Showing posts with label Hall of Fame. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hall of Fame. Show all posts

Monday, January 9, 2012

Barry Larkin...Hall of Famer without a doubt


Barry Larkin was elected to the Hall of Fame today. 

Well deserved.
Larkin defies gravity at Wrigley.
 (photo from AP)
For some reason, baseball’s Hall of Fame voters (BBWAA) has this ridiculous thought process in electing players to the Hall.  Barry Larkin, to me, from the moment he retired, was a Hall of Famer.  I don’t know why it took him 3 tries before he got in.

What changed about Barry Larkin’s career over these last three years? 

Anyway, Larkin was the only player elected to the Hall this year (in the traditional way, not taking anything away from Ron Santo).  Larkin’s career speaks for itself.  He was an All-Star 12 times, won the Silver Slugger 9 times, 3 Gold Gloves and was MVP in 1995.  He had a WAR of over 5.0 in 8 seasons. 

Quite simply he was the best shortstop in the National League during the 90s. 

I made the argument last year that I thought it was insane that Roberto Alomar was elected last year and Larkin wasn’t.   Alomar was to 2nd base what Larkin was to shortstop.  Their careers were strikingly similar. 

I suppose that if any argument could be made against Larkin, it could be said that his numbers were a bit bloated because I got to play the Cubs some much.  (His .OPS against the Cubs was about 60 points higher than his career mark.)

But justice was served right today and Larkin will get his rightful play in Cooperstown this summer.  He was the only player elected, and looking at the rest of the ballot, Larkin was by far the best player in the group.  The only other player who deserves some serious consideration is Bernie Williams, but his stats really don’t justify his election, in my opinion.    

Congrats, Barry!

Saturday, February 6, 2010

Mark Grace and Keith Hernandez...Hall of Famers? And someone who doesn't belong in.

Mark Grace has been brought to the forefront after his rather interesting comments about steroids a few weeks ago.

His comments about steroids (and his lack of using them) made me think a bit...was Mark Grace a better player than most people thought?  Was he just overshadowed by the juiced up Mark McGwire?

I have felt, for a long time, that Mark Grace's achievements in baseball were vastly overlooked by much of the the world.  Why?  Because he was a singles and doubles hitting first baseman in an era when home runs reigned supreme.

First base is often considered a power position.  It's a position where, if you have a great power hitter who can't field worth a lick, you stick him there.  It's where great power hitters are put at the end of their careers.

But when I was growing up, I was told that the model of a truly great first baseman was one man: Keith Hernandez.  While I still think many consider that to be true, Hernandez was used more as the ideal model defensively rather than offensively for a first baseman.  Hernandez won 11 consecutive Gold Gloves.  He was a 5 time All-Star.  He was MVP in 1979...a year when he also won the batting title. 

But the man won 11 straight Gold Gloves!!!  During nearly an identical time span, Ozzie Smith earned 13 straight gold gloves. Smith's career batting average was .262 and his career on-base percentage was .337.  While he was a great defensive shortstop, Smith's career fielding percentage of .978 is only slightly above average for a shortstop.

Ozzie Smith was a first ballot Hall of Famer.

Keith Hernandez was almost Smith's equal at defensively at his position.  Offensively, Hernandez had a career batting average of .296...and on-base percentage of .384.  Hernandez's fielding percentage was .994 which is slightly above average for a first baseman.

In 9 years on the Hall of Fame ballot, Hernandez never received votes from more than 10.8% of the voters.

Keith Hernandez was the player that other first basemen idolized when they were growing up....just as Smith was for shortstops.

Why all the love for Smith and not Hernandez?  Because Ozzie did back flips going out to shortstop at the beginning of each game?  I guess so.

Ok...so now I come back around to Mark Grace.  Mark Grace has more base hits in the 1990's than any other player in baseball.  He won 4 Gold Gloves (while part of his career was played during Hernandez's career), was a 3 time All Star.  Grace had a career batting average of .303 and an on-base percentage of .383.  Defensively he had a career fielding percentage of .995. 

Most of Gracie's numbers compare very favorably to Keith Hernandez.  And I always felt that Hernandez should be in the Hall of Fame.  So why not Mark Grace too?   And consider this...Mark Grace struck out once every 12.6 at-bats.  Compare that to Hernandez?  7.6 AB per K. Defensively, Grace was only slightly worse than Hernandez when taking all defensive stats into consideration.

Ok...but comparing these guys to Ozzie Smith is kinda like comparing apples to hamburgers.

Two other first basemen from a slightly earlier time have been elected to the Hall, Tony Perez and Eddie Murray. 

Perez was a 7 time All-Star with a career .279 average and .804 OPS and no Gold Gloves.  Murray was an 8 time All-Star with a career .287 average and an .836 OPS and 3 Gold Gloves. 

If you put Grace's OPS of .824 and Hernandez OPS of .821, overall their statistics look very similar.

Where are the main differences with Hernandez/Grace and Perez/Murray?  There are two...home runs and longevity. Tony Perez played for 23 seasons and hit 379 home runs.  Eddie Murray played for 21 seasons and hit 504 home runs.

So where does that leave us?

Hernandez and Grace were better defensively and got on base more.  Perez and Murray played longer and hit more home runs.

Eddie Murray was a first ballot Hall of Famer....Perez needed 9 tries before he got in. Eddie Murray's statistics, along with his longevity should easily qualify him.  Perez?  Well, that is a lot more debatable.  In fact, I'd argue that Hernandez and Perez are equally qualified to go to the Hall. 

Let's look at one more example of a first baseman during this era...Don Mattingly.  Mattingly won 9 Gold Gloves.  He was a 6 time all-star.  He was MVP in 1985.  He had a career .307 batting average and .830 OPS.  He hit 222 homers and had 2153 hits in his career.

Mattingly received a 28.2% vote in his first year on the HOF ballot.  In ten years he has never been close to topping that, and will likely go through his 15 years of eligibility without being elected. 

So we basically have set some standards here...Eddie Murray on one side...Don Mattingly on the other.  I leave Tony Perez out for the moment.

It is apparent that voting for the HOF focuses more on a player's offensive achievements...especially at first base.  But offensive achievements with an emphasis on home runs.  Murray sets the standard for us.

That leaves us with three first baseman who define their position during their era, Grace, Hernandez and Mattingly...all of whom have similar career numbers and none of whom will likely make it into the hall.

That leaves us with Tony Perez.  Perez's numbers pale in comparison to the three non-Hall of Famers in every category except home runs and longevity.  But even in those categories, he didn't stand out all that much from Grace, Hernandez and Mattingly.

By way of majority rules, Tony Perez doesn't belong in the Hall.

**************************************
Side note:

And I have heard a number of people questioning Mark McGwire's qualifications for the Hall (regardless of steroids).  McGwire's numbers are impressing as far as home runs and OPS are concerned.  But things drop off after that.

583 homers
.982 OPS
12 time All-Star.
1 Gold Glove.
.263 batting average.
1626 hits. 

McGwire broke Roger Maris' single season home run mark in 1998.  Maris held that record for 37 years.  He was a 2 time MVP.  Maris is not in the Hall of Fame.  Mark McGwire probably shouldn't be there as well.

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

The Hall of Fame chooses to make 3 fans happy instead of millions: Dawson to enter as an Expo

An announcement is expected today from the Baseball Hall of Fame saying that Andre Dawson will enter the Hall as an Expo.

Dawson gets to go into the Hall with this ugly uniform.


As a Cub fan, I'm disappointed.  As a baseball fan, it is probably the right move.

But I will continue to make these arguments..

1.  Andre Dawson probably doesn't get elected to the Hall of Fame if he never played for the Cubs (even if he had the same stats).

2.  Putting him in as a Cub would make more people happy...especially since the current "Nationals" franchise bares little resemblance to the Expos.

3.  Dawson was never embraced by fans in Montreal the same way he was embraced in Chicago.

Anyway, there you have it.

Now, will the Cubs retire his number?  The next debate!

Happy Wednesday.

Sunday, January 10, 2010

Something new at stake with Dawson's cap decision by the HOF!

Fred Mitchell has reported that a source close to Andre Dawson has stated that Dawson has been promised to have his number 8 retired by the Cubs if he goes into the Hall as a Cub.

The Nationals/Expos have already retired Dawson's #10...

So, hey HOF, put him in as a Cub!  There's no down side to doing it.

The Mitchell blip can be found here.

Friday, January 8, 2010

Dawson quietly urging the Hall of Fame to put him in as a Cub?

A number of reports have started leaking out that Andre Dawson has said that he would like to enter the Hall of Fame as a Chicago Cub.

Details here and  here.

I'm assuming that they will grant him his wish for a couple reasons.

First, Dawson's numbers as a Cubs, at least offensively, were as good as his numbers in Montreal.  Yes, he spent more time in Montreal, though.

Second, the Hall of Fame should be doing things to try to attract more people.  Putting Dawson in as a Cub would make a huge group of Cub fans very happy thus make us picky people more likely to show up to see their favorite Cub when they were growing up. Putting him in as an Expo will make virtually no one happy.

It does nothing to the integrity of the Hall since there are legit arguments arguments to be made for both the Cubs and the Expos. Now, if he were to go in as Red Sox or Marlin, then we start to have integrity issues.

Another thing to keep in mind here...if Dawson has spent all of his time in Montreal, would he have gotten elected?  The truth is, he probably would be sitting in the same situation that Tim Raines is right now.  I don't think he would have gotten in.  Yes, that makes the Hall of Fame a popularity contest, but that's just the way it is. 

So, put him in as a Cub! And I think that is what will happen.

Wednesday, January 6, 2010

He's in the HOF, but should the Cubs retire Dawson's #8?

Just about all Cubs fans are happy that Andre Dawson made it into the Hall of Fame on Wednesday. It is well deserved. Andre's biggest negative stat for me was his OBP. He was a dominating player in just about every other category offensively and defensively for years.

And there is going to be a lot of debate about what hat he will go in with. I'd love it to be the Cubs....but I'm going to guess it will be the Expos. (and I'm sure all 3 of those Expos fans will really appreciate him going in as an Expo too.)

But now we should ask...should the Cubs retire the number 8?

Cub fans have taken in Andre as their own, even though only 6 of his 21 seasons were with the Cubs. That is just over 1/4 of his career in Cubbie blue. Dawson spent 11 years as an Expo, two in Boston, and two as a Marlin.

Now the Cubs were very quick to retire the 31 of Greg Maddux (and of Fergie Jenkins) last season only months after Maddux retired. Maddux spent 9 1/2 season in Chicago during his 23 years. That was over 40% of his career. But most of Maddux's most productive seasons were spent in a Braves uniform.

Andre had 3 stellar years in Chicago, 1987, 1990 and 1991 were he put up some very good numbers which were comparable, if not better than typical numbers while with the Expos. Dawson averaged 29 homers and 98 RBI in a Cub uniform...compared to only 20/76 as an Expo.

And then there was the blank contract he signed in 1987 when he came to the Cubs and proceeded to hit 49 homers (tied for most in the decade of the '80s) and won the MVP for a last place team.

Dawson and Ryne Sandberg were the Cubs during that span. Maddux blossomed a little later, though he was on the club at that time too. People went to the ballpark to see Dawson. With exception of the blip of the 1989 division title (which Dawson had not much to do with) Dawson kept the Cubs interesting between 1987 and 1992. He put the fans in the stands even when the rest of the product on the field was quite terrible.

So, it's my opinion that the number 8 should be retired this year.

Thoughts?

The Hall opens up for Dawson!

Andre Dawson has been elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame...and it's well deserved. 

Dawson got 77.9% of the vote and he was the only player elected this year!

I guess we now have to wonder...who will he go in as...

A Cub (yea!)

 An Expo (most likely!)

Or a Marlin (goodness no!)

So Congratulations, Hawk! See you in Cooperstown!