Adrian Gonzalez: He has the talent. But does he understand the moment?
Jon Lester: There are only two pitchers in Major League history who were born after 1930 and have a better career winning percentage than Jon Lester. The first is Don Gullett who went 109-50 (.686) over nine years with the Red and Yankees, before retiring with shoulder problems at the age of 27. The other is a guy named Pedro Martinez, who went 219-100 over 18 seasons with the Dodgers, Expos, Red Sox, Mets and Phillies. Now obviously things aren’t trending in a great direction for Lester. Even if he’s still a solid pitcher, he’s clearly lost his rank among baseball’s elite.
You know he has the stuff, and would like to think he has the mental make up to fight through this and pick up where he left of before *everything* hit the fan, but for now, his already unlikely Hall of Fame chances are barely visible.
David Ortiz: He’s had a few unbelievable seasons, and a handful of historic playoff moments, but the overall numbers aren’t up to par, and steroid rumors will haunt him moving forward.
Josh Beckett: When you win a World Series MVP at 23, and serve as the undisputed ace on another champ four years later, you’re certainly on the road to Cooperstown. Then again, when you win 20 games only once in your career, have a sub-3.00 ERA only once, pitch more than 200 innings only three times and also happen to be almost universally perceived as an enormous a-hole, the road gets a little cloudy and you eventually drive off a cliff.
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.
RANGERS
No.
MAVERICKS
Dirk.
STARS
Who cares?
COWBOYS
No.
I think Gonzalez is a maybe, not an outright no.
That's it, that's the whole comment. It makes "Pass." look revelatory.
Beg to differ on this. Assuming even a weak decline phase of just another three no-postseason-honors years to his career, Cowboys LB DeMarcus Ware is pretty much a Pro Football HoF lock. Currently, his 7-year career shows 4 first-team all pro selections, 6 pro bowls, and membership on the NFL all-00s decade team, which are elite postseason honors numbers at his position. And his current lifetime 99.5 sacks is about equal to Charles Haley's entire career numbers on the stat.
I don't see anyone else getting in who is currently on their team, though.
One of my biggest peeves is guys comparing a current player's rate stats with other players who have retired. I'm sure there are a hell of a lot of pitchers who had a better winning percentage than Lester through 100 decisions or so. The first one that popped into my head was Dwight Gooden, who's 132-53 mark through age 26 blows Lester out of the water. Ron Guidry is another.
Beltre, I'm less sure. He's never really been a dominant player, a lot of his value is in his defense, and he's still a long way from 3,000 hits or even 400 HR, even though he's young. If he motors on toward 3,000 with six more years of 140-150 hits a year (a possibility), he'll be in the Johnny Damon category of "will we really elect someone who just passes a milestone without ever seeming great to anyone?"
Beltre will be a strong HOM candidate, I reckon, given his position and his fielding there. For the BBWAA, he faces some of the same problems faced by Nettles, Evans, and Santo (and possibly Scott Rolen, once he's eligible), all HOM/non-HOF members until Santo's long-premature Veterans induction.
Through age 28, 800+ IP, by winning %:
Rk Player W-L% W L1 Whitey Ford 0.734 91 33
2 Tim Hudson 0.702 92 39
3 Pedro Martinez 0.691 125 56
4 Juan Marichal 0.691 130 58
5 Roger Clemens 0.687 134 61
6 Don Gullett 0.686 109 50
7 Dave Ferriss 0.684 65 30
8 Mike Mussina 0.682 105 49
9 Mel Parnell 0.682 60 28
10 Johan Santana 0.679 93 44
11 Jon Lester 0.678 78 37
12 Roy Oswalt 0.676 98 47
13 Tex Hughson 0.663 57 29
14 Dave McNally 0.662 135 69
15 Lefty Gomez 0.662 135 69
16 Bob Feller 0.656 158 83
17 Dwight Gooden 0.655 154 81
18 Adam Wainwright 0.653 66 35
19 Justin Verlander 0.652 107 57
20 Jim Palmer 0.652 129 69
What? There's no major league pitcher named "Whitey Ford." Get out of here.
Ohhh, you mean Eddie Ford.
/Francesa
But is there a "that way?" Hamilton turns 31 next week, and has played in 622 major-league games. He misses a lot of games every year. He's going to have a very short career for a HOFer, at best. Of the HOFers who had relatively short careers but multiple MVP awards, the closest cases are going to be Campanella, Cochrane, and Greenberg – and Hamilton's mitigating reasons for missing playing time aren't quite as compelling as theirs.
He'll probably be closer in perception to somebody like Roger Maris (not that there are a whole lot of people like Maris; these are extremely unusual careers). Like Maris, Hamilton is hugely famous, lauded, and associated with winners, but like Maris, he just isn't going to have a Hall of Fame career – though he may have a cadre of advocates.
I'll wait and see, but I'm not going to project Hamilton to play 150+ games a year through age 40 at a Triple Crown pace: if he does that, he has a chance, for sure.
Yeah, Beltre will probably finish up his career with somewhere between 60 and 70 WAR, certainly enough to be a serious candidate, but I doubt he'll have the kind of resume that excites BBWAA voters.
I actually think Josh Hamilton may have a shot assuming he can win the Triple Crown (or at least another MVP), then put together 4-5 solid seasons afterwards. It would be a Jim Rice-ian narrative based induction, but it wouldn't shock me. When he's locked in, Hamilton looks like the best player who ever played, and that kind of thing has a powerful effect on the minds and memories of voters.
Yes. Beltre's really going to be a fascinating case. If he hangs around (and stays healthy) long enough, he could have matching historically great counting numbers (the type that traditionally resulted in election) while also playing outstanding defense. But the former will mostly be the byproduct of simply playing for a very, very long time and being a free swinger, not the result of any kind of Hall of Fame peak, and the latter skill has typically been overlooked by the BBWAA. He'll have a case that is, at once, attractive and repellant to the voters.
If you subtract Jon Lester's wins and losses from the above pitchers' thru-28 totals, several of them (e.g. Martinez, Marichal, Clemens, Gullett, Hudson, Mussina) have winning percentages higher than Lester's in their "extra" decisions. By this calculation, with more wins and fewer losses, Whitey Ford tears open the space-Forman continuum.
Nah. It's a tough hill to climb when you miss your first 5 seasons. And while he's had a nice turnaround in his career and his life, it's still hard to have too much sympathy for the missed years. I certainly don't think he should get Koufax/Puckett injury type "credit" for missed time, do you?
Edit: coke to Bob, kinda.
What kills me is that the writer doesn't need to go to that level to make his point. Look at the list in #12, Lester is 11th in the last 60 years (give or take) in the category. You take any stat you consider meaningful and find the guy who is 11th best in a 60 year span and he's probably someone who is awfully good.
CHIEFS
No one.
SPORTING KC
Jimmy Nielsen?
ROYALS
Jeff Francoeur
TIGERS
No one yet. Verlander is heading in the right direction, Cabrera's making a strong case so far and Fielder might get the traditional narrative if not the SABR crowd.
LIONS
No one yet. Calvin Johnson, Ndamukong Suh and Matthew Stafford have all had the kind of early career success that might preview that kind of career.
RED WINGS
Nicklas Lidstrom- first ballot, no doubt about it. Pavel Datsyuk and Henrik Zetterberg could get there but I would guess they're still a couple of great seasons away from being sure things.
PISTONS
No one. Unless I underestimate Ben Wallace's chances as a defensive specialist.
I think this understates him. Without thinking it through I don't think he's at "this is his tenth season, thus he is in" status, but he's damned close. I can't envision what he could do between now and his career ending that would take him out of the Hall (not counting PED/gambling type stuff).
No one. I'd love to say Konerko, but he'd have to have a Jamie Moyer-esque old man career. (Frank Thomas, among retired players.)
CUBS
No one. Castro has to be on the radar somewhere, but it's so early. (Sammy Sosa should, among retired players, but won't.)
BEARS
Urlacher has a very good shot, is likely to make it, even. Cutler if he plays to his potential. Peppers has a good shot.
BULLS
Rose, if he can overcome his injuries. Noah, if they wind up winning a handful of championships.
BLACKHAWKS
Toews has a good a shot as any young NHLer. Kane has a good shot of debauchery-ing himself out of the league, or at least off the team.
This is probably not the most popular point of view, but I think that sort of thing really does matter for the Hall of Fame. Not to a huge extent, granted, but it's a part of the smell test. When he's right, Josh Hamilton really, really, really looks and plays the part of a Hall of Famer - the type you tell your grandkids about. That sort of player should be in the Hall of Fame, all other things being equal.
I'd say Chauncey Billups has a very real chance. At least as good as Ben Wallace.
Billups deserves at least a very long look. Wallace has less of a case, but still should be discussed. The basketball Hall of Fame does weird things, too, so they might both get in with ease.
And are we counting Grant Hill on the Pistons' list? It's the basketball HOF, not the NBA HOF; his college and pro careers combined will make him a shoo-in, I'd have to think.
Weight related injuries or a drop off in production? I don't think he's a Pujols type lock yet where he'd still make it with a completely useless, Nomar-esque second half to his career.
But FWIW, I don't think this will happen and I would be willing to bet that Miggy will make the HOF.
To go back to the Maris analogy, one thing that Tony Kubek stresses in his book 61 is how "locked in" Roger Maris seemed that year. It's hard to recapture – we'd have to ask Andy or Harv, I'm too young to remember Maris except as a Cardinal – but for a couple of years it did seem like Maris could do anything. He did not "play the part" as well as some others, but Maris impressed a generation well enough to gather considerable HOF voting support; it wasn't just the single number 61 that did it for him.
Pujols (sigh), with Jered Weaver having an outside shot if he keeps it up. Perhaps Mike Trout someday.
DODGERS
No one, but perhaps Kershaw and Kemp someday, assuming health.
LAKERS
Kobe Bryant, of course. Pau Gasol has a shot. Perhaps Andrew Bynum someday.
CLIPPERS
Chauncy Billups. Perhaps Chris Paul and Blake Griffin someday.
KINGS and DUCKS
No idea.
GALAXY
I'm sure David Beckham makes some soccer Hall of Fame somewhere. Landon Donovan in the virtual, U.S. edition of one that no one will care about.
No one, though I'm still holding out hope that Gordon Hayward will develope into a less douchey version of Kobe and Derrick Favors will be the second coming of Tim Duncan. And it's not too much to ask for Paul Millsap and Al Jefferson to do spot-on Mailman and Olajuwon impersonations for the next ten years, is it? Don't ruin my delusions by telling me that none of this is likely to happen.
Maybe Deron Williams, if I can still count him as a Jazzman by the time his career is over.
REAL SALT LAKE
Who knows, and who cares? We finally get a second major league team, and it's ****ing SOCCER, of all sports! It's a cruel, cruel world...
Unless his career ends in the next year or so, I can't see Paul being left out of the HOF.
I agree, although I wonder how much HOF support Nomar would have received if he'd managed to hit .400, or Eric Davis if he'd managed to steal 140 bases while hitting 40 HRs? Well, and each had put together a couple more productive seasons as regulars... enough to get them to the ~50 WAR mark.
Good point. If Hamilton wins the triple crown(*), then he'll definitely see some Maris-style support. Maris's '61 was clearly some writers' entire case for voting for him; not all - there are other arguments that have been made - but definitely some.
(*) And that's a really huge "if", there.
And as I said a few days ago, I actually think his baseball-time off in his 20s will serve him well in his 30s. And he's working on his second elite hitting year, so he has that kind of ability. And can play center.
I won't claim that he's not injury prone, but his injury last year was of the fluke variety - a slide into home - and he's played 156 games in a season before, so I wouldn't be _too_ pessimistic on the durability front.
Jays:
Omar Vizquel?
Leafs:
Phil Kessel is 24 and has 165 goals I suppose
Raptors:
I'm not sure I know anyone on the Raptors
Agros:
Ricky Ray?
What we've learned:
Not a great time for sports in Toronto.
That could be. Of course, his drug use could have done things to his body that expedite the aging curve. It's tough to predict; Hamilton is quite the outlier.
Roy Halladay doesn't count?
Heh, that your Roughrider pride kicking in?
Well. I`ll at least add to Los Angeles El Hombre of Anaheim`s post and say Selanne from the Ducks is a certain inductee. All the Kings` potential Hofers are too young to guess at (Doughtry and Quick?)
Edit to add: I guess Bautista has a Hamilton-esque long shot chnace if he can turn it around this year and post 5 or 6 more 160 ops+ type seasons with a nice slow decline into his forties. Or he could get a time machine, go back sign with the Jays and adopt Dwayne Murphy as his hitting coaché as a 19 year old.
As dearly as I'd love for him to be a Jay at the moment, I don't believe he is.
I was also about to say Lawrie having the best chance (in the sense that he has the most of his career left to go...super long-shot I agree)
Though Vlad Guerrero could potentially make the list.
I was about to say...I'm sure all my Saskatchewan friends would disown me for suggesting Ray is anything but an over-rated loser, but none of the other names on the Argos roster are ringing a bell.
Beltre's "problem" is not that the BBWAA will underrate his defense, it's that baseball "insiders" have under-rated his defense. His obvious HoF comp is Brooks Robinson but Beltre, incredibly, has only 3 GG. Barring winning every GG over the next 8 years or so, he's got no shot (except with 3000 hits). Unless the BBWAA by then has adopted dWAR or similar as a valid measure and pays much less attention to GG.
Anyway, through age 32:
AB 54 WAR, 31 WAA, 172 Rfield, 3 GG
BR 52 WAR, 31 WAA, 199 Rfield, 10 GG (consecutive with 6 more to come)
Except for GG, they're the same player. I find it a bit hard to believe that Beltre is as good defensively as Brook ... and I'm near certain the BBWAA wouldn't believe it in a million years.
And on second thought that`s a pretty weak - agroculture? Ugh.
An interesting thing about him is that, among top-hitting CF, he may have the worst defensive rep. Griffey, Edmonds, Cedeno, Davis and even Bernie Williams won multiple GG. (And Mays of course. Mantle only 1 GG and Snider 0 but he had a bit of competition :-) I think that means he gets viewed more as a corner OF long-term (where he'll probably move full-time soon) and so far his numbers aren't that impressive for a corner OF given all we've got is his "peak".
I know he's incredibly hot and he has 1 MVP already and is poised for a 2nd but this is kinda crazy. From ages 26-30, he has 20 WAR. From ages 26-30, Johnny Damon had 20 WAR for crying out loud. In the expansion era, for ages 26-30, Hamilton is 128th in WAR. 128th. He's behind Zobrist, Kinsler, Erstad, Brock. Lemon, Cameron, Van Slyke, Simmons, Harrah. Dykstra, Petrocelli, White. Limit to guys with at least 250 games in CF (Hamilton just 312 through 30) and he's still 24th. And that's not all PA either. Dawson, Giles, Dykstra, Lemon, Van Slyke, Lynn, Maddox, Erstad and Blair are all ahead of him in WAR in fewer than 3000 PA.
I'll grant, he could end up with 3 or 4 MVP and he'll probably be a shoo-in. But his career to date isn't anywhere close to HoF consideration -- even as a peak, it's not a HoF peak.
So, no chance. Less a chance than Hamilton.
If you give him 25% more playing time over ages 26-30 (i.e. if he was durable) that would get him to 25 WAR assuming the same performance. That does put him on the fringes of HoF peaks -- Munson, Cey, Kaline, Bernie, Holliday, Ichiro, Vlad, Tex, Murphy, Palmeiro, Tejada, John Valentin are the 24.5 to 25.5 WAR range and are #46-57 on the post-expansion list. If Hamilton's late career is a match for the other bits of Vlad's career, he could be a decent comp.
He'd have been a little ahead of guys like Larkin, Puckett and Biggio. In that altnernate univers, the only "CF" ahead of him would be Dawson, Beltran, Lofton and Griffey. Griffey, the only no-doubter there, would still have been nearly 10 WAR ahead. But a healthier Hamilton would be in the conversation for a modern HoF CF peak.
Barring an insane run of MVPs, he needs to play himself into contention like Edmonds. A good comp really as Edmonds' first full season wasn't until age 25 and he missed (or was platooned out of) substantial playing time at ages 26 and 29. Still even he had about 900 more PA (and 5 more WAR) through age 30 than Hamilton. 30 was Edmonds' first really big year (6.1 WAR) and he added 32 WAR after that. There's no particularly good reason to think Hamilton is less likely than Edmonds to perform that way in his 30s (but lots of good reasons to think it's bloody unlikely) and that's what he needs to put himself on the fringes of a regular HoF case.
Doesn't Pedro Martinez already have that spot?
I think this understates him. Without thinking it through I don't think he's at "this is his tenth season, thus he is in" status, but he's damned close. I can't envision what he could do between now and his career ending that would take him out of the Hall (not counting PED/gambling type stuff).
Agreed. He's perhaps not quite at "hit by a bus today" status yet, but even if he played his last game today -- and he's just 29 -- he'd have a sound Hall of Fame resume.
His career numbers over his first approximately 9 full seasons (8 full, 2 partial) compare extremely well to anyone's: .316/.394/.554, 149 OPS+, 162-game averages of 192 hits, 33 HR, 118 RBI, 102 R, 76 BB. He's led the league in 2B, HR, RBI, AVG, OBP, TB and OPS (but not in the same year). For good measure, he's hit .282/.383/.573 with 8 HR in 28 postseason games.
Cabrera has played in 6 All-Star Games. He hasn't won an MVP yet, but finished 2nd in 2010 (and should have won IMHO), has five Top 5 finishes, and has received MVP votes in every single year of his career, including his 87-game rookie season. HOF Monitor has him at 126 already (likely HOFer is 100).
His comps through age 28 are:
1. Frank Robinson
2. Hank Aaron
3. Ken Griffey Jr.
4. Albert Pujols
5. Mel Ott
6. Joe Medwick
7. Al Kaline
8. Mickey Mantle
9. Juan Gonzalez
10. Hal Trosky
Obviously perception is an important part of any Hall of Fame election, and maybe the voters don't regard Cabrera as highly as Tiger fans like me do, but it seems like he would have to do something really bad/illegal to derail his HOF trajectory. Even if you tacked on Juan Gonzalez's post-29 career to what Cabrera's done so far (an example of a guy whose HOF perception actually got worse the longer he played), he'd end up with around 2200 hits and 400 HR, with a career average over .300.
So, yeah, I think "making a strong case so far" is an understatement. More like "is a lock unless he screws up."
I find that kinda contradictory to the paragraph before. OK, guess it depends on what you mean by "screws up". But if he finishes with 2200 hits and 400 HR and no MVP I have a very hard time seeing him making it. OK, those are Edgar Martinez numbers so maybe I'm under-rating him. But it's below Vlad for example. I suspect Vlad makes it but he had flair, charm, defensive value and an MVP.
But I'll agree that with a standard decline phase he's looking awfully good so if "crappy decline" is what you meant by "screw up" then I agree. He needs at least 4 more full seasons to reach bus-hit status and an MVP would really help. In WAR terms he's in some trouble. He's 27+ WAR from "lock" status.
And he was carrying about 50 fewer pounds on his frame, which makes me a little leery of Cabrera's longevity (but again, I think he'll make it).
Do you really think Vlad has a good shot? I sure hope so since he was one of my faves, but I could see him sticking around on the ballot for awhile.
I'm sure David Beckham makes some soccer Hall of Fame somewhere.
Beckham is already in the English Football Hall of Fame, for which non-retired players are eligible if (i) they have played in England for at least 5 seasons and (ii) are at least 30 years old.
It's kind of the Dwight Evans problem.
Re Cutler, he's already 29 and he's going to have to turn into Kurt Warner from here on out or win four Super Bowls like Terry Bradshaw to get even the least HoF consideration. I don't think he has a prayer.
Peppers is pretty much a lock now. He has played 10 years, has 4 first-team all-pro selections, has 6 pro bowls, is on the 00s all-decade team, and currently stands at 100 lifetime sacks -- and that's right at the top of the heap for a DE of that era along with Dwight Freeney and Jason Taylor. They're all getting in sooner or later, given the voting history.
Urlacher's 4 all pro 8 pro bowl all 00s team honors should be enough as well, though he may wait a while because there's a perception in some quarters (helped a lot by a Sports Illustrated story on "most overrated" NFL players where he was the focus) that he was not as good as people think. My guess is that this will be a delaying, not denying, point.
There was talk at one time about Devin Hester, but the HoF voters don't seem to much like voting for folks whose whole argument is special teams play. I think he'll suffer the same non-HoF fate as guys like Michael Bates and Billy "White Shoes" Johnson.
A lot of other examples included players not currently in the city, but who are still famous for having played there. At this point, Halladay could very well be wearing a Jays cap on his plaque.
------
QBs get special treatment, particularly if they win a championship or two. Four Super Bowls would make Cutler a stone-cold lock; two gets him in for sure; one that he clearly led the team to would get him in.
It's definitely not probable at this point, but his reputation has increased a ton this past year, so he's got that going for him, as well.
I'd say it would partly depend on those around him. If he had these years earlier in his career, but nothing else changed (Bagwell, Thomas, Thome, Helton, Palmeiro, McGwire, Giambi, etc. were all doing what they were doing when Paulie was younger), then no, it's not going to change the view of him much. If, it's a different time frame and he's establishing himself as one of the two or three best hitting first sackers in the game, then sure, it could definitely change the view of him.
Nowhere close to a deserving Hall of Famer either way, however.
Willis
Maybe Vernon Davis if he continues to be a star
Raiders:
God only knows
Warriors:
Ha!
Sharks:
Thornton
Giants:
Cain?
Lincecum?
A's:
Manny!
Weiters has now begun the run that will take him past the HoF and into DemiGod status.
At one point early in his career I had high hopes for Markakis but they have dwindled and are pretty much dead at this point.
-Skins
Nada
-Wizards
Hahahahahahaha
Nats
-If they only had a few good young players :-)
Lidge only has 11 years in and Zimmerman (Ryan, not Jordan) looks to be more a HoVG than HoF type.
Caps
-I don't follow the NHL closely but Ovechkin pretty much has to be considered a lock unless something goes really haywire unless I'm really really mistaken.
-I can see Hamilton making it if
1-Obviously winning the triple crown would be nice
2-He goes on a crazy five year run and
3-follows up with a nice decline phase and
4-Becomes an "elder statesman" type with impressive "intangibles" that the press loves and maintains good media/public relations.
I actually see the last as being equally important to the first three. The thing with Hamilton is that he has a story, a hook, and reporters love that. I see his riches to rags to riches again story as being the thing that could take him into the hall. I mean, there's little people love more than a good redemption tale-the prodigal son come home thing. With a bit of spin, his missing early years can be turned into a tear jerker tale of endurance and overcoming that will hurt him a lot less than could be expected.
That said, a few relapses, Hamilton loses his touch with the press, does some stupid things,attends one of Jose Canseco's pool parties, that same story could ricochet and come back and haunt him hard.
As for Vlad, he is in like Flynn. I've made the argument before.
He's a lifetime .300 hitter, went 30/30 twice, scored 100 runs 6 times, 30+ HR's 8 times, was seen as a clean player in the steroid era, had a cannon of an arm,won an MVP and finished in the top 5 four other times, gets the extra bonus feel good points as being one of the last of the great Expos, played in a major media center, has a terrific nickname and is famous as being the best bad ball hitter of his generation with the appropriate highlights and media attention that has received. Who hasn't laughed as they watched Vlad golf balls that bounce to the plate for homers? The man is insane when it comes to the strike zone.
He scores 166 on grey ink and 209 on the HoF monitor.
And his most similar by ages is perhaps more telling:
23 Willie Mays (946)
24 Manny Ramirez (946)
25 Willie Mays (937)
26 Willie Mays (938)
27 Willie Mays (942)
28 Manny Ramirez (937)
29 Willie Mays (928)
30 Manny Ramirez (920)
31 Manny Ramirez (915)
32 Duke Snider (900)
33 Duke Snider (880)
34 Duke Snider (878)
35 Jim Rice (867)
36 Rafael Palmeiro (888)
I won't go so far as to say 1st ballot, but I'd be stunned if Vlad doesn't get in.
lock: Chipper
possible: Hudson, McCann. Hudson's likely to fall short, though. He's 36, and not quite to 200 wins yet. If he could win 15-18 games a year for the next 4-5 years, that would help. McCann needs to be productive for a good while longer. And as a catcher nearing 30, that's not a foregone conclusion. (Plus, it seems like the HOF standard for catchers is Fisk/Bench/Carter, and that's ridiculously high.)
Most of the team is still pretty young. It's way too early to predict a careeer for Heyward, Freeman, Hanson, etc.
Falcons:
lock: Tony Gonzalez
probable: John Abraham
Hawks:
no one
I hope that's true, and I would certainly vote for him. 9 All Star games and 8 silver sluggers won't hurt his case, either. But I'm much less confident about my ability to predict what the BBWAA will do than I was 10 or even 5 years ago. Their hysterical overreaction to the steroid era has gone beyond mere immaturity and is reaching completely unreasonable levels. With a dozen or more clearly deserving candidates on the 2013 ballot, they very well could elect no one but Jack Morris, a guy with virtually no legitimate argument whatsoever.
Bagwell has similar numbers and may be a good test case for Vlad. Hell, Piazza's numbers aren't far off either, and he was a catcher - and I still wouldn't bet on him making it first ballot. If I had to guess, I'd say that all 3 get elected, but only after milling around on the ballot for 4 or 5 years.
Willis has a terrific start that should get him in: 5 year career with 4 first team all pro selections and 5 pro bowls is remarkably good. He'll need to add ca. 5 more years to his career, but even if they're undistinguished, that should be enough. Agreed that it's way too early to say on Vernon Davis, but he's going to have to be an elite TE at career end, as HoF voters tend to be tough on the position. Randy Moss is currently on their roster, if memory serves, and he's a lock to get in despite some attitude baggage.
Raiders: God only knows
Richard Seymour is currently playing for the Raiders, and his career is at elite enough level that he'll probably get elected, if not immediately. 11 year career, 3 first team all pro, 7 pro bowls, all 00s NFL decade team, plus being seen as the best defensive player from the Patriot dynasty years on a squad notably short of good options. The HoF definitely does not seem inclined to elect a punting specialist, but Shane Lechler will be at the top of such a list if it ever gets around to considering one.
Falcons: lock: Tony Gonzalez; probable: John Abraham
Agreed fully about Gonzalez. Abraham is likely to have tough sledding despite his 12 year career, as he has only 3 first team all pro selections and 4 pro bowls, plus he didn't make the all 00s decade team -- which puts him behind Michael Strahan, Julius Peppers, Jason Taylor, and Dwight Freeney -- and I'd thus be surprised if he gets in.
I don't know much about the NFL HOF, and even less on voting patterns and such, but wouldn't the "best ever" tag overcome that bias? Billy Johnson might have been a heck of a return man, but 8 return TDs vs 18 (plus one to start off a SB) is a big gap, and will likely get even bigger.
QBs get special treatment, particularly if they win a championship or two. Four Super Bowls would make Cutler a stone-cold lock; two gets him in for sure; one that he clearly led the team to would get him in.
QBs only get special treatment up to a point. QBs with great stats and no postseason success normally do get in (Jurgensen, Fouts, Tittle, Marino), as do those with great stats and postseason success (Graham, Unitas, Montana). But merely good stats with postseason success (Bradshaw, Layne) isn't an automatic HoF ticket, though sometimes it's enough.
Note well that winning one Super Bowl isn't enough to overcome just good stats, or players like Phil Simms and Ken Stabler and Joe Theismann would be in -- only Joe Namath qualifies here, and he's a special case if not a mistake.
And two Super Bowl wins alone doesn't necessarily get a QB over the hump -- it did for Bob Griese, but didn't for Jim Plunkett. Griese's career looks to be better than Plunkett's, which explains how he vaulted in. And I'm hard pressed to see that Jay Cutler has a career any better than Plunkett's at the same point in their careers adjusted to era. Plunkett in fact has lousy regular season stats, and the SB wins don't make up the difference.
True-but both Bags and Piazza, rightly or not, bear the steroids taint.
Vlad, on the other hand, has never had a whiff of steroid accusations leveled at him. It would be kinda tough. He has a standard aging pattern and the only weights he looks like he lifts are quarter-pounders. I see steroids helping Vlad's case, not hurting him.
That said, I can see Vlad being a first ballot guy in lots of eras(I think the writers pay more attention to A-fame and B-story (Best bad ball hitter of his era) than we do), but so many guys from the Steroid Era put up such dynamite numbers, I think they are gonna hold Vlad back a bit just because he doesn't look so good in comparison.
For instance, I deliberately used Gray Ink as a stat because Vlad has almost no Black Ink (He has 6).
Plus, I think the backlog effect might damage his chances a bit.
My bet is, depending on who exactly he is up against, maybe 4th or 5th ballot
Hope you're right about Vlad. I'm curious how his last years will be seen. Because of the loss of power, he runs the risk of being seen as someone with both an early collapse and no long decline phase, which keeps him from either being remembered for going out on top or for piling up counting stats. To compare him to someone in no way really comparable, Dale Murphy would sure have garnered more (undeserved) support if he either walked away early or was able to string out valueless but not risible seasons at the end. In truth Vlad was fine last year, but given the attention on his power decline, I have my concerns he'll get overlooked.
And MBM ain't bad for the other four years around them either.
Vlad the Impaler?
With that moniker, not likely.
There are way too many "You won't believe the ball he hit" Vlad stories out there-sportwriters are gonna be reminiscing like old-timers at a 50 year reunion
Good question. As far as I can tell, some positions just don't seem to get any love from the HoF voters, and special teams specialists definitely fall in that category. As of now, there is only one pure place kicker in the HoF (Jan Stenerud), no pure punters, and no players whose primary case rests with special teams play, including kick returners and long snappers and gunners (like Steve Tasker). For what it's worth, I've seen arguments to the effect that players of this kind only participate in a limited number of plays per game as opposed to offensive and defensive players -- kind of like saying the pinch-hitting prowess of Smokey Burgess and Manny Mota isn't enough to get them elected compared to their total body of work -- and it's just not enough to seriously consider them. And Devin Hester's pedestrian WR numbers might be seen as bearing that out.
Excellent special teams players in the HoF at present tend to have also had fine offensive or defensive play that likely would have gotten them elected with or without their special teams skills: Deion Sanders, Sammy Baugh, Yale Lary, Gale Sayers, and Emlen Tunnell are good examples.
There's always a chance Hester will break the mold, but I wouldn't bet the rent on it.
Chipper has similar numbers to Vlad too. Would he still be a likely HOFer if he was an average corner outfielder rather than a 3B and if he didn't have the whole one team superstar thing going for him? Maybe, but his case takes a big hit.
I think Tony Gonzalez is as much of a lock as Chipper Jones is, if not moreso. The press has always loved him, and he is widely percieved as having revolutionized the TE position.
Overall, though, I do agree on this.
I can see Konerko hitting 500 HRs. He's at 403 and off to a great start after registering the two best OPS+ marks of his career the last two years, so its certainly not a huge leap to think he can average 25 homers over the next 4 seasons (inlcuding this one). That would make him an interesting case. He only has one top-5 MVP finish, has never led the league in anything except GIDP, but he'd have 500+ HR, 2600+ hits, 1000+BB,1600 or so RBI, and not a whiff of steroid taint. The BBWAA would elect him for spite wouldn't they?
Vlad getting into the HOF is not even debatable, he's in.
Definitely moreso (well, they're both locks, but Tony's the lockier). He's second all-time in catches, the only tight end in the Top 20.
With the backlog and the "no one from the steroid era regardless of whether they were personally implicated or not" voters (hopefully these morons are few), the only non active players that would surprise me if they didn't go first ballot are Maddux, RJ, and Griffey. Even Pedro, Glavine, and Thomas are no longer first ballot locks, IMO.
Paul Konerko will never come close to election, regardless how many homers he hits.
This. Gonzalez holds pretty much every receiving record for TE's and is pretty high up on most of the lists for all receivers. He will go in as soon as he is eligible.
This is an excellent point that hadn't occurred to me previously.
http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/newsstand/discussion/masn_vlad_guerreros_days_as_orioles_cleanup_hitter_could_be_numbered/
I ran him through the Keltner test in that thread
I should note that I'm not an Angels fan, or even necessarily a Vlad fan (Though he was a blast to watch), but it seems pretty obvious to me that Vlad is almost exactly the type of player writers love to vote for. That's my main point. I'm not saying he was the best, or even that I think he's HoM worthy, but I do think the writers are gonna send him in pretty quick.
Dave Parker, rate stats, through age 28: .317/.370/.521 OPS+ 143
Vlad, rate stats, entire career: .318/.379/.553 OPS+ 140
Add in the basepath speed and the arm and the thundering around right field like a herd of wildebeest, and you've got a close match – and if Parker had had a normally-interpolated career path from ages 29-33, he'd be a Hall of Famer.
This is a big part of why I'm skeptical that Vlad will get in as easily as others here seem to think (along with the backlog, etc). Why aren't "clean" hitters like Edgar and Walker even pulling in 50% of the vote? Probably cuz their HR and RBI totals aren't quite up there with the top (mostly roiding) sluggers of their era. In what other era would a guy like McGriff with 493 homers, 1550 rbi, and a .284/.377/.509 career line in AVG/OBP/SLG only get 20% of the vote? How does that happen when inferior sluggers like Perez, Dawson, and Rice all get elected? The only answer I can think of is that his numbers are found lacking in comparison to contemporaries like McGwire, Palmeiro, Sosa, Manny, Sheffield, etc. Nevermind that almost all the guys ahead of him in those power categories are known or suspected juicers (Griffey, Thomas, and Thome are the exceptions). If they're already "adjusting" for the steroid era by keeping out the roiders, it just doesn't make sense to me to still use them as the comparison bar for the "clean" guys.
Plunkett's the *only* QB with two rings not in the HOF, though, and he won both his rings in his mid-30's with his third team. If* Cutler wins two Super Bowls with the Bears I think he'd get in, just like Roethlisberger and Eli are going in.
* Obviously it's an enormous if - right now, he's 0% of the way there, and he doesn't have anywhere near the stats needed to get in without postseason success. "He could get in with two rings" puts him on the same level as Alex Smith or Mark Sanchez.
He's less of a Hall of Merit lock because he never walked, and he made such poor decisions in the field and on the bases that he didn't actually produce much value for his teams when he wasn't at the plate. Then his knees gave out and he was done pretty quickly after turning 33.
Vlad's one of those guys that I want to have in the Hall of Fame. He was an exciting, memorable, fun player who was truly great for a significant number of seasons. That's enough to push him over the line for me, even if his numbers are more borderline.
How does that make sense?
That pretty much sums it up.
Not all children. Just mine. :)
(and that was just an example. It's not really the main reason why I'd like to see a little more logic and consistency with the BBWAA voting)
Understanding BBWAA voting is obviously a speculative endeavor; my speculations are that:
-- I'd guess Alomar sans spitting incident would have been elected first ballot
-- Larkin is the sort of all-around talent that tends to get underappreciated in any era
-- Edgar is losing substantial support as the result of being mostly a DH. How fair this is depends on how you think DHing should be taken into account.
--Walker is losing substantial support as the result of playing in Coors field.
None of those concerns are particularly relevant to Vlad. I wouldn't get too pessimistic about Vlad on the basis of these data points.
PIRATES
None and McCutchen is probably the only one with even a remote shot.
STEELERS
Polamalu (almost certainly)
Roethlisberger would have a shot if it weren't for the personal issues, probably gets in anyways with a third Super Bowl victory in what would be four tries (there aren't any QB's with three Super Bowl victories who are not in or not definitely going to the HOF)
Hines Ward retired after last season, but also has a decent shot of getting in
PENGUINS
Crosby (if he doesn't get injured seriously again)
Malkin (if he doesn't implode)
I probably should have said above "And two Super Bowl or pre-Super Bowl championship wins alone doesn't necessarily get a QB over the hump." There are in fact more examples of these, including Jack Kemp (2 pre-SB AFL championships) and Tobin Rote (2 pre-SB championships, one each in the NFL and AFL). I see Plunkett as similar to these two. Should Cutler ever win two Super Bowls, whether he gets in the HoF will depend on whether his regular season stats look like Griese/Layne or Plunkett/Kemp.
There's always a chance I'm wrong on this, but as of right now it's really hard to say on both Ben Roethlisberger and Eli Manning for the HoF, though the former's regular season numbers are a bit better thus far which currently gives him a leg up. If both were hit by a bus tomorrow, I'd say no because their careers are too short at 8 years apiece.
Maybe we should just see if Cutler even wins two Super Bowls and then start talking about a HoF case for him.
It doesn't bother me so much that McGriff isn't in as it does that he's not even remotely close. His voting totals just don't make any sense compared to past BBWAA results.
McGriff also doesn't have a particularly strong Hall of Fame case on the merits. His peak was not overwhelming, and he was a poor fielder and a poor baserunner. He's probably actually "rated" about right, with the underappreciation of his bat balancing out the fact that he was pretty bad at the rest of the game.
Troy Polamalu is indeed at elite level for postseason honors at his position, plus unlike Ed Reed he probably has some top-level seasons left to add to his numbers: 4 first team all pro selections, 7 pro bowls, all-00s decade team mamber. Reed's honors are a bit larger at 6/8/00s, and he'll likely slot just ahead of the recently retired Brian Dawkins at 5/8/00s. The problem here is that the HoF voters have historically not been kind to safeties. My guess is that all three of Reed, Polamalu, and Dawkins make it in, though.
Hines Ward is I think going to be an interesting case. He's got a long career with no real peak and perhaps just enough compiling stats to get noticed, plus a Super Bowl MVP trophy. But his career numbers don't look as good as those of contemporaries Marvin Harrison, Randy Moss, and Terrell Owens (all of whom probably will get in), and he's about comparable with Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt (who may not get voted in) at the next level down. If the HoF were as lavish voting in WRs as they are QBs, he and Bruce and Holt would get in -- but the HoF voters are historically tougher on WRs than other skill positions.
When I was a kid we went to the Canadian Football Hall of Fame and my dad raised a huge stink that Cookie Gilchrist wasn't in there. Which led to me, my brother, and the teenager working the till who my dad was yelling at to ask, "who the hell is Cookie Gilchrist?"
It turns out Cookie had refused the honour in protest against a labour grievance or something.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main