Palmeiro, McGriff

[Guest phoenixrising]

I've been meaning to put this up for sometime now...Hall of Fame debates are always interesting.

 

As you all know, Rafael Palmiero hit his 500th homer a few weeks ago, catapulting him into the elite 500 homer club. Fred McGriff is also on pace to hit his 500th homer either this year or next. Of all the members of the 500 homer club, the only ones not in are still playing (Bonds, Sosa, Palmeiro) or currently ineligible (McGwire). And I think it's safe to say that Bonds, Sosa and McGwire are automatic HOF locks.

 

However, both Palmiero and McGriff play in an era where hitting 30 homers and driving in 100 runs is routine. While they've been consistent, they haven't posted spectacular numbers. Heck, McGriff could become the first 500 home run hitter to never hit 40 in a season. And Palmiero is the only 500 home run hitter never to win a home run title. So should they go in? The Hall is for the greatest players, the best of the best.

 

Personally I'd argue that both should be in. They were among the top first basemen of the 1990's. And they have been consistent in putting up solid numbers. Palmiero may play a few more years and could reach 3,000 hits, and I don't think a guy with 500/3,000 is going to get left out. McGriff has played for good teams, has a ring and was a key performer on a few other Atlanta Brave Series teams.

 

So what are your thoughts?

[Guest MaxPower27]

I'd say yes, because hitting 500 homers isn't easy, and both have had solid careers

[Guest MarvinisaLunatic]

Raffy needs to play 2 more years, get 25-50 more HR (ending somewhere between 525 to 550) come close to getting 3,000 hits (if not more) and get another 150-200 RBI's. I think that these are feasible given that he's playing in Texas and for the most part he hasn't began abusing the DH (although he's been playing DH a bit more often as of late). He can still hit so the hits should be there and with the Ranger's lineup around him the HR and RBI should be there if he can go 2 more years.

 

McGriff is screwed though. He's not going to be able to keep playing in the NL on a daily basis long enough to put up similar numbers. He needs to go to an AL Team and be a DH, but I don't know if theres a team that would be interested outside of someone like the Tigers or D-Rays. If McGriff doesn't make it to an AL team, he won't make it to the HOF, and even if he does DH somewhere, Im not sure he could hold up 2 more years or so and still put up decent numbers.

[Guest alkeiper]

Palmeiro's in, assuming he plays a few more years. And hell, I'd put McGriff in when he gets 500.

 

People forget the exact same thing happened to the 500 club in the 60s, when McCovey, Mays, mantle, and everyone else got it. Watering down, higher offense, etc. 500 is still a lofty goal. Ask Jose Canseco.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

McGriff is alot more deserving consideration than he gets.

 

In a way he reminds me of Sutton and Niekro who didn't make it unti until something like the 4th attempt and they won 300 games. McGriff by the time his career is over should have well over, 500 Hr's, with over 1700 bi's, 1500 runs, and 2700 hits. It will take him 7 or 8 years but eventually he'll make it.

[Guest DrTom]

Palmeiro will play another year or two and remain productive, thus making him a lock. His career average will be in the .285+ range, he'll have 575 or so homers, and be closer to 3000 hits. He should make it on the first ballot. I'm a little less supportive of McGriff, since I've always thought Raffy to be the better player, but if he gets 500, I'd put him in.

[Guest bob_barron]

Crime Dog is one of my all time favourite players so I would put him in the Hall easily.

 

Palmeiro has been great his whole career and got #500- so put him in

[Guest Vern Gagne]

500 is still going to be a Magic Number for another 10 years or so.

[Guest Bosstones Fan]

Personally, I don't think that either of them deserve to go. It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good.

 

While both Palmerio and McGriff have been very good players, I don't consider either of them to be the once-in-a-lifetime players that I think should reside in the Hall. Think about it: when someone asks you who the best first basemen of this generation are, do YOU put Palmerio and/or McGriff in the top 3 (even 5)? I don't. Just because you play a long time and manage to stick around to reach some magic number (i.e. 500 homers) doesn't mean that you were one of the all-time greats. Longevity is NOT an indicator of greatness.

 

All that said...if Gary Carter and Eddie Murray are in the Hall, there isn't really any justifiable reason to keep Palmerio (for sure) or McGriff out. I do NOT like it, but that's the way it is; the standard has been lowered to allow them in, so you have to include all the players that were on that level. Palmerio and McGriff both fit that bill.

 

And before anyone asks, yes, I have some reservations about whether Ozzie Smith is truly Hall-worthy.

[Guest kkktookmybabyaway]

Sure, why not. I like both players anyway. Maybe Palmerio can run a Viagra pitch or something while giving his speech...

[Guest alkeiper]

Personally, I don't think that either of them deserve to go. It's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good.

 

While both Palmerio and McGriff have been very good players, I don't consider either of them to be the once-in-a-lifetime players that I think should reside in the Hall. Think about it: when someone asks you who the best first basemen of this generation are, do YOU put Palmerio and/or McGriff in the top 3 (even 5)? I don't. Just because you play a long time and manage to stick around to reach some magic number (i.e. 500 homers) doesn't mean that you were one of the all-time greats. Longevity is NOT an indicator of greatness.

 

All that said...if Gary Carter and Eddie Murray are in the Hall, there isn't really any justifiable reason to keep Palmerio (for sure) or McGriff out. I do NOT like it, but that's the way it is; the standard has been lowered to allow them in, so you have to include all the players that were on that level. Palmerio and McGriff both fit that bill.

 

And before anyone asks, yes, I have some reservations about whether Ozzie Smith is truly Hall-worthy.

1. While idealistic, keeping only the best of the best in the Hall is not going to work at this point. The HOF was diluted years ago by Veteran's Committees who chose infielders whose sole qualifications were appearing in verse, and just about everyone who ever played with Frankie Frisch. George Kelly, for example, could scarely be considered better than John Olerud or Mark Grace, let alone other HOFers.

 

2. Murray and Carter are NOT lowering anyone's standards of the Hall. Bill James, a respected baseball writer and statistician, considers Murray one of the top 5 first basemen EVER, and has Carter in his top 10 of catchers. Murray hit 500 home runs AND 3,000 hits. If your standards are higher than that, then I suggest you start a new hall, and carry around a scrap of paper that says "Ruth." There are good arguments for not including Palmeiro and McGriff, but to suggest Carter and especially Murray aren't deserving is lunacy.

 

3. If you have an argument for not including Ozzie Smith, I'd like to hear it.

[Guest alkeiper]

Sure, why not. I like both players anyway. Maybe Palmerio can run a Viagra pitch or something while giving his speech...

And McGriff can shill Tom Emanski's instructional video.

[Guest Bosstones Fan]

1.  While idealistic, keeping only the best of the best in the Hall is not going to work at this point.  The HOF was diluted years ago by Veteran's Committees who chose infielders whose sole qualifications were appearing in verse, and just about everyone who ever played with Frankie Frisch.  George Kelly, for example, could scarely be considered better than John Olerud or Mark Grace, let alone other HOFers.

 

2.  Murray and Carter are NOT lowering anyone's standards of the Hall.  Bill James, a respected baseball writer and statistician, considers Murray one of the top 5 first basemen EVER, and has Carter in his top 10 of catchers.  Murray hit 500 home runs AND 3,000 hits.  If your standards are higher than that, then I suggest you start a new hall, and carry around a scrap of paper that says "Ruth."  There are good arguments for not including Palmeiro and McGriff, but to suggest Carter and especially Murray aren't deserving is lunacy.

 

3.  If you have an argument for not including Ozzie Smith, I'd like to hear it.

Rebuttal, by point:

 

1. The Veteran's Committee is pure crap. You'll get no argument from me that they have diluted the Hall with some of their selections. But that doesn't mean that an attempt to "stem the tide" can't be made to preserve the prestige of the Hall by dissolving the Committee and returning the sole power of election to the traditional voters, who would hopefully keep up high standards for enshrinement.

 

2. Hall "worthiness," like most other things, is often a matter of personal opinion. Murray, to me, doesn't belong because I think he falls into that category of "guys who were pretty good and played a long time." As I said before, longevity isn't an indicator of greatness to me. Murray, for all his hitting prowess, still barely made it to 500 HR's. One could argue that he got there only because he stuck around for 21 years. The question, to me, is if Murray didn't have 500 HR's (say he only got 475), would you still put him in? Maybe my appreciation for Murray's talent is hindered by my being a child of the National League (my Cubbies and watching the Astros growing up here) and thus not seeing all that much of Murray, but I just don't feel that he belongs.

 

As for Carter, I have less of a beef with him being in than Murray, but there's still some question marks, in my opinion. His BA, OBP, and SLG % numbers are all relatively low (the OBP is forgiveable, though because he wasn't a lead-off guy), as is his colleting barely 2,000 career hits. His defensive prowess is unquestionable. But it takes more than defensive prowess to be considered one of the all-time greats, in my opinion. I mean, Brad Ausmus' career numbers thus far are eerily close to Carter's (except for HR's)...would you elect Brad Ausmus to the Hall? I doubt it.

 

Perhaps my being less than 7 years old when the true prime of Carter's career ended hurts my ability to evaluate him, but I just don't know. I think the fact that it took Carter several tries before he finally got elected might lend some credence to the fact that his Hall-worthiness is very debatable. Personally, I wouldn't have voted for either him or Murray, but it's not up to me so I guess I'll just have to accept it.

 

3. My main point of debate over Ozzie is his offensive numbers. I'm certainly not saying that he doesn't belong in the Hall (I actually think he does, though I'm reluctant to name him an "undisputable" pick), but some of his career offensive numbers really aren't that good:

 

BA = .262 (only hitting over .300 once)

OBP = .337 (certainly not an elite number)

HR = 28 (I know HR's aren't an indicator of one's total greatness, but 28 in almost 10,000 career AB's is pretty low)

H = 2,460 (3,000 is a very high standard, but to not get to 2,500 in 19 years is a red flag to me)

Edited June 2, 2003 by Bosstones Fan

[Guest bob_barron]

What cap should McGriff wear if he goes into the Hall?

 

Of course I think he should go in as a Brave but the guy has played for many different teams

[Guest CanadianChris]

McGriff's not getting in. No way in hell. The Hall of Fame voters are finally going to take a stand against 500 homers being the standard in this era, and McGriff's going to be the first example. Hell, I forgot McGriff was still in the league the last five years or so.

[EL DANDY~! 0]

It's yes to both. I think that McGriff has been an impact player wherever he's gone. He's always been a big bat in the lineup, and he still is. He's played a good first base and he's well on his way to 500/2500/1250, I think.

 

Palmeiro has to get in on the fact that he's been a great player defensively (3 gold gloves) and with his bat (only person in history to have eight straight seasons of 37 homers or more), and he's just a class act. He didn't care about the money. He played for the respect. He's always had mine, and I think that he's a great choice for the hall.

[Guest alkeiper]

If Murray had 475 home runs, I would still vote him in. Just look at his accomplishments. He's 6th all time in games played, and at bats. 33rd in runs scored. 12th in hits. 17th in doubles. 17th in home runs. 8th in RBIs. 27th in base on balls. 8 All Star games, and he even won 3 gold gloves, and a world series.

 

As for Ozzie Smith, I asked because he's my favorite player ever. The way I look at it is, do you think the best defensive player in baseball history should be in the Hall of Fame? When you add his 15 all star appearances and 580 steals, I have no misgivings about putting him in the hall. And his batting average and OBP were right around league average most of his career, so he wasn't dragging the offense.

[Guest DrTom]

Eddie Murray routinely hit 30 HR and drove in 100 runs a year, back when those numbers actually meant something. He's also second in career grand slams, was a tremendous hitter with men on base, won three Gold Gloves, a World Series, and a batting title (after changing leagues, no less). Factor in that he's among an extremely select few with 500 HR and 3000 hits, and it's automatic to put him in the Hall. Hell, the Hall was built for people like him.

[Guest Vern Gagne]

It's yes to both. I think that McGriff has been an impact player wherever he's gone. He's always been a big bat in the lineup, and he still is. He's played a good first base and he's well on his way to 500/2500/1250, I think.

I'd say McGriff has a good chance to put even better numbers than that by the time he's done playing.

[Guest DrTom]

I doubt it, Vern. His best days are definitely behind him. He got off to a miserable start this year, and while he's managed to play better since, who knows if another slow start like that next year will be tolerated.

 

McGriff should get his 500th and then retire. If he does it this season, make this year his last.

[Guest Choken One]

What about Barry Larkin? An Player VERY similar to Ozzie Smith with JUST SLIGHTLY better Batting numbers...Is it HOF worthy or what?

 

Palmerio is in already but dont forget he'll tap in 550 hrs and likely get the 3000 hits and other acolades...

 

McGriff is iffy...

[Guest Human Fly]

What about Barry Larkin? An Player VERY similar to Ozzie Smith with JUST SLIGHTLY better Batting numbers...Is it HOF worthy or what?

I think Larkin is hurting himself the longer he "plays". He is shaky at best for the Hall, but hanging around these last few years aren't helping his cause at all, I would guess they are probably hurting him.

[Guest alkeiper]

I think Barry Larkin is more than deserving of Hall status.

[Guest Choken One]

yeah but his last two seasons REALLY kill his average and hurts him a little...

 

If he retires this season...He won't face any major competition since I don't see any big names calling it quits this season...barring injury...

 

Mo Vaugh won't cut it...

[Guest Vern Gagne]

I doubt it, Vern. His best days are definitely behind him. He got off to a miserable start this year, and while he's managed to play better since, who knows if another slow start like that next year will be tolerated.

 

McGriff should get his 500th and then retire. If he does it this season, make this year his last.

His best days... yes. But he'll probably be able to hit around 25 to 30 more hr's if he sticks around another year. If he retires, after this year probably around 505 hr's. If he's finished after this year, I'd McGriff will make it on around the 7th or 8th time on the ballot.