Big Mac
Contrary to the Bu-baiting tendencies of Note Rice Strada, Mark McGwire absolutely and unequivocally belongs in the Hall of Fame. No question. Look at these stats and awards:
583 HR: 7th all time (5th at the time he retired)
Career .394 OBP: 20th all-time among post-WWII HOF eligible players (i.e, not including people still playing who've not yet hit their late career decline phase, e.g., Chipper Jones, Brian Giles, etc.)
Career .588 slugging: 10th all time
10.6 at bats per home run: #1 all time
12-time All Star (obviously, All Star appearances aren't the greatest metric for HOF induction, but 12 times in a 15-year career shows that many people thought he was great consistently while he was playing)
3 Silver Slugger Awards; only Todd Helton has more as a 1b
Rookie of the Year
Gold Glove
Rookie record for HR in a season
Most HR in a 2-year span
Most HR in a 3-year span
4 straight 50+ HR seasons
Finished in the top 7 in MVP voting 5 times and in the top 25 5 more times. Of the other 5 years in his career (and not counting his 18 game cup of coffee at the end of the '86 season), injuries limited him to less than 50 games in 2 of them and to less than 100 in 2 others. Thus, he finished in the top 25 in MVP voting in 10 of his 11 full seasons.
Only caught stealing 8 times in his entire 15-year career
Career OPS+ of 163 (i.e., his OBP + SLG percentages were 63% better than the average player for his entire career; for comparison Tony Gwynn's career OPS is 132, and Willie Mays's is 156) good for 11th all time. He had years where his OPS was over 200, i.e., years where his combined OBP and SLG percentages doubled the combined OBP and SLG percentages of the league as a whole. That's nearly unheard of.
Applying the Keltner Test that Bill James created also clearly shows that he warrants HOF admission:
1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?
Yes (qualified). He was not a five-tool player, but people certainly regarded him as the greatest slugger/HR hitter of his day.
2. Was he the best player on his team?
Yes. He was certainly the best player on many of his teams, including years when he did not have the best year (e.g., 2000 Cards: he was the best player on the team, but he did not have a great year) . If one wants to make a claim that he was not the best player on the 2001 Cardinals because Pujols was on that team, I won't argue strenuously. Same thing for the time he spent with Rickey Henderson as his teammate. Other than that, he was easily the best player on his team. He may not have had the best year of everyone on his team every year, but he was the best player.
3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?
Yes. His 12 All Star appearances help demonstrate this one. He was better than contemporaries like Jeff Bagwell, Jim Thome, Will Clark, Fred McGriff, Cecil Cooper, Raphael Palmeiro, and Andres Gallaraga. He was the best 1b of his day.
4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?
Yes. He was on 3 straight pennant winners with the A's (1988-1990), and he hit .340/.415 /.617 down the stretch in '88. I'm not looking up the other years, so I invite anyone to disprove this.
5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?
Good enough? Yes. Healthy enough? No. In his final 2 seasons, he hit 61 homeruns in 535 at bats. When he could stand, he could hit. He just couldn't bring his body out there day after day. Worth noting is that this is an odd question because it is difficult to determine his prime, due to his late career peak and because it was health and not ability or production that kept him out of the lineup after the peak. If the question is "was he good enough that he could play regularly after the age at which players typically reach their prime (i.e., 27-32)," then yes. If the question is "was he healthy enough that he could play regularly after he had the 2 best years of his career, which also happened to be 2 of the best years of anyone's career," then no.
6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?
Among eligible players, yes. No question.
7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?
Yes. Due to his high number of HRs and comparatively low number of plate appearances thanks to injuries, there are not many players with comparable stats. However, the most similar is probably Harmon Killebrew, who is in the HOF.
8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?
Yes. Every eligible player with 500 HR is in the Hall, and he has nearly 600. People with much lesser numbers are in there. 163 OPS+. Everyone above him and eligible for the Hall is in there.
9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?
He played in an offensive era, BUT OPS+ adjusts for that. [Also, see the final question to segue into the Big Issue.]
10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?
Yes. The other 1b are Keith Hernandez, Don Mattingly, Will Clark, and Steve Garvey (apologies if I'm missing someone). He's superior to all of them, and it's not even close.
11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?
See above. Sosa won the 1998 MVP because the Cubs made the playoffs (barely), and the Cards did not.
12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?
Again, he was on 12 AS teams. Without looking it up, I'm fairly confident that everyone with 12 AS games is in the HOF.
13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?
Yes. With apologies to Rickey Henderson (who came to the A's midseason), he was the best player on the '89 team that won the Series.
14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?
See 15 below.
15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?
Well, here we get to address the Big Question: he did not tip coffee shop baristas. As a former coffee shop barista who served Big Mac (he ordered granitas), I won't hold this one against him.
I guess there's also some issue involving steroids. There's only 2 relevant facts in this regard:
1. He's never tested positive for steroids or been convicted of possessing them.
More importantly, however:
2. Using steroids was not prohibited by MLB during his career.
Thus, he was playing by the rules of the game. Punishing him for something that was not prohibited by the rules is completely nonsensical (and completely ignores relevant fact #1).
583 HR: 7th all time (5th at the time he retired)
Career .394 OBP: 20th all-time among post-WWII HOF eligible players (i.e, not including people still playing who've not yet hit their late career decline phase, e.g., Chipper Jones, Brian Giles, etc.)
Career .588 slugging: 10th all time
10.6 at bats per home run: #1 all time
12-time All Star (obviously, All Star appearances aren't the greatest metric for HOF induction, but 12 times in a 15-year career shows that many people thought he was great consistently while he was playing)
3 Silver Slugger Awards; only Todd Helton has more as a 1b
Rookie of the Year
Gold Glove
Rookie record for HR in a season
Most HR in a 2-year span
Most HR in a 3-year span
4 straight 50+ HR seasons
Finished in the top 7 in MVP voting 5 times and in the top 25 5 more times. Of the other 5 years in his career (and not counting his 18 game cup of coffee at the end of the '86 season), injuries limited him to less than 50 games in 2 of them and to less than 100 in 2 others. Thus, he finished in the top 25 in MVP voting in 10 of his 11 full seasons.
Only caught stealing 8 times in his entire 15-year career
Career OPS+ of 163 (i.e., his OBP + SLG percentages were 63% better than the average player for his entire career; for comparison Tony Gwynn's career OPS is 132, and Willie Mays's is 156) good for 11th all time. He had years where his OPS was over 200, i.e., years where his combined OBP and SLG percentages doubled the combined OBP and SLG percentages of the league as a whole. That's nearly unheard of.
Applying the Keltner Test that Bill James created also clearly shows that he warrants HOF admission:
1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?
Yes (qualified). He was not a five-tool player, but people certainly regarded him as the greatest slugger/HR hitter of his day.
2. Was he the best player on his team?
Yes. He was certainly the best player on many of his teams, including years when he did not have the best year (e.g., 2000 Cards: he was the best player on the team, but he did not have a great year) . If one wants to make a claim that he was not the best player on the 2001 Cardinals because Pujols was on that team, I won't argue strenuously. Same thing for the time he spent with Rickey Henderson as his teammate. Other than that, he was easily the best player on his team. He may not have had the best year of everyone on his team every year, but he was the best player.
3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?
Yes. His 12 All Star appearances help demonstrate this one. He was better than contemporaries like Jeff Bagwell, Jim Thome, Will Clark, Fred McGriff, Cecil Cooper, Raphael Palmeiro, and Andres Gallaraga. He was the best 1b of his day.
4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?
Yes. He was on 3 straight pennant winners with the A's (1988-1990), and he hit .340/.415 /.617 down the stretch in '88. I'm not looking up the other years, so I invite anyone to disprove this.
5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?
Good enough? Yes. Healthy enough? No. In his final 2 seasons, he hit 61 homeruns in 535 at bats. When he could stand, he could hit. He just couldn't bring his body out there day after day. Worth noting is that this is an odd question because it is difficult to determine his prime, due to his late career peak and because it was health and not ability or production that kept him out of the lineup after the peak. If the question is "was he good enough that he could play regularly after the age at which players typically reach their prime (i.e., 27-32)," then yes. If the question is "was he healthy enough that he could play regularly after he had the 2 best years of his career, which also happened to be 2 of the best years of anyone's career," then no.
6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?
Among eligible players, yes. No question.
7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?
Yes. Due to his high number of HRs and comparatively low number of plate appearances thanks to injuries, there are not many players with comparable stats. However, the most similar is probably Harmon Killebrew, who is in the HOF.
8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?
Yes. Every eligible player with 500 HR is in the Hall, and he has nearly 600. People with much lesser numbers are in there. 163 OPS+. Everyone above him and eligible for the Hall is in there.
9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?
He played in an offensive era, BUT OPS+ adjusts for that. [Also, see the final question to segue into the Big Issue.]
10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?
Yes. The other 1b are Keith Hernandez, Don Mattingly, Will Clark, and Steve Garvey (apologies if I'm missing someone). He's superior to all of them, and it's not even close.
11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?
See above. Sosa won the 1998 MVP because the Cubs made the playoffs (barely), and the Cards did not.
12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?
Again, he was on 12 AS teams. Without looking it up, I'm fairly confident that everyone with 12 AS games is in the HOF.
13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?
Yes. With apologies to Rickey Henderson (who came to the A's midseason), he was the best player on the '89 team that won the Series.
14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?
See 15 below.
15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?
Well, here we get to address the Big Question: he did not tip coffee shop baristas. As a former coffee shop barista who served Big Mac (he ordered granitas), I won't hold this one against him.
I guess there's also some issue involving steroids. There's only 2 relevant facts in this regard:
1. He's never tested positive for steroids or been convicted of possessing them.
More importantly, however:
2. Using steroids was not prohibited by MLB during his career.
Thus, he was playing by the rules of the game. Punishing him for something that was not prohibited by the rules is completely nonsensical (and completely ignores relevant fact #1).
posted by Not Jennifer Gibbs at 1/16/2007
3 Comments:
Mark McGwire's wife is a nurse?
When admitted cheaters like Gaylord Perry and Whitey Ford are in the HOF (they scuffed balls, which was expressly prohibited by the rules of baseball and had a direct relationship to the games themselves) without any mention of their cheating, then there is nothing worth talking about.
When a racist like Ty Cobb is in the HOF (he forced a black orphan he named "Lil Rastus" to be the Tigers' mascot and to sleep underneath Cobb's bed on the road), then there is nothing worth talking about.
When amphetamines were an accepted part of baseball's clubhouses for decades, then there is nothing worth talking about.
"So you think Pete Rose should be in the HOF and that we shouldn't ever speak of Washington's slaves?"
I have no idea how you could possibly glean that from what I typed.
My point was that there is “nothing worth talking about” (Note Rice Strada’s words) because he broke no rule and because others who broke rules don’t have things worth talking about in HOF discussions. That is, if there is nothing worth talking about with people who broke rules (e.g., Whitey, Gaylord), then there’s certainly nothing worth talking about with someone who did not break rules. If there is nothing worth talking about with people who broke laws (e.g., those who used or provided greenies—amphetamines—without a prescription), there is nothing worth talking about with someone who used Andro, a legal product when McGwire used it.
Pete Rose broke a rule; McGwire did not. Pete Rose broke the biggest rule in baseball, the only rule that is posted in big letters in every major league clubhouse and the only rule that automatically results in being banned from baseball: no betting on baseball. Had Rose not broken that particular rule, he should be in the HOF, but he accepted punishment for that rule, so he can’t be in the HOF.
As far as the George Washington analogy is concerned, there is nothing morally wrong about injesting steroids.
Post a Comment
<< Home