posada even had more hits and did it from both sides of the plate. I'm not making an argument for him over anyone else, I'm just saying don't be surprised if/when he gets in.

Yes, awful defense. 7 times in 17 years he had a negative dWAR. He was a bad defensive catcher. That's just a fact.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Regarding Tim Raines' candidacy, have we all forgotten the drugs? The same issue seemed to derail Dave Parker's HOF chances many years ago. I realize that Raines was a little better player than Parker for his career, although Parker had a higher peak IMHO. Although less qualified, Keith Hernandez too.........

[bcbgcbrcb]

I just took a look at the eligible players for the HOF going out to 2019, which is as far forward as you can go right now. I do not see any names going forward who have good enough numbers to get in but have strong suspicions of PED use. This does not include the confirmed users that I have already listed elsewhere in this thread (just added Ortiz to my list today).

The way I see it then, the only questionable names going forward are: Bagwell, Piazza & Kent (I might be in the minority on him). I think Bagwell is a user and should not get in, Piazza is a good possibility but nothing definitive so I would be willing to let him in at this point & Kent is also a good possibility, but no evidence. With poor defense and base running, I would say that he's on the borderline but it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if he gets in either.

To me, none of the confirmed users get in until after Bonds & Clemens, which isn't happening anytime soon, maybe never.

So I guess going forward, the cloudy issue of who used and didn't use PED's may not be hovering over the HOF vote for too much longer. Ultimately, the decision will have to be made as to whether any confirmed PED users will get in though.........

[h2oya311]

It's amazing how quickly Rafael Palmeiro fell off the HOF ballot and off the radar for discussion. He had the sweetest left-handed swing I ever saw (even better than Griffey's), and at the time his career ended, was one of only three players with 500 HR and 3,000 hits. In fact, I don't know if anyone else has even accomplished that yet.

Anyone remember him? I haven't heard his name mentioned in several years.

As for Biggio, I couldn't be happier! It was only a matter of time. Just cause all you East and Left Coasters had never heard of him doesn't mean he wasn't a huge influence on the people in the Houston metropolitan area. He was the key ingredient to the rotating list of names that comprised the killer B's. No major league pitcher wanted to face the Astros line-up that featured Biggio, Bagwell, and D. Bell (or Berkman or Beltran in later years).

Before someone like J. Kent gets in, I'd love to see Crime Dog or Dale Murphy get their due. Murphy was the equivalent of A. Dawson during the '80s. He just didn't have as long of a playing career. The stats don't burst any eye-balls, but they did during the early to mid '80s when 30 HR was a Herculean accomplishment. They got swamped when the juice hit the game. Too bad IMO. Murphy is the kind of guy the HOF needs to have in its halls.

[Jobu]

Quite a thread here. My responses to a number of topics:

Mariano Rivera is 100% a HOFer. He was dominant for his entire career and is the greatest to play his position. Ranking the relative worth of different positions is a slippery slope. Even if you aren't a fan of closers, the top few guys at each position deserve to be in - once you move beyond the top 1-2 players at each spot for the era I can understand arguing against certain positions. The fact that Mo wasn't a successful starter at 21 years of age should not be a factor - lots of young guys with 1-2 awesome pitches struggle until they find a third and there is no reason to suggest Mo wouldn't have developed another pitch to become a great starter.

I think the PEDers will get in eventually. Right now they are paying the price for cheating, and getting caught for many of them, which I think is 100% fair. They did everything they could to win games, just like guys from every era (as has been pointed out here by many). Once they are in people will always look at their numbers and say "yeah, but...", epecially following not getting elected for a number of years, which to me is enough. If you were the best during an era when everyone cheated you belong in - the alternative is having a 20-year strectch of baseball where the guys who were clearly the best players are not included in the group that is supposed to contain the best players.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Jobu

I think the PEDers will get in eventually. Right now they are paying the price for cheating, and getting caught for many of them, which I think is 100% fair. They did everything they could to win games, just like guys from every era (as has been pointed out here by many). Once they are in people will always look at their numbers and say "yeah, but...", epecially following not getting elected for a number of years, which to me is enough. If you were the best during an era when everyone cheated you belong in - the alternative is having a 20-year strectch of baseball where the guys who were clearly the best players are not included in the group that is supposed to contain the best players.

I disagree. I don't think they ever get in. Joe Jackson has a better case and he has been waiting since 1936, 78 years. If you want to put Joe in next year, start t he clock on Rose, Bonds, and Clemens. When you get to 79 years of waiting, put them in.

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by Jobu

I think the PEDers will get in eventually. Right now they are paying the price for cheating, and getting caught for many of them, which I think is 100% fair. They did everything they could to win games, just like guys from every era (as has been pointed out here by many). Once they are in people will always look at their numbers and say "yeah, but...", epecially following not getting elected for a number of years, which to me is enough. If you were the best during an era when everyone cheated you belong in - the alternative is having a 20-year strectch of baseball where the guys who were clearly the best players are not included in the group that is supposed to contain the best players.

I don't think Bonds, Clemens, Palmeiro, etc. will ever get in. Look at sprinter Ben Johnson from the 1980s and the East Germans of the 1970s. It has been a quarter century since Johnson lost his gold medal and 35-40 years since the East Germans were at their peak. In that time, Johnson and the East Germans have not been viewed more legitimately.

It seems hard to believe that the PED users in baseball will be viewed more legitimately a generation from now or two generations from now when that has not been the case in other sports.

[bnorth]

I would have liked to see Fred McGriff get in. I actually collected baseball cards for a couple years before I ever watched baseball. Either the first or second game I ever went to was the Twins vs The Jays in Minnesota. I was amazed by what seemed like 100's of "McGriff is McGreat" signs. So after that game I followed his career and McGriff was McGreat.

[packs]

I've been reading a lot of articles from people who hold similar views on PEDs and the need to "prove" something when it comes time to punishing players. I've come away with this:

The HOF is entirely based on opinions: the opinion that someone was a HOFer. So if a voter has the opinion that someone cheated, that's all that matters. You don't have to prove anything. You just have to be of the opinion. Same principle that was used to vote in seemingly less-than HOFers.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Regarding Tim Raines' candidacy, have we all forgotten the drugs? The same issue seemed to derail Dave Parker's HOF chances many years ago. I realize that Raines was a little better player than Parker for his career, although Parker had a higher peak IMHO. Although less qualified, Keith Hernandez too.........

Thank you for bringing this up! Raines seems to be the darling of the knowledgeable fans of non-steroid users. Yet he's a guy who slid headfirst so he wouldn't break his crack vial in his back pocket!

[ElCabron]

So much stupid. This thread is filled with so much stupid.

-Ryan

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Thank you for bringing this up! Raines seems to be the darling of the knowledgeable fans of non-steroid users. Yet he's a guy who slid headfirst so he wouldn't break his crack vial in his back pocket!

Powdered cocaine, sir. Get your facts straight.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Thank you for bringing this up! Raines seems to be the darling of the knowledgeable fans of non-steroid users. Yet he's a guy who slid headfirst so he wouldn't break his crack vial in his back pocket!

Why did he need crack while running the base paths? Did he carry his pipe, wallet and car keys in his other pocket?

[ALR-bishop]

According to the WSJ, the following have received a vote for the HOF

2014--Jacques Jones
2013--Aaron Sele
2012--Eric Young
2011-- Benito Santiago
2010-- David Segui
2009--Jesse Orosco
2008--Shawon Dunston
2007--Jay Buhner
2006--Walt Weiss
2005-- Terry Steinbach
1980-- Sonny Jackson

[Runscott]

Al, I'm wondering if these weren't cases of a buddy voting for them just so they could say they received a vote. If they only gave each voter 5 votes, that might change.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Al, I'm wondering if these weren't cases of a buddy voting for them just so they could say they received a vote. If they only gave each voter 5 votes, that might change.

Agreed. Anyone who legitimately thinks Jay Buhner belongs in the Hall should not be allowed to vote, period. It still irks me that guys like Jermaine Dye even make it on the ballot to begin with.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Al, I'm wondering if these weren't cases of a buddy voting for them just so they could say they received a vote. If they only gave each voter 5 votes, that might change.

Scott, they tried that in 1946. It made the problem worse, not better. In times when there is a logjam and a number of candidates that are arguably qualified, lessening the number of candidates that can be voted for dilutes the vote for each of them and helps ensure that no one gets enough votes. I'm sure the problem was more acute in 1946, but I really don't see that as a fix that is workable. Most of the voters argue, and I think that I tend to agree, is that the fix is not to arbitrarily limit the number of votes that can be cast to 10. That way, if you want to vote for your buddy or hometown hero just because, it doesn't hurt the ones who are actually qualified and might deserve a vote.