White Outfielders and Hall of Fame Don't Mix

[Grandstander]

Triad...your above refinements are meaningful to you, however, I was responding to the criteria presented by you in the first post. To wit:
Quick — think of the white outfielder who played the most recently that was elected to the Hall of Fame.

Yount was white, Yount played in the outfield and Yount was enshrined in the Hall of Fame. I met your criteria.

[jtur88]

Originally Posted by Grandstander

Triad...your above refinements are meaningful to you, however, I was responding to the criteria presented by you in the first post. To wit:
Quick — think of the white outfielder who played the most recently that was elected to the Hall of Fame.

Yount was white, Yount played in the outfield and Yount was enshrined in the Hall of Fame. I met your criteria.

Then the answer might be Paul Molitor.

[LongtimeBravesFan]

Future HOFer Chipper Jones was a left fielder for two years.

[jtur88]

Actually, the question is ambiguous It could be calling for one of a number of things:

1. The last white person to stand in the outfield with a glove on, who was then inducted. (Yount)

2. The last active white player who played the outfield among his positions who was then inducted. (Boggs)

3. The last white person to be inducted who had ever played in the outfield. (Boggs)

4. The last white inductee who played most of his games as an outfielder (Ashburn)

5. The last active white player who played most of his games in the outfield and was then inducted (Yastrzemski)

6. The last active white player who had ever played most of a season in the outfield and was then inducted (Molitor)

7. The last white inductee who had ever played most of a season as an outfielder (Molitor)

None of those answers would be "wrong", since the question could be interpreted in any of those ways.

[Grandstander]

jtur:
I doubt that the resolution to the question lies in seeing how many examples of ridiculous extremes may be produced by your imagination.

The question would hinge on what is commonly understood when someone is identified as an outfielder. So right away we may eliminate your extreme suggestions concerning anyone who has ever played an inning in the outfield.

In contrast, I don't think anyone would disagree that Yount was indeed an outfielder for the last nine years of his career. However, Molitor playing 50 of his 1495 career games in the outfield would not establish him in the common mind as an outfileder, would it?

My point to Triad is that Yount truly does qualify as the last white outfielder to make it to the HoF. Not only did he play nearly half of his career there, but if he had played his entire career there, he would still be in the HoF because of his 3000 plus hits, everyone elligible with 3000 plus hits has been elected. You would not argue that if Yount had played his entire career as an outfielder, he would have been a lesser offensive player, would you? And as I pointed out, but was seemingly misunderstood by Triad, Yount would have still won the MVP in '82 if he had been a centerfielder rather than a shortstop. Yount wasn't just the best hitting shortstop in the AL that year, he was the best hitting anything. Because of these considerations, I reject the somewhat arbitrary standards Triad raised....that you only qualify for the HoF at the position where you had your best years.

Yount was white, he was indeed an outfielder and he's in the HoF because he was a great baseball player, not just because he was a great shortstop the first part of his career. Molitor wasn't an outfileder, Boggs wasn't an outfielder, so those answers are "wrong."

Yount is the correct answer.

[Nat]

Discussions like these may be innocent on the surface, and no ill-will intended on the author, but yet another example of why our culture can't move on from its racist history.

[Triad]

Originally Posted by Nat

Discussions like these may be innocent on the surface, and no ill-will intended on the author, but yet another example of why our culture can't move on from its racist history.

None taken, Nat. It just struck me as odd that the HOF voters either have been overlooking white outfielders, or they've had no good white candidates to choose from. Maybe there's a subconscious bias to overlook the accomplishments of a white outfielder in the post-Yaz era. If Dale Murphy or Dwight Evans were black, perhaps they would have gotten more support. Murphy is Andre Dawson's contemporary in every way, but Murphy has gotten next to no support, while Dawson is knocking on the door of the Hall. I don't think it's so much a racial thing, but possibly more of a perception thing.

Originally Posted by Grandstander

I reject the somewhat arbitrary standards Triad raised....that you only qualify for the HoF at the position where you had your best years.

They're not all that arbitrary. Bill James in his more recent Historical Abstract lists Yount as the 4th-best shortstop in history. He categorizes him, like he does all players, at only his most significant position.

Where do you make your distinction as to what constitutes a position to identify a player by? Is it at least one full season at the position? Cal Ripken was a 3rd baseman in his final five seasons (two of which were abbreviated). Would you then say that Brooks Robinson isn't the greatest Orioles 3rd baseman ever? I'm not sure where you're making the delineation.

True, Ripken did play 3rd, but if his career is taken as a whole, technically he wasn't a 3rd baseman. But then by your standards would you consider him a shortstop-3rd baseman?

Pete Rose was a 2nd baseman for four seasons (minus Frankie Valli). Would you say he's the most qualified 2nd baseman not in the Hall of Fame? Do you see the problem?

My delineation is clear: The most significant position for a player, based on where most of his best came at. Your criteria is what seems more arbitrary, pending some clarification as to where you draw the line.

So when I asked "Who's the greatest white outfielder since Yaz and Rose?", it becomes cumbersome to claim it's Yount, because at best he's only a less-than-halftime-outfielder.

If I were to ask the question: "Who will be the next catcher elected to the Hall of Fame by the BBWAA?", would you say either Mike Piazza or Ivan Rodriguez? Well, by your criteria, you'd have to say neither of them, but instead Craig Biggio. That's kind of a strange way to approach it, don't you think?

[Grandstander]

You need explain no further, I understand. Your position is that someone who plays the outfield in the majors for nine seasons and wins an MVP award as a centerfielder, wasn't an outfielder. Because Yount played shortstop, he wasn't an outfielder, we must have just imagined that was him out there all those years.

[Nat]

Originally Posted by Triad

None taken, Nat. It just struck me as odd that the HOF voters either have been overlooking white outfielders, or they've had no good white candidates to choose from. Maybe there's a subconscious bias to overlook the accomplishments of a white outfielder in the post-Yaz era. If Dale Murphy or Dwight Evans were black, perhaps they would have gotten more support. Murphy is Andre Dawson's contemporary in every way, but Murphy has gotten next to no support, while Dawson is knocking on the door of the Hall. I don't think it's so much a racial thing, but possibly more of a perception thing.

No I just see it as both an unnecessary and hindering arguement/perspective. The only reason racial background should even enter an arguement in this age is if the player came from another country's league, ie Japan or Cuba. Milton Bradley was cut from the A's, oh it must be because he's black. People a few years back were opposed to the inductions of Perez & Cepeda, oh it must be because they're Latino. Now white people are feeling left out of the arguement. It's the 21st century now, black latino & white are up-and-down every organization, let's move on.

[Triad]

Originally Posted by Nat

No I just see it as both an unnecessary and hindering arguement/perspective. The only reason racial background should even enter an arguement in this age is if the player came from another country's league, ie Japan or Cuba. Milton Bradley was cut from the A's, oh it must be because he's black. People a few years back were opposed to the inductions of Perez & Cepeda, oh it must be because they're Latino. Now white people are feeling left out of the arguement. It's the 21st century now, black latino & white are up-and-down every organization, let's move on.

But there are some basic differences to note in the performance, not just in how they're perceived. Only 3 of the last 60 stolen base champions have been white. Discrimination? Hardly. It's been 46 years since a team with an all-white outfield won the World Series (Maris, Mantle Berra). I don't think this is due to racism.

I think it's valid to note social trends. If we haven't had a white outfielder in the Hall of Fame since Yastrzemski's era but many black outfielders, and the only ones on the horizon are black, does that mean the white outfield superstar has gone the way of the dinosaur? Don't those questions have some merit?

[Triad]

Originally Posted by Grandstander

You need explain no further, I understand. Your position is that someone who plays the outfield in the majors for nine seasons and wins an MVP award as a centerfielder, wasn't an outfielder. Because Yount played shortstop, he wasn't an outfielder, we must have just imagined that was him out there all those years.

So then you would also say that the next catcher to be elected into the Hall of Fame will be Craig Biggio? He was a full-time catcher for three years. You mentioned that Yount's nine years as CF should constitute being a center fielder. What's the lowest number of seasons that this should apply? I may agree with you if you further your argument, but I'm just looking for consistency.

[Grandstander]

So then you would also say that the next catcher to be elected into the Hall of Fame will be Craig Biggio?
I beieve that if elected, Biggio will be going in as a human being who played professional baseball. Since he played multiple postions and played them well, I expect that this will be mentioned on his plaque. My understanding is that a player is simply inducted, not inducted "as" anything. For example, here is Ty Cobb's plaque and to read it you would think he must have been inducted as a designated hitter. No defensive position is mentioned.



I would say that I expect the next player to have been a catcher for several seasons who gets elected, will be Biggio.

[Nat]

Triad, I think Larry Walker is a shoo-in....

[Triad]

Originally Posted by Nat

Triad, I think Larry Walker is a shoo-in....

I would think he has about a 30-40% chance of getting in, less than Jim Rice or Andre Dawson. And he would seem to be less deserving than Tim Raines and Dale Murphy.

Walker's lack of durability is what kills him. He had only 2 seasons with at least 500 at-bats! He had only one season with more than 145 G. He had only 1311 RBI and 2160 H. He only walked at least 80 times 3 times in his career. And he spent the better part of ten seasons playing in Coors.

I think the next outfielders to get in will be as follows:

2009 - Rickey Henderson
2010 - Jim Rice
2013 - Pete Rose (via Veterans committee)
2015 - Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Ken Griffey Jr.
2017 - Manny Ramirez (and Andre Dawson via Veterans committee)
2019 - Ichiro Suzuki
2020 - Vladimir Guerrero

Possibly Gary Sheffield in that mix as well, who is very deserving.

[Grandstander]

Pete Rose is inelligible, that includes the Veteran's committee. MLB would have to remove him from the inelligible list before he could be considered regardless of what the Veteran's committee wants.