TwitterHelp Me Understand
9 Jan 2012
Let’s take a few players and compare them.
Player A hit .307/.358/.471 over his 1,785 game career. He amassed 2,153 hits and 222 homers. His OPS+ was 127 for his career.
Player B hit .295/.371/.444 over his 2,120 game career. He amassed 2,340 hits and 198 homers. His OPS+ was 116 for his career.
Player C hit .297/.381/.477 over his 2,076 game career. He amassed 2,336 hits and 287 homers. His OPS+ was 125 for his career.
Sharp-eyed Yankees’ fans may have figured out that Player A is Don Mattingly and Player C is Bernie Williams. As for Player B, he is the latest member of the Hall of Fame, Barry Larkin.
Now, I am not saying that Larkin is undeserving of induction, I think he absolutely deserved it. But I am left scratching my head that 86% of the voters saw fit to vote for him while only 18% voted for Mattingly and 10% for Bernie Williams. I get that Larkin is a shortstop and therefore, his offensive numbers are more impressive for his position, but it still seems like an odd disparity. Then again, I have never understood how the writers voted for the Hall of Fame.
And there are plenty of other complaints you can make about this year’s results. You always hear the argument that Hall of Famers should be the best players of their generation. Well wasn’t Jack Morris the best pitcher in the AL for most of the 80′s? Tim Raines had over 2,600 hits and 800 steals and he can’t get 50% of the vote. And finally, how does Mark McGwire get more votes than Rafael Palmeiro? They both cheated, so that’s a wash, but Palmeiro had over 500 homers and 3,000 hits. McGwire had 1.626 hits and only hit 14 more homers than Palmerio. They both played first, so on what basis can you say McGwire is more deserving than Palmeiro? I also wonder how the writers who refuse to vote for McGwire and Palmeiro feel about Ryan Braun?
Jan 09, 2012 @ 18:23:23
Mattingly and Williams both had careers comparable to that of Kirby Puckett. All three belong in the Hall.
I agree that the best players of a decade belong in the Hall. By that measure, Mattingly, Jack Morris, Tony Oliva, Roger Maris, Bernie Williams, and Raines all belong in the Hall.
As for the steroid issue, proof of cheating does justify a negative vote. But mere suspicion is not enough. So, Bonds, McGwire, Palmeiro, and Sosa are out (as are Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson). Clemens is probably out. Bagwell is in.
Jan 09, 2012 @ 19:37:08
Corey
Puckett is a good comp for those guys.
I have a tough time with the whole steroid issue. They cheated, but so did Gaylord Perry, just in a different way. And while McGwire has admitted to using them and Palmeiro failed a test, I don’t think Sosa ever got caught, did he?
I think they should be voted in, but their plaques should mention what they did. It’s an imperfect solution, but I think it is better than the way the voters go about it now. (And Bagwell is a great example of someone being unfairly judged.)
It will be very interesting to see what happens next year with Mike Piazza. The numbers are clearly there, but the whispers are rampant.
Jan 13, 2012 @ 07:55:09
Peter – take out all the players of the HOF, remove Larkin from the discussion – do you vote either Mattingly or Williams into YOUR hall of fame as you see how a HOF should be? I can’t imagine your answer is yes.
The fun is all about who already is in and comparing…but the truth is neither Mattingly or Williams should sniff out a HOF on their merits alone.
Jan 13, 2012 @ 13:10:09
Bl
I understand your argument, but in 2012 don’t we have to use comparisons?