What mgrs/exec's/umps would you consider future HOFers?

[novakjr]

I know this is the pre-war forum, but I think the topic is somewhat relevant since most HOF collection threads fall into this forum. Anyways, here goes. There's a good number of us with HOF player/manager/whatever collections, and I'm sure that I'm not the only one that tries to beat the hall to the punch by also collecting players that I think WILL(or at least should) get in eventually. I'm pretty comfortable with my assessment of the players, but I was wondering what managers/executives/umpires(past or present) people think will eventually get in as well?

Manager-wise, I think Joe Torre and Bobby Cox are probably safe bets. I also think that Jim Leyland, Lou Piniella and Terry Francona have a decent chance.

As far as executives go, commissioners almost always get in, but owners and such I'm really not so sure about....Steinbrenner, maybe?

And when it comes to umpires, I wouldn't even know where to begin guessing.

Any thoughts and additions would be appreciated?

[rhettyeakley]

add Tony LaRussa to the list (love 'em or hate 'em he has managed over 5,000 games and has won 2 World Series.)

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

add Tony LaRussa to the list (love 'em or hate 'em he has managed over 5,000 games and has won 2 World Series.)

Ahh Yes! I knew I was forgetting an obvious one...

[bcbgcbrcb]

Steinbrenner will likely get in during the next go-around for executives.

[carrigansghost]

how many managers have won two world series and are not in the HOF?

[novakjr]

Originally Posted by carrigansghost

how many managers have won two world series and are not in the HOF?

Well, the first one off the top of my head would be Carrigan.

Danny Murtaugh, Ralph Houk, Cito Gaston, Tom Kelly, Torre and Larussa. Although, I'm pretty sure a few of these guys will drop off of this list.

[tcdyess]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Steinbrenner will likely get in during the next go-around for executives.

The Boss!!!! He changed the game forever (good or bad), every player should pay homage to what he did for them.....

[novakjr]

Any thoughts on Ralph Houk, Billy Martin or Dusty Baker?

And I know this one will be a big stretch, but being a Cleveland fan I've gotta at least mention him. Mike Hargrove? From '94-'99 he was arguably "one of" the best managers in the league. I will say that I think his years in Baltimore and Seattle have hurt him a lot though...

Which also leads me to one executive, John Hart? Those 90's Indians teams he put together were incredible...Sure no World Series wins, but 2 appearances, and 870-681 under Hart. He was also the Sporting News Executive of the Year in '94 and '95.. Now add a 3rd WS appearance while the Senior Adviser of Baseball Operations for the Rangers... This guy had an undeniable knack for scouting, whether it be through the draft or in trades for prospects..

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

add Tony LaRussa to the list (love 'em or hate 'em he has managed over 5,000 games and has won 2 World Series.)

I know I'm in the minority here... But if ever there was a Manager who should be scrutinized for the use of steroids, it's LaRussa. Were any other teams in history more rampantly "using" than the 1990s Athletics or 2000s Cardinals?

At worst, he encouraged its usage, and at best he "turned a blind eye". Few could argue (with a straight face) that LaRussa was unaware of what was going on. If players like McGwire, Palmeiro and even Bagwell (who was never actually incriminated) are receiving incredibly low vote totals, shouldn't it stand to reason that LaRussa would as well?

I know he's been a very successful Manager over the years, but seems to me that the same rules should apply. You can say he's managed over 5,000 games, but McGwire's hit a whole bunch of Home Runs (playing for both of LaRussa's teams) and he's not getting in anytime soon.

I'm anticipating lots of dissenting opinions on this, but that's my 2 cents on LaRussa.

[Kenny Cole]

That's an interesting position on LaRussa. I'm probably in the minority in terms of steroid usage, as I don't get nearly as exorcised about it as some do (which is not meant to derail the thread and start the tired old debate about that issue), but I do agree that whatever the rules, they ought to apply across the board, to include managers, owners, executives and players. If players are to be penalized, so too should be those who facilitated usage and/or profited while knowing about it but turning a blind eye. That would obviously include every owner and manager, as well as the esteemed commissioner.

LOL, I gues the net result of that positon is almost no one associated with MLB in the 90's or 00's should be elected. I'm guessing that's not too likely to happen.

Kenny Cole

[AndyG09]

Marvin Miller should already be in the HOF. I hope he is alive when he finally gets his due.

Would have to imagine Bud Selig will get a plaque someday as well. Love him or hate him, he has quite a bit of longevity and that seems to carry a lot of weight.

Best,

Andy

[Bugsy]

Originally Posted by perezfan

I know I'm in the minority here... But if ever there was a Manager who should be scrutinized for the use of steroids, it's LaRussa. Were any other teams in history more rampantly "using" than the 1990s Athletics or 2000s Cardinals?

At worst, he encouraged its usage, and at best he "turned a blind eye". Few could argue (with a straight face) that LaRussa was unaware of what was going on. If players like McGwire, Palmeiro and even Bagwell (who was never actually incriminated) are receiving incredibly low vote totals, shouldn't it stand to reason that LaRussa would as well?

I know he's been a very successful Manager over the years, but seems to me that the same rules should apply. You can say he's managed over 5,000 games, but McGwire's hit a whole bunch of Home Runs (playing for both of LaRussa's teams) and he's not getting in anytime soon.

I'm anticipating lots of dissenting opinions on this, but that's my 2 cents on LaRussa.

I agree with you 110%

Chris

[mcadams]

Originally Posted by perezfan

I know I'm in the minority here... But if ever there was a Manager who should be scrutinized for the use of steroids, it's LaRussa. Were any other teams in history more rampantly "using" than the 1990s Athletics or 2000s Cardinals?

At worst, he encouraged its usage, and at best he "turned a blind eye". Few could argue (with a straight face) that LaRussa was unaware of what was going on. If players like McGwire, Palmeiro and even Bagwell (who was never actually incriminated) are receiving incredibly low vote totals, shouldn't it stand to reason that LaRussa would as well?

I know he's been a very successful Manager over the years, but seems to me that the same rules should apply. You can say he's managed over 5,000 games, but McGwire's hit a whole bunch of Home Runs (playing for both of LaRussa's teams) and he's not getting in anytime soon.

I'm anticipating lots of dissenting opinions on this, but that's my 2 cents on LaRussa.

I completely agree with this line of thinking. Of the 3 modern managers we've mostly discussed here, Larussa AND Torre should both be questioned. Alongside your Big Mac and Palmeiro points, there were lots of Yankees on "the list" as well. Andy Pettitte, Jason Giambi, Alex Rodriguez, Roger Clemens, Chuck Knoblauch, Jason Grimsley, Glenallen Hill, etc. etc. etc. In my opinion, the only HOF manager from this era who DIDNT have a steroid problem on his team was Bobby Cox.

[ls7plus]

Originally Posted by perezfan

I know I'm in the minority here... But if ever there was a Manager who should be scrutinized for the use of steroids, it's LaRussa. Were any other teams in history more rampantly "using" than the 1990s Athletics or 2000s Cardinals?

At worst, he encouraged its usage, and at best he "turned a blind eye". Few could argue (with a straight face) that LaRussa was unaware of what was going on. If players like McGwire, Palmeiro and even Bagwell (who was never actually incriminated) are receiving incredibly low vote totals, shouldn't it stand to reason that LaRussa would as well?

I know he's been a very successful Manager over the years, but seems to me that the same rules should apply. You can say he's managed over 5,000 games, but McGwire's hit a whole bunch of Home Runs (playing for both of LaRussa's teams) and he's not getting in anytime soon.

I'm anticipating lots of dissenting opinions on this, but that's my 2 cents on LaRussa.

Agree with your point philosophically. Add Dusty Baker to that list IMO also--with Bonds' head getting bigger almost by the day (as well as the rest of that juiced bod) and Bonds seemingly defying the laws of nature in getting incredibility better just at the time he oridinarily would have been entering baseball old age, the situation should have presented quite an ethical dilemma to the former Giants skipper, but obviously did not. Imagine the fallout if Baker had told Bonds that he could not in good conscience write his name into the lineup (an absolutely delicious thought to those of us who are not exactly Barry Bonds fans)! In actual practice, however, both Baker and LaRussa probably found themselves caught between a rock and a hard place, and naturally believed they had little alternative than to keep writing their most productive players' names into the lineup. I have the same problem putting either of them into the HOF that I do with a number of players from that era--according to Kirk Radomski (former Mets clubhouse attendant, and central figure in the Mitchell report)'s book, "Bases Loaded," heavy steroid use was simply the culture during that time. While Bonds and McGwire were among those who embraced it, they also were probably two of the very hardest working players of the time (a lot of people think all they had to do was inject their butts, but the kind of results they got, both in terms of muscle mass and enhanced hitting performance, were also directly related to hard workouts, watching video and studying pitchers, and, at least in McGwire's case, the evolution of his swing into one incredibly short, compact and lightning quick stroke!). And I could not and still cannot stand Bonds, but there is no denying how incredibly well he played the hitter/pitcher game. He could read pitches and pitchers' thinking as well as anyone, and when he did get a pitch to hit, he almost never missed it! I'm certainly not saying these two should be HOF'ers, because there is no question their achievements cannot be directly compared to their predecessors whose performance was not artificially enhanced. I honestly don't know what to do with them or their peers, who were the best of that era, unless Cooperstown opens a Cheaters' Wing! But do we move Gaylord Perry's plaque to that wing, if it is opened??? It's true that there's always been cheating in baseball, from stealing and relaying signs by a confederate stationed in the bleachers to amphetamines to corked bats (I've got an excellent game-used example of the latter, originating from one of the leading sluggers of the '60's). Are some forms of cheating OK, and others not? Or are we into a really gray area, which is why I say I really do not know what to do with these guys?

With regard to Jim Leyland, he knows how to treat men with respect and players like to play for him, but please, PLEASE let us not include him for HOF consideration. Here in Detroit, we don't believe he ever really learned to make out a lineup. He doesn't seem to understand that putting your least productive hitters near the top of the lineup is absolutely counter-productive, because they get more at bats than those penned in lower in the order, and falls in love with certain players who have rarely been productive, playing them 3-4 times as often as he should, simply because they are equally bad at any number of postions in the field--can anyone say "Ryan Rugburn (oops--Rayburn)?" He also has a knack for resting young players just when they're really starting to hit their stride, then seems to be mystified when they've lost that groove after several needless games on the bench. He came up with what I call a "SALL," meaning a silly-ass Leyland lineup, just the other day, and when my wife asked why I wasn't watching the game, I told her that he had presented the lineup to the umpires at the start of the game, and they started laughing so hard they couldn't stop, and had to call the game!

Great thread, though.

Larry

PS: I would put Torre and Bobby Cox in the HOF in a heartbeat!

[perezfan]

Terrific post, Larry.... very well thought out, and nicely articulated. I would put both Cox and Torre in there as well (and agree that Baker is a resounding "no"!)

[HexsHeroes]

.

Lefty O'Doul for the early contributions he made
towards the growth of baseball in Japan ?