2011....So who's making the Hall???

[Titans74]

The compiler arguement is weak and idiotic. Stats are stats. Whether it takes you 10 years or 21 years, you still accomplished them. End of story.

 

[elmalo]

The compiler arguement is weak and idiotic. Stats are stats. Whether it takes you 10 years or 21 years, you still accomplished them. End of story.

The Hall of Fame is for greatness. Blylevin was never a great pitcher. Good pither yes. Great pitcher, no.

 

[bodiaz]

I think Blyleven and Alomar get in.


My picks would be Alomar, McGwire, and Jack Morris.


Alomar is flat out one of the best all around baseball players I have ever seen. Could do it all, and it is a damn shame that he was not 1st ballot!

McGwire is one of the most feared hitters of all time, and he should have been first ballot also.

Morris is due. One of the best big game pitchers in history, and durable as hell. One of the first to master the spliter, and was the best pitcher of the 80's.

 

[f2tornado]

Alomar and Blyleven.

Blyleven was no more a compiler than Nolan Ryan or Steve Carlton.

 

[SamHell]

The compiler arguement is weak and idiotic. Stats are stats. Whether it takes you 10 years or 21 years, you still accomplished them. End of story.

The Hall of Fame is for greatness. Blylevin was never a great pitcher. Good pither yes. Great pitcher, no.

I am going to disagree with that. People might not have recognized him having great seasons, but he certainly had some. He might not have the Cy Young's or the win totals but he had a lot of great seasons. He didn't just hang around compiling mediocre stats year after year.

I found this just doing some quick research on baseball reference.

A season of 5.0 or greater WAR generally would put you in the top 10-12 of ALL pitchers that year.
Number of seasons with 5.0 or greater WAR.
Tom Seaver - 11
Warren Spahn -10
Phil Neikro -10
Greg Maddux -9
Randy Johnson -9
Bert Blylevin - 9
Bob Gibson -8
Ferguson Jenkins -7
Pedro Martinez -7
Steve Carlton -7
Jim Palmer -6
Robin Roberts -6
Nolan Ryan -5
Tom Glavine -4

I think he compares very favorably with the number of 'great' seasons that other HOF and future HOF'ers put together.

 

[maxpower]

Only 1st ballot locks I see: Marquis Grissom, Bobby Higginson and Benito Santiago.

That's crazy. They'd send a player of Higginson's caliber in by himself. Don't want one of the true all-time greats to have to share the spotlight. Grissom and Santiago will have to wait til next year.

 

[maxpower]

Blyleven (momentum and timing) and Alomar (should have been first ballot).

Larkin will get there soon, but there isn't much urgency. I think Raines' ardent supporters will eventually convince enough people to push him over the top too (not this year, of course).

No way on Bagwell because the voters are going to be extra careful about not voting in a guy who might later turn out to be a juicer. Not saying Bagwell is, but in the minds of many, there's a question mark.

 

[jbone17]

Bert and Alomar will get in and Bert is a hall of famer hands down. I have been stressing this for years now. The guy is 5th all time in K's and he has 287 career victories. The guy is a HOF'er.

 

[nosterbor]

The compiler arguement is weak and idiotic. Stats are stats. Whether it takes you 10 years or 21 years, you still accomplished them. End of story.

The Hall of Fame is for greatness. Blylevin was never a great pitcher. Good pither yes. Great pitcher, no.

just like Ozzy Smith was not a COMPLETE great player.

 

[dreamerfan]

As a Detroit homer I would love to see Trammell get his due and get in but I do not see it happening. I do believe he is better than Ozzie and that was a shame to put him in ahead of Trammell. I also would die happy if Walker gets in but again I do not see it happening. My choices are Walker, Trammell, Morris, Alomar. But I know I am going to be wrong again.

 

[scotty21690]

Not a very strong ballot IMO, a heckuva lot of borderline players.

I say Alomar gets in, because someone has to.

 

[craftysouthpaw]

The compiler arguement is weak and idiotic. Stats are stats. Whether it takes you 10 years or 21 years, you still accomplished them. End of story.

The Hall of Fame is for greatness. Blylevin was never a great pitcher. Good pither yes. Great pitcher, no.

I am going to disagree with that. People might not have recognized him having great seasons, but he certainly had some. He might not have the Cy Young's or the win totals but he had a lot of great seasons. He didn't just hang around compiling mediocre stats year after year.

I found this just doing some quick research on baseball reference.

A season of 5.0 or greater WAR generally would put you in the top 10-12 of ALL pitchers that year.
Number of seasons with 5.0 or greater WAR.
Tom Seaver - 11
Warren Spahn -10
Phil Neikro -10
Greg Maddux -9
Randy Johnson -9
Bert Blylevin - 9
Bob Gibson -8
Ferguson Jenkins -7
Pedro Martinez -7
Steve Carlton -7
Jim Palmer -6
Robin Roberts -6
Nolan Ryan -5
Tom Glavine -4

I think he compares very favorably with the number of 'great' seasons that other HOF and future HOF'ers put together.

Post thanked

 

[scotty21690]

The compiler arguement is weak and idiotic. Stats are stats. Whether it takes you 10 years or 21 years, you still accomplished them. End of story.

The Hall of Fame is for greatness. Blylevin was never a great pitcher. Good pither yes. Great pitcher, no.

I am going to disagree with that. People might not have recognized him having great seasons, but he certainly had some. He might not have the Cy Young's or the win totals but he had a lot of great seasons. He didn't just hang around compiling mediocre stats year after year.

I found this just doing some quick research on baseball reference.

A season of 5.0 or greater WAR generally would put you in the top 10-12 of ALL pitchers that year.
Number of seasons with 5.0 or greater WAR.
Tom Seaver - 11
Warren Spahn -10
Phil Neikro -10
Greg Maddux -9
Randy Johnson -9
Bert Blylevin - 9
Bob Gibson -8
Ferguson Jenkins -7
Pedro Martinez -7
Steve Carlton -7
Jim Palmer -6
Robin Roberts -6
Nolan Ryan -5
Tom Glavine -4

I think he compares very favorably with the number of 'great' seasons that other HOF and future HOF'ers put together.

According to your data Bert Blylevin is/was a better pitcher than Bob Gibson and Pedro Martinez!

 

[hofautos]

bagwell and alomar will be only 2 getting in.

 

[maxpower]

The compiler arguement is weak and idiotic. Stats are stats. Whether it takes you 10 years or 21 years, you still accomplished them. End of story.

The Hall of Fame is for greatness. Blylevin was never a great pitcher. Good pither yes. Great pitcher, no.

I am going to disagree with that. People might not have recognized him having great seasons, but he certainly had some. He might not have the Cy Young's or the win totals but he had a lot of great seasons. He didn't just hang around compiling mediocre stats year after year.

I found this just doing some quick research on baseball reference.

A season of 5.0 or greater WAR generally would put you in the top 10-12 of ALL pitchers that year.
Number of seasons with 5.0 or greater WAR.
Tom Seaver - 11
Warren Spahn -10
Phil Neikro -10
Greg Maddux -9
Randy Johnson -9
Bert Blylevin - 9
Bob Gibson -8
Ferguson Jenkins -7
Pedro Martinez -7
Steve Carlton -7
Jim Palmer -6
Robin Roberts -6
Nolan Ryan -5
Tom Glavine -4

I think he compares very favorably with the number of 'great' seasons that other HOF and future HOF'ers put together.

Very informative post. Thanks!

I don't dispute that Blylevin should be in the HOF. I absolutely think he should. I would, however, take with a grain of salt, any measure of greatness that put Blylevin above Bob Gibson, Steve Carlton, and Nolan Ryan.

 

[henderson939]

Fred McGriff is a hall of famer. I am sure he wont make it though. Its too bad, he was a excellent player and a class act.

I think he is borderline. There are a lot of guys like him. Delgado, Bagwell, Galaraga. None of those guys really stand out. Not to mention the fact that in the same era as these guys you had Frank Thomas, McGwire, Palmiero. All first baseman with better stats.

I hear ya, but he has never been linked to roids, like most of the guys mentioned above. He was 7 HR shy of 500 & was just a great ballplayer who was a total professional. I think he should be recognized as one of the greats from that era, because he was.

 

[SamHell]

The compiler arguement is weak and idiotic. Stats are stats. Whether it takes you 10 years or 21 years, you still accomplished them. End of story.

The Hall of Fame is for greatness. Blylevin was never a great pitcher. Good pither yes. Great pitcher, no.

I am going to disagree with that. People might not have recognized him having great seasons, but he certainly had some. He might not have the Cy Young's or the win totals but he had a lot of great seasons. He didn't just hang around compiling mediocre stats year after year.

I found this just doing some quick research on baseball reference.

A season of 5.0 or greater WAR generally would put you in the top 10-12 of ALL pitchers that year.
Number of seasons with 5.0 or greater WAR.
Tom Seaver - 11
Warren Spahn -10
Phil Neikro -10
Greg Maddux -9
Randy Johnson -9
Bert Blylevin - 9
Bob Gibson -8
Ferguson Jenkins -7
Pedro Martinez -7
Steve Carlton -7
Jim Palmer -6
Robin Roberts -6
Nolan Ryan -5
Tom Glavine -4

I think he compares very favorably with the number of 'great' seasons that other HOF and future HOF'ers put together.

According to your data Bert Blylevin is/was a better pitcher than Bob Gibson and Pedro Martinez!

I wouldn't say that. Just that he had several great seasons and people should not get too caught up in the lack of All-Star games and CY's. Actually he should have 10 seasons with a WAR above 5.0. He was traded mid-season in 85 and compiled a 6.0 combined WAR. BR separates the team WAR totals.
Edit. Add one more season to Randy Johnson's total to give him ten. Combined 5.5 in 98.

 

[scotty21690]

The lack of Cys and ASGs goes to show that he was never a dominant pitcher. He was an above average pitcher for many years.

Over 22 seasons the only worthwhile catagories he has led was: SHO(3), SO(1), ERA+(1), WHIP(1), and SO/BB(3).

He was a great pitcher for many years, but overall borderline for the HOF. I would not be disappointed to see him make it into the HOF, but considering he has not made it in yet questions why should he make it in now? (It would not surprise me though, because it seems as if this year there are no real strong candidates)

 

[SamHell]

The lack of Cys and ASGs goes to show that he was never a dominant pitcher. He was an above average pitcher for many years.

Over 22 seasons the only worthwhile catagories he has led was: SHO(3), SO(1), ERA+(1), WHIP(1), and SO/BB(3).

He was a great pitcher for many years, but overall borderline for the HOF. I would not be disappointed to see him make it into the HOF, but considering he has not made it in yet questions why should he make it in now? (It would not surprise me though, because it seems as if this year there are no real strong candidates)

I guess we have different opinions on dominant and what is valuable. Throwing a shutout is about as dominant as you can get(No hitters and perfect games aside.) Blyleven has 60 of them for 9th overall. Everybody else in the top 20 is in the HOF.
As for CY's...
Mark Davis, Jim Lonborg, LaMarr Hoyt, Pat Hentgen and Steve Stone all have won it. Is that going to be the only measurement for HOF?

ASG's...Doug Jones and Cookie Rojas went to 5. Are they more qualified than Blyleven?

I will agree Blyleven is not a slam dunk HOF'er but some people calling him mediocre and just 'pretty good' is carrying it a bit too far.

 

[predatorkj]

Blyleven (momentum and timing) and Alomar (should have been first ballot).

Larkin will get there soon, but there isn't much urgency. I think Raines' ardent supporters will eventually convince enough people to push him over the top too (not this year, of course).

No way on Bagwell because the voters are going to be extra careful about not voting in a guy who might later turn out to be a juicer. Not saying Bagwell is, but in the minds of many, there's a question mark.

Right. My question is...how fair is that? Shouldn't they go with what they know versus what they don't? Now I totally agree with you on Bags. I do. I just don't know how to call it. I honestly think he did roids. Many don't agree. Some do. But like I said in about 5 other threads...this will be the true litmus test. If Bags at least gets a nice chunk of votes...it shows people are willing to take a flier on possible roid users. If he gets a small amount...I think it will show that people are willing to pass him up just in case. Only problem is...it wouldn't be based on stats or "fame". It would be based on assumption. I'm not sure if his numbers and "fame" status alone are enough to allow him in but I seriously doubt that would be the deciding factor. Which is truly a damn shame. Even if he does get in and they find out later on that he did them. Even if they kicked him back out. The problem becomes...now its a game of assumption versus what the true HOF voting used to be about. Which pretty much screws up the last couple of decades.