Baseball HoF - Longevity vs Brilliance

[Clarkmeister]

I don't want to hijack the thread below, but it brings up an interesting issue. How long must a player be brilliant to compensate for a shortish career, or a career that tailed off dramatically? Some persons to ponder:

Kirby Puckett (already in)
Albert Belle
Dennis Eckersley
Frank Thomas
Pudge Rodriguez
Pedro Martinez (if he retired tomorrow - only 9 or 10 seasons)


There are others, but you get the idea. How brilliant do you need to be in the short or medium term to compensate for not hitting the acceped milestones in the long term?

Also, should less emphasis be placed on the long term (Rafael Palmiero) and more on short term brilliance (Albert Belle)?

[andyfox]

Hard question to answer. Sometimes charisma counts if you had a short stay at the top (Dizzy Dean and Sandy Koufax come to mind.) Sometimes it seems some people have "it" with the voters (Puckett, for example, whose numbers are roughly comparable to Don Mattingly's).

BTW, I don't believe Eck belongs on your list below. He had a long career as a starter before he became a reliever, and a pretty long career as a reliever. I believe he won 20 games one year and may have pitched a no-hitter.

[B-Man]

I think there should be some sort of sliding scale--the more brilliant you are (a la Koufax and Pedro), the less longevity you need. In generaly, brilliance over some period, say for example, 10 years, should count more than longevity over 15 or 20.

In other words, I would be more inclined to vote for a guy who hit 350 home runs in 10 years than someone who hit 450 home runs over 20 years.

Puckett should not be in, and, as Andy pointed out, has numbers very close to Mattingly, who will never come close to being elected.

Eckersley, Pudge and Pedro are locks, even if Pudge/Pedro retired tommorow. Each of them is arguably the best ever at their position. I think Griffey, Jr. would be elected if he retired tmw, too, though he may not be as much of a shoo-in as the others. (I would vote for him without a second thought if I had a vote)

I don't think Albert Belle or Frank Thomas should make the cut, though if Thomas has some big years left in him he could make it.

What if A-Rod sufferred a career-ending injury tmw? Now THAT would be interesting.

[andyfox]

A lot depends, I think, on the definition of the word "great." Who was a greater pitcher, Sandy Koufax or Warren Spahn? If you consider who was a better pitcher in his prime, the answer is Koufax. If you consider who was in his prime for a longer period, the answer is Spahn, since he won as many games as Koufax and Drysdale combined.

Can't remember the exact argument, but Bill James once talked about the area underneath the line. The shapes of the area will vary, but the key is the area. Koufax would have a very high line, with a sharp slope on both sides, but the line would be shorter. Spahn's line would be lower, but much longer. Koufax's would look like a steep, high mountain, Spahn's like a long, level plateau. Yet each would have considerable area under the line.

I like the woman's golf hall of fame: they have specific requirements, I'm not sure exactly what they are, but you have to win x number of tournaments and x majors, or something like that. Hard to implement that in baseball, though, since, say, hitting .300 was pretty easy in the 1930s and now, not so easy in the 1900s or 1960s.

[Sooga]

I find it funny that back in 2000, writers were talking about how Griffey had already done things and put up numbers to merit first-ballot HOF consideration... and now after 2 years of injuries and low numbers, people are popping out of the woodwork to say he doesn't belong in there at all. Personally I would vote him in on the first ballot. There was no disputing that throughout the 90's, Griffey was THE premier center fielder (or outfielder, for that matter) both defensively and offensively. The back-to-back 56 homer years, the gazillion gold gloves, the picture-perfect swing... What he did the past couple years doesn't negate what he did in the 90's.

Frank Thomas I think will be a very interesting HOF discussion. He put up Ted Williams numbers for pretty much all of the 90's, but his defense was mediocre at best, and he's mostly been DH'ing for his career. I honestly don't know if I would vote for him or not.