Friday, May 24, 2013
MLB: Don Sutton never shy about voicing his opinion
(mlb.mlb.com)
Sutton: Because that’s where the defaced money is.
Read More...The outspoken Sutton—who came up with the Dodgers in 1966 and pitched with them for 16 of his 23 seasons—has his own opinion about everything.
He said in an interview last week that he hates pitch counts.
“I say it with a laugh in my voice when I broadcast: ‘That’s 100 pitches. On the next one, he’s going to turn into a troll.’ At 101, you just disappear. Poof, you’re gone,” Sutton said.
...MLB.com: Did you cheat?
Sutton: No, I never got ...
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.
Page 1 of 3 pages
1 2 3 >1) There are candidates you feel are qualified that you are simply not going to be able to support, because you'll run out of ballot space.
2) You're going to have to be strategic in whom you select. He loves Murphy, and has voted for Murphy in the past - but he acknowledges that he's not getting in on his 15th and last ballot, so don't waste a slot on it.
But - it takes three of these types of ballots to counteract one crappy ballot.
I'd have liked to see Kenny Lofton and Bernie Williams acknowledged at this level, rather than in a separate post.
Pedro, Raines after that...? Maybe Smoltz too, or was he '10? Griffey pops in there too, of course.
Bonds and Clemens probably start to pick up steam in '17/'18 when this all starts to clear out.
I wonder how long it will take Mr. Wolf to show up and cry about cheaters.
And people say he wasn't durable?
That should read 8,030 PA.
[Edit to add: I never realized Walker had more PAs than Edgar Martinez, Mike Piazza, and Mark McGwire]
*EDIT: I have always argued that Murphy was "the cutoff line" and left him outside on my personal HOF ballots, but given the character clause and Pos' argument that it should cut both ways, and given the dearth of center fielders represented in the Hall, I've moved him above the cut off line, which shall now be Don Mattingly and Raffy Palimiero. (Also, Dale Murphy was a much better player than Jim Rice.)
So I'm saying you've got to have Bagwell, Biggio, Bonds, Clemens, Piazza, Schilling.
I think Trammell's combination of peak/prime/career lifts him above the rest of the stars, but I don't think it's absolutely necessary to read the data that way. Same with Walker. And then past them, obviously Raines, McGwire, Palmeiro, Martinez and Sosa all have entirely reasonable Hall of Fame cases. With felicitous evaluations of their defense, and/or felicitous weightings of peak and career, Murphy and Lofton and the Crime Dog are defensible choices. I can almost squint to see the argument for including Bernie Williams in that group too. There are way too many good players on the ballot.
Both are under 6 feet tall and rather squarely built, though there was never a chance that Gwynn was going to get the nickname "Rock".
Durable may not be the right word, maybe dependable is a better one but I think it is a fair criticism. While 8,000 PA is nothing to sneeze at he played over 150 games just once in his career and over 140 just four times. He was not a player who you should have expected to be in the lineup everyday.
Jose, our little boy Ray was making his first joke. He's grown up so fast.
That's about as good a Hall of Merit ballot as you're likely to see, and lop off Bonds and it'll serve for Cooperstown as well.
So you'll support Clemens, but not Bonds? You're pinstripes are showing.
LOL, I love that.
No, but I did follow the trial and the many discussions of it here, which caused me to change my initial opinion that the evidence against Clemens was convincingly credible, a POV reflected in his acquittals on all counts. If it were merely a case of pinstripes worship, I'd be voting for A-Rod down the road, but I won't be doing that unless another known steroid user gets in between now and then.
A known steroids user other than Mantle?
But I don't know why it matters to you whether a "known" steroids user gets in between now and then, since you've proven that past standards of the Hall are irrelevant to you on this issue: the Hall let amps users in without hesitation, as it did the known cheater Gaylord Perry. The voters didn't stumble over the newfound character clause then.
and Mike Crudale.
McGwire was a better hitter and actually played the field.
Disconcur.
But I don't know why it matters to you whether a "known" steroids user gets in between now and then, since you've proven that past standards of the Hall are irrelevant to you on this issue: the Hall let amps users in without hesitation, as it did the known cheater Gaylord Perry. The voters didn't stumble over the newfound character clause then.
I sincerely hope that that wall you keep banging your head against is well-padded. We wouldn't want to lose such an illustrious contributor to something as preventable as a terminal concussion.
Edgar had a longer career - a little over 1000 more PA - and played a good 3B at the start of his career, 500+ games with a slightly above average TZ rating.
I'm not saying I put Edgar ahead of McGwire (undecided), but I can see how one could make a case for either. In the past I have supported both. If I had a vote, I would have to make a choice between them this year.
My disagreements are Piazza and Schilling, but I totally accept that this is a minority opinion.
I am with Poz on Murphy. He, along with McGriff and Bernie Williams, woudl be on my ballot if there were room. (And I, you know, HAD a ballot, which most of you are probably glad that I do not...)
````````````````
Seperate point: any Hall of Fame without Bonds and Clemens is a joke.
How do you have a hall of fame without any catchers?
If you have Piazza out, then you only have two catchers in your personal HoF.
If you don't you're likely to have a lot of passed balls.
Yeah I agree and I also want Lofton in there. But the ballot's simply too crowded. By by Kenny!
In his later years I always thought of Gwynn as a parker house roll
Tim Raines career OPS+ 123
Maybe a function a bit of the different shapes of their careers, but thought that was interesting.
Disconcur.
Concur with your disconcur.
And the reason for your opinion?
OPS doesn't include stolen bases. Hope this helps.
Tim Raines career OPS+ 123
Maybe a function a bit of the different shapes of their careers, but thought that was interesting.
Tony Gwynn career basestealing: 319/125.
Tim Raines career basestealing: 808/146.
Difference: 489/21.
That makes up a lot of OPS+ ground.
Tony Gwynn: "he seems so articulate"
Gwynn + 500 walks + 500 stolen bases - 500 singles = Raines
Tony Gwynn: "he seems so articulate"
Tim Raines: Rock, liked rock cocaine
Tony Gwynn: Liked Rock Candy
Yes, I know, and that's great and all, but I wasn't trying to claim that Gwynn was better than Raines. But Pos makes a big point in the article about how close their hitting stats are:
Raines: 10,359 plate appearances
Gwynn: 10,232 plate appearances
Raines: .294 batting average
Gwynn: .338 batting average
Raines: .385 on-base percentage
Gwynn: .388 on-base percentage
Raines: 4,076 times on base
Gwynn: 4,094 times on base
yet Gwynn comes out with 9 points of OPS+ advantage, which isn't a small number.
Poz says that he considers Schilling one of the 25 best starting pitchers ever. I don't think he's getting lopped off next year.
Right, that's the raw numbers, but OPS+ seems to indicate Raines needs the stolen bases to make up the batting ground.
9 points of OPS+ is the difference between Reggie Jackson and Dave Winfield, or between Wade Boggs and Scott Rolen.
I do think they are roughly equivalent players in terms of overall value, but my impression at the time was that Gwynn was clearly the superior hitter, and I don't see any reason to change that, despite similarities in their overall raw numbers.
Page 1 of 3 pages
1 2 3 >You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.