 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Other Stuff » Sports Talk » Who Gets Your Vote? - MLB HoF
eragon
If you had a vote, which players would you vote for? (a maximum of 10, like in real life). There are some obvious ones (Pedro, Randy Johnson) and some closer calls along with the steroid group. Who gets your vote?
Who Gets Your Vote? - MLB HoF
January 06, 2015 at 07:52AM View BBCode
MLB's 2015 HoF results will be released shortly. A link to baseball reference with this year's candidates. http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_2015.shtmlIf you had a vote, which players would you vote for? (a maximum of 10, like in real life). There are some obvious ones (Pedro, Randy Johnson) and some closer calls along with the steroid group. Who gets your vote?
dirtdevil
Clemens
Pedro
Big Unit
Raines
Piazza
Smoltz
Edgar
Smoltz
Kent
January 06, 2015 at 01:51PM View BBCode
BondsClemens
Pedro
Big Unit
Raines
Piazza
Smoltz
Edgar
Smoltz
Kent
tworoosters
January 06, 2015 at 03:30PM View BBCode
Wow, Bonds, Clemens, Edgar Martinez and Jeff Kent and not Bagwell, so it's not the spectre of PEDs,(Bonds and Clemens) and it's not the production, (Martinez & Kent) it's just that you don't like Bagwell ?
tworoosters
Piazza
Bagwell
Raines
Mussina
Walker
Trammell
Johnson
Pedro Martinez
Smoltz
The first seven were easy for me then it was a tough call between Edgar Martinez, Walker, Smoltz and Trammel for the last 3 spots with Edgar losing out due to his lack of defensive contribution.
January 06, 2015 at 03:39PM View BBCode
BiggioPiazza
Bagwell
Raines
Mussina
Walker
Trammell
Johnson
Pedro Martinez
Smoltz
The first seven were easy for me then it was a tough call between Edgar Martinez, Walker, Smoltz and Trammel for the last 3 spots with Edgar losing out due to his lack of defensive contribution.
dirtdevil
the PED thing is kind of a tough nut to unravel for me. I suspect bagwell was using. I suspect piazza was as well. I know bonds and Clemens were. i know McGwire was. but I also firmly believe that there are a very large number of guys that were also using who didn't get caught. there's no way to sort out who was, who wasn't, who might have been. on the other hand, some guys were caught breaking rules and that has to have some impact.
so what I did was this- what likely impact did the PED use have on their HOF candidacy? in all the fuss over the record, people seem to forget that Bonds was a first ballot lock before he started using. Clemens was, imo, a hofer prior to using as well. McGwire without PEDs would be JT Snow without the defence. so yes to Bonds and Clemens, no to McGwire. it's not a perfect system, and I don't think that everyone is going to feel it's a good one, but it's what works for me.
January 06, 2015 at 03:47PM View BBCode
Martinez is the best player that has ever played his position. kent is arguably the best offensive 2B of the modern era. (I don't think he is, but I can see the argument. personally I think he's probably third but that's still HOF calibre.) I like bagwell fine. I just had him 11 or 12 on this ballot. it's a tough list to cut down to 10.the PED thing is kind of a tough nut to unravel for me. I suspect bagwell was using. I suspect piazza was as well. I know bonds and Clemens were. i know McGwire was. but I also firmly believe that there are a very large number of guys that were also using who didn't get caught. there's no way to sort out who was, who wasn't, who might have been. on the other hand, some guys were caught breaking rules and that has to have some impact.
so what I did was this- what likely impact did the PED use have on their HOF candidacy? in all the fuss over the record, people seem to forget that Bonds was a first ballot lock before he started using. Clemens was, imo, a hofer prior to using as well. McGwire without PEDs would be JT Snow without the defence. so yes to Bonds and Clemens, no to McGwire. it's not a perfect system, and I don't think that everyone is going to feel it's a good one, but it's what works for me.
tworoosters
I'm not going to focus on the PED situation because that's your moral decision but purely on the numbers.
Martinez's numbers are nowhere near as good as Bagwell's so saying he's "The best player at his position" is just silly since he only played "his position" because he was a defensive liability. Are you saying that if Bagwell had been a DH his, vastly superior, numbers would have somehow been less, because statistically Bagwell is a much better offensive player than Edgar plus Bagwell was an adequate 1st baseman to boot.
Kent's argument is a tallest midget situation, I'm not sure he was any better than [url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/grichbo01.shtml] this guy[/url] and nobody wanted him in the HOF .
January 06, 2015 at 04:09PM View BBCode
Sorry DD I'm not buying.I'm not going to focus on the PED situation because that's your moral decision but purely on the numbers.
Martinez's numbers are nowhere near as good as Bagwell's so saying he's "The best player at his position" is just silly since he only played "his position" because he was a defensive liability. Are you saying that if Bagwell had been a DH his, vastly superior, numbers would have somehow been less, because statistically Bagwell is a much better offensive player than Edgar plus Bagwell was an adequate 1st baseman to boot.
Kent's argument is a tallest midget situation, I'm not sure he was any better than [url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/grichbo01.shtml] this guy[/url] and nobody wanted him in the HOF .
dirtdevil
I don't think it's at all silly. the positions people play matter. if Dennis Eckersley is a starter his entre career, is he in the hall of fame? no. if craig biggio stays at catcher, does he have a long enough career to even be in this conversation? probably not. is ozzie smith a hall of fame player in LF? not in a million years. like it or not (and I think it's a good thing), DH is a position. if it is, then I don't believe it's fair to penalize those guys for not "contributing" on defence. pitchers don't contribute jack on offence and we don't hold that against them in hof balloting. why is ozzie smith in the hall of fame other than he's the best defensive SS of all time? for that matter, how many middle infielders really have the offensive numbers to be in the hall had they played elsewhere? three? one? they're in because of the position they played. DH should be no different. Edgar Martinez was the best DH of all time. that means something.
that's absurd. kent was better by 25 points in BA, 75 in SLG, and 60 in OPS. the counting stats are if anything worse. kent is ahead by 630 hits, 150 HR and nearly twice as many RBI. he also has an MVP award. grich had one season of 20+ HR and 100 RBI. Kent had eight. heck, grich only hit 20 dingers twice. kent did it 12 times. the two guys aren't in any way comparable other than they both played second base.
Jeff Bagwell is essentially Fred McGriff with speed. on a different ballot (or had I eliminated the two PED guys) I'd vote for Bagwell (and the Crime Dog, for that matter). but I don't think he's a no-brainer.
[Edited on 1-6-2015 by dirtdevil]
January 06, 2015 at 05:20PM View BBCode
Originally posted by tworoosters
Martinez's numbers are nowhere near as good as Bagwell's so saying he's "The best player at his position" is just silly since he only played "his position" because he was a defensive liability. Are you saying that if Bagwell had been a DH his, vastly superior, numbers would have somehow been less, because statistically Bagwell is a much better offensive player than Edgar plus Bagwell was an adequate 1st baseman to boot.
I don't think it's at all silly. the positions people play matter. if Dennis Eckersley is a starter his entre career, is he in the hall of fame? no. if craig biggio stays at catcher, does he have a long enough career to even be in this conversation? probably not. is ozzie smith a hall of fame player in LF? not in a million years. like it or not (and I think it's a good thing), DH is a position. if it is, then I don't believe it's fair to penalize those guys for not "contributing" on defence. pitchers don't contribute jack on offence and we don't hold that against them in hof balloting. why is ozzie smith in the hall of fame other than he's the best defensive SS of all time? for that matter, how many middle infielders really have the offensive numbers to be in the hall had they played elsewhere? three? one? they're in because of the position they played. DH should be no different. Edgar Martinez was the best DH of all time. that means something.
Kent's argument is a tallest midget situation, I'm not sure he was any better than [url=http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/grichbo01.shtml] this guy[/url] and nobody wanted him in the HOF .
that's absurd. kent was better by 25 points in BA, 75 in SLG, and 60 in OPS. the counting stats are if anything worse. kent is ahead by 630 hits, 150 HR and nearly twice as many RBI. he also has an MVP award. grich had one season of 20+ HR and 100 RBI. Kent had eight. heck, grich only hit 20 dingers twice. kent did it 12 times. the two guys aren't in any way comparable other than they both played second base.
Jeff Bagwell is essentially Fred McGriff with speed. on a different ballot (or had I eliminated the two PED guys) I'd vote for Bagwell (and the Crime Dog, for that matter). but I don't think he's a no-brainer.
[Edited on 1-6-2015 by dirtdevil]
dirtdevil
Martinez
Johnson
Smoltz
Biggio
Piazza
January 06, 2015 at 05:58PM View BBCode
just for the record, my prediction is:Martinez
Johnson
Smoltz
Biggio
Piazza
tworoosters
The fact that Edgar was "the best DH ever", he wasn't by the way Frank Thomas was by a mile and Harold Baines/Paul Molitor could be argued as well, doesn't mean that his offensive numbers can only be compared to other DHs, that's absurd.
Also if you only want to rely on traditional starts then yes Kent was vastly superior to Grich, but the new stats give Grich a significant edge, plus Grich was a wonderful defensive player while Kent ......not so much.
January 06, 2015 at 08:24PM View BBCode
So your argument is Edgar gets in on his offense, even though his offensive numbers don't compare with Bagwell's, simply because he didn't play defense ?The fact that Edgar was "the best DH ever", he wasn't by the way Frank Thomas was by a mile and Harold Baines/Paul Molitor could be argued as well, doesn't mean that his offensive numbers can only be compared to other DHs, that's absurd.
Also if you only want to rely on traditional starts then yes Kent was vastly superior to Grich, but the new stats give Grich a significant edge, plus Grich was a wonderful defensive player while Kent ......not so much.
dirtdevil
no. my argument is that Edgar gets in because he was the best player at his position. there are any number of SS, 2B, 3B, C deservedly in the hall who have numbers that don't compare to bagwell's.
it has nothing to do with not playing defence, or playing defence. it has to do with being the best player at his position, just like any other player at any other position. a player can only play where the manager writes his name. penalizing him for the position someone else assigns him is silly. had edgar played his entire career at 3B he would be 3rd among HOF 3B in BA (behind boggs and traynor but ahead of brett), 5th in HR (Schmidt, Matthews, Santo, Brett), 7th in RBI, 6th in R and 1st in OBP. in other words, he would be a hall of fame third baseman. to say he then shouldn't be in the hall because he played DH for the bulk of his career is ridiculous.
in what way is it absurd? do we regularly compare the offensive stats of SS candidates to those of 1B? of course we don't. they don't play the same position. Thomas won two MVP playing 1B (for 8 years), so he hardly counts as a full-time DH. as much as i like Harold Baines, he was a full-time OF for 8 years and is nowhere near as good a hitter as Edgar. Molitor broke in in 1978 and became a full time DH in 1991.
if you start quoting WAR at me, I'm going to call b.s. on you. kent was not a great 2B defensively. so what? bagwell was not a great 1B defensively and you don't seem to feel that hurts his candidacy any. bagwell was better at his position than kent was at his, but bagwell's was easier to play and neither of them are building a case on their defence.
January 06, 2015 at 09:29PM View BBCode
Originally posted by tworoosters
So your argument is Edgar gets in on his offense, even though his offensive numbers don't compare with Bagwell's, simply because he didn't play defense?
no. my argument is that Edgar gets in because he was the best player at his position. there are any number of SS, 2B, 3B, C deservedly in the hall who have numbers that don't compare to bagwell's.
it has nothing to do with not playing defence, or playing defence. it has to do with being the best player at his position, just like any other player at any other position. a player can only play where the manager writes his name. penalizing him for the position someone else assigns him is silly. had edgar played his entire career at 3B he would be 3rd among HOF 3B in BA (behind boggs and traynor but ahead of brett), 5th in HR (Schmidt, Matthews, Santo, Brett), 7th in RBI, 6th in R and 1st in OBP. in other words, he would be a hall of fame third baseman. to say he then shouldn't be in the hall because he played DH for the bulk of his career is ridiculous.
The fact that Edgar was "the best DH ever", he wasn't by the way Frank Thomas was by a mile and Harold Baines/Paul Molitor could be argued as well, doesn't mean that his offensive numbers can only be compared to other DHs, that's absurd.
in what way is it absurd? do we regularly compare the offensive stats of SS candidates to those of 1B? of course we don't. they don't play the same position. Thomas won two MVP playing 1B (for 8 years), so he hardly counts as a full-time DH. as much as i like Harold Baines, he was a full-time OF for 8 years and is nowhere near as good a hitter as Edgar. Molitor broke in in 1978 and became a full time DH in 1991.
Also if you only want to rely on traditional starts then yes Kent was vastly superior to Grich, but the new stats give Grich a significant edge, plus Grich was a wonderful defensive player while Kent ......not so much.
if you start quoting WAR at me, I'm going to call b.s. on you. kent was not a great 2B defensively. so what? bagwell was not a great 1B defensively and you don't seem to feel that hurts his candidacy any. bagwell was better at his position than kent was at his, but bagwell's was easier to play and neither of them are building a case on their defence.
tworoosters
So your assumption is that Edgar would've posted the same offensive numbers had he played full time 3B, that's purely theoretical, and highly unlikely . As a 3B Edgar's career likely would've been greatly reduced in tenure and the day to day wear and tear of playing the field would likely have reduced his effectiveness when he did hit, but that's theoretical as well.
As for comparing SS to 1B it's not exactly the same as comparing DHs to all other hitters. Your statement that Martinez should be judged solely vs other DH's is absurd, sorry if I keep coming back to that word but it's really the only one I see that fits. Since the DH is purely offense Edgar's offense must be judged against all hitters, because every hitter had the ability to DH, whereas I would warrant no 1B have the ability to play SS. Edgars numbers don't match up with Bagwell's PLUS Bagwell played defense so your argument doesn't wash with me.
Best DH ever ? Well Thomas played less than 100 fewer games as a DH than Edgar, and played over 57% of his games as a DH, if he'd played 57% of his games in RF and 43% at 1B wouldn't he be a RFer ? So Thomas is a DH, meaning Edgar is, at best, the 2nd best ever at his position.
Molitor may have come to the role late in his career but he still accumulated more starts at the DH position than at any other position, and 44% of all his starts were there, if we judge a player's "position" as the one he played most frequently then Molitor is a DH, pure and simple so now Edgar is down to 3rd. I'll give you Harold Baines .
As for poor Edgar's pigeon holing as a DH I wonder :should Matt Alexander be in the Hall because he was the best pinch runner in history, or Lenny Harris, who eclipses all pinch hitters of all time, I wonder who the best situational left handed reliever was ? Better get him a plaque too, after all it's not their fault the manager chose to use them that way, but they were the best at what they did so get the speeches ready.
January 06, 2015 at 09:56PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dirtdevil
Originally posted by tworoosters
So your argument is Edgar gets in on his offense, even though his offensive numbers don't compare with Bagwell's, simply because he didn't play defense?
no. my argument is that Edgar gets in because he was the best player at his position. there are any number of SS, 2B, 3B, C deservedly in the hall who have numbers that don't compare to bagwell's.
it has nothing to do with not playing defence, or playing defence. it has to do with being the best player at his position, just like any other player at any other position. a player can only play where the manager writes his name. penalizing him for the position someone else assigns him is silly. had edgar played his entire career at 3B he would be 3rd among HOF 3B in BA (behind boggs and traynor but ahead of brett), 5th in HR (Schmidt, Matthews, Santo, Brett), 7th in RBI, 6th in R and 1st in OBP. in other words, he would be a hall of fame third baseman. to say he then shouldn't be in the hall because he played DH for the bulk of his career is ridiculous.
So your assumption is that Edgar would've posted the same offensive numbers had he played full time 3B, that's purely theoretical, and highly unlikely . As a 3B Edgar's career likely would've been greatly reduced in tenure and the day to day wear and tear of playing the field would likely have reduced his effectiveness when he did hit, but that's theoretical as well.
As for comparing SS to 1B it's not exactly the same as comparing DHs to all other hitters. Your statement that Martinez should be judged solely vs other DH's is absurd, sorry if I keep coming back to that word but it's really the only one I see that fits. Since the DH is purely offense Edgar's offense must be judged against all hitters, because every hitter had the ability to DH, whereas I would warrant no 1B have the ability to play SS. Edgars numbers don't match up with Bagwell's PLUS Bagwell played defense so your argument doesn't wash with me.
Best DH ever ? Well Thomas played less than 100 fewer games as a DH than Edgar, and played over 57% of his games as a DH, if he'd played 57% of his games in RF and 43% at 1B wouldn't he be a RFer ? So Thomas is a DH, meaning Edgar is, at best, the 2nd best ever at his position.
Molitor may have come to the role late in his career but he still accumulated more starts at the DH position than at any other position, and 44% of all his starts were there, if we judge a player's "position" as the one he played most frequently then Molitor is a DH, pure and simple so now Edgar is down to 3rd. I'll give you Harold Baines .
As for poor Edgar's pigeon holing as a DH I wonder :should Matt Alexander be in the Hall because he was the best pinch runner in history, or Lenny Harris, who eclipses all pinch hitters of all time, I wonder who the best situational left handed reliever was ? Better get him a plaque too, after all it's not their fault the manager chose to use them that way, but they were the best at what they did so get the speeches ready.
tworoosters
January 06, 2015 at 09:59PM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
Please don't get me wrong, Edgar Martinez was a great hitter but to put him in the Hall of fame ahead of a player with Bagwell's number just makes no sense to me.
dirtdevil
January 06, 2015 at 10:06PM View BBCode
there are any number of hitters in the hof who weren't as good as jeff bagwell. there will be many more coming, whether bagwell gets in or not. sometimes it's about numbers relative to the position, not the raw numbers themselves. I think bagwell will get in eventually. had I gone in a different direction with the PED couple, he would likely have been on my fake ballot this year.
chbutt
Clemens
Pedro
Johnson
Biggio
Smoltz
Mussina
Aaron Boone for the 2003 ALCS! (throwaway vote because I can)
January 23, 2015 at 01:26AM View BBCode
BondsClemens
Pedro
Johnson
Biggio
Smoltz
Mussina
Aaron Boone for the 2003 ALCS! (throwaway vote because I can)
Hamilton2
January 28, 2015 at 02:47AM View BBCode
I would have voted for Pedro, Johnson, Smoltz, Bagwell, and Biggio. Probably Raines as well.
tworoosters
Smoltz pitched 3473 innings, with an ERA of 3.05 and a whip of 1.176, his K/BB ratio was 3.07/1 and he spent, virtually, his entire career in the National league so no DH's to face every day, if you are interested in advanced stats his ERA+ is 125, the higher number are better, and his WAR is 66.5. I don't think WAR is the one ring but it's another number which must be considered. Smoltz was hella good in the post season, he won a Cy Young and finished in the top 10 in Cy Young voting 5 times .
Mussina pitched 3562 innings, every damn one of them in the American League and all in the AL East which was for much of his career the toughest division in baseball. Mussina's ERA is much higher, 3.58 but his WHIP is pretty much the same at 1.192 and his K/BB ratio is much better at 3.5/1, Mussina's ERA+ is 123, his WAR dwarfs Smoltz' at 82.7 and while he wasn't as good in the playoffs he didn't suck, in fact his playoff WHIP is better than Smoltz, Mussina never won a Cy Young but was in the top 10 in voting 9 times.
I'm not saying Mussina should be in ahead of Smoltz but the voting disparity is quite amazing to me. Please tell me it's not the saves because I would think Mussina's extra 57 wins, and winning %, would negate that .
January 28, 2015 at 03:13AM View BBCode
I find it interesting that Smoltz is on everyone's list and Mussina on half . The actual voters put Smoltz in with 83% while Mussina only got 24.6% support.Smoltz pitched 3473 innings, with an ERA of 3.05 and a whip of 1.176, his K/BB ratio was 3.07/1 and he spent, virtually, his entire career in the National league so no DH's to face every day, if you are interested in advanced stats his ERA+ is 125, the higher number are better, and his WAR is 66.5. I don't think WAR is the one ring but it's another number which must be considered. Smoltz was hella good in the post season, he won a Cy Young and finished in the top 10 in Cy Young voting 5 times .
Mussina pitched 3562 innings, every damn one of them in the American League and all in the AL East which was for much of his career the toughest division in baseball. Mussina's ERA is much higher, 3.58 but his WHIP is pretty much the same at 1.192 and his K/BB ratio is much better at 3.5/1, Mussina's ERA+ is 123, his WAR dwarfs Smoltz' at 82.7 and while he wasn't as good in the playoffs he didn't suck, in fact his playoff WHIP is better than Smoltz, Mussina never won a Cy Young but was in the top 10 in voting 9 times.
I'm not saying Mussina should be in ahead of Smoltz but the voting disparity is quite amazing to me. Please tell me it's not the saves because I would think Mussina's extra 57 wins, and winning %, would negate that .
Hamilton2
I like Mussina just fine. I guess I just think he is a cut or two below Pedro and Randy and I put too much emphasis on the comps of others on the ballot at the same time. Smoltz kind of gets his own category in my mind as a hybrid RP/SP type. Technically easier to pitch that way and technically any great SP should be able to convert to RP and be MORE dominant, but few have had to do it and few who have have been as successful as Smoltz.
Not really a great explanation, but that's where my guy was at. Mussina is a fine pitcher, probably HOF worthy, but when I hear his name I don't immediately think "that guy is a HOFer." Shrug.
January 28, 2015 at 03:21AM View BBCode
I just like Smoltz a lot. It is partly the saves. Smoltz was the only pitcher in the career of Greg Maddux who ever relieved him and it did not relieve the other team. That's got to count for something, right?I like Mussina just fine. I guess I just think he is a cut or two below Pedro and Randy and I put too much emphasis on the comps of others on the ballot at the same time. Smoltz kind of gets his own category in my mind as a hybrid RP/SP type. Technically easier to pitch that way and technically any great SP should be able to convert to RP and be MORE dominant, but few have had to do it and few who have have been as successful as Smoltz.
Not really a great explanation, but that's where my guy was at. Mussina is a fine pitcher, probably HOF worthy, but when I hear his name I don't immediately think "that guy is a HOFer." Shrug.
dirtdevil
the other thing is that smoltz has a much better story to his career than does mussina as part of one of the top pitching triumvirates of all time. that resonates with voters in a way that mussina's cog in a machine persona doesn't. you can argue all you want that shouldn't matter, but it does. baseball is about stories much more than other sports.
January 28, 2015 at 04:27PM View BBCode
it's not just the saves, although that does play a role. I think it shows a versatility to him and a willingness to do what's best for the team rather than put himself first. also getting the saves cost him some years of his prime as a starter and I think you have to acknowledge that somehow. and hamilton is right, although in theory every quality starter should be able to make that transition effectively, the truth is that not everyone can succeed as a closer. I don't think people (or voters) take the AL/NL disparity into account very much, if at all, when considering players for the HOF.the other thing is that smoltz has a much better story to his career than does mussina as part of one of the top pitching triumvirates of all time. that resonates with voters in a way that mussina's cog in a machine persona doesn't. you can argue all you want that shouldn't matter, but it does. baseball is about stories much more than other sports.
tm4559
I have seen the complaint against batting average (LOL batting average and all) as this:
"batting average is bad because it attaches the same importance to a single, and double, and triple, or a home run."
true enough. I agree.
So why does whip get hold this big holy place for evaluating pitchers, when whip attaches equal importance to a walk, a single, a double, a triple or a home run?
(I am just curious.)
I like mussina alright, he is an easy walk in the second time up. Glavine should have been a second time through guy, but dumb 300 wins. the first ballot is a unjust reward for somehow getting that same pitch six inches outside and six inches low called a strike for 20 freaking years.
((let's go ahead and say it out loud, for once and all. THERE IS NO censored COUNTING STAT AS DUMB AS DUMBASS DUMBSHIT WINS.))
(((well, saves. those are just as bad.))))
Smoltz, easy first ballot, because of counting numbers to please the dumb voters and he dominated anybody and everybody with the fastball, the curveball, the changeup, the slider, all of it. I expect Smoltz to be named on at a similar percentage of ballots to Pedro, probably more (does not deserve more, but he is white and all).
(((you guys might as well stop with your ballots with Bonds and Clemens, they're just not ever going to get in. my problem with them, as opposed to somebody like Palmeiro or ARod? (this is not saying Palmeiro or A Rod is as good as Bonds or whatever) at least those guys paid in the coin that professional understand. they lost MONEY. they deserved to lose money. so did Bonds and Clemens (and any other pitcher that used and didn't get caught, its a silly notion that pitchers didn't use the PEDS, its stupid). but they didn't. never getting to the Hall? whatever. if Pete Rose* is never in? those guys can get used to never getting in too.)))
*not a big Pete Rose fan or anything. but, obviously, the all time leader in hits should be in the HOF. just as the all time leader in home runs should be. betting didn't make Rose hit more hits though. but betting on games he managed is enough to exclude him. breaking the home run record on roids? is enough to exclude Bonds. justice is a cruel mistress.
January 28, 2015 at 05:38PM View BBCode
can I ask a question. its been bothering me.I have seen the complaint against batting average (LOL batting average and all) as this:
"batting average is bad because it attaches the same importance to a single, and double, and triple, or a home run."
true enough. I agree.
So why does whip get hold this big holy place for evaluating pitchers, when whip attaches equal importance to a walk, a single, a double, a triple or a home run?
(I am just curious.)
I like mussina alright, he is an easy walk in the second time up. Glavine should have been a second time through guy, but dumb 300 wins. the first ballot is a unjust reward for somehow getting that same pitch six inches outside and six inches low called a strike for 20 freaking years.
((let's go ahead and say it out loud, for once and all. THERE IS NO censored COUNTING STAT AS DUMB AS DUMBASS DUMBSHIT WINS.))
(((well, saves. those are just as bad.))))
Smoltz, easy first ballot, because of counting numbers to please the dumb voters and he dominated anybody and everybody with the fastball, the curveball, the changeup, the slider, all of it. I expect Smoltz to be named on at a similar percentage of ballots to Pedro, probably more (does not deserve more, but he is white and all).
(((you guys might as well stop with your ballots with Bonds and Clemens, they're just not ever going to get in. my problem with them, as opposed to somebody like Palmeiro or ARod? (this is not saying Palmeiro or A Rod is as good as Bonds or whatever) at least those guys paid in the coin that professional understand. they lost MONEY. they deserved to lose money. so did Bonds and Clemens (and any other pitcher that used and didn't get caught, its a silly notion that pitchers didn't use the PEDS, its stupid). but they didn't. never getting to the Hall? whatever. if Pete Rose* is never in? those guys can get used to never getting in too.)))
*not a big Pete Rose fan or anything. but, obviously, the all time leader in hits should be in the HOF. just as the all time leader in home runs should be. betting didn't make Rose hit more hits though. but betting on games he managed is enough to exclude him. breaking the home run record on roids? is enough to exclude Bonds. justice is a cruel mistress.
tm4559
January 28, 2015 at 06:17PM View BBCode
(but truly roosters point is well taken, lol national league and pitcher's hitting, and I realize a pitcher has little control over whether a hit is a single, double, triple or home run.)Pages: 1