May 31, 2004
Bite Out of Crime
Fred McGriff has hit his first HR of the season, giving him 492 for his career. He's trying to get to 500 before he retires. I wonder if the 500 HR mark will really make a difference to HOF voters? Why would McGriff be anymore or less of a HOF candidate with 500 than 491? I'd love to see a discussion involving a number of reporters in which they are asked to defend or attack the Hall of Fame credentials of McGriff and Palmeiro. The voters need to have this debate, because it's becoming clear that certain milestones are no longer a reliable indicator of career greatness.
BaseballMusings.com would be happy to host the discussion on-line.
Posted by David Pinto at
02:41 PM
|
Sluggers
|
TrackBack (0)
The milestones definitely matter, IMO. Example: Blyleven. Also the way it seemed to be decided that Palmerio was an HOFer after he hit 500.
Personally, I don't think either Palmeiro or McGriff should go to the Hall. While they're both fine players, they look much better than they are because they've played much of their careers in an offensive era. Looking back at their careers, was there any year that either of them was the best first baseman in baseball, or even in his league? I'd submit that the presence of McGwire, Bagwell, and Thomas, among others, pushed these two to a lower level.
That having been said, I'm confident that Palmeiro will reach the Hall, and I wouldn't be surprised to see McGriff there as well.
McGriff did lead the AL in homers in 1989 (36) and in 1992 (35). He was top 5 in OPS every season from 1988 to 1994.
Great player? Sure. Hall of Famer? Not in my opinion.
What's strange is that McGriff was considered a great offensive player before the offensive boom starting in '95 (just a coincidence with post-strike recovery). From 1988 - 1994, he really was considered among the best hitters in baseball.
Starting in 1995, he didn't get better and thus looked worse.
Does he belong in the Hall, I don't know but in many respects he didn't benefit much from the offensive boom in the late 90's. Maybe he should have taken 'roids, or andro or something!
I am rooting for Fred McGriff to get his 500th homer this season so he won't wind up like Dale Murphy being a couple homers short of his 400th. The way I look at it is that if Ray Schalk makes the Hall of Fame with his mediocre record then Fred McGriff should make it since his stats tower over Ray Schalk's stats. Schalk had 11 homers and 310 rbi's in 18 years and hit .253. His lifetime slugging average was .315. He hit only hit a total of 2 homers in his last 7 seasons which were during the live ball era. Granted he had no part of the Black Sox scandal and even fought with those he thought were throwing the games he should not be in the Hall of Fame or he was the best defensive catcher in the history of all baseball.
I think the fact that most (if not all) of McGriff's peak came pre-1995 should count for something. Palmeiro's peak has certainly come post-1995 (and in Arlington for much of it). I think Rob Neyer did an article comparing the two.
My gut says no on McGriff and yes on the 600+ HR Raffy (who couldn't hit for power enough for my Cubs!).
