Blyleven & Alomar get in the HOF

[oldjudge]

Blyleven was just a stat accumulator. He was never thought of as one of the best pitchers of his day and he should not be in the HOF. Alomar was inducted for his play, not his personality.

[Robextend]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Blyleven was just a stat accumulator. He was never thought of as one of the best pitchers of his day and he should not be in the HOF. Alomar was inducted for his play, not his personality.

I strongly disagree with the sentiment that Blyleven was a stat accumulator.

In his 16th season he won 17 games, and in his 17th season he won 15 and had a great postseason helping the Twins win the WS. In 1988 he had an off year (10-17) but then in his 19th season he went 17-5 with a 2.73 ERA. Then he played two more seasons winning 8 games each and retired. How is that an example of a "stat accumulator"?

[keithsky]

That HOF voting is such a joke. Seems like they do whatever it takes to put someone in every year so they can have a induction ceromony. These guys that go in after 10-14 years on the ballot and now all of a sudden they are HOF material. I agree Blylevven should be in there but what makes him go in now and not 14 years ago when first eligible. Same with Rice last year, on the ballot 14 years and last year HOF material. To me if you don't make it in after say 3 years your not HOF worthy. Your stats don't change. They are already set in stone the day you retire. Nothing about you changes. So 6 guys go in the HOF one year what's the problem with that as long as they are HOFers. It just ticks me off when I see guys go in after at least 10 years on the ballot. Get rid of the writers and do it a different way. The only good thing they did this year was to keep McGuire and Palmerio out

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by oldjudge

Blyleven was just a stat accumulator. He was never thought of as one of the best pitchers of his day and he should not be in the HOF. Alomar was inducted for his play, not his personality.

Agreed. I would only have voted for Alomar. Blyleven is one step down from a Hall of Famer, nice longevity stats but the mere two all star selections speaks volumes.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Rob:

You would be right but I don't do the registry thing. I did pick up Alomar & Blyleven rookies on e-bay this past week in preparation though. I will be sending them in to SGC this week.

[Anthony S.]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Agreed. I would only have voted for Alomar. Blyleven is one step down from a Hall of Famer, nice longevity stats but the mere two all star selections speaks volumes.

I think the volumes the all-star game snubs speak is that spots on the all-star team go to undeserving players from teams who otherwise would go unrepresented. In 1984, Blyleven finished 3rd in the Cy Young voting and didn't make the all-star team. In 1989, he finished 4th in the Cy Young balloting and didn't make the all-star team.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Anthony S.

I think the volumes the all-star game snubs speak is that spots on the all-star team go to undeserving players from teams who otherwise would go unrepresented. In 1984, Blyleven finished 3rd in the Cy Young voting and didn't make the all-star team. In 1989, he finished 4th in the Cy Young balloting and didn't make the all-star team.

Since he played for mostly bad teams, you would think HE would have been that representative more times than two.

[martyogelvie]

The only thing that bothers me about the writers is how can a player garner only 15% his first year of eligibility (I think i read thats what Blyleven got his first year) to over 75% in 15 or so years??? I can see garnering a few more votes here or there but to go from 15 - 75 plus is asinine to me!

I think Alamor is a perfect example of how the system should work.. he came close but didn't make it his first year but was easly in his second.

I think that if your not in after 5 years, your off the ballot.. period. It certainly would help keep some of the marginal players that seem to get better over time out of the hall.

[Chris-Counts]

At least they got it right with Blyleven and Alomar. They blew it with Larkin, but I suspect he'll get in next year. As for Surhoff, Tino Martinez and Grissom getting votes, it's proof that just because somebody pays a guy to write about baseball for a living doesn't mean he knows anything about the game ...

[tothrk]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Since he played for mostly bad teams, you would think HE would have been that representative more times than two.

I never looked at it that way. I was on the fence about Bert, but this is swaying me towards the notch below HOF camp. With players like Sutton, longevity bothers me. Just because your career lasted longer than a MEARS auction and you reached a magical number doesn't mean you should get in.

[doug.goodman]

Finally

[oldjudge]

Rob--The best he ever finished in a 22 year career was third in the Cy Young voting; he was in the top ten only four times and an All Star only twice. In eight of twenty-two seasons he was at or below .500 in W/L %. He won twenty games only once, but lost seventeen games four times. He was a very good pitcher, not a HOF pitcher.

[ChiefBenderForever]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Blyleven is one step down from a Hall of Famer, nice longevity stats but the mere two all star selections speaks volumes.

I don't see the all star selection as being relevant, plus isn't it the fans who voted them in anyways ? If Blyleven was on the Yankees then maybe he would've been on more all-star teams, but seeing he played with Carew who was basically on the All-star team every year and the small market Twins usually could only have one player, two tops if lucky on the team he couldn't be on the team more than twice.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by JohnnyHarmonica

I don't see the all star selection as being relevant, plus isn't it the fans who voted them in anyways ? If Blyleven was on the Yankees then maybe he would've been on more all-star teams, but seeing he played with Carew who was basically on the All-star team every year and the small market Twins usually could only have one player, two tops if lucky on the team he couldn't be on the team more than twice.

He played 16 seasons after he left the Twins the first time and I think Carew was gone during his second stint.

[usernamealreadytaken]

The H-of-F will (or should) go the way of the diner's club card...

[oldjudge]

Johnny--He didn't make the All Star team because he wasn't good enough. Regardless of where they play, HOFers should make at least one of three All Star teams. He is almost an exact match for Tommy John. In fact, Tommy John was better, and he is not in the HOF.

[ChiefBenderForever]

You guys might be right, but if that is the case and Bert isn't good enough for the HOF then they have a lot of cleaning out to do of others who shouldn't be there.

[uffda51]

It looks like it's "Wait til Next Year" for Raul Mondesi.

Re: Blyleven. Warren Spahn won 20 games 13 times, 8 times leading the league in wins including five years in a row, and made 14 All-Star teams.

Bert won 20 gmes once, never lead the league in wins, and made three all-star teams.

He may well be the first player born in the Netherlands to make the Hall.

[cdn_collector]

Congrats Robbie!

Just like I said last year when Alomar didn't get in, I have a huge bias here. I'm thrilled he got into the HoF, and while I don't think there is any excuse ever to spit in somebody's face, I don't think it should come into the equation.

If we're going to start looking at character first, then there are some racists, bigots, cheaters, gamblers and even others that have spit in umpires faces that are already enshrined and need to have their plaques taken down.


Regards,

Richard.

[Peter_Spaeth]

IF Bert is in, Tommy John and Jim Kaat should be in too, they are very comparable and it is hard for me to justify including only one of them. That said, I would not vote for any of them, but would put them one rung down.

[barrysloate]

Jay- I think you are selectively picking stats of Blyleven's that are not among his best. Everything you cited suggests he was borderline, but when you consider the 287 wins and 3000+ strikeouts, I believe he is deserving.

It would be like saying Nolan Ryan doesn't belong because he had a mediocre won-lost record and never won a Cy Young, but conveniently leaving out the 5714 strikeouts and the 7 no-hitters. You have to look at the whole picture, not just those stats that fall a little short.