|
Post by Scott on Jun 6, 2005 14:00:38 GMT -5
*wants stats, even if basic ones, such as w-l, era, k's for pitchers and avg. hr, rbi for hitters*
|
|
|
Post by csale on Jun 6, 2005 14:54:07 GMT -5
Clemens Maddux Alomar
|
|
|
Post by Kevlar on Jun 6, 2005 20:32:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by csale on Jun 6, 2005 20:46:04 GMT -5
bah... Palmiero is a typical compiler.
For all you people voting Palmiero - was Palmiero EVER the best at his position in any year?
He is a very good player who played a very long time with very little down time.
|
|
|
Post by csale on Jun 6, 2005 20:48:07 GMT -5
btw... are the candidates only for each year or do they carry over x many terms like real baseball? For example, 3 times on the ballot with no vote = not on the ballot anymore.
|
|
|
Post by Phoenix on Jun 6, 2005 20:48:41 GMT -5
nearly 3000 hits
nearly 550 homeruns
you lose
edit: and if it weren't for the weird age sliders he would have gotten to both of those marks
|
|
|
Post by Dankbud on Jun 6, 2005 20:59:58 GMT -5
btw... are the candidates only for each year or do they carry over x many terms like real baseball? For example, 3 times on the ballot with no vote = not on the ballot anymore. if the game carries them over then they shall remain candidates. the 3 times not on any ballot = no more chances is probably how it will go.
|
|
|
Post by cangriimmortal on Jun 6, 2005 21:01:38 GMT -5
Palmeiro might not have been the best player in his position, but he was a player teams could depend on to produce greatly for 20 years.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jun 6, 2005 21:10:41 GMT -5
in ootp, the players stay eligible for the ootp. they'll just stay in that list for as long as the league goes to my knowledge.
|
|
|
Post by csale on Jun 6, 2005 21:44:26 GMT -5
Palmeiro might not have been the best player in his position, but he was a player teams could depend on to produce greatly for 20 years. Yet the first part is why I think he should not go to the hall. Does this not say compiler? Anyhow - weren't a lot of others to challenge him greatly and Maddux and Clemens were locks. On another note, surprised that noone has sniffed at Frank Thomas at all either.
|
|
|
Post by Phoenix on Jun 6, 2005 21:56:34 GMT -5
honestly, if I could vote in more than three I would have about 6 or 7 guys on my ballot right now. Maybe more.
But the rules are the rules.
|
|
|
Post by csale on Jun 6, 2005 22:19:53 GMT -5
honestly, if I could vote in more than three I would have about 6 or 7 guys on my ballot right now. Maybe more. But the rules are the rules. My complete take: Benito Santiago - 1/5 (short peak, wicked arm though. .263 BAA... really on this list?) Frank Thomas - 4/5 (was THE most feared player for years) Rafael Palmerio - 3/5 (compiler, very good player - most likely a juice monkey too ) Carlos Baerga - 1/5 (good early, fizzled quickly) Fred McGriff - 1/5 (is being the 5-6th best player at your position every year for 20 years really enough?) Andres Galaraga - 2/5 (fell of the map a bit, some monster years though) Roberto Alomar - 4/5 (the best 2b in the league for years, very productive) Rueben Sierra - 1/5 (compiler, a very good player) Julio Franco - 1.5/5 (see McGriff, but more of a difference maker) Kenny Lofton - 3/5 (was THE multi-tool guy for a few years, never much pop - great speed and glove) Craig Biggio - 2/5 (compiler, very good player) Larry Walker - 2/5 (you realy have to be a stand out at outfield to make the HOF - Coors years a bit misleading?) Bobby Abreu - 1/5 (Short but productive career. Not enough) Roger Clemens - 5/5 (Done it all, nuff said) Greg Maddux - 5/5 (A dominant pitcher for more years then you would reason) Curt Schilling - 4/5 (A dominant pitcher when healthy. Is it enough?) Kevin Brown - 3/5 (A step below Schilling in dominance, although compiled more wins) David Wells - 1/5 (A compiler aided by some very big bats) John Franco - 3/5 (Dominant closer for a few years, pretty good for the rest)
|
|
|
Post by cangriimmortal on Jun 6, 2005 22:26:23 GMT -5
Hey, i'd prefer to have a player perform very good-great than having him be outstanding for just 5-6 season and fading into oblivion like Giambi.
|
|
|
Post by Phoenix on Jun 6, 2005 22:55:33 GMT -5
dude, by your definition, or what I can gather from it since you haven't defined it, EVERY FUCKING PLAYER is a compiler.
|
|
|
Post by csale on Jun 6, 2005 23:27:10 GMT -5
dude, by your definition, or what I can gather from it since you haven't defined it, EVERY FUCKING PLAYER is a compiler. Not really. For example - if a player hits 30/100 for 15 years while playing outfield in the era of the juiced ball (meaning he likely isn't near the top of league in stats for any of those years) - he is compiler. I'd rather see a vote go to the player who was the best (or at least debatebly close) at their position for 5-7 years and pretty good the rest. To further, part of my vote is biased by what I seen of these players in their career. Obviously in the sim league, we eventually will only have the stats to work with - but for now... as an example - as someone who has followed the Blue Jays games during the past 20 years, I think I can speak for most of us (perhaps Dave would like to chime in here) when I suggest if it came to the last out in a 1-run game with the bases loaded - I would rather see Alomar at bat rather than McGriff - Comprende? Now, I'm a Blue Jay fan - but I'm not ignorant to other teams and other players. McGriff is an easy example because many sports stations here have debated the topic at length, but with Palmiero I look at it like this - At any point in his playing career, was Palmiero ever someone who I felt could single-handedly win a game - not really. He chipped in many a run during his playing days, but I think that the HOF should be reserved for the Elite of the Elite.
|
|