1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Jeff Bagwell - HOF?

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Evil Bastard (aka Chris_L), Dec 15, 2006.

?

Do you think Jeff Bagwell will be inducted into the Hall of Fame?

  1. Yes

    20 vote(s)
    43.5%
  2. No

    15 vote(s)
    32.6%
  3. Bagwell deserves to get in but won't get the votes

    5 vote(s)
    10.9%
  4. Bagwell doesn't deserve to get in but will get the votes anyway

    6 vote(s)
    13.0%
  1. Flying Headbutt

    Flying Headbutt Moderator Staff Member

    I think McGriff and Bagwell both had a few seasons where they were among the best in the league. They were clearly at the top of the game. They just didn't do it long enough in my opinion. I think McGriff gets shorted here sometimes, but he's still definitely not a hall of famer. And right now I'm not convinced Bagwell is either.
     
  2. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    If memory serves, Bagwell was always liked by the media... That won't hurt either...
     
  3. Gold - Bagwell never played a game for the Red Sox. His whole career was spent with the Astros.

    As far the Jim Rice comparison is concerned - Rice is hurt by the stat heads (especially Bill James) who argue that he benefited by playing half his games at Fenway where the left-field wall as condusive to doubles. As a person who watched almost all of Rice's games - I can tell you that a majority of his doubles off the wall were followed by the phrase "that would have been out in most parks". Dave Parker is hurt by the fact that he is perhaps the most visible player convicted during the early 80's cocaine scanadals. Parker was a great player but he also brough great shame to the game which Jim Rice did not do.

    And to Mizzou's point that Bagwell did well by the media - that is true. The fact that Rice did not has held hi back and that should not count. The media holds a grudge and it costs Rice who i should point out:

    1. Literally saved the life of a fan at Fenway with his quick reactions when a fan passed out
    2. Would have had a career average over .300 if he ever tried to change the official scorer's mind the way people like Wade Boggs did on a regular basis (and that opinion comes from the official scorer ho worked over 90% of Rice's Fenway games).
    3.is the only player to have a .300 average over a 10-period not in the Hall of Fame
     
  4. GB-Hack

    GB-Hack Active Member

    I have a question for you guys that I think is apropos here. Is the fact that Bagwell played his entire major league career with one team a benefit to him when you think of him?

    It seems to me like it would be, see Ripken and Gwynn, but I'd be interested to hear what you think.
     
  5. buckweaver

    buckweaver Active Member

    I hate to say yes (in this age of free agency, it shouldn't matter.)

    But I have to say yes (the HOF is about legacy; spending a great career with one team makes for a great legacy.)
     
  6. Its about 50/50 on the votes. I think Bagwell may have a tough row to hoe to get the necessary votes.
     
  7. Columbo

    Columbo Active Member

    He has made a nice rally, though.

    Bagwell needs to pay for a tour for all voters to walk around the Astrodome.
     
  8. Gold

    Gold Active Member

    Chris: When looking this up several months ago, I recall a difference which was noticeable between home and away for Rice. And while some of those doubles might have been home runs, some of them would have been outs on the warning track.

    I would also disagree with your characterization of Parker bringing "great shame" on baseball. He certainly had some embarrassing moments during the drug situation in 1980s, but he never was indicted and he has been employed as a coach in the major leagues after his career so we aren't talking something like Vida Blue or Willie Wilson. I don't think his teammates have had negative judgments. And my point is - how does that explain a 30 percent difference in a Hall of Fame vote?
     
  9. da man

    da man Well-Known Member

    Gold, I just remember Rice as being a dominant player of that era. Maybe that's just perception -- I'm surely not a hard-core baseball guy -- but in the '70s and early '80s, he was one of those players who defined a franchise, a guy even the casual fans knew about. At the time, I thought there was never a question he would end up in the Hall of Fame. And that's coming from a guy who grew up rooting for the Yankees.
     
  10. Gold

    Gold Active Member

    He was a top-rank player in the 70s and a little into the 80s, and I remember him while watching the Yankees. But on reflection, he was Don Mattingly (a prime member of the Hall of Very Good) with more power and was regarded as no better than average as a defensive player. The longevity is a question - this wasn't a case like where Sandy Koufax dominated baseball for five years. And there is no way anybody is going to convince me he was the offensive force Dave Parker was.
     
  11. Guy_Incognito

    Guy_Incognito Well-Known Member

    None of the guys you mentioned (Dawson, Rice, Mattingly, McGriff) had close to the career he did, and only Mattingly can match his peak, though Bagwell's was longer. Take Bagwell's best 5 years, or 3 years, or 7 or 8 years or ten years and match them up against any of those guys (I'm not looking now, but I bet) it's not even close. Easy HOFer.
     
  12. fromdawntodesk

    fromdawntodesk New Member

    First ballot. And I despise the Astros.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page