Jump to content

Cincinnati Reds and Barry Larkin


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 200
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes, I agree (and said so on here last year), I think Biggio gets in.

I like his chances as well and can remember, him being a catcher.

 

Consummate professional and goes about his business, of Baseball...One of my favorites to watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have I mentioned he had a very good image and relationship with the media?

Even though I knew this line to be completely false, I went to a horse's mouth. Below is an e-mail that I sent to a buddy of mine who is a former beat writer covering the Reds....and then his response. Want his name, PM me. Enjoy....

 

 

First of all, today is a day to be in LA and not here. For the love of God, we have 7” on the ground and it is 10 degrees. Awesome.

 

How’s LA? Loving the Dodgers? Getting ready for Spring Training?

 

Here is my question: Barry Larkin….HOF or not? I say, “no.” Most in Cincy think I’m nuts. What say you?

 

Be careful and let’s have lunch when you're in town this year.

 

======================================================

 

Great to hear from ya. I'm going to say NO on Larkin (and not simply because he didn't speak to me or anyone else my last year on the Reds' beat). I just don't think he qualifies. He only had one GREAT year, and a whole lot of above average ones. And I also think he hung on WAY too long at the end, which hurts his cause some.

 

Mid-60s here through the weekend, but it actually got into the 80s on Monday. Sorry to rub it in. See ya in August.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even though I knew this line to be completely false, I went to a horse's mouth. Below is an e-mail that I sent to a buddy of mine who is a former beat writer covering the Reds....and then his response. Want his name, PM me. Enjoy....

 

 

First of all, today is a day to be in LA and not here. For the love of God, we have 7” on the ground and it is 10 degrees. Awesome.

 

How’s LA? Loving the Dodgers? Getting ready for Spring Training?

 

Here is my question: Barry Larkin….HOF or not? I say, “no.” Most in Cincy think I’m nuts. What say you?

 

Be careful and let’s have lunch when you're in town this year.

 

======================================================

 

Great to hear from ya. I'm going to say NO on Larkin (and not simply because he didn't speak to me or anyone else my last year on the Reds' beat). I just don't think he qualifies. He only had one GREAT year, and a whole lot of above average ones. And I also think he hung on WAY too long at the end, which hurts his cause some.

 

Mid-60s here through the weekend, but it actually got into the 80s on Monday. Sorry to rub it in. See ya in August.

 

 

He didn't speak to one reporter his last year here and that guy won't vote for him....... WOW very convincing....:rolleyes: I have maintained that I think Nomar, Tejada, Jeter, and A-Rod's numbers will keep him out. Without these guys he'd have been a lock. I've also compared his numbers to other HOF SS's and he BLOWS MOST AWAY!!! He had "a whole lot of average years" compared to today's SS's, but compared to SS's before him those years were STELLAR. I've also gone on the record as saying that I don't think he'll be first ballot, but I think he'll "campaign" and try to get in. There is a VERY GOOD CHANCE Larkin doesn't get in, but it's because he's going to be compared to the new generation of SS's. If Barry is included in the HOF there are about 8 SS's right now that will have a chance to get in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was an All-Star his last year. That doesn't entirely qualify as holding on too long. However, if he represents the view of 25.01% of the eligible voters, Larkin won't get in. Let's hope that your friends sentiments are part of the minority.
I would quantify that by saying, more of a sentimental selection that anything.

 

He played in 111 games and hit .289, with 100 hits....Which is my contention regarding Larkin, the lack of offensive production and combined with HSSB's offering, on lack of durability and games played.

 

He was a HOF type of player, in effort, ability, hustle but its about accomplishment, related to the career.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would quantify that by saying, more of a sentimental selection that anything.

He played in 111 games and hit .289, with 100 hits....Which is my contention regarding Larkin, the lack of offensive production and combined with HSSB's offering, on lack of durability and games played.

 

He was a HOF type of player, in effort, ability, hustle but its about accomplishment, related to the career.

I agree with that for him being an All-Star his last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would quantify that by saying, more of a sentimental selection that anything.

 

He played in 111 games and hit .289, with 100 hits....Which is my contention regarding Larkin, the lack of offensive production and combined with HSSB's offering, on lack of durability and games played.

 

He was a HOF type of player, in effort, ability, hustle but its about accomplishment, related to the career.

 

If you guys remember that year, he was hitting over .300 going into the break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you guys remember that year, he was hitting over .300 going into the break.

 

 

A lot of casual fans don't think hitting 300 is very good. They would rather a guy bat 230 with 40 bombs. BA is becoming an overlooked stat. I think that's garbage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of casual fans don't think hitting 300 is very good. They would rather a guy bat 230 with 40 bombs. BA is becoming an overlooked stat. I think that's garbage.

Yeah, I remember a certain former Reds that played in this year's World Series being ripped for ONLY batting over .300 each season. What a horrendous player he must have been for ONLY batting over .300 each season.:sssh: ;):p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.