HOF First Time Nominees...cough, cough
 

Well...here are some of the Boys of Summer up for nomination for the first time for Cooperstown. This list is cringe-worthy..

Brady Anderson, Rod Beck, Shawon Dunston, Chuck Finley, Travis Fryman, Chuck Knoblauch, Robb Nenn, Jose Rijo, Todd Stottlemeyer ...(Todd Stottlemeyer??..Did his Dad donate money for a new wing to the library?)

Hoping Goose and Rice get in...McGuire also up again

I was looking this over and it is absolutely terrible. Baseball-reference has a HOF monitor statistic where you are supposed to be over 100 to even be considerd. All of the following are under 100:

•*Robb Nen 92
•*Tim Raines 90
•*Harold Baines 66.5
•*Chuck Knoblauch 66.5
•*Rod Beck 63
•*Chuck Finley 53.5
•*David Justice 43.5
•*Brady Anderson 38
•*Travis Fryman 36
•*Jose Rijo 28
•*Todd Stottlemyre 15
•*Shawon Dunston 14


I'd vote for McGwire, Rice, Lee Smith, and possibly Gossage. No one else should even crack 30%.

Agreed on Lee Smith as well.

How do they come up with these "nominees"?...It seems like getting a star on the walk of fame in Hollywood...you can just buy one.

Hell..based on my High School baseball stats, I'd probably fall between Rijo and Stottlemeyer...Better figure out who my presenter is

rice won't get in because he didn't get along with the press especially in boston. if smith gets in, gossage has to get in. i'm on the fence about big mac.

There is a list of criteria for automatic nomination. I believe one of the criteria is that you are a 2 or 3 time all-star. So there are a lot of players nominated that were not even great players, just good players on crappy teams that had to have a representative.

I think that Rice doesn't get in becuase his stats are just below what it takes as far as "magic" numbers .300 avg 400 HRs 1500 RBI's 3000 hits etc. Personally I believe he should be in. His numbers are eerily similar to Orlando Cepeda's.

Gossage should be in. He was the dominant relief pitcher of his time. He played a long time, played well in the post season. If Sutter is in then Gossage should be. I suppose Lee Smith has a case too but while he was very consistent he was never really dominant like Gossage, Sutter, and Eckersley. I think Raines should be looked at also. He was one of the top 5 players in the NL during the 80's into the 90's. His drug issues wont help as well as the fact he played in Montreal where no one saw him play.

Rice's numbers

2089 games
1249 runs
2452 hits
382 HRs
1451 RBI's
670 BB's
1423 K's
.298 avg
.352 OBP
.502 SLG
1 MVP
2nd in ROY
8 time All Star


Cepeda
2124 games
1131 runs
2351 hits
379 HR's
1365 RBI's
588 BB
1169 K's
.297 avg
.350 OBP
.499 SLG
1 MVP
1 ROY
7 time All Star

How about being NL-MVP IN '74,AND BEING THE STARTING 1ST BASEMAN 9 F'N TIMES IN THE ALLSTAR GAME?
1974 (1B)
1975 (1B)
1976 (1B)
1977 (1B)
1978 (1B)
1979 (1B)
1980 (1B)
1981 *
1984 (1B)
1985 (1B)

* Played,but didn't start.

Isn't this what Sandberg did too?(NL-MVP IN '84 AND 9 times started in the ALLSTAR GAME.)F'n Tony Perez started in the ALLSTAR GAME how many times?

Starting in the all star game is determined by fans popularity not achievement. He simply does not have the numbers...do we really have to go through this again?

LETS DO IT.......YOU'RE GUNNA BE WRONG EACH TIME(BECAUSE YOU GO BY LENGTH OF CAREER,AND GATHERING UP A LOT OF SOMETHING OVER TIME........LIKE HE DID WITH ALLSTAR APPEARANCES....SO TO NEGATE THAT YOU USE THE FANS=****.)

Ok....only because the football game is going to end scoreless

Don't tell me his stuff wasn't good enough.He has a 130.5 HOF MONITOR RATING(130 is suppose to be a virtual lock,and so it's bullshit to keep saying he wasn't good enough.You fkrs that want people to play average for a long time,(and pad #'s) are just wrong.If your the best player in a league for a year..then probably you should go in.That(to me) is more important than playing 20 years,and getting a lot of whateva.YOU GUNNA SAY THE WRITERS WERE ON DOPE IN '74? BEST PLAYER IN LEAGUE,BUT OH NO,HE WAS NEVA GOOD ENOUGH..WAS HE? NOT ACCORDING TO NOT- IT- ALL CHUCK.Lackey was puke in the post.Like I said he'd be.You were wrong then,and you are wrong now.He is good enough.His personal life is keeping him out.

How many times (out of 9) were the fans wrong? Don't just say they are wrong.Say they are wrong because so n' so should've started at 1st base.

Garveys numbers

2332 games
1143 runs
2599 hits
272 HR's
1308 RBI
479 BB
1003 K
.294 Avg
.329 OBP
.446 Slg

1 MVP
9 All Star
4 Gold Gloves

hit well in postseason .338 11 31 in 55 games

But his average season of .294 19HRS 91RBIS 79 RUNS .329OBP .446SLG
and the fact he never led the league in any catagory except hits 2 times and Double Plays 2 times simply is not good enough to get him in as a 1st baseman. He is ranked behind non hall of famers Rusty Staub, Al Oliver and Bill Buckner in both HR, hits , OBP and Slg %. He has lessor numbers than Will Clark. He did a lot of nice things and was a very good player but not really a Hall of Famer.

Zolio Versailles should be in according to that logic. Dale Murphy has 2 MVP's and he isn't in nor should he be. And Garvey did stay around past his prime and did pad the stats just to get him where they are.

And I dont have a HOF vote but those that do never supported Garvey even a little bit.

We disagree about what should get in the HOF.You like quantity over quality.Hence, the low # of Grade One Wins........Dale Murphy was voted to be the best player in the league...the champion player ..above all others...2 times..If you do that, you should get in automatically.My God lets award some champions.Somebody who was best at something.

Buckner HOF Monitor: Batting - 69.5 (Likely HOFer > 100)

Shows how off you are.Garvey has a 130.5 rating.How dare you mention Garvey and Buckner together.That is low.Staub is even ranked lower than Buckner 59.0 (Likely HOFer > 100.)These guys played very average for a long time,and you even mention them as better than Garvey at anything? Just because they played longer? You're a whack when it comes to HOF. That's not an opinion.That's a fact.You just compared a guy with a 130.5 to guys with less than 70.They say 130 is a virtual cinch to get in.Obviously it isn't,but a 130.5 is far from not being good enough(they just said it should be easily good enough..not borderline.)

Andre Dawson has a 118 rating....Garvey a higher ranking of 130.5....They both are league MVP WINNERS.Both should go in,but only the one with the lesser rating is said to deserve it.

Don Mattingly has a ranking of 133.5...Garvey a 130.5....This shows just how f'n far off you are.You mention him with Staub n' Buckner.....They mention him between Dawson and Mattingly.You're bitter they came back on you in '81 and beat ya in your own house.Down 2 games to nothing,Fernando beat your Righetti.Came back all the way on you.That's why ya hate Garvey.Look at who you compare him to,and who others compare him to.

Awards
1974-ML-AS MVP1st at something....notice the word "most"
1974-NL-MVP1st at something....notice the word "most"
1978-ML-AS MVP1st at something....notice the word "most"
1978-NLCS MVP1st at something....notice the word "most"
1981-ML-Roberto Clemente Award
1984-ML-Lou Gehrig Memorial Award
1984-NLCS MVP1st at something....notice the word "most"

Let me explain to the dense... They are saying he was the best player in the league in'74.Then they're trying to tell you he was responsible for putting his team in the World Series in 78,and 84.Seems the individual was a lil more clutch a player than one,Chuck S is able to admit.He gives a post season batting %.Others were willing to say he was the most responsible(in both '78 and '84) for his team getting to the world series.

You act as though Garvey had his career cut short. He played in 2300 games! He should have amassed better numbers than he did. He was a very good 1st baseman for 5 years, ok for 7, and below average for 4. He did nothing so outstanding that seperated him from other good but not great players. The amusing part of your argument is that he is everything that you accuse me of being biased toward. A guy who played a lot, hung on for a long time, had a decent peak but was pretty middle of the road for the rest of his career.

I think you would be hard pressed to find any indication that I am a fan of the Yankees.

And what 'others' besides you are carrying the cross for the Garvey for Hall of Fame drive?

In 1984 Garvey played in 161 games, hit .284 with 8 HR's and 81 RBI's. His OBP and SLG % were .307 and .370 which are weak for a utility middle infielder let alone a supposed HOF 1st baseman.

HE BEAT THESE HALL OF FAMERS IN '74....I PUT A VALUE OF WINNING THINGS.YOU PUT MORE VALUE ON COLLECTING OVER A LOT OF YEARS.In other words you like a weed,and I prefer flowers.One looks beautiful,and makes people feel good,and the other is just there for a while(hanging out.)You say he isn't good enough,buy he routinely led his team to kick Schmidt's butt in the post.So,he beat Schmidt again.This is my point..Garvey (accused of being so self-centered) shows signs of being the offensive glue for the teams he played for.He wasn't just a part of the puzzle.He usually was playing 162 games,and not slumping.A very consistent offensive weapon when the team needed to win.When they wanted to get to the World Series,he showed up(unlike these future hof members like AROD.)

1 Steve Garvey |
2 Lou Brock |
3 Mike Marshall
4 Johnny Bench |
5 Jimmy Wynn
6 Mike Schmidt|
7 Al Oliver |
B8 Joe Morgan
Richie Zisk |
10 Willie Stargell

1974-ML-AS MVP1st at something....notice the word "most"
1974-NL-MVP1st at something....notice the word "most"
1978-ML-AS MVP1st at something....notice the word "most"
1978-NLCS MVP1st at something....notice the word "most"
1981-ML-Roberto Clemente Award
1984-ML-Lou Gehrig Memorial Award
1984-NLCS MVP1st at something....notice the word "most"

The above accomplishments should of got him in.He should of taken Tony Perez' spot.Garvey liked to hump too much(that's why he isn't in...it's not because of what he didn't do on the field.)Before he got caught humping,people voted him to start allstar games 9 times.....Best 1st baseman 9 times in his league,but his accomplishments aren't enough?

If there was ever a time to kick someone's a$$. That was the year to do it. LOL!!!

He had a great Cartoon written about him.
"..., and Garvey hits another Home Run to win the game. His family is at home plate waiting for him to score." His 500+ children yell, "Hooray Daddy!"

I guess it still counts as a kill(kickin cub butt.)It's recognized.

I'm sure Dusty Baker, Ron Cey, Davy Lopes, Don Sutton, etc would love to know that Garvey was singlehandedly winning all those games.

Not the best 1st baseman just the one lucky enough to play in the 2nd biggest media market in an era where there were very few top 1st baseman.

I told you to PLEASE give me names that should've started in front of him in those ALL STAR GAMES.If you disagreed with him starting ,then you should have the alternates you wanted back then.

I didn't say singlehandedly,but I grew up with the 70's Dodgers.Sutton was our dominant starter,and the consistent offense was there from Garvey.He didn't take many games off,and he was a reliable offensive leader on this team.Dusty came n' went.Cey was too streaky.Lopes was the good player(not great) that you're trying to make Garvey out to be.Russell was (of course) pretty much puke.Without Garvey,the Dodgers wouldn't have won even division titles in the 70's.I have to say though that he was the Corey Nakatani as far as interviews went(Cliche you into a deep sleep.)

Do you know how many times this team needed a pinch hit down the right field line from Mota?(in order to win tie games.) Those were mainly pitching teams. Without Garvey...nah...no way.There is no way they win all those division titles.

I actually meant - I literally wanted to be in San Diego to kick Garvey's a$$.

David Justice with 43.5 points? Hell, the guy should have been given an additional 50 style points just for his ability to take post-game showers with Halle Berry for four years.

People in New York (I'M SURE) didn't help him in his HOF bid.As you said,people didn't like his personality.Those are 2 of the reasons that a guy with a 130.5 HOF reference ranking(130 is almost a sure HOF inductee) didn't get in.

Hall of Fame Monitor
All-Time and Active Leaders

This is another Jamesian creation. It attempts to assess how likely (not how deserving) an active player is to make the Hall of Fame


Of course this little tidbit escaped you when you used the 130 number

Black-Ink Test
All-Time and Active Leaders

Named so because league leading numbers are traditionally represented with Boldface type. The definition for the test that I'm using here was written up in Bill James's The Politics of Glory, p. 65-67. The essential point is to measure how often a player led the league in a variety of "important" stats. This method penalizes more recent players as they have 14-16 teams per league, while the older players had just 8. To get a point you must lead the league in that category.

Batting Statistics
Four Points for home runs, runs batted in or batting average
Three Points for runs scored, hits or slugging percentage
Two Points for doubles, walks or stolen bases
One Point for games, at bats or triples
Pitching Statistics
Four Points for wins, earned run average or strikeouts
Three Points for innings pitched, win-loss percentage or saves
Two Points for complete games, lowest walks per 9 innings or lowest hits per 9 innings
One Point for appearances, starts or shutouts
Note that Hall of Famers have a wide variety of values for the Black Ink Test, and the method is unforgiving of positional differences, but it is a neat little metric.

Gray-Ink Test
All-Time and Active Leaders

Essentially the same as the Black-Ink above, but it counts appearances in the top ten of the league. For each appearance the values are below. As with the Black Ink, this method penalizes more recent players as they have 14-16 teams per league, while the older players had just 8. To get a point you must be in the top 10 in the league in that category.

Batting Statistics
Four Points for home runs, runs batted in or batting average
Three Points for runs scored, hits or slugging percentage
Two Points for doubles, walks or stolen bases
One Point for games, at bats or triples
Pitching Statistics
Four Points for wins, earned run average or strikeouts
Three Points for innings pitched, win-loss percentage or saves
Two Points for complete games, lowest walks per 9 innings or lowest hits per 9 innings
One Point for appearances, starts or shutouts



Since you wanted to use this group of stats I figured I would show the WHOLE story.

Steve Garvey's Hall Of Fame standards rating is 31, far below the average hall of famers score of 50

Steve Garvey's Grey Ink rating of 142 is slightly less than the average hall of famer's 144

Steve Garveys' Black Ink rating of 12 is far, far below the average hall of famers score of 27

He does not rate out on any of these scales as a Hall of Famer. What other ratings or stats do you want to use?

The only catagories that Steve Garvey ever led the NL in were hits 2 times, games played 6 times, sac flies 1 time and Grounded into Double Plays 2 times. Sound like a Hall of Famer to you?