Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Published ballots for 2006

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Jim Salisbury of the Philly Inquirer put his ballot with his reasons here:

    http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/sports/13573423.htm

    I don't know how long the column will be generally available, so here's the cliff notes version. He names eight guys Albert Belle, Bert Blyleven, Andre Dawson, Goose Gossage, Jack Morris, Jim Rice, Lee Smith and Bruce Sutter. The fact he named only eight means one must question whether he'll ever support candidates like Will Clark, Dave Concepcion, Steve Garvey, Don Mattingly, Dale Murphy, Dave Parker, or Alan Trammell. Please note that the final eight are only chosen because they're candidates I've seen serious discussion of on these boards.

    Jim Albright
    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.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by 538280
      Parker's peak years weren't just better-they were worlds better. Dawson didn't even really have a peak. The Win Shares system says he didn't even have one MVP candidate type season. Their top three WS seasons:

      Parker-37, 33, 31
      Dawson-29, 28, 26
      I agree with you about Parker, he really had two peaks, one with Pit (75-79) and one with the Reds (84-85), if he could have just had a few more of those years in between he'd be a shoo-in.

      Just out of curiosity, how do Albert Belle's best WS years compare to these two? (sorry I don't have the BJ Abstract!)

      Comment


      • #18
        Bob Elliot of the Toronto Sun went with Belle, Blyleven, Dawson, Gossage, Morris, Smith, Sutter and Trammell.

        Morris was a Blue Jay fan favourite so that selection does shock me but it does bother me somewhat.

        The only two guys I'm for here are Blyleven and Gossage.

        In the article he says "we" voted for....hmmm.

        Here it is.

        http://torontosun.canoe.ca/Sports/Co...87226-sun.html
        "I think about baseball when I wake up in the morning. I think about it all day and I dream about it at night. The only time I don't think about it is when I'm playing it."
        Carl Yastrzemski

        Comment


        • #19
          Baseball Primer has been tracking this and with 92 writers accounted for no one has 75%. Gossage has 72%.

          http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/...tand/newsblog/
          Buck O'Neil: The Monarch of Baseball

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by KCGHOST
            Baseball Primer has been tracking this and with 92 writers accounted for no one has 75%. Gossage has 72%.
            Tough to draw any conclusions with that sample. These aren't political elections, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's a shut out this year.
            "I think about baseball when I wake up in the morning. I think about it all day and I dream about it at night. The only time I don't think about it is when I'm playing it."
            Carl Yastrzemski

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Barnstormer
              I agree with you about Parker, he really had two peaks, one with Pit (75-79) and one with the Reds (84-85), if he could have just had a few more of those years in between he'd be a shoo-in.

              Just out of curiosity, how do Albert Belle's best WS years compare to these two? (sorry I don't have the BJ Abstract!)
              Albert Belle's three best WS years are 37, 31, and 30. His five best are 37, 31, 31, 27, 24, and 24. Here's how that compares to Dawson/Parker/Rice:

              Belle-37, 31, 27, 24, 24
              Parker-37, 33, 31, 29, 25
              Dawson-29, 28, 26, 26, 25
              Rice-36, 28, 28, 26, 24, 21

              And I would definitely recceommend the Bill James Abstract to you. It is the book any serious baseball fan should truly have.

              I'll give my opinion on Belle and Rice since I haven't yet.

              They basically have the same HOF argument, in that they both may have been the best hitters in the game for a short period of time.

              But, I favor Belle and not Rice, because of two factors:

              1.Rice was helped tremendously by Fenway Park
              2.Rice was a GIDP machine, to understate things.

              Let me explain:

              1.This is self explanatory. Rice's line at home was .320/.374/.546, and on the road he was .277/.330/.459. His OPS at home was about 15% better than his OPS on the road. Players do tend to do better at home as a general rule, so I'm willing to give him a bit of a break, but reducing his numbers by 10% (a huge cut) is not unfair.

              2.Rice grounded into 315 double plays in his career, or one per 26 at bats, the 7th highest ratio of all time. Belle also grounded into a lot of DPs (30 per AB), but not as much. Rice led his league in GIDP four years in a row in his peak, which is enough in my mind to greatly knock that peak down in terms of value.

              Those two things, IMO, are enough to put Rice below Belle.
              Last edited by 538280; 01-11-2006, 06:53 PM.

              Comment


              • #22
                Rice below Albert Belle!? Gimme a little of what you're smoking!

                I don't want to go into these little obscure stats like "win shares" that only Bill James and the Reggie guy care about, Rice was a better player than Belle, period. I think it is clear that when comparing Rice to any number of HOFers his numbers, for the period of time he played, compare favorably.

                Give the GIDP argument a rest please. There are so many variables to that that it it silly to bring it up. Someone who is actually around the game, and not some silly stat-nerd knows this. The primary requirement for a GIDP is making consistent hard contact with the ball, which Rice did until the very end of his career, without juice I might add.

                Its a shame Rice did not make it, but please don't insult those of us who watched him for 12 seasons night in and night out, by saying that people like Dave Parker or Albert Belle:noidea are more deserving of HOF induction than Rice.

                I will admit to being a die hard Sox fan, but I must tell you, Fisk is in(as he should be), and in his best day HE wasn't a pimple on Rice's butt! Of course that pimple just hung around a lot longer, and it is longevity that has been the most overrated criteria for the hall, I mean come on, Don Sutton:noidea

                Did someone on this board say Tommy John!? PUUULLLLEEEAAASSSE!

                tominct

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by tominct
                  I don't want to go into these little obscure stats like "win shares" that only Bill James and the Reggie guy care about, Rice was a better player than Belle, period. I think it is clear that when comparing Rice to any number of HOFers his numbers, for the period of time he played, compare favorably.
                  Without factoring in ballpark and concentrating on offense.

                  Give the GIDP argument a rest please. There are so many variables to that that it it silly to bring it up. Someone who is actually around the game, and not some silly stat-nerd knows this. The primary requirement for a GIDP is making consistent hard contact with the ball, which Rice did until the very end of his career, without juice I might add.
                  GIDP don't make a big difference. However, they are still outs and there are many variables that go into getting a hit, as well.

                  Its a shame Rice did not make it, but please don't insult those of us who watched him for 12 seasons night in and night out, by saying that people like Dave Parker or Albert Belle:noidea are more deserving of HOF induction than Rice.
                  Code:
                  baseball-reference
                  	Seas	AB	PA	BA	OBP	Slug	OPS+	RBI	R	RC	RC/27	Bases	Outs	Bases/Out
                  Belle	12	5853	6673	0.295	0.369	0.564	143	1239	974	1231	7.48	4126	4443	0.929
                  Parker	19	9358	10184	0.290	0.339	0.471	121	1493	1272	1502	5.75	5298	7055	0.751
                  Rice	16	8225	9058	0.298	0.352	0.502	128	1451	1249	1459	6.33	4921	6221	0.791
                  Splits
                  Code:
                  retrosheet
                  Belle
                  Type     G    AB    R    H  2B  3B  HR  RBI   BB IBB   SO HBP  SH  SF  XI ROE GDP   SB  CS   AVG   OBP   SLG
                  Home   768  2852  488  861 193  13 191  643  335  43  456  26   2  44   0  26 102   40  21  .302  .375  .580
                  Away   771  3001  486  865 196   8 190  596  348  48  505  29   2  34   3  37  91   48  20  .288  .364  .549
                  
                  Parker
                  Home  1209  4500  651 1362 270  47 170  785  334  76  691  17   0  45   0  55 103   70  59  .303  .350  .497
                  Away  1257  4858  621 1350 256  28 169  708  349  93  846  39   1  41   0  64 107   84  54  .278  .329  .446
                  
                  Rice
                  Home  1048  4075  681 1304 207  44 208  802  348  50  691  34   2  48   0  49 156   32  17  .320  .374  .546
                  Away  1041  4150  568 1148 166  35 174  649  322  27  732  30   3  46   0  65 159   26  17  .277  .330  .459
                  I will admit to being a die hard Sox fan, but I must tell you, Fisk is in(as he should be), and in his best day HE wasn't a pimple on Rice's butt!

                  tominct
                  Only if you're going on offense.
                  Last edited by Chisox; 01-11-2006, 09:03 AM.
                  Johnson and now Goligoski gone.
                  I hope that's all.

                  Comment

                  Ad Widget

                  Collapse
                  Working...
                  X