Jump to content

DTroppens

1995 voting results

Recommended Posts

We had 20 vote

Elected

Lou Whitaker 20

Kirk Gibson 20

Sparky Anderson 19

Paul Carey 18

John Fetzer 15

Earning votes

Jim Campbell 14

Steve O'Neill 13

Mike Henneman 13

Dan Petry 11

Willie Hernandez 9

Tony Phillips 8

Mickey Tettleton 8

Mayo Smith 6

Dick Tracewski 4

Earl Whitehill 3

Larry Osterman 3

Frank Tanana 2

Mickey Stanley 2

Darrell Evans 1

Steve Kemp 1

Earning No votes

Walt Terrell

Bill Gullickson

Paul Gibson

Dave Bergman

Rob Deer

Aurelio Lopez

Mark Fidrych

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry we were late. This was my fault. I was gone most of the night.

1. Campbell and O'Neill have to get in. That's ridiculously close.

2. Dan Petry really shocked me. I didn't expect him to get so many votes.

3. Looks like Henneman is going to get in before Hernandez.

Thanks everyone for voting throughout. We are getting close to the end. It's been a long process but a rewarding one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are getting close to 50 Tigers in the Hall. That really seems like a good number to start at for the rest to be judged. That's working out really well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tettleton and Phillips, especially Phillips deserved more. I still can't believe Mickey Stanley found his way onto ballots this week.

Unfortunately, it's going to be just as loaded next week as far as players. With only two players elected, they are replaced on the ballot by deserving players in Fielder and Fryman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whitehill is better than Petry. Not by an egregious amount, but he is. That said, I don't really mind the support Petry got, though it might have been a little much. Some people are probably putting Whitehill's candidacy on hold for now. I don't agree with it but I understand it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Whitehill is better than Petry. Not by an egregious amount, but he is. That said, I don't really mind the support Petry got, though it might have been a little much. Some people are probably putting Whitehill's candidacy on hold for now. I don't agree with it but I understand it.

I'm putting Whitehill on hold, since there are so many others who are just as worthy on these ballots. Tony Phillips straight up deserves more support. At this point, it's about keeping people alive. I know that Whitehill can make it to the 2005 ballot without any more support and is close to being a guarantee on the 2008 ballot. I also know that there are some out there who just won't vote for him and wouldn't vote for him on this ballot. I felt a vote for Whitehill in 1995 and now 2000 would be a lost cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are so few votes for so many people. It's hard to say who really deserved more. Kemp and Evans don't deserve just one vote, but how were you going to make room for them? Henneman or Hernandez? It seemed you had to make room for one to get others you wanted on the ballot.

Mickey Stanley is a mystery to me. Liked him or not, he doesn't compare to about 10 people on the ballot. It's hard for me to see how he's in anyone's top five. Tettleton, Phillips and several others are suffering from the numbers crunch You simply can't vote for all of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately, it's going to be just as loaded next week as far as players. With only two players elected, they are replaced on the ballot by deserving players in Fielder and Fryman.

Wow, I'm tired and completely forgot the 12th greatest Tiger of all time... This ballot is just as loaded with carryovers.

Time to campaign for Kemp and Phillips... starting after a good night's sleep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess one of the issues I have with this era is that the Tigers just weren't that good. You can argue it was the pitching that hurt this squad but for the most part they had a great offense. That's true. But it's going to be hard for me to want to put a load of players from this era into the Hall. It's just a tough call how to deal with this, especially when so many are begging for one of just five votes. It's not going to get any easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1993 offense was arguably the best in the team's history, and frankly most of the hitters of the early 90's era that are up for consideration deserve it. It's really not their fault that Mike Moore, Tim Belcher, and John Doherty were terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm befuddled about the Mickey Stanley support as well.

The Frank Tanana support is purely "I remember that guy" nostalgia votes. Take a look back at Vic Sorrell (1940 ballot). The guy got zero votes on a weaker ballot. Now tell me Frank Tanana is better than Vic Sorrell. He isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm interested to see how much or little support Fryman gets.

Trammell and Fielder are locks for me. Fyman is clearly a solid candidate.

This is what I see:

Phillips, Tettleton, Fielder, Fryman and eventually Clark, Higginson and a few others. Was this little 10-14 year era really that "loaded with talent" that it commands this many players? Heck, Gibson, Whitaker and Trammell are other people that were position players in this era as well. Does it really command about 9-10 position players when other eras don't have that? I really don't know about that. But the numbers can look impressive. But they are all about the same. So does that mean every one of them should be in? Augh. It really does cloud the head. And we haven't even thrown in the carryovers like Kemp and Evans to the mix - or any pitchers for that matter that do deserve a look like the two Hs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is the free agency era clouding things a bit. Whereas in old days when guys were on the team for 10-20 years, they are essentially being split into two or three careers (if that makes any sense at all). There are just more quality candidates without there necesarily being a more quality team.

Travis Fryman is the best 3B in team history based on every study I've done so far... better than marginal Hall of Famers like Kell and Boone. He belongs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1993 offense was good but I don't know if it was the best ever. 1984 compares very well and some key offensive players on that team are struggling to stay on the ballot. Some other years that certainly compare well have to be 1908, 1921, 1922, 1934, 1935, 1940, 1961 and 1968.

Plus Whitaker, Gibson and Trammell are already in for that season. Fielder certainly is in.

Tettleton really didn't have a position. He was pretty bad at catcher, first base or the outfield. Of course his offensive numbers are hard to deny (I loved watching him bat for sure) but then you have Fryman as well. God, that's more than half of that team's starting lineup making it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edman,

That's a very good point. You stay for five years and then another guy or maybe two can be very good as well to replace you and also be HOF material. We are running into that here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have really fallen into the "players we grew up watching" stage. Was Phillips that good, or Fielder or even Tettleton? This HOF shouldn't be based on what we grew up watching. I went into this to learn about the former Tigers that I didn't grow up with. I'll ask you all this... How can any of the foremention players be better than guys like Coveleski, Rogell and even (I'm sorry to say) Whitehill? Tony Phillips was my favorite, the dude could play every position.....HOF not in my book....just my 2 pennies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Squid,

That seems legit but check the numbers - they do have very good numbers even based on their era of increased offense.

One thing I've wondered and maybe Lee or someone can help on this. When offensive numbers are higher is it "easier" or "harder" for a player to get higher production historically. I can see the argument being harder because if the average is X.X, then it's x.x+5 isn't percentage-wise as impressive. However, because offense is so high that means the level of the "average" pitcher has decreased so much that it seems "average" offensive players aren't going to reap the most benfits - the best ones will.

Anyone that can give me help on this one way or the other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Was Phillips that good, or Fielder or even Tettleton?

Yes. Yes. Yes.

I went into this to learn about the former Tigers that I didn't grow up with.

We all did to some degree. That's no reason to cheat worthy players who you just happened to grow up with.

I'll ask you all this... How can any of the foremention players be better than guys like Coveleski, Rogell and even (I'm sorry to say) Whitehill?

The real question is, why can't they be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The place where Squid's viewpoint makes a ton of sense is when comparing these guys to others that played their positions.

Tony Phillips was a very good player - but we never saw him making All-Star teams. How about Bobby Higginson? For as good as some represent him to be (and to a point his stats do as well) he couldn't ever make it to an All-Star game as the Tigers' representative. Does that mean he wasn't a good player? Of course not. But it does show to a point that he wasn't even regarded as one of the elite outfielders of his time. People respected Bobby and they may even respected him because of the cast of players surrounding him during hsi career, but no one was confusing him with the guys that may have earned these honors rather rountinely. If he was that good, he would've been selected to an All-Star game at some time or another. How unlucky can you get? He's not on leaderboards (although he played a lot many years) and he's not a Silver Slugger or anything like that for even a season. Respected? Probably. Feared? Not really. Maybe feared because we didn't have legit All-Star power in the lineup, leaving him as the top hitter, but no one was really thinking him as an established All-Star. If they did, he would've made a few of those lists.

Tony Clark? The same thing pretty much.

Tettleton? I think he had that respect.

But sifting through this is painful. And trying to make the right decisions based on what you aren't sure is really the "right" information is getting and will be getting painful here.

We're at the end here and I'm more confused than ever. Maybe experiencing the players has a large reason for that as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All-Star appearances? Come on, Dave. You know better. I saw you filling out 30+ ballots for a guy who has more extra base hits than all but one player in baseball, and yet you had to write him in. The only player ahead of him in that category also plays for the Tigers and may be the most feared hitter in the league thus far this season. It looks like he too will be sitting at home during the All-Star break.

Don't even get me started on Casey and Pudge.

All-Star appearances are based on a nebulous combination of popularity with the fans, name recognition, team recognition, and reputation from past years. In other words, it's junk science. I know you're too smart of a guy to use that in your own evaluation, and I don't think it should factor into qualifying these players for our HOF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dt,

Only the starters make it on the All-star team that way. Others are selected by the manager of the team. Everyone gets one at least. Star players make it regardless of the system if they are good enough. If Granderson deserves it this year, he's going to get there. Matt Nokes wasn't on the ballot I'm guessing in 1987. Most fans probably don't know who he even was. He was there. You mentioned Magglio. He's gotten there. I also like the MVP voting. People who are good get votes every now and then. Thirty AL players got a least vote somewhere on the ballot last year. Magglio was one of them. So were Rogers, Verlander and Guillen. Look at Silver Sluggers. If a guy holds his weight, he's going to have some of this stuff filtered on his register.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

dt35456884,

About now I would've thought you knew I look at just about everything. I love looking at tools and figuring out why that happened or why not. I find the MVP voting, the SS, the GG and the All-Star appearances as interesting info. Of course all have some issues but used properly to explore for answers they give you some.

Pudge

13-time All-Star

7-time Silver Slugger

6 times has received MVP votes

Did he get some All-Star selections because he's a fan favorite? Maybe. But he's still been there 13 times. Just a couple would really be nice. The No. 13 is almost overkill. He's a 7-time Silver Slugger. Again a way of suggesting he was the best hitter at his position for at least a few years. And the MVP votes show someone thought he had some solid seasons.

I think that tells you something about Pudge. I don't think you need to look at a stat after that to realize this guy is probably a pretty solid player. Of course you do look but that tells you something right there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I don't get is how everyone thinks Tettleton is almost a lock and Darrell Evans gets only 5 votes, then 1 vote. Look at the numbers, they are almost identical. How can one be a virtual lock and the other doesn't get any support whatsoever?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...