Scott Rolen: Hall of Famer?

[JC]

The lack of third basemen is irrelevant, or at least it should be. Rolen belongs in the Hall of Very Good.

If you are not comparing him to other third basemen who do you compare him to?

Every other hitter. You want to give him an edge over a first baseman or an outfielder due to his position? Ok. I can see that. But to say you have to lower the standard for a third baseman because there aren't enough in there is bull****.

So how do his stats compare to some of the middle infileders that have made tha hall? Of coure you compare positions, if not how the hell do you put Ozzie Smith in?
For the record i don't believe for a second he should be in but to say you don't comare positins is ridiculous.

 

[RickStain]

Mattingly had a much better peak than Rolen and his peak is why he's in, but for career value, the biggest difference is that Mattingly did it with singles and Rolen did it with walks and power.

 

[outofplace]

The lack of third basemen is irrelevant, or at least it should be. Rolen belongs in the Hall of Very Good.

If you are not comparing him to other third basemen who do you compare him to?

Every other hitter. You want to give him an edge over a first baseman or an outfielder due to his position? Ok. I can see that. But to say you have to lower the standard for a third baseman because there aren't enough in there is bull****.

So how do his stats compare to some of the middle infileders that have made tha hall? Of coure you compare positions, if not how the hell do you put Ozzie Smith in?
For the record i don't believe for a second he should be in but to say you don't comare positins is ridiculous.

That is not what I said. Did you even read my last post before responding?

I said you can absolutely credit him for playing a tougher defensive position and for playing it so well, but no way should the relative lack of third basemen in the Hall of Fame help any third baseman to get in.

 

[outofplace]

Mattingly had a much better peak than Rolen and his peak is why he's in, but for career value, the biggest difference is that Mattingly did it with singles and Rolen did it with walks and power.

You do realize that Mattingly isn't in the Hall of Fame, right?

 

[RickStain]

I did not. He's not also the Bears' backup, is he?

 

[The Big Ragu]

Also, Mattingly was hardly a singles hitter. Did you see him play?

He hit a ton of balls into the gap and was the consummate doubles hitter. He also had just as much power as Rolen and drove in more runs before he went down hill. He hit a home run in 8 consecutive games during one of the last years of his run, hit 6 grand slams that year, and his home run numbers during his good years were just better than Rolen's were in his prime; and before the era of smaller ballparks and guys hitting 60+ HRs.

Mattingly doesn't belong in. He didn't last long enough. Neither does Rolen. He's not quite good enough. But if you were making Mattingly out to be a slap hitter or a singles hitter, you're off.

 

[BYH]

I did not. He's not also the Bears' backup, is he?

That's pretty funny.

Also, as for the question, absolutely positively not. And only b/c Bubbler already took "**** no."

 

[RickStain]

Also, Mattingly was hardly a singles hitter. Did you see him play?

He hit a ton of balls into the gap and was the consummate doubles hitter. He also had just as much power as Rolen and drove in more runs before he went down hill. He hit a home run in 8 consecutive games during one of the last years of his run, hit 6 grand slams that year, and his home run numbers during his good years were just better than Rolen's were in his prime; and before the era of smaller ballparks and guys hitting 60+ HRs.

Mattingly doesn't belong in. He didn't last long enough. Neither does Rolen. He's not quite good enough. But if you were making Mattingly out to be a slap hitter or a singles hitter, you're off.

I was saying for the purposes of comparing him to Rolen, Mattingly's biggest edge was singles. They both hit a ton of doubles.

Which is all moot, because apparently I imagined him being in the HOF.

 

[Johnny Dangerously]

I hope anyone about to go to war over this understands I was just having a little fun with the "It's not the Hall of Very Good" crowd, which apparently is taking this far more seriously than I am. It's the Hall of Fame, and I think it's fair to point that out when people make the cornerstone of their case based on a play on the name, a name that isn't actually the name of the place.

But not being a voter, I'm curious: What does your ballot say? I am always tickled by arguments about the Heisman Trophy between people who don't know what the award honors. The Heisman ballot tells you what you're voting for: the most outstanding player in college football "whose performance best exhibits the pursuit of excellence with integrity."

Does the Hall of Fame ballot say what, exactly, you're voting for, or is it just that you're voting for election into the Hall of Fame? Is the word "great" on the ballot? I'm curious to know what it specifically calls for, and not what people think or assume.

 

[sgreenwell]

I think I lean more toward Rolen being in than out. I think there is a perception that 3B is a "power" position because it's a corner, but I'm not sure that this is entirely true. Maybe that accounts for why the number of third basemen enshrined tends to be lower than other positions.

To me, Rolen is a better version of JD Drew. Both have high values when you look at them with advances statistics, since they're patient hitters that'll take a walk and play defense, but both have bad reputations with fan bases and the media. I think both get flack for their contracts and actually taking themselves out the lineup and sitting 30 to 60 games a year, as opposed to contributing an 0-for-4 piece of **** day when their back is acting up. (I've never really "got" the hero worship that goes on when a guy who clearly shouldn't be playing through an injury is out there.)

 

[The Big Ragu]

"A better version of JD Drew" is not exactly the best Hall of Fame argument I have ever heard.

 

[sgreenwell]

"A better version of JD Drew" is not exactly the best Hall of Fame argument I have ever heard.

heh, Maybe not ;) Drew isn't as valuable (probably) because he plays an outfield corner, where it's normally easier to find a better bat. Both guys play 100 to 140 games most years. In Boston, Drew is about as popular as the plague, since he has the audacity to remove himself from the lineup for 25ish games a year, as opposed to being given the day off. I think fans are risk-adverse though - They'd rather have the sure mediocrity for 162 games than 120 to 140 random games of good.

 

[cyclingwriter]

In regards to Rolen being an HOFer, the first question I would want to know is he the best third basemen not in? Is he better than Santo? Ken Boyer? Darrell Evans? Buddy Bell? Terry Pendleton (kidding). Would it make sense to say his numbers and stats and elect him when a better player is out?

The second question is do his stats warrant him in going over a player at another position with better stats (since that idea has been floating on the board today)?

 

[Mizzougrad96]

I know when you're talking about catchers, shortstops and second basemen, people are often willing to look the other way if you're not close to any of the typical (and rapidly disappearing) HOF benchmarks like 500 HR, 3000 hits etc...

I don't think third base deserves the same treatment.

 

[Ben_Hecht]

Who are the Yankees Hall of Famers who don't belong? The only one I can think of is Phil Rizzuto, and he got in through the Vet Committee.

Lazzeri. Joke.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

Quick piece of trivia: What is the only team to have a Hall of Famer at every position?

Hint: It's not the Yankees.

 

[slappy4428]

My immediate reaction is **** no.

Oh good, another worthless "Hall of Famer" thread... who are you going to start next? Mario Mendoza?

 

[Dick Whitman]

My immediate reaction is **** no.

Oh good, another worthless "Hall of Famer" thread... who are you going to start next? Mario Mendoza?

It didn't come from me. "Baseball Prospectus" said he has already done enough to be in. Said it rather matter-of-factly, actually. So I wondered what the consensus was.

 

[Baron Scicluna]

Quick piece of trivia: What is the only team to have a Hall of Famer at every position?

Hint: It's not the Yankees.

If you want to be technical, you can say ... the Pirates (note, I lcheated. I looked it up).

I say technical, because both Al Lopez and Connie Mack were catchers for the team, but went on to greater fame as managers.

C: Lopez/Mack
1B: Jake Beckley/Willie Stargell
2B: Mazeroski
SS: Wagner
3B: Pie Traynor
OF: Clemente, both Waner brothers, Fred Clarke, Ralph Kiner, Hank Greenberg,
P: A bunch of guys, none of whom were ever you ever remember for their Pirates run.

 

[Flying Headbutt]

Quick piece of trivia: What is the only team to have a Hall of Famer at every position?

Hint: It's not the Yankees.

I'm going to guess the Pirates? If not them, the Cubs.