Posted by ncmusician_7 on 11/16/2017 2:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 2:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ncmusician_7 on 11/16/2017 2:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 2:12:00 PM (view original):
I wouldn't put Ortiz in. I think he falls just short of HOF quality. I'd put Sheffield in before him. Definitely Edgar Martinez. Larry Walker and Jim Thome. Maybe even Scott Rolen.

I'm curious why you would put Edgar Martinez in before David Ortiz.

Martinez hit:

312/418/515 with a 147 wRC+ and 68 WAR

Ortiz hit

282/365/525 with a 140 wRC+ and 55 WAR

Martinez was better.

.286/.380/.552 was the slash line for Ortiz

Well, ****...you are correct. Not sure where the 282/365/525 number came from.

I'd still put Martinez ahead of him, but the smaller OBP, larger SLG gaps make it a lot closer.

Posted by cccp1014 on 11/16/2017 2:09:00 PM (view original):
I think he gets in because he was a winner and the PED test may not count against him as much as you think as he posted great numbers afterward as well and for 13 year post that 2003 test he never tested positive. I have a Boston bias of course but I think he gets in.

Barry Bonds never failed a PED test (that we know of) and was a much better hitter than Ortiz and he also played defense. So, you think Ortiz will get in but Bonds won't? Because Ortiz won a couple of rings? I don't think either gets in.

Posted by Got_Worms on 11/16/2017 12:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by wylie715 on 11/16/2017 12:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2017 11:31:00 AM (view original):
And, if Ortiz's career arc doesn't scream PED!!!!!!!!!, I don't know whose does.

Brady Anderson?

Brady Anderson's career arc spanned one season.

and your point is?

Ortiz is getting in. Book it.

Posted by wylie715 on 11/16/2017 2:41:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 11/16/2017 2:09:00 PM (view original):
I think he gets in because he was a winner and the PED test may not count against him as much as you think as he posted great numbers afterward as well and for 13 year post that 2003 test he never tested positive. I have a Boston bias of course but I think he gets in.

Barry Bonds never failed a PED test (that we know of) and was a much better hitter than Ortiz and he also played defense. So, you think Ortiz will get in but Bonds won't? Because Ortiz won a couple of rings? I don't think either gets in.

I think BB gets in too.

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 2:37:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ncmusician_7 on 11/16/2017 2:32:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 2:28:00 PM (view original):

Posted by ncmusician_7 on 11/16/2017 2:21:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 2:12:00 PM (view original):
I wouldn't put Ortiz in. I think he falls just short of HOF quality. I'd put Sheffield in before him. Definitely Edgar Martinez. Larry Walker and Jim Thome. Maybe even Scott Rolen.

I'm curious why you would put Edgar Martinez in before David Ortiz.

Martinez hit:

312/418/515 with a 147 wRC+ and 68 WAR

Ortiz hit

282/365/525 with a 140 wRC+ and 55 WAR

Martinez was better.

.286/.380/.552 was the slash line for Ortiz

Well, ****...you are correct. Not sure where the 282/365/525 number came from.

I'd still put Martinez ahead of him, but the smaller OBP, larger SLG gaps make it a lot closer.

You are ignoring his post season success. Arguably w/o him the Yankees fans are still yelling "1918"....

I'm not ignoring it. His 289/404/543 postseason line is basically the same as his career regular season line. I don't see a reason to give him a bonus for it.

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 2:12:00 PM (view original):
I wouldn't put Ortiz in. I think he falls just short of HOF quality. I'd put Sheffield in before him. Definitely Edgar Martinez. Larry Walker and Jim Thome. Maybe even Scott Rolen.

Holy ****!!!!

This shocks me, Mr. "I Like a Big Hall of Fame".

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 2:56:00 PM (view original):
I'm not ignoring it. His 289/404/543 postseason line is basically the same as his career regular season line. I don't see a reason to give him a bonus for it.

Because he faced better pitching in the post season and again w/o him the Sox may still be crying that they have not won since 1918. How about his most recent success vs. St. Louis in the WS? Pretty impressive?

That's great. But I don't think his career as a whole merits induction. The good stuff he did in the playoffs isn't enough to push him over the line.

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 3:07:00 PM (view original):
That's great. But I don't think his career as a whole merits induction. The good stuff he did in the playoffs isn't enough to push him over the line.

He hit 541 HRs and 632 doubles (10th all time) and he wasn't exactly a speed guy?
In the WS he hit a combined .455 and won 3 rings?

I disagree 100% with you on this matter. He has the tangibles and intangibles.

Posted by cccp1014 on 11/16/2017 3:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 3:07:00 PM (view original):
That's great. But I don't think his career as a whole merits induction. The good stuff he did in the playoffs isn't enough to push him over the line.

He hit 541 HRs and 632 doubles (10th all time) and he wasn't exactly a speed guy?
In the WS he hit a combined .455 and won 3 rings?

I disagree 100% with you on this matter. He has the tangibles and intangibles.

'roider

Posted by MikeT23 on 11/16/2017 3:25:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 11/16/2017 3:16:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 11/16/2017 3:07:00 PM (view original):
That's great. But I don't think his career as a whole merits induction. The good stuff he did in the playoffs isn't enough to push him over the line.

He hit 541 HRs and 632 doubles (10th all time) and he wasn't exactly a speed guy?
In the WS he hit a combined .455 and won 3 rings?

I disagree 100% with you on this matter. He has the tangibles and intangibles.

'roider

Let's for arguments sake take that out. If he was not would you believe he should get in based on numbers both regular season and post season and his intangibles.

I ask for you to just for this debate exclude roids because so many people differ on the matter. IMO it was the era so players like AROD, Clemens and Sheffield should still get it in. But I understand those that view this as "cheating" and that players should be excluded.

I don't really care about 'roids. I feel they should be dispensed in the dugout like Pez.

That said, it seems like he was the most mediocre player to benefit the absolute most from them. ARod, Clemens, Sheffield were great ballplayers who wanted to extend/enhance their greatness. Ortiz was a guy who couldn't keep a job who went on to put up some really great numbers.

But, if I were to pretend he didn't juice, his post-season and personality gets him in. Not a gimme but he's in.

Thank you for the honest response.