HOF Announcement

Jan-05-2011, 02:04 PM

Alomar and Blyleven make the hall. Source: KNBR radio.

Jan-05-2011, 02:06 PM

Alomar 90%, Blyleven 79%.

...I'm surprised Morris and Larkin not in....mmmm, actually I'm not.

**wvkeeper** · Jan-05-2011, 02:07 PM

Roberto Alomar 523 (90.0%), Bert Blyleven 463 (79.7%), Barry Larkin 361 (62.1%), Jack Morris 311 (53.5%), Lee Smith 263 (45.3%), Jeff Bagwell 242 (41.7%), Tim Raines 218 (37.5%), Edgar Martinez 191 (32.9%), Alan Trammell 141 (24.3%), Larry Walker 118 (20.3%), Mark McGwire 115 (19.8%), Fred McGriff 104 (17.9%), Dave Parker 89 (15.3%), Don Mattingly 79 (13.6%), Dale Murphy 73 (12.6%), Rafael Palmeiro 64 (11.0%), Juan Gonzalez 30 (5.2%),

Jan-05-2011, 02:12 PM

Larkin, Morris , Raines and Smith should be in the hall. Hey Voters, do the right thing.

**wvkeeper** · Jan-05-2011, 02:32 PM

Next year I bet Barry Larkin is the only one chosen. Looking at the ones left there is no one other than maybe Lee Smith who would make that big of a jump and then in 2012 the deck gets stacked.

Jan-05-2011, 02:42 PM

And I'd bet you were right. I find something very wrong with the Voters though not to vote in Morris, Raines, and Smith. It doesn't make sense. I watched these guy play and followed their careers. they are Hofers, imo.

**vandelay industries** · Jan-05-2011, 03:58 PM

Originally Posted by sjdrewk

And I'd bet you were right. I find something very wrong with the Voters though not to vote in Morris, Raines, and Smith. It doesn't make sense. I watched these guy play and followed their careers. they are Hofers, imo.

I don't think that Jack Morris is HOF material.

**jnn123** · Jan-05-2011, 04:11 PM

Bagwell only getting 41.7% is ridiculous. I don't know that there was a more obvious choice on the ballot. Larkin should definitely be in as well. He's pretty clearly a top 10 SS of all time.

**vandelay industries** · Jan-05-2011, 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by jnn123

Bagwell only getting 41.7% is ridiculous. I don't know that there was a more obvious choice on the ballot. Larkin should definitely be in as well. He's pretty clearly a top 10 SS of all time.

I agree about Bagwell.

He's never been truly linked to any PED's, but I think that just due to when he played he's getting wrongly lumped in.

**Kipper** · Jan-05-2011, 04:23 PM

Shame that Dave Parker is gettign less votes than a steroid user in Mark McGwire

Morris is a tough one. He should get in but I'm not sure he gets in over some of the others right now. He's a guy you can't look at his entire body of work. You have to look at his prime years of Age 26-32 and in those years Jack Morris was a **** good pitcher. His overall numbers get dragged down because he kept pitching until he was 39 and his numbers took a hit due to him deciding to keep playing. I prefer to look at the prime years of a player in general. Morris was good

**Kipper** · Jan-05-2011, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by vandelay industries

I agree about Bagwell.

He's never been truly linked to any PED's, but I think that just due to when he played he's getting wrongly lumped in.

I don't know Vandy. You're talking about a guy who hit a career high 47 homers at the age of 32 during the steroid era. 42 homers at the age of 31...

It's debatable for sure but when it comes to that era you really cannot assume anything was clean

**vandelay industries** · Jan-05-2011, 04:30 PM

Originally Posted by Kipper

Shame that Dave Parker is gettign less votes than a steroid user in Mark McGwire

Morris is a tough one. He should get in but I'm not sure he gets in over some of the others right now. He's a guy you can't look at his entire body of work. You have to look at his prime years of Age 26-32 and in those years Jack Morris was a **** good pitcher. His overall numbers get dragged down because he kept pitching until he was 39 and his numbers took a hit due to him deciding to keep playing. I prefer to look at the prime years of a player in general. Morris was good

Unless you get a guy like Koufax, who was God-like for 5 years or so, then I think that a HOFer needs a great sustained career though.

Otherwise you'd have guys like Kevin Brown or Cecil Fielder (as just two examples off the top of my head of guys like Morris who had a very good 5 year run but pedestrian rest of their career) making the HOF.

**vandelay industries** · Jan-05-2011, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by Kipper

I don't know Vandy. You're talking about a guy who hit a career high 47 homers at the age of 32 during the steroid era. 42 homers at the age of 31...

It's debatable for sure but when it comes to that era you really cannot assume anything was clean

I don't think that 47 homers at age 32 is too ****ing. That's about the end of a lot of player's prime, especially one of a superior athlete or player like Bagwell who's prime may last a year or two longer than Johnny Ballplayer.

Don't get me wrong, it can very easily be a sign of PED's and it's hard to look at any numbers from 1995-2005 without being skeptical, but I'm in the opinion that unless there's been a clear link (Mitchell Report mention etc) of a player then he should be ok.

**Kipper** · Jan-05-2011, 04:45 PM

Originally Posted by vandelay industries

I don't think that 47 homers at age 32 is too ****ing. That's about the end of a lot of player's prime, especially one of a superior athlete or player like Bagwell who's prime may last a year or two longer than Johnny Ballplayer.

Don't get me wrong, it can very easily be a sign of PED's and it's hard to look at any numbers from 1995-2005 without being skeptical, but I'm in the opinion that unless there's been a clear link (Mitchell Report mention etc) of a player then he should be ok.

47 at that age during an era of juicing which also happened to be a career high as well...

I always liked Bagwell as a player but there's no way I can look at his stats and not be at least 50/50 on him taking PED's.

If it were about Bagwell vs. players of his era that would be one thing but Bagwell vs. Larkin, or any other player before him outside of the Roid era is tough. I'd probably shy away from Bagwell at this point as well. It's not like some others aren't deserving of being in

**Kipper** · Jan-05-2011, 04:51 PM

Originally Posted by vandelay industries

Unless you get a guy like Koufax, who was God-like for 5 years or so, then I think that a HOFer needs a great sustained career though.

Otherwise you'd have guys like Kevin Brown or Cecil Fielder (as just two examples off the top of my head of guys like Morris who had a very good 5 year run but pedestrian rest of their career) making the HOF.

I disagree. I think some players simply play longer than they should. There's some players whose overall stats look better because they hung them up earlier or played a lot less. You look at a guy like Jack Morris, he wasn't as dominating outside of his prime but he was still a serviceable vet. Still, it took a toll on his overall numbers. You break down the career of a player though and look at his prime years 1st (like I would) and then look at his post-prime years and the story can change on a player.

Kevin Brown had an interesting catreer. Here's a guy whose best numbers come after his prime and during the PED era.... I don't see much wrong with a consideration for a guy like Kevin Brown. The PED era stuff if I were a writer, I wouldn't grant to Brown but ignoring that, Brown's personal "prime years" were very good.

Personally I think an athlete especially anymore with the way they're pampered only has a about 5-6 prime window. After that so much can be influenced by injuries and a person's body aging etc.. Perhaps their position. Pitchers are definitely in that range of 5 years or so prime to me