Let's talk about Hall of Fame candidates who have been "neglected"

[bbcard1]

Originally Posted by shagrotn77

Gil Hodges is probably the most glaring omission IMO. .

Gil is a perfect argument against a lot of the players we are discussing here. When you combine his managerial and player record he looks like a hall of fame, however voters are not supposed to vote on anyone as a player/manager. His stats are light as a 50s 1st basemen...not in comparison to the league but in comparison to the established powerhitting HOFers. It wouldn't be a travesty if he were in neither is it one that he's not. Never really lead the league in anything all that significant, WAR well below the established level for firstbasemen, he had a lot of All Star appearances, but so did Ed Bailey. After his career he was Really nice player but you have to be a big hall guy to let him in. He was an under .500 manager, but did get the Mets an amazing world series, so there's that. He would have likely climbed in his win % had he not died young.

Some people will argue he lost years to the war. That's conjecture...he probably didn't miss much time but even if he did you can't make assumptions on "what if." If you're going to do it for Thurman Munson and Gil Hodges you have to do it for Vida Blue and Tony Conigliario.

One other thing. He was only 47 when he died, which is tragic, but I have neve seen a picture of him, even from his early days when he looked younger than 47.

[maniac_73]

I think Carlos Delgado and Fred McGriff are overlooked because they came up in the Steroid Era.

[dealme]

I would like to see Tommy John get in not only for the nearly 300 wins, but also for the surgery that bears his name. I also like seeing Vada Pinson getting some love in this thread. When I first started taking baseball seriously as a player (maybe 6th grade?), my dad borrowed an instructional video from the coach at the high school where he taught. It had Vada Pinson going through various hitting drills. He's been an under-the-radar favorite of mine ever since.

[timn1]

I agree Tommy John should be in the conversation for the nearly 300 wins, but for the surgery????? Did he do the surgery on himself?


And Steve Garvey? Really? Retrosheet.org has him -6.1 in BFW (Batter/Fielder Wins) - admittedly it's a harsher measure than WAR, but even Baines is +13.7 by that same measure. Trout is +54.3 in half a career.

Originally Posted by dealme

I would like to see Tommy John get in not only for the nearly 300 wins, but also for the surgery that bears his name. I also like seeing Vada Pinson getting some love in this thread. When I first started taking baseball seriously as a player (maybe 6th grade?), my dad borrowed an instructional video from the coach at the high school where he taught. It had Vada Pinson going through various hitting drills. He's been an under-the-radar favorite of mine ever since.

[egri]

Originally Posted by timn1

I agree Tommy John should be in the conversation for the nearly 300 wins, but for the surgery????? Did he do the surgery on himself?


And Steve Garvey? Really? Retrosheet.org has him -6.1 in BFW (Batter/Fielder Wins) - admittedly it's a harsher measure than WAR, but even Baines is +13.7 by that same measure. Trout is +54.3 in half a career.

There has been a push to induct Dr. Frank Jobe, who developed and performed that surgery.

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by egri

There has been a push to induct Dr. Frank Jobe, who developed and performed that surgery.

But not Canseco's pharmacist.

How is surgically altering a pitching arm praised, while chemically altering muscle tissue is banned? What, really, is the difference when it comes to using modern medicine to gain a competitive advantage?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Mark17

But not Canseco's pharmacist.

How is surgically altering a pitching arm praised, while chemically altering muscle tissue is banned? What, really, is the difference when it comes to using modern medicine to gain a competitive advantage?

Has anyone ever questioned Koufax' regime of cortisone (steroid) injections?

[milkit1]

Id vote for Johnny Kling. He was constantly voted best catcher by his peers whom played with him and he lead the Cubs to 3 straight pennants, took a year off (Cubs finish 2nd) comes back and brings the cubs to the series again in '10

1906 cubs.jpg

[Mark17]

Originally Posted by maniac_73

I think Carlos Delgado and Fred McGriff are overlooked because they came up in the Steroid Era.

Fred McGriff and his 493 HRs is in if not for the 1994 strike, which robbed him of at least 7 HR. He was having his best season, with 34 home runs in his 113 games, before the player strike wiped out the rest of the season.

I have no sympathy for the players regarding that strike but it's too bad most of them (Molitor, Morris, etc.) didn't pay a price like McGriff.

[Clutch-Hitter]

Originally Posted by Mark17

Fred McGriff and his 493 HRs is in if not for the 1994 strike, which robbed him of at least 7 HR. He was having his best season, with 34 home runs in his 113 games, before the player strike wiped out the rest of the season.

I have no sympathy for the players regarding that strike but it's too bad most of them (Molitor, Morris, etc.) didn't pay a price like McGriff.

+1. Crime Dog was robbed!

.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by maniac_73

I think Carlos Delgado and Fred McGriff are overlooked because they came up in the Steroid Era.

I don’t think I would vote for Delgado in the end, but he very much deserved a fair look and genuine consideration instead of falling off the ballot first year.

McGriff I think belongs. If we keep out the steroid guys but only elect guys with steroid-level stats like Frank Thomas and Ken Griffey very few players from this era will be making the hall.