Tuesday December 9, 2003
 

Hall of Fame Mailbag

Twins/Milton Mailbag

Chris Coste Update

NFL “EXPERT” PICKS
 

MAILBAG EDITION

I have to start with a quick correction. Yesterday, I mentioned that the University of North Dakota’s football team lost in the semi-finals of the Division II playoffs. Well, I was completely wrong. They defeated North Alabama 29-22 in front of over 9,600 fans at the Alerus Center in Grand Forks, ND. Next Saturday, they will play against Grand Valley State down in Florence, Alabama.

Hall of Fame Postings

Last week, I wrote two postings regarding this year’s Hall of Fame ballot. Part 1 discusses the players on the ballot for the first time. Part 2 then discusses those players who received enough votes last year to stay on the ballot. Those two postings were linked to on Baseball Primer causing a lot of your to read this site. Many left Comments on that site about the Hall of Fame Discussion. Check it out here, some of the discussion is very interesting!

There are over 80 comments there, but I also received a bunch of e-mails regarding those postings. There probably isn’t a topic in baseball that garners more discussion than the Hall of Fame. So, here are a few of the replies I received. I hope you enjoy this. I like letting you read other people’s comments and opinions as well.

From Kirk Beller of Fargo, ND:

Good postings the last couple of days.
My ballot:
Molitor--duh
Blyleven--as much as the 250 L, and 3.31 ERA hurt him, you're exactly right that the 3700 Ks and 287 W make him a HOF guy. It's a shame that he's not in there. Tommy john… <no>. He took 4 more years to amass 1,500 fewer Ks. Maybe I just hate him for his stint as Twins color guy. He was terrible.
Gossage--He was just plain dominant
Sutter--If you take one, you have to take the other. I wonder if that's why neither of them make it in every year.
Eckersley--He was that good, that versatile, and lasted an incredibly long time. Plus he had a sweet hairdo on that 1979 Topps card. Look at those numbers from '87 to '92. Amazing.
Sandberg--Like you said, considering the era, the position and all that sort of thing he's a viable HOF candidate. Then there's his defense. I say put him in.

Guys I leave off:
Smith--Maybe another year, but I can't vote for 4 relief pitchers in one year. Honestly, I say Eckersley goes this year and that alone will be enough to keep Gossage, Sutter, and Smith out.
Murphy--I think his case and Sandberg's are fairly similar (bad era for offense), and I think he suffered from the same thing that Bert did—being the lone star (aside from Claudell Washington) on some bad teams. That and the fact that he was one of my personal favorites makes a guy wonder why I wouldn't pick him for the Hall. Don't know what I'm thinking. Maybe it's the fact that he played mostly at offensive-minded positions.
Morris--Thank you for mentioning that he was the losingest pitcher of the 80s. so freakin' what if he won a lot of games in that span? he had an era of 3.90. That belongs in the hall of mediocre. I love the guy for that game in the World Series, but I'm sorry, not HOF worthy.
the rest of them would take too long to discuss.
OK. Voting with your heart, who do you let in that you didn't put in based on numbers? I add Murphy and Carter and Morris.

SETH’S THOUGHTS

For those who didn’t read the HOF postings I wrote last week (first check here for Part 1 and Part 2), I cast my “vote” for Paul Molitor, Dennis Eckersley, Bert Blyleven, Goose Gossage and Lee Smith. Voting with my heart, I really think the only one I would add would be Joe Carter. He was always a favorite of mine and I was nervous every time he came up against the Twins. I generally don’t agree that Ryne Sandberg is a Hall of Famer, but check out this message I received, then you too might change your mind.

From Mike Donohue from Chicago:

Seth,

I respectfully disagree with your assertion that Ryne Sandberg does not deserve election into the Hall of Fame.

Like many astute fans/bloggers out there, you appear to base your analysis entirely on the four times per game that a player steps into a batter's box, apparently dismissing defensive contributions--hence your first-year induction of Paul Molitor, whose coke-ravaged body prevented him from even playing a position with any regularity since Reagan's second term. Talk about one-dimensional.

Consider Sandberg's defense. In my opinion, Sandberg is the best defensive second baseman since Charlie Gehringer. But don't take my opinion for it. Consider that Sandberg was the first second baseman since Charlie Gehringer of Detroit (they're the only two, in fact) to have SIX 600 assist seasons. Joe Morgan had none. In fact, Joe Morgan had exactly SIX 500 assist seasons. Sandberg, who played the equivalent of 4 1/2 fewer seasons than Morgan, had ten.

Defensively, Sandberg was without peer. If you feel compelled to check out the best attempts at defensive quantification, I refer you to baseball-primer.com, which has been currently publishing Michael Humphrey's yeoman’s work in evaluating defensive players, Defensive regressive Analysis (DRA). You may find it interesting to note how his results rate Sandberg defensively.

Offensively, Sandberg's within barking distance of Morgan. While Morgan's OBP obviously not only blows the doors off of Sandberg's, but is also in the top 100 OBPs of all time (93rd, last I checked), Sandberg's power numbers are stronger. The truth is, Sandberg and Morgan were somewhat different hitters. Sandberg's SLG was 25 pts. higher than Morgan's, he hit more home runs, and had only 46 fewer doubles and 72 fewer RBI in nearly 500 fewer games than Morgan.

Throw in the fact that Morgan, during his peak years, was couched in a lineup which also housed future Hall-of-Famers Johnny Bench and Tony Perez, as well as Hall-worthy (on merit) Pete Rose, as well as Ken Griffey Sr. and George Foster while, at the same time, Sandberg was surrounded by some of the most painfully mediocre ballplayers to ever collect a pension check, well I believe that it's fair to say that Morgan gains an advantage strictly on circumstance.

Considering how closely behind Morgan Sandberg was offensively, and how far ahead of Morgan Sandberg was defensively, I am absolutely flabbergasted that Morgan sails into the Hall on the first ballot and Sandberg not only gets less than 50% in his first year but, because of institutional short-sightedness of people like yourself, will likely get jobbed again this year.

I urge you to reconsider your assessment.

I did reply to Mike with some of my thoughts, and here are some tidbits from his next response, equally worth the read:

My concern on this topic has less to do with myself and more to do with ensuring that the truth gets out. I have no doubt that there exists a prevailing prejudice out there that is anti-Sandberg and pro-Morgan. The fact that you, yourself, were unaware of Sandberg's strengths and also, at the same time, assumed Morgan was as great as he insists he was proves my point. Because Sandberg was a boring interview, and just went about his job, I knew, from the moment he retired, that he would have a hard time getting inducted, simply because the writers would have it in for his boring ass. In Chicago, he never did commercials, never pushed his own agenda, never promoted himself. He just showed up, played hard and played great, and went home. At the same time, to see that arrogant, insecure gasbag Morgan take shots at Sandberg while he was playing also made me aware of the other side of the coin--Morgan's tireless self-promotion which has obviously worked. Thanks to his own PR campaign, most people just ASSUME that Morgan was far and away a superior second baseman to Sandberg. As you can now see, they're not so far apart. In my opinion, Sandberg was better, but to make that point often brings ridicule that I'm just a biased Cub fan. Oh well.

You may not have recalled that Sandberg was so solid defensively exactly because he was so low-key. My dad, who was born in '33 and has been observing baseball since the early 1940's, used to marvel at how well-positioned Sandberg always was. My dad would tell me at the time that Sandberg had the best range of any second baseman that he had ever seen. This is a man who had seen Billy Herman, Jackie Robinson, Ken Hubbs, and, yes, Joe Morgan play ball. He could not recall any of those players possessing the range Sandberg possessed. Sandberg was SO in position to field a grounder, so often, that he actually made difficult plays look effortless. Of course, the downside to this would be that, becasue we live in an MTV-age, that he appeared to lack hustle because he didn't dive, ignoring the fact that he never needed to dive. That loudmouth showboat Shawon Dunston even stabbed his old double-play partner in the back when he complained that Sandberg never "dove for a ball" Show me an infielder who's constantly diving for the ball, and I'll show you a hot dog who's out of position. For a more credible witness, I would be interested to hear what Rick Sutcliffe and Greg Maddux, two workmanlike, old-school guys that pitched in front of Sandberg, would have to say say about Sandberg's range.

SETH’S THOUGHTS

First, I’m no expert. Actually, I’m a moron. I’m just a guy who loves baseball and has this website to throw out my opinions on things. I’m not always right, although, if you want to think so, that’s fine with me too! Mike certainly makes a strong case for the Hall of Fame candidacy of Ryne Sandberg. It’s hard to argue that he shouldn’t be considered. I don’t think that comparing his numbers to a current Hall of Famers is completely fair, because each player makes it or doesn’t make it on his own merits. Each case is and should be judged separately. That said, I don’t disagree that Joe Morgan is very overrated.

Also, in no way do I agree that a player who dives for a ball is a “hot dog”!!

From Justin Ahern, who is also from Fargo:

I know that you haven't heard from me in awhile, but it's not because I haven't been reading your site. It's because I have been agreeing with you a lot lately. It's not any fun to send you an email saying that I think that you are right. You finally put something up on your site that got me going.

Here are your selections.

1.) Paul Molitor – IF/DH

2.) Dennis Eckersley – Pitcher

3.) Bert Blyleven – Pitcher

4.) Goose Gossage – Relief Pitcher

5.) Lee Smith – Relief Pitcher

I think that your first 3 are no doubt Hall of Famers. I would also vote for Goose Gossage, but you will find many people with somewhat valid arguments that he doesn't belong. I have a serious problem with putting in Lee Smith at this point. Here is a list of his top 10 comp's according to www.baseball-reference.com.

Jeff Reardon (896)

John Franco (885)

Doug Jones (858)

Rollie Fingers (850) *

Bruce Sutter (832)

Rick Aguilera (828)

Kent Tekulve (825)

Gene Garber (821)

Steve Bedrosian (816)

Mike Jackson (813)

How many of those guys do you want in the Hall of Fame? I don't know if any of them belong. How do you decide between a great closer and a good closer? These guys are all contemporary relievers. Ryne Sandberg was easily the best 2nd baseman of the 1980's. You will have a hard time convincing me that each of the top 5 relievers in any given year is better than the best player at his position for an entire decade. I also think that Ron Santo is better than any of these guys. I would also vote for Dale Murphy, Andre Dawson, and Alan Trammell.

Alan Trammell was a legitimately great player from 1983 until 1988. He was also a very good player from 1978 until 1982 and again from 1989 until 1993. His biggest problem was that he was overshadowed by Cal Ripken for the majority of his career. Like Ryne Sandberg and other middle infielders who played before the hitting explosion of the 1990's, his offensive stats get pushed aside. Middle infielders couldn't always hit like Jeff Kent, Edgardo Alfonso, Nomar, ARod, and all the other guys who have been filling up the stat sheets over the last ten years. Ryne Sandberg's 282 career home runs is still the record for most by a second baseman. The fact that Trammell could hit .300 with 20 home runs was amazing for a shortstop at that time. There are several Hall of Fame middle infielders who couldn't hit any near as well as these two guys. They belong in the Hall in my book.

Dale Murphy and Andre Dawson were 2 of the best players in the National League for the majority of the 1980's. Dale Murphy was a great player from 1978 until 1987. That's 10 years. Kirby Puckett was only a great player for 10 years and he belongs in the Hall. Andre Dawson was a great player from 1977 until 1988 and a very good player until 1992. He won 7 Gold Gloves, was an 8 time All-Star and won an MVP award. I remember watching a Cubs game in 1987 where he got intentionally walked 5 times!

I know that when it comes to electing players into the Hall of Fame that we want to err on the side of exclusivity, but you can't ignore the players who are already there. If the players who are currently up for election are better than many of the players who are already in, I think that they should be voted in.

SETH’S THOUGHTS

Justin used my Baseball Reference Similar Players usage against me! But it makes a good case. I used the Similar Players of Bert Blyleven and used it to help make the case for him. Justin uses the list for Lee Smith, and he’s right! By looking at that list, not many of them deserve Hall of Fame consideration. Fingers is already in, and I think that Sutter will be shortly, but that’s about it!

From Jimbo from Pleasanton:

Hi Seth, have enjoyed your writings about the HOF ballot the last couple of days.....it makes this 'hot stove time' one way to get through the period from November to March bearable.

Here's just one hard-core bb fan's opinion (I'm 42, loved the Pirates, A's, and Twins as a kid, and now am firmly settled into being an SF Giants and NL fan and roto-player).

I never considered Bert Blyleven to be the 'ace' of any of the staffs he played on. He was always the quality 2 or 3 guy, but when his team needed a big win and had to hand the ball to somebody.......I don't think he would have been the first choice. Strikeouts are a truly overrated stat. If they counted for a lot, then Greg Maddux will actually have people question his HOF credentials. The purpose of being a pitcher is to get outs, and in my opinion, the fewer balls it takes to get those outs, the better. Nolan Ryan ruins this whole line of reason, but I consider him to be from another planet! I'd have to put Jack Morris a lot higher on my own ballot, in place of Bert. Game 7 in 1991 was the greatest game I've ever seen. But Morris really was the ace of every staff he pitched on, and was the guy that the manager wanted to give the ball to when he needed a W.

I'm not really sure about what to do about all of the relief pitchers.....I saw Eckersley in his prime as a closer with the A's and the only question when he came into the game was how many pitches it would take him to get the side out. He truly is a HOF player based upon his success as a starter and conversion to the dominant reliever he became. Gossage was the most intimidating RP I ever saw, but not sure if he belongs. Lee Smith was good for a long time as well. I'm thinking that once a reliever gets on the Veterans' committee, then the door will probably open wider for the specialists. And if relief pitchers are having trouble getting in, then it will be a very long time before a DH is elected!

Keep up the good work, and I'll be a frequent reader of your site.

SETH’S THOUGHTS

I think today that many statheads do overvalue the strikeout. The key to pitching is not striking out hitters, it’s to get hitters out, however that is accomplished. “Ace” is an interesting word to bring up with this conversation. I certainly can’t disagree with your points regarding Blyleven not being an ace and Jack Morris always being a staff ace. That said, Blyleven still put up Hall of Fame numbers regardless of that. From a Twins standpoint, in ’87, Frank Viola was the Twins “ace”, but I would say that Blyleven was 1B. I just can’t figure out how Blyleven is not a Hall of Famer, when you consider not only the wins, the strikeouts, the shutouts and more.

Jack Morris, well, I think his ERA is way too high. But he was certainly the ace of those staffs. Of course, Brad Radke has been called the Twins ace for about 8 or 9 seasons, so does that give him a shot at the Hall of Fame? I realize this is an extreme scenario, but that’s an argument against the “ace” factor.

I’d love to hear other thoughts on that argument. If you’d like to comment, e-mail me.
 

The Eric Milton Trade

It has now been over a week since the Eric Milton trade, where they got very little back from the Phillies for the veteran lefty. However, the Phils took Milton’s entire $9 million salary, so the Twins could work with that. Yesterday, the Twins resigned LF Shannon Stewart to take up about $5.5 million of that. They offered Eddie Guardado arbitration, so if they can resign him as well, then the Milton trade is ok. But I did receive a few e-mails regarding the Milton trade from our readers. Here is a sampling:

David Bloom from The D-Rays Blog (which has moved and is now called You Gotta Believe:

As I saw the Milton Trade headline on ESPN.com yesterday. My first reaction was ok so the Phillies must of have given up Chase Utley due to their log jam in the infield. Its a salary dump, but at least they come away with some talent.

But no, the Twins land the "Talented Mr Punto".

Not a good trade from the Twins. I guess this means Radke (Seth Note - who has been rumored to Tampa Bay) stays. From the Phils perspective, it just seems they have David Bell penciled in at third and Polanco at 2nd. Where will Utley fit in? Millwood?

SETH’S THOUGHTS

I was thinking the exact same thing. I was hoping they could receive more for Milton. However, the current economics of baseball dictate that, had the Twins received any real potential talent for Milton, they would have had to pay a portion of the $9 million salary. Utley would have been a great pickup. But I like Polanco and is it even possible that David Bell can be as bad as he was in 2003 again? That said, Utley needs to play. Just like Michael Cuddyer, Michael Restovich, Justin Morneau, Lew Ford, Joe Mauer and other Twins.

From Pabs from Moorhead, MN, just across the border from Fargo, ND:

Hello again I thought I'd comment on what worries me most about the Milton trade and it has to do with something Hunter said.
My primary concern and growing fear, is that they are putting together a team for 2005 or even beyond! How can Oakland do it with less than our payroll?! Bah on SABRemetrics!
First the other teams will be better so it will be harder to compete and second - I can see it now - is attendance plunging. We know how hard it was to get fans to attend games during the season when the Twins were struggling. When it comes to baseball Minnesota fans are fairly "fair weather." Especially when you consider that Vikings games are sold out regardless of whether they win or lose.
Because of that, any support for a stadium would evaporate leading to my greatest ultimate super-duper (pick one!) terror. The Minnesota Twins leaving Minnesota! That is what concerns me most. I can live with not winning a division, but how can I live without even a team to cheer for?
That is what concerns me most about the Milton trade: conceding a subpar season and potentially driving a knife into the heart of the franchise's future in Minnesota.

SETH’S THOUGHTS

Pabs, you make two very good points. First, I think that they are, in some ways, planning for the 2005 season and beyond. But to slightly disagree, I’m said numerous times on this site that I think the guys who will be coming up in the next year have ceilings that are higher than many of the current guys. Morneau and Mauer, Durbin and Crain are four examples just off the top of my head. And, under the current Carl Pohlad regime, the salaries will have to stay low. So, out of necessity (or Pohlad probably wouldn’t hire him back), Terry Ryan has to think long term. So again, I think that he is building a team that will contend for years to come. SABRmetrics is one way to accomplish that, and Terry Ryan has been successful doing things his way as well.

The second point you make is equally astute. Minnesota fans are definitely ‘fair-weathered’ (as a whole, there are obvious exceptions and if you are following this site for Twins information, you’re probably not fair-weathered!). Yes, the Vikings sell-out regardless of their record. But look at the Twins and the Timberwolves. How is it possible that the Wolves have the best player in the NBA, that they have won 50 games and even been in the playoffs in past years, yet they don’t even sell out playoff games any more? I don’t understand that in the least.

Likewise, with the Twins, the primary goal is to contend and win the AL Central. I see absolutely no reason that they can’t win the division again. I’ve read somewhere that they can’t contend with the likes of the Yankees and Red Sox who are spending like crazy. Well, first, the Twins are in a different division, so they don’t have to. And second, which of those two teams won the World Series this year? Oh, neither of them, it was the Marlins, with a low salary group.  How about the year before? Nope. That was the Angels.  My point is that the key is getting to the playoffs. You have to try to put together the best team possible to make the playoffs and then take your chances against those higher spending teams (Note - I said “higher-spending, not “better”).  The World Series isn’t about the best team in baseball. It’s about the best team in baseball in October, two very separate things!
 

CHRIS COSTE UPDATE

NFL “EXPERT” PICKS

Well, we had another tough week of games. This week, we had four panelists accurately pick (guess?) ten of the sixteen games. Aaron Gleeman, Ben Jacobs, Anthony Fox and Mike Brasel each got ten correct. Aaron maintains his one game lead on Ben.  Here are this week’s results, along with the overall standings. For specifics, please check out our FB Picks web page.

Well, that’s it for today. I’ll be back tomorrow with hopefully something really interesting to cause plenty of e-mails. Any questions or comments, please feel free to e-mail me!

Back to Archives           Home