Posted by all3 on 7/27/2016 5:40:00 PM (view original):
Posted by dahsdebater on 7/27/2016 5:21:00 PM (view original):
Posted by all3 on 7/27/2016 3:36:00 PM (view original):
Posted by wylie715 on 7/27/2016 2:15:00 PM (view original):
He was very good for a long time, but that does not make him hall of fame worthy.
Like Jeter.
There's a big difference between being very good for a long time as a 1B/OF and being very good for a long time at shortstop.
It's more difficult to last, but good is still only good.
I don't want "Sure he was only good, but he played a long time." in the HOF.
Of course, I don't want "He was great those couple years." in either.
I'm not going to claim there's any benchmark numbers for performance, longevity, or the combo, which does make the argument of who's in and who's out very subjective.
That subjectivity probably results in too many guys being admitted (in all sports).
It's not just more difficult to last. There also just aren't guys who can play MIF positions who ARE "best hitter in baseball" caliber bats. It's not a fair standard for HOF inclusion not because of some subjective feeling about what you should have to do at each position offensively for the HOF, but because objectively it's the only way you
have MIF in the Hall.
I mean seriously, how many middle infielders, in the entire history of the sport, have been MVP-caliber bats for more than 1-2 seasons? Honus Wagner, Rogers Hornsby, Nap Lajoie, Joe Morgan, A-Rod, and Ripken. Maybe Arky Vaughan and Eddie Collins if you want to be generous in your definition of an MVP-caliber bat at a different position. So by this standard you have between 3 and 4 HOFers at each middle infield spot? I don't think many people want that. And if you're going to include any more guys beyond these, Jeter is comfortably in the next group. He OPSed over .850 6 times in his career. Go look how many shortstops in Major League history can say that.