Your top 3 non HOFers

[nat]

What's with the love for Gil Hodges? Here's a game, guess which line belongs to which player. The first number is plate appearances, the second is home runs, the third is OPS+ (on-base percentage plus slugging percentage, adjusted to take home park into account, and compared to league average, 100 is dead average each year, higher is better), and wins above replacement.

8657, 473, 138, 44

7137, 293, 128, 38

8102, 370, 120, 45

7809, 339, 134, 39

7914, 377, 139, 52

8230, 340, 137, 53


And here's the names in a different order: Kent Hrbeck, Boog Powell, Jack Clark, Gil Hodges, Carlos Delgado, and Norm Cash. See if you can match the line to the name.

That's a bunch of similar players right there. None of them are in the hall of fame, and none of them have much of a chance.

[Laxcat]

Late to the game but here are mine: Ken Boyer Roger Maris & Bill Freehan

[Harliduck]

I'm a huge Tony Oliva fan...still can't believe he isn't in.

Tony Oliva
Gil Hodges
Tommy John


Honorable Mention - Thurman Munson, Dale Murphy


All mentioned earlier, so sorry for the boring post...lol

[bravos4evr]

Jim Kaat, Dale Murphy, Tim Raines

I really don't see why Kaat has been kept out, from 61-75 the only 2 arms with more WAR were Gibson and Gaylord Perry.

Murph, cuz he was my idol growing up a Braves fan. and Rock Raines because in any other era he would have been the best leadoff man, he just happened to play at the same time as Rickey, his numbers scream HOF to me tho.

[Exhibitman]

Raines for Nick's reasons.

Munson because he was the core of the great Bronx Zoo teams and the best or second best catcher in the league for nearly a decade. ROY MVP.

Dick Allen. He may have been a dick but he was a genuine talent.

[MCoxon]

Originally Posted by Harliduck

I'm a huge Tony Oliva fan...still can't believe he isn't in.

Tony Oliva
Gil Hodges
Tommy John


Honorable Mention - Thurman Munson, Dale Murphy


All mentioned earlier, so sorry for the boring post...lol

I'm a HUGE Oliva guy. My friends won't open emails from me any more with Oliva in the subject line because they know I'm on the same broken record. Up until 71 when he hurt his knee, he was at the top of the AL in hitting and really all of MLB.

He won batting titles in his first two full seasons, won a 3rd, barely missed a 4th, all in his first 8 seasons. And he was a gold glove winner.

I always think he was hurt by having Carew in the early 70s, and in 65 Versalles winning the MVP, taking some of the attention away from him

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by MCoxon

I'm a HUGE Oliva guy. My friends won't open emails from me any more with Oliva in the subject line because they know I'm on the same broken record. Up until 71 when he hurt his knee, he was at the top of the AL in hitting and really all of MLB.

He won batting titles in his first two full seasons, won a 3rd, barely missed a 4th, all in his first 8 seasons. And he was a gold glove winner.

I always think he was hurt by having Carew in the early 70s, and in 65 Versalles winning the MVP, taking some of the attention away from him

IDK man, 41 WAR over 15 seasons, an .829 career OPS and a negative defensive rating aren't really HOF material. It sucks that his career really crashed and burned after he turned 31, but we have to judge players by what they did and not what they might have done if healthy. I think he's a hall of very good, but short of the HOF. ymmv

[MCoxon]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

IDK man, 41 WAR over 15 seasons, an .829 career OPS and a negative defensive rating aren't really HOF material. It sucks that his career really crashed and burned after he turned 31, but we have to judge players by what they did and not what they might have done if healthy. I think he's a hall of very good, but short of the HOF. ymmv

So tell me why we give the pass to Koufax who had arthritis in his left arm and retired at 30?

He ranks #82 in War for Pitchers

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...h_career.shtml

He has 165 wins (#204 all time)

What happened if Koufax limped along and tried to play 6 more seasons with his arthritic elbow (he couldn't comb his hair on the days after he pitched in his last season), and his stats were poor in those 6 years. Would we have dinged him and had someone on these boards saying "he had a good run, but not HOF worthy in spite of his 5 great seasons because he had an otherwise mediocre 15 year career" (4 mediocre seasons early, 6 mediocre seasons late)?

[Peter_Spaeth]

I think probably the best case for Koufax is that his peak years, and admittedly there weren't many of them, were SO off the charts that he gets a pass for his early career and early departure. Oliva, while great for a decade, wasn't far and away the best hitter like Koufax was (ok, with a nod to the Dodger Stadium detractors) far and away the best pitcher.

Can someone explain Dizzy Dean to me, by the way. Koufax-like but even fewer peak years, maybe 3 or 4.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by nat

What's with the love for Gil Hodges? Here's a game, guess which line belongs to which player. The first number is plate appearances, the second is home runs, the third is OPS+ (on-base percentage plus slugging percentage, adjusted to take home park into account, and compared to league average, 100 is dead average each year, higher is better), and wins above replacement.

8657, 473, 138, 44

7137, 293, 128, 38

8102, 370, 120, 45

7809, 339, 134, 39

7914, 377, 139, 52

8230, 340, 137, 53


And here's the names in a different order: Kent Hrbeck, Boog Powell, Jack Clark, Gil Hodges, Carlos Delgado, and Norm Cash. See if you can match the line to the name.

That's a bunch of similar players right there. None of them are in the hall of fame, and none of them have much of a chance.

Hodges did have 7 straight 100 RBI seasons and all star appearances.

[Peter_Spaeth]

As an aside Rocky Colavito had 350+ HR at age 32, then vanished.

[RTK]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

As an aside Rocky Colavito had 350+ HR at age 32, then vanished.

....kind of like Koufax

[Samsdaddy]

Dick Allen. Tony Oliva. Don Mattingly.

[the 'stache]

As to my second and third choice, I'm still mulling it over.

Hodges is a tough sell for me. I love the Brooklyn Dodgers, and Gil was a great player. But Hall of Fame worthy? I just don't know. He's borderline, to me, at least. We're quick to drop Rice, but is Hodges more deserving? Gil had a career 45.0 WAR, and exactly three seasons of 5.0 or higher (5 being All Star caliber). And, even his best season by WAR, 1954, was only a 6.2.

He never finished in the top five of any MVP vote in 18 seasons (well, 15 seasons of 100 or more games). His career OPS + is 120, which is seven points lower than Dwight Evans, who is not in. He won three Gold Gloves. His defensive metrics are ok, nothing great.

Here's the main problem I have with Hodges. Besides his MVP finishes (three top ten finishes; 7th in 1957, 8th in 1950, and 10th in 1954) don't wow me. And, he never led the league in any meaningful category. Games played twice, strikeouts once. That's it.

Don't get me wrong, I've always liked Gil Hodges. I just think he was overshadowed by Duke Snider for a reason. Really, if you look at the stars of the Dodgers, he was the fourth best offensive player on the team, behind Robinson, Campanella and Snider.

Can somebody make a case for his induction, please? He hit a good deal of home runs; two 40 + seasons, four others of 30 +. He drove in a good deal of runs; from 1949 to 1955, he drove in 100 + each season.

But where does he stand out as an exceptional player?

[RayBShotz]

Dick Allen, Roger Maris, Don Mattingly

[spaidly]

Garvey - Mr. Clean (or Popeye as my Dad called him due to his massive forearms) was my childhood baseball hero - Go Dodgers!

Munson - leader and general badass. He was not a fan of Reggie Jackson, which made the enemy of my enemy my friend.

I don't have a third but if I had to add one he would be anyone from the best infield that ever was: Lopes, Russell, or Cey.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by nat

What's with the love for Gil Hodges? Here's a game, guess which line belongs to which player. The first number is plate appearances, the second is home runs, the third is OPS+ (on-base percentage plus slugging percentage, adjusted to take home park into account, and compared to league average, 100 is dead average each year, higher is better), and wins above replacement.

8657, 473, 138, 44

7137, 293, 128, 38

8102, 370, 120, 45

7809, 339, 134, 39

7914, 377, 139, 52

8230, 340, 137, 53


And here's the names in a different order: Kent Hrbeck, Boog Powell, Jack Clark, Gil Hodges, Carlos Delgado, and Norm Cash. See if you can match the line to the name.

That's a bunch of similar players right there. None of them are in the hall of fame, and none of them have much of a chance.

As has been mentioned, he drove in 100+ runs 7 seasons. He was also a key member of a team that won 7 pennants and 2 championships. 8 time all star, recieved mvp votes 9 times and won 3 gold gloves (would have won a lot more if the award existed his whole career). Hodges was also very good in team wins (and bad in losses) , hitting .309 with a .974 ops. So despite his career numbers, he was very important to team success on a team that won a lot and is remembered for being good in those wins. He was also good defensively although some don't seem to value defense at all. That is why although he may not make the hof, he stands out on that list of first basemen.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by rats60

As has been mentioned, he drove in 100+ runs 7 seasons. He was also a key member of a team that won 7 pennants and 2 championships. 8 time all star, recieved mvp votes 9 times and won 3 gold gloves (would have won a lot more if the award existed his whole career). Hodges was also very good in team wins (and bad in losses) , hitting .309 with a .974 ops. So despite his career numbers, he was very important to team success on a team that won a lot and is remembered for being good in those wins. He was also good defensively although some don't seem to value defense at all. That is why although he may not make the hof, he stands out on that list of first basemen.

RBI's is not a very good number to use for player's individual performance because it s driven by the quality of the player's who bat in front of him. 3 guys can have equal offensive production but vary greatly in RBI because one guy played for a good offensive team and the others didn't.

not trying to start a SABER war, but I think RBI is like pitcher wins, it's just too contingent on the performance of other people to be treated as if it is the product of the individual.

[Johnny630]

Mine would be
1.Gil Hodges
2. Ken Boyer
3. Minnie Minoso
3. Tony Oliva
4. Dick Allen

Favorite Signature would be Gil Hodges on a 52 Topps ! Wow

[Jim65]

Bill Madlock, .305 Career BA, 4 Batting Titles

[DBesse27]

Minoso, Oliva, murphy, Garvey, Dwight Evans. That's more than 3, but I couldn't decide who to drop

[rats60]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

RBI's is not a very good number to use for player's individual performance because it s driven by the quality of the player's who bat in front of him. 3 guys can have equal offensive production but vary greatly in RBI because one guy played for a good offensive team and the others didn't.

not trying to start a SABER war, but I think RBI is like pitcher wins, it's just too contingent on the performance of other people to be treated as if it is the product of the individual.

Well will just have to agree to disagree then because I strongly disagree with your whole post. The player has to drive in those runs. I would rather have a player like Hodges than some guy who walks a lot and has an inflated obp, but doesn't produce. I wouldn't penalize a guy who played on a bad team and didn't have opportunities to drive in runs. However, you have to give Hodges credit for taking advantage of his opportunities and driving in those runs that led to wins.

As far as pitching wins, after era it is the most important stat. After all the idea of the game is the score the most runs/allow the fewest runs and win games. Have a good fip, whip, bb/k ratio, etc. are all fine, but in the end may be meaningless to the result of this game. Some people act like this game is played in a vacuum. They ignore that valid strategies of the game harm those prized sabr stats but produce wins. Things like pitching around hitters in situations or pitching to the score of the game. Also, to complain that a pitcher's bullpen can't hold a lead when the pitcher is partially at fault because he wasn't able to finish the game is silly in my opinion.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by rats60

Well will just have to agree to disagree then because I strongly disagree with your whole post. The player has to drive in those runs. I would rather have a player like Hodges than some guy who walks a lot and has an inflated obp, but doesn't produce. I wouldn't penalize a guy who played on a bad team and didn't have opportunities to drive in runs. However, you have to give Hodges credit for taking advantage of his opportunities and driving in those runs that led to wins.

As far as pitching wins, after era it is the most important stat. After all the idea of the game is the score the most runs/allow the fewest runs and win games. Have a good fip, whip, bb/k ratio, etc. are all fine, but in the end may be meaningless to the result of this game. Some people act like this game is played in a vacuum. They ignore that valid strategies of the game harm those prized sabr stats but produce wins. Things like pitching around hitters in situations or pitching to the score of the game. Also, to complain that a pitcher's bullpen can't hold a lead when the pitcher is partially at fault because he wasn't able to finish the game is silly in my opinion.

IDK man, "agree to disagree" is not solving the issue. pitcher wins have been PROVEN to be a worthless stat. Maybe not as much in the old days where guys threw 400 innings a year, but it's still too contingent on the quality of the offense one plays with. and that has no bearing on the ability of the pitcher. (See King Felix winning the Cy Young with 12 wins, he was easily the best arm that year, but his team's offense was awful)

and that tired argument about "played in a vacuum" doesn't fly. the only difference between modern stats and older stats is accuracy. Nobody gets accused of 'seeing the game in a vacuum" because they use batting avg and wins, so there's no reason to make the same accusations against the modern stats.

Time moves on, the game changes, stats become better, more accurate. It is the nature of science and the world. No reason to be dismissive of it.

[Mark70Z]

I'm sure no one picked any of these three but I'll go total homer and I'd pick Belanger, McNally and Grich.

If not a homer then Oliva, Minoso and Allen.