Agree
 

Maris as a hofer is nonsense.

Belle's argument is that he was an elite hitter for a decade before his career was ended by a severe injury. He played 10 full seasons and averaged 40 homers every 162. There are plenty of other guys who had careers shortened by injury or death but are in the Hall. Addie Joss, Sandy Koufax, and Kirby Puckett to name three.

The idea that he didn't play long enough or doesn't have the career numbers holds no water. He meets the Hall criteria and his career was ended by injury. If Belle was just pretty good or whatever (Don Mattingly), then OK. But he wasn't. He was elite.

Yea I'd have to say yes to Belle and no to Maris. His last 9 seasons he had 100 or more RBIs. Has anyone ever done this and not made the HOF?

The argument for Belle is Ralph Kiner.

I would not put Belle in but I believe in the future, when people forget his rep, some kind of Veterans Committee will elect him.

Joe Carter had 10 seasons of 100 RBIs and another with 98. Is he a Hofer too?

Ralph Kiner led the NL in Hrs 7 times, Albert Belle led the AL once.

Kiner in 10 seasons WAR 49.4 WAR7 43.7 JAWS 46.5
Belle in 12 seasons WAR 40.1 WAR7 36.0 JAWS 38.1
Bob Johnson 13 seasons WAR 57.3 WAR7 36.0 JAWS 46.6

When you are talking about a player with a short career they need to have a high peak. Kiner was 8th among LF and those above him were elite players. Belle is tied for 30th with Bob Johnson. That is his comp not Ralph Kiner.

Wow, I just took a look at Belle’s numbers. I had no idea he was that consistently productive.

Baines: 2866 h, 1299 r, 384 hr, 1628 rbi, .289 ba
Edgar: 2247 h, 1219 r, 309 hr, 1261 rbi, .309 ba
From the time it was announced, people have been outraged by Baines induction. At the same time people have been outraged that it took Edgar this long to get in. Baines numbers are actually HOF range while Edgar’s fall very short. Maybe Baines can stop being the poster boy for undeserving HOF inductees. He may not belong but he belongs long before Edgar.

Baines played almost 800 more games, so it should be expected he'd have more hits, hr and rbi's.

Baines 38.7 WAR, OPS+ 121, OPS 820
Edgar 68.7 WAR, OPS+ 147, OPS 933

Edgar was better.

No comparison between Belle and Carter.

Carter
19.6 career WAR / 21.5 7yr-peak WAR / 20.5 JAWS
Belle
40.1 career WAR / 36.0 7yr-peak WAR / 38.0 JAWS

I was replying to someone using RBIs, which is a flawed stat on its own, to make a HOF case for Belle. Bob Johnson had 8 100 RBI seasons + 92 & 93 RBI seasons. He was an 8 time all star. He had a similarly short career with equal peak to Belle (higher WAR and JAWS). Johnson also had a career OPS+ of 139 which is only slightly less than Belle's 144. Neither Johnson nor Carter are close to HOF. They also weren't known cheaters. When dealing with the Veteran's Committee, it is better to be a nice guy like Baines than a jerk like Belle. Corking Bats + being a jerk = no HOF when your career was marginal (low career WAR & low 7 year peak WAR).

Still no
 

Albert’s HOF voting record is dismal.
Writers and committees have had 18 years to vote him in, but they don’t appear to believe he is a HOFer either.
If you peak @ 7.7% then drop off the ballot after two tries, you don’t have much support for the folks best able to put you in.

I’m not saying he wasn’t a good hitter. His numbers are good. But there are a lot of hitters with good numbers.

Albert "don't call me Joey" Belle was a force when he played. He was only 33 when he left baseball. Calling him the Barry Sanders of baseball may be a stretch, but he did some damage when he played.

What if Roger only had 59 HRs in 1961? Would there be a discussion about it? From what I've read Roger and Joey were probably opposites when it comes to "public relations" but when you look at just the stats and remove all other considerations, how do these two stack up?

My opinion is that the writers have shown over the years that they don’t have much of a clue about what they are doing. Whitaker and Trammell had almost identical career numbers and both played at a position where their numbers rank him among other hof members. Whitaker was off the ballot in a year. Trammell stayed on the ballot and gained support over the years and was finally put in by the vets. Just because the voters didn’t vote for a player doesn’t mean that they don’t deserve it.

I said both but I am for a large hall of fame.

It is because of position. Trammell played one of the 2 most difficult positions in the game (SS & C) where defense is the primary concern and offense is rare, only Honus Wagner and Arky Vaughan put up strong offensive numbers at the position over a full career. Trammell was slighly above the average for his position for a HOFer.

Whitaker on the other hand played a much easier position where HOFers have put up more offense (Hornsby, Collins, Lajoie, Morgan, Carew, Jackie) and his career numbers are slightly below average for his position for a HOFer.

In particular, he had a low 7 year peak (as did Maris & Belle) while Trammell had a much higher peak along with WS MVP and AL MVP 2nd place. Whitaker only received MVP votes once, finishing 8th. He should have received more support from HOF voters, but he really isn't a strong candidate. He is behind Bobby Grich and Chase Utley among weak 2b candidates, both of which never had strong individual seasons (higher than 7th or 8th in MVP voting).

Ripken was a SS through age 35. Not exactly shabby offensive numbers.

Hodges had 7 in a row not in off the top of my head.

ops+ 112.

95.9 war

The RBIs were what stood out when I googled his stats. Others were impressive as well. They may be a flawed stat according to some new modern metric, but I will take home runs, batting average, and RBIs over war, jaws, or whatever else some millenials will come up with next.

RBIs are quite dependent on how good the guys are hitting in front of you, so I wouldn't place TOO much stock in it. Pujols kept up fairly high RBI totals despite clearly going downhill because he hit behind Trout, for example. The good thing about the newer metrics is that they tend to neutralize for team effects, as well as park effects.

I was stubborn to accept modern stats but they really are a better way to compare players across different leagues, eras, ballparks, etc.

The problem I still have is some cannot be calculated without computers. Back in the day, every kid knew how to calculate BA, Slugging and even ERA. Todays WAR and OPS+? Forget it.

I get the idea behind the modern metrics. But they have their flaws as well and I think people put too much stock into them. From what I understand people can't even decide on which war calculation is best. I will stick with what I know until I'm convinced otherwise.

I like them for comparing 2 people that played at the same time and played the same position. Otherwise i find them completely worthless and hilariously flawed.

no for both, BTW there are some pretty funny comments under that you tube video

Roger Maris -YES
MLB must also recognize his 61 HR's as the single season record
Maris was a great man and a great athlete

For me, it's a no go for either. I love Maris and think his contributions to the history of the game are remarkable, but his career didn't provide enough overall to garner enshrinement. Belle could have been had he not been such a jerk and struggled with health-related issues late. He was truly a feared hitter.

Bob Johnson isn't a good comp because Johnson played well into old age. Belle, who put up bigger numbers, retired due to injury.

Johnson also gets a big bump to metrics because he was one of the few decent players to not lose any time to WW2. Of course he stood out in comparison to the likes of Pete Gray.

7/63/.265 in 1943 and he takes 5th in MVP voting. Ouch.

Interesting stats though. He started at age 27. One imagines he would be on more people's radar screens with a few more good early years.

I get the whole career thing...
but like Paul Henderson who scored the most famous goal in history (he is not in the Hockey Hall of Fame), Maris achieved something only a few players have been able to - ensuring his legacy, and he was extremely famous at some point....

Maybe these institutions should be called the Hall's of Career Stats and Longevity

I love this post.

Maris has more of an argument than Belle. Belle was a juicer who hit 380 hrs, those were a dime a dozen in the 90's / 2000's. Carlos Delgado had 100 more hrs and hit .280 and didn't even get 5% of the vote to stay on the ballot a couple years back.

This. As for Belle, I grew up watch8ng him play at The Jake, and he was as feared as they come for quite sometime. While I’m not sure he’s hall worthy, the standards to get in have slipped a bit lately. I mean, Mike Mussina will be in this year, and Fred McGriff probably next year.

If Joe Carter played in New York, Chicago, or some other major market for the moajority of his career instead of in front of 8,000 fans at old Cleveland Municiple Stadium he would absolutely be in. If he played in the ESPN and Fox Sports era of today, he’d be in.

Attachment 347205

McGriff - a stand out HOF package, if there ever was one.:D

Here are all the pitchers better than Mussina who are not in the Hall of Fame.

1. Roger Clemens

Based on his peak years I might put Schilling ahead of Mussina.

It is called the Hall of Fame. So shouldn't fame be recognized? Maris is unquestionable famous. He held for a very long time one of the most famous, remarkable and most prestigious records in all of sports. Absolutely Maris, yes! And they put in Harold Baines ?!?! Unbelievable

McGriff v Baines - contrast and compare...

'Talk amongst yourselves'


.

In 500 more games. Again, Belle retired because of injury not because of age or ineptitude. If Belle had been able to play a full career, he'd have hit 600+.

100backstroke, I could not possibly agree more with you. "Hall of Fame", not Hall of Fifteen Years of Remarkable Stats. Be that as it may, fifteen years of remarkable stats are what the BBWA has gone by to enshrine. The Old Timers Committee passed over Roger Maris, too. I won't insinuate a "what do they know?" line. I will not insinuate, but rather sharply accuse both groups of hating the Yankees in general. Roger Maris was a complete player whose peak was indeed short, but like the great Hack Wilson, accomplished some mighty terrific accomplishments for a couple years. I know, a couple years does not make a HOF career. You're right. However, the 61 in 61 ALONE should get Mr. Roger Eugene Maris elected to the MLB Hall of Fame. I do not care what anyone else says to the contrary. The man achieved more fame in 1961 ALONE than half the players on the plaques. I prize my Roger Maris cards and coins regardless of whether he is ever begrudged the honor due him. Many never understood the man or his value.

I'm Brian1961 because of my first name and the year I began collecting cards. The correlation is precisely what you might expect that to be. I am what I am and it is what it is.

Honestly, whether Mr. Maris is elected to the HOF is not as important to me as when MLB will finally quit dragging their big feet in the mud to overrule who genuinely holds the MLB single season home run record. We all know Mark McGwire finally confessed to taking steroids in his hot pursuit of Roger's hard-earned record. Barry Bonds steadfastly insists he broke the record and it's his, and you can forget Ruth, Maris, and McGwire! Somehow, the powers that be could not test the big braggart to see if he was legit. Bonds certainly did not offer his body to be tested, and defied everyone who accused him, believing himself to be "untouchable". Unfortunately for Barry, the many photos of him before, and during, his late career rampage tell a decidedly decisive picture of the man's euphoric numbers.

I know, I know, this is about Roger and Albert. I guess I just had to remind everyone of Roger's home run record that was initially broken 20 years ago last year, again and again through 2001 or whatever (by then I had tuned out!), but to the point, should rightfully be acknowledged as never having been legitimately broken.

Now that we're at 2019, I wonder if Bonds's guilt can ever be conclusively proven.

If youse guys don't want to go down that road, just skip this post.

--- Brian Powell

Brian,

Maris's Home Run record is also tainted.

First off, he did it in a 162 game season and NOT a 154 game season

and

2) He did it in a year where the pitching was watered down and OTHER players ALSO put up big numbers.

Norm Cash had a GREAT year in 1961 and put up better numbers over his career than Roger Maris did, so does Norm Cash deserve to be in the HOF??

David

This perspective is mystifying to me. What do you have to say about Babe Ruth's record then? He did it with the lively ball and without pitchers pitching underhanded and batters calling for a slow or fast pitch like they did in 1871. Give me a break.

Why anyone would try to take away from what Maris did is beyond my understanding. The man's feat was remarkable and likely will never be replicated by a clean player.

My point is, people are pointing to steroid abusers and saying they shouldn't be in the HOF and their records shouldn't count because they cheated (I agree). Yet, Maris is given a pass because of one year and one number while OTHER players who ALSO had a great 1961 season and who had BETTER career numbers than Maris aren't considered for the HOF.

Again look at Norm Cash's stats compared to Maris in 1961---

Cash had more hits, doubles, triples, walks, a higher batting average, on base percentage, slugging percentage, OPS and OPS+ and almost as many rbi's and total bases. As for his career, Cash also had a longer career and put up bigger numbers than Maris yet Cash is in no discussion about the HOF.

David

I honestly have no idea why Norm Cash enters into any discussion about Roger Maris' career or achievement.

Because Norm Cash played in the same league in the same year as Maris and batted against the same watered down pitching and look at his numbers compared to Maris. Cash had an overall better offensive year than Maris and had an overall better career than Maris yet Maris is the one getting the HOF love in this thread and on these boards while Cash isn't even being talked about.

I am comparing apples to apples and other than the 61, Maris doesn't stack up against even Norm Cash for 1961 or for his entire career.

If Maris had hit 59 home runs in 1961 then Cash most likely would have been the MVP because of the numbers he put up.

David

Because almost all baseball discussions are relative.

Take a look at 1961 - the league avg. BA was .258 - that doesn't seem so high as to call the pitching watered down. Lots of years the BA has been higher.

Maris won 2 MVP awards. Are there any other multiple MVP award winners not in HOF ?

I am still baffled by your characterization here. Maris won the MVP in 1960. Norm cash finished FOURTH in voting in 1961, behind Jim Gentile.