Edgar H.O.F Thread

[SeattleCoug]

Bob Nightengale didn't vote for Edgar. What a stunner from the guy who wanted to rename the DH award the David Ortiz award.

 

[seahawksfan234]

Edgar is currently sitting at 77.1%.

Really gonna come down to the wire.

 

[SeattleCoug]

Yea not this year, its looking like it might not even be that close

 

[wazzu31]

1) From the timeframe that's been claimed, Bonds started roiding after the 1999 season when he was hurt, so not sure why you're using only 1990-1996

2) Every defensive metric out there would say you're wrong about saying Bonds was Johnny Damon defensively

3) Like your homerish arguments for Edgar, you're using hypotheticals with nothing to back it up...luckily, we have baserunning stats to quantify these types of things, and there's nothing to suggest that Griffey was better at scoring while on base....for starters, Bonds had more instances of scoring from 1st on a double and scoring from 2nd on a single than Griffey in the '90s...

Barry Bonds Batting Stats | Baseball-Reference.com
Ken Griffey Batting Stats | Baseball-Reference.com

Because I believe Bonds started around 96 with the pressure and him switching his game. Obviously no proof, but I'd put my money on he started before 99 and most likely in 95-96 when players were encouraged to take steroids.

I'm cool with every defensively metric saying I'm wrong, except I'm not. Bonds was Johnny Damon with a name. Johnny Damon could've thrown out Sid Bream.

Keep throwing out metrics which have nothing to do with my argument. Barry Bonds would not have scored from first like Griffey did, of course overall numbers would show Bonds or a ton of players would've scored more. Griffey's game wasn't to give it 100% of all the time, it's not complicated nor is it complicated that Frank Thomas would've been a car salesman if he had to deal with two bum knees and an essentially a lazy eye.

 

[StanMarsh51]

I'm cool with every defensively metric saying I'm wrong, except I'm not. Bonds was Johnny Damon with a name. Johnny Damon could've thrown out Sid Bream.

Keep throwing out metrics which have nothing to do with my argument. Barry Bonds would not have scored from first like Griffey did, of course overall numbers would show Bonds or a ton of players would've scored more. Griffey's game wasn't to give it 100% of all the time, it's not complicated nor is it complicated that Frank Thomas would've been a car salesman if he had to deal with two bum knees and an essentially a lazy eye.

So you dismiss every stat that goes against the Mariner player and base everything on a personal opinion that's clearly biased towards the team you root for...


-"Edgar was the best hitter of the '90s, because I said so and not the stats"
-"Bonds was not a good fielder, because I said so, and not the stats"
-"Bonds was not as good a runner a Griffey, beause I said so, and not the stats"



Seems reliable...

 

[NWinAZ]

Pretty cool

Steven Souza Jr.Verified account @SouzaJr
Dear @TBTimes_Rays, You are hereby on probation from interviews until my childhood hero, Edgar Martinez is rightfully voted in to the Hall Of Fame. This may seem unprofessional and unfair, but I say to you “My oh My”.…

 

[wazzu31]

So you dismiss every stat that goes against the Mariner player and base everything on a personal opinion that's clearly biased towards the team you root for...


-"Edgar was the best hitter of the '90s, because I said so and not the stats"
-"Bonds was not a good fielder, because I said so, and not the stats"
-"Bonds was not as good a runner a Griffey, beause I said so, and not the stats"



Seems reliable...

If I said Edgar was the best hitter of the 90's, then my bad. It was meant to be best RH hitter of the 90's. So my bad.

I never Bonds wasn't a good fielder. Johnny Damon was a good fielder too. Not sure why you think it's a slam. Bonds isn't in Griffey's league defensively. I conceded there is an argument about them offensively in which I'd give Bonds the slight edge but any metric that puts Bonds in his category defensively isn't a legitimate "metric"

I'm not sure of you are trolling or not but not once did I say Griffey was a better baserunner. I stated Bonds was not as fast as Junior and could not have made it from 1st to home like Griffey did on Edgar's double.

 

[wazzu31]

Pretty cool

Steven Souza Jr.Verified account @SouzaJr
Dear @TBTimes_Rays, You are hereby on probation from interviews until my childhood hero, Edgar Martinez is rightfully voted in to the Hall Of Fame. This may seem unprofessional and unfair, but I say to you “My oh My”.…

Normally I'd say that's a shame like when the Mariners weren't talking to LaRue but some of these excuses are ridiculous. The baseball writer in Boston left him off because he was never one of the best two players on his team and he wasn't a popular attraction. It's like damn, his bad he played with two of the best players in history and Randy ended up being the most dominant pitcher of the era.

 

[SeattleCoug]

Normally I'd say that's a shame like when the Mariners weren't talking to LaRue but some of these excuses are ridiculous. The baseball writer in Boston left him off because he was never one of the best two players on his team and he wasn't a popular attraction. It's like damn, his bad he played with two of the best players in history and Randy ended up being the most dominant pitcher of the era.

Yea I remember reading that. Imagine how many guys currently in the hall would fall in that category. Ridiculous and a poor excuse

 

[seahawksfan234]

Lol A-Rod (roids aside) and Ken Griffey Jr. were two of the greatest players of their generation. To say that Edgar shouldn't be a HoF caliber player because of that has to be one of the dumbest fucking excuses I've ever heard.

 

[wazzu31]

Lol A-Rod (roids aside) and Ken Griffey Jr. were two of the greatest players of their generation. To say that Edgar shouldn't be a HoF caliber player because of that has to be one of the dumbest fucking excuses I've ever heard.

That's my thoughts. How a league can charge money for people to come watch but allow these guys to cast a vote is idiotic. Besides all the hypocrisy you see with the voters who won't vote him but to hold against a guy that he batted behind guys? I'd entertain an argument if Edgar was batting in front of those two his whole career but he protected them. I guess since beat writers are irrelevant in the world today they get a kick out of wielding some kind of power.

 

[NWinAZ]

That's my thoughts. How a league can charge money for people to come watch but allow these guys to cast a vote is idiotic. Besides all the hypocrisy you see with the voters who won't vote him but to hold against a guy that he batted behind guys? I'd entertain an argument if Edgar was batting in front of those two his whole career but he protected them. I guess since beat writers are irrelevant in the world today they get a kick out of wielding some kind of power.

The system is a joke. How can you take seriously anyone who won't vote at all (it happened with one voter), or multiple voters who will vote for lesser players while leaving the the top players off because they say others will still vote them in and the lesser guys need the votes. No, your job is to vote for unto the top 10 deserving. Griffey, Ryan, Chipper, and others should have a 100% vote. Also, voters voting for guys like Moyer and the like have no business voting. Just too much politics and relationships being involved. The newest issue one writer pointed is in regards to making the votes public as they come in. They said other voters see them and have changed their votes based on the numbers as being tabulated. Again, the system is a joke.

My suggestion some time back is to use new stats and compare eligible players over their best ten consecutive years with players during those same ten years. Set a standard on whichever stats you want to use and give them points for each rank. If you don't want to use that as the final determination, then at least use it as an eligibility standard to even have on a ballot.

 

[wazzu31]

The system is a joke. How can you take seriously anyone who won't vote at all (it happened with one voter), or multiple voters who will vote for lesser players while leaving the the top players off because they say others will still vote them in and the lesser guys need the votes. No, your job is to vote for unto the top 10 deserving. Griffey, Ryan, Chipper, and others should have a 100% vote. Also, voters voting for guys like Moyer and the like have no business voting. Just too much politics and relationships being involved. The newest issue one writer pointed is in regards to making the votes public as they come in. They said other voters see them and have changed their votes based on the numbers as being tabulated. Again, the system is a joke.

My suggestion some time back is to use new stats and compare eligible players over their best ten consecutive years with players during those same ten years. Set a standard on whichever stats you want to use and give them points for each rank. If you don't want to use that as the final determination, then at least use it as an eligibility standard to even have on a ballot.

I guess as the other dude pointed out, I'm a "Homer" so the process hasn't bugged me but the Boston dude kind of put me over it. Holding grudges against a dude who has never done anything to him is a huge flaw for what is suppose to be a prestigious honor. Just seems like the dudes who are now paid bloggers have a power trip. Why is it a big deal their votes are made public?

Your idea sounds great but they can't kick out guys who already have inferior numbers to the bar set. Edgar's stat line is better than all the HOFers averages as it stands outside of defensive stats so I'm not sure what the process would look like. Especially since the Mariners have a current starter who's metrics are actually borderline HOF worthy right now. I guess I am the old dude who hates the new analytics because it takes away the eye test, and doesn't include the nuances of the great sport and IMO is a part of what is leading to the death of the game.

 

[NWinAZ]

I guess as the other dude pointed out, I'm a "Homer" so the process hasn't bugged me but the Boston dude kind of put me over it. Holding grudges against a dude who has never done anything to him is a huge flaw for what is suppose to be a prestigious honor. Just seems like the dudes who are now paid bloggers have a power trip. Why is it a big deal their votes are made public?

Your idea sounds great but they can't kick out guys who already have inferior numbers to the bar set. Edgar's stat line is better than all the HOFers averages as it stands outside of defensive stats so I'm not sure what the process would look like. Especially since the Mariners have a current starter who's metrics are actually borderline HOF worthy right now. I guess I am the old dude who hates the new analytics because it takes away the eye test, and doesn't include the nuances of the great sport and IMO is a part of what is leading to the death of the game.

If you continue with human voting, then you will always have issues. That is why I prefer stats based selection based on the same 10 year span of the player being looked at. I am biased with Edgar because I was able to watch him play just about every game in his career. Maybe that isn't bias, and more like appreciation of talent.

 

[NWinAZ]

Just for historical value, Edgar is 86th in WAR all-time. Tony Gwynn 88th.

 

[NWinAZ]

Just for historical value, Edgar is 86th in WAR all-time. Tony Gwynn 88th.

41st All-Time in offensive WAR. Griffey Jr. 50th.

 

[wazzu31]

If you continue with human voting, then you will always have issues. That is why I prefer stats based selection based on the same 10 year span of the player being looked at. I am biased with Edgar because I was able to watch him play just about every game in his career. Maybe that isn't bias, and more like appreciation of talent.

Definitely appreciation, not homerism. Edgar was on national TV what maybe 100 times in his career. If he were a Yankee or Red So, the 95 ALDS alone would've put him the hall already.

I don't disagree with your proposal but it will still lead to arguments. What happens if another era happens like the steroid era happens. I don't mind them keeping out juicers who have no business in the HOF (McGwire) but Bonds and Clemens deserve to be in IMO because their careers prior to steroids.

 

[NWinAZ]

I don't disagree with your proposal but it will still lead to arguments. What happens if another era happens like the steroid era happens. I don't mind them keeping out juicers who have no business in the HOF (McGwire) but Bonds and Clemens deserve to be in IMO because their careers prior to steroids.

I think all should be eligible if no actual proof was ever found. McGwire and Sosa should be just as eligibles Bonds and Clemens or none should be. That is an entire different subject.

 

[wazzu31]

I think all should be eligible if no actual proof was ever found. McGwire and Sosa should be just as eligibles Bonds and Clemens or none should be. That is an entire different subject.

Guess we can disagree on McGwire. IMO he remained a failed pitcher until he chose the Jose Canseco route. I overlook the steroids for guys who were still good ballplayers but enhanced them through PED's. I wouldn't be crushed if McGwire got in though. Roids were pushed on the players by owners, it's tough to say no to a drug that got you millions more in a contract. I know I tried them to try to get a scholarship and wouldn't have batted an eye if I was offered them for millions.

 

[NWinAZ]

Roids were pushed on the players by owners, it's tough to say no to a drug that got you millions more in a contract.

The truth!