Joey Votto

I agree with everything you said...except about Concepcion. Shortstops just didn't hit big back in his day, and he, along with Ozzie Smith, was the best there was. 9x All Star. He had a higher batting average than Smith too (.267 vs. .262). More home runs. More RBIs, nearly as many hits. Concepcion hit over .300 three times. Smith never did that. Smith got in because of his fielding, but Concepcion was ALMOST as good.

Anyway, ALL of them better than Keith Hernandez.

6403 wrote:

Ghost of Viktor Bryzhin wrote:

I think Dewey Evans should be in off of his fielding and offensive numbers. The man had a great arm and seemed to get better with age offensively.

I think Belle had steroid rumors, it would explain his temper and public blow ups. Adam Dunn was Dave Kingman 2.0 with less longevity, maybe if he hit 500 home runs he would have made the hall near the end of his eligibility.

Come on, now.

Dewey Evans did have a rifle but he was not a Hall of Famer. He didn't have any of the automatic "open sesame" numbers and just was not consistent enough of an offensive player for me. I put him in the same category as Bill Buckner, almost but not quite. And it has nothing to do with "that", and you all know what I'm referring to.

I only think he "should" be a Veterans inductee, I agree that he is in the Buckner, Al Oliver, Rusty Staub nether world.

I really don't think Mex is even there, he is with Bobby Grich, Lou Whitaker and Willie Randolph group.

More hall of good than hall of very good.

I really only included him because of Simmons, Trammell and mostly Baines.

I don’t know how Gil Hodges, who belongs firmly in the middle of the Hall of Very Good, became a key player in this discussion. I’m far from old enough to have seen him play, but nothing I’ve ever read or seen makes me think he deserves any serious HoF consideration.

Hernandez is close, and not an awful Votto comparison—a bit better with the glove and a bit worse with the at. I wouldn’t hate it if he got in, but I agree with someone else above that Dewey is one of the most-deserving guys on the outside looking in. And if we’re all using this thread to share our personal pet Hall candidates, let me cast a vote for Kenny Lofton who unceremoniously fell off the ballot despite adding substantial value in centerfield and on the base paths in addition to a solid bat.

6403 wrote:

Ghost of Viktor Bryzhin wrote:

I think Dewey Evans should be in off of his fielding and offensive numbers. The man had a great arm and seemed to get better with age offensively.

I think Belle had steroid rumors, it would explain his temper and public blow ups. Adam Dunn was Dave Kingman 2.0 with less longevity, maybe if he hit 500 home runs he would have made the hall near the end of his eligibility.

Come on, now.

Dewey Evans did have a rifle but he was not a Hall of Famer. He didn't have any of the automatic "open sesame" numbers and just was not consistent enough of an offensive player for me. I put him in the same category as Bill Buckner, almost but not quite. And it has nothing to do with "that", and you all know what I'm referring to.

Bill Buckner was an average player that had a long career. He hit with his weight out front, rarely walked or struck out and didn't drive the ball. He averaged less than 1 WAR per year over his career.

Dewey had almost 4 times the career WAR that Buckner had. They are not in the same category and there's probably a couple of other categories in between.

Dunn and Kingman were otherwise awful players that could hit 40 homers.

Saying you’re fine with Adam Dunn in the HoF ahead of Keith Hernandez is one of the funniest things I’ve seen on this site in a long damn time.

I was the person who introduced KH as a comparison and commenting on his HOF creds. Then someone else chimed in about how Hodges is much better than Hernandez, etc…

I disagree with you that Hodges is much better than Hernandez with the bat. Look at the advanced stats and you’ll see that Hernandez’s BA compares much more favorably with the league when he played than Hodges’ did. Hernandez is also much more effective as a run producer over replacement. However, with that one minor point aside, I generally agree with your sentiments.

Nvrmind about comparing Hodges and Hernandez. I see you were talking about Votto with the bat.

Concepcion was a very good fielder, but not anywhere near Smith. Mark Belanger and Omar Vizquel (as crappy a person as he may be) were both better fielders and belong in theHall before Concepcion if we’re inducting people into the Hall solely on the basis of shortstop defense now. Hell, Andrelton Simmons is a HoFer on those merits before Concepcion!

Well, like I said, I wouldn't advocate for Dunn to get in, but yes, he deserves it over the very light-hitting Hernandez. 462 home runs is more Hall worthy than 162 home runs, even with the better glove of Hernandez...pathetic number for a first baseman.

Keith Hernandez is one of the most over rated MLB players ever.

Not An Expert wrote:

Concepcion was a very good fielder, but not anywhere near Smith. Mark Belanger and Omar Vizquel (as crappy a person as he may be) were both better fielders and belong in theHall before Concepcion if we’re inducting people into the Hall solely on the basis of shortstop defense now. Hell, Andrelton Simmons is a HoFer on those merits before Concepcion!

Disagree on all of that.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Dunn and Kingman were otherwise awful players that could hit 40 homers.

Kingman hit 40 home runs just ONE time in his career.

Dunn did it SIX times, and then he hit 38 two other times.

Really, the only thing keeping Dunn out of the Hall of Fame is that his career was over age age 34. If he had managed 38 more home runs, he would be going in.

Now, I AGREE that he doesn't deserve to get in (because he DIDN'T hit 38 more home runs), but he was that close, and closer to Hall worthy than Keith Hernandez.

I knew you would come at me with Ozzie Smith, LOL!

TBH, I did not know that Concepcion hit over 300 three times. You may have turned me with that. But Ozzie was a wizard, Concepcion a great SS, absolutely. The greatest pure fielding SS I ever saw, and he didn't have a long career, was Rey Ordonez for the Mets. I'm from the NY area, so I got to see him every day on TV for several years, and he did things I've never seen anybody do, including Ozzie Smith. The Mets traded him away after about three or 4 years, not great offensively, and his career petered out after that, but he did some things that I had never seen before that time or since. He did Ozzie Smith highlight reel type stuff on a regular basis. He had this move where he'd go to his left into the hole, get on his knees and pop up in one motion and throw a rocket to first, it was just ridiculous.

Maybe the smartest trade ever was trading headcase/malcontent Garry Templeton for the Wizard of Oz.

I remember at the time Templeton was a star too but more with the bat and when he went to San Diego his career petered out and Smith improved from a Belanger level hitter to a respectable hitter.

Flagpole wrote:

Big Mike wrote:

Saying you’re fine with Adam Dunn in the HoF ahead of Keith Hernandez is one of the funniest things I’ve seen on this site in a long damn time.

Well, like I said, I wouldn't advocate for Dunn to get in, but yes, he deserves it over the very light-hitting Hernandez. 462 home runs is more Hall worthy than 162 home runs, even with the better glove of Hernandez...pathetic number for a first baseman.

Keith Hernandez is one of the most over rated MLB players ever.

Saying that Hernandez had a better glove than Dunne is like saying Hocker has a better kick than Salazar did. Dunn's defense during his 2009 season is considered by many to be the worst in MLB history.

Walks, homers and nothing else is not good enough for the HOF. Like Buckner, Dunne averaged about 1 WAR per year over his career. His lifetime BA was .237 and considering that took multiple hits to bring him home, his walks didn't do his teams much good.

Smith also added more value on the basepaths than Concepcion. So Smith was a better fielder than Concepcion (and the greatest of all-time at fielding his position according to many, which I think counts for something), a substantially better base runner than Concepcion, and basically the same hitter. None of this it to say that Concepcion is bad, but saying “if Smith then Concepcion” doesn’t make sense. Concepcion is the poor man’s Smith, at best.

And bringing it all back around, Votto is an all-around better player than Concepcion (and belongs in the Hall of Fame, while Concepcion is solidly in the Hall of Very Good. (And +1 to whoever added Rey Ordonez to the list of defensive shortstops better than Concepcion—that guys was a human highlight reel, and the advanced stats mostly back it up especially earlier in his career.)

6403 wrote:

The greatest pure fielding SS I ever saw, and he didn't have a long career, was Rey Ordonez for the Mets. I'm from the NY area, so I got to see him every day on TV for several years, and he did things I've never seen anybody do, including Ozzie Smith. The Mets traded him away after about three or 4 years, not great offensively, and his career petered out after that, but he did some things that I had never seen before that time or since. He did Ozzie Smith highlight reel type stuff on a regular basis. He had this move where he'd go to his left into the hole, get on his knees and pop up in one motion and throw a rocket to first, it was just ridiculous.

I loved that team. I think in 98 or 99 the infield had almost no errors for the year. Ventura-Rey-Fonzie-Olerud was a great defensive infield lineup. The outfield not so much….

As an aside, one of the funniest things I’ve ever seen was when Ventura was was with the Sox and he charged Nolan Ryan.

Flagpole wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Dunn and Kingman were otherwise awful players that could hit 40 homers.

Kingman hit 40 home runs just ONE time in his career.

Dunn did it SIX times, and then he hit 38 two other times.

Really, the only thing keeping Dunn out of the Hall of Fame is that his career was over age age 34. If he had managed 38 more home runs, he would be going in.

Now, I AGREE that he doesn't deserve to get in (because he DIDN'T hit 38 more home runs), but he was that close, and closer to Hall worthy than Keith Hernandez.

You're obviously a Reds fan and I admire your loyalty but Dunne sucked. He benefited from playing in an era before the analytical tools were developed. I'm not sure he would even be good enough to play in today's MLB. There is no way any team would put him on the field and a .237 hitter that's a statue on the basepaths is not a great option at DH.

Ghost of Viktor Bryzhin wrote:

Maybe the smartest trade ever was trading headcase/malcontent Garry Templeton for the Wizard of Oz.

I remember at the time Templeton was a star too but more with the bat and when he went to San Diego his career petered out and Smith improved from a Belanger level hitter to a respectable hitter.

I agree. That said, here's some stats for you:

1) Templeton was a career .271 hitter over 16 years...better than Concepcion (.267) and Smith (.262).

2) Templeton had over 2,000 hits (2,096).

.

A career WAR of 62 is pretty much a ticket to the Hall. He will get in