[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Beatles Guy

I never have figured out why Ted Simmons is not in.

I agree with you, Jason. I had the good fortune of seeing Simba several times in person once he was traded to Milwaukee. He was, of course, in his early thirties by then, but he could still rake. People that look at his career numbers and see 248 home runs have no idea how hard this man hit the baseball. I grew up seeing some great hitters, including Cecil Cooper, Robin Yount, Paul Molitor, and some great power hitters in Gorman Thomas and Ben Oglivie. Simmons hit the ball as hard as any of them. There were times I wondered how County Stadium kept some his blasts from going out. And he was underrated defensively. More on that below.

Originally Posted by johnmh71

Because they were catchers and he was a DH.

When Ted Simmons was acquired by the Brewers, he immediately assumed his place behind home plate. Charlie Moore, who was our #1 catcher before Ted arrived in Milwaukee, moved to right field.

In 1981, Simmons caught 75 of the 100 games he played (strike season).
In 1982, Simmons caught 121 of the 137 games he played.
In 1983, Simmons caught 86 of the 153 games he played.

From 1984 going forward, yes, he was pretty much a full time DH, catching occasionally. But he didn't move to DH because of any defensive deficiencies. His knees were giving out. He was 34 then, and had played nearly 2,000 games.

You are being a bit unfair in suggesting that Simmons was a liability defensively. In 1982, when we went to the World Series, he had the highest fielding percentage of all AL catchers, and threw out 36% of all base stealers, which was league average. Earlier in his career, he was better. In 1971, he threw out 42%. In 1973, he threw out 44%. In 1976 he threw out 44%, second in the NL. In 1972 and 1978, he led all NL catchers in assists. In 1973, 1974, and 1976 he was second. in 1975 and 1979 he was third. So while he was not the top defensive catcher in the National League, and there are much better methods of evaluating his defensive prowess now in the Saebermetric age, using these old standards shows he was not exactly a slouch behind the plate.

Johnny Bench was clearly the best catcher of the 70s. Then there's Fisk, Carter and Simmons (I'd include Thurman Munson in this discussion, but I don't think he played long enough at a high level). Two are in, and Simmons should be as well.

Originally Posted by calvindog

Nuts that Marvin Miller hasn't gotten in yet.

Completely agree, Jeff. KO hypothesized this is the direct result of executives that were embarrassed by Miller utilizing their influence to stack the vote against him. I have no doubt this is true.

Keith referenced a line by Red Barber, who said that Jackie Robinson, Babe Ruth and Marvin Miller were the most important men in baseball history. I would certainly include Curt Flood and Henry Chadwick in that short list. That Miller is not in the Hall of Fame is a joke. That he was excluded while Tony LaRussa was unanimously voted in by the Exansion Era committee is disgraceful.

Originally Posted by brewing

Why does the manager of cheaters get a free pass? He has always supported the actions of McGwire and his win totals were padded from his steroid use. Their cheating impacted the results of games.

This is a hot-button issue for me, and I almost posted about this while watching Olberman's show the other night. We agree, Brent.

We know McGwire and Canseco were using, and I'm betting that other A's eventually used, too. LaRussa clearly knew that steroids were being used, and looked the other way.

If the BBWAA are going to hold the hitters that used PEDs accountable by excluding them from Cooperstown, then how the heck would anybody be ok with some committee allowing the managers that enabled their drug use to get in? It's like sending a bunch of bank robbers to jail, but letting the getaway driver off scot free. Either accountability is all encompassing, or there shouldn't be any.