Net54baseball.com Forums

Net54baseball.com Forums (http://www.net54baseball.com/index.php)
-   Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions (http://www.net54baseball.com/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   HOF is a Joke (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=216255)

baztacula 01-07-2016 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1489373)
How does Brooks do on fielding stats? I always suspect them because guys with great range are going to reach more balls but probably as a result commit more errors. And I don't know how you could account for this unless you had tape of every fielding chance. Maybe "range factor" somehow figures this in through some algorithm?

Range factor per nine innings is this: 9 x (putouts+assists)/inning played.

That's it. So if your pitching staff strikes out lots of batters, your fielders will have lower range factors... except for the catcher.

Tabe 01-07-2016 11:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SAllen2556 (Post 1489031)
I would love to see a survey of mlb players who played during Trammell and Whitaker's era to see what they think. I have always gone back and forth, and I watched them both for 20 years. Same with Jack Morris. I thought I read once that Reggie Jackson thought Morris was the best pitcher of that era.

The Tigers had the 2nd most wins in all of baseball during the 80's and won it all in '84. Seems like someone on those teams would be hall-of-fame worthy. And I can't think of anyone who played for the Tigers in the 80's who's in the hall-of-fame.

The guy with the best case at one time would have been Lance Parrish. He was a HOF level player until he got hurt in 86.

rats60 01-08-2016 07:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baztacula (Post 1489263)
I'm going to take it easy on you since you support Whitaker, which I respect. All I'll say is that if I was a Pirates fan during the Maz years, I'd groan every time he stepped up to the plate, just like Tigers fans did during the Brandon Inge era. Both were great defensively for sure. But that's not enough. In fact, Inge was arguably a better hitter than Maz (.685 OPS to .667 for Maz) and there is absolutely, positively no way in anyone's lifetime that Inge should get within 1000 miles of the Hall of Fame.

Inge wasn't an elite defensive player. If it wasn't for his defense, Mazeroski wouldn't be close to the hof. Neither should Ozzie Smith, Brooks Robinson, Luis Aparicio or Rabbit Maranville. I get that you don't value defense, but many do, including the hof voters. If you are going to enshrine any player for their defense, then Mazeroski must be included.

rats60 01-08-2016 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baztacula (Post 1489346)
Maz 2094 games at 2B
204 errors
.983 Fld%
5.72 Range Factor per 9 innings

Whitaker 2308 games at 2B
189 errors
.984 Fld%
5.39 Range Factor per 9 innings

I don't see where Mazeroski is the best fielding second baseman ever with those stats. There is a good chance that Maz's better range factor is directly related to more balls in play due to less k's by Pirate pitchers in the 50s, 60s & 70s compared to Tigers pitchers in the 70s, 80s and 90s.

Total Zone Runs
Mazeroski 148 (22 more than 2nd best player)
Whitaker 77

Mlb Records for Double Plays 2B
Career: 1706 Mazeroski (Whitaker 1527)
Season 161 Mazeroski (Whitaker's best 120)
Seasons led league 8 Mazeroski (Whitaker never led AL)

Peter_Spaeth 01-08-2016 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60 (Post 1489482)
Inge wasn't an elite defensive player. If it wasn't for his defense, Mazeroski wouldn't be close to the hof. Neither should Ozzie Smith, Brooks Robinson, Luis Aparicio or Rabbit Maranville. I get that you don't value defense, but many do, including the hof voters. If you are going to enshrine any player for their defense, then Mazeroski must be included.

Brooks had 2800 hits and some seasons with good power. I would not mention him in this list.

doug.goodman 01-08-2016 01:45 PM

A whole bunch of you guys think too much...


The game has been played for 150 years (give or take)

There have been 20,000 people involved (give or take)

There are 300 members of the Hall (give or take)

That seems like a pretty select group.


People in general can't agree on anything. Every day I see three cars at a four way stop have a hard time figuring out who should go next, so of course there are going to be some hits & misses with the exact selections to the best HOF of them all.

I'll let somebody else figure out the percentage of players in the football, basketball & hockey halls. I would would guess that each of them has more than baseball, proportionately.

Doug "I'm also thinking too much" Goodman

ooo-ribay 01-08-2016 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baztacula (Post 1488842)

Rank------Player--------(yrs)----Career WAR

78.---Lou Whitaker------(19)---------74.9
93.---Alan Trammell----(20)---------70.4
604.--Bill Mazeroski-----(17)---------36.2 <---HOF

Ridiculous.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...R_career.shtml

4---Barry Bonds---(22)----162.4

ALR-bishop 01-08-2016 03:08 PM

Thinking
 
I think Doug might be wrong

Peter_Spaeth 01-08-2016 03:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by doug.goodman (Post 1489680)
A whole bunch of you guys think too much...


The game has been played for 150 years (give or take)

There have been 20,000 people involved (give or take)

There are 300 members of the Hall (give or take)

That seems like a pretty select group.


People in general can't agree on anything. Every day I see three cars at a four way stop have a hard time figuring out who should go next, so of course there are going to be some hits & misses with the exact selections to the best HOF of them all.

I'll let somebody else figure out the percentage of players in the football, basketball & hockey halls. I would would guess that each of them has more than baseball, proportionately.

Doug "I'm also thinking too much" Goodman

To me the more relevant number would be how many make it of those who play 10 years or more.

Tabe 01-09-2016 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1489655)
Brooks had 2800 hits and some seasons with good power. I would not mention him in this list.

Why not? You think a guy who hit .267 while averaging 15 homers but with no gold gloves would get even a sniff at the HOF? Of course not. So, yeah, he belongs on that list.

rats60 01-09-2016 07:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1489655)
Brooks had 2800 hits and some seasons with good power. I would not mention him in this list.

OPS+ 104. That is not a hofer without his elite defensive.

Peter_Spaeth 01-09-2016 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tabe (Post 1489884)
Why not? You think a guy who hit .267 while averaging 15 homers but with no gold gloves would get even a sniff at the HOF? Of course not. So, yeah, he belongs on that list.

he did have 6 seasons with 20 plus HR nd 7 seasons with 80 plus RBI including two over 100 that's not bad for a third baseman just seemed to me in a different category than aparicio etc.

Topps206 01-09-2016 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by glchen (Post 1488845)
I think you're forgetting Tommy McCarthy of the 16.1 career WAR, so low he doesn't even make the top 1000 cutoff.

Frankly, I grew up during the age of those great Tiger teams of Trammell and Whitaker. I always thought of those two as solid All Stars, but not HOFer material. I thought those Tiger teams were led by Gibson and Morris, and Gibson will never sniff the Hall of Fame, and Morris might only get in through generosity of the Veteran's Committee. (Frankly, I think Morris deserves to get in.)

If you think Morris belongs and not Trammell/Whitaker, I simply cannot agree with that.

the 'stache 01-09-2016 09:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshchisox08 (Post 1489060)
Of course this would be biased then.......

What about Konerko? Border line numbers, won ALCS MVP, as well as a ring..... Can't say the same for Trammel or Whitaker

McGriff?
Baines?
Raines?
Larry Walker? (Please spare the whole Colorado crap)

A lone World Series ring and an ALCS MVP really carry no weight in Hall voting.

And, while I'm not the biggest fan of WAR, it's a good quick-reference starting place, and there's no way Paul Konerko and his 27.6 career WAR even sniff the Hall.

A 5.0 WAR or higher is considered an All Star season. Konerko's best seasons were a 4.7 (2010), a 4.0 (2005), and then a 2.9 (2006). Yes, his defense was terrible (career -18.9 dWAR), but his offense wasn't all that hot, either (career 32.6 oWAR). His numbers are clearly inflated by the era he played in.

Beyond WAR, he never led the league in any major statistic. He never won a Silver Slugger. He placed in the top 10 of MVP voting twice in a 17 year career.

JAWS has him as the 86th ranked first baseman of all-time. Pass.

And what's the "spare the Colorado crap" mean, that we should ignore the incredible boost hitters get at Coors?

In his MVP season of 1997, Larry Walker's splits were pretty even. But they started to veer off into the abyss after that.

In 1998, he won the NL batting title hitting .363. He hit .418 at home, and .300 on the road.
In 1998, he again won the NL batting title, hitting .379.
At Coors Field, he hit .461 with 26 HR and 71 RBI. His slash line was .531/.879/1.410.
Everywhere else, he hit .286 with 11 HR and 45 RBI. His slash was .375/.519/.894.

Yes, let's overlook that 516 point OPS disparity. :rolleyes:

In 2001, Walker again won the NL batting title, hitting .350.
At Coors Field, he hit .406.
Everywhere else, he hit .293.

It's like whenever anybody says "oh, Carlos Gonzalez is one of the best hitters in the game!"

Hmm. In 2015, his splits:
At Coors, .293 AVG, 24 HR, 61 RBI, .355/.617/.972.
Everywhere else, .243 AVG, 16 HR, 36 RBI, ..294/.464/.758

Please.

Topps206 01-09-2016 10:16 AM

Coors is an aid, but the road splits determine if someone is merely a product of Coors or not.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:35 PM.