Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Barry Larkin

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

  • #31
    Larkin's chances will definitely be helped by the fact that his competition in the 2010 election will not be that stiff. Roberto Alomar, Edgar Martinez, and Robin Ventura are the other big names for that election, and only Alomar will likely receive significant support (and perhaps election). Plus, the holdovers will not be that significant either. After next year, in which Gwynn and Ripken will surely be elected, and perhaps McGwire too, the only surefire Hall of Famer to enter the ballot after that is Rickey Henderson (assuming no team gives him another chance), and he'll get in on his first try in 2009. Of the holdovers in 2010, I image Tim Raines will probably be receiving strong support (he might even be in by then, but I doubt it), Bert Blyleven and Andre Dawson could still be hanging around as well, and hopefully Alan Trammell would have gained some momentum by then too. Anyway, the point is that the competition when Larkin enters the ballot will not be that stiff, so he could have a chance of first year election.

    Comment


    • #32
      Since I'm hard pressed to make Larkin any lower than the #7 SS all time(I have him 5, but could see moving him down, maybe), and the guys ahead of him are either in or active(ARod), plus 10 or more HOFers BELOW him....he's a first ballot to me. Having said that, by then he'll be lucky to stay on the ballot...the writers are idiots.

      Comment


      • #33
        Hit it on the head PAP,

        I would actually be shocked to see the writers elect Larkin. In fact, I wouldn't be shocked at all to see him get the one and done treatment.

        Personally, I'm not as big a supporter of Larkin as many others here. I think he's borderline- I have a hard time getting past the durability issue. I think he deserves some consideration and wouldn't be upset if he got in. I think he'll get less consideration than I think he deserves, and I don't even actively support him.
        THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT COME WITH A SCORECARD

        In the avy: AZ - Doe or Die

        Comment


        • #34
          Just posted my article about Tim Raines, who I see you guys have already elected to your hall of fame.

          My co-author and brother also posted a short peice on Deacon McGuire.

          Going to look over your HOF again...interesting stuff in there, some really great selections!
          Visit my card site at Mike D's Baseball Card Page.

          Comment


          • #35
            He´s not a first-ballot hall of famer. He will eventually get in, probably on a poor-man´s selection year. His overall numbers are the best for a ss in the national league, which should help.
            "I am not too serious about anything. I believe you have to enjoy yourself to get the most out of your ability."-
            George Brett

            Comment


            • #36
              I think Larkin is borderline, but I'd support him. However, I think the voting might get too spread out by the time Larkin arrives on the ballot. By that I mean there will be an ample number of borderline guys on the ballot when Larkin's name first appears. Roberto Alomar is the best of Larkin's class and most likely to get elected. I'd say Fred McGriff, Edgar Martinez, and Tim Raines (a holdover from the previous year) are all about equally deserving. I don't think Andres Galarraga will be one and done, but he'll get some support, though not nearly as much as the other newcomers. The voters haven't elected more than three players in a single year in decades, and by the time Larkin gets on the ballot, there might just be a ton of derserving players, but only 2 or 3 will get in. If Larkin doesn't make it in his first year, then the next year Larry Walker, John Franco, and quite possibly Jeff Bagwell, Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro, and Roger Clemens make the ballot. That group of guys doesn't make it any easier for Larkin to get voted in.

              Anyone know if Kevin Brown retired?

              Comment


              • #37
                I would be very surprised if Larkin doesn't make it on the first ballot. Whether or not people here consider him superior to Trammel, most people who actually vote do, and the difference should be enough to result in being elected on the first try.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Good post micsmith,

                  I agree, he's going to have a his best shot in his first year of eligibility, and I assume he won't go then because in my mind, and more importantly in the eyes of writers, I highly doubt he is a first ballot guy. The longer he sticks around...here comes Thomas, Bagwell, Sosa, Clemens, Johnson, Maddux, Biggio, Piazza.

                  It will be interesting to see, if the writers decide to compensate for the impending binge of power guys by showing Larkin some extra love, or if his paltry raw numbers get lost in the shuffle of 450+ HR guys.
                  THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT COME WITH A SCORECARD

                  In the avy: AZ - Doe or Die

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Larkin is a Highest Common Demoninator case. It's not an issue of "Well, Phil Rizzuto is in, and Barry Larkin is better, ergo, Barry Larkin should go into the HOF." That's the Lowest Common Denominator argument.

                    Larkin is a case of "There is NO shortstop in the history of baseball as good as Barry Larkin that is NOT in the HOF, and there are many, many shortstops nowhere near as good as Barry Larkin that ARE in the HOF." Really, where's the precedent for keeping him out?

                    What SHORTSTOP . . .

                    Who hit .295 over 18 1/2 seasons . . .

                    And appeared in 12 All Star Games . . .

                    And won 3 Gold Gloves . . .

                    And won an NL MVP Award . . .

                    And was the best SS in baseball between 1992-95 . . .

                    And was the best player on a World Championship Team . . .

                    Is NOT in the HOF? What shortstops NOT in the HOF are better than Larkin? Concepcion? Bowa? Vern Stephens? Campeneris? No way, no way to all of them. The only SS even close to Larkin not in the HOF is Alan Trammell, and while I view Trammell as a HOF injustice, Trammell is not the equal of Larkin.

                    That's Larkin's case, and I'm surprised there is such dissent over his candidacy.
                    "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

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      I think Larkin vs. Trammell is a closer call than Fuzzy does, although (a) I've got Larkin rated slightly higher too; I'm just not that confident about it, and (b) they are both WELL over the HOF line.

                      So, for all practical purposes, I completely agree.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Barry Larkin is one of the top 10 Shortstops of all time. How could he not be in?

                        He was a constantantly very good hitter, very good defense, and he has a career success rate of 83% stolen bases.

                        The negatives against Larkin:
                        -The 2nd half of his career was overshadowed by shorstops with power (Rodriguez, Tejada, Jeter, Nomar?)
                        -He was injured a number of seasons.

                        I look at it this way. Hard Larkin played in 70's and 80's and retired in 1991, he would be looked back on as a great shorstop. Now, we're talking about how he might get in. I don't think we should penalize Larkin for playing at a time when power hitting shorstops are easier to find then they were previously.
                        AL East Champions: 1981 1982
                        AL Pennant: 1982
                        NL Central Champions: 2011
                        NL Wild Card: 2008

                        "It was like coming this close to your dreams and then watching them brush past you like a stranger in a crowd. At the time you don't think much of it; you know, we just don't recognize the significant moments of our lives while they're happening. Back then I thought, 'Well, there'll be other days.' I didn't realize that that was the only day." - Moonlight Graham

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Some metrics, and much public opinion of the time rated Larkin over Ozzie in about 4 or 5 of Ozzie's last GG years. His defense was exceptional...not just pretty good. Much like the AL 3B GGs in the early-mid 70s went to Robinson, when he wasn't as good as 2 or 3 other 3Bmen. Still very good, but not the best any more. Of course every time someone says GG I think Palmeiro and zone out completely.

                          Larkin should be a no-brainer...unfortunately, that description also fits many of the HOF voters, so we'll see.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            he's in in my book
                            Cubs: World Champs 2007?

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Cougar
                              I think Larkin vs. Trammell is a closer call than Fuzzy does, although (a) I've got Larkin rated slightly higher too; I'm just not that confident about it, and (b) they are both WELL over the HOF line.

                              So, for all practical purposes, I completely agree.
                              Trammell is closer to Larkin than I may have implied. Especially if you consider Trammell to be the guy who REALLY deserved the 1987 AL MVP (instead of the ridiculous George Bell).

                              I hope Trammell's fate isn't a harbinger of what Larkin's will be. I also believe that Trammell will eventually get in.
                              "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

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I would not personally vote for Larkin, but would not complain at all if he was to be inducted.

                                One of my biggest problems with him is the complete lack of durability. Larkin was certainly a big asset, but what about the back up SS practically guaranteed to play 35-40 games a year?...
                                THE REVOLUTION WILL NOT COME WITH A SCORECARD

                                In the avy: AZ - Doe or Die

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X