Anyone agree Carlos Delgado deserved better? ...

[br801]

I consider myself a pretty close baseball follower but Delgado has a much stronger case than I realized.

What do you all think about Fred McGriff? I admit being biased because Fred was one of the guys I remember watching in MacArthur for the Chiefs growing up and then I moved to Atlanta and became a huge Braves fan and loved him there. I just loved the quiet way he went about having a great career, and actually him being soft spoken and not drawing attention to himself might be one reason he doesn't get as much consideration.

Fred McGriff Statistics and History | Baseball-Reference.com

On their raw offensive numbers, McGriff is quite similar to Willie McCovey, and both were probably average to below average first basemen.

McGriff was probably more consistent season to season with the bat, but McCovey at his peak was probably the better hitter. McCovey played mostly in an era dominated by pitching, and hit over 500 home runs when that was a rare feat and a ticket to the HoF.

Still, it is a bit surprising that McGriff hasn't received more voting support, given the numbers he put up. For me, while I'd rate him somewhat below McCovey, I'd argue that he was at least as good as Tony Perez, who is obviously in the HoF.

 

[Knicks411]

On their raw offensive numbers, McGriff is quite similar to Willie McCovey, and both were probably average to below average first basemen.

McGriff was probably more consistent season to season with the bat, but McCovey at his peak was probably the better hitter. McCovey played mostly in an era dominated by pitching, and hit over 500 home runs when that was a rare feat and a ticket to the HoF.

Still, it is a bit surprising that McGriff hasn't received more voting support, given the numbers he put up. For me, while I'd rate him somewhat below McCovey, I'd argue that he was at least as good as Tony Perez, who is obviously in the HoF.

I don't think Perez is a good HOF choice, but I agree McGriff is probably pretty comparable to him.

My first though on McCovey vs McGriff is that McCovey was clearly better. I went back and I looked it up, and I still think that's right, but maybe I underrated McGriff a little. If you look at OPS+, McGriff was top 5 7 years in a row, which is real damn impressive. (No other top 5's). McCovey had the same # of top 5, though he lead the league 3 years in a row. (McGriff just once)

It looks like McCovey may have been platooned a little as his career went on? he had a few seasons where he woud have made the leaderboard in OPS+ but he just missed the PA to qualify. In both 73 and 74 he would have finished 2nd if he had enough PA to qualify. So I'd def go McCovey but McGriff was underrated to me

 

[br801]

I don't think Perez is a good HOF choice, but I agree McGriff is probably pretty comparable to him.

My first though on McCovey vs McGriff is that McCovey was clearly better. I went back and I looked it up, and I still think that's right, but maybe I underrated McGriff a little. If you look at OPS+, McGriff was top 5 7 years in a row, which is real damn impressive. (No other top 5's). McCovey had the same # of top 5, though he lead the league 3 years in a row. (McGriff just once)

It looks like McCovey may have been platooned a little as his career went on? he had a few seasons where he woud have made the leaderboard in OPS+ but he just missed the PA to qualify. In both 73 and 74 he would have finished 2nd if he had enough PA to qualify. So I'd def go McCovey but McGriff was underrated to me

As I recall, McCovey was sort of injury prone in his later years, but I do think he was also platooned some.

I agree with you about Perez and didn't mean to suggest McGriff belongs in because Perez is in (I hate that line of thinking). Perez never seemed like a HoFer when he was playing. I've always thought it a travesty that he is in and Gil Hodges (one of the best power hitters of his day and one of the greatest fielding first basemen of all time) is not.

 

[STEVEHOLT]

I dont think Delgado is a hall of famer. However, I think there are alot of guys in the hall of fame who shouldnt be. so its sort of like, hmm..he shouldnt really be in..but if THAT other guy is in, Delgado should be in before him.

 

[Cowtown]

I dont think Delgado is a hall of famer. However, I think there are alot of guys in the hall of fame who shouldnt be. so its sort of like, hmm..he shouldnt really be in..but if THAT other guy is in, Delgado should be in before him.

Understood. I'm not making the case he should so much as I was very surprised that, with those numbers, he was dropped from the ballot after his first year of eligibility. Especially when compared to Tony Perez ... :noidea:

 

[two3zone]

Bagwell is not a hof.

Lmao. What?

 

[billsin01]

I consider myself a pretty close baseball follower but Delgado has a much stronger case than I realized.

What do you all think about Fred McGriff? I admit being biased because Fred was one of the guys I remember watching in MacArthur for the Chiefs growing up and then I moved to Atlanta and became a huge Braves fan and loved him there. I just loved the quiet way he went about having a great career, and actually him being soft spoken and not drawing attention to himself might be one reason he doesn't get as much consideration.

Fred McGriff Statistics and History | Baseball-Reference.com

I think guys get penalized for not being THE guy at their position, which is fine if you want the Hall to be the most exclusive club of all time. But as a guy who follows baseball day-to-day, I really value consistency and producing far more often than not. The example I always think of is Papi -- I mean, I don't think there has been many months that I can remember that he hasn't put up 15 RBI and 5-6 HRs. It's like you can just book him for that number and go from there. You contrast that with Manny, who always ended up with huge numbers, but had a tendency to get red hot and carry a team for stretches of at least a couple weeks if not a month or 6 weeks at a time. But then he'd have some stretches where he was a no-show for a week or more, which hurts in the midst of a pennant race. (not saying, of course, that manny is anything other than a total stud, but just that he wasn't always the most consistent.)

I'm probably a bad judge of this stuff though. Watching the Sox win three WS in the past 12 years or watching the yanks' dominance, I tend to feel like guys like Mike Lowell, Derek Lowe, Tim Wakefield, Tino Martinez and Bernie Williams and Mike Stanton are so important despite not being HOFers. I mean, Lowe's performance on 2 days rest vs. the Yanks was huge. You don't win the WS without it. Wakefield would have been the MVP in 03 if not for Little's bizarre decision on Pedro. Mike Timlin was huge in those two postseasons as well.

At the end of the day the Hall is cool, but winning WS titles is what it's all about and that is much more about the 40-man roster.

 

[Briancuse]

I think guys get penalized for not being THE guy at their position, which is fine if you want the Hall to be the most exclusive club of all time. But as a guy who follows baseball day-to-day, I really value consistency and producing far more often than not. The example I always think of is Papi -- I mean, I don't think there has been many months that I can remember that he hasn't put up 15 RBI and 5-6 HRs. It's like you can just book him for that number and go from there. You contrast that with Manny, who always ended up with huge numbers, but had a tendency to get red hot and carry a team for stretches of at least a couple weeks if not a month or 6 weeks at a time. But then he'd have some stretches where he was a no-show for a week or more, which hurts in the midst of a pennant race. (not saying, of course, that manny is anything other than a total stud, but just that he wasn't always the most consistent.)

I'm probably a bad judge of this stuff though. Watching the Sox win three WS in the past 12 years or watching the yanks' dominance, I tend to feel like guys like Mike Lowell, Derek Lowe, Tim Wakefield, Tino Martinez and Bernie Williams and Mike Stanton are so important despite not being HOFers. I mean, Lowe's performance on 2 days rest vs. the Yanks was huge. You don't win the WS without it. Wakefield would have been the MVP in 03 if not for Little's bizarre decision on Pedro. Mike Timlin was huge in those two postseasons as well.

At the end of the day the Hall is cool, but winning WS titles is what it's all about and that is much more about the 40-man roster.

The hof club is the best of the best, if we start watering it down by taking guys who don't belong, you cheapen the accomplishment, theres no shame in not being a hof, there are a lot of really good players who just aren't hof level.

 

[cuseattle]

Jim Palmer signed my Orioles jersey with his name and "HOF 1990".

The guys that are in know what an honor it is, and they want to keep it exclusive.

 

[billsin01]

The hof club is the best of the best, if we start watering it down by taking guys who don't belong, you cheapen the accomplishment, theres no shame in not being a hof, there are a lot of really good players who just aren't hof level.

I don't really disagree but I think it's a tough line to draw. I guess also just care less about it as I get older. I don't really care whether or not pedroia makes it to the hall -- I just want another WS title before he retires.

I also think it runs the risk of becoming so exclusive that it becomes irrelevant. I mean, we're debating Papi but the dude has been among the most feared hitters in the game since 03 and been huge in the clubhouse and community. He's the face of an organization that ended an 86-year WS drought and has had a ton of success in that span. Yet that's not good enough for the hall? I don't get that

 

[br801]

The hof club is the best of the best, if we start watering it down by taking guys who don't belong, you cheapen the accomplishment, theres no shame in not being a hof, there are a lot of really good players who just aren't hof level.

It's already been watered down from what it was initially. What it needs to do is reflect the modern game, and that means acknowledging the accomplishments of designated hitters and relief pitchers; it still falls short in that regard.