2025 MLB Thread

[gehringer_2]

30 minutes ago, tiger2022 said:

Eddie Murray is an interesting case.

In 22 seasons, Murray hit 30+ HRs only 4 times with a high of 33.  

And age 31 to the end of his career, outside of 1 season, he was pretty mediocre.

People think he was this big basher and amazing hitter because he got to 3000 and 500, but he was always healthy and wouldn't retire...just kept getting at bats.  His last 10 years he had 12.2 WAR and his first 13 he had 56.6.  A lot of counting stats were just those of an average player for a lot of his career.

I didn't really start paying attention to baseball until about '86 or so and by that time he was kind of on the downward part of his career, which is why I wasn't too impressed with him.

Well that's the thing, you can't expect a guy to quit just because he's not as good as he used to be, at least if he is still being reasonably productive. So that's going to be the story for most good players who aren't forced to quit early by injury.

That said, it is getting to be more extreme with teams having given out so many contracts that run well past when the player has any real chance to still be productive. The team is then reluctant to release the non-productive player because they don't want to pay him to play out the string somewhere else, or they are still hoping for a little reprise performance season like Murray had at age 39 (2.4 WAR), or sometimes it's marketing the star chasing milestones (Cabrera), and sometimes it's just dumb all together.

Edited 18 hours ago by gehringer_2

[Tiger337]

42 minutes ago, tiger2022 said:

Eddie Murray is an interesting case.

In 22 seasons, Murray hit 30+ HRs only 4 times with a high of 33.  

And age 31 to the end of his career, outside of 1 season, he was pretty mediocre.

People think he was this big basher and amazing hitter because he got to 3000 and 500, but he was always healthy and wouldn't retire...just kept getting at bats.  His last 10 years he had 12.2 WAR and his first 13 he had 56.6.  A lot of counting stats were just those of an average player for a lot of his career.

I didn't really start paying attention to baseball until about '86 or so and by that time he was kind of on the downward part of his career, which is why I wasn't too impressed with him.

I was thinking about him just the other day.  I remembered him as a big slugger back in the 80s.  When I looked him up, I was surprised that he never came close 40 homers.  There weren't as many home runs back then, but I thought he would have reached that mark at least once.  He was really good in his prime though - more of an all around hitter with high a batting average, lots of doubles, 30 homers per year.  He was also a good defensive first basemen.  He was also very consistent.  He had almost the same OPS+ every year from 1981-1984:

1981 156

1982 156

1983 156

1984 157

[buddha]

1 hour ago, tiger2022 said:

But the HOF is a joke anyway.  David Ortiz, failed PED test, is in the HOF but his roider teammate, Manny Ramirez, a much better hitter, isn't in there.  I think the Raiders should all be in there but it doesn't make sense how Ortiz, Bagwellz IRodriguez are in there but other roiders aren't.

david ortiz is in the hof because he was a red sox hero and the media loved him.  if manny was a fat POS like ortiz who laughed and made the media feel special, they would forget about the roids in 5 seconds.

just like they forgot about ortiz's positive test.  is ortiz still looking for the culprit who faked his test?  or is too busy recovering from getting shot in the bahamas?

[buddha]

whitaker was never the best second baseman.  he was quiet.  he played in an after-thought media market.  he was never an mvp candidate.  he was a really good lefty bat in a park that made his power numbers look better.  

like everyone else here, i'd put him in because he was one of my favorites growing up, but he's not a lock by any means.  neither was trammell, the difference being trammell played a more glamorous position, stuck around the game longer, had a great playoffs where he was mvp, should have been the mvp in 87, and had more great seasons than whitaker did.

now dont get me started on jack morris, probably the least deserving non-friend of frankie frisch who was voted in this side of harold baines.

[oblong]

Whitaker did win the GG and Silver Slugger 3 years in a row.  His top 3 similar batters on BR are in the HOF, as are 6 of the 10.   The HOF is what the voters make of it and if a guy is better than others that are in there, and more importantly are still getting in there, he should make it.  There's no definitive standard.  Lou has a better case than Tram did.  

[Tiger337]

1 hour ago, oblong said:

Whitaker did win the GG and Silver Slugger 3 years in a row.  His top 3 similar batters on BR are in the HOF, as are 6 of the 10.   The HOF is what the voters make of it and if a guy is better than others that are in there, and more importantly are still getting in there, he should make it.  There's no definitive standard.  Lou has a better case than Tram did.  

Right, Based on who is in the Hall of Fame, both Whitaker and Trammell belong.  They are not Honus Wagner and Rogers Hornsby, but they are as good or better than half the players at their position.  Saying thst Player X belongs in the Hall of Fame because he's better than Baines is a weak argument, but when you are as good or better than half the players at your position, that's a legitimate argument. 

I also think it's OK for a voter to be a small Hall of Fame guy who won't vote for Whitaker, but they need to be consistent.  If that same person votes for David Ortiz and Jim Rice, then then he's not being honest.  

[oblong]

If Lou were somehow on the BBWAA ballot today he would get in. Seems like the voters now are getting better.  He is a very fluke case and that's why its aggravating that the era committees aren't doing the right thing. His first year on the ballot was a crowded year and the voters have a limit of 10.

[tiger2022]

Back to the 80s stuff, had Mike Schmidt played during the roid and juiced ball era, he would have destroyed the home run record.

[tiger2022]

12 hours ago, Stormin said:

The Tigers need to win a World Series for you.  It's wonderful!

It was a sad time to be a Tigers fan.  They made the playoffs in '87 and then starting in '89, fifteen years of utter pathetic baseball.  We had TBS, so I ended up following the Braves more than the Tigers during that time.

[buddha]

6 hours ago, oblong said:

Whitaker did win the GG and Silver Slugger 3 years in a row.  His top 3 similar batters on BR are in the HOF, as are 6 of the 10.   The HOF is what the voters make of it and if a guy is better than others that are in there, and more importantly are still getting in there, he should make it.  There's no definitive standard.  Lou has a better case than Tram did.  

his HOF "political stats" are low.  his peak wasnt that high, he didnt win an mvp or ever finish in the top 10 voting, 3 gg's are not high profile and trammell has more, he didnt win any awards in the playoffs, he dropped out of the game after retiring, he is probably best known to most reporters as the guy who forgot his jersey for the all star game.

people dont remember lou whitaker.  trammell had a higher peak, was in the game after retirement, played short stop, was a top 10 mvp candidate 3 times, six time all star, was second in mvp in 87, was a world series mvp.

that **** matters in who gets into the hall of fame.  its why morris and trammell are in.  its why whitaker isnt.

[buddha]

its why bobby grich isnt in.  voters tend to go with narrative and counting stats and peak value over guys who were consistently "very good" over their whole careers.

why is jack morris in the hall of fame and dave steib isnt?  or mark beuhrle?  narrative.  big game performances on the biggest stage.  not a steady accumulation of stats over a long period. 

whitaker gets in if there's a massive movement publicly to do it.  his peers have rejected him multiple times, they just dont consider him a star.

i like lou.  i want lou in, but he's still borderline for me because i'm more of a peak voter than a "compiler" voter.

[Tenacious D]

21 minutes ago, buddha said:

his HOF "political stats" are low.  his peak wasnt that high, he didnt win an mvp or ever finish in the top 10 voting, 3 gg's are not high profile and trammell has more, he didnt win any awards in the playoffs, he dropped out of the game after retiring, he is probably best known to most reporters as the guy who forgot his jersey for the all star game.

people dont remember lou whitaker.  trammell had a higher peak, was in the game after retirement, played short stop, was a top 10 mvp candidate 3 times, six time all star, was second in mvp in 87, was a world series mvp.

that **** matters in who gets into the hall of fame.  its why morris and trammell are in.  its why whitaker isnt.

If only Lou had embraced the green St Pats Day uniform in spring training, he’d be in by now.

[Tenacious D]

Btw, I like the Mets offseason so far. Peralta, Semien, Polanco, Robert Jr.  will be interesting to see how this comes together. And they still have the prospect capital if they wanted to make a push for Skubal now or at the deadline.

[Tiger337]

1 hour ago, buddha said:

people dont remember lou whitaker.  trammell had a higher peak, was in the game after retirement, played short stop, was a top 10 mvp candidate 3 times, six time all star, was second in mvp in 87, was a world series mvp.

that **** matters in who gets into the hall of fame.  its why morris and trammell are in.  its why whitaker isnt.

This is the reason Lou Whitaker gives for not being in the Hall of Fame and it may be one of the biggest. I would think the lifers on the Veterans Committee loves guys that stay in the game.  

When Whitaker said that, Denny McLain (one of the interviewers) asked him in a seemingly accusatory tone why he he didn't stay in the game.  Whitaker said that he was dedicating his time to his religon and family.   I don't think McLain understood that. 😀 That whole interview was probably the best Whitaker interview ever.  He never sounded that good when he was playing.

The Drunk Lou Whitaker interview where he ripped Jack Morris was a good one too!

 

Edited 1 hour ago by Tiger337

[Tenacious D]

Denny McLain should never be in the position of questioning anyone’s motives.

[oblong]

1 hour ago, buddha said:

his HOF "political stats" are low.  his peak wasnt that high, he didnt win an mvp or ever finish in the top 10 voting, 3 gg's are not high profile and trammell has more, he didnt win any awards in the playoffs, he dropped out of the game after retiring, he is probably best known to most reporters as the guy who forgot his jersey for the all star game.

people dont remember lou whitaker.  trammell had a higher peak, was in the game after retirement, played short stop, was a top 10 mvp candidate 3 times, six time all star, was second in mvp in 87, was a world series mvp.

that **** matters in who gets into the hall of fame.  its why morris and trammell are in.  its why whitaker isnt.

Morris is in the HOF because of game 7 in '91 where, if Lonnie Smith doesn't make a base running error, he probably loses the game... and he was fortunate to have been born in the right year where he was able to get most of his wins in the 1980's, instead of, say 1977-1986.  That way "winningest pitcher of the 80's" can be said about him.

I fully understand the reasons you laid out, that's been said numerous times by many people, and I'm saying that's bull**** and not a valid scorecard of who should be in the HOF.  The voters aren't doing their job correctly by leaving Lou out when others are in.

[Tiger337]

2 hours ago, buddha said:

its why bobby grich isnt in.  voters tend to go with narrative and counting stats and peak value over guys who were consistently "very good" over their whole careers.

why is jack morris in the hall of fame and dave steib isnt?  or mark beuhrle?  narrative.  big game performances on the biggest stage.  not a steady accumulation of stats over a long period. 

whitaker gets in if there's a massive movement publicly to do it.  his peers have rejected him multiple times, they just dont consider him a star.

i like lou.  i want lou in, but he's still borderline for me because i'm more of a peak voter than a "compiler" voter.

Lou was a a compiler, but he was the best compiler in the history of the game!  Seriously, 17 years with an OPS over 100 for a middle infielder without ever having without ever having an MVP type season.  Nobody else has done that.  

[buddha]

42 minutes ago, Tiger337 said:

Lou was a a compiler, but he was the best compiler in the history of the game!  Seriously, 17 years with an OPS over 100 for a middle infielder without ever having without ever having an MVP type season.  Nobody else has done that.  

would you rather have grich or whitaker?

whitaker or sandberg?

whitaker or utley?

whitaker or kent?

or would you consider them all equal?  whitaker had a nice end to his career after he became largely a platoon player.

trammell got hurt by being compares to the ripken's, yount's, and then arod's of the world.  whitaker gets hurt by the rise of the bigger second baseman (even though it used to be a hitter position back in day).

but ultimately, he was "good/very good" for a long time.  but never great.