ThoseBackPages
New member
Congrats to:
1987 Donruss
1988 Score
1990 Leaf
for making it into the PSA HOF Registry!
1987 Donruss
1988 Score
1990 Leaf
for making it into the PSA HOF Registry!
Welcome to our community
Be apart of something great, join today!
HOF results are in
- Thread starter MrMet
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
D-Lite
New member
If being on inserts or other "hits" is an indication of Hallworthiness then you can pencil in Brad Hand and Angel Pagan in the not too distant future.
predatorkj
Active member
- Aug 7, 2008
- 11,871
- 2
I'm not disputing Bagwell isn't a HOF'er. IMO, he may not be. But the only time I've ever even heard his name mentioned is by Gumble and he pulled it out of thin air. Bagwell has never been implicated. Do I think he used? Hell yeah. But since you know he has, or has been implicated, please be kind enough to post a link. Otherwise, you're argument is dead in the water.
maxe0213
New member
I'm not saying he's been "implicated" or anything of that nature. What I'm saying is he has been talked about among other steroid users and people have said that he is under the suspicion of using. Whether or not he did, I honestly have no idea. He was connected to steroids at least somewhat (there are tons of articles out there if you do a google search) which hurts his candidacy. I'm not saying that it should or shouldn't but that along with the fact that he wasn't a HOF player doesn't get him into the hall IMO. If he would've been able to get to 500 HR's I think he's in for sure. He falls a little short in my book.
"you're argument is dead in the water." So your the argument police and I'm not allowed to have an opinion that is different than your own about your PC player getting into the hall? Okay...
BBCgalaxee
Well-known member
- Sep 9, 2011
- 6,475
- 59
Does this make u feel old? There's now a hof rc from the 90s.
Sent from my HTCONE using Freedom Card Board mobile app
Sent from my HTCONE using Freedom Card Board mobile app
craftysouthpaw
New member
- Jan 8, 2010
- 668
- 0
Who accused Bagwell of using? He's not on any list, any report, any hand written scraps from a shady pharmacy. Nothing. I don't know of a single accusation. A few voters have suspected but that is much different than accusing. Even conceding the point, since when is an accusation the standard of guilt in a civilized society? Thomas looked much more like a poster boy for PED use than Bagwell did but because he was outspoken, that exonerates him? I seem to remember some finger pointing from Palmeiro - what did that prove?
Before anyone starts a stampede, I don't believe that Thomas used. But we have no more reason to think so than we do for Bagwell. Show me some proof.
Multiple recent rankings of value disagree with the conclusion that Thomas' Offense> Bagwell's Offense, Defense, Baserunning. They are close enough in career value that I can certainly be convinced Thomas was slightly better. I am not foolish enough to take a WAR ranking as gospel but it is a great point of reference. But not to the degree that should result in ~175 votes difference. If the people not voting for him leaned on the 500 HR plateau, I would at least be happy they are using facts instead of speculation. Still wouldn't agree with their conclusion but could see a path for how they got there.
He is not getting the votes because too many guys have lumped him in with PED use without a shred of evidence that carries any weight. He is getting shafted.
maxe0213
New member
Please take a look at the post I made after this in response to predator. I stated that Bags would be in if he hit 500. I just think Bags stats don't make him a HOF'er along with the suspected steroid use (which we all know that voters take to heart for some reason). I'm not saying I think that he used or not. I have no idea. I'm saying that he doesn't have the stats along with being semi-connected to steroids leads me to say he doesn't deserve it. We are putting too many good players in the HOF. It needs to be for the greats of the game and Bags was not one of the greatest players of that time.
****I meant suspected steroid use and not accusations in my post you quoted. My apologies.
craftysouthpaw
New member
- Jan 8, 2010
- 668
- 0
And how does a player that ranks in many places as one of the 5 best at his position since 1900 fall short of the HOF? Assuming one isn't leaving him short due to suspected PED use, I just don't get it. But if we all thought the same, the world would be a much duller place!
maxe0213
New member
He doesn't have the stats. Not getting shafted.
maxe0213
New member
I'm not sure I would rank him as a top 5 first basemen since 1900. Maybe not even the top 10. I'd have to take a look.
craftysouthpaw
New member
- Jan 8, 2010
- 668
- 0
Which stats leave him short? For guys that debuted since WWI, which I think is when the game settled into a semblance of what it is today, here are his 1B ranks for (mostly) traditional stats:
2B 13th
HR 13th
Runs 10th
RBI 11th
SB 1st
BB 6th
OBP 9th
SLG 13th
OPS+ 9th
So just on those alone, he is on the fringes of the top 10. His gets up to as high as 4th in some rankings (WAR for example) due to his defense and his (non-SB) baserunning. Even if you throw out defense and baserunning, I don't see how a guy that is in the discussion for the 10th best ever at his position falls short.
He wasn't just a good player, he was a great one. The ironic thing is he retired at 37 because his shoulder was hurt. He could have easily reached some arbitary plateaus such as 500 HR's even if he took a year or so to recover (maybe used some HGH to get there!) and hung on for 3 or 4 more years. And then you'd have a crowd screaming that he was a compiler and only got there because he played too long. Some guys are just damned if they do and damned if they don't.
If you believe that Hall should just be for guys in the Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Lou Gehrig class, then I guess I can see how he doesn't make it. But that standard is awfully high and doesn't seem to be where the Hall is at (not to mention, most of the guys in that class played a long time ago and that makes me wonder he fair it is to compare guys of the past 50 years to guys that played before WWII with no African Americans or Hispanics).
2B 13th
HR 13th
Runs 10th
RBI 11th
SB 1st
BB 6th
OBP 9th
SLG 13th
OPS+ 9th
So just on those alone, he is on the fringes of the top 10. His gets up to as high as 4th in some rankings (WAR for example) due to his defense and his (non-SB) baserunning. Even if you throw out defense and baserunning, I don't see how a guy that is in the discussion for the 10th best ever at his position falls short.
He wasn't just a good player, he was a great one. The ironic thing is he retired at 37 because his shoulder was hurt. He could have easily reached some arbitary plateaus such as 500 HR's even if he took a year or so to recover (maybe used some HGH to get there!) and hung on for 3 or 4 more years. And then you'd have a crowd screaming that he was a compiler and only got there because he played too long. Some guys are just damned if they do and damned if they don't.
If you believe that Hall should just be for guys in the Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Lou Gehrig class, then I guess I can see how he doesn't make it. But that standard is awfully high and doesn't seem to be where the Hall is at (not to mention, most of the guys in that class played a long time ago and that makes me wonder he fair it is to compare guys of the past 50 years to guys that played before WWII with no African Americans or Hispanics).
maxe0213
New member
We can agree to disagree. I'd put Gehrig, Foxx, Greenberg, Pujols, Eddie Murray, Sisler, Killebrew all definitely ahead of Bagwell. And I'd have to look at numbers closely to compare him to the guys I'd say he falls in a category with like Carew, McCovey, Thome(Although I'd rank Thome ahead based on pure great power numbers) and the likes.
I think the HOF should be a special place for the best of the best. Bags wasn't the best of the best. Plain and simple. He was very good but never the best and didn't quite reach certain statistical plateaus.
ASTROBURN
Active member
Just some key points that keep popping up in my mind...
I still think Bags would have cleared 500 homeruns had he not played half his career in the pitcher friendly Astrodome.
Didnt Thomas spend half his career as a DH?
Bagwell had 449 homeruns thru his 15 year career. (Playing only 39 games his last year)
Thomas had 448 homeruns thru his first 16 years, then got 73 more as a dh for toronto and oakland, putting him over 500.
In my mind, Bagwell was better. But he couldnt play hurt and string his career along as a DH.
I still think Bags would have cleared 500 homeruns had he not played half his career in the pitcher friendly Astrodome.
Didnt Thomas spend half his career as a DH?
Bagwell had 449 homeruns thru his 15 year career. (Playing only 39 games his last year)
Thomas had 448 homeruns thru his first 16 years, then got 73 more as a dh for toronto and oakland, putting him over 500.
In my mind, Bagwell was better. But he couldnt play hurt and string his career along as a DH.
ChasHawk
New member
Sure he could have. He could have signed anywhere if he was good enough.
MansGame
Active member
Some really great points here man! I guess it does shed some light on Bags and the career he had...
I would tell you that the shoulda woulda coulda game does get a little choppy because you could play that game with nearly anyone...
ASTROBURN
Active member
Good enough and Healthy are two different things. Besides, if he did stick around, he'd probably get crapped on like all the people that complain Biggio stuck around too long just to hit the numbers...
Will Style 13
New member
A couple of the thoughts...
Armando Benitez getting a vote made me chuckle.
I'm shocked Morris went backwards in votes.
I'm also surprised Biggio didn't get in this year. Seemed like a no brainer.
The rest didn't surprise me much.
Armando Benitez getting a vote made me chuckle.
I'm shocked Morris went backwards in votes.
I'm also surprised Biggio didn't get in this year. Seemed like a no brainer.
The rest didn't surprise me much.
MaineMule
Active member
Here's something interesting I just found on the HOF's web-site, actually it's very interesting.......
http://baseballhall.org/hall-famers/rules-election/rules-history
Read this at the bottom-
[h=2]NOTES[/h] [h=4]Jan. 5, 1995[/h] BBWAA petitions Board of Directors to reconsider eligibility of Larry Bowa, Bill Madlock, Al Oliver and Ted Simmons, with the intention of restoring their names to the 1996 ballot. The four players failed to achieve 5% in their first year on the ballot (Bowa, ’91, Maddlock, ’93, Oliver, ’91 and Simmons ’94). Board approves reinstatement.
[h=4]1984[/h] BBWAA petitions Board of Directors to reconsider eligibility of Ken Boyer, Curt Flood and Ron Santo with the intention of restoring their names to the 1985 ballot.They failed to achieve 5% in their first years on the ballot (Boyer, 1975-79, Flood, 1977-79 and Santo, 1980). Board approves reinstatement.
http://baseballhall.org/hall-famers/rules-election/rules-history
Read this at the bottom-
[h=2]NOTES[/h] [h=4]Jan. 5, 1995[/h] BBWAA petitions Board of Directors to reconsider eligibility of Larry Bowa, Bill Madlock, Al Oliver and Ted Simmons, with the intention of restoring their names to the 1996 ballot. The four players failed to achieve 5% in their first year on the ballot (Bowa, ’91, Maddlock, ’93, Oliver, ’91 and Simmons ’94). Board approves reinstatement.
[h=4]1984[/h] BBWAA petitions Board of Directors to reconsider eligibility of Ken Boyer, Curt Flood and Ron Santo with the intention of restoring their names to the 1985 ballot.They failed to achieve 5% in their first years on the ballot (Boyer, 1975-79, Flood, 1977-79 and Santo, 1980). Board approves reinstatement.
ChasHawk
New member
Yet the XXXXs never voted Santo in, and even the vet committee did it posthumously.
MansGame
Active member
Similar threads
