"He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

[Blzer]

I take offense to this. If a player puts up a good pace of numbers that he is expected to do (with a decline, sure), then I understand what they're going for with their saying, provided that the player lasts the number of years they expect as well.

However, let's take the most extreme hypothetical situation with someone like Albert Pujols. Let's say he just never gets off this snide that he's found himself in the first month of the year. Let's say that for the next ten years, he hits .240 and totals around 150 HR. Again, this probably just won't happen to the extent that I might as well say it won't happen, but you truly never know for sure.

Anyway, do we only look at his career totals? After all, he'd be looking at ~600 HR if he reached that feat, and his career average would still surface somewhere between .280-.290, but those last ten years would simply be abysmal.

So I kind of have two questions here:

1) Can you discredit a player at all for having a prolonging lackluster stint in his career, especially on the back nine?

2) If not, can Albert Pujols retire today and be considered a Hall of Famer? Or does a certain amount of longevity come into play with the accolades, regardless of the numbers he puts up down the line?

I'm just wondering where people stand on this matter, because it makes me wonder if someone like a Pujols has any shot in taking himself out of HOF contention simply by sucking near the end of his career. Again, I don't see why he can't bounce out of this slump (and it just might take one home run for him to have the season of his life thereafter), but in this extreme scenario, I wanted to know people's thoughts on the matter.

And on that note, based on your opinion of the quote in the thread, who else can you find be in this category, no matter the age of the player? (yes, I'm also including people who for some reason want to include someone like Bryce Harper)

[Sportsforever]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

I take offense to this. If a player puts up a good pace of numbers that he is expected to do (with a decline, sure), then I understand what they're going for with their saying, provided that the player lasts the number of years they expect as well.

However, let's take the most extreme hypothetical situation with someone like Albert Pujols. Let's say he just never gets off this snide that he's found himself in the first month of the year. Let's say that for the next ten years, he hits .240 and totals around 150 HR. Again, this probably just won't happen to the extent that I might as well say it won't happen, but you truly never know for sure.

Anyway, do we only look at his career totals? After all, he'd be looking at ~600 HR if he reached that feat, and his career average would still surface somewhere between .280-.290, but those last ten years would simply be abysmal.

So I kind of have two questions here:

1) Can you discredit a player at all for having a prolonging lackluster stint in his career, especially on the back nine?

2) If not, can Albert Pujols retire today and be considered a Hall of Famer? Or does a certain amount of longevity come into play with the accolades, regardless of the numbers he puts up down the line?

I'm just wondering where people stand on this matter, because it makes me wonder if someone like a Pujols has any shot in taking himself out of HOF contention simply by sucking near the end of his career. Again, I don't see why he can't bounce out of this slump (and it just might take one home run for him to have the season of his life thereafter), but in this extreme scenario, I wanted to know people's thoughts on the matter.

And on that note, based on your opinion of the quote in the thread, who else can you find be in this category, no matter the age of the player? (yes, I'm also including people who for some reason want to include someone like Bryce Harper)

Well, it can certainly happen (see Dale Murphy/Don Mattingly for recent examples). IMO, if Pujols hung it up today he's a HOF'r so no, I don't see him not making it if he sucked from here on out. I don't think he'd play for 10 years sucking, however, so his numbers really wouldn't get hurt that much.

I think we're a bit pre-mature to talk about Albert's sucking for 10 years though...

[Blzer]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

Well, it can certainly happen (see Dale Murphy/Don Mattingly for recent examples). IMO, if Pujols hung it up today he's a HOF'r so no, I don't see him not making it if he sucked from here on out. I don't think he'd play for 10 years sucking, however, so his numbers really wouldn't get hurt that much.

I think we're a bit pre-mature to talk about Albert's sucking for 10 years though...

Absolutely we are, but he was just in a perfect situation where I could throw that out hypothetically. That is, he has a pace to be of the greatest players of all time, but if the pace of this season was telling of the rest of his career, what would that mean for his accreditation into the HOF?

Personally, I kind of like seeing him struggle. Not him specifically, but I like seeing players sign huge contracts and having it fly into the organization's face. Might mean salaries will be less inflated in the future, because absolutely nothing is guaranteed.

[Sportsforever]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

Absolutely we are, but he was just in a perfect situation where I could throw that out hypothetically. That is, he has a pace to be of the greatest players of all time, but if the pace of this season was telling of the rest of his career, what would that mean for his accreditation into the HOF?

Personally, I kind of like seeing him struggle. Not him specifically, but I like seeing players sign huge contracts and having it fly into the organization's face. Might mean salaries will be less inflated in the future, because absolutely nothing is guaranteed.

Personally I don't understand GM's ever signing players to these huge contracts. I can't think of ONE that has worked out. You could argue that ARod has given the Yankees some good years, but he's got another 5 years to go at 25/per and he's not even close to worth that anymore.

[ImTellinTim]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

Absolutely we are, but he was just in a perfect situation where I could throw that out hypothetically. That is, he has a pace to be of the greatest players of all time, but if the pace of this season was telling of the rest of his career, what would that mean for his accreditation into the HOF?

Personally, I kind of like seeing him struggle. Not him specifically, but I like seeing players sign huge contracts and having it fly into the organization's face. Might mean salaries will be less inflated in the future, because absolutely nothing is guaranteed.

Albert Pujols struggling isn't going to do anything to future contracts. At all.

[SPTO]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

Albert Pujols struggling isn't going to do anything to future contracts. At all.

Yeah, some GM will probably think to himself "He probably lied about his age when he signed his first pro contract" and use that as rational for when he signs some guy to a huge mega contract.

As for the question, I think a HOFer has to show at LEAST 10 great years with a slow decline and then 2 or 3 really bad years. We've seen instances where guys were on a HOF track but fell off the face of the planet for various reasons (Mattingly and Murphy are great examples) and so they're not in the Hall when conceivably they should. It's not fair but it's how human nature works out. I mean you'd think Murphy would be in by now just based on how much the media people liked him.

So if Pujols were to turn into a pumpkin for the next 10 years I think he'd be hard pressed to get his due but would probably still get in based on just how much he's done already. If he were to (heaven forbid) die tomorrow he'd probably make the HOF on the first ballot. I think seeing someone age and struggle can sometimes blind the voters to the numbers and significant things they've done whereas if someone died young while having HOF numbers renders them immortal and forever young in the minds of people.

[55]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

3 time MVP
2 time World Series Champion
Rookie of the Year
9 time All-Star
6 time Silver Slugger
2 time Gold Glove

Career line of .326/.418/.611

Three players have a higher career slugging percentage: Babe Ruth, Ted Williams and Lou Gehrig.

Five players have a higher career OPS: Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, Lou Gehrig, Barry Bonds and Jimmie Foxx.

That's it.

He's a stone cold lock for the HoF already no matter what the future holds.

[Sportsforever]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

BTW - I always find discussions like this interesting and the counter to the example you gave is the guy who is average/mediocre most of his career and then goes lights out to finish. Sandy Koufax was that guy...from 1955 to 1961 he wasn't that great...from 1962-1966 he was unbelievable (although I think Dodger Stadium and the era he was in had a lot to do with it). The guy made the HOF and you hear people tout him as the best LHP of all time (Lefty Grove, Steve Carlton, and Randy Johnson were all better IMO) all off of 5 great years to FINISH his career.

Now, let's say he had started his career with those 5 great years and then finished with the 7 mediocre years...would he be a HOF'r? I think probably not.

[Blzer]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

BTW - I always find discussions like this interesting and the counter to the example you gave is the guy who is average/mediocre most of his career and then goes lights out to finish. Sandy Koufax was that guy...from 1955 to 1961 he wasn't that great...from 1962-1966 he was unbelievable (although I think Dodger Stadium and the era he was in had a lot to do with it). The guy made the HOF and you hear people tout him as the best LHP of all time (Lefty Grove, Steve Carlton, and Randy Johnson were all better IMO) all off of 5 great years to FINISH his career.

Now, let's say he had started his career with those 5 great years and then finished with the 7 mediocre years...would he be a HOF'r? I think probably not.

I was going to bring up that kind of example as well, but I couldn't think of the best example at the time. Koufax is definitely a great example.

[1andonly]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

Pujols is probably the best hitter (not player) of all time.

[snepp]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

Pujols is probably the best hitter (not player) of all time.

Right-handed hitter perhaps, certainly not better than some of the lefties.

[Blzer]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

Pujols is probably the best hitter (not player) of all time.

Indeed. However, let's say he starts hitting worse than any replacement player out there for the next ten years. Can we still make that argument for his career as a whole? That's the question at hand.

This isn't just for Pujols, but for any player.

[55]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

He won't be on the roster for anywhere near ten years if he keeps hitting the way he has.

[JBH3]

Pujols has two rings and has been considered the best of his era, even if he hits a steep decline beginning this yr he is still a first ballot HOFer w/out question IMO.

Sent from my Droid, most likely when I've been taking a dump.

[Blzer]

Re: "He will be a Hall of Famer someday..."

Okay, so then next question... say he (or somebody like him) uses steroids from this point on, but for some reason only gets caught down the road. In? Or nullified?