[rjcj2017]

bagwell most likely had "help", however

as far as firstbase from that era, i think frank thomas is clearly number 1, with bagwell and mcgriff vying for second spot

im not arguing that mcgriff isnt a borderline guy. i think he's borderline in

but 11.7% of the vote is ridiculous

My friend, as you know, it's not even the most ridiculous baseball-related vote of the last two months or so ...

That would be ...

Here it comes ...

Jose Fernandez over Yasiel Puig for NL ROY.

Here are the percentages of THAT vote:

Marlins without Fernandez — last place

Marlins with Fernandez — last place

Dodgers without Puig — last place

Dodgers with Puig — first place.

But in all seriousness, how does anyone know who was juicing and who was not?

I mean, everyone assumes Thomas and McGriff were clean and Bagwell and Piazza were dirty, but how does anyone honestly know other than those four people themselves?

My opinion is, unless there's a positive test — i.e. Palmeiro — you let anyone in that has the numbers.

But even if you do let in Bonds and Clemens, for example, just simply add a line to their HOF plaque — "Bonds was investigated by the federal government over alleged PED use in 20XX and was found guilty of X in 20XX" or whatever.

That way, based on numbers — which a lot of this stuff is — the guys that are "deserving" get in, but the known scoundrels are differentiated by the verbage on their plaque.

That way, their PED use is just as immortalized as their on-field performance, and you'll never have one without the other.

I just don't think it's fair to say Player A and Player B were cheaters and Player C and Player D were clean without a test result somewhere along the line.

Perfect example — Griffey. Everyone says either "imagine the numbers he would have put up with PEDs" or "at least he was clean, think of what he could have done if he was healthy" ... but isn't nagging injury breakdown one of the key components of PED use?

I mean, think about how often Bonds was hurt the last few years.

Look at how often Griffey was on the DL his last few years.

I don't think Griffey used, personally. But I don't think it's fair to assume Piazza and Bagwell did, either.

[uvaspina]

from tom verducci:

Mcgriff was only the 10th player to retire with an OPS of .886 or greater after 10,000 plate appearances. That's not some quirky stat to be easily dismissed. To be that good for that long put McGriff in the company of the truly elite; eight of them were first-ballot Hall of Famers (Ty Cobb, Babe Ruth, Tris Speaker, Stan Musial, Frank Robinson, Willie Mays, Hank Aaron and Mike Schmidt) and the other should have been (Mel Ott).


i know at this point he'll never get in. if bagwell ever does, and mcgriff never gets to 50%, the BBWAA can bite me. McGriff has more runs, hits, home runs, total bases, RBIs and All-Star appearances, more top five seasons in home runs, OPS and Runs Created, and is the far superior postseason player (.917 OPS in 50 games) than Bagwell (.685 OPS in 33 games).

and here's a simple fact: without mcgriff, maddux and glavine dont have a ring. period, point blank

i understood dale murphy being a borderline guy that didnt make it, though i thought his ambassadorship to the game should have counted in his favor (character clause should cut both ways)

and i get that mcgriff, when compared to steroid era guys, doesnt fare well. but for him to only get 11.7% of the vote? is crapola

I'm a fan of McGriff's, but I don't think his HOF case is as clear cut as you seem to make it.

In terms of OPS, he ranks 78th all-time, which is borderline great.

His career WAR (52.6) ranks as 116th all-time, which is very good.

His 2,490 hits rank 98th all-time, which is borderline great.

His 1,550 RBI rank 42nd, as do his 1,305 walks-- both of which are great.

His 5 AS games are very good but not eye-popping. He lacks a MVP and had only 1 top-5 finish (but 6 top-10s).

All told, McGriff was a very good--and perhaps borderline great player. (All of the HOF metrics show McGriff to be a borderline candidate). But I respectfully disagree that it is a travesty that he has been denied so far. I think he has an interesting case (and I enjoy discussing it), but it's no slam-dunk. That said, I hope Griffey's induction in 2016 draws favorable attention to McGriff's case. As far as I can tell, they were widely viewed as being "natural" players of the steroid era. I think McGriff might see a boost in his numbers, but probably will never break 50%.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/player...fr01.shtml

[jacobystealshome]

I'm a fan of McGriff's, but I don't think his HOF case is as clear cut as you seem to make it.

In terms of OPS, he ranks 78th all-time, which is borderline great.

His career WAR (52.6) ranks as 116th all-time, which is very good.

His 2,490 hits rank 98th all-time, which is borderline great.

His 1,550 RBI rank 42nd, as do his 1,305 walks-- both of which are great.

His 5 AS games are very good but not eye-popping. He lacks a MVP and had only 1 top-5 finish (but 6 top-10s).

All told, McGriff was a very good--and perhaps borderline great player. (All of the HOF metrics show McGriff to be a borderline candidate). But I respectfully disagree that it is a travesty that he has been denied so far. I think he has an interesting case (and I enjoy discussing it), but it's no slam-dunk. That said, I hope Griffey's induction in 2016 draws favorable attention to McGriff's case. As far as I can tell, they were widely viewed as being "natural" players of the steroid era. I think McGriff might see a boost in his numbers, but probably will never break 50%.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/player...fr01.shtml

im not saying its a travesty that he isnt in, but rather that his percentage is so low. i fully understand he is a borderline candidate

[uvaspina]

At first glance, I agree with you. 12% seems low. But when you look at the top-10 vote-getters, I can see how it could happen. I think there's reasonable arguments that could be made that McGriff should receive more support than Morris, Raines, and maybe Bagwell, but that's it. Just a crowded ballot that's complicated by the fact that the clock on Morris and Raines was/is running out (which probably changes the voting dynamic a bit). On top of that, there are some stubborn dark horse candidates out there like Trammell and Mattingly that consistently draw 10-20% of the votes.

What shocked me most scanning the stats of the candidates is the fact that Kenny Rogers' WAR is 51.4(!) compared to Jack Morris' 44.1. Kenny received exactly 1 vote and will fall off the writers' ballot (forever). I'm not saying that Kenny was as good as Morris, but it's surprising that there's such a gap between the two (in my view).

http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_2014.shtml

[rjcj2017]

At first glance, I agree with you. 12% seems low. But when you look at the top-10 vote-getters, I can see how it could happen. I think there's reasonable arguments that could be made that McGriff should receive more support than Morris, Raines, and maybe Bagwell, but that's it. Just a crowded ballot that's complicated by the fact that the clock on Morris and Raines was/is running out (which probably changes the voting dynamic a bit). On top of that, there are some stubborn dark horse candidates out there like Trammell and Mattingly that consistently draw 10-20% of the votes.

What shocked me most scanning the stats of the candidates is the fact that Kenny Rogers' WAR is 51.4(!) compared to Jack Morris' 44.1. Kenny received exactly 1 vote and will fall off the writers' ballot (forever). I'm not saying that Kenny was as good as Morris, but it's surprising that there's such a gap between the two (in my view).

http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_2014.shtml

Kenny likes to beat up members of the media (remember the camera guy in Texas?), and the people that vote for the Hall of Fame are ... wait for it ... members of the media.

It's exactly why Kareem Abdul-Jabbar can't get a coaching contract ... act like an a--hat to anyone involved with the NBA for about 30 years, and don't be surprised when they're not in a big hurry to welcome you back in the arena.

[uvaspina]

Kenny likes to beat up members of the media (remember the camera guy in Texas?), and the people that vote for the Hall of Fame are ... wait for it ... members of the media.

It's exactly why Kareem Abdul-Jabbar can't get a coaching contract ... act like an a--hat to anyone involved with the NBA for about 30 years, and don't be surprised when they're not in a big hurry to welcome you back in the arena.

I didn't follow Kenny's pre-Detroit career very closely, but I don't recall him having a particularly contentious relationship with the media (other than shoving a cameraman in Minnesota in '05ish). I think he's just one of those guys that doesn't pass the eyeball test. I'm not saying he belongs either, just that I'm surprised (a bit) by his vote totals.

[rybowski97]

crime dawg should be in, if he could of cracked 7 more hrs i dont think this would be a discussion. he has better numbers than several 1b in there now. i guess im biased growing up in the 80s and 90s...i think its insane dale murphy isnt in with 2 mvps and how the he!! did maddux not get 100percent!