Cincinnati Reds and Barry Larkin

[h.s.sportsrbest]

As I said, I would have to look cause I can't really think of many AL SS's for the 80's.

 

YEP, absolutely it could be because of him playing in the AL and no ESPN around to tout how good everyone supposedly is.

 

I agree that his stats are good and as I said he accumulated stats over a long career could win me over. But I would never have considered him a better shortstop than an Ozzie Smith or IMO even Barry Larkin. Admittingly, my knowledge of him is limited.

 

When him and Molitor both went in, I felt it was because they played so daggone long and accumulated stats rather than they were two of the very best.

Between 1975 and 1983 there was no one better in baseball than Robin Yount at SS.

 

Ozzie gets a lot of pub because he made great plays in the field, played with flair, played in America's quintessential Baseball town, and was well marketed. Ozzie couldn't hold a candle to Yount. I'm telling you (and everyone else, and have been for 2 pages) Larkin's embarrasing track-record in terms of durability (and in turn, numbers like hits [as Strike3 alluded to]) will be his Waterloo in terms of the HOF.

[STRIKE3]

Larkin 2340 Hits .295 avg 198 HR 960 RBI 379 SB

Yount 3142 Hits .285 avg 251 HR 1400 RBI 271 SB

 

I believe Young played 2 more seasons than Larkin.

 

Edge has to go to Robin Yount offensively.

Huge gap, in this area.

[h.s.sportsrbest]

 

Edge has to go to Robin Yount offensively.

...and the winner of "Understatement of the Thread" goes to...

[h.s.sportsrbest]

Huge gap, in this area.

What about the 440 extra runs he drove in?

[h.s.sportsrbest]

If you Pro-Larkin folks want to debate his cause you better pick a battle you can win, and opposing him to Robin Yount's career isn't that battle.

[STRIKE3]

What about the 440 extra runs he drove in?

Massive amount but Yount, also hit a little deeper in the order than Larkin, so I could understand that.

 

The SB's, should be much greater in Larkin's favor, instead of approximately 100....I would guess, you ask people their first impression about Larkin and they would say, singles, contact type hitter....Yet for all those years, only 2,340 hits....

 

Your durability argument, is valid. I will say, the number of E's by Smith was alarming, compared to Ripken and Larkin. Most consider Ozzie, the greatest defensive of all-time.

[h.s.sportsrbest]

Most consider Ozzie, the greatest defensive of all-time.

See my point on Ozzie above and why he is in Cooperstown. :thumb:

[ladiesbballcoach]

Between 1975 and 1983 there was no one better in baseball than Robin Yount at SS.

 

Ozzie gets a lot of pub because he made great plays in the field, played with flair, played in America's quintessential Baseball town, and was well marketed. Ozzie couldn't hold a candle to Yount. I'm telling you (and everyone else, and have been for 2 pages) Larkin's embarrasing track-record in terms of durability (and in turn, numbers like hits [as Strike3 alluded to]) will be his Waterloo in terms of the HOF.

In the time frame you mention, he batted above 300 twice with 3 years of 267 and lower.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/y/yountro01.shtml

His prime offensive years are late 80's when, if I am not mistaken, he was an outfielder rather than SS. For most of those years, he was single digits in HR's and exploded to 23 after 8 the previous year. (Early steroid user? J/K) His RBI's were in the 60-70 range until 1982 when he exploded offensively. Wasn't that the year they went to the WS? OB% was basically low 300's during that time.

 

His fielding was around the 960's for most of that time.

 

He did play almost a full season, 138 games, at DH. That would add to his offensive totals but not account for all of the differences between him and Larkin.

 

Larkin's hit total is very disappointing and should be held against him.

 

He won ONLY ONE GOLD GLOVE at SS during a time he is supposedly the best SS and coincidentally it was during his best offensive year.

 

I did NOT realize that he had won two MVP awards Was only an all-star on 3 occassions, 80, 82 and 83.

[ladiesbballcoach]

Massive amount but Yount, also hit a little deeper in the order than Larkin, so I could understand that.

 

The SB's, should be much greater in Larkin's favor, instead of approximately 100....I would guess, you ask people their first impression about Larkin and they would say, singles, contact type hitter....Yet for all those years, only 2,340 hits....

 

Your durability argument, is valid. I will say, the number of E's by Smith was alarming, compared to Ripken and Larkin. Most consider Ozzie, the greatest defensive of all-time.

He got to balls others would not be able to get to.

[ladiesbballcoach]

HSSB, thought you might find this interesting.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/scomp.cgi?I=yountro01:Robin+Yount&st=career

 

He compares well with .......

Craig Biggio.

[STRIKE3]

He got to balls others would not be able to get to.

I don't necessarily agree with you on that one but I believe, that is a perception many have on Smith.

 

I've seen Larkin go in the hole and make as many plays, as Smith. I have no resource but I would imagine, most of Smith's E's, are fielding and Larkin's would be throwing but yet, Smith is considered by many as the Gold Glove standard, to measure SS by.

 

His personality, mid-field flip and smile, often made us fans not see what the stats said.

[ladiesbballcoach]

http://www.baseball-reference.com/l/larkiba01.shtml

 

Looking at Larkin, his career seems to be more consistent than Younts while playing SS. Larkin had 9 years batting 300 or better to Yount's 3. From 1988 to 2000, Larkin batted 292 or higher each and every one of those years EXCEPT 1994 when he batted 279. Much better than Yount's SS years in the 260's and 250's.

 

Larkin did though miss ALOT of games. And I am sure that is the reason for his low overall hit total. 1989 he only played in 97 games. 1991, 123. 1993, 100. 1994, 110. 1997, 73 games. 2000, 102 games. He makes Ken Griffey Jr look like Lou Gehrig.

 

Fielding is similar.

 

Larkin was an All-Star for 12 years compared to Yount's 3. THis could be seen as a testament that Larkin was seen as one of the best at his position year in and year out while Yount was not.

 

He won the Silver Slugger award 9 times compared to Yount's 1 while a SS.

 

And in the Adam Dunn stat just for HSSB, in 1989 he was 3rd in the NL with 8 sac flies.

 

http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/scomp.cgi?I=larkiba01:Barry+Larkin&st=career

 

His stats seem most comparable to Alan Trammel who didn't make it in. They also are comparable to Ryan Sandberg who played 2B though and did make it in.

[h.s.sportsrbest]

HSSB, thought you might find this interesting.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/scomp.cgi?I=yountro01:Robin+Yount&st=career

 

He compares well with .......

Craig Biggio.

Who I said in a thread last year deserves serious HOF consideration.

[h.s.sportsrbest]

He won the Silver Slugger award 9 times compared to Yount's 1 while a SS.

I believe Yount won it in '80 and '82. Ripken won his first of many in '83.

 

Regardless, your stat is a little skewed since you didn't mention that the award wasn't launched until 1980. Yount already had 7 years in the MLB at that point. Important point you left out, IMHO.

 

Again, you can compare Larkin to Yount until your blue in the face, but I can fly to Cooperstown and see (deservedly so) his Bust....you'll be hard pressed to do that to see Barry's anytime in the next 20 years.

[h.s.sportsrbest]

Larkin = Trammell

 

Seems very fair to me. Good point LBBC.