Jump to content

RedRamage

Putting Tram and Lou in the Hall together?

Recommended Posts

I think Larry Walker and Dale Murphy might be on it in place of a couple of those guys.

Does it say anywhere who the voters are?  Would be great to launch a Twitter campaign.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Tenacious D said:

I think Larry Walker and Dale Murphy might be on it in place of a couple of those guys.

Does it say anywhere who the voters are?  Would be great to launch a Twitter campaign.

I am going to tweet old articles I wrote about Whitaker and Trammell over the next couple of weeks.  I know I have zero influence, but I will do my part to get the train going.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Oblong said:

So really.... if you are Ryne Sandberg or Andy McPhail (I just made those up based on a list I saw of previous members of a veterans' committee)... you are tasked with looking at potential new HOFers and given this list... 

I am starting to agree with Chas.  I don't see how you can look at a list like that and not pick our guys.   

Other guys with great numbers during this period, who might show up on the list, include:

  • Craig Nettles
  • Buddy Bell
  • Darrell Evans
  • Jose Cruz
  • Ron Cey
  • Cesar Cedeno
  • Reggie Smith
  • Toby Harrah
  • Willie Randolph
  • Chet Lemon
  • Ted Simmons
  • Bobby Bonds
  • Sal Bando
  • Fred Lynn
  • Gene Tenace

I picked these guys because they all had a higher WAR during this specific period than Alan Trammell or Lou Whitaker.

It's possible that Trammell and Whitaker could get squeezed off the ballot entirely if they take "this and only this period 1970-1987" seriously. That's why I put the odds of being on the ballot at maybe 80%.

But I would say if Trammell and Whitaker do make the ballot along with any of these guys, as well as any of the guys I listed earlier, it looks really good for them, because of the fame factor on top of their performance record. The only guys I'd be afraid would block them from getting elected is Dwight Evans and Keith Hernandez.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hall of Fame weekend is nice (I was there for Ryan, Brett and Yount - I think it was '99), but the museum is the main draw.

You basically sit in a field for 2 hours and listen to people talk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Guidry had the higher peak.  But Tommy John was pretty good.

I think his name helps him too.  

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

Hall of Fame weekend is nice (I was there for Ryan, Brett and Yount - I think it was '99), but the museum is the main draw.

You basically sit in a field for 2 hours and listen to people talk.

I would withstand that if I could hear Trammell and Whitaker talk.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, chasfh said:

I would withstand that if I could hear Trammell and Whitaker talk.

yeah, I would not attend this event for a non-Tiger but would do it for Whitaker and Trammell.  I am sure it's going to be really crowded and difficult to make reservations.  Cooperstown is a great place when it's not crowded.  Seeing Whitaker and Trammell inducted would be better than the World Series as far as I am concerned though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Biff Mayhem said:

Have you ever heard a Trammell speech?

Both of them will give weak speeches but it's Whitaker and Trammell.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you guys might be giving this baseball committee a little too much credit.  morris is the most likely tiger to get in imo because of the name recognition with the national baseball folks.

trammell and whitaker going in together is the kind of gimmick that might get them more votes, but thats the only way they make it i think.

the new generation of baseball writers amd players may be more sympathetic to trammell and whitaker (and less to morris) because of their numbers, but the old school guys still dominate and so does their old school thinking.

to me, trammell was the better player than whitaker.  he had better seasons and played a tougher defensive position.  lou was healthier and was able to hang on as a dh (and a productive one), but i'll take trammell's peak years over whitakers above-average consistency.

morris is not a hall of famer under any circumstances.  i loved the guy, but he wasnt good enough and his playoff success overshadowed other failures no one likes to talk about.  plus he's a dick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Buddha said:

trammell and whitaker going in together is the kind of gimmick that might get them more votes, but thats the only way they make it i think.

 

It's a gimmick, put not unprecedented.  That is how Tinker, Evers and Chance got in.  I agree that is the only way they could get in though.  They are not going to get in because of sabermetrics or because of any kind of individual achievement.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Buddha said:

you guys might be giving this baseball committee a little too much credit.  morris is the most likely tiger to get in imo because of the name recognition with the national baseball folks.

trammell and whitaker going in together is the kind of gimmick that might get them more votes, but thats the only way they make it i think.

the new generation of baseball writers amd players may be more sympathetic to trammell and whitaker (and less to morris) because of their numbers, but the old school guys still dominate and so does their old school thinking.

to me, trammell was the better player than whitaker.  he had better seasons and played a tougher defensive position.  lou was healthier and was able to hang on as a dh (and a productive one), but i'll take trammell's peak years over whitakers above-average consistency.

morris is not a hall of famer under any circumstances.  i loved the guy, but he wasnt good enough and his playoff success overshadowed other failures no one likes to talk about.  plus he's a dick.

I'm not so sure on the committee.... I don't think this one has been announced but here's one from the last votes they took, I think before the announced the current process.   These are old timey baseball writers.... there's some intelligent people here.

 

Expansion Era Committee members[edit]

Hall of Famers[edit]
Executives[edit]
Media[edit]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think trammell has a decent shot. I guess it depends on the other players that may be on this ballot. If he is one of the top 2 or 3 guys, his chances are pretty good. I think this committee will want to elect someone. 

There seems to be the idea that trammell was robbed of his mvp vote. He played a long time and had good numbers as a shortstop. He was part of the 84 team. He was supposedly likeable.

morris and Lou would be tougher. Lou has the stigma of being off the ballot after a year. Morris got high percentages, but also had a very vocal group that opposed him (and rightly so). I think those things stick with people.

i think it’s better to go into these things as the guy who was undersupported (trammell) than the guy who seemed oversupported (morris).

Lou is a wildcard. No idea how he might be viewed these days  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But having to only read into the mind of 16 people is easier than several hundred voters.  It's been pretty well established that Lou was very undeserving of being dropped off the ballot.  In fact that may be more to his advantage as this new way is meant to right some wrongs.   The nice thing about the committee is that you get away from that groupthink mentality.  These are guys who will discuss this and give it real thought rather than just go through a 'gut check'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i know this is an unpopular opinion, but i think they are all very borderline candidates.  trammell was hurt too much.  too many down years in between excellent seasons.  if he had been healthier, he would likely be a lock.  what helps trammell is that borderline guys like larkin got in.  why not tram?  and i know everyone loves ozzie smith, but i'd still take trammell over him any day.  but yeah yeah wizard of oz backflips yadda yadda yadda.

whitaker was consistently good to occasionally very good but never great.  never an mvp candidate like trammell was a couple times.  i guess sandberg and grich would be his contemporaries, but he never had the high years of sandberg (or grich), but played longer and was more consistent.  i'd rather see the hall reserved for the greatest players and i dont think whitaker ever was one of those.  but if consistency is your thing, lou is your man (****, they let blyleven in...).

morris never led the league in anything other than wild pitches.  he had some good years and some above average years, and everytime he had an above average year he got a top 10 cy young vote out of it.  morris is the opposite of trammell in that the media fell all over themselves thinking he was great every time he tied his shoes.  he was durable.  he was irascible.  he performed well on the big stage.  and he pitched for teams with great offenses who won him a lot of games.  

statistically, he'd probably be the worst non frankie frisch friend elected to the hall of fame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me Tram is a HOFer but Lou isn't.  I just feel that while consistently good Lou just never had that 3-5 year peak that I look for in a Hall of Famer. 

To me having a great peak is more important  for the HOF than just a long consistent career even if the latter scenario produced more WAR

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Buddha said:

i know this is an unpopular opinion, but i think they are all very borderline candidates. 

I understand what you are saying about Whitaker and Trammell.  They are not so good that they HAVE to be in.  However, they are as qualified or more qualified than half the Hall of Famers playing their positions.  There are lots of players like Whitaker and Trammell in the HoF, so I don't think fans of other teams would complain if they made it.   They may be borderline , but they are OUR borderline candidates and I want them in.  Morris is a different case in that I don't think there are that many similar pitchers in the HoF.  Almost all the pitchers are better than him.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Buddha said:

i know this is an unpopular opinion, but i think they are all very borderline candidates.  trammell was hurt too much.  too many down years in between excellent seasons.  if he had been healthier, he would likely be a lock.  what helps trammell is that borderline guys like larkin got in.  why not tram?  and i know everyone loves ozzie smith, but i'd still take trammell over him any day.  but yeah yeah wizard of oz backflips yadda yadda yadda.

whitaker was consistently good to occasionally very good but never great.  never an mvp candidate like trammell was a couple times.  i guess sandberg and grich would be his contemporaries, but he never had the high years of sandberg (or grich), but played longer and was more consistent.  i'd rather see the hall reserved for the greatest players and i dont think whitaker ever was one of those.  but if consistency is your thing, lou is your man (****, they let blyleven in...).

morris never led the league in anything other than wild pitches.  he had some good years and some above average years, and everytime he had an above average year he got a top 10 cy young vote out of it.  morris is the opposite of trammell in that the media fell all over themselves thinking he was great every time he tied his shoes.  he was durable.  he was irascible.  he performed well on the big stage.  and he pitched for teams with great offenses who won him a lot of games.  

statistically, he'd probably be the worst non frankie frisch friend elected to the hall of fame.

I agree with all of this. All good reasons for why none of these guys made it in initially. And good reasons for why they still may not. 

I think trammell easily has the best case of the three. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×