Hall of Fame Votes

thewupk said:
Their cases are really similiar. Face of a team in the 80s, MVP winners, multiple GG and AS selections. Mid 40 WAR guys. Both of their teams went on to become dynasties right after they fell off and weren't on the team anymore.
Click to expand...

I won't disagree that they're similar. Both had like intense peaks and lots of meh around them with a few high quality years. For Mattingly it was 23-26 Still being good through 28 before falling but his peak was kind of stopping at 26 beofre a slip before a fall. Murph was 24-29 but his 25 season was injury heavy and kind of bad.

I'm just giving Murphy the overall edge. 1 more MVP and 4 more rWAR is a big bonus to Murphy.

We can both be right, Murphy had a better peak, and they're similar.
 
zitothebrave said:
I won't disagree that they're similar. Both had like intense peaks and lots of meh around them with a few high quality years. For Mattingly it was 23-26 Still being good through 28 before falling but his peak was kind of stopping at 26 beofre a slip before a fall. Murph was 24-29 but his 25 season was injury heavy and kind of bad.

I'm just giving Murphy the overall edge. 1 more MVP and 4 more rWAR is a big bonus to Murphy.

We can both be right, Murphy had a better peak, and they're similar.
Click to expand...

Sure. Murph had a better peak. But the argument is that if Murphy had played in New York he would have been an easy HOFer. I think Mattingly disproves that. Murphy wasn't so much better than him that him being in a bigger market would have mattered. The much more important issue is each player only went to the playoffs once. Had either player been on good teams that likely would have put them over.
 
thewupk said:
Sure. Murph had a better peak. But the argument is that if Murphy had played in New York he would have been an easy HOFer. I think Mattingly disproves that. Murphy wasn't so much better than him that him being in a bigger market would have mattered. The much more important issue is each player only went to the playoffs once. Had either player been on good teams that likely would have put them over.
Click to expand...

I think Murphy being in CF, the position of DiMaggio and Mantle, versus at 1B would've given him extra juice as well. And at the time Murph was considered an elite defender in CF, before we had metrics to show otherwise.
 
Not to Beltran, Abreu and Buehler. I don't think any of them should be close.

Feel about the same about Utley.

The steroid guys are obvious yes's but for the steroids.

I am unsympathetic to their plight.
 
thewupk said:
Sure. Murph had a better peak. But the argument is that if Murphy had played in New York he would have been an easy HOFer. I think Mattingly disproves that. Murphy wasn't so much better than him that him being in a bigger market would have mattered. The much more important issue is each player only went to the playoffs once. Had either player been on good teams that likely would have put them over.
Click to expand...

For me, I think it's somewhat unfair that short career pitchers get in sometimes and position players do not.

I feel like Murphy was better than his peers that got in, but they held on longer to help counting stats.
 
Andruw is +7 from known ballots so far.

Beltran has made the biggest improvement so far at +13.

Wagner is +6 right now and only missed getting in by 5 votes last year.

CC and Ichiro both remain super high (Ichiro is at 100%).

Still looks to be the CC, Ichiro, and Wagner show. Beltran may squeeze in but he probablly needs another year.

I feel like Andruw is going to go the Wagner route and it will take year 10 to get him in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top