|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Neal</b><p>Hodges, Santo head Veterans Committee ballot <br /> <br />September 28, 2006<br /><br />COOPERSTOWN, N.Y. (AP) -- Gil Hodges, Ron Santo, Tony Oliva and Jim Kaat are among the 27 players on next year's Veterans Committee ballot for the Hall of Fame announced Thursday. <br /><br />Umpire Doug Harvey, former Dodgers owner Walter O'Malley and former union head Marvin Miller are among 15 managers, executives and umpires on the 15-man "composite" ballot. <br /><br /> <br />No one received the required 75 percent in the first two votes by the new Veterans Committee, in 2003 and 2005. In the last vote, Hodges and Santo received 65 percent, falling eight votes shy. <br /><br />Oliva and Jim Kaat were the only other players to be picked on more than half of the ballots. <br /><br />In the composite vote, held every four years, Harvey received 48 votes in 2003, falling 12 short. O'Malley was next with 38 and Miller had 35. <br /><br />The 84 eligible voters on the Veterans Committee include 61 living Hall of Famers, 14 members of the broadcast wing, eight members of the writers wing and one holdover from the previous Veterans Committee. Voting results will be announced Feb. 27. <br /><br />Four players were added to the ballot: Lefty O'Doul, Al Oliver, Cecil Travis and Mickey Vernon. Two were dropped: Elston Howard and Smoky Joe Wood. <br /><br />Holdovers also include Dick Allen, Bobby Bonds, Ken Boyer, Rocky Colavito, Wes Ferrell, Curt Flood, Joe Gordon, Mickey Lolich, Sparky Lyle, Roger Maris, Marty Marion, Carl Mays, Minnie Minoso, Thurman Munson, Don Newcombe, Vada Pinson, Luis Tiant, Joe Torre and Maury Wills. <br /><br />The composite ballot remained the same. It also includes Buzzie Bavasi, August Busch Jr., Harry Dalton, Charles O. Finley, Whitey Herzog, Bowie Kuhn, Billy Martin, Gabe Paul, Paul Richards, Bill White, Dick Williams and Phil Wrigley.<br /> <br /><br /> My vote is for Roger "Doc" Cramer life time batting average of .296 including 2,705 hits and played in over 2,239 games!!!!! COME ON VETERANS COMMITEE!!!!<br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Mike</b><p>Where is this Cooperstown? I've heard of Copperstown.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>If you look at the HOF inductees like alcohol then Babe Ruth would be 100 proof (I know the scale goes to 200 proof but 100 sounds like a nice round number) then players like the recently elected Sutter (good but not great) would be like a high alcohol content beer. <br /><br />It amazes me that the HOF (writers, buddies, etc) continue to water down the enshrinement list by inducting star players that may have been good but in comparison to Ruth, Gehrig, Cobb, Wagner, Matty, W. Johnson, etc. <br /><br />I can hear the arguements already... different eras and different circumstances. Well, the fact remains that a lot of players really don't deserve to be in the hall. <br /><br />I guess an arguement can be made for Santo. He was good defensively and he did put up some good (not great) HR numbers but when you compare him to other players already enshrined, there's a little tarnish and shine there. Again, Santo was a star in his day and if you consider the already watered down list of HOF enshrinees then I suppose Santo belongs because he was probably (arguably) one of the best third basemen in his era. <br /><br />Ok, someone beat me up now...
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Greg</b><p>All right, here we go:<br /><br />If you believe that the Hall of Fame has loosened its standards too much over the years, and only sure-fire first ballot types belong in, then none of these candidates is worthy.<br />If you believe that people meeting and exceeding the defacto standards in place for Hall of Famers should be elected, then there are a number of worthy players.(and please don't think by that I mean that anyone better than the worst Hall of Famers deserves to be in -- I'm talking about people who would fall in the middle of the group of Hall of Famers at their position).<br /><br />Hodges, Santo and Oliva all deserve to be in - that's easy. Kaat is borderline. Cecil Travis is one of the most overlooked great hitters in baseball history, and he has to be given credit for losing what should have been the second half of a great career to WWII. Joe Gordon should also be in (vastly superior to Bobby Doerr), as should Curt Flood, borderline as a great hitter and fielder, but pushed over the line by being a pioneer. Also in -- Minnie Minoso, he lost the first half of his career because of his race, and his numbers from age 28 on, are incredible. Joe Torre should also be elected, but later, as a manager.<br /> I'm not sold on any of the executives, but Billy Martin and Dick Williams should both be in as managers. <br /><br />I'm sorry to say I disagree on Doc Cramer -- a very good player, but not a Hall of Famer in my opinion. Al Oliver should rank ahead of him -- Al's numbers are better in an era that wasn't as kind to hitters.<br /><br />Greg
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>joe</b><p>No disrespect to Curt Flood, but it's the Hall of FAME, not the Hall of Pioneers.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>JimCrandell</b><p>None of those should get in. The HOF should be for the truly great--the best of the best--not merely the very very good.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Without Flood, ballplayers would still be working winter jobs. If that don't make you famous, what does?
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Griffin's</b><p><<No disrespect to Curt Flood, but it's the Hall of FAME, not the Hall of Pioneers.>><br /><br />Tell that to Cartwright and Bulkeley.<br /><br />I vote for Charlie O and Marvin Miller. Both changed baseball dramatically. The players on the ballot all had their chance with the writers and didn't make it, and not one has added to their stats since then.<br /> A case could be made for Minoso based on achievments in various leagues, and a special selection of Buck O' Neil wouldn't surprise me.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Rhys</b><p>If they are going to induct a truck full of guys who played in Cuban Leagues and wrote a few books on black baseball, why is there only one member of the American Association in the hall of fame?<br /><br />Stovey, Mullane, Browning. There is absolutely no reasonable justification I have heard that these players should not be in. Stovey was the first professional player in baseball history to use speed and power. Mullane was the most famous pitcher of 1880's and Browning was one of the 10-20 best pure hitters of all time. Even by the highest standards possibly set by the Hall of Fame, these three guys should be in.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Oliva, Santo, Phillippi, Dahlen and Donlin.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Steve M.</b><p>Reulbach and McGuire<br /><br />McGuire compared to HOF Catchers:<br />RUNS<br /><br />Carlton Fisk 1,276<br />Yogi Berra 1,175<br />Buck Ewing 1,118<br />Johnny Bench 1,091<br />Ted Simmons 1,074<br />Mickey Cochrane 1,041<br />Bill Dickey 930<br />Gabby Hartnett 867<br />“Deacon” McGuire 770<br />Rick Ferrell 687<br />Roger Bresnahan 684<br />Roy Campanella 627<br />Ernie Lombardi 601<br />Ray Schalk 579<br /><br />HITS<br /><br />Ted Simmons 2,472<br />Carlton Fisk 2,356<br />Yogi Berra 2,150<br />Johnny Bench 2,048<br />Bill Dickey 1,969<br />Gabby Hartnett 1,912<br />Ernie Lombardi 1,792<br />“Deacon” McGuire 1,748<br />Rick Ferrell 1,692<br />Buck Ewing 1,663<br />Mickey Cochrane 1,652<br />Ray Schalk 1,345<br />Roger Bresnahan 1,251<br />Roy Campanella 1,161<br /><br />DOUBLES<br /><br />Ted Simmons 483<br />Carlton Fisk 421<br />Gabby Hartnett 396<br />Johnny Bench 381<br />Bill Dickey 343<br />Mickey Cochrane 333<br />Rick Ferrell 324<br />Yogi Berra 321<br />“Deacon” McGuire 300<br />Ernie Lombardi 277<br />Buck Ewing 237<br />Roger Bresnahan 222<br />Ray Schalk 199<br />Roy Companella 178<br /><br />HOME RUNS<br /><br />Johnny Bench 389<br />Carlton Fisk 376<br />Yogi Berra 358<br />Ted Simmons 248<br />Roy Campanella 242<br />Gabby Hartnett 236<br />Bill Dickey 202<br />Ernie Lombardi 190<br />Mickey Cochrane 119<br />Buck Ewing 66<br />“Deacon” McGuire 45<br />Rick Ferrell 28<br />Roger Bresnahan 26<br />Ray Schalk 12<br /><br /><br /><br />RBI<br /><br />Yogi Berra 1,430<br />Ted Simmons 1,389<br />Carlton Fisk 1,386<br />Johnny Bench 1,376<br />Bill Dickey 1,209<br />Gabby Hartnett 1,179<br />Ernie Lombardi 990<br />Buck Ewing 883<br />Roy Campanella 856<br />“Deacon” McGuire 840<br />Mickey Cochrane 832<br />Rick Ferrell 734<br />Ray Schalk 596<br />Roger Bresnahan 531<br /><br />BATTING AVERAGE<br />Mickey Cochrane .320<br />Bill Dickey .313<br />Ernie Lombardi .306<br />Buck Ewing .303<br />Gabby Hartnett .297<br />Ted Simmons .285<br />Yogi Berra .285<br />Rick Ferrell .281<br />Roger Bresnahan .279<br />“Deacon” McGuire .278<br />Roy Campanella .276<br />Carlton Fisk .269<br />Johnny Bench .267<br />Ray Schalk .253<br /><br /><br /><br />GAMES CAUGHT<br /><br />Carlton Fisk 2,226<br />Rick Ferrell 1,806<br />Gabby Hartnett 1,793<br />“Deacon” McGuire 1,781<br />Ted Simmons 1,771<br />Johnny Bench 1,742<br />Ray Schalk 1,727<br />Bill Dickey 1,708<br />Yogi Berra 1,699<br />Ernie Lombardi 1,544<br />Mickey Cochrane 1,451<br />Roy Campanella 1,183<br />Roger Bresnahan 974<br />Buck Ewing 636<br /><br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>I agree with Rhys. There should be more 19th century players in there. They could have a pioneers of baseball section in there. Add to Rhy's list the following:<br /><br />Caruthers, Mathews and VanHaltren. There are others that have been shut out because of their AA affiliation. There are a couple that don't meet the 10 year requirement that played well in their short tenures.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Brett</b><p>There are so many players in the Hall of Fame that should not be in. Most most of those were voted into the Hall in the past 20 or so years. <br /><br />Also, big mac, sosa and bonds should NOT be in the Hall. steroid users and losers with corked bats should be banned.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Greg</b><p>I don't think he should be in, but Steve's catcher numbers actually make a pretty good argument for Ted Simmons.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>MVSNYC</b><p>gil hodges...that's about it.<br /><br />close: smoky joe wood, but did not play long enough, was only dominant for a few years, same with maris.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Ryan Christoff</b><p>Rhys, <br /><br />Who are the "truck full of guys who played in Cuban Leagues and wrote a few books on black baseball" and which ones are you saying shouldn't be in the HOF? <br /><br />-Ryan<br /><br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Danny</b><p>Dummy Hoy should be in the HOF. He was one of the best player during 19th century. He brings an ART of the game with umpire signals. Now every umpires got their own style. MLB made the league to not wear Jackie Robinson's number but couldnt even honor Dummy Hoy being the first deaf baseball player with amazing stats. No Offense Jackie... <br /><br />Your thoughts on Dummy Hoy? Does he belong to HOF?<br /><br />Danny
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>warshawlaw</b><p><img src="http://www.network54.com/Realm/tmp/1159496746.JPG">
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>Jack Taylor 2.66 ERA pitcher who completed 185 consecutive starts in the twentieth century.<br />For comparison, since 2000, the most consecutive completed starts in MLB is 4.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>This is something to consider. MLB was not really integrated until Jackie Robinson played (yes there was Moses). I feel if you're going to include those that didn't play in MLB (Negro Leagues and Cuban Leagues) you might as well allow Sadahra Oh and some minor leaguers that did great at the lower level to be included. The AA players have been discriminated against. <br /><br />I'm not saying that Negro (and Cuban) League players should not be considered, I'm just saying that if they are being considered then so should others. <br /><br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>*
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Anonymous</b><p>I've said this on this forum before, and I'll say it again -- there should be no debate over Andre Dawson, yet he's not in the HOF.<br /><br />2700+ hits<br />400+ HRs<br />1500+ RBIs<br />.278 AVG -- a little low for the HOF, but not low enough to keep him out<br />NL Rookie of the Year 1977<br />NL MVP 1987<br />8 Gold Gloves<br />8 time All Star<br /><br />IMO, there is nobody more qualified who is not in, and he is more qualified than many already in.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Adam J. Baxter</b><p>I agree with Rhys' picks., it's really hard to understand how Stovey, The Louisville Slugger and The Apollo Of The Box continue to be overlooked year after year. <br /><br />If I had my way I'd like the HOF take another look at some of the early players and pioneers of the game from the 1840-70's era. I've heard several arguements made for HOF enshrinement for guys like Dickey Pearce, Duncan Curry and Jim Creighton to name but a few. <br /><br />I'd also like to see Buck O'neil get in before he passes. His contributions to the game have been enormous and waiting to do it until after he's gone would be a crime.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Rhys</b><p>Ryan, I never said the whole truck full should not be in there, but I think 17 people would fill a truck. Some of the inductees this year were very deserving; others were not. Sol White and Effa Manley are two people the Hall of Fame could have lived without. Both are in primarily because they wrote famous books. <br /><br />My comment was not meant to disrespect played like Jud Wilson and Cristobal Torriente, but more to illustrate the point that if they are going to do something to make it fair to specific leagues who have been excluded from the Hall than do the same thing for the American Association which had ZERO members until Bid McPhee of all people was put in as a token member.<br /><br />There was more injustice toward members of the AA than the Negro Leagues coming into this last mass election. One guy from a league which dominated for 15 years? How many Negro/Cuban Leaguers have they inducted in the Hall for leagues that lasted about 40-50 Years. All things being equal (which we know its not), if it is more than 4 than that means they were more fairly represented than the AA.<br /><br />Once again NO DISRESPECT to the deserving Cuban/Black players who are elected, but why is there so much Disrespect toward the American Association?
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Mike Pugeda</b><p>Agree with Andre Dawson. Offense and defense-a very well rounded player
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Cchris</b><p>Bert Blyleven! Just check the numbers and one of the nastiest curve balls ever.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Mike (18colt)</b><p>The question for this thread is about who deserves to be in the HOF (not necessarily who can be enshrined and who cannot).<br /><br />On a vintage board, no one has named Shoeless Joe Jackson yet? (Banned, yes. Acquitted, yes. Deserves to get in based on playing career, yes.)<br /><br />One more -- a former league MVP, World Series MVP, Clemente Award winner (good community work), Gold Glove winner, and 17-time all-star who batted over .300 for his career, is 2nd in career doubles, could play multiple positions, wasn't a horrible manager, had a lot of the "intangibles" (see Jeter thread), and happens to be the all-time hits leader -- Pete Rose. Those of us that watched him play (not necessarily manage or conduct himself in interviews or courtrooms or informercials) cannot argue against that part of his career.<br /><br />Just my two cents.<br /><br />Mike (18colt)
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>The place claims to be the Hall of Fame.<br /><br />There are so many folks in there that there are too many for all of them to be famous, or at least so famous that folks actually recognize all of the names. I'd add a few folks, but I'd remove a bunch, like Puckett and Carter... and I'd thin out some of that most recent bunch of inductees.<br /><br />Who should be in?<br /><br />Ed Reulbach (he did early players' fraternity stuff that predated Flood, and that is a big reason his career was shortened, owners didn't want him in baseball).<br /><br />Ted Simmons.<br /><br />And I'm ok if they elected Flood and Santo. Any voter who votes Santo in after he dies who could have voted for him while alive who didn't... those voters should be buried for a period of time equal to that time span from when Ron passes and his induction. That would teach the knuckleheads to hold off voting folks in while alive.<br /><br />And Pete should be in there any day he pays admission, just like us. He should never be inducted. Not ever. Anyone who thinks otherwise fails to comprehend the dynamics of gambling and the origins of professional baseball, the reasons for baseball's rules about gambling, and the wisdom of Pete's ban. Lord he was a fierce competitor, what a hitter... but his conduct precludes his enshrinement.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Ryan Christoff</b><p>Fred, <br /><br />Still waiting for a legitimate reason to discount the careers of the many still remaining deserving Negro Leaguers who, like many deserving 19th century players, will never get in. It's easy for people to belittle the careers of the recently elected group of Negro Leaguers, especially it's been suggested that their Cuban League careers were factors in their election. <br /><br />In fact, there were specific instructions to the voting committee to only consider their American careers. In fact, they were only supposed to consider their official Negro League careers. <br /><br />Also, you make your opinion about the Negro Leagues pretty clear by comparing it to Japan and the minor leagues as well as other "lesser" leagues. It's crazy how bad black players were before 1947 and how good they immediately became after that. Something in the pigmentation of their skin must have been triggered because prior to Jackie Robinson, the top 5 career home run leaders were all white. And yet now, only one is. <br /><br />Let's not forget that it's the NATIONAL Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum. It's not the WORLD Baseball Hall of Fame, although it really should be. It's also not the MAJOR LEAGUE Hall of Fame. It's the NATIONAL Baseball Hall of Fame. How does Sadaharu Oh fit in? How in the world does Lefty O'Doul not belong?<br /><br />Rhys, I'm glad you further explained your point as it makes much more sense to me now. Actually, I completely agree with you about Sol White and Effa Manley. White got in largely because of his book, but was a decent player and an important early historian, so to speak, for the Negro Leagues. I wouldn't have voted for him, but it's not as unwarranted as Effa Manley. Personally, I think her election had more to do with someone writing a book ABOUT her than anything she ever did. Is being a woman in addition to having one of the voters write a book about you enough to make it to Cooperstown? Apparently so. But I've yet to hear a good argument for why she's deserving. Even so, I do like the idea of a woman being elected, just because I know how much it will piss some people off. Other than Manley and White, the committee elected all legitimate HOFers. Unfortunately, several legitimate candidates didn't make it.<br /><br />Well, in order to quit banging my head against a brick wall, and to stick with the original theme of the thread, here's who I'd put in of the ones mentioned in the original post:<br /><br />FOR SURE:<br /><br />Left O'Doul<br />Curt Flood (pioneer)<br />Gil Hodges (1969 Mets puts him over the top)<br />Ron Santo<br />---<br /><br />ON THE FENCE, PROBABLY YES:<br /><br />Thurman Munson<br />Tony Oliva<br />Billy Martin (manager)<br />---<br /><br />ON THE FENCE, PROBABLY NO:<br /><br />Rocky Colavito<br />Roger Maris (great all-around baseball skills)<br />---<br /><br />ONES I LIKE WHO SIMPLY SHOULD NOT BE IN:<br /><br />Al Oliver (2,700+ hits, 7-time all-star) <br />Dick Allen (feared hitter, 7-time all-star)<br />---<br /><br />As I mentioned earlier, this list does not include the many Negro Leaguers and 19th Century players who I believe are deserving but will never get in.<br /><br />Also, while Buck O'Neil is a worthy HOFer (and will get in at some point) there are many Negro Leaguers who are more deserving than him who will never get in. <br /><br />-Ryan<br /><br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p>Ryan youre the best person to ask probably.You say others are better choices than Buck,but are any of those guys still alive?<br /><br /> One of the best reasons i think to elect O'Neil isnt because hes alive but its his overall contribution to the game, but god forbid he dies before hes elected, then the hall of fame wouldve done a great man a huge injustice
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Bob</b><p>Buck O'Neill, I didn't mention him because he is a no-brainer, definitely should be in for a multitude of reasons spelled out in prior posts. I forgot to mention Ed Reulbach who along with Phillippi deserve to be in long before Smokey Joe Wood who had one fabulous year as a pitcher and several average to above average years as an outfielder. Blyleven would be my #3 behind those 2 on the mound. <br />Bad Bill Dahlen and Turkey Mike Donlin deserve to be in but won't be because both were slightly incorrigible. They both, however, were far more pleasant than the Georgia Peach or a few others in the Hall and were stars of their era.<br />Tony Oliva and Andre Dawson should be in. Great ballplayers, who would have been nobrainers if not for knee injuries but still were sensational in their era and had they played in New York or anywhere but Minnesota or Montreal, would have been in long ago. Oliva was better than Puckett but all that media attention gave Kirby a huge boost that Tony O. and Andre never did.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>Ryan,<br /><br />You are without a doubt a very passionate person when it comes to the Negro League players. Your point regarding "It's crazy how bad black players were before 1947 and how good they immediately became after that" was a very good point and one that I've heard many times in the past. The sad part about this is that the records for the Negro Leagues are so incomplete and the only things left are stories, some probably embellished others probably modest accounts. <br /><br />I've been somewhat short sighted because I've always looked at the HOF as a major league HOF rather than a National HOF. Wouldn't you say that it's been something that's pretty much been bred into the institution (HOF) until this recent injection of polictical correctness? Look back 30 years, did people even consider a huge influx of Negro League players? This is a recent phenomena. I suppose the "better late than never" cliche applies here.<br /><br />Rather than begin a debate over "who" should be eligible for election into the Baseball HOF I'll leave it at this. Most people relate the BB HOF with MLB. Obviously, before the recent consideration given to the Negro League players (owners and historians), the baseball writers of America pretty much influenced many generations of us into making that exact correlation between the BB HOF and MLB. <br /><br />Edited to add - by the way, your post was very good and well taken. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>Curt Flood and Marvin Miller as a pioneers<br />Ron Santo, Charlie O<br /><br />I agree that Mnullane, Browning and Stovey need to be inducted. I had 3 Stovey OJs at one time hoping he was going to get into the HOF and his card was the first OJ I bought.<br /><br />Blyleven also belongs. If you have any doubts as to how great he was, just read any of Bill James Historical Abstracts or The Inside Game of Baseball by Palmer and Thorn to see just home dominate he truely was. I love Tony Oliva. He was my favorite player as a kid and agree with Bob, if he had the press/PR behind him that Puckett had or played in NY or LA , he would also be in the HOF. <br /><br />Jay<br><br>I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Dave Rey</b><p>Fred --<br /><br />I'm interested in what is so "politically correct" about an long-overdue recognition of many players that were the equals (or even better) of their white major league counterparts that were already enshrined.<br /><br />The Hall of Fame had to be shamed by that paragon of political correctness, Ted Williams, into finally getting around to extending invitations to players such as Paige, Gibson and Lloyd -- who may be the best three players to have ever played their positions (regardless of skin color) -- starting in 1971.<br /><br />Baseball, as an institution, was so different pre-1947 that there probably should be a revival of recognition that nineteenth century baseball, the Negro Leagues and the minor leagues were every bit as important or relevant to the health and success of baseball in America as the modern major leagues.<br /><br />I would love to see the same serious effort that recently went into identifying deserving Negro Leagues players go into identifying the most deserving of the nineteeth century players.<br /><br />I believe there are easily at least a dozen that deserve enshrinement that most serious historians could come to near consensus on.<br /><br />As for the list of "modern" (post-1947) players being considered, I think Minnie Minoso is the most deserving -- had he been white and not had to wait for the color line to be dissolved, he would've easily been up near the all-time top in hits and probably runs. As it is, he has good enough HOF qualifications even though he had to wait until he was nearly 30 to play MLB.<br /><br />I'd also give a nod to Santo, Torre (combined for his play and managing success) and Blyleven -- though that trio are all third-tier (the bottom third) HOFers.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Kevin Cummings</b><p>Two more 19th century stars that should get some consideration:<br /><br />Jim McCormick <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/mccorji01.shtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.baseball-reference.com/m/mccorji01.shtml</a><br /><br />Gus Weyhing <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/w/weyhigu01.shtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.baseball-reference.com/w/weyhigu01.shtml</a><br /><br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>rp60</b><p>..Ambassadors and pioneers.. I really dont know exactly what qualifies anymore.How about that black guy who is 110. Can longevity qualify? Which President threw out the most opening game balls, perhaps they should go in for that distinction..Should I thank Curt Flood for my 6.75 pint of beer. NOW thats impact..I gotta go to work guys..
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>dennis</b><p>the veterens comittee was a bad idea. if the voting was only done by the sports writers. it would truely only be for the immortal players......check the records of who they voted in and i think all here would agree with 95% of the choices. <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof.shtml" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof.shtml</a> it's the vets com. choices that creates the debates over the mattinglys and santos! sadly they are not going to throw anyone out so why not let more in? bert blylevin is better than 1/3 of the pitchers in so why not bert? santo and ken boyer belong if goerge kell is in,don't they? does anyone think kell was better than ken boyer?
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Sean</b><p>Ed Reulbach, Hal Chase, Joe Jackson, Andre Dawson, Jim Kaat, Tony Oliva and Bert Blyleven (if only for this - <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNzT5j8CmOo" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNzT5j8CmOo</a>)<br /><br />Sean BH
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>John Kalafarski</b><p> My hall would include Joe Jackson, Joe Wood, Jim Rice, Gil Hodges, Buck O'Neil.<br /> Never McGuire (or Bonds + Sousa + Giambi); my hall is for people.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>Dave,<br /><br />The political correctness part of this has to do with the fact that it took so long for this to occur. Call it what you want, if you think I took the term out of context then that's your opinion. Call it a correction of an oversight but you have to admit that it sure took a long time for the correction to occur. Perhaps you should re-read my last post. In summary, generations of fans have probably made the same correlation between the BB HOF and MLB because a majority of the enshrinees were part of MLB. The recent mass induction of Negro Leaguers pretty much doubled the Negro League representation to the HOF. I hope nobody thinks that there are any racist connotations to my posts because if anybody feels that way then those people have misinterpreted what's been posted. <br /><br />The HOF balloting and selection process leaves a lot to be desired. Look at who's in and who's not. The failure to select Buck O'Neil is horrible because he could have been one of the few Negro Leaguers that could have been alive when inducted. This is a shame. Perhaps this error will be corrected. <br /><br />By the way, do you feel that Minnie Minoso's career was really so negatively impacted by the color barrier? He was younger than Jackie Robinson when he made his MLB debut. He made his MLB debut when he was 23 years old. Two years later he was a full time player and then reeled off almost a dozen years of full time play. He had a fruitful career but I don't think he was as negatively impacted by the color barrier as you believe. If you base his career on the current list of enshrinee accomplishments then he deserves consideration.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>jP</b><p>Steve Garvey !
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Joe D.</b><p>William Hoy.<br /><br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>prewarsports</b><p>One of the other things that has always bothered me about the Hall of Fame is it's overwhelming desire to do the "right thing" with regard to some groups and no desire to do it to others. The Hall of fame basically this year inducted a whole bunch of guys where there was very little statistical evidence and many of them never really played in the United States. Therefore they take the stance that concrete stats and reputation among peers is the predominant factor (Once again I am NOT discounting their careers, simply using it to point out the simple fact that heresay and reputation got most of these guys inducted as there was little or no statistical evidence for their inductions). Why not then induct some of the games greatest pioneers who were simply not fortunate enough to play during a time of concrete stats as well, which is the pre-professional days of the 1860's-70's. Using the same argument as "Isnt it funny how black players suddenly got so good in 1947" you can use the same argument to say "Isnt it funny that George Wright was so good and the rest of the mid-19th century guys sucked".<br /><br />It is really weird that is a Hall of Fame that is OBSESSED TO A FAULT with "pioneers" and "ground-breakers" that only one pre-professional player is enshrined in the hall? There should honestly be about 10-15 of these guys in the hall of fame. Asa Brainard, Jack Chapman, Jim Creighton, Lipman Pike, etc etc etc. I think that the Hall of Fame has dug itself into a hole that it will never be able to free itself from and their unreasonable lack of representation of the games truest pioneers and the American Association is the biggest travesty in their history. <br /><br />Rhys
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Jason</b><p>Dawson, yes, for all the previously stated reasons, plus a classy guy<br />Santo, yes, regardless of what Mike Schmidt thinks<br />Pete Rose, yes, even though he is my most-disliked baseball personality<br />Shoeless Joe, yes, I loved him in Field of Dreams<br />Me, for several consucutive years of outstanding play in various little leagues<br /><br />Also, pretty cool how this topic has drawn out a lot of folks I haven't seen post before (or in awhile)<br /><br />Jason<br /><br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Dan Lundrigan</b><p>To me these men ALL deserve to be in the hall Lefty O`Doul,Gil Hodges,Buck O`Neil and Jim Rice!
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Steve Dawson</b><p>Is there a book available that lists PCL players and their stats say, prior to 1958? The reason I ask is I wonder what players (such as Lefty O'Doul) elected to stay in the PCL, and possibly turned down playing in the majors due to the fact that no major league teams existed west of the Mississippi; and also being that the PCL was considered a "Third Major League" by many in earlier years.<br /><br /><br />Steve
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>I'm afraid to make a comment that may seem negative about Lefty O'Doul. I'll fear for my life and keep looking behind my back for the dagger that will await me...<br /><br />Lefty started out as a pitcher and made his ML debut when he was 22. Guess what, he wasn't that good at pitching. He was about 26 when he finally gave up trying to be a big league pitcher. He then changed over to playing the outfield and made his return to the ML at the age of 31. He didn't do too badly, he played a good part of the season and he swung the lumber well. The following year (when he was 32) he found a full time position for four years (on two different teams, oddly enough). In those four years he won 2 batting titles while hitting about .373 during that span. He acheived the 200 hit plateau 3 times with a high of 254 hits in 1929 (one of his batting title years - .398). He played 2 more ML seasons after that 4 year stretch. All total he was in the ML for 11 seasons but he only played in 4 full seasons (but what great seasons they were). He left the ML at the age of 37 after only 3,264 at bats. This is the biggest knock on Lefty's ML career. He was stellar for 4 seasons and that was it. Yes, he meets the 10 year requirement but he basically only had 4 full seasons of incredible stats (actually 3 really great years, the other was still pretty good). He also had two seasons with about with about 350 to 390 at bats but he only batted over .300 in one of those seasons. <br /><br />That .349 lifetime batting average usually raises a few eyebrows but I think if he could have dominated for 2 to 3 more years he probably would be enshrined already. <br /><br />He was a very dominant 4 year player and that's probably why the writers haven't elected him (yet). <br /><br />Now, those of you Lefty lovers/supporters, please don't kill me... <br /><br /><br />edited to add a link (if possible)<br /><br /><br /><a name="here"></a><br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Judge Dred (Fred)</b><p>Steve,<br /><br />By the way, PCL ball was great ball. A lot of great players were in that league. Joe DiMaggio had a longer hitting streak in the PCL than he did during that magical 1941 season with the Yankees. They had some long seasons in the PCL. I'm sure someone will be able to suggest a great book on the PCLs golden years. <br /><br />Do PCL players deserve to be in the HOF based on their PCL playing records? Any comments or opinions on that topic?
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>I've never quite understood how Rocky Colavito was treated by the writers. He put up very good numbers, though in my opinion not quite enough to be a hall of famer. But he had fantastic press during his career. I think it is fair to say that he was one of the most beloved players of his era. I don't think those factors SHOULD be a plus, but I certainly think they ordinarily WOULD be a plus. Also, I think his popularity and positive press emphasize the fact that he was a genuine star during his time, not a statistical anomoly who only looks good on paper in retrospect.<br /><br />So, how close do you think he came to getting into the Hall? How about "not as close as George Case". Colavito got a grand total of three votes over the course of his eligibility. Three. That rounds off to zero percent. Here's the official page from the HOF:<br /><br /><a href="http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/history/hof_voting/alpha/C.htm" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/history/hof_voting/alpha/C.htm</a><br /><br /><br />I'm not lobbying for Colavito or against him. But I think the guy deserved more than three votes. At the same time, it's amazing that some one with only three votes made it onto the veterans' ballot.<br /><br />Edited to add: Other surprising vote totals -- Frank Howard and Norm Cash, 6 votes each. I've always liked Gil Hodges and thought he should make it, but was he THAT much better than Colavito, Howard and Cash?
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>The HOF has no merit in my eyes. At one time it did, but my judgement at that time was faulty.My current thinking is that the HOF never had any merit.<br /><br />For example, 16% of the BW voted against Walter Johnson's induction, while only 1% disagreed with Seaver's selection.<br />Ok, one chink in their armor.<br />18% against Speaker, 19% against Pete Alexander, 22% against Hornsby, 24% against Keeler. Yet 4% against Bench and only eight percent against Brooks Robinson.<br /><br />I stop, only because you have heard enough. There are countless examples of the baseball writers preferring second tier players over those who represent baseball's highest performance percentile.<br /><br />And the inequities are throughout their history and their range of responsibilities.<br /><br />I do not collect HOFer cards. I collect cards of players who have achieved specifically identifiable performance milestones.<br /><br />Phooey on the Hall.<br /><br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>It has definitely become easier over the years to get high vote totals. This is probably due to the fact that the definition of "greatness" has become a little clearer. When Ruth was first elected, it may not have been clearer to voters whether or not 10 more guys would hit 700 home runs in the next few decades. The home run hitter was a new phenom (similar to the closer today). Now, everyone knows what the major milestones of greatness are (except for saves where the stat is still developing).<br /><br />Incidentally, Seaver was essentially a unanimous inductee. Four people voted against him. Two were protesting Pete Rose's exclusion from the ballot and said that they would have voted for him otherwise. One was in the hospital on sedatives and said he marked the wrong name. One said he believed Seaver belonged but never voted for anyone on the first ballot as a matter of principle.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p> One player who i think deserves a better look is Lave Cross who started as an 19th century catcher when catchers werent putting up offensive stats and had a tough time catching 100 games a year.He platooned there until age 27 (despite a 293 average over the last 4 years)when he got a spot at 3rdbase. He then put up real good numbers both at the plate and in the field where he put up fielding % from 30-50 points higher than the league average while always making more plays in the field than the average player.<br /><br /> He ended up with a .292 average and over 1300 rbi's and runs and over 2600 hits,400+ doubles and just over 300 stolen bases(which looks even better when you consider he caught his 1st 7 years). He gets no mention here despite these very good numbers. When you realize the only 3rdbaseman that played in the 19th century in the hall is Jimmy Collins who trails him in everything but average(and Collins batted .294 career),and Cross even has a better fielding %,and his range is just behind him. Collins was known for a long time as the best 3rdbaseman in baseball history,yet by fielding and batting stats Cross should have a case.....but then when you figure in 7 years as a platoon catcher to start,that should help Cross's case,not hurt him
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Steve Dawson</b><p>Do PCL players deserve to be in the HOF based on their PCL playing records? Any comments or opinions on that topic? <br /><br /><br /><br />Fred,<br /><br />I'm really not sure about that. That's kinda why I asked about a book on the PCL. I suppose an argument could be made for some players, but I'm afraid it would be a slippery slope that once one player is inducted, then calls would be made for more and more players to be inducted (sorta like it is now <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14> ). Let's just say that if it could be shown that a player had outstanding stats in the PCL way back when, and for whatever reason they never got the chance to move up to the "majors", then they should at least be considered for HOF induction.<br /><br />I guess it just kinda hit me tonight when someone above mentioned that it's the "National" Baseball Hall of Fame, meaning "all" baseball in the country. It's like I've been arguing for some time about the "Pro" Football Hall of Fame meaning that it's "all" pro football, not just the NFL.<br /><br />I know there would be all kinds of arguments about if so and so player in the PCL was really good, he would've been called up to the "majors". Like I said before though, were there any really great Hall of Fame caliber players in the PCL who could have made it in the "majors", but chose not to because they didn't want to play clear across the country since no major league teams were west of the Mississippi.<br /><br /><br />Steve<br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Rich W.</b><p>I would like to see a housecleaning before they let anyone else in. Get rid of the George Kells and Red Schoendiensts. Or put their plaques out in a free room at Cooperstown while it's paid admission for the Ruths and Gehrigs.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>dennis</b><p><a href="http://www.amazon.com/Pacific-Coast-League-Statistical-1903-1957/dp/0786400455/ref=pd_sim_b_1/104-9776969-1442345?ie=UTF8" target="_new" rel="nofollow">http://www.amazon.com/Pacific-Coast-League-Statistical-1903-1957/dp/0786400455/ref=pd_sim_b_1/104-9776969-1442345?ie=UTF8</a>
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>Johnny Evers, Joe Tinker, Roger Bresnahan, Jimmy Collins, Eppa Rixey, Chick Hafey, Kiki Cuyler, Travis Jackson, and the list goes on and on. Look up the stats of some of these guys. All time greats? NOT. <br /><br />To me, the only two players who aren't in who obviously should be are Rose and Joe Jackson. But with standards as devalued as they are, it seems to me Santo, Dawson, Ken Boyer, and Kaat and as good as a number of players who are in.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>In the mid-40s the baseball writers had no good candidates to induct, so they stood their ground, and elected noone. The veterans committee, however, felt an urgency to fill this gap and in 1944 elected Judge Landis; in 1945 Jimmy Collins and Fred Clarke; in '46 it was Joe Tinker, Tommy McCarthy, Johnny Evers and Frank Chance.<br /><br />With this precedent set, the door was open for what has followed. And here we have the demise of credibility which now exists.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>I'm not sure I'd endorse the stingy voting practices of the writers in the mid-1940s. The guys they passed over included Lefty Grove, Carl Hubbell, Pie Traynor, Frank Frisch, Rube Waddell, Ed Walsh, Mordecai Brown, Joe McGinnitty, Charlie Gehringer, Bill Dickey, and Mickey Cochrane. What puzzles me is that all of these guys finished consistently behind Frank Chance and Johnny Evers until those two were put in by the veterans committee with Tinker.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p> Peter mentioned Jimmy Collins,and i did mention him in passing before but its worth noting in a poll taken in 1969 Collins was rated the best 3rdbaseman of the 1st 100 years of professional baseball. Another poll had him 2nd to Pie Traynor, but either way, if youre one of the top 2 players at your position thru the first 100 years of a sport then you deserve to be a hall of famer
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>John, that's exactly my point about HOFers. Stats be damned, if you are the best or one of the best if it happens to be a time when a position has a lot of great players, ala 3B in the 70s or SS now, then you should be in.<br /><br />Jay<br><br>I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>That is a difficult concept to accept.<br />I believe that one's merit is independent of everyone elses poor performance.<br />For example: the best hitting pitcher may not be a good hitter.<br /><br />Similarly, the best third baseman (or anything else) may still not be any good.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>But how do you know that a best player from their era is not very good? Various pepople have tried stats, but there is still no real agreement how to compare players across eras. Given that, I don't have a problem with putting the best player at each position from a given era. They were the best that existed given the circunstances. Ruth would have put up outstanding numbers no matter what era he played in, but do you seriously think that he would have posted the numbers he did if he played in the 60s when pitching dominated the game? Instead, we'd be looking at Jjimmy Foxx as the Sultan of Swat and Ruth would be just another member of the 500 HR club. That is if the combination of greenies and booze didn't kill him first.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>We were talking about Jimmy Collins, aka. the best third baseman in the first 100 years of baseball.<br /><br />Gosh, they didn't even have gloves for much of that time. Aside from that, it seems that Collins' main claim to fame was his bunt fielding abilities. Admittedly there were lots of bunts in those days, and that capability was important. But that skill comes at a price. And that price is a decrease in the range of the third baseman's fielding. Other than fielding, Collins was not quite a .300 hitter during a period in which there were plenty of them.<br /><br />Each of us will draw our own conclusions on these marginal HOFers. But it does not matter. What is done, is done. And more are in the wings.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p> Gilbert,that would be true if the Collins example wasnt based on 5 or 6 eras,not just the best from his era. The other thing to consider is that another poll done mid-80's said Mike Schmidt passed Traynor as the best 3rdbaseman ever.If you consider that 20+ years after Traynor retired a majority of people thought Collins was actually better,then youre adding another era of players it took to have someone better come along.<br /><br /> How many great 3rdbaseman have come along since then? George Brett immediately comes to mind but he played over 1000 games at a position besides 3rdbase. Wade Boggs was a great hitter but because of the era differences its hard to say if he was really a better 3rdbaseman overall.Fielding-wise it was a more important position back in Collins era and he was known for his great glove and strong arm,so youd have to give him a big advantage over Boggs who started as a weak to average fielder and developed into a respectable one later in his career winning 2 gold gloves.<br /><br /> You might not look at Collins stats and be real impressed(except his fielding stats should) but its hard to argue with how well he compares to his peers thru the years
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p> Gilbert,when looking at Collins you have to realize that he was known for his ability to field bunts better than anyone else so chances are teams bunted less against him.You also have to figure in that he made more plays than the average 3rdbaseman each year constantly thru his career which means he probably had great range,plus his fielding % is well above league average as well. Now according to fielding stats,3rd baseman during his career averaged over 40% more plays than 3B's now which means his fielding stat should have more significance attached to it compared to current players.<br /> When you factor in for a 3rdbaseman he was one of,if not the best hitters of his era and until Traynor came along,any 3B after,then its hard to argue that he doesnt measure up to hall of fame standards.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>John, I've played some 3B, although mainly SS, maybe you have as well. It is surprising at first how different those positions are. The ball comes down the third base line like lightening. Fielding that position without a decent glove is suicidal.<br /><br />Collins played alongside Long until he went to the AL. Long was very good. In the AL he played with Parent. I don't know much about Freddy Parent, but by then gloves were developing to the point that you could actually catch the ball rather than hope to knock it down, scramble for it, and retrieve it in time to throw out the runner. But all of this is regarding a batted ball, not one which is bunted.<br /><br />The fielding of a batted ball is not Collins claim to fame, although it clearly was part of his job. He was good on bunts. Actually, he was the best third baseman of his time at fielding bunts.<br /><br />This is true. It is also true that he nearly had a lifetime BA of .300. As you say: "then its hard to argue that he doesnt measure up to hall of fame standards". This is also true. However, I note that it seems somehow incongruous to use the terms "hall of fame" and "standards" in the same sentence.<br /><br />IMHO Jimmy Collins is not close to top tier ballplayers, and maybe not second tier players either.<br /> <br /><br />Edited to add: Traynor was a good fielder and a .320 hitter. But I do not consider him a top tier player. Do you?<br /><br />My original contention was that simply being the best, does not necessarilly make you good.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Peter_Spaeth</b><p>Jimmy Collins is so far down on Bill James' scales it is a joke. <br /><br />Black Ink: Batting - 6 (322) (Average HOFer ˇÖ 27) <br />Gray Ink: Batting - 128 (135) (Average HOFer ˇÖ 144) <br />HOF Standards: Batting - 25.9 (413) (Average HOFer ˇÖ 50) <br />HOF Monitor: Batting - 39.5 (437) (Likely HOFer > 100) <br /><br />He does compare favorably to Carney Lansford though.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>dennis</b><p>postion players roger maris, ken williams,cy williams,gavy cravath,buck oneil & minnie minoso. pitchers bert blylevin,joe wood and jack morris.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p> So if you go according to Bill James list AND the opinion of baseball writers/players/experts from 1969 then you would have to agree that Mike Schmidt wouldve been the 1st 3rdbaseman ever in the Hall of Fame? That to me is ridiculous,if the standards are set that high then you could still possibly be at just Schmidt right now,and maybe Brett but like i said he played over 1000 games at other positions(1b/dh)<br /><br /> Gil just to answer your one question,i did play a little 3rdbase and shortstop during little league but im a lefty so coaches didnt let me play there much.I also had the strongest arm and all but one team i played on so i usually pitched and played centerfield. 3rdbase probably was my best position tho,because i could field better than most kids,but i wasnt fast,i just had quick initial reactions.Im surprised theres no lefty 3rdbaseman but i assume most coaches stereotype lefties from an early age
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>prewarsports</b><p>Actually, the best third baseman in the first 100 years of organized baseball was Ned Williamson. In 1894 the Reach guide asked former players and umpires who the best PLAYER was of all time up to that point. Ned Williamson got more votes than anyone including Kelly, Anson, etc. That is some pretty strong support by your peers. Unfortunately for him, your worth as a catcher or third baseman back then do not translate to our modern "stat sheets". If the Hall of fame had started at the turn of the century, Ned Williamson would have been most likely the first ever Hall of Fame inductee. Guys voting today though will never vote him in because they do not understand, or care, about the early game. <br /><br />The last thing I do not understand is, why did they vote so many Cuban players into the Baseball Hall of Fame this last year when there is already a Cuban Baseball Hall of Fame that I have heard mentioned in other posts? No offense as I know this is a touchy subject. I know they were great players but why induct them into the National American baseball Hall of Fame when they already reside in the Cuban Baseball Hall of Fame? <br /><br />
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>john/z28jd</b><p> I guess they picked Williamson over Collins based only on the fact Collins didnt start playing till a year after that poll was taken.Thats pretty short-sighted if you ask me.<br /><br /> Williamson didnt play enough 3rdbase in my opinion to qualify over Collins,he didnt even play half as many games as him,and Collins was only in the 1600's himself.I would rate Billy Nash higher than Williamson,and hes a contemporary of him
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>I'd like to see the poll naming Ned Williamson as the greatest player of all time. No one in his right mind could have listed him above Anson or Clarkson or Keefe. He had one tremendous home run year, due entierly to the fact that he played in the smallest ballbark in major league history. Other than that, he was truly mediocre.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>I get the feeling that many of you don't understand what was important in 19c baseball, especially from 1871-1894. Feilding was as absolute premium and the stars of day were not the batsmen, but the top fielders. The rules were written to highlight and feature fielding. Once the mound was moved back, pitching and hitting took center stage and fiedling started to take a back seat as to how a player was rated.<br /><br />Basing you opinion on how great an early player was based soley on his hitting stats is going to give you a false idea as to who was great and who wasn't. <br /><br />Jay<br><br>I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>John: its not just coaches, everyone stereotypes lefties from an early age. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14>
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Paul</b><p>Ned Williamson's lifetime fielding percentage was .866 as a 3rd baseman (slightly above average) and .874 as a shortstop (slightly below average). To my knowledge, he was not renowned as an extraordinary fielder.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>One statistic which can be employed to determine how a good fielder from long ago compares with those good fielders of recent history, attempts to look at how dominant each fielder was, when compared to his peers. Although nothing is perfect, this statistic is called Most Seasons Leading League - 3rd Basemen. And it works out as follows:<br /><br />Assists <br />AL - Brooks Robinson = 8<br />NL - Santo, Schmidt = 7<br /><br />Chances<br />AL - Frank Baker, Brooks Robinson = 8<br />NL - Santo = 9<br /><br />DPs<br />AL - Jimmy Austin, Ken Keltner, Frank Malzone = 5<br />NL - Heinie Groth, Ron Santo, Mike Schmidt = 6<br /><br />PutOuts<br />AL - Eddie Yost = 8<br />NL - Willie Jones, Pie Traynor, Ron Santo = 7<br /><br />Fielding Avg.<br />AL - B. Robinson = 11<br />NL - H. Groth, Ken Reitz = 6<br /><br />So, if you want to determine how a specific individual stacks up, compare the seasons he has in which he led the league in these catagories, and you will have an idea regarding his actual overall performance.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>jay behrens</b><p>The problem with that is an infielder that that players for a team with a pitching staff that gives up a lot of fly balls gets penilized, while pitching staffs that cause most batters to ground out will cause their infielders to a lot mroe chances to field the ball. Range also makes a difference. Compare Ripken and Ozzie Smith. Ripken's Fielding Percentage was .979, Smith .978. Essentially a tie, but no one would ever confuse Ripken's ability at SS with Smith's. If you look at Total Chances Ripken had @12,000 in 17 years at SS while Smith @17,000 in 19 years. This means that SMith was getting to a lot more balls than Ripken. This also means that he was getting charged for errors on some balls that would have been base hits if Ripken were playing instead.<br /><br />Jay<br /><br />I love pinatas. You get to beat the crap of something and get rewarded with candy.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>I agree Jay. The approach which I offered is imperfect. However, although it has its limitations, it is the best way I know of to achieve a comparison of players from different eras.<br /><br />And like I say: being the best does not necessarilly make it good.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Rhys</b><p>You can easily look up what I quoted as it is right in the 1894 Reach baseball guide. Someone on this forum probably has a copy as I sold mine a few months back. Also, the fact that people today use MODERN fielding stats to compare players of the 19th century is a dislexic way of looking at things.<br /><br />In the 19th century if you touched a ball and did not make an out, it was considered an error. Therefor the BEST fielders usually had the worst fielding stats. The shortstops or third baseman with the best range made spectacular plays that others could not make, and if they made the play, great, if they got to a ball way in the hole but could not throw the guy out, error. The same problem is used by people who have no clue what they are talking about when refering to Germany Long who was THE BEST defensive shortstop of his era, but led the league in errors almost every year. <br /><br />Ned Williamson was FAR AND AWAY the best fielding third baseman of the 19th century and basically any book on 19th century baseball will tell you that, but like I said, you cant look at modern stats to prove it. If you read enough material from the 19th century and go to sources from the era and not just reading modern crap from other guys who have never read vintage material, you will get this overwhelming impression over and over again. Ned Williamson was one of the premier players of early baseball and he was voted more popular than Anson and Kelly in the 1894 guide.
|
Who do you think deserves to be in the HOF!!
Posted By: <b>Rhys</b><p>I just found the info I was looking for. In the 1894 Reach guide the 12 most prominant men in baseball according to Reach were polled as to specific questions. Among these questions were "who was the greatest player the game has ever known" and "what was the greatest play you ever witnessed." Of the twelve men surveyed, Ned Williamson drew three votes as the best player EVER up to that point with votes from Jim O'Rourke, Arthur Irwin, and James Hart. Anson Ewing and Kelly were each voted for twice.<br /><br />Williamson was also given a nod for "greatest play ever" by a man who did not vote for him as greatest player, Fred Pfeffer. <br /><br />I can go into greater detail of what was said if needed, but that should suffice for now. <br /><br />There you go, Ned Williamson voted by his peers in the only poll of its kind as the greatest player of the 19th century. I do not think of him as the best player of the 19th century, but his peers did and no matter what we say 120 years after the fact, no modern stats can compare to eyewitness accounts of the men who watched him every day for years and years!<br /><br />
|
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:14 AM. |