Number 15
by shadetree on Nov 18, 2009 10:44 AM EST
Email
Print
via witorwisdom.files.wordpress.com
OK so I may be jumping the gun here a bit... but it seems that Matt Holiday is heading to the East coast for a big payday. Saddened as I may be by the gaping hole this leaves in left feild I can't help but think about the other number 15. Jim Edmonds. If Holiday leaves it is time to retire that number. Jimmy ballgame deserves this honor. Lets just glance at some of his stats.
Gold Gloves 8 Six with St. Louis.
382 Career home runs. 241 with St. Louis.
1176 Career RBI 713 with the Cardinals.
A career 988 fielding percentage.
Of course some of you wonderful stat heads out there may be able to futher elaborate on his stats. These stats however do not come close to describing what it was like to watch him play. The acrobatics in the outfield. That beautiful swing. And of course that all around swagger. I mean seriously just look at the picture above. He deserves this.
131 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I actually looked at the retired Cardinals numbers in a Fanpost a while back.
Let me clear, that I am about as big of a Jimmy Edmonds fan as you’ll find, and I would have to do a bit of research, but the Cardinals’ retired number bar is extremely high. Here’s my Fanpost on Recognizing Cardinal Greats.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
and let's not become the Yankees just yet.
http://www.flipflopflyin.com/flipflopflyball/info-yankeesretirednumbers.html
"It was like two ankles." AVENGE BOOG
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
by Yadi2Second on Nov 18, 2009 11:42 AM EST up reply actions
That was nice to read again
thanks
Go Broncos!!
by from First to Third on Nov 18, 2009 9:13 PM EST up reply actions
Yeah, it's pretty much the HoFers and Boyer, who should be a HoFer
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
Boyer?
come on, he only pitched for us for about a month. I’m not even sure Brian Barton belongs in the hall, personally.
Felonius Monk - bitching to contact since 2008
by Felonius_Monk on Nov 19, 2009 1:53 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs
If you're going to make that joke
you should have invoked Worrell
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
Just read that for the first time
and I am damn sorry I missed it last time. It is amazing how far this franchise has come and where it is heading, we have always struggled to “keep up with the Yankees” in terms of finaicial means but yet we somehow come up with other ways of competing whether it is with creating a little thing called a “farm system” or expanding into other markets for scouting.
"Come test me every day if you want," says Pujols, "Everything I ever made in this game I would give back to the Cardinals if I got caught."
I don't think his number deserves to be retired
Look at the other numbers the Cardinals have retired — In the last decade, the only guy I can think of who would deserve this honor would by #5.
I would retire Ted Simmons’ #31 before I’d retire Jimmy Edmonds’ #15.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
Uhhh....
“Simba” wore #23…
"In this game, don't nobody know nuthin' about nuthin'." -- attributed to Lawrence Peter "Yogi" Berra
by The Ol Goaler on Nov 18, 2009 11:52 AM EST up reply actions
Dammit
I knew that didn’t look right when I was researching it, I just didn’t go far enough around the web I guess.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
Unfortunately fielding percentage isn't going to get you very far with this crowd...
..and neither will a great picture. After all, I don’t see anyone clamoring to retire #24…
Free Milton
Ha
Dick is a little bit of a different case now. Edmonds was great for an extended peiod of time. Rick was a rolercoaster. First he is the next big thing future Cy Young winning ace. Then he can’t find the strike zone. And presto a few years later you have a feel good story with heartwarming moments but overall not more than A great glove and a below average hitter. Don’t get me wrong I love Rick.
don't see the comparison
I cannot repeal the words of the golden eel
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 18, 2009 11:53 PM EST up reply actions
Uh... no
Rick’s a great fielder like Jimmy is, but Jim strikes out a lot less.
Best moment I've ever seen at a game in person
"If it was Zoom Zoom'd, we'd be doom doom'd" - making fun of myself for my bad luck streak in the 2009 season
Looking forward to Cardinals baseball in 2010!
My favourite ever Cardinal, I think
although it’s close with Carp.
I think he’s probably a HOFer. I also think it’s ridiculous that they let #15 be worn so soon after he finished with us – bit of a slap in the face, even. They should’ve at least left it for 5-10 years whilst his legacy is fully evaluated in retrospect. I wouldn’t be aversed to retiring it, although (as with his HOF candidacy) you could argue it’s a bit borderline. It’d also be wierd to do it now after they let someone else wear it!
With all the talk recently of going out to grab a LHB to play LF and platoon with Craig, I just wonder….. Nah.
Felonius Monk - bitching to contact since 2008
A number is a number
and while I respect him for his service here, it shouldn’t be retired, and other people should have the opportunity to wear it if that’s what they want to do. I’d just as soon not see anyone in #51 either, but I’m sure someone will come along and grab it at some point, and I don’t think it should be retired either.
I’ve always thought the whole “Number retiring” thing was kind of a scam anyway. There are players for certain teams that I would never think would have merited retirement, yet they are retired.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
I think its more
of fan appeal to it, sentimental value retiring the number, not so much stats
Pujols takes out "I" in BIG and "A" in MAC, previously considered to be an unyielding, consonant threat
and this is why
people (im a people too) want the number to be retired in the first place. they only then turn to stats to justify it. i loved jimmy ballgame. when i think of him, i think diving catches, over the wall catches, 2004 nlcs game 6, etc. i don’t care if he didnt rack up all the stats. he came over at the beginning of the 2000s and helped end the misery that was the ’90s.
Matthew, Mark, Lugo, and John.
by BVHeck on Nov 22, 2009 7:04 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
So I guess we should retire Big Mac's 25 then too?
And Scott Rolen’s number? What about Matt Morris? He was pretty good for those teams as well. Jason Isringhausen? Guy has more saves in a Cardinal uni than any other guy out there and was a fixture on our division and pennant winning teams this decade.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
Edmonds is a little different.
His acquisition pretty much directly precipitated our rise. Jocketty very cleverly acquired him heading into the year 2000. We won the division and made the playoffsin six of the next seven seasons. He was the lone constant on those clubs. He was consistently a 5+ WAR player for six seasons, I’d wager (Fangraphs only has WAR from ‘02 on). Edmonds is 25th in franchise history in games played as a Cardinal. His 241 HRs are fourth all-time for a Cardinal, but that’s really the problem. His HR total is about it. Almost every other counting stat is in the twenties for rank, like games played. His OPS, however, is .947 as a Cardinal, which would place him behind McGwire, Pujols, Hornsby and Musial. I just don’t know that the longevity is there to justify retiring Edmonds’s number, as much of a fan of his as I am.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Had he played the his whole career in St. Louis
I could buy it. But he didn’t and he wasn’t ever really the best player on his own team, which is a problem for me when retiring numbers. He didn’t play great in a World Championship season.
I think that a lot of people just love his goofy swing and his homers and his flashy defense with all the diving catches. I loved Willie McGee’s goofy swing and his MVP season (Edmonds never won one) and his prowess on the basepaths, and they way he covered ground on the turf in Busch II, but I don’t think we should retire his number by any stretch of the imagination.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
Don't you think that Edmonds was the best player in 2000, 2001, and 2002?
I think he probably was. But that’s really the problem. I don’t think that his number 15 shoulder be retired. Don’t get me wrong. But he was great for longer as a Cardinal than Clark was. Clark spent three seasons in St. Louis. Edmonds spent eight. I agree that he doesn’t have the longevity to have his number retired by the Cardinals, or, for that matter, to make the Hall of Fame. He was a great player for us and an integral part of one of the greatest runs in franchise history. His postseason heroics have earned him a spot in many a fan’s heart and with good reason.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
If done this way, however
every team would have 20-30 numbers retired like the Yankees do. Hell, I grew up in the era of John Tudor, Jack Clark, and Tommy Herr — outside of Ozzie those were the guys that I most related to on those mid-80’s Cardinal teams, so why don’t we retire them? I mean, Clark was a fixture very similar to Edmonds albeit in a different era, and those who grew up on Cardinal baseball in the 80’s probably remember Clark as fondly as the younger generation remembers Edmonds.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
Funny story
When Clark went to the Yankees, I got his poster because I could finally have a Jack Clark poster. Let me establish the 1980s Cardinal heirarchy of my youth:
1) Ozzie Smith
2) Willie McGee
3) Vince Coleman
4) Jack Clark
5) Tony Pena
I am young enough where my “coming of age” Cardinal team was the 1987 group, a fact very much reflected in my list. Did you know that Jack Clark’s Cardinal OPS was .935? Sure, it was only in about 1,300 PAs, but that is some raking.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
He was a great player in St. Louis
really the only power threat on those Runnin’ Redbird teams of the early and mid-1980’s.
I just don’t see how Edmonds is really any better than Clark, or any more of a Cardinal great than Ted Simmons, and neither of those players should or would have their jersey retired, imho.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
Edmonds is far superior to Clark.
Clark was a Cardinal from 1985 through 1987 and never played more than 131 games in a season. He put up some great numbers in those three seasons, but he isn’t even remotely comparable, during his Cardinal career, to Edmonds during Edmonds’s eight seasons as a Cardinal. I love The Ripper as much as the next guy, don’t get me wrong, but he is no Jimmy Baseball in the annals of Cardinal lore.
Now, Simmons, on the other hand, has a great argument, one roughly on par with Edmonds. About the same amount of time with the club for each of them, with Simmons being a Card for a bit longer. Simmons was consistently very good, even if his peak years (top 3 OPS+ seasons of 142, 144, and 148) were not comparable to Edmonds’s peak seasons (top 3 OPS+ seasons of 158, 160 and 170).
Like you, I don’t think any of the three should have their number retired on the left field wall.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
I'm not talking on a statistical basis
I’m talking about how much Clark meant to those who grew up watching those teams. That seems to be the reason why people want #15 retired: They loved watching Edmonds play. Well, I loved watching John Tudor pitch and Jack Clark hit, and Vince Coleman wreak havoc on the basepaths, but I don’t think any of them should have their number retired.
I think those of us who grew up watching the great teams of the 80’s and have a better sense of Cardinal history wouldn’t support retiring #15. I think that those who great up watching the teams of the late 90’s and the early part of this decade would probably think that #15 should be retired. It’s all a focal point of when your fan following started. I’ve seen more than enough people on this blog who’d like to see #51 retired and, joking or not, it seems like a cool idea because so many of us relate to Willie as a great player on those Cardinal teams in the 80’s.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
I see what you're saying
I think part of what makes Edmonds so tantalizing is that he’s way closer than most of those guys on the actual statistical merits. Maybe his career wasn’t quite great enough for long enough, and maybe he wasn’t quite a Cardinal for a long enough duration, but I think he’s at least close. There’s a serious argument to be made in my opinion, which separates him from the likes of Clark (only three years) or Willie (just not good enough except for that awesome year) et al.
Albert Pujols does not have "down" years. He has "~6 WAR" years.
I think they attempted to keep anybody from wearing it by letting McRae wear it for two years
but let Matty Ho have it as part of Operation Midwest Nice.
I bet they will unofficially “retire” it if Holliday doesn’t return.
"She gone! Airplane time! Airplane Time!! AIRPLANE TIME." Boog
"I think those scorers must be from Mars or Venus. Or maybe they're just from that book." --Mike Shannon, 7/09/2009
By "anybody" I meant players on the field
"She gone! Airplane time! Airplane Time!! AIRPLANE TIME." Boog
"I think those scorers must be from Mars or Venus. Or maybe they're just from that book." --Mike Shannon, 7/09/2009
that would have been a neat conversation
To eavesdrop on.
“hey, hal. What’s up?”
“Nothin’ much, tony.”
“Hey, big news. Mo put down his slide rule and got us matt holliday.”
“No shit. That’s great. I can’t wait to help him with his swing.”
" … . . . . Um, right, hal. Anyway, got a little favor to ask you."
“Go ahead, shoot.”
“we were thinking he might like to wear #15.”
“Oh.”
“I was thinking if it wasn’t a big deal, he could take your number and you could wear . . . #94 or something. I mean it’s not like you’d be wearing it long.”
“Uh, okay . . . What?”
" Did I say that last part out loud?"
“Yeah, you did, tony.”
“Oh. . . . I gotta go make out the lineup now.l
the truth can't hurt you, it's just like the dark/ it scares you witless, but in time you see things clear and stark -- macmanus
by tom s. on Nov 20, 2009 11:44 PM EST via mobile up reply actions 5 recs
very funny
Sometimes you win, sometimes you lose and sometime it rains.
by garden nome on Nov 21, 2009 12:07 AM EST up reply actions
Edmonds presents some problems, both with the question of retiring a number and with the HOF
His time with the Cardinals and his career in general were both a little shorter than one typically wants from a “retire the numbers” guy. He spent 8 years with the Cards, the most of any team in his career, but he was in California for 7 years as well.
He is a very good example of a (rightly) marginal HOF candidate. He burned quite brightly, just not for long enough to be a shoe-in. According to Sean Smith’s WAR he has about 9 or 10 years of close to 4 WAR or above (one of those is a 3.8 year). He had a 4.something and a 5.8 (I think) year with the Angels, and then 6 great years with the Cards.
Add this all together and you have a “marginal” HOF candidate who, due to the foibles and difficulties with quantifying defense and adjusting across eras, is worth more WAR than Ozzie Smith by that measure.
I do not know if he truly “deserves” either honor, but I would vote for him if given the chance. I also am still a little upset that they let Holliday have his number so quickly, especially when he was only a rental at that time (plans to sign him long-term be damned. He was a rental until he is proven not to be a rental).
Albert Pujols does not have "down" years. He has "~6 WAR" years.
sutter was only a cardinal for four years
and he was terrible in one of them.
But I’m still sore about the HOF vote.
I think the Sutter thing
had more to do with the fact that it seemed like only Cardinals fans appreciated him, and when he went into the HOF Cardinal nation decided that it was our personal effort that had put him there.
Go ask any Cub fan to give you a run down of the 4 guys who won the Cy Young award pitching for them, and they’ll give you Maddux, Sutcliffe, and Jenkins in a hurry but they won’t be able to name the other one, which was Sutter in 1979.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
well, not any of their fans
99% of them couldn’t give you one name, let alone 3 or 4
pretzels pretzels pretzels pretzels
i think the org already decided
not to retire that number, or else holliday wouldn’t/shouldn’t have worn it.
jimmy is borderline HOF, but the WWL web gems will likely give him a greater chance than, say, fred mcgriff. there are certainly others in line in front of jimmy, imo, like barry larkin. and simba gets no love, but probably as deserving as jimmy in all regards.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
I think he's a HOFer
but not so sure he should have the jersey retired
I cannot repeal the words of the golden eel
by Cards Fan in Chitown on Nov 18, 2009 11:51 PM EST reply actions
If he makes the HOF, his jersey # will be retired.
That’s pretty much how the Cardinals do it.
Now with extra feisty!
Kind of.
Ducky Medwick, Jim Bottomley, Branch Rickey. All in the Hall; all not on the LF wall. Then you have Boyer, who I thought was in the HOF, but actually is not. And I believe Sutter’s number was retired before he made the Hall.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
It was retired as Robinsons.
Sutter wasn’t honored until he made the Hall.
"In 2035, 25 young men will be able to call themselves world champions. Some of those guys haven’t even been born yet. And some of them are Asian." -Mike Shannon
How long
do we have to wait to take down Robinson’s name alltogether from the wall? I thought it when major league baseball shoved it down every franchise’s throat, and I still havn’t cooled to the issue. Checking back, Jackie Robinson still never played for the Cardinals. Let Sutter, you know the cardinal, have his own honor.
It's supposed to be hard. If it wasn't hard, everyone would do it. The hard... is what makes it great.
I agree that it might not make sense to have his name on the wall
but I do really like that baseball globally retired his number. Robinson’s integration of baseball was one of the few times that something that happened within baseball fundamentally affected the world outside of baseball. That is something that deserves a very prominent honor.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
how about putting the name on the wall
of the man responsible for putting him on the roster? (i’m not opposed to robinson’s number on the wall)
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
I think we can all support that
He essentially built the St. Louis Cardinals anyway.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
WHO IS THE ONLY CURRENT PLAYER WEARING 42?
hint he is a closer
Pujols takes out "I" in BIG and "A" in MAC, previously considered to be an unyielding, consonant threat
if it's retired
how can he wear it – grandfathered, or is it merely a meaningless gesture by MLB?
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
They grandfathered everyone who was
wearing #42 at the time that MLB decided to globally retire it. Rivera’s been in the league a long time.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
Did Bottomley have a number?
He played during the Rogers Hornsby era, after all.
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
A very good question.
And one I don’t know the answer to. He did play for us into the 1930s, though, so he may have had a uniform number if Ol’ Diz did.
"I'm gonna throw the nastiest curveball I have ever thrown...if he hits it, I'll tip my cap, but if not we're going to the Series."
--Adam Wainwright on the final pitch of the 2006 NLCS
Sunny Jim's uniform #
1,2,3 & 4. link (scroll to bottom)
I recall reading somewhere that a player’s number used to correspond to the batting order.
i believe the yanks were the first to use numbers
and they did indeed correspond to batting order, which is why ruth is 3, etc.
no idea how they chose pitchers and reserves, but probably assigned them up to 25 (if that was the roster then) by merit or seniority or whatever.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
As far as I know, just Ozzie and the redundant retirement of Sutter
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
Country Slaughter's #9, too
right?
I know it's time for hockey because I've started singing "Don't Stop Believing" with the words "...born and raised in FUCK DETRIOT!!!"
Jack Buck's microphone as well...
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
Have I ever mentioned that I Really Like Jim Edmonds?
Just throwing that out there.
Albert Pujols does not have "down" years. He has "~6 WAR" years.
let go of his arm, matty, the kid wants to go see Mickey Mouse
"It was like two ankles." AVENGE BOOG
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
those were good times
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
I saw his great catch in Cincy in 04
And I’d love to have him back as a Cardinal. Unfortunately, I see Jim like Barry Bonds – still a free agent, but virtually retired. I don’t think the Cards will be interested in bringing him back. Also, I’m not sure how the two sides’ terms were when Jim was traded to San Diego in 07.
Best moment I've ever seen at a game in person
"If it was Zoom Zoom'd, we'd be doom doom'd" - making fun of myself for my bad luck streak in the 2009 season
Looking forward to Cardinals baseball in 2010!
I thought he asked to be traded.
"She gone! Airplane time! Airplane Time!! AIRPLANE TIME." Boog
"I think those scorers must be from Mars or Venus. Or maybe they're just from that book." --Mike Shannon, 7/09/2009
But I thought that request was based on him being told he wasn't assured a starting job
They say that it's never too late, but you don't get any younger...
That certainly makes the most sense, but I wasn't sure how all that went down.
"She gone! Airplane time! Airplane Time!! AIRPLANE TIME." Boog
"I think those scorers must be from Mars or Venus. Or maybe they're just from that book." --Mike Shannon, 7/09/2009
Tony's love for all things Ankiel
but he actually had a bit of a reason for it at that time.
Lighten up, Francis - Sergeant Hulka
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
I miss THAT Ankiel.
I have a nice picture of Ank, Jimmy, and Taguchi chatting in center field during a pitching change. I knew two of them were on their way out.
Actually, now that I think about it, that was during the Josh Hancock Death Make-Up Game.
"She gone! Airplane time! Airplane Time!! AIRPLANE TIME." Boog
"I think those scorers must be from Mars or Venus. Or maybe they're just from that book." --Mike Shannon, 7/09/2009
I know, I've got Josh Hancock conversations going on in two different threads
Think of it as a happy time. It was when Ank was still bad-ass and used “Anywhere I Roam” as his walk-up music.
He was a late-inning defensive replacement. The inning before, I just had a feeling they were going to have him pinch-hit. Then I heard that guitar and I knew he was coming up to bat so I stood up and started screaming and everyone in the bleachers was like WTF IS WRONG WITH THAT WEIRDO and then they realized, “Oh, Rick Ankiel is up to bat.”
I think his choice of walk-up music reflects his mnetal state. Once he switched to “All Along the Watchtower” he seemed kind of lost. “There must be some kind of way outta here…”
Maybe he was just a BSG fan.
"She gone! Airplane time! Airplane Time!! AIRPLANE TIME." Boog
"I think those scorers must be from Mars or Venus. Or maybe they're just from that book." --Mike Shannon, 7/09/2009
jeez, nice spelling--make that "mental"
"She gone! Airplane time! Airplane Time!! AIRPLANE TIME." Boog
"I think those scorers must be from Mars or Venus. Or maybe they're just from that book." --Mike Shannon, 7/09/2009
Rick Ankiel's a Cylon??
"It was like two ankles." AVENGE BOOG
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
Maybe. It would explain a lot.
The song kept playing in his head, driving him nuts. Nobody else but Lugo could hear it.
He felt compelled to choose it as his walk-up music; maybe that would exorcise it from his head—booze and blow wasn’t working anymore.
The first time he heard the song before a plate appearance, he realized what he was. Then, consumed by despair, he forgot how to hit.
"She gone! Airplane time! Airplane Time!! AIRPLANE TIME." Boog
"I think those scorers must be from Mars or Venus. Or maybe they're just from that book." --Mike Shannon, 7/09/2009
so tripping into the wall was a cry for help?
"It was like two ankles." AVENGE BOOG
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
Failed toaster suicide attempt, maybe
Unfortunately, only Jocketty has the resurrection technology.
"She gone! Airplane time! Airplane Time!! AIRPLANE TIME." Boog
"I think those scorers must be from Mars or Venus. Or maybe they're just from that book." --Mike Shannon, 7/09/2009
Chris Duncan was only trying to save him
by humping all those toasters.
"It was like two ankles." AVENGE BOOG
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
What a noble sacrifice!
hee hee
So does that make Chris Duncan the Chief? Or does it make him Helo?
Actually, he could be Tigh or Starbuck too—my mind is officially blown at this point
"She gone! Airplane time! Airplane Time!! AIRPLANE TIME." Boog
"I think those scorers must be from Mars or Venus. Or maybe they're just from that book." --Mike Shannon, 7/09/2009
maybe they will just bronze statue him....
that seems to be a cooler thing to do then retire numbers now a days even though I dont find any signifigence or relevence in it besides 42. When will we see the first triple diget jersey 007 is mine i called it
Well I learned one thing
With just a little nudge, Fourstick can probably be brought over to your arguement.
I love Jimmy Ballgame but he really belongs in another category. He was a a visceral player witha lot of appeal. Not really a retire his number kinda guy. He is the ESPN highlight machine guy. If ESPN ever creates a Hall for webgems, then I’d put him in there.
Having said that, he will get quite a bit of consideration for the real Hall. I think he is ultimately in the Hall of the Very Good. 30-40% rate for the Hall vote.
Just win
I thought, even though he's my favourite all-time Cardinal
the Jimmy probably didn’t belong in the hall, but I’m being won over by some of the positional scarcity arguments, I think. He WAS a CF, and for most of his career he probably WAS a very good one. It’s a tough role to play. Still, the lack of CF in the HOF suggests to me that the voters have traditionally not been very good at recognising that fact, so I think he’ll probably miss out.
If he was a LF his whole career, I’d say no, but his peak numbers PLUS his status as probably the best non-Griffey CF of the 90s and early 00s gives him a pretty good case IMO.
Felonius Monk - bitching to contact since 2008
by Felonius_Monk on Dec 1, 2009 12:19 PM EST up reply actions
how'd I miss that....
there aren’t a lot of CF’s in the Hall?
"It was like two ankles." AVENGE BOOG
"But listen, and understand: more Molinas are out there. They can't be bargained with. They can't be reasoned with. They don't feel pity, or remorse, or fear." - THT
just let these names roll over you - position players arranged by net career WAR.
61 Bobby Grich 67.6 1970 1986
62 Carlton Fisk 67.5 1969 1993 yes
63 Albert Pujols 67.4 2001 2008
64 Duke Snider 67.2 1947 1964 yes
65 Edgar Martinez 67.2 1987 2004
66 Larry Walker 67.1 1989 2005
67 Alan Trammell 66.8 1977 1996
68 Eddie Murray 66.7 1977 1997 yes
69 Jim Edmonds 66.6 1993 2008
70 Pee Wee Reese 66.4 1940 1958 yes
Let’s see. Do you think Eddie Murray is a HOF player? Pee Wee Reese? Carlton Fisk? Several interesting arguments to be made there. almost every single player at 60 or higher on this list is either in the HOF, active, or so recently active they haven’t yet come up for consideration.
the truth can't hurt you, it's just like the dark/ it scares you witless, but in time you see things clear and stark -- macmanus
Interesting
- Eddie Murray – Yes. He hit 500 homers and was only the second switch hitter to do so. He was a very good hitter for his era, only Don Mattingly was better than he was as an AL first baseman for most of his career. He also played the majority of his career at 1B, only going to the DH role full time in the last year of his career. He had 4 straight years of OPS+ over 156 in the early 80’s, and while never winning an MVP he was runner up two different times.
- Carlton Fisk – Yes. He’s probably the second best catcher of all time behind Bench, although Yogi Berra could make an argument for himself (and this would be fun to watch anyway). At his peak he had OPS+’s of 162, 158, and 150 and was one of the better hitters in the AL during the 70’s while playing catcher full time. Second in homers by a catcher only to Bench, in fact, he’s second in a lot of stats to Johnny Bench. I think if you’re considered the second best player at your position of all time when you retire, it’s pretty damn hard NOT to put you in the Hall of Fame.
- Pee Wee Reese – He’s an interesting one here. He was put in by the Veteran’s Committee, so he wasn’t voted in on a ballot. I think of him kind of like I think of Barry Larkin — he was a very good player for a very long time but his numbers just don’t look very good until you compare him to players in his era, and then he looks like a shoo-in.
Of the other names on that list, I think the Trammell should get in, Grich should have been in a long time ago, and that Walker and Edmonds should merit serious consideration when they are eligible but that they probably won’t get in. Edgar Martinez’s induction all depends on how you feel about full time designated hitters. He’s a considerably better hitter than Harold Baines ever was, and Baines has always kinda been the punching bag for good offensive players who piled up stats while DHing full time for 10+ seasons. Martinez played 2/3 of his total games as a DH and had a career OPS+ of 147. At his peak he was a fantastic hitter — from 1995 to 2001 he had an OPS+ of 163.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
I think if Molitor's in, Martinez really should be there
I know Molitor had a LONG career, so racked up the counting stats, but he only had three .400+ wOBA years and only ONE 1.000+ OPS season. He was really a very good, rather than great, hitter who played DH most of his career and played for a long time. Career wOBA .366 (Jim Edmonds put up a career .384 in CF, for goodness sake!). I’m not very keen on the HOF being a longevity award, personally.
Edgar’s CAREER wOBA of .405 beats all but three of Molitor’s best years, and 95-2001 he was absolutely awesome. I think a 17 year career (14 as a full-time starter) with a .405 wOBA should be enough to make the hall.
Felonius Monk - bitching to contact since 2008
by Felonius_Monk on Dec 1, 2009 12:29 PM EST up reply actions
Molitor vs. Martinez
It really isn’t a fair comparison because Molitor played 2B or 3B for most of his best seasons, he didn’t become a half-time or better DH until 1991 which was his 12th year in the big leagues. He also has 3319 hits, which is good for ninth all time. Are you seriously saying the the guy who’s ninth all time in hits shouldn’t be in the HOF? You have to be very good for a long time to get that many hits.
Martinez really never played defense, and when he did, he played it terribly, sometimes so badly that he ended up getting himself hurt, which was why Seattle moved him to the full time DH position despite not having a third baseman that was worth a crap for pretty much Martinez’s whole career. Here are the 3B (he came up as a 3B) who played for the M’s from 1995-2001, Martinez’ best seasons:
Mike Blowers (‘94,’95): Career OPS+ = 97
Russ Davis (‘96, ’97, ’98, ’99): Career OPS+ = 93
David Bell (’00,’01): Career OPS+ = 85
That is some real crap at 3B, and only Bell was an above average defender, mostly because his last name is Bell and the family motto is “glove first, bat second”. If Edgar could have fielded at all without spiking himself, he would have been playing the field. Fact is, he was a horrible defender and thus, half a player.
If Andre Dawson and Dale Murphy can’t get in with their numbers when they were elite defenders for good portions of their careers, why should Martinez get in when he played only on offense? If we’re truly going to value prevented runs as highly as created runs, then full time DH’s for Martinez should take a huge penalty for not having the ability to play defense. If you do this, and decrease his offensive production by that of a league average defender, then his OPS+ numbers don’t look so good in comparison with the other guys.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
I dunno
DHs only lose about a win per year compared to a 1B, don’t they (perhaps even slightly less, I can’t remember the adjustment completely – I think it’s about -10 runs for a 1B and -17 for a DH or something). And Martinez was an ELITE hitter, and not just for his peak years, either. .405 wOBA over 17 years, that’s pretty hard to do. I bet Pujols will be barely above that figure if he plays until he’s 38.
Felonius Monk - bitching to contact since 2008
by Felonius_Monk on Dec 2, 2009 1:20 PM EST up reply actions
Pujols?
He’ll be way above that I would imagine. Somewhere in the .420 – .425 mark is what I’d guess.
A win per year? That’s the difference between a good defender and piss poor defender. Why shouldn’t I expect my HOF’s to be fairly well rounded players? I think a lot less of guys like Bernard King and Steve Nash in basketball because they have trouble guarding their own shadows.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
Yah but Pujols will also be one of the top 20 players of all time
I’m not arguing Martinez will be.
Felonius Monk - bitching to contact since 2008
by Felonius_Monk on Dec 3, 2009 6:20 AM EST up reply actions
larkin/reese
i think you’re selling larkin a little short, personally. “he was a very good player for a very long time” is one way to put it, but he was also a great player for “healthy” spurts who missed considerable parts of so many seasons. i always liked alan trammell, but he was no barry larkin – more like pee wee reese.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
also
in regard to martinez, playing in the DH era at least he didn’t hurt his team or his value with his defense. surely there are HOF’ers who actually played defense so poorly that they in fact did? surely if someone is a no-brainer first-ballot HOF’er solely on his sublime defense (Oz), then another can at least squeeze in solely because of his sublime hitting.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
Ozzie was an above average hitter
for his position for the majority of his career. From 1984 – 1992 he had an OPS+ of 99 and stole 336 bases. You have to compare him to players in his era AND to players who played SS in his era. An OPS+ of 99 for a SS who played the majority of his career from 1980-1992 is pretty good, and that’s before you consider the fact that he’s probably the most valuable defensive player in the entire history of the game.
I can’t think of anyone, non-DH, that has been kept out of the HOF for being a horrible defender while being great with the bat. It all comes down to how you feel about the designated hitters and the HOF. I, personally, think that you have to have a lot better numbers over a longer period of time than Martinez did before you can merit consideration without playing defense at all. Since Dale Murphy and Andre Dawson aren’t in, and they have better counting stats with lesser peaks and were elite defenders for a good portion of their careers, I personally would have a hard time putting Martinez on my ballot instead of those guys.
In regards to Larkin, I don’t think I’m selling him short. He’s not Alex Rodriguez, he’s not Miguel Tejada. If you look at his counting stats after the steroid era, you go “wow, he was ok but nothing really sticks out”. When you compare those stats to players from the era he played in (‘86 – ’00), you go: "Holy shit, he’s a first ballot HOF player!". Considering he was also great defensively for pretty much his whole career, I’d say Larkin is probably in, although not on a first ballot. Had he been healthy his whole career, he probably is sniffing 3000 hits, which would make him a first ballot guy. Alas, that is not the case.
If you think I’m selling Barry Larkin short, then you’re throwing Alan Trammell under the bus. He was a very similar player at his peak. From ‘87 to ’00 Larkin had an OPS+ of 122. From ’80 to ’93, Trammell had an OPS+ of 118. They are very comparable players, so if you think Larkin should be in, I don’t know how you can argue against Trammell.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
Martinez was an average fielder
compared to the other DHs he played at the same time as…
Felonius Monk - bitching to contact since 2008
by Felonius_Monk on Dec 2, 2009 1:21 PM EST up reply actions
And how many of those guys are in the HOF?
Here’s an interesting data set for you and perhaps it sheds a little better light on my position.
Those are the players who have more than 300 games played from 1995-2004 who also played 40% of their games at the DH position. Now, what do you notice? Martinez has nearly twice as many games at DH as the next closest guy, which is David Justice. In his era, he’s pretty much the only guy on that list who played for more than 5 of those years and was a full time DH. That makes him a pretty rare player, which is what I mean when I say that your HOF vote for Martinez revolves around how you feel about someone so bad at defense that he essentially plays only offense, but who puts up elite offensive numbers.
Here is the same list for 1972 (the first year of the DH) to the present.
Martinez DH’d in 65% of the games during his career. Here are the guys who DH’d that high a percentage of games since 1972. He truly is in a class by himself both offensively for DH’s, and in the number of games played as a DH.
So, do we induct him because he’s probably the best DH of all time or do we punish him for not being able to man a defensive position. It all comes down to how you feel about the DH.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
i hate the dh
but i just can’t leave out one of the greatest hitters i’ve ever seen, maybe second only to pujols as far as righties go. some DH will be the first, just like with closers (which is similarly a “new position”), and whenever it happens i think edgar deserves the honor of being that guy.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
I don't really care about this argument much either way so I'm putting no particular effort into saying Martinez should be in
nor do I particularly hold that opinion (it’s probably closer to “I don’t really care either way”) but I think a really, really good DH should be able to make the hall, and he’s probably one of those.
Felonius Monk - bitching to contact since 2008
by Felonius_Monk on Dec 3, 2009 6:23 AM EST up reply actions
My feeling is that
You should induct players who played exceptional defense and were very good hitters for their positions before you induct an exceptional DH. So as long as Dale Murphy is excluded, I can’t put Martinez on my ballot.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
wait a second...
… are you saying:
1. you would vote for murphy but not edgar.
2. you would vote for murphy and edgar, but hope that murphy gets in first.
3. you would vote for murphy but not edgar in year 1, and if murphy is elected you would then vote for edgar in year 2. if not, then you would continue to vote against edgar.
4. you would never, under any circumstances, vote for a player who was largely a DH, even if they were one of the best hitters of their generation.
5. you would never, under any circumstances, vote for an excellent offensive player who was terrible defensively but played in a non-DH league.
just curious.
i'm rather impressed
twice (avatar challenge) now i’ve witnessed your continued existence in one day.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
There are other players ahead of Murphy
Like Tim Raines, Dawson, etc. I just picked Murphy because he was a great defensive CF and a great hitter at his peak and his numbers compare favorably with Martinez, adjusting for the era they played in.
I think #3 and #4 say it best. I have a very hard time voting for someone who only played on one side of the ball for all the productive years of his career. Other guys who played a lot of DH, like Molitor, were good defenders for a good portion of their careers. I can see an argument for voting for Martinez, but only after a ton of other people are on my ballot. If he gets left off, he gets left off.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
i'm not arguing against trammell
like you describe reese, he was very good for a long time. i’m just saying that larkin was a superior player whose numbers, because of missed games, can never reflect just how great he was. all else equal, detroit trades trammell + for larkin in a heartbeat, not the other way around.
btw, larkin is not tejada? though literally this is true, it couldn’t be farther from the truth. i wonder, would you say oz is not tejada?
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
He's not Cal Ripken either
What I mean is that he’s not a bigger guy that we expect to slug 25+ homers a year playing the SS position, and that’s what a lot of people look at when they see SS these days. Ripken, Tejada, A-Rod — they aren’t the typical short stop. Neither is Larkin obviously, but he doesn’t have the power numbers of those guys, and I think that people hold that against him when they shouldn’t.
Wait — the Tigers would trade Alan Trammell straight up for Larkin in a heartbeat? Um, maybe in 1992 when one was on the downside of his career and the other one was in his prime, but I don’t see any Detroit fan trading 1983 Allen Trammell for 1992 Barry Larkin — no fucking way. Look at the comparisons here — they are really pretty comparable players — Larkin had a few more seasons at his peak and some of those were injury shortened.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
ironic
i’m not wedded to numbers, but now i wish we had UZR and all these other defensive metrics for larkin and trammell – boog and barden might be an approximate comparison, using players i think you have seen play SS.
i get your point about the power. larkin was sort of the precursor of that type.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
couldn't remember
the who and where of this discussion before, but here it and you are.
fwiw, bill james calls larkin one of the 10 most complete players ever and rates him at SS behind only honus wagner, arkie vaughan, ripken, yount, and banks. (james also rates simba as the 10th greatest catcher of all time, which influences my opinion of james’ opinions greatly to the good side, being that simba is my own ray lankford, so to speak, based on all the love in the ray-ray post)
WAR:
larkin 68.8
e. martinez 67.2
trammell 66.8
alomar 63.6
big mac 63.2
d. murphy 44.4
not using these for any argument either way, but posnanski just listed them in an article, and coincidentally those are some players we’ve been debating. murphy seems like the outlier, and i really like the guy. he was my favorite non-card when he played, and i had a nephew growing up in gainesville, ga. who just adored the guy – i took him to a game at busch and had his hat autographed by murph, who shook the kid’s hand and is a gentleman in the pujols class.
actually, very like pujols. another nephew won some big homerun derby last year and, being properly raised, he is a card and pujols fan although he doesn’t live there. a request for an autographed pujols bat was put in to the fo (not by me, as it was explicitly a reward for the feat, and i have no use for derbies), and 2 or 3 days later DHL delivered. so i was of course a big pujols fan before, but after seeing my nephew’s face when he got that bat…priceless.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
Dale Murphy
Career WAR just doesn’t do him justice, imo. From 1982 to 1987 his wOBA’s were (with the MLB rank in parenthesis): .389(13), .414(2), .398(5), .401(6), .359(35), .415(9). Over his 5 peak years, he was one of the top 7 hitters in the big leagues, all while playing a stellar Gold Glove CF in the purgatory that was Atlanta baseball in the 1980’s.
He wasn’t great before that, and his decline was swift, which is what makes him an outlier, but my guess is that if he had moved to DH at age 30, he could have extended his career like Paul Molitor, and ended up with much better career WAR — probably around 60 or so.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
i'll always keep my mouth shut
rather than argue against murph. i truly appreciated the guy. his career reminds me somewhat of mattingly’s. at their best, in their day both top 5 in baseball type players.
strangely, although not at that level but in a similar career-trajectory sense, murph played with bob horner, who at his best was akin to matt williams, who some (not i) believe is HOF-caliber.
i believe murph has TWO mvp’s. which is no fluke in a jimmy rollins type sense. at their respective peaks murph was better than jimmy, imo, just to put it in perspective, but i believe jimmy will come closer to the HOF – not arguing either way, just an assessment.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
jimmy edmonds
is the jimmy referenced in my last sentence above, btw.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
but my guess is that if he had moved to DH at age 30, he could have extended his career like Paul Molitor, and ended up with much better career WAR — probably around 60 or so.
But, you know, he, erm, didn’t?
Seriously, we’re giving out invitation to the HOF now for “what he might have done in a certain situation if he’d carried on playing”?
Felonius Monk - bitching to contact since 2008
by Felonius_Monk on Dec 6, 2009 6:36 AM EST up reply actions
No
just arguing against inducting Edgar Martinez for batting 4 times a game and doing shit else, because he couldn’t play defense without looking like a doofus or hurting himself.
Had Martinez played his whole career in the National League, are we even having this conversation? I seriously fucking doubt it.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
we probably would not be having this convesation
because with his bat he would have manned first, no matter how poorly you think, and then he is a shoo-in without that DH label. i have yet to hear of a player with an all-world bat kept out of the HOF because of his shoddy defense.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
You're assuming that he could have stayed on the field
90% of the reason they moved him to DH was he kept getting hurt playing defense. That’s why his career didn’t get rolling until he was in his late 20’s — he was hurt all the fucking time.
You think he’s a shoo-in as a first baseman if he stays healthy? Show me a first baseman in the last 30 years who’s gotten in the HOF that has similar counting stats to Martinez? Don’t bother, there isn’t one.
The closest guy is Will Clark, and he’s not getting in the HOF. Interestingly, Clark was wanted by a number of teams has a DH, but didn’t want to DH full time, so he retired. Had he played until age 40 as a DH, he probably has 600 doubles (good for 15th all time), and he might have an outside shot at the Hall with another 100 homers.
John Olerud is also close, and he was an amazing defense 1st baseman, and probably won’t get in the HOF. Todd Helton? He might get in, but he’s going to get a lot of flack for playing his whole entire career at Coors Field too, which is why Larry Walker won’t get in even though he probably should.
If you want to get mention as a 1st baseman in the era the Martinez played in, you better be sniffing 500 homers and have done it “clean”. Fair or not, that’s the truth.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
since he wasn't a homerun hitter
that works in his favor, imo, as that’s not what he’s hanging his hat on.
olerud and clark weren’t near the hitters martinez was, whatever you think certain numbers might say.
helton has a good chance at the hall, representing the rockies. i’d have to say he’s their all-time face of the organization.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
Clark is his #1 comp on B-R, Olerud is #3.
Which is pretty damn close if you ask me. Considering that Clark played most of his career prior to the steroid era, his numbers stack up as well against his peers as Martinez does. Olerud was the best defensive first baseman in baseball for pretty much his whole career, and his offensive numbers compare very favorably with Martinez, so I think he merits more consideration, and he’s not going in the HOF anytime soon.
He’s not a home run hitter, which is his whole problem with a HOF induction. They don’t reward high average hitters unless you get to 3000 hits or steal a shitload of bases. Edgar didn’t do either of those. You don’t get credit for hitting 500 doubles, you get credit for hitting 500 homers. Edgar did the latter. He didn’t have enough healthy years to put up great counting stats, so I think he’s going to have trouble getting into the Hall.
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
i'm pretty confident he'll get in
he’ll have to wait one year longer than someone the writers consider more deserving, because that’s how it works – pretty much how they differentiate HOF’ers – there’s your first-ballot, etc. for example, if player x gets in in his sixth year, then player y will have to wait seven or eight if he is perceived as lower on the totem pole than player x.
edgar was one of those hitters one would stop to watch hit. he’ll be the first dh elected, in due time.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
also
interesting article on this at fangraphs, by jack moore.
sean smith’s total zone has martinez as a plus defender for his 4 full years of games at 3b.
texeira’s career high ops+ is 152. of course i’m not arguing that he is a hof’er, just putting into perspective that martinez had a 152 as his ninth best season.
edgar played 13 full seasons of games, so his counting stats might not be there, like in homers, but his AB/HR is higher than kaline and winfield and not far off musial.
frank thomas is a sure-fire hof’er despite the fact he was terrible in the field, and thus hurt his team there. they have similar wOBA for career.
research shows that a dh deserves a boost to his offensive numbers because it has a detrimental effect to a player’s offensive production to dh rather than play the field.
griffey hit pretty good in front of edgar, like ortiz hitting in front of manny. this is the same as why the cards should bat holliday before pujols, because it would make holliday better and the other way around doesn’t make pujols better.
is mariano rivera a hof? he is a specialist, a closer, the pitching equivalent of edgar martinez as a hitter, a dh. pitchers don’t even bat in AL…the DH is their other half!!
i disagree with your assertion that martinez dh’ed because he was a fumbler in the field. someone has to dh, and his bat allowed seattle to play a defensive 1b like olerud.
martinez didn’t play a full year till he was 27, despite hitting in AAA like allen craig in the second half of this year. that is not his fault, it just lowers his counting stats, and neither is it his fault that his team played him as dh…it was smart to play him at dh, in retrospect, because he became the best ever at that position.
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
Now you're starting to go off the rails...
i disagree with your assertion that martinez dh’ed because he was a fumbler in the field. someone has to dh, and his bat allowed seattle to play a defensive 1b like olerud.
You can disagree, but you’re fucking wrong. I posted above the 3B (and you say he’s an “above average” 3B) that were employed by Seattle from 1995 – 2004 and they are all worse than league average. If he was such an awesome 3B, why the hell wasn’t he playing the field instead of those guys? They could have signed Chili Davis or someone to DH and been an even better offensive ballclub. I remember Martinez literally SITTING OUT inter-league games because they didn’t want him playing the field.
Fine, you think the designated hitters deserve to get in the HOF. That’s all you need to say. I’m very much on the fence, and I certainly don’t think they deserve to be in the HOF while guys who played excellent to average defense and have good offensive numbers are on the outside looking in. If Martinez had 600+ doubles and 400+ homers I could buy it — but he doesn’t.
research shows that a dh deserves a boost to his offensive numbers because it has a detrimental effect to a player’s offensive production to dh rather than play the field.
You saying it doesn’t make it true. I haven’t seen anything on this that has been shown to be definitive by any stretch, so if you have, I need links to the research you’re quoting.
frank thomas is a sure-fire hof’er despite the fact he was terrible in the field, and thus hurt his team there. they have similar wOBA for career.
You’re not comparing Martinez with Frank Thomas as a hitter are you? From 1991 to 1997, The Big Hurt AVERAGED a 181 OPS+. At his peak he was a much, much better hitter than Martinez was, who had one season of OPS+ above 180 in his whole career. FWIW, Thomas was a little worse than league average defender (by Sean Smith’s Total Zone) for the first 7 years of his career, until they moved him to full time DH in 1998 due to various back and leg injuries — similar to Jim Thome.
martinez didn’t play a full year till he was 27, despite hitting in AAA like allen craig in the second half of this year. that is not his fault, it just lowers his counting stats, and neither is it his fault that his team played him as dh…it was smart to play him at dh, in retrospect, because he became the best ever at that position.
- DH isn’t a position — it’s a spot in the batting order. A “position” requires you to take the field of play.
- You’re right — he was such an awesome hitter than they kept him in the minors until he was 27. Or maybe it was because he had tons and tons of nagging injuries on his way up, witness his games played his last full year (1988) in AAA, or maybe it was because he was a great bat that didn’t have a position with the big club because he couldn’t field a lick. His last years at 3B were 1993 and 1994, two years in which he was hurt for almost two thirds of the season. Again, if he was so good on defense, and didn’t get hurt playing defense, why wouldn’t Seattle play him there instead of the multitude of suck that was Mike Blowers, Russ Davis, and David Bell?
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
i love how you cite every stat
that suits your arguments, including everything sean smith, yet dismiss his numbers off-hand when they don’t suit you, such as on martinez’ defensive prowess.
and you seem to twist your ever-changing argument until it no longer resembles the original. anyway, viva milton bradley!
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
Where did I dismiss Sean Smith's numbers?
I simply said that if Smith’s numbers are correct, then why was he moved to DH full time, while the Mariners then employed three of the worst third basemen of the 1995-2005 period? Intuitively, if he was a plus defender at 3B they would have left him there. That’s my point.
If you’re going to use Total Zone to defend Martinez, why can’t I use it to defend Thomas? Not to mention that you completely gloss over the fact that Thomas was CLEARLY the better offensive player.
My argument hasn’t changed:
I don’t buy that Martinez deserves HOF induction because there are other players who have similar offensive peaks within their era who also played excellent defense. If he were going in as a 1B, he would be a long shot, like the other 1B that I’ve mentioned in this thread. Yet a 1B plays defense, while a DH does not. So if he’s not in a 1B, why should he be in as a DH?
Please consider any Hot Stove talk in the above comment is spoken under the assumption that the Cardinals are not signing Matt Holliday.
I'd have to agree that while I love Edmonds, he was the
star of a couple of my fave moments at the ballpark, I don’t think he really deserves the honor/honour of being enshrined with the other retired numbers. He was a great player on the team but never THE STAR, and while I don’t blame him one bit for it, he did play on the cubs after the Cardinals.
That got me laughing
I can see Jimmy ending up at 74.6% and some St. Louis sportswriter being saying " I know he had to make a living, but he lost my vote when he went to play for the Cubs".
There was so much emotion about that, I could see that happening.
That would be a terrible day for Aaron Miles as he realizes his chance for entering the Hall are forever gone.
Just win
That got me laughing
I can see Jimmy ending up at 74.6% and some St. Louis sportswriter being saying " I know he had to make a living, but he lost my vote when he went to play for the Cubs".
There was so much emotion about that, I could see that happening.
That would be a terrible day for Aaron Miles as he realizes his chance for entering the Hall are forever gone.
Just win
he makes a good point
Lighten up, Francis - Sergeant Hulka
* sarcasm might be involved in this comment
twice
so let me reiterate…
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
I SEE EVERYTHING TWICE!
the truth can't hurt you, it's just like the dark/ it scares you witless, but in time you see things clear and stark -- macmanus
are you seeing double
or do things repeat (as kundera might unbearably say)?
"Some days I feel like the hypotenuse in a love triangle; others as if my lucky number is pi."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- The Cardinals Hall of Fame can now be found at Bill Clinton’s library in Arkansas (Huh?)
- Will Bryce Harper start the season with the Nationals?
- Mitch Mustain puts football behind him, signs reported rookie deal with White Sox
- Robinson Cano and Denzel Washington face off in Jay Leno’s Yankees trivia contest
- Shane Victorino lands role on ‘Hawaii Five-0′
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
