View Full Version : 3 or more Batting Titles and not in the HOF
NOMAR22
03-30-2006, 09:46 PM
Who else Besides Tony Oliva and Bill Madlock have won 3 or more batting titles and are not in the HOF?
Tony Oliva.323 (1964)Rookie Year ,.321(1965),337(1971)
Bill Madlock .354 (1975),.339(1976),.341(1981).323(1983)
The Dude
03-30-2006, 09:52 PM
I wish Larry Walker luck.
julusnc
03-30-2006, 09:56 PM
yep Larry Walker
1998-.363-1
1999-.379-1
2001-.350-1
Ubiquitous
03-30-2006, 10:44 PM
Pete Runnels came close. He won it twice and finished second once. Ferris Fain won it twice.
Outside of that you have the already mentioned Larry Walker as eligible and then you have likely HoF'er Tony Gwynn.
So yeah basically its going to be Larry. Ichiro is an iffy if he gets another title but then again another title probably helps his cause.
ElHalo
03-30-2006, 11:10 PM
Ross Barnes is another one, and one year he led his leage by 63 points over the second place finisher.
dgarza
03-31-2006, 06:40 AM
I'm counting Pete Browning
Brad Harris
03-31-2006, 08:21 AM
Ross Barnes, Pete Browning, Bill Madlock, Tony Oliva and Larry Walker are the only three-time (plus) batting champs to not be elected to the Hall of Fame. (Of course, Walker isn't eligible yet.)
dgarza
03-31-2006, 08:51 AM
Ross Barnes, Pete Browning, Bill Madlock, Tony Oliva, Pete Rose, Tony Gwynn, and Larry Walker are the only three-time (plus) batting champs to not be elected to the Hall of Fame. (Of course, Rose, Gwynn, and Walker are not eligible "yet".)
Brad Harris
03-31-2006, 09:30 AM
Thank you. Must have glossed over those names; in the habit of thinking of Rose and Gwynn as "Hall of Famers." :rolleyes:
dgarza
03-31-2006, 09:37 AM
Thank you. Must have glossed over those names; in the habit of thinking of Rose and Gwynn as "Hall of Famers." :rolleyes:
I don't know why I didn't even think about Rose until now.
KCGHOST
03-31-2006, 09:38 AM
Pretty good group of hitters even if Barnes got two of his titles in the NA. Pete Browning has, for quite awhile, been my #1 guy who was overlooked from the 19th century.
Brad Harris
03-31-2006, 09:42 AM
Even the lists of two-time batting champs are filled with Hall-of-Fame caliber players and near misses.
KCGHOST
03-31-2006, 11:49 AM
For the sake of discussion let's consider Gwynn an HoFer. Doesn't that make Madlock the only four-time batting champion not in the HoF?? I realize 1981 was a strike year, but didn't they award batting titles that year??
dgarza
03-31-2006, 12:00 PM
For the sake of discussion let's consider Gwynn an HoFer. Doesn't that make Madlock the only four-time batting champion not in the HoF?? I realize 1981 was a strike year, but didn't they award batting titles that year??
So who actually won the "official" batting crown in 1981, Madlock or Rose?
Captain Cold Nose
03-31-2006, 12:02 PM
So who actually won the "official" batting crown in 1981, Madlock or Rose?
It was Madlock who shared the Topps League Leaders card with Carney Lansford in the 1982 set.
I thought Rose was third when the season ended, but that's without looking. Sure, games were missed during the season, but there was a definite finish that year. No reason to not credit Madlock.
dgarza
03-31-2006, 12:19 PM
No reason to not credit Madlock.Well, the issue of enough plate appearances. But if Madlock had enough plate appearances to qualify, what's the deal with baseball-reference's asterisks next to Madlock's name?
KCGHOST
03-31-2006, 12:49 PM
Well, the issue of enough plate appearances. But if Madlock had enough plate appearances to qualify, what's the deal with baseball-reference's asterisks next to Madlock's name?
B-R's asterisks are saying that technically Madlock did not have enough plate appearances but by rule you add to his PA's sufficient AB's so that he would qualify for the crown. This lowers his actual BA because he does not getany "hits" with these BA's. If he is still the BA leader after this calculation then he is the champ. This calculation is frequently referred to as the Ted Williams rule.
dgarza
03-31-2006, 12:52 PM
B-R's asterisks are saying that technically Madlock did not have enough plate appearances but he DID have enough...right?
KCGHOST
03-31-2006, 01:04 PM
Every place Ihave looked shows Madlock as the batting champion, so one way or the other, he got enough PA's.
Captain Cold Nose
03-31-2006, 01:07 PM
The Pirates played 102 games in 1981, with Madlock having 320 plate apperances, which is a mere four more than the minimum as per 3.1 PA per game.
dgarza
03-31-2006, 01:24 PM
On a similar note, other titles -
3+ ERA titles and not in the HOF
Roger Clemens
Pedro Martinez
Randy Johnson
Greg Maddux
so just current pitchers
3+ HR crowns and not in the HOF
Alex Rodriguez
Ken Griffey
Mark McGwire
Jim Rice
Cy Williams
Gavvy Cravath
Harry Davis
Harry Stovey
Lip Pike
no Barry Bonds?!
3+ Win titles and not in the Hall
Tom Glavine
Roger Clemens
Greg Maddux
Bucky Walters
Bill Hutchison
have I missed anyone?
dgarza
03-31-2006, 01:26 PM
The Pirates played 102 games in 1981, with Madlock having 320 plate apperances, which is a mere four more than the minimum as per 3.1 PA per game.
that's what I thought. I'm note sure why there ever was/is confusion.