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

GannonFan wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:
It's good that you are comparing him to Hall of Famers. Mauer didn't play first base until his 8th season, at 28 years old. He played more than half his games, that he was healthy enough to play, at catcher in 10 seasons.

And his health is a knock against his HOF case as well. It's a shame, but if you're not able to play we can't just assume that you would've had great numbers. Those extra 4 years you're giving him for playing catcher are a fraction of what healthy players were playing. Injuries suck but it's a reality that has to be dealt with.

Yep.

Good debate. I'm on the fence, just trying to see what people outside of Minnesota think. Around here, many people don't like him because his career tanked after he signed the big contract. Same group doesn't think he belongs in the hall of fame, or even the Twins hall of fame.

As somebody or other likes to say, it's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good.

Grizalltheway wrote:As somebody or other likes to say, it's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good.

Yep. That only applies to the Rock & Roll Hall of Very Good.

Catching is a tough position to assess because there is no truly objective way to measure the catcher's most significant contribution to his team: controlling the game, defending the plate, and calling the game.

The two best catchers in my lifetime are Johnny Bench and Thurman Munson.

My favorite stat:

Munson: 10 seasons, 2 WS rings. And the MVP of those teams.

Fisk, Piazza, Carter: 59 seasons, 1 ring.

Remember, this game is about winning the ring. Munson joined a franchise during its darkest years and turned it back into a dynasty: three-straight World Series appearances, two wins. And he only had 10 seasons to do that in. Heck, that's better than the Braves of the 90s.

As for Mauer, he's a borderline guy. I'm not going to break my back for him unless and until the Twins fans get behind him. And only after Munson gets in.

JoltinJoe wrote:Catching is a tough position to assess because there is no truly objective way to measure the catcher's most significant contribution to his team: controlling the game, defending the plate, and calling the game.

The two best catchers in my lifetime are Johnny Bench and Thurman Munson.

My favorite stat:

Munson: 10 seasons, 2 WS rings. And the MVP of those teams.

Fisk, Piazza, Carter: 59 seasons, 1 ring.

Remember, this game is about winning the ring. Munson joined a franchise during its darkest years and turned it back into a dynasty: three-straight World Series appearances, two wins. And he only had 10 seasons to do that in. Heck, that's better than the Braves of the 90s.

As for Mauer, he's a borderline guy. I'm not going to break my back for him unless and until the Twins fans get behind him. And only after Munson gets in.

Joe,
with all due respect The Hall of Fame is absolutely NOT about the World Series
any more than Gold Glove or Cy Young award are about the World Series

The World Series is a team achievement
ownership / management / coaching / players

The Hall of Fame is something entirely different
The Hall of Fame is about performing at an all star level over the entirety of a lengthy career



I know it gets confusing
because the answer to every baseball question for a Yankees fan is "well we have 27 world series wins"

Chizzang wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:Catching is a tough position to assess because there is no truly objective way to measure the catcher's most significant contribution to his team: controlling the game, defending the plate, and calling the game.

The two best catchers in my lifetime are Johnny Bench and Thurman Munson.

My favorite stat:

Munson: 10 seasons, 2 WS rings. And the MVP of those teams.

Fisk, Piazza, Carter: 59 seasons, 1 ring.

Remember, this game is about winning the ring. Munson joined a franchise during its darkest years and turned it back into a dynasty: three-straight World Series appearances, two wins. And he only had 10 seasons to do that in. Heck, that's better than the Braves of the 90s.

As for Mauer, he's a borderline guy. I'm not going to break my back for him unless and until the Twins fans get behind him. And only after Munson gets in.

Joe,
with all due respect The Hall of Fame is absolutely NOT about the World Series
any more than Gold Glove or Cy Young award are about the World Series

The World Series is a team achievement
ownership / management / coaching / players

The Hall of Fame is something entirely different
The Hall of Fame is about performing at an all star level over the entirety of a lengthy career



I know it gets confusing
because the answer to every baseball question for a Yankees fan is "well we have 27 world series wins"

You see that big space over your head? That's where my point went.

Munson was the most valuable player on that Yankees team that won two-straight World Series. Without Munson, the Yankees don't win in '77 and '78.

But, he was also a 7-time all-star in what was really a nine-year career. Rookie of the year, an MVP.

And he was the best catcher in my lifetime, except for Johnny Bench.

If the Red Sox had Munson, instead of Fisk, the Sox would have won in' '77 and '78.

JoltinJoe wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
Joe,
with all due respect The Hall of Fame is absolutely NOT about the World Series
any more than Gold Glove or Cy Young award are about the World Series

The World Series is a team achievement
ownership / management / coaching / players

The Hall of Fame is something entirely different
The Hall of Fame is about performing at an all star level over the entirety of a lengthy career



I know it gets confusing
because the answer to every baseball question for a Yankees fan is "well we have 27 world series wins"

You see that big space over your head? That's where my point went.

Munson was the most valuable player on that Yankees team that won two-straight World Series. Without Munson, the Yankees don't win in '77 and '78.

But, he was also a 7-time all-star in what was really a nine-year career. Rookie of the year, an MVP.

And he was the best catcher in my lifetime, except for Johnny Bench.

If the Red Sox had Munson, instead of Fisk, the Sox would have won in' '77 and '78.

oh...
well okay

Chizzang wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:
You see that big space over your head? That's where my point went.

Munson was the most valuable player on that Yankees team that won two-straight World Series. Without Munson, the Yankees don't win in '77 and '78.

But, he was also a 7-time all-star in what was really a nine-year career. Rookie of the year, an MVP.

And he was the best catcher in my lifetime, except for Johnny Bench.

If the Red Sox had Munson, instead of Fisk, the Sox would have won in' '77 and '78.

oh...
well okay

You really don't get baseball, do you?

JoltinJoe wrote:
You really don't get baseball, do you?

Joe,
Sometimes I feel like it's the only thing I understand

Chizzang wrote:

JoltinJoe wrote:
You really don't get baseball, do you?

Joe,
Sometimes I feel like it's the only thing I understand

Then, you should understand that in the days before computer programs were capable of storing every pitching sequence a batter faced, catchers functioned as the storehouse of the data of batter tendencies, weaknesses, and strengths. Munson was the best in the business at that. Munson was so good at calling the game, Billy Martin made it a fine for a pitcher to shake Munson off. Munson was being touted as a manager when his playing days were over, although he expressed mixed emotions, saying that when he quit, he just wanted to spend time with his family.

You should take a look at the stats of the pitchers that Munson handled significantly during his career. You will see that they had the best seasons pitching to Munson.

Just reading a few articles, it sounds like Mauer will make it in at some point. On the spectrum of articles:

Here is a very optimistic one: https://calltothepen.com/2018/10/01/min ... l-of-fame/

Here is a less optimistic one: https://www.cooperstowncred.com/joe-mau ... -of-famer/

So it sounds like he's generally regarded as the 7th or 8th best catcher, and a positive in his favor is that there aren't many dynamic young catchers in the league now to take steam away during his eligibility waiting time.

I say he gets in.

Bench and Scioscia belong in the Hall....

SuperHornet wrote:Scioscia

Personally. I don’t think he should get in. But I’m betting he does the third to fifth time around.
The thing he has going for him was steady batting production without any wow factor in power. Especially during the steroid era. And defense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Minnesota Twins announced that they are retiring Joe Mauers #7.

Mauer's #7 was retired last night. Still a debate or HOF status. Here are a few numbers comparing Joe to all catchers. Demonstrates Mauer was not a power hitter, but a hitter for average.

Batting Average (min. 500 games caught)

Joe Mauer -- .328
Piazza -- .313
Brian Harper -- .306
Manny Sanguillen -- .300
Joe Torre -- .300

On-Base Percentage (min. 500 games caught)

Mauer -- .408
Gene Tenace -- .396
Dick Dietz -- .385
Piazza -- .382
Jorge Posada -- .380

OPS (min. 500 games caught)

Piazza -- .942
Mauer -- .889
Napoli -- .879
Posada -- .868
Campanella -- .858

AZGrizFan wrote:nope.

Enter Clenzy....

Agreed, good player not Hallnof Fame worthy. That means hes probably in because they put pretty much anyone in there now.

You used to have been a special player for a decade or more but now you just need instant gratification cred

Sent from my SM-G975F using Tapatalk

I would consider him borderline HOF. The fact that he played in a smaller market does not help his case. If Harold Baines, which is a joke, can get in the bar is low enough for Mauer to get in easily,


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Gil Dobie wrote:Mauer's #7 was retired last night. Still a debate or HOF status. Here are a few numbers comparing Joe to all catchers. Demonstrates Mauer was not a power hitter, but a hitter for average.

Batting Average (min. 500 games caught)

Joe Mauer -- .328
Piazza -- .313
Brian Harper -- .306
Manny Sanguillen -- .300
Joe Torre -- .300

On-Base Percentage (min. 500 games caught)

Mauer -- .408
Gene Tenace -- .396
Dick Dietz -- .385
Piazza -- .382
Jorge Posada -- .380

OPS (min. 500 games caught)

Piazza -- .942
Mauer -- .889
Napoli -- .879
Posada -- .868
Campanella -- .858

Just rehashing this thread a year later doesn't get around the fact that Mauer wasn't really a catcher. Stop comparing his numbers to guys who were really much more full time catchers.

GannonFan wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:Mauer's #7 was retired last night. Still a debate or HOF status. Here are a few numbers comparing Joe to all catchers. Demonstrates Mauer was not a power hitter, but a hitter for average.

Batting Average (min. 500 games caught)

Joe Mauer -- .328
Piazza -- .313
Brian Harper -- .306
Manny Sanguillen -- .300
Joe Torre -- .300

On-Base Percentage (min. 500 games caught)

Mauer -- .408
Gene Tenace -- .396
Dick Dietz -- .385
Piazza -- .382
Jorge Posada -- .380

OPS (min. 500 games caught)

Piazza -- .942
Mauer -- .889
Napoli -- .879
Posada -- .868
Campanella -- .858

Just rehashing this thread a year later doesn't get around the fact that Mauer wasn't really a catcher. Stop comparing his numbers to guys who were really much more full time catchers.

Those stats are only for games as a catcher.

Gil Dobie wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
Just rehashing this thread a year later doesn't get around the fact that Mauer wasn't really a catcher. Stop comparing his numbers to guys who were really much more full time catchers.

Those stats are only for games as a catcher.

Yes, he had a great career as a catcher, no one is arguing that. The argument has always been that Mauer only played predominately catcher for something like 6 years of his career. The rest was played at 1B and DH. He doesn't have HOF stats at those positions, which were at least half of his career. If he hadn't have been so injured and if he could've played a lot more years at catcher with those stats he'd be a shoo-in for the HOF. That didn't happen, and unfortunately he looks to be on the outside looking in.

A year later and he still doesn't belong.

GannonFan wrote:

Gil Dobie wrote:
Those stats are only for games as a catcher.

Yes, he had a great career as a catcher, no one is arguing that. The argument has always been that Mauer only played predominately catcher for something like 6 years of his career. The rest was played at 1B and DH. He doesn't have HOF stats at those positions, which were at least half of his career. If he hadn't have been so injured and if he could've played a lot more years at catcher with those stats he'd be a shoo-in for the HOF. That didn't happen, and unfortunately he looks to be on the outside looking in.

He was primarily a catcher his for the first 10 years of his career. If he would have retired after 10 years, would he be HOF worthy to you? Name another AL catcher that won a batting title, let alone 3, as a catcher? If you play the games per season game, Johnny Bench played 10, Lombardi 12 and Roy Campanella just shy of 8. Catchers don't play every day.

Gil Dobie wrote:

GannonFan wrote:
Yes, he had a great career as a catcher, no one is arguing that. The argument has always been that Mauer only played predominately catcher for something like 6 years of his career. The rest was played at 1B and DH. He doesn't have HOF stats at those positions, which were at least half of his career. If he hadn't have been so injured and if he could've played a lot more years at catcher with those stats he'd be a shoo-in for the HOF. That didn't happen, and unfortunately he looks to be on the outside looking in.

He was primarily a catcher his for the first 10 years of his career. If he would have retired after 10 years, would he be HOF worthy to you? Name another AL catcher that won a batting title, let alone 3, as a catcher? If you play the games per season game, Johnny Bench played 10, Lombardi 12 and Roy Campanella just shy of 8. Catchers don't play every day.

Slap-hitting catchers will never be HOF-worthy.