Can you think of a worse argument?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RickD

The only ones who would say that are the ones jealous of the 26 World Championships Baby!!!! :D

---

all last millieum...:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sardins

You kind of accidentally provided a reason why Raines' and Dawson's chances for the HOF are somewhat handicapped. Writers are somewhat geo-centric and therefore small-market and Canadian team players are often overlooked. It is hard to be famous when writers don't feel like talking about you. I wonder how many average players are in the Hall because they were on famous teams.

---

Average players? None, really. But there are a few who were merely good--Phil Rizzuto, for one.

Still, there's a difference between putting a good but not great player in the Hall because he was on several championship teams, and not putting a legitimately great player in because he was generally on mediocre teams. There are few fairly obvious examples of the former, but not any really clear-cut examples of the latter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wassit3

all last millieum...:p

---

:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dps

Average players? None, really. But there are a few who were merely good--Phil Rizzuto, for one.

---

He was named the American League's Most Valuable Player in 1950 after leading the team to its second consecutive pennant with a .324 batting average; he had been MVP runnerup the previous year. Rizzuto led the AL in double plays three times and in putouts and fielding percentage twice each. His 1,217 career double plays ranked second in major league history when he retired, trailing only Luke Appling's total of 1,424, and his .968 career fielding average trailed only Lou Boudreau's mark of .973 among AL shortstops. He also ranked fifth in AL history in games at shortstop (1,647), eighth in putouts (3,219) and total chances (8,148), and ninth in assists (4,666). A popular figure on a team dynasty which captured 10 AL titles in his 13 seasons, Rizzuto played in nine World Series, winning seven. He holds World Series records for most career games, putouts, assists and double plays as a shortstop.

Ty Cobb named Phil Rizzuto and Stan Musial as "two of the few modern ball players who could hold their own among old timers."

Rizzuto was noted for "small ball", strong defense, and clutch hitting, which helped the Yankees win seven World Series. As an offensive player, he is particularly regarded as one of the best bunters of his era; he led the AL in sacrifice hits every season from 1949 to 1952. In retirement, he often tutored players on the bunt during spring training.

Rizzuto was among the AL's top five players in stolen bases seven times. Defensively, he led the league three times each in double plays and total chances per game, twice each in fielding and putouts, and once in assists. Rizzuto ranks among the top ten players in several World Series categories, including games, hits, walks, runs, and steals. Three times during his career, the Yankees played until Game Seven of the World Series; Rizzuto batted .455 in those three games (1947, 1952, 1955).

Looks like a good player to me. Great defense, average hitting.

I don't really think he deserved that MVP, either. I mean, he has a legitimate case for it, but I don't even think he was the best player on his own team in 1950 - I would give that honor to Yogi Berra or Joe Dimaggio.

Ah but its the intangibles which can't be measured by statistics!

Can "intangibles" make up for 100 points of slugging?

Honestly, I'd rank the players Berra, Rizzuto, Dimaggio, for that season. Rizzuto's true value above that of Dimaggio wasn't intangibles, but defense.

Well he was great enough for the Yanks to retire his number!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RickD

Ah but its the intangibles which can't be measured by statistics!

---

Well that is an euphemism is there ever was 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FRENCHREDSOX

Well that is an euphemism is there ever was 1.

---

now THATS funny ! :D

Rizzuto was a legitamately great player in 1950, and was at least very good in 1949. The rest of his career, he was a good regular. I don't think a year or two of greatness is enough to put a man in the HoF, and if it was, Maris and a lot of other guys would still have been better choices.

The Yankees won 7 World Series during Rizzuto's time with them, yes.
But mostly they won them with power hitting, which Rizzuto had nothing to do with. Givern the strentgh of the rest of their lineup and their pitching, they would have won those 7 championships with any adequate starting SS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dps

Rizzuto was a legitamately great player in 1950, and was at least very good in 1949. The rest of his career, he was a good regular. I don't think a year or two of greatness is enough to put a man in the HoF, and if it was, Maris and a lot of other guys would still have been better choices.

The Yankees won 7 World Series during Rizzuto's time with them, yes.
But mostly they won them with power hitting, which Rizzuto had nothing to do with. Givern the strentgh of the rest of their lineup and their pitching, they would have won those 7 championships with any adequate starting SS.

---

exactly

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dps

Rizzuto was a legitamately great player in 1950, and was at least very good in 1949. The rest of his career, he was a good regular. I don't think a year or two of greatness is enough to put a man in the HoF, and if it was, Maris and a lot of other guys would still have been better choices.

The Yankees won 7 World Series during Rizzuto's time with them, yes.
But mostly they won them with power hitting, which Rizzuto had nothing to do with. Givern the strentgh of the rest of their lineup and their pitching, they would have won those 7 championships with any adequate starting SS.

---

:p

Look I am an irrational Yanks Fan. Rizzuto was one of the greatest Yankees ever.

lol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by yankee hater

That's the whole point. The are much worse arguments, some of which have no bearing on anything relevant to anything at all. This argument had weak reasoning, but is no where close to what the worst possible or even worst I heard is.

---

Again, think rationally here. Of all the actual arguments, based on the facts of what Raines did on the field, what's a worse argument than a guy that attmepted 900+ steals didn't steal enough? Okay, maybe you can think of some, but seriously, you're arguing semantics here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Okay, maybe you can think of some, but seriously, you're arguing semantics here.

---

that's what makes it fun...for awhile