2019 MLB HOF Class...

So who the hell are your HOF catchers, then? Bench hit .267. Fisk hit .269. The offensive production for that position needs to be viewed differently.

 

No, he was only dominant offensively for a few years but he was the best at his position defensively for most of his career. His main competition was probably Fisk.

 

The baseball HOF needs a special committee because sometimes the regular guys that vote mess up. Like they did with Ron Santo. And even the special committee messed up because by the time they finally said yes the man died. When he was definitely a Hall of Fame player all along.

Lee Smith was another guy they definitely missed on with the regular ballot.

 

A .262 average for a catcher in the era Carter played in is really, really good. Plus he hit for some power and he drove in runs.

 

out of these 5 catchers-bench played the second least amount of games.

bench-2158 games-2048 hits-389 hrs-1376 rbis .267 avg-2 mvps-2 world series titles, 9 gold gloves
fisk-2499 games-2356 hits-376 hrs-1330 rbis .269 avg 0 mvps, 1 ws loss 0 gold gloves
carter-2296 games-2092 hits-324 hrs-1225 rbis .262 0 mvps, 1 world series title, 3 gold gloves, 2 AS MVPs

piazza-1912 games-2127 hts-427 hrs-1335 rbi 0 mvps, 1 world series loss
rodriguez-2543 games, 2844 hits, 311 hrs, 1332 rbis .296 avg - 1 mvp, 1 world series title, 13 gold gloves and the highest throw out % in baseball history until it was broken.

fisk played a long time to accumulate those stats. 0 gold gloves is pretty shocking for a hof catcher.
rodriguez overall is the best catcher, but bench is right there with most rbis, second most hrs and more mvps than everyone else in the least amount of games. that's why bench is better than fisk and carter. overall - yes they are all pretty close to the same player but there is separation in their careers.

growing up i wasn't a fisk or carter guy. i can see why they got into the HOF however.

 

never saw Santo play, but I agree on Lee Smith. How can the all-time leader in saves (before it was broken) not be in the HOF?

 

If one catcher per decade were to be inducted, then Bench is the 70s guy, Carter the 80s and Pudge the 90s.

Fisk would get HM, no gold gloves and two 100 rbi seasons compared to Carters 4.

 

Also Piazza in the 90s.

 

out of these 5 - carter is -

lowest and last in batting average
second lowest in hits but he played more than bench
second lowest in hrs
last in rbis

 

Yeah but he's only competing with the catchers from his era. He probably had the strongest arm next to pudge.

 

That doesn't mean they automatically have to induct a catcher from a certain decade because he was the best of a very mediocre decade of catchers.

 

but u dog called him a first tier hof'er. to me he's not. and if i pulled out mickey cochrane's or yogi berra's stats, he falls down the list.

 

I'll never understand the first ballot versus needing to wait argument.

Either you are a Hall of Fame player or you aren't. My only criteria would be this...

- You had to have been among the best at your position IN YOUR ERA. I'm not gonna compare a guy from the 90s to a guy from 50s or 60s because the game was different. But if you were elite as compared to the guys that played around the same time as you....you deserve consideration.

- Your greatness has to be sustained over a period of time. If you had 2 great seasons, 4 good seasons, and a bunch of mediocre seasons...you probably don't belong. The mark of a Hall of Famer should be sustained greatness over a longer period of time. That doesn't simply mean playing a lot of seasons and compiling stats. That means having a good 6 to 10 great seasons that really stick out.

- No one dimensional players. The best players in baseball are the ones that do more. If all you do is hit homeruns....then you better hit more than everyone else because one stat shouldn't put you in the Hall. And if you don't hit great but play amazing defense....then you better hope you stack up a bunch of Gold Gloves because otherwise you don't get my vote.


If a player checks all the boxes....then he should be voted in. This purposely not voting someone in because they aren't worthy of being a first ballot Hall of Famer is silly. Ryne Sandberg was definitely the best 2nd basemen of his era but had to wait a few years to get voted in to the Hall. But everyone voting knew he was a Hall of Famer...they just wanted to make him wait. That's complete crap.

 

bww-agree 10000000000000000000000000000000% wow, we actually agree on something!

it's like i said yesterday - if you have to find reasons and look through stats to justify someone is a hof'er, then they aren't. their careers should stick out on their own without doing research. to me that's what separates a jim rice or gary carter or don mattingly from being a hof'er. it's funny they think fred mcgriff, who is no longer on the ballot, will get in on the new era committee? again, nothing about his career stands out to me to make him a lock hof'er, but this new era committees see it differently. it's the hall of fame, not the hall of very good. lately - it's the hall of very good.

 

McGriff is interesting to me...

Numbers wise he is almost on level with Frank Thomas...probably a half level below. Gets overlooked due to the era he played but I think he had 15 straight seasons of at least 80 RBIs? That's awfully impressive.

 

Bob Costas said something about McGriff that was interesting "he played in 1994 and due to the strike missed a lot of games. Those missed games cost him a shot of 500 hrs and a lock for Cooperstown." That's true, but that's like saying "if Lou Gehrig didn't get ALS he would've had 500 hrs," as he was 7 hrs shy. I could be a millionaire if i had more numbers of the Powerball. Just like you can't give the victory to the New Orleans Saints for that blown call 2 weeks ago, you can't give a player games or stats he didn't earn for various reasons. Sorry Fred. And Thomas won back to back MVPs to McGriffs none. There is a difference between Thomas and McGriff. That's why one is in the HOF and one is off the ballot after 10 tries. If 10 yrs of being on the ballot didn't get him in, then how the hell is he a HOF'er?

 

If 7 homeruns is all that is stopping McGriff from being in the Hall...they need to vote him in right now.

Because the writers who do the voting don't have a perfect system for determining who gets in and who doesn't.

Santo was held out for a long time...someone people thought it was because there were already Cubs from the same era in (Banks, Wlliams, Jenkins) the Hall already and because that team never won adding a 4th would be too much. Others said it was because sportswriters didn't like Santo and his heel clicking he did and all that. No one....absolutely no one....ever said it was because he didn't do enough on the field. 340 HRs, 1300 RBIs, a .270 BA, 9 AS appearances, and 5 Gold gloves were certainly enough compared to the era. Only Brooks Robinson was better at that time.

But something held Santo old in the minds of voters. Which proves the voting is insanely subjective and not objective at all.

There definitely is a difference between McGriff and Thomas but honestly it's not a huge difference. Compare their stats side by side. It's really not that far apart.

 

Maybe because he was on the ballot for 10 years? lol.

There are plenty left out for reasons I cant phathom and a bunch in that probably shouldn't be. The process needs tweaked, big time. BWW mentioned Sandberg, that's a perfect example of, 'what the hell are these guy's thinking'?... same goes for Whitaker and Trammel. Either you are or your not, the wait is ridiculous.
_________
_____________________

By the way, BearsWillWin. Im glad you've been showing up on the baseball boards. Hope you continue to post as I enjoy reading your thoughts and opinions. The more the better... lets have some fun this Summer.

 

I will try to pop in as much as I can.

I've wanted to ask you this before and always forget....how did you end up a Vikings fan as well as Wings and Tigers but not a Lions fan?

 

is anyone a Lions fan ?