[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by packs

Johan Santana won two Cy Youngs and the pitching Triple Crown. That is a HOF resume and there are plenty of lesser accomplished pitchers in the Hall.

I brought up the vote because you kind of insist it’s only single posters who see the same things as the general public.

No idea what you are talking about.

Yes, I am aware of Santana's achievements.

Mattingly was my probably fav. player growing up. His Rookie was my first big purchase of a baseball card. But let's not let our feelings get in the way of the reality that he doesn't have the strongest HOF resume. Does he get in some day? Probably. Does he deserve to leapfrog Hernandez. Perhaps not.

Just came across this article by Joe Posnanski that sums it up well: "I am not entirely clear why Keith Hernandez’s Hall of Fame case never got going. As an 11-time Gold Glove winner who won an MVP award and is pretty widely regarded as the greatest defensive first baseman ever, he was certainly one of the most famous players of his day (and he became even more famous after retirement for his work on Seinfeld and in commercials).

He seemed like the sort of player who would capture the voters’ imaginations, especially because he starred in New York, which — if you follow the conventional wisdom — is supposed to make a big difference.

But things never really got going for him. In his first Hall of Fame year, 1996, Hernandez barely got the 5 percent necessary just to stay on the ballot. He did stay on the ballot for nine years, but just barely each time. He never got 11 percent of the vote. In those nine years, three first basemen were elected by either the BBWAA or veterans committees. Here are those three in career WAR, seven-year peak WAR and JAWS, the Jay Jaffe invention that combines them both.

1. Tony Pérez (54.0 career WAR, 36.5 peak, 45.3 JAWS)
2. Orlando Cepeda (50.1 career WAR, 34.5 peak, 42.3 JAWS)
3. Eddie Murray (68.7 career WAR, 39.1 peak, 53.9 JAWS)

OK, now compare them to Keith Hernandez — 60.1 career WAR, 41.3 peak, 50.8 JAWS.

You will notice, I do use WAR and JAWS quite a bit when discussing these players. This is not to say that I always agree with WAR and JAWS’ conclusions; this list, as you have certainly noticed, does not go in order of those things. But I think what WAR and JAWS do well is give us a baseline to discuss.

And in this case, by WAR, Hernandez had the best seven-year peak of the four. I think that’s probably right; he and Cepeda are the only two to win MVP awards, and Hernandez’s 1979 season — .344/.417/.513, led league in runs and doubles, won the Gold Glove with outrageously good defense — was probably the best year any of the four had. And Hernandez had three or four years that were just about as good.

In career WAR, he only trails Murray because, let’s be clear, Eddie Murray was a marvelous and indestructible force who played more than 3,000 games (a thousand or so more than Hernandez). Murray was a metronome who basically had the same superb year every year and over 21 seasons cracked more than 3,000 hits and 500 home runs. Murray is a first-ballot, no-doubt Hall of Famer.

But shouldn’t that that put Hernandez close? Why has he basically been ignored?

I don’t think it’s one thing; it’s never just one thing. Hernandez’s struggle with drugs in the 1980s undoubtedly has something to do with it. The fact that he was not a home run hitter undoubtedly has something to do with it. The fact that his career ended up being a bit short — his last full season was at age 33 — undoubtedly has a lot to do with it.

But Hernandez also faces a unique challenge that can be summed up in two words: Don Mattingly.

They were not precise contemporaries. Hernandez is seven years older than Mattingly and had collected more than 1,000 hits, four Gold Gloves and an MVP award before Mattingly even debuted in the Major Leagues.

But … they overlapped in New York. From 1983-89, Hernandez was first baseman for the Mets, Mattingly for the Yankees. They were each 6-foot, 180-or-so pound left-handed batters who sported fantastic mustaches. Comparisons were inevitable and plentiful.

And, frankly, it was a battle that Hernandez could not win, even if he did play for the superior team. Mattingly was everything in the mid-1980s while Hernandez was already into the decline phase of his career. Oh, Hernandez still had good years. In 1984, he hit .311, drove in 94 RBIs, won the Gold Glove and finished second in the MVP voting. He was just about as good in 1985 and ’86 as the Mets roared to their World Series title.

But Mattingly was something else. He was almost mythical. He launched double after double into the gaps, crushed 30 homers a year, won his own Gold Gloves in large part because of the gorgeous way he scooped bad throws out of the dirt. And he did it with such style, such coolness, he was an ’80s icon like Molly Ringwald, George Michael, Madonna, Bruce Willis, Princess Di — OK, he wasn’t like any of them, but he had a vibe. New York belonged to Donnie Baseball.

And I don’t think that Hernandez has ever quite escaped that comparison. Mattingly is not in the Hall of Fame. His career has been seen as too short. But the fire is still burning, there are so many people who believe that he belongs in Cooperstown.

Hernandez, meanwhile, is all but forgotten as a Hall of Fame candidate even though his case is significantly better than Mattingly’s. I mean, again, not to make too much out of WAR but Hernandez over his career was worth 18 or 19 more wins than Mattingly. Offensively, he was more valuable than Mattingly because he walked almost twice as often. Defensively, he was more valuable than Mattingly — because he really was more valuable defensively than pretty much any first baseman in the game’s history.

This leads to one more Keith Hernandez topic. A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about how I am left cold by the argument that Jeff Kent belongs in the Hall of Fame simply because he hit more home runs than any second baseman ever. But this is only because second basemen through the years rarely hit home runs. Kent’s 377 homers are impressive enough as far as that goes, but that would rank him 10th among left fielders, 11th among right fielders and tied for 18th among first basemen. As I wrote then, this feels more like trivia than a notable argument to me.

But then: What are we supposed to do with the consensus that Hernandez was the greatest defensive first baseman ever? Isn’t this the same thing? First base, by virtually all measures, is the least challenging and least important defensive position. How much does it matter when talking about the Hall of Fame to say that Hernandez played first base better than anyone else?

Well, I actually think it does matter, in a way that Kent’s homer lead does not. The goal of every first baseman is to play the best defense possible — whether that means covering a lot of ground, rescuing bad throws, slapping down tags on pickoff plays, charging bunts and so on. The person who does that best makes the team better.

Meanwhile, the goal of second basemen is not only to hit home runs. Nobody thinks that Jeff Kent was the best hitter to play second base, just that he hit the most home runs.

Here, for argument’s sake, is my opinion about the best defender ever at each position:

C: Johnny Bench, HOF
1B: Keith Hernandez, not Hall of Fame
2B: Bill Mazeroski, HOF
SS: Ozzie Smith, HOF
3B: Brooks Robinson, HOF
LF: Carl Yastrzemski, HOF (maybe Barry Bonds, not a Hall of Famer though that has nothing to do with his defense).
CF: Willie Mays, HOF
RF: Roberto Clemente, HOF

If Hernandez was a poor hitter, I don’t think his first base defense alone would be enough to get him into the Hall of Fame. But he was a very good hitter, an MVP, a big star. Like I said at the top, I do not quite understand why Hernandez hasn’t received more support."