|
|
|
|
Baseball Primer Newsblog— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand
Wednesday, August 20, 2008
Billy Beane and the HOF? Well...after that old Johnny Ramone - Billy Beane interview, I don’t see why...oh, the BASEBALL HOF.
Question #4: Does Billy Beane belong in the Hall of Fame?
Pizza Cutter: Oddly enough, I’ll answer this question by referencing Barry Bonds* and Pete Rose* (again). Consider for a moment that if Bonds* and Rose* were judged solely by what they did on the field, they’d both be in the Hall of Fame with no questions asked. Rose* looks like he’ll never make it, and I don’t think the odds are looking good for Bonds*. Why keep them out (and the reason why is important)? It’s not personal character that seems to keep people out. The Hall has its share of people with character flaws. What Rose* and Bonds* did was affect the way in which the game was perceived by the public, and that can apparently trump even obvious Hall-worthy numbers. Rose* and Bonds* changed the way that people viewed the game… they brought the game into disrepute, so they are out.
Now, suppose that in 10 years, most teams have adopted a Sabermetric worldview. It might not happen, but it certainly could. Suddenly, who has affected the way that people see baseball (and may I say positively) by being an early adopter of such methods? Billy Beane. His record as a GM (no World Series titles) says that he doesn’t deserve to get in, but really, has anyone else, other than maybe Barry Bonds*, had more of an effect on the way that people think about baseball over the last 20 years? Even those who don’t subscribe to Sabermetric principles now make a point to say that they are “anti-Moneyball” which means that like it or hate it, Sabermetrics frames the debate. Had it not been Beane, maybe someone else would have come along and been the poster boy (Theo Epstein?), but Beane is a symbol for the movement. If one is going to make a case to keep Bonds* and Rose* out for reasons involving what they did to the cultural perception of baseball, is it not proper to vote Billy Beane based on the same arguments?
Repoz
Posted: August 20, 2008 at 07:31 AM | 9 comment(s)
Related News: General, Sabermetrics, Hall of Fame
|
My Bookmarks
You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.
Hot Topics
|
|
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Hey Walt Jockety---the HOF is calling.
Colin Wyers, you've got to be off your friggin' rocker. This is one of the worst teams in the American League.
I'm not sure how this team could contend in 2009, but then again I was surprised they did as well as they did in the first half of this season. We might see Cahill and Brett Anderson joining the rotation at some point in 2009. Young pitchers are always a big if, as to whether they can handle the jump and handle the workload. Duchsherer cannot be expected to have as great a season, and that's if he's even on the team next year. The A's need to have the best run prevention in the league to even have a chance. Sure, it's possible that they do it again, but is that something we take for granted when once again they'll be doing it with a cast of unproven pitchers? If they have even an average year in run prevention they are doomed. If Ellis leaves all the pitchers will suffer.
I don't really see any young position players making an impact that haven't already been up. Barton could improve quite a bit (it would be hard for him not to), and Gonzales may have some improvement in him as well. Hard to be optimistic about this offense.
It's kind of pointless to talk about the chances of the 2009 A's though, when nobody has any idea what they'll look like. Expect Beane to make several more trades between now and spring training.
True, but any trades he makes are likely to be for more prospect types that aren't ready to help out right away.
Like any team, they could always go after free agents and up the payroll, but somehow I don't think that's in the cards in Oakland's short term future.
I simply don't see how anyone in his right mind could possibly look at the A's as they are right now and say with a straight face that they look ready to compete with the Angels and contend next season, and that's even taking into account a likely Angel regression. It flabbergasts me.
Well, sure. But that's kind of the point of the question - which bad team has a chance at being not so bad next year? The As have some seriously mediocre players on the offensive side of the board, but Emil Brown isn't signed to a long-term contract like, say, Kurt Suzuki.
The As probably won't contend next year, because Beane doesn't seem interested in that for now - the Harden trade was a hell of a white flag. But, again, that wasn't really the question.
Seriously, Beane doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame for what he's done (yet), but for what he represents. Over on the blog, someone actually made a comment about voting Bill James into the Hall. I'd do it.
Henry Chadwick is in the Hall of Fame. So it's not like there isn't precedent. I'd do it, too.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main