Major League Hall of Fame Pitchers and Batters on the cusp ??

Question

Tommy John career is most compared to Fergie Jenkins, Don Sutton and Phil Neikro ??
Bert Blylevan career is most compared to Tom Seaver, Steve Carlton and Gaylord Perry ??
Jim Rice career is most compared to Duke Snider, Billy Williams and Willie Stargell ??
Ok, My point is this these 3 and many other deserving Hall of Famers sit outside looking in but are compared with present Hall of Famers what gives why are they not in the Hall of Fame ?? is the Hall nothing more then a popularity contest ??

just check out these web sites :

http://www.baseball-reference.com/r/riceji01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/b/blylebe01.shtml
http://www.baseball-reference.com/j/johnto01.shtml

many of you anwered as if these comparisons are my opion, believe me they are not i was just referencing the web site that i invited everyone to look at. others that are deserving and compared to current Hall of Famers are, but not limited to:
Goose Gossage (Rollie Fingers)
Dale Murphy (Reggie Jackson)
Jim Kaat (Early Wynn)
Luis Tiant(Jim Bunning)or(Pedro Martinez of the 70's)
Andre Dawson (Dave Winfield)
as for those that think K. Hernandez, Mattingly, and Munson (by the way he played 11 seasons) deserve induction i would have to say NOT!!!!!!!

Answer 1

John is only compared to Niekro because they don't have a lot of other 46-year-olds to compare him to....if you look at his closest CAREER comps, you see Joe Niekro and Ron Reed. Neither of those possess HOF careers. Tommy John was a decent pitcher for a long time, but in no way does he have HOF credentials.

As for Blyleven, a much stronger case can be made for him. His career comps are Sutton and Gaylord Perry, but Blyleven is hurt by the fact that he didn't get 300 wins and never had a Cy Young season.

With Rice, you again have overstated his comps - the closest to him are Orlando Cepeda (who shouldn't be in the Hall but is), Andres Galarraga and Ellis Burks. Again, not exactly a stellar group to be compared to if you're hoping for Hall admission.

While I disagree that all three of these guys are deserving - I'd only vote for Blyleven - I do agree that the HOF is based way too much on popularity.

Answer 2

I would definitely say that Blyleven should be in. Tommy John has longevity and reinvented him self after his surgery but his numbers are more a product of longecity than HOF type dominance. I am torn on Jim Rice, he has early numbers but only had some power at the end, no average and only decent play in the field was off the wall, routine fly balls were an adventure everytime.

Some of the guys had that special it that others do not, their numbers may not be as impressive as others but they had a mystique that changed a game or they did little things that others do not do that do not show up on the stat sheet.

Thurman Munson would be a good candidate but he is a year short of service time. Mattingly should be in, people forgot how good he was with bad hitters around him most of his career. He could have gone elsewhere to pad his stats but would only play for the Yankees.

Answer 3

more answering for the ones who mentioned Mattingly and Hernandez and then Pucket. The difference between these people is that Pucket was still performing while he was forced to retire because of his condition. Where clearly mattingly and hernandez had already entered the down side of their career.

Few people outside of NYC talk about Mattingly being a hall of famer. Yes, he was very good for 6 years. Rice had 4-7 years varying between dominence and excellence.

Perhaps the voters these days want 12 years, or 15 years.
If someone gets in simply because they were good enough to play for 22 years, is that a hall of famer?

Heck, I am sure Blyleven could come back now, play for the Red Sox and pick up 13 wins to get to 300.
I don't agree with John, Sutton being in. Blyleven is close though, (those 3700 strikeouts help)

If you are thinking Rice should get in, I think Dale Murphy needs it too.

Answer 4

Gil Hodges not in the Hall, is a crying shame. Agree with your choices, but for Tommy John... Blyleven should get in first.

What about players like Don Mattingly & Thurman Munson for that matter (careers cut short) -- if Kirby Puckett is in, and for WHAT reason other than popularity?!? then BOTH of these Yankees need to be in, as well. In fact, Kirby was probably a STEROID case, at that. Under the radar - but check his 1st 3 years and notice it goes: with over 500ABs per season... 4hrs, 4hrs and POP! 31hrs (when Steroids were rampant).

Answer 5

Tommy John needs to get in. As so does Jim Rice. But Blyevan is border line. Also John Franco isn't able to be elected yet but he needs to get in because when he retired he was 2nd on the all time saves list. He is 4th now but he wasn't a closer his last five or six years. He will get passed by Wagner though. Also Keith Hernandez needs to get in.

Answer 6

Don Sutton & Phil Niekro should not be in, so rule out Tommy John (unless their is a surgery name wing). Gaylord Perry should not be in and comparing Blylevan to Seaver is ludicrous, so forget Blyleven. Jim Rice is the only one I tend to agree with.

Answer 7

Reading the previous responses was so painful -- mistakes, misinterpretation, utterly bad judgement -- that I'm simply not gonna bother answering this one in detail.

John -- no.
Blyleven -- yes.
Rice -- maybe, Hall isn't a lesser institution without him.

Stated comparisons -- hogwash and rot.

Niekro -- utterly deserving.
Mattingly, Munson -- Yankee delusions. (Munson had his full 15 years on the BBWAA ballot and peaked at 15%, on his first one. Why is it Yankee fans cannot co-process the terms "Yankee" and "not good enough"?)
"Many" others -- ??? Go ahead, name "many" others.

Answer 8

Tommy John should be in (he won 288 games, for God's sake!), as should Blylevan. I'm not sure about Rice, though.