Prev: Another bonehead play by Votto
Next: Sweet Swingers
From: David Short on 15 Sep 2009 15:12 "HTP" <tmbowman25(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:d >On Sep 15, 10:30 am, eddyg...(a)msn.com (john smith) wrote: >> If Larkin had played for the Yanks he would be considered a lock hall of >> famer. He will be lucky to get in IMO. Definitely won't be in there on >> first ballot.... > >Larkin is a lock for the HoF and i think it will be the writers that >put him in. For one thing, I think that the voters will take a hard >look at players from the roid era, and will be looking for excellent >players who dont have ties to PED's. Thats Barry (knock on wood). >Also, there is a small shift that appears to be happening in the >mindset of the writers. I'm reading more often about things like OBP >and OPS. They seem less fixated on RBI total and the younger ones are >more inclined to look at advanced analysis. Allan Trammel. The voters have their collective heads up their tails. I grew up watching Hall of Fame locks. Bench is in. Morgan is in. Perez is in but is often held up as an example of a player that shouldn't be in. I have no clue what the voters will do with Barry, but I don't trust them to do the right thing at all. dfs
From: Ron Johnson on 15 Sep 2009 15:43 On Sep 15, 2:06 pm, "Bob Braun" <oxin...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > "john smith" <eddyg...(a)msn.com> wrote in message > > news:1955-4AAFCF1D-10838(a)baytvnwsxa002.msntv.msn.com... > > > Derek Jeter= Barry Larkin less the injuries, range and can't forget the > > Worldd Series(4 Rings as oppposed to 1 Larkin ring).... > > > If Larkin had played for the Yanks he would be considered a lock hall of > > famer. He will be lucky to get in IMO. Definitely won't be in there on > > first ballot.... > > So being on the Yankees DL as opposed the Cincy DL would put him in the Hall > of Fame? > > You should be arguing Davey to the HOF. He had more range than either of > them. And they more than made up the difference with their bats. The difference between Larkin and Concepcion on a per-season basis is roughly the same as the difference between Caraig Biggio and Joey Cora. Closer to 3 wins a season than two. Yeah there are health issues, but the fact is that you're miles ahead with Larkin+backup than Concepcion. Jeter isn't done yet. He's actually not as good as Larkin on the field, but he's been so much healthier than Larkin that he's probably passed him in overall value and is still adding to his resume.
From: Ron Johnson on 15 Sep 2009 15:56 On Sep 15, 3:12 pm, "David Short" <David.No.Sh...(a)Spam.Wright.Please.Edu> wrote: > "HTP" <tmbowma...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message news:d > >On Sep 15, 10:30 am, eddyg...(a)msn.com (john smith) wrote: > >> If Larkin had played for the Yanks he would be considered a lock hall of > >> famer. He will be lucky to get in IMO. Definitely won't be in there on > >> first ballot.... > > >Larkin is a lock for the HoF and i think it will be the writers that > >put him in. For one thing, I think that the voters will take a hard > >look at players from the roid era, and will be looking for excellent > >players who dont have ties to PED's. Thats Barry (knock on wood). > >Also, there is a small shift that appears to be happening in the > >mindset of the writers. I'm reading more often about things like OBP > >and OPS. They seem less fixated on RBI total and the younger ones are > >more inclined to look at advanced analysis. > > Allan Trammel. The voters have their collective heads up their tails. > > I grew up watching Hall of Fame locks. Bench is in. Morgan is in. Perez is > in but is often held up as an example of a player that shouldn't be in. I > have no clue what the voters will do with Barry, but I don't trust them to > do the right thing at all. Right. He's a player who was good at a lot of things but not outstanding in any particular area. Even when you use seasonal notation (ie per 162 games played) there's no one thing that you can point to. 99 runs scored. 33 doubles. 28 stolen bases. (Yes I know there are only a handful of SS on radar with Larkin as an offensive player -- and most of them weren't career SS. ARod, Vaughn, Banks, Wagner, Yount, Ripken all saw significant time at less demanding defensive positions) Tim Raines is a good example of a guy with a resume that's hard to sum up in a few bullet points and hasn't done particularly well in the voting.
From: Bob Braun on 15 Sep 2009 16:14 "Ron Johnson" <johnson(a)ccrs.nrcan.gc.ca> wrote in message news:43ef74df-9296-4712-88a4-6c2645959803(a)m11g2000vbl.googlegroups.com... On Sep 15, 2:06 pm, "Bob Braun" <oxin...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > "john smith" <eddyg...(a)msn.com> wrote in message > > news:1955-4AAFCF1D-10838(a)baytvnwsxa002.msntv.msn.com... > > > Derek Jeter= Barry Larkin less the injuries, range and can't forget the > > Worldd Series(4 Rings as oppposed to 1 Larkin ring).... > > > If Larkin had played for the Yanks he would be considered a lock hall of > > famer. He will be lucky to get in IMO. Definitely won't be in there on > > first ballot.... > > So being on the Yankees DL as opposed the Cincy DL would put him in the > Hall > of Fame? > > You should be arguing Davey to the HOF. He had more range than either of > them. >And they more than made up the difference with their bats. The comment was about 'range'. And I thought Barry became an arrogant jerk-off that turned his back on his team more than once. I didn't forget about him ripping the 'C' off his uniform or leaving early during a game spitting in McKeon's face. They manipulated Uncle Carl into giving him his last contract, which was a mistake. I have an admitted bias..............He's a Wolverine. Screw him!
From: Bushcraftgregg on 15 Sep 2009 19:29
On Sep 14, 9:58 pm, John Kasupski <kc2...(a)spamfilter.verizon.net> wrote: > On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 15:46:31 -0700 (PDT), Bushcraftgregg <gk...(a)earthlink..net> > wrote: > > >On Sep 14, 2:44 am, "Bob Braun" <oxin...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >> "Bushcraftgregg" <gk...(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message > >I remember talking to a couple of Mariner fans maybe a year ago and > >the talk was the Ichiro > >would eventually pass Pete. > > >I don't know, he still has a way to go. I read today > >that he just got his ninth straight 200 hits, no one > >has done that before apparently. > > As of what's showing on baseball Reference as I write this, Ichiro's still got > 2251 more to go to catch up to Pete. > > Think about that. A guy could get 200 hits a year for twenty years in a row and > he still wouldn't quite have caught Pete. That's an astounding number of hits. > When Suzuki catches Rose - if he ever does - I'll probably throw my cane, my > walker, my Geritol, my Ex-Lax, and anything else that's handy at the screen when > he gets #4257. > That last paragraph made me laugh. Yeah, I don't think he'll do it though. Pete had a body and a makeup you just don't see anymore. Ichiro little by little...his body is starting to break down from what I read. The advantage Ichiro does have over Pete is his speed. He legs out a lot of hits that way. That is eventually going to wane. Maybe the stat guys in here can confirm what I'm saying about that. |