PDA

View Full Version : Who has hurt their H.O.F. chances in 2006

The Commissioner
10-07-2006, 12:43 PM
As a companion to mac195's thread, I've added this. Who has hurt their chances this season?

Unfortunately, I'd have to head the list, with one of my favorite players, Shawn Green. His low power numbers were fine when he was second in the league in batting (around .330) for a stretch. Over the long haul of the season, however, his average plummeted while his powers numbers never rebounded. He'll have to rebound in 2007.
RuthMayBond
10-07-2006, 05:39 PM
How about a guy who hasn't even played for 20 years, Pete Rose :laugh
I don't know how many of these guys had a Hall of Fame case, but they didn't help theirs
Ruben Sierra, Jose Guillen, Javy Lopez, Mark Mulder, Bartolo Colon, maybe Steve Finley. Blalock, Lidge, Buehrle are kinda young but they stumbled. Mostly it has been a comeback year
Fuzzy Bear
10-07-2006, 07:00 PM
I don't want to comment on the steroid group, in that the effect steroid allegations (most of which are unproven at this time) is not yet clear.

I'm not sure whether Schilling and Kent hurt their chances. Kent probably hurt his chances a little bit, mainly because of the ongoing resistance to his candidacy despite being the career leader in HRs amongst second baseman.
STLCards2
10-07-2006, 10:16 PM
Some guys with borderline credentials or "a few good seasons away" numbers (as the voters would see them, not as I feel, neccesarily) who did little to help their HOF cases:

Jim Edmonds
Gary Sheffield
Jeff Kent
Andy Pettitte
Tod Helton
EvanAparra
10-08-2006, 08:38 PM
Some guys with borderline credentials or "a few good seasons away" numbers (as the voters would see them, not as I feel, neccesarily) who did little to help their HOF cases:

Jim Edmonds
Gary Sheffield
Jeff Kent
Andy Pettitte
Tod Helton


Nice list. About the post above... I think the Wins actually helped Schilling's chances.
Charger567
10-08-2006, 09:28 PM
I really don't think Green has the slightest chance at the HoF..
cup2006sensrule
10-08-2006, 10:14 PM
I really don't think Green has the slightest chance at the HoF..

Me neither unless he puts up ablout 6 monster seasons in a row starting next year. He would be borderline if he does that and they would need to be really monster years with 35 110 110 lines.
EvanAparra
10-08-2006, 10:41 PM
what is the last 110?
Myankee4life
10-08-2006, 10:48 PM
what is the last 110?

Runs I think........
cup2006sensrule
10-09-2006, 12:16 AM
HR Runs and RBI.
Fuzzy Bear
03-02-2007, 07:14 PM
Edmonds hurt his chances, definitely. It will be interesting to see if he arrests his decline, or declines to the point where he no longer hits even 20 HRs a season.

Kent hurt his chances a little bit, I think. He needed to keep it up there, and he seems to have lost some power. Kent's problem is that people just don't think he's a HOFer no matter what he does, so he needs to keep impressing people and he didn't do that last year.
Appling
03-08-2007, 09:16 AM
By not playing in 2006, Sammy Sosa hurt his HOF chances the most.
KCGHOST
03-08-2007, 10:03 AM
Brian Giles didn't help himself either.
Fuzzy Bear
03-09-2007, 07:54 PM
By not playing in 2006, Sammy Sosa hurt his HOF chances the most.

If he makes it back this year and gets to 600 jacks, he'll be in. Period.

There is no way you can hit SIX HUNDRED home runs and NOT be a great player.
jalbright
03-10-2007, 05:55 AM
If he makes it back this year and gets to 600 jacks, he'll be in. Period.

There is no way you can hit SIX HUNDRED home runs and NOT be a great player.

The only problem with that line of thinking comes if you believe the jacks came as a result of pharmeceutical help. Some people have tarred Sammy with that one, quite possibly unfairly--but the question becomes, how many buy into that idea? That could keep him out.

Jim Albright
Mariano_Rivera
03-10-2007, 05:57 AM
I don't thinkl you can really hurt HoF chances.
jalbright
03-10-2007, 06:06 AM
I don't thinkl you can really hurt HoF chances.

Sure you can. Pete Rose surely did by gambling. Joe Jackson did. If Clemens was convicted of an OJ style murder, it would at least become a horse race as to whether he'd get in--and a lesser player could easily screw up his chances with off the field stuff like that. Similarly, if a borderline HOF guy got caught in a performance enhancing drug scandal, that could wreck his chances. These scenarios don't even get to what I see as the main idea of the thread--how have the perceptions of active players HOF worthiness changed based on last season? There's no doubt that some guys who are seen as on a HOF track or at least close to it lose that aura with a bad season or two and never are seen that way again.

Jim Albright
The Commissioner
03-13-2007, 08:29 PM
I don't thinkl you can really hurt HoF chances.

Unfortuantely, that's not always the case.

I agree completely with Jim when he says "There's no doubt that some guys who are seen as on a HOF track or at least close to it lose that aura with a bad season or two and never are seen that way again." It's illogical that the results should be that way, but they are. For example, let's say player A is a pitcher who is 200-80 with a career 2.35 ERA. If he retired today he would be a sure fire Hall of Famer. Let's say that this hypothetical player manages to stick around for another ten years, though. In that time he goes 10-130 with an ERA through the roof. He retires as a 210-210 pitcher with a 4.10 ERA (keep in mind this is all hypothetical). Suddenly that pitcher is seen as a mediocre player. He hasn't "un-won" any of the games from the first part of his career, yet those same wins have somehow been tarnished by the last part. In real life that scenario isn't likely to happen, but we do see a lot of players whose batting average dips dramatically or they receive less media praise in their latter years and that seems to greatly affect the "Hall worthiness" perception of them.
RuthMayBond
03-14-2007, 07:03 AM
Unfortuantely, that's not always the case.

I agree completely with Jim when he says "There's no doubt that some guys who are seen as on a HOF track or at least close to it lose that aura with a bad season or two and never are seen that way again." It's illogical that the results should be that way, but they are. For example, let's say player A is a pitcher who is 200-80 with a career 2.35 ERA. If he retired today he would be a sure fire Hall of Famer. Let's say that this hypothetical player manages to stick around for another ten years, though. In that time he goes 10-130 with an ERA through the roof.I don't think even ElHalo would give a hypothetical this extreme
yankillaz
03-22-2007, 07:45 AM
I wonder, is this a list for playeres with REAL chances to get in the HOF, or just simple guesses?

Most of the players you've mentioned are barely Bordeline, others haven't even had the time to prove they're Hall Worthy.

Let's just see, who REALLY hurt their chances:

Gary Sheffield.
Jeff Kent.

I don't see who else hurt their chances.
Windy City Fan
03-22-2007, 09:18 AM
The only problem with that line of thinking comes if you believe the jacks came as a result of pharmeceutical help. Some people have tarred Sammy with that one, quite possibly unfairly--but the question becomes, how many buy into that idea? That could keep him out.

Jim Albright

I buy it. Plus Sosa is the classic player who's stats look better than he really was. Sosa made horrible choices in the field and on the basepaths. He was a pain in the ass prima donna in the clubhouse.

His case is based largely on a five year peak run that many people suspect of being pharmicutically fueled. His career outside of 1998 - 2002 is fairly pedistrian for a corner outfielder.
Fuzzy Bear
03-22-2007, 06:26 PM
I buy it. Plus Sosa is the classic player who's stats look better than he really was. Sosa made horrible choices in the field and on the basepaths. He was a pain in the ass prima donna in the clubhouse.

His case is based largely on a five year peak run that many people suspect of being pharmicutically fueled. His career outside of 1998 - 2002 is fairly pedistrian for a corner outfielder.

Sosa's peak was SO high that no one can deny he's a HOFer, even with his deficiencies.

Sammy Sosa hit 60 HRs THREE times. No one else has ever done that. Period. No one has proved he's on steroids; it's all talk.

Roids or not, a three time 60 HR guy had a peak that is clear HOF material. I don't believe it's possible to do what Sosa did in his career and NOT be a HOFer. He's not the greatest RF ever, no way. But he's a HOFer; that should be obvious to even the most obtuse.
Windy City Fan
03-22-2007, 08:23 PM
Sosa's peak was SO high that no one can deny he's a HOFer, even with his deficiencies.

Sammy Sosa hit 60 HRs THREE times. No one else has ever done that. Period. No one has proved he's on steroids; it's all talk.

Roids or not, a three time 60 HR guy had a peak that is clear HOF material. I don't believe it's possible to do what Sosa did in his career and NOT be a HOFer. He's not the greatest RF ever, no way. But he's a HOFer; that should be obvious to even the most obtuse.

Sosa's peak wasn't really even THAT great going by rate stats. He had one legitimately historical season in terms of OPS+. He smacked a lot of longballs, but that's in part due to playing in the homer happy late 90's/2000's. Then add to it that we have very good reason to suspect his peak was chemically fueled, I see absolutely no reason to honor him with induction to the HOF.

I did a post a while back in a Sammy thread about what his career would've looked like if he was clean. You tell me if I was fair and if you think that guy is a slam dunk Hall of Famer. http://baseball-fever.com/showpost.php?p=556874&postcount=91
Appling
03-26-2007, 08:41 PM
I don't thinkl you can really hurt HoF chances.
As a general rule, this seems to make a lot of sense -- at least for their performance between the lines.
(Did Willie Mays or Rickey Henderson hurt their chances by playing too long? I don't think so.)

But look at Rafael Palmiero: if he had retired before being caught using steroids, I think his numbers would have put him in the Hall.
StanTheMan
03-29-2007, 08:47 PM
I don't want to comment on the steroid group, in that the effect steroid allegations (most of which are unproven at this time) is not yet clear. .

Think McGwire agrees with you?
Fuzzy Bear
07-03-2008, 07:34 PM
Think McGwire agrees with you?

McGwire's rejection by the writers is preposterous. After a while, the BBWAA members will stop being pompous patoots and get of their pseudo-moral high horses and vote based on what these guys did on the field.
TheMadDog31
07-03-2008, 08:15 PM
McGwire's rejection by the writers is preposterous. After a while, the BBWAA members will stop being pompous patoots and get of their pseudo-moral high horses and vote based on what these guys did on the field.

While I somewhat agree with your points, what do you think of Bonds? Should he be put into the Hall after everything that has gone on in the last years? Keep in mind, this is not meant to be sarcastic whatsoever. This is a legitimate question.
SamtheBravesFan
07-03-2008, 08:23 PM
While I somewhat agree with your points, what do you think of Bonds? Should he be put into the Hall after everything that has gone on in the last years? Keep in mind, this is not meant to be sarcastic whatsoever. This is a legitimate question.

I honestly think it'll depend on what happens in the five years after Bonds retires how much more comes to light. Even with Bonds, it's too early to tell. This saga hasn't ended.