HOFER'S Who Don't Belong

[Archive]

Posted By: John Kalafarski

Wagner the best? You mean the card, don't you?

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave S

John--not to argue, but "when he was healthy" is appropriate to hundreds, if not thousands of players over the years. I won't deny that Pedro had a few fantastic years, but not a career that merits the Hall...

[Archive]

Posted By: PC

I suspect Gary Carter's 11 all-star appearances, 3 gold gloves, 5 silver sluggers, 2000+ hits, 1000+ RBIs and 324 HRs as a catcher had something to do with his admission to Cooperstown.

And the HOF needed an Expo, so that's the icing on the Carter cake.

[Archive]

Posted By: John Kalafarski

When he was healthy, not if. He'll waltz into the hall (well, maybe rumba).

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

And Gary could get in AFTER Ted Simmons.

[Archive]

Posted By: john/z28jd

I dont think people really appreciate how great of a pitcher Pedro was during his best years. Just go to his baseball-reference page and look at his ERA compared to the Leagues ERA the same year,in five seasons his is less than half of the leagues average and his WHIP is better than everyone in history not named Ed Walsh(the elder that would be,he stomps all over the son) and Addie Joss.

Just think for a second about the era being half of the leagues average five times,Clemens has done it 3 times but only two were full seasons and when Greg Maddux did it for the second time years back they made a big deal about it.Johnson did it four times but he pitched 6 more full seasons than Pedro. Mathewson did it twice,Grove did it once and Alexander and Koufax never did that. I think you can safely put him in with those names

[Archive]

Posted By: Frank Wakefield

No, John. I meant just plain old best.

Read The Glory of Their Times. Read Baseball When the Grass was Real. The guys that played with Ruth and Cobb and Gehrig... they thought Wagner was the best ballplayer ever.

I didn't see any of them play. But I'd like to think I can believe the players who played with all of them. Today, we look at stats, play computer and dice ball games, and we buy into Ruth being the best. I used to think Cobb was the best, just barely better than the Babe. But the more and more I read of the old, contemporary perceptions, it became obvious that Wagner was the man.

[Archive]

Posted By: Kenneth A. Cohen

I couldn't disagree more that Pedro doesn't merit the Hall. I'll take a pitcher any day with a multiyear period of dominance (e.g Pedro, Koufax, Dean) over the longevity guys (Sutton, Neikro, Perry), who were never truly dominant. Look at Pedro's record from 1997 through 2005 and compare his ERA to the league average. For me, it should be more about dominance than sticking around long enough to reach milestones.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jodi Birkholm

To add to Howard's train of thought, what about Billy Cox? The best defensive twentieth century third sacker before Brooks. All who saw him play seem to agree. An above-average offensive player as well. I am more than a bit biased--he's my favorite player.

[Archive]

Posted By: Fred C

One more thing about Pedro -

Look at that win%... How many pitchers with more than 200 wins have a higher win% ?

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd Schultz

"Puckett and Carter and that woman.... no way they get in unless they buy a ticket for admission"

Frank, take a look at the stats of George Brett, Tony Gwynn and Kirby Puckett. Look at their first full 12 seasons--Puckett only played twelve, so I'm letting you discard the partial seasons of the other two, who couldn't crack the everyday lineups their rookie years like Puck. Anyway, unless I'm messing up my math you should see that Puckett had more hits (2304) than EITHER Brett or Gwynn during those 12 seasons. In fact, Puck had more runs scored, HR and RBI than Brett too. Same for Puckett over Gwynn, except for runs scored, where Tony scored exactly two more during that time than Puck. Oh and Kirby fielded his position at least as well and probably better than those two also.

These are not marginal HOFers I'm comparing to Puckett--they are two guys pretty much regarded as studs. Again, add in the two rings, one over your Cardinals when he hit just .357 and the other when they beat Atlanta and he hit two homers plus made a great catch to help save a game in a seven game set.

Now, please tell me why, with any objectivity, there is no way Puckett belongs. Even use your yardstick and rely heavily on what is said by those who played against him--I doubt you will find ANY who feel he doesn't belong.