2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

[Kepler]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Fair enough. Vida Blue, Tommy John, Don Sutton, Mike Cuellar, Dave McNally.

When I think of '70's baseball, I think of the great Orioles pitching, those great A's teams, the big Red Machine and the return of the Yankees. When I think of great '70's pitchers, Bert Blyleven does not come to mind.

IIRC the Dodgers had some pretty good staffs in the 70's, too. (Yes, I see John and Sutton in your list.)

Top 10 pitchers by wins in the 70's:

1. Jim Palmer - 186
2. Gaylord Perry -184
3. (tie) Steve Carlton & Tom Seaver - 178
5. Catfish Hunter - 169
6. Don Sutton - 166
7. Phil Niekro - 164
8. Ferguson Jenkins - 158
9. (tie) Vida Blue and Nolan Ryan - 155

Of course the HOF will never be complete without Wilbur Wood, last man to win and lose 20 in the same season.

 

[ScottK]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Interesting to note that NO ONE has ever received 100% of the votes. Highest percentage ever, according to <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/bullpen/Hall_of_Fame_Voting_Percentages">br.com</a> is Tom Seaver with 98.84%. There is seriously someone who thought Hank Aaron shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame?

11 people didn't think Babe Ruth was a Hall of Famer, 20 didn't vote for Ted Williams, and 28 people didn't vote for Joe DiMaggio. That is just mind-boggling.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

11 people didn't think Babe Ruth was a Hall of Famer, 20 didn't vote for Ted Williams, and 28 people didn't vote for Joe DiMaggio. That is just mind-boggling.

Was the voting different then, like perhaps 1 vote per writer, or not being allowed to vote for a guy from your paper's city?

 

[SJHovey]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Of course the HOF will never be complete without Wilbur Wood, last man to win and lose 20 in the same season.

Wilbur Wood, the aforementioned Tommy John, and even Hoyt Wilhelm all pitched in that 1967 game in Chicago that I mentioned below was my first to see in person.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Wilbur Wood, the aforementioned Tommy John, and even Hoyt Wilhelm all pitched in that 1967 game in Chicago that I mentioned below was my first to see in person.

Don Sutton won the first game I ever saw in person, July 7 1972. Maury Wills was at short for the Dodgers. I am old.

 

[jen]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Was the voting different then, like perhaps 1 vote per writer, or not being allowed to vote for a guy from your paper's city?

br has the <a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/hof_voting.shtml">voting procedures for each year</a> and the ballots -

Babe Ruth is the only one that had any real competition from other "first ballot" type guys (and yes, I know it was 1936 so it was everyone's first ballot )

<a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_1936.shtml">1936</a> - Babe Ruth gets 95.1%

<a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_1945.shtml">1945</a> - DiMaggio's first year on ballot with 0.4% - I'm assuming he was considered "retired" because he was in the military and not playing baseball
<a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_1953.shtml">1953</a> - the year after his one year waiting period after "real" retirement - he gets 44.3%
<a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_1954.shtml">1954</a> - he gets 69.4%
<a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_1955.shtml">elected in 1955</a> with 88.8%

<a href="http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_1966.shtml">1966</a> - Ted Williams inducted with 93.4%

it doesn't say anything about not voting for your city's players, and it looks like you could always vote for 10 guys, and the ones with more than 75% got in. Maybe some voters felt certain guys would get in regardless of their vote, so they didn't bother?

In 1936, you only had to have played for 10 years.
In 1937, you had to be retired and played for 10 years.
In 1946, you had to be retired for at least 1 year and played 10.
In 1954, you had to be retired for at least 5 years and played 10 (same as today).

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Wilbur Wood doesn't merit induction, but he was an amazing pitcher in the early 70s. I remember him pitching regularly with two day's rest as part of the White Sox three man rotation with Stan Bahnsen and someone else. And he was the last person to pitch both ends of a doubleheader. I don't expect anyone will again come close to his 49 starts in 1972. Amazing stamina.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Don Sutton won the first game I ever saw in person, July 7 1972. Maury Wills was at short for the Dodgers. I am old.

Interesting site. Mine was August 24, 1967.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Wilbur Wood doesn't merit induction, but he was an amazing pitcher in the early 70s. I remember him pitching regularly with two day's rest as part of the White Sox three man rotation with Stan Bahnsen and someone else. And he was the last person to pitch both ends of a doubleheader. I don't expect anyone will again come close to his 49 starts in 1972. Amazing stamina.

What I remember about 1972 was in the spring you could always buy a small paperback book containing the previous years baseball statistics. Probably put out by The Sporting News or someone. The 1973 edition I believe had Wood, and Steve Carlton on the cover. Of course, in 1972 Carlton won 27 of the Phillies 59 wins that season, still one of the more amazing baseball statistics I've ever seen.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Interesting site. Mine was August 24, 1967.

You saw Mickey Mantle play? I am very envious. (I did see Willie Mays in his last year.)

 

[SJHovey]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

You saw Mickey Mantle play? I am very envious. (I did see Willie Mays in his last year.)

Yeah. Watching him in his mid-30's, hitting about .250 and playing 1st base certainly can't compare to the chance to see him roaming centerfield in Yankee Stadium in the '50's, but it will have to do for me.

 

[The Paragon of Virtue]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Paragon, if the shoe, or pocket protector in this case, fits - wear it.

And on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and...

 

[Hammer]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Of course the HOF will never be complete without Wilbur Wood, last man to win and lose 20 in the same season.

Incorrect.

Phil Niekro went 21-20 in 1979.

 

[Rover]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

And on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and...

I'm not going anywhere, so it seems you have two choices: 1) suffer, or 2) like it.

Regarding DiMaggio, IIRC the problem with him was not everybody was convinced that he was officially retired, hence some didn't vote for him as they didn't want an active HoF'er.

Kep, what is your problem? Don't you know that wins are a meaningless statistic? What are you, some kind of fossil or something.

jmh,

Presuming that McGwire would have played the same way in 2001 as he did in 1990 is stark raving stupid, even for you. He's only under consideration for the 52, 58, 70, and 65 HR's he put up in his prime juicing years. Replace that with the 100+ HR's he may have hit had he stayed healthy (remember, 'roiders are more durable too) and he's Dave Kingman.

 

[Hammer]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

I also wonder why such a power hitter never had a 30-double season in his career. I don't know why I'm fixated on that particular stat, but it seems to me that a power hitter would have higher double totals along with the big homer totals. The others in his category have much higher double ratios in their career than McGwire. It would stand to reason that someone who is going to hit the ball a long way is bound to bounce a few of them off the wall in right- and left-center. McGwire didn't do that. To me he was a one-trick pony. If the ball didn't end up in the seats he was worthless. At least with Killebrew (whose numbers appear to be most comparable to McGwire's), he might very well end up at 2B, and you can say the same thing with the others as well.

I'm overlooking the fact that the man has 6 triples in his whole career because frankly, some guys just can't run.

 

[jmh]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

jmh,

Presuming that McGwire would have played the same way in 2001 as he did in 1990 is stark raving stupid, even for you. He's only under consideration for the 52, 58, 70, and 65 HR's he put up in his prime juicing years. Replace that with the 100+ HR's he may have hit had he stayed healthy (remember, 'roiders are more durable too) and he's Dave Kingman.

You know, I'm trying to be civil here, I'm not sure why you need to be flinging insults around.

And why is he only under consideration for 1996-99? The other seasons don't count? He was good for 35-40 HR per season already (looking at his 1987-1992 performance), and that's pretty solid. Again, a guy who played the way McGwire did in 1990 for a long period of time (to say nothing for the way he played in 1987) would merit serious Hall of Fame consideration.

Now, let's look at your assumption that he would have declined precipitously after 1991, rather than returning to 1990 levels. You point out that players who use steroids are more durable. That's true, but plenty of good baseball players remain productive into their mid-late 30s (as opposed to the early-40s like Bonds). McGwire played 1B, and could potentially have played DH with the A's, both of which aren't tremendously strenuous (as opposed to if he were a catcher, say). And as the Schmidt example illustrates, it's not unheard-of for a superstar to have a down year and then return to the same level from before that. What we know is (obviously) that he had the remainder of a career that he had. Your assumption that he wouldn't have been any good anymore absent PEDs is just that: an assumption.

Last, the comparison of McGwire and Kingman that some have made is a poor one. Kingman swung at everything and his career OBP of .302 reflects that. McGwire knew how to take a walk and and his career OBP of .394 is better than a lot of members of the 500-HR club including Griffey, Robinson, Mays, Jackson and Schmidt. That's just a massive, massive difference between the two.

 

[Kepler]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Incorrect.

Phil Niekro went 21-20 in 1979.

With a paltry 342 IP. Pshaw!

Will White was 43-31 in 680 IP in 1879. That's how you lose 30 games with an ERA under 2.00

 

[TCHB]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

Without reading all 4 pages, I just have to say that the HOF is a crock of you know what until Blyleven gets in.

And Raines for that matter

 

[Rover]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

You know, I'm trying to be civil here, I'm not sure why you need to be flinging insults around.

But over on the last page....

Most people realize that if they're the only ones laughing at their own jokes, then they're probably not that funny. But not Rover!

Don't remember calling you out specifically, but anyway...

And why is he only under consideration for 1996-99? The other seasons don't count? He was good for 35-40 HR per season already (looking at his 1987-1992 performance), and that's pretty solid. Again, a guy who played the way McGwire did in 1990 for a long period of time (to say nothing for the way he played in 1987) would merit serious Hall of Fame consideration.

Now, let's look at your assumption that he would have declined precipitously after 1991, rather than returning to 1990 levels. You point out that players who use steroids are more durable. That's true, but plenty of good baseball players remain productive into their mid-late 30s (as opposed to the early-40s like Bonds). McGwire played 1B, and could potentially have played DH with the A's, both of which aren't tremendously strenuous (as opposed to if he were a catcher, say). And as the Schmidt example illustrates, it's not unheard-of for a superstar to have a down year and then return to the same level from before that. What we know is (obviously) that he had the remainder of a career that he had. Your assumption that he wouldn't have been any good anymore absent PEDs is just that: an assumption.

Last, the comparison of McGwire and Kingman that some have made is a poor one. Kingman swung at everything and his career OBP of .302 reflects that. McGwire knew how to take a walk and and his career OBP of .394 is better than a lot of members of the 500-HR club including Griffey, Robinson, Mays, Jackson and Schmidt. That's just a massive, massive difference between the two.

The problem is that even with Roids his career was over by 2001. I say his career was extended by the juice, and would probably have ended earlier. Therefore, I don't believe he would have been putting up 1990 numbers in 2001. I'm not saying he would have been a bad player, but he had 1 bad season, 1 good season, 1 injured season, and one not so good season in the strike year before he presumably started using. Given that this period of time is more recent than his rookie year to 1992, its most likely a better way to look at how he would have played out.

 

[Priceless]

Re: 2010 Baseball Hall of Fame Class

You know, I'm trying to be civil here, I'm not sure why you need to be flinging insults around.

And why is he only under consideration for 1996-99? The other seasons don't count? He was good for 35-40 HR per season already (looking at his 1987-1992 performance), and that's pretty solid. Again, a guy who played the way McGwire did in 1990 for a long period of time (to say nothing for the way he played in 1987) would merit serious Hall of Fame consideration.

Now, let's look at your assumption that he would have declined precipitously after 1991, rather than returning to 1990 levels. You point out that players who use steroids are more durable. That's true, but plenty of good baseball players remain productive into their mid-late 30s (as opposed to the early-40s like Bonds). McGwire played 1B, and could potentially have played DH with the A's, both of which aren't tremendously strenuous (as opposed to if he were a catcher, say). And as the Schmidt example illustrates, it's not unheard-of for a superstar to have a down year and then return to the same level from before that. What we know is (obviously) that he had the remainder of a career that he had. Your assumption that he wouldn't have been any good anymore absent PEDs is just that: an assumption.

Last, the comparison of McGwire and Kingman that some have made is a poor one. Kingman swung at everything and his career OBP of .302 reflects that. McGwire knew how to take a walk and and his career OBP of .394 is better than a lot of members of the 500-HR club including Griffey, Robinson, Mays, Jackson and Schmidt. That's just a massive, massive difference between the two.

How much of McGwire's OBP is because of the intentional walk?

If we're going to start guessing how players would have performed if they hadn't cheated, then Barry Bonds gets in because everyone says he had HoF numbers before he started juicing. So does Clemens. For that matter, Pete Rose and Joe Jackson get in, because they had Hall worthy numbers before they got caught cheating.

Or are we going to make exceptions for people we don't like?