I figured I'd toss this out there as we have a lot of baseball fans here that have been watching and following the game for a long time. The baseball Hall of Fame is very fascinating including the politics and the statistical requirements with steroids interrupting that whole thing. Politics - Albert Belle not being in because he was a dickhead despite averaging 42 homers, 132 RBI's, and 105 runs while batting .295/.374/.571 over 9 years. No ties to steroids that I'm aware of. A couple below to look at and toss your own in. Nelson Cruz 7x All-Star 4x Silver Slugger ALCS MVP https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/c/cruzne02.shtml Carlos Beltran ROY 9x All-Star 3x Gold Gloves 2x Silver Slugger https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/beltrca01.shtml Joey Votto MVP 6x All-Star Gold Glove https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/v/vottojo01.shtml Jon Lester 5x All-Star NLCS MVP https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/l/lestejo01.shtml
All nice players bit none are HoF worthy. MLB has an extremely high standard. For position players you are looking for 3000 hits or 500 home runs. These guys aren't close and Lester is definitely not a HoF pitcher. Just my opinion.
So you're a hard and fast with the bench marks kind of guy? I don't think the bottom three are. I think Cruz should get some consideration. He has an outside chance at 500 if he keeps playing. I tried to include fringe players to spark debate. Also - pitcher benchmarks are going to need to change. 250 wins even in the age of injuries is pretty difficult to get to. Greinke is at 217 and Scherzer is at 182 and they're both considered HOFers on the web.
I'm not a hard and fast with the bench marks kind of guy. But my vote doesn't mean dick, lol. I agree that they will need to adjust at some point. I wouldn't be opposed to seeing different eras for the HoF. That way you can compare apples to apples.
Nelson Cruz has a real shot at the HOF in my opinion. You can add superlatives like multiple 40 homer seasons in Seattle, best 40 yr old hitter potentially, and being a world class team mate.. the bizzaro Belle.
A lot of automatics are pitchers... Scherzer, Kershaw, DeGrom if he stays healthy, Verlander most likely. Greinke has a decent shot but not for me. Miguel Cabrera, Pujols, I think Cruz gets in... trying to think of other position players but can't think of any... any Houston player has the stink on them and like you said it is political... bregman and Altuve would be HOF quality IMO. It pains me, but I can totally see Devers being a HOF player. He is insanely good and doesn't get enough props. Every ball he hits is an absolute rocket. I have a lot of friends who root for the Red Sox, they say his defense is below average... well, when he's plays the Yankees he a god damn gold glover.
I only say it like that because based on your posts I believe you were born in the 60's and my dad had that hardline stance on the Hall of Fame with obvious excepts (ex. If Miguel Cabrera never hit 500 homers). I didn't mention the obvious ones cause it's assumed Pujols, Cabrera and Kershaw will all get in. Verlander is a shoe in I think - right top 5 Cy Young finishes, two wins and an MVP along with being the ace on four different teams that made it to the dance. I think Greinke is more borderline but it's tough to weigh him because he pitched in a weak division for the first 8 years of his career on a bad team but that comes with getting less wins. I tried to stay away from the young active players. I mean trajectory wise - Devers is definitely on his way but he's only 24. His stroke is extremely clean and he has a swing that has longevity. Down the road I feel like he'll be moved to first.
Speaking of Harold Baines, I did not realize he got in. Why? Lots of hits over a 20 year career and decent batting average but extremely limited accolades and barely any all star appearances. What do you guys think about Curt Schilling? He's another guy that suffered from being on bad teams and you can realistically probably add another 30 wins if he was on a good team early in his career. No Cy Young absolutely kills him along with his scandal and ousting from ESPN over his views on bathrooms. Randy Johnson took at least two from him and I doubt he gets one in the 90s because of all the Braves pitchers and Pedro but I'd imagine he at least places higher if he was on a better team.
I think that Baseball Reference does a pretty good job of summarizing Hall of Fame status in lots of different ways. Based on their metrics, Nelson Cruz and Jon Lester are not at a Hall of Fame level, while Carlos Beltran, Joey Votto, Max Scherzer, and Zack Greinke probably are. Miguel Cabrera, Albert Pujols, Clayton Kershaw, and Justin Verlander are shoo-ins. Another player who I would think is already in, and will be a shoo-in with another year or two at his current level, is Mike Trout. All of this is assuming no scandals of sufficient damage, of course. Schilling has the profile of an "average" Hall of Famer. Besides any political/personal things that are holding him back, the fact that he was probably never the best pitcher in the league in his entire career (although he was pretty close in the early 2000s) has definitely hurt him. Larry Walker isn't too bad a member of the HoF, but Harold Baines being elected by the Veterans Committee was a joke (the writers got his case very right). Albert Belle had a much better case, but was still actually somewhat marginal, which made it easer for the writers to keep him out because they hated him.
Devers had already been in the league for 4 years I think? He's young but established. Edit: 5 years.
So the evidence for Beltran, Cruz, Bottom, etc. is rooted in some current Hall of Famers that probably shouldn't be in. Maybe others can shed some insight as I'm going based on numbers and never saw them play. Tony Perez 7x All Star https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/perezto01.shtml Alan Trammell 6x All Star 4x Gold Glove 3x Silver Slugger https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/t/trammal01.shtml I'm trying not to go too far back because the guys from like the 1900s-early 1950s had no bench marks and honestly no one here really saw them play.
The thing those two have in common is a long career. But their numbers don't jump out at me. I remember them both when they played and both were good players. They would get big hits in big spots. But they didn't have "blow you away" type numbers.
Perez was a bottom third Hall of Famer - making it isn't bad, but not making it wouldn't have been either. Trammell got in because he was a shortstop - any other position other than catcher and he wouldn't have had the slightest chance.
Understood. And a shortstop in an era where none of them could hit. Trammel making it actually helped me out a ton. My dad left me tons of baseball cards including the entire 1978 set and about ten Molitor/Trammell rookie cards. The value of that card skyrocketed when he squeaked in. With that being said. What about these two? Yadier Molina 10x All Star 9x Gold Glove Silver Slugger https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/m/molinya01.shtml Salvador Perez 7x All Star 5x Gold Glove 3x Silver Slugger World Series MVP https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/p/perezsa02.shtml
Yes, if Trammell had been around in the Jeter/Nomar/A-Rod era he would have been viewed very differently. In my view Molina is a clear Hall of Famer because of his defense and his longevity. He has had the best arm I've seen in a catcher since Johnny Bench; indeed, Bench is one of the very few catchers who might have been better than Molina defensively. Of course, Bench was a vastly vastly better hitter, which is why he is the best catcher in major league history. Being a Mets fan, I've seen very little of Perez (although he played well in the 2015 World Series), but on paper he is distinctly better than Molina at the plate, and reasonably similar behind it. He needs at least 3-5 more years like that, and he could eventually get in.
Nelson Cruz definitely gets my vote as a future HOF slugger. He'll give 500 career HRs a run for it's money over the next 2.5 years.