EVIL~! alkeiper

I really think most of the listings are random, because otherwise they would become overly grouped by sports. For example, you'd have 5-6 straight NFL moments, followed by five MLB moments. This creates some variety. 1974, so its ineligible.

There was a thread a week ago discussing the '94 Playoffs. The Expos and White Sox most likely would have beaten their mediocre West opponents, in my view. NY beat Cleveland nine out of nine in the regular season, so they'd likely advance. Reds/Braves is completely up in the air. Slight edge to Cincy for having home field.

Unfortunately, work will keep me away until the evening, but if anyone has any questions about the specific details of the Strike, I'll be happy to answer them tonight.

Essentially. The players' Union filed a grievence claiming the owners were not bargaining in good faith. The judge agreed, and the Union agreed to return to the field under the old agreement, while a new agreement was worked upon. That agreement was reached in 1996. The Strike itself, in my view, was caused by the owners. They wanted a hard salary cap, and of course players weren't buying it. The problem was if there was no new contract by the 1995 season, owners could declare an impasse and impose their new rules. So players had no choice but to Strike. They struck in early August hoping that would leave plenty of time to renew the season, but obviously it didn't work out that way. And contrary to popular belief, most of the fans returned by 1996.

So has anyone actually seen the full Playboy interview?

The Red Barons actually had a 7 inning no hitter earlier in the year by Bob Ellis. I've got to try and make it to Scranton to see Gavin Floyd.

Also, anyone else catch Germany-China today? Germany absolutely beat the crap out of one of the best womens' soccer teams in the World, 8-0.

Tomorrow we've got a handful of men's soccer matches. Iraq makes their olympic return, playing Portugal. I smell blowout. Otherwise we have the excitement of Costa Rica-Morocco, Paraguay-Japan, and Ghana-Italy.

Randy Wolf, Eric Milton. Sometimes Brett Myers on a good day. He's young, so he'll have his struggles, but he has great potential. Vicente Padilla pitched well yesterday as well, but I'm waiting before declaring him 100% healthy. Randy Wolf has an excellent night tonight, hitting two home runs.

Good news for Phillies fans. Paul Abbott has been designated for assignment.

Reports are the Royals wanted Berroa to work on his defense, and Frank White is a coach at AA. Considering the Royals' woes this year, they should probably call up Frank White to the Majors to work with Berroa instead, and insert him in the lineup while they're at it. And (more) bad news for the Mariners. Eddie Guardado is done for the season, and Rafael Soriano needs Tommy John surgery, which will likely make him unavailable for most of next season as well.

For what it's worth, Total Baseball states the Expos lost $15 Million due to the Strike, which forced them to cut salary.

The Olympic games have commenced, as MSNBC is showing men and womens Soccer all day today and tomorrow. This thread is for those who wish to discuss the games.

1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball? Probably not. Dawson was overlooked because he played for the Expos, and Mike Schmidt was a superior player. 2. Was he the best player on his team? In 1981 for the Montreal Expos, and in 1987 for the Chicago Cubs. Otherwise he was overshadowed by Gary Carter, Ryne Sandberg, and Tim Raines. 3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position? Dawson was probably the best center fielder in baseball from 1980-81, and the best in the National League from 1978-81. And yes, that's CENTER field. People forget that Dawson spent half a career in center before moving to right. 4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races? Dawson played regularly for two division winners, the 1981 Montreal Expos and the 1987 Chicago Cubs. However, Dawson hit poorly in the playoffs. 5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime? Yes. Dawson played regularly until he was 38, and retired at 41. 6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame? No. 7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame? Five of Dawson's ten most similar players are in the Hall, and the two most similar (Billy Williams and Tony Perez) are in. 8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards? Yes. Dawson scores well on the Gray Ink and HOF Standards measures. He is also in the top 30 All-Time in home runs, RBIs, and Total Bases. 9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics? Yes. Dawson won eight Gold Gloves, four as a center fielder. 10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame? You can make an argument. Its either Dawson, Dave Parker, or Tony Oliva. 11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close? Dawson won an MVP in 1987, and was the runner up in 1980 and '83. 12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame? Dawson played in eight All-Star games. 13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant? Yes. 14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way? Andre Dawson challenged collusion by producing a blank contract to the Cubs, and daring them to sign him. 15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider? Yes. Andre Dawson was considered a class act. Conclusion: I think Dawson deserves the Hall. His excellent years are forgotten since he played in Montreal, but he was truly an exceptional player. In addition to the power, he stole 314 bases in his career. So we have a power hitting outfielder, who played Gold Glove defense and could steal a base or two. I say he's in.

By the way, I'm planning on doing a Keltner List on Martinez, but I'm holding off until my next column.

Sandberg isn't borderline. He is IN, and that the voters missed that is a disgrace.

That's true. The Mariners management had their heads planted firmly up their asses for a long time.

Most, if not all Halls of Fame contain more than simply the very elite players. In baseball, the standard disappeared very quickly in 1946 when Johnny Evers and Joe Tinker made the Hall. From then on, choosing just the elite was impossible. In any case, a strict admission criterion is undesireable, because the HOF needs inductions in order to maintain interest, and only having an induction every three years or so for an elite player would harm business.

Some more Edgar discussion. I took every first baseman in the Hall and plugged their numbers into a spreadsheet. I computed averages and compared them to Edgar. The average 1B had a 142 OPS+. Edgar's was 151. The average 1B created 1557 runs. Edgar created 1567. Total Baseball's Total Player Rating credits Edgar as 45.4 wins above average. The average is 32.5. Don't like advanced metrics? Edgar's BA, OBP, and SLG are all better than the average 1B HOFer. Edgar outhomers the average HOFer, 297 to 286. Edgar appeared in 7 All-Star games. The average HOFer appeared in seven. I think Edgar Martinez deserves the Hall.

Damnit Dykstra shaved the mullet. There goes my childhood.

I interpret it to mean Edgar should be compared to 1B and corner outfielders solely on the basis of their offense. If we want to debate Edgar for the Hall, those are the hitting stats which are the standard. Agreed. Indians fans like to compare Vizquel to Ozzie Smith, claiming Vizquel's an equal with the glove, and a better hitter. When you adjust for era and park, Ozzie was BETTER at the plate, and his fielding was superior to any player in the history of the game.

Kruk stated DH's should be compared to hitters at other hitting positions, such as 1B and corner outfielders. I buy that. I don't buy his conclusion, but I buy his premise.

Not closely. Last I checked it was at over 200 posts, which is somewhat intimidating. The specifics of the argument (low counting totals/DH vs. High OBP) are pretty much set as it is.

On other news, Jeff Francis is out of the Canadian Olympic Team. Perhaps a call-up to the Rockies is coming soon.

Both Kruk and Reynolds make decent points about Martinez, but miss the mark on their arguments. Its a shame the anti-Moneyball bias prevents them from bringing up OBP, which was Martinez's greatest strength.