Modern Era HOF Ballot: Who do you think should get in?

[packs]

I'm having trouble understanding why Miller is even included. Every other name on that list is a former player. Why would Miller not have to sit out until the next Executives vote?

[Peter_Spaeth]

None of the above unless we want to further expand the Hall of the very good.

[KMayUSA6060]

Mattingly definitely shouldn't get in. The time for stat forecasting is long gone when it comes to voting. Puckett is the last one to get in based on the forecasting of stats.

The others, we'll see. I tend to agree that they are at the "very good" level, but not "Hall of Fame" level.

[bravos4evr]

My head says Trammel, Simmons and Marvin Miller


My heart adds Dale Murphy

[bravos4evr]

Tho, I might add that I think Tommy John should be in for a combination of his career numbers AND his contribution to the game of baseball by subjecting himself to the surgery. So, kinda more of a "contribution to the game of baseball" thing than a "you were one of the all time great players" thing

[packs]

Would be nice to see Fred McGriff on that list. To me he's a HOFer and much better than a lot of those listed.

[clydepepper]

Is there a block on Cuban-born candidates?

Neither Tony Oliva nor Minnie Minoso were ever seriously considered...


and Luis Tiant was as good or better than many that are already in the Hall:

Marquard, Rixey, Haines, Drysdale, Bunning and Hunter come to mind.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

My head says Trammel, Simmons and Marvin Miller


My heart adds Dale Murphy

This.

Also wondering where Rick Reuschel is.

Tom C

[Steve D]

Honestly, I would vote for all 10 of them in the HOF.

Steve

[Big Six]

Originally Posted by Steve D

Honestly, I would vote for all 10 of them in the HOF.



Steve

I agree...good bunch of guys who would add a lot to the Hall. Can you imagine that induction ceremony?!?!?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[seanofjapan]

I'd say they all belong (and as one other poster noted, Fred McGriff too, who would be close to the top of my list among those guys).

The hall is way too clubby than it needs to be. Also, you can't go back and kick the guys from the 30s out whose careers fall pretty clearly into what we consider "Hall of Very Good" territory today thanks to basically arbitrary changes in standards over the years. Those guys are the standard for admission, not Ruth.

There is easily enough deserving players out there today to double the HOF population.

[rats60]

I think Alan Trammell will get in. If I had a second choice in would be Steve Garvey. Sabermetrics don't treat him kindly and you wouldn't want him on your fantasy team. He didn't walk much. All he did was get a lot of hits, drive in a lot of runs and win games. 5 Pennants and 1 Championship between 1974-1984. He led those championship teams in RBIs every time. An MVP award, 10 time All Star and 4 Gold Gloves. He was even better in the postseason. .910 OPS with over 200 at bats and 2 LCS MVPs.

[chaddurbin]

trammell. this is not the nba where everyone and their grandmother get in, i don't care about contributions to the game or what you do outside of it. tommy john can mail his ligament to the hall of fame after he dies.

[BearBailey]

I think Trammel deserves it and will get in, probably Miller too, but dont see any of the others making it. But all of the players were at least really good players.

[quinnsryche]

Simmons, Parker & Garvey. Based on what I saw growing up and looking at the stats now. Just my opinion, feel free to blast away.

[dgo71]

Honestly I wouldn't be all up in arms if any one of these 10 get in. I'm not a small hall guy that thinks if your name isn't Ruth or Gehrig you shouldn't be in. Morris and TJ are probably the least deserving in my eyes but if they got in it wouldn't be the end of the world. I'm probably biased because I already have their autographs...

[Jim65]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

None of the above unless we want to further expand the Hall of the very good.

Agreed, too many mistakes in the past seems to make the standard low which it shouldn't be. To me, its ridiculous that Andre Dawson is a HOFer and he shouldn't be the standard by which others are judged. No one on that list is worthy.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Agreed, too many mistakes in the past seems to make the standard low which it shouldn't be. To me, its ridiculous that Andre Dawson is a HOFer and he shouldn't be the standard by which others are judged. No one on that list is worthy.

To me, if there's a substantial doubt or debate, that should in and of itself mean no. I think the Hall should be reserved for unquestionable all time greats, guys about whom there is no room for argument -- guys like Gwynn, Maddux, Ripken, Henderson, to give a few relatively recent examples.

[the 'stache]

Agreed. The Hall should be for the greats of the game. It's not the Hall of really, really good.

I look at a player, and use two criteria. Peak and length of career. Playing in the league for 18 years alone is not enough. Playing for 18 years, and being one of the very best players in the game for a substantial period of time should warrant serious consideration.

I also used to think that 3,000 hits, for example, meant a lock. Now, I'm not so sure. Playing long enough to get 3,000 hits is a feat in and of itself, but some guys are getting close to that threshold, or have passed it, and I just wring my hands while considering their eligibility for the Hall.

I look at a guy like Adrian Beltre. He just went over 3,000 hits. Great defensive third baseman. That and 3,000 hits will likely get him in. But people look at his being a no brainer. I don't. The guy was decidedly average offensively his first twelve seasons. He had one MVP caliber season in 2004 when power numbers were ridiculous (a 163 OPS + is real good, but hardly historic). With that season included, from 1998 to 2009, he had a 105 OPS +. That means he was only 5% above league average.

Anybody think he was a Hall of Famer then at age 30? Nope. Not close. Not even in the discussion. One Silver Slugger, two Gold Gloves, one single season getting MVP votes-even one.

Rhen he goes to Boston, steroid central, and his career takes off. Age 31-38 he has a 133 OPS +, including a 139 OPS + from 2010 to 2014. Boston and Texas, where steroids were handed out like Pez.

Now, he's over 3,000 hits. 462 home runs. Five Gold Gloves. That's a good resume. But do we just ignore the fact that he was a league average played for the first half of his career? Never won an MVP, and finished top five only one other time besides 2009. That's a stat compiler if I've ever seen one. A 117 OPS + career is not Hall-worthy, to me.

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To me, if there's a substantial doubt or debate, that should in and of itself mean no. I think the Hall should be reserved for unquestionable all time greats, guys about whom there is no room for argument -- guys like Gwynn, Maddux, Ripken, Henderson, to give a few relatively recent examples.

[clydepepper]

But Bill, does his moving the on-deck circle get him in?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by the 'stache

Agreed. The Hall should be for the greats of the game. It's not the Hall of really, really good.

I look at a player, and use two criteria. Peak and length of career. Playing in the league for 18 years alone is not enough. Playing for 18 years, and being one of the very best players in the game for a substantial period of time should warrant serious consideration.

I also used to think that 3,000 hits, for example, meant a lock. Now, I'm not so sure. Playing long enough to get 3,000 hits is a feat in and of itself, but some guys are getting close to that threshold, or have passed it, and I just wring my hands while considering their eligibility for the Hall.

I look at a guy like Adrian Beltre. He just went over 3,000 hits. Great defensive third baseman. That and 3,000 hits will likely get him in. But people look at his being a no brainer. I don't. The guy was decidedly average offensively his first twelve seasons. He had one MVP caliber season in 2004 when power numbers were ridiculous (a 163 OPS + is real good, but hardly historic). With that season included, from 1998 to 2009, he had a 105 OPS +. That means he was only 5% above league average.

Anybody think he was a Hall of Famer then at age 30? Nope. Not close. Not even in the discussion. One Silver Slugger, two Gold Gloves, one single season getting MVP votes-even one.

Rhen he goes to Boston, steroid central, and his career takes off. Age 31-38 he has a 133 OPS +, including a 139 OPS + from 2010 to 2014. Boston and Texas, where steroids were handed out like Pez.

Now, he's over 3,000 hits. 462 home runs. Five Gold Gloves. That's a good resume. But do we just ignore the fact that he was a league average played for the first half of his career? Never won an MVP, and finished top five only one other time besides 2009. That's a stat compiler if I've ever seen one. A 117 OPS + career is not Hall-worthy, to me.

Yet you think Ted Simmons is a Hofer? It took him 19 seasons to accumulate 50 WAR. About 2 1/2 WAR per season is very average. Thurman Munson would be far more deserving, 46 WAR in 9 1/2 seasons, almost 5 per season. I would take Bill Freehan over Simmons and his 44 WAR in 14 seasons plus 5 gold gloves and 2 top 3 MVP finishes.

He is easily the worst candidate on that list. He never finished top 5 in MVP voting. At least those other guys all had short peeks, won MVP awards, top 5 finishes, gold gloves. If you are going to elect a marginal candidate, it should be someone who was great for a short period, not a compiler who wasn't very good at compiling.

I never heard anyone ever say Ted Simmons was a Hofer during his career. Tiant yes, Trammell yes, Morris yes, Murphy yes, Parker yes, Mattingly yes, Garvey yes, Munson yes, Whitaker yes, Tony Oliva yes, Dick Allen yes and now with 96 WAR Beltre yes.

[glynparson]

I actually would not care if every single one of them got in the hall of fame. By the way its not the Hall of greats either, it is the hall of fame. In my opinion it is there to tell the games history and honoring any of these men for their contributions to the game I feel would be warranted.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by rats60

Yet you think Ted Simmons is a Hofer? It took him 19 seasons to accumulate 50 WAR. About 2 1/2 WAR per season is very average. Thurman Munson would be far more deserving, 46 WAR in 9 1/2 seasons, almost 5 per season. I would take Bill Freehan over Simmons and his 44 WAR in 14 seasons plus 5 gold gloves and 2 top 3 MVP finishes.

He is easily the worst candidate on that list. He never finished top 5 in MVP voting. At least those other guys all had short peeks, won MVP awards, top 5 finishes, gold gloves. If you are going to elect a marginal candidate, it should be someone who was great for a short period, not a compiler who wasn't very good at compiling.

I never heard anyone ever say Ted Simmons was a Hofer during his career. Tiant yes, Trammell yes, Morris yes, Murphy yes, Parker yes, Mattingly yes, Garvey yes, Munson yes, Whitaker yes, Tony Oliva yes, Dick Allen yes and now with 96 WAR Beltre yes.

I agree with you regarding Freehan as being a viable name. He is realy forgotten but was an incredible defensive catcher who had two huge seasons where he was one of the best players at any position in the league and several others where he was pretty darn good.

I disagree regarding Simmons however. By my estimation it could be argued that he is one of the ten best catchers in baseball history. He hung around too long but by that point he was no longer a catcher. 1983 was his last as a catcher, and through the end of that season, his career OPS+ was 126 in 7,244 AB 95% of which were as a catcher. I like the win shares statistic. Do you know how many catchers in the history of baseball had 10 consecutive 20+ win share seasons? Three. Yogi Berra 12 straight, Mike Piazza ten stright and Ted Simmons ten straight. To be fair, Johnny Bench had fourteen straight years of 19+ win shares. Still, that is some really good company to keep.

By using Munson as a comparison, you give Munson credit for not having a career end slope. His career OPS+ would have dropped had he been around to have a natural career arc.

Simmons had the fourth most hits in baseball history as a catcher. For his career, only two catchers had more total bases than he did (Fisk and Pudge). He also has the ninth most hits in history for a switch hitter.

JAWS ranks Simmons tenth in baseball history as a catcher. Behind Bench, Carter, Rodriguez, Fisk, Piazza, Berra, Mauer, Dickey, Cochrane. Ahead of the likes of Hartnett, Ewing, Munson, Lombardi, Posey, Bresnahan, Schalk, Campanella, Ferrell.

Tom C

[the 'stache]

First of all, 19 seasons????

He played 2 games in 1968.
He played 5 games in 1969.

You'd deducted those from his 21 years.

He played 82 games in 1970.
He played 76 games in 1986.
He played 73 games in 1987.
He played 78 games in 1988.

Those 6 "seasons" he played a combined 316 games. That's 1.95 seasons. He played in 2,456 games. That's slightly over 15 seasons of actual play time.

He's 10th all-time in JAWS for catcher, and all 9 ahead of him, except for Joe Mauer, are in Cooperstown. Average JAWS for a Hall catcher is 43.9. His is 42.4. His WAR is 50.1. Average WAR for the 15 Hall of Famer catchers is 53.4. Only four catchers in baseball history have a WAR of over 60: Johnny Bench, Gary Carter, Pudge Rodriguez and Carlton Fisk.

Look at his 7 year peak. Average 7 year peak for a Hall of Fame catcher is 34.4. Simmons 7 year peak is 34.6.

From 1974 to 1980, his 162 game averages: .298 AVG, 81 runs scored, 174 hits, 35 doubles, 21 home runs, 101 RBI, .374 OBP/.477 SLG/.852 OPS. 134 OPS +. That's fantastic production from the catcher position. Yogi Berra, who is in the Hall, had the exact same 134 OPS + during his best seven year stretch from 1950 to 1956. Simmons had an .852 OPS, while Berra's was at .866.

WAR7 of great catchers (top seven seasons. Need not be seven years in a row)

Gary Carter, HOF 48.3 WAR
Johnny Bench, HOF 47.1 WAR HOF
Mike Piazza, HOF 43.1 WAR
Ivan Rodriguez, HOF 39.7 WAR
Joe Mauer, 38.5 WAR
Carlton Fisk, HOF 37.5 WAR
Yogi Berra, HOF 37.0 WAR
Mickey Cochrane, HOF 36.9 WAR
Buster Posey 36.2 WAR
Ted Simmons 34.6 WAR
Bill Dickey 34.2, HOF WAR
Roy Campanella, HOF 32.9 WAR

What about a guy like Buster Posey, who a lot of people are already discussing as a future Cooperstown enshrinee? (I think it's premature, obviously). Between 2010 and 2017, which is really seven seasons, as Posey only played 45 games in 2011, he had an OPS + of 136. Simmons OPS + at his 7 year peak was 134.
Thurman Munson? His peak 7 year OPS + was 121, from 1970 to 1976. His 7 year peak WAR? 37.0.

Simmons, again, essentially, played 15 seasons. His top 12 seasons, by WAR: 5.5, 5.5, 5.2, 5.2, 4.9, 4.5, 4.0, 3.6, 3.6, 3.4, 3.3, 3.3. Those 12 seasons, the lion's share of his career, he averaged more than 4 WAR per season. 5 WAR is All Star level. 5 seasons, by WAR, he was All Star level. Another he was a half point from, and another a point from.

So, looking at his best seven seasons, compared to other great catchers throughout history, he was hardly a "compiler". But his lifetime stats, as a catcher, should warrant another look.

2,472 hits. Among catchers, only Ivan Rodriguez' 2,844 are higher.
483 doubles. Among catchers, only Rodriguez' 572 are higher.
1,389 RBI. Among catchers, only Yogi Berra's 1,430 are higher.

Calling him a strong Hall of Fame candidate is not at all a stretch.

Originally Posted by rats60

Yet you think Ted Simmons is a Hofer? It took him 19 seasons to accumulate 50 WAR. About 2 1/2 WAR per season is very average. Thurman Munson would be far more deserving, 46 WAR in 9 1/2 seasons, almost 5 per season. I would take Bill Freehan over Simmons and his 44 WAR in 14 seasons plus 5 gold gloves and 2 top 3 MVP finishes.

He is easily the worst candidate on that list. He never finished top 5 in MVP voting. At least those other guys all had short peeks, won MVP awards, top 5 finishes, gold gloves. If you are going to elect a marginal candidate, it should be someone who was great for a short period, not a compiler who wasn't very good at compiling.

I never heard anyone ever say Ted Simmons was a Hofer during his career. Tiant yes, Trammell yes, Morris yes, Murphy yes, Parker yes, Mattingly yes, Garvey yes, Munson yes, Whitaker yes, Tony Oliva yes, Dick Allen yes and now with 96 WAR Beltre yes.