Hack Wilson -vs- Ted Kluszewski HOF?

[novakjr]

Ted. Always loved the '57, thanks for posting that. And Yes, Gil not being in the HOF puzzles me to this day.

I've always believed that Gil will get in, and have always collected him as such. I don't think there's any other player that I can say the same for. There's many I've collected on speculation though, but Gil's in his own category. "NON Hall of Famers who are treated as Hall of Famers". For most collectors, generally local heroes will fit that mold, but Gil is somewhat universal in that respect. Maybe Rose and Joe Jackson, but their non-inclusion is obviously due to other factors.

[almostdone]

I have seen a few threads on the topic of how is in the Hall as compared to how has been left out. I think that Kluzuski's carrer was great but not HOF material. I have always thought that Wilson should be the first batter in the Hall of Fame that shouldn't be there. That being said while you can compare their carrers (with out without the 191 RBIs) I don't feel either should be in but both remembered in history much like the the Ted is. Just my humble opinion.
Drew

[LanceRoten]

I tend to agree with an above poster who says Kluszewski appears to be more a stepping stone to other candidates(Cash, Rocky, Frank Howard) and Albert Belle's stats do blow him out the water. But, for a few seasons there Ted was pretty doggone dominant. Personal opinion on Hack Wilson is this, he shouldn't be anywhere near the Hall but is basically because of that one season.

[Robextend]

What is the big difference then, between Hack Wilson and Roger Maris? Wilson had a good career, but his overall numbers certainly don't scream HOF. So if both are basically known for one huge accomplishment why is Wilson in and Maris not?

For the record I don't believe either should be in.

Rob

[E93]

He was very good, but I think it is difficult to argue for HOF worthiness based on such a short career (7 full seasons). If one has to make the argument based on comparisons with relatively weaker HOFers that many don't think deserve to be there, then I think that says it all.
JimB

[LanceRoten]

Originally Posted by Robextend

What is the big difference then, between Hack Wilson and Roger Maris? Wilson had a good career, but his overall numbers certainly don't scream HOF. So if both are basically known for one huge accomplishment why is Wilson in and Maris not?

For the record I don't believe either should be in.

Rob

Good point. Who was on the Vet Committee in '79? Might explain it. It's post Frisch, but some other good ol' boy networking got him in possibly . As for Roger, never understood so much support for Maris' HOF bid either. He's not close either IMO.

[Tabe]

Ted's drop off after 1956 is pretty dramatic. He actually had a longer run of greatness than Wilson - 7 seasons vs 5. - but Wilson's peak was higher. What hurts Klu is that he stuck around after he'd stopped being any good and that tainted his legacy. In Wilson's case, he had one last great season (1932), hung around 2 more years, and was gone. Klu had one in 1956 then hung around 5 more years as a shell of himself.

All that said, here's the way I go on this: If your main argument for a guy's inclusion is "But he's better than xxx who's already in", then he doesn't belong. So if the argument is that Klu was better than Wilson - not a given - then he doesn't belong.

Tabe

[B O'Brien]

I think Chris hit the nail on the head. Klu stuck around too long after the drop.

Also the 1930 numbers that Hack put up are crazy! He also had two more HR that he lost out on due to rain stopping games short, that season (if I remember that correctly).

On another note, the 1957 card is one of my all time favs! I had one once, but the hair that kept growing on was a pain to keep trimmed, that's how awesome that card is!!!

Hope all is well,
Bob

[ls7plus]

[QUOTE= Also the 1930 numbers that Hack put up are crazy! He also had two more HR that he lost out on due to rain stopping games short, that season (if I remember that correctly).


Ah, yes those numbers were crazy, but rember the entire national league average for 1930 was .301 or .303, meaning that Hack hit roughly 18% higher than the league average in that season. The ball the NL was using in 1930 was acknowledged to be hotter than hot, and replaced with something less elastic the very next season. If you take a modern season, with a league average of somewhere around .260, that .356 average is down to about
.307.

I don't really believe Ted is HOF material because he simply was physically unable to continue his dominant string long enough. It would seem from his records that he eventually learned to sit on his pitch in certain counts, which took him from more of a line drive hitter to a fearsome longball guy (yes, I know the right field fence was brought in from 366' to 342', but you will also notice a great increase in his homeruns hit on the road with his first big season also. But for four, and perhaps five years, he was not only about as dominant a firstbaseman as anyone in either league was at the time, but also about as dominant as anyone had been at that position in either league for quite awhile! I haven't checked this, but you might have to go back to a younger Greenberg more than a decade earlier, or perhaps Mize to really match up against Kluszewski. THE SANDY KOUFAX only won 20 or more games 3 times and had only 4-5 dominant years also. And before we here the chant about yeah, but Koufax was one of the best pitchers of all time, we must remember that the mound was significantly higher in Koufax's time, thus placing his pitches on a steeper trajectory as they approached the hitter, and the top of the strike zone at that time was up, way up around the shoulders, which gave Koufax a sizeable advantage with his 95+ mph fastball. Bottom line is that when Ted was physically up to standing tall, he stood tall with the best of them!

Considering Koufax, perhaps Don Mattingly should be in the hall of fame--he had a similarly short, incredibly dominant period, and career stats not much different than Kirby Puckett.

Just a few thought, fellows.

Happy Collecting!