February 9, 200719 yr Phil Niekro had 318 wins over 24 seasons averaging 13 wins per season. Is that being great or simply very good for a long period of time? Gaylord Perry had 314 wins over 22 seaons averaging 14 wins per season AND CHEATED doing it. Is that being great or simply very good for a long period of time?
February 9, 200719 yr Also interesting to note, http://baseball-almanac.com/hof/hofmem2.shtml 22 SS's are in the HOF. 12 were chosen by the Veterans Committee after being passed over by the Writer's or 55% of the SS's in the HOF were passed over by the writer's. It seems the Veterans Committee is more appreciative of the things a SS brings to the game than writer's are. Maybe Larkin's best hope is the Veteran's Committee.
February 9, 200719 yr Here's the danger in comparing players from different eras when one or both of the players haven't reached an "automatic" Hall of Fame benchmark such as 3000 hits. Player A..................................Player B Games 1736............................1988 Runs 1390..............................1355 Hits 2214...............................2160 2Bs 389.................................471 3Bs 131.................................62 HRs 361.................................383 RBIs 1537..............................1311 SBs 30..................................230 BBs 790.................................913 BA .325................................ .313 OBP .398............................... .400 Slg .579............................... .565 Do either one of these players have a massive advantage over the other? Which one would you vote in if either? Let me know and I'll tell you who each player is. SB's are noticeably different and same with 3B's....BB's are close but different. Similar numbers, even though they are from different Leagues.... The one on the left, one of the classiest as well.
February 9, 200719 yr Phil Niekro had 318 wins over 24 seasons averaging 13 wins per season. Is that being great or simply very good for a long period of time? Gaylord Perry had 314 wins over 22 seaons averaging 14 wins per season AND CHEATED doing it. Is that being great or simply very good for a long period of time? Like I said before there's a couple of ways that people get voted in. One way is to be very good for a very long time so that you reach milestones that only a miniscule fraction of players ever reach such as 300 wins, 3000 hits or 500 homers. In those instances you might not have a bunch of 20 win seasons but you've still done something that only a select few have. When someone introduces Phil Niekro they don't introduce him as "Phil Niekro with a .537 winning percentage." Lots of pitchers can claim that. He's introduced as "Phil Niekro, 300 game winner." Only a few can say that. Like it or not there are certain "milestone" numbers that get you in The Hall of Fame.
February 9, 200719 yr SB's are noticeably different and same with 3B's....BB's are close but different. Similar numbers, even though they are from different Leagues....The one on the left, one of the classiest as well. You got that right :thumb:
February 9, 200719 yr Julio Franco came up as a shortstop and has numbers that exceed Larkins'. I don't see Franco as a hall of famer (probably because he'll never retire and get past the five-year rule).
February 9, 200719 yr Julio Franco came up as a shortstop and has numbers that exceed Larkins'. I don't see Franco as a hall of famer (probably because he'll never retire and get past the five-year rule).I watched Franco play, when I was young....:lol:
February 9, 200719 yr I saw a recent list of current Hall of Famers Franco has been teammates with over the years. The list is staggering.
February 9, 200719 yr Ernie Banks: 1259 Games at First Base, 1125 Games at Shortstop, 69 Games at Third Base and 23 in the Outfield. He didn't even play half of his games at Shortstop. Ozzie Smith: 13 Gold Gloves, 15 All-Star appearances. Next argument. Larkin had 4 and 13 and do offensive numbers matter?
February 9, 200719 yr Larkin had 4 and 13 and do offensive numbers matter? Yes offensive numbers do matter--and Larkin's are on par with Tony Fernandez and Alan Trammell two non-Hall of Fame members. Those 13 gold gloves dwarf Larkin's and are what set Ozzie apart from him.....and any one else at that position.
February 9, 200719 yr Yes offensive numbers do matter--and Larkin's are on par with Tony Fernandez and Alan Trammell two non-Hall of Fame members. Those 13 gold gloves dwarf Larkin's and are what set Ozzie apart from him.....and any one else at that position. But more RBI's, HR's, and his batting average being 30 points higher for his career aren't big enough factors to catch up with that? His offensive numbers are better than all 3 SS's mentioned in the post, he was the second best defensively, he won an MVP, he was a 13 time all-star, and he won a World Series and was captain of his team. HAd Ozzie Smith not been around then Larkin would have 10+ Gold Gloves and we'd be saying how he's a lock. When he was young B-Lark could flat play glove and unfortunately for him the best defensive SS ever was also in the NL.
February 9, 200719 yr But more RBI's, HR's, and his batting average being 30 points higher for his career aren't big enough factors to catch up with that? His offensive numbers are better than all 3 SS's mentioned in the post, he was the second best defensively, he won an MVP, he was a 13 time all-star, and he won a World Series and was captain of his team. HAd Ozzie Smith not been around then Larkin would have 10+ Gold Gloves and we'd be saying how he's a lock. When he was young B-Lark could flat play glove and unfortunately for him the best defensive SS ever was also in the NL. I just thinks its going to be a combination of the two stats that will do him in. His offensive numbers are only a little bit better than Fernandez and slightly better than Trammell's. You saw how low a percentage of the vote Trammell got--if Larkin's percentage is as small as his statistical advantage he's got no shot. As for defense you pretty much summed it up. Ozzie was the best defensive SS ever so Barry was unable to win the Gold Gloves that probably would have made the difference. Would I vote him in if he had his offensive numbers AND 10 Gold Gloves. In a heartbeat. As it is I just don't think his numbers are that much better than some of his comtemporaries. Fernandez, Trammell, even Jay Bell has comparable numbers. He just doesn't have that one thing that sets him aprart far enough to vote for him. I think you'll see that will be the thinking of the voters.
February 9, 200719 yr But more RBI's, HR's, and his batting average being 30 points higher for his career aren't big enough factors to catch up with that? His offensive numbers are better than all 3 SS's mentioned in the post, he was the second best defensively, he won an MVP, he was a 13 time all-star, and he won a World Series and was captain of his team. HAd Ozzie Smith not been around then Larkin would have 10+ Gold Gloves and we'd be saying how he's a lock. When he was young B-Lark could flat play glove and unfortunately for him the best defensive SS ever was also in the NL.Ozzie his down in the order....Larkin at top, offensive numbers should be higher. It's like that adage, Clark Kellog says about field of 65....Body of Work and that is true, when players aren't exceptionally amazing, at one or the other. Offensively, Larkin doesn't pass the test. Defensively, I'm with you.
February 9, 200719 yr Here's the danger in comparing players from different eras when one or both of the players haven't reached an "automatic" Hall of Fame benchmark such as 3000 hits. Player A..................................Player B Games 1736............................1988 Runs 1390..............................1355 Hits 2214...............................2160 2Bs 389.................................471 3Bs 131.................................62 HRs 361.................................383 RBIs 1537..............................1311 SBs 30..................................230 BBs 790.................................913 BA .325................................ .313 OBP .398............................... .400 Slg .579............................... .565 Do either one of these players have a massive advantage over the other? Which one would you vote in if either? Let me know and I'll tell you who each player is. Anyone besides Strike-3 know who these two are or have an opinion?
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.