-
Not Super, But Pretty Good
June 18, 2013 | 20 comments
-
Player of the Week
June 12, 2013 | 12 comments
-
Bart Brightman vs. The 50 Ft. Democrats
June 5, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Time for Gawker to Put Up or Shut Up
May 29, 2013 | 27 comments
-
Anyone Still Believe Me?
May 21, 2013 | 38 comments
Sports Arena
Consideration for Cooperstown
Tomorrow we’ll learn who’ll be inducted into baseball’s Hall of Fame this year — and the list probably won’t include these five greats.
On January 5, we will find out who will be inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame this July in Cooperstown, New York. In order to be inducted, a player needs to receive a minimum of 75% of the vote from the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA).
It is widely expected that the inductees for the class of 2011 will be pitcher Bert Blyleven and second baseman Roberto Alomar. Both Blyleven and Alomar were only a few votes short of attaining 75% of the vote last year. While Alomar is only in his second year on the Hall of Fame ballot, Blyleven is in his fourteenth and penultimate year of eligibility. If for some reason Blyleven is not elected to the Hall in 2012 then he will have to wait for the Veterans Committee to consider him for inclusion. Although the Veterans Committee comprises mainly Hall of Fame players, in recent years they have become a tougher crowd to please than the baseball writers.
With this in mind here is a list of a few players who I think deserve consideration for Cooperstown but have been overlooked. This list is by no means exhaustive. Since I was born in 1972, I am leaning towards players I’ve seen during the course of my lifetime. Some of the players listed are currently on the 2011 Hall of Fame ballot, some were recently considered by the Veterans Committee, while others are not currently eligible for consideration. Please note that I am not including either Pete Rose or “Shoeless” Joe Jackson. That’s a discussion for another day. So without further adieu let’s play ball.
Lee
Smith
This tall
intimidating right handed flame thrower saved
478 games in his 18-year big league career which included stops
with the Chicago Cubs, Boston Red Sox, St. Louis Cardinals, New
York Yankees, Baltimore Orioles, California Angels and Montreal
Expos. Only Mariano
Rivera and Trevor Hoffman have recorded more saves.
In recent years, Cooperstown has welcomed several closers to its ranks, including Rollie Fingers, Goose Gossage, Dennis Eckersley, and Bruce Sutter. All have fewer saves than Smith yet Smith remains on the outside looking in. The only knock against Smith is that unlike his aforementioned peers he never pitched in a World Series. It could explain why he has never broke 50% of the vote with the BBWAA.
Yet who can argue with Smith’s consistency? During the 1980s, Smith saved 234 games. Only Jeff Reardon (another overlooked closer) had more saves that decade with 266. In the 1990s, Smith recorded 274 saves. Only Eckersley was better during the '90s with 293 saves. Surely being baseball’s second best reliever for nearly two decades warrants inclusion in Cooperstown.
Alan Trammell & Lou
Whitaker
For nearly two
decades, Trammell and Whitaker were fixtures up the middle at the
corner of Michigan and Trumbull. Simply put, Trammell at short and
Whitaker at second comprised the greatest double play combination
in the history of Major League Baseball. That alone should earn
them plaques in Cooperstown.
Unfortunately, the BBWAA has not seen fit to recognize this pair of Detroit Tigers. After nine years on the Hall of Fame ballot, Trammell has failed to receive 25% of the vote. Whitaker only received 2.9% of the BBWAA vote in 2001 and dropped off the ballot. Yet Whitaker’s career offensive totals (.276 AVG, 244 HR, 1084 RBI) are in line with current Hall of Fame second basemen Joe Morgan and Ryne Sandberg and they are also comparable to soon-to-be Hall of Famer Roberto Alomar’s numbers. Alas, Whitaker is not eligible for consideration by the Veterans Committee until 2015. But good things come to those who wait. Besides I agree with Cal Ripken, Jr. when he says Trammell and Whitaker should be enshrined in Cooperstown together.
Ted
Simmons
This man might be
the most underrated catcher in the history of Major League
Baseball. Simmons
collected 2,472 hits in a 21-year career. Of that total, 1,908
came as a catcher. That’s better than Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra or
Gary Carter. Only Ivan Rodriguez and Jason Kendall have more hits
in games in which they wore the tools of ignorance.
On six occasions, the switch hitting Simmons hit .300 or better and finished with a respectable .285 lifetime batting average. Simmons, who spent the bulk of his career with the St. Louis Cardinals but who also saw time with the Milwaukee Brewers and the Atlanta Braves, appeared in eight All-Star games and knocked in 100 or more runs thrice. Yet Simmons received only 3.7% of the BBWAA vote in 1994. But in 2010 Simmons candidacy was considered by the Veterans Committee. Unfortunately, when they convened at the MLB Winter Meetings in December he received only four of the twelve votes necessary for admission. The Veterans Committee should have been charged with a passed ball.
Al
Oliver
The Veterans
Committee also passed over this great outfielder/first baseman last
month. But Al “Scoop” Oliver was overlooked throughout his career.
Oliver spent ten of his eighteen big league seasons with the
Pittsburgh Pirates where his achievements were overshadowed by the
likes of Roberto Clemente, Willie Stargell, and Dave Parker.
“Scoop” also spent time with the Texas Rangers, Montreal Expos, San
Francisco Giants, Los Angeles Dodgers and the Toronto Blue Jays.
Oliver hit .300 or better on eleven occasions winning a NL batting
title with the Expos in 1982 and had a lifetime batting average of
.303. A respected leader in the clubhouse, Oliver finished
his career with 2,743 hits and seven All-Star game appearances. If
it were not for collusion on the part of MLB owners in the
mid-1980s, Oliver might reached 3,000 hits and attained baseball
immortality.
Will any of these players have the chance to deliver a Hall of Fame acceptance speech?
About the Author
Aaron Goldstein writes from Boston, Massachusetts.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (57) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Aaron Goldstein
More Articles From Sports Arena
http://spectator.org/archives/2011/01/04/consideration-for-cooperstown
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
JimP| 1.4.11 @ 6:26AM
The facts you point to in this column are why I don't care about who is in the BBHOF. It's too subjective, kind of like the BCS rankings. There are stats, but also opinion which throws the entire 'formula' out of whack.
PCC| 1.4.11 @ 8:22AM
If it were only about stats, then it's hard to argue with Mr. Goldstein. Clearly some of these fellows are handicapped by playing on numerous teams and therefore never developed iconic status in a single uniform over most of their career.
But leadership and winning must count for something, too. Producing great stats on mediocre teams might be a legitimate basis for determining someone falls short of "fame". Slightly less great stats but World Series rings might be the right formula.
I'm just sayin'.
Terrance Shuman| 1.4.11 @ 8:35AM
Trammell is a pretty marginal candidate. Even with such a lengthy career, he isn't in the Top 100 in any of the major offensive categories. His defense was nothing special. Comparing Whitaker to Sandberg or (especially) Morgan is just silly. Sandberg's was a far more valuable player, and Morgan is one of the 5 or 10 best ever at the position. Whitaker and Trammell were fine players who had long careers. That's not enough...
Dave| 1.4.11 @ 8:38AM
Lee Smith should be in as well as Trammel. Dave Concepcion and Barry Larkin both have equal or better numbers than Ozzie Smith and the rings. The rest of your list don't belong. A player should have been dominant at his position in his era. Oliver,Whitaker and Simmons were not. Simmons while a good hitter was average on defense.
Derek Leaberry| 1.4.11 @ 8:48AM
Alan Trammell won four gold gloves and was a very good hitter. Barry Larkin won three gold gloves and was a very good hitter. If the lighthitting Ozzie Smith(a beneficiary of not only playing on an astroturf field for home games but of batting behind speedster Vince Coleman for several years) is in the Hall of Fame, so should Trammell and Larkin.
Bob K.| 1.4.11 @ 8:57AM
Mariano Rivera will be be a 1st ballot selection because he played his entire career in NYC which impresses writers like you, Mr. Goldstein, and illustrates why it is wrong to have journalists who want to see their names in the big NYC papers determine who belongs in the Hall of Fame.
Most Baseball at all levels is played out here in "Flyover Country."
Just as there is a country outside of Manhattan, there is Baseball out there too!
Lee Smith will not be in the Hall of Fame although he was a far better pitcher than Mariano because he wasn't a long time New York ball player. Smith also pitched for teams that weren't as good as the Yankees.
These are essentially the same reasons why Bert Blyleven has had to wait this long for his overdue election.
You can plug in the same reasons for Trammel and Whitaker. And while Joe Morgan certainly belongs there his constant whining has made him an embarrassment to the Hall.
The Veteran's Committee has also been affected by a form of "Money Ball" since Hall of Famer's now get a portion of the profits of the Hall of Fame and they are reluctant to dilute these proceeds to new inductees.
cuban pete| 1.4.11 @ 9:04AM
Exactly right. If Billy Pierce had pitched for the Yankees he would be in the HOF today.
Steve A| 1.4.11 @ 9:37AM
Bob K, If you were drafting players for a team & your life depended on it, you would be out of your mind if you handed the ball to Lee over Rivera. No disrespect to Lee Smith, but Rivera is on a whole different level.
Bob K.| 1.4.11 @ 11:30AM
Smith didn't have the pitchers in front of him that Rivera was blessed with.
Bob K.| 1.4.11 @ 11:36AM
And If I had to bring one in who would possibly need to pitch more than an Inning and a Third I would bring in Smith!
Steve A| 1.4.11 @ 12:08PM
Bob, I was a set up guy for 6 years, 2 at AAA. I appreciate your recognition of that task. I am not even talking about stats in terms of total saves etc. I am talking about stuff, performing in the clutch & long term consistency. As for stuff, I take Rivera all day. As for performing in the clutch, Rivera takes it by default as Lee simply did not have the opportunities thru no fault of his own. They are a wash on consistency & longevity. It really is no contest.
PS: Now me personally, I liked to watch Lee amble on out there & bring it way more than Rivera.
Tom| 1.4.11 @ 10:32AM
A far better pitcher? How so? Under what criteria? Because if you look at the stats Rivera is clearly better.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/riverma01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/smithle02.shtml
Bob K.| 1.4.11 @ 11:20AM
Well, how do you like that!
Based on all the screams coming from you New Yorker's I must have touched a nerve!
I'll name one that should keep you screaming! How about Phil Rizzuto who couldn't carry Pee Wee Reese's glove as a caddy or even Granny Hamner's for that matter.
Bob K.| 1.4.11 @ 11:27AM
Rivera came into most of his situations with the game won and didn't blow it. Good for him. That was what he was supposed to do! At least give a tip of the hat to the middle relievers who made it possible.
Bob K.| 1.4.11 @ 11:39AM
And if I had to bring in a pitcher who could pitch more than an inning and 1/3rd I would bring in Smith!
ejp| 1.4.11 @ 6:36PM
It amuses me how Yankee haters frequently resort to the same technique of duplicity that leftists resort to to push their arguments.
Rivera is the best relief pitcher in the history of the game, period. The facts speak for themself on that because he's proved that first as a set-up man in 1996 (a year I might add in which the Yankee championship came when they were underdogs to the Braves who were being likened to the 27 Yankees at one point), and then as a closer who also came up big in postseason in a way that no other relief pitcher has ever done (and doing that even with some failures mixed in like 1997, 2001 and 2004). No one's ever matched him for durability and those who are going to deny his greatness no doubt have some stupid Boston Red Sox fan's mentality (they of course were the morons who used to chant "Nomar's better!" to say that the long forgotten Garciaparra was better than Jeter!).
As for Rizzuto and Reese, gee, funny how Pee Wee never came up with an MVP award. And of course there was the fact that as a broadcaster, Pee Wee couldn't have held the Scooter's mike! :D
ejp| 1.4.11 @ 6:37PM
Lee Smith better than Rivera. Mind telling me which illicit drugs you've been smoking? :)
Occam's Tool| 3.9.11 @ 1:13PM
Sorry. Pee Wee Reese was also a great man. He was there when it counted for his teammate, Jackie Robinson. That's an aspect of game that the Scooter just can't match.
Incidentally, Santo needs in.
astorian| 1.4.11 @ 10:52AM
Bob K. , I hear complaints like yours all the time. Some kind of evil “New York Media Bias” is constantly being blamed for someone’s favorite player being screwed out of an award or a spot in the Hall of Fame.
Problem is, there ISN’T any New York media bias in sports. Anyone who thinks there is has to be delusional.
Don’t believe me? Okay- just name me some of the New York Mets who’ve won the MVP award. Oh wait… NOBODY from the Mets has EVER won the MVP award!
But surely, the Yankees get FAR more than their share of awards. Look at all the MVP awards the undeserving Derek Jeter has won… oh wait, that’s right, Derek Jeter has NEVER won an MVP award. In fact, n every season that Derek DESERVED the award, it was given to someone from the “big market” Minnesota Twins.
Fact: the Texas Rangers have won more MVP awards over the past 40 years than the Yankees have. So have the Oakland A’s.
What about the Hall of Fame? Tell you what- if “New York Media Bias” is as blatant as you claim, you should have no trouble naming 5 undeserving Yankees, Mets or Brooklyn Dodgers that the writers put in the Hall of Fame (note, I’m not counting the Veterans’ Committee). Come on, name me all the undeserving Yankees, Mets and Brooklyn Dodgers that the biased New York media put in the Hall of Fame!
Are there advantages to playing in New York? Of course! Players can make a LOT more money in New York, and they can get a lot more opportunities for endorsements. But when it comes to awards, there is NO benefit to playing in New York. There MAY even be a slight hostility toward New York among reporters in other cities, and that hostility may actually have COST some Yankees (like Jeter) some big awards.
Bob K.| 1.4.11 @ 11:41AM
See my response with comments on Phil Rizzuto above.
astorian| 1.4.11 @ 3:16PM
Phil Rizzuto was a wea kchoice, but as I noted, the "New York Media" DIDN'T elect him to the Hall of Fame. The Veterans' Committee did, and that Committee has long been about cronyism.
And even there, the Veterans' Committee has put FAR more undeserving St, Louis Cardinals in the Hall than Yankees (Frankie Frisch used to head the Veterans' Committee- that explains a lot).
But for the heck of it, I'll ignore my own rules and give yo uPhil Rizzuto. name me 4 more undeserving players who are in the Hall of Fame solely because of "New York Media Bias." And if you name ANOTHER guy picked by the Veterans' Committe, you'll have proven again that you don't know what you're talking about.
JP| 1.4.11 @ 8:58AM
It is a subjective task chosing a HOFamer. I agree that Simmons and Al Oliver belong there. Questionable about Trammel and Whittaker. And personally I don't think any relievers belong there. Of course I waited 2 decades for Ron Santos to get inducted.
One wise writer stated that Hall of Famers should have dominated thier position through thier careers. Besides stats, one needs to also evaluate the intangibles. Jeter, who is a shoe-in, not only dominated his position defensively, but he also was a clutch hitter (something that is difficult to get from stats), and he was a team leader. Ditto for Hall of Famer Ryne Sandberg (with the exception of team leadership).
In an age that worships the Long-Ball it is difficult to imagine that were great players who were very well rounded (I believe Joe Torre in 1978 only hit 8 homeruns but had over 100 RBIs). There are only a few active players today that I believe deserve to be future Hall of Famers (Pudge Rodriguez, A-Rod, Pujols). Barry Bonds a decade ago was a shoe-in. He was one of the best all around players of his generation. Too bad he decided to juice up.
Occam's Tool| 3.9.11 @ 1:13PM
Santo is STILL NOT IN.
Richard Baker| 1.4.11 @ 9:12AM
As to not having played on good teams, I give you Ernie Banks with the Cubs, or, in another sport, Paul Hornung getting the Heisman at Notre Dame while on lousy teams. It shouldn't be the teams on which one plays but your individual effort that's the deciding factor. Either you have the stats or you don't.
Lawler Nicoteri| 1.4.11 @ 9:17AM
A shame and disgrace that Ron Santo is not a Hall of Famer. More than a decade of excellence and consistency at his position, rather than a few outstanding plays in a World Series that sealed inclusion for another third baseman who threw rainbows to first, demands his induction.
MacDaddy| 1.4.11 @ 11:51AM
Ditto's for Ron Santo. Also, from the1984 Tigers...somebody please provide a rational reason why Jack Morris is not in the Hall?
cuban pete| 1.4.11 @ 1:27PM
MacDaddy:
You are on the money. I'm a Sox fan but Santo deserves to be in the HOF.
If a game was being played to determine the fate of the free world I give the ball to Jack Morris-a nasty competitor.
Steve A| 1.4.11 @ 1:57PM
Hey Pete, How about a young Loius Tiant? Used to love it when he was on the hill.
cuban pete| 1.4.11 @ 4:02PM
El Tiant. No argument.
Sean| 1.4.11 @ 9:41AM
When the Hall of Fame was first established they only included the legends of the sport. The greatest of the greats. The quality of inductees has fallen every year since. sure if Rollie Fingers is in so should Lee Smith, but really neither one should be there. Maybe there should be a Hall of Fame Fame. Where only the true greats are inducted.
Casey Abell| 1.4.11 @ 10:50AM
Santo's omission is just weird. In the second deadball era of the sixties, he put up offensive numbers that would look good in any era. But for some unexplainable reason he kept getting passed over until he was dead. Now he'll probably get a posthumous plaque.
An oddball favorite of mine has always been Keith Hernandez. Almost any statistical system rates him as the best defensive first baseman ever, and he could hit a little, too. But he stands no chance of induction. Glovework generally doesn't cut much ice with HOF voters, except (sometimes) for up-the-middle guys.
MacDaddy| 1.4.11 @ 11:52AM
Mr. Hernandez was an admitted drug user in his playing days. For such was not the Hall constructed.
Casey Abell| 1.7.11 @ 1:08PM
Then you might as well kick out Babe Ruth, who used an illegal drug with gusto throughout Prohibition.
Again, Hernandez has no chance because glovework at corner positions (except maybe third base) doesn't usually impress HoF voters. But he ranks surprisingly high on statistical evaluations because of that great glove.
Petronius| 1.4.11 @ 11:01AM
The baseball universe of today is so far removed from that of the 8 team major leagues has skewed the overall picture regarding candidates now eligible, and left to be forgotten so many journeyman players who hung it up before the first expansion of 1962 having posted better numbers in their day than some stars achieve now.
Not having distinguished themselves in their day when starting for any first division team carried the cachet of royalty, it was a given that Hall of Fame votes were showered upon the player who's face appeared on the Wheaties box as well as those who's trading cards were most in demand.
Yet they deserve recognition. The Hall should institute a Starters Row consisting of players logging 5 or more consecutive seasons holding down a regular starting position beginning with 1920, ending at the expansion of 1962, with stats placing them in the top 1/3 of their positions during their careers. This will give greater context to the quality of play at any time.
Christopher| 1.4.11 @ 11:28AM
Al Oliver was a mediocre defensive center fielder. He was a decent first baseman but the Pirates finally settled on Stargell at first. Oliver was a good hitter, but below average outfielder, weak arm, and always complaining while with the Pirates that he did not get enough recognition
Conrad Spiracy| 1.4.11 @ 12:26PM
Hey y'all, did you ever watch Trammell and Whitaker play more than a few games? Especially in 1984? When the Tigers started out 35-5? When the Tigers swept the Padres in the World Series?
Part of those two accomplishments were due to T&W's abilities get the lead runner out along with the batter.
They were ABSOLUTELY the best double-up team I have ever seen - and I've been watching ball since the mid-60s.
BTW - I'm not just referring to numbers - check out some of their career highlights on film.
'Nuff said.
Aaron Goldstein| 1.4.11 @ 12:29PM
Conrad,
Actually, the Tigers beat the Padres in five games.
Nevertheless, your endorsement of Trammell and Whitaker is much appreciated.
JP| 1.4.11 @ 1:08PM
One season does not a Hall of Famer make. Great players, yes. Hall of Famers? Probably not.
And as I said earlier, I do not believe closers should be nominated for the simple fact that teams with the lead going into the 8th inning win 80% of the time. The late sports writer Jerome Holtzman invented the position in the early 1960s. For the last 30 years this position has been overblown.
George LeS| 1.4.11 @ 12:40PM
Sure, Smith belongs. No doubt about it. There's too much in his favor. However, I do want to point out that in arguing greatness, there are 2 factors to weigh: short term brilliance vs long-term quality. Of course, in a few cases, like Cobb, or Musial, or Ruth, you get both. For most, it's more of a balancing act: Koufax or Spahn. But Lee is well over the line. The only trouble is that the weighing of relievers is a recent development, & will take some time to sort out.
Trammel & Whitaker, however, are more questionable. Their stats are good, even very good, not great. They could go in, & I wouldn't protest, but it's not that clear cut. But one thing I do protest, which is the notion, that their playing together so long, is an argument for inclusion.
The only case where this argument has force, would be an undeniably great team (which the W&T Tigers were only for one year), which is otherwise underrepresented. That is, it's the real argument for Tinker-Evers-Chance, as without them it's 3-Finger Brown, all alone, for a team which still has the wins record for every span from 1 to 10 years.
Extended to any, merely good, team, and it collapses. Davy Lopes & Bill Russell for the Hall? The 70's Dodgers were a better team, over several years, than the 80's Tigers. So why not them, vs the Tiger twins?
Simmons? I don't know, I go back-and-forth. Yes, his numbers are very good. Yes, there is an argument that his D was not so bad as it was perceived to be. But the lack of respect of contemporary observers, compared to a lot of other (non-NY/LA) players, puts me off a bit. Like some other Cards, Gibson & Brock, or for that matter, Boyer while he was playing.
And Oliver, well, not a totally bad choice, but not a great one. His defensive value was minimal, & his offense was mostly just batting average. It would appear that Goldstein doesn't look at the walks column, comparing Whitaker to Morgan. Further, neither he, nor many of the commenters, seem to look at defense very much. While it isn't a sole determinant (I'm not advocating Belanger for the Hall), it is a plus.
All, except Lee, I'd rate behind Santo, absolutely. Probably behind Boyer & Oliva, too.
I would encourage all to refrain from the "Rizzuto is in, therefore should be". If you believe the Hall has made a mistake, that is no reason to argue that it should therefore make another.
I would also suggest leaving off the "this puts him in the Hall", replacing it with "this +this - this puts him in the same range as", followed by a look at comparable players. Are they mostly in the Hall, or out? What sets My Guy ahead of them (or behind?).
A final point: Tommy McCarthy was elected in 1946. It didn't take long for the standards to drop.
Peter Murphy| 1.4.11 @ 12:49PM
Interesting. I think a good case is made for Al Oliver and Ted Simmons based on them being dominant at their positions during the eras they played. Not sold on the others. By contrast, how about listing the five players in the HOF who don't belong? This could start with Tony Perez, Jim Rice, Phil Ruzzuto. There's more.
Derek Leaberry| 1.4.11 @ 1:39PM
One must be wary of voting into the Hall of Fame men who were superstars for 5 or 6 years and then faded. Roger Maris had three great years sandwiched between ten or so middling years, hit 275 home runs, and owns the true seasonal record for home runs- 61. George Foster had three great years, four or five very good years, and was the most feared slugger of the mid-70s. He flopped badly in New York and retired with 348 homers. Dave Parker was another frightening talent, had 6 great years and about another 6 very good years. Yet he had some very bad years, some in the prime of his career. He's more on the bubble and hit 339 homers. Dale Murphy may have been the best player in baseball from 1982-87 but faded very badly and hit two short of 400 home runs. Fred Lynn had two monster seasons, about ten very good years, hit 306 homers, and faded badly. None of these players should be in a true Hall of Fame.
Interested conservative| 1.4.11 @ 2:05PM
1 - Understanding the born in 1972 limitation, many feel the bestplayer not in the HOF is Sam Leveer.
2 - Some, a few, feel Joe Morgan is among the 5 best ever, at any position, and possibly the best. He basically had two excellent careers. He's easily the best 2b ever.
astorian| 1.4.11 @ 3:20PM
Trammell was the best shortstop (or close to it) in the American League for a long period of time, and would be a worthy selection.
But there were MANY second basemen about as good as Lou Whittaker. Look at their numbers, and you'll find that Lou Whittaker was almost indistinguishable from Willie Randlph (Lou had a bit more power, Willie got on base a bit more, Lou had a slightly better fielding percentage, Willie had slightly better range). Even we "biased" New York fans have never tried to argue that Willie Randolph is a Hall of Famer.
Though... if Bill Mazeroski is a Hall of Famer, the definition has been watered down quite a bit. If Maz is a Hall of Famer, surely Frank White is, too.
Derek Leaberry| 1.4.11 @ 3:46PM
Trammell played much of his career in the shadows of contemporary American League shortstops Robin Yount and Cal Ripken Jr. Steep competition yet Trammell was surely great in his own right.
Being best at a position for a small era can not be the only way to determine Hall of Fame status. Don Kessinger was the class shortstop of the National League in the late 60s and he was never a threat to enter the Hall. Larry Bowa, Don Concepcion and Bill Russell were the class shortstops in the 70s National League yet only Concepcion deserves any sort of Hall consideration.
You're right about Mazeroski. If Mazeroski is in the Hall, Willie Wilson, just as an example, deserves induction.
j| 1.5.11 @ 2:15AM
You mean Dave Concepcion. And , yes, I agree with you that he deserves consideration for his contribution to the Big Red Machine.
Pete Rose absolutely deserves entry. The betting scandal is the subject that should be taken up in another conversation.
Bob Grant| 1.4.11 @ 3:32PM
Baseball seems to be just a subjective as the NFL and NBA regarding whom to select into their respective HOF's.
There should be minimal (black and white) standards considering baseball consists of hard statistics.
Looks like sports writers have - yet again - have managed to screw something else up by making the selection process too subjective.
Joseph McGrath| 1.4.11 @ 5:39PM
Compare the stats of Hall of Famer, Kirby Puckett, with those of Don Mattingly. They are eerily alike. And yet Puckett was a shoo-in and Mattingly never received serious consideration. Puckett had the personality that could light up the room, while Donny Baseball was more reserved (and never won a ring). A fickle distinction.
Who Knows?| 1.4.11 @ 5:57PM
I think Eddie Basinsky of the Portland Beavers deserves to be in the HOF.
In the 50's, I saw him win a game in the bottom of the ninth, by slapping a pitch into right field, when they were trying to intentionally walk him.
He's everyman's player!
Paul Windels| 1.4.11 @ 6:37PM
I think the Hall of Fame should have an Honorable Mention gallery for players who are close but don't quite merit election. On the other hand, one player who certainly deserves HOF is Tony Oliva. He was a far better player than Al Oliver.
Yodergrrr| 1.5.11 @ 3:43PM
I believe Steve Garvey should be in. He had over 200 hits many seasons, was MVP in 1974 and was a winner everywhere he went. As soon as he hooked up with the Padres, they won the pennant.
It seems as if stats that used to easily get people in are not good enough today. Maybe, they should take a look at players from before the steroid era again now that stats are starting to return to reality.
Tex Expatriate| 1.5.11 @ 4:44PM
Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe ought not to be relegated to a discussion on another day. Each of those players were bypassed out of "political correctness" and both of them deserve a spot in the hall. The hall is about baseball.
As for Oliver, I watched him play in AAA ball and in the Majors, and I think he'll eventually make it, and long before the hypocrites in the writer's association vote for Charlie Hustle or Shoeless Joe.
somnolence| 1.5.11 @ 5:28PM
Gil Hodges deserves to be in the Hall Of Fame. Otherwise, it is all a farce. He is certainly as deserving as Blyleven or Alomar. Yawn, yawn.
Adidas | 8.11.11 @ 6:06AM
is good
العاب بنات | 4.10.12 @ 12:33PM
Smith didn't have the pitchers in front of him that Rivera was blessed with.