Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

89Hen wrote:I'd be voting on name alone. I really don't know any stats for these guys.

GannonFan wrote:

89Hen wrote:I'd be voting on name alone. I really don't know any stats for these guys.

Same here. I would think Jack Morris would be one, but honestly the other guys seem like all great players but maybe not HOF material. Oh, and I have no idea who Marvin Miller is. Is he coming to a Minneapolis autograph show soon?

Gil Dobie wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
Same here. I would think Jack Morris would be one, but honestly the other guys seem like all great players but maybe not HOF material. Oh, and I have no idea who Marvin Miller is. Is he coming to a Minneapolis autograph show soon?

I hope not

From his wiki page: was an American baseball executive who served as the Executive Director of the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) from 1966 to 1982. Under Miller's direction, the players' union was transformed into one of the strongest unions in the United States. In 1992, Red Barber said, "Marvin Miller, along with Babe Ruth and Jackie Robinson, is one of the two or three most important men in baseball history."

Chizzang wrote:Alan Trammel and Lou Whitaker were the best 2nd base short stop combo in baseball from 1983 to 1988...
They had a dominant 5 year run

SuperHornet wrote:

Chizzang wrote:Alan Trammel and Lou Whitaker were the best 2nd base short stop combo in baseball from 1983 to 1988...
They had a dominant 5 year run

No. I'll take Lopes-Russell over those two....

JoltinJoe wrote:Bill James Hall of Fame Monitor Scores for the 9 players on the ballot (100 or more = possible Hall of Famer; 130 or more = "Hall of Fame Lock"

Jack Morris, 123
Alan Trammel, 119
Dale Murphy, 116
Don Mattingly, 134
Tommy John, 112
Luis Tiant 97
Steve Garvey, 131
Dave Parker, 125
Ted Simmons, 125

Gil Dobie wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:Bill James Hall of Fame Monitor Scores for the 9 players on the ballot (100 or more = possible Hall of Famer; 130 or more = "Hall of Fame Lock"

Jack Morris, 123
Alan Trammel, 119
Dale Murphy, 116
Don Mattingly, 134
Tommy John, 112
Luis Tiant 97
Steve Garvey, 131
Dave Parker, 125
Ted Simmons, 125

I remember when you were arguing that Mattingly deserved to go in ahead of Kirby Puckett, and Mussina 121 over Morris 123. I see Blyleven is 121, but practically begged to get in the Hall, while Jim Kaat, another Twins, is at 130. Puckett's score is 160.

There's room for all of them, just might take time.

JoltinJoe wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:
I remember when you were arguing that Mattingly deserved to go in ahead of Kirby Puckett, and Mussina 121 over Morris 123. I see Blyleven is 121, but practically begged to get in the Hall, while Jim Kaat, another Twins, is at 130. Puckett's score is 160.

There's room for all of them, just might take time.

Mattingly was better than Puckett and deserved to go in ahead of Puckett. I don't swear by HOF Monitor scores. They are just one piece of helpful information.

In Mattingly's case, he is one of a handful of players in the history of baseball who can say he was the best player in the game for an extended number of years. Puckett can't make that claim.

That being said, Puckett's HOF Monitor Score is a reflection that he played at his best for more years than Mattingly did. Unfortunately, the second half of Mattingly's career was beset by injuries and he was not the same player he was during the first half of his career.

But I still maintain that any player (or pitcher) who is the best in the game for an extended number of years should be in the Hall of Fame, even if his career is shortened by injuries. I call it the "Koufax Rule." Koufax won only 165 games in his career, and 97 of them came during a four-year streak before injuries ended his career. Mattingly deserves the same consideration.

Chizzang wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:
Mattingly was better than Puckett and deserved to go in ahead of Puckett. I don't swear by HOF Monitor scores. They are just one piece of helpful information.

In Mattingly's case, he is one of a handful of players in the history of baseball who can say he was the best player in the game for an extended number of years. Puckett can't make that claim.

That being said, Puckett's HOF Monitor Score is a reflection that he played at his best for more years than Mattingly did. Unfortunately, the second half of Mattingly's career was beset by injuries and he was not the same player he was during the first half of his career.

But I still maintain that any player (or pitcher) who is the best in the game for an extended number of years should be in the Hall of Fame, even if his career is shortened by injuries. I call it the "Koufax Rule." Koufax won only 165 games in his career, and 97 of them came during a four-year streak before injuries ended his career. Mattingly deserves the same consideration.

please identify the "years" in which Don Mattingly was the best player in all of baseball..?

JoltinJoe wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:
I remember when you were arguing that Mattingly deserved to go in ahead of Kirby Puckett, and Mussina 121 over Morris 123. I see Blyleven is 121, but practically begged to get in the Hall, while Jim Kaat, another Twins, is at 130. Puckett's score is 160.

There's room for all of them, just might take time.

Mattingly was better than Puckett and deserved to go in ahead of Puckett. I don't swear by HOF Monitor scores. They are just one piece of helpful information.

In Mattingly's case, he is one of a handful of players in the history of baseball who can say he was the best player in the game for an extended number of years. Puckett can't make that claim.

That being said, Puckett's HOF Monitor Score is a reflection that he played at his best for more years than Mattingly did. Unfortunately, the second half of Mattingly's career was beset by injuries and he was not the same player he was during the first half of his career.

But I still maintain that any player (or pitcher) who is the best in the game for an extended number of years should be in the Hall of Fame, even if his career is shortened by injuries. I call it the "Koufax Rule." Koufax won only 165 games in his career, and 97 of them came during a four-year streak before injuries ended his career. Mattingly deserves the same consideration.

Chizzang wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:
Mattingly was better than Puckett and deserved to go in ahead of Puckett. I don't swear by HOF Monitor scores. They are just one piece of helpful information.

In Mattingly's case, he is one of a handful of players in the history of baseball who can say he was the best player in the game for an extended number of years. Puckett can't make that claim.

That being said, Puckett's HOF Monitor Score is a reflection that he played at his best for more years than Mattingly did. Unfortunately, the second half of Mattingly's career was beset by injuries and he was not the same player he was during the first half of his career.

But I still maintain that any player (or pitcher) who is the best in the game for an extended number of years should be in the Hall of Fame, even if his career is shortened by injuries. I call it the "Koufax Rule." Koufax won only 165 games in his career, and 97 of them came during a four-year streak before injuries ended his career. Mattingly deserves the same consideration.

please identify the "years" in which Don Mattingly was the best player in all of baseball..?



I'm good with 1985 indeed... but "years"..?

bandl wrote:This is what I always think of when I think of Mattingly

"For his career, Mattingly never appeared in the World Series, and his tenure with the Yankees marks the team's largest drought without a World Series appearance. Interestingly, the Yankees made the Series both the year prior to Mattingly's rookie year, 1981, and the year after his last with the club, 1996."

JoltinJoe wrote:[He was a patient hitter known for making pitchers throw pitches

JoltinJoe wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
please identify the "years" in which Don Mattingly was the best player in all of baseball..?

Go iron your undershirt, pretty boy.