Posted by MikeT23 on 1/17/2017 1:25:00 PM (view original):
Who's Batman? dahs or jtpops?

Since they're agreeing about Rolen, one must be Robin.

Dahs likes to play alpha male with his posts sometimes, so he's definitely Batman. Jtpoops is the somewhat frail and slightly effeminate Robin.

This coming from Grover Dill. PS: love this childhood photo of you and your big bro Mikey.

Posted by tecwrg on 1/17/2017 1:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 1/17/2017 1:25:00 PM (view original):
Who's Batman? dahs or jtpops?

Since they're agreeing about Rolen, one must be Robin.

Dahs likes to play alpha male with his posts sometimes, so he's definitely Batman. Jtpoops is the somewhat frail and slightly effeminate Robin.

That makes sense.

Posted by Jtpsops on 1/17/2017 1:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 1/17/2017 1:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 1/17/2017 1:17:00 PM (view original):
I never had that feeling about Palmeiro, either. Yet if he hadn't tested positive, he'd be in the HOF.

I guarantee there are a few HOFers who didn't feel like "best all-time" players during their careers, but when it was all said and done, people looked back and realized they had a HOF career.

Here's a clue: if a player has never had a "one of the best all-time" reputation during their careers, then they're not HOFers.

Again, you're going by offense. Did Rolen stand out as an all-time great hitter during his career? No.

But he DID have a reputation for being one of the best defensive 3B ever during his career. And considering your anti-DH boner for guys who don't play the field, you should appreciate defense.

Unless you're all about D-rated defenders who hit ball very far, make home run.

Did I say "offensive all-time best 3B"? Or did I say "all-time best 3B", which includes the total package of offense and defense.

Hindsight after a player's career is over should not elevate him to something higher than how he was regarded as an active player.

Rolen = good player. Rolen NOT = all-time great player.

Posted by tecwrg on 1/17/2017 1:33:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 1/17/2017 1:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 1/17/2017 1:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 1/17/2017 1:17:00 PM (view original):
I never had that feeling about Palmeiro, either. Yet if he hadn't tested positive, he'd be in the HOF.

I guarantee there are a few HOFers who didn't feel like "best all-time" players during their careers, but when it was all said and done, people looked back and realized they had a HOF career.

Here's a clue: if a player has never had a "one of the best all-time" reputation during their careers, then they're not HOFers.

Again, you're going by offense. Did Rolen stand out as an all-time great hitter during his career? No.

But he DID have a reputation for being one of the best defensive 3B ever during his career. And considering your anti-DH boner for guys who don't play the field, you should appreciate defense.

Unless you're all about D-rated defenders who hit ball very far, make home run.

Did I say "offensive all-time best 3B"? Or did I say "all-time best 3B", which includes the total package of offense and defense.

Hindsight after a player's career is over should not elevate him to something higher than how he was regarded as an active player.

Rolen = good player. Rolen NOT = all-time great player.

You must have a very small HOF if we're only allowing players that were dominant on both sides of the ball.

Where did I say that?

In this thread. The fact that you think it's laughable to even consider Rolen means you don't value players who don't dominate both offensively and defensively.

There are 16 3B in the hall (the least of any position, as was mentioned earlier). Rolen is a better defender than all but 2-3 of them, and a better hitter than half. And being the smart guy that you are, you realize that the HOF merits of players should be measured against others at their positions. You can't compare C to 3B, 2B to 1B, etc. Measured against the best 3B of all-time, and those already in the HOF, Rolen at very least deserves consideration.

What are some of the other 3rd baseman during the Rolen era? Rolen might played in the wrong decade cuz he played in the offensive 90s and 2000s. I get he was a great fielder at the position but I don't feel that's enough. On the other hand, is Adrian Beltre a HoF? Better hitting version of Scott Rolen

Beltre is definitely a HOFer. He's likely going to finish as the 5th 500/3000 guy in history, and is arguably the best defensive 3B ever.

Beyond that, Rolen is the next guy up in that era, with the exception of Wright, who overlapped with Rolen for a few years.

Posted by Jtpsops on 1/17/2017 1:54:00 PM (view original):
In this thread. The fact that you think it's laughable to even consider Rolen means you don't value players who don't dominate both offensively and defensively.

There are 16 3B in the hall (the least of any position, as was mentioned earlier). Rolen is a better defender than all but 2-3 of them, and a better hitter than half. And being the smart guy that you are, you realize that the HOF merits of players should be measured against others at their positions. You can't compare C to 3B, 2B to 1B, etc. Measured against the best 3B of all-time, and those already in the HOF, Rolen at very least deserves consideration.

My problem with Rolen is that at no time during his career did he ever feel like a Hall of Fame player.

Player's don't magically have had Hall of Fame careers five years after they retire. If you don't pass the smell test for HOF worthiness at the time you retire, then you're not a HOFer.

Beltre is absolutely a HOF 3Bman at this point. He could suffer a career-ending injury before the season starts and he'd go in, and deservedly so. But that doesn't mean Rolen shouldn't. His best 10 years were from 1997-2006 and he was easily the best 3B in baseball during that time. A-Rod switched to 3B toward the end of that period, and Beltre happened to be better than Rolen in Rolen's best season, but nobody was close to Rolen's level for more than a year or 2 of that decade.

Tec, your standards are obviously way out of touch with reality. There are over 21 players per position in the HOF at this point. You can't have that many guys who were "one of the best ever." What you call 'common sense' is really 'I'm too lazy to actually compare this guy to the historical standard at his position.' You and Mike can spend all the time you like in Fantasyland where only 40 or 50 guys make the HOF, but in the real world it just makes you sound ignorant when you offhandedly dismiss guys like Rolen or Beltre or Raines and can't even begin to formulate an intelligent argument in favor of your position.

I challenge you to come up with a list of 12 3B in the history of baseball who were better than Rolen.

Beltre is a lock. Jones is a lock. That would get us to something like 18 or 19 third baseman (depending on Arod and Edgar positional assignments) in the Hall or deserving but left out for PEDs.

I think you could make a pretty good argument that Rolen ranks around the top 10 third basemen of all time. That's a hall of famer, regardless of how you felt about him during his career.

Oh good, Batman dahs is here to stick up for his little buddy.

I'm pretty sure that it's not my standards that are out of touch with reality. Rolen's never going to reach 75%. That will be proven over the next 10 years.

I'm not sure where you're getting that I'm dismissing Beltre. I do think he's a HOFer. I didn't a couple of years ago, but the fact that he is still playing at very high level in his late 30's has changed my mind.

I've argued about Raines many times over the years. I'm not going to rehash that over again now. I don't think he's deserving. He was nothing special after age 27. If he gets in tomorrow, it will be through the back door as voters will be throwing sympathy votes towards him in his final year of eligibility. Much like how Jim Rice got in (undeservedly) a few years ago.

As for making a list . . . make your own ******* list. I'm not your puppet. And I also don't believe in quotas, so just because there's "x" number of players at one position doesn't necessarily mean that you need "x" number of players at every position.

Posted by tecwrg on 1/17/2017 2:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by Jtpsops on 1/17/2017 1:54:00 PM (view original):
In this thread. The fact that you think it's laughable to even consider Rolen means you don't value players who don't dominate both offensively and defensively.

There are 16 3B in the hall (the least of any position, as was mentioned earlier). Rolen is a better defender than all but 2-3 of them, and a better hitter than half. And being the smart guy that you are, you realize that the HOF merits of players should be measured against others at their positions. You can't compare C to 3B, 2B to 1B, etc. Measured against the best 3B of all-time, and those already in the HOF, Rolen at very least deserves consideration.

My problem with Rolen is that at no time during his career did he ever feel like a Hall of Fame player.

Player's don't magically have had Hall of Fame careers five years after they retire. If you don't pass the smell test for HOF worthiness at the time you retire, then you're not a HOFer.

I used to take this approach then Bert Blyleven got elected on his 15th try!

Posted by dahsdebater on 1/17/2017 2:16:00 PM (view original):
Beltre is absolutely a HOF 3Bman at this point. He could suffer a career-ending injury before the season starts and he'd go in, and deservedly so. But that doesn't mean Rolen shouldn't. His best 10 years were from 1997-2006 and he was easily the best 3B in baseball during that time. A-Rod switched to 3B toward the end of that period, and Beltre happened to be better than Rolen in Rolen's best season, but nobody was close to Rolen's level for more than a year or 2 of that decade.

Tec, your standards are obviously way out of touch with reality. There are over 21 players per position in the HOF at this point. You can't have that many guys who were "one of the best ever." What you call 'common sense' is really 'I'm too lazy to actually compare this guy to the historical standard at his position.' You and Mike can spend all the time you like in Fantasyland where only 40 or 50 guys make the HOF, but in the real world it just makes you sound ignorant when you offhandedly dismiss guys like Rolen or Beltre or Raines and can't even begin to formulate an intelligent argument in favor of your position.

I challenge you to come up with a list of 12 3B in the history of baseball who were better than Rolen.

This is a retarded argument. The smartest kid on the short bus doesn't get into Yale because he was a the smartest kid on the short bus.

FWIW, I can easily dismiss Rolen and Raines because they aren't HOFers. Raines hasn't gotten better. I'm not sure why his support has grown because, in truth, that makes no sense. People haven't had full ballots and he was the 11th man. They just haven't felt he was worthy before. Rolen never gets in regardless of how many 3B are in. See: smartest kid/short bus/Yale story.

I've changed my mind on Beltre. He's probably full of PED but he's carried himself well over the last few years.