Tony Pena

[Cowtipper]

Tony Pena played 18 years in the big leagues, hitting .260 in 1988 games. He didn't have stellar offensive stats, however he was still a five-time All Star and a four time Gold Glove award winner.

He also had a stellar postseason career, hitting .338 in 71 playoff at-bats.

His 1,950 games behind the plate is fourth most among catchers, and he played at least 130 games in a season 10 times.

The Baseball Page ranks Pena as the 34th best catcher of all time. He received two votes for the Hall of Fame in 2003.

None of the players he is most similar to statistically are in the Hall of Fame. The players he is similar to are Leo Cardenas, Mike Bordick, Bob Boone, Phil Garner, Greg Gagne, Granny Hamner, Brad Ausmus, Jim Sundberg, Chris Speiers and Cookie Rojas.

What is your opinion on good ol' Tony Pena? Should he be in the Hall?

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

Absolutely, let's put a guy with a career .260 BA / .673 OPS / 84 OPS+ & .403 OWP into the HOF. Why didn't I think of nominating him??

Your killing us here Cowtipper :hp

You do know this is a Hall of Fame discussion forum, don't you?

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

And in case anybody is wondering, Tony Pena received 2 votes, or 0.4% of the vote in his only year on the ballot, 2003. So naturally we should be debating on whether he belongs in the HOF, because the voters have it so wrong, don't they?

[Fuzzy Bear]

The question here is whether or not Tony Pena would be the worst catcher in the HOF.

I think he would. I think Pena is not the player Rick Ferrell or Ray Schalk were. Even Schalk had a higher OWP, and both, IMO were better on defense. Ferrell's OWP was .100 higher than Pena's.

Pena's only qualification was that he broke Al Lopez' career mark of 1,918 games caught. The problems with that as a qualification as (A) Lopez' record was broken by Bob Boone before Pena had a shot at it, and (B) Lopez is in the HOF as a manager, not as a catcher.

[Cowtipper]

Absolutely, let's put a guy with a career .260 BA / .673 OPS / 84 OPS+ & .403 OWP into the HOF. Why didn't I think of nominating him??

Your killing us here Cowtipper :hp

You do know this is a Hall of Fame discussion forum, don't you?
You do know that people support Charlie Bennett who hit .256, don't you?

[Mike90]

Reaching a bit here Cowtipper? Well, Pena did win 4 gold gloves and was named to 5 all-star teams.

[henrich]

I voted no. His place is 33rd all-time at his position 6353 for me. He's behind Darryl Porter and Gus Mancuso and ahead of Manny Sanguillen and Jimmie Wilson. Schalk I have at 5699 41st all-time and Ferrell 58th all-time and coming in at 5045.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Reaching a bit here Cowtipper? Well, Pena did win 4 gold gloves and was named to 5 all-star teams.

The selection of HOF catchers has been an EXTREMELY subjective practice. When one gets beyond the obvious candidates, the rest become subjective.

Look at the catchers that aren't the "clear-cut" choices. Ferrell. Schalk. Bresnahan. Lombardi. These guys are in, while comparable players are out.

Something made these guys "special", at least to the VC. Why is Schalk in, but not Bob Boone? Why is Ferrell in, but not Sherm Lollar? Why is Lombardi in, but not Ted Simmons? Why is Bresnahan in, but not Wally Schang?

There are reasons why the guys in are in, while the guys out are out. Ferrell was an early All-Star. Schalk was one of the very first truly full-time catchers who played for a storied team (plus, he was one of the Clean Sox). Bresnahan invented the shin guard. Lombardi won a batting title, and had a BA over .300, plus he was colorful (if flaky). Pena has nothing to particularly recommend him as "special", nor does he have a remarkable peak, however short.

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

You do know that people support Charlie Bennett who hit .256, don't you?

Charlie Bennett was a MUCH better offensive player (.596 OWP / 118 OPS+). Tony Pena was such an offensive liability, that even his excellent defensive leaves him light years away. Now, if he could have duplicated his 'peak' (I use that term half tongue-in-cheek) of 1982-1986 for another 8 years, and continued his strong GG caliber defensive for almost as long, then perhaps he'd be in the discussion. As it was, he dropped off the table offensively starting in 1987 and never recovered. Furthermore, he only won 1 GG after 1985 so apparently he wasn't the premier fielding catcher either.

Anyways, if you wanted to increase to the HOF to 1200+ players, Tony Pena would be your guy.

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

Pena has nothing to particularly recommend him as "special", nor does he have a remarkable peak, however short.

Tony Pena did have something special Fuzzy Bear. He was the only catcher I ever saw who extended his leg fully-stretched while in the crouch.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Tony Pena did have something special Fuzzy Bear. He was the only catcher I ever saw who extended his leg fully-stretched while in the crouch.

That was special enough to get him a thread here. It wasn't special enough to make him a remotely serious candidate. Nor was his aborted managerial career.

Pena did have a long career. That's remarkable. I doubt, however, that the VC will find that special enough; Pena was "one and done" on the HOF ballot.

[Cougar]

His longevity and defense are not trivial, and he was OK with the bat for a few years, but he's pretty far back in the pack.

[KCGHOST]

This guy isn't near as good as Sundberg and we bounced him, too.

[Greg Maddux's Biggest Fan]

You know you have to be a terrible hitter when you post the numbers Pena did as a righthanded batter at Fenway! I don't know why he fell off a cliff offensively after 1986, but he could be counted on to be one of the 10 worst offensive fulltime regulars in any given year after that period.