Richie Allen and Dave Parker.

[Vintagedeputy]

Garvey snubbed again. Unreal.

[packs]

Pretty surprised Vic Harris got almost no support.

There needs to be another pre-integration vote for only pre-integration players to give proper focus and respect to this era of baseball. this committee does not take it seriously enough in its current iteration.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by packs

Pretty surprised Vic Harris got almost no support.

There needs to be another pre-integration vote for only pre-integration players to give proper focus and respect to this era of baseball. this committee does not take it seriously enough in its current iteration.

Why? In 2006; they formed a special committee. There were 94 players who were evaluated. That was paired down to 39 for a vote. Each one was given a yes or no vote. All 39 could have been elected, but only 17 were. Harris was in the 94 and didn't make the cut. Donaldson was in the 39 and was voted no on.

This is a lot different than what someone like Parker went through. Everytime he has been voted on, the voters were limited how many players they can choose. From his first ballot, he is the 11th Hall of Famer elected from that ballot and there are about 6 more who are deserving. It would be impossible to have elected all of these due to the number voters could vote for.

His last time on the ballot, he was on a ballot with 13 Hofers, plus steroid users and a few more that will be elected in the future.

His first time on the Veterans Committee, he was one of 12. 3 were elected with 100%, that is why no one else received 6 votes. Parker is the 6th Hofer off that ballot.

His second time on the ballot, Morris received 14/16, Trammell 13/16, future Hofer Simmons 11/16 and future Hofer Miller 7/16. That left 3 votes for the other 6 guys on the ballot. Parker is the 5th Hofer from that ballot.

Unless the voting system is changed to give voters the option of voting for everyone, like on the Negro League ballot, you are going to see the same players get voted on with a few new names replacing those who were voted in.

[packs]

Originally Posted by rats60

Why? In 2006; they formed a special committee. There were 94 players who were evaluated. That was paired down to 39 for a vote. Each one was given a yes or no vote. All 39 could have been elected, but only 17 were. Harris was in the 94 and didn't make the cut. Donaldson was in the 39 and was voted no on.

This is a lot different than what someone like Parker went through. Everytime he has been voted on, the voters were limited how many players they can choose. From his first ballot, he is the 11th Hall of Famer elected from that ballot and there are about 6 more who are deserving. It would be impossible to have elected all of these due to the number voters could vote for.

His last time on the ballot, he was on a ballot with 13 Hofers, plus steroid users and a few more that will be elected in the future.

His first time on the Veterans Committee, he was one of 12. 3 were elected with 100%, that is why no one else received 6 votes. Parker is the 6th Hofer off that ballot.

His second time on the ballot, Morris received 14/16, Trammell 13/16, future Hofer Simmons 11/16 and future Hofer Miller 7/16. That left 3 votes for the other 6 guys on the ballot. Parker is the 5th Hofer from that ballot.

Unless the voting system is changed to give voters the option of voting for everyone, like on the Negro League ballot, you are going to see the same players get voted on with a few new names replacing those who were voted in.

My point wasn't that Vic Harris deserves more attention but that players of his era, who were not able to play in MLB baseball, haven't had enough opportunities to be considered for enshrinement or for their careers to be talked about in relation to the HOF. Talking about it once doesn't really satisfy that.

Parker was voted on 19 times.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Vintagedeputy

Garvey snubbed again. Unreal.

In my mind, Garvey’s mistake was all that BS with his personal life that caused his support on the writer’s ballot essentially to implode back in the 90’s and 00’s for a while when he was fresher in everyone’s collective memories. Once he moved on to the various iterations of the VC and “era” committees, sabermetrics had become a thing, and his shortcomings in certain career stats to me at least anyway seemed a lot more obvious.

For starters before you even get to that, he’s a 1B with less than 300 career HR. Most typical HOF 1B have power figures way beyond that. Only 38 career WAR and a .329 OBP don’t help him much either.

If it were up to me, I’d put him in; I’m for a (slightly anyway) “larger” Hall. Garvey certainly has the hardware accolades (An MVP, 10x AS, 4 GG, an AS MVP, an LCS MVP…) and there is at least a decent argument that he was the best 1B in the majors in the 1970’s. The problem though is now it’s been so long that he is getting that reputation as “best player not in the HOF” - which ironically before him seemed to be a distinction held forever by Gil Hodges. I don’t know if he overcomes that or not. It would seem to make sense that he would eventually, but who knows.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by jchcollins

In my mind, Garvey’s mistake was all that BS with his personal life that caused his support on the writer’s ballot essentially to implode back in the 90’s and 00’s for a while when he was fresher in everyone’s collective memories. Once he moved on to the various iterations of the VC and “era” committees, sabermetrics had become a thing, and his shortcomings in certain career stats to me at least anyway seemed a lot more obvious.

For starters before you even get to that, he’s a 1B with less than 300 career HR. Most typical HOF 1B have power figures way beyond that. Only 38 career WAR and a .329 OBP don’t help him much either.

If it were up to me, I’d put him in; I’m for a (slightly anyway) “larger” Hall. Garvey certainly has the hardware accolades (An MVP, 10x AS, 4 GG, an AS MVP, an LCS MVP…) and there is at least a decent argument that he was the best 1B in the majors in the 1970’s. The problem though is now it’s been so long that he is getting that reputation as “best player not in the HOF” - which ironically before him seemed to be a distinction held forever by Gil Hodges. I don’t know if he overcomes that or not. It would seem to make sense that he would eventually, but who knows. Not starting until age 27 obviously hurt Bob Johnson, and probably doom him forever to hall of very good.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think maybe Garvey initially suffered because of his personal baggage and now it's pretty easy to make the No case based on advanced metrics. But there's no denying that in the day, the consensus was that he was an elite player, and there is certainly support for that perception, including 6 straight 200 hit seasons.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Not starting until age 27 obviously hurt Bob Johnson a lot.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Not starting until age 27 obviously hurt Bob Johnson a lot.

His minor league numbers were not all that good at ages 23 or 24. By age 25 and 26 he was tearing up the PCL though. He also could have stayed around a bit longer. Had 5 homers and .283 batting average in PCL in just 145 at bats at age 42 three years after his last major league at bat. Hit .326 the next year in B level ball, walking more than twice as much as he struck out.

Just think he is worthy of a discussion from those who make those decisions.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

His minor league numbers were not all that good at ages 23 or 24. By age 25 and 26 he was tearing up the PCL though. He also could have stayed around a bit longer. Had 5 homers and .283 batting average in PCL in just 145 at bats at age 42 three years after his last major league at bat. Hit .326 the next year in B level ball, walking more than twice as much as he struck out.

Just think he is worthy of a discussion from those who make those decisions.

His stats also benefited from playing full seasons throughout the war years against notably depleted competition.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

His stats also benefited from playing full seasons throughout the war years against notably depleted competition.

Mel Ott
Joe Medwick
Lou Boudreau
Rick Ferrell
Bobby Doerr (in military only 1945)
Ernie Lombardi
Hal Newhouser

Wasn't a problem for them.

[jchcollins]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I think maybe Garvey initially suffered because of his personal baggage and now it's pretty easy to make the No case based on advanced metrics. But there's no denying that in the day, the consensus was that he was an elite player, and there is certainly support for that perception, including 6 straight 200 hit seasons.

Exactly. I was born in ‘77, but even as a fairly little kid in mid-80’s, I knew who Steve Garvey was.

In fact, he was a main part of the sub-theme (baseball, and baseball cards) in the movie “Mask” with Cher and Eric Stolz. I vividly remember a ‘74 Topps Garvey in that movie, and of course the ‘55 and ‘56 Brooklyn Dodger cards that Rocky had up on his wall in his room. By the time I saw this movie, I was already buying Topps packs, but I’m sure it did quite a lot to aid in my burgeoning interest in vintage cards.

It’s always interesting when someone is superstar good for a period of time, but in some way falls short on their career. I hope Steve gets in one day.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Peter_Spaeth]

Not like he had a short peak though. He made 10 all star teams including 8 in a row, and batted over .280 12 times.