MLB 2013

[Rasix]

I love me some Kenny Lofton (go UofA), but no.  Gawd no.

edit: Woah, .299 career average.  I didn't know that.   His career stats really aren't that bad. 

[Ingmar]

Lofton is really underrated, borderline case. I'd be comfortable with a Hall of Fame where Lofton is the worst player in it. (And of course he wouldn't be, thanks to the Veteran's Committee...)

[ghost]

I think I just pulled off my first successful intentional troll.    


Lofton absolutely does not belong in the HOF. 

[Ingmar]

His defensive value - which was high - doesn't really show up in the stat line. A lot of players, center fielders in particular, in that mold are underrated and Lofton is one of the best of those guys - high on-base, great defense, good baserunner, but doesn't have flashy power numbers etc. He's just a touch behind the *average* center fielder in the HoF for career value, which puts him squarely in the 'should be considered' zone. I think he's got a good shot at a Vet's committee induction eventually.

[ghost]

I think the chances of that are very, very low. 

[Ginaz]

His defensive value - which was high - doesn't really show up in the stat line. A lot of players, center fielders in particular, in that mold are underrated and Lofton is one of the best of those guys - high on-base, great defense, good baserunner, but doesn't have flashy power numbers etc. He's just a touch behind the *average* center fielder in the HoF for career value, which puts him squarely in the 'should be considered' zone. I think he's got a good shot at a Vet's committee induction eventually.

Defensive ability seems to be the last thing considered in these things.  Another great center fielder playing at the same time as Lofton was Devon White.  White's offensive numbers were average at best but I've never seen another center fielder play his position as smoothly as White.  Lofton was probably just as good in the field as White was but his offensive stats were far and away superior.  I didn't realize Lofton was so productive for so long and I don't think I'd have a problem with him being in the HoF.  But I agree, he's borderline and would be a good cut off point for future voting for center fielders.

[Ingmar]

Honestly I think part of Lofton's problem is his career stats look all choppy when you look at them because he was traded mid-season several times later in his career. It makes it look like he was hanging around forever having bad seasons, when really he was hanging around almost-forever having decent-to-good ones.

[Nebu]

Defensive ability seems to be the last thing considered in these things.  Another great center fielder playing at the same time as Lofton was Devon White.  White's offensive numbers were average at best but I've never seen another center fielder play his position as smoothly as White.

Andruw Jones, Kirby Puckett, Jim Edmunds, Otis Nixon, Carlos Beltran, Lenny Dykstra, Doug Glanville, Willie Wilson, Darren Lewis, Amos Otis, Kenny Lofton, and Gary Maddox come to mind.  

Damn, forgot Eddie Milner.

[Ingmar]

Andruw Jones is a good example of guy who went from seemingly a lock for the HOF to borderline at best. It's going to be very hard for a player who lost his full time job at the age of 31 to get in, no matter how good he was before that. If he'd retired or something he could use the Koufax argument - at his peak he was pretty dominant -  and those later part-time years are mostly better than they look at first glance, but yeah. Going to Japan at age 34 makes his chances almost zero, and the whole beating up his wife thing isn't going to do him any favors as that will be one of the last things people remember about him. Mind you, I don't actually believe the writers give a shit about that sort of thing, the character clause is for STEROIDS ONLY as far as they're concerned.

Edmonds isn't eligible yet but I believe he will make the HOF, at his peak he was a fantastic hitter on top of the regular CF skillset. Beltran has a good case building, for the same reason. Puckett is in already, of course (speaking of guys with at least as much of a character clause issue as a lot of guys who are getting painted as steroid users), nobody else there really is close but most of them were underrated during their careers.

[ghost]

I have a real issue with those kind of guys-  the ones that "hang around forever having decent-to-good ones".  I believe that to be in the HOF you really should have at least one truly transcendental year (like Larry Walker and his MVP year or Bagwell and his MVP year).  To me being consistently pretty good isn't a great formula for picking the best to ever play the sport.  Sure, you have to be consistent over a career.  I think the consistency is a requirement, but I also think "best in the game" type seasons should be too.  Example-  Raffy Palmeiro.  He hit in the 30s and 40s for home runs almost every year of his career and had a .288 average with low deviation.  I don't think he belongs just because he put up big numbers for his career.

[Ingmar]

I have a real issue with those kind of guys-  the ones that "hang around forever having decent-to-good ones".  I believe that to be in the HOF you really should have at least one truly transcendental year (like Larry Walker and his MVP year or Bagwell and his MVP year).  To me being consistently pretty good isn't a great formula for picking the best to ever play the sport.  Sure, you have to be consistent over a career.  I think the consistency is a requirement, but I also think "best in the game" type seasons should be too.  Example-  Raffy Palmeiro.  He hit in the 30s and 40s for home runs almost every year of his career and had a .288 average with low deviation.  I don't think he belongs just because he put up big numbers for his career.

Lofton had that year in '94. When you add his defense in I believe he should have won the MVP over Frank Thomas. Granted, it was a strike-shortened year.

[ghost]

I'll give that a maybe. 

[Ingmar]

As it turns out there was just an article about the HOF shorting center fielders: http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/31978/the-underappreciated-bernie-williams

[ghost]

I would actually be much more in favor of Bernie Williams over Lofton, for several reasons:  1.  He was with one team his entire career, unlike Lofton who was with 11 or 12.  And you'll probably say that "yeah, but his most productive years were with the Indians in that 7 year stretch in the beginning".  Yes, but that's the point-  if he didn't have the extra years of shit padded on  we certainly wouldn't be having a discussion about him.  Jumping around also means that no team though he was valuable enough to keep, which makes me think that he isn't valuable enough for the HOF.  2.  Williams was a winner.  I appreciate winning and I think there are things that go into winning that don't show up on the stat sheet.  Yes, he played for the Yankees, but it's still tough to win the WS as we've seen wit the recent results from the "throw the bank at it" payrolls.  He was also very good in the playoffs (something that is a legitimate knock against Biggio and Bagwell). 

But we won't have to deal with either Williams or Lofton any more because they both got less than 5% of the vote. 

[Nebu]

They are both good defensive players with very different approaches at the plate.  Lofton had value for being a dangerous baserunner with a decent OBP.  Williams had the advantage of being able to hit later in the order due to his power (0.50 better Slugging and a lot more HR).  Both had similar BB/SO ratios.  Looking over their career stats, they are surprisingly similar otherwise.  I'd say that is pretty impressive for Lofton as much as he was bounced around in the league he was able to maintain a pretty high standard.  If Lofton were a career 0.300 hitter (instead of 0.299), I think he may have been a lock for the 2nd ballot.   

Overall, I think the reason that Lofton ranks consistently higher in his rating against Williams would be because leadoff hitters in skill positions hold a lot of value and are harder to find.  

[Ingmar]

If Lofton had come up as a Yankee you can be sure he would have spent his whole career or most of it with one team as well. Bouncing around in all those midseason trades is really out of his control; it happened because he was a valuable commodity on bad teams.

[Slayerik]

I'm not sure why all the Jack Morris hate. I'm a Detroit homer, and watched him as a young lad...but here are some good points for him:


whole detroit free press story here: http://www.freep.com/article/20130110/SPORTS02/301100188/Ex-Tiger-Jack-Morris-deserved-Hall-of-Fame-nod-due-to-long-run-as-ace-postseason?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CDetroit%20Tigers


"Petry pitched with Morris for nine years in Detroit. He saw things -- Hall of Fame things -- that weren't easy to measure.

"He won big games," Petry said. "(And) if he won, 6-5, oh well. He was out there long enough to do it."

A point, said Dan Dickerson, that should be considered when deciding how to vote.

"He pitched eight innings or more almost half of the starts of his career," said Dickerson, a Tigers radio play-by-play announcer. "He was the ace. And I think the postseason does count."

Morris' supporters point to his postseason performance as reason No. 1 -- well, that and the fact that he won more games than any other pitcher in the '80s.

"I think the postseason does count," said Dickerson, who acknowledged that Morris' candidacy is somewhat unconventional because his career ERA (3.90) is higher than any current Hall of Fame pitcher.

Petry argues said that Morris would simply replace the pitcher who holds that designation now. In other words, so what?"




and another opinion that's on the money IMO

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/mlb/2013/01/09/jack-morris-should-be-in-hall-of-fame/1821091/

For years, there have been people who argued that Morris did not belong in the Hall of Fame. They said he gave up too many runs. During his 18-year career, Morris gave up nearly four runs per nine innings.

But that misses the point.

Morris didn't care whether he won, 6-0 or 6-3. He would go to the mound and take the ball and snarl and challenge hitters and try to get another complete game. If he gave up a home run in a blowout, no big deal.

Morris pitched for 18 years and won 254 games. That's what Morris was about. Winning games. He won four World Series rings, including in 1984. He was the winningest pitcher of the 1980s and a five-time All-Star.

And best of all?

He was clean.

Now, do you want to know the cruel twist of fate?

Maybe Morris didn't get in this year because there was so much focus on the first-time guys on the ballot. The cheaters."

[ghost]

If he was that good the Yankees would have traded for him or signed him as a free agent.  


Also, Jack Morris was a badass.  That doesn't mean I believe he belongs in the HOF though.  I don't think he does.

[Ingmar]

It isn't hate, but the case for Morris simply isn't there statistically. He was a very good pitcher, but there are plenty of better pitchers left out (EDIT: Maybe not plenty, but they certainly exist. He's not even the best snubbed Tigers pitcher, that's Mickey Lolich. Tommy John and Luis Tiant also come to mind, and that's not including the guys on this ballot who didn't get in - Clemens, Schilling.) His one and only remarkable talent was having a pretty indestructible arm. It's telling how everyone who says he should get in in those articles essentially pins their argument on 'well he tried really hard' rather than something actually supportable.

The 'won most games in the 80s' argument is among the dumbest, honestly; not only because pitching wins are overrated as a start but because there's a bunch of artificial value being attached to the arbitrary start and end dates because they happen to line up with where the 10s digit in the years change.

I also see no particular reason to believe he was clean. Remember, everyone is guilty now, regardless of evidence.  

I don't think he gets in now, because a bunch of pitchers who utterly blow him away are about to show up on the ballot next year: Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, and Mike Mussina, and next year is his last year of eligibility. Even if he had 2 more years, Randy Johnson and Pedro Martinez show up the next year I believe.

[Slayerik]

And being clutch. But, I guess you guys have sorta swayed me.

[ghost]

pitching wins are overrated as a start

Everybody loves a loser.   

[Nebu]

As a purist, I think pitchers with less than 200 IP a season did too little work to be statistically significant for HOF consideration.    

Yes, I hate the DH too.

[Paelos]

I dislike WAR in a conversation about the hall of fame.

Other than that, I'm glad nobody got in this year. I hope this trend continues for players with steroid inflated stats.

[Ingmar]

As a purist, I think pitchers with less than 200 IP a season did too little work to be statistically significant for HOF consideration.   

Yes, I hate the DH too.

I kind of go back and forth on that; I think there should be room for truly dominant relief pitchers, but I don't think the voters are going to focus on that so much as questionably valuable stats like saves.

And of course if we really actually give a crap about drug use we should be very suspicious about high innings totals on pitchers from the 60s-80s, as there's a very interesting correlation between pitcher work totals and the years in which amphetamines were being used heavily by players to combat fatigue.

[WayAbvPar]

So, apparently the Mariners managed to negotiate a trade for Justin Upton. Who then blocked it with his limited no trade clause. Sigh. I can't blame him- who would want to join that crap sandwich of a team?

[Paelos]

So, apparently the Mariners managed to negotiate a trade for Justin Upton. Who then blocked it with his limited no trade clause. Sigh. I can't blame him- who would want to join that crap sandwich of a team?

Maybe if they didn't have one of the lowest median salaries in the league?

[WayAbvPar]

FUCK THIS SHITTY TEAM

Unless this is the first step of some clever over-arching plan (it isn't), I am fucking done with these fucking clowns. They already have a logjam at 1B/DH, and needed a 3rd catcher for emergencies if Jaso and Montero were both in the lineup and one of them got hurt or was pinched for...so they trade a catcher (who was also about their best hitter last season) for ANOTHER 1B/DH stiff. FUCK YOU. I really wish I had purchased tickets before this so I could return them and scream at someone. What a fucking joke of a franchise.

[Ingmar]

And they did it in-division! Wow.

[Paelos]

But they need power right? Power?

Right? 

[Teleku]

Billy Beane strikes again!   

[Paelos]

Braves just made a trade for Upton #2. Unfortunately we moved our best hitter and our utility guy to get him in Martin Prado. I am not amused.

[HaemishM]

I... that doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Upton seems to be a better hitter than his brother and Johnson seems a decent hitting 3rd baseman but I'm going to bet the Braves set a record for strikeouts this year. You traded away a 69K guy for 2 guys with over 120K's each. The fuck?

On a good note, at least Atlanta fans won't need fans to watch the games. 

[WayAbvPar]

They are just looking to provide a nice cool evening breeze for Atlantans on those muggy summer nights.

[Paelos]

We are trading for power in the outfield because our numbers in that regard are a disaster. They keep hoping Uggla will turn it around, but the only deep threats on the team were Heyward and Freeman. Chipper could go yard occasionally, but he's gone for good. The other reason is that Upton is younger and cheaper than Prado, who balked at the Braves prelim offer and wanted to go to arbitration. That's a first class ticket out of town in this organization. The last guy to try it was Franceour, and the Braves moved him to the Royals as a fuck you. The major problem is that we're owned by a corp that sees the team as a tax writeoff, and we're hamstrung by a sweetheart TV deal Ted Turner cut before he sold the team until 2030.

My BIG problem with this move is that solo dingers don't mean shit. We have to have people base to make them matter.

[ghost]

The top 10 outfields in history, according to ESPN Insider:  


And Honorable mention:

I think it's bullshit to have the 1927 Yankees behind the 1995 Indians.  So........discuss.