Jump to content

six-hopper

Lowering the bar for the Hall of Fame

Recommended Posts

I doubt Mauer gets in, personally, and I wouldn't vote for him, but a 50 WAR player who spent 40% of his career at catcher is defensible as a candidate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Tigrrfan said:

it is more than reasonable to say that he will not get there except "on the crazy off chance" that Mr Bigglesworth so eloquently stated.

Never doubt Biggs - unless he's giving you relationship advice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

I doubt Mauer gets in, personally, and I wouldn't vote for him, but a 50 WAR player who spent 40% of his career at catcher is defensible as a candidate.

There's always someone else someone is describing when making these type of posts.  In this case, it's Ted Simmons.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, gmoney said:

What do you guys think about Robinson Cano?

Personally I would not vote for anyone with strong evidence of PED use.  In Cano's case, it doesn't get any clear than a positive test.  I wouldn't vote for him with that alone.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mr. Bigglesworth said:

I doubt Mauer gets in, personally, and I wouldn't vote for him, but a 50 WAR player who spent 40% of his career at catcher is defensible as a candidate.

yeah - position matters. Mauer was a difference maker as a catcher - he's almost a deficit as a 1b.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, bobrob2004 said:

There's always someone else someone is describing when making these type of posts.  In this case, it's Ted Simmons.  

I think the better example is Ernie Banks.  Less than 50% of his games were at short, yet 54 of his 68 WAR were earned at short during the first 8 seasons of his career.  So he earned 54 WAR in 8(!) seasons, and then was basically Tony Clark at 1st for the last 10 seasons of his career.

And Ted Simmons has 50 WAR, so yeah, he wouldn't be a horrible selection either, but not my first choice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ted Simmons would be in the Hall of good players.  When I think of great catchers, he isn't the first guy to come to mind.

Most people think about Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, and Carlton Fisk. Piazza and  IRod, in my opinion, are tainted by steroids.  

Guys like Buster Posey and Mauer are certainly top catching HOF candidates, but you stick them at another position like first or third base and they are just ho-hum.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are lots of good players in the hall already, and I'd argue the standard never has been Bench, Berra and Fisk.

Hartnett, Dickey, and Cochrane are very solid HoF catchers.  Simmons has a similar WAR as they did, and did it in a more competitive (IMO) league.

I am not saying Ted needs to be in the hall (I don't care either way), but if we are going to claim he doesn't belong because he is in the hall of good players, then the same could be said for something like half of current hall of famers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, gmoney said:

Ted Simmons would be in the Hall of good players.  When I think of great catchers, he isn't the first guy to come to mind.

 

What did you say?

DMs-qVeXUAEO8TG.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no need for Simmons to be in the HoF, but I think if he had peaked in the 80s on those good Cardinals teams, he would have made it (instead of peaking in the 70s on mediocre teams).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, gmoney said:

Ted Simmons would be in the Hall of good players.  When I think of great catchers, he isn't the first guy to come to mind.

Most people think about Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, and Carlton Fisk. Piazza and  IRod, in my opinion, are tainted by steroids.  

Guys like Buster Posey and Mauer are certainly top catching HOF candidates, but you stick them at another position like first or third base and they are just ho-hum.  

Posey is likely to be a much stronger candidate than Mauer.  He is not only a better hitter, but is also a guy who seems prepared to stay a catcher for much more of his career.  Mauer hasn't played catcher since 2013, and offensively he is no great shakes as a first baseman and DH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, six-hopper said:

Posey is likely to be a much stronger candidate than Mauer.  He is not only a better hitter, but is also a guy who seems prepared to stay a catcher for much more of his career.  Mauer hasn't played catcher since 2013, and offensively he is no great shakes as a first baseman and DH.

I wouldn't say Posey is a better hitter.  When Mauer was younger he was possibly the best hitter for average in MLB.  He hit .347 and .365.  The guy won 3 batting titles and finished 2nd once.  His 2009 season was probably the greatest season for a catcher ever; he won the MVP, GG, SS, the batting title, and led the league in ops and ops+.  In his first 10 seasons, Mauer had a .323 batting average.  Injuries have taken their toll on him and he is now a shell of his former self.  Had he retired in 2013, his average numbers per year would be much more impressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tiger337 said:

What did you say?

Not many people would argue with that look.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, gmoney said:

I wouldn't say Posey is a better hitter.  When Mauer was younger he was possibly the best hitter for average in MLB.  He hit .347 and .365.  The guy won 3 batting titles and finished 2nd once.  His 2009 season was probably the greatest season for a catcher ever; he won the MVP, GG, SS, the batting title, and led the league in ops and ops+.  In his first 10 seasons, Mauer had a .323 batting average.  Injuries have taken their toll on him and he is now a shell of his former self.  Had he retired in 2013, his average numbers per year would be much more impressive.

Of course, if there ever was an extended case of luck in the MLB though, it was Mauer's home run total in 2009. He basically had a combination of a bunch of good weather luck and a lot balls falling in the 1st row luck. 28 hr was an absolute outlier in to his normal power production ability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Gehringer_2 said:

If there ever was an extended case of luck in the MLB though, it was Mauer's home run total in 2009. He basically had a combination of a bunch of good weather luck and a lot balls falling in the 1st row. 28 hr was an absolute outlier in to his normal power production ability.

Absolutely, yet it still happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posey and Mauer both play in parks that are difficult to hit home runs at.  Not so much Mauer, but Posey's power numbers would be much more impressive if he played in a home ball park that was more beneficial to hitters.  I remember Memorial Stadium in Baltimore was about 290 down the left field line.  It was an utter joke, much like Yankees stadium down the right field line now.  Parks like Oakland have so much foul territory that players have many more foul outs per year than they would have if they played in a place like Fenway or Wrigley Field.  I seem to remember that Oakland produces 35% more foul outs than the average MLB park.  Mike Trout plays in a park that does not produce a lot of home runs either.

I wonder when new ball parks are planned, if the organization will design them so they are more hitter friendly in order to attract better offensive free agents?  St. Louis, for example, has always tried to build teams that work best in their stadium.  Colorado has trouble attracting top pitchers in free agency.  Who would want to pitch there if they had the option?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, gmoney said:

 

I wonder when new ball parks are planned, if the organization will design them so they are more hitter friendly in order to attract better offensive free agents?  

But teams might want to sign a free agent pitcher once in a while too.

And the thing is, the balls are so live now that the variations in ball park size are becoming meaningless. It is mostly things like foul ball area and hitting backgrounds that are having the most effect between parks instead of their OF size - at least other than New Yankee Stadium, which is just an abomination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, gmoney said:

I wouldn't say Posey is a better hitter.  When Mauer was younger he was possibly the best hitter for average in MLB.  He hit .347 and .365.  The guy won 3 batting titles and finished 2nd once.  His 2009 season was probably the greatest season for a catcher ever; he won the MVP, GG, SS, the batting title, and led the league in ops and ops+.  In his first 10 seasons, Mauer had a .323 batting average.  Injuries have taken their toll on him and he is now a shell of his former self.  Had he retired in 2013, his average numbers per year would be much more impressive.

Chicks dig the long ball.  So do I.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, gmoney said:

Posey and Mauer both play in parks that are difficult to hit home runs at.  Not so much Mauer, but Posey's power numbers would be much more impressive if he played in a home ball park that was more beneficial to hitters.  I remember Memorial Stadium in Baltimore was about 290 down the left field line.  It was an utter joke, much like Yankees stadium down the right field line now.  Parks like Oakland have so much foul territory that players have many more foul outs per year than they would have if they played in a place like Fenway or Wrigley Field.  I seem to remember that Oakland produces 35% more foul outs than the average MLB park.  Mike Trout plays in a park that does not produce a lot of home runs either.

I wonder when new ball parks are planned, if the organization will design them so they are more hitter friendly in order to attract better offensive free agents?  St. Louis, for example, has always tried to build teams that work best in their stadium.  Colorado has trouble attracting top pitchers in free agency.  Who would want to pitch there if they had the option?

The Tigers certainly didn't go for a hitter-friendly yard when they replaced the home-run heaven that was Tiger Stadium with the horribly ill-conceived Comerica National Park.

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

×