Congrats To The HOFers

[ShawnC]

I think Smoltz is likely to get in on his first try.

[rotohuff]

How can Blyleven not be in yet?

293 career wins
Career ERA of 3.31
Career Whip of 1.19
3701 career K's

[SteveB]

The fact is that the Hall of Fame is not the Mt. Olympus that many believe it should be, and the steroid era is sure to make things interesting to say the least. In my mind it is what it is and we can't expect it to change... very good (as opposed to outstanding) players are still going to be inducted

You make a good point but still there will be a line drawn somewhere. Then you will be having the same argument with the "new" fringe players.

So looking at my first post in this thread , do you think Rice should be in? What about Dave Parker, Dwight Evans, Dale Murphy, and Juan Gonzales. See these were all "very good" players that i dont see as a whole lot different than Rice. When you take players that are below the line then you lower the line and as such arguments can be made for all those guys.

I would like the Hall to shoot for the Mt.Olympus , keep standards to "outstanding" with an occasional mistake, than to have the whole standards pushed southward.

[da_big_kid_94]

I was listening to our local sports guy (Lansing) interview John Smoltz this morning, and after the interview the question of his worthiness of induction came up.

Career Numbers to date:
20 years, 210 wins, 154 saves, 3011 Ks, 3.26 ERA. - Fringe.

What say you?

I would say he's nowhere near fringe ... I see him as lock. Look at it in this way ..... on a team that averages 90 wins per season, John Smoltz was a direct participant in every one of those wins for 4 straight seasons. The only guy you can compare Smoltz to is obviously Eck. His career is unique, he switched roles to accommodate his team on several occasions and he excelled at multiple facets of pitching.

[eudubbz]

Another "fringe" player may be Ichiro. Does he make the HOF? The Mariners are terrible and he should decline sook, skewing his ratios and make his numbers look worse as he has a smaller MLB sample size to build from. Also, does any accomplishment in Japan count?

[drapes]

I was listening to our local sports guy (Lansing) interview John Smoltz this morning, and after the interview the question of his worthiness of induction came up.

Career Numbers to date:
20 years, 210 wins, 154 saves, 3011 Ks, 3.26 ERA. - Fringe.

What say you?

I would say he's nowhere near fringe ... I see him as lock. Look at it in this way ..... on a team that averages 90 wins per season, John Smoltz was a direct participant in every one of those wins for 4 straight seasons. The only guy you can compare Smoltz to is obviously Eck. His career is unique, he switched roles to accommodate his team on several occasions and he excelled at multiple facets of pitching.

Kid - I wasn't suggesting that he was fringe myself. If you look at the rest of the post I suggest that he's more than worthy, but I'm not voting, the fickle BWAA are the ones voting and I was merely trying to walk through their process of evaluation. At first glance at those career numbers, if you take away the name Smoltz, I think it's fair to suggest that there are plenty of morons who will keep him off the ballot using the "fringe" argument.

He has to rise above the long shadows of Maddux and Glavine, but I think at a bare minimum his post-season record justifies him as a lock on the first ballot.

[da_big_kid_94]

I was listening to our local sports guy (Lansing) interview John Smoltz this morning, and after the interview the question of his worthiness of induction came up.

Career Numbers to date:
20 years, 210 wins, 154 saves, 3011 Ks, 3.26 ERA. - Fringe.

What say you?

I would say he's nowhere near fringe ... I see him as lock. Look at it in this way ..... on a team that averages 90 wins per season, John Smoltz was a direct participant in every one of those wins for 4 straight seasons. The only guy you can compare Smoltz to is obviously Eck. His career is unique, he switched roles to accommodate his team on several occasions and he excelled at multiple facets of pitching.

Kid - I wasn't suggesting that he was fringe myself. If you look at the rest of the post I suggest that he's more than worthy, but I'm not voting, the fickle BWAA are the ones voting and I was merely trying to walk through their process of evaluation. At first glance at those career numbers, if you take away the name Smoltz, I think it's fair to suggest that there are plenty of morons who will keep him off the ballot using the "fringe" argument.

He has to rise above the long shadows of Maddux and Glavine, but I think at a bare minimum his post-season record justifies him as a lock on the first ballot.

I understand, Drapes ... I just don't see it that way. I think Glavine is the one that has to rise up above the shadows of Maddux and Smoltz. I know there's a lot of sentiment for Glavine to go in as one of the Three Amigos of Atlanta - but I'd put John or Blyleven in before I'd put Glavine in.

[drapes]

I'm with ya Kid. I'd take Smoltz over Glavine myself.

[cwk1963]

Mattingly had 6 years where he was an above avg offensive player and done as an elite offensive player at 29.

Puckett had 10.

I don't care about McGwire's WS efforts, but 583 HR, somewhat speaks for itself IMO.

Now, cwk I will grant you that Thome isnt far behind and he's not HOF in my mind, so maybe Im full of it.

This is why I love the subjectivity.

Another conversation - Raines vs Dawson vs Rice

Raines stacks up very well.

Wouldn't that seem to say that, since they both wound up with nearly identical lifetime stats, that Puckett's years were more pedestrian than Donnie's? Puckett had 4 more years to accumulate the same type of stats.