Blowout Cards Forums
This Just In

Go Back   Blowout Cards Forums > BLOWOUTS HOBBY TALK > BASEBALL

BASEBALL Post your Baseball Cards Hobby Talk

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-10-2013, 02:08 AM   #51 (permalink)
Member
 
Ziveus101's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: The Empire State
Posts: 2,510
Default

#thisisanoutrage
__________________
Pandemonium Doesn't Reign Around Here, It Pours
Ziveus101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 09:44 AM   #52 (permalink)
Member
 
AUTaxMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 524
Default

Frank is a first ballot HOFer to me, but if he gets in, it will only make the intellectual dishonesty of the voters more obvious. They would have voted in a masher who they dont think took PEDs, and left out others just as deserving because they think they took PEDs. So stupid.
__________________
COLLECTING
GREG MADDUX, QUENTIN GROVES, FRANK SANDERS, AND AUBURN TIGERS
AUTaxMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:33 AM   #53 (permalink)
Member
 
JohnnysBench's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: the City of Steele...
Posts: 3,066
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by metsandweezer View Post
but he hit 291 homers and he is under 6 feet tall. so a small dude with 3,000 hits plus 300 homers, in my mind = sterorids. plus he was on the same team as jeff "steroids" bagwell.
Look how many years it took him to compile his numbers. I usually associate PED use with a sudden spike in homers(ped's do not help you hit the ball, only hit the ball further, making routine pop fly's home runs). The prime example of this is a player like Juan Gonzalez. Steroids are also known for shortening a career, not lengthening it. Biggio had a long stint in MLB, and his consistancy over time makes me think no juice, and first ballot Hall of Famer...
__________________
" I hate ALL hitters, I start a game mad and stay that way until it's over..." (Don Drysdale)
JohnnysBench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 10:37 AM   #54 (permalink)
Member
 
xbignick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 13,556
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnysBench View Post
Look how many years it took him to compile his numbers. I usually associate PED use with a sudden spike in homers(ped's do not help you hit the ball, only hit the ball further, making routine pop fly's home runs). The prime example of this is a player like Juan Gonzalez. Steroids are also known for shortening a career, not lengthening it. Biggio had a long stint in MLB, and his consistancy over time makes me think no juice, and first ballot Hall of Famer...
Home Run Rates in 1998 and 2012 | FanGraphs Baseball

"If you put forth the current run environment as an example of what baseball looks like without PEDs, please understand that you are arguing that PEDs caused hitters to be able to make contact more often, not hit the ball over the wall more often when they did make contact. That is what the facts demonstrate. We’re all entitled to our own opinions, but we aren’t entitled to our own facts. And the fact is, the rate of home runs on contacted balls was higher in 2012 than it was in 1998."
__________________
@xxbignick on twitter!
xbignick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 11:30 AM   #55 (permalink)
Member
 
lobo_hacker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2,626
Send a message via Yahoo to lobo_hacker
Default

-We've had this discussion before. Search is your friend. My reply on Biggio below:

"-Traditionally, the Hall of Fame has weighted counting statistics more than saber analysis. Certainly Biggio gets in when considering the counting stats: the only player in history to amass this combination = 3000 hits, 600 doubles, 400 stolen bases, and 250 home runs. He also generated opportunities in an oft-unrecognized way, crowding the plate and leading the league in HBP for 5 seasons. Through in a few Gold Gloves and an All-Star bid at both 2b and Catcher (weird), it would seem the counting stats are in his favor.

When compared to other 2b players in the Hall, he's around middle of the pack in most counting stats. Not near close to the worst, only the best on one or two categories. 1st in Runs Scored, 2nd in HR, 4th in Hits, 5th in SB, etc. So, again, by traditional 'counting stat' measures, it would seem Biggio has the right stuff.

A quick aside, particularly for all you Larry Walker haters. Biggio played in the Astrodome, a not-friendly-to-hitters park by most measures. If yer gonna downgrade Walker for the Coors factor, you darn well better give Biggio a bump for playing a good shot of games in that place. If not, let Walker in and quit being hypocritical.

And then we get to the sabermetric analysis. Length hurts here, but something that comes up a lot in these discussions is dominance. Jack Morris and Blyleven can speak to this. So, was Biggio ever 'dominant'?

In the 1990s, his best decade, he led the league in doubles 3 times, had a 5+ oWAR 5 times (topping out over 7 twice), the best dWAR of his career, and during the decade was second only to I-rubbed-some-mayonnaise-type-substance-on-my-muscles-and-didn't-know-it-was-bad-Barry Bonds in Win Shares. For the decade.

Add in a few Silver Sluggers for good measure and 32nd all-time in Runs Created (ahead of a whole slew of HOF players).

In the end, i personally think the Hall of Fame as currently-designed is a bit flawed. Without discussing that, though, to maintain some consistency and relevance to the past, if we're gonna keep this ol' gal together...Biggio gets in.""
lobo_hacker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 11:48 AM   #56 (permalink)
Member
 
JohnnysBench's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: the City of Steele...
Posts: 3,066
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xbignick View Post
Home Run Rates in 1998 and 2012 | FanGraphs Baseball

"If you put forth the current run environment as an example of what baseball looks like without PEDs, please understand that you are arguing that PEDs caused hitters to be able to make contact more often, not hit the ball over the wall more often when they did make contact. That is what the facts demonstrate. We’re all entitled to our own opinions, but we aren’t entitled to our own facts. And the fact is, the rate of home runs on contacted balls was higher in 2012 than it was in 1998."
I respect the facts, so it would seem to me many factors could go into that stat such as number of power hitters in the Major leagues or rate of foul balls ect, but again I can see your point. Food for thought thanks!
__________________
" I hate ALL hitters, I start a game mad and stay that way until it's over..." (Don Drysdale)
JohnnysBench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 12:14 PM   #57 (permalink)
Member
 
guru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Central, KY
Posts: 16,176
Default

Biggio is a Hall of Famer, but he isn't a first ballot HOFer IMO.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter - @ebayguruEric

Now Collecting: Ken Griffey Jr. & Kevin Garnett
guru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 12:17 PM   #58 (permalink)
Member
 
Imac7065's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,233
Default

Anyone know who got the highest % of all time?... Tom Seaver

Babe Ruth? nope... Ty Cobb? not uh... Hank Aaron? Willie Mays? Ted Williams? nope nope nope... Tom Seaver

The writers are fickle idiots.. period.
__________________
For My Up to Date Inventory Please Check My Ebay Store: http://stores.ebay.com/Jeremys-Sports-Cards-and-Coins
Imac7065 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 01:50 PM   #59 (permalink)
Member
 
lobo_hacker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2,626
Send a message via Yahoo to lobo_hacker
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guru View Post
Biggio is a Hall of Famer, but he isn't a first ballot HOFer IMO.
-What does that mean? Either he's qualified or he's not. This first-ballot crap is one of the many issues i have had for awhile with voters. Go to a job interview, they tell you they want to hire you, you're great, qualified, handsome/pretty, everything they need. But because you didn't have a 4.0 gpa in high school, go apply three more times, then we'll hire you.

Nonsense. Always has been.

lobo_hacker
lobo_hacker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 02:11 PM   #60 (permalink)
Member
 
Imac7065's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,233
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lobo_hacker View Post
-What does that mean? Either he's qualified or he's not. This first-ballot crap is one of the many issues i have had for awhile with voters. Go to a job interview, they tell you they want to hire you, you're great, qualified, handsome/pretty, everything they need. But because you didn't have a 4.0 gpa in high school, go apply three more times, then we'll hire you.

Nonsense. Always has been.

lobo_hacker
Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, etc etc.. people you cannot argue against logically.. these are "first ballot hofers"


Biggio, Nellie Fox, Billy Williams, Tony Perez, etc etc... these are guys people can and have argued against.. and are not first ballot HOFers
__________________
For My Up to Date Inventory Please Check My Ebay Store: http://stores.ebay.com/Jeremys-Sports-Cards-and-Coins
Imac7065 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 02:26 PM   #61 (permalink)
Member
 
AUTaxMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 524
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lobo_hacker View Post
-What does that mean? Either he's qualified or he's not. This first-ballot crap is one of the many issues i have had for awhile with voters. Go to a job interview, they tell you they want to hire you, you're great, qualified, handsome/pretty, everything they need. But because you didn't have a 4.0 gpa in high school, go apply three more times, then we'll hire you.

Nonsense. Always has been.

lobo_hacker
I agree. There should be no distinction. You are either qualified for the Hall, or you are not.
__________________
COLLECTING
GREG MADDUX, QUENTIN GROVES, FRANK SANDERS, AND AUBURN TIGERS
AUTaxMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 02:50 PM   #62 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,519
Default

Did you really just compare Craig freaking Biggio to Derek Jeter?
razorsharp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 03:00 PM   #63 (permalink)
Member
 
guru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Central, KY
Posts: 16,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lobo_hacker View Post
-What does that mean? Either he's qualified or he's not. This first-ballot crap is one of the many issues i have had for awhile with voters. Go to a job interview, they tell you they want to hire you, you're great, qualified, handsome/pretty, everything they need. But because you didn't have a 4.0 gpa in high school, go apply three more times, then we'll hire you.

Nonsense. Always has been.

lobo_hacker
In that case, Jim Rice should have never made the Hall of Fame.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter - @ebayguruEric

Now Collecting: Ken Griffey Jr. & Kevin Garnett
guru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 03:02 PM   #64 (permalink)
Member
 
AUTaxMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 524
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guru View Post
In that case, Jim Rice should have never made the Hall of Fame.
Totally agree. He should not have made it.
__________________
COLLECTING
GREG MADDUX, QUENTIN GROVES, FRANK SANDERS, AND AUBURN TIGERS
AUTaxMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 03:16 PM   #65 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 2,108
Send a message via AIM to Jenkinssssss
Default

Read the title. laughed. thanks OP.

the HoF is completely BS now, but to be 1st ballot you have to be a boss.
Jenkinssssss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 03:22 PM   #66 (permalink)
Member
 
lobo_hacker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2,626
Send a message via Yahoo to lobo_hacker
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guru View Post
In that case, Jim Rice should have never made the Hall of Fame.
-I'm not sure what you are saying here.

Do you feel Jim Rice was/is worthy? Then i would say to the voters that ultimately voted him in: they should've put him on their first ballot. Just because he's older doesn't mean he suddenly qualifies for something that, not a few years ago, they thought he didn't qualify for. It's not like he's been accumulating more HRs since he retired.

Do you feel Jim Rice was/is not worthy? Then i would say that the voters that ultimately voted him in disagree and the nonsensical ability for them to just keep voting for these lingering players allows the nonsense to continue. Nonsensically, even. I would also say to those voters, put him on your first ballot. Why wait? Are you that insecure that you have to wait several years before making a grown-up decision?

A player's worth for the Hall should not change over time. They're retired. The rules for induction don't change over time. Their stats don't change. What the hell are they waiting on?

Nonsense.

lobo_hacker, happy to contribute to a slight thread derailment while bored at work

Last edited by lobo_hacker; 01-10-2013 at 03:29 PM.
lobo_hacker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 03:26 PM   #67 (permalink)
Member
 
lobo_hacker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2,626
Send a message via Yahoo to lobo_hacker
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imac7065 View Post
Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, etc etc.. people you cannot argue against logically.. these are "first ballot hofers"


Biggio, Nellie Fox, Billy Williams, Tony Perez, etc etc... these are guys people can and have argued against.. and are not first ballot HOFers
-But why? *Why* aren't they first-ballot? Because the voters historically have maintained this odd honor? Have you even seen ballots cast by these numbskulls over the last few decades?

Just saying "not first ballot" means acrapsolutely nothing. What changes in the players stats/qualifications 5 years down the road? Nostalgia? Grey Hair? They wear diapers now so we feel sorry for them?

I just don't get it. I understand individual voters change, and am understanding of that being one possible reason for some late ballot players getting in. But that isn't the majority of what's happening here. The majority seem to have this odd notion int heir heads as well.

Similar stuff happens at work with guys that have been at the firm waaaaay too long. They'll say things like 'that's the way it's always been' or 'that department just works best that way'.

...

Nonsense!

lobo_hacker

Last edited by lobo_hacker; 01-10-2013 at 03:28 PM.
lobo_hacker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 03:32 PM   #68 (permalink)
Member
 
hche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,667
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lobo_hacker View Post
-But why? *Why* aren't they first-ballot? Because the voters historically have maintained this odd honor? Have you even seen ballots cast by these numbskulls over the last few decades?

Just saying "not first ballot" means acrapsolutely nothing. What changes in the players stats/qualifications 5 years down the road? Nostalgia? Grey Hair? They wear diapers now so we feel sorry for them?

I just don't get it. I understand individual voters change, and am understanding of that being one possible reason for some late ballot players getting in. But that isn't the majority of what's happening here. The majority seem to have this odd notion int heir heads as well.

Similar stuff happens at work with guys that have been at the firm waaaaay too long. They'll say things like 'that's the way it's always been' or 'that department just works best that way'.

...

Nonsense!

lobo_hacker
I totally agreed! So someone doesn't make it in the first time, then later suddenly he becomes a deserving HOFer? I don't get that part. Well, if we need to separate level of HOFers, then HOF should have gold, silver, bronze levels and people get in different levels. :b
hche is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 03:35 PM   #69 (permalink)
Member
 
guru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Central, KY
Posts: 16,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lobo_hacker View Post
-I'm not sure what you are saying here.

Do you feel Jim Rice was/is worthy? Then i would say to the voters that ultimately voted him in: they should've put him on their first ballot. Just because he's older doesn't mean he suddenly qualifies for something that, not a few years ago, they thought he didn't qualify for. It's not like he's been accumulating more HRs since he retired.

Do you feel Jim Rice was/is not worthy? Then i would say that the voters that ultimately voted him in disagree and the nonsensical ability for them to just keep voting for these lingering players allows the nonsense to continue. Nonsensically, even. I would also say to those voters, put him on your first ballot. Why wait? Are you that insecure that you have to wait several years before making a grown-up decision?

A player's worth for the Hall should not change over time. They're retired. The rules for induction don't change over time. Their stats don't change. What the hell are they waiting on?

Nonsense.

lobo_hacker, happy to contribute to a slight thread derailment while bored at work
I just think to be a first ballot Hall of Famer it is just an honor.

It means you were a slam dunk candidate and most writers thought you should be in. In other words no debate.

Not sure why that is so hard to grasp.

Then as time passes, some players stats, achievements, etc.... start to look better when comparing them to the players of their generation. So they get voted in later on. Like a Tony Perez.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter - @ebayguruEric

Now Collecting: Ken Griffey Jr. & Kevin Garnett
guru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 04:05 PM   #70 (permalink)
Member
 
bronxbomber33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 2,324
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jubjub47 View Post
This thinking is so stupid to me. The players career is over. It's not going to improve so waiting until the 2nd or 3rd year etc. makes no sense. If the player is a HOF caliber player put him in on his first year or don't put him in at all. No lessons are being learned and nothing is being gained by making them wait. As for the PEDs, baseball is just going to have to accept they were a part of the game and move on. While I don't like Bonds or Clemens, they deserve to be in as does McGwire. Really I think most of the guys eligible today are deserving. The one being slapped the hardest by the PEDs is Palmeiro and even he probably needs to be in. He was a great player.
I do think that the only way you should get in on the first ballot is if you are one of the elite players of all time. It is an honor to be elected into the hall of fame, but it is the utmost honor to be voted in on your first chance. It is something that has only happened less than a quarter of the time. And I firmly believe that Biggio belongs in the hall but not as a part of that elite group. Getting in on the first ballot is of itself something special just like making it on the ballot is also.
__________________
http://s1134.photobucket.com/albums/m609/bronxbomber33/

2014 IP Auto's: Cards-474, 8x10's-16, ROMLB-3
bronxbomber33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 04:16 PM   #71 (permalink)
Member
 
lobo_hacker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2,626
Send a message via Yahoo to lobo_hacker
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guru View Post

..Not sure why that is so hard to grasp...
-It's not hard to grasp, i just think it's not very bright. Goes back to my point about some vague sense of 'nostalgia'. Voting based on feelings is what American Idol is for, and should not bleed into the Hall.

But, as i said earlier, the trend has been a constant and has resulted in a voting based (much like voting for the Gold Glove or other postseason awards) decreasingly on merit.

Steam vented, i'll just go back to ignoring the Hall.

lobo_hacker
lobo_hacker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 04:57 PM   #72 (permalink)
Member
 
Imac7065's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,233
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lobo_hacker View Post
-But why? *Why* aren't they first-ballot? Because the voters historically have maintained this odd honor? Have you even seen ballots cast by these numbskulls over the last few decades?

Just saying "not first ballot" means acrapsolutely nothing. What changes in the players stats/qualifications 5 years down the road? Nostalgia? Grey Hair? They wear diapers now so we feel sorry for them?

I just don't get it. I understand individual voters change, and am understanding of that being one possible reason for some late ballot players getting in. But that isn't the majority of what's happening here. The majority seem to have this odd notion int heir heads as well.

Similar stuff happens at work with guys that have been at the firm waaaaay too long. They'll say things like 'that's the way it's always been' or 'that department just works best that way'.

...

Nonsense!

lobo_hacker
Let me ask you something..

Is Michael Jordan the same level of HOFer as Spencer Haywood?

Is Babe Ruth the same level as Luis Aparicio?

Is Wayne Gretzky the same level as Cam Neely?

Is Dan Marino the same level as as an offensive linemen from the 1950's?

There are top tier, no doubt about it, can't argue against them type of HOFers... and then there are "all time greats" that are HOF worthy, but when you think of their sport.. you by no means think of them first.

That is the difference between a HOFer and a First Ballot HOFer in my view.
__________________
For My Up to Date Inventory Please Check My Ebay Store: http://stores.ebay.com/Jeremys-Sports-Cards-and-Coins
Imac7065 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 05:14 PM   #73 (permalink)
Member
 
Metsfan1121's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: long island
Posts: 3,740
Default

Would you consider Joe Dimmagio a first ballot?
Metsfan1121 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 05:22 PM   #74 (permalink)
Member
 
Imac7065's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Florida
Posts: 5,233
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Metsfan1121 View Post
Would you consider Joe Dimmagio a first ballot?
I would.. and I also would say the BWAA is fully of fickle idiots before you tell me he wasn't lol.. I already pointed out that Tom Seaver got the most votes all time.

Tom Verduci was asked on MLB Network why his ballot changes every year.. even though nothing has changed about the player (IE he put Bert Blyleven on and off his ballot multiple times). He started stuttering and stammering before saying "it's all about perception at that time" (IE a cop out).

If a guy isn't "first ballot" worthy.. I wouldn't vote for them the first time, but would subsequently vote for them every ballot after that until they were elected.

My HOF ballot in 2013 would have looked like this:

Fred McGriff
Jeff Bagwell
Mark McGwire
Rafael Palmeiro
Mike Piazza (first ballot worthy)


My 2014 Ballot would look like this:

Greg Maddux (first ballot)
Fred McGriff
Jeff Bagwell
Mark McGwire
Rafael Palmeiro
Mike Piazza
Roger Clemens
Barry Bonds
Craig Biggio

Behold.. the steroid class of the HOF

(note: I do not think Tom Glavine is a first ballot HOFer.. but should get in on his second vote)
__________________
For My Up to Date Inventory Please Check My Ebay Store: http://stores.ebay.com/Jeremys-Sports-Cards-and-Coins
Imac7065 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2013, 06:18 PM   #75 (permalink)
Member
 
lobo_hacker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 2,626
Send a message via Yahoo to lobo_hacker
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Imac7065 View Post
Let me ask you something..

Is Michael Jordan the same level of HOFer as Spencer Haywood?
-I have no idea what 'same level of HOFer' means. And that's where the disconnect is. Do i generally consider that Babe Ruth was a better hitter/player than Duke Snider? Yes

Do i consider Babe Ruth a 'higher level' HOF inductee? No.

The Hall has standards of a vague nature to determine enshrinement. Gut feeling and all that. But those standards should not flex and strain on the whims of voters. If you want to parse out the 'Best' HOF players and the 'Good Enough' HOF players that's fine, but they're allegedly measured by the same stick. Just because Babe Ruth measures 99/100 and Snider 80/100, if they both pass they both should get their ticket. And if they happen to be on the same train, i have not one idea why that should make any sane, rational, logical difference. That's my point.

Agree to disagree and all that.

lobo_hacker
lobo_hacker is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO
Copyright © 2013, Blowout Cards Inc.