He's a great player on a great team. Is there really any doubt? I'd vote for Bernie as well, and also Mariano. And I'm an A's fan.

Cal entered when someone said Jeter only had two SS (Wagner and Vaughan) who have eclipsed him offensively. Which is silly.

Jeter only has a lack of slugging when compared to ARod, Tejeda, or a few other guys.

That's exactly it, Jeter has to compare to good players of his era.

Well, that's not exactly it, Jeter doesn't need the extra HRs to get into the HoF. But it just seemed odd to me that he hasn't developed more power. Even if he's not a 30 plus home run guy, I figure he'd see more mid 20 tater seasons than he has.

That's exactly it, Jeter has to compare to good players of his era.

And he compares favorably to them. The fact that a couple/few outslug him doesn't mean he has a "lack of slugging".

Remember when the story of the '98 Yankees was that the team had no likely HOFers on it? (Stupid even then, for ignoring Raines.)

Unfortunately, I can see Raines not making it. 170 HR for a corner OFer? He stinks.

Remember when the story of the '98 Yankees was that the team had no likely HOFers on it? (Stupid even then, for ignoring Raines.)

True, but how much of a HOF guarantee is Raines right now?

I also think that Posada and Bernie will get voted in by the Veterans Committee (Posada just might get voted in directly, though I tend to think he won't).

He should be in if he produes anyhting for a couple more years, but IMO he's not going to get in even by the Veteran's comittee

Raines is basically the Mike Mussina of LF.

Very good every year for just about ever.

LF rankings:

Ted Williams, Stan Musial, Barry Bonds, Ricky Henderson, Carl Yastrzemski, Joe Jackson, Al Simmons, Willie Stargell is a reasonable top 8.

After that, who is better than Tim Raines? Billy Williams? maybe, it's really close, I'll take Raines. Ed Delahanty? Fred Clarke? Zack Wheat? Ralph Kiner? Albert Belle? I'll take Raines over any of them, peak or career. Yes, I think Raines had a higher peak than Kiner.

He easily could have been a back-to-back MVP (1986-87). He was arguably the best player in baseball from 1983-87, behind maybe Murphy, Henderson or Boggs or Mattingly, but maybe not. He is definitely in the discussion and at the top of it probably.

But it's all about perception. For some reason he was never perceived as the superstar that he was. Strange how these things happen. I'll bet some people probably just compare him to Vince Coleman or Willie Wilson.

what Joe said.

Timmy's problems were poor timing (RICKEY) and the white stuff.

I always find the Posada-HoF talk very curious. I don't see how Posada, at this point, is really any different from Javy Lopez--and nobody thinks of Lopez as a Hall of Famer.

But it's all about perception. For some reason he was never perceived as the superstar that he was. Strange how these things happen.

I don't think it's strange. He is 31st all time in walks, which are mostly ignored.

The only way Derek Jeter doesn't go to the Hall is via the Pete Rose route.

I've often thought of Jeter as a more modern day Rose. Well regarded for smart play and getting absolutely everything out of their ability. To a very large degree, their offensive games are quite similar with a difference in rate stats driven more by a difference in generation (and by a drawn out coda to Rose's career) than a true difference in performance. Jeter is a much better base stealer, but both thought of as excellent, agressive base runners. Both played up the middle defensive positions (for Rose, only the first 4+ years) and both struggled with the glove. Both were at the center of dynastic clubs with both having excellent post-season resumes. Both had a reputation as "clutch" performers. Both enjoyed a media relationship that seems to give them even more credit than the tremendous amount they deserve.

I have to think that Mussina is going to have a hard time getting into the HOF, because of the nature of the voters. At the end of the day, things like CY Awards, 20 win seasons, leading the league, World Series, etc., matter to them.

Here is what Mussina supporters may hear if he does not get to 300:

Never won 20 games
Never won a Cy Young Award
Never led the league in ERA
Never led the league in strikeouts
Led the league in wins only once
Never led his team to the WS

Even in his one really great year for the Yankees, he was overshadowed. In 2001, he went 17-11 with a 3.15 ERA, second in the league. But that was the year Clemens, with a 3.51 ERA, went 20-3 and copped the Cy Young.

Given the lack of love they show Blyleven, I think Moose may have some problems.

It kinda sucks that Jeter's offensive numbers get compared to SS's when he's such a black hole on defense. Terrible range will not be accounted for in voting as much as it should be.

He was probably in 2 years ago.

I hope you haven't had this out before, but why is Stan Musial a LF? He only played there about three seasons during his career. He played RF regularly about as much and 1B more than either.

He doesn't fit well as a LF in my book, but I'm not sure where to put him either.

why is Stan Musial a LF? . . .

He doesn't fit well as a LF in my book, but I'm not sure where to put him either.

I think you answered your own question. He played 850+ more games in the outfield than first base, so he should be thought of as an outfielder. I think in most fan's minds, the differences between LF and RF are a lot less than the difference between either and 1B.

In the outfield, he played more leftfield than any other, and he finished his career largely in left, so that is where he ends up.

But anywhere you put him, it is largely arbitrary. With his career, he would have been a no-brainer as a DH.

FWIW, per the Cooperstown website, in the lists of HOFers by position, the Hall lists him as a left fielder.

Far be it for me to dispute the "pantheon", but how do Pete Alexander and Mathewson rate above Clemens?

FWIW, it's a 2002 column, and doesn't include the ridiculous tail-end resurgence of the last couple of years, which is probably needed to bump him over those two guys.

Rose played a huge role in building up his own myth, though. He would be the first to tell you that he was Charlie Hustle and that he represented everything that was great about the game. Say what you will about Jeter, but he's not self-aggrandizing. The publicity Jeter gets, is pretty much all unsolicited praise. He doesn't stoke it at all.

Rose was clearly so into himself that it didn't surprise me at all when he turned out to be a complete dick. It would surprise me a helluva lot to learn that about Jeter. Well, I guess I could buy Jeter being cold and taciturn, a la DiMaggio. But I can't buy him doing things like being a huge tax cheat, gambling on baseball and then pointing the finger at his friends while he stuck them with the debts, or other semi-sociopathic activities. Rose, IMO, thought he could get away with that stuff because he was PETE ROSE; I don't think Jeter is like that.

Maybe to test his mettle, we should let Jeter become his own manager once he closes in on 4,000 hits or so, and see if he plays himself above other, more deserving players. (Perhaps not the world's most ludicrous hypothetical -- he does figure to at least go significantly past 3,000.)

Agreed, Ace. Say what you want about Jeter, but at least through his actions on and off the field, he respects the game. And that's more than I can ever say for Rose.

Rose was clearly so into himself that it didn't surprise me at all when he turned out to be a complete dick. It would surprise me a helluva lot to learn that about Jeter. Well, I guess I could buy Jeter being cold and taciturn, a la DiMaggio. But I can't buy him doing things like being a huge tax cheat, gambling on baseball and then pointing the finger at his friends while he stuck them with the debts, or other semi-sociopathic activities.

Gimme five to one and I'll take Jeter cheating on his taxes!

Cal entered when someone said Jeter only had two SS (Wagner and Vaughan) who have eclipsed him offensively. Which is silly.

That was me, and I had ARod in there above Jeter, too. But below Ripken's three great years (1983-84-91), there's a big falloff, and once he turned 30 he flat out dropped off the cliff. Look it up. His value was in his glove and his durability, not particularly in his bat.

And although Ripken's overall value may still prove greater than Jeter's, this is also much more due to defense than offense. Cal's career is a lot like Yazstremski's, meaning that the first half of it was much better than the second half, only Ripken never had Yaz's eye. Look at the numbers.

Beyond that, Jeter is a far superior baserunner, base stealer, has a much higher OBP, and has been far more consistent offensively on a year to year basis. Ripken was the Iron Man of Durability, but he was also the Man of a Thousand Stances, and as streaky a hitter as you can find. When he got into one of those slumps of his, he was flat out pathetic at the plate. And this pattern took hold quite early in his career. No way he was as valuable an offensive force as Jeter.

That was me, and I had ARod in there above Jeter, too. But below Ripken's three great years (1983-84-91), there's a big falloff, and once he turned 30 he flat out dropped off the cliff. Look it up. His value was in his glove and his durability, not particularly in his bat.

I don't see it at all. Best years by EqA:

324, 301, 295, 294, 293, 284, 279 - Jeter
322, 309, 304, 295, 286, 285, 277 - Ripken

Ripken was playing an extra few games a year, but their peaks are basically equal. Cal completely blows him away on career value.

(that's purely offensive numbers - of course Ripken's peak is clearly better when you account for defense)

The other thing is that, in the era when Ripken was at his best, the average shortstop hit far worse than in Jeter's era. Ripken dominated his contemporaries to a degree that Jeter never has. There are about six seasons where Ripken was the best shortstop in the league (three where he was just the best player, period), compared to only one for Jeter (although this year is looking like it will be #2).

(that's purely offensive numbers - of course Ripken's peak is clearly better when you account for defense)

And also keep in mind that EqA includes basestealing (one of Jeter's big advantages). Jeter might pick up a few more runs on "undocumented" base-running, but Ripken's advantages in fielding and durability are much greater than that.

Which is one of the things that makes Jeter so valuable. Here the intangible may not be measureable but it surely exists. Derek Jeter is one d*mn smart ballplayer. Toss in the hustle, the durability, and the determination to succeed and if the guy was hitting .240 he could play for me all day long. That he hits .300 makes him inner-circle. And folks who b*tch about that fact are just jealous.

this is why i've never been anything other than 100% satisfied with having jeter on the yankees. for every jeter hater who bashes on him, for every time i see a "jeter's gay" t-shirt...i just sit back and watch jeter play some really beautiful baseball. now, i hate the gushing some media types do over him, but really, i just ignore all of it (good or bad) and enjoy.

Level 2: [R]eserved for guys who were definitely Hall of Famers, but didn't quite possess a Level 3 résumé

this sort of thing exemplifies simmons's ignorance/laziness. i love this definition; the definition of level 2 are players who aren't in level 3. brilliant.

oh, and jeter's in. he retires tomorrow and he's 100%. mussina probably should be in, but only has like a 70% chance of getting in. bernie is very interesting.