|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 9:54 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Among active hitters I would say Piazza, Ramirez, Jeter, and Rodriguez will certainly be first-balloters. Among pitchers, Clemens, Glavine, Maddux, and Rivera. Williams was the greatest on-base man in history and would have passed Ruth in homers if not for the wars; even comparing most hall of famers to him borders on blasphemy. I would call Thomas and Bagwell as probably first or second balloters.
Although, hitters may have a tough time garnering votes in the coming years as the voters have to grapple with how to judge relief pitchers. That is going to be a years-long process. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
sjrm
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Hater Depot wrote: |
| Among active hitters I would say Piazza, Ramirez, Jeter, and Rodriguez will certainly be first-balloters. |
coming from a dodger fan, i wouldn't call piazza hof material. mediocre at best catcher, and ok hitter. many dodger fans were happy to see him go. had problems hitting with runners in scoring position, and mainly hit home runs while winning or losing by a lot. don't forget the whole world series incident where he gave up (game ???). not quite hof material if you ask me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 02, 2006 11:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, ok. But I'd bet anything Piazza goes on the first ballot. On the other hand I also feel pretty sure Edgar Martinez will be in the hall. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 12:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hater Depot wrote: |
| Well, ok. But I'd bet anything Piazza goes on the first ballot. On the other hand I also feel pretty sure Edgar Martinez will be in the hall. |
Piazza is in, no doubt. One of the best hitting catchers ever. His defense might not be great, but he can play the position.
As for Edgar, I doubt it. Primarily a DH. Only 309 career homers. Good on base, mediocre slugging. He's in the good, but not great group. With the likes of Will Clark, Mattingly, Olerud, and Gallaraga (who could all play a decent first base, while Edgar only managed three full season at 3rd).
I'd add to your list of first ballot guys:
Barry Bonds (unless there is still serious steroid backlash 7 years from now, but even his pre-steroid numbers were 1st balot material)
Griffey - Still has an outside shot of passing Aaron
Randy Johnson - 10 dominating years. Great career numbers as well.
I'd disagree with Rivera and Jeter (mainly because I hate the Yankees), but Jeter may have a good shot at the first ballot. Depending on how he does over the next 5-10 years.
This is, of course, ignoring guys like Pujols, who is on pace to be a 1st ballot HOFer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 1:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sjrm wrote: |
coming from a dodger fan, i wouldn't call piazza hof material. mediocre at best catcher, and ok hitter. many dodger fans were happy to see him go. had problems hitting with runners in scoring position, and mainly hit home runs while winning or losing by a lot. don't forget the whole world series incident where he gave up (game ???). not quite hof material if you ask me. |
Don't blame Piazza. The reason the Dodgers didn't win had to do with guys like Karros, DeShields, Offerman, Wallach, and pretty much the rest of the Dodgers offense. Butler was the only other regular contributor to the offense during Piazza's tenure there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woland
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| jajdude wrote: |
| Sosa was the only one to hit over 60 twice, if I'm not mistaken. That's a cool feat. Steroids perhaps? But maybe a few pitchers use them too? |
thrice. yet didn't lead the majors in any of those years. wierd. |
Sort of like Juan Marichal winning 25 games three times and never winning the Cy Young any of those years (Koufax, Koufax, Gibson). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jajdude
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2006 9:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
3 times? Wow.
I was mistaken about the Babe though. He also hit for a damn good average. He changed the game. What if he hadn't been a pitcher, playing every fourth day, for 5 years? I guess 800 homers easily, maybe 900. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sjrm
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2006 2:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| sjrm wrote: |
coming from a dodger fan, i wouldn't call piazza hof material. mediocre at best catcher, and ok hitter. many dodger fans were happy to see him go. had problems hitting with runners in scoring position, and mainly hit home runs while winning or losing by a lot. don't forget the whole world series incident where he gave up (game ???). not quite hof material if you ask me. |
Don't blame Piazza. The reason the Dodgers didn't win had to do with guys like Karros, DeShields, Offerman, Wallach, and pretty much the rest of the Dodgers offense. Butler was the only other regular contributor to the offense during Piazza's tenure there. |
i wasn't blaming piazza for the dodgers not winning. i agree that karros and deshields were more to blame than piazza, but piazza didn't exactly do anything spectacular. many fans were quite annoyed at the signing of hundley an even worse catcher coming off of surgery after piazza left. many dodger fans would have like to see loduca stay. he was very popular in LA. He's a very good defensive catcher and hits well, even with runners in scoring position. but back to piazza, my feelings towards him are that he just couldn't hack it (only reason the dodgers signed him is because he is tommy lasorda's godson). if he could hit in the clutch, and could play defense at the catching position, or was at first base (where he should have been), i might have considered him for the hall. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2006 4:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sjrm wrote: |
| piazza didn't exactly do anything spectacular. |
You mean besides being the best hitting catcher in the majors? Possibly ever?
| Quote: |
| my feelings towards him are that he just couldn't hack it (only reason the dodgers signed him is because he is tommy lasorda's godson). |
It may be why they signed him, but it was one of the greatest sympathy picks in the history of baseball.
| Quote: |
| if he could hit in the clutch, and could play defense at the catching position, or was at first base (where he should have been), i might have considered him for the hall. |
I don't have his clutch stats in front of me, but people usually have a misguided memory of a player's "clutch" performance. And to me, it's overrated. If you get on base and hit for power, you help your team win. Piazza did that like no other catcher in baseball.
Catcher defense is somewhat important, but you probably over estimate its value. Fact is, he's been good enough to play the position and still produce a great deal of offense.
And if you think he would have been a HOFer at first, but not at catcher, you have no idea what replacement value means. The average catcher is an offensive dead weight. You don't plan on having a catcher hit 35 homers a year. You almost expect that out of a first baseman. The catcher usually bats 8th or 9th. To have a catcher who can bat 3rd or 4th is enormous.
He's a first ballot lock. They only thing keeping him out would be if he pulled a Pete Rose or OJ. It's just too bad that Dodger fans couldn't spot one of the best players in the majors right under their own nose. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2006 5:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
It's true he was only drafted because he was related to
Lasorda but he was chosen nearly dead last and went straight to A ball. He worked his way up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sjrm
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="huffdaddy"]
| sjrm wrote: |
| piazza didn't exactly do anything spectacular. |
You mean besides being the best hitting catcher in the majors? Possibly ever?
[quote]
better than johnny bench, gary carter, roy campanella? don't really think he even compares to them. plus, lo duca was a much more consistent hitter. he hits .300 or better every year, in clutch situations also, and is also good for 15 to 20 home runs. how many catchers do you know that can also hit in the 1 or 2 spot? not many. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sjrm
Joined: 27 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 04, 2006 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[/quote]
I don't have his clutch stats in front of me, but people usually have a misguided memory of a player's "clutch" performance. And to me, it's overrated. If you get on base and hit for power, you help your team win. Piazza did that like no other catcher in baseball.
Catcher defense is somewhat important, but you probably over estimate its value. Fact is, he's been good enough to play the position and still produce a great deal of offense.
And if you think he would have been a HOFer at first, but not at catcher, you have no idea what replacement value means. The average catcher is an offensive dead weight. You don't plan on having a catcher hit 35 homers a year. You almost expect that out of a first baseman. The catcher usually bats 8th or 9th. To have a catcher who can bat 3rd or 4th is enormous.
He's a first ballot lock. They only thing keeping him out would be if he pulled a Pete Rose or OJ. It's just too bad that Dodger fans couldn't spot one of the best players in the majors right under their own nose.[/quote]
you mean to tell me that a guy who strikes out with the bases loaded with two outs and down by 1 is nothing? 
yes, the average catcher doesn't put up a lot of stats. but a good defensive catcher is very necessary. i mean, having a lot of pass balls with runners on i take it is nothing, then. or being able to set up his glove in the right spots to get some calls, or not being able to catch guys stealing is not a problem. or not being able to block the plate properly, etc. having a good defensive catcher isn't exactly anything you'd like to go without. and again, what good are putting up big numbers if it doens't do the team any good? i'd rather have a catcher hitting 15 home runs, that and putting up a few less numbers that actually gets on base when the team needs baserunners, and getting hits when the team needs a hit to tie the score, or take the lead. i'm sorry, but watching piazza for years, he just wasn't that player. i and many other dodger fans would take lo duca over piazza any day of the week. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sjrm wrote: |
| Quote: |
I don't have his clutch stats in front of me, but people usually have a misguided memory of a player's "clutch" performance. And to me, it's overrated. If you get on base and hit for power, you help your team win. Piazza did that like no other catcher in baseball.
Catcher defense is somewhat important, but you probably over estimate its value. Fact is, he's been good enough to play the position and still produce a great deal of offense.
And if you think he would have been a HOFer at first, but not at catcher, you have no idea what replacement value means. The average catcher is an offensive dead weight. You don't plan on having a catcher hit 35 homers a year. You almost expect that out of a first baseman. The catcher usually bats 8th or 9th. To have a catcher who can bat 3rd or 4th is enormous.
He's a first ballot lock. They only thing keeping him out would be if he pulled a Pete Rose or OJ. It's just too bad that Dodger fans couldn't spot one of the best players in the majors right under their own nose. |
you mean to tell me that a guy who strikes out with the bases loaded with two outs and down by 1 is nothing?
|
I don't consider one data point to be relevant. Noone always comes through in "the clutch". I've yet to see any statistical evidence that "clutch" ability exists.
| Quote: |
yes, the average catcher doesn't put up a lot of stats. but a good defensive catcher is very necessary. |
There is one way to win baseball games. Outscore your opponent. There are things that prevent the other team from scoring, and things that help your team to score. Neither one is necessarily more valuable than the other. Piazza contributed way more runs offensively than he gave up on defense. That's what wins games.
| Quote: |
| i mean, having a lot of pass balls with runners on i take it is nothing, then. |
Piazza 97 PB in 1565 games. Or a PB every 16 games.
Lo Duca (since he seems to be your "ideal" catcher) 41 PB in 714 games, or a PB every 17.4 games. So in a 162 game season, Piazza will give up about 1 more PB. That's not a lot.
| Quote: |
| or being able to set up his glove in the right spots to get some calls, |
I'm not even going to bother to find catching ERAs. Too many variables to control for. But I reckon that this is a very insignificant factor used to justify bad hitting catchers' existence. Do you believe that umpires are actually swayed by the set up? And how many runs over the course of a season do you think this is worth?
| Quote: |
| or not being able to catch guys stealing is not a problem. |
SB/CS
Piazza - 1340/415 in 1565 games. 23% caught, and .85 SB/game.
Lo Duca - 470/226 in 714 games. 32% caught, and .65 SB/game.
No doubt, Piazza has the worse stats. But the difference is about 32 SB / 162 game season. Which works out to, IIRC, about 10 runs, or roughly one game. Let's make it easier and blame Piazza for all of this. I'd have to say that giving back one game a year on defense is worth his offense.
| Quote: |
| or not being able to block the plate properly, etc. having a good defensive catcher isn't exactly anything you'd like to go without. and again, what good are putting up big numbers if it doens't do the team any good? |
It creates runs. Runs win games. It's helping the team a lot. Just because you don't notice it doesn't mean it isn't helping.
| Quote: |
| i'd rather have a catcher hitting 15 home runs, |
Well, 15 homers is a decent output from the catching slot. Something Lo Duca surpassed only once in his career. Meanwhile, Piaaza was hitting 30-40 for nine seasons.
| Quote: |
| that and putting up a few less numbers that actually gets on base when the team needs baserunners, and getting hits when the team needs a hit to tie the score, or take the lead. |
Noone in the history of baseball has been able to "get on base when the team needs baserunners, and get hits when the team needs a hit to tie the score or take the lead." You think players can decide when to get on base and when not to? Who knows whether or not that run in the first inning is valuable or not? You win games by scoring more runs than your opponent. Be it in the first inning or the ninth inning.
| Quote: |
| i'm sorry, but watching piazza for years, he just wasn't that player. i and many other dodger fans would take lo duca over piazza any day of the week. |
Well, many Dodgers fans are wrong. I guess that's what happens when you don't show up to games until the 3rd inning and leave in the 7th. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 7:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| Woland wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| Gees. He's having a monster season. Still, it'll be tough to beat 73. |
Well, Pujols hit number 25 yesterday, so he's on track to do it. |
Still, it'll be tough. he's likely to cool off sooner or later. Not to mention the media attention and pitcher's not giving him anything to hit. |
Oh, and not to mention injuries.
(And he was cooling off) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheFonz
Joined: 01 Dec 2005
Location: North Georgia
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 05, 2006 2:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jajdude wrote: |
3 times? Wow.
I was mistaken about the Babe though. He also hit for a damn good average. He changed the game. What if he hadn't been a pitcher, playing every fourth day, for 5 years? I guess 800 homers easily, maybe 900. |
Good point. Not to mention he was a damn good pitcher also. 94 wins 46 losses and a career era of 2.28. Imagine if he would of stayed a pitcher instead of switching to an everyday position. Who knows how many wins he could have racked up? By age 24 he already had 89 wins and two 20 plus win seasons. No doubt the man was a badass whether he was on the pitching mound or in the batters box. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
