I count 27 locks for the baseball HOF(ACTIVE PLAYERS) and a ton on the verge.

[fhmesq44]

30 saves does not a great closer make.

I cant name dozens of closers thats saved 30 games that I would not give 2 cents for.

There are only about 6 or 7 great closers in all of baseball right now. About another 5 good to decent closers. Everyone else is nothing more than a crap shoot.

I think that is what he means, not that there are a lot of great closers or that saving 35+ makes you one, but that even bad closers rack up 30+ saves per year. Therefore, the stat itself is a joke and not a good measure of greatness.

I am with you, I think he should get in. However, FW and Rupert have valid points. Closers are not respected by HOF voters and that could be a problem for Hoffman. Additionally, the fact that almost every team has a guy with 30+ saves de-values the statistic itself.

I do, however, tend to disagree with you that in 15 years there will be plenty of closers in. Right now there are 3 (Fingers, Eck and Sutter). The only other feasible guys with any chance before Hoffman will be eligible are Lee Smith and Gossage, neither of whom look likely to get in, and John Franco, who I also think falls short. Billy Wagner is the only other likely guy to get any consideration, so the max you will have in 15 years is 6 (assuming Wagner, Rivera and Hoffman get in). If anything, Hoffman will have to be one of the trailblazers that changes voters minds.

Personally, I have to look beyond the saves stats and, again, get to what I saw and he and Rivera were the only two guys that, over a long period of time, I thought "ok, game is over" when they came in and b/c of that, they would be the only two guys I would vote for.

 

[RupertPupkin]

come on man, that comment is not even close to true.

30 saves does not a great closer make.

I cant name dozens of closers thats saved 30 games that I would not give 2 cents for.

There are only about 6 or 7 great closers in all of baseball right now. About another 5 good to decent closers. Everyone else is nothing more than a crap shoot.

I backed up stats to go with that , 38 Saves in a season done 4 times EVER before 1982. Since then 25 years Later ... Its been done 138 times ... You may be right about less than 10 solid closers considering you bet every night and taste defeat .. But over a 162 game season , every Team feels they have a reliable closer. Last year 18 players had more than 30 saves. 18 players equals 18 teams when it comes to closers. In 2005 it was 19 with more than 30 saves. In 2004 it was 15 ( two had 29 ) In 1982 , 5 teams had them. So what I said , is not completely out of line like you imply. Hoffman may make it after waiting a long while , but no way in hell is he one of the Top 5 locks in the game right now. Closers are not locks to begin with. My point is , look at the progression in the last 25 years , Now imagine the next 10. Teams are making a point about finding and nurturing young pitchers and grooming them into closers. Hoffman is good, and one of the best around .. But Hall of Fame ??? Come on ? Who's kidding who , here ?

 

[RupertPupkin]

I think that is what he means, not that there are a lot of great closers or that saving 35+ makes you one, but that even bad closers rack up 30+ saves per year. Therefore, the stat itself is a joke and not a good measure of greatness.

That exactly what im saying

 

[RupertPupkin]

I think that is what he means, not that there are a lot of great closers or that saving 35+ makes you one, but that even bad closers rack up 30+ saves per year. Therefore, the stat itself is a joke and not a good measure of greatness.

I am with you, I think he should get in. However, FW and Rupert have valid points. Closers are not respected by HOF voters and that could be a problem for Hoffman. Additionally, the fact that almost every team has a guy with 30+ saves de-values the statistic itself.

I do, however, tend to disagree with you that in 15 years there will be plenty of closers in. Right now there are 3 (Fingers, Eck and Sutter). The only other feasible guys with any chance before Hoffman will be eligible are Lee Smith and Gossage, neither of whom look likely to get in, and John Franco, who I also think falls short. Billy Wagner is the only other likely guy to get any consideration, so the max you will have in 15 years is 6 (assuming Wagner, Rivera and Hoffman get in). If anything, Hoffman will have to be one of the trailblazers that changes voters minds.

Personally, I have to look beyond the saves stats and, again, get to what I saw and he and Rivera were the only two guys that, over a long period of time, I thought "ok, game is over" when they came in and b/c of that, they would be the only two guys I would vote for.

I realize it is your "personal" opinion and your entitled to that as much as anybody on this site. However there was a game where these two faced off if you can recall. Back in 1998, in game 3 of the World Series at Qualcom stadium. In a must win game where San Diego led in the Top of the 8th. A game the Padres desperately needed to add life and spark to a series which they trailed 2-0. I remember this game well , because I was watching it from my apartment in Queens. And in the top of the 8th with nobody on ,The "Great" Randy Myers ( 7th All-time Career Save List mind you, including 53 in 1992 ) walked Tino Martinez and the stage was set for the Mighty Hoffman to come in and save the day for The Dreys and turn this into a series afterall. The crowd erupted as Hoff sprinted onto the field. Should I continue ??

Well the rest history as you know it Scott Brosius sent the ball over the wall and Hoffman just Lost the game for San Diego. Lost it- World Series a.k.a Choke city ...To Be considered an all time great you have to rise to the great occasions the game offers you and Trevor Hoffman sunk like a stone on the grandest stage of them all. While the real deal came in and sealed the deal. Mariano Rivera came in and got the outs needed for save when New York held a one-run lead. After that , the broom came out and why shouldnt it , the Padres had a shot, their best player had a lead and couldn't protect it. Thats in my mind thinking of Hoffman, that game, that pitch , that homer , that loss. And believe you me, the voters for the Hall will be thinking of it too.

 

[fhmesq44]

You can't judge a guy by his best or worst game. Rivera is better, no doubt. However, you can't dismiss an entire career for one poor outing. that is like judging Rivera based on one game, a certain Game 7 against the Dbacks, or a certain game 4, against the Red Sox. Everyone has shit themselves at some point. Clemens' career is full of post season flame outs. Maddux's post season career is nothing to speak of either. Bonds too.

 

[fhmesq44]

Or Eck's HR to Gibson. I should also clarify the "ok, it's over" and being shocked/surprised when he doesn't close the door. To me, only Rivera and Hoffman elicited that response over an extended period of time.

 

[lander]

A guy by the name of Rollie Fingers.

We are just now getting to the age of eligabilty for career closers. There was really no such thing as a real closer until the 70's.

Eck did not get into the hall because of his starting. That had nothing to do with him getting in there.

There will be plenty of closers in the hall 15 years from now.

Fingers was a starter for many years too. I understand your point, but like the DH .. the closers don't have the odds of getting into the hall that other positions do.

I hope there are plenty of closers in the hall .. Mo, Hoffman, Lee Smith to start with.

The game has changed and the hall should change with it. I'm not debating that point with you, but rather pointing out the realities of the hall as it exists today.

 

[Journeyman]

Rollie Fingers was a closer just about his entire career...I think maybe you mean Eckersley.

 

[Journeyman]

Fingers is also in. Rivera will be in, at least he had better get in.

Rivera is a lock.

 

[lander]

J,
Fingers started his career as a starter. Not as long as Eck ... I realize that.

 

[Journeyman]

Yea he had one yr where he started 19 games, he was a closer from age 25 on.

 

[fhmesq44]

J,
Fingers started his career as a starter. Not as long as Eck ... I realize that.

Fingers had 37 career starts, 19 came in one season where he also had 29 relief appearances, 35 starts were in his first 3 seasons when he also had 31 saves.

 

[TomBrady#1]

Fingers had 37 career starts, 19 came in one season where he also had 29 relief appearances, 35 starts were in his first 3 seasons when he also had 31 saves.

DUde there has been a lot of debate and discussion on Yaz, Carl Yazstremski. Some feel he is a product of lengevity and not a great player. Actually more feel that than I would expect. I personally think you have to be insane to not realize how great Yaz was if you add it all up. He is a clear HOFer and it is a no brainer. I am shocked that some people (even a few smart ones) do not agree. ANy thoughts on this? Not sure how old you are but it helps if you watched the time frame in question. Thanks.

 

[lander]

Guys,
I'm perfectly aware of Fingers stats ... baseball-reference.com works in NY too ...

my point WAS that there has been 1 guy in the hall from start to finish that was a closer.

Whether Fingers started 3 seasons or 2.5 does NOT change the point.

let it go already. b*tch at the hall if you don't like the facts.

 

[fhmesq44]

37 starts are irrelevant to Fingers' career. No one said "guys that ONLY closed", we said closers and to disqualify Fingers b/c he had 37 starts early in his career is ridiculous. Enough said on that. As I have said, I agree w/ you regarding the lack of respect closers get and it being a problem for HOffman.

Tom,

In 25 years someone will look back at Biggio's career and say the same thing. WHat? 3000 hits, all time right handed doubles leader, all star at 2 positions, 1800 runs scored, 4 time GG, blah blah blah.

I have heard the same about Yaz (and Yount). Yaz was a broken down old man by the time i saw him play so it is tough for me to say he should or shouldn't. He did, however, only have a few exceptional seasons and had a number of pretty shitty ones during what should have been the prime of his career. I can see how someone can think that. He only finished in the top 6 of MVP voting 3 times and 2 more at 9 and 10.

 

[TomBrady#1]

37 starts are irrelevant to Fingers' career. No one said "guys that ONLY closed", we said closers and to disqualify Fingers b/c he had 37 starts early in his career is ridiculous. Enough said on that. As I have said, I agree w/ you regarding the lack of respect closers get and it being a problem for HOffman.

Tom,

In 25 years someone will look back at Biggio's career and say the same thing. WHat? 3000 hits, all time right handed doubles leader, all star at 2 positions, 1800 runs scored, 4 time GG, blah blah blah.

I have heard the same about Yaz (and Yount). Yaz was a broken down old man by the time i saw him play so it is tough for me to say he should or shouldn't. He did, however, only have a few exceptional seasons and had a number of pretty shitty ones during what should have been the prime of his career. I can see how someone can think that. He only finished in the top 6 of MVP voting 3 times and 2 more at 9 and 10.

There are so many points to be made it is hard to get them all in. Plus I do not dwell on this (baseball YES, HOF questions no)which makes it a little harder. Remember I think Yaz won the Batting title with a .301 average...you see because times were different that brings down his lifetime avg but it was the best in that year. Nowadays with a "livlier" ball and more you couldn't hit .301 and win the title. SO to compare players from different eras is not right..same with HR's. You cannot compare Jim Rice HR's to today because the todays stats are padded for several reasons, juice ball, steriods, small ballparks, expansion, etc.

Yaz was a great all around player. He hit in the clutch, he stole some bases., he won Gold Gloves, he played multiple positions very well, He won HR titles, he won batting titles, he was the last man to win the triple crown. He played for a long time. Yaz made 18 allstar games. That is pretty darn impressive. I realize he had some avg years in there too. No doubt. IF you didn't see him play against his contemporaries then it is hard for you. YAz is a no brainer first ballot HOFer and well deserved. If you ask players from his day (which I have done) they all give him high props. Some wiseguys do not. It is fun to debate. Thanks for the response.

 

[fhmesq44]

not saying he shouldn't be in, only that I can see how someone can conceivably say that. I realize the game was much different back then and take that into account. I wasn't comparing him to current day numbers. However, look at 1971-1975 (ages 31-35), what should have been a top time in his career, and he was VERY ordinary (probably .273/15/<75). He was pretty damn consistent but had few seasons that really blow you away. Again, I am only looking at the numbers which admittedly can be deceiving.

I love the HOF talk, so subjective with everyone having different opinions on players and standards.

 

[RupertPupkin]

not saying he shouldn't be in, only that I can see how someone can conceivably say that. I realize the game was much different back then and take that into account. I wasn't comparing him to current day numbers. However, look at 1971-1975 (ages 31-35), what should have been a top time in his career, and he was VERY ordinary (probably .273/15/<75). He was pretty damn consistent but had few seasons that really blow you away. Again, I am only looking at the numbers which admittedly can be deceiving.

I love the HOF talk, so subjective with everyone having different opinions on players and standards.

I have a few my friends telling me Dave Winfield ( my favorite player as a Kid ) shouldn't be in either and they use an argument similar to that of Yaz ... That he played a long time , etc , etc ... But isnt that a tribute to the game itself , a long career , many major milestones , etc. Thats why I cant see Hoffman getting right in ... He hasn't even pitched 1000 innings in his career , and now he's get in before say Tom Glavine ? or Biggio ? Highly doubtful , I still believe the Hall will see this the same way I do about Hoffman ...

 

[TomBrady#1]

I have a few my friends telling me Dave Winfield ( my favorite player as a Kid ) shouldn't be in either and they use an argument similar to that of Yaz ... That he played a long time , etc , etc ... But isnt that a tribute to the game itself , a long career , many major milestones , etc. Thats why I cant see Hoffman getting right in ... He hasn't even pitched 1000 innings in his career , and now he's get in before say Tom Glavine ? or Biggio ? Highly doubtful , I still believe the Hall will see this the same way I do about Hoffman ...

True. Longevity in itself is a requirement to get in. Some people want to use that against some players. It might be true sometimes that aside from playing long the player was pretty average. Winfield was great for a long long time.

 

[fhmesq44]

I once read an article by a voter where he discussed the longevity issue and a guy's "dominance" during his career. He basically said that he looked at the best 10-12 year period of a guy's career and voted more based on that than the end result, giving more credit if a guy's best period was say 16 years. His theory being that to be "great" and deserving of the HOF you had to be elite for an extended period of time/dominant/among the best in the game for an extended period and that guys (like Biggio, perhaps like WInfield, Murray, Palmeiro, Yaz) who accumulated impressive career numbers were never elite players. It doesn't discredit a guy for sticking around, but it does limit worth given to the years when the guy isn't elite or great or even very good.

Frankly, I tend to agree with this approach. To me, Alomar's 14 year run is far more impressive than the entirety of Biggio's career. I kind of feel the same way about Albert Belle compared with some guys. He, unfortunately, was a bad citizen and only had 10 seasons in his career.