RIP Dave Parker

[OrangeXtreme]

 

[Newhouser]

In his prime he was as good as it gets. Should have been in the Hall years ago, but at least got the call.

 

[Dinkyspond]

The Cobra, a 5-tool player. An absolute rifle arm in RF.

 

[bpo57]

Five tool player for sure.

 

[Cusefan95]

In his prime he was as good as it gets. Should have been in the Hall years ago, but at least got the call.

He’s got about half the WAR of an average HOF right fielder- his prime was phenomenal but too short. His drug issues in the 80s didn’t help. It’s not a shock it took so long - I’m not convinced he should be in the HOF. He’s Hall of Very Good.

I realize this is a jerky opinion to share today, but as a guy living in PA forced to watch the Pirates broadcast yesterday as the Mets lost yet again with about 9000 over the top tributes to him during the game - I’m a bit cranky.

 

[bpo57]

I watched a lot of his games - and people hate this term - he passed the eye test of what a HoFer looked like. I'd rather take the guy with a somewhat shorter prime than a stat compiler who reached some magic # of hits or HRs. Guys like Baines, Biggio to name a couple, couldn't carry Parker's jock imo. Mattingly is another one that should be in the Hall given that same notion. Parker and Mattingly were just better ballplayers than some of these guys.

 

[Cusefan95]

I watched a lot of his games - and people hate this term - he passed the eye test of what a HoFer looked like. I'd rather take the guy with a somewhat shorter prime than a stat compiler who reached some magic # of hits or HRs. Guys like Baines, Biggio to name a couple, couldn't carry Parker's jock imo. Mattingly is another one that should be in the Hall given that same notion. Parker and Mattingly were just better ballplayers than some of these guys.

The eye test is nonsense - it’s basically saying “I don’t care about objective reality! I just care about my feelings”.

The average first baseman HOF bWAR is 65. If you’re not going to hit that, at least have a seven year stretch at 42. Mattingly isn’t remotely close to that - he was great from ‘84-87, really good in 88-89 - and did nothing outside that window. He’s got a career WAR of 42.4. He was a lone bright spot in what was a pretty terrible decade for the Yankees, and his career ending right as the Yankees got good makes him a sympathetic character - but there’s absolutely no way he belongs in the HOF. Keith Hernandez has a much stronger case with a longer prime and a career bWAR of 60 - but even he is probably consigned to the Hall of Very Good.

Totally agree that “stat compilers” shouldn’t be in the Hall of Fame - but Biggio had a career bWAR of 65 (HOF average for catchers is 53, second basemen about 60) and had as much from ‘91-99 as Parker or Mattingly had in their entire careers. If that’s your go-to for a stat compiler - you picked an exceptionally terrible guy to compare unfavorably to Parker or Mattingly. The position that Biggio doesn’t belong while Mattingly and Parker do is indefensible with any reasonable objective measure - and I don’t think emotional attachment to particular guys is a viable criteria for them making the Hall of Fame. The marginally better argument would be a true stat-compiler like Tony Perez being in justifies including Mattingly and Parker - but I’d rather see the HOF keep shifting away from subjectively adding likable above average players in favor of legitimately great ones.

 

[bpo57]

The eye test is nonsense - it’s basically saying “I don’t care about objective reality! I just care about my feelings”.

The average first baseman HOF bWAR is 65. If you’re not going to hit that, at least have a seven year stretch at 42. Mattingly isn’t remotely close to that - he was great from ‘84-87, really good in 88-89 - and did nothing outside that window. He’s got a career WAR of 42.4. He was a lone bright spot in what was a pretty terrible decade for the Yankees, and his career ending right as the Yankees got good makes him a sympathetic character - but there’s absolutely no way he belongs in the HOF. Keith Hernandez has a much stronger case with a longer prime and a career bWAR of 60 - but even he is probably consigned to the Hall of Very Good.

Totally agree that “stat compilers” shouldn’t be in the Hall of Fame - but Biggio had a career bWAR of 65 (HOF average for catchers is 53, second basemen about 60) and had as much from ‘91-99 as Parker or Mattingly had in their entire careers. If that’s your go-to for a stat compiler - you picked an exceptionally terrible guy to compare unfavorably to Parker or Mattingly. The position that Biggio doesn’t belong while Mattingly and Parker do is indefensible with any reasonable objective measure - and I don’t think emotional attachment to particular guys is a viable criteria for them making the Hall of Fame. The marginally better argument would be a true stat-compiler like Tony Perez being in justifies including Mattingly and Parker - but I’d rather see the HOF keep shifting away from subjectively adding likable above average players in favor of legitimately great ones.

Upon further reflection, Mattingly doesn't deserve to be in the HoF but I'll stick with Parker, certainly over Baines and at least the equal of Biggio. I notice you didn't touch the Baines comparison so should I assume you're good with Parker over Baines?

Parker finished in the top 5 in terms of MVP voting five different times in his career including three times in the top 3. The best Baines could muster up was one 9th place finish. Their careers somewhat overlapped and I can tell you that nobody ever was walking around saying Harold Baines was a better ballplayer than Dave Parker. Biggio himself never had a top three finish in terms of MVP voting in his career. MVP voting may not be everything but stark differences like that tell a story.

Tony Perez was not a stat compiler. Unless you have an aversion to RBI machines he belongs in the Hall. His first full year in the bigs he was 25. Over the next 14 years he averaged 100 RBI's a season. As a Red Sox fan I watched him at 38 drive in 105 runs on a mediocre red sox team. About five years ago I was able to attend a small dinner (half dozen people) with Pete Rose. I asked Rose who was the most underrated on that Big Red Machine team. The answer came back quickly - "Doggie" aka Tony Perez.

 

[donniesyracuse]

He was a lone bright spot in what was a pretty terrible decade for the Yankees

I don’t take issue with your other points, but the Yankees had the best cumulative record in the 1980s. If there were a wild card back then, perception of the 1980s Yankees would be very different. 1989 - 1992 were the only truly terrible Yankee teams in my lifetime.

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

I used the WAR to look up how two of my favorites, Eddie Murray and Cal Ripken, compare to other HOFs at their positions.
Eddie is in the top 10. Cal is number 2, well ahead of the other top 10, but WAY behind ARod. Sometime because of all the stuff, we forget how great ARod.

 

[Lord Ashby]

Parker in. Mattingly out. Biggio in but should have had to wait for the old timers committee.

Future Hall of Famers... Aranado, Goldshmidt, Molina and Posey. They may have to wait a bit but Molina and Buster should happen quickly.

The eye test does come into play with Molina... if nobody runs on you how are you going to throw them out. He threw out 40%, the league average was 27%. Stats don't capture things that people don't do and nobody ran on him.

 

[MSOrange]

The eye test is nonsense - it’s basically saying “I don’t care about objective reality! I just care about my feelings”.

The average first baseman HOF bWAR is 65. If you’re not going to hit that, at least have a seven year stretch at 42. Mattingly isn’t remotely close to that - he was great from ‘84-87, really good in 88-89 - and did nothing outside that window. He’s got a career WAR of 42.4. He was a lone bright spot in what was a pretty terrible decade for the Yankees, and his career ending right as the Yankees got good makes him a sympathetic character - but there’s absolutely no way he belongs in the HOF. Keith Hernandez has a much stronger case with a longer prime and a career bWAR of 60 - but even he is probably consigned to the Hall of Very Good.

Totally agree that “stat compilers” shouldn’t be in the Hall of Fame - but Biggio had a career bWAR of 65 (HOF average for catchers is 53, second basemen about 60) and had as much from ‘91-99 as Parker or Mattingly had in their entire careers. If that’s your go-to for a stat compiler - you picked an exceptionally terrible guy to compare unfavorably to Parker or Mattingly. The position that Biggio doesn’t belong while Mattingly and Parker do is indefensible with any reasonable objective measure - and I don’t think emotional attachment to particular guys is a viable criteria for them making the Hall of Fame. The marginally better argument would be a true stat-compiler like Tony Perez being in justifies including Mattingly and Parker - but I’d rather see the HOF keep shifting away from subjectively adding likable above average players in favor of legitimately great ones.

I think Mattingly would have continued to put up really good years into the early 90s without his back problems, but injuries are part of the game and you have to look at the career he actually had.