HOF Ballot Released

[Win TWINS!!!]

I'd still take Pedro 2000-2005 over Santana's 2002 - 2010

 

[navamind]

I think he play some RF and LF, most of the time while he was playing CF. He could cover some ground!!!

Bugs isn't impressed.

 

[navamind]

I'd still take Pedro 2000-2005 over Santana's 2002 - 2010

Not even including Pedro's 97-99?

 

[navamind]

Pedro Martinez Stats | Baseball-Reference.com

Just crazy. He ran a 186 ERA+ over 9 seasons. Five of those seasons were above 200.

 

[Win TWINS!!!]

Not even including Pedro's 97-99?

He's the one sticking to the 2000s

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I'd still take Pedro 2000-2005 over Santana's 2002 - 2010

yea, didn't realize how good Pedro was in the 2000s too... For some reason when i look back, i think of him as a 90s Great... same thing with Clemens... so really my statement was just flat out wrong...

But santana in his 5 year prime was of the best pitchers in the last 20 years... his prime was much better than the other 2 serious non steroid SP HOF candidates on this ballot...

In no way can you say Mussina or Schilling were better than santana... they were just GOOD for longer...

 

[soxfan1468927]

yea, didn't realize how good Pedro was in the 2000s too... For some reason when i look back, i think of him as a 90s Great... same thing with Clemens... so really my statement was just flat out wrong...

But santana in his 5 year prime was of the best pitchers in the last 20 years... his prime was much better than the other 2 serious non steroid SP HOF candidates on this ballot...

In no way can you say Mussina or Schilling were better than santana... they were just GOOD for longer...

Very similar to the Sammy Sosa vs Jim Thome debate. I disagree with your point that Santana had a better peak and therefore was the better pitcher than either Mussina or Schilling.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Very similar to the Sammy Sosa vs Jim Thome debate. I disagree with your point that Santana had a better peak and therefore was the better pitcher than either Mussina or Schilling.

similar, BUT modern day pitchers last so much shorter now, that I question if we may allow pitchers in without it...

 

[StanMarsh51]

similar, BUT modern day pitchers last so much shorter now, that I question if we may allow pitchers in without it...

Their careers had a lot of overlap, so it's not like they were generations apart in different eras. I mean, 75% of Santana's career innings came when Mussina was still pitching.

 

[soxfan1468927]

similar, BUT modern day pitchers last so much shorter now, that I question if we may allow pitchers in without it...

Well it's not like Schilling and Santana are from two eras 50 years apart. Since Santana's first full season as a starter in 2004, there have been 46 pitchers who have more innings than him.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Well it's not like Schilling and Santana are from two eras 50 years apart. Since Santana's first full season as a starter in 2004, there have been 46 pitchers who have more innings than him.

sure, but again, if it is rarer for pitchers to last long, then shouldn't a player's peak count more than ever before??

 

[soxfan1468927]

sure, but again, if it is rarer for pitchers to last long, then shouldn't a player's peak count more than ever before??

It's more rare for pitcher's to last longer in games and have more innings per season, but is it really more rare for pitchers to have more years?

 

[rightstuff]

I feel like Edgar's 3rd base seasons (1990-1992) get overlooked a lot. He rates as a fine defender (+18 runs as a 3B) and he had some really good offensive years at 3rd, including 1992 where he batted .343/.404/.544 (164 OPS+). He was top 10 in WAR those three years before going on to be one of the best hitters in baseball from 95-01 (2nd in RAA behind only Barry and third in wRC+ behind Bonds and McGwire).

I would like to see more Edgar discussion.



Great, Great Hitter. End of Discussion on Hitting. Yes???

DH. Edgar had the opportunity to DH being in the AL, and the Mariners used that advantage, so don't hold that against Edgar. Edgar WAS NOT a bad defender, the Mariners just had a better use for Edgar, that being DH.

The DH award is named after Edgar. The Greatest DH.


All that said, EDGAR deserves the HOF.
One year wonder.....NO
Edgar was the GREATEST for a number of years.


Best of Success Edgar. I'm rooting for you.

 

[Cedrique]

I would like to see more Edgar discussion.



Great, Great Hitter. End of Discussion on Hitting. Yes???

DH. Edgar had the opportunity to DH being in the AL, and the Mariners used that advantage, so don't hold that against Edgar. Edgar WAS NOT a bad defender, the Mariners just had a better use for Edgar, that being DH.

The DH award is named after Edgar. The Greatest DH.


All that said, EDGAR deserves the HOF.
One year wonder.....NO
Edgar was the GREATEST for a number of years.


Best of Success Edgar. I'm rooting for you.

Yeah, I've been looking at the stats and Edgar really was a great hitter. But now that I see that he was an above average defender at 3B it seems in retrospect that the Mariners made a colossal mistake moving him to DH. What was the reasoning at the time?
One thing I've noticed watching baseball for a long time is the really good teams have guys who are way above average hitters at positions that other teams don't.
For example, the Giants teams that did well recently were not known for their hitting as much as pitching but they were still tough to shut down because instead of having some .220 hitting catcher hitting 7th or 8th like a lot of teams have they had Buster Posey with his .850 OPS sitting right in the middle of the lineup so the lineup was deeper.
Are you sure there wasn't some injury that moved him to DH? Or did they think Russ Davis was going to become the next Brooks Robinson, winning a million gold gloves or something (obviously this didn't happen)

 

[navamind]

Yeah, I've been looking at the stats and Edgar really was a great hitter. But now that I see that he was an above average defender at 3B it seems in retrospect that the Mariners made a colossal mistake moving him to DH. What was the reasoning at the time?
One thing I've noticed watching baseball for a long time is the really good teams have guys who are way above average hitters at positions that other teams don't.
For example, the Giants teams that did well recently were not known for their hitting as much as pitching but they were still tough to shut down because instead of having some .220 hitting catcher hitting 7th or 8th like a lot of teams have they had Buster Posey with his .850 OPS sitting right in the middle of the lineup so the lineup was deeper.
Are you sure there wasn't some injury that moved him to DH? Or did they think Russ Davis was going to become the next Brooks Robinson, winning a million gold gloves or something (obviously this didn't happen)

he had a hamstring injury that made him miss most of the 1993 season. He was 30, so it made some sense to move him to DH to save his bat IMO. He played only 89 games in 1994, but he played about 1/4 of his games at DH before moving over permanently in 1995.

 

[Cedrique]

he had a hamstring injury that made him miss most of the 1993 season. He was 30, so it made some sense to move him to DH to save his bat IMO. He played only 89 games in 1994, but he played about 1/4 of his games at DH before moving over permanently in 1995.

That makes sense. For some reason he was a way better hitter in games where he was DH than 3B so maybe they recognized that and just left him there. (or like you said they could have just been worried about him getting injured again and losing his bat in the lineup).

 

[msgkings322]

he had a hamstring injury that made him miss most of the 1993 season. He was 30, so it made some sense to move him to DH to save his bat IMO. He played only 89 games in 1994, but he played about 1/4 of his games at DH before moving over permanently in 1995.

To be fair the Mariners only played 112 games in 1994. Interestingly when the season ended on Aug 11, they had played 44 home games and 68 road games...

 

[DragonfromTO]

That makes sense. For some reason he was a way better hitter in games where he was DH than 3B so maybe they recognized that and just left him there. (or like you said they could have just been worried about him getting injured again and losing his bat in the lineup).

It was absolutely to keep him healthy. If he's playing 3B I doubt that he has anywhere near the longevity that he had DHing. I think it was the right call, even though I always played him at 3B in video games

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I would like to see more Edgar discussion.



Great, Great Hitter. End of Discussion on Hitting. Yes???

DH. Edgar had the opportunity to DH being in the AL, and the Mariners used that advantage, so don't hold that against Edgar. Edgar WAS NOT a bad defender, the Mariners just had a better use for Edgar, that being DH.

The DH award is named after Edgar. The Greatest DH.


All that said, EDGAR deserves the HOF.
One year wonder.....NO
Edgar was the GREATEST for a number of years.


Best of Success Edgar. I'm rooting for you.

I will admit, i am NOT for Edgar in the HOF.... if he makes it, i won't complain as he is on top of the fence for me...

the reason i dont have him in:

he played in an offensive dominant era, so lots of his offensive SHOULD be over exaggerated... Sure, his Career BA is a .312, but he was only top 10 in the MLB 4 times, and BEST only once.. now that is very good, but the point is is that he wasn't really ever GREAT... he is one of those players who is great because of being consistently very good...

being a DH doesn't help his case, i have higher standards for someone who ONLY hit... as he played less than 1/3 of his career in the field...

 

[msgkings322]

I will admit, i am NOT for Edgar in the HOF.... if he makes it, i won't complain as he is on top of the fence for me...

the reason i dont have him in:

he played in an offensive dominant era, so lots of his offensive SHOULD be over exaggerated... Sure, his Career BA is a .312, but he was only top 10 in the MLB 4 times, and BEST only once.. now that is very good, but the point is is that he wasn't really ever GREAT... he is one of those players who is great because of being consistently very good...

being a DH doesn't help his case, i have higher standards for someone who ONLY hit... as he played less than 1/3 of his career in the field...

One of my all time favorite players Frank Thomas only played 42% of his games in the field. That's more than Edgar, and of course he was a better hitter. But he may have broken the seal on DHs and the HOF.