'The most underappreciated player of our generation'

Personally I think he should get in but I think he won't. A 10 GG center fielder with 400+ HR's should get in. He's 2nd all-time in defensive WAR i.e. if he has any kind of good offensive numbers he should get in and he indeed has good offensive numbers.

 

I don't think Jones will even get close.

 

this specific debate rears its head periodically. i used to be among those in the 'mattingly should be in the hof'' camp, predominantly based upon his first five full seasons -- which were a pretty extraordinary piece of work -- and the fact his balky back is what robbed him of future hof-worthy seasons when he was still in his prime. the only player in the hof with such a brief dominant period was koufax, whose sttar burned so brightly i guess voters felt he could not be denied.

so i've come to peace with the argument that mattingly didn't have enough hof-worthy seasons to get in. in the discussion here, though, i fall in the 'puckett isn't worthy' camp. mattingly was considered the superior player during his prime years. was even considered thbest player in baseball, period, for about 2 years. puckett, to me, was a very good player player for a longer time. i just don't think he was ever what i'd consider 'great,' which is what i prefer my hof'ers to be.

but the debate is silly now because it's moot. puckett's in and he ain't ever coming out. mattingly's out and ain't ever getting in (unless he pulls a joe torre, another very good player who was never seen as hof-worthy until he went from being a lousy manager to a four-time champion manager).

 

The Fat Andruw phase of his career was not kind to his reputation.

 

what's interesting about jones is that he's the 'anti-compiler.' some guys end up hitting 'magic numbers' not by being great but by sticking around long enough at a fairly productive rate to deceive voters.

jones would've been better off retiring after his time with the braves was done. his crash-and-burn has gone on for so long now it's harder and harder to recall when he was terrific. but look at his season-by-season numbers when he was 20-30. the image of him since is the killer.

and i truly don't think gold gloves have anything to do with anyone except maybe a shortstop getting into the hof. it's swell when outfielders are great in the field, but you don''t get in unless your offensive numbers are seen as worthy. other positions, too. you never hear pounding for keith hernandez. his fielding would certainly boost mattingly's case.

 

He won't make it in either, but I'd vote for Jim Edmonds over Jones. I'd have to look, but I'm guessing they have a similar number of gold gloves and I'll bet they have fairly similar batting stats. Edmonds never had the 50 HR season, but was more consistent at the plate.

 

McNabb is a good choice, but I bet what people remember more than him and TO is him puking in the biggest game of his life.

 

I can't let this go by.

No, defensive numbers are nowhere near as sophisticated yet as offensive numbers (although they're getting closer) ... but Jones is on the same level as Mays and Speaker. You can look it up.

Edmonds is on the level with Paul Blair and "Sarge" Matthews and Torii Hunter.

Jones was an all-timer for an entire decade.

If Brooks Robinson and Ozzie Smith can get in -- deservedly, I might add -- Jones is at least worth some serious consideration, his spectacular fall from grace notwithstanding.

 

Sandy Alomar?

 

Brodeur v. Hasek = Emmit Smith v. Sanders

And as for the question for the thread, Albert Belle.

 

SS and CF are the positions that GG's matter. LF and RF no, but CF hell yes. There have also been very few CFers where were great at the plate.

 

Jim Edmonds is the best example of how GG's aren't awarded correctly anymore. 10 years ago some thought was still put into it. Now, it's whoever has the reputation and has had a good amount of web gems.

Defensive WAR isn't a perfect rating but Jim Edmonds is 97th all-time, Jones is 2nd. Jones is nearly three times better too.