-
Originally Posted by
BrunswickDawg
I think you have to differentiate between Murphy and Kingman because of the awards. Kingman was an All-Star three times, no MVPS. He was not considered a dominate player of his era. He led the AL in HR twice but never got above 11th in MVP voting even in his best season.
Murphy also has a career 46.5 WAR to Kingman's 17.3 WAR.
-
Originally Posted by
BrunswickDawg
Yeah - Koufax had a real interesting career. He almost quit after going 8-13 in '60 to go into electronics. He gets in tip top shape for '61 to give it one more go and then goes 18-13. He then rattles off one of the best 5 year stretches of the live ball era and retires with arthritis in his elbow.
So in other words, had he not had the 1st 6 years of mediocrity, he would not be in the HOF one would assume. If he only had the 6 years of dominance, would not be there?
-
Originally Posted by
KB21
Murphy also has a career 46.5 WAR to Kingman's 17.3 WAR.
I was mostly making the Kingman comparison because I don?t think Murphy should be in the HOF. Someone that batted above .300 only twice in 16 or 17 seasons shouldn?t be the in the Hall unless they are a defensive juggernaut like Ozzie Smith
-
Originally Posted by
msudawglb
I know everyone loves Dale Murphy, but if he gets in the HOF, then someone like Dave Kingman deserves in as well. He had more HR?s in less at bats and same number of RBI?s as Murphy. Neither of them sniffed .300 batting average for career and both had about 1700 strike outs.
Dale Murphy was a FAR better player than Dave Kingman. Holy crap.
-
Originally Posted by
msudawglb
I was mostly making the Kingman comparison because I don?t think Murphy should be in the HOF. Someone that batted above .300 only twice in 16 or 17 seasons shouldn?t be the in the Hall unless they are a defensive juggernaut like Ozzie Smith
That's like saying Pujols shouldn't be in the HOF because Mark Grace isn't. It's a nonsensical argument.
-
Are MLB voters as shady and vindictive as some NFL HOF voters have historically shown?
"It is not courage to resist TUSK; It is courage to accept TUSK."
No.
Easy there buddy. Tusk is...well Tusk is Tusk. Tireddawg 12.20.17
-
Originally Posted by
Cooterpoot
Considering there are only 3 guys with multiple MVP awards not in the Hall, it's a travesty. Hell, Roger Maris should be in the Hall IMO.
Right on!
-
Originally Posted by
TUSK
Are MLB voters as shady and vindictive as some NFL HOF voters have historically shown?
Worse, Tusk! Way worse!
-
One thing to remember too, it's not just about offense. Murph was an elite defender with a cannon arm. He was one of the best outfielders in the game for almost a decade.
-
Originally Posted by
msudawglb
I was mostly making the Kingman comparison because I don?t think Murphy should be in the HOF. Someone that batted above .300 only twice in 16 or 17 seasons shouldn?t be the in the Hall unless they are a defensive juggernaut like Ozzie Smith
Murphy won 5 gold gloves. His WAR is close to Jim Rice who won 1 mvp. Murphy’s OPS would put him a tie for 100th in the Hall of Fame with Barry Larkin and Roush, one spot behind Johnny Bench.
-
Originally Posted by
Bully13
So in other words, had he not had the 1st 6 years of mediocrity, he would not be in the HOF one would assume. If he only had the 6 years of dominance, would not be there?
I'm saying that we don't give equal credit sometimes based on some pretty arbitrary measures, that get thrown out the window when the voters want them to be.
If you had asked me in 1990 who I thought would be a HOF lock of 1990s pitchers who still had years left I would have said Brett Saberhagen and Doc Gooden. Sabes was 92-55 with a CY in 7 seasons - and was only 26. He played for 9 more season, but was injured in 5 of them and pitched sparingly. Doc was 119-40, with 4 AS games, ROY, and a CY in 7 seasons and was only 25. We all know what happened to Doc. So, Saberhagen and Gooden - who were arguably the best pitchers in baseball from 1984 - 1990 gets penalized for trying to fight through injuries and drugs to have a long careers while Koufax is regarded as one of the best ever.
Say Koufax had gotten surgery for arthritis (which were probably bone spurs), and comes back and fights through 4-5 more years and is basically a .500 pitcher over 80 starts and ends up 195-127 (almost identical to Doc's 194-112). Is Koufax a HOF?
"After dealing with Ole Miss for over a year," he said, "I've learned to expect their leadership to do and say things that the leadership at other Division I schools would never consider doing and to justify their actions by reminding themselves that "We're Ole Miss.""
- Tom Mars, Esq. 4.9.18
-
Originally Posted by
Commercecomet24
One thing to remember too, it's not just about offense. Murph was an elite defender with a cannon arm. He was one of the best outfielders in the game for almost a decade.
He wasn't. His defense didn't really hurt him, but it was below average.
-
Originally Posted by
BrunswickDawg
I'm saying that we don't give equal credit sometimes based on some pretty arbitrary measures, that get thrown out the window when the voters want them to be.
If you had asked me in 1990 who I thought would be a HOF lock of 1990s pitchers who still had years left I would have said Brett Saberhagen and Doc Gooden. Sabes was 92-55 with a CY in 7 seasons - and was only 26. He played for 9 more season, but was injured in 5 of them and pitched sparingly. Doc was 119-40, with 4 AS games, ROY, and a CY in 7 seasons and was only 25. We all know what happened to Doc. So, Saberhagen and Gooden - who were arguably the best pitchers in baseball from 1984 - 1990 gets penalized for trying to fight through injuries and drugs to have a long careers while Koufax is regarded as one of the best ever.
Say Koufax had gotten surgery for arthritis (which were probably bone spurs), and comes back and fights through 4-5 more years and is basically a .500 pitcher over 80 starts and ends up 195-127 (almost identical to Doc's 194-112). Is Koufax a HOF?
You're right about perception, but Koufax's peak was longer, better, and more consistent than either of those guys.
-
Originally Posted by
smootness
He wasn't. His defense didn't really hurt him, but it was below average.
The 5 Gold Gloves were undeserved?
-
Originally Posted by
smootness
He wasn't. His defense didn't really hurt him, but it was below average.
5 Gold Gloves, 3 seasons of top 10 in putouts as CF, 6 seasons top 10 putouts as RF(led league 3 times), 6 seasons top 10 in assists as CF(led league once), 2 seasons top 10 in assists as RF(led league once), 4 seasons top 10 in Fielding Percentage as CF, 4 seasons top 10 fielding percentage as RF, 66th in career putouts as an OF.
I'm sorry but that's not a below average outfielder.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.
Reply With Quote
