Hall of Fame Trial - Ted Simmons

[clancyphile]

I bring Ted Simmons.

 

In the Hall of Fame, or not?

[DuWayne Steurer]

I've always been baffled as to why Simmons got hardly any push for the hall, let alone admittance. Considering he put those numbers up mostly as a catcher, and in parks that favored pitchers, I would vote yes.

[splitterpfj]

Hey Clancy, you're kind of walking on me here.

 

I guess I don't have a right to say much, this certainly isn't my site, but I kind of had a plan for this.

[SeriesFinale]

Yes, no one had ever talked about players potentially being in the Hall of Fame here until you introduced the format. Come on.

[colbyjack]

splitterpfj may not be introducing anything new, but he has gone on record stating that he is going to unveil new players to be debated in days to come:

 

p092.ezboard.com/fbrewers...9315.topic

 

It's obvious he has put a lot of thought and hard work into these threads, and it has generated some interesting discussion, so for someone else to come along and just start their own, using the same title, idea, etc., is kind of a slap in the face IMO.

 

I'm not speaking as a moderator, because I don't believe this thread is a lockable offense since I certainly don't want to regulate what people talk about when, but I do think it shows some poor taste on clancy's part.

[splitterpfj]

I'll start by voting no on Simmons. Great player, in fact my favorite for some of his time in Milwaukee. The best eligible catcher who's not in, but I have to say no.

 

Hi SeriesFinale, thanks for your comment.

 

I wasn't trying to make a big deal of things, this is all just for fun. What I was saying is, I had put some thought into this and had developed a list of players I wanted to do this for. I'm sure I still will, if others want to throw names out there, I'm sure we could all do it that way too.

 

I hope I didn't offend Clancy, or anyone else with my prior comment, I also hope everyone enjoys the topic.

[BillScottCanRake]

I tend to agree with Patrick on this one. While it isn't the biggest deal in the world, it would certainly have been nice if spliiterpfj would have been allowed to complete his series, which he's obviously put a lot of time and effort into, before others would have started threads like this.

[splitterpfj]

Thank you Colby, I have indeed put a lot of thought into this, and I hope everyone is enjoying it. I didn't like it, and I did feel a bit disrespected, but please don't anyone get worked up over it, have a good time, this is a fan site........be a fan!

 

Nothing has changed for me, I plan to continue as stated in the thread Colby referenced. This thread is out here now, if you have something to say about Simmons, he's certainly a worthy candidate.

[SeriesFinale]

I think I came off harsher than I meant to there, I keep forgetting that brewerfan.net is an island of civility.

 

Anyway, if this isn't going to get locked, my vote is for Simmons to get in, esp. based on the aforementioned Carlton Fisk comparisons.

[RoseBowlMtg]

Anyone who doesn't think Simmons belongs in the HOF please read this since it breaks down the 15 years they both played at the same time. You tell me who was the better player at that time and if you think Fisk playing 8 extra years without surpassing Simmons' numbers made him a first time elected HOFer while Simmons only received 17 votes not enough to remain on the ballot....well then you are like too many HOF voters who didn't take the time to look at the details.

 

Tell me another HOF who:

 

Leads all players in his position in hits who is not in the HOF?

2nd most RBI's per position and is not in the HOF?

Leads his team in RBI's 7 consecutive times and is not in the HOF?

Leads all players per position for a decade in hits and RBI's and is not in the HOF?

 

 

 

 

 

Fisk v Simba

[clancyphile]

If you want to lock it - go ahead, colbyjack.

 

Sorry I jumped in.

[Blue584ever]

Quick, Bill James worshippers, where does he rank Ted? I vote him in.

[pogokat]

Quick, Bill James worshippers, where does he rank Ted? I vote him in.

 

i worship not the jamesian wit, but he makes a better case for his rankings than anyone else:

 

Simmons is 11th.

 

Right behind gabby Hartnet (HOF)

and right in front of Joe Torre (not Hof, but probably will be for his managing exploits)

 

he certainly ranks behind current catchers Piazza and rodriguez,but not Jorge posada and javy lopez...i'd say after a quick glance that he was a very good player..

 

and that one could make a case for him...

 

He was a compiler, but being a compiler as a catcher is really amazing..He was primarily a catcher until 1984..so thats what, 17 season's as a catcher

 

I'm gonna break my no vote string and vote yes

[JumpinMacFlash]

I had never thought of Ted Simmons as a Hall of Famer. I had never actually looked at his career stats. After reading that link and his lifetime stats, I say yes.

[splitterpfj]

I went ahead and set up a poll for Ted in the polls forum.

 

I changed my vote to yes. Clancy, it looks like you picked a good one, the early posts seem to support Ted.

[Bucky Rules]

I don't know. IMO Carlton Fisk was the better player of the two. But, you could make an argument for both getting in. And you could make an argument for neither deserving to be in. At the end of the day, I guess Fisk deserved to be in and Simba.... hmmm.... hem, haw, hem, haw... I'll say no, but I wouldn't scream if they selected him.

 

By the way... the article link that presents this scenario from the earlier post really understates the difference in their defensive abilities. Carlton Fisk was a much, much, much better defensive catcher than Simba. And that very well might be the difference maker in the end.

[brewerjamie15]

Wow. I didn't know that Simmons was so close to HOF type numbers. Carlton Fisk was better defensively, but Simmons was better with the bat. I think Simmons may have gotten ripped off by such a small vote tally in his first ballot. I'm not positive he belongs in the hall, but I do know he deserved more votes.

[splitterpfj]

I know a lot of you voiced opinions on Simmons a few weeks ago in RoseBowl's "Happy Birthday" thread, but I have a hard time believing 1800 Brewer fans have less to say in Ted's HOF trial than they had to say about Rice or Sutter.

 

C'mon guys, let's hear it. Only 5 votes in the polls forum? That's the same kind of treatment Ted got from the writers, and he was one of our own.

[RoseBowlMtg]

BuckyRules love the name btw which years in the head to head battle did Fisk outperform Simmons. That to me would be a good discussion for you said:

 

I don't know. IMO Carlton Fisk was the better player of the two

 

Of the 14 years head to head give me a year you want to say Fisk was better and I will give you a year Simmons was and we can see where we end up at.

[Bucky Rules]

RoseBowl -- You're probably going to win that comparison, due in no small part to the fact that Simmons was able to stay healthy and on the field more than Fisk. But, IMO it's not quite as simple as that. When they both were healthy, I would take Fisk over Simmons. This is just my opinion... but, I think they were comparable hitters -- with an edge towards Simmons, and Fisk was the far superior defensive catcher. Ted Simmons was a liability behind the plate (although his reputation for calling a good game should be considered). At a position like catcher, defense must be considered high up the list of priorities.

 

Now, if Simba had hit like Piazza, I would be willing to let that slide. Piazza makes the HOF as a hitter at any position, I would think. Simba wouldn't. As I said, though... it's very close. I wouldn't be screaming outrage if Simmons makes it. And I agree with those that said he deserved more consideration than he got.

[splitterpfj]

The next Veterans Committee vote is in 2007, Fingers, Molitor, Sutton, Yount, Brock, Gibson, Musial and Schoendienst are all on the committee, as are Bench and Berra..........I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Ted get in.

[RoseBowlMtg]

Bucky rules you state:

 

and Fisk was the far superior defensive catcher. Ted Simmons was a liability behind the plate (although his reputation for calling a good game should be considered). At a position like catcher, defense must be considered high up the list of priorities.

 

I have friends that were Card fans in the 70's who think Simmons was a great defensive catcher after passed ball problems at age 21-23 when Fisk wasn't even playing yet. Factor that in and Fisk had a .988 fielding % vs Simba's .987. Huge difference?

 

Now, if Simba had hit like Piazza, I would be willing to let that slide. Piazza makes the HOF as a hitter at any position, I would think.

 

I agree Piazza has had huge numbers in this juiced era and will get into the HOF. Not to degrade Piazza but look at the career numbers of Piazza after last year (Piazza is not doing much this year at age 36) and Simmons when he was 35:

 

............Piazza....Simba

Hits: 1829........2370...(541)

doubles: 285....464....(179)

triples: 6........47.....(39)

HR: 378......238...(-140)

RBI: 1161......1323...(162)

 

Honestly did you know that Simmons at an equal faze of his career had over 500 more hits and 160 more ribbies than Piazza. I am not degrading Piazza but showing how great Simmons was where obviously only 17 HOF voters realized.

[RoseBowlMtg]

Here are the fielding % from the Boston/Cards years:

 

1972: .984/.987

1973: .983/.987

1974: .980/.986

1975: .979/.983

1976: .984/.993

1977: .987/.987

1978: .980/.988

1979: .982/.985

1980: .983/.985

 

Not one year did Fisk have a better fielding % while at Boston when Simmons was at St.Louis. That's a combined .39 better. I believe to dis Simmons on his d is recalling his 1983 year with the Brewers but he had quite the career before that.

[Bucky Rules]

Quote:

---

I have friends that were Card fans in the 70's who think Simmons was a great defensive catcher after passed ball problems at age 21-23 when Fisk wasn't even playing yet. Factor that in and Fisk had a .988 fielding % vs Simba's .987. Huge difference?

---

I don't think that anyone who was around to see these two players in the '70s and '80s would argue that Simmons was in the same area code of Fisk as a defensive catcher. You can dig up any selective statistics to try and demonstrate their comparability -- it will not convince me. They were not close.

 

Quote:

---

look at the career numbers of Piazza after last year (Piazza is not doing much this year at age 36) and Simmons when he was 35:

---

At that point in their life, Simmons had played five more seasons than Piazza. That goes under the category of compiling. I'm pretty confident that if you gave a young Piazza five seasons, he would've been able to surpass those 500 hits and 160 RBIs fairly easily. Never mind the HUGE disparity in power.

 

Think about it this way. You're trying to compare Simmons who was a very good hitting Catcher to Piazza who was one of the best hitters PERIOD in baseball. There really isn't much comparison.

 

I appreciate your point of view, and I agree that Simmons should be much closer than the 17 votes he got. But you're not going to win points arguing that he was comparable defensively to Fisk or offensively to Piazza. I just can't buy it. I think it's much closer to say he was comparable to Fisk OFFensively and Piazza DEFensively. That's not giving Simba enough credit, but it's closer than the other way around.

[gregmag]

This is really a tough one for me. In general I think the Hall undervalues the contributions of guys who play key defensive positions in favor of too many 1Bs and LFs who get to bat fourth. So Simmons, for me, is a lot closer than Jim Rice.

 

Simmons caught as many games as Johnny Bench (about 1750 games), and performed offensively at the level of Carlton Fisk (OPS+ 118, compared to 126 for Bench). That's kind of Simmons' problem: he needed either a bit more offensive potency or a bit more longevity to be a sure thing for the HoF.

 

So he's on the borderline, which for me means his defense should be the deciding factor. Presumably he wouldn't have caught 1750 games if he wasn't any good; but catchers' defensive contributions are notoriously tough to measure.

 

I'm going to vote yes, mainly because I have to believe that catchers in the HoF should run at least 12 deep, probably substantially more. But I'm not sure.

 

Greg.