Dale Murphy for the HOF

[wuapinmon]

Who?

[wuapinmon]

Well know something on Monday at 2PM. I doubt it, but a kid can dream.

[Top Ute]

Well know something on Monday at 2PM. I doubt it, but a kid can dream.

I'm not sure Murph belongs in the HOF, but I'd like to think there's enough to his career to warrant getting more than 23 percent of the vote in his best year. That's just outright insulting right there.

Still, I'd like to hear Murph's explanation behind how his career was essentially over at 35. Just two more years like the one he had in Philly in 1991 puts him over the top.

[wuapinmon]

I'm not sure Murph belongs in the HOF, but I'd like to think there's enough to his career to warrant getting more than 23 percent of the vote in his best year. That's just outright insulting right there.

Still, I'd like to hear Murph's explanation behind how his career was essentially over at 35. Just two more years like the one he had in Philly in 1991 puts him over the top.

His knees gave out.

[CardiacCoug]

Interesting article -- yeah he probably doesn't deserve to get in.

http://mlb.si.com/2012/12/14/jaws-an...hy/?xid=cnnbin

[Paperback Writer]

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.

I'm on the fence on whether Murphy deserves to be in the HOF. I'd probably say "No" if he wasn't LDS. I'd probably say "No" to Jim Rice too but I'm a RedSox fan. Having said that, I'd argue that CF is at least as important a defensive position as 3B. I'd take a great offensive gold glove CF over a great offensive gold glove 3B.

[Indy Coug]

Not good enough for long enough. It's really that simple.

[MartyFunkhouser]

Not good enough for long enough. It's really that simple.

I agree, it is that simple. It is nice to see that we won't have to worry about this discussion anymore after this season. wuap, I'm sorry that your hopes and dreams are about to be dashed but the good news this is the last time.

[Jacob]

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

This is his last ballot.

Was it a tween from Hank Aaron I saw that was asking voters to finally vote him in on his last ballot? I think so.

[wuapinmon]

Interesting article -- yeah he probably doesn't deserve to get in.

http://mlb.si.com/2012/12/14/jaws-an...hy/?xid=cnnbin

I don't think the Hall of Fame is merely about on the field accomplishments; he did more for the game than stats. The article is solid until the last two or three lines. Murph was class all around, on and off. I know he won't get in, but the HOF needs someone like him in there.

[wuapinmon]

I agree, it is that simple. It is nice to see that we won't have to worry about this discussion anymore after this season. wuap, I'm sorry that your hopes and dreams are about to be dashed but the good news this is the last time.

I'm going leprechaun hunting.

[Indy Coug]

I don't think the Hall of Fame is merely about on the field accomplishments; he did more for the game than stats. The article is solid until the last two or three lines. Murph was class all around, on and off. I know he won't get in, but the HOF needs someone like him in there.

Baseball is definitely better with Dale Murphy as a part of it, but unfortunately not in the HOF as presently constituted.

[MartyFunkhouser]

I don't think the Hall of Fame is merely about on the field accomplishments; he did more for the game than stats. The article is solid until the last two or three lines. Murph was class all around, on and off. I know he won't get in, but the HOF needs someone like him in there.

Dale Murphy is a good human being, but those aren't Hall of Fame contributions.

Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens are complete assholes, but they should be voted into the Hall of Fame this year. Neither of them will get in because of steroids, but they both are deserving.

[SoCalCoug]

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

The problem is that his stats are viewed against the inflated stats of the steroid era.

By the time his name came up for the HOF, stats that put him in the top 5 in the NL during his years looked average.

He's the primary victim of the steroid era, when it comes to HOF voting. The only reason his numbers don't pop out at you is because people are used to the inflated numbers of the steroid era.

For instance, in 1986, he had a .265 batting average. Crappy, right? Only in the steroid era. In 1986, Robby Thompson of the SF Giants hit .271, good for 25th in the NL.

In 1986, Murph hit 29 home runs, 4th most in the NL. Mike Schmidt had 37, followed by Glenn Davis and Dave Parker with 31 each. 3 players in the NL hit 30 or more HR's.

1986 is probably seen as a down year for Murph. But it wasn't. He was still a top slugger in the league. And his numbers in the previous years were dominant.

So what was happening in baseball in 1999, when Murph was first eligible for the HOF? Larry Walker led the NL in batting average at .379. 25th in the league was Luis Castillo at .302. In 1999, Mark McGwire hit 65 home runs. 24 players hit 30 or more that year.

He's still overshadowed by the inflated numbers today. Last year, 25th in the NL in batting average was Andre Ethier at .284. Last year, 12 NL players hit 30 or more home runs (compared to 3 in 1986). 29 home runs in 1986 was far better than it sounds to us today.

Dale Murphy is simply a victim of the inflated numbers of the steroid era. He was one of the top sluggers of his generation, and it's a pure travesty that he's not in the Hall. His numbers are far better in context than he is given credit for today.

[MartyFunkhouser]

The problem is that his stats are viewed against the inflated stats of the steroid era.

By the time his name came up for the HOF, stats that put him in the top 5 in the NL during his years weren't good enough to put him in the top 10.

He's the primary victim of the steroid era, when it comes to HOF voting. The only reason his numbers don't pop out at you is because people are used to the inflated numbers of the steroid era.

For instance, in 1986, he had a .265 batting average. Crappy, right? Only min the steroid era. In 1986, Robby Thompson of the SF Giants hit .271, good for 25th in the NL.

In 1986, Murph hit 29 home runs, 4th most in the NL. Mike Schmidt had 37, followed by Glenn Davis and Dave Parker with 31 each. 3 players in the NL hit 30 or more HR's.

So what was happening in baseball in 1999, when Murph was first eligible for the HOF? Larry Walker led the NL in batting average at .379. 25th in the league was Luis Castillo at .302. In 1999, Mark McGwire hit 65 home runs. 24 players hit 30 or more that year.

He's still overshadowed by the inflated numbers today. Last year, 25th in the NL in batting average was Andre Ethier at .284. Last year, 12 NL players hit 30 or more home runs (compared to 3 in 1986). 29 home runs in 1986 was far better than it sounds to us today.

Dale Murphy is simply a victim of the inflated numbers of the steroid era. He was one of the top sluggers of his generation, and it's a pure travesty that he's not in the Hall. His numbers are far better in context than he is given credit for today.

It isn't about over inflated numbers from the steroids era, it is about him not being good enough. If you look at his adjusted stats, they don't measure up.

No one doubts that for a 5 year period he was a top 5 player at worst and possible the best player in MLB, but that isn't enough especially when the rest of his career is so average.