The Disgrace of the Kirby Puckett HOF Selection

[He Hate Me]

Someone please look at these numbers and tell me how Kirby Puckett gets in on the first ballotm but Donnie Baseball doesn't or that Jim Rice doesnt for how many years now???

 

Kirby Puckett

.318 BA, 2,304 Hits, 414 2B, 207 HR, 1,085 RBI, 450 BB, 965 SO, .837 OPS, 3,453 Total bases

 

Don Mattingly

.307 BA, 2,153 Hits, 442 2B, 222 HR, 1,099 RBI, 588 BB, 444 SO, .829 OPS, 3,301 Total bases

 

Jim Rice

.298 BA, 2,452 Hits, 373 2B, 382 HR, 1,451 RBI, 670 BB, 1,423 SO, .854 OPS, 4,129 Total bases

 

 

Honestly if Mattingly and Rice don't get in based on those stats, the Hall of Fame is a complete joke.

 

Anyone have any others to compare to Kirby's stats? Rice and Donnie were the first two that I knew of

[yeszir]

Puckett played for 11 years and was consistently good. Mattingly played for 13 and wasn't. Rice played for 15 and was only dominant for something like 6 of them. Basically Puckett did the same, if not more, in less time.

[RedSoxRooter]

None of them deserve to be in if you ask me.

[MC Hammer]

Also Puckett's career was ended by an eye problem ... who knows if he would have had better numbers than the two you picked out, but I think it was a special circumstance.

[RedSoxRooter]

Rice's career was ended by an eye problem. Mattingly's was ended by a back problem.

 

Really, Puckett won a WS and Rice and Mattingly didn't. That's the only diff.

[jsinger121]

puckett put his numbers up as a centerfielder that is also one of the reasons he got in. mattingly's numbers stacked up with other hall of fame firstbaseman don't even compare.

[ORS]

Puckett doesn't belong in the hall, and he shouldn't be the standard others are compared to either.

[Cityofchampions33]

If you look at those stats they aren't too different besides HRs

[jsinger121]

they are not but mattingly played a position where hall of famers are known for there power while centerfield is traditional not a power position.

[Cityofchampions33]

Yeah, and Mattingly isnt rly afr above Puckett in HRs

[jimmycarter05]

jc, why is redsoxrooter banned?

[MC Hammer]

jc, why is redsoxrooter banned?

I believe thats just his custom user title.

[Cityofchampions33]

Yeah, that got me too, its pretty hillarious

[jimmycarter05]

I believe thats just his custom user title.

 

 

I want one, I'd be Original Gangsta.

[He Hate Me]

puckett put his numbers up as a centerfielder that is also one of the reasons he got in.

 

Mickey Mantle?

Willie Mays?

Joe Dimaggio?

Ty Cobb?

Duke Snider?

 

 

I'm sure theres more. It's a disgrace for Kirby Puckett to be mentioned with those names.

[jsinger121]

the writers look at different positions differently.....he probably should not be in but he is in. mattingly will not get consideration because his position is a power position.

 

foxx

mcguire

gehrig

Killebrew

Murray

 

mattingly should never be compared with these players if he were to ever get in. but he will not so its a non-issue

[He Hate Me]

the writers look at different positions differently

 

Are you saying they only compare stats of other first basemen when voting in 1B guys, and that they completely ignore the other CFs in the HOF when voting in CFs?

[jsinger121]

i am saying writers look at first base as a traditional power position while they do not look at centerfield as a traditional position of power.

[He Hate Me]

i am saying writers look at first base as a traditional power position while they do not look at centerfield as a traditional position of power.

 

So what do you think is the cutoff for a HOF CF career?

[jsinger121]

probably at duke snider but what puckett did over a shortened career cannot be taken away from him. say he never went blind and played 4-5 more years. he gets to 3000 hits easily. the hall looks at that and probably put him in for his great play over 12 seasons. .318 lifetime hitter with 2304 hits, 6 gold gloves. they put him in the hall because his career was cut short by his eyesight while don mattingly's last 6 seasons were not impressive at all.

[AlexanderTheGreat13]

they put him in the hall because his career was cut short by his eyesight while don mattingly's last 6 seasons were not impressive at all.

Yeah but I can also say Don Mattingly's final 6 seasons were a result of his terrible back problems. What if Mattingly retired after 1989 because of his back problems? Do they still put him in because he might have reached the HOF magic numbers? He didnt play the 10 years needed up to that point but the arguement still holds do you put someone in the HOF based on what they might have done?

[jsinger121]

i believe hall writers want someone with at least 10 seasons in the bigs and had he retired in 1989 that would not have been enough plus he still would not have had stats as good as other hall of fame first baseman. firstbase has and always will be considered a power position with the writers and that is why don mattingly never gets any consideration.

[AlexanderTheGreat13]

i believe hall writers want someone with at least 10 seasons in the bigs and had he retired in 1989 that would not have been enough

Ah I said that in my post already but the fact remains you cant put someone in the HOF based on what the MIGHT have done.

[jsinger121]

had puckett had his last 4-5 seasons like mattingly had he would not have been in the hall of fame. when he left the game because of his eye problem he was still consistently hitting over .300 each season. mattingly after 1989 had 1 season of .300 plus and that was in the strike shortened season when he hit .304. puckett only needed about 3-4 seasons more to reach 3000 hits if not for his eye problem while when mattingly's back was hurting after the 1989 season he only totaled 1300 hits. had he retired after that he wouldn't even be close to the hall. puckett was closer to the hall when he retired because of injury than mattingly was when frankly his injuries started after 1989.

[He Hate Me]

had puckett had his last 4-5 seasons like mattingly had he would not have been in the hall of fame. when he left the game because of his eye problem he was still consistently hitting over .300 each season. mattingly after 1989 had 1 season of .300 plus and that was in the strike shortened season when he hit .304. puckett only needed about 3-4 seasons more to reach 3000 hits if not for his eye problem while when mattingly's back was hurting after the 1989 season he only totaled 1300 hits. had he retired after that he wouldn't even be close to the hall. puckett was closer to the hall when he retired because of injury than mattingly was when frankly his injuries started after 1989.

 

So are you saying Kirby got in based on what he might have done, or what he had already done in his career?

[jsinger121]

both......what he had already done which was a .318 lifetime average and over 2300 hits plus what he would have accomplished in the next 3-4 had he not had an eye injury(3000 hits).

[elsrbueno]

None of them deserve to be in if you ask me.

 

My opinion exactly. IF you use Puckett as a barometer, the Hall of Fame itself becomes less significant because anyone can get in.

 

Mattingly and Rice were good players but not HOF worthy. Same with Puckett.

 

Alexander the Great-- you're exactly right. You shouldn't let someone in the hall based on what they MIGHT have done. The fact is he didn't do it. If Ken Griffey Jr didn't have a series of injuries between 2001 and 2004, we'd probably be talking about his chances to break Hank Aaron's HR record and how he was a sure-fire HOF. Now people are forced to ask: Is Ken Griffey Jr a Hall of Famer? because he was hurt and didn't put up the numbers.

 

If Puckett makes the hall and Griffey doesn't that's a damn shame.

[jsinger121]

griffey is a lock for the hall of fame. he has 500 homers already. its not even a question

[Sox Fan on Cape]

My opinion exactly. IF you use Puckett as a barometer, the Hall of Fame itself becomes less significant because anyone can get in.

 

Mattingly and Rice were good players but not HOF worthy. Same with Puckett.

 

Alexander the Great-- you're exactly right. You shouldn't let someone in the hall based on what they MIGHT have done. The fact is he didn't do it. If Ken Griffey Jr didn't have a series of injuries between 2001 and 2004, we'd probably be talking about his chances to break Hank Aaron's HR record and how he was a sure-fire HOF. Now people are forced to ask: Is Ken Griffey Jr a Hall of Famer? because he was hurt and didn't put up the numbers.

 

If Puckett makes the hall and Griffey doesn't that's a damn shame.

If the Puckett logic is valid for the Hall ( ie career cut short due to injury ). Then why the hell wouldn't Tony C. have been elected ???

[jsinger121]

well lets see. never did tony ever hit .300 in a season. only once did he knock in 100 runs. he never won a gold glove. granted he never played as long as puckett but his injury was unfortunate. puckett already had much better stats by the time his eyesight went. they were near hall stats and had his eyesight not gone he was rewarded as a hall of famer since he would have attained the 3000 hits. puckett was a consistent player during his 12 seasons while guys like tony c and mattingly were not. they had bad years due to injury and hung around. had puckett hung around for say 3-4 seasons more and his stats took a significant dip the writers would have looked at him much differently.