Edgar Martinez in the Hall?? [Archive]

Etheridge2

06-07-2003, 06:35 AM

abolishthedh

06-07-2003, 03:18 PM

If Edgar is on the record as stating that he would retire if the end the era of the DH, then I am disappointed. I try not to go on a rant about this topic because, as you can see, I feel strongly about it too. But I don't want to sound like a paraiah about the whole thing, so I'll let others state their positions.

Here's the thing: Edgar was a fairly good 3rd baseman! He must not have liked playing the position, and this is a different matter, and it would be enough to keep him out of the Hall on that alone. However, I still love the guy as a player because I thought he was a good 3rd baseman, and that he was a team player who went along with the assignment for the good of the team. He must have changed his mind, as people are prone to do over time.

I love Edgar because he is as professional as anyone can be at baseball. He's as professional as Tony Gwynn, Ripken or any player in the past several decades you could name. Its a shame that he must now think of himself as one dimensional.

Peggin_Maniac

06-07-2003, 05:00 PM

He became a DH when he tore up his hamstring back in the early
90's...And he was a pretty decent 3rd baseman til the injury..As long as he is productive (which he still is) why not keep playing???? As long as the DH is still in the big leagues you shouldn't fault him for filling a role...It know different than a reliever,
a starter going every 5 days...I know I will get some flack from this statement because the pitchers are on the field and the Dh is not...But this is how I feel....

One day relievers and Dh's will make the hall (some day)

Brad Harris

06-08-2003, 12:22 AM

(1) It seems quite clear from a number of the previous posts that whether or not you think Edgar Martinez should be elected to the Hall of Fame rests largely on one's personal feelings about the designated hitter rule.

To wit: the designated hitter rule is a part of the game - like it or not - and has been for thirty years now. Edgar Martinez has filled that role throughout his career. It is not the designated hitter's fault that the designated hitter rule exists. You can't fault Martinez for playing that position. He gets no demerits for it.

(2) Martinez is the best designated hitter in the history of the game. After thirty years and some fairly good hitters filling those roles, Martinez is heads above the rest at that "position." Being the best at any position is worthy of serious consideration for enshrinement. There is a designated hitter. Someone had to fill that role. Martinez did it and has excelled at it for over a decade!

(3) Martinez must be judged solely on his offensive contributions (as he really has no career defensive contributions to speak of.) You don't subtract from Martinez's career value because he has no fielding stats, but rather you would add value to the careers of other hitters for whatever fielding accomplishments boosted their overall value. Penalizing Martinez is the wrong way to compare the relative worth of these players. You should, instead, reward others for positive fielding contributions. In this way Martinez can be fairly and accurately measured against other players.

(4) Martinez has consistently been one of the 5 best hitters in the game for a decade. That, in itself, is worthy of serious consideration. Not many players outside the Hall of Fame can make such a claim.

(5) Martinez's career numbers are not short as many people think. He had 7,520 career plate appearances coming into 2003. Fifty percent of the players in the Hall of Fame had fewer career plate appearances than Martinez. And that percentage is rising as Martinez sees playing time this summer.

(6) Martinez had 620 Runs Created Above Average thru 2002 - the 34th highest total in history! That doesn't tell me that he needs 3,000 hits or any other "magic number" that voters will recognize. That tells me this: there is no one who has ever retired with that many RCAA who has not been elected to the Hall of Fame.

Martinez has, in my opinion, done enough to warrant election to the Hall - or, at the very least, to be a very strong candidate. He shouldn't be so easily dismissed just because some people don't like the DH-rule. I certainly hope the voters don't treat him similarly.

Brad Harris

06-08-2003, 12:35 AM

Another thing: Edgar Martinez's RC/27 of 8.62 is the 47th in history (minimum 2,000 plate appearances). Place it in the context of his era, however, and you'll find Martinez's adjusted RC/27 to be the 41st best total in history.

However, there's a huge difference between someone with 2,000 plate appearances and the 7,520 that Martinez has put in.

Among players with at least as any attempts as Martinez, you're looking at Edgar rating 23rd all-time. Martinez's RC/27 of 8.62 came in an environment of 5.00 RC/27 which means that Martinez's offensive contributions were a whopping seventy-two percent higher than average!

The only players with that much playing time and more valuable offensive contributions are: Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Ty Cobb, Barry Bonds, Mickey Mantle, Lou Gehrig, Rogers Hornsby, Jimmie Foxx, Dan Brouthers, Stan Musial, Mel Ott, Tris Speaker, Billy Hamilton, Honus Wagner, Ed Delahanty, Willie Mays, Joe DiMaggio, Frank Robinson, Hank Aaron, Nap Lajoie, Mark McGwire and Jeff Bagwell.

That's a pretty exclusive list of the greatest hitters ever.

That means Martinez's career offensive contributions have exceeded the value of those of Mike Schmidt, Duke Snider, Willie McCovey, Joe Morgan, Sammy Sosa or Pete Rose.

It seems to me the burden of proof in this argument rests with those who would keep Martinez out of the Hall of Fame. So far, I've seen no evidence save the fact that the designated hitter rule reduces a player to playing only "half the game."

Peggin_Maniac

06-08-2003, 12:43 AM

There is somebody out there that agrees with me...thanks for you insight Chancellor...

BoSox Rule

06-08-2003, 08:20 AM

Originally posted by Etheridge2
Even a DH with 3000Hits and 5000 HR wouldn't be a Hall of Famer IMO as when you don't play the field you miss half the game..

if i had 5000hr i want to e in the hall, dh or not ;)

abolishthedh

06-08-2003, 01:24 PM

Quoted, from Etheridge2: Even a DH with 3000Hits and 5000 HR ....

3000 hits and 5000 Homers? Now THERE'S Enron-style bookkeeping! :p

That's okay. We know what you meant.

Since he's now 39 and will still have 900 hits to go by the end of the year in order to get to 3000 hits, I expect his case to be among the most contentious in baseball history.

Brad Harris

06-09-2003, 07:39 AM

Originally posted by abolishthedh
Since he's now 39 and will still have 900 hits to go by the end of the year in order to get to 3000 hits, I expect his case to be among the most contentious in baseball history.

It's a pretty fair guess that he won't reach 3,000 career hits (not that he has to.)

He presently has 2,031 hits (thru 6/8/03). There are 205 players in history with more. 95 of the 191 players in the Hall of Fame have fewer career hits than Martinez does at this point. Some of those Hall of Famers with fewer hits include Johnny Mize, Earl Averill, Sam Thompson, Bill Dickey, Jimmy Collins, Earle Combs and Frank Baker.

Martinez has more career hits than popular candidates such as Gil Hodges, George Foster, Minnie Minoso, Dick Allen, Tony Oliva, Curt Flood or Vern Stephens.

Martinez has more career hits than active (or recently retired) stars like Jose Canseco, Sammy Sosa, Bernie Williams and John Olerud, whose names are occassionally tossed around as candidates for the Hall.

So clearly, having a career hits total near 3,000 - while certainly beneficial - is not a requirement for election. It would appear that election is based more on the quality of his hits, rather than just their quantity.

Captain Cold Nose

06-09-2003, 07:49 AM

Originally posted by Chancellor

He presently has 2,031 hits (thru 6/8/03). There are 205 players in history with more. 95 of the 191 players in the Hall of Fame have fewer career hits than Martinez does at this point.

.

How many of those 95 were everyday players after WWII? That looks like a very manipulative stat to me.

Steffo

06-09-2003, 07:55 AM

Though I agree with you Chancellor, that Edgar should be in the HOF, some of your arguments are sorta weak. You say 95 players have less hits then him? Most are pitchers. Am I not right? Do you expect pitchers to have that many hits since they play every 5th day or so? Or AL pictchers from the '70's plus with near no hits.

Oh, and those 7520 plate apperaces, 50% lower, aren't most of them pitchers too?.

SO I do agree with you on most arguments and the general fact that Edgar is a HOFer, some of your arguments re quite weak as well.

CardFanNV

06-09-2003, 02:32 PM

Great positon players are measured by the five tools .........

hit for average
hit for power
run
field
throw

To be HOF, you should be among the best at 4 of these tools. I'd be willing to sacrifice one.

The only thing Ozzie couldn't do is hit for power. You can argue hit for average, also. But his last 12 years were FAR better than his early days.

Harmon Killebrew - couldn't run, not a good fielder, low BA, one of his own team's scouts once said, "He throws like a girl."

He did improve, but he's a HR hitter. Nothing more.

Mays, like Bonds, could do it all. And if you have to sacrifice a tool, you'd better be EXCELLENT at the rest.

How can a guy who almost NEVER wears a fielder's glove get in the hall?

CardFanNV

06-09-2003, 03:24 PM

Fielding is part of the game. It is essential to winning.

How many broadcasters emphasise the importantance of the pitcher being able to FIELD his position well? And why do they do it so often?

I cannot condone a player getting HOF consideration who either CAN'T or WON'T take the field!

DH IS NOT A POSITION! It is a full-time PH, and it should be stricken from the rules.

Captain Cold Nose

06-10-2003, 06:00 AM

Originally posted by CardFanNV

DH IS NOT A POSITION! It is a full-time PH, and it should be stricken from the rules.

But it's not. You can ignore the big elephant standing in the hallway, but it's still there. Not acknowledging it doesn't change the fact it's still there. So it has to be treated as such, abhorent as you find the rule or not.

As a full-time hitter, Martinez should have better overall numbers. That's why I wouldn't put him in. Not because he is listed as a non-fielding position that seems to get some people's lather up so much. Why? Because pitchers don't strike out or bunt as much? Because it cuts down on double switches? I'm not a big DH proponent but I find the anti-DH argument way too much ado about nothing.

Should a player be penalized for dh'ing toward the end of their career, after they have done more than enough to merit consideration, (Brett, Murray, Yaz)? If a player can still hit well enough, then use that player.

The five tools is a good judge, though. If a player can't show most of those tools for a good portion of their career, they shouldn't make it. I'm not against the DH, but I don't think they show enough overall skills.

Etheridge2

06-10-2003, 12:00 PM

I can and will hold a bias towards players who are essentially a DH a player who doesn't take the field not only doesn't get any consideration for his glovework but gets negative points towards his career. No player in baseball disgusts me more then Edgar for the simple reason that during the players strike when they were talking about eliminating the DH he stated he would retire if they did so..The man doesn't evben want to play the field..plain and simple he isn't a baseball player.. a pitcher taking the mound every 5 days is different because the position is physically demanding to the point where you cvan not play everyday. A DH in order to even mnerit consideration needs numbers that blkow the mind 4000 hits ore 700hr it just The DH is basebgall's biggest mistake over the last 40 years and it ruins the game IMO. I don't care that it isn't mARTINEZ'S FAULT THAT there is a DH he could play the field if he wanted to and if he can't then let him reetire he has also not been among the best 5 hitters in the game for the last decade..

the best hitters over the last decade in my oppinion have been
AROD
Bonds
Sosa
Alomar
Jeter
Bagwell
Manny Ramirez
Nomar
Piazza
Palmiero

And all these guys have played the field and some have even won Gold Gloves I would take ANYH of them over Edgar over the last decade...

If Martinez gets in to nthe hall it would be a BIG mistake

Brad Harris

06-10-2003, 01:48 PM

Originally posted by Steffo
You say 95 players have less hits then him? Most are pitchers. Am I not right?....Oh, and those 7520 plate apperaces, 50% lower, aren't most of them pitchers too?.

You are, of course, quite right. Thank you for pointing that out.

There are 133 non-pitchers in the Hall of Fame.
37 of them have fewer hits than Edgar Martinez.
That's still 28% (and rising as he continues to play).

Martinez has more hits than 28% of the non-pitchers in the Hall of Fame. It's still a sizeable group.

The point was simply that a player doesn't necessarily need a high hit total to gain election. (Or, conversely, that a high hit total doesn't necessarily guarantee election either.)

Brad Harris

06-10-2003, 01:59 PM

Originally posted by CardFanNV
Great positon players are measured by the five tools .........

hit for average
hit for power
run
field
throw

To be HOF, you should be among the best at 4 of these tools. I'd be willing to sacrifice one.

The only thing Ozzie couldn't do is hit for power. You can argue hit for average, also. But his last 12 years were FAR better than his early days.

Harmon Killebrew - couldn't run, not a good fielder, low BA, one of his own team's scouts once said, "He throws like a girl."

He did improve, but he's a HR hitter. Nothing more.

Mays, like Bonds, could do it all. And if you have to sacrifice a tool, you'd better be EXCELLENT at the rest.

How can a guy who almost NEVER wears a fielder's glove get in the hall?

Horsefeathers!

First off, when do you ever hear of "great position players" being compared to the Hall of Fame? Never! It's "great players!" You're inserting the "position" into that phrase in order to single out Martinez.

Secondly, the idea that Hall of Fame qualification is somehow based on the well-roundedness of a player's greatness defies both the trends of the past and the current voting patterns of those who decide who gets elected.

If being superb at several things instead of truly great at one or two is enough, then why isn't Dwight Evans or Bobby Grich in the Hall? Where's Minnie Minoso or Ron Santo? Why couldn't Ryne Sandberg get half the votes last winter?

No. The Hall of Fame voters focus more on exactly the opposite - they tend to focus on people who do one thing really, really well. Look at the bias towards power hitters in the Hall. There are very few power hitters who couldn't do anything else who have been elected (Kingman is one example.)

Say what you want about Ozzie Smith, but he was never a good hitter. Sure he improved, from being a bush league hitter to an adequate major league hitter, but he was never a good major league hitter. His defense got him into the Hall and nothing else. In fact, if his glove hadn't been considered the best ever, if it had merely been the best of his generation, say, he'd have had a lot more difficult time convincing the voters he belonged.

I don't understand why you mentioned Killebrew because it completely contradicts what you said at the beginning of your post - that great position players are measured by how many of the "tools" they excel at. Killebrew gained election to the Hall (as have numerous others) through excelling at only one thing.

Edgar Martinez has only had to excel at one thing - getting on base and driving in runs - and he's done a marvelous job of that. He shouldn't be judged on the standards applied to players who play defense as well in the same vein that you can't judge a relief pitcher by the same standards you apply to a starter; it's simply a different (not a lesser) role.

Captain Cold Nose

06-10-2003, 02:00 PM

How many of the 28% have comparable career lengths as Martinez? And how many of them came from offensive-eras like Martinez?

Peggin_Maniac

06-10-2003, 02:04 PM

Amen Chancellor!!!

Brad Harris

06-10-2003, 02:07 PM

Originally posted by CardFanNV
Fielding is part of the game. It is essential to winning.

It is less essential to winning than hitting is. Far less. There are tens of thousands of people across the United States who could strap on a glove and play a major league caliber field. There are only hundreds who could pick up a bat and hit at a big league level. The value of an above average fielder is far less than the value of an above average hitter. Furthermore, the value of good fielding varies from one position to another. A good fielding shortstop is worth more than a good fielding first baseman. DH is a position wherein no fielding is required. It is a role, the same as any other on the team.

To fight against that reality is to piss in a wind that's blowing in your face.

How many broadcasters emphasise the importantance of the pitcher being able to FIELD his position well? And why do they do it so often?

Oh...well, if a broadcaster mentions it, gee...it must be integral to winning the game. Broadcasters talk about things they hope the audience finds interesting. They are entertainers and rarely know more than a knowledgabale fan. A pitcher's fielding is very minimal in the scheme of his overall value. Sandy Koufax was a poor fielder. No one ever mentions it. Why not? Because it's not that important.

I'll take a lineup full of Edgar Martinez's and put them in the field over a lineup full of Ozzie Smith's any day of the week and I'll beat your butt black and blue 9 times out of 10.

I cannot condone a player getting HOF consideration who either CAN'T or WON'T take the field!

DH IS NOT A POSITION! It is a full-time PH, and it should be stricken from the rules.

Good for you. Why don't you go take your little placquard and go down to the park and protest, huh? Or have you attended an AL game in the last 30 years?

If you want to ignore reality, that's certainly up to you. Just know, "the Matrix has you." :laugh

Brad Harris

06-10-2003, 02:11 PM

Originally posted by Etheridge2
...The DH is basebgall's biggest mistake over the last 40 years and it ruins the game IMO....

Bud Selig must drool over fans like you.

1. You think the DH is baseball's biggest mistake over the last 40 years; and

2. You think the game is ruined, but you're still a fan.

:rolleyes:

Brad Harris

06-10-2003, 02:26 PM

Captain Cold Nose...

My argument is two-fold. Edgar Martinez has done enough to warrant consideration for the Hall of Fame. And it is patently ridiculous to dismiss the candidacy of Martinez (or any other career DH) because of the designated hitter rule. My vitriol is primarily aimed at the latter.

If you haven't already, I suggest you read my earlier posts in this thread regarding Martinez's runs created and RC/27 totals and where they rate in the history of the game.

Martinez has 281 win shares going into this season, which places him in solid territory as a Hall of Fame candidate. (Especially considering that he has no fielding win shares to help boost that total, as most players would.)

Martinez's .952 OPS is the 13th highest total in history (minimum 7,500 plate appearances.) Calculating his adjusted OPS yields similar results. His OPS+ of 126 is still solidly among the best ever (32nd all-time.) Martinez's career OPS is 26 percent better than league average.

Here, by the way, are the top 10 RCAA totals for the last 10 years (1993-2002):

938 Barry Bonds
583 Jeff Bagwell
545 Frank Thomas
506 Edgar Martinez
485 Jim Thome
478 Mark McGwire
465 Manny Ramirez
453 Gary Sheffield
428 Mike Piazza
421 Rafael Palmeiro

Martinez has been one of the best hitters in baseball for the last decade. Etheridge2's opinion doesn't really have any bearing on that fact.

Has Martinez been good enough for long enough? Perhaps not quite yet. However, he certainly has earned a good look by the voters and I hope he isn't treated as poorly (for committing the crime of being a DH) by the BBWAA as he has been here.

CardFanNV

06-10-2003, 02:36 PM

When was the last time the worst-fielding team made the playoffs? Even in their expanded state?

Texas can hit the covers off the ball. They are in LAST place, if memory serves.

Steffo

06-10-2003, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by CardFanNV
When was the last time the worst-fielding team made the playoffs? Even in their expanded state?

Texas can hit the covers off the ball. They are in LAST place, if memory serves.

When was the last time that the worst hitting team made the play-offs? What about tenth worse? Fifteenth worse? 20th worse? That's already getting into top ten and you can't name too many. I know we can name an awful fielding team that mad eth play-offs, but not an awful hitting team. Or is that too much to handle?

CardFanNV

06-10-2003, 06:05 PM

Originally posted by Steffo
When was the last time that the worst hitting team made the play-offs? What about tenth worse? Fifteenth worse? 20th worse? That's already getting into top ten and you can't name too many. I know we can name an awful fielding team that mad eth play-offs, but not an awful hitting team. Or is that too much to handle?

Of course, you need to hit a little. You also need to FIELD a little. And pitch a little. That's the Rangers problem.

You're totally blowing off one side of the equation because you're trying to justify a corrupt notion.

Keep the DH, fine. But allowing a player who only plays HALF the game to be considered for the HOF is nuts.

And the other great Iron Glovers on yore should be reconsidered as well. But at least, they went out there.

Brad Harris

06-11-2003, 08:24 AM

Originally posted by CardFanNV
Keep the DH, fine. But allowing a player who only plays HALF the game to be considered for the HOF is nuts.

And see...my point is exactly the converse of this statement.

I am not a fan of the DH rule. But it's here and it's "nuts" to not consider a DH for the Hall of Fame just because we don't like the rule!

Martinez simply isn't required to play the field and therefore he isn't skimping out on "half the game." For him, or any other DH, hitting is the whole game; whether we like it or not.

Cougar

06-12-2003, 02:28 PM

We're losing track of Edgar in our DH discussion.

For the moment, let's pretend that Edgar is a lead-footed, weak-armed LF; i.e., about as close as one can come to no value in fielding.

He's still not a slam dunk.

His percentage stats are great; his counting stats are a little low.

I wouldn't be appalled if Edgar made the HOF -- he's a legitimately great player -- but I think he's got a tough argument.

CardFanNV

06-12-2003, 02:32 PM

Let me say this .................................

As far as being a pure hitter, Edgar is arguably one of the 10 best righthanders in the post WW II era. Not just power, but high average and lots of doubles.

But he doesn't take the field. I'd feel much differently then.

bly11

06-12-2003, 07:21 PM

One thing that gets me about the whole "should a DH be inducted into the Hall" debate is how no one -- on either side -- looks at the other half of the equation for reference. Because when a DH is used, that means two things:

1. A player is batting who doesn't field
2. A pitcher (or several) is pitching who doesn't hit

Catch that second part? Obviously, a pitcher in the AL from 1973 on is not going to have too many at bats -- and the at bats they have are going to be bona fide hideous. (Anyone remember Dave Stieb in the '81 All-Star Game? And Dave was a converted outfielder.) So if you're going to say that a career designated hitter should not be in the Hall because he was not involved in every part of the game, as a matter of logic you would also have to say that a post-'73 career AL pitcher should not be in the Hall, for the same reason -- he wasn't involved in every part of the game!

Therefore, if you dismiss Edgar Martinez or Harold Baines from HOF discussion, not on the basis of their accomplishments, but simply because they did most of them without wearing a glove ... then for your stance to be consistent, you also have to dismiss Roger Clemens, Mike Mussina and possibly Randy Johnson, because they achieved most of their accomplishments without picking up a bat.

And I don't think anyone in this forum will argue that fielding is more important than hitting (anyone that ignorant probably can't find the on/off button on a PC). So the AL pitchers are missing a bigger part of the game than the AL DHs.

==============================================

Okay, on to the topic at hand: Edgar for the Hall? It's a close one -- his career numbers are stunted by not making it as a starter until he was 27. He led the AL in OBP three times; batting and doubles twice; and runs and RBIs once each. His career totals are comparable with Chuck Klein and Earl Averill (who are in the Hall) as well as Don Mattingly, Fred Lynn and Indian Bob Johnson (who aren't). He was a fair 3B (probably better than Chipper Jones), and probably could have continued there were it not for that hammy injury; his lack of time spent fielding is a factor (just not THE factor). As far as I know, he's a good character guy.

Two more real good seasons, and he probably should be in. Right now, he's on the border.

Etheridge2

06-12-2003, 09:48 PM

Originally posted by bly11
One thing that gets me about the whole "should a DH be inducted into the Hall" debate is how no one -- on either side -- looks at the other half of the equation for reference. Because when a DH is used, that means two things:

1. A player is batting who doesn't field
2. A pitcher (or several) is pitching who doesn't hit

Catch that second part? Obviously, a pitcher in the AL from 1973 on is not going to have too many at bats -- and the at bats they have are going to be bona fide hideous. (Anyone remember Dave Stieb in the '81 All-Star Game? And Dave was a converted outfielder.) So if you're going to say that a career designated hitter should not be in the Hall because he was not involved in every part of the game, as a matter of logic you would also have to say that a post-'73 career AL pitcher should not be in the Hall, for the same reason -- he wasn't involved in every part of the game!

Therefore, if you dismiss Edgar Martinez or Harold Baines from HOF discussion, not on the basis of their accomplishments, but simply because they did most of them without wearing a glove ... then for your stance to be consistent, you also have to dismiss Roger Clemens, Mike Mussina and possibly Randy Johnson, because they achieved most of their accomplishments without picking up a bat.

And I don't think anyone in this forum will argue that fielding is more important than hitting (anyone that ignorant probably can't find the on/off button on a PC). So the AL pitchers are missing a bigger part of the game than the AL DHs.

The reason that logic is faulty is because NEVER EVER has a pitcher been elected to the Hall based on his offensive production it isn't even a factor in the minds of voters... A pitchers hitting accomplishments aren't even a part of the equation...otherwise Wes ferrell might have made it...pitchers are elected for what they do on the mound period but other players are elected based on their bat and glove adn not fielding to me is a HUGE negative. Edgar's offensive averages aside from average are OK but not great he doesn't field and doesn't want to and that's a bigger knock against him...I would consider it a disgrace if he was ever elected

J W

06-14-2003, 12:11 AM

Originally posted by abolishthedh
I expect his case to be among the most contentious in baseball history.

How did you guess? :D

CardFanNV

06-16-2003, 09:12 AM

Originally posted by Etheridge2
The reason that logic is faulty is because NEVER EVER has a pitcher been elected to the Hall based on his offensive production it isn't even a factor in the minds of voters... A pitchers hitting accomplishments aren't even a part of the equation...otherwise Wes ferrell might have made it...pitchers are elected for what they do on the mound period but other players are elected based on their bat and glove adn not fielding to me is a HUGE negative. Edgar's offensive averages aside from average are OK but not great he doesn't field and doesn't want to and that's a bigger knock against him...I would consider it a disgrace if he was ever elected

Except for Babe Ruth ................ but that's a unique story ..........

carrp

06-17-2003, 11:04 AM

Chancellor has presented some very well-reasoned arguments in support of Edgar Martinez. The majority of posters who oppose Martinez seem rely solely on the fact that's he a DH. That's a very weak argument which is made even more absurd by claims that he'd have to reach arbitrary totals such as 4000 hits or 700 HRs.

The reality is that the DH is a part of baseball and has been for many years. You can hold any opinion you wish on the subject, but it's still necessary to accept that it's not going away. Martinez shouldn't be punished for being a DH any more than modern pitchers should be punished for not having large numbers of complete games. There are certainly reasons why Martinez should not be elected to the Hall of Fame, but being a DH isn't one of them.

CardFanNV

06-17-2003, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by carrp
There are certainly reasons why Martinez should not be elected to the Hall of Fame, but being a DH isn't one of them.

Yes it is. Sorry. NO PLAYER has ever been elected that has been predominantly a DH.

And hopefully, no one ever will.

razors

06-18-2003, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by CardFanNV:
"Yes it is. Sorry. NO PLAYER has ever been elected that has been predominantly a DH.

And hopefully, no one ever will."

i agree that being a DH is a factor that needs to be considered in the same way that i believe that one does not compare LF with SS candidates with the same criteria, necessarily.

equally, i am not a huge fan of the DH - though i'm rather more ambivalent than many at the fever (it is what it is)...

but what i find striking about your last comment is that you truly do not care even if some outlandish and seemingly unattainable milestones are reached by a player who has predominantly been a DH - e.g. 700HR, 4000hits or 1000HR, 7000hits...you just do not want to see a DH -EVER- in the hall.

I think this is why reasoned argument (in this thread, outlined well by Chancellor, imo) is pointless - to argue against an opinion that says a player with a 1000HR should not make the hall is an exercise in futility at best...

...but still, it is fun :) and this topic will heat-up before it abates...

razors.

CardFanNV

06-18-2003, 12:19 PM

No kidding ................ I think we need another bat corker to spice things up in here ................ getting a little slow

tearforamariner

07-17-2003, 05:52 PM

Those of you who do not think Edgar has posted HOF Numbers offensively, think about this:

Arky Vaughan is an HOF-er. His career numbers:

2,103 hits
356 2B
128 3B
96 HR
1,173 Runs
926 RBI
.318 BA
.406 OBP
.453 SLG

Edgar Martinez's Career numbers (up to 6/17/03):

2,058 hits
477 2B
15 3B
292 HR
1,144 Runs
1164 RBI
.316 BA
.424 OBP
.528 SLG

No one here can tell me he's going be kept out of Cooperstown because he didn't hit enough triples!!!

As for all of you who think that because DH's only focus on one aspect of the game, they should be kept out of the HOF, well think about this. Should Clemens be kept out of the Hall because he only pitches? I think not.

CardFanNV

07-17-2003, 05:59 PM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
Those of you who do not think Edgar has posted HOF Numbers offensively, think about this:

Arky Vaughan is an HOF-er. His career numbers:

2,103 hits
356 2B
128 3B
96 HR
1,173 Runs
926 RBI
.318 BA
.406 OBP
.453 SLG

Edgar Martinez's Career numbers (up to 6/17/03):

2,058 hits
477 2B
15 3B
292 HR
1,144 Runs
1164 RBI
.316 BA
.424 OBP
.528 SLG

No one here can tell me he's going be kept out of Cooperstown because he didn't hit enough triples!!!

As for all of you who think that because DH's only focus on one aspect of the game, they should be kept out of the HOF, well think about this. Should Clemens be kept out of the Hall because he only pitches? I think not.

Clemens also FIELDS his position, which requires covering bases, backing up throws, and fielding bunts and grounders. He also BATS, when required by interleague rules and post-season requirements.

Edgar just bats and runs bases.

NOT GOOD ENOUGH!

tearforamariner

07-17-2003, 06:02 PM

cubbieinexile

07-17-2003, 06:11 PM

And he has a .998 fielding injury percentage if he ever takes the field.

Seriously though the .952 fielding percentage is nothing to brag about or really mention if you are trying to use as a point in favor of Edgar. From 1987 (when Edgar Started) to 2002 there have been 48 players who manned third base for at least 500 games. Edgar ranks 36th. If we were to look from 1980 to 2002 he drops to 54th of 69 players.

cubbieinexile

07-17-2003, 06:20 PM

Chancellor you say that Ozzie Smith was never a good hitter, well I am going to disagree with you on that.

For instance his lifetime batting average is league average once we factor in ballpark. His OBP is above average, and only his slugging is below average. Ozzie had at least 4 if not more (depending on how you weight OBP) seasons in which Ozzie was above average (good) with the bat. I personally would say he had at least 8 good seasons with the bat.

To me 8 good seasons with the bat, 16 really great seasons with the glove, 2 or 3 very good seasons on the basepath, and all around great ambassador for baseball makes him hall worthy.

CardFanNV

07-18-2003, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by cubbieinexile
Chancellor you say that Ozzie Smith was never a good hitter, well I am going to disagree with you on that.

For instance his lifetime batting average is league average once we factor in ballpark. His OBP is above average, and only his slugging is below average. Ozzie had at least 4 if not more (depending on how you weight OBP) seasons in which Ozzie was above average (good) with the bat. I personally would say he had at least 8 good seasons with the bat.

To me 8 good seasons with the bat, 16 really great seasons with the glove, 2 or 3 very good seasons on the basepath, and all around great ambassador for baseball makes him hall worthy.

Ozzie MADE himself into a decent hitter. Had nearly 2,500 hits.

Edgar has essentially REFUSED to take the field since I can remember.

Bet he's been on the trading block before. No NL team would touch him, good a hitter as he is.

Cougar

07-18-2003, 09:35 AM

Is it really a refusal? I think it's more of a mutual thing between him and the M's -- everyone pretty much agrees it's a bad idea.

For a long time he wasn't entirely unwilling, but his hammys have gotten so bad he's been basically physically unable to play the field for some time.

CardFanNV

07-18-2003, 09:52 AM

Cougar

07-18-2003, 10:03 AM

Yes, that's all true.

But...the DH rule exists, and he did get all those hits.

I'm pretty much undecided on Edgar's HOF candidacy -- my first instinct is that his counting stats aren't big enough, but I don't want to diminish how unworldly good his percentage stats are.

The guy might just be the best all around hitter (measured by OPS+) of his generation. (Frank Thomas is about 5 years younger.) That's something.

But yeah, absent the DH, he might not even have a 10 year career, or at best he might have been merely the best pinch hitter ever.

CardFanNV

07-18-2003, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by Cougar
Yes, that's all true.

But...the DH rule exists, and he did get all those hits.

I'm pretty much undecided on Edgar's HOF candidacy -- my first instinct is that his counting stats aren't big enough, but I don't want to diminish how unworldly good his percentage stats are.

The guy might just be the best all around hitter (measured by OPS+) of his generation. (Frank Thomas is about 5 years younger.) That's something.

But yeah, absent the DH, he might not even have a 10 year career, or at best he might have been merely the best pinch hitter ever.

For years, he was the best pure right-handed hitter in baseball. No arguement there.

But he'd have been gone long ago, if he were FORCED to play the field. Unless he could have sucked it out at 1B.

But he didn't. The rule is a farce. No player should be admitted to the HOF that had 20% of their plate appearances as a DH. Period.

Hmmmmmmm ................... wonder how Yaz matches up on that percentage? I'll have to check.

Actually, until Edgar came along, DH was usually manned either by an aging power hitter or a horrible defensive player. Neither of which would have been a "star".

Cougar

07-18-2003, 10:19 AM

20% is way, way too extreme. Your point about Yaz illustrates that. And Molitor. And Frank Thomas. And Reggie Jackson.

I think when you get above, say, 50% of your AB as a DH -- I'm not inclined to say never, but such a player really needs something like 3000 hits or a .330 average or 600 HR or something.

Edgar's awfully close, but assuming he's not going to play five more years, I think he's a little short.

CardFanNV

07-18-2003, 10:25 AM

Originally posted by Cougar
20% is way, way too extreme. Your point about Yaz illustrates that. And Molitor. And Frank Thomas. And Reggie Jackson.

I think when you get above, say, 50% of your AB as a DH -- I'm not inclined to say never, but such a player really needs something like 3000 hits or a .330 average or 600 HR or something.

Edgar's awfully close, but assuming he's not going to play five more years, I think he's a little short.

No it isn't. That's 1/5 of your playing time. If your career is 2,000 games, that 400 games you spent as a DH. The rules essentially prevent you from taking the field after you've been the DH, because the PITCHER would have to bat in your spot.

You spent over 2 1/2 seasons PADDING your "counting" stats as a full-time PH, and you expect to get into the hall?

Nope.

Etheridge2

07-18-2003, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by Cougar
Is it really a refusal? I think it's more of a mutual thing between him and the M's -- everyone pretty much agrees it's a bad idea.

For a long time he wasn't entirely unwilling, but his hammys have gotten so bad he's been basically physically unable to play the field for some time.

yes it is Edgar has gone on record as saying if they did away with the DH he would retire he has NO DESIRE to play the field...and that is JUST SAD...i'm with NV 110% on this one Edgar is in my book 100% NOT A HALL OF FAMER and short of accumulating eye popping numbers will never be...

he would need a .350+ career average 4000hits 600HR 2000RBI 2000Runs just for me to seriously consider him the typical benchmarks aren't good enough for a guy who doesn't take the field....3000 hits isn't good enough if all you are doing is hitting you should be better then that...

As for pitchers it doesn't matter that they don't hit because very few have ever really contributed with the bat anyway...

Though i would rather see Jose Lima stepping to the plate after plunking a guy then Ken Harvey..

Captain Cold Nose

07-18-2003, 11:39 AM

I'm not as adamant about the dh as CardFan is (you must dream of the double switch) but I have to concur with Etheridge. His counting stats need to be far better.

Cougar

07-18-2003, 11:50 AM

tearforamariner

07-18-2003, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by Cougar
I agree; this is my position too.

Are you all actually suggesting we discriminate against an entire position? Are you saying that because he only hits standards should be set higher? He plays a position, an actual position. Its in the rule books, go ahead check, its there. Edgar Martinez has put up better numbers then any other DH. He is "Mr. DH". If you don't like the DH, then fine, hate the rule. Don't hate the players. Had he stayed at 3rd base and posted these numbers, most everyone here would agree he deserves to be in the HOF.

Cougar

07-18-2003, 12:00 PM

Originally posted by CardFanNV
No it isn't. That's 1/5 of your playing time. If your career is 2,000 games, that 400 games you spent as a DH. The rules essentially prevent you from taking the field after you've been the DH, because the PITCHER would have to bat in your spot.

You spent over 2 1/2 seasons PADDING your "counting" stats as a full-time PH, and you expect to get into the hall?

Nope.

Then Reggie Jackson (630 games as DH, 23%) isn't a HOF.

Then Paul Molitor (1174 games as DH, 44%) isn't a HOF.

20% is too high a standard. Take Jackson's case. He was a mediocre fielder for most of his career, but absent the DH, he would have played the field every day (maybe not at the very end of his career, but all but the last year or two). But the DH rule exists, and managers are going to use it to try to win. Often, after the starting 8, the best hitter on the bench is a corner OF/1b type. So a manager will use that sort of guy as a DH, and he'll rotate the DH slot to rest guys. So good hitters are going to accumulate DH at-bats for strategic reasons only peripherally related to their talent. It's just the nature of a game played with a DH rule.

Now, you have a guy like Edgar, who can't play the field at all, that's different.

Cougar

07-18-2003, 12:04 PM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
Are you all actually suggesting we discriminate against an entire position? Are you saying that because he only hits standards should be set higher? He plays a position, an actual position. Its in the rule books, go ahead check, its there. Edgar Martinez has put up better numbers then any other DH. He is "Mr. DH". If you don't like the DH, then fine, hate the rule. Don't hate the players. Had he stayed at 3rd base and posted these numbers, most everyone here would agree he deserves to be in the HOF.

I'm not discriminating against the position; I'm just weighting it. You are right, if Edgar had put up these stats at 3b, he's a HOF. But if he did it primarily as a lousy fielding LF or 1b (in other words, something close to nil defensive value), I'd still think the counting stats were a little short.

I think a guy with virtually no defensive value needs to get a lot more than 2000 hits and 300 HR to make the HOF. There's just too many guys that have done that sort of thing.

CardFanNV

07-18-2003, 12:19 PM

Originally posted by Captain Cold Nose
I'm not as adamant about the dh as CardFan is (you must dream of the double switch) but I have to concur with Etheridge. His counting stats need to be far better.

It's not about double switching, or anything else. To be a HOF ballplayer, you should be able to excel in more than just one facet of the game. The way the rule is written, if you DH and go into the field later, your team LOSES the DH because the person you were batting for (usually the pitcher) must hit in your vacated position.

DH can only hit and run bases. Most of them are not what you would consider "fleet". That's why Pujols does it when the Cards play interleague.

So they excel at maybe 2 of the 5 "tools". Hit for average and power. Edgar has done that. But that's only two out of five. Not enough.

Killebrew could only do one of five. Hit for power.

Big Mac could only do one of five. Hit for power.

I wouldn't have voted for either.

tearforamariner

07-18-2003, 12:25 PM

Originally posted by CardFanNV
It's not about double switching, or anything else. To be a HOF ballplayer, you should be able to excel in more than just one facet of the game. The way the rule is written, if you DH and go into the field later, your team LOSES the DH because the person you were batting for (usually the pitcher) must hit in your vacated position.

DH can only hit and run bases. Most of them are not what you would consider "fleet". That's why Pujols does it when the Cards play interleague.

So they excel at maybe 2 of the 5 "tools". Hit for average and power. Edgar has done that. But that's only two out of five. Not enough.

Killebrew could only do one of five. Hit for power.

Big Mac could only do one of five. Hit for power.

I wouldn't have voted for either.

Killebrew's in the Hall and Big Mac's on his way to being there. Are you saying that even though YOU don't think Edgar should be in the HOF, he will? :p

CardFanNV

07-18-2003, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by Cougar
Then Reggie Jackson (630 games as DH, 23%) isn't a HOF.

Then Paul Molitor (1174 games as DH, 44%) isn't a HOF.

20% is too high a standard. Take Jackson's case. He was a mediocre fielder for most of his career, but absent the DH, he would have played the field every day (maybe not at the very end of his career, but all but the last year or two). But the DH rule exists, and managers are going to use it to try to win. Often, after the starting 8, the best hitter on the bench is a corner OF/1b type. So a manager will use that sort of guy as a DH, and he'll rotate the DH slot to rest guys. So good hitters are going to accumulate DH at-bats for strategic reasons only peripherally related to their talent. It's just the nature of a game played with a DH rule.

Now, you have a guy like Edgar, who can't play the field at all, that's different.

Exactly ................................... Molitor played too many games at DH. Reggie was lacking at other parts of his game. Reggie would merit special consideration for his WS exploits, along with guys like Larsen. A "Special Achievments Wing", if you will.

Here's a good example. Yaz was not a full-time DH until his final 2 seasons. He ALREADY had 3,000 hits, 600 doubles and 400 HR by then. He would have qualified without needing "padded stats".

Murray DH'd for 58 games at the ripe old age of 32 in his last year with the O's. Whether or not this was HIS idea is debatable, because he went to the NL for 5 seasons. Apparently, he could still play.

Here's the list of those with 500 HR and 3,000 hits

Aaron
Mays
Murray

Which name doesn't seem to hit?

Aaron and Mays obliterated 500 HR. And they played the field for the vast majority of their careers. Mays was NEVER a DH.

Murray played nearly 500 games at the "position".

CardFanNV

07-18-2003, 12:38 PM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
Killebrew's in the Hall and Big Mac's on his way to being there. Are you saying that even though YOU don't think Edgar should be in the HOF, he will? :p

Voters always have this pile a magic numbers, which they think automatically qualifies you for the hall. No matter HOW BAD you are at anything else, 500 HR is pretty much a lock.

I totally disagree.

I think, in Edgar's case, the fact that he has been primarily a DH will certainly be held against him. He won't make it. Neither should Molitor, but he probably will.

Cougar

07-18-2003, 01:24 PM

Let me get this straight...you're questioning Eddie Murray, Mark McGwire, and Harmon Killebrew now?

Of course Murray is not in Mays' or Aaron's class -- that 500-3000 club is more a coincidence than anything else. But Murray's an upper-tier guy; the fact that he DH'ed a bit is completely irrelevant.

Again -- Murray was played at DH by managers because the position was available and they usually had two 1b types that could hit. It was not that he was a poor fielder; in fact, for the first half of his career, he was outstanding, and he was never bad. The DH may have extended his career a couple years at the very end, but so what -- he'd earned the HOF anyway by then.

McGwire hardly DH'ed at all (37 games). Killebrew only in his last two seasons. No, they couldn't run at all, and Killebrew was a poor fielder (Big Mac was actually a rather good first baseman), but they had great on-base skills and they were two of the very best pure sluggers (top 10 -- maybe top 5) of all time.

Well-roundedness is important, but not everything. Greatness is more than a checklist.

Originally posted by CardFanNV
Exactly ................................... Molitor played too many games at DH. Reggie was lacking at other parts of his game. Reggie would merit special consideration for his WS exploits, along with guys like Larsen. A "Special Achievments Wing", if you will.

Here's a good example. Yaz was not a full-time DH until his final 2 seasons. He ALREADY had 3,000 hits, 600 doubles and 400 HR by then. He would have qualified without needing "padded stats".

Murray DH'd for 58 games at the ripe old age of 32 in his last year with the O's. Whether or not this was HIS idea is debatable, because he went to the NL for 5 seasons. Apparently, he could still play.

Here's the list of those with 500 HR and 3,000 hits

Aaron
Mays
Murray

Which name doesn't seem to hit?

Aaron and Mays obliterated 500 HR. And they played the field for the vast majority of their careers. Mays was NEVER a DH.

Murray played nearly 500 games at the "position".

Brad Harris

07-20-2003, 12:35 AM

Originally posted by Etheridge2
...[Edgar Martinez] would need a .350+ career average 4000hits 600HR 2000RBI 2000Runs just for me to seriously consider him

This from someone who supports Jack Morris' induction! :laugh

tearforamariner

09-01-2003, 06:29 PM

Think about this: When Edgar hits his 300th HR and his 500th 2B, will have 300 home runs, 500 doubles, a .400 OB%, a .500 SLG%, and a .300 BA. He's one of the greatest pure hitters of all-time, and deserves to be in the Hall.

MasonDixon

09-01-2003, 07:48 PM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
Think about this: When Edgar hits his 300th HR and his 500th 2B, will have 300 home runs, 500 doubles, a .400 OB%, a .500 SLG%, and a .300 BA. He's one of the greatest pure hitters of all-time, and deserves to be in the Hall.

Not to mention that he's one of the (if not THE) best DH of all-time and has been the best DH in the majors for almost a decade.

tearforamariner

09-01-2003, 07:50 PM

Originally posted by MasonDixon
Not to mention that he's one of the (if not THE) best DH of all-time and has been the best DH in the majors for almost a decade.

No doubt about it, he was the best DH. But that's the problem: People don't think a Dh belongs in Cooperstown.

TXRangerFan

09-01-2003, 10:02 PM

If Martinez played 3rd base for his entire career would he be a viable candidate?

If he played first base would he?

I don't think so.

He doesn't play a position.
He can't run.
He doesn't have the career numbers.

I see a tendency on the part of some to qualify his statistics by comparing them to other players who were DH's for the majority of their careers.

It's very similar to the logic used when people qualify the statistics for second basemen and shortstops by comparing them to others who played that position.

That isn't a correct line of thinking IMO..A DH has one job and that's to hit..and 2000 hits, 1200RBI and 300 homers isn't going to cut it IMO.

A DH isn't a position it's a role.

Is Edgar one of the greatest hitters of this era? Yes when healthy.

The problem is that he hasn't been healthy and all those projection based stats are going to run out of projection room soon.

2000 hits is 2000 hits, that's all it is..300 homers is 300 homers...no more, no less...480 doubles is 480 doubles..in a career that began in 1987 he has had one major responsibility..and that is to hit...he's done it well when healthy but he's been unhealthy often and therefore he does not have the career marks.

One has to assume that due to the relatively poor career statistics for dh's compared to position players..that the reason they could not play in the field was because of physical limitations imposed by lack of athleticism more than anything relating to injury. In Edgar's case it was obviously injury...but you can't give him credit for what he didn't do..and he wasn't there for his team a lot of the time.

I mean why haven't there been more great hitters that played DH? Why are their career benchmarks so poor compared to those who played actual positions? I am always going to wonder that...

But what I do know is that when Raffy played DH for about 2/3rds of the 99 season he set records in HR and RBI..that Edgar busted his tail the following year to catch. Why didn't he do that more often or sooner?

I mean all he had to do was hit...he played in what at one time was one of the greatest lineups in baseball history..he's got zero excuse for his lack of numbers injured or otherwise...

Molitor was injured, he still put up the numbers..

If you are going to excuse Edgar's injuries then you have to excuse Canseco's..I mean he still played in the field quite often..basically you are going to create a whole different standard for HOF admission..

Because any position player is going to be able to make a justified argument that if he has equal numbers to Edgar he is more of a HOF'er because he also played in the field.

Edgar's bad health while unfortunate, is a double strike IMO...he was injury prone playing only one half of the game.

What you have is a very one dimensional player..I mean he has one dimension and that is it, he's really not much of a home run hitter for this era, he has no speed..but even within that dimension he lacks the career benchmarks that would qualify most hitters for the HOF.

The day Edgar gets let in you are going to have to explain to Chili
Davis and Harold Baines why they aren't in the HOF...

1500 runs wins more games than 1200..no matter how you look at it.

And even worse you are going to have to explain to Steve Garvey, Will Clark and Don Mattingly why they aren't in the HOF when they put up better numbers plus they were better defensive players.

How can he be half the player they were doing half the job and be more qulified for the HOF?

For a DH to make the HOF he has to hit..he has to hit great season in and season out and he has to have the career numbers..moreso than any other position on the diamond.

Just because most of the DH's in AL history have sucked ..well that's not a good reason for letting a guy with out any career benchmarks inspite of a 17 year career..that's not a good reason to let him in.

TXRangerFan

09-01-2003, 10:50 PM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
No doubt about it, he was the best DH. But that's the problem: People don't think a Dh belongs in Cooperstown.

Any player should be eligible for the HOF, DH or otherwise..

But the hitting standards should be higher for a DH than positional players, or at least as high..not less because of a lack of truly great hitters in that role.

Chancellor, as always, made a very compelling argument on Edgar's behalf...

But the flaw is...those statistics he cited were projection based more than anything...it doesn't matter how good a player was when healthy, if he wasn't in the lineup, he wasn't able to help his team win or contribute..and when a player only plays half of the game he's got less of an excuse for not being there than any position players.

Chancellor posted Edgar's impressive RC totals and his nice OPS(and sub stats)...

But what I see is that in 17 years Edgar has 1200 BB, 2000 hits 1100 runs, 1200 RBI, 480 doubles, 300 homers and a 317 AVG..with a 405OBP and a 52+ SLG...

But then I look at Jeff Bagwell and in 13 seasons I see 1400 runs, 1350+BB, 1400 RBI, 400 HR, 450 doubles, nearly 200 SB's a GG...

In 4 fewer years Bagwell has put up superior numbers..Edgar may have excellent numbers for his per game averages but the fact remains when a player has better stats in every single raw category he did more to help his team win..projecting less or otherwise..Bagwell played in the field suffering additional wear and tear as well...

It's just not fair to positional players to put a DH on an even level..the DH has less of a job..the hitting standards need to be higher across the board for a career DH and he needs to put up the superior numbers both in raw form and in per game statistics and his numbers need to be judged against the best hitters in the game regardless of their position. .

tearforamariner

09-01-2003, 10:58 PM

Edgar also has a .316 career BA, .423 OB%, and a .527 SLG. When he hits 13 more doubles and 5 more home runs he will have 500 2B and 300 HR. When he does that, he'll join an elite group. Would you like to guess how many players have a .300+ BA, .400+ OB%, .500+ SLG, 500+ 3B, and 300+ HR?

tearforamariner

09-01-2003, 11:00 PM

Bagwell has had more at-bats as well. Why should DHs be held at a hire standard? DO they get more chances to hit?

TXRangerFan

09-01-2003, 11:29 PM

I can do better than that, I can find guys with a 330 AVG 400OBP and a 600 SLG that also racked up 700 - 800 more hits 5- 600 more runs and RBI and an extra 200 - 400 homers over those totals.

And they did it playing in the field.

He is getting in that selective group by by some very low totals.

The 40 - 40 club is a selective group does that mean Jose gets in as well?

So is 30 - 30 does that mean Ron Gant deserves entry?

The standards should be higher for DH's because they don't suffer the additional wear and tear that other players do playing in the field. Because they have only one job and it's to hit. If a guy is getting in for his defense he usually has to have about 10 GG's...IOW he has to be a better defender than the typical HOF'er..A DH should be a better hitter than the typical HOF'er..

Look the HOF isn't just about hitting..it's about being a great player...

One dimensional players do get in from time to time, as in the case of Ozzie Smith..but he is considered the best ever defensive short stop he was unquestionably the greatest defensive SS of his era. And I know you want to say Edgar is the best ever DH...although I'd argue that..Frank Thomas is right there with him...Edgar's position is hitting..is he the best ever hitter? No he isn't..he isn't even the best of his era...he isn't even the best combo power average hitter of his era...

If a player is going to be judged soley by one dimension, in this case hitting..then he better be giving Ted Williams and Barry Bonds a run for their money.

And you are right, Bagwell does have more at bats, he's played in more games, inspite of his career beginning 4 years after Martinez...That's because Bagwell has been healthier..and therefore he's contributed more to his teams in 14 years than Martinez has in 17.

Why should Martinez be given a bonus for injury? Why should Bagwell be penalized for good health and being a complete player?

As I said earlier, his projection and per game statistics are nice..but his career stats aren't even close in any area other than doubles. If he is getting in without using a glove he needs to be competitive in every aspect of hitting, and from a career numbers perspective he falls very very short, inspite of having to only focus on one aspect of the game and getting to rest every other half inning for the majority of his career.

Frank Thomas has better numbers in a shorter career..and he is gonna get the 500 homers 1700 RBI etc...Frank Thomas just might make it..But Edgar comes out short on career numbers.

2000 hits in 17 years doesn't cut it.

tearforamariner

09-01-2003, 11:31 PM

Originally posted by TXRangerFan
I can do better than that, I can find guys with a 330 AVG 400OBP and a 600 SLG that also racked up 700 - 800 more hits 5- 600 more runs and RBI and an extra 200 - 400 homers over those totals.

Show them to me.

TXRangerFan

09-01-2003, 11:49 PM

Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Jimmy Foxx, Lou Gehrig...

He's not close to those guys in any single area except doubles..he's dwarfed and im most cases they stole more bases than he did too, while playing in the field.

Edgar's stats aren't even unique to this era...Bagwell and Thomas have superior stats in fewer years, while spending more time in the field. Ramirez has similar stats in 8 or 9 years....

Even Piazza who has the most grueling job on the baseball field has better numbers in just about every category...

Your boy Olerud has similar numbers to Martinez in far fewer years..

All those guys didn't get to rest every half inning...they've put up comparable numbers in 4-5 fewer seasons.

300 homers and a 317 AVG gets you in as a hitter...if you are George Brett and tack on another 1000 hits and 100 doubles.

Edit: And BTW...RE Your Sig...

Jeff Bagwell, Chipper Jones, Frank Thomas, Larry Walker, Jim Thome and Gary Sheffield all have a 400 OBP and a 500 SLG in over 5000 AB...Manny needs about 60 more AB's to join the club and Giambi will join it next season.

TXRangerFan

09-02-2003, 12:20 AM

I've got a question for you as well..

If Edgar gets in, do you think Mattingly, Clark, Garvey, and Keith Hernandez should get in?

Do you think Chili Davis and Harold Baines deserve entry on the basis of better career numbers?

What about Andrea Galaraga? He's got basically the same power numbers, he won a career TC, he's got two GG's?

Where does defensive ability factor into it for positional players? Does it count for anything? Or is it an overrated aspect of the game IYO?

I like Edgar, he is the best DH in history.. but I do think the hitting standard needs to be as high if not higher for a DH as a positional player, the same way it is for a player getting in for his defensive prowess...

Where do you think defensive ability and career numbers should rate?

abolishthedh

09-02-2003, 10:06 AM

TFAM, Edgar was a fine, fine hitter and he's always been one of my favorite players because he's a class guy. He was a better fielder than a lot of people remember, too. But TXRangerFan has it right here-- Edgar doesn't belong in the Hall.

No DH belongs in the Hall as of today, and if it ever happens it will be after that DH has walked on water for about 20 years. I am not banning DHs from the Hall, but one dimensional players are one dimensional players. In fact, I question whether Rollie Fingers belongs in the Hall! IMO, the only reliever who could belong in the Hall might be Eckersley because Eckersley was NOT one dimensional (he also won 20 games once). My point is that one dimensional players belong in the Hall only after proving themselves as Ted Williams' equal.

A rising sea raises all boats. This means that we will have an ongoing major debate in the upcoming years. One or the other factors has to give: either we raise the standards for the Hall, or we compromise the integrity of the Hall and let more players in. I'm willing to bet that a lot of fans' loyalty to baseball and belief in the Hall will be tested over that.

I still love Edgar, but can't support his Hall prospects. As a matter of conjecture, I still wonder how Atlanta's Bob Horner would have hit had he played in the AL and accepted the DH role. Trust me, Bob Horner would have put up numbers like Edgar's. Other players might have done the same: Pedro Guerrero, Greg Luzinski, George Foster. These guys chose not to play baseball when forced to play as a DH later in their careers.

tjkrueger

09-05-2003, 05:01 PM

Because the postings against Edgar (and DH's in general) joining the Hall are predominantly from Cardinal fans, let me pose a hypothetical situation:

If the NL were to adopt the DH rule and the Cards decide to DH Pujols for the remainder of his career, should he be punished for not playing defense? I certainly don't think he should be punished by Hall voters; by letting a better defensive player take the field in his place he is actually helping his team.

Edgar is a similar situation; by simply hitting whenever it's his turn in the lineup he is giving the Mariners a better chance to win than if he would also play defense.

tearforamariner

09-05-2003, 05:06 PM

Originally posted by tjkrueger
Because the postings against Edgar (and DH's in general) joining the Hall are predominantly from Cardinal fans, let me pose a hypothetical situation:

If the NL were to adopt the DH rule and the Cards decide to DH Pujols for the remainder of his career, should he be punished for not playing defense? I certainly don't think he should be punished by Hall voters; by letting a better defensive player take the field in his place he is actually helping his team.

Edgar is a similar situation; by simply hitting whenever it's his turn in the lineup he is giving the Mariners a better chance to win than if he would also play defense.

That is a good point TJ. In the "refuse to lose" run in 1995, Edgar Martinez was the most valuable player in the AL. (Just look at the win shares from '95 if you don't believe me). If it wasn't for him, the M's who did not have Griffey or A Rod would not have gone to the ALDS forthe first time EVER, where they eventually defeated the Yankees. Edgar is an incredible hitter, and one of the greatest pure hitters of all time.

Also, remember one thing: The HoF is for great players BY POSITION. Right now, there is no DH better than Edgar, and therefore he deserves to be the first DH in the Hall of Fame.

Zito75

09-05-2003, 07:00 PM

The DH is not really a position though. It's more like a spot in the batting order.

tearforamariner

09-05-2003, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by Zito75
The DH is not really a position though. It's more like a spot in the batting order.

Does the MLB recognize it as a position?

Brad Harris

09-07-2003, 02:07 AM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
The HoF is for great players BY POSITION.

I'd have to take exception to that remark.

The Hall of Fame seeks to honor "great players." Period.

Players are only sorted by position as a categorization tool once they're enshrined. Otherwise, you'd have a list of some 250+ persons, organized alphabetically, whenever someone looked at a list of Hall of Famers. The organizing of players by position that the Hall of Fame does for enshrinees is just a simple way of cataloging those players into smaller and more manageable groups, much the same way books are categorized in a library.

Voters, on the other hand, seem to categorize players by position in order to focus on smaller groups. It's much easier to decide who the best third baseman not in the Hall is, or the best catcher not in the Hall...much more so than just trying to figure out who the best player - irrespective of position - is. It's just a compartmentalization of the mind which is taking place when this happens.

Just wanted to clarify that a little.

And, yes...I think a very powerful argument in favor of Edgar Martinez's election is the fact he's the greatest designated hitter in the history of the game.

Steffo

09-07-2003, 08:33 AM

Originally posted by CardFanNV
Clemens also FIELDS his position, which requires covering bases, backing up throws, and fielding bunts and grounders. He also BATS, when required by interleague rules and post-season requirements.

Edgar just bats and runs bases.

NOT GOOD ENOUGH!

Hmmmmm, I always thought that Edgar took the field in interleague, but silly me, I don't know anything on the subject. :rolleyes:

As for pitchers it doesn't matter that they don't hit because very few have ever really contributed with the bat anyway...

I agree, since they haven't contributed with the bat they shouldn't be in the hall, plain and simple. :rolleyes:

Like someone else said hitting is bigger in a game then fielding. Pitchers field, but they miss a bigger part of the game in Hitting then DH's do in fielding.

Do you think Chili Davis and Harold Baines deserve entry on the basis of better career numbers?

Absolutely Not!

Let me say something, the DH has been around 30 years, it is in baseball, are you going to dis-credit DH's for what they do. Someone Has to play that position, and criticizing Edgar for it isn't right.

Think about it, DH's have been around 30 years, and Edgar is the best offensively. Does that mean that DH' generally aren't great hitters? He has put up the best numbers, but they aren't amazing. Therefore, he really is the best DH. He has to get credit for that, there is no Great hitting DH because great hitters usually are able to field. Are we going to discredit 2B's and SS's because they have smaller numbers. Not if they have the best numbers as a Middle Infielder ever, even if their stats are worse that Edgars, and I don't see reason in that.

tearforamariner

09-08-2003, 12:39 AM

Well, just for kicks, let's see how Edgar stands up to the Keltner List:

1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?

No.

2. Was he the best player on his team?

For a short time, however you must remember Edgar played with Ken Griffey Jr., Randy Johnson, and Alex Rodriguez, who are all future Hall of Famers in their own rights. Ichiro is also a tremendous talent who might have a shot at the Hall (too soon to tell).

3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?

Yes, with Frank Thomas in second place.

4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?

1995, 1997, 2000, 2001, and eventually 2003.

5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?

Yes, he as had many productive seasons after 35 and is currently having one of the best season by a 40 year old in history.

6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?

Most likely not.

7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?

Yes.

8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?

Yes. Edgar scores a 49 on the HOF Standards test. (50 is the average among HOFers, however current HOFers are as low as 34.)

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

Because Edgar did not play in the field for the majority of his career, an argument can be made that his stats are misleading.
10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?

Undeniably. Edgar Martinez is without argument the greatest DH the game has ever seen.

11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?

The 1995 MVP was arguably stolen from Edgar (He finished 3rd in the voting behind Mo Vaughn and Albert Belle). Edgar also finished 6th in 2000. Her had a number of other seasons with over 25 home runs, over 100 RBI, and over .320 BA.

12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?

Edgar Martinez has been named to 7 all star teams.

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?

Absolutely, as proven in 1995.

14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?

Edgar’s contributions to baseball history include the 1995 ALDS run, in which he led the Mariners to overcome one of the greatest deficits in history. Also, he has redefined the DH and has brought a new audience to baseball.

15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?

Absolutely.

Not Bad, Not Bad at All.

TXRangerFan

09-08-2003, 02:16 AM

Balderdash!

there is no Great hitting DH because great hitters usually are able to field. Are we going to discredit 2B's and SS's because they have smaller numbers. Not if they have the best numbers as a Middle Infielder ever, even if their stats are worse that Edgars, and I don't see reason in that.

Again, I fail to see why he is being rewarded for being a one way player.

Second Basemen and SS play defense they play arguably the most important defensive positions. DH does not.

I argue that the DH is a position..show me where on the diamond it is..position has nothing to do with hitting in a line up.

Playing 2dn base is a position..it is positioned directly behind the catcher..

Where is the DH positioned? On his butt on the bench?

Anyone can hit in the DH spot..not anyone can play SS or 2dn base..

Are there many guys that can put up Edgar's averages? No..but by the same token..there are a lot of guys that can put up 300 homers and 2000 hits in a 17 year career and there are going to be more and more..

And inspite of his averages it's still just 2000 hits and 300 homers on a guy getting in for his offense, he wasn't helping his team win in all those games he missed. . Not fair.

So out of the typical critieria..You have offense, defense, and career numbers.

Edgar has 1 of those 3..he has some nice seasonal averages, offense..but he does not have the career benchmarks that great hitters do, nor does he play defense. Most modern HOF'ers are well above average in 2 of those 3. It's just really unfair to anybody who plays defense to give him credit as being a positional player.

You want to put Molitor in as a DH? Ok with me..Thomas in a few years? Yeah I can see his case, but 2000 hits and 300 homers without playing defense isn't hall worthy.

Let me give Edgar the TXRangerFan test...

1.Is Edgar a great hitter?

Yes, in fact I'd be kinder to him than TFAM was..I'd say there were at least 2 years in his career where you could make a very strong argument for him being the best hitter in the game.

2.Does Edgar have great PCT's and averages per games played?

Yes he does, quite nice in fact.

3.If Edgar was a 1stbaseman would he be HOF bound?

Nope IMO he wouldn't, not with guys like Don Mattingly looking in from the outside.

4.Is 1stbase the least demanding defensive position?

I'd say so..probably

5.Does a 1stbasemen still usually do more to help a team than a DH does?

90% of the time I'd say so, by virtue of what he does on defense.

6.Does Edgar have the typical career benchmarks for HOF'ers getting in for their hitting? No, they're nowhere close from a career standpoint.

And the standards are rising, not lowering..we're talking now 500 homers, 3000 hits doesn't get you into the Hall automatically in this era..a lot of writers say this.

..

7.Will Edgar going into the HOF lower the standards?

Yes, immensely, and this is where my problem lies...

IF you put Edgar in..anyone that plays 17 years and has 2000 hits and 1300 RBI and plays defense will have a better case than Edgar will for induction into the HOF.

You guys are already trying to use the low end numbers for certain HOF'ers to justify Edgar getting in..it's only going to get worse after Edgar gets in..but those guys will at least had to have had a glove too.

Brad Harris

09-08-2003, 07:32 AM

1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball? No, but he was the best player in his league once. (In 1995.) Barry Bonds - by 4 win shares difference - was the only National League player that year to be more productive. So you could say he was the second-best player in all of baseball one time.

2. Was he the best player on his team? Once. In 1995, he was the best - by a landslide. He was very regularly the second or third-best player on the team, though.

3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position? As a third baseman, Martinez finished 3rd in the league (behind Ventura and Boggs) in 1991; and second in the league (behind Ventura) in 1992. As a designated hitter, Martinez was the best in baseball in 1995, 1996, 1997 and 2001. He finished second to Frank Thomas in 1998 (by a single point); second to Rafael Palmeiro in 1999; second to Thomas again in 2000; third to Ellis Burks and Thomas in 2001. As of this writing (thru 9/5/03), Martinez is just one win share behind Thomas for this year's lead. So yes...he was often the best and almost always the second- or third-best player at his position during his career.

4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?
Well documented by tearforamariner already.

5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime? Also pointed out already.

6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame? Without question...no. However, he is the best designated hitter who is not in the Hall of Fame.

7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame? Certainly. Two of his four closest comps using "similarity scores" are enshrined: Chuck Klein and Earl Averill. Several other comps - Bob Johnson, Don Mattingly, etc. - are popular candidates.

8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards? He passed the mark this season where his career numbers are now among the upper half of Hall of Famers.

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics? Not really. 5% of his career win share total is due to his limited fielding appearances. Given a "normal" ratio of fielding value (17%) over the course of his career and you boost Martinez's career totals over the 300 mark, which is where Bill James (the creator of win shares) claims Hall of Fame territory starts for everyone but catchers and pitchers. So positing that Martinez had continued to play in the field - as other players did - and performed at a level near his earlier performances, he would unquestionably be a strong candidate for the Hall of Fame.

10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame? Most definately.

11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close? Martinez had one MVP-type season (30+ win shares); that was in 1995. He finished third in the voting. He finished 6th in the voting in 2000, as well, after a strong season.

12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame? Though Martinez has appeared in only 7 All Star Games, he has produced an "all-star-type" season 9 times and is very likely to make this his 10th "all-star-type" season (of 20+ win shares.) Several of those years were very close to being MVP-type seasons (as described above.)

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant? Absolutely.

14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way? I don't think Edgar contributed anything special to the history of the game besides being the first truly great hitter be a "career DH."

15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider? I've never heard or read anything to the contrary about Martinez, which is an accomplishment in this day and age, I suppose.

tearforamariner

09-08-2003, 10:44 PM

Originally posted by TXRangerFan
Balderdash!

Again, I fail to see why he is being rewarded for being a one way player.

Second Basemen and SS play defense they play arguably the most important defensive positions. DH does not.

I argue that the DH is a position..show me where on the diamond it is..position has nothing to do with hitting in a line up.

Playing 2dn base is a position..it is positioned directly behind the catcher..

Where is the DH positioned? On his butt on the bench?

Anyone can hit in the DH spot..not anyone can play SS or 2dn base..

Are there many guys that can put up Edgar's averages? No..but by the same token..there are a lot of guys that can put up 300 homers and 2000 hits in a 17 year career and there are going to be more and more..

And inspite of his averages it's still just 2000 hits and 300 homers on a guy getting in for his offense, he wasn't helping his team win in all those games he missed. . Not fair.

So out of the typical critieria..You have offense, defense, and career numbers.

Edgar has 1 of those 3..he has some nice seasonal averages, offense..but he does not have the career benchmarks that great hitters do, nor does he play defense. Most modern HOF'ers are well above average in 2 of those 3. It's just really unfair to anybody who plays defense to give him credit as being a positional player.

You want to put Molitor in as a DH? Ok with me..Thomas in a few years? Yeah I can see his case, but 2000 hits and 300 homers without playing defense isn't hall worthy.

Let me give Edgar the TXRangerFan test...

1.Is Edgar a great hitter?

Yes, in fact I'd be kinder to him than TFAM was..I'd say there were at least 2 years in his career where you could make a very strong argument for him being the best hitter in the game.

2.Does Edgar have great PCT's and averages per games played?

Yes he does, quite nice in fact.

3.If Edgar was a 1stbaseman would he be HOF bound?

Nope IMO he wouldn't, not with guys like Don Mattingly looking in from the outside.

4.Is 1stbase the least demanding defensive position?

I'd say so..probably

5.Does a 1stbasemen still usually do more to help a team than a DH does?

90% of the time I'd say so, by virtue of what he does on defense.

6.Does Edgar have the typical career benchmarks for HOF'ers getting in for their hitting? No, they're nowhere close from a career standpoint.

And the standards are rising, not lowering..we're talking now 500 homers, 3000 hits doesn't get you into the Hall automatically in this era..a lot of writers say this.

..

7.Will Edgar going into the HOF lower the standards?

Yes, immensely, and this is where my problem lies...

IF you put Edgar in..anyone that plays 17 years and has 2000 hits and 1300 RBI and plays defense will have a better case than Edgar will for induction into the HOF.

You guys are already trying to use the low end numbers for certain HOF'ers to justify Edgar getting in..it's only going to get worse after Edgar gets in..but those guys will at least had to have had a glove too.

Just in case you did not know, the test I used was created by Bill James and is often used to judge players for the Hall of Fame. It was not a random test I made up.

Now, as for a first baseman doing more to help his team than a DH, that might be true, but Edgar does more for his team than typical first basemen. It can be argued that Mariner first baseman John Olerud, who is one of the best first baggers in the game today, doesn't do as much for the M's as Edgar has.

Now, I would like to see how many players you can name that have at least 2,000 hits AND 1300 RBI who are not in the Hall of Fame (not including active players and players not eligible for the Hall).

TXRangerFan

09-09-2003, 01:28 AM

Well you hit the nail on the head right there...If Edgar gets in there's a long line of guys that should be in front of him...and Olerud helps his team more by being in the lineup than Martinez does when he is out of it, which has been frequently in his career. Am I holding Edgar's injury problems against him? You bet, durability is part of it.

In short Edgar could have a OPS of 2000 and be batting 1000 for his career, but if all he has is 2000 hits and 300 homers after 17 years, and his candidacy is based on his hitting...I am gonna feel the same way...those 6-700 games he missed he wasn't doing anything for his team..Generally averages decline with a greater number of games..He should not get rewarded for missing so many games, he should not get rewarded for not playing D..it's not that I don't like Edgar, I like him immensely and would take him on my team..it's that it's not fair to other players who did play D, who put up similar career numbers in 17 years..

It;s not fair to them to say that Edgar is more hall worthy because DH's have sucked for most of their history.

The fact is any player that got 2000hits, 300HR and 1300RBI, in 17 seasons, certainly could have done it as a DH...Edgar could not have gotten his numbers playing in the field.

Trying to claim positional exceptions for a DH like you would a SS or 2dn baseman is nothing more than misuse of a loophole that rapes the rules and intentions of the HOF's loose criteria for SS's, Catchers and 2ndbasemen.

You guys know this too...anyone can play DH..not anyone can play 2ndbase...it's a safe bet to say that any guy that could make the Hall as an offensive 1stbaseman could certainly do it as a DH...

Like I say, I have nothing against Edgar...but there's a lot of players that deserve entry before Edgar does based on their career numbers...and when you got Jim Rice with nearly 400 homers 1500 RBI...etc...telling him he isn't a HOF'er because he played in the outfield but Martinez is because he was a DH...

That's a travesty. It's not fair.

And BTW Chili Davis, Baines and Baylor were all considered the best DH in the game at various times of their career as well..actually they had less competition than Edgar did..so if you are gonna use that argument for Edgar you need to let them in too..

Players with 2100 hits, 1300 RBI and 300 homers not in the Hall?

Playing it lose and fast and just guessing..

Jim Rice for one
DaleMurphy
Andre Dawson
Will Clark
Keith Hernandez
Ryne Sandberg
Gary Gaietti
Mark Grace
Luis Gonsalez(if he doesn't have those #'s yet he will in 2 more years or so)
Paul O'Neil
Bobby Bonds
Dwigt Evans
Joe Carter
Dave Parker
Rusty Staub
Joe Torre
Don Mattingly
Jose Canseco
Don Baylor
Chili Davis
Harold Baines

Maybe Steve Garvey..but what I do know is that even if some of those guys do not have right at the 1300 RBI or 300 HR many of them weren't given the opportunity Martinez was to extend his career, many of them have more hits, and many of them have multiple Gold Gloves add World series rings as well as a few MVP's.

Some of those guys put up better numbers while playing in the field and they did it in fewer years..

I know Edgar's numbers are nice for games played...but his lack of games played in 17 years is a negative to me..it's not a positive..I have yet to see a hitter than helps his team when he isn't in the lineup. Some guys play through pain and injury and their PCT stats and numbers suffer because of it, but they still help their team on the field.

I am sure there are a ton more...Olerud has almost identical numbers to Martinez in fewer years, plus he's got a Gold Glove

Thomas has superior numbers in fewer years...

Piazza is probably right there with him and he plays catcher...

You have to explain to Don Mattingly and Keith Hernandez that
while they have similar career numbers to Martinez, and while they were arguably the greatest defensive 1stbasemen in history...

You have to explain to them why Edgar is a HOF'er and why they
aren't...I don't think they're going to understand why his inability to play defense and stay healthy means he was a better player or even a better hitter than they were.

It's just not fair to the players who played in the field and have equivalent numbers.

Griffey is gonna be the first M's HOF'er..and he should be, not Edgar.

And add him to my list of guys with 2000 hits, 300 homers and 1300 RBI.

Add Juan Gonzalez to that list too..

TXRangerFan

09-09-2003, 02:53 AM

Brad Harris

09-09-2003, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
I would like to see how many players you can name that have at least 2,000 hits AND 1300 RBI who are not in the Hall of Fame (not including active players and players not eligible for the Hall).

The complete list:
Andre Dawson
Darrell Evans
Dwight Evans
Graig Nettles
Dave Parker
Jim Rice
Ron Santo

Joe Carter will be added to this list when he appears on the BBWAA ballot this December.

Brad Harris

09-09-2003, 07:17 AM

Incidentally, I think at least half of those players do belong in the Hall of Fame.

Brad Harris

09-09-2003, 08:29 AM

For those of you who don't think Martinez is a legitimate Hall of Famer, I'd like to know on what grounds you would consider his accomplishments Hall-worthy.

What would be the obstacles to his election - in your mind - if Martinez had played third base all these years, and done so in a non-descript (that is, average) way? What if he'd been a below average fielder all these years? What if Martinez had moved to first base instead of DH?

I'm just curious...is the DH the primary impediment to his candidacy? Or is it a combination of factors (position, lack of durability, etc.?)

TXRangerFan

09-09-2003, 11:42 AM

Chancellor on that list of players with 300homers and 1300 RBI..

Some of the guys I mentioned had 2 or 300 SB's and 2400 hits in 14 or 15 years...they may have only had 285 HR and 1230 RBI or something but they had other things they did well...and most of them had multiple WS rings and Gold Gloves.

I mean Mark Grace got more hits in the 90's than any other player..I think he's got 2500 hits and 500 doubles in 15 or 16 years to go along with a few Gold Gloves and World Series ring. He's not a HOF'er as a DH using the criteria you guys are using?

I think the standard for a a DH should be as high as it is for a 1stbaseman or right or left fielder.

AT least as high as it is for a 1bman.

I think Frank Thomas is hitting his way to the Hall exactly the way a DH should have to do it...

10 years of Ted Williams like performance followed by hitting the career benchmarks of 500 home runs and 1500 RBI.

And yes IMO Thomas needs the career numbers to make it, just like Martinez does.

If Edgar was a 1stbaseman or a corner outfielder
you and I both know his numbers would not be hall worthy. IF he was a second baseman or catcher or something of course he would be getting heavy consideration....but those are demanding defensive positions and his offense isn't t hat much better than what some of the guys playing those positions are doing right now.

PS Edgar does not have 1300 RBI, he has less that 1200, and he also doesn't have 300 homers yet.

Look at how many people don't think Juan Gone is a HOF'er...in 14 years he's got well over 1300 RBI, he's got over 400 homers, he'll have 2000 hits next year...he's got multiple MVP's, multiple home run crowns(by out homering McGwire and the like in the pre 94 era) he's got an RBI crown...You guys don't think he could have put up those numbers as a DH?

If a guy is getting in for being a high average or doubles type hitter IMO he needs to have a high 320 + average and 3000 hits.
I agree a player can get in for a short burst of brilliance but it needs to be true brilliance for that 10 year period, say like what Pujols or Helton are doing..

tearforamariner

09-09-2003, 11:58 AM

According to the Hall of Fame Standards test, the Average Hall of Famer scores a 50. I was incorrect in saying that Edgar has a 49. Including this season, Edgar Martinez scores about a 54, and that's getting 0 points for fielding.

tearforamariner

09-09-2003, 01:20 PM

It's not the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, but today Edgar Martinez will be inducted into the Hispanic Heritage Baseball Museum Hall of Fame.

Steffo

09-09-2003, 06:39 PM

Ok then, let's do Olerud's Keltner if you think he was better......

1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?
Absolutely not, he's never been near the top......

Score-0

2. Was he the best player on his team?

You must take into account, Randy Johnson, A-Rod, and KG Junior played on his team, as well as Edgar. I think it's safe to say that in 1993 he was the best on his team...

11.25 runs a game, 11.03 adjusted, in an environment of 4.72 runs, or about 57% better than league average, he was creating much more runs than an average team, no one on his team was any better.

Score-1

3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in his league at his position?

James means over a period of time, he got selected to two All-Star games, one in his monster 1993 season, the other in 2001. I think it's safe to say we wasn't the best first-basebman in the AL or MLB....

Score-1

4. Did he have impact on a number of pennant races?

From 1991-1993 with the Blue Jays he was very much an impact player, he also had an impact on the 1999, 100, and 2001 races. I give him points here.

Score-2

5. Was he a good enough player that he could continue to play after passing his prime?

He's done a pretty good job in latter years, his best years were before age 27 though....

Score-3

6. Is he the very best player in history who is not in the hall of fame?

We all know the answer is no.

Score-3

7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the hall of fame?

He has 3 layers who are very similar to him, Those being Mattingly, Cecil Cooper, and Wally Joyner in that order. Mattingly is the only good player in the bunch. Note that number four is Edgar Martinez....

None of his top ten are in the hall.

Score-3

8. Do the player's numbers meet hall of fame standards?

He scores 35.9 on HOF Standards, a typical hall of famer is 50.

Score-3

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than the statistics show?

No.

Score-3

10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the hall but not in?

He isn't eligible, I won't count this or number 6.

Score-3

11. How many mvp type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an mvp award? If not, how many times was he close?

He had two seasons of 30+ win shares, which are technically MVP caliber. He never won the award, however, in 1993, he could have won it over Frank Thomas.

Score-4

12. How many all-star type seasons did he have? How many all-star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many go into the hall of fame?

He had two seasons of 25+, whcih can be clalled "ALL-STAR" type seasons. He was in the game twice, and numerous others who twice were in an All-Star game aren't in the hall.

Score-4

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely his team would win the pennant?

See 1992 and 1993.....

Score-5

14. What impact did this player have ion baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?

Not at all.

Score-5

15. Did the player uphld the standards of sportsmanship and harachter that in the hall of fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?

I won't answer this.....

Final Score: 5 out of 12 possible

My own question.

Is that hall of fame caliber?

I say NO!

TXRangerFan

09-09-2003, 07:03 PM

Steffo I am not sure which side of the line you stand upon, I think I recall you being on the wron er Martinez :D side of this debate..

But that test is highly subjective...What defines a period? Edgar has hardly ever played more than 3 consecutive years healthy...so what period is he the best DH in the game for?

Secondly..why not answer the questions about Olerud's character? He has a fine character to the best of my knowledge.

Lastly...

Didn't have any impact on the game? I disagree..he has played the majority of his career weraring batting helmet at 1st base due to a head injury he had many years ago..

Not only does he set a new standard for a what an injured player can achieve he is also the only guy in history that I know of to play the the majority of his career wearing a batting helmet in the field.

That would qualify under the introuduction of new equipment...at least from fielding perspective..

Although to tell you truth I think that is a silly question ...

And finally...who died and left Bill James god?

What has Martinez done in his career that Olerud hasn't?

Win an RBI crown..maybe a slugging PCT title..

What has Olerud done in his career that Martinez hasn't?
Won a GG
Been arguably the best player on a WS team that was 2-0 in WS play.
Won 2 WS.
Played in the WS in two different leagues.
Stayed healthy.
Played defense.

What you guys will do if the voting goes your way is create a situation where no one wants to play in the field anymore and will only want to play DH.

Why?

Because all you have to do is out produce the very mediocre Chili Davis and Harold Baines to gain entry into the Hall. You don't have to play defense, you can just sit there and hit..

You get all the desert without having to eat any vegetables..and you don't even have to do any chores before dinner.

And I'd argue that Edgar was ever the best player on his team...

All of his good years he has had an MVP or HOF caliber hitter in the line up with him...

Who do you take from 1992 - 1999? Griffey Jr or Edgar?

Who do you take from then on? Arod? Ichiro? Boone? or Edgar?

Notice anything odd there? Which one doesn't have a GG? Which one was injured the most? They all could hit.

Steffo

09-09-2003, 07:10 PM

Yes, I am on Edgar's side.

I don't answer the carachter questions for everyone, I feel I can't judge them.

I say a period is 4+ straight years......

I will acknoledge Olerud's batting helmet, to put him at 6 out of 12....

Still not very good.

James isn't god, he is very knoledgable on the sport, though and is often right in his ways. I believe the Keltner List is a good way to evaluate candidates for the hall, I really despise some of his methods however, only recently, i the last month, have I grown fond of Win Shares.

Brad Harris

09-10-2003, 09:54 AM

Originally posted by TXRangerFan

Chancellor on that list of players with 300homers and 1300 RBI...Some of the guys I mentioned had 2 or 300 SB's and 2400 hits in 14 or 15 years...they may have only had 285 HR and 1230 RBI or something but they had other things they did well...and most of them had multiple WS rings and Gold Gloves. So? That wasn't your point, nor mine, as they were stated. Tearforamariner asked how many guys met X criteria. You guessed at a number of them; I looked it up and responded with a factual answer to his question. I wasn't trying to make qualitative statements about those players (or compare them to Edgar), but I was answering tearforamariner's question.

I mean Mark Grace got more hits in the 90's than any other player..I think he's got 2500 hits and 500 doubles in 15 or 16 years to go along with a few Gold Gloves and World Series ring. He's not a HOF'er as a DH using the criteria you guys are using? No. Mark Grace doesn't rate as a Hall of Famer in my book. His numbers are purely the product of consistency and good health. Grace has not produced at an all-star level either for most of his career. He's a good ballplayer who's hung around a long time and stayed healthy. That's not a Hall of Famer. (If he hangs around another 5-10 years, I'd be happy to revisit his 3,500 hits.) Grace has never been a great player. His defense at first base is an asset to his case, but if he doesn't merit election on the basis of having been a first baseman, his offensive contributions (empty batting average with few walks and no power) are miniscule compared to that of a hitter like Edgar Martinez.

I think the standard for a a DH should be as high as it is for a 1stbaseman or right or left fielder...At least as high as it is for a first baseman. I'm not sure I can disagree with this assesment. My point is that if Martinez had merely been an average-fielding first baseman his entire career, I don't think as many people would be against his election at this point in his career.

I think Frank Thomas is hitting his way to the Hall exactly the way a DH should have to do it...10 years of Ted Williams like performance followed by hitting the career benchmarks of 500 home runs and 1500 RBI...And yes IMO Thomas needs the career numbers to make it, just like Martinez does. Though this is a matter of some debate, Thomas already merits election to the Hall of Fame. Any player that can claim the kind of dominance Thomas had over a 10-12 year period deserves election to the Hall of Fame (barring some enormous negative, which Thomas doesn't have). Whether Thomas continues to add to his career numbers or hits as a first baseman or designated hitter is irrelevant at this point. He's already spent the vast bulk of his career as one of the best hitters in the game and one of the best hitters in history. I am glad to hear, however, that you'd be willing to endorse Martinez - as that's how I understand it - if his numbers mirrored Thomas' more closely.

If Edgar was a 1stbaseman or a corner outfielder
you and I both know his numbers would not be hall worthy. IF he was a second baseman or catcher or something of course he would be getting heavy consideration....but those are demanding defensive positions and his offense isn't t hat much better than what some of the guys playing those positions are doing right now. You presume too much. If Edgar were even a poor-fielding first baseman or corner outfielder, he would still have a strong case, as his career exists to date. You and I disagree on that point, which elevates your argument to one against Edgar's lack of playing time - he's missed 29% of his team's games in all the seasons he's played - rather than one against the designated hitter. I certainly agree that, had he been a poor-fielding middle infielder or catcher, few would bother counting those missed games.

PS Edgar does not have 1300 RBI, he has less that 1200, and he also doesn't have 300 homers yet. Martinez had 296 home runs and 1,188 RBI thru games of 9/9/03 (per ESPN's web site.) I don't believe anyone suggested he had already reached those numbers?

Look at how many people don't think Juan Gone is a HOF'er...in 14 years he's got well over 1300 RBI, he's got over 400 homers, he'll have 2000 hits next year...he's got multiple MVP's, multiple home run crowns(by out homering McGwire and the like in the pre 94 era) he's got an RBI crown...You guys don't think he could have put up those numbers as a DH? With few exceptions, Juan Gonzalez's offense has not stood out above the crowd. His RBI totals - a product of hitting in the middle of much better lineups - are what have seduced voters into giving him two undeserved MVP awards. Gonzalez has not been a dominant hitter (like Martinez has). And while I'm unprepared to endorse Gonzalez's candidacy at this writing, he's awfully close given that he continues to pile up career numbers worthy of consideration. I also think it's patently ridiculous to suggest that anyone who hits anywhere on the field couldn't do so as a designated hitter. By the way...Gonzo's "out homering McGwire...in the pre 94 era" was the result of McGwire's most injury-marred seasons and it only lasted a year or two. As I said earlier, there were some exceptions towards his being a league-leading type of hitter.

If a guy is getting in for being a high average or doubles type hitter IMO he needs to have a high 320 + average and 3000 hits. And you're entitled to that opinion.

I agree a player can get in for a short burst of brilliance but it needs to be true brilliance for that 10 year period, say like what Pujols or Helton are doing.. I wish you'd define "true brilliance for that 10 year period," especially in light of the fact that your two examples are players who, respectively, have only played 3 and 7 seasons.

Brad Harris

09-10-2003, 10:16 AM

(1) John Olerud had 16 win shares in 1992, 37 in 1993.

Olerud was the 7th-best player on his team in '92, the best in '93.

Over those two seasons - the Blue Jays' World Championship years - Olerud's cumulative total of 53 win shares fell substantially short of team leader Roberto Alomar (64 win shares from 1992-93).

Olerud was the best player on the team in 1993 (by a fair margin), but over that period of time, he was not the best player on the team.

(2) I should mention that Olerud was the best player in the American League, as well, in 1993; and the second only to Barry Bonds (47 ws) in all of baseball that year.

Of course, he never had another year like that, but how many people can really say that they were ever the best player in the league? Not too many.

(3) I think Olerud's candidacy is also strong. Perhaps stronger than Martinez when it comes down to it because, after all, Martinez is likely to retire after this season while Olerud will still be around, batting .300 and collecting 40 doubles a year for a few more seasons. Olerud's career totals are - to this point - as impressive as many Hall of Fame candidates (guys like Mattingly, Will Clark, etc.) I'm not about to suggest that Martinez has a Hall of Fame case while Olerud does not. I will, however, state unequivocally, that Mark Grace doesn't belong anywhere near Cooperstown.

Brad Harris

09-10-2003, 10:21 AM

Let me take a moment to clarify my position, as well, while I'm at it.

I don't mean to say that I'd give Edgar Martinez a vote if I could, at this point. I merely mean to state that Martinez has a stronger case than most people realize.

What's compelling me to take his "side" is the utterly ludicrous dismissal of his amazing accomplishments with a bat merely on the basis that he's been a designated hitter for most of his career. It's the attitude that somehow thinks a DH must do significantly greater things at the plate than a first baseman or corner outfielder in order to get elected; or the attitude that no DH should be allowed in. Period.

It's that non-sensical perspective which has propelled me to the pro-Martinez camp more than anything.

Martinez is a fabulous hitter and if there's one black mark against him it's his poor durability. Not his designated hitter status.

tearforamariner

09-10-2003, 03:52 PM

The player we are talking about here has been playing with a broken toe for several games. A broken toe! If that isn't a testament to his character and love of the game, I don't know what is.

TXRangerFan

09-10-2003, 04:46 PM

Who questioned his character or love of the game?

I questioned his health, raw numbers VS other players in his 17 year career and overall value since he has missed so many games.

Just out of curiosity...

What's Edgar batting since he broke his toe?

Because like I said earlier in this thread..you can't just go by averages, especially if they don't add up with the raw numbers that should have been produced over a 17 year period.

When players play injured their averages do suffer..some guys play through that..often because of defensive or clutch hitting necessity..others don't.

I remember watching Palmeiro play through a pulled calf last year..actually he is still suffering the effects of that and his knee injury from 1999...but in particular when his calf was hurt..his averages were awful but his raw numbers were still quite nice.

While his averages suffered..he was still able to eak out a hit here and there...he didn't however hit a single home run during a 15 game stretch of that injury..and by playing he probably prolonged the time it took to heal from the injury...it didn't help his numbers from an average persepctive, it hurt them...and it probably made his recovery time much longer..so just because guys put up great PCT and AVG numbers doesn't mean those numbers would be even better if they had played injured..

This is why when people hypothesize about what kind of numbers Bonds or McGwire would have put up without injury I say you can't prove anything..some guys play injured, others don't...but who's to say if McGwire or Bonds played injured more often their numbers would be better? I'd say their averages would be worse..and that not playing injured actually helped their averages and PCT's and made their numbers better when they healed much sooner than they would have otherwise..but one thing cannot be denied...if they aren't in the lineup they are doing nothing to help their team win in those game they miss.

I will BBIAB to offer a counter point to Chancellor's arguments and position.

tearforamariner

09-10-2003, 04:50 PM

Steffo said that you can't judge a person's character. My response was in response to that.

TXRangerFan

09-10-2003, 04:53 PM

Do you know what his BA is since the injury though? Seriously? I have a feeling it is quite low..I notice he is under 300 now and my guess would be the toe injury is responsible for that.

tearforamariner

09-10-2003, 04:58 PM

Originally posted by TXRangerFan
Do you know what his BA is since the injury though? Seriously? I have a feeling it is quite low..I notice he is under 300 now and my guess would be the toe injury is responsible for that.

For the first couple of games after the injury, he was consistent with his batting average. However, recently he has dropped off. Remember however that Edgar is currently playing with little to no protection on that toe (They got him a protective shoe for the wrong foot).

TXRangerFan

09-14-2003, 06:57 PM

Well after deliberating over Chancellor's last very well thought out post...

I guess my stance is just that...the hitting standards for DH, RF, LF and 1B should be higher than any other position. I think these guys need to have the great individual seasons and the career powerhitting benchmarks.

I am not against the DH position itself..just saying a HOF DH needs to have been one of the most productive players at his position over at least a 15 year period and have the benchmarks to back it up.

I am definitely not in favor of granting the DH positional exception status like SS and 2B...if anything I think DH should be the other way and have a positional disadvantage based on the fact that they didn't have to play defense.

And if Edgar does indeed make it into the HOF..I am certainly going to feel that a great disservice was done to HOF'ers that had similar career totals and were known for their defensive excellence as well(and no I don't think Mattingly is a HOF'er necessarily)..but if Edgar is a HOF'er, then Mattingly and similar types certainly belong in the HOF.

tearforamariner

09-14-2003, 08:22 PM

I think Edgar has demonstrated his Hall worthiness DESPITE not fielding. The Hall of Fame Standards test awards points for fielding. A DH does not field, so they get no points. Yet DESPITE that, Edgar still scores a 54, 4 more points than the average Hall of Fame-er.

TXRangerFan

09-14-2003, 08:44 PM

Yeah I know, that formula give a DH a whopping one point disadvantage over a 1stbaseman or something like that.

And like I mentioned elsewhere in these forums..that formula gives a guy the same number of points for having 1300BB as it does for having 1300XBH.

I don't think James intended to use that formula to pick HOF'ers..he just analyzed the statistics of past HOF'ers...

But I think we all know there is nothing scientiffic about the criteria for chosing HOF'ers..it is a biased and subjective process.'

At's fine put Edgar in, but there is no way guys like Mattingly and Hernandez and even Grace(who has more hits, doubles, runs, RBI, 3b's, stolen bases, games played, AB's and GG's in fewer years can be kept out). And the guys who have been waiting longer need to go in first.

I mean Grace has 500 more hits than Edgar does in one fewer season..more RBI, more runs..more everything except BB and homers..I know Edgar's averages project him as being as getting more of those things if he played the same # of games..but the fact is he didn't...the 500 extra hits that Grace has are game winning/contributing reality...not some projection.

If Edgar goes in, a lot of guys that have been waiting for a long long time need to go in before he does.

tearforamariner

09-14-2003, 09:16 PM

I don't think James intended to use that formula to pick HOF'ers..he just analyzed the statistics of past HOF'ers...

Okey, that might be so, but Edgar still scores higher than the average HOFer. You mentioned Mattingly, but Mattingly scores a 34 on the HOF standards test. That's a big difference.

Jose Tartabul

09-14-2003, 09:39 PM

Is this not rather an academic argument? Martinez won't be eligible for the hall until 2008 at the earliest. People's perspective change over 5 years. (I believe that is why there is the five year rule -- too give people some perspective.) It is probably interesting to note that in the 30 years since the horrid DH was invented, only Martinez, as a full time DH, has had numbers worthy of consideration.

Who knows what will happen in 5 years, and who knows who Edgar will be competing against in his first year of eligibility.

Let's agree to revisit the subject in 2008 and in the meantime plump for other worthies like Gil Hodges whose eligibility is not in question

tearforamariner

09-14-2003, 09:42 PM

Originally posted by Jose Tartabul
Is this not rather an academic argument? Martinez won't be eligible for the hall until 2008 at the earliest. People's perspective change over 5 years. (I believe that is why there is the five year rule -- too give people some perspective.) It is probably interesting to note that in the 30 years since the horrid DH was invented, only Martinez, as a full time DH, has had numbers worthy of consideration.

Who knows what will happen in 5 years, and who knows who Edgar will be competing against in his first year of eligibility.

Let's agree to revisit the subject in 2008 and in the meantime plump for other worthies like Gil Hodges whose eligibility is not in question

Or 5 years after he reitres (might not retire this year). I'll agree to that. It makes complete sense Jose.

TXRangerFan

09-14-2003, 11:38 PM

Alright..but just for one second tell me something..

If Edgar is Hall worthy..what is your opinion on guys that have similar career totals in raw numbers but also had GG's and MVP's etc..

Mattingly, Hernandez..what is your stance on their Hall worthiness?

Part of my discrimination against Edgar(and I am not discriminating based on his hitting ability, he's punished the Rangers in his career, and he's definitely a HOF caliber hitter...he just didn't have the career IMO) is his career totals..and I am equally discriminative against Mattingly and Hernandez for those reasons.

You can point out ratings, PCT's averages and all that but the fact remains those guys were just as productive if not more productive when everything is said and done, in their careers..

Brad Harris

09-15-2003, 12:02 PM

Looking at total career value for Martinez and the three comps mentioned earlier...

Here's their career runs created - the sum of their net offensive worth. Note that these are not averages, but totals.

Career Runs Created (thru 9/14/02)
1534 Edgar Martinez
1390 Mark Grace
1265 Keith Hernandez
1160 Don Mattingly

Here are the two most accepted measurements for the complete value of a player's total contributions - offensive and defense. The first is win shares, recently publicized by Bill James:

Career Win Shares (thu 9/10/03)
311 Keith Hernandez
295 Edgar Martinez
294 Mark Grace
263 Don Mattingly

The second method is the more "traditionally" accepted linear weights method developed by Pete Palmer and published in Total Baseball. Totals are accurate as of the most recent (2001) edition of that volume.

Career Total Player Rating (thru 2000)
35.7 Edgar Martinez
34.8 Keith Hernandez
16.8 Mark Grace
11.9 Don Mattingly

I believe that, in terms of career value, Martinez has surpassed the aforementioned players. Hernandez (who's been getting practically no love from the BBWAA) is the only one of the three who's reasonably in the same league career-wise as Martinez.

I haven't heard anyone argue against Martinez from the peak value standpoint. Though the lack of an MVP Award has been mentioned (certainly in contrast to Mattingly and Hernandez's MVPs). On the other hand, Martinez arguably deserved one and finished high among vote getters several times, just as the others did.

Based on the combination of career and peak value, then, I think it's evident that Martinez is a better candidate than either Mark Grace, Don Mattingly and (very probably) Keith Hernandez. And that includes the gold gloves those three first basemen garnered in their noteworthy careers.

No one said Hernandez, Grace and Mattingly were great Hall of Fame candidates either. However, if Martinez's lack of career production is going to count against him, I don't see how those three first baseman can be used as benchmarks anymore since Martinez has clearly surpassed the three of them in that department.

In short, Martinez having a candidacy doesn't legitimize the election of any of those three players.

Brad Harris

09-15-2003, 12:28 PM

Originally posted by TXRangerFan
If Edgar is Hall worthy..what is your opinion on guys that have similar career totals in raw numbers but also had GG's and MVP's etc..

Mattingly, Hernandez..what is your stance on their Hall worthiness?

Here are the ten most comparable careers to Martinez (thru 2002):

John Olerud
Chuck Klein
Will Clark
Earl Averill
Dante Bichette
Don Mattingly
Larry Walker
Bob Johnson
Fred Lynn
Gary Sheffield

What you have here is a collection of players who seem to have a mix of many very good seasons and a few truly great seasons; most players don't have enough cumulative seasons to be strong contenders, though I've seen cases made for almost everyone on the list.

Right off the bat - Klein and Averill are already enshrined so that's two Hall of Famers that are among his ten closest comps.

Sheffield and Walker are great players who are still trying to reach the "career plateaus" people expect of a Hall of Famer. John Olerud isn't considered in the same class (i.e. lower peak value), but is accumulating the same kinds of career totals nonetheless. He's a poor man's Will Clark. Which brings me to Clark, who's seen - sabermetrically - as a very strong candidate, but who's career totals just weren't enough. Unfortunately many people forget just how good his peak years were.

Fred Lynn - another player (besides Clark and Don Mattingly) derailing a Hall of Fame career due to durability issues.

Dante Bichette doesn't belong on this list at all and, frankly, I'm surprised he is. His numbers are, of course, purely the product of Denver's mile high ballparks.

Last, but not least, is Indian Bob Johnson who is a very popular candidate for people interested in "old timers." The concensus seems, however, to be that he was merely a very good player who played on miserable teams, but not for long enough to merit induction.

So you've got a mixture of very good players who fell a little shy of the career numbers people want to see and some really great players who - due to injuries (or still playing) haven't put in enough plate appearances to get those numbers.

Specifically regarding Mattingly and Hernandez, please refer to the previous post.

FYI...Guys I'd give serious consideration to, if I were a voter:

Will Clark, Bob Johnson, Keith Hernandez plus Larry Walker, Gary Sheffield, Edgar Martinez and John Olerud among active players still adding to their career totals.

Brad Harris

09-15-2003, 12:39 PM

It should be noted here, for those familiar with similarity scores, that no one is unusually or truly similar to Edgar Martinez. The first seven comps on the above list (thru Walker) are similar while the rest are only somewhat similar.

James defined the ranges as follows:
950 or more unusually similar
900-949 truly similar
850-899 similar
800-849 somewhat similar
799 or less vaguely similar

The fact that Martinez's closest comp (Olerud) is only 89% comparable speaks well for Martinez's career numbers.

Also noteworthy, of course, is the fact that - besides Averill and Lynn - those comps are all corner outfielders or first basemen.

TXRangerFan

09-15-2003, 03:16 PM

Chancellor..the feeling you get when you see Bichette placing well in a similarity comparison to Martinez is exactly the way I feel when I see Edgar Martinez getting a 54 on his HOF standard rating....

Seeing Edgar place so well on that standard does not make me think Edgar is more HOF worthy..it makes me think that obviously the standards formula has flaws.

Now I know you like Win Shares...and it seems like a good concept..although perhaps I would have a different opinion on it if I had ever found a satisfactory breakdown on the formula..the fact that one is so difficult to find is revealing to me..I guess it's as good as anything else..I don't see any evidence that it is better than anything else.

What I do know is that it is still an estimation based averaged formula...

How do I know this?

What I can do is look at the 2003 Win Share totals from the Website you graciously posted for us to browse...

What I can see from those WS totals is that Thomas is ranked as the best DH in the league this year..Martinez is second..Raffy is third...

Well this is obviously flawed to me...

I do agree Thomas is without a doubt the best DH in the league this year...I mean he has as much or more of anything than anyone else..One hit short of Raffy...but better in every thing else..

I do not agree that Martinez is the second best DH in the league this year...

I see he has lower numbers than both Thomas and Palmeiro in every category just about..except BB and Doubles...

I also see that he has played in fewer games...

That right there tells me that WS are based on averages and estimations, and I can also tell that because BB is the only stat in which Edgar is obviously superior that James once again has found a way to put BB and not making outs over XBH, durability and consistency.

Let me put it this way from my own perspective...

IF Martinez had slughtly better totals than Raffy or Thomas in every stat ..but it was done in 10 fewer games I would still not rate him as the best DH this year...

The answer for this is simple..there were 10 games where he did nothing to help his team..nothing..

IF you take two players...and they have identical stats...say EG...4 homers 5 hits 12 RBI and 10 runs scored 1 SB...

IF one guy ..player A put up those numbers in one game(which would be about the best game anyone ever had in the history of baseball) but was injured for the next 4 games..

And another guy, player B, who distributed those numbers equally over a 5 game period...

I am going to say the guy who distributed his numbers over 5 games did more to help his team...because there were 5 different games where he made contributions as opposed to 1. I would feel that way if the first guy had better numbers in 1 game than the other had in a 5 game stretch..

Sometimes one hit is enough to win one game..sometimes 4 homers aren't.

Now that is not always the way I am going to judge things...but in this case I am...

To me it looks like WS turned Edgar's 9BB and 2 double advantage into more than the 9 games, 2 hits, 10 homers, 10 RBI and 18 run advantage....that Raffy has in his favor.

To compare Martinez to Grace..If I had to pick which one was the more talented hitter..I would obviously pick Martinez..I would pick Martinez's best season over anything Grace did...

If I was a manager however..and my goal was to build a winning team, ideally to win a WS..based on player careers..
I would not pick Martinez's career over what Mark Grace did in his career..

I do not think less is more..I do not think putting up great numbers while missing a ton of games is worth a bonus..I do not see that as a plus..I see that as a negative..If James ever managed a game I have a feeling he would feel differently as well.

All that says to me is that if so and so played as many games he would have better numbers than a guy that was healthier...but there are no "ifs" in baseball..player A did not play in more games,..he played in fewer, he impacted fewer games..he did less to help his team than the guy whose contributions were spread out over more games.

We can apply this to Barry Bonds...now of course I am not gonna take some guy who merely plays in more games than Barry Bonds over Bonds..but if they are considered the same caliber hitter on the basis of their seasonal totals I am gonna take the healthier guy...the more reliable guy.

IOW, I take Arod over Bonds even though Bonds is the more complete offensive player... and the more dangerous..I take Frank Thomas this year over Bonds..

I also value run production more from my 3 and 4 hitters than settling for a BB and leaving the run production up the guy batting 230 behind the clean up hitter.

If the M's fall 3 or 4 games short of the A's or Wildcard at seasons end..those 10 games Edgar missed are going to loom large. Bond's team is not going to have that problem but that's not because of Barry so much as it is the other teams in the NL West..

Baseball is a team game..no one player can win a game..I applaud the efforts to find ways to credit players who contribute to their team beyond the glamour stats..but I am not convinced WS or any of James ideas are the best way to judge players..I am certainly not convinced they are the only ways to judge players. I think they can add to a comparison..enhance it, give you a different perspective..I think they have a valuable purpose there..but I am not quite ready to hand the keys to the Hall over to James..If he wants to make his formula for WS more acessible and less mysterious then perhaps I might reconsider.

Brad Harris

09-18-2003, 11:19 AM

I think you might be missing the forest for the trees.

Win shares are based on what a player did, not the rate of production, although that (as well as playing time, of course) has a great deal to do with what a hitter's final numbers are.

Bill James wrote an entire book explaining both the "how" and the "why" of win shares. If you're interested in learning how to calculate it - it's not for people shy of mathematics, I can tell you that - then I would highly recommend you obtain a copy of Win Shares (published by STATS, Inc.)

As for the problem at hand: why Martinez has more win shares than Palmeiro, there are two primary reasons:

(1) Martinez is a better situation hitter than Palmeiro this year.[/b] Martinez is batting .362 with runners in scoring position so far, while Palmeiro is batting only .316 with RISP.

(2) Palmeiro has been bashing the ball in Arlington while Martinez has had to contend with Safeco Field all year. This is a very significant difference.

Pete Simpson (who maintains and updates 2003 win shares at the Baseball Graphs web site you mentioned) was kind enough to send me an Excel file with the calculations for the two players, explaining how their offensive win shares are derived and what the key differences are. Palmeiro's defensive win shares (less than 1) are so negligible as to not eliminate the margin of difference between his and Martinez's overall contributions. If you're interested, and you pm me with your e-mail address, I'd be more than happy to send it to you.

I'd recommend you spend some time learning how win shares works, however, rather than simply criticizing a system you don't understand simply because you disagree with its product (or don't like its creator, as is the case with some other people on these boards).

Win shares is a tool. That's all. It's not the only tool, but it's the best one, that I know of.

If you want to debate the merits of Martinez based on linear weights (Pete Palmer's more accepted method), then I'd be happy to do that, too. Other than those two, however, I'm afraid I'm in the dark as to any comprehensive valuation system that includes all facets of a player's game and allows for cross-season comparisons.

TXRangerFan

09-20-2003, 09:06 PM

Chance old boy..I said, what I do know about Win Shares is that they are no doubt an estimation and average weighted formula..I think you misunderstood my point...

One of the major differences you cited between Pameiro and Martinez is Martinez's batting average with RISP..is that not an average? Is it not a component of the formula? Is that what swung the advantage to Martinez? Partly..most likely...But there is no doubt that is an average statistic..and from what you yourself have said it is a very powerful one(and BTW I agree that that is probably the best AVG statistic, but it's still an average statistic) within this formula.

What I do find amusing in looking at their season totals is that Palmeiro has only had 4 more TPA's with runners in scoring position in 9 more games played(maybe batting behind the league leader in HR has something to do with that?), he has 8 more XBH..over a 655 SLG%...and a higher OPS with RISP..I am guessing the major deciding factor is Martinez ability to draw a BB..In spite of the fact that he has grounded into over twice as many double plays as Palmeiro in 9 fewer games..and BB inflation IMO, is also the main reason Martinez is being considered Hall Worthy. . I smell the BB inflation rat in here somewhere lol and I know the rat's in his HOF stadards test.

I know Win Shares are a tool intended to judge a player's season after it is over, but I also know that James doesn't go breakdown every game for every player to see exactly how the game was won..So IMO it is an estimation based formula, because it estimates what a players contributions were to every win. Is WS the most accurate concept for judging a players contributions to wins? Possibly..and I definitely applaud the effort..but all I need to know here and now is that he has given a guy with fewer XBH, games played, runs, and RBI a higher rating than another(I know he isn't selectively over rating Martinez himself, but his formulas that I have seen always tend to give too much weight to BB and OBP)..I like games played..I think that's a good thing..a guy can go hitless or baseless and still contribute..if by nothing else working a pitcher and seeing a lot of pitches..giving protection to the hitter in front of him..I have never seen anything from James to show me that he ever gives things like that much consideration..I am sure James takes games played into consideration in this formula but I bet he doesn't take games played into consideration very far..he never has yet.

These things I know from what I have studied about James and WS, and what I can see with my own eyes from looking at seasonal statistics..and you and I both know that James swears by OBP because he belives it is the statistic that most closely mirrors runs scored(I've always believed runs scored were the stat that did that but that's just me :D)...I look and see that it was the Angels, who lead the AL in BA, Sacrifices and Sacrifice Flys last year, that won the WS..not the team with the highest OBP or OPS..the game is not always about generically scoring runs without making outs..it's a game of situations..

To me this ranking and favoring of Martinez looks a whole lot like ranking Will Clark as the 5th best 1stbaseman of all time(or something like that)...and I will never agree with that..I got to see Will play every day for a half a decade in the latter half of his very short prime.....and he isn't anywhere near the best.nor does he have any business being anywhere near the HOF.

I know you like win shares and James, you are obviously a very intelligent person and have your reasons for being so fond of James..and I am sure they are good reasons....I personally have no dislike for him but I haven't seen anything from him to make me value his opinion over my own :D. I like some of his ideas..and I admit to listening to your own valued reccomendations on players often when you are citing Win Shares..However this time I believe the prototypical nature of the WS formula is being exposed..I definitely believe the HOF standards test being weighted in favor of BB has been exposed...I mean I can look at that formula and see he gives no points for playing in games(except for select positions) or AB...but he does manage to give as many points for having 1300 BB as for having 1300 XBH.

I think we are still at the stage with Jamesian ideas and statistics..well I think we are still better off with the horse and carriage over the automobile right now..but I have no doubt the automobile will one day be better.

In short sometimes I may agree with what James's methods and formulas say and sometimes I won't. I am going to go look into buying his book so I can see the formula..but IMO if he wanted a formula widely accepted as well as respected, he would make it freely available and in the public domain..and not make people have to go out and pay for it to see what's up...I do believe Marintez is a HOF caliber hitter..I just don't think he's done enough to merit HOF entry..I came to this opinion by looking at the length of his career and seeing what(raw) numbers most players that have played as long as he has had in the same number of years.. ...In that area Edgar falls very short...there are a lot of players that have better or similar career numbers in the same number of seasons, and they aren't even being considered for the HOF. I think average statistics are great if they have the raw numbers to back them up(ultimate example - Ty Cobb having the highest lifetime BA and the second most hits)..Edgar really doesn't. That's a big thing to me for a guy trying to gain entry to the HOF soley on his hitting.

So I don't think I am going to agree with James on this one even if I do get a good look at the WS formula..but I do hope there are no hard feelings and that you won't consider me closeminded..I hope you never stop citing WS in your arguments to me and I certainly hope you never stop debating players HOF worthiness with me since I enjoy it immensely. Still, I am not gonna give James the keys to the HOF on this one lol.

Brad Harris

09-21-2003, 03:05 AM

TXRangerFan:

I have enjoyed your thoughtful analysis and witty commentary very, very much. And I don't think you and I are that far apart on the issue.

Primarily, it seems, you're less convinced that Martinez's rate stats are high enough to overcome his lack of career numbers where I've more inclined to give the rate stats a little more credence and overlook the cumulative totals somewhat. Fair enough.

The only part of the entire thread I've really disagreed with - down to the core - is that no DH should be in the Hall (period). Your discussion points have been very well thought-out and a pleasure to read and rebuttal. Thanks.

I particularly liked the runs scored correlation to runs which you pointed out so colorfully in that last post. Had me in stitches. And...you were right. LOL

Hope to do this again real soon.

baseball junkie

09-23-2003, 10:52 PM

If I had a vote Edgar Martinez would get it. Edgar, however, will not be the first designated hitter in the Hall of Fame. That honor will go to Paul Molitor, a sure-fire HOFer who logged 1,174 games at DH. Yes Molitor also played 1,495 games in the field in his career; Molitor essentially played the last seven years of his career as a DH.

The election of Molitor will pave the way for the election of Martinez and his .316 career batting average, hopefully, putting this debate to bed.

The real task is keeping players like Harold Baines out of Cooperstown, not players like Edgar Martinez.

Brad Harris

09-24-2003, 01:06 AM

You're preachin' to the choir now, Reverend! :)

Captain Cold Nose

09-24-2003, 06:06 AM

I liked Harold Baines. I remember being in a small cabin off of Lake Huron and watching him his three home runs against the Tigers on a small black and white television in 1982. That was when he arrived. And I followed his career. I even made up a little song about him and the White Sox's chances after they traded him to Texas. He was a fine hitter who did the job well for his entire career.

But so did Al Oliver. So did Vada Pinson. So did the Hawk and the Cobra and Cecil Cooper.

And one difference between the above-mentioned players and Baines is they had some standout single seasons. Batting titles. MVPs. High averages with a lot of rbi.

Baines was consistently good, but I never would call him great.

The players I listed didn't come too close to making it to Cooperstown, although Dawson still has a shot. And if their voting results is any indication, Baines won't make it, either.

I don't think his chances for undeserved election are a cause for worry. Won't happen.

Baseball Guru

02-29-2004, 06:49 AM

The case for the Hall: Did Edgar make the bigs too late in career?

Bob Finnigan, Seattle Times staff reporter

PEORIA, Ariz. — In recent years, fans have lamented that Edgar Martinez's status as a designated hitter would keep him out of the Hall of Fame.

Seeing Paul Molitor at the batting cage, intently watching his Mariners hitters, is a reminder that the concern about Martinez, 41, may have shifted.

Only weeks after being named Seattle's hitting coach, Molitor was voted into the Hall and gave legitimacy to the position of hitting specialist, since many of his 3,319 hits came as a DH in the latter half of his career.

"I questioned right up until I got the phone call (the first week of January) what kind of effect being a DH much of the time would have on my chances of getting in," Molitor said. "I don't think being a DH is going to affect Edgar. It's going to be numbers, cumulative numbers, not average."

So now the chorus on Edgar might be: What if?

What if he, like Molitor, had been in the big leagues early, or at least earlier than age 27?

After hitting .364 in the Class A Midwest League at Burlington at age 20, Molitor made the majors the next year. With that quick start, he lasted more than two decades, and quality longevity is the key to most career runs to Cooperstown.

After hitting .303 in the Midwest League at Wausau at age 21, Martinez was six years away from sticking.

"It does no good to dwell on it," he said as he prepared for a day in camp. "I can say I wish I had come up sooner, gotten a chance or something. But what good would it do? There's nothing that can be done about it."

Molitor recalls being kept on by the Milwaukee Brewers at the end of camp "because Robin (Yount) was hurt." Molitor played shortstop until Yount returned to the lineup and then moved to second base, then the outfield.

"I only moved to third base when Sal Bando retired and that was my position most of the time after that as long as I played defense," said Molitor, who went to mostly DH with a little first base starting in 1991.

Fate was nowhere near as kind to Martinez. Not only was it slow going for the man who was to become the most beloved Mariner since Alvin Davis, but Martinez certainly deserved more of a shot to stick for a number of years before he made it for good.

"He probably should have been here, somehow," said Roger Jongewaard, who came to the Seattle club as director of scouting in 1986. "I knew him as a quality prospect from my years scouting this organization for the Tigers."

Martinez began his Mariners career in 1983, as a 20-year-old with Bellingham of the Northwest League. He spent 1984 in Wausau, then a lot of time in Calgary of the Pacific Coast League.

"He kept going back to Triple A because (Jim) Presley was here," Jongewaard said. "Edgar did not profile for a corner position — not enough power. Presley did."

Presley, who hit 115 homers in six years with the Mariners (1984-89), sixth on Seattle's all-time list, was the Mariners' everyday third baseman from 1985 to 1988.

Martinez, a slender man and slick fielder back then, was moved to second base in 1985.

"They were thinking of moving (trading) Harold Reynolds and they wanted to be ready," Martinez recalled. "They moved me back to third later."

In a sense, the Mariners saw that they had a possible front-line regular.

"If we had considered him just a utility guy, maybe we'd have brought him up to play now and then," Jongewaard said. "But he wasn't the type you would move around in positions."

Meantime, Martinez hit .353 in a late-season move up to Calgary in 1985, yet spent the next season back at Class AA Chattanooga, a big park where it was tough to hit homers.

In 1987 he opened at Calgary and hit .329, then hit .372 in a September callup to Seattle. It was back to Calgary in 1988, where he hit .363, then .281 in a second late-season call to the big leagues.

In 1989 he opened at third base in Seattle, struggled and was sent back to Calgary. He came up again and hit .357 in his first 12 games, but as soon as he tailed off he was sent back to the minors again.

"(Presley) had power and produced more runs and that's what they were looking for," Edgar said with a wan smile. "I was stuck in the minors ... (fake tears, fake sniff) ... hitting singles.

"There was a different mentality in those years. They liked to have production. If you had it in some areas you didn't normally see it, it meant maybe they could play you."

In that case, maybe Ken Griffey Jr.'s arrival in 1989 as a power hitter in center field, not normally a power slot, might have helped Martinez.

"I think you could say that," Martinez said. "Just another good thing he did."

Martinez only discusses this in response to questions, noting, "I don't think of it until people remind me, and they've been reminding me a lot more the last couple of years."

Relenting to discuss it briefly, he echoes Molitor in saying it should not be about position, but "about numbers."

"If you have the numbers, you should be able to get into the Hall of Fame no matter what position you played," he said. "Relief should be able to get in as well as starters, and among relievers, long men should get in as well as closers. It should be about what you achieved and how you contributed to your team."

Ted Williams, one the game's immortal hitters but not even a good defensive player, once said, "Defense does not mean that much to Hall of Fame voters and I may be one of the best examples. Most guys noted for their fielding that got in were also good hitters. And there are a lot of men in there who weren't that good with a glove."

When it comes to numbers, Molitor's 21-season journey to Cooperstown produced 3,319 hits — exactly 1,200 more than Martinez.

Of course, had Martinez been promoted permanently a few years earlier, he could easily be north of 2,500 hits by now.

Were it not for the Mariners' desire for power at third base that kept him in the minors until age 27, Martinez arguably should have been in the majors at least two or three years sooner.

"If he had played those years, there's no question he would have had 150 hits a year, minimum," Jongewaard said.

With his career shortened at the beginning, it creates wonder if Martinez might contemplate lengthening at the other end.

When a reporter says, "I have one more question for you," Martinez laughs.

"I know what it is," he said, still laughing, knowing he will hear the question over and over this year.

And, the reporter rejoined, "I know what your answer will be ... 'I don't know yet. I'll see how it goes. I'll see how I feel, then I'll sit and talk with Holli and Alex (wife and son).' "

Edgar laughed again and said, "I don't know. I'll see how it goes, how I feel. Then I'll sit and talk to Holli and Alex.

"Right now I feel good. If you had asked me a month ago I might not have said that, but the closer you get to the season, the easier it gets to feel good."

He took a week and a half off after last season before he began working out to prepare for 2004.

"Each year means you have to work that much harder," he said, "and when you're 40 ... 41 ... 41? ... Wow ... it really makes a difference."

Bob Finnigan: 206-464-8276 or bfinnigan@seattletimes.com

Copyright © 2004 The Seattle Times Company

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news?slug=knight-thecaseforthehalldidedgar&prov=knight&type=lgns

BoSox Rule

02-29-2004, 09:40 AM

Edgar Martinez doesn't belong in the Hall.

.315/.423/.525 is worthy...

but 2119 hits/297 HR/1198 RBI/1174 runs isn't.

Especially for a DH.

For a DH you should have amazing HR/RBI numbers. Edgar doesn't. His % numbers are great, but his career numbers are less than that.

Zeth

03-01-2004, 06:58 PM

I like Edgar a lot -- great professional -- but he doesn't look like a hall of famer to me. Applying a few of the questions I can remember from Bill James' "Keltner List"...

Was he ever the best player in baseball? No, not even for a single season, he wasn't. There were some years when he was maybe one of the five best.

Was he ever the best player at his own position? Edgar has been pretty consistently the best DH in baseball for quite a while.

Was he ever the best player on a championship team? No. Even the teams that came close to championships had either Junior or Ichiro was their best player.

How did he do in the MVP voting? Edgar never won an MVP, probably isn't going to, and has been a factor in the voting only a couple of times.

Following what BoSox Rule said, if a player is going to have zero defensive value, to make a hall of fame case for him is going to require being a hitter of legendary proportions. I don't think Edgar is one of the twenty or twenty-five best hitters in history, nor do I think he was one of the five best pure hitters of his own era (Bonds, Thomas, McGwire, Sosa, Manny.) Maybe some of you who really like Edgar would place him behind only Bonds in his generation, and that's OK if you want to do that. Even if that's true, I still have my doubts that that makes him a hall of famer with no defense. He's been an extremely good player, but not playing defense at all is too much of a handicap.

If he shows exceptional longevity and gets to 3,000 hits, 400 homers, and keeps his averages high... then maybe we can talk about him. But injuries are piling up and it looks like he may be starting to run out of gas. Right now, I can't support him as a hall of famer, as much as I'd like to. It's too bad the Mariners' brass was populated by idiots when he was young. It's almost criminal that he didn't get to play regularly until he was pushing 30.

Paul Molitor is not a case for Edgar Martinez, I don't think. Molitor was not a career DH. He piled up some longevity numbers as a DH late in his career, but played in the field for the first half of his career. Martinez tried to play third for about two years and then started DHing, partly because he had trouble staying healthy and partly because he was a bad fielder. (If he didn't have trouble staying healthy, he'd have been a first baseman, presumably.)

I don't know... I wouldn't vote for him, but I can be talked into it. Would he be a first baseman if the Mariners hadn't already had good first basemen his whole career? I dunno. If so, should we hold that against him? Should we hold it against him that he didn't get to play in the majors for so long, despite leaving bruises all over minor league pitchers for several years?

Let's look at it this way: If the hall of fame institutes a rule tomorrow that we have to put one DH in the hall of fame, is Edgar absolutely the best DH in history? Maybe he is, depending on what constitutes a DH to you. You can define DH strictly enough that Edgar is really the only career DH in history who had a long career. Even Baines played the field longer than Edgar did before going permanently to DH. Should that be held against Edgar for the fact he couldn't play defense, or in his favor because of its uniqueness? I lean toward the former, but I could be talked out of it.

tearforamariner

03-01-2004, 11:04 PM

Originally posted by Zeth
I like Edgar a lot -- great professional -- but he doesn't look like a hall of famer to me. Applying a few of the questions I can remember from Bill James' "Keltner List"...

Was he ever the best player in baseball? No, not even for a single season, he wasn't. There were some years when he was maybe one of the five best.

Was he ever the best player at his own position? Edgar has been pretty consistently the best DH in baseball for quite a while.

Was he ever the best player on a championship team? No. Even the teams that came close to championships had either Junior or Ichiro was their best player.

How did he do in the MVP voting? Edgar never won an MVP, probably isn't going to, and has been a factor in the voting only a couple of times.

Following what BoSox Rule said, if a player is going to have zero defensive value, to make a hall of fame case for him is going to require being a hitter of legendary proportions. I don't think Edgar is one of the twenty or twenty-five best hitters in history, nor do I think he was one of the five best pure hitters of his own era (Bonds, Thomas, McGwire, Sosa, Manny.) Maybe some of you who really like Edgar would place him behind only Bonds in his generation, and that's OK if you want to do that. Even if that's true, I still have my doubts that that makes him a hall of famer with no defense. He's been an extremely good player, but not playing defense at all is too much of a handicap.

If he shows exceptional longevity and gets to 3,000 hits, 400 homers, and keeps his averages high... then maybe we can talk about him. But injuries are piling up and it looks like he may be starting to run out of gas. Right now, I can't support him as a hall of famer, as much as I'd like to. It's too bad the Mariners' brass was populated by idiots when he was young. It's almost criminal that he didn't get to play regularly until he was pushing 30.

Paul Molitor is not a case for Edgar Martinez, I don't think. Molitor was not a career DH. He piled up some longevity numbers as a DH late in his career, but played in the field for the first half of his career. Martinez tried to play third for about two years and then started DHing, partly because he had trouble staying healthy and partly because he was a bad fielder. (If he didn't have trouble staying healthy, he'd have been a first baseman, presumably.)

I don't know... I wouldn't vote for him, but I can be talked into it. Would he be a first baseman if the Mariners hadn't already had good first basemen his whole career? I dunno. If so, should we hold that against him? Should we hold it against him that he didn't get to play in the majors for so long, despite leaving bruises all over minor league pitchers for several years?

Let's look at it this way: If the hall of fame institutes a rule tomorrow that we have to put one DH in the hall of fame, is Edgar absolutely the best DH in history? Maybe he is, depending on what constitutes a DH to you. You can define DH strictly enough that Edgar is really the only career DH in history who had a long career. Even Baines played the field longer than Edgar did before going permanently to DH. Should that be held against Edgar for the fact he couldn't play defense, or in his favor because of its uniqueness? I lean toward the former, but I could be talked out of it.

One year you must be forgetting: 1995. Go back and look at Papi's stats and tell me that he wasn't among the best that season. He was better than Vaughn (who won the MVP) and most everyone else. The only argument I'll accept against Edgar as the best that year is Belle, and even then it's iffy. 1995 was also the year that Edgar was the best player (position player at the very least) on the team that took the M's to the ALCS. Don't believe me? Check the history, he was. Edgar never won an MVP because he's a DH and DH's don't win MVPs. Voters just don't vote for them. Again, let's look at '95 where either he or Belle were robbed. I believe that Edgar was robbed because, as Chance pointed out earlier on another thread, he lead all AL players in Win Shares that year, as well as winning a batting title and posting some other prolific numbers. Take a closer look and you'll find more MVP-calibur seasons (not saying he should have won, but they were MVP-calibur seasons). Furthermore, Edgar was a solid fielder (not the best, but solid). I don't care about the FP, anyone who saw him play would agree that he held his own in the hot corner. And he played more than 2 years at third (check again). Edgar was hindered by the stupidity of the M's front office because they left him in the minors too long.

To sum up, most of your claims are incorrect. Edgar was the best player in the league at least one season (I'd argue that his 2000 season wasn't shabby either). Edgar was the best player on the M's in 1995 (which is saying more than a little about how good he really was). For most of his career, Edgar has played on the same team as superstars and has been overshadowed. Had he played for another team, he'd be the legendary DH that he should be. 'Gar played on the same team as players like Griffey, A Rod, Unit, Ichiro, and Boone. I wouldn't say it's a bad thing to be called the 3rd or 4th best Mariner at any given time, would you?

Zeth

03-02-2004, 02:28 PM

I would pick Belle in 1995, but certainly Edgar was great that year. That he led the league in win shares despite being a DH is quite an accomplishment.

So, let's give him 1995. Let's even imagine he won an MVP award in 1995. Is he a hall of famer then? I dunno... I'm still really on the fence about him.

I think he is a "legendary DH," which, again, could be seen as an argument for him (legendary) or against him (DH). I still wouldn't vote for him, but I'm beginning to be wooed by the argument... keep convincing me, and we'll talk in a few years. :) I would like to see him post another couple of stellar seasons, though, which may be a tall order.

tearforamariner

03-06-2004, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by Zeth
I would pick Belle in 1995, but certainly Edgar was great that year. That he led the league in win shares despite being a DH is quite an accomplishment.

So, let's give him 1995. Let's even imagine he won an MVP award in 1995. Is he a hall of famer then? I dunno... I'm still really on the fence about him.

I think he is a "legendary DH," which, again, could be seen as an argument for him (legendary) or against him (DH). I still wouldn't vote for him, but I'm beginning to be wooed by the argument... keep convincing me, and we'll talk in a few years. :) I would like to see him post another couple of stellar seasons, though, which may be a tall order.

Zeth, would you agree that if he played any other position, with the numbers he's posted, he be a HOFer?

Zeth

03-06-2004, 11:50 AM

If he were a first baseman and an average one defensively his whole career, I still may hesitate to put him in the Hall. If he played any other position on the field and played it adequately, yeah, he'd be a Hall of Famer.

tearforamariner

03-06-2004, 11:59 AM

Originally posted by Zeth
If he were a first baseman and an average one defensively his whole career, I still may hesitate to put him in the Hall. If he played any other position on the field and played it adequately, yeah, he'd be a Hall of Famer.

I can accept that. I think that (for the most part) opponents of the DH put too focus on fielding to make their case. There are a lot of sub-par fielders in the HoF, and not all of them put up better offensive numbers than Edgar.

TheUnknownBandit

03-08-2004, 12:01 AM

What about players such as Bobby Abreu down the line? He has put up 5-6 solid seasons in a row, including a 30/30 season. He can be counted on to produce .300 BA, .400 OBP, 40 2B, 20-25 HR, 80-100 RBI seasons. He has good speed, and he is decent with the glove. However, not too much is said about any of that. Outside of Philly, not many people know about his career or the numbers he's quietly putting up. Let's say he plays 15 years consistently as he has so far. While he has never been the best in baseball (and probably won't be considered that ever), he will compare favorably to many HOF'ers. Would you still make the case that somehow he is not Hall-worthy?

Edgar isn't the best in baseball, but he has been very consistent. He is revered in Seattle, and he has had a major impact on that city, that team, and the playoff runs of the Mariners. You don't have to be the greatest in baseball to be in the Hall. Many HOF'ers are not great, but their contributions to their team were. People should look past stats and see what the player themself did for baseball. He has been a cornerstone in the M's lineup for many years, and is considered one of the best clutch hitters of the past fifteen years.

And about the injury talk, what about Barry Bonds? He won an MVP award last year when he missed 32 games. If you are going to consider injury, consider all the games Bonds has sat out over the past few years. Consider that he is about the same as a DH since his fielding is nowhere near as good as it was during the earlier part of his career. Last year was his first decent season in the field in a few years, although his range was, and has been for awhile, amongst the lowest of all MLB'ers. Also, consider that he has stated that he will no longer steal bases because he simply doesn't want to. He is now just a player who hits for power and hits for average. In interleague play, he usually plays as a DH.

I'm not saying Edgar is as good as Bonds, but my point is that Bonds does have similarities with him. However, Edgar plays DH because of injuries he suffered. Bonds plays lax because he knows he's great and doesn't care to hustle. He sits out games usually because he just wants to rest, but that's a game where he isn't helping. If he had ever gone to the AL, everyone knows he would have become a DH. What argument could have been made against him then? Would Barry Bonds' 658 HRs, 1941 R, 2595 H, 1742 RBI, and 500 SB be discounted because he didn't play the field every inning? He barely does it now. He used to be an exciting five-tool player. He looks like a DH with a glove on now.

Just because Edgar Martinez no longer puts on a glove is no reason to discount him. Yes, he's been injured, but he always has tried to do what was best for the team, not himself. And that meant switching to DH to allow his bat to help the M's become one of the best teams of the '90s. I can think of only the Yankees and perhaps the Indians as better teams in the AL, and only the Braves in the NL. Padding his stats would only aide in providing numbers. The best baseball players didn't get their reputations for numbers, they got their reputations for being baseball players.

MikeCameronFAN

03-08-2004, 02:44 AM

Originally posted by TheUnknownBandit
What about players such as Bobby Abreu down the line? He has put up 5-6 solid seasons in a row, including a 30/30 season. He can be counted on to produce .300 BA, .400 OBP, 40 2B, 20-25 HR, 80-100 RBI seasons. He has good speed, and he is decent with the glove. However, not too much is said about any of that. Outside of Philly, not many people know about his career or the numbers he's quietly putting up. Let's say he plays 15 years consistently as he has so far. While he has never been the best in baseball (and probably won't be considered that ever), he will compare favorably to many HOF'ers. Would you still make the case that somehow he is not Hall-worthy?

Edgar isn't the best in baseball, but he has been very consistent. He is revered in Seattle, and he has had a major impact on that city, that team, and the playoff runs of the Mariners. You don't have to be the greatest in baseball to be in the Hall. Many HOF'ers are not great, but their contributions to their team were. People should look past stats and see what the player themself did for baseball. He has been a cornerstone in the M's lineup for many years, and is considered one of the best clutch hitters of the past fifteen years.

And about the injury talk, what about Barry Bonds? He won an MVP award last year when he missed 32 games. If you are going to consider injury, consider all the games Bonds has sat out over the past few years. Consider that he is about the same as a DH since his fielding is nowhere near as good as it was during the earlier part of his career. Last year was his first decent season in the field in a few years, although his range was, and has been for awhile, amongst the lowest of all MLB'ers. Also, consider that he has stated that he will no longer steal bases because he simply doesn't want to. He is now just a player who hits for power and hits for average. In interleague play, he usually plays as a DH.

I'm not saying Edgar is as good as Bonds, but my point is that Bonds does have similarities with him. However, Edgar plays DH because of injuries he suffered. Bonds plays lax because he knows he's great and doesn't care to hustle. He sits out games usually because he just wants to rest, but that's a game where he isn't helping. If he had ever gone to the AL, everyone knows he would have become a DH. What argument could have been made against him then? Would Barry Bonds' 658 HRs, 1941 R, 2595 H, 1742 RBI, and 500 SB be discounted because he didn't play the field every inning? He barely does it now. He used to be an exciting five-tool player. He looks like a DH with a glove on now.

Just because Edgar Martinez no longer puts on a glove is no reason to discount him. Yes, he's been injured, but he always has tried to do what was best for the team, not himself. And that meant switching to DH to allow his bat to help the M's become one of the best teams of the '90s. I can think of only the Yankees and perhaps the Indians as better teams in the AL, and only the Braves in the NL. Padding his stats would only aide in providing numbers. The best baseball players didn't get their reputations for numbers, they got their reputations for being baseball players.

Although I hesitate to enter this debate because I'm already sick of the subject, and will only hear about it more on Seattle sports radio for at least 6 years to come, my personal opinion is that the only Hall of Fame Edgar will be inducted to is the Mariners Hall of Fame. His percentages are great, but his career numbers just aren't quite there.

Bringing Bonds into the debate is absurd. Aside from any potential punishment, Bonds will certainly go in on his first ballot, while Edgar is on the fence. I think Barry's injuries almost help his case because it's like "Wow - he missed 32 games and *still* hit 45 dingers?!"

As far as Abreu goes - it's way too early to tell, but the thing that might hurt his case is that, although he puts up solid numbers, he flies too far under the radar.

Zeth

03-08-2004, 02:24 PM

Actually, the angle of how much Edgar Martinez contributed to the growing viability of the Mariners' franchise (look at where they were in 1990 and compare them to where they are now) may be a good argument for him. You Mariners' fans out there will have to inform me on whether Edgar deserves credit for this, or whether it's mostly coincidence. He IS beloved in Seattle, it seems.

Bobby Abreu is one of the biggest jerks in baseball, if I may go off topic. Totally full of himself. Refuses to hit leadoff, where he would be a devastating leadoff man, because he wants to get RBI (because he knows RBI producers get paid much more than run scorers). A guy like that can stay off my team.

tearforamariner

03-09-2004, 02:41 PM

Originally posted by Zeth
Actually, the angle of how much Edgar Martinez contributed to the growing viability of the Mariners' franchise (look at where they were in 1990 and compare them to where they are now) may be a good argument for him. You Mariners' fans out there will have to inform me on whether Edgar deserves credit for this, or whether it's mostly coincidence. He IS beloved in Seattle, it seems.

Bobby Abreu is one of the biggest jerks in baseball, if I may go off topic. Totally full of himself. Refuses to hit leadoff, where he would be a devastating leadoff man, because he wants to get RBI (because he knows RBI producers get paid much more than run scorers). A guy like that can stay off my team.

The M's took serious risks in the late 80's that paid off well for us. Phelps for Bone, Langston for Unit, and trading an all star 3rd baseman and letting Edgar Martinez play in the hot corner. I don't want to single anyone out for the success of the Mariners, but Edgar certainly has played a prominent role in putting basebal center-stage in Seattle.

ElHalo

03-09-2004, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
The M's took serious risks in the late 80's that paid off well for us. Phelps for Bone, Langston for Unit, and trading an all star 3rd baseman and letting Edgar Martinez play in the hot corner. I don't want to single anyone out for the success of the Mariners, but Edgar certainly has played a prominent role in putting basebal center-stage in Seattle.

I'd have to give Kurt Cobain probably about 95% of the credit for putting Seattle baseball on the map. If it wasn't for Cobain, most Americans wouldn't know Seattle from DuBois.:D :D

tearforamariner

03-09-2004, 03:41 PM

Originally posted by ElHalo
I'd have to give Kurt Cobain probably about 95% of the credit for putting Seattle baseball on the map. If it wasn't for Cobain, most Americans wouldn't know Seattle from DuBois.:D :D

I hope this is just a joke. Either that, or you are forgetting about Hendrix, Microsoft, Boeing, Starbucks, the Space Needle, Ron Santo, the WTO Riots (not a great example I know), and Frasier.

ElHalo

03-09-2004, 03:47 PM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
I hope this is just a joke. Either that, or you are forgetting about Hendrix, Microsoft, Boeing, Starbucks, the Space Needle, Ron Santo, the WTO Riots (not a great example I know), and Frasier.

Of course it was a joke. And as much as I'd love to forget about Frasier, I haven't.

Little tidbit: I was in college when the WTO protests went on, and I had planned to go out for them, but couldn't make it. Lucky for me, I guess. A couple of my friends ended up in jail, I think. I barely missed that one, and I barely missed the riots at Woodstock in 1999 (my friends and I left Woodstock early to avoid traffic... tells you what kind of Woodstock guy I am). I guess I was just born to have no fun.

tearforamariner

03-09-2004, 03:51 PM

Originally posted by ElHalo
Of course it was a joke. And as much as I'd love to forget about Frasier, I haven't.

Little tidbit: I was in college when the WTO protests went on, and I had planned to go out for them, but couldn't make it. Lucky for me, I guess. A couple of my friends ended up in jail, I think. I barely missed that one, and I barely missed the riots at Woodstock in 1999 (my friends and I left Woodstock early to avoid traffic... tells you what kind of Woodstock guy I am). I guess I was just born to have no fun. \

A guy I know is still in jail for the WTO riots. Manslaughter.

ElHalo

03-09-2004, 04:13 PM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
\

A guy I know is still in jail for the WTO riots. Manslaughter.

Manslaughter? I didn't know THAT kind of stuff was going on there.

I believe a friend of mine got arrested for failure to yield to a policeman's order. Sitting down in the middle of a street or whatever. Could be wrong; it's been a while.

tearforamariner

03-09-2004, 04:24 PM

Originally posted by ElHalo
Manslaughter? I didn't know THAT kind of stuff was going on there.

I believe a friend of mine got arrested for failure to yield to a policeman's order. Sitting down in the middle of a street or whatever. Could be wrong; it's been a while. It was nuts in Seattle. It was an accident, but because of the events of WTO, he was charged with Manslaughter and convicted. Sad really, no one new what they were getting into when it started.

tearforamariner

03-09-2004, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by BoSox Rule
Edgar Martinez doesn't belong in the Hall.

.315/.423/.525 is worthy...

but 2119 hits/297 HR/1198 RBI/1174 runs isn't.

Especially for a DH.

For a DH you should have amazing HR/RBI numbers. Edgar doesn't. His % numbers are great, but his career numbers are less than that.

I know I'm responding to this a bit late, but let me ask you this: What DH's have more HRs and RBIs than Edgar?. How many DH's have scored more career runs?

BoSox Rule

03-09-2004, 06:58 PM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
I know I'm responding to this a bit late, but let me ask you this: What DH's have more HRs and RBIs than Edgar?. How many DH's have scored more career runs?

Nobody. However, if all you do is hit, then your stats should be amazing. Edgar's are not. You should have atleast .300 (does)/.400 (does)/.550 (doesn't)/500 HR and 1500 RBI (doesn't, and doesn't)

tearforamariner

03-10-2004, 06:28 PM

Originally posted by BoSox Rule
Nobody. However, if all you do is hit, then your stats should be amazing. Edgar's are not. You should have atleast .300 (does)/.400 (does)/.550 (doesn't)/500 HR and 1500 RBI (doesn't, and doesn't)

They should? Based on what? Name one DH that has better numbers than Edgar. You can't because there aren't any. Base your argument on actual facts, not arbitrary standards that have not been reached by any DH. Who ever said you need 2800 hits to be considered a great baseball player before Anson did it? It's poppycock. If Edgar played any other position, he'd be a hands down HOFer, and nothing should change just because he DH'd. Besides, it's arguably harder to hit and sit than hit and field. Anyway, let's say Edgar plays 2 more seasons and finishes his career with over 2500 hits, 330 HRs, well over 500 doubles, over 1300 RBI and 1300 runs scored, and maintains a .300/.400/.500 line. Is he a HoFer then?

BoSox Rule

03-10-2004, 07:26 PM

I'll go back on my last statement. If he finshes with 2500H/.315 BA/.420 OBP/.520 SLG then I'd put him in. It hard with only 330 HR/1300 RBI but I guess I'd do it.

Cougar

03-10-2004, 08:51 PM

I think if Edgar cracks 2500 hits, I'd back him too.

The problem is, if you back Edgar with 2500 hits, 330 HR, and 1300 RBI, how do you exclude Harold Baines with 2800 hits, 380 HR, and 1600 RBI? I think you have to take them both. Baines's counting stat advantage matches Edgar's percentage stat advantage, to me.

I can live with that, but I think a lot of people out there probably can't.

As far as "No DH has ever done" this or that, the fact is that Edgar is maybe the first or second or third (Molitor, Baines) great player to mostly fill the role of DH. That's not a sign of greatness, exactly...it's more of a historical accident.

Guys like Ted Williams and Harmon Killebrew would have been primarily DH's if they'd been born later in the 20th century -- and greater ones than Edgar, no knock on him -- but they just weren't.

MikeCameronFAN

03-10-2004, 09:27 PM

Originally posted by Cougar
I think if Edgar cracks 2500 hits, I'd back him too.

The problem is, if you back Edgar with 2500 hits, 330 HR, and 1300 RBI, how do you exclude Harold Baines with 2800 hits, 380 HR, and 1600 RBI? I think you have to take them both. Baines's counting stat advantage matches Edgar's percentage stat advantage, to me.

I can live with that, but I think a lot of people out there probably can't.

As far as "No DH has ever done" this or that, the fact is that Edgar is maybe the first or second or third (Molitor, Baines) great player to mostly fill the role of DH. That's not a sign of greatness, exactly...it's more of a historical accident.

Guys like Ted Williams and Harmon Killebrew would have been primarily DH's if they'd been born later in the 20th century -- and greater ones than Edgar, no knock on him -- but they just weren't.

Very well put Cougar. Also - not many players have as much DH time as Edgar. Most players play longer in the field and then switch to DH at the tail end of their career.

Actually, the angle of how much Edgar Martinez contributed to the growing viability of the Mariners' franchise (look at where they were in 1990 and compare them to where they are now) may be a good argument for him. You Mariners' fans out there will have to inform me on whether Edgar deserves credit for this, or whether it's mostly coincidence. He IS beloved in Seattle, it seems.

Yes, Edgar is beloved in Seattle. However, I think that Griffey, Randy and Lou Piniella were more influential in the "growing viability of the Mariners' franchise."

Cougar

03-11-2004, 07:15 AM

Originally posted by MikeCameronFAN
Very well put Cougar. Also - not many players have as much DH time as Edgar. Most players play longer in the field and then switch to DH at the tail end of their career.

Thanks MikeCFan. Basically, to put it another way, players who for whatever reason (in Edgar's case, injuries) who cannot play a defensive position for the preponderance of their careers at all, but who remain great hitters in spite of it, are pretty rare. But they're unique because the have a skill set that's incomplete in a way that's unusual, not because they're great at something

The DH gives players like Edgar an opportunity they didn't have before, but that involves more luck than skill -- picking the right year to be born.

tearforamariner

03-11-2004, 09:06 AM

Originally posted by MikeCameronFAN

Yes, Edgar is beloved in Seattle. However, I think that Griffey, Randy and Lou Piniella were more influential in the "growing viability of the Mariners' franchise."

Very true, and I wouln't disagree with it either. However, I would say, probably with some disagreement, that no one was more influential with the "growing viability of the Mariners' franchise" than the Bone.

MikeCameronFAN

03-11-2004, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
Very true, and I wouln't disagree with it either. However, I would say, probably with some disagreement, that no one was more influential with the "growing viability of the Mariners' franchise" than the Bone.

TFAM - I know we love Buhner, but how do you figure that he was more influential than Griffey, Randy or Lou?

tearforamariner

03-11-2004, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by MikeCameronFAN
TFAM - I know we love Buhner, but how do you figure that he was more influential than Griffey, Randy or Lou? Shaved heads all over the Dome, and still to this day. Bone brought fans to the stadium and created a persona no one in Seattle (or surrounding areas) will soon forget. Sure, Randy and Griffey were better than Bone was, but Bone was much more likeable and was much more marketable. I still think that Bone is more responsible for the success of this franchise than Griffey, Randy, and Lou. In 1995, it was the outstanding play of Bone, and not Griffey that helped lead the M's to their first playoff appearance ever. My point is, Bone's contributions are often overlooked, but are arguably the strongest contributions in franchise history.

MikeCameronFAN

03-11-2004, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
Shaved heads all over the Dome, and still to this day. Bone brought fans to the stadium and created a persona no one in Seattle (or surrounding areas) will soon forget. Sure, Randy and Griffey were better than Bone was, but Bone was much more likeable and was much more marketable. I still think that Bone is more responsible for the success of this franchise than Griffey, Randy, and Lou. In 1995, it was the outstanding play of Bone, and not Griffey that helped lead the M's to their first playoff appearance ever. My point is, Bone's contributions are often overlooked, but are arguably the strongest contributions in franchise history.

Sorry, but I just don't agree. From about 1990 - 1999, the only human being on the planet more marketable than Ken Griffey Jr. was Michael Jordan.
Buhner got "Buhner Buzz Night" because the other 80 games of the season were dedicated to The Kid.
Edgar and Buhner were simply icing on Griffey's cake.

tearforamariner

03-11-2004, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by MikeCameronFAN
Sorry, but I just don't agree. From about 1990 - 1999, the only human being on the planet more marketable than Ken Griffey Jr. was Michael Jordan.
Buhner got "Buhner Buzz Night" because the other 80 games of the season were dedicated to The Kid.
Edgar and Buhner were simply icing on Griffey's cake. So I assume that means that the massive jump in attendance between '95 and '96 was because of a guy who spent the majority of the season injured?

MikeCameronFAN

03-11-2004, 07:43 PM

Originally posted by tearforamariner
So I assume that means that the massive jump in attendance between '95 and '96 was because of a guy who spent the majority of the season injured?

I find it really odd that we're even debating this. There shouldn't be any question in anyone's mind: Junior put Seattle on the baseball map. Period.

Sure, there was an attendance jump after the 1995 season in which Griffey was injured and limited to 72 games (BTW - he was an All-Star and Gold Glove winner that season), but it can be attributed to the M's (as a team - not one individual) making the playoffs for the first time. Your boy Buhner spent his fair share riding the pine as well (36 games).

I'm sure there's a substantial difference in the average attendance rates between:
'83-'88 (pre-Griffey) and '89-'94 (w/ Griffey, pre-playoffs)

And as an interesting side note...
Junior tore it up in the playoffs vs. the Yankees and Indians
.391/.444/1.043 w/ 5 HR in 5 games vs. Yanks
.333/.440/.571 w/ 1 HR in 6 games vs. Tribe

And I know the pitching was worn out by this point, but Edgar really helped the M's watch the World Series at home with his absolutely pathetic .087/.192/.087 clip vs. Cleveland in the playoffs.

tearforamariner

03-11-2004, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by MikeCameronFAN
I find it really odd that we're even debating this. There shouldn't be any question in anyone's mind: Junior put Seattle on the baseball map. Period.

Sure, there was an attendance jump after the 1995 season in which Griffey was injured and limited to 72 games (BTW - he was an All-Star and Gold Glove winner that season), but it can be attributed to the M's (as a team - not one individual) making the playoffs for the first time. Your boy Buhner spent his fair share riding the pine as well (36 games).

I'm sure there's a substantial difference in the average attendance rates between:
'83-'88 (pre-Griffey) and '89-'94 (w/ Griffey, pre-playoffs)

And as an interesting side note...
Junior tore it up in the playoffs vs. the Yankees and Indians
.391/.444/1.043 w/ 5 HR in 5 games vs. Yanks
.333/.440/.571 w/ 1 HR in 6 games vs. Tribe

And I know the pitching was worn out by this point, but Edgar really helped the M's watch the World Series at home with his absolutely pathetic .087/.192/.087 clip vs. Cleveland in the playoffs. Okay, let me correct myself. Other than Griffey, Bone was the most influential player in Mariner history. I still think that Griffey's "super-stardom" was only further fuel by the Bone persona, and Bone dos not get enough credit for his role.

ci11829

04-02-2004, 03:12 PM

To me a HOF player should be an all around players since DH have been around 25 yrs maybe there should a special designation if so he would be the only one in it. Also as a DH his chances of being are much lower all part of the game.

iPod

04-09-2004, 04:55 PM

Originally posted by Chancellor
There are tens of thousands of people across the United States who could strap on a glove and play a major league caliber field...

...and Edgar Martinez is not one of those people. The BBWAA shouldn't consider that? I disagree that Edgar should be inducted just because he's put up bigger numbers than any other career DH. There's no provision that says that there must be a DH in the Hall of Fame. That said, I guess I might back him, but I'd have to wait until he's eligible and had some time to think about his career as a whole.

leecemark

04-11-2004, 08:30 PM

edgar is hands down the best dh ever. any other position and that is end of the arguement - first ballot hall of famer. of course, the problem with being the best ever dh is that very few (only one?) great players have dhed the majority of their careers well, molitor was close. he was okay at third, but couldn't stay healthy. for that matter he's missed alot of time even dhing. he has also been far and away the slowest baserunner in the majors for at least the last five years. i wouldn't vote for him and i doubt the writers will either. however, if they did he would be far from the worst member. mariners fans would love to see him as their first HOFer.

razors

04-11-2004, 10:15 PM

Originally posted by ci11829
To me a HOF player should be an all around players since DH have been around 25 yrs maybe there should a special designation if so he would be the only one in it. Also as a DH his chances of being are much lower all part of the game.

so you want very few (if any) pitchers in the hall?

what about catchers or 'pure' sluggers?

just asking...

razors

mako224

06-18-2004, 04:13 AM

Edgar Martinez is the greatest DH to ever play the game, and the most valuable player to the Mariners of all time. :gt On black and white Edgar sure looks good. He is one of only 18 players ever to have 6 or more POP (premium offensive player) seasons, a POP season is one in which the player has a BA over .300, OBP over .400, SLG over .500, and Edgar has eight! :D All 18 players who have earned this stat have gone onto, or for the active players, going to be in the Hall of Fame. The big contreversy is that he only hits and is not a defensive player. He has played 1st and 3rd base, but not very well tying a MLB record for most errors in a single game. :grouchy I'm just posting this because there is no way Olerud and especially Cameron should be talked about entering the Hall of Fame in front Edgar, and I am amazed no one has talked about him. :noidea Maybe everyone thought he was a sure thing? Just remember he is a DH and it is very hard to make it, sort of like a reliever, into the Hall of Fame.

Captain Cold Nose

06-18-2004, 05:35 AM

Check out this thread, Mako.

http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=8496

You're new here, so, welcome. However, discussion on Martinez's candidacy is not. It's come up several times beyond this thread, as well.

ElHalo

06-18-2004, 06:58 AM

On a seperate note, though... the day John Olerud and Mike Cameron make it in the Hall of Fame is the day I stop having any respect whatsoever for the institution. Those guys are questionable as All Stars (with the exception of Olerud's batting title year), but to have their names even brought up in HoF discussions is ridiculous.

Brad Harris

06-18-2004, 08:20 AM

Martinez is actually one of only 13 players with 9+ seasons of .300/.400/.500 plus offense. Barry Bonds (10) and Frank Thomas (9) are the only other active players with that many "POP" seasons under their belt.

Martinez's candidacy boils down to two things: (a) his low career totals and (b) how much having no defensive position should hurt him. As for the latter, I'm convinced that he should be treated as a player with replacement-level defense. The fact that the rules don't require him to take the field shouldn't be held against him. As for the former...

True Martinez has "only" 2,174 hits and 302 home runs and he hasn't even appeared in 2,000 games yet (as of this writing). But the man has 506 doubles, 1,229 runs batted in and 1,250 walks. He has a career .940 OPS! Sure his artificial numbers are small compared to the gaudy career totals most of us expect from a Hall-of-Famer, but Martinez just passed 300 career win shares (a good summary of the value of his overall production). And how much of that is due to his defense? Just 13 win shares. That means 287 of Martinez's 300 career win shares are attributable solely to his offense.

That's the 73rd best career offense in history. Only 72 players have contributed more with the bat in their career than Martinez did.

Throw in the fact that Martinez is the posterboy for his "archtype" and you've got a Hall-of-Fame caliber hitter who holds a unique place in history as the best designated hitter ever.

In my book, that's a Hall-of-Famer.

julusnc

06-18-2004, 11:05 AM

Edgar is very good at what he does and has been for a long time.

Edgar has been a mainstay for Seattle and one of its better homegrown rookies.

I feel one day he will be enshrined.

Cougar

06-18-2004, 12:07 PM

I've argued against Martinez for a long time, because his career numbers were too low to support a DH candidacy, despite his outstanding rate stats.

In fact, it's been such a long time that Edgar's built his career totals to the point where I retract my opposition.

Edgar should be the first primary DH in the Hall. Welcome to the club.

dgarza

06-18-2004, 01:37 PM

? - where does he normally hit in the order?

The Dude

06-18-2004, 03:14 PM

Edgartohof

06-18-2004, 03:25 PM

Ooohh, my favorite subject (hence the name)...

Here are some quick stats I have on hand:

Players Name 300 HR 500 2B .310 AVG .415 OBP .520 SLG OPS+ 150 HOF Status
Edgar Martinez yes yes yes yes yes yes Active
Babe Ruth yes yes yes yes yes yes HOF
Ted Williams yes yes yes yes yes yes HOF
Lou Gherig yes yes yes yes yes yes HOF
Rogers Hornsby yes yes yes yes yes yes HOF
Stan Musial yes yes yes yes yes yes HOF

Jimmie Foxx yes no yes yes yes yes HOF
Frank Thomas yes no yes yes yes yes Active
Barry Bonds yes yes no yes yes yes Active

Hank Aaron yes yes no no yes yes HOF
Mike Piazza yes no yes no yes yes Active
Joe Dimaggio yes no yes no yes yes HOF
Willie Mays yes yes no no yes yes HOF
Manny Ramirez yes no yes no yes yes Active
Tris Speaker no yes yes yes no yes HOF
Johnny Mize yes no yes no yes yes HOF
Hank Greenberg yes no yes no yes yes HOF
Ty Cobb no yes yes yes no yes HOF
Mickey Mantle yes no no yes yes yes HOF
Al Simmons yes yes yes no yes no HOF
Frank Robinson yes yes no no yes yes HOF

career numbers number of players players in HOF Active Players % of players total in HOF % of retired players in HOF
300 HR 99 37 23 37.30% 48.60%
506 2B 39 27 5 68.40% 79.40%
.312 Avg 86 54 8 62.70% 71.00%
.420 OBP 20 12 4 60.00% 75.00%
.520 Slg 58 24 26 41.30% 75.00%
823 X-base hits 69 44 12 63.80% 77.10%
3500 Times on base 81 57 10 70.30% 80.20%
1250 Walks 39 22 6 56.40% 61.10%
.940 OPS 34 15 16 44.10% 83.30%
OPS+ 150 37 21 9 56.70% 75.00%
130 HOF Monitor 95 68 22 71.50% 93.10%
20 Black ink test 108 61 15 56.40% 65.50%
107 Grey ink test 192 94 16 48.90% 53.40%
48 HOF career standard 82 62 14 75.60% 91.10%

Edgartohof

06-18-2004, 03:27 PM

Sorry, didn't come out as good as I'd hoped.

Cougar

06-18-2004, 06:18 PM

Cougar, if you mean primary by "playing more games there", then Paul Molitor is already the first primary DH in the hall.

Oh ... and The Ignitor's the greatest DH ever. :D
He had 412 WS, and I'm not exactly sure on how many of those are Fielding WS, but I'm guessing at the most 25. No way will Martinez ever come close to (approximetly) 375 offensive WS.

You could call him a DH, but I'd consider him more of a multi-position utility player.

Molly played more games at DH than at any one position, but he played more games at any position than at DH. To put it another way, he played less than 50% of his games as a DH; the majority of his games he played at some defensive position (and he played everything but pitcher and catcher at some point).

Edgar is way over 50% at DH.

Cougar

06-18-2004, 06:43 PM

? - where does he normally hit in the order?

Seattle's been a team that's tended to shuffle its order around a lot.

In the first half of the main part of his career, he batted anywhere between #2 and #6 in the order.

More recently, as he developed more run-producing power, he's batted either third, fourth, or fifth.

Imapotato

06-18-2004, 06:51 PM

Edgartohof

06-18-2004, 08:20 PM

What is that about OPS? Edgar has one of the best OPS all-time!

ElHalo

06-18-2004, 08:26 PM

What is that about OPS? Edgar has one of the best OPS all-time!

In a crazy offensive era... Edgar's only 14th among active players, trailing such decidely non-HoF guys as Brian Giles, Jason Giambi, Carlos Delgado, and Jim Thome, and is barely a smidgeon ahead of Chipper Jones, Gary Sheffield, and Bobby Abreu... all guys who'll need a ticket to get into Cooperstown, and all guys who, I might add, played some defense... though admittedly not particularly well, in many cases.

leecemark

06-18-2004, 09:02 PM

Brad Harris

06-19-2004, 01:14 AM

In a crazy offensive era... Edgar's only 14th among active players, trailing such decidely non-HoF guys as Brian Giles, Jason Giambi, Carlos Delgado, and Jim Thome, and is barely a smidgeon ahead of Chipper Jones, Gary Sheffield, and Bobby Abreu... all guys who'll need a ticket to get into Cooperstown, and all guys who, I might add, played some defense... though admittedly not particularly well, in many cases.

I think it's pretty silly to talk about a "crazy offensive era" and then not use figures that would compare Martinez's OPS to league average for purposes of a more accurate comparison. Of course doing that would mean having Martinez rank 7th, not 14th.

Yes...Martinez's career OPS+ rates 7th among active players with 3,000+ plate appearances and, if you want to look only at active players with 8,000+ PAs (which include Martinez) and who have a higher OPS+, then you've lost everyone better than Edgar except for Bagwell, Bonds and Thomas.

Let's look at it another way...Edgar Martinez earned 204 win shares in the 1990s - that's good for the 19th most in the decade, 17th most if you exclude pitchers (Maddux and Clemens). While the 17th most valuable position player of the decade isn't a de facto Hall-of-Famer, neither is he chopped liver. Martinez's value in the 1990s was equal or better than that of Larry Walker, Cal Ripken, John Olerud, Juan Gonzalez, Bernie Williams, Sammy Sosa, Randy Johnson and a host of other all-stars.

Just for kicks, I looked up the 19th most valuable player of previous decades. Here's a brief list:

1980s - Paul Molitor*
1970s - Carl Yastrzemski*
1960s - Bob Gibson*
1950s - Al Rosen
1940s - Dizzy Trout
1930s - Chuck Klein*
1920s - Eddie Collins*
1910s - Gavy Cravath
1900s - Bobby Wallace*

Guys who had Hall-of-Fame careers, or at least parts of one. I would suggest that drawing the line above Edgar Martinez would mean drawing the line above a host of other guys, too. An asterisk (*) in the above list indicates the player has been elected to the Hall of Fame.

Edgar Martinez has hit and hit well for a long time. Don't think it's been long enough? Consider that Martinez's career PAs now rank among the top 200 career totals, which is pretty extraordinary for a guy with the reputation for a "short" career.

leecemark

06-19-2004, 06:42 AM

---Limiting comparisons to "the 90s" or the "the 70s" or whatever always gives a huge bonus to the handfull of players who centered their best years in that box. Of your decade examples, Yaz may have been the 19th best player of the 70s, but the 70s weren't his best decade. Most of his great years came in the 60s. The same would apply to Collins and the 20s/10s. I'm not sure if I would look to the 80s or 90s as Molitor's best decade, but he was certainly better in the 90s than Martinez has been in this decade.
---Edgar has an interesting and unique case for the Hall. Having actually seen him play ALOT I wouldn't call him a Hall of Famer. He looks better on paper than he does on the field. I am a stat minded guy, but numbers aren't everything. In any case, I think Edgar will eventually make Cooperstown based on his numbers because at some point that is all people have to go by. Plus he is a good guy who hasn't alienated anyone and seems unlikely to embarrass himself in his post career waiting period.

mako224

06-21-2004, 02:44 AM

Edgar Martinez, may not be the greatest hitter of all time, He is no Ty Cobb, but he certainly has Hall of Fame numbers, and unlike Ty Cobb who is has been documented as the "meanest person to play the game" and teamates tended to hate him; Edgar is loved by all his fellow teammates and is a really likeable guy. I believe that being the great person he is should give him the edge to make the Hall of Fame and as for this comment :grouchy

When I think of the best players of recent memory, Edgar Martinez doesn't even pop into my head.

really can you name every Hall of Fame member in recent history from memory? Just because he is no Babe Ruth or Willie Mays doesn't make him a nobody. Please realize that if you were a Mariner Fan you would think of Edgar.

P.S.
Many think Edgar should have retired a long time ago, some say he was greedy, but Edgar stayed with the team to help the team, and few would retire after the year he had last year and definatly the year before, heck last year he just missed getting another POP by 3 points on his batting average!!!

mako224

06-21-2004, 02:50 AM

--I might add that, in addition to having no defensive value, Martinez is perhaps the slowest baserunner in the history of the game. As a Mariners fan, I think he could have helped the team best by retiring a couple years ago. Of course, then he wouldn't have the 2,000 hits or 300 HR or 500 doubles that make him a borderline candidate now. I know this puts me in the minority of Mariner's fans, but when it comes to Edgar I gotta say NO.

And yet it is funny Edgar still, even this year, he is one of the more successful doubles hitters of all time (506 and still going up), hmm...
He has helped his team out far more than hurt, more than some of the fastest baserunners on the team! He did not stay to reach those milestones, if he had known this year would be this bad for him, he probably would have retired, but who could've known after the year he had last year, see my comments above. Finally Edgar himself brings up a good point if there are announcers and relievers in the Hall of Fame why not a DH? (on further answers please don't disrespect Martinez, he said it jokingly)

mako224

06-21-2004, 03:24 AM

Edgar Martinex SHOULD NEVER be elected into Cooperstown and YES you can hold the fact that he only bats against him and I do. He essentially plays only half the game and if you only play half the game you better be twice as good as anybody else at it or you aren't all that special.

The DH is the most abhorent rule in all of professional sports. I mean it is such a ludicrous notion I am not sure how or why it was ever instituted in the first place. Aside from baseball's exclussionary practices of yesteryear the DH is single worst thing about the game??? really what excitement does it really add??? I would much rather see Roger Clemens have to pick up a bat and step in the batters box then to see some mediocre DH. Now Edgar is an exceptional DH but he is also the exception and being a GREAT DH doesn't amount to a hell of a lot anyway...I mean at present at Edgar is the ONLY DH with an average of more then .276 do people really hate seeing pitchers hit to the point they want Josh Phelps and Brad Fullmer in the line-up so badly???

If we want excitement hos about a Designated Runner... i mean that way we could all be spared being forced to watch benji Molina run the bases...instead the Angels could hire Rickey Henderson and he could run f or Benji??/ i mean imagine all the close plays at home...the added runs it could generate the reintroduction of the stolen base into today's game??? time Raines might still be playing same too with Vince Coleman and Otis Nixon....Would Davey Lopes have been able to extend his career and get into Cooperstown??? What about Brett Butler???

If Edgar wants in Cooperstown he can buy a ticket in order for me to even consider a DH worthy he would have to achieve some monster numbers for not only individual seasons but a career as well..

I am talking 700HR 2000RBI 4000Hits or a .350+ lifetime batting average......

Even a DH with 3000Hits and 5000 HR wouldn't be a Hall of Famer IMO as when you don't play the field you miss half the game..

Frank Thomas is also IMO as full time a DH as it gets...his career numbers have always been better when he plays 1B as opposed to when he DH's but he has also desired to NOT play the field??? I mean Edgar and Frank actually LIKE sitting on the bench??? If I was a big league ball player I want to be out there for EVERY PLAY and anyone with the attitude of if they abolished the DH I woudl retire (Something Edgar has said.) is a disgrace to the game.

I don't know about Thomas, but Martinez has done the job he was assigned, you cannot say it is the players fault for not wanting to go out on the field. Edgar does not just spend his time on the bench looking at the sky, or mopping around, Edgar is studying pitchers and the field for holes. Edgar has always done that, he figures out if a pitcher is throwing for first pitch strikes and for the perfect place in the field to try to put his ball. The DH position may not be good for baseball, but it is not Martinez's or Thomas' call. Edgar only remarked that he would retire if the DH position was abolished because he is a team player, and he knows that he is the best help to the team as a DH. And do you really believe all the Hall of Famers in history were great fielders? You cannot say that the DH has not helped teams, the mariners would never have won 116 games without Edgar, and as for post season numbers, Edgar holds the record for most hits in a postseason series in '95 when he has 12 hits to help defeat the Yankees in 6 games. Also to say a DH only plays half the game so he should be twice as good is insane, you take any great hitter who fields and have them play just batting, their batting averages would not raise to twice as good as before, fielding does not take much from hitting. Finally a DH is to help the team more, in Football their are offensive and deffensive players, are you saying Joe montana should be a deffensive linbacker as well as a QB to make the Hall of Fame? Edgar though not a great fielder still has played 1st and 3rd base and would still be in the major leagues if the DH did not exist. Edgar is a great person and is not by far a discrace to baseball and neither is the DH position. :grouchy
Of course Edgar and Frank want to stay on the bench, they know they are a better help offensively than defensively.

P.S.
Lighten up, like I said before many sports are offensive players and deffensive players, baseball is an exception, but the DH is not a stupid thing as it stands to reason in the sports world, also if you were a big league ball player no one would want you if you played crumby field but insisted on playing field anyway!!!

mako224

06-21-2004, 03:37 AM

And I know the pitching was worn out by this point, but Edgar really helped the M's watch the World Series at home with his absolutely pathetic .087/.192/.087 clip vs. Cleveland in the playoffs.

The series before Edgar earned 12 hits against the Yankees, which is a playoff single series record, and he did it in 5 games!!!, You really can't expect, even Edgar to follow that performance very well in the next series, Edgar was not the reason for their defeat, but a big reason they were even there in the first place.

2Chance

06-21-2004, 07:51 AM

originally posted by mako224
If there are ... relievers in the Hall of Fame why not a DH?
This is a point that has been plaguing me. Not to totally dismiss Edgar's tongue in cheek quote there, but a DH, like a 9th inning closer, is a specialist. We expect more out of major league baseball players -- especially in regards to the Hall of Fame -- than one-dimensional play.

Over this winter I lost a bet. I said there was no way a DH and a closer, both part-time players, would be elected to the Hall of Fame. Who are we enshrining this summer? Paul Molitor and Dennis Eckersley. So the standards are changing. (Mine haven't yet, but they didn't give me a vote.) Still, I have been more willing to consider relief pitchers than designated hitters. The only other one in now is Hoyt Wilhelm, but if Eck is in, Gossage NEEDS to be there...and Sutter....

Anyway, here's another tangent: There have been hitters who couldn't play defense elected to the Hall, and it is harder to draw a line between them and a DH. So sure, when Edgar's time comes, he will probably be elected.

leecemark

06-21-2004, 08:04 AM

---Sure there are Hall of Famers who were lousy fielders. Some were probably no more valuable defensively than Edgar. The thing with Edgar is that he was moved to DH not so much because he couldn't field as because he couldn't stay healthy. I mean he wasn't a very good thirdbaseman, but they didn't have somebody else who was very good either. If Martinez wasn't getting hurt so much he would have played alot more in the field.
--So it isn't just that is numbers were put up as a DH. It is also that he never would have lasted anywhere near as long or gotten as much playing time if not for the DH. That is true of Molitor as well, although to a lesser extent.
--Of course, I didn't think Molitor should have sailed into the Hall so quickly either. I could see eventually voting for him, and maybe for Edgar too, but I definately have to discount their numbers for the way they got them. Sure they are only playing by the rules that existed when they played. However, if were going to discount the HR numbers of current players (and we should) because they played under more favorable conditions than past players the same should apply to Molitor and Martinez.

Cougar

06-21-2004, 09:07 AM

Rollie Fingers is in the HOF as a reliever too.

Brad Harris

06-21-2004, 10:15 AM

So many factual errors, so little time....

(1) Thank you, Cougar for correctly pointing out Fingers' membership in the Hall of Fame. Dennis Eckersley's induction will make him the third reliever in the Hall (after Wilhelm and Fingers). Furthermore, three other relievers (Sutter, Gossage and Smith) received a higher percentage of votes last winter than the most popular starting pitcher (Blyelven). So it's not as though relievers aren't being considered seriously by the voters.

(2) No one has ever been elected to the Hall of Fame as an "announcer". I believe that Hall-of-Famer Ford Frick was once a broadcaster; he's the namesake for the career achievement award that the Hall hands out each year to a broadcaster - Bob Uecker won it in 2003 - so he'd have to have been a broadcaster, right? Nevertheless, Frick was elected because he'd been a league president and commissioner for many, many years. (He was also the "ghost" writer of Babe Ruth's autobiography for those of you who didn't know.)

Broadcasters who are honored with the Frick Award (and writers who are honored with the Spink Award, for that matter) are not members of the Hall of Fame. They are not inducted into anything. They do not have the right to be called "Hall of Famers". This language is made clear on the Hall of Fame's web site, if you care to read about those awards there. It's a common misnomer and one that local teams and local press are happy to continue spreading as it only serves to elevate local broadcasters/writers in the minds of local fans. Sort of a self-congratulatory MAS ("Mutual Admiration Society") amongst these people.

They are not in the Hall of Fame.

(3) It is illogical to penalize Martinez's (or any other designated hitter's) offensive numbers because he played DH. First of all, if you compare a hitters' offense to league average, then a designated hitter is already receiving an adjustment for playing in a DH league (ie. a league where it takes more runs to win a game.) You can do that with Martinez and he still comes out smelling like a rose.

(4) A player being kept healthy because he is moved to designated hitter should in no way be brought to bear upon his statistics. You cannot penalize a player for staying healthy simply because he was put in a situation that maximized his chances for doing so. Many players have spent time as pinch hitters while they recovered from injuries - many Hall of Famers, in fact - and I don't see anyone talking about taking a few hits or home runs off their record because they were used in capacity that maximized their productivity while protecting their health.

It's not as though Martinez was someone with crippled legs who's bat would never have seen a major league pitcher had his team not "hidden" him from competition by placing him at DH. Some of you make it sound almost sinister to have been a great hitter with fragile health.

(5) Any player should be judged on how he performed as opposed to how much talent he had. A player merits election to the Hall of Fame based on what he did, not on what he didn't do.

Martinez was one of the best hitters in baseball for a decade! Don't you think playing him at DH had a more positive effect on the team's chances of winning than if they had put him at third base?!? Obviously the Mariners thought so!

(6) The "the great person that he is" garbage about Martinez makes me sick to my stomach. I don't know the man personally, but I don't need to. It makes absolutely no difference to me how he conducts himself off the field or in the privacy of his own home and life. My concern, in regards to Edgar Martinez, is was he a great hitter? He was. His personality, his character (to almost any reasonable extent) and his personal life are irrelevant to the discussion of his merits as a Hall-of-Famer. That him being a "nice guy" should push him over the top is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. Babe Ruth wasn't a nice guy. Tris Speaker wasn't a nice guy. Mickey Mantle was hardly a role model. Half the players in the Hall of Fame were probably alcoholics for crying out loud. If you want the Hall of Nice Guys, then call up Ray Schalk and Ozzie Smith and Nellie Fox and have yourself a party. I'll keep the Ruths, Williams and Cobbs of the world, thank you very much. These guys are paid to win ballgames, not friends.

(7) Ty Cobb was certainly not the meanest man to ever play in the big leagues. There is plenty of (solid) competition for that title. Anyone who thinks otherwise is busy lazy to read more about the history of the game. And too lazy to question the status quo, no matter how much support its refutation can provide. (Anyone doubting this can ask Bill Burgess about Ty Cobb. Just be sure you have a few spare hours. :D )

Most memorable quote from this whole thread (so far): "Just because he is no Babe Ruth or Willie Mays doesn't make him a nobody." :clapping

2Chance

06-21-2004, 10:39 AM

originally posted by Chancellor
(1) Thank you, Cougar for correctly pointing out Fingers' membership in the Hall of Fame. Dennis Eckersley's induction will make him the third reliever in the Hall (after Wilhelm and Fingers). Furthermore, three other relievers (Sutter, Gossage and Smith) received a higher percentage of votes last winter than the most popular starting pitcher (Blyelven). So it's not as though relievers aren't being considered seriously by the voters.
....
(3) It is illogical to penalize Martinez's (or any other designated hitter's) offensive numbers because he played DH
....
(4) A player being kept healthy because he is moved to designated hitter should in no way be brought to bear upon his statistics. You cannot penalize a player for staying healthy simply because he was put in a situation that maximized his chances for doing so.
It's a good thing they don't give me a ballot, because obviously my heart will occasionally override my head when it's time to fill it out. I wasn't saying that it is logical to not cast a vote for a DH, just that it wasn't very likely that I would. That is why we need people with cooler heads, facts, figures and, in some cases, anecdotal evidence to make sure voters are well-informed.

Edgartohof

06-21-2004, 11:08 AM

There is also another point that I take into consideratio - which some may disagree with. That while Edgar was signed in 1982, he didn't play a full season until 1990, at the age of 27. This among other things, shows what horrible management the team was under.

They continued to hold on to their *beloved* Jim Presley, even though he was performing horribly.

So I think of it this way, even if the team had brought him up full time just 2 years earlier, what he could have accommplished - whether it be at Third Base or at DH.

(and it definitely would have added to those counting stats that many people would like to see higher).

mako224

06-21-2004, 01:59 PM

I Edgartohof brings up a great point; however, Martinez did not get the chance unfortunatly, so we cannot give him credit for something he may or may not have done. Edgar has plenty good enough stats right now, I don't think, unless they were dramatically higher, any increase in his stats now would help his chances. He has reached the milestones, now it is just a matter of whether a fulltime DH deserves a place in the HOF.

P.S.
I think it's crap that he did not play much at first too.

leecemark

06-21-2004, 03:40 PM

---The statement "many Hall of Famer have spent time pinch hitting while they recovered from injuries" is, of course true. Many of them also added a couple extra years to their careers by doing it. None of them specialized in it for 12 years. None of them got to do it 4 or 5 times a game and compiled almost all of their value as pinch hitters. The DH is part of the game. I'm certianly not saying a man should be excluded from consideration because they were primarially a DH (Martinez had only three years where he played 100 games in the field).
--- However, I am saying that a DH needs to be held to a higher standard than men who play the field. We expect firstbasemen and leftfielders to hit more than shortstops and catchers. In fact, there are very many firstbasemen and outfielders who were significantly better hitters than the average Hall shortstop and never came close to making it. If we have a higher standard for hitters positions (which we do and should), then shouldn't the standard be even higher for a man without a position?
---How much higher I'm not sure. I could perhaps one day be persuaded that Edgar has met that standard. I'm not ready to say that today though. I've been a Mariners fan for 10 years and probably seen Edgar play considerably more often than most. He hurts the team more than you might imagine on the basepaths, in interleague play and in a lack of flexibility (other players who are hurting or could use a rest are not able to fill at DH because Martinez can't play elsewhere.). His case probably looks better on paper than it has looked to me in person over the years.
--I like Edgar. I agree his being a nice guy is irrelevant to his qualifications for the Hall, but most Mariners fans would love to see him be the first Mariner inducted. As a fan I wish I could support his case, but it would be dishonest of me to say I believe he is a Hall of Famer.

mako224

06-22-2004, 01:24 AM

-I like Edgar. I agree his being a nice guy is irrelevant to his qualifications for the Hall, but most Mariners fans would love to see him be the first Mariner inducted. As a fan I wish I could support his case, but it would be dishonest of me to say I believe he is a Hall of Famer.

Though it matters little, it is not irrelevent, writers look for players with the classic 'Hall of Fame character' and it might give him the edge he needs to make it. Writers look for good sportsmanship as to how it helps the team, and Edgar has always been a 'team player'.

mako224

06-22-2004, 03:30 AM

Leecemark:

I have heard you many times bring up that Edgar slow baserunning has hurt the Mariners a lot, and that you have watched Edgar for a long time. I too have watched Edgar for a long time; however, I do not think he hurts the Mariners any more than any one else. Edgar is a very slow baserunner, he always has been, but as I have watched him the double plays he gets into not many would beat out any way, and as for not making some singles, that hurts Edgar's stats more than it hurts the team. He has always been successful making it to base, and as I have quoted you before and said he hits many doubles. I believe that slow baserunning is only a factor if it effects Edgar, and never has seemed to, because even in his younger days he was not very fast. I just think that if he was a faster baserunner he only be more amazing. You have got to look at it this way...
THE GLASS IS HALF FULL, NOT HALF EMPTY :crazy
Sincerly,
Mako224

Brad Harris

06-22-2004, 06:38 AM

Martinez was signed by Seattle as an undrafted amateur free agent at the age of 19 in 1982. The following year, 1983, he spent an unsuccessful season in A ball at Bellingham of the Northwest League. In 1984, Martinez batted .303 with 32 doubles and 15 home runs and was promoted to AA.

Martinez only spent 111 games at AA Chattanooga (despite an underwhelming performance there) and was soon shipped to the M's AAA affiliate in the Pacific Coast League, Calgary.

Martinez hit .353 in a few weeks of work at Calgary before the end of the '85 season. He started 1986 (age 23) back at AA Chattanooga where he spent the entire season, batting a respectacle (if unspectacular) .264 with modest power (29 doubles).

In 1987 (now age 25), Martinez began the year back at Calgary. He hit .329 with the same doubles-power and earned himself a September call-up to the big league club. Martinez batted .372 in 14 games against big league pitching.

He started the 1988 season back at AAA Calgary. He continued to tear up the PCL to the tune of a .363 average while slugging a professional career high .517. Naturally, Martinez found himself back in Seattle before the end of the year. In 13 games that September, he hit .281 with few extra base hits.

So naturally, when 1989 started (with Martinez now 26 years old), was back at Calgary, back hitting well over .300 and waiting for another chance to show he could play in the majors. This time he was called up after only 32 games at AAA (.345 BA at the time), but Martinez simply didn't cut it. He flailed away with .240 batting average and .304 slugging percentage in 65 MLB games.

This time, however, the Mariners stood by the minor-league batting wizard and he started the 1990 season as the team's regular third baseman. He never looked back.

Based on his numbers, Seattle in the worst case scenario kept Martinez from an absolute maximum of another 245 big league games by not making him the regular third baseman in 1988 and '89 after his successful September, 1987 call-up.

Let's look at the team in those years, though. Jim Presley had come up through the ranks just a few years earlier. At the end of the 1987 season (in which Martinez made his major league debut), Presley was just one year older, with four years of major league experience under his belt (ie. a track record of far more than 13 games that "proved" he could hit big league pitching.)

Presley had just averaged hitting .256 with 26 HR and 98 RBI the previous two seasons. And he was just 26 years old going into the 1988 season. It's entirely reasonable that the proven quantity would be expected to continue amassing similar (if not better) numbers as he moved into what should have been his peak seasons.

Over the next two years (1988-89), Presley averaged .232 with 13 HR and 52 RBI. The reason Presley dropped is another subject - and one I'm not qualified to talk about. Suffice it to say that, after the 1989 season, Presley signed with the Braves as a free agent and the Mariners decided Martinez was their best option to start at third base.

The point being is that, from the Mariners' perspective in spring training of 1988 or 1989, it's entirely reasonable to have expected Presley to return to his previously established "norms" and have another 25 HR/90 RBI season. No team with a third baseman who's doing that is likely to move that player for a minor leaguer who hits lots of singles and doubles. Especially not if the two players are within a year's age of each other.

Presley's "mysterious" decline, however, paved the way for one of the best hitters of his generation to find a permanent home in the Emerald City.

I don't see how any reasonable view can be held that Martinez was unfairly "held back" in the minors for so long. It wasn't obvious that Martinez would develop into the great hitter he became just like it wasn't obvious that the M's (then) current third baseman would regress to a worse performance level than his ages 25-26 seasons.

It's difficult to imagine how much better Martinez would have to have hit at AAA in order to take Presley's job from him sooner.

Martinez should receive no credit for not being a regular before age 27. It's unfortunate that the opportunity wasn't there, but Martinez didn't exactly leave a strong impression - according to the stats - when he had his subsequent chances (in 1988 and '89). It was a combination of unfortunate circumstance and Martinez's lack of taking advantage of his chances that kept him from regular playing time until that age; just as bad luck and his own fragility have resulted in lost playing time since (particularly in 1993-94 when the team began to move him into the DH role).

Just wanted to put to rest the notion that Martinez should somehow receive extra credit for his pre-"age 27" career.

Brad Harris

06-22-2004, 06:57 AM

...I am saying that a DH needs to be held to a higher standard than men who play the field. We expect firstbasemen and leftfielders to hit more than shortstops and catchers. In fact, there are very many firstbasemen and outfielders who were significantly better hitters than the average Hall shortstop and never came close to making it. If we have a higher standard for hitters positions (which we do and should), then shouldn't the standard be even higher for a man without a position?

Here is, to me, the crux of the argument. I suppose I think of a designated hitter no differently than a poor-fielding corner outfielder or first baseman. In fact, I believe I'd rather have a Dick Stuart type at DH and install Wes Parker at first. I think that would increase the team's chances of winning rather than playing Stuart at first and rotating the injury-of-the-week through the DH slot.

That's what I don't get...the DH is a rule. That rule is maximized by putting a player there who's bat would otherwise lose some value because of limited or poor defense. Playing Martinez at DH rather than 3B was the Mariners' way of maximizing his skills while minimizing the risks that went with them.

I don't know what kind of adjustment you could make to his offensive stats (for playing DH full-time) that wouldn't simply be arbitrary. Your inch may be another man's mile (or vice versa).

Again...looking at your last sentence fragment, leecemark, I think it continues to boil down to this: that people don't consider designated hitter a "position."

If it's not a position, what is it? It's no longer an abberation. I mean, the American League has lived with the DH for 32 seasons now. It's a bigger part of today's game than the bunt or the hit-and-run. And it appears that the NL will eventually adopt the rule, too, if Communist S....errr....Commissioner Selig is to be believed. (*snicker*)

A DH may play only "half the game", but it's the more important half. (The average player's defensive value is only 17% of his total value.) And it's the only half the rules require the man to play. Doesn't the absence of opportunity to add defensive value to his resume hurt him enough?

I mean...Edgar hits exactly like he has over the years, but plays an exactly average game at third base? He's got to add another score or two win shares to his already impressive total of 300! So doesn't being the DH already "rob" him to the chance to accumulate value based on his fielding production? He might have been a poor fielder, but that's worth (a small) something over the course of a career. As a DH, we are already only judging him on his batting value and, at 300 win shares, it's one of the best ever - better than the total value of many all-star and Hall-caliber players.

I guess I figure that, statistically, he's already penalized by not playing in the field, he doesn't need an arbitrary discount applied. Although....that's exactly what will happen when he becomes eligible for election in 5-6 years.

Know you'll be in good company with the BBWAA. ;)

hanshintigers

06-22-2004, 09:23 AM

You can't include Martinez without also bringing in Baines and McGriff

Cougar

06-22-2004, 11:21 AM

McGriff has played over 2200 games at 1b, and less than 200 at DH (through the present day). How exactly is he germane to the DH issue?

leecemark

06-22-2004, 01:47 PM

--McGriff is a) not a DH (as Cougar pointed out) and b) more likely to make the Hall than Martinez. I'm not sure he has actually been a greater player than Martinez, but he's got longevity and (most likely) 500 HR on his side.
--Baines also played many more games in the field than Marintez and was a very good Rfer before his knees went bad. That said, his long career as a fairly good hitter (and long term DH) doesn't match up well to Edgar's in anything but counting stats. I'm at least on the fence with Edgar's qualifications for the Hall. I get a little queasy thinking about the idea that Baines could make it. Harold Baines is a poor man's Rusty Staub.

mako224

06-22-2004, 01:57 PM

Edgar surpassed Baines on the homeruns as a DH, and has proven to be a very consistent batter, if he is the only DH in the Hall of Fame, then he deserves it if any DH does. Edgar has such unique stats, that I don't think if you put him in he will make it easier for any other hitter of the time, except for maybe Frank Thomas, but Edgar is a far better DH. I think the only reason I would put Edgar in, is because he has been consistently very good at batting since taking the DH role. His 8 POP seasons is great, but he has 7 in a row, only 3 other batters have had more in a row: Babe Ruth, Stan Musial, and Lou Gehrig all Hall of Famers, and only two more also have 7 in a row: Harry Heilmann, a Hall of Famer, and Frank Thomas, a great active player who has a shot.

hanshintigers

06-22-2004, 02:17 PM

Martinez is a pretty solid hitter...but never dominated the game. He was also pretty well protected by a lineup of future HOFers. He will fall well short of 3,000 hits.

leecemark

06-22-2004, 02:22 PM

leecemark

06-22-2004, 02:38 PM

--HanshinTigers makes a good point about Martinez and his teammates. For most of his career Edgar has been the third (Boone, Ichiro) or fourth (Johnson, Griffey, Rodreguiz) best player on a team that failed to win a single pennant. This doesn't disqualify him or anything, but it doesn't help his case either. Actually, while Martinez being overshadowed by his teammates probably will be a factor in the BWAA voting , it is kind of unfair. Those teamates who were better than him, at least the first group, were all amoung the 10 best players in baseball.

mako224

06-22-2004, 03:16 PM

Three points Mako;
1) Frank Thomas has more than a shot at the Hall of Fame. There really is no good reason not to vote for him when his time comes.
2) I agree Edgar Martinez is the best career DH of all time. I just don't think that is, in and of itself, justification for being a Hall of Famer. Being the best DH ever is nothing like being the best thirdbaseman or rightfielder or firstbaseman, etc.
3) Edgar is in several "clubs" of men with groups of statistical achievements. They are generally some exclusive groups to be in and he should be proud to be a member. However, he has the lowest numbers across the board of the members of each of those groups - he just reached 300 HR and 500 doubles this year and 2000 hits last year. Being in a group that includes Ruth and Gehrig and Musial doesn't make him as good as they were. Although, of course, you don't have to be as good as those men to make the Hall of Fame. It would be a much smaller club if you did.

P.S. In response to your earlier post that Edgar's lack of speed hurts only his own stats and not the team, I couldn't disagree more. It makes him much more prone to the double play, both at first and at bat. It clogs the bases so that the men behind him must take only one base at a time. I saw him twice last year forced (once at second and once at third) on what should have been clean singles ot the outfield - turning a hit for someone else into an out and killing rallies. His lack of speed has a definate impact on the effectiveness of the Mariners offense as a whole.

Just in response, I don't think Edgar is as good as Ruth, Musial, and Gehrig, but being in any group with them is an amazing accomplishment in itself and should be considered when talking about his chances in the Hall of Fame; however, the only reason I did bring it up is because it proves how consistent of a player he is, and that he has for a long time been a very valuable player to the Mariners. Also I never meant that his slow baserunning only hurts him and not the team, but when he just misses getting on base for a single, that is only one out he gave the team when the next time he may hit a double. I can tell your opinion will not change on this as mine will not either, but it is like I said before think of the glass as half full not half empty, he doesn't only hurt the team he helps it tremendously, and would only help the team out more if he was a faster baserunner, one thing I do understand is that he does bunch up players behind him, but that is not very often, as he is not the lead off hitter or anything, he usually drives runs in!!! Thank you very much for responding to my messages I hope Edgar finishes the season strong and makes a good run for the Hall, but I can certainly understand if he does not make it. I do not think just because he is the greatest fulltime DH of all time it should give him an automatic trip to the Hall of Fame, as I agree it is nothing like being the greatest of any other postition, but I do think it should be looked at when considering him.

P.S.
If Edgar is on the borderline of being in the Hall of Fame, meaning that writers are just unsure, I think Edgar's character will be taken into account, and that he should make it, at least eventually make it.

leecemark

06-22-2004, 04:25 PM

Mako, I think he has a fairly decent chance of making it eventually myself. I'm really not sure how I ended up as the leading spokesperson for the anti-Edgar arguement anyway. I do think he comes up just a littel short, but while my head says no my heart says yes. We've got 5 years before we (or the BWAA) have to decide, so plenty of time to work on his case.

Edgartohof

06-22-2004, 05:19 PM

Hey everybody, I would also like to point out that Edgar still has not said for sure that this will be his last year - although there is a good chance that it will. I feel (and hope) that he will stay at least one more year, so he can go out on top, not on a last place team - one more shot at a ring.

ElHalo

06-22-2004, 05:32 PM

Edgar's a great player. Has been for a while. But not enough of a while to get in on counting stats/longevity... and has he really been THAT great that he should be one of the guys put in on dominance over a short time? My first inkling with him is to say that he's a borderline yes, but that's without taking into account his lack of fielding... it's questionable. It wouldn't bother me if he made it in, it wouldn't bother me if he got left out...

Of his ten most similar batters, only one (Chuck Klein) is in the Hall.

He kind of reminds me of Johnny Mize (but not nearly as good)... great player, not very good counting stats... and maybe, thirty years down the road, the Veterans Committee gives him the nod. That would probably be ok.

Oh, and Mako, one point... Frank Thomas is an All Time Great. He's a sure fire Hall of Famer, and in my opinion one of the top four 1Bmen of all time. He doesn't just "have a chance"... he's a much, much greater player than Edgar.

leecemark

06-22-2004, 06:43 PM

mako224

06-22-2004, 07:21 PM

I didn't mean he won't make it, but he is an active player, it came out wrong, I know he will make the Hall when his time comes. I do think he is a better player than Edgar, mainly because he was a good fielder as well as a hitter, plus a awesome power hitter, but if Edgar had a little more power, he would be very close offensively, that is it though, yes I do agree Thomas is a great and the debate is over Edgar.

mako224

06-22-2004, 07:35 PM

EdgarHoF, I promised myself I was done with the anti-Edgar posts, but once again it looks like I'll be letting myself down. If Edgar insists on coming back another year the Mariners will probably let him - and my heart can join my head in opposing his election.
-- I was mildly disappointed he came back last year and think his coming back this year is one of the biggest factors in the team's collapse. Not only could they have improved the team by replacing him, but I think at least part of the teams stocking up on mediocore veterens in the off season was to give Edgar one last shot at a ring. It failed miserably and the Mariners now need a major overhaul, not another doomed effort to patch things together around Martinez.
--Martinez is no longer a great - or even particularly good - hitter. He is not part of the future for the Mariners - not even future as in 2005. He can't reach any more meaningfull counting milestones and will only hurt the percentage numbers that make up his Hall case by hanging around. I think he is less likely to get elected 6 years from now than he is 5.

I have to agree with you too Leecemark, but I do not think, unless Edgar gets his stats way up to where he is hitting in the 300's again that he would even consider coming back another year. He was convinced he would retire last year until his stats were way high again, just 3 points on his batting average and he would have had a ninth POP season! No, with how bad he is doing this year (Bad for Edgar that is, he still has the most RBI's, but it is not what we normally see out of him) there is no way he will come back next year, He just stayed this year to try and help the team, so they did not have to pay so much to young stars, we all know that did not work, but how was Edgar to know. He will leave so the team can do better, and he already has the milestones he needed, the only other one he could go for is 3,000 hits, which would probably take him 2 or 3 seasons, I sure agree that there is nothing to gain with him coming back for 2005, and I also agree that he could stay if he wanted to, as the organization would let him, but he does deserve in my mind that respect! Good post and I do not think it is anti-Edgar at all, stay a Mariner Fan!!!

mako224

06-23-2004, 03:37 AM

Just posting to try and catch someone's attention :D

Edgartohof

07-06-2004, 06:05 PM

This isn't about whether you think Edgar Martinez SHOULD get in or not, but rather WILL he get in.

I personally think that he will eventually voted in by the veterans committee

leecemark

07-06-2004, 06:56 PM

--I think you need to add another poll option. There are lots of opportunities between "first ballot", which Edgar definately is not, and the VC. I think there is a reasonable chance he'll be elected his 3rd or 4th time on the ballot. If I was handicapping his chances, I'd say 100-1 against first ballot, 3-1 against BWAA election and even money on the VC.

mako224

07-06-2004, 09:40 PM

I think he will make it eventually, but I know everyone can agree he will not make it on the first ballot, in this era too many offensive ballplayers who are automatic HoF members will be retiring around the same time as Edgar, but his kind demenor, his stats, and his unbelieveable consistency should eventually get him in!

Brad Harris

08-09-2004, 06:50 PM

In light of the fact that Edgar Martinez announced his retirement (http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=1855838&POLL181=200000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000) today, I thought I'd dig this thread back up and toss it out into the ether.

The Dude

08-09-2004, 09:05 PM

They should? Based on what? Name one DH that has better numbers than Edgar. You can't because there aren't any. Base your argument on actual facts, not arbitrary standards that have not been reached by any DH. Who ever said you need 2800 hits to be considered a great baseball player before Anson did it? It's poppycock. If Edgar played any other position, he'd be a hands down HOFer, and nothing should change just because he DH'd. Besides, it's arguably harder to hit and sit than hit and field. Anyway, let's say Edgar plays 2 more seasons and finishes his career with over 2500 hits, 330 HRs, well over 500 doubles, over 1300 RBI and 1300 runs scored, and maintains a .300/.400/.500 line. Is he a HoFer then?

Actually, if Edgar played any other position, I'm not sure he'd be in the hall. Only 1 of his 10 most similar players are in the Hall, and only 1/2 of the others on there have a real shot at making it.

As for DH's better than Edgar, Paul Molitor beats him in every counting category except Home Runs.

leecemark

08-09-2004, 09:30 PM

--Guess who leads at DH depends on how you look at it. Counting stats compiles strictly as a DH would favor Martinez over Molitor. Edgar has the edge in rate stats either way. I'm pretty sure Edgar would make it first ballot if he'd spent most of his career at 3B and would be a pretty good bet even at 1B. As a DH I think the hitting standards are going to be higher.
--I think he comes up a little short, but we'll have to wait and see how the real voters feel about it. One thing for sure, his case hasn't changed since yesterday. Maybe Edgar just realized this is his last year, but I'm sure the Mariners made that decision months ago and he wasn't going to find a job elsewhere.

TXRangerFan

08-10-2004, 12:53 AM

SilentKiller

08-10-2004, 11:50 AM

I agree that he should not be in the hall. I guess maybe the best middle reliever of all time whoever that is also should be in the hall.

tearforamariner

08-10-2004, 01:41 PM

I still haven't changed....

Bottom line...Forget that Edgar is a DH...he isn't a defensive specialist, he isn't a position player...

Edgar is a hitter plain and simple.

You judge him by his hitting.

Edgar currently ranks in the top 20 all time in one offensive category...OBP, and he is just barely in th top 20 in that category and likely to fall out of it by seasons end.

That is the only stat of any kind that he has to merit serious HOF consideration......There are 3 other eligible players ahead of him in career OBP that are not in the HOF...and there are others coming.

I have seen many make arguments based on a grouping of his stats...and while I like groupings as much as the next guy, his groupings are only impressive from an average based POV...as far as cumulative stats go he still has an underwhelming case.

You look at guys like Thomas, Bagwell...Piazza...that began their careers after Edgar and still have better cumulative totals and are almost equal in their averages...

Sorry Edgar...he's a great hitter but he's not a HOF'er...and it takes quite a bit of contriving an argument, a very complex argument, to make him into 1 IMO.

Check again, there is only one eligible player ahead of Edgar Martinez on the all-time OBP list, and that's Max Bishop. Don't forget, 10 seasons. I think we can all agree that Max Bishop does not compare to Edgar Martinez.

Another thing, I wasn't aware that HOFers must have multiple top 20 all-time finishes. Sorry Klein and Averill and you others, you are not worthy of the hall.

If you want to talk about cumulative totals, let's look at the whole picture. Only six players have a career .300 BA, .400 OBP, 1000 walks, 300 HR, and 500 doubles. The other five are Musial, Hornsby, Ruth, Gehrig, and Williams. Now, I know you can say that those 5 are so far ahead of Edgar in those categories that it isn't a fair comparison, but tell me, where are the other guys who have those numbers? Where are they? Parker didn't do it. Staub certainly didn't do it. Bagwell, Thomas, Piazza, and Bonds haven't done it. Only those six have done it, and that is something. Enough of my rambling, I still say Papi is a HoFer.

tearforamariner

08-10-2004, 01:47 PM

Actually, if Edgar played any other position, I'm not sure he'd be in the hall. Only 1 of his 10 most similar players are in the Hall, and only 1/2 of the others on there have a real shot at making it.

As for DH's better than Edgar, Paul Molitor beats him in every counting category except Home Runs.

I believe the whole, "Similiar players" things is a bit bogus, but if you want to go that way, his most similiar player is in the HoF. And as Chance said before, none of his similiar players are that similiar look at the numbers, not just the names.

And as Leece said, Molitor does not lead Edgar in every counting category as a DH. In fact, it's the other way around. Now, if Edgar had stayed at 3B and put up the numbers he did, he would most certainly be a HOFer. Compare his numbers to other HOF third basemen.

The Dude

08-10-2004, 02:57 PM

Actually, Molitor does lead Edgar in every counting category besides home runs. Molitor spent more time at Dh than any other position, so he is a DH, thus all his stats fall under DH in a comparison vs another DH.

DoubleX

08-10-2004, 03:12 PM

Now, if Edgar had stayed at 3B and put up the numbers he did, he would most certainly be a HOFer. Compare his numbers to other HOF third basemen.

But sadly the fact remains that Edgar didn't stay at 3B. His only job was to be a good hitter. Which he was. But during his career there were several positional players that were at least almost as good as Edgar, so if Edgar or any DH for that matter can't excel at hitting more than the better hitting positional players, than I can't see how we can reward his one-dimensional career with the hall of fame. Sure he was good at that one-dimension, but there were/are several multi-dimensional players that were at or around Edgar's level in hitting dimension.

leecemark

08-10-2004, 03:31 PM

--Dudecar, the records for position stats only include what a player accomplished while playing that position. That is the primary reason that Mike Piazza resisted the move to firstbase until this year. He wanted to break Fisk's HR record for catchers and only got that done this year. The Mariner's announcers have made a big production out of each DH counting stat record Martinez has passed in the last two years, most of them Molitor's. At this point I'm pretty sure Edgar owns all the DH specific records except SB.
--Personnally I don't care who holds the records for that "position". It was never really intended to be a career for anyone. When it was introduced it was promoted as a way for aging stars to squeeze in an extra year or two. Initially it was used that way or on some teams to rotate bench guys in and keep people fresh. I found that less a violation of the game than the current trend of lead footed, one dimensional and/or injury prone players choosing or having it chosen for them as a career path.
--Molitor actually played the field and did so reasonably well for half his career and was a fine baserunner even after moving to DH. Obviously he wouldn't have lasted long enough to make the Hall of Fame without the DH, but I've no real complaint with him making it the way he did. I wouldn't object to Edgar making it either, even though I personally couldn't give him my vote (if I had one). I think voters have a right , even obligation, to hold DH's to the highest possible hitting standard to earn their vote. They have to be at least a little bit better hitter than the worst fielding 1B or LF Hall of Fame candidate to qualify for me. There are enough hitters from this era clearly or at least argueably better that I have to say no to Edgar.

The Dude

08-10-2004, 03:44 PM

Yes, if you want to split up their stats by position, then go ahead. IMHO, they're both DH's, and all of their stats should be counted as such.

I wouldn't mind if He got in, but I wouldn't care if he didn't. I think the next for-sure DH that will go into the HOF, is Frank Thomas. He's les than 40 games away from playing more DH than 1B, and unless he calls it quits after this season, I think he'll easily take the spot as the greatest DH in history.

leecemark

08-10-2004, 03:56 PM

...and even when Thomas was playing first he was basically a DH who happened to be carrying a glove around.
--I think most of us can agree Thomas will be the best DH of all time when/if we class him that way. He seems a pretty good bet to replace Edgar as the slowest, most injury prone star in baseball once Martinez retires too. That should cement the "honor" for him.
--Just for the record though, I DO think Thomas is a Hall of Famer even if he is one dimensional. His peak was significantly higher than Martinez and he is going to end up with much better counting stats. He is far enough over the line as a hitter for me to overlook all the things he can't (or won't) do.

pretorius

08-10-2004, 04:14 PM

I do not look at the DH position as an equal position. If Ted Williams or Babe Ruth played DH for basically their entire career would I vote them in? Yes because they were that phenomenal of hitters. Edgar isnt Ted Williams or Babe Ruth and for being a DH that is about what you have to be for me to think you are hall worthy. My rationale is this. Would Edgar be in the hall if he would have played 3rd base his whole career? I simply dont think he would. I also do not think he would have played past 36. Unlike relief pitchers a DH is a game anomaly. It shouldnt exist and it has no reason to exist except for greed. I am not punishing the Paul Moliters or Edgar Martinez's but they are allowed to play on an exemption. Its like playing golf with a golf cart or hitting from the ladies tee. As someone who played baseball the degree of difficulty between playing the field and batting and simply batting is huge. Even if you only do play first base.

I think Bill Mazeroski, Aparicio and Ozzie Smith are light years ahead of the Edgar's and Molitor's when it boils down to hall voting. I will take exceptional defense and solid batting over exceptional batting and zero defense anyday. I will also take the player who is durable enough to do both.

TXRangerFan

08-10-2004, 08:57 PM

Another thing, I wasn't aware that HOFers must have multiple top 20 all-time finishes. Sorry Klein and Averill and you others, you are not worthy of the hall.

They don't. There is no hard and fast rule, there are a lot of factors, but I bet most of the strong candidates do.

And I'd be willing to bet that Chuck Klein at the time of his retirement was in the top 20 all time in 3 or 4 different categories. On top of that he set a ton of records and won a triple crown.

As for Averill...well I think he's a weak HOF'er. Very weak, in fact if he was retiring today I doubt he would make it into the HOF, but because of the fact that he played a key defensive OF position, and the fact that he only really played what amounted to about 12 years, yet still put up numbers comparable to Edgar...I think he'd probably have a better case.

In any case...the two examples you just listed, I believe both had to wait some 30 years before getting in by the vet commitee...not exactly a strong argument in Edgar's favor.

If you plunked Edgar down 60-70 years ago he probably would have a better case...but he didn't play 60 or 70 years ago.

If you want to talk about cumulative totals, let's look at the whole picture. Only six players have a career .300 BA, .400 OBP, 1000 walks, 300 HR, and 500 doubles. The other five are Musial, Hornsby, Ruth, Gehrig, and Williams.Now, I know you can say that those 5 are so far ahead of Edgar in those categories that it isn't a fair comparison, but tell me, where are the other guys who have those numbers?

I don't know...why didn't Edgar hit as many HR as Kingman?

You see he doesn't have those guys numbers...what he has is their averages without their cumulative totals, or anything near them, backing him up.

What's more impressive without going into detail?

A 300% avg?

Or 40 homers?

I think picking blind most would say the 40 homers are more valuable. You'd have to see the real numbers behind that 300 AVG to judge it's value...40 homers is going to be pretty valuable no matter what other numbers go along with it.

There's a difference there...Edgar just isn't complete. I don't know any other way to explain it...and he doesn't have any excuse for not being complete. In fact he has less of an excuse than most positional players.

Enough of my rambling, I still say Papi is a HoFer.

To each their own and Edgar might get elected. As a RangerFan I respect Edgar, and I got to feel the brunt and see the bulk of his averages first hand...I'd take him on my team. But he just doesn't have the all around numbers to be a HOF'er from this era...IMO.

He's strong in the averages...which I consider to be secondary statistics...but he is very weak in the cumulative totals, which I consider to the be primary statistics, to give those averages more weight.

The best thing he's got going for him IMO is that he was a doubles hitting freak...but even his career mark in that area is underwhelming by todays standards.

Strong averages, weak cumulative totals, no cumulative benchmarks...He is very much in the Kirby Puckett mold of HOF'er...only he played in more of an offensive era than Puckett...he played longer than Puckett, without putting up noticiably better numbers, he wasn't the defensive player Puckett was, he didn't have his career ripped from him prematurely by a debilitating injury that made it impossible to play like Puckett and he lacks the memorable WS plays of Puckett.

If it makes you feel any better...I wouldn't have voted for Puckett or Averill either.

Sandman

08-11-2004, 03:39 PM

I haven't read everything in this thread, but I'm going to weigh in on the issue:

Numbers aside for a minute, I think the Hall should be reserved for the legends; the ball players that give you chills when you see old highlights, the ones your grandfather told you about, and the ball players you will tell your grandchildren about, "I actually watched this guy play all of the time back in 2004, he was amazing."; maybe a little leeway here to make up for underrated guys, like Rafael Palmeiro (one of the greats, just never really talked about). I can't see myself talking about Edgar Martinez as a legend. If I was asked 20 years from now about Edgar Martinez, my first reaction would be 'Who?'. While he was a stand up guy and a good player throughout his career, I just don't think he's HOF material. This is why guys like Killebrew and Jackson are in the Hall of Fame.

Now for the numbers game. If you let him in, then there are a ton of other players that should follow. His stats are good, but not great or legendary. He's always been a good (not great) player throughout his career, and had 1 spectacular season in 2000. He's never been the best player at his position (hitter), and he's really only had one stellar season.

He is the best at his position because he is the only one at his position. There are no other full time DHs in the league, how can another expect to hold DH records? On top of that, he doesn't play a position; he's a designated hitter, his job on the baseball field is to hit; has he done his job on the level as some of the greatest of all time? No. Has he done his job on the level of some of the greatest of the last decade? No. Not to take anything away from Edgar, he's been good, but he's never really been one of the best.

If you let Edgar Martinez in, there are plenty of other guys that should follow, like Tino Martinez, Andres Galarraga, Mo Vaughn or Ellis Burks, plenty of other guys that shouldn't be in. The Hall of Fame is reserved for All-Time Greats, Edgar Martinez is not an all-time great.

micsmith

08-11-2004, 04:55 PM

If we discount hitters who play the DH (and thus only play half the game) should we also now discount AL pitchers who no longer hit because they're only playing half of the game?

csh19792001

08-11-2004, 04:55 PM

Edgartohof

08-12-2004, 12:42 AM

I just found a wonderfully hilarious side note in the newspaper today about Edgar's career, so here it is:

1996
"...Martinez suffers four cracked ribs...The injury forces Martinez, playing third base for the only time all year, to mist 21 games, snapping his club-record streak of 293 consecutive games played"

For a man who never takes the field, that is a pretty impressive (or funny, whatever way you want to look at it) feat.

birtelcom

08-12-2004, 07:03 PM

Bill James' Win Shares is a very useful tool to evaluate questions such as Edgar's contribution compared to other hitters who played in the field. A player receives added Win Shares if he plays the field better than a marginal Triple AAA call-up would play it, and many more Win Shares if he plays a diffficult posititon very well. A player gets zero additional Win Shares if doesn't play the field at all. A DH is not artificially penalized, he simply isn't given any credit for something he doesn't do. To say it another way, a hitter who is identical to Edgar in every way except that he plays a position in the field will have more Win Shares than Edgar -- how many more depends on the position he plays and the quality of his fielding.

Edgar has about 302 Win Shares in his career through August 1 of this year, with about 8 weeks left before retirement. That puts him in the range of fine players who are not quite at the BBWAA election level: Al Oliver, Jim Wynn, Bobby Bonds, Harold Baines, Ken Singleton. There are some players at the 300 Win Share level who have been elected: Eckersley, Maranville, Luis Aparicio -- but it's not easy. Edgar would have accumulated more Win shares, and might have been much more solid a BBWAA HOF candidate if, as some people in this thread have pointed out, the Mariners had seen his talent earlier and made him a regular before he was 27.

Win Shares info comes from Bill James book, from hardballtimes.com, baseballgraphs.com and baseballtruth.com. I haven't seen the new Total Baseball but I hear it has Win Shares by player as well.

Edgartohof

08-18-2004, 02:59 PM

Seeing as this thread is about my namesake, I have to keep it alive.

I would just like to note that between 1995-2002, Edgar Martinez had 490 RCAA, 2nd out of active players only to Barry Bonds.

He is also 12th all time in RCAA in the AL, beating out Nap Lajoie, George Brett, and Harry Heilmann

Also, there are only 43 players who have at least 3 of the following 7 stats
(.312 Avg, .415 OBP, .515 Slg, 300HR, 500 2B, 1250 BB, and OPS+ 150)

there are 12 active players, 9 of whom only match with 3 or 4 of them

4 retired players are not in the hall. Of them, Mark Mcgwire and Wade Boggs are still waiting to be voted on (both are very likely to get in), Joe Jackson is ineligible, and finally Dick Allen who only has 3 (HR, BB, and OPS+)

The only active players with 6+ of these stats, are Edgar Martinez, Barry Bonds, and Frank Thomas, and only Edgar has all 7.

Edgar is one of only 5 players all time who match in ALL 7 categories, alongside the likes of: Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Lou Gherig, and Stan Musial.

Sandman

08-18-2004, 04:58 PM

Ok, but...

What the heck are these stats you're throwing at us?

Cougar

08-18-2004, 07:30 PM

Ok, but...

What the heck are these stats you're throwing at us?

Exactly.

RCAA/RSAA is so much quackery.

Good-Now

08-25-2004, 02:18 AM

Edgar Martinez is probably one of the most amazing ballplayers i have ever seen play the game It does not matter what position he plays he is 41 years old and for about the first 7 years he didnt play full time DH he was out there on the field as a 3B or a 1B u [edit]. He has gotten older and has even played the field as late as 2001 he was even given the choice to play the field more this year now that Bucky Jacobson has been brought to see waht he can do as DH, and was up to the challenge of playing 1B but Bob Melvin didnt want to put Edgar out there this late in his career and make a mistake when he is rusty in the position. Edgar is the best offencive player ever and that is the bottom line so [edit]

Captain Cold Nose

08-25-2004, 05:31 AM

Edgar is the best offencive player ever and that is the bottom line so [edit]
Let's not get carried away here.

leecemark

08-25-2004, 07:00 AM

--Edgar Martinez was a regular in the field for 3 seasons, not 7. He did play one game at firstbase in 2001. More accurately he played part of one game. In an attempt to get him in the lineup in an NL park he was inserted at 1st and managed to hurt himself bad enough to go on the DL. He would have been out of the game 5 years ago if the DH didn't exist. And please refrain from obsenities. We try and maintain a more civil (and honest) level of discussion at BBF.

Sandman

08-25-2004, 01:24 PM

Let's not get carried away here.
In more ways than one :p

Edgartohof

08-25-2004, 01:45 PM

RCAA/RSAA is so much quackery.

Except if I were using these stats and talking about babe ruth or any non-DH, you would think them normal and fine.

Sandman

08-25-2004, 01:53 PM

Except if I were using these stats and talking about babe ruth or any non-DH, you would think them normal and fine.
Not at all, I'd still question the stat - - - I don't know what the heck it is. You could add this number, multiply by this one and divide by this one and get whatever number you want. For example, Todd Zeile has a 4.0 TNM, higher than any slugger in the league :clapping

improbus

08-25-2004, 02:15 PM

A few slightly random thoughts on Edgar, and HOF voting. First, he was NEVER the best player on his team, which nearly every guy elected to the hall has at one time or another been (and many others who haven't yet, think Ryne Sandberg, Dale Murphy, and the list goes on.) Now I admit that may not be his fault, but still to be the third, fourth, or even fifth best player on a team that does not win or even make it to the WS is tough for me to swallow. Also, I could care less that he is a DH. We shouldn't be electing guys to the hall simply because they happened to be the best at that position at that given time, because if so there would be a whole lot more 3B, and let's be honest, DH has not attracted HOF material over the years, and the guys who are HOF's most likely would already have been HOF's. If Edgar is going to be in the hall, then he needs to stack up to other HOF's, not just other DH's. Are we ready to elect the best utility infielder of all time (Jose Oquendo...), or middle reliever just because they were the best at what they did? Also, I think we might be able to come up with 10 American Leaguers non-pitchers who should be in the Hall before Edgar, and do we think the 11th best position player of a decade should be in the hall. I would put ARod, Grif, Palmeiro, Frank Thomas, Manny, Jeter, Juan Gonzalez, Pudge, Robby Alomar, maybe Nomar above Edgar, and then you start to get to the guys around Edgar, like Albert Belle, Delgado, Paul O'Neill, Bernie Williams, Giambi, Thome, Kenny Lofton, even Mo Vaughn, all of whom had comparable careers to Edgar. And remember, that is just the American League, without the pitchers (Add RJ, Pedro, Clemens to the list.) The most players I've seen elected in a single year since 1990 is 3, both in '91 and '99. So, in order to put Edgar in the Hall, someone is probably going to have to get bumped out, and who would that be? Junior? Robby Alomar? Jeter? Pudge? I just don't think that it will happen for Edgar. Put it this way, if people question whether Rafael Palmeiro and Fred McGriff are HOF's, both of whom have superior numbers over Egdar, how can he get in?

tearforamariner

08-27-2004, 10:38 PM

Mariano Rivera

08-28-2004, 11:05 PM

Sandman

08-29-2004, 08:03 AM

If Don Mattingly can't get in then Edgar Martinez should not get in.
I think that's one of the biggest problems with letting Edgar in. He's not one of the best of all time, and he wouldn't even be one of the best of the all-time snubs.

Edgartohof

08-29-2004, 12:01 PM

If Don Mattingly can't get in then Edgar Martinez should not get in.

I would take Martinez over Mattingly any day.

pretorius

08-29-2004, 12:47 PM

My problem is this. Is Edgar Martinez a Ted Williams, Babe Ruth or Ty Cobb? No. This is exactly what he would have to be to deserve in the hall. What he is doing is playing golf from the ladies tee or with a golf cart. He only plays half the game and it has been that way for most of his career. He has been allowed to play off an exemption. If he would have been a regular his whole career he would have never seen the 2000's. The only way I can tolerate a full time DH in the hall is if he is the greatest hitter of his generation. Edgar isnt. The DH is a greed position. It is unique amongst sports. It is a position that doesnt serve a needed purpose. It is unfair. It is the same reason that in sports like Diving you incorporate difficulty. You cannot hold a DH to standards set by full-time players. He is a great guy but he does not belong.

tearforamariner

08-29-2004, 09:58 PM

The media says this guy is a Hall of Famer, but I don't think of Edgar Martinez as a Hall of Famer. If he had 500 homers or 3,000 hits I would say yes, but he doesn't have either so I would say no. If Don Mattingly can't get in then Edgar Martinez should not get in.

But see, Chuck Klien, Earl Averill, and Duke Snider are all in the Hall of Fame, and all of them are closer to the kind of player that Edgar Martinez is than Mattingly.

Edgartohof

09-18-2004, 12:44 AM

Just wanted to note that Edgar got his 1,000th RBI as a DH tonight.

J W

09-18-2004, 01:01 PM

But see, Chuck Klien, Earl Averill, and Duke Snider are all in the Hall of Fame, and all of them are closer to the kind of player that Edgar Martinez is than Mattingly.

Not sure I understand concerning Averill and Snider... both of them were very accomplished CFers. You probably mean offensively, they're closer.

leecemark

10-02-2004, 11:19 PM

Edgartohof

10-03-2004, 12:16 AM

--At tonight's retirement ceremony for Edgar Martinez Bud Selig was on hand and announced the the award for best DH will now be called the Edgar Martinez Award. Of course, this doesn't change his credentials one bit but I wonder if it doesn't enhance his chances of being elected to the Hall of Fame. One could argue this is MLB's official endorsement of Edgar as an all time great (or certainly the greatest DH anyway).
--In some ways this is a greater honor than making the Hall of Fame will be when/if he gets there. If he should get elected that will be the last time anyone would really have reason to mention him. This way his name will be brought up every season till the end of time (or baseball) when the award is given out.
--Anyone think this helps his chances? Any of his supporters agree this might be a worthy substitute for the honor of being elected to Coopertown?

Having an award that is handed out every year, named after him is a fairly good indicator of his chances at Cooperstown. Like it or not, Edgar was just endorsed by the MLB (or as much as Bud Selig can represent it). And while Buddy Boy ain't my favorite person, I will accept the endorsement, and anything that will come with it.

And while you may never talk about him again, but his induction, will only give me more to talk about. Fans from other teams may not appreciate him as much as we do (and we are the greatest fan's in baseball - because at least 7-8 people said that tonight at Edgar's celebration :laugh ), but for Mariner's fans everywhere, we will always keep a special place in our hearts for him.

On a more personal note, if it were not for my male chauvenist machismo, I would have been bawling my eyes out during the ceremony :laugh