Makes sense. Catchers go through a lot of wear and tear. There's something to be said to going out on a high note a year or so early than badly a year or so late.
He is also leaving a 5M option buyout on the table by retiring. The Giants have a 22M/5M team option that they now do not have to act on.
And when people bring up that it took Molina longer to get to 1,500 then Posey, the response will be that Molina played longer, how would we know if Posey would have gotten there? After all, you cannot induct based on "what-ifs".
All good points but I don't think WAR is taken very seriously by very many of the voting members.
too bad there's no stat to measure the impact he had on the staff, the intimidation factor he held over baserunners, and probably more important the steadying influence on the clubhouse
go out on top.... '22 is far from a certainty
I think about the "what if" HOF thing a lot. In respect to The Barry. As in "what if you discount his steroid seasons" -- He's still a mortal LOCK for the HOF. Still irritates me.
I am pretty clear on my opinion about Barry (he never broke a baseball rule, therefore he never cheated, therefore he should absolutely be in the Hall).
Per Ray Ratto, there is a HOF metric called JAWS which does a pretty good job of comparison across eras. Apparently, it has a lot of traction with HOF voters. I was unaware of this stat til yesterday. Buster is 14 for catchers all time, 6th if you adjust for his best seven years (JAWS7)
apples and pineapples. Longevity counts for sure, but you can't compare catchers and other position players. The average HOF catcher can't have played 18 seasons.
I see what you're saying, but Rose (and Shoeless Joe) broke the cardinal rule. I agree with you, Barry broke no rules.
I'm interested to see how the voters handle A-Rod. If he gets more votes than Bonds, then something smells fishy. A-Rod DID break the rules, since he was busted after the rules were set in place. That, to me, should be more egregious than what Bonds (and Clemens) did.
I agree that he should still be a lock but this "what if" feels different. You are trying to figure out how reduced his numbers would be. But the "what if" also has to consider how rampant steroid usage was then. What if not just Barry, but all the other MLBers who were taking, didn't do steroids. Would his numbers have been that different? To me, arguing that both Bonds and Clemens don't deserve enshrinement because of steroid usage provided an unfair advantage is ridiculous. Wouldn't the usage have canceled either other out and put everything back on par? After all, its been documented that the crappy pitchers and crappy hitters were using too.
I think both MLB and the players union need to come clean on the fact that, at the very least, they ignored all the signs and dragged their feet on actually making these substances illegal league wide. Both used players and covered up their actions to save face. Now, some of the guys that they benefited the most from, they have left to their own devices. Of course, these guys are pretty prickly, so that has not helped their cause. In my opinion, the voters need to recognize the era these guys were created in, acknowledge that there was nothing illegal in their steroid usage and vote them in, with an asterisk if needed (by the way, I hate that asterisk mark on the Bonds home run ball, so stupid). In the HOF voters want to make an example of players breaking the rules, do it with the guys who were busted after rules were in place, not before rules were implemented. That's like choosing to deny a player a spot in the HOF because he busted a few catchers in home plate collisions before they were outlawed.
This article has me wondering how the pitching staff will perform next year.As usual the nerds at 538 have a good take
Buster Posey’s Career Was Short But Elite. Will It Land Him In The Hall Of Fame?
When longtime San Francisco Giants catcher Buster Posey announced his retirement on Thursday, it marked the end of the line for one of baseball’s most unassumin…fivethirtyeight.com
