T206 Who should be a HOFer that isn't ???

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by packs

The home run has always been king but Gavvy Cravath doesn't get any love. Six time home run champ. Three years in a row twice. The Babe Ruth prototype.

at the Baker Bowl? 260 feet?

on my best day, even I might have done that.

Oh, and the home run wasn't king until the Babe made it so.

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

at the Baker Bowl? 260 feet?

on my best day, even I might have done that.

Oh, and the home run wasn't king until the Babe made it so.

That's still a lot of black ink in a monstrous peak in his later years and when he debuted it took him a while.

Babe Ruth became synonymous with the home run. It doesn't mean there were no kings before him.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

at the Baker Bowl? 260 feet?

on my best day, even I might have done that.

Oh, and the home run wasn't king until the Babe made it so.

His career OPS+ is 151. That is park adjusted. Short career, but that is 32nd in the history of the sport.

Tom C

[rats60]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

His career OPS+ is 151. That is park adjusted. Short career, but that is 32nd in the history of the sport.

Tom C

It is not park adjusted. They adjust for runs scored, but that doesn't account for 265 foot fly balls that he got credited for home runs which would be outs in any other park. He only hit 20 home runs on the road, less than two per season. His OPS at home was .986, on the road .772.

He only played 100 games in 7 seasons. He couldn't stick in the majors with the Red Sox, White Sox or Senators. Only when he made it to the Phillies was he good enough to stick in the majors, taking advantage of the home field. If he was a HOFer, he would have played longer and made it as a full time player before age 31. His career was too short and too home field aided to be a Hall of Famer, in my opinion.

[Topps206]

Baker Bowl or not, Cravath had a peak bested by very few in history. He was probably the best player on that 1915 Phillies team which won the pennant. He absolutely should be in.

[packs]

How come no one talks about Fenway's short porch to right field but the Baker Bowl is always a point of contention?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Topps206

Baker Bowl or not, Cravath had a peak bested by very few in history. He was probably the best player on that 1915 Phillies team which won the pennant. He absolutely should be in.

I think very few would agree that he was better than Pete Alexander. I guess if you think Craveth should be in, we should ignore the Coors Field factor and put in those Rockies with home park inflated stats.

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by rats60

I think very few would agree that he was better than Pete Alexander. I guess if you think Craveth should be in, we should ignore the Coors Field factor and put in those Rockies with home park inflated stats.

I was referencing position players, and really, I wouldn't have much of a problem with Larry Walker or Todd Helton.

Cravath was doing stuff in his day that players simply did not do.

[packs]

He was the prototype for the modern player. But it makes sense Cravath isn't in because neither is Stovey. Stovey was Mike Trout and Mickey Mantle before anyone even knew it was possible to play baseball that way.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by Topps206

Baker Bowl or not, Cravath had a peak bested by very few in history. He was probably the best player on that 1915 Phillies team which won the pennant. He absolutely should be in.

I don't see how a guy with 5 great years in an 11 year career should be a HOF'er. (and those great years aren't at Koufax type levels either) Yes his wRC+ of 150 is very good, but it is inflated by 3 very high years. If you are gonna let people in with those sorts of careers, you might as well open the floodgates.

and yes Larry Walker and Todd Helton are more deserving as they were as good or better for longer.

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

I don't see how a guy with 5 great years in an 11 year career should be a HOF'er. (and those great years aren't at Koufax type levels either) Yes his wRC+ of 150 is very good, but it is inflated by 3 very high years. If you are gonna let people in with those sorts of careers, you might as well open the floodgates.

and yes Larry Walker and Todd Helton are more deserving as they were as good or better for longer.

Keep in mind that this is also because his career was shortened and didn't get his chance early on, but more than made up for it in his thirties.

Walker gets a raw deal. All it takes is a few minutes of research to see he was not a product of Coors.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by Topps206

Keep in mind that this is also because his career was shortened and didn't get his chance early on, but more than made up for it in his thirties.

Walker gets a raw deal. All it takes is a few minutes of research to see he was not a product of Coors.

I get that, he didn't even make it to MLB until he was 27. BUT, we have to judge players by what they did and not by what they might have done.

IF, Josh Donaldson has one more great year then declines into a 1.4 WAR player over his last 4 years would he be a HOF'er? That's kinda the argument you are making. I would say no, not good enough for long enough.

but, as I have stated before, I am a "small hall" guy and think too many borderline players are in already.

yet I think Jim Kaat deserves it, so there goes that right!

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by rats60

It is not park adjusted. They adjust for runs scored, but that doesn't account for 265 foot fly balls that he got credited for home runs which would be outs in any other park. He only hit 20 home runs on the road, less than two per season. His OPS at home was .986, on the road .772.

Polo Grounds left field foul pole was 279 and right field 258. That was for two teams at this time period.

Tom C