Beerball Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 Really? I'm not fanatical about baseball, but I watch it. I always thought of Barry Larkin as a Hall of Very Good player. Is he Hall worthy?
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) Really? I'm not fanatical about baseball, but I watch it. I always thought of Barry Larkin as a Hall of Very Good player. Is he Hall worthy? I think you nailed it. Hall of Very Good. Jeff Bagwell, Tim Raines and Bernie Williams were all better. Larkin's prime occurred when fast power-hitting shortstops like Jeter, Rodriguez, Tejada and Garciaparra were entering the league so he'll probably be the last SS to get into the Hall on the basis of "Well, he had great numbers for a middle infielder." He also did a lot of the things that shouldn't matter as much as they do...played his entire career with one team, some gold gloves, won an MVP (with a .886 OPS, how freakin pathetic was 1995?). Edited January 10, 2012 by SageAgainstTheMachine
GOBILLS78 Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 Definitely debatable, but he was a perennial all-star who was probably the best shortstop in the game for a decade. MVP and World Series star and good guy.
CowgirlsFan Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 He's worthy enough. No dislike here but I would've preferred Alan Trammel.
stinky finger Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 A very good player not deserving of enshrinement in Cooperstown.
bbb Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 I pay so much more attention to the American League that I didn't really realize all he had accomplished until he retired. I wish there was more to go on than what I'm seeing in wiki and the baseball reference, because it says 12 time All Star. Does that mean he went to the All Star Game or was he named to the season ending AP All Star time or such........Obviously, Pro Bowl is a far cry from All Pro in football, and is very much a popularity contest. He put up some good numbers offensively, but only three gold gloves. I guess like Sage said it's a case of "Well, he had great numbers for a middle infielder." The shortstop I really want to see get in is Omar Vizquel. He was a witch with the glove - I think he's got to be top two in my lifetime in terms of a fielding shortstop (with Ozzie Smith). 11 time Gold Glover. (And, he was pissed when they started giving it to Jeter and ARod - he thinks because of their offense and star power). And, I always thought he got a bad rap for not having a bat. I thought he was pretty good at the plate, and I remember going crazy when he hit a triple to finalize the greatest comeback I ever saw - vs. the Mariners on Sunday night baseball. It was something like 14-0, and the Indians came back. I don't think he'll make it, but he's only 139 hits away from 3000 hits and has a .272 lifetime average (vs. .295 for Larkin). PS I mean I don't think he'll make it to 3000. I hope he makes it to Cooperstown.
Alaska Darin Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 He put up some good numbers offensively, but only three gold gloves. How many GG's was he going to win in the same league with Ozzie Smith? Larkin was the best all-around SS in the National League for over a decade. He put up GREAT offensive numbers for his position when compared to those who came before him. People are very jaded now because guys like A-Roid and Ripken took the offensive side to such lofty heights but Larkin compares very favorably to everyone else who's already enshrined. There's only ONE infielder who has ever won more Silver Sluggers (Piazza). He's 4th all time for his position in WAR (Ripken/Jeter/A-Roid). The only real knock against Larkin is durability.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) I pay so much more attention to the American League that I didn't really realize all he had accomplished until he retired. I wish there was more to go on than what I'm seeing in wiki and the baseball reference, because it says 12 time All Star. Does that mean he went to the All Star Game or was he named to the season ending AP All Star time or such........Obviously, Pro Bowl is a far cry from All Pro in football, and is very much a popularity contest. He put up some good numbers offensively, but only three gold gloves. I guess like Sage said it's a case of "Well, he had great numbers for a middle infielder." The shortstop I really want to see get in is Omar Vizquel. He was a witch with the glove - I think he's got to be top two in my lifetime in terms of a fielding shortstop (with Ozzie Smith). 11 time Gold Glover. (And, he was pissed when they started giving it to Jeter and ARod - he thinks because of their offense and star power). And, I always thought he got a bad rap for not having a bat. I thought he was pretty good at the plate, and I remember going crazy when he hit a triple to finalize the greatest comeback I ever saw - vs. the Mariners on Sunday night baseball. It was something like 14-0, and the Indians came back. I don't think he'll make it, but he's only 139 hits away from 3000 hits and has a .272 lifetime average (vs. .295 for Larkin). PS I mean I don't think he'll make it to 3000. I hope he makes it to Cooperstown. Vizquel...now there's an interesting case. SPECTACULAR defensive player. He's the Brooks Robinson of shortstops, and I really think that should be enough. Offensively...I have to disagree. A middling career batting average masks a poor OBP (.337) and a terrible slugging percentage (.353). All of it combines for a .690 OPS. That's usually bad enough to earn a ticket back to Triple A, but again, he had that magical glove. Let's compare slash lines of some of the SS's to which Vizquel will be compared... Larkin: .295/.371/.444/.815 Jeter: .313/.383/.449/.832 Wagner: .328/.391/.467/.858 Yount: .285/.342/.430/.772 Ripken: .276/.340/.447/.787 Vizquel: .272/.337/.353/.690 Those are 4 of Vizquel's contemporaries, plus the greatest SS of all time, just for good measure. As you can see, Yount is the closest comparison and even his OPS is about 80 points higher. He got to Cooperstown for breaking the 3,000 hit mark. I've never been a huge fan of the logic because 3,000 hits is a testament to longevity. Yount played for 21 seasons, Vizquel for 22. It would be difficult to NOT approach 3,000 hits. If Vizquel chooses to hobble around until he reaches the milestone, does that suddenly make him a better player? Derek Jeter could probably wax toward 4,000 if he chooses to play until 2017, but that has a better chance of stealing from his greatness than adding to it. Another stat that sabermetricians love is WAR (wins above replacement) which accounts for offense and defensive potency. So the number essentially means, how many wins did this player add or subtract from his team over the course of his career if the alternative is a hypothetical replacement level bench player. Larkin: 68.9 Jeter: 70.4 Wagner: 134.5 (and no, I don't know how they calculate this for players from the 1890's, but that is just ridiculous) Yount: 76.9 Ripken: 89.9 Vizquel: 42.3 Again, not quite in the same league, but his dWAR (defensive wins above replacement) is 13.3, higher than any of the others. Edited January 10, 2012 by SageAgainstTheMachine
HopsGuy Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 (edited) I'm okay with Larkin getting in for the reasons AD mentioned. Raines needs to get in soon. That guy GOT ON BASE. Then he was a terrific base-runner. He could have slugged a bit better (higher XBHs), but having that guy at the top of the lineup for a decade in Montreal must have been nice. Then he played parts of another TWELVE years! I see that Juan Gonzalez, a 2-time MVP, failed to get 5% of the vote to get to next year's ballot. The steroid era makes all of this such a mess. It will be nice in 15 years or so when these numbers mean something again. Dale Murphy, decidedly not a steroid guy, also a 2-time MVP is running out of time. He garnered 14.5% of the vote and would be a nice addition to the Hall of Very Good. If not for him, Mike Schmidt would have won a least one more MVP - and I'm quite biased when it comes to THE GREATEST THIRD BASEMAN OF ALL TIME. I guess you could call me a 'real baseball fan'. Edited January 10, 2012 by HopsGuy
Ramius Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 I've got no problem with Larkin getting in. Along with Ozzy and Cal, he was the gold standard for shortstops when i was growing up.
Alaska Darin Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 Raines needs to get in soon. Him admitting he slid head first to keep from breaking his coke vials are what's keeping him out. Compare him to Lou Brock and tell me how Brock's in but Rock isn't. Ridiculous.
bbb Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 Vizquel...now there's an interesting case. SPECTACULAR defensive player. He's the Brooks Robinson of shortstops, and I really think that should be enough. Offensively...I have to disagree. A middling career batting average masks a poor OBP (.337) and a terrible slugging percentage (.353). All of it combines for a .690 OPS. That's usually bad enough to earn a ticket back to Triple A, but again, he had that magical glove. Let's compare slash lines of some of the SS's to which Vizquel will be compared... Larkin: .295/.371/.444/.815 Jeter: .313/.383/.449/.832 Wagner: .328/.391/.467/.858 Yount: .285/.342/.430/.772 Ripken: .276/.340/.447/.787 Vizquel: .272/.337/.353/.690 Those are 4 of Vizquel's contemporaries, plus the greatest SS of all time, just for good measure. As you can see, Yount is the closest comparison and even his OPS is about 80 points higher. He got to Cooperstown for breaking the 3,000 hit mark. I've never been a huge fan of the logic because 3,000 hits is a testament to longevity. Yount played for 21 seasons, Vizquel for 22. It would be difficult to NOT approach 3,000 hits. If Vizquel chooses to hobble around until he reaches the milestone, does that suddenly make him a better player? Derek Jeter could probably wax toward 4,000 if he chooses to play until 2017, but that has a better chance of stealing from his greatness than adding to it. Another stat that sabermetricians love is WAR (wins above replacement) which accounts for offense and defensive potency. So the number essentially means, how many wins did this player add or subtract from his team over the course of his career if the alternative is a hypothetical replacement level bench player. Larkin: 68.9 Jeter: 70.4 Wagner: 134.5 (and no, I don't know how they calculate this for players from the 1890's, but that is just ridiculous) Yount: 76.9 Ripken: 89.9 Vizquel: 42.3 Again, not quite in the same league, but his dWAR (defensive wins above replacement) is 13.3, higher than any of the others. Excellent analysis of Vizquel. I just always looked at his average and never delved deeper. How does he compare to Ozzie in those numbers? The others I think are HOF worthy due to their combination of O/D, but Ozzie would be about the only other contemporary who got in just because of defense. Like you said, Omar should get in on that alone, too. I used to really really root for the Indians in the 90s/early 2000s, because I wanted Cleveland to get a major championship and they had such a great shot at it. I used to wonder how many HOFers were on their team - I was thinking at least four were on the field at one time in the late 90s - Robbie Alomar, Thome, Juan Gonzalez, and Omar. And, before Gonzalez, it was Manny.
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 Excellent analysis of Vizquel. I just always looked at his average and never delved deeper. How does he compare to Ozzie in those numbers? The others I think are HOF worthy due to their combination of O/D, but Ozzie would be about the only other contemporary who got in just because of defense. Like you said, Omar should get in on that alone, too. I used to really really root for the Indians in the 90s/early 2000s, because I wanted Cleveland to get a major championship and they had such a great shot at it. I used to wonder how many HOFers were on their team - I was thinking at least four were on the field at one time in the late 90s - Robbie Alomar, Thome, Juan Gonzalez, and Omar. And, before Gonzalez, it was Manny. I was lucky enough to be a young Yankees fan during the same time period and wondered about the hall of famers on those teams. Some people used to assume that Bernie, Posada and Pettitte were shoe-ins, but it's looking more and more like just Jeter and Rivera. Anyway, you're correct...The Wizard of Oz was a poor hitter as well. In fact, his OPS was .666, even worse than Vizquel's .690. His dWAR was an incredible 21.6, compared to Vizquel's 13.3. The only other edge that Ozzie has over Vizquel is a sizable difference in stolen bases (580 to 401). My overall analysis, however, is that they both belong in Cooperstown for being veritable black holes at arguably the most difficult defensive position. An oddity I found in Ozzie's stats...despite only striking out 589 times in 10,778 plate appearances, he sported a decidedly mediocre .337 on-base percentage (not bad in the baseball gen. pop. but as low as you're likely to find among non-power hitting hall of famers). http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/smithoz01.shtml (if you've never been to baseball-reference, that site is like a Bible to me)
bbb Posted January 10, 2012 Posted January 10, 2012 I was lucky enough to be a young Yankees fan during the same time period and wondered about the hall of famers on those teams. Some people used to assume that Bernie, Posada and Pettitte were shoe-ins, but it's looking more and more like just Jeter and Rivera. Anyway, you're correct...The Wizard of Oz was a poor hitter as well. In fact, his OPS was .666, even worse than Vizquel's .690. His dWAR was an incredible 21.6, compared to Vizquel's 13.3. The only other edge that Ozzie has over Vizquel is a sizable difference in stolen bases (580 to 401). My overall analysis, however, is that they both belong in Cooperstown for being veritable black holes at arguably the most difficult defensive position. An oddity I found in Ozzie's stats...despite only striking out 589 times in 10,778 plate appearances, he sported a decidedly mediocre .337 on-base percentage (not bad in the baseball gen. pop. but as low as you're likely to find among non-power hitting hall of famers). http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/smithoz01.shtml (if you've never been to baseball-reference, that site is like a Bible to me) Long term, I've always been a Yankee fan, but I always had this soft spot in my heart for the Indians (because when I was real young, my father told me that he used to go to Cleveland to see the games, so I thought he was an Indians fan. I didn't find out till I was a little bit older that he only went when they were playing the Yankees, so he could root for them!). I actually was on baseball-reference, looking up a lot of this. That site is really great. To me, baseball and not soccer, should be called the beautiful game, and it's mostly because of amazing defensive plays. And, nobody made more beautiful ones than Omar and Ozzie, so I hope that Omar joins Ozzie in Cooperstown.
Taro T Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 How many GG's was he going to win in the same league with Ozzie Smith? Larkin was the best all-around SS in the National League for over a decade. He put up GREAT offensive numbers for his position when compared to those who came before him. People are very jaded now because guys like A-Roid and Ripken took the offensive side to such lofty heights but Larkin compares very favorably to everyone else who's already enshrined. There's only ONE infielder who has ever won more Silver Sluggers (Piazza). He's 4th all time for his position in WAR (Ripken/Jeter/A-Roid). The only real knock against Larkin is durability. For his time, his offensive stats as a SS were amazing. And he was solid defensively. I've got no issues with him getting into the HoF.
bbb Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 The one thing you have to say is that it's not like they are green lighting a ton of guys into the HOF. Wasn't it just one last year, maybe two the year before......A 12 time Pro Bowler would have been first ballot HOF in football.
CowgirlsFan Posted January 11, 2012 Posted January 11, 2012 The one thing you have to say is that it's not like they are green lighting a ton of guys into the HOF. Wasn't it just one last year, maybe two the year before......A 12 time Pro Bowler would have been first ballot HOF in football. I agree. In years past, 2-4 would go in each year. This is the second year only one will be enshrined.
Recommended Posts