Board index » Word on the Street... » Sports




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 1:31 pm 
Offline
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:16 am
Posts: 2576
Location: Maine, formerly MA
Skitch Patterson wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
who the fuck is the 10% not voting for Alomar? I mean, the whole "first vote" thing is over and done with, how can you possibly make the argument Alomar is not a hall of famer?


I think its more disgusting that 3/4 of voters dont think trammell is a hall of famer.


Trammell was a very good player, but he wasn't a hall of famer. If he were to get in, someone like Dale Murphy should be committing mass murder on the BBWA

_________________
4/11/94, 4/12/94, 9/15/98, 9/16/98, 8/29/00, 8/30/00, 7/2/03, 7/3/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 5/24/06, 5/25/06, 6/30/08, 5/17/10


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar
a joke
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am
Posts: 22978
Gender: Male
MattA751 wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
who the fuck is the 10% not voting for Alomar? I mean, the whole "first vote" thing is over and done with, how can you possibly make the argument Alomar is not a hall of famer?


I think its more disgusting that 3/4 of voters dont think trammell is a hall of famer.


Trammell was a very good player, but he wasn't a hall of famer. If he were to get in, someone like Dale Murphy should be committing mass murder on the BBWA



Trammell was a great shortstop. The only better shortstop of his era was Cal Ripken. The thing holding trammell back is immediately after his career is when Offense exploded. Its absolutely terrible that a guy like Ozzie Smith is a first ballot, no brainer and trammell is lucky to get 25% of the vote.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm
Posts: 9282
Location: Atlanta
Gender: Male
Guys, I think Jack Morris is a HOFer.

_________________
Attention Phenylketonurics: Contains Phenylalanine


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 2:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar
a joke
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am
Posts: 22978
Gender: Male
Skitch Patterson wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
who the fuck is the 10% not voting for Alomar? I mean, the whole "first vote" thing is over and done with, how can you possibly make the argument Alomar is not a hall of famer?


I think its more disgusting that 3/4 of voters dont think trammell is a hall of famer.


Trammell was a very good player, but he wasn't a hall of famer. If he were to get in, someone like Dale Murphy should be committing mass murder on the BBWA



Trammell was a great shortstop. The only better shortstop of his era was Cal Ripken. The thing holding trammell back is immediately after his career is when Offense exploded. Its absolutely terrible that a guy like Ozzie Smith is a first ballot, no brainer and trammell is lucky to get 25% of the vote.



To expand on this a little, Things that are held against trammell
Lack of MVP- The same people that hold it against him, are the same people that screwed him out of the '87 MVP.
Not that Many Gold Gloves/ASG: He was in a league with Cal Ripken, Tony Fernandez (who was awesome defensively for a couple of years) and Robin Yount. Meanwhile Ozzie Smith won all his with who as NL SS?
Offensively, he is pretty comparable with Larkin and Yount (as a SS), and was signficantly better than Ozzie. 2 of those guys were first ballot, and larkin did over 50%. Yet Tram cant crack 25%? His stats on their own maybe borderline, but given position and the stats of other HoF SS, he should be in.


And Whitiker shouldn't have been kicked off the ballot either.
and Morris shouldnt' be in.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar
a joke
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am
Posts: 22978
Gender: Male
Skitch Patterson wrote:


And Whitiker shouldn't have been kicked off the ballot either.


and to expand on this
G ...... R .. .... H ... 2B .. HR .. RBI .. AVG . OBP .. SLG . OPS . OPS+
2379 . 1508 . 2724 . 504 . 210 . 1134 . 300 . 371 ... 443 . 814 . 116
2164 . 1318 . 2386 . 403 . 282 . 1061 . 285 . 344 ... 452 . 795 . 114
2390 . 1386 . 2369 . 420 . 244 . 1084 . 276 . 363 ... 426 . 789 . 116


3 2nd Basemen that played 80's and 90's.


2 of them made the hall of fame on their second ballot and were pretty much called no Brainers. 1 of them was kicked off the ballot after his first year.

Whitaker, Sandberg and Alomar. Not in that order.


ETF-typos, format


Last edited by Skitch Patterson on Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:34 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:25 pm 
Offline
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:16 am
Posts: 2576
Location: Maine, formerly MA
Skitch Patterson wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
who the fuck is the 10% not voting for Alomar? I mean, the whole "first vote" thing is over and done with, how can you possibly make the argument Alomar is not a hall of famer?


I think its more disgusting that 3/4 of voters dont think trammell is a hall of famer.


Trammell was a very good player, but he wasn't a hall of famer. If he were to get in, someone like Dale Murphy should be committing mass murder on the BBWA



Trammell was a great shortstop. The only better shortstop of his era was Cal Ripken. The thing holding trammell back is immediately after his career is when Offense exploded. Its absolutely terrible that a guy like Ozzie Smith is a first ballot, no brainer and trammell is lucky to get 25% of the vote.



To expand on this a little, Things that are held against trammell
Lack of MVP- The same people that hold it against him, are the same people that screwed him out of the '87 MVP.
Not that Many Gold Gloves/ASG: He was in a league with Cal Ripken, Tony Fernandez (who was awesome defensively for a couple of years) and Robin Yount. Meanwhile Ozzie Smith won all his with who as NL SS?
Offensively, he is pretty comparable with Larkin and Yount (as a SS), and was signficantly better than Ozzie. 2 of those guys were first ballot, and larkin did over 50%. Yet Tram cant crack 25%? His stats on their own maybe borderline, but given position and the stats of other HoF SS, he should be in.


And Whitiker shouldn't have been kicked off the ballot either.
and Morris shouldnt' be in.


he's not in the same class as Yount...Yount had over 3000 hits, Trammell didn't even get to 2500, Yount had significantly more extra base hits, and Yount won 2 MVPs...

as for Ozzie, he revolutionized the position defensively, something you can hardly say about Trammell on either offense or defense

I always liked Trammell and Whitaker as players, they were good or very good for the majority of their careers, but they ain't hall of famers.

_________________
4/11/94, 4/12/94, 9/15/98, 9/16/98, 8/29/00, 8/30/00, 7/2/03, 7/3/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 5/24/06, 5/25/06, 6/30/08, 5/17/10


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:31 pm 
Offline
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:16 am
Posts: 2576
Location: Maine, formerly MA
Skitch Patterson wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:


And Whitiker shouldn't have been kicked off the ballot either.


and to expand on this
G .. R .. H .. 2B .. HR .. RBI .. AVG .. OBP .. SLG .. OPS .. OPS+
2379 . 1508 . 2274 . 504 . 210 . 1134 . 300 . 371 . 443 . 814 . 116
2164 . 1318 . 2386 . 403 . 282 . 1061 . 285 . 344 . 452 . 795 . 114
2390 . 1386 . 2369 . 420 . 244 . 1084 . 276 . 363 . 426 . 789 . 116


3 2nd Basemen that played 80's and 90's.


2 of them made the hall of fame on their second ballot and were pretty much called no Brainers. 1 of them was kicked off the ballot after his first year.

Whitaker, Sandberg and Alomar. Not in that order.


that should read 2724 hits for Alomar, which makes a HUGE difference when arguing Whitaker vs Alomar (and no offense, but if you're actually arguing Whitaker was a better player, then you're just being a homer)

Whitaker never hit 30 home runs or drove in 100 runs in a single season, something Sandberg did twice (including 1 40 HR season), Sandberg has 9 gold gloves, 5 seasons with 30+ stolen bases (Whitaker's high is 20 which he did once, Sandberg's is 54!), an MVP, and better 162 game averages pretty much across the board than Whitaker

_________________
4/11/94, 4/12/94, 9/15/98, 9/16/98, 8/29/00, 8/30/00, 7/2/03, 7/3/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 5/24/06, 5/25/06, 6/30/08, 5/17/10


Last edited by MattA751 on Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar
a joke
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am
Posts: 22978
Gender: Male
MattA751 wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
who the fuck is the 10% not voting for Alomar? I mean, the whole "first vote" thing is over and done with, how can you possibly make the argument Alomar is not a hall of famer?


I think its more disgusting that 3/4 of voters dont think trammell is a hall of famer.


Trammell was a very good player, but he wasn't a hall of famer. If he were to get in, someone like Dale Murphy should be committing mass murder on the BBWA



Trammell was a great shortstop. The only better shortstop of his era was Cal Ripken. The thing holding trammell back is immediately after his career is when Offense exploded. Its absolutely terrible that a guy like Ozzie Smith is a first ballot, no brainer and trammell is lucky to get 25% of the vote.



To expand on this a little, Things that are held against trammell
Lack of MVP- The same people that hold it against him, are the same people that screwed him out of the '87 MVP.
Not that Many Gold Gloves/ASG: He was in a league with Cal Ripken, Tony Fernandez (who was awesome defensively for a couple of years) and Robin Yount. Meanwhile Ozzie Smith won all his with who as NL SS?
Offensively, he is pretty comparable with Larkin and Yount (as a SS), and was signficantly better than Ozzie. 2 of those guys were first ballot, and larkin did over 50%. Yet Tram cant crack 25%? His stats on their own maybe borderline, but given position and the stats of other HoF SS, he should be in.


And Whitiker shouldn't have been kicked off the ballot either.
and Morris shouldnt' be in.


he's not in the same class as Yount...Yount had over 3000 hits, Trammell didn't even get to 2500, Yount had significantly more extra base hits, and Yount won 2 MVPs...

as for Ozzie, he revolutionized the position defensively, something you can hardly say about Trammell on either offense or defense

I always liked Trammell and Whitaker as players, they were good or very good for the majority of their careers, but they ain't hall of famers.


As a SS Yount. He put up a lot of those numbers as an OF- including one of his MVPs. Yount deserves is based on stats accumulation, but as a SS he was not really much better than trammell.

Smith revolutionized Defense, or just played it really well? He was a great defensive player and a showman. Being a great defensive SS should not make you a first ballot hall of famer if the 2nd best offensive SS of the era is nothing more than an afterthought.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:34 pm 
Offline
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:16 am
Posts: 2576
Location: Maine, formerly MA
Skitch Patterson wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
Skitch Patterson wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
who the fuck is the 10% not voting for Alomar? I mean, the whole "first vote" thing is over and done with, how can you possibly make the argument Alomar is not a hall of famer?


I think its more disgusting that 3/4 of voters dont think trammell is a hall of famer.


Trammell was a very good player, but he wasn't a hall of famer. If he were to get in, someone like Dale Murphy should be committing mass murder on the BBWA



Trammell was a great shortstop. The only better shortstop of his era was Cal Ripken. The thing holding trammell back is immediately after his career is when Offense exploded. Its absolutely terrible that a guy like Ozzie Smith is a first ballot, no brainer and trammell is lucky to get 25% of the vote.



To expand on this a little, Things that are held against trammell
Lack of MVP- The same people that hold it against him, are the same people that screwed him out of the '87 MVP.
Not that Many Gold Gloves/ASG: He was in a league with Cal Ripken, Tony Fernandez (who was awesome defensively for a couple of years) and Robin Yount. Meanwhile Ozzie Smith won all his with who as NL SS?
Offensively, he is pretty comparable with Larkin and Yount (as a SS), and was signficantly better than Ozzie. 2 of those guys were first ballot, and larkin did over 50%. Yet Tram cant crack 25%? His stats on their own maybe borderline, but given position and the stats of other HoF SS, he should be in.


And Whitiker shouldn't have been kicked off the ballot either.
and Morris shouldnt' be in.


he's not in the same class as Yount...Yount had over 3000 hits, Trammell didn't even get to 2500, Yount had significantly more extra base hits, and Yount won 2 MVPs...

as for Ozzie, he revolutionized the position defensively, something you can hardly say about Trammell on either offense or defense

I always liked Trammell and Whitaker as players, they were good or very good for the majority of their careers, but they ain't hall of famers.


As a SS Yount. He put up a lot of those numbers as an OF- including one of his MVPs. Yount deserves is based on stats accumulation, but as a SS he was not really much better than trammell.

Smith revolutionized Defense, or just played it really well? He was a great defensive player and a showman. Being a great defensive SS should not make you a first ballot hall of famer if the 2nd best offensive SS of the era is nothing more than an afterthought.


he's arguably (or maybe not so arguably) the best defensive shortstop of ALL TIME...maybe he shouldn't be in (honestly, I don't care either way), but it doesn't matter, Trammell just isn't a HOF'er

_________________
4/11/94, 4/12/94, 9/15/98, 9/16/98, 8/29/00, 8/30/00, 7/2/03, 7/3/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 5/24/06, 5/25/06, 6/30/08, 5/17/10


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar
a joke
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am
Posts: 22978
Gender: Male
MattA751 wrote:
he's arguably (or maybe not so arguably) the best defensive shortstop of ALL TIME...maybe he shouldn't be in (honestly, I don't care either way), but it doesn't matter, Trammell just isn't a HOF'er



based on the standard of HOF SS, trammell is a HOF SS.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:37 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:52 pm
Posts: 10620
Location: Chicago, IL
Gender: Male
MattA751 wrote:
as for Ozzie, he revolutionized the position defensively,


What does this even mean?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:37 pm 
Offline
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:16 am
Posts: 2576
Location: Maine, formerly MA
Skitch, I'll say this much...at least Trammell I can understand the case for, even if I don't buy it

Whitaker has no case, ZERO

_________________
4/11/94, 4/12/94, 9/15/98, 9/16/98, 8/29/00, 8/30/00, 7/2/03, 7/3/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 5/24/06, 5/25/06, 6/30/08, 5/17/10


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:41 pm 
Offline
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 3:16 am
Posts: 2576
Location: Maine, formerly MA
Chris_H_2 wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
as for Ozzie, he revolutionized the position defensively,


What does this even mean?


I thought it was pretty self explanatory

_________________
4/11/94, 4/12/94, 9/15/98, 9/16/98, 8/29/00, 8/30/00, 7/2/03, 7/3/03, 7/8/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 5/24/06, 5/25/06, 6/30/08, 5/17/10


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar
a joke
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am
Posts: 22978
Gender: Male
MattA751 wrote:

Whitaker never hit 30 home runs or drove in 100 runs in a single season, something Sandberg did twice (including 1 40 HR season), Sandberg has 9 gold gloves, 5 seasons with 30+ stolen bases (Whitaker's high is 20 which he did once, Sandberg's is 54!), an MVP, and better 162 game averages pretty much across the board than Whitaker


No, im not saying he is as good as Alomar. Alomar is a sure fire, should have been first ballot hall of famer.

Please stop pointing to Gold Gloves, they're a voted on award that have been proven time, and time again to be retarded (palmeiro a couple of years ago). And So is the MVP for that matter. The same guys that give the awards are then the same guys that hold the fact a guy didn't win them against a guy.


and im not even saying He's better than sandberg.. what im saying is, the difference between the players is not so large that one is a SURE FIRE hall of famer, and then other didnt even get enough votes to stay on the ballot for more than a year. They are, all three, very comparable players in a lot of ways. When a guy like Blyleven gets in, in large part, on the strength of a reevaluation of stats, and a guy like Morris is getting absolutely slammed by the same type thing... Guys like Whitaker should be reexamined against their contemporaries.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar
a joke
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am
Posts: 22978
Gender: Male
MattA751 wrote:
Skitch, I'll say this much...at least Trammell I can understand the case for, even if I don't buy it

Whitaker has no case, ZERO


Half this list has Obviously better stats.
He has obviously better stats (mazeroski....) than some
and is similar with the rest.
http://www.baseball-almanac.com/hof/hofst2b.shtml

maybe he should be, maybe he shouldnt be a Hall of Famer.
But he sure as shit belongs in the conversation.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:47 pm
Posts: 9282
Location: Atlanta
Gender: Male
Chris_H_2 wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
as for Ozzie, he revolutionized the position defensively,


What does this even mean?


*insert backflips.

_________________
Attention Phenylketonurics: Contains Phenylalanine


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 6:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:52 pm
Posts: 10620
Location: Chicago, IL
Gender: Male
Electromatic wrote:
Chris_H_2 wrote:
MattA751 wrote:
as for Ozzie, he revolutionized the position defensively,


What does this even mean?


*insert backflips.


That's what I thought of too. I guess if you're a light-hitting, but extraordinarily gifted defensive shortstop and can do backflips, you can revolutionize your position defensively. Otherwise, you're just an extraordinarily gifted defensive shortstop.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 6:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Got Some
 Profile

Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:55 pm
Posts: 1461
Location: PA
I feel like Blyleven was very good for a long time, but never Hall of Fame worthy. His numbers are excellent (wins, Ks, ERA), but I feel like his Ws and Ks were a benefit of him playing forever.

The HoF should be for the elite talents of the game, not for good players who played a hundred seasons.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2011 2:18 am 
Offline
User avatar
Unthought Known
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:24 pm
Posts: 6501
Location: Massachusetts
Gender: Male
I'm with you Skitch, Trammell is a HOF'er in my book. I dont see how everyone assumes Larkin is going to get in, but Trammell isnt even discussed.


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: MLB HOF ~ Making the case for Bert Blyleven
PostPosted: Sun Feb 20, 2011 6:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar
a joke
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:08 am
Posts: 22978
Gender: Male
So i was watching some thing on MLB network this morning. Harold Reynolds said whitaker should be in the hall of fame.
I agree with Harold Reynolds.


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Board index » Word on the Street... » Sports


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
It is currently Fri Mar 29, 2024 5:16 am