Dale Murphy for the HOF

[wuapinmon]

The Braves sent a letter to HOF voters this year in support of Murph:

http://blogs.ajc.com/atlanta-braves-...murph-for-hof/

Murph's stats:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...urphda05.shtml

It's not going to work, but I can still hope that voters will consider the positives he brought to the game and the sport with the same kind of weight with which they punish those like Rose, Canseco, and Bonds who bring negatives to MLB.

[il Padrino Ute]

I love the Murph and think he's a great ambassador of the sport, but the fact that he didn't reach the 400 club in home runs will keep him out of the HoF and that is a damn shame.

[MartyFunkhouser]

The Braves sent a letter to HOF voters this year in support of Murph:

http://blogs.ajc.com/atlanta-braves-...murph-for-hof/

Murph's stats:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...urphda05.shtml

It's not going to work, but I can still hope that voters will consider the positives he brought to the game and the sport with the same kind of weight with which they punish those like Rose, Canseco, and Bonds who bring negatives to MLB.

Good for the Braves. It makes sense for them to advocate for one of their great players. Only problem is that they are wrong that he belongs in the HOF.

[wuapinmon]

Good for the Braves. It makes sense for them to advocate for one of their great players. Only problem is that they are wrong that he belongs in the HOF.

From 1980-1989, find me a better player besides Rickey, who is peerless. Dwight Evans? Eddie Murray? Robin Yount?

Of those four, who did you want in the lineup batting cleanup?

[MartyFunkhouser]

From 1980-1989, find me a better player besides Rickey, who is peerless. Dwight Evans? Eddie Murray? Robin Yount?

Of those four, who did you want in the lineup batting cleanup?

The problem is that his period of greatness wasn't long enough.

[wuapinmon]

The problem is that his period of greatness wasn't long enough.

He was among the best for a decade. He and Schmidt were the class of the NL from 1980-1987.

[Green Monstah]

If Jim Rice is in, then I'm okay with Dale Murphy being in (numbers are comparable). I don't think it will happen. His problem is that he played his greateast ball for pre-mass-distribution-of-TBS teams and played some gawdawful baseball when he wasn't tearing it up.

I'd love to see it happen, but I'm not horribly optimistic.

How many more years of elibility does he have before he's taken off the ballot?

[MartyFunkhouser]

He was among the best for a decade. He and Schmidt were the class of the NL from 1980-1987.

He wasn't the best for a decade. He was the best for 5-6 years.

OPS+ for the decade
1980: 135
1981: 101
1982: 142
1983: 149
1984: 149
1985: 152
1986: 121
1987: 157
1988: 106
1989: 89

He was fantastic from about 1982 through 1985 and in 1987. That is 5 seasons of greatness. If you also want to throw in his 1980 season that is fine, but only puts him at 6 years. It just isn't enough considering that he was below average or below average from 1988 through the rest of his career.

[MartyFunkhouser]

If Jim Rice is in, then I'm okay with Dale Murphy being in (numbers are comparable). I don't think it will happen. His problem is that he played his greateast ball for pre-mass-distribution-of-TBS teams and played some gawdawful baseball when he wasn't tearing it up.

I'd love to see it happen, but I'm not horribly optimistic.

How many more years of elibility does he have before he's taken off the ballot?

That Jim Rice is what people use to measure Dale Murphy proves he doesn't belong. Jim Rice doesn't belong in the hall either.

[Green Monstah]

MPF,

That was sort of my point. If you're going to open up the gates to people who probably don't belong, you might as well add a really nice Mormon guy too.

[SoCalCoug]

Murph got screwed by the steroid era. Batting numbers that put him in the top 5 in the league wouldn't have been top 10 or 15 in the 90's. So, as dominant as he was, his numbers didn't look as good during the steroid-fueled 90s.

I started putting together a chart at one point (since lost to computer crash) - he was definitely in Mike Schmidt's class - Schmidt was better, sure, but he was in that category with Schmidt.

I think one of the biggest problems is that in the 80's, there were years when only a handful of players hit over .300. For instance, in 1983, only 9 NL players finished with BA over .300 (Murphy was one of them). In 1993, there were 20. In 1984, there were 11 (Murphy was #18 at .290); in 1994, there were 22.

Same thing with home runs. In 1983, 5 players in the NL had 30 or more HRs (Schmidt led with 40, Murphy had 36); in 1993, 10 players had 30 or more HRs (Big-head Bonds led with 46). In 1984, 2 players had 30 or more HRs (Schmidt & Murphy both had 36); in 1994, 6 players had 30 or more HRs (Matt Williams led with 43).

The steroid era killed Murph's HOF chances; he was one of the top players of his era and absolutely belongs there.

[MartyFunkhouser]

Murph got screwed by the steroid era. Batting numbers that put him in the top 5 in the league wouldn't have been top 10 or 15 in the 90's. So, as dominant as he was, his numbers didn't look as good during the steroid-fueled 90s.

I started putting together a chart at one point (since lost to computer crash) - he was definitely in Mike Schmidt's class - Schmidt was better, sure, but he was in that category with Schmidt.

I think one of the biggest problems is that in the 80's, there were years when only a handful of players hit over .300. For instance, in 1983, only 9 NL players finished with BA over .300 (Murphy was one of them). In 1993, there were 20. In 1984, there were 11 (Murphy was #18 at .290); in 1994, there were 22.

Same thing with home runs. In 1983, 5 players in the NL had 30 or more HRs (Schmidt led with 40, Murphy had 36); in 1993, 10 players had 30 or more HRs (Big-head Bonds led with 46). In 1984, 2 players had 30 or more HRs (Schmidt & Murphy both had 36); in 1994, 6 players had 30 or more HRs (Matt Williams led with 43).

The steroid era killed Murph's HOF chances; he was one of the top players of his era and absolutely belongs there.

The steroid era is not what killed his chances, it was his extreme regression early in his career that killed his chances. Even if Schmidt's numbers were exactly the same as Murphy that wouldn't mean Murphy belongs. Schmidt played 3B and providing great offensive production for a premium defensive position.

[Shaka]

The steroid era is not what killed his chances, it was his extreme regression early in his career that killed his chances. Even if Schmidt's numbers were exactly the same as Murphy that wouldn't mean Murphy belongs. Schmidt played 3B and providing great offensive production for a premium defensive position.

Murphy was a pretty darn good outfielder and has the awards to prove it. Even more impressive considering he started his career as a catcher.

[MartyFunkhouser]

Murphy was a pretty darn good outfielder and has the awards to prove it. Even more impressive considering he started his career as a catcher.

This isn't about his ability to play OF. It is about Schmidt playing a more demanding defensive position and a position that you expect less from offensively. A great offensive 3B is more valuable than a great offensive OF.

[landpoke]

Who?