I actually laughed out loud when I saw that headline.

Terrific article, strong on facts and no skewing of the stats that I spotted.

This was amusing:

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?

Likely? No.

A poke at the Phils, I'm guessing.

As for

15. Did the player...

...Of course, the real determinant will be what happens from here on out--how long Rollins plays, and how well he plays over that span. Over the last four years, he's averaged 158 games played, 685 at-bats, 197 hits, 125 runs, 41 doubles, 13 triples, 20 homers, 76 RBI, 37 SB, and triple-slash numbers of .288/.339/.475. Six or seven more years of that, and a relatively three or four-year gentle decline phase following it, probably wins Rollins admission to baseball Valhalla: he'd finish with around 1,750 runs, 20th or so all-time; in the neighborhood of 3,000 hits; maybe 550 steals and 300 homers.

The "probably wins Rollins admission..." is awfully pessimistic. If he winds up with those stats it's hard to imagine anything other than a first ballot election.

Whoa. Um...we'll see.

It's odd to have someone on my favorite team be one of the most overrated players in the game, especially when the team was hopeless and its fans (and their opinions) were subjected to universal scorn less than a decade ago.

Why overrated, Crispix? Anything more than the OBP and merely good, not great, D?

I guess it's surprising to have a player who's famous partially because of his charisma, and then to see that that charisma extends beyond Philadelphia into sports fans in general.

We'll see. By the way, "comparable to or better than Travis Jackson" is a pretty lousy argument.

Who's up for comparing Omar Vizquel to Luis Aparicio?

If George Kelly is a Hall of Famer, Mark McGwire should be a unanimous first balloter!

There are an awful lot of 28 year old MLBers who'd be in the HOF if they managed another dozen productive years after their age 28 seasons, so at a bare minimum an article like this is grossly premature.

That said, it's not hard to imagine Rollins ending his age 35 season (7 more years) with around 2600 hits, 500 doubles, 135 triples, 250 HR, 1500 runs scored, 400 SB and a batting line in the neighborhood of 280/335/460, while still managing to play SS. If he gets into that ballpark, he'll have better raw numbers pretty nearly across the board than Trammell's career. While I think Trammell's an edge case for the HOF, even if Jimmy's racked up only Trammel's 2365 hits/412 doubles/185 HRs by that age 35 season, I can't see him not having a reasonably legit shot to hang around and get 3000 hits, which I expect would make him a lock for the HOF.

I actually laughed out loud when I saw that headline.

Yeah, but if, before the 2007 season, you'd seen the headline, "Jimmy Rollins: MVP?", wouldn't you have laughed at that too?

Actually, it's still pretty funny. Heh.

There are an awful lot of 28 year old MLBers who'd be in the HOF if they managed another dozen productive years after their age 28 seasons,

Yes. Couple that with the fact that his comps are skewed by a high offensive environment, and to me the likely scenario is Jimmy Rollins, HoFer? No.

And even best case:

The "probably wins Rollins admission..." is awfully pessimistic. If he winds up with those stats it's hard to imagine anything other than a first ballot election.

Given the way the BBWAA is treating modern players, e.g. Trammell, even with those stats, it's a crap shoot these days. Somebody would say, well, he never felt like a HoFer.

"Somebody would say, well, he never felt like a HoFer."

Not with that MVP. He's no Zoilo..

Man, this is way too premature. What I want to know is if Joba Chamberlain or Clay Buchholz are HOFers yet.

Given the way the BBWAA is treating modern players, e.g. Trammell, even with those stats, it's a crap shoot these days. Somebody would say, well, he never felt like a HoFer.

Yep. Who the hell knows what the BBWAA is thinking anymore. There are no standards, really. Maybe we should just got to a Japanese system where if you hit a certain statistical benchmark, you get in. Or we could do what they do in Cuba and just enshrine everybody. Either way would make as much sense as what we do now. Or we could even adopt the basketball method and elect obscure international and women's coaches no one's ever heard of and ignore professional ball players altogether.

Given the way the BBWAA is treating modern players, e.g. Trammell, even with those stats, it's a crap shoot these days. Somebody would say, well, he never felt like a HoFer.

Well, Trammell doesn't have any of the cachet benchmarks. I think 3000 hits is likely to remain an automatic entrance, and Rollins has a lot going for him in getting a shot at 3000 hits (well as much as anyone who needs another 1700 hits can).

Yes. Couple that with the fact that his comps are skewed by a high offensive environment, and to me the likely scenario is Jimmy Rollins, HoFer? No.

I'm not sure offensive context is an issue for Rollins at this point, given that most writers seem to think only in terms of HR, and I don't think Rollins' HR numbers are likely to be a big factor in his HOF argument. If he continues the transformation to a slugger as he ages and comes up short on hits but with more total power than he has now, it could be an issue, but the question might well transform over the next 10-20 years depending on how offense changes going forward, and it seems possible that Rollins' numbers will be viewed favorably versus the "steroid era" given that his power surge started near the (apparent) end at a natural point in his career. Plus, he's already got the scrappy SS rep down.