Printable View
My list of hall of famers has barely wavered in the last couple of years since I started paying more attention, if it was my job to have a vote, I sure as hell would make sure that I did all my research before I casted my votes and I doubt it would waiver much throughout their lifetime on the ballot.
of course that is easier to say since I don't have a vote I guess.
More hilariousness on another forum about Morris/Blyleven:
Emphasis added.Quote:
You want to know why you cannot figure this out? Because you do not and have not watched baseball but instead you look at a bunch of historical stats. Morris was hands down a better pitcher than Blyleven. Morris was an ace on more than one team. Bert was never considered to be an ace at any time in his career.
And what did you say?Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
Because I have a slew of replies available :)
my response:
Quote:
Maybe you should try saying something that's true, instead of telling me how much baseball I have or haven't watched.
Bert was never an ace? You should ask the 79 Pirates about that (WS champs). He was also the ace on a lot of other Twins, Rangers, and Indians teams in the early to mid 80s. I may not have watched a Morris start in his prime. I'm not sure you've seen either pitcher's career numbers....ever.
Morris was such an unquestionable ace in 84 the ****ing closer got all the Cy Young and MVP votes.
Also, apparently Blyleven didn't have any dominant seasons.
Morris' best season was 86: 21-8, 3.27 ERA, 267 IP.
Blyleven had approximately 11 seasons better than that.
HAC
From Tang
http://baseballanalysts.com/archives...ich_a_base.php
That other thread really should just be titled "Nick talks circles around turds who can't debate Morris v. Blyleven without resorting to undefined subjective standards."
just noticed, the Hawk writes left handed but bats right handed.
just thought I would share.
what forum is it? are there meaningful baseball posters on it?Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
I have been looking for a second forum with other 'inteligent' baseball posters on it. Everything I have found, I keep coming back to Mogul because of the IQ levels here haha.
I like to keep learning.
what was the Hawks vote totals each of the last 6 years or whatever it is.
2002 BBWAA (45.3%)Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
2003 BBWAA (50.0%)
2004 BBWAA (50.0%)
2005 BBWAA (52.3%)
2006 BBWAA (61.0%)
2007 BBWAA (56.7%)
2008 BBWAA (65.9%)
2009 BBWAA (67.0%)
2010 BBWAA (77.9%)
Selected to HOF in 2010 by BBWAA
BR lists this for every candidate that was ever on a ballot
Than he should never vote for him.Quote:
Originally Posted by ragecage
If you think the player is a Hall of Famer, the only legitimate excuse for not voting for him is if there are 10 more deserving players on the ballot. Everything else - the "sanctity" of the first ballot, "punishment" for a spitting incident, or whatever - is the writers making up their own rules
where?Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Below all the stats...where it lists the appearances on leader boards and such.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
Is Ralph Kiner the player that made it by like one vote on his last ballot?
I mean wow, close
1960 BBWAA ( 1.1%)
1962 BBWAA ( 3.1%)
1964 BBWAA (15.4%)
1964 Run Off ( 1.5%)
1966 BBWAA (24.5%)
1967 BBWAA (42.5%)
1967 Run Off (13.4%)
1968 BBWAA (41.7%)
1969 BBWAA (40.3%)
1970 BBWAA (55.7%)
1971 BBWAA (58.9%)
1972 BBWAA (59.3%)
1973 BBWAA (61.8%)
1974 BBWAA (58.9%)
1975 BBWAA (75.4%)
Hey me too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
if you get mlb network, turn it on right now
He could've gotten 1 less vote and made it still, but 2 less votes he would've been out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
it's noble sharing his reasons for leaving Alomar off the ballot
wonder what kind of campaign was put on for him based on that large jump at the end.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Noble
Herschbeck said Alomar apologized to him, Noble replied saying that it still offended him and that no body apologized to him.
I will allow you guys to reply to that on your own.
He needs to quit his ridiculous moralizing and stupid reasoning. Yes, Alomar sucked with the Mets. What's that have to do with voting for him this year, even though you agree his overall career makes him a Hall of Famer? It's ridiculous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
and he is defending moments where Alomar "didn't care"
yup.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
Exact quotes
from http://www.drunkjaysfans.com/2010/01/alomar-waits.htmlQuote:
The best we’ve got so far is from Marty Noble of MLB.com, who prefaces his ****ing argument by calling Alomar “the best second baseman since Joe Morgan – and probably the best ever.”
However, he “doesn't deserve my vote for at least one year because of two spitting instances,” Noble explains. “We're all aware of the one involving John Hirschbeck. I don't care that Hirschbeck forgave Alomar for spitting at him; I haven't. It was unacceptable behavior. And during his 222-game tour with the Mets, Alomar repeatedly spit in the face of the game by playing with conspicuous apathy.”
Heyman or Reynolds should bring up how Babe Ruth punched an umpire or how Juan Marichal pummeled Johnny Roseboro's head with a bat.
This is a guy who became a famous writing for making coloring books
haha, it looks like all three guys were just very annoyed with Noble...I'm assuming you watched that interview?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoustonGM
http://www.spartantailgate.com/forum...hall-fame.html
I'm posting as Truman Capote.
And no, it is not an intelligent baseball forum. It's a veritable wasteland of baseball knowledge, and quite often I'm attacked for trying to raise its profile.
The last half of it I guess. I turned it on when I read your post.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
Jeffy is clearly the superior writing to Marty Noble. :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeffy25
And... why does it matter as long as Noble votes for him next year?
Although... Noble's ballot was Dave Parker and Barry Larkin- that's just silly.
I like your description. I'm pumped for Book of Eli now.Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
I just don't see why if the guy is a hall of famer, then why are you "punishing him" and making him wait a year because of something he did that you take offense to?Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
If you're gonna vote for him one day, vote for him now....it's terrible logic.
No beat down required. Just the facts man. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
5 hitters in the history of the Rockies circa 1993 through 2005 have had a significant amount of plate appearances with both the Rockies and teams other than the Rockies and have been able to hit to at least an OPS+ of 100 with the Rockies (otherwise [*ahem* Eric Young, Walt Weiss etc] they would be wasting our time). The Blake Street 5 are Andres Galarraga, Vinny Castilla, Dante Bishit, Ellis Burks, and Larry Walker. The humidor was put to work in 2002, but the Batting/Pitching park effects remained kind of crazy until they started to settle down in 2006. First up, their WAR per 600 PA with teams other than the Rockies:
Galarraga: 1.48
Castilla: 0.27
Bishit: 0.05 (see what I mean? but wait for it, it gets better ;) )
Burks: 3.64
Walker: 4.30
Now during the time when they called the shooting gallery known as Coors Field/Mile High Stadium home:
Galarraga: 2.44
Castilla: 2.04
Bishit: 0.25 (told ya - hahaha ;) )
Burks: 3.16 (Hmm...he went down)
Walker: 5.52
Now let's mash all 5 of them together, just for fun. WAR per 600 PA:
with other teams: 2.21
with Rockies: 2.70
Is there an inflationary effect? Probably. Is it statistically significant? I don't know, I'm not a Stats major, but if I had to guess, I'd say probably, but I don't think it's as significant as you're assuming it to be HAC. You see, you have to factor in the fact that the 3 OF in this sample would have to run 9 miles in a spacious outfield to track down fly balls and line drives that are hit harder and further because of the thin air. The outfielders will probably take some defensive hitpoints, but that's just a guess. If they did, it would push their WAR downward. I don't know whether or not the ball would be on Galarraga or Castilla quicker at the corners, but I'd assume not, due to the shorter distance involved. Also, how much of a running game would the Rockies have employed during their games in Denver? It makes sense to not run into outs when you're going to score a gazillion runs with the long ball. The baserunning component of their WAR probably takes a hit here too, but again that's just a guess.
As for Walker, well 4.3 WAR per full year is all-star calibre and that's what he did when he wasn't with the Rockies. With them he became an absolute beast. He was there from his age 28 through age 37 (until he was dealt to the Cards mid-season) seasons. If a player is to make the HOF or have a legit case for it (as Walker does) he has to have great seasons not only in his 20s, but also into his late 30s and he did that. Bye the bye just for comparisons sake: WAR per 600 PA:
non-Rockies Walker: 4.30
Rockies Walker: 5.52
Overall Walker: 5.01
The Hawk: 3.16
Not...even...close. Hawk: Hall of Very Good (not even as good as Ellis f**cking Burks on a per 600 PA basis); Walker: Hall of Fame. :D ;)
I'm not so sure Walker makes the Hall of Fame. I'd have to look over his numeros first.
actionjackson, I think having a higher average WAR with the Rockies probably means nothing. Andres Galarraga debuted with the Expos, and usually players aren't immediately good players, and his last few years with the Expos and his season with the Cardinals were marred by injuries. Then he played for Colorado and was healthy and finished out his career from age 37 on with other teams. I think that's why his WAR was higher with Colorado - it was really theonly time in his career where he was healthy and not nearing 40.
Castilla played for Colorado from ages 25-31 (and again at age 36)...the usual peak years of a player's career. Again, it should be expected for him to be better in those years than outside of them.
Dante Bichette's increase with Colorado is minimal, but again, he started and ended his career with other teams while playing in Colorado from ages 29-35, and his career itself has the profile of a "late bloomer" (didn't debut until age 24, first full season at age 27), so it's not unreasonable to assume that 29-35 was simply the prime of his career.
Burks went down so that doesn't need to be addressed...and Walker, again, started and ended with another team while playing with Colorado from ages 28 to 36.
He probably won't make the actual Hall of Fame.Quote:
Originally Posted by metsguy234
Ugh, my brain hurt after reading about 5 posts. I know you're a Michigander, but would you expect people on a site that appears to discuss Michigan State sports to not hold Morris up as God while wondering who the f**k this Bert Blyleven guy thinks he is and could he please get the f**k off the ballot so that this fire-breathing, pitch-to-the-score, intense, fierce competitor of a front line grade A ace can take his rightful place in Cooperstown? Just sayin' ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by haveacigar
And me too. I guess that it isn't that unusual.Quote:
Originally Posted by OregonDuck1989