MLB 2017 Season

[CTWarrior]

Agree 100%. Great games.

Great series.  Even though it was 5-1 last night, Dodgers we one single away from 2 runs several times, but the Astros pitchers came up big when they had to.

We Nutmeggers are proud to have the game 7 winning pitcher and the Series MVP hail from our state.  We are not very prolific at producing major leaguers, to say the least.

[MU82]

It was a fine series. The last game being anticlimactic definitely drops it from "great" category.

The best WS ever, IMHO, continues to be one of the 5 greatest sporting events I ever witnessed in person: '91 between the Twins and Braves.

5 games were decided by 1 run. 4 ended with walk-off hits. 3 went into extra innings, including an epic Game 7. The series was filled with twists and turns and big-time drama. Superstar legacies were cemented (Puckett, Morris, Smoltz). To this day, I've never been in a stadium as loud as the Metrodome was for the 91 and 87 WS (another good 7-gamer).

But this one was fun and interesting, with a lot of second-guessable moments.

As many said last year about the Cubbies (correctly IMHO), these Astros are built for the long haul, too. How about a keystone combo of Altuve and Correa for the next 5-10 years if the Astros can keep them that long? Could eventually go down as one of the best ever. Some pretty nice pitchers to build around, too. Improve the bullpen some, and I don't see many weaknesses.

It was an enjoyable season for this long-time observer, especially considering I live in a town without MLB and don't have a horse in the race.

[buckchuckler]

Offseason starts quickly...Upton resigns with the Halos.

[Jockey]

Now that the WS is over and it is likely that Beltran retires, is he a HOF'er?

I'd be interested in opinions here (this thread probably has the best posters on Scoop).

I think he is in the same class as Santo, Dawson, Williams (didn't mean to pick all cubbies). A very good player, but not a guy who would inspire the term "great".

My opinion is that he will get in - probably in one of the leaner years for choices. I'm not generally a guy for arbitrary stats, but he is one of only 5 guyus with 400+ HRs and 300+ SBs. Quite an impressive power/speed number. Bonds, Mays, ARod, and Thome are the others.

JK, it was Dawson.

[🏀]

Now that the WS is over and it is likely that Beltran retires, is he a HOF'er?

I'd be interested in opinions here (this thread probably has the best posters on Scoop).

I think he is in the same class as Santo, Dawson, Williams (didn't mean to pick all cubbies). A very good player, but not a guy who would inspire the term "great".

My opinion is that he will get in - probably in one of the leaner years for choices. I'm not generally a guy for arbitrary stats, but he is one of only 5 guyus with 400+ HRs and 300+ SBs. Quite an impressive power/speed number. Bonds, Mays, ARod, and Thome are the others.

JK, it was Dawson.

Yeah, he will make it. Look at his playoff numbers too, incredible.

[MUBurrow]

I agree he'll get in. Not a no-brainer though, and it might take a down year rather than a first ballot guy. Super rough comparison, but 5/10 similar players listed on baseball reference are in, and of the others, Chipper and Beltre will be (and Sheffield will be a borderline guy for awhile, though i don't think he makes it).  For those interested, here's the admittedly very back of the napkin list. Asterisk = already in.

1. Andre Dawson (928.0) *
2. Billy Williams (886.0) *
3. Al Kaline (881.8) *
4. Luis Gonzalez (870.8)
5. Tony Perez (863.4) *
6. Gary Sheffield (856.8)
7. Dave Winfield (856.6) *
8. Dwight Evans (851.4)
9. Chipper Jones (850.4)
10. Adrian Beltre (843.2)

[DegenerateDish]

Now that the WS is over and it is likely that Beltran retires, is he a HOF'er?

I'd be interested in opinions here (this thread probably has the best posters on Scoop).

I think he is in the same class as Santo, Dawson, Williams (didn't mean to pick all cubbies). A very good player, but not a guy who would inspire the term "great".

My opinion is that he will get in - probably in one of the leaner years for choices. I'm not generally a guy for arbitrary stats, but he is one of only 5 guyus with 400+ HRs and 300+ SBs. Quite an impressive power/speed number. Bonds, Mays, ARod, and Thome are the others.

JK, it was Dawson.

Hmm, this is actually a really good question. He's one of those very good players, great postseason numbers, who does probably just gets enough votes in a lean year. Before you posed the question, I hadn't considered it, but he's a great guy to debate on.

[MU82]

My gut reaction on Beltran was "no." But that is usually my default reaction unless a guy is obvious, as I'm a tough grader. I had the same knee-jerk reaction for Vlad Guerrero (a rookie in last year's class) until I really looked inside the numbers and decided he was deserving.

Beltran truly is a borderline case. Here's how he compares to Vlad (who received 71.7% of the vote last year and probably will get in this time), and Harold Baines (who never received even 6% of the vote and fell off the ballot after five tries):

BELTRAN: 20 Yrs ... .279 BA ... .837 OPS (223rd all-time) ... 435 HR (46th) ... 1587 RBI (41st) ... 1 top-5 MVP showing (4th in 06) .... 8 100 RBI seasons ... 4 30 HR seasons.

GUERRERO: 16 Yrs ... .318 BA (10 yrs .300-plus) ... .931 OPS (34th) ... 449 HR (40th) ... 1496 RBI (57th) ... 4 top-5 MVP showings (incl 1st in 2004) ... 10 100 RBI seasons ... 8 30 HR seasons ... 2 40 HR seasons.

BAINES : 22 Yrs ... .289 BA ... .820 OPS ... 384 HR (65th) ... 1628 RBI (33rd) ... no top-5 MVP showings ... 3 100 RBI seasons ... 0 30 HR seasons.

On raw stats, is Beltran closer to Guerrero (himself a borderline HoFer) or Baines (not a HofFer)?

A few notes: Unlike Guerrero, who was still posting big numbers in his next-to-last season, Beltran and Baines were guys who hung around compiling stats ... Beltran had a darn impressive 1.021 OPS in the postseason, much better than Vlad's .664 ... Beltran was a heck of fielder when he was younger, with 8 straight Gold Gloves.

I'd be surprised if Beltran makes it on his first try, mainly because his OPS isn't even top-200 material and he only had 1 top-5 MVP showing. The latter means that it would be hard to make a case for him being one of the true greats of his era. Voters also tend to deduct points for guys who just hang around as old men, contributing fairly little to their teams. But he was a very good player whose defensive ability, postseason showing and RBI total very well could get him into the Hall eventually. It also didn't hurt that he had some great years in NY with the Mets, as a lot of BBWAA voters come from that area.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

My gut reaction on Beltran was "no." But that is usually my default reaction unless a guy is obvious, as I'm a tough grader. I had the same knee-jerk reaction for Vlad Guerrero (a rookie in last year's class) until I really looked inside the numbers and decided he was deserving.

Beltran truly is a borderline case. Here's how he compares to Vlad (who received 71.7% of the vote last year and probably will get in this time), and Harold Baines (who never received even 6% of the vote and fell off the ballot after five tries):

BELTRAN: 20 Yrs ... .279 BA ... .837 OPS (223rd all-time) ... 435 HR (46th) ... 1587 RBI (41st) ... 1 top-5 MVP showing (4th in 06) .... 8 100 RBI seasons ... 4 30 HR seasons.

GUERRERO: 16 Yrs ... .318 BA (10 yrs .300-plus) ... .931 OPS (34th) ... 449 HR (40th) ... 1496 RBI (57th) ... 4 top-5 MVP showings (incl 1st in 2004) ... 10 100 RBI seasons ... 8 30 HR seasons ... 2 40 HR seasons.

BAINES : 22 Yrs ... .289 BA ... .820 OPS ... 384 HR (65th) ... 1628 RBI (33rd) ... no top-5 MVP showings ... 3 100 RBI seasons ... 0 30 HR seasons.

On raw stats, is Beltran closer to Guerrero (himself a borderline HoFer) or Baines (not a HofFer)?

A few notes: Unlike Guerrero, who was still posting big numbers in his next-to-last season, Beltran and Baines were guys who hung around compiling stats ... Beltran had a darn impressive 1.021 OPS in the postseason, much better than Vlad's .664 ... Beltran was a heck of fielder when he was younger, with 8 straight Gold Gloves.

I'd be surprised if Beltran makes it on his first try, mainly because his OPS isn't even top-200 material and he only had 1 top-5 MVP showing. The latter means that it would be hard to make a case for him being one of the true greats of his era. Voters also tend to deduct points for guys who just hang around as old men, contributing fairly little to their teams. But he was a very good player whose defensive ability, postseason showing and RBI total very well could get him into the Hall eventually. It also didn't hurt that he had some great years in NY with the Mets, as a lot of BBWAA voters come from that area.

Beltran also won 3 Gold Gloves and stole over 300 bases. He was a legit 30-30 threat for almost a decade. He was an extremely well-rounded player.

I don't recall any PED suspicions around him either, although Incould be mistaken.

[LAZER]

Hard to argue against Beltran. I think his case is similar to Beltre's in a lot of ways.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_CF.shtml

[B. McBannerson]

Great series, great TV ratings.

Despite cord cutting and other excuses being used for NFL, this series beat the following years

2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015

The only year it didn't beat since 2010 was 2016 with the Cubs winning first title in 100+ years.

Incidentally this year's series also beat 2008, 2007, 2006.  Wednesday's total viewership was the third highest MLB game in the last 15 years.

[Jockey]

Hard to argue against Beltran. I think his case is similar to Beltre's in a lot of ways.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_CF.shtml

Beltre is in.

[LAZER]

Beltre is in.

Agreed.  I think Beltran is too.

[buckchuckler]

I don't think Beltre is a good comparison for Beltran at all.  Beltre is in, and there likely won't be much to think about.  Beltre has the magic number, 3000.  He is 4th (likely to reach 3rd next year) all time in HRs among 3B, 3rd in hits, 1st in RBI, 2nd in Doubles, 3rd in WAR.  Those numbers are all time among 3B.

He is also a 5 time Gold Glove winner.  He is quite simply one of the best all around 3B to ever play the game. 

Beltran is a little bit of a different story.  In full disclosure, I was never a huge Beltran fan early in his career.  I really thought he was a bit overrated ( it may go back to him winning ROY over Chris Singleton -- He was robbed -- maybe not really...).  I couldn't believe the contract he signed with the Mets.  But then, well, while he was healthy, he kind of lived up to that contract. 

His counting numbers are impressive, 435 HRs, almost 1600 RBI, 565 Doubles, .837 Career OPS.  He also played CF, for some of which he was very good (he played about 70% of his career defensive innings in CF not counting over 300 games in which he DHed).  He even won 3 Gold Gloves while with the Mets (even though he probably wasn't the best defensive CF on his own team the first year). 

Though saying he was a 30/30 threat every year is a bit of a stretch.  The last time he surpassed the high 20s for steals was 2004.  And he had never hit 30 HRs before 2004 (his one and only 30/30 season).  Certainly that does not take away that he was great blend of power and speed.

His numbers compare very well with many guys in the HOF.  They also compare well with many not in the HOF (guys like the aforementioned Harold Baines, Luis Gonzalez, Bobby Abreu).

For the most part though, he is a little better than the "very good but not great" players of his era.   He outpaces Torii Hunter, Garret Anderson, Bernie Williams as well as all those mentioned above, and many others that had a lot of great numbers and many great seasons. 

I think the biggest concern for Beltran may be Jim Edmonds.  Edmonds didn't play as long, but was better in all three slash categories.  He also played CF for the entirety of his career (and I think most would say he played it better, and certainly flashier).  I was surprised to learn that Edmonds has a career OPS that is about 70 points higher than Beltran (Edmonds had a .903 career OPS -- WOW!).  Beltran hit more doubles (but they each averaged 35 per 162), more HR (Edmonds averaged more per 162) Beltran has more RBI (99 per 162 to Edmonds 97).  The only category in which Beltran far exceeds Edmonds is SB.

Aside from the steals,  I would say that Edmonds had the better numbers, but that is debatable, and unless I am remembering incorrectly, he didn't get 5% of the vote and fell off the ballot after his first attempt. 

If I had to guess I say he gets in.  If I had a vote, I'd say I would vote for him.  To me though, he isn't the slam dunk case like Beltre.  If one was to look for reasons not to include him, or want comparable players that aren't in, you could find them. 

He was one of the best OFers of his generation.  Had strong all around numbers, strong postseason success and seems to be universally liked and respected.  I think that combination deserves the HOF.

[buckchuckler]

A few notes: Unlike Guerrero, who was still posting big numbers in his next-to-last season, Beltran and Baines were guys who hung around compiling stats ..

Gotta defend Baines, one of my favorite players as a kid.  In 1999, his age 40 season, Baines was an All Star.  He put up .312/.387/.533 for an OPS of .919.  He hit 25 HRs and drove in 103 runs.  He also walked more than he struck out.  That is some damn good stat compiling for a 40 year old. 

[buckchuckler]

Hard to argue against Beltran. I think his case is similar to Beltre's in a lot of ways.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_CF.shtml

Those numbers look great, but keep in mind, Beltran had about 63% of his ABs as a CF.  Beltre has had about 99% of his ABs as a 3B.  So where they fall on those lists may be a little deceiving. 

[Vander Blue Man Group]

I don't think Beltre is a good comparison for Beltran at all.  Beltre is in, and there likely won't be much to think about.  Beltre has the magic number, 3000.  He is 4th (likely to reach 3rd next year) all time in HRs among 3B, 3rd in hits, 1st in RBI, 2nd in Doubles, 3rd in WAR.  Those numbers are all time among 3B.

He is also a 5 time Gold Glove winner.  He is quite simply one of the best all around 3B to ever play the game. 

Beltran is a little bit of a different story.  In full disclosure, I was never a huge Beltran fan early in his career.  I really thought he was a bit overrated ( it may go back to him winning ROY over Chris Singleton -- He was robbed -- maybe not really...).  I couldn't believe the contract he signed with the Mets.  But then, well, while he was healthy, he kind of lived up to that contract. 

His counting numbers are impressive, 435 HRs, almost 1600 RBI, 565 Doubles, .837 Career OPS.  He also played CF, for some of which he was very good (he played about 70% of his career defensive innings in CF not counting over 300 games in which he DHed).  He even won 3 Gold Gloves while with the Mets (even though he probably wasn't the best defensive CF on his own team the first year). 

Though saying he was a 30/30 threat every year is a bit of a stretch.  The last time he surpassed the high 20s for steals was 2004.  And he had never hit 30 HRs before 2004 (his one and only 30/30 season).  Certainly that does not take away that he was great blend of power and speed.

His numbers compare very well with many guys in the HOF.  They also compare well with many not in the HOF (guys like the aforementioned Harold Baines, Luis Gonzalez, Bobby Abreu).

For the most part though, he is a little better than the "very good but not great" players of his era.   He outpaces Torii Hunter, Garret Anderson, Bernie Williams as well as all those mentioned above, and many others that had a lot of great numbers and many great seasons. 

I think the biggest concern for Beltran may be Jim Edmonds.  Edmonds didn't play as long, but was better in all three slash categories.  He also played CF for the entirety of his career (and I think most would say he played it better, and certainly flashier).  I was surprised to learn that Edmonds has a career OPS that is about 70 points higher than Beltran (Edmonds had a .903 career OPS -- WOW!).  Beltran hit more doubles (but they each averaged 35 per 162), more HR (Edmonds averaged more per 162) Beltran has more RBI (99 per 162 to Edmonds 97).  The only category in which Beltran far exceeds Edmonds is SB.

Aside from the steals,  I would say that Edmonds had the better numbers, but that is debatable, and unless I am remembering incorrectly, he didn't get 5% of the vote and fell off the ballot after his first attempt. 

If I had to guess I say he gets in.  If I had a vote, I'd say I would vote for him.  To me though, he isn't the slam dunk case like Beltre.  If one was to look for reasons not to include him, or want comparable players that aren't in, you could find them. 

He was one of the best OFers of his generation.  Had strong all around numbers, strong postseason success and seems to be universally liked and respected.  I think that combination deserves the HOF.

Good post.

I don't think anyone said he was a 30/30 threat every year.  Between 1998 and 2008 (excluding 1999 when he didn't play a full season) he averaged over 28 HRs and almost 32 SBs per season.  If that's not a 30/30 threat I'm not sure what is. 

[MU82]

I don't think Beltre is a good comparison for Beltran at all.  Beltre is in, and there likely won't be much to think about.  Beltre has the magic number, 3000.  He is 4th (likely to reach 3rd next year) all time in HRs among 3B, 3rd in hits, 1st in RBI, 2nd in Doubles, 3rd in WAR.  Those numbers are all time among 3B.

He is also a 5 time Gold Glove winner.  He is quite simply one of the best all around 3B to ever play the game. 

Beltran is a little bit of a different story.  In full disclosure, I was never a huge Beltran fan early in his career.  I really thought he was a bit overrated ( it may go back to him winning ROY over Chris Singleton -- He was robbed -- maybe not really...).  I couldn't believe the contract he signed with the Mets.  But then, well, while he was healthy, he kind of lived up to that contract. 

His counting numbers are impressive, 435 HRs, almost 1600 RBI, 565 Doubles, .837 Career OPS.  He also played CF, for some of which he was very good (he played about 70% of his career defensive innings in CF not counting over 300 games in which he DHed).  He even won 3 Gold Gloves while with the Mets (even though he probably wasn't the best defensive CF on his own team the first year). 

Though saying he was a 30/30 threat every year is a bit of a stretch.  The last time he surpassed the high 20s for steals was 2004.  And he had never hit 30 HRs before 2004 (his one and only 30/30 season).  Certainly that does not take away that he was great blend of power and speed.

His numbers compare very well with many guys in the HOF.  They also compare well with many not in the HOF (guys like the aforementioned Harold Baines, Luis Gonzalez, Bobby Abreu).

For the most part though, he is a little better than the "very good but not great" players of his era.   He outpaces Torii Hunter, Garret Anderson, Bernie Williams as well as all those mentioned above, and many others that had a lot of great numbers and many great seasons. 

I think the biggest concern for Beltran may be Jim Edmonds.  Edmonds didn't play as long, but was better in all three slash categories.  He also played CF for the entirety of his career (and I think most would say he played it better, and certainly flashier).  I was surprised to learn that Edmonds has a career OPS that is about 70 points higher than Beltran (Edmonds had a .903 career OPS -- WOW!).  Beltran hit more doubles (but they each averaged 35 per 162), more HR (Edmonds averaged more per 162) Beltran has more RBI (99 per 162 to Edmonds 97).  The only category in which Beltran far exceeds Edmonds is SB.

Aside from the steals,  I would say that Edmonds had the better numbers, but that is debatable, and unless I am remembering incorrectly, he didn't get 5% of the vote and fell off the ballot after his first attempt. 

If I had to guess I say he gets in.  If I had a vote, I'd say I would vote for him.  To me though, he isn't the slam dunk case like Beltre.  If one was to look for reasons not to include him, or want comparable players that aren't in, you could find them. 

He was one of the best OFers of his generation.  Had strong all around numbers, strong postseason success and seems to be universally liked and respected.  I think that combination deserves the HOF.

This is an excellent post, and the comparisons to Edmonds - who didn't get enough votes his first year to stay on the ballot - is valid. I actually made a strong argument for Edmonds last year, to no avail, saying:

He ranks in the top 60 all-time in slugging percentage, OPS and HRs. He was a hard-nosed, valuable player for some outstanding Cardinals teams, including the 2006 champions. At age 38, he was still an extremely valuable player for the division-winning Cubs, driving in 49 runs in only 250 at-bats after they picked him up during the season.

I believe ballplayers deserve recognition for the long, outstanding stretches of their careers. For me, Edmonds gets plaudits for his 11-season stretch with the Angels and Cardinals in which his WAR was third in all of baseball behind only Bonds and Alex Rodriguez. And unlike Bonds and A-Rod, there were no serious steroid allegations. During those 11 seasons, Edmonds averaged 30 HRs, slugged .554 and won eight Gold Gloves.

Oh, and in 64 postseason games, Edmonds, had 13 HRs, 42 RBIs and a .513 slugging percentage.

And you can't talk about Edmonds without spending plenty of time talking about his all-out, life-or-limb defense at an important position. Did any center fielder who played in the '90s and '00s produce more highlight-reel catches? He was on SportsCenter more than Chris Berman was. Among CFs since 1954, he ranks in the top 20 in assists, putouts and double plays. His "Ultimate Zone Rating" was eighth all-time among CFs, and his arm was rated second-best ever at the position. But if you spent any time watching him, you didn't need all those new-fangled metrics to know you were watching an amazing outfielder.

If we can enshrine Ozzie Smith mostly because of his defensive prowess at shortstop, we can't give Edmonds serious props because of his defensive prowess in center field ... AND his 393 HRs AND his .527 slugging percentage and his .903 OPS?

Despite all of that, I have a feeling that Edmonds will not get much love among BBWAA voters, and that's a shame because he was too good a player to be 1-and-done.

buckchuck, also a good point about that big year Baines had at 40. But he did little in the two years before that or the two years after that - so that's 4 out of 5 years at the end of his career where he basically just hung around and picked up some stats. But yes, he did have that big year, and goodness knows how! In his younger days, he was a fine player, especially before the injuries mounted.

[tower912]

82, do/did you have a hall of fame vote?

[LAZER]

Those numbers look great, but keep in mind, Beltran had about 63% of his ABs as a CF.  Beltre has had about 99% of his ABs as a 3B.  So where they fall on those lists may be a little deceiving.

I guess what I meant is that they’re both guys that have never really been thought of as elite players while they played, which I think is reflected by their MVP voting, hell Beltre is only a four time AS (which is crazy to think about).

But both careers have been excellent and consistently great over a very long time.  When you look at their numbers they’re both some of the best to play their positions. If Beltran doesn’t get in, it’s going to be hard to make cases for CF’s going forward.

[MU82]

82, do/did you have a hall of fame vote?

yes/yes ... though I hope I don't regret saying that here.

[Lennys Tap]

yes/yes ... though I hope I don't regret saying that here.

I think it's very cool (and I'm a little envious) that you have a HOF vote. It's a great privilege/responsibility and from your posts in this thread you clearly approach it that way. Good for you, Mike!

[tower912]

yes/yes ... though I hope I don't regret saying that here.

What Lenny said.    Very cool.    Now, about Trammel and Whitaker......

[buckchuckler]

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/jose-altuves-gift-brings-young-fan-tears-disney-world-233926495.html

Hard to not love Altuve...

[MU82]

I think it's very cool (and I'm a little envious) that you have a HOF vote. It's a great privilege/responsibility and from your posts in this thread you clearly approach it that way. Good for you, Mike!

What Lenny said.    Very cool.    Now, about Trammel and Whitaker......

Thanks guys. My tenure as a voter is probably nearing its end. The BBWAA enacted a new rule a couple of years ago to try to weed out those who haven't actively covered the sport for 10+ years, and this is my 9th year since I left the business (or since it left me).

I get the idea behind the rule: Those who are no longer actively covering (but still have Lifetime BBWAA privileges) are theoretically less likely to follow the sport closely, so culling the herd could make voting more "consistent" or "accurate."

What's interesting for me is that now that I don't predominantly cover one team (or in my case, the 2 Chicago teams), I am much less tunnel-visioned and I take a more overall-MLB approach to my observations. So I actually think I am MORE qualified. And I don't think anybody takes the responsibility any more seriously than I do, so I really appreciate that Lenny noticed.

But I am not going to beg for the opportunity. I've enjoyed having it for 20 years now, so if this year or next year is my last, then it's been a good run.