Tim Salmon is on the Cooperstown Ballot
by Rev Halofan on Jan 2, 2012 5:13 PM PST
in Angels News
Email
PrintLook at the 2012 ballot after the poll...
Baseball's 2012 Hall of Fame player selections will be announced Wednesday. Anyone from the current ballot who receives the requisite number of votes will be inducted this summer along with the late Ron Santo, elected to the hall by the veteran's committee last month.
- To be eligible of inclusion in the Baseball Hall of Fame, a player must have played at the major league level in at least TEN seasons and have been retired for at least FIVE years.
- While these are the only qualifications, voters are asked to consider the accomplishments on the field and the overall character of the player.
- A candidate must be selected on 75% of all returned ballots to enter the Hall of Fame - that would be approximately 433 of the 575 ballots (based on the most recent returns).
- For candidates who receive less than 75% of the vote, a vote from a minimum of 5% of the returned ballots is needed. A candidate is eligible to remain on the ballot for 15 years. After that, the candidate can again be considered by the veteran's committee.
- Currently, the Hall selects the cap that the player wears on his Hall of Fame plaque. The voters are members of the Baseball Writers Association of America.
-
The Baseball Hall of Fame is located in Cooperstown, New York.
- The 2012 ballot contains 26 players, including the debut of Angels legend Tim Salmon.
My selections here are in red - Which players below would you choose?
| HOF Candidate | Year on the Ballot | 2011 Voting % |
| Dale Murphy | 14th | 12% |
| Jack Morris | 13th | 53% |
| Don Mattingly | 12th | 13% |
| Alan Trammell | 11th | 24% |
| Lee Smith | 10th | 45% |
| Mark McGwire | 6th | 19% |
| Tim Raines | 5th | 37% |
| Barry Larkin | 3rd | 62% |
| Edgar Martinez | 3rd | 32% |
| Fred McGriff | 3rd | 17% |
| Jeff Bagwell | 2nd | 41% |
| Juan Gonzalez | 2nd | 5% |
| Rafael Palmeiro | 2nd | 11% |
| Larry Walker | 2nd | 20% |
| Jeremy Burnitz | 1st | - |
| Vinny Castilla | 1st | - |
| Brian Jordan | 1st | - |
| Javy Lopez | 1st | - |
| Bill Mueller | 1st | - |
| Terry Mulholland | 1st | - |
| Phil Nevin | 1st | - |
| Brad Radkie | 1st | - |
| Tim Salmon | 1st | - |
| Ruben Sierra | 1st | - |
| Bernie Williams | 1st | - |
| Eric Young | 1st | - |
86 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
He will never make it
but he will always be number one in our Hearts
The neighbor is a cranky irish expat. He if wanted no snakes, he shoulda stayed in Ireland.
-Moondoggy
Trammel, McGwire, Raines, Larkin, Martinez, Bagwell, Palmeiro
I’m really not a fan of Palmeiro, but if I’ve voted for McGwire I suppose I have to take him too.
I think McGriff and Walker are really close calls.
The Bagwell “shadow of doubt” steroids arguments are beyond ridiculous.
Would vote for Timmy for Angels HOF in an instant, just doesn’t have the career numbers for Cooperstown.
"Why [pitcher wins] should be taken as a record of the pitcher's ability is a conundrum to which no one has as yet vouchsafed an answer." M.G. Lloyd; Baseball Magazine - 1908
Tim Salmon > Jim Rice
all that matters.
This is a sig.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Jan 2, 2012 5:44 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
3 more WAR for his career, plus an OPS 30 points higher
Rice has higher counting stats, lower rate stats, but still didn’t each any of the HoF “milestones” that people care about, either.
This is a sig.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Jan 2, 2012 8:58 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
True
what’s that worth on the ballot weighting? Like a 50% stat padding buffer?
This is a sig.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Jan 2, 2012 10:13 PM PST up reply actions
Right with the OPS, wrong on 3 WAR.
According to Baseball Referance, Jim Rice had a career 41.5 WAR while Salmon had a 37.6 WAR.
OPS is the only significant rate stat where Salmon has the edge (other than OBP, which is why you have a high OPS). In fact, they both had the same career OPS+ with 128.
Hits:
Salmon – 1674
Rice – 2452
Runs:
Salmon – 986
Rice – 1249
HR:
Salmon – 299
Rice – 382
RBI:
Salmon – 1016
Rice – 1451
BA:
Salmon – .282
Rice – .298
SLG:
Salmon – .498
Rice – .502
Rice was an 8 time All Star while Salmon was never voted in. Granted, that’s based on perception and he did play in Boston. Still, 8 appearances compared to 0 is telling.
Rice even won an MVP, something Salmon never managed to do. The highest Salmon ever ranked in the MVP voting was 7th, while Rice finished better than 7th 6 times throughout his career.
Rice won two Silver Slugger awards compared to Salmon’s lone Silver Slugger.
While I believe his offense stands head and shoulders above Salmon’s, it’s somewhat surprising that Salmon had a -4.6 dWAR for his career and Rice had 2.3 dWAR. Even that argument fails you.
The one key factor when comparing these players is that they played in different eras. Salmon was a good offensive player in a time where hitters practically hit off a tee. It was an offensive power hitting era in which Salmon never took center stage. Rice didn’t play in such an offensively inflated time, which is why they had the same career OPS. While I’m not high on Rice and I was doubtful of his HOF worthiness, he is still clearly better than Salmon. I love Tim Salmon, and as an Angels fan, I will always respect him for what he did for our franchise. My case is that he is by no means better than Rice, which would’ve been his only chance at making it in the Hall of Fame.
by moralesforpresident on Jan 2, 2012 11:49 PM PST up reply actions
The 3 WAR was a reference to offense, not overall
see: person below me.
What you just listed are a series of counting stats, NOT rate stats. Rice played longer, no one ever questioned that.
But for all his extra longevity, his bat still provided less offensive value for his career than did Salmon’s. They were, at the minimum, virtual equals…certainly not a ‘stretch’ apart. And call me biased, but I’d be willing to give Salmon the benefit of the doubt regarding steroids, meaning he has a heavily suppressed OPS+ via playing in an era of heavily inflated OPS. Unless you’re arguing that Salmon was on the same playing field (i.e. cheated) as those who inflated offense so heavily for the era, then it’s silly to fault him for "never [taking] center stage,’ when that would mean that the stage was so clearly stolen FROM him.
WAR/Season
Salmon: 2.68
Rice: 2.59
AB/HR
Salmon: 1/19.8
Rice: 1/21.5
OPS:
Salmon: .884
Rice: .854
OBP:
Salmon: .385
Rice: .352
More to the point, however, is the fact that neither of them should be in the HoF. I’m certainly not gonna buy that having fewer than a hundred more dingers in a bandbox of a stadium and winning a popularity contest a handful of times makes him a significantly better, or even better at all, candidate.
This is a sig.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Jan 3, 2012 10:07 PM PST up reply actions
WAR means total Wins Above Replacement
If you’re going to cite a stat, cite it correctly. Otherwise, the entire point can be misconstrued.
First off, my point was to say that Salmon’s higher career OPS was negated by the fact that they both shared the same OPS+. OPS and OBP are the only legitimate stats Salmon has an edge. Rice has a higher BA and SLG, which means the only difference between the two was that Salmon walked more. While that’s important, their equal OPS+ trumps even that edge Salmon had over Rice.
If you’re going to dismiss a difference of 83 HRs and cite a difference of 1.7 AB/HR between Rice and Salmon, don’t even bother. Rice played 417 more games than Salmon, which translated to more than 2,000 more plate appearances. That means he played 25% more games than Salmon and had 28% more plate appearances. Don’t cite an inefficient stat when there is such a drastic difference in their length of careers.
Here are the things the writers look for: longevity, numbers, and impact.
Despite your claim that longevity is not relevant, the writers take it into consideration. In this case, Tim Salmon really only played 11 full seasons (14 total). If you’re Albert Pujols, 11 seasons may be all you need, but not in this case. In comparison, Rice had 14 full seasons under his belt (16 total).
Regarding numbers, counting stats are a big deal with the writers. While you may disregard a difference of 83 HRs between them, that matters to the writers. That means Jim Rice hit more than 27% more HR, over 42% more RBIs, over 26% more Runs, 208% more Triples. That’s a significant difference.
Here’s a look at an average season for each of them (based on counting stats, to give you an idea of their production per year, which should be more representative than a lump sum career total):
Disregarding Salmon’s ’92,’04,’06 seasons and Rice’s ’74 and ’89 seasons due to playing time
Salmon: 142 H, 85 R, 26 HR, 87 RBI
Rice: 170 H, 87 R, 27 HR, 101 RBI
Factoring each player’s entire career
Salmon: 120 H, 70 R, 21 HR, 73 RBI
Rice: 153 H, 78 R, 24 HR, 91 RBI
Are the numbers similar? Not really. The major difference is that Rice produced in such a manner, which was better than Salmon’s production, for a longer period of time. Here is where longevity comes into play and where the writers make their conclusions. Had Salmon sustained such production for 3-4 more years, he may have had valid argument. As alluded to before, Rice played 417 more games than Salmon, which translated to more than 2,000 more plate appearances. That means he played 25% more games than Salmon and had 28% more plate appearances. When you’re talking about a guy who played that much longer, the comparisons fall apart. Great players can sustain success for longer than the 11 full seasons Salmon put in.
As for impact, Rice had just two losing seasons with his team throughout his 16-year career, while Salmon was stuck on a losing team in 7 of his 14 seasons. Can you blame the player? No, but the writers do anyway. Why did Joey Votto beat out Pujols for the 2010 MVP despite Pujols winning the GG and SS? Votto was on a winning team. Why did Braun snub Matt Kemp in this year’s MVP voting? He was on a winning team. I disagree with some of that flawed logic, but the writers view production in light of your teams’ success. If that’s the case, Salmon has no case.
It is wrong to dismiss the fact that Rice won an MVP and here’s why. The same association that votes for the MVP votes for the Hall of Fame. That association thought that at one time, Rice was the best player in his league. Salmon never finished higher than 7th in the MVP voting. That is a small factor in Rice’s favor.
In summary, while Salmon edges out Rice in OPS (Rice’s slugging was higher but his OBP was lower), Rice beats Salmon in every other category. The argument that counting stats are flawed when comparing a career is useless in this case, for I have shown that even in counting stats Rice had significantly better average annual production. Rice edges out Salmon in every category except how often he was walked (Just like the old Dominican saying, "You can’t walk across the Atlantic," you can’t walk into the Hall of Fame.). I love Salmon, but Rice is clearly better.
by moralesforpresident on Jan 4, 2012 1:51 AM PST up reply actions
And for all that, all you showed is that Rice PLAYED longer
…by 3 seasons. Not that he was better.
The reason I dismiss the MVPs and the All-Stars is not because I don’t think they would matter to a HoF voter, because they do matter to them. But our argument was never even remotely about “what matters” to a HoF voter…it was about whether or not a player was better than another. In fact, you sort of bring up my point entirely by citing the Braun/Kemp debate. Kemp WAS the better player. In virtually every way. Were each player to play the exact same way for an entire career, Kemp would be the far better, far more HoF-worthy candidate. Which is to my point: MVPs don’t show who is a better player.
You keep arguing from this flawed assumption that I am saying Salmon belongs in, and Rice does not. To the contrary, what I’ve said on that matter is that NEITHER belongs.
Also, regarding this matter:
While that’s important, their equal OPS+ trumps even that edge Salmon had over Rice.
I touched on that. I think it’s flawed to ignore the era Salmon played in, as he had the distinct disadvantage of playing with a group of a significant number of known cheaters. You call that “never standing out” on the big stage offensively, I call that statistical deflation. Were he to have been able to play in a clean era, the 30 point OPS difference doesn’t translate anymore into an equal OPS+. And it’s pointless for you to try to tell me that HoF voters won’t take that into consideration, since my argument has never been about what HoF voters will or won’t do.
You negate the OPS/OBP argument because, as you said, Salmon basically “only walked more.” (nevermind that he walked at a rather SIGNIFICANTLY higher rate for his entire career.). But also consider a similar logic can be applied to your SLG stat. Rice did not actually hit for better power….he hit for higher average. As is, their SLG differential is statistically insignificant (Salmon would have needed exactly 21 total bases for his entire career extra to have Rice’s SLG). But aside from that, Rice’s .298 career BA vs. Salmon’s .282 mark a .204 ISO for Rice vs. a .216 ISO for Salmon. In the same way you say Salmon “only walked more” in terms of being the better OPS candidate, I can say that Rice merely “singled a little more” in terms of being the better power candidate.
And again, going back to WAR, the WAR/year rate stats I cited about WERE from the total WAR category, not just oWAR as in my previous post. Which shows you that Salmon did have a marginal statistical year-over-year advantage over Rice in that category. For the years in which they played, Salmon provided more value to his team than did Rice. The rate at which he produced when he played was better than Rice. The only thing Rice has on him is the length of time over which he did it. And that was a matter of a few seasons. When it comes down to it, the argument that Rice was CLEARLY better than Salmon is marginal and flawed at best. He played a couple years longer. And maybe that matters to HoF voters, but it’s hardly the crux for a superiority argument.
This is a sig.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Jan 4, 2012 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
I appeal to the writers because you won't appeal to reason.
To each of your arguments, in order:
MVP: I clarified that it is a small factor, but a factor nonetheless. Is that the sole or primary reason for my argument? Of course not. But it’s a relevant factor.
Winning Bias: I also clarified that being on a winning team helps’ Rice’s case, but that a player can only control so much when it comes to his teams’ success. That’s why I used those examples, to shed light on that truth. The voters view is that a Hall of Fame player impacts his team to such a degree that he makes them competitive, in which case you can argue that Rice has the edge, but we won’t go there because it’s not concrete.
I’ll stop arguing about OPS, simply because your clinging to the one significant stat where Salmon has the edge. I’ll give it to you. My point is that Rice has more impressive stats outside of OPS.
What you just listed are a series of counting stats, NOT rate stats. Rice played longer, no one ever questioned that.
But for all his extra longevity, his bat still provided less offensive value for his career than did Salmon’s.
I gave you a clear representation of those counting stats to show annual averages throughout their careers. Your argument was that his counting stats were better because he played longer. My rpepresentations clearly showed that it was not only that he played longer, but that even his counting stats were better by year than Salmon’s. It’s foolish to dismiss counting stats. The only way people would take your argument is if Salmon played better by year but Rice had better career totals because he played longer, which isn’t the case.
The only stats that favor Salmon are OPS and WAR. While each of these are significant stats and reliable ways to measure a player’s worth, they don’t account for EVERYTHING, as you have used them. OBP, OPS and WAR are all intertwined. WAR leans heavily on OBP and OPS, which plays a significant role in WAR. Salmon has a slight edge in WAR, but it isn’t significant enough to say he is better. Based on WAR they have similarities, but Rice edges Salmon in all the important categories to voters: BA, H, R, HR, RBI.
For clarification, longevity matters. Don’t dismiss that point just for the sake of old Timmy. That is an essential characteristic of a Hall of Famer. Anyone can put up a few good years, but great ones can maintain them for a career.
Show me another stat besides OPS or WAR that can prove your point, because you keep coming back to those flawed arguments. Unimportant stats like ISO aren’t enough to stake a claim in the Hall. Otherwise, I’m sure Richie Sexson would do great. I’ve given the pillar stats of the Hall of Fame (BA, R, H, HR, RBI) but the only significant stats that favor Salmon are OPS and WAR, and not by much.
by moralesforpresident on Jan 4, 2012 12:43 PM PST up reply actions
Two players who are virtual statistical clones
with a slight edge in longevity to one.
I say one is better, you say the other.
And you say I can’t accept “reason.”
Yeah, okay champ. Touche. You’re clearly my superior.
This is a sig.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Jan 4, 2012 1:00 PM PST up reply actions
Oh and:
Unimportant stats like ISO aren’t enough to stake a claim in the Hall.
Yeah, next time don’t bother talking to me if you’re not going to read what I said. Cuz that’s what that sentence says: “I didn’t read anything.”
This is a sig.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Jan 4, 2012 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
the thing is that Rice doesn't belong in the HOF
so justifying Salmon based on Rice isn’t really a valid point
I never justified Salmon in the HoF
that’s about half the issue I took with moralesforpresident…he kept making that part of my argument when it never was.
In fact, I EXPLICITLY stated, more than once, that neither belonged.
Follow the chain upward, find my original post, and find EXACTLY how simple a point it was making from the beginning. It had nothing to do with the HoF and Salmon.
This is a sig.
by Caseys Kiss of Death on Jan 6, 2012 5:23 PM PST up reply actions
Salmon vs. Rice
Career OPS+
Salmon : 128+
Rice : 128+
Career oWAR (Offensive Wins Above Replacement)
Salmon: 42.2
Rice: 39.2
Number of seasons with oWAR of at least 3.9
Salmon: five
Rice: five
The performance of Rice and Salmon were remarkably similar. However neither belongs in the Hall of Fame.
by Fan Since 1981 on Jan 2, 2012 9:03 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
My ballot would be...
Larkin, Bagwell, Raines, Trammell, McGwire, Palmeiro, Walker and Edgar.
How does this team win with this offense? Hey, anyone....DRAW A WALK!!!
Jim Scully
Jim Scully Home
Palmeiro and McGwire are assholes
no way would I ever vote for an asshole.
Gotta make Larry Walker squirm a few more seasons.
He is not on the ballot
Slavery used to be legal, doesn’t mean we should tolerate contemporary slaveholders.
by Rev Halofan on Jan 2, 2012 6:38 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Palmeiro yes, McGwire no.
See, Palmeiro got caught after steroids became illegal in baseball, and he continually denies it. McGwire used them before MLB banned them, they helped him revitalize baseball in 1998 with one of the most encapsulating sagas in the game’s history (mind you, some fans were still strike-bitter and this certainly alleviated any remaining animosity), and he eventually confessed to using them and showed contrition.
Aside from that, McGwire was a powerful hitter before he juiced. 1987, he did not juice, and he put up ridiculous rookie numbers. If you could ascertain McGwire’s natural home run ceiling (I.e. raw power before he roided up), and replace any subsequent season that exceeded that total with his natural total, he still puts up exceptional power numbers.
GORGEOUS BOURJOS! *clap clap clap-clap-clap*
by Of Maicer and Men on Jan 2, 2012 10:44 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
According to Canseco
He juiced during his rookie year too (although, if you’ve ever wasted a day reading Canseco’s book cover to cover like I did, he lies throughout most of the book. He said he ran a 3.9 40-yard dash- when he was in Tampa Bay.) Doesn’t matter to me. I’d vote for the guy. He was a HOFer with or without steroids. I also think that steroids’ impact on the game has been vastly overstated. There were many many other reasons besides steroids why guys were hitting more home runs in the 90s, but the media loves a good story and steroids in baseball was media masturbation material.
Larry Walker and Tim Salmon
My two favorite baseball players. I have 70 Larry Walker rookie cards and while I doubt they will every increase in value, they mean a lot to me!
For me...
Barry Larkin
Jack Morris
Edgar Martinez
Fred McGriff
Mark McGwire
Bernie Williams
Lee Smith
Tim Raines
Jeff Bagwell
Alan Trammell
GORGEOUS BOURJOS! *clap clap clap-clap-clap*
by Of Maicer and Men on Jan 2, 2012 6:07 PM PST via mobile reply actions
Bernie Williams is not a HOFer...
CJ Wilson is OUR douche now!
by ryanfea on Jan 2, 2012 6:21 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Thank you.
I hope the writers can get past the Yankees bias and see him through a neutral lens. Bernie Williams was undoubtedly a very good player, but he doesn’t belong in the Hall of Fame.
by moralesforpresident on Jan 2, 2012 7:56 PM PST up reply actions
Bernie's postseason legend is HoF-worthy.
If I’m not mistaken, he had the most postseason homers for a while (can’t remember if he still does or if Manny took that away). Big reason why the Yankees won 4 World Series in 5 years. I figure he won’t come close to making it in first ballot, but he’ll be a Blyleven-type whose case gains more and more support.
I hate the Yankees, but hey, Bernie cemented his spot. I mean, if postseason lore was enough for Bill Mazeroski and Tony Lazzeri…it’s CERTAINLY enough for Bernie.
GORGEOUS BOURJOS! *clap clap clap-clap-clap*
by Of Maicer and Men on Jan 2, 2012 10:38 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
He played in more postseason games than pretty much anyone
That’s why he leads a counting stat like that. Bernie was also one of the worst defenders of my lifetime and was god awful for the last four years of his career. Not to mention he didn’t hit any of the typical milestones that voters historically like to vote for.
CJ Wilson is OUR douche now!
None of those typical milestones
But carried a .929 OPS during his nine-year prime. Andre Dawson was terrible in HIS final four years and he got into the Hall on his ninth try. Bernie will NOT go in first ballot—but he will most certainly get in.
GORGEOUS BOURJOS! *clap clap clap-clap-clap*
by Of Maicer and Men on Jan 3, 2012 8:26 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
If Bernie had spent his career with the Padres, we would not be having this conversation.
Dear Texas: "One, two...........THREE!" The next number IS THREE!!!
by Stirrups on Jan 3, 2012 9:06 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Lee Smith was an angel for a brief stint...
just sayin’….
"The Transplant" (So. Cal boy stuck in NYC)
by BryanHarvey'sMoustache on Jan 2, 2012 6:19 PM PST reply actions
you dont think that guy ever juiced, do you?
"The Transplant" (So. Cal boy stuck in NYC)
by BryanHarvey'sMoustache on Jan 2, 2012 6:26 PM PST up reply actions
Hey, that's my Jr. High School Pre-Algebra teacher's son you're barfin' about!
"It is a haunted game in which every player is measured against the ghosts of all who have gone before."
does that make you two lovers?
"The Transplant" (So. Cal boy stuck in NYC)
by BryanHarvey'sMoustache on Jan 2, 2012 8:02 PM PST up reply actions
The writers should vote him in
as an apology from MLB for not going to a single fucking all star game!
Tim Salmon: The once and future Kingfish.
Tim doesn't care
"I have something 95 percent of all those All-Stars only wish they had: a World Series ring. If I had to choose between that and being an All-Star, it would be no contest. I’d grab the gold ring and never look back." -Tim Salmon
by BruinHalo on Jan 2, 2012 8:42 PM PST up reply actions 4 recs
Rec'd for appropriate sig.
"If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base." ~Dave Barry
by LAASurfin on Jan 2, 2012 9:04 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Juan Gonzalez
Got 5%. Surely Timmy can at least get that, especially if the Hall takes character into account (like they say). He was my childhood hero and I got to met him at Spring Training two years ago. One of the nicest people I’ve ever spoken with. It validated my admiration.
I'd love for Tim to get into Cooperstown.
But I just don’t see it happening. Especially since the selection committee will be in painful deliberation over Phil Nevin.
YOU DON'T KNOW THE POWER OF THE DARKSIDE.....
Kingfish looks like a VC vote.
I think, optimistically, he stays on the ballot for one year.
I mean, this is a guy who put up decent power numbers NATURALLY, in the thick of an era where so many guys did it the wrong way. He was a class act, epitome of a fan’s player. Loved the game, a key cog in the Angels’ 2002 run…I’d vote for him if he stays on after this season.
GORGEOUS BOURJOS! *clap clap clap-clap-clap*
by Of Maicer and Men on Jan 2, 2012 10:48 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
At this moment the vote is split 50-50.
My guess is half those votes are fans and half are realists.
"It is a haunted game in which every player is measured against the ghosts of all who have gone before."
Guilty
I voted yes to send positive vibes.
by Rock Island Line on Jan 2, 2012 6:54 PM PST up reply actions
Count me amongst the realists.
I just don’t see any way in which the Kingfish gets into the HOF. Besides the fact that he just doesn’t really have the numbers, (but all of us here love him lots) I just think he’d have a hard time getting in. I mean, these clowns took forever to get Blyleven in, not too mention Buck O’ Neil. And not playing for the skanks or bosux hurts his chances too. Hope i’m wrong.
YOU DON'T KNOW THE POWER OF THE DARKSIDE.....
Unfortunately, he won't get the 5% this year....
If two-time MVP Dale Murphy is only getting 12% then I don’t think Timmy gets 5%…
Poor Timmy
His own team isnt even smart enough to retire his number and he is the #1 halo of all time
Ima gonna go all Rich Lederer
on the BBWAA’s asses until he gets in.
‘Course, Blyleven had a much better case but simple facts have never prevented me from doin’ stupid shit in the past.
"If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base." ~Dave Barry
Ya, but Sam Miller's already working on the Grich's file, no?
Ex-Angel Grich is a no-brainer Hall of Famer
Sam > LAASurfin at the keyboard.
"If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base." ~Dave Barry
I love HoF discussion
Because I am always right and everyone else is varying degrees of wrong unless they agree with me. Which is fun.
Salmon doesn’t have the numbers, and he played a power position during power years with stats that would’ve been better in a pitcher-dominated era (like right now). I’d love to say the character clause boosts him, but let’s face it – he was several years shy of a real HoF discussion even in the right era. But I still love him.
Anyway, the ballot
Trammell (Whitaker deserves to be here, too)
Raines
Larkin
E Martinez
McGriff
Bagwell
R.I.P. Nick Adenhart - Always an Angel
Don't know why the Angels haven't formally retired his number yet
Tim Salmon is the greatest Angel and #15 should have been retired on Opening Day the season after he hung ’em up.
I remember when I was a kid and I was waiting in line before a game next to the Angels dugout to get an autograph. Right when I get to the front, whoever was doing the autographs (it was a pitcher, can’t remember exactly who) took off to warm up. As he was leaving, my all time favorite player Tim Salmon comes out of the dugout, trots over, signs my hat and leaves to warm up. As soon as he took my hat and Sharpie my jaw dropped and I tried to thank him but the cat had my tongue – I couldn’t believe my childhood hero was signing my hat. I sprinted back to my seat and showed off my most prized possession to my grandpa. I had the biggest smile for about a week, and the only times during that game I stopped looking at my autograph was to watch Salmon bat. Game 7 of the 2002 World Series is my #1 baseball moment, but that autograph is #1B. Words can’t describe how awesome that was, and I feel bad that little Angels fans today don’t have a Tim Salmon to idolize.
Fight on!
EMAW!
by Shackleford on Jan 2, 2012 8:19 PM PST reply actions 4 recs
So he's in YOUR Hall of Fame.
And your Grandpa’s. And, probably, your kid’s one day too, through you. And mine as well.
That’s as it should be.
"If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an infant's life, she will choose to save the infant's life without even considering if there are men on base." ~Dave Barry
I got a Salmon autograph in 2005.
Made my night. It was my birthday, too.
See, I think the Angels are waiting for the Hall of Fame vote to pass. Then they’ll induct him into the team Hall and retire #15.
GORGEOUS BOURJOS! *clap clap clap-clap-clap*
by Of Maicer and Men on Jan 2, 2012 10:51 PM PST via mobile up reply actions
He signed a hat for me last year
During extra innings against the Chi Sox. Very few people were at the rockpile, or the game for that matter, and he chatted with us a little bit. Great guy.
I just want him around the organization.
I loved him in the broadcast booth this past season, I would love it if he took Mickey’s job, I’d love it if he was in the front office. Just be an Angel forever, Tim.
by Halowitz on Jan 3, 2012 12:41 AM PST via mobile reply actions
I cannot believe Edgar Martinez isn't in.
The dude was good.
I would vote:
Salmon
Morris
Trammell
Walker
Martinez
Bagwell
Larkin
Tim Salmon: The once and future Kingfish.
Non-segregated-against position players in the Hall w/ fewer WAR than Salmon's 37.6
22.6 Ray Schalk
22.9 Rick Ferrell
24.3 Lloyd Waner
24.3 George Kelley
26.9 Bill Mazeroski
29.2 Freddie Lindstrom
29.5 Chick Hafey
32.4 Jim Bottomley
33.6 George Kell
36.2 Ross Youngs
37.1 Pie Traynor
4% - my prediction
he’s gonna be right on the edge of getting another look at the ballot. It’ll be more than 3% but less than 8%.
Barry Larkinwill be the one guy voted in for sure. I’d include Raines, Morris, Trammell, Martinez and Bagwell on my ballot too (in descending order of chances to get in this year) but they’ll have to wait
Hmmmm. GA leads Salmon in many statistical categories....
In fact GA is the Angels All-Time Leader in several offensive categories..He beats Tim in SLG. (.461) to (.450) for career but Tim gets him in OPS (.811) to (.785)…
As much as I like Timmy I don’t think you can say definitively that he was the better player…
GA leads Salmon in lots of counting stats as a result of playing almost 600 more games
Yet Salmon still has more home runs and walks. Salmon’s OBP and SLG are both much better than Anderson’s. Not sure where you got Tim’s stats because his career SLG is .498 not .461 and his career OPS is .884 not .811 as you stated. a .100 difference in OPS is HUGE. The only real advantage GA has over Salmon is defense and even the defensive metrics are iffy at best.
CJ Wilson is OUR douche now!
My bad.... Numbers quoted are incorrect.
I did this quickly and upon re-check discovered that I looked at wrong column on Baseball Reference.com
My apologies, and you are right ryan…Salmon’s career numbers are .498 SLG. and .884 OPS. I stand corrected.
He'll be too lazy to get on the ballot.
If the Halos don't care about the way they play, then why should I?
One thing about "counting stats" etc..
I don’t like how most people downgrade very good players numbers because they experience decline in the later years. Their numbers are said to be the result of “counting stats” etc… Well, just about every player, great, very good, good , average and below avg. all decline in their later years. The exceptions would be those players who retire young due to injury or for some other quirky reason.
In short, “counting stats” are not a bad thing, rather their are indicative of a player who has had longevity. And to me at least, longevity is one of things that makes a player good (note that I say “one of the things” not the only thing) . In GA’s case his numbers validate a long and auspicious career. The fact that GA was able to avoid injury and stay on the field is one of the things that made him valuable to the Angels. If a player is constantly injured and out of the lineup it is hard to accumulate counting stats…
So, let’s not detract from GA’s career by downgrading him and his numbers with the pejorative designation of “counting stats.”
it pains me to no end to say what hasn't been said
Bernie Williams is a better candidate than Timmy.
Bernie won’t get in either but a realist has to make that conclusion. And sadly, Bernie will get over 5% and be back. Lord, I sure hope Tim does.
Bernie and Tim actually have a lot in common
They were both good hitters who aged in dog years after 2002. They are beloved by their team’s fans and are class acts off the field. They also played integral parts in WS victories. Neither belongs in the HOF but both deserve to have their numbers retired ASAP.
Besides, I think most would rather have a Salmon/Williams career over that of a Bonds. The WS victories have to mean more than the Hall to most players.
Agreed
Not all great players are HOF’ers. Not all HOF’ers are as beloved as Salmon and Williams. Given the choice, I think they would both take the rings and adoration.
I'm Not Disagreeing
But Williams was skewed by the short porch in RF and playing in stacked lineups.
Salmon could post 30 HR / 90 RBI with a poor offense in a pitchers park.
I think Salmon was a far better player who hit a road block, injuries-wise.
They both will be in their respective teams’ HOF’s.
IMO, One Thing Stood Between Tim Salmon and the Hall of Fame
Injuries. His health (or lack there-of) slowed him down considerably after 2000.
In looking at his career numbers through 2000, as well as his career averages, I see a greater resemblance with Eddie Murray through the first 8 years of his career.
Murray and Salmon both hit .280-.300 most of their careers; both had exceptional OBP’s; and both shared a career high in HR’s of 33 — we think of Murray as an elite power hitter, but he only had 5 seasons out of 21 with 30+ HR’s. The RBI’s were similar through the first 8-10 years.
The difference between the two: Murray stayed heatlhy, Salmon didn’t. Murray was also not overshadowed at his position by a more elite name as Timmy was (Manny).
Had Salmon stayed healthy, and continued the pace he was on from 1993-2000, it would’ve taken him about 16 seasons (fewer than Murray), to reach 500 HR’s.
Had Salmon stayed healthy and played as long as Murray, he would’ve probably been consistent enough to be a first ballot Hall of Famer, because he didn’t do steroids, and because he was pretty much a great all around player.
When I think Tim Salmon, I think Eddie Murray, Dave Parker, guys like that.
Unfortunately, Salmon couldn’t stay healthy enough to play long enough to pile on the Hall of Fame credentials I think he would’ve compiled anyways.
O/T for SB Nation: A Computer Virus Attack occurred while logging off of this post:
Attacker URL: Scan14.poolkko.in/
Attacking Computer: 94.61.247.181, 80
I also sent you an email. My Norton antivirus blocked it.
A wise man does not need advice and a fool won't take it.
Surprise surprise surprise.
Last night on Clubhouse Confidential, they went over the SABR statistics for all the HOF ballot rookie class except for…
You guessed it… Timmah.
If the Halos don't care about the way they play, then why should I?
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Halos Heaven
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Big League Stew - MLB - Yahoo! Sports
- College player makes impossible over the fence catch to save tournament game (Video)
- Security!: Camden Yards guard collides with Royals’ Mike Moustakas
- The Juice: Nelson Cruz matches career high eight RBIs, Pujols stays hot in Seattle
- Benches clear at Fenway as Red Sox-Rays rivalry heats up
- Keeping good company: Albert Pujols becomes fourth-youngest player to hit 450 home runs
