HOF Expansion Era Committee Ballot--Gillick In, Others Not

[snyttri]

I think Marvin Miller stands out among some other worthy candidates. It's strange that there was a veteran's committee for executives and it didn't select Marvin Miller. No other executive they could have selected had as much impact on the game.

Here's an argument for Mller's inclusion from Biz of Baseball: "Making the Case for Marvin Miller"

[Outlander]

I probably wouldn't vote for any of those guys in but would consider Dick Allen, and Lou whitaker never really had a chance. Hopefully they do this at least every few years so a guy like Dave Parker also gets a chance once his 15 years are over.

[RockCoCougars]

You are right on about the short span thing as well. Puckett makes the Hall- which I don't argue with- but Mattingly doesn't?

I think Mattingly is one of the most overrated players of all time. He had 4 fantastic seasons, 1984-1987, and then wasn't really anything special after that. In the 8 seasons he played after 1987 he topped .800 OPS only 4 times, just once reaching into the .820's. He only played 13 seasons, those last 8 hitting just 99 homers with a .347obp/.424slg.

 

His peak didn't last long enough, and his health didn't allow him the years to run up the counting stats. Take away those 4 great years and all you have left is an injury prone Wally Joyner.

I agree that Mattingly had a short spurt of greatness, but in those four years he was the best player in baseball hands down. If I had a vote, I'd still say no though. That said, if you look, his and Puckett's career stats were very similar. Both had their careers ended by injuries. I think that Puckett's sudden departure due to the glaucoma got him a lot of votes as opposed to Mattingly's slow decline from his back problems, which probably hindered his stats in the latter part of his career as well.

[1992casey]

I think that Puckett's sudden departure due to the glaucoma got him a lot of votes as opposed to Mattingly's slow decline from his back problems...

 

Kirby got in on the same basis as Sandy Koufax. Both careers were cut short while the players were at or near their peaks.

[Invader3K]

I probably wouldn't vote for any of those guys in but would consider Dick Allen, and Lou whitaker never really had a chance. Hopefully they do this at least every few years so a guy like Dave Parker also gets a chance once his 15 years are over.

Speaking of Parker, I don't get why he never gets any mentions. Not like he had a mediocre career or anything.

[DuWayne Steurer]

I probably wouldn't vote for any of those guys in but would consider Dick Allen, and Lou whitaker never really had a chance. Hopefully they do this at least every few years so a guy like Dave Parker also gets a chance once his 15 years are over.

Speaking of Parker, I don't get why he never gets any mentions. Not like he had a mediocre career or anything.

You can put Parker's numbers right next to Andre Dawsons and Jim Rice's numbers, and wonder "hmmm.........now why are 2 of these guys in, and one not?"

[Invader3K]

Yeah, that's my point, RoCo. Parker is very similar to those two, and they are in. I know Parker is somewhat tainted by his admitted drug use, but so were a whole lot of other guys during his era that are in.

[gregmag]

I don't think Dawson and Rice were good selections. Now, maybe I'm wrong about that; those have been lively arguments. My point in bringing it up is, what do you do if people get in who you don't think should be in, and then a comparable player comes up? I think you stay consistent. I mean, there are some really bad selections from the 1920s in the Hall; once they're in, they're in, but that doesn't mean you should set the standards by them. So -- because I happen to think that Dawson and Rice weren't good selections, and because I agree that Parker is a comparable player, I wouldn't vote for Parker.

 

Lou Whitaker, on the other hand . . . Alan Trammell too. I would give serious consideration to both of those guys; my gut says they belong. If we did use the argument that guys should get in if they're better than the guys who are already in, then it would be easy -- Whitaker and Trammell are significantly better than Tinker and Evers.

[Invader3K]

greg, I see your point. I didn't think Rice or Dawson should get in either...but since they are, I don't see how you can exclude Parker in fairness.

[RockCoCougars]

I think there have been a lot of bad selections in the past 10 years or so: Cepeda, Tony Perez, Sutter and Rice to name a few (though I'll argue in Dawson's favor until my face is blue, the sabermetrics just don't do him justice). That's becoming the issue now, "if so in so is in, so should so and so"- I'm guilty of this too. For example, in my view Dave Parker was a much better player than Jim Rice. Though they both peaked right about the same time in the late 70's, Rice maintained playing pretty well until about 1984, but unfortunately Parker got out of shape and started partying a little too much... so he disappeared for a few years in the early eighties. Then, ironically enough, Rice basically started to wash up in '85 and Parker started to resurrect at the same time. Had Parker not wasted a few seasons, he would have easily been a HOF, probably gotten to 3,000 hits, etc.

[Fatter than Joey]

It's staggering to me that Marvin Miller isn't in the Hall.

 

Agreed, Miller is long overdue.

 

If Simmons make the HOF, do the Brewers retire his number?

 

No. Don Sutton is in the HOF, and the Brewers never retired his number. Ted Simmons, while a solid solid player, didn't have the impact that Fingers did in Milwaukee.

 

It's hard for me to imagine Steinbrenner not getting in as a so-recently-posthumous gesture.

 

Steinbrenner needs to get in.

 

Didn't Caldwell beat Guidry twice that season? Between Caldwell and Higuera, the Brewers had a patented Yankee killer on the staff for over a decade.

I seem to remember another 'Mike' beating Guidry for his only other loss that season.

 

Moose Haas was a great Yankee killer as well. The only three pitchers to beat Guidry in '78 were Caldwell, Mike Torrez, and Mike Willis.

 

As I said, Blue should have been in the HOF, and would have had he been able to keep his nose clean (literally).

 

This simply is not true -- Blue's drug problems surfaced when he was with the Royals in 1983. Now, he probably was using drugs well before that, but his legal problems happened well into the down-side of his career. Blue was never talked about as a HOFer in the mid-70's to early 80's before his legal problems. Blue's career simply wasn't good enough for the HOF, and there were so many good HOF starting pitches in the mid-late 70s, Blue gets rightfully placed on the back burner.

 

By the way, where is Dick Allen?

 

Dick Allen finished up his career well before most of these players -- I think Allen was done in 1976 -- all of the other players, played well into the 80s.

 

I don't think Dawson and Rice were good selections.

 

Agreed -- Tony Perez either.

 

If I had to vote -- I'd probably vote for Miller, Steinbrenner, Simmons and Concepcion.

[RockCoCougars]

This simply is not true -- Blue's drug problems surfaced when he was with the Royals in 1983. Now, he probably was using drugs well before that, but his legal problems happened well into the down-side of his career. Blue was never talked about as a HOFer in the mid-70's to early 80's before his legal problems. Blue's career simply wasn't good enough for the HOF, and there were so many good HOF starting pitches in the mid-late 70s, Blue gets rightfully placed on the back burner.

 

I'm not sure about that. Blue had 165 career wins on his 30th birthday. He also had a Cy Young, an MVP, and several World Series under his belt. It seems like he was in the All Star game every year. If he'd had half the longevity of a guy like Sutton or Gaylord Perry and stayed out of prison, I don't think that there is any reason to believe that he couldn't have pitched until 1990 or so. I don't think that he ever really had any injury problems. Like Dave Parker it was a combination of poor conditioning and drugs that eroded his skills and cost him the HOF.

[JimH5]

Gillick is the only one from the group to get in.

[gregmag]

Well, that's just about as anticlimactic as it could possibly be. But good for Gillick.

[danzig6767]

Good for Gillick, well deserved