Now that we've studied Palmeiro to death. What about Fred McGriff? He'll move past 500 HR this year too. Actually a healthy Conseco would have hit about 550 HR or better, which would have easily put him in the Hall. Conseco was pretty dynamic too. He was the first 40-40 guy, and was one of the few guys that you really loved to watch hit, because it was so dramtic when he stepped to the plate.
Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
Collapse
Recommended Videos
Collapse
X
-
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
Now that we've studied Palmeiro to death. What about Fred McGriff? He'll move past 500 HR this year too. Actually a healthy Conseco would have hit about 550 HR or better, which would have easily put him in the Hall. Conseco was pretty dynamic too. He was the first 40-40 guy, and was one of the few guys that you really loved to watch hit, because it was so dramtic when he stepped to the plate. -
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
Now that we've studied Palmeiro to death. What about Fred McGriff? He'll move past 500 HR this year too. Actually a healthy Conseco would have hit about 550 HR or better, which would have easily put him in the Hall. Conseco was pretty dynamic too. He was the first 40-40 guy, and was one of the few guys that you really loved to watch hit, because it was so dramtic when he stepped to the plate.Comment
-
-
-
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Now that we've studied Palmeiro to death. What about Fred McGriff? He'll move past 500 HR this year too. Actually a healthy Conseco would have hit about 550 HR or better, which would have easily put him in the Hall. Conseco was pretty dynamic too. He was the first 40-40 guy, and was one of the few guys that you really loved to watch hit, because it was so dramtic when he stepped to the plate.
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
Canseco only put up Hall of Fame numbers from 86-91, and that is debatable because he only hit about.270 during that time. After 91 he did not even approach HOF numbers (46 HR's in '98, but batted .237). Canseco had power and speed early on, but only stole 10 bases twice after 91 and 20 bases only once. Thank god he didn't stick around long enough to hit 500 HR and ruin that mark for everyone else. Even with 500 he was not even a borderline HOF candidate. He will join Dave Kingman as the only two 400 HR hitters not in the hall.
As for McGriff, he has the longevity, the HR's and the postseason success. He is a debatable candidate, but should get in.Comment
-
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Now that we've studied Palmeiro to death. What about Fred McGriff? He'll move past 500 HR this year too. Actually a healthy Conseco would have hit about 550 HR or better, which would have easily put him in the Hall. Conseco was pretty dynamic too. He was the first 40-40 guy, and was one of the few guys that you really loved to watch hit, because it was so dramtic when he stepped to the plate.
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
Canseco only put up Hall of Fame numbers from 86-91, and that is debatable because he only hit about.270 during that time. After 91 he did not even approach HOF numbers (46 HR's in '98, but batted .237). Canseco had power and speed early on, but only stole 10 bases twice after 91 and 20 bases only once. Thank god he didn't stick around long enough to hit 500 HR and ruin that mark for everyone else. Even with 500 he was not even a borderline HOF candidate. He will join Dave Kingman as the only two 400 HR hitters not in the hall.
As for McGriff, he has the longevity, the HR's and the postseason success. He is a debatable candidate, but should get in.Comment
-
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Now that we've studied Palmeiro to death. What about Fred McGriff? He'll move past 500 HR this year too. Actually a healthy Conseco would have hit about 550 HR or better, which would have easily put him in the Hall. Conseco was pretty dynamic too. He was the first 40-40 guy, and was one of the few guys that you really loved to watch hit, because it was so dramtic when he stepped to the plate.
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
Canseco only put up Hall of Fame numbers from 86-91, and that is debatable because he only hit about.270 during that time. After 91 he did not even approach HOF numbers (46 HR's in '98, but batted .237). Canseco had power and speed early on, but only stole 10 bases twice after 91 and 20 bases only once. Thank god he didn't stick around long enough to hit 500 HR and ruin that mark for everyone else. Even with 500 he was not even a borderline HOF candidate. He will join Dave Kingman as the only two 400 HR hitters not in the hall.
As for McGriff, he has the longevity, the HR's and the postseason success. He is a debatable candidate, but should get in.
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
I don't disagree with what you are saying, but my point was about a healthy Conseco. The guy missed a ton of games, and that is why he fell short of 500 HR. He only averaged 116 games a year for the 16 full seasons he played in the majors. Had he averaged about 140, and that's not asking a lot, he would have ended his career with about 570 homers. And 570 would be a stone cold lock for the Hall of Fame. The numbers he has now don't do the job, but without injuries he would have been a great player. Had he played the same number of games as a guy like Palmeiro he would be around 590 homers. I know ifs and buts don't mean much, but his potential was there.Comment
-
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Now that we've studied Palmeiro to death. What about Fred McGriff? He'll move past 500 HR this year too. Actually a healthy Conseco would have hit about 550 HR or better, which would have easily put him in the Hall. Conseco was pretty dynamic too. He was the first 40-40 guy, and was one of the few guys that you really loved to watch hit, because it was so dramtic when he stepped to the plate.
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
Canseco only put up Hall of Fame numbers from 86-91, and that is debatable because he only hit about.270 during that time. After 91 he did not even approach HOF numbers (46 HR's in '98, but batted .237). Canseco had power and speed early on, but only stole 10 bases twice after 91 and 20 bases only once. Thank god he didn't stick around long enough to hit 500 HR and ruin that mark for everyone else. Even with 500 he was not even a borderline HOF candidate. He will join Dave Kingman as the only two 400 HR hitters not in the hall.
As for McGriff, he has the longevity, the HR's and the postseason success. He is a debatable candidate, but should get in.
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">
I don't disagree with what you are saying, but my point was about a healthy Conseco. The guy missed a ton of games, and that is why he fell short of 500 HR. He only averaged 116 games a year for the 16 full seasons he played in the majors. Had he averaged about 140, and that's not asking a lot, he would have ended his career with about 570 homers. And 570 would be a stone cold lock for the Hall of Fame. The numbers he has now don't do the job, but without injuries he would have been a great player. Had he played the same number of games as a guy like Palmeiro he would be around 590 homers. I know ifs and buts don't mean much, but his potential was there.Comment
-
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
The sad thing is there is a debate about some great players that have been great, or very good for a long period of time.
With the exception of A-Rod (hes only been playing for 6 or 7 seasons, that shouldnt earn him a spot in the HOF, not yet at least imho) players like McGwire, Bonds, Griffey(b4 2000), Bagwell, Gywnn, Palmeiro, Biggio, Alomar, McGriff, L. Walker, F.Thomas(b4 99 or 98), Piazza should be 1st balloters, but i bet you at least 4 or 5 guys i just mentioned wont be. Pitchers, esp "closers" get no love what so ever, unless your name is Seaver, Ryan, Gibson, Koufax, Palmer, but guys like Gossage and Sutcliffe(i believe thats the right spelling) will never get in, meanwhile, there stats were unbelievable during the era they played.
Because of the 5yr delay, and the fact that stats have been "inflated" over the last 10-20yrs, totals and consistentcy should be rewarded, and guys that have been feared consistently like Palmeiro, McGriff, Bagwell, may and will have a hard time because: 1. Writers are picky, if they never really got to see a guy play, then they look at his raw numbers compared to others. 2.Because there are so many good players, they try to judge them to other great players @ their position. 3. If the guy never finished high in the MVP race, he wasnt great enough.
1 and 3 are directly related, seeing that writers are the voters, and i dont believe you should compare guys solely on other players, or on offense alone, which is why Visquel(pretty decent off #'s though) should be a 1st timer also.
Bottom line: There are too many great players, too many players that we've seen get shafted because they didnt play in NY or Chi or La, get shafted because they had some great individual #s, but somone else overshadowed them in those same years, get shafted because a voter, who hasnt watched baseball in 5yrs doesnt recognize their name.
If Palmeiro doesnt get in, then there are alot of great guys that wont either. And the same goes for the Crime Dog, aka Fred McGriffVi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
"Do you know how to catch a ball with no eyes, and stubby hands?.......You catch it with your heart"Comment
-
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
The sad thing is there is a debate about some great players that have been great, or very good for a long period of time.
With the exception of A-Rod (hes only been playing for 6 or 7 seasons, that shouldnt earn him a spot in the HOF, not yet at least imho) players like McGwire, Bonds, Griffey(b4 2000), Bagwell, Gywnn, Palmeiro, Biggio, Alomar, McGriff, L. Walker, F.Thomas(b4 99 or 98), Piazza should be 1st balloters, but i bet you at least 4 or 5 guys i just mentioned wont be. Pitchers, esp "closers" get no love what so ever, unless your name is Seaver, Ryan, Gibson, Koufax, Palmer, but guys like Gossage and Sutcliffe(i believe thats the right spelling) will never get in, meanwhile, there stats were unbelievable during the era they played.
Because of the 5yr delay, and the fact that stats have been "inflated" over the last 10-20yrs, totals and consistentcy should be rewarded, and guys that have been feared consistently like Palmeiro, McGriff, Bagwell, may and will have a hard time because: 1. Writers are picky, if they never really got to see a guy play, then they look at his raw numbers compared to others. 2.Because there are so many good players, they try to judge them to other great players @ their position. 3. If the guy never finished high in the MVP race, he wasnt great enough.
1 and 3 are directly related, seeing that writers are the voters, and i dont believe you should compare guys solely on other players, or on offense alone, which is why Visquel(pretty decent off #'s though) should be a 1st timer also.
Bottom line: There are too many great players, too many players that we've seen get shafted because they didnt play in NY or Chi or La, get shafted because they had some great individual #s, but somone else overshadowed them in those same years, get shafted because a voter, who hasnt watched baseball in 5yrs doesnt recognize their name.
If Palmeiro doesnt get in, then there are alot of great guys that wont either. And the same goes for the Crime Dog, aka Fred McGriffVi Veri Universum Vivus Vici
"Do you know how to catch a ball with no eyes, and stubby hands?.......You catch it with your heart"Comment
-
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
I agree with much of what you said blaise, but Sutcliffe will never get in the Hall Of Fame. He only had 171 wins with a .552 winning percentage and an ERA of 4.08, far from HOF numbers. Now the closers you have a point. Gossage should be there as should Sutter. Eckersley will make, so should Rivera and I really hope Hoffman gets in too. We are now in the era of the closer so more of them will start to get consideration. I forgot Lee Smith too, he's ths all time saves leader, he should be a lock for God sake.Comment
-
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
I agree with much of what you said blaise, but Sutcliffe will never get in the Hall Of Fame. He only had 171 wins with a .552 winning percentage and an ERA of 4.08, far from HOF numbers. Now the closers you have a point. Gossage should be there as should Sutter. Eckersley will make, so should Rivera and I really hope Hoffman gets in too. We are now in the era of the closer so more of them will start to get consideration. I forgot Lee Smith too, he's ths all time saves leader, he should be a lock for God sake.Comment
-
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
Sutcliffe no way, was very good for a few years, but injuries and probably conditioning didn't help him.
Canseco was awesome for awhile, but career wise he is just not a HOFer.
McGriff is a tough one, obvioulsy a very consistent excellent hitter, he is the definition of a guy who was steady is whole career but never great, not sure if that qualifies as an HOFer.Comment
-
Re: Palmeiro-Hall of fame? or Not
Sutcliffe no way, was very good for a few years, but injuries and probably conditioning didn't help him.
Canseco was awesome for awhile, but career wise he is just not a HOFer.
McGriff is a tough one, obvioulsy a very consistent excellent hitter, he is the definition of a guy who was steady is whole career but never great, not sure if that qualifies as an HOFer.Comment
Comment