Joe Torre for HOF???

How many ways can one say, "Yes!"?

Ed

 

Marginal. It's not a travesty that he has been left out, but I wouldn't complain if he were elected. You know, just being the best catcher to not be in the Hall of Fame is not a good argument. What if the all the deserving catchers are already in the Hall? Putting in the next best guy is a good way of diluting the Hall. Do we really want to become like the Football Hall of Fame where everyone makes it?

For Torre, three things hurt him:

1) Never played on a winner.

2) Not very impressive career numbers, and he didn't play catcher his whole career, so he can't use that as an excuse.

3) His great managing career has now way overshadowed his playing career. I think this will hurt him the most. He is a no-brainer as a manager, so the Veterans Committee won't be itching to put him in, knowing that he will eventually make it as a manager.

 

While I do not disagree with what you are saying about "diluting" the HOF, I have to disagree with some of your analysis of career numbers on both Ted Simmons and Joe Torre, with others in the HOF. Marginal?? Not very impressive career numbers?? Let's see with both Simmons and Torre.

Ted Simmons- 21 Yr, 2456 G, 1074 R, 2472 H, 248 HR, 1389 RBI, .285 BA, .348 OBP, .437 Slg, 8 time AS, (2 Starting C), above avg. Def C (.987 Fldg) (despite how much you seem to dislike that idea, Andy), 182 PB in 1771 G (c), 915 A (c), 8906 PO (c). No HOF??

Joe Torre - 18 Yr, 2209 G, 996 R, 2342 H, 252 HR, 1185 RBI, .297 BA, .365 OBP, .452 Slg, 6 times starting AS, 4-C, 2-3B, above avg. career Def. at all three positions he played (How many can say that??) [.990 Fldg (c)], 87 PB in 903 games as a catcher ([Uek had 25 in 59 games, in one year, alone, mostly by catching (or not catching ) 'Knucksie'], 428 A (c), 4850 PO (c), 1 GG, not to even mention 2000+ W, as a manager, w/ 6 Lg. championships and 4 WS. No HOF??

Johnny Bench - 17 yr, 2158 G, 1091 R, 2048 H, 389 HR, 1376 RBI, .267 BA, .342 OBP, .476 Slg, 10/14 time starting AS, above avg. def. C (.990 Fldg, identical to Torre, and .003 above Simmons BTW), below avg, at the other two positions), 10GG, 94 PB in 1742 G (c), 850 A (c), 9249 PO (c), 10 GG. HOF!

Carlton Fisk - 24 Yr, 2499 G, 1276 R, 2356 H, 376 HR, 1330 RBI, .269 BA, .341 OBP, .457 Slg, 7/11 time starting AS, above avg. Def C (.988 Fldg), 129 PB in 2226 G (c), 1048 A (c), 11369 PO (c). 1GG. HOF!

Gary Carter - 19 Yr, 2296 G, 1025 R, 2092 H, 324 HR, 1225 RBI, .262 BA, .335 OBP, .439 Slg, 7/11 Starting AS, above avg. Def. C, (.991 Fldg), 84 PB in 2056 G (c), 1203 A (c), 11785 PO (c), 3 GG. HOF!

Yogi Berra - 19 Yr, 2120 G, 1175 R, 2150 H, 358 HR, 1430 RBI, .285 BA, .348 OBP, .482 Slg, 11/18 starting AS, above avg. Def C, (.989 Fldg) 76 PB in 1699 G (c), 798 A (c), 8378 PO (c). HOF!

Joe Torre has a better BA (by a minimum of 14 points) than the four HOF catchers, who went in during my memory, and also a better OBP (by a minimum of 17 points) than any of these four.

Ted Simmons is likewise better than all except Yogi, and has exactly identical stats in those two categories.

Simmons and Torre do not "dilute' the HOF, but actually raise the bar a peg.! Don't penalize them, as players, for playing on a less than championship quality team for most of their careers.

We have already established that all the six are better than average Def. Cs. (Remember my previous post about catching "junk" pitchers and passed balls.) So unless the ability to hit home runs, has now suddenly become the determining factor (in which case, who could even possibly question the expected credentials of a Jim Thome, or a Ken Griiffey, Jr. into the HOF), that is likewise a "red herring."

The one thing one cannot discern from statistics is the strength of one's throwing arm behind the plate. That is the intangible? that made Johnny Bench one of the greatest of all time, if not the greatest. (Gary Carter actually had a better glove, statistically, as well as IMO.) But one who only has a better than average stick and a weak arm and/or poor glove will usually wind up as a DH or at first base, if they even stay in baseball for all that long.

Catchers realistically get their assists in three ways. Picking off baserunners by throwing behind them, throwing out would-be stealers, or throwing out fielded sacrifice bunts. And all six players named in this post, have a fairly comparable assist per game ratio, with Carter and Simmons being one and two in that department.

Poor fielders with weak arms do not stay in a crouch for 1000-2000 games, even if like Carlton Fisk and Ted Simmons, they do not have any GG awards, which BTW, are not determined from the statistics, but by the Rawlings people, where of course, perception and/or whether or not one uses Rawlings equipment has absolutely nothing to do with the GG. And if you believe that last phrase, then I have some beautiful oceanfront KY property, I'll be happy to sell to you, sight unseen.

Ed

 

Ed,

Of all the catchers you mentioned, I would be willing to bet that just about every baseball expert or historian would put Simmons and Torre as the bottom two. James does. And I know I've seen other assessments that put them behind all of these players. So if they both go in the Hall, they will definitely bring the catcher class down a bit. And that's even if I concede that Simmons and Torre were merely average in their defensive abilities.

BTW, don't even mention Torre's managing career - everyone agrees he should make it as a manager.

 

Remember, you were the one who said "the career numbers" were "not very impressive", and that Torre, was "marginal", not me.

If the stats and numbers don't agree with the premise, ignore them and appeal to some 'authority' figure, in this case, Bill James, or other "unnamed" individuals. Then just repeat the same opinion. :BangHead: And/or reword something else that was said, in this case, "defensive abilities." :thumbs: Or deflect the question with an appeal to "what "everybody agrees."

Do you by any chance work for either government or the media? If not, they would love to hire you, no doubt.

Ed

 

Ed, you think Torre and Simmons were better than some of those other guys. I don't. I've read others (experts and historians) who agree with me. This is not a debate on theology or some other truth matter. It's sports; it's subjective to a certain degree.

 

This subjective question is also situational. I have already said that Carter is the best 'defensively'. So if the situation is catching a wild or a 'junk' pitcher, I want him behind the plate. If it were throwing behind a fast runner 'napping' at first base, I would want Johnny Bench, there. (I've mentioned his arm, as well.) If it were a situation with the bases loaded with two out in the bottom of the ninth, and down one run, I would want Joe Torre (a .300 hitter and tough out) at the plate, and not some .240 hitting slugger and strike-out king like a Gene Tenace, for example, with the stick.

One is not necessarily 'better' than another (except in the case of Tenace, IMO), but all were different. The question is, however, do these (or whoever) belong in the HOF? I say yes, and they are both better players overall when filling another position (as are also Berra, Bench, and Carter, with Fisk only borderline, here), as well as at the C position, than some players at various positions who are enshrined there, already, with a couple whose names come to my mind fairly easily.

And mere numbers in no way 'dilute' the Hall, but the lack of any and all deserving individuals do exactly that.

And Pete Rose, Buck O'Neil and Big Mac are exhibits A, B, and C in this, far surpassing even Torre and Simmons and Blyleven, and Kaat, to name some more worthies. Should Pete be in the HOF?? Absolutely! And he should be banned from any further participation in pro baseball for life?? Absolutely! They are not one and the same.

BTW, I noticed you again appealed to those same "unidentified authorities" for your validation. But you even added "experts" this time.

Ed

 

I think he should be in as a manager and maybe so maybe not as a player. I know when he was playing no one was talking about him being a HOF player. I recall when I was a kid back in the 40's and early 50's people were saying that if your numbers were not outstanding you had to be a great leader. Years later Pee Wee Reese got into the HOF and the big thing all the players were talking about was his leadership.

I don't recall Joe being knowed for his leadership as a player or as a manger of the Braves.

 

Tom, as for Schalk and Bresnahan, I don't think it is meaningful to compare guys from the dead ball era with guys from the 70's and 80's. I don't have time to assess it, but maybe Schalk, Bres., and Ferrell were all poor choices. So are you saying we can justify more poor choices, because some poor choices were made in the past?