Player A: .284/.376/.527 (132 OPS+) in 7,980 PAs. 393 HR, 4 ASGs, 8 GGs in centerfield. .274/.361/.513 in 64 playoff games, including 13 HR, and one WS title.
Player B: .292/.393/.514 (140 OPS+) in 10,947 PAs. 509 HR, 9 ASGs. .248/.401/.398 in 44 playoff games, including 6 HR, and one WS title .The savvier among us know that A is Jim Edmonds and B is Gary Sheffield, both of whom announced their retirements from Major League Baseball this week. Neither is a first-ballot Hall of Famer as the voters seem to insist on the distinction, but both merit serious consideration. Edmonds earned that consideration by reputation, especially defensively, and seemed to get that all-around-good-guy veteran glow as the years passed. Which leads me to Player C, who already is a HOFer -- Kirby Puckett -- and other than the ASGs it's a bit hard to justify a Hall that has Puckett but doesn't eventually induct Edmonds.
Player C: .318/.360/.477 (124 OPS+) in 7,431 PAs. 207 HR, 10 ASGs,1 MVP,6 GGs in centerfield. .309/.361/.536 in 24 playoff games, including 5 HR, and two WS titles.
As for Sheffield, hoo boy. He may join Dick Allen as the only baseball players otherwise qualified for the Hall but denied entry on account of dickishness, playing for eight different franchises and burning his bridges with nearly each of them. Oh, and he was in the Mitchell Report. This may be the hitting equivalent of his one-time teammate Kevin Brown's HOF evaluation -- so disliked by the media that he can't stay on the ballot long enough to be considered properly. That would be a shame -- he was a feared hitter, with one of the more imitable stances of all -- and his performance merits a fair hearing.
<p><span>Puckett is the Catfish Hunter of position players. He never should have been inducted and now serves as the guy everyone points to when trying to justify their own borderline candidates. I'm not sure if Edmonds and Sheffield should be Hall of Famers, but I'd prefer to see how they stack up against more clear cut choices than someone like Puckett.</span>
ReplyDelete</p>
Ironically, Puckett got in because of the Good Guy boost, subsequently revealed to be undeserved, plus the "aww, he had to retire early" bonus.
ReplyDeleteAndruw Jones is already parallel to Edmonds on the counting stuff, lower in OPS+, but his career arc is in the wrong direction to get HOF recognition.<span> </span>
Player D: .297/.381/.477 (125 OPS+) in 9,053 PAs. 287 HR, 5 ASGs, 1 SS, 4 GGs in centerfield. .275/.371/.480 in 121 playoff games, including 22 HR and four WS titles.
ReplyDeleteIs anyone knocking down the doors for Bernie Williams?
Player E: .312/.418/.515 (147 OPS+) in 8,672 PAs. 309 HRs, 7 ASGs. Never, ever cite GGs in support of any argument, but I'll give you that he had negative defensive value.* .266/.365/.508 in 34 postseason games, including the double that saved his franchise from leaving the city. 0 WS. But you already knew I was going to say that.
ReplyDelete*Sheffield's defensive value was wildly volatile, but overall he seems to have been bad. You can't find range stats for Puckett, but I just have a hard time believing that his defensive reputation was earned. He was a round man with short legs and short arms. This may be totally unfair, but I think his defensive reputation came from not dropping anything and from frequently catching balls on the run that more fleet outfielders would have caught standing still. Don't anybody please say anything about his Gold Gloves, please. Please.
That was me
ReplyDeleteIf not for Phil Rizzuto and Tony Perez, Kirby Puckett would be the most overrated Hall-of-Famer. Puckett benefitted from being in the last generation of players who could get away with only 30 walks a season without it adversely affecting his reputation. Puckett won 2 WS, though, and I can see an argument that someone from that Twins team should be in the Hall of Fame.
ReplyDeleteI think Edmonds doesn't deserve it (neither the career-length chops nor the peak value), though I have a lot of love for him as my star centerfielder on my Strat-O-Matic keeper league team for years (mmm... CF-1 rating).
I'd vote for Sheffield, but not on the first ballot, and not before Tim Raines makes it in.
I think Sheffield's appearance in the Mitchell Report makes the point moot. I'll be surprised if anyone named in that report gets enshrined anytime in the near future. The one exception might be Pettitte, just because his quick admission seemed to remove the steroid stain from his legacy in the eyes of the Hall voters.
ReplyDeleteThe one exception might be Pettitte, because writers liked him and he was a True Yankee. In other words, steroids matter except when they don't.
ReplyDelete