keep the main room and the big plaques for the truly elite players. Heck, have some kind of vote to select the cream of the crop, truly elite stars. They get to stay.

The rest, they can go into a side hall, and get smaller signs made up. Calling it the “hall of very good” is an excellent idea. Or the Don Sutton wing.

ongoing, let the writers have 3 options: elite, very good, stiff. So Keith can get his sign in the HOVG, and Piazza can go in the main room.

if you really want to get fancy, have another room for guys that qualify for the main room, but are tainted. Call it the Bonds annex. That way, you can asterix the whole room! Hell, make it in the shape of one.

OBP is just a standard stat IMO. it has always existed. Same with slugging I think. so, IMO, they are basic stats.

Obviously stuff like WAR, win shares, etc. are saber creations. But where do you draw the line in between?

I also thought it should be anything derived from what the player actually did that attempts to assign a value to it.

Society for American Baseball Research (the SABR in sabermetrics) was founded in 1971.

Really?

And for the record, it wasn’t Alderson that drafted Conseco. It was Billy Martin.

Offensive records from when corked bats and weighted bats were allowed are OK?

Pitching records from when the spitball (among other methods of doctoring) are OK?

What about the fact that there are more pitchers than power hitters in the Mitchel Report?

What about the admission by Willie Mays and others that they took pills every color of the rainbow without the first clue what they were?

By the way, anabolic steroids were first synthesized in the 1930s. If you think guys didn’t jump at them until the late 1980s, I got a bridge to sell you.

Piazza also had 1,845 fewer AB’s than Fisk, 1,060 fewer than Carter, and thus far 2,557 fewer than Pudge, yet amassed better power and run production, BA, OPS, OBP, SLG, Homers, RBI. Piazza is a no doubt about it Hall of Famer.

Bagwell had great career but his accrued stats fall a bit short. He may eventually get elected, but I think it will take some time.

And Rickey Henderson one of the top ten players of all time? – well, that’s a stretch. No way.

Just asking.

If there the guy I have stops getting on base than just get another guy who can get on base more. Not only that, the guy who rips the ball into the gap or over the wall will most likely be someone who gets on base a lot too. That’s as basic as it gets.

People are not coming to the game to see somebody get on base, they are coming to the game to see somebody rip the ball into the gap or over the wall to drive in the guy on base.

Give me the guy who rips the ball into the gap or over the wall anytime, I don’t care who is on base. Some guys are better than others at getting on base true, but give me the guys who drive them in, give me the guys who put the numbers on the board.

You will more likely go to the Hall Of Fame if you rip the ball into the gaps or over the wall then if you just “get on base”.

Get that through your head.

hey, must be true. Metsie told me.

Let me revisit, or at least be more concise for clarification.

“Ranking guys like that is entirely too difficult. I mean, what’s more impressive, Gehrig’s 493 home runs, mediocre speed and great defense at first, or Rickey’s 297 home runs, terrific, game-changing speed and great defense in left field. If you can tell me definitively, I’ll buy you a Coke.”

THAT’S WHY…….

“I try to look at the total package and how many categories each has a equal chance of succeeding (OBP, doubles, WAR, and other such individually achieved numbers) and see how many lists each appears at the top of.”

Using just a smattering of traditional stats is no way to compare two ballplayers. Especially two players from different eras, AND with different skill sets.

“How come you don’t mention Gehrig’s 13 seasons of 100+ RBIs or his 7 season of 150+ RBIs”

“I would also find is a bit unfair if one’s reasoning for ranking Gehrig or Ruth ahead of Rickey was strictly because of power numbers. That would be like me arguing Rickey’s superiority because of speed.”

“I try to look at the total package and how many categories each has a equal chance of succeeding”

“I can say this definitively, though. If Lou hadn’t gotten sick, he’d have finished in the top 5 all time, maybe top three. That I’m convinced of.”

How come you don’t mention any of that? Because you hate sabermetircs so much, EVERYTHING someone who trusts the numbers says is wrong, even when it’s not about sabermetrics?