If someone wants Dave Parker in what are their thoughts on Rocky Colavito? Better Power numbers in a bad power hitting era and very similar in the field. Average fielder with canon arm. (or Roy Sievers, Frank Howard, George Foster, Jack Clark ad infinitum)

Similar batters, according to Baseball Reference. I would not have guessed Torii Hunter hit 350 HR.

Similar Batters
Luis Gonzalez (907.1)
Torii Hunter (906.8)
Tony Perez (895.7) *
Billy Williams (883.9) *
Garret Anderson (874.5)
Harold Baines (871.6) *
Andre Dawson (865.2) *
Al Oliver (862.7)
Chili Davis (859.1)
Rusty Staub (857.1)

Well, that ain't gonna happen.

I agree, Baseball will never open that can of worms. Even if they did, theres far worse elections than Harold Baines.

Who would you say is a worse pick than Baines? I'd call some of the elections by the almost openly corrupt Frisch VC as probably worse. I can't think of a worse selection the last 30 years or so. Maybe Sutter, that was a pretty bad one too.

[QUOTE=D. Bergin;2215002]I think a GM would be ecstatic to trade for the next Nolan Ryan. Kevin Gausman gets $21-23 Million a year based on one passable season out of 10.

Nolan would only have to go 5 or 6 innings a game. He'd be able to throw even harder, and snap that curveball even sharper then he already did.

Modern coaching would likely be able to shave the walk rate he was cursed with the 1st half of his career, down a bit in the process to.

I would argue that Nolan’s walk rate has nothing to do with control. I believe- and I may be stealing some of this from Bill James- that it was Nolan’s ego that lead to his walks. He was obsessed with limiting hits. He refused to give anyone anything to hit ever. While this got him lots of glory and no hitters it also lead to the insane pitch counts, the super high walk rates and his very mediocre era’s. He would have rather had an inning where he threw 40 pitches to get three walks and 3 strike outs then to risk giving up a hit. A lot of people seem to celebrate this. I don’t understand the adoration.

[QUOTE=Jason19th;2215347]Not sure I buy this as his walk rate was almost always steadily improving through his career. In his last 9 full seasons he had 8 of his best BB/9 rates.

[QUOTE=Jason19th;2215347]Not sure I buy this as his walk rate was almost always steadily improving through his career. In his last 9 full seasons he had 8 of his best BB/9 rates.

Well giving up a Walk, IS better then giving up a hit, and his ego must have lessened throughout his career, because by the 2nd half of his career he had a pretty respectable walk rate.

Mediocre ERA? I mean, he had some up and down years, but he won 2 ERA titles, and was Top 7 in the league 8 different years.

Was also Top 10 in WHIP (hits/walks combined) 9 times, leading the league twice.

As far as Dave Parker goes, I do not feel he is a Hall of Famer. 1st Ballot Hall of Very Good. Among the best 1-2% to not be in Cooperstown. I will say this as far as his candidacy much like I said about Harold Baines. Did he play his way into the conversation. He absolutely played his way into the conversation. Once you are in the conversation, anything can happen. Will I be upset if Parker got in? Not at all, just as I wasn't upset when Baines got in. I wasn't because they certainly played their way into the conversation. Baines had the right mix of voters on the panel that year and he is in. That could really be anyone.

The Frisch selections were horrible. The 2 worst selections off the top of my head are Phil Rizzuto and Bill Mazeroski. The first player I would remove would be Cap Anson.

In the last 30 years? Just looking over the various metrics on bb-ref, I'd definitely go with Sutter. Same career WHIP as Bret Saberhagen but with only 40% as many innings pitched. And among relievers, a worse ERA+ than John Franco (who also had substantially more IP).

Baines is not a good choice, but 4 of his 5 top matches on similarity score are also Hall of Famers. (The one exception, interestingly, is Dave Parker.) None of Suter's top 10 matches are in the Hall. It's hard to even know where to start if you had to make a case for one of them. Jeff Reardon?

Going by the JAWS rankings, I would certainly agree that inducting the 74th best rightfielder was, at best, a questionable choice, but probably not as much as inducting the 23rd best relief pitcher when the consensus is that the Hall should include somewhere from 0-10 relievers. I mean, I'm a big Hall guy, but 23rd best reliever (which I think is a fair ranking for Sutter) doesn't comport with my vision of Cooperstown.

People really need to get over the Harold Baines thing. Especially if you're a traditional stats, WAR is over-rated type of fan. He's in. He's not getting kicked out. ;)

He was THE figurehead of a certain position in baseball for almost 10 years (regardless of whether or not you like the DH), until Edgar Martinez came along.

Call him a compiler if you want (hasn't ever been a penalty for getting into the HOF), but he's also 34th All-Time in RBI's (1628). Everybody in front of him and for a ways behind him, is either in the HOF, waiting to get in the HOF, or a scandal/steroid guy.

Also: 47th in Hits (2866), same situation as above, though he is much closer to the likes of Johnny Damon and Vada Pinson right behind him.

43rd Total Bases (4604), closest non-scandal/non-future guy to him is Fred McGriff 11 spaces back (who I would put in, in a second, if it were up to me).

I might not have put Baines in, but I'm not sure why so many people are so upset about it. It's not like he bet on baseball or kicked your grandmother down the stairs. :D

Harold had heart and kidney transplant this past year. I want to take this time to wish the man well.

I'm more okay with Mazeroski than Rizzuto. Rizzuto is about the same as Al Dark. Nobody wants to elect Al Dark.

The last choice is politics. If people who do not meet the prevailing social standards of the present are not allowed to be honored, the HOF itself probably cannot reasonably exist at all.

He is much worse than this suggests because of his poor rate stats. The sheer number of RF's better than him (that also didn't have to play 1,600 more games at DH to get their raw values up) who are not in and have no realistic chance of getting in make it look like a terrible selection. The Hall typically does not reward compilers who still failed to hit the biggest milestones. 22 years to collect 2,800 hits is not exactly HOF impressive.

He's 34th in RBI's - and had 100 in a season only 3 times, maxing out at 113. Two of those 3 years his OPS+ was below 120.

He's 47th in Hits - with a batting average of .289 which is not terrible or anything but has never been considered Hall worthy itself. Again, especially for a player who actually took the field less than half the time.

He's 43rd in total bases - with a .465 slugging as a primary DH and an OPS+ of 121, which is again good but not a HOF positive.

He didn't hit the 'auto-induct' compiler milestones (300 wins, 3,000 hits, 500 dingers), he didn't produce at anything approaching a HOF rate, especially for his position as a pure offense player at the easiest position in the game.

It is further made worse by the stink of open corruption oozing from his election. It is not a credit that his former manager and owner were 2 of the votes for him and advocating on the committee. If you need your friends to have votes and lobby for you to gain admittance after maxing out at 6% of the vote before this, you probably aren't a real HOFer. It looks like the Frisch committee all over again. People tend to not like corrupt choices.

If it wasn't for the corruption, he'd be seen more as a Sutter/Rizzuto type of weak choice who doesn't really belong, but that's the system. The corruption puts it into the bigger deal category for a lot of people.

I think the evolution of Cap Anson is a interesting story that needs to be thought about. While he was clearly racist there is some evidence that he had some growth on the issue. From 1907 until 1910ish Anson sponsored, managed and occasionally played for a team called Anson’s Colts which played in the racially integrated Chicago semi pro league. The league had all white teams, all black teams and often played exhibitions with mixed race Cuban teams. There is also some evidence that Anson formed a friendship or at least a relationship of mutual respect with Rube Walker. I am not saying that he had a full conversion and should be treated as a civil rights champion, but as is often the case the reality is a bit more complicated then the sound bite

Quisenberry, for a contemporary example, was so far superior to Sutter it's not even funny.

Dave Parker for HOF? Yes, #120
 

Rizzuto was way better than Dark because of his great fielding. Dark wasn't that much better as a batter (98 OPS+ vs. 93 OPS+), but Rizzuto was way better as a fielder. He moved to third base by the end of his career, and BR rates Rizzuto as 95 runs better than Dark as a fielder, if you include the positional adjustments.

Al Dark is probably underrated though.

As you can probably tell from my avatar, I'd love it if Quisenberry was elected.

Dark oWAR: 42.4
Rizzuto oWAR: 29.6

Dark dWAR: 12.2
Rizzuto dWAR: 23.0

Dark WAR: 43.8
Rizzuto WAR: 42.2

Dark slashed .289/.333/.411, Rizzuto .273/.351/.355

Dark did move to 3B when he got old, but his career was also longer. Rizzuto was a better fielder, but they are very similar players on the whole, and many of the modern analytics give more value to Dark's career than Rizzuto. Yankees get more press clippings and Rizzuto was a stud in 1950, but it's very debatable which was better. I don't think either belong, but they are direct contemporaries in the same city at the same position in the same time, and Rizzuto comes out lower by a lot of the modern stats.

I always thought that if Dark had stayed a Giant his whole career there might have been a catchy song written "Pee Wee, Darkie and the Scoot"

Of course Pee Wee left both of them in the shade as a much more complete ballplayer.

Never let nuance, complexity or facts get in the way of a regurgitated political sound bite narrative.

Parker
 

If you have to have a poll, then he is not worthy. And the fact that our little poll is split down the middle emphasizes the point. A HOFer should be obvious to everyone.

Rizzuto certainly doesn't have overwhelming credentials, and I wouldn't mind much if he wasn't in the Hall, but he did miss three years to WWII, and taking that into account it's closer.

I think the Hall was only that way for a decade or so, until the Frankie Frisch cronyism started.

I think he's in because he's a Yankee and because of his post-career career.

Yup. I think Rizzuto is a good example that your post career contributions to baseball, do have a say in whether you get elected or not.

He was a beloved announcer in New York for decades after his career was over.

Maybe he wasn't a HOF announcer, or a HOF player, but put them together, and maybe he equals a very worthy HOF'er.

Plenty will argue that's not how things are done. I'd argue they are...and Rizzuto and Joe Torre are just two examples of it. It's just not acknowledged.

Just so happened that Rizzuto got in as a player and Torre a manager...but we know, they both got in for more then that in combination.

Also, the MVP and 3 years of prime production lost to the military, don't hurt either.

The interlude in Paradise by the Dashboard Light should have disqualified Rizzuto.

Dark lost a few years as well; he went into the Marines in 1943 and didn't get out until July of 1946.

There are several who were HOF'ers for lifetime service
 

Do I think Dave Parker belongs in the Hall? - No
Do I think Dave Parker belongs in the hall based on other fringe players in? - Yes

What we need is an Elite HOF category of players who are in already. Maybe a fixed number and only way in is to bump someone out.

Wow. 127 votes for yes. 127 for no. I guess you could say that we're split on this topic. I voted yes, but only because the voters have loosened their standards quite a bit over the last few years. Harold Baines getting in really messed everything up. I hate playing the if this guy's in, then that guy deserves to get in game. But it's kinda where we're out now. We can thank Jerry Reinsdorf for that. :mad:

If you use Phil Rizzuto as the standard, then almost everyone should be in.

If the standard is "is this player better than the worst player elected?" then we are adopting the "one mistake must beget a thousand mistakes" logic. This doesn't make rational sense to me. We've got to induct several hundred players pretty quickly now if that is the standard.

Comparing to the average HOFer at that position, or to "is he the best player of his time not in? Is he the best player at his position not in?" makes more rational sense. One mistake should not dictate that dozens more must then be made.

Does Dave Parker compare alright to an average HOF RF'er? Is he the best eligible player not in? Is he the best eligible RF not in? I think this would be a reasonable process of inquiry.

Asking "Who is the best RF not in?" and looking into the data tends to lead to less biased answers.

I don't like the "is he the best player not in"? Or the "is he the best player at his position not in"? Because there will always be someone who fits that description.

If we were the BBWAA he wouldn't get in, so there's no change in status. Let's find the guys that 75% of us can agree on!

We won't get 75% agreement on him but my #1 guy (besides guys like Arod, Clemens, and Bonds) is Albert Belle. The only argument against him is "his career was too short" but, if we're not holding that against Addie Joss, Kirby Puckett, or Sandy Koufax, we shouldn't be holding it against Albert Belle either. The standard is 10 seasons (9 if you're Joss) - not "well, kinda 10 but really 14-16 or however many I feel like". And Belle played in 12 seasons anyway.

Tim Raines HOF 2017

He was caught using corked bats, and had a seriously less than friendly relationship and interactions with media and fans, during and after his career. In fact, he even changed the name he went by when he got into the majors to try and uncouple with his past due to alcohol and anger issues. He actually went by "Joey" until after getting out of rehab back in 1991, and switched to his first name Albert, to signify a supposed new start. I doubt the BBWAA has/had a lot of sympathy for him. And the bat corking likely doesn't sit well with a lot of veteran players.

Harold Baines HOF 2019

Close but no cigar
 

I voted no.

Gaylord Perry. Ted Williams. Steve Carlton. Ty Cobb.

The key difference being that Belle is a borderline hall of famer, while these 4 are far and above the general hall standard. They also were not as publicly reviled as much as Belle was. It doesn't take much to keep someone on the edge out.

Chris,

Did any of the guys you named ever go so far as to hop in their vehicle to physically chase down trick-or-treaters who came and egged their house as a prank on Halloween, and then hit one of the kids with their Ford Explorer? Or how about actually throwing a ball into the stands and hitting a fan who was heckling them? Or what about stalking and harassing a former girlfriend and getting locked up for 90 days as a result. Oh, and then did any of them ever go out and get super drunk, get arrested for an extreme DUI, and as part of the festivities also expose themselves to adults and children so they tacked on an indecent exposure charge as well? Belle did all of these!

Albert/Joey is a very complicated and troubled individual. Being unfriendly to sportswriters and the media is likely the least of his issues in seeking selection to the HOF. Throw in the fact he cheated and used a corked bat to unfairly boost his hitting prowess, along the same lines as many of the PED users, and it makes sense why he only lasted for two HOF ballots.

Actually, what Belle was able to do, and the hitting ability he had, are not borderline HOF type numbers, they are full-blown HOF worthy type stats. Belle suffered from a career cut short due to injury/health reasons, and thus was not able to reach the typical HOF plateaus you expect from hitters, like 500 HRs or 3,000 hits. If anything, Belle is comparable to Koufax in that during his peak years, there really was no one more feared as a hitter than him. Had he been anywhere near as nice and friendly with fans and the media as Koufax (and never caught using a corked bat), he would be in the HOF.

Actually, no he's absolutely not. Belle is not in the top half, the no brainers that there is a consensus on among the vast majority. Belle is not in this group.

WAR:
Cobb 151.5
Williams 122
Carlton 90.2
Perry 90
Belle 40.1

He had great rate stats and a very, very short career. Just like Dick Allen, he's right on the edge, and his off the field record is helping keep him on the barely out side instead of the barely in side. He played only 10 real seasons, he has none of the milestones, 0 of his counting stats are hall of fame worthy when put into the extreme offensive context of his era.

I think he belongs on the strength of his rate stats, I'd probably vote for him. But let's not allow our narratives to get completely divorced from reality and argue Belle is a top tier HOFer and belongs in the group with Cobb, Williams, Carlton and Perry. He's on the border, the Hall is a total-career based honor and always has been.

I said, he's like Koufax, who also doesn't have a typical HOF length career. WAR has a lot to do with the length of one's career. Belle also was up against the height of the PED era sluggers. I wonder how he would look if the PED users were removed from the equation, or did you forget to take that into consideration? This is why stats like WAR are sometimes ridiculous and not all that accurate. (Same goes with WAR calculated for hitters during years the cheating Astros were getting away with their crap.) So, using WAR to try and prove a point he did not have HOF stats from where I'm sitting is sort of a worthless and useless argument.

For hitters with at least 5,000 plate appearances, his .564 slugging percentage puts him at the 12th highest all-time. And regardless of the number of plate appearances, he's still at 16th all-time.

During Belle's 7 peak years from 1993-99 his average annual stat line was - .308/.391/.602 with 41 HRs and 127 RBIs. And those numbers were with the shortened 1994 and 1995 seasons.

He had over 100 RBIs in 9 straight seasons, led the league/majors multiple times in various different offensive categories, and is 27th all-time on the career OPS list at .933.

He is also the only player in MLB history to hit 50 homers and 50 doubles in the same season. And he also is the first player in MLB history to get paid $10M for a season.

If he wasn't known as such a total jerk, he'd be in the HOF already. I believe it was Buster Olney who once wrote/said, "It was taken as fact in baseball circles that Albert Belle was nuts".

Albert Belle
 

I'm a native of Louisiana. Oddly enough, you almost never hear people around here talk about Albert Belle. I guess it has to do with all the personality issues.
One of the big problems with WAR is that it is greatly affected by the length of career. One of my problems with the Hall of Fame is that it is often the Hall of the Guy who was very good for a long time, and was never really great, but he picked up a lot of stats because he played a really long time. Meanwhile, a greater player who played a shorter time doesn't make it. I think the Hall should be about great players, as much as possible.
Koufax is a good case in point, but he was so great (even though it was for a short time) he had to get in. A guy who I would mention as a great player, but for a shorter time, is Ron Guidry. He has a career winning percentage of 65%. That is great.

Sorry
 

I don't mean to hijack this thread.

Supposedly Williams aimed foul balls towards a heckler in the stands at least once.

If you can intentionally hit a heckler with a batted ball you are a HOF'er.

i kinda remember the old TWIB...this week in baseball...the intro.

Or maybe it was the ending?

Wasn't there depicted a play where Dave PArker took a carom off the rt field wall and then proceeded to throw the ball on a line to home to nab the runner out????

Guy must have blew thru a stop sign. Base coaches learned their lesson early on. The more impressive to me were the "display" throws to third. All lasers, on line, and able to be cut off. Probably prevented more runs than anything else. For years.

LOL. Now THAT takes talent!

Sandy Koufax has none of the milestones. Addie Joss has none of the milestones. Kirby Puckett has none of the milestones.

The HOF asks for 10 seasons. Belle played 10 full ones and parts of 2 others. in 1995, Belle had 103 extra-base hits, the first player in 47 years to top 100 XBH in a single season. And he did it in a shortened season. 3 years later, he nearly did it again with 99. His numbers are *ridiculous*. Belle was outstanding or better in 9 of his 10 full seasons and was still good (OPS+ of 109) his final year limping around with a retirement-inducing injury.

If the argument is that his character should keep him out - but somehow not Ty Cobb (who went into the stands and beat up a fan) or Cap Anson or any of the other myriad bad characters in MLB history - so be it.

If the argument is that he cheated and that should keep him out - but not Gaylord Perry or Tony LaRussa (who benefitted from cheaters) - so be it.

But there's no argument that he wasn't good enough as a player other than "well, gee, he didn't play long enough because of a career-ending injury". And people only had that against him because they don't like him, as opposed to a guy like Sandy Koufax or Kirby Puckett. And, in Puckett's case, they just ignore the multiple negative incidents involving him because, hey, he smiled a lot on the field.

Sandy Koufax has none of the milestones. Addie Joss has none of the milestones. Kirby Puckett has none of the milestones.

The HOF asks for 10 seasons. Belle played 10 full ones and parts of 2 others. in 1995, Belle had 103 extra-base hits, the first player in 47 years to top 100 XBH in a single season. And he did it in a shortened season. 3 years later, he nearly did it again with 99. His numbers are *ridiculous*. Belle was outstanding or better in 9 of his 10 full seasons and was still good (OPS+ of 109) his final year limping around with a retirement-inducing injury.

If the argument is that his character should keep him out - but somehow not Ty Cobb (who went into the stands and beat up a fan) or Cap Anson or any of the other myriad bad characters in MLB history - so be it.

If the argument is that he cheated and that should keep him out - but not Gaylord Perry or Tony LaRussa (who benefitted from cheaters) - so be it.

But there's no argument that he wasn't good enough as a player other than "well, gee, he didn't play long enough because of a career-ending injury". And people only had that against him because they don't like him, as opposed to a guy like Sandy Koufax or Kirby Puckett. And, in Puckett's case, they just ignore the multiple negative incidents involving him because, hey, he smiled a lot on the field.

See post 208 where I said I think he should be in. He is very clearly not in the top group of no brainers though; like the 4 named players who all produced more than double his value. Puckett and Joss are also both low end players and Puckett is often criticized as an electee on here. Koufax possesses some magical charm over a large segment of baseball fandom that makes rational analysis all but impossible (see the 10,000 mega thread). Arguing that he belongs alongside the bottom of the hall like Puckett and Joss is exactly where I ranked him.

I never endorsed the view that his personal conduct SHOULD keep him out; I said it IS a factor in him being out. There are many things that are true that I do not think should be true; being cognizant of the later is not to endorse the former.

If Albert Belle’s career was measured purely on stats, he would have been a first-ballot HOFer. No doubt.

Yep, people just like to make stupid comments. I say clearly yes given where the standards have clearly gone for induction. He was a feared hitter in his prime, absolutely feared.

+1

Those four weren't named because they were no-brainers - they were named because the possessed the same "character issues" for which Belle is penalized by some.

Obviously Belle would be not an inner circle HOFer if he were elected. His shortened career eliminates that. Having said that, his numbers when he was playing ARE inner circle elite - when you average more homers and as many RBI per 162 games as Ted Williams, while playing your entire career in an integrated league with flamethrower relievers, you ARE elite.

I am well aware they weren't named because they were no brainers. I never said that was why they were named. See post 205 again. What I said was that top-tier guys like Carlton, Perry, Cobb and Ted Williams who are far and away obviously hall of famers, who are not kept out for being unlikable or throwing a spitball. Marginal hall of famers may or may not be kept out, Dick Allen and Albert Belle are marginal hall of famers close to the border. It is hard to prove this is why they are out.

Belle's issues are certainly more severe than being unpopular with the press (Carlton, Williams) or throwing a spitball (Perry). Belle's problems include similar things like a corked bat and being a surly dick, but he also was convicted of stalking a woman, charged with indecent exposure, and caught a case for assaulting a child.

As for your 2nd paragraph, it seems we agree and there's nothing to debate? I wouldn't compare raw values in the 90's AL to raw values in the 40's and 50's, but it doesn't seem to change the calculation much.

I can totally agree with that!

In
 

Having watched his whole career I would say if Jim Rice is in then Parker should be in! Bringing up the drug trials,I would say Rock Raines never slid legs first for a reason:D