Biggio "3000"!!!

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

GARVEY has almost 2 thousand less at bats,but somehow BIGGIO is not even that close in RBI TOTAL. That's what I am talkin' bout here.Garvey took care of business.

GARVEY'S RBI=1308
VERSUS BIGGIO'S 1152...keep getting another 700-800 at bats and maybe you equal the amount of runs this man knocked in.

Biggio batted leadoff while Garvey batted 3rd to 5th. The fact that Garvey only has 150 more RBI's while playing a corner infield position on good teams is actually another point in Biggios favor. You act like Garvey did not have a long career. He played for a long time and did not really have great numbers for a 1st baseman. You could make a strong case for him being the 40th best 1st baseman of all time while Biggio is clearly a top 10 at his position, while also spending time at Catcher which noone is baseball history ever has done.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Biggio batted leadoff while Garvey batted 3rd to 5th. The fact that Garvey only has 150 more RBI's while playing a corner infield position on good teams is actually another point in Biggios favor. You act like Garvey did not have a long career. He played for a long time and did not really have great numbers for a 1st baseman. You could make a strong case for him being the 40th best 1st baseman of all time while Biggio is clearly a top 10 at his position, while also spending time at Catcher which noone is baseball history ever has done.

Make up your mind...If he is a lead off hitter,then how does he have 700 more strikeouts than Garvey? Garvey hit for better average,has 700 less strike outs,and almost 200 more RBI.HOW CAN HE HAVE 700 MORE strike outs,and no seasons of 90 or above RBI? GARVEY had 106,110,111,113,and 115 seasons,and managed to do it with 700 less strike outs.Garvey is still way ahead in sacrifice flies.This guy was getting it done.I know exactly how good he was.There is no question he carried those L.A. Teams.They were not great offensive teams.Certainly not the 70's teams.We had to have Manny Mota bloop pinch hits into right field to win pitching duels.Garvey was the only reliable bat,and went forever without missing a game.That guy should be in that Hall.That much I know.You want ta put this punchin' Julie in, then do it after this guy gets in.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Your lead-off type hitter has one season of 200 or more hits.Meanwhile,the Guy who doesn't get to go in the HALL was doing this:

1974 200 hits
1975 210 hits
1976 200 hits
1977 192 hits
1978 202 hits
1979 204 hits
1980 200 hits

I was there.I saw this go down.It wasn't smoke n' mirrors.This guy was gettin' it done on that f'n scoreboard.Those were meaningful hits.Not like Pierre's.His RBI Total would be a lot more,but they were not good offensive teams.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

Well, clearly Garvey isn't in because he is...white?

Still trying to figure out wtf race has to do with it?

The guy doesn't have any stats that are good enough to be in the Hall.He has stats showing some high quantities of certain things,but they are not incredible (if you simply look at how many at bats he has taken.)If you're gunna get a boner over him getting 3000 hits,then you have to be willing to also weigh in the fact that he will most likely finish his career with a sub .280 batting average,and well over 1700 whiffs at the plate.When you see people refusing to weigh negatives(those are 2 big negatives) with the positives,then you need to figure out why it is that he would get into the hall over 3 less popular players (with better stats.)Yes,Garvey is white,but he is seen as a womanizer with a huge ego.People don't like that,and that turns this whole thing into a popularity contest.People would rather put in the white guy from Houston who played very hard for a long time,and was a good citizen.He played on a team that was known for being as white as they could get it (without having an official "white is right" policy.) He hits all the buttons for a simple white conservative thinker.Even though he will go in the Hall hitting .278.He makes them feel all warm n' fuzzy/teary-eyed.This is very much a race-based Hall of Fame candidacy.After all,he is still playing because he is hard-working white guy,and from a very conservative city.He is long past his prime,and they keep playing him even though he is usually hitting .230-.250. That's how a guy with decayed skills gets to 3000 hits.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

The guy doesn't have any stats that are good enough to be in the Hall.He has stats showing some high quantities of certain things,but they are not incredible (if you simply look at how many at bats he has taken.)If you're gunna get a boner over him getting 3000 hits,then you have to be willing to also weigh in the fact that he will most likely finish his career with a sub .280 batting average,and well over 1700 whiffs at the plate.When you see people refusing to weigh negatives(those are 2 big negatives) with the positives,then you need to figure out why it is that he would get into the hall over 3 less popular players (with better stats.)Yes,Garvey is white,but he is seen as a womanizer with a huge ego.People don't like that,and that turns this whole thing into a popularity contest.People would rather put in the white guy from Houston who played very hard for a long time,and was a good citizen.He played on a team that was known for being as white as they could get it (without having an official "white is right" policy.) He hits all the buttons for a simple white conservative thinker.Even though he will go in the Hall hitting .278.He makes them feel all warm n' fuzzy/teary-eyed.This is very much a race-based Hall of Fame candidacy.After all,he is still playing because he is hard-working white guy,and from a very conservative city.He is long past his prime,and they keep playing him even though he is usually hitting .230-.250. That's how a guy with decayed skills gets to 3000 hits.

As usual you ignore the facts and use twisted logic to make a futile argument. I have shown you the statistical evidence that shows that Biggio clearly has the credentials to be in the Hall of Fame by comparing him to OTHER HALL OF FAME SECOND BASEMAN!!! He absolutely stacks up on both peak efficency and longetivity. He not only has the stats he is a good citizen which is nothing but icing on the cake.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

The whole race thing is total BS, Rev. Sharpton. The shelter sought by the simple-minded.

1st you guys say that 3000 hits is the reason he should go in(only 27 guys etc.)Then,you say his last 3-5 years shouldn't be held against him.So,he gets credit for hitting 3000 hits,but you don't want it held against him that he was hitting at a poor average while doing it(meaning he will possibly go in the hall hitting lifetime sub .280.)No matter how ya turn the ball (to make it look good,) he is short on talent.I don't think he is anywhere near as deserving as the guys Chuck mentioned(who he is saying tailed off late.)It's not like Biggio had multiple 200+ hit seasons before he started hitting a low average.I don't think race is B.S. in this situation.I think it's a big part of why he has been allowed to keep playing on this team.I don't think he would be doing this if he wasn't white.I don't think he would be on the team,and if he was, then they would have replaced him when his performance started dropping off. Team has struggled for years offensively,but they are too stubborn to reload.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Make up your mind...If he is a lead off hitter,then how does he have 700 more strikeouts than Garvey? Garvey hit for better average,has 700 less strike outs,and almost 200 more RBI.HOW CAN HE HAVE 700 MORE strike outs,and no seasons of 90 or above RBI? GARVEY had 106,110,111,113,and 115 seasons,and managed to do it with 700 less strike outs.Garvey is still way ahead in sacrifice flies.This guy was getting it done.I know exactly how good he was.There is no question he carried those L.A. Teams.They were not great offensive teams.Certainly not the 70's teams.We had to have Manny Mota bloop pinch hits into right field to win pitching duels.Garvey was the only reliable bat,and went forever without missing a game.That guy should be in that Hall.That much I know.You want ta put this punchin' Julie in, then do it after this guy gets in.

You got me on this one. Garvey was way better at Sacrifice Flies. No one is saying that Garvey wasn't a bad player and if he had put the numbers he put up at second base he may be a fringe canidate but he pales in comparison to other 1st baseman while Biggio is a top player at his position. What is so hard to understand about that? Garvey was a top player at his position in his league for about 6 years and was pretty average for about 12. Biggio was a top player at his position for about 14 years and was pretty average for about 5. Simply Garvey was no where as good at doing the things he needed to do at his position as Biggio was at his. Period.

From 1974 to 1980 with the exception of 1976, Garvey was a very good player. But before that and after that he was very average. He may have been hampered by playing in Dodger stadium but no more so than Biggio was playing in the Astrodome. 6 good years are just not enough to get a guy into the Hall. He is not as good as Jim Rice or Andre Dawson neither of which is in the Hall.

Outside of you, Steve, Cindy and the 23 kids there is no one that thinks that Steve Garvey should be in the Hall of Fame. If he had played in Texas, you would have forgotten his name 10 years ago.