Baseball HOF talk

[Cubswin]

"Sandberg, the 1984 NL Most Valuable Player, was a nine-time Gold Glove second baseman for the Chicago Cubs and a 10-time All-Star. He hit 277 homers, at the time of his retirement the most by a second baseman, and his .989 fielding percentage is the highest at the position." link (http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylc=X3oDMTBpa2lpNnFzBF9TAzk1ODYxNzc3BHNlYwN0 bQ--?slug=ap-halloffame&prov=ap&type=lgns)

Could someone please help me understand why Sandberg was not a first time selection? It just doesnt make sense to me.

cubs

[[censored]]

Welcome to the [censored] up steroid era.

I can't believe these dumb [censored] sports writers have forgotten that Sandberg during his era was probaly the league's best 2nd baseman, his team's franchise player, one of the best players in NL and at times an MVP candidate. Until Alomar any talk about second basemen started and stopped with Ryno.

[ThaSaltCracka]

wait, why should he be a 1st ballot entry?

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
wait, why should he be a 1st ballot entry?

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
the 1984 NL Most Valuable Player, was a nine-time Gold Glove second baseman for the Chicago Cubs and a 10-time All-Star. He hit 277 homers, at the time of his retirement the most by a second baseman, and his .989 fielding percentage is the highest at the position

[/ QUOTE ]

It's pretty clear he was the best at his position during his era and one of the best to ever play the position.

[ThaSaltCracka]

oh, because some article says so?

Well, he'll get in eventually, but he isn't a first ballot HoF'er.

Here are some offensivve categories in which he is in the top 100 all time.
AB's(92), Runs(97), Hits(98).

Sure he was an awesome fielder, but that means little when you talk about first ballot HoF'ers.

[ThaSaltCracka]

Alomar in comparison.

Categories he is in the top 100 all time.

BA(25), Games(76), AB's(55), Runs (57), Hits (50), Doubles (40), BB (88), SB (40).

Alomars numbers are also very comparable to many other HoF'ers.

[nolanfan34]

Alomar will be a first ballot HOF, most likely.

[Sponger15SB]

Aren't there more than 100 people in the HOF?

[Cubswin]

Here are some offensivve categories in which he is in the top 100 all time. AB's(92), Runs(97), Hits(98).

Ummm... how many seasons did he play? I think it is safe to say he could have padded his number much more if he chose to stick around the game for 15-20 years.

He left the game as the best defensive 2nd baseman of all time and the HR leader for his position. Please... list the 2nd basemen in the HOF who were better then sandberg.

cubs

[Cubswin]

This article mad me laugh though... lots of errors in his logic. I think the sox (and their newspaper) have fan-base envy. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dirty talk: Sandberg not Hall-worthylink (http://www.suntimes.com/cgi-bin/print.cgi)

January 2, 2005

BY DALE BOWMAN

Ryne Sandberg made me a White Sox fan.

It's not a casual journey from the North Side to the South Side in Chicago baseball. It takes an outsider to do it. Just as it takes an outsider to objectively consider the place of Chicago players in baseball history.

Lord knows Cubs fans can't judge rationally.

Losing has made them loony. Their view of baseball immortality forever is linked to players from the years of yore in Cubs lore: 1969 (Ron Santo) or 1984 (Ryne Sandberg). Years, like always, the Cubs didn't reach the World Series.

Like thousands of others who came to the big city to make their mark, I landed as a 20-something in the North Side neighborhood of Lake View. From just off Racine, it was only blocks to Wrigley Field.

It was the glorious mid-1980s, and the Cubs of Ryno, Jodeeee, Sarge, Keith and Big Red. The Wrigley bleachers were the latest hot thing for young things.

I enjoyed my beer, baseball and babes as much as anyone. At the last baseball game Bill Veeck watched on this earth, I sat a few feet away from him in the center-field bleachers. The last season the Cubs played all day games at Wrigley, 1987, I went to 55.

I saw more of Sandberg than any one human should have to suffer. It was bad enough to have to listen to collective love-sick sighs every time he came to bat. Even worse, as a fan, was watching Sandberg make it through entire seasons without getting his uniform dirty.

The drivel I had to listen to from Cubs fans finally forced me to seek my baseball fix on the South Side.

For years, I dreaded when Sandberg would become eligible for the Hall of Fame. I knew Cubs fans would cry about how they were slighted once again.

Just to refresh my memory that Sandberg wasn't the greatest thing to pick up a glove at second, I crunched some numbers.

I compared Sandberg's fielding statistics with those of six other second basemen: the two best in the modern era (Jackie Robinson and Nellie Fox), two similar contemporaries (Tommy Herr and Juan Samuel), the best fielder of Sandberg's time (Jose Lind) and the man Cubs fans downgrade as Hall of Fame-worthy (Joe Morgan).

None of this is to say that Sandberg wasn't a good player. He was. Just not Hall of Fame-worthy.

Great fielders, Hall of Fame fielders, get to balls. For Sandberg fans, let me translate: That means diving for balls.

The best way to examine getting to balls is to look at real chances -- sum of putouts, assists and errors -- per game. In other words, how many balls a player reaches in a game.

In 2,295 games at second, Fox had 5.52 real chances per game. Robinson had 5.34 in 748 games at second. That's what Hall of Famers do. As fielders, Sandberg (5.15), Lind (5.14) and Morgan (5.13) were respectable.

And Sandberg had several advantages. He played behind great ground-ball pitchers, including one, Greg Maddux, who will be in the Hall of Fame. He played with one of the greatest fielding first basemen of his time in Mark Grace and a shortstop with excellent range and one of the greatest arms ever in Shawon Dunston.

If Sandberg had dirtied his uniform, he would have Hall of Fame fielding stats. Though diving more would mean he wouldn't own the errorless streak and his excellent .055 errors per game would not be as gaudy. Only Herr (.054) had fewer errors per game, but Herr didn't reach as many balls.

As it is, Sandberg has good but not great stats. All the players surveyed had more putouts per game. Sandberg had an outstanding 3.19 assists per game. All but Samuel had more double plays per game. (Samuel was a butcher with .138 errors per game.)

And please don't insult my baseball intelligence with that worthless stat that Sandberg hit the most homers as a second baseman. That's like saying Maddux belongs in the Hall because he is a great fielder. Maddux belongs because he's one of the greatest pitchers ever.

Sandberg was good, even graceful, but he was not one of the greatest second basemen ever.

The most damning stat for me? Sandberg led the Cubs to zero World Series. That's why the game is played, why Morgan belongs.

Enjoy memories of "Ryno, Ryno'' chants on warm August afternoons. Savor his heroics of June 23, 1984, against the Cardinals. But please don't sully the Hall of Fame with his bust.

The only way Sandberg should get in is as the blandest player in baseball history.

[Uston]

Jackie Robinson, Joe Morgan, Nap Lajoie, Rogers Hornsby, Charlie Gehringer, and Eddie Collins were so much better than Sandberg it's ridiculous.

You can probably add Tony Lazzeri, Billy Herman, and Bobby Doerr (as well as Craig Biggio and Roberto Alomar) to this list, also. I think Rod Carew went in as a second-baseman, too.

I do think Sandberg should get in. It's just not as obvious as some may think.

[Cubswin]

Morgan .277 BA, 268 HR, 2517 hits (9277 ABs), .977 FP, 5 Gold Gloves

Sandberg .285 BA, 282 HR, 2386 hits (8385 ABs), .989 FP, 9 Gold Gloves

[Cubswin]

Nap Lajoie, Eddie Collins... so what your saying is you have to go back 90 years to complete your list of 5 better 2nd basemen???


**EDIT** i thought i had originally asked for 5 in the HOF that were better

[ThaSaltCracka]

I am tempted to leave this discussion alone because I am worried that I may be talkin to some rabid cubs fan who won't accept anything other than Sandberg as a first ballot HoF'er.

[Nick B.]

[ QUOTE ]
Morgan .277 BA, 268 HR, 2517 hits (9277 ABs), .977 FP, 5 Gold Gloves

Sandberg .285 BA, 282 HR, 2386 hits (8385 ABs), .989 FP, 9 Gold Gloves

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously you would only include categories that Sandberg is ahead of Morgan.

Morgan 819OPS, 689Sb

Sandberg 796OPS, 344sb

[Cubswin]

Not at all rabid. If you just explain how morgan is voted in his first time around and sandberg is still waiting to get in after two years of eligibility ill shut my trap.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
He left the game as the best defensive 2nd baseman of all time and the HR leader for his position

[/ QUOTE ] first of all, this means nothing to me. 2B has long been a posistion which has been filled with average players, the 80's was no exception.


[ QUOTE ]
Please... list the 2nd basemen in the HOF who were better then sandberg.

[/ QUOTE ] Carew, Eddie Collins, Rogers Hornsby, Nap Jaroie, Joe Morgan(barely), and Jackie Roinson.

I have no clue at all which of these players were first ballots, but it doesn't matter, they all are better.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Not at all rabid. If you just explain how morgan is voted in his first time around and sandberg is still waiting to get in after two years of eligibility ill shut my trap.

[/ QUOTE ]I have zero explanantion for that. Morgan played on some good teams, so perhaps he is overrated. Sandberg will get in simply because he was the best 2B for a long time, and he deserves to be in, but I cannot see how he could possibly considered a first ballot HoF'er, really, be honest with yourself.

[Cubswin]

so not having as many SBs is why morgan was a first time in and sandberg wasnt???

[andyfox]

Low lifetime batting average (absolute numbers), low lifetime home runs, relatively short career, no World Series numbers. Thus unlikely to get in, at least at first.

[Cubswin]

Carew, Eddie Collins, Rogers Hornsby, Nap Jaroie, Joe Morgan(barely), and Jackie Roinson.

3 of them played in the last 60 years. Robinson was better. Carew played more games as a 1st baseman and should have went in as one. Sandbergs numbers are better then morgans.

[Cubswin]

I guess ill just toss it up to the fact that infielders (1B excluded) tend to get overlooked... especially when they come from losing teams.

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess ill just toss it up to the fact that infielders (1B excluded) tend to get overlooked... especially when they come from losing teams.

[/ QUOTE ]this is probably very true. I think to get a lot of attention, you need to be a marqui type player on a losing team.

[Uston]

As you illustrated, Joe Morgan's career numbers were more impressive than Sandberg's, even if the margin isn't enormous. Where Morgan really blasts Sandberg is in peak value and postseason accomplishments. Joe Morgan 1972-1977 is the greatest stretch by a second baseman since before WWII.

[Cubswin]

As you illustrated, Joe Morgan's career numbers were more impressive than Sandberg's

Ummm... where did i say this?

[Uston]

Sorry. That was NickB who illustrated that fact.

FWIW-I think Bill James considers Joe Morgan one of the ten to twenty best players that has ever lived. Maybe the noted Bill James expert Andy Fox could confirm this.

[Cubswin]

Low lifetime batting average

Not for a middle infielder with mad defensive skills. Ozzie Smith's career BA was .262.

low lifetime home runs, relatively short career,

Well, i would expect a lower HR total for a shorter career. Despite his shortened career he still walked away from the game as the HR leader for his position... before small ball parks and shots in the ass.

no World Series numbers.

very true

[Cubswin]

FWIW-I think Bill James considers Joe Morgan one of the ten to twenty best players that has ever lived. Maybe the noted Bill James expert Andy Fox could confirm this.

I always thought it was Joe Morgan that considered Joe Morgan one of the best ball players ever /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[wuwei]

Let's talk about a true travesty... why isn't Bert Blyleven in the HoF yet?

[DontRaisePlz]

[ QUOTE ]
The most damning stat for me? Sandberg led the Cubs to zero World Series. That's why the game is played, why Morgan belongs.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is retarded. In football or basketball, these types of statements can go either way depending on what type of sports fan you are, but in baseball, this screams stupid.

The sad part is the guy actually seemed capable of rational thinking when he used defensive stats (not that they are accurate, but good enough).

[hoyaboy1]

Morgan has a career OBP of .392 - Sandberg's is .344.

Morgan has a career OPS+ of 132. Sandberg's is 114. Morgan also managed to maintain these far superior numbers for a longer period of time and started his career at a younger age.

There is no comparison, really - but Sandberg probably still deserves to make it, just not first ballot.

[andyfox]

Ozzie was known to the writers as The Wizard; Sandberg was known as Ryno. I think also that him quitting and then trying to come back might have hurt him in their eyes.

With middle infielders now hitting home runs like crazy, Sandberg's numbers don't look impressive to the writers anymore.

I'm not defending their position, I'm just trying to explain why he doesn't look like HOF material to many of them. FWIW, I think he's HOF material. There are a lot of players in there who weren't as good as Sandberg.

[jakethebake]

[ QUOTE ]
rabid cubs fan

[/ QUOTE ]
Repetitive and Redundant.

[Paluka]

I don't know about first ballot or whatever- I think a HOFer is a HOFer. If he is deserving he should be first ballot, why do people change their mind so much?
Sandberg is clearly a HOFer. From 1984 to 1990 or so he was the best player at his position and arguably one of the best players in the league. Obviously Hornsby, Collins, Lajoie, and Morgan are a cut above. His career OPS+ (OPS compared to the rest of the league) is almost identical to that of Alomar and Biggio. His raw numbers don't look as good because his peak years were in a low offensive era. He was 27 in 1986. Biggio was 27 in 1992 and Alomar in 1995. The difference from 1986 to 1995 is night and day.

Forget Sandberg. Cubs fans, Cardinals fans, Braves fans, and baseball fans ought to be wondering how Bruce Sutter is not in the Hall of Fame. Not only did the guy revolutionize the position of closer, he also re-invented the split-finger fast ball, the staple of many pitchers today.

[ThaSaltCracka]

is it really that big of a deal that he was the best 2B in the 80's? I mean, the 80's really sucked for that posistion anyways. Especially when you compare the 80's to the 90's, in which there were more than a few players either juast as good as him(and maybe some that are better).

[RogerZBT]

Is there any other position where the 6th best player at that position isn't in the HoF? (Carew played too many games elsewhere to count) No. Any othe position where the all time leader in homers at that position isn't in? No. (I know he got passed by Kent last year.) Sandberg HAS to be in.

My ballot: Boggs, Dawson, Gossage, Morris, Rice, Sandberg, and Sutter. (Mattingly would also get my vote, but only because he's my favorite player ever, not because he's worthy.)

[Paluka]

[ QUOTE ]
is it really that big of a deal that he was the best 2B in the 80's? I mean, the 80's really sucked for that posistion anyways. Especially when you compare the 80's to the 90's, in which there were more than a few players either juast as good as him(and maybe some that are better).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are underestimating the difference between the 80s and the 90s. Sandberg's career OPS+ is the same as Alomar's. Offensive stats were very supprssed in the 80s compared to the 90s. I agree that players like Alomar and Biggio have an edge over Sandberg due to longevity, but I just don't agree that 80s players sucked. Troy Glaus career high in home runs is about the same as Mike Schmidt's. Do you really think they are similar? Players have to be judged vs the other players in their era. We just happened to have lived through a time when baseball changed dramaticaly in a decade.

[ThaSaltCracka]

I said the 80's sucked for second basemen.

Alomar OPS .814
Sandberg OPS .796

[andyfox]

Carew played more games at first base than at second (1184 vs. 1130). I hadn't realized that.

[Drac]

[ QUOTE ]
With middle infielders now hitting home runs like crazy, Sandberg's numbers don't look impressive to the writers anymore.

I'm not defending their position, I'm just trying to explain why he doesn't look like HOF material to many of them. FWIW, I think he's HOF material. There are a lot of players in there who weren't as good as Sandberg.

[/ QUOTE ]

Opening up spots in a HOF based on being better than the worst player already in is a terrible way to go. Every sport has guys in its HOF that were mistakes.

I watched tons of baseball during Sandberg's career and while he was a very good hitting 2B I don't think he's a lock for the HOF. Wrigley was one of the top hitters parks during the 80's and this helped his numbers. The biggest travesty is this over hyping of his defensive abilities. There were 4 or 5 guys EVERY YEAR that were better defensively than Ryno. His range was limited and he rarely dove for balls. He was great on the balls he could reach but range is a critical element for a middle infielder and his was fairly limited. Even my psycho Cub fan buddies of the time made fun of how overrated his D was.

I wonder how many of the people that remember him as a stud were involved in fantasy baseball? He was a top pick every year in our leagues but that doesn't make him anything more than a good offensive player at a position that was very weak in that regard.