Is Edgar Martinez a Hall of Famer?

[HoustonGM]

3. His numbers were great though stand-alone not HOF worthy.

His counting totals maybe not, but that's because he wasn't a huge home run hitter. .312/.418/.515 are Hall-worthy numbers, easily. 147 career OPS+, as well.

1. IMO, he's included in the 'roid' era and discussion.

So is every single other player that played at all in this time period. This is not a "Con" to anybody's Hall of Fame argument, unless they're explicitly linked to steroids.

Second, I think that there is some evidence that he was better than is suggested by his stats--namely, the Marineers kept him in the minors well after he was ready to play in the bigs.

I didn't follow baseball back then, but, I'd guess that it was largely due to his defensive incapabilities...



I'd vote for Edgar. I think he'll eventually get in, but that it'll take a while for the writers to come around on him.

[HoustonGM]

His numbers don't merit HOF worthiness. 2200 hits, 300 HRs??

That's an awfully limited view of looking at his numbers.

The .312 BA is impressive..

So is the .418 OBP. The only eligible players with higher OBP's than that (min. 3000 PA's) that aren't in the HOF are Bill Joyce, Ferris Fain, and Max Bishop, and they all had very short careers, and only Joyce had power.

Not a HOF'er...or at least I have yet to see a valid reason as to why.

Because he was a VERY GREAT hitter, even adjusting for his era.

[dickay]

So is every single other player that played at all in this time period. This is not a "Con" to anybody's Hall of Fame argument, unless they're explicitly linked to steroids.

That isn't true.....the numbers of players 'in this steriod era' have been viewed as bloated. Players in this 'era' have to get by the question, is his 300HR's the same as XYZ's 300 HRs from the 60s and 70s. Thats why many say 600 is the new 500. There is no question offensive production has increased through this era, and offensive production is ALL we have to judge Martinez on. It is a con for everyone in this era.

Martinez has never been proven of taking roids, but neither has 95% of MLB players during this era. All there is out there is speculation. Speculation is why Mark McGwire is not in the HOF. Speculation is why many claim they won't vote for Clemens.

And for Mariner fans wondering when Martinez was ever mentioned with roids, google Shane Monahan. Are you guys really that naive to think these guys didn't roid it up? I personally think 75% of MLB players over the last 10-20 years have.

[dickay]

Oh...and other 'admitted' roid users during Martinez's career with the Mariners include;

David Segui
Shane Monahan
Glenallen Hill
Ryan Franklin
Todd Williams

We couple that with Buhner and Boone collapses. Griffey and Martinez's 'health' issues. Griffey's 'close' relationship with Bonds. It's alot of inuendo but alot of reason for speculation.

[HoustonGM]

That isn't true.....the numbers of players 'in this steriod era' have been viewed as bloated. Players in this 'era' have to get by the question, is his 300HR's the same as XYZ's 300 HRs from the 60s and 70s. Thats why many say 600 is the new 500. There is no question offensive production has increased through this era, and offensive production is ALL we have to judge Martinez on. It is a con for everyone in this era.

That's like saying that playing in the Deadball Era is a con for pitchers.

Playing in a high offensive environment is not a "con." You just simply need to take context into account.

Martinez has never been proven of taking roids, but neither has 95% of MLB players during this era. All there is out there is speculation. Speculation is why Mark McGwire is not in the HOF. Speculation is why many claim they won't vote for Clemens.

Yep, and I think that's sad.

And for Mariner fans wondering when Martinez was ever mentioned with roids, google Shane Monahan. Are you guys really that naive to think these guys didn't roid it up?

Nope. Never said that.

I personally think 75% of MLB players over the last 10-20 years have.

So do I, or around that amount, which is why I think penalizing or downgrading players in the least bit should not be done without proof.

[boomboom]

the numbers of players 'in this steriod era' have been viewed as bloated. Players in this 'era' have to get by the question, is his 300HR's the same as XYZ's 300 HRs from the 60s and 70s. Thats why many say 600 is the new 500. There is no question offensive production has increased through this era, and offensive production is ALL we have to judge Martinez on. It is a con for everyone in this era.

Because he was a VERY GREAT hitter, even adjusting for his era.

See HGM POST, even verses his era, he was a fantastic hitter.

[dickay]

That's like saying that playing in the Deadball Era is a con for pitchers.

Playing in a high offensive environment is not a "con." You just simply need to take context into account.


Yep, and I think that's sad.


Nope. Never said that.


So do I, or around that amount, which is why I think penalizing or downgrading players in the least bit should not be done without proof.

OK....so you agree Martinez might have been a roid'ee....as there is alot of valid speculation that many were in that/this era. What I"m saying, is that MANY voters now are seeing the benchmarks for HOF worthiness being elevated due to statistics during this era being unquestionably bloated. With that in mind, It is unlikely that Martinez's 'borderline or even nearly sub-marginal' stats are not going to be worthy with those who vote.

Right or wrong, thats for everyone to decide individually. The question was will he make the HOF...and with how everyone is voting I say absolutely not.

[HoustonGM]

OK....so you agree Martinez might have been a roid'ee....as there is alot of valid speculation that many were in that/this era. What I"m saying, is that MANY voters now are seeing the benchmarks for HOF worthiness being elevated due to statistics during this era being unquestionably bloated. With that in mind, It is unlikely that Martinez's 'borderline or even nearly sub-marginal' stats are not going to be worthy with those who vote.

Right or wrong, thats for everyone to decide individually. The question was will he make the HOF...and with how everyone is voting I say absolutely not.

Well, the question actually was "Is Edgar Martinez a Hall of Famer?" and that, to me, implies your personal opinion, not what you think will happen. (Although, then throwing the "Maybe eventually" response as an option makes it seem like he's asking whether or not you think he'll make it. The third option should really be "Undecided" if the question is "Do you think he belongs?")

As I said in my first post, he's a Hall of Famer in my opinion, but I think it'll be an uphill battle for him to get elected by the writers, for the reasons you stated.

[dickay]

See HGM POST, even verses his era, he was a fantastic hitter.

ugh..he was a fantastic hitter, but not HOF worthy. The numbers speak. As mentioned earlier, I think it was only Cepeda mentioned with similar numbers, and Cepeda went to multiple WS's, was an MVP, ROY, and I thought won a few gold gloves but can't find it. Regardless he was seen as a good fielder.

[HoustonGM]

ugh..he was a fantastic hitter, but not HOF worthy. The numbers speak. As mentioned earlier, I think it was only Cepeda mentioned with similar numbers, and Cepeda went to multiple WS's, was an MVP, ROY, and I thought won a few gold gloves but can't find it. Regardless he was seen as a good fielder.

Cepeda was only a similar hitter in raw counting totals.

Edgar Martinez - .312/.418/.515, 147 OPS+
Orlando Cepeda - .297/.350/.499, 133 OPS+

[dickay]

Well, the question actually was "Is Edgar Martinez a Hall of Famer?" and that, to me, implies your personal opinion, not what you think will happen.

As I said in my first post, he's a Hall of Famer in my opinion, but I think it'll be an uphill battle for him to get elected by the writers, for the reasons you stated.

My personal opinion is that steriod era aside he doesn't have HOF credentials. I have yet to hear a valid argument putting his stats as HOF worthy. I hear the DH re-defined argument, but in my opinion that isn't a selling point. There are many big time closers who re-defined the closer role in the last 20 years not getting consideration (Lee Smith for example). Heck it took Goose how long to get in?

[dickay]

Cepeda was only a similar hitter in raw counting totals.

Edgar Martinez - .312/.418/.515, 147 OPS+
Orlando Cepeda - .297/.350/.499, 133 OPS+

What did he do with those numbers though? Longevity is a crucial component to a HOF'er. He got 2200 hits and 300 HRs. His RBI numbers I don't believe were significant enough to garner entry. Couple that with the fact he was pretty much a career DH and couldn't play enough to rack up the stats!!

Many great players have had their careers cut short by injury and don't get in. Why would Martinez be different?

[ohms_law]

There are many big time closers who re-defined the closer role in the last 20 years not getting consideration (Lee Smith for example).

Shouldn't they, though?

[HoustonGM]

His overall offensive prowess, being a good amount above average in every area of offense except for speed, does it for me.

[HoustonGM]

What did he do with those numbers though? Longevity is a crucial component to a HOF'er. He got 2200 hits and 300 HRs. His RBI numbers I don't believe were significant enough to garner entry. Couple that with the fact he was pretty much a career DH and couldn't play enough to rack up the stats!!

Or, wasn't given the chance to play enough when he was young.

Many great players have had their careers cut short by injury and don't get in. Why would Martinez be different?

His career wasn't cut short by injury. It was relatively short because he didn't become a fulltime player until he was 27.