TSB 2008 MLB Hall of Fame poll

[cmaleski2]

As for Mattingly, people overlook defense way too much.

The problem is, even if I use Mattingly's fielding as the edge he needs to get in, when I compare him to other 'great fielding 1Bs of their era', his offensive numbers come up short every time.

Steve Garvey 4 time gold glover, 1 time NL MVP - More HRs and RBIs than Mattingly, .294 career hitter. Not in the Hall

Cecil Cooper - 2 time gold glover, More HRs and RBIs than Mattingly, .298 career hitter, Not in the Hall

George Scott - 8 time Gold glover, More HRs, 40 fewer RBIs than Mattingly, crummy .268 career hitter, Not in the Hall

Keith Hernandez - 11 time Gold glover, 60 fewer HRs, 20 fewer RBIs, career .296 hitter, not in the Hall

Mark Grace - 4 time gold glover, 50 less HRs, 50 more RBIs, career .303 hitter, not in Hall (won't be close)

They were all good defensive first baseman too. Career numbers, on par with Mattingly or better totals.

That's Mattingly's biggest problem, none of his numbers stand out as 'great' even in his era. You can always find other 1Bs who played the same time Mattingly did that ended up with better career numbers. Mattingly's gold gloves are nice, and yeah, he deserved them. His 5 years of offensive greatness is a major plus too. But none of that make him far and away the best overall first baseman of his era. He was the best for 5 years of a 14 year career. Those other 8 'full' seasons make you think Mark Grace was a HoF candidate.

Just not enough overall numbers for Mattingly, his defense at 1B can't get him in, its not considered a key defensive position (which is a crock to me, but its reality to many).

[BulaJacket]

Originally Posted by cmaleski2

Steve Garvey 4 time gold glover, 1 time NL MVP - More HRs and RBIs than Mattingly, .294 career hitter. Not in the Hall

Cecil Cooper - 2 time gold glover, More HRs and RBIs than Mattingly, .298 career hitter, Not in the Hall

George Scott - 8 time Gold glover, More HRs, 40 fewer RBIs than Mattingly, crummy .268 career hitter, Not in the Hall

Keith Hernandez - 11 time Gold glover, 60 fewer HRs, 20 fewer RBIs, career .296 hitter, not in the Hall

Mark Grace - 4 time gold glover, 50 less HRs, 50 more RBIs, career .303 hitter, not in Hall (won't be close)

They were all good defensive first baseman too. Career numbers, on par with Mattingly or better totals.

That's Mattingly's biggest problem, none of his numbers stand out as 'great' even in his era. You can always find other 1Bs who played the same time Mattingly did that ended up with better career numbers. Mattingly's gold gloves are nice, and yeah, he deserved them. His 5 years of offensive greatness is a major plus too. But none of that make him far and away the best overall first baseman of his era. He was the best for 5 years of a 14 year career. Those other 8 'full' seasons make you think Mark Grace was a HoF candidate.

Just not enough overall numbers for Mattingly, his defense at 1B can't get him in, its not considered a key defensive position (which is a crock to me, but its reality to many).

FTR, I think some of the above should probably be in the Hall as well, mainly Garvey.

[Punzil]

Gossage and Morris.

[KingBrodeur]

Originally Posted by SteeleRED

McGwire? I've made my feelings clear in other threads about the villification of players "on the juice", and McGwire is unfairly villified in this because it wasn't illegal during part of his career. And he admitted past andro use, which is an anabolic steroid! But they didn't make him hit 70 HRs, or 58 HRs, or any HRs. Skill did! That he's not in the Hall is its own shame, and lends to its ever-growing lack of credibility.

As mentioned in other threads Steroids do help you hit home runs, and it has nothing to do with the added strength.


But as for the ever-growing lack of credibility, on the contrary, the MLB Hall has some of the most credibility of any Hall because they are so choosy. You need to have a career that is above and beyond others to be there, not just a great career. You have to have earned the right to be there.

There are other professional sports who put you in just based on great or even very very good careers, and as such, that takes away credibility.

[ZeRo4]

Wow. Seems like they're just trying to put people in the hall of fame...

Mark Mcguire?

But people are boycotting Bonds.

Absolutely ridiculous.

[TestSubjekt]

It doesn't look like we'll be inducting anyone this year based on the early numbers.

The top vote getters are Andre Dawson and Rich Gossage named on only 26 of the 47 ballots cast thus far for a non-HOF calibre 55.32%.

[slagonia]

Notice Mattingly is one of the top vote-getters in this and any other fan poll, yet he'll be lucky to get his 5% in the real one. When are the writers going to catch up to what we already know?

[TyPenn613]

One of these times we should probably lower the bar a little bit. It appears some the voting is always going to be skewed this way simply because of people who put in one vote, and that vote is for Chuck Finley.

[RangerFan09]

Maybe we should do 50%

[broadwayjoe2]

Originally Posted by slagonia

Notice Mattingly is one of the top vote-getters in this and any other fan poll, yet he'll be lucky to get his 5% in the real one. When are the writers going to catch up to what we already know?

Yes... because you want reactionary fans voting for the HOF.