Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 29

Thread: The MVP and the HOF

  1. #1
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Under the Knickerbocker beer sign at the Polo Grounds
    Posts
    5,882

    The MVP and the HOF

    As of this writing, the AL has selected a HOFer for MVP 46 times; 25 times they have selected a non-HOFer, with the other years filled by folks who are ineligible for the HOF. The NL has a rate of 42-27 in favor of HOFers with other winners not eligible for the HOF (including Pete Rose, who won the award once).

    Only two MULTIPLE MVP winners have not been selected to the HOF that are eligible; Dale Murphy and Juan Gonzalez. Murphy is in his final year of eligibility and hasn't gontten that much traction.

    On it's face, winning an MVP indicates that your chances of making the HOF are 60-65%. To what degree does winning the MVP award contribute to a player's selection to the HOF?
    "I do not care if half the league strikes. Those who do it will encounter quick retribution. All will be suspended and I don't care if it wrecks the National League for five years. This is the United States of America and one citizen has as much right to play as another. The National League will go down the line with Robinson whatever the consequences. You will find if you go through with your intention that you have been guilty of complete madness."

    NL President Ford Frick, 1947

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    southeastern PA
    Posts
    19,799
    Blog Entries
    34
    It's better than a Cy Young, that's for sure. Excluding banned players and guys with strong PED issues, you've got to go to Juan Gonzalez for the most MVP shares to be excluded, and he's in the 40's. Bret Saberhagen is only 12th in Cy Young shares, and he's out. Even allowing twice as many position players as pitchers, that's definitely tilted toward MVPs.

    It's a heck of a selling point for a player to have been considered among the best in the game. Now a guy who has one fluky MVP or Cy Young award season (basically defined as one that just stands way out above the level of the other seasons in his career), it doesn't matter much. But if a guy follows up one of those award winning seasons with five or six other All-Star quality seasons, it becomes very hard to dismiss the guy. Assuming there's some other seasons to back it up, it's more valuable the greater the consensus that he was one of the two or three best in the game that year, the more it helps. If a guy wins a badly split MVP vote, it doesn't carry the same weight.
    Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
    Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
    A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    18,592
    Roger Maris also won two MVPs.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Under the Knickerbocker beer sign at the Polo Grounds
    Posts
    5,882
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuzzy Bear View Post
    As of this writing, the AL has selected a HOFer for MVP 46 times; 25 times they have selected a non-HOFer, with the other years filled by folks who are ineligible for the HOF. The NL has a rate of 42-27 in favor of HOFers with other winners not eligible for the HOF (including Pete Rose, who won the award once).

    Only two MULTIPLE MVP winners have not been selected to the HOF that are eligible; Dale Murphy and Juan Gonzalez. Murphy is in his final year of eligibility and hasn't gontten that much traction.

    On it's face, winning an MVP indicates that your chances of making the HOF are 60-65%. To what degree does winning the MVP award contribute to a player's selection to the HOF?
    Cowtipper reminded me of Maris's 2 MVPs, so that's 3 Multiple MVP winners not in the HOF that are eligible
    "I do not care if half the league strikes. Those who do it will encounter quick retribution. All will be suspended and I don't care if it wrecks the National League for five years. This is the United States of America and one citizen has as much right to play as another. The National League will go down the line with Robinson whatever the consequences. You will find if you go through with your intention that you have been guilty of complete madness."

    NL President Ford Frick, 1947

  5. #5
    Any of the three make viable candidates. Murphy always surprised me in that he never received more support. I can't help but think that if his batting average didn't take a nose dive near the end of his career, he would already be in Cooperstown. He was definitely one of the elite players of the 1980s. If he finished with a BA maybe 5 or 6 points higher, I believe he's in. Those strikeouts and low BA are acceptable in a guy with Killebrew power totals, but for Murph, depsite the great glove and prowess on the basepaths it wasn't enough.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Braves Country
    Posts
    991
    Roger Maris vs. Dale Murphy Hall of Fame voting.

    Maris:
    1974 BBWAA (21.4%)
    1975 BBWAA (19.3%)
    1976 BBWAA (22.4%)
    1977 BBWAA (21.4%)
    1978 BBWAA (21.9%)
    1979 BBWAA (29.4%)
    1980 BBWAA (28.8%)
    1981 BBWAA (23.4%)
    1982 BBWAA (16.6%)
    1983 BBWAA (18.4%)
    1984 BBWAA (26.6%)
    1985 BBWAA (32.4%)
    1986 BBWAA (41.6%)
    1987 BBWAA (42.6%)
    1988 BBWAA (43.1%)

    Murphy:
    1999 BBWAA (19.3%)
    2000 BBWAA (23.2%)
    2001 BBWAA (18.1%)
    2002 BBWAA (14.8%)
    2003 BBWAA (11.7%)
    2004 BBWAA ( 8.5%)
    2005 BBWAA (10.5%)
    2006 BBWAA (10.8%)
    2007 BBWAA ( 9.2%)
    2008 BBWAA (13.8%)
    2009 BBWAA (11.5%)
    2010 BBWAA (11.7%)
    2011 BBWAA (12.6%)
    2012 BBWAA (14.5%)
    Chop! Chop! Chop!

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by jalbright View Post
    It's better than a Cy Young, that's for sure.
    Saberhagen and McLain are the 2 multiple CY winners who have been Hall eligible who have not made the Hall, and they were (in terms of support) both one and done. [McLain was on the BBWAA ballot a few times, but always received less than 1% support.]

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by The Commissioner View Post
    Any of the three make viable candidates. Murphy always surprised me in that he never received more support. I can't help but think that if his batting average didn't take a nose dive near the end of his career, he would already be in Cooperstown. He was definitely one of the elite players of the 1980s. If he finished with a BA maybe 5 or 6 points higher, I believe he's in. Those strikeouts and low BA are acceptable in a guy with Killebrew power totals, but for Murph, depsite the great glove and prowess on the basepaths it wasn't enough.
    I think at if he also saw better post-season days, he would have gotten more support.

    The Braves were pretty well swept in the 1982 NLCS. And even though he was all but done while in Philly, he was released just days prior to Opening Day of the Phillies 1993 World Series run.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by dgarza View Post
    I think at if he also saw better post-season days, he would have gotten more support.

    The Braves were pretty well swept in the 1982 NLCS. And even though he was all but done while in Philly, he was released just days prior to Opening Day of the Phillies 1993 World Series run.
    Excellent point. Unfortunately for him, some of his best seasons were when the rest of team was just plain bad. A few of those years, the Braves finished 20+ games behind in the standings. 1985 would be the quintessential example. That year he led the N.L. in HRs, runs scored, and walks. He finished 2nd in RBI and total bases, and hit .300. He would have finished higher than 7th in the M.V.P. race had the Braves not finished 29 games out of first place.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    963
    To your point, if Larkin doesn't win his mvp in '95, he would have fallen short from induction IMO. I think he would have been compared to another Red-Davey Concepcion. That may not be fair, perhaps closer to Alan Trammell.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Far NE Philadelphia
    Posts
    7,510
    Of course in a couple of years we'll have Frank Thomas on teh ballot and he's questionable based on two things.... 1) he played during the PED era so there will be questions of that, and 2) he played more games as a DH than anywhere else. His overall body of work is almost impossible to pass on, but there are members of the BBWAA that have their own agendas.
    "Chuckie doesn't take on 2-0. Chuckie's hackin'." - Chuck Carr two days prior to being released by the Milwaukee Brewers

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    963
    true on thomas, but i'd vote for him without batting an eye.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Westchester County, NY
    Posts
    3,132
    Quote Originally Posted by The Commissioner View Post
    Any of the three make viable candidates. Murphy always surprised me in that he never received more support. I can't help but think that if his batting average didn't take a nose dive near the end of his career, he would already be in Cooperstown. He was definitely one of the elite players of the 1980s. If he finished with a BA maybe 5 or 6 points higher, I believe he's in. Those strikeouts and low BA are acceptable in a guy with Killebrew power totals, but for Murph, depsite the great glove and prowess on the basepaths it wasn't enough.
    I'm not sure if retiring earlier would have helped Murphy. he retired in 1993 batting .265 with 398 homeruns, 2111 hits and 1266 RBIs. He would have had to retire 4 years earlier to have left with his average at .270. At the end of 1989, he had 1820 hits, 354 HRs and 1088 RBIs. At the end of the prior year he was at .274 with 334 homeruns, 1689 hits and 1004 RBIs. I don't think his career would have been viewed as good enough to withstand those low counting numbers, unless it had ended by injury.

    I actually look at it the other way - I think if he hit 2 more homeruns to get to 400 he would have been looked at very differently.

    Growing up in the 80's, Murphy was one of those players that you knew was a HOFer. Another was Garvey. Amazing what 30 years of perspective does

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    963
    i still think murphy and garvey are hall of famers. Garvey does have a case on par with murphy, albeit different positions.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Northern plains
    Posts
    9,610
    Quote Originally Posted by Brooklyn View Post
    Growing up in the 80's, Murphy was one of those players that you knew was a HOFer. Another was Garvey. Amazing what 30 years of perspective does
    I'm totally puzzled by this also. What happened? was it sabermetrics? I was sure that Murphy and Garvey were HOFers at the time that they played. They seemed like no-brainers. I still still think that they are. Baseball is played on the field and not in a math problem. Did anyone think that Bobby Grich was a HOFer when he played? He gets all-kind of support here. And don't even get me started on Darell Evans.

  16. #16
    The Big Hurt played during the PED era but has his name ever been mentioned as a potential user? Yes, I suppose you could go out on a limb and say that any player during that era could have been a potential user, but I don't ever recall his name being brought up like like some of his peers.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Northern plains
    Posts
    9,610
    Quote Originally Posted by 9&10 View Post
    The Big Hurt played during the PED era but has his name ever been mentioned as a potential user? Yes, I suppose you could go out on a limb and say that any player during that era could have been a potential user, but I don't ever recall his name being brought up like like some of his peers.
    I don't think that one has to go out on a limb and be skeptical. Remember when AROD was the "clean" poster boy before the leak.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    6,665
    Frank Thomas is not "questionable" for the HOF in any way, shape or form.
    "It's like watching a Western. It's slow, so you can watch the chess moves. Nothing seems to happen, but when it goes down, it goes down big." - Howard Bryant

    3 6 10 21 29 31 35 41 42 44 47

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    25,801
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Los Bravos View Post
    Frank Thomas is not "questionable" for the HOF in any way, shape or form.
    I agree. I'll be shocked if he isn't elected on his first try.
    Strikeouts are boring! Besides that, they're fascist. Throw some ground balls - it's more democratic.-Crash Davis

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    9,847
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by JR Hart View Post
    I'm totally puzzled by this also. What happened? was it sabermetrics? I was sure that Murphy and Garvey were HOFers at the time that they played. They seemed like no-brainers. I still still think that they are. Baseball is played on the field and not in a math problem. Did anyone think that Bobby Grich was a HOFer when he played? He gets all-kind of support here. And don't even get me started on Darell Evans.
    Murphy faded, much like Mattingly. It's hard when all is said and done to put into the HOF a player who was a regular from 1980-1988. Fred Lynn got compared to Dimaggio for crying out loud, won GGs, ASG MVP, MVP-Rookie of the Year, Batting title, and I see noone bemoaning his absence from the hall.

    Garvey had much of his HOF case in the 200 hits, GGs, 100 RBI and the "clean cut, future political candidate image". Once Bill James started in with the he gets 700 PA and has no range articles. People saw what a real GG 1B looked like with Hernandez (and JT Snow). Then when the revelations came out about his personal life the mystique was gone. Grich FWIW was one of the first big money FAs after 1976 along with Reggie and Rudi. Perhaps it was just that he was out at the time or that Autry was spending like mad but I think he has a pretty good reputation back then. Unfortunately he got hurt in '77 and had an off year in 78. People forget the big years he had in '79 and '81 as they had moved on. After that he was solid but often injured.

    Evans never lived up to 1973 even though 1974 was a very good season. Then he went to the Giants and was putting up those sub .270 averages with 19 or so HR. I'm sure it was a let down. By his next big season in '83 I'm sure for Giant fans it was a bit of it's about time or too little too late overall.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •