Quote:
Originally Posted by calvindog
As a Dodgers fan growing up in the 70s I hated Reggie. Notwithstanding the strikeouts and low career BA, his greatness could not be denied. 13 AS teams and 7 top ten MVP finishes are all that need to be said. He was the dominant player pretty much of his generation.
On another note, I always felt that stats shouldn't be the sole arbiter on HOF eligibility which is why I never bothered to think about them when considering a player whose career I witnessed growing up. Jim Rice to me always felt like a monster player of his generation. How could he not make the HOF? Similar to an extent was Steve Garvey. While his production fell off at the end thus him never being considered a serious HOF candidate, he surely was the best player on a decade of great Dodgers teams, was a perennial AS and MVP vote getter -- winning it once -- but finished just 400 hits short of 3000 and had a lifetime BA of .298. If he had 400 more hits is there by any doubt he would be in the HOF today?
|
+1. If anyone had told you in 1980/81 that Garvey not only wouldn't get in the Hall of Fame, but wouldn't even really be a serious candidate, what would you think at the time?
__________________
___________________
T206 Master Set:103/524
T206 HOFers: 22/76
T206 SLers: 11/48
T206 Back Run: 28/39
Desiderata
You are a child of the universe,
no less than the trees and the stars;
you have a right to be here.
And whether or not it is clear to you,
no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams,
it is still a beautiful world.
Strive to be happy.
|