`
Connect With Us!
IOS Store
Share Thread:
 
Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Who should be in The Hall .., making a case for those snubbed
#21

RE: Who should be in The Hall .., making a case for those snubbed
DrM,
Here are Richie/Dick Allen's credentials (for fun I looked at him vs your boy Donnie - all stats per baseball reference):

Years 15
Games 1749
AB 6332
Runs 1099
Hits 1848
2b 320
3b 79
HR 351
RBI 1119
BB 894
Ave .292
OBP .378
Slg .534
OPS .912

Allen played 1 more year than Mattingly but was hurt quite a bit. On base 1 more time than Donnie when combining hits & walks. Averages .292 vs .307. OPS 83 points higher for Allen.

ROY, MVP 1972 White Sox (1974 was actually his best year with WS), 6x all-star. One of 3-4 most feared hitters in NL in his era (1963-1978)

1st ballot HOFer.....no, but ask the guys he played against if he deserves to be in the HOF.

Bob Costas had a great interview with him on MLB network

Of course...he was a Phillie....LOL




*When it's all said and done - all we have left is our reputation.
Reply
#22

RE: Who should be in The Hall .., making a case for those snubbed
(12-28-2016, 03:09 PM)DrMitchJ Wrote: Koufax wasn't great for 6 years ... He was dominant for 6 years. He was the most feared opponent for 6 years. I think The Hall is better with him than without.
I agree with his dominance (again...I Love Sandy Koufax), however, he won only 165 games and 1/2 of them came in his 3 best years. Heck, Babe Ruth had a better ERA by almost 1/2 a run and WS record better than him when he "was a pitcher". Babe Ruth is my yardstick by which all players are judged statistically and he (Ruth) doesn't make the HOF as a pitcher because he didn't pitch long enough.

A very great man (that's another story) and a great 6 year period, but we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
*When it's all said and done - all we have left is our reputation.
Reply
#23

RE: Who should be in The Hall .., making a case for those snubbed
(12-28-2016, 08:31 PM)jason32rich Wrote: Fun discussion guys.

I think Mazeroski was widely considered to be the greatest defensive 2nd baseman in the game (up until Alomar probably) so that has to account for something. He's kind of an Ozzie Smith type candidate, a tremendous defender who was light hitting and both had signature playoff moments.

Like Zep said a 7x all-star (10 if you count the years that they played two games) with 8 gold gloves is nothing to snub your nose at and 2,000 hits in an era where zero offense was expected out of the middle infielders is also pretty good.

The thing about Koufax is that he wasn't just great for that 7 year prime, he was doing things that had never been done by a pitcher in the history of baseball. In that time span he won 3 pitching triple crowns, 3 cy young awards, 1 MVP, set the all time record for K's in a season and the all time record for career no-hitters. If Don Mattingly (or any of the various short career players) had won 3 MVP's, 3 triple crowns, hit .400 in a season and set the all time record for hits in a season he would also be a shoe in for the hall of fame, which is roughly equivalent to what Koufax did.
Mattingly was an MVP, 6X all star, lifetime .307 BA, 1X batting champion (top 5 for 5 years), 9X Gold Glove and 3X Silver Slugger, lead the league 2X in hits, and tied the most consecutive HR record. His team was never in a WS, but that's more of a Team-thing, IMO.
He doesn't match up to Koufax numbers like you mentioned (Koufax was a beast, and what he did in a short career was unbelievable ... But it's still comparing apples to oranges), but he's far more Hall Worthy than Mazeroski. Mattingly and Boggs were the two best hitters in the AL in the mid-to-late 80's. Boggs continued his excellence and surpassed Mattingly, but Mattingly had 8 gold gloves to Boggs' 2 GGs (with the Yankees) Boggs 3K hits vs Mattingly's 2K.
Mattingly was great, Boggs was better ... Should Mattingly be in the Hall? I'm certainly biased ... Mattingly is one of my favorite players, but I still think he had a Hall Worthy career especially in light of Bill Mazeroski's and Lou Boudreux's enshrinement.
Okay, everyone can't be enshrined, but where to draw the line and who should get an automatic Hall Pass?
500+ HR? 3000 hits? .300 Lifetime BA? 300 wins? 3000 K's?

[Image: Ch4Mt.png]
I guess if I saved used tinfoil and used tea bags instead of old comic books and old baseball cards, the difference between a crazed hoarder and a savvy collector is in that inherent value.
Reply
#24

RE: Who should be in The Hall .., making a case for those snubbed
I don't see how Kirby Puckett was enshrined and Mattingly wasn't. Puckett never was as dominant as Mattingly was.
Bowman: home of the pre-rookie card.
Reply
#25

RE: Who should be in The Hall .., making a case for those snubbed
Another name that hasn't been mentioned yet and should at least be considered is Dale Murphy.

Pros: 7x All-Star, 5x Gold Gloves, 4x Silver Sluggers, 2x MVP, 2x RBI Leader.

Cons: Stats fall short of the compilers and he never made it to the World Series.
I collect Hall of Fame baseball player cards and cards of current and retired superstars.



My Huge Wantlist: http://www.zeprock.com/WantList.html
Reply
#26

RE: Who should be in The Hall .., making a case for those snubbed
(12-28-2016, 11:34 PM)oneofakindcards Wrote: I don't see how Kirby Puckett was enshrined and Mattingly wasn't. Puckett never was as dominant as Mattingly was.
I'll agree that Puckett wasn't considered "dominant", but his 2 WS titles and his defense is really what got him in. And one other thing that I think helps or hurts a players chance is how they interact with the media. I guarantee that there are some voters who hold grudges based on how they were treated by the player. Right, wrong, or indifferent it happens. Puckett was a charmer, no doubt about it. Was he an upstanding citizen? We came to find out later that he was not, however the perception of the media made him out to be perfect.
Reply
#27

RE: Who should be in The Hall .., making a case for those snubbed
(12-29-2016, 09:20 AM)madamson Wrote: I'll agree that Puckett wasn't considered "dominant", but his 2 WS titles and his defense is really what got him in. And one other thing that I think helps or hurts a players chance is how they interact with the media. I guarantee that there are some voters who hold grudges based on how they were treated by the player. Right, wrong, or indifferent it happens. Puckett was a charmer, no doubt about it. Was he an upstanding citizen? We came to find out later that he was not, however the perception of the media made him out to be perfect.
This makes sense, it also explains why Albert Belle fell off the ballot the way he did.
Bowman: home of the pre-rookie card.
Reply
#28

RE: Who should be in The Hall .., making a case for those snubbed
I don't know if this guy was brought up but Lee Smith should have been in a long time ago. When he retired he was the all-time leader in saves.
Reply
#29

RE: Who should be in The Hall .., making a case for those snubbed
(12-29-2016, 07:37 PM)cspen Wrote: I don't know if this guy was brought up but Lee Smith should have been in a long time ago. When he retired he was the all-time leader in saves.
Lee Smith was one of the snubbed players that actually started this discussion.

(12-22-2016, 03:33 PM)DrMitchJ Wrote: +1 about Lee Smith ... Long overdue in my opinion.
+1 about PED ... There have been PEDs since the begining of time. Whether it's Cocaine in coca cola, Nicotine in tobacco, Greenies, Caffiene, diet pills, etc, etc. ... There'll always be something to give someone a boost. It gets banned, or made illegal, the players move forward and find newer PEDs. Let'em in the hall right after Pete Rose gets in before them all. It's about time.
My HOF picks
Lee Smith, Manny, Trevor & Pudge.
[Image: Ch4Mt.png]
I guess if I saved used tinfoil and used tea bags instead of old comic books and old baseball cards, the difference between a crazed hoarder and a savvy collector is in that inherent value.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)