Scott Lucas on Michael Young's Chances of Getting 3000 Hits
by Adam J. Morris on Mar 7, 2010 1:34 PM CST
Email
PrintWe talked a little while back, in some of the comments, about Michael Young's chances of getting into the Hall of Fame, which, in my opinion, are governed almost entirely by whether or not Young reaches 3000 hits. If Young gets 3000 hits, he's in. If he doesn't, I don't think there's anything else he has a remote possibility of accomplishes the rest of his career that would get him in.
In any case, it got me thinking about whether Young could reach 3000 hits or not, and what the likelihood is of him doing so. I thought it would be an interesting post to do, looked at Bill James' Favorite Toy projection, and then promptly forgot about it.
Fortunately, Scott Lucas has done a post that drills down into the data, compares Young to the 3000 hit club members through age 32, and looks at what hitters similar to Young have done after age 32.
It is a really interesting piece, and like me, Scott concludes that the Favorite Toy projection (he has it at 18%) is probably too high for Young. I encourage everyone to check it out.
119 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I doubt he gets there
In addition to what Scott lays out, it’s just damn hard to do. Even if Young already had 2,000 hits I’d doubt he’d get there, just because it’s really, really hard to get that many hits every season for that many years. I’m rooting for him to do it, but don’t think it will happen.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
I understand what you are saying about him not making it even if he already had the 2K.
But I hadn’t realized how long it took MY to put it all together. Too bad being a late bloomer doesn’t protect him from physiological decline.
I actually wonder whether players who take until their mid-twenties to hit well aren’t also more vulnerable to a precipitous decline as speed etc. goes.
T, did you read this yet?
Very much supports your position on hGH, an AJSM research paper.
This past week, MLB announced that they will institute a blood test for hGH in the minor leagues. There’s a lot of hype about hGH right now, but the science on the subject is fairly clear: there are minimal if any positive effects of using hGH as an adult. Here, I’m linking a very readable review paper looking at most of the common PED’s that I assigned to students in my baseball class. It turns out that perhaps the best demonstration of hGH’s effects occurs in a condition called acromegaly, which is caused by elevated growth hormone titers in adults. In this case, affected individuals actually experience a weakening of muscles. MLB is wasting both time and money pursuing a test for what is apparently an expensive placebo.
From BTB.
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
Hadn't seen that, not surprised
For a couple of years now I keep asking people on multiple forums to show me proof it helps athletes perform. I get little but “dude, it’s obvious!” type posts in reply and zero documented proof. Waste of time.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
Glad to help,
in the furtherance of critical thinking.
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
The odds are stacked against Young
and I may think he would have a better chance of accomplishing the feat if he didn’t already start having physical issues that prevented him from getting 200 hits the last couple of years. The injuries will only get harder to overcome and Young will not reach the goal. The question is not the quality of hitter Young is, it’s a question of durability.
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.
I disagree
It’s both durability and quality (not just hitting). He gets a lot of hits based on the fact that he plays a ton of games and is a good hitter. Honestly, what else does he do that is HOF worthy? He doesn’t stand out in any other aspect of the game. No speed, little power, decent but not great OBP, decent glove. He’s solid and steady but is that really what we want the Hall to be about?
by LoneStarBallUser on Mar 7, 2010 2:25 PM CST up reply actions
Young is a great hitter
if he reaches 3000 hits regardless of anything else, he’s HOF worthy. The discussion is whether he will get there, and it’s unlikely due to a lack of durability as aging takes it’s hold.
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.
He is a great hitter...
…in the sense that Al Oliver was a great hitter — as a guy who makes good contact, hits the ball hard, and consistently puts up a very good batting average.
by Adam J. Morris on Mar 7, 2010 2:31 PM CST up reply actions
Sacred ground
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Scoop hit it harder than MY does
If the Rangers don't make the play-offs this year I'm gonna go all Epic Bearded Man on your ass.
“I believe that he’s the best out and out pure hitter that I’ve ever seen, Al Oliver definitely deserves to be in the Hall of Fame.”- Jon Miller
“There is no question in my mind, had he not been forced out of the game by collusion, Al would have reached 3,000 hits.”- Andre Dawson
“I would like to know who the writers are that vote for the Hall of Fame. To miss Al Oliver means somebody didn’t do their homework.”- George Foster
“I was really disappointed to see the lack of consideration Al received for the Hall of Fame. I believe that that he deserves to be in Cooperstown.”- Willie Stargell
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
More proof that ballplayers are morons
by LoneStarBallUser on Mar 8, 2010 5:12 PM CST up reply actions
...that know a little something about playing baseball.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
3,000 is HoF worthy because you believe there should be automatic bench marks. . .
. . . or because you believe it’s impossible to get to 3,000 and not be HoF caliber?
I think 3000 hits is a benchmark
to do something that only a handful of players has ever done warrants consideration. 27 players have gotten 3000 hits in the history of MLB. Of those 27, only 3 aren’t in the HOF – Biggio (will be elected), Palmeiro (issue with PED’s but his numbers warrant it if others get in) and Rose (we all know his situation). If history holds up, I don’t see how you could keep Young out of the HOF with 3000 hits
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.
But then do we do that with every statistic?
Create a bench mark and say “everyone who does this gets in,” even if that was the only thing they were good at?
everyone's hall is different
but in mine, if someone reaches 3000 hits, they deserve some serious consideration to be in the HoF. Young would have to have an avg of well above .300 to get to 3000 hits. If he accomplishes both, I think he would be in the HoF — at least my personal HoF.
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.
So if Julio Franco had hung around a few more years...
…racked up 100 hits per year as a PH, and got to 3000 on the nose, he’d have been a HOFer?
POP QUIZ: What position does Franco have the most career games at?
by Adam J. Morris on Mar 7, 2010 2:40 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah
I think that is fair. 30 seasons at 100 hits per year is a pretty phenomenal accomplishment, even though it doesn’t necessarily mean he was ever the best.
At least, in my baseball museum, I would want those kinds of longevity stats memorialized. There is room for the best and the those kinds of guys. There’s a difference between being very good and being very good for a freakishly long time.
If he got 100 hits per year as a pinch hitter, I think that's HOF-worthy in itself.
by nivarsity on Mar 7, 2010 3:22 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
haha
"He do what he do" - Ron Washington
by dustinvandeman on Mar 7, 2010 6:46 PM CST up reply actions
This got me thinking about Vizquel, who still has real value.
If Vizquel played to age 46 at the level he has the last two years, he’d fall less than 100 hits short of 3000. He’d come closer if he ended up being a more regular player.
I know he has a lot more going for him beyond hits, but I thought it was interesting how many he had.
No he's not
What if Garrett Anderson somehow gets to 3000? Is he a Hall of Famer too?
by LoneStarBallUser on Mar 7, 2010 2:33 PM CST up reply actions
The only way you could call Lou Brock HoF worthy. . .
. . . is if you thought the all-time steals leader automatically belonged just for having a record and/or if you consider 3,000 an automatic qualifier.
But yeah, Edgar Renteria might get to 3,000 hits. Hall of Famer?
Renteria
Same age as MY but with 500 more hits right now. Plus, he’s a winner!! First ballot.
by LoneStarBallUser on Mar 7, 2010 3:07 PM CST up reply actions
I do think Renteria will end up one of the greatest shortstops ever who doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame.
I think his career is a little underrated. If Elvis ends up living up to those comps I’ll be happy with it.
As long as that Red Sox season doesn’t happen.
If Renteria got to 3000 hits, yeah
Considering what he’s done over the past 2 seasons, that will never happen though.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
I was just thinking...
…these discussions are reminiscent of the ones taking place on the Angels ESPN boards in the early part of the Aughts, with Angels fans saying that Anderson was a legit candidate to get 3000 hits (and thus be a HOFer).
Anderson and Young are very similar offensive players, really.
by Adam J. Morris on Mar 7, 2010 2:38 PM CST up reply actions
They also both had career arcs that went from underrated to overrated.
Anderson went back to underrated then back to overrated. I think MY is headed back to underrated right now, so we’ll see after that.
I think if Garrett Anderson somehow got to 3000, it would be a pretty significant deal
which is why I think 3000 is a good gatekeeper
I wonder when Young would decide to retire
He might just decide to play until he gets to 3000 hits if he’s a few hundred short at the age of 39/40, which seems pretty likely to happen at this point. But if he’s also just barely making the 3000 hit club thanks to sticking around 2-3 years too long, would that still make him HOF worthy?
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
3000 hits should be a benchmark that gets you in the HOF
Because it takes alot to get there. 200+ hits a year isn’t easy to do one year. Much less year in and year out for 12-15 seasons. Unless they start extending the seasons to 200 games or making games 14 innings so people get 2 more ABs each game 3000 is a pretty significant milestone. Maybe hes not a first ballot guy but 3000 hits should get you in
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
So you don't necessarily think a player should be one of the best players in baseball for any period of time to get in?
Trying to be clear.
Raffy had a peak as one of the best players in baseball.
But I think there was a justifiable argument for keeping him out.
But the "he never started an ASG/won an MVP" argument was retarded.
The fact that he was a first baseman in a huge offensive era who had several MVP caliber seasons but no historically great years is a good one.
he was in an MVP conversation one year ('99)
and maybe should have been in another one in 91. But other than that, he was never really a legit MVP candidate
I think if you can look past his contract Michael Young deserves HOF consideration should he get to 3000 hits
People around here love to hate on him because of his contract. Getting 200 hits a season is no small feat and takes a level of skill that not alot of baseball players possess. To do it for as long as it takes to get to 3000 hits a pretty remarkable. That is my point
Bryan Smith (12:17:17 PM PT): Justin Smoak and Josh Hamilton. The AL West might just have found their Bash Brothers, v. 2.0.
Consideration, yes.
Automatic inclusion, not even close.
You’re right, it’s no small feet, but it’s also not a picture of the entire game. It ignores large parts of power and on base skills and fielding ability.
Its still not an easy milestone to get
and it wasn’t like we’re talking about someone who has gotten 3000 singles.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
I don't think I'm calling it easy.
A lot of things are hard to do. I don’t think everything that’s hard to do in baseball should mean in get in to the Hall of Fame.
Are we more interested in what’s hard or what helps teams win the most?
Also, you’re right he hasn’t just gotten 3,000 singles, but if you’re putting players in for reaching 3,000 hits, your ignoring whether or not they were all singles. That’s the point: there’s a lot more to the picture and by looking at just one skill you’re ignoring a lot more than also matters.
I don't think anyone's doing that
There are some things that are assumed by most people here and one of those is that to get to 3000 hits, you usually are going to have to be pretty good overall. With Young specifically, I think you can look at his career and see a handful of really good seasons to go along with a solid career and reaching a rare milestone.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
I think its pretty safe
since there has yet to be a member of the 3000 hit club who didn’t have a HOF worthy career. If you look even at the active hits leaders, you’ve got a top 5 of Griffey, Jeter, Pudge, Vizquel, and Sheffield. Those are all guys who if they made it to 3000 hits, I wouldn’t have a problem putting them in the HOF (with the top 3 being HOF worthy anyways). And of course, Jeter’s the only making it to 3000 out of that bunch or even has a snowball’s chance of making it to that.
When the time comes that you have a Juan Pierre type player who can make it to 3000 hits with a crappy OBP, no power, and no defense to fall back on, then I think you might not be able to make that assumption.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
I actually don't believe Lou Brock had a HoF worthy career.
Outside of having a high-profile record, which MY wouldn’t have. And I personally don’t agree with putting someone in just for having a specific record, but that’s at least more than Young will stake claim to. So, no, I don’t think it’s a given.
When the time comes that you have a Juan Pierre type player who can make it to 3000 hits with a crappy OBP, no power, and no defense to fall back on, then I think you might not be able to make that assumption.
That’s Brock. Crappy OBP, no power and horrific defense (I’ve read a few people calling him the worst LF with a career at the position as long as him ever). After the Oscars I think I might look at how much he profiled like Pierre. I’m assuming better (and I’m also assuming better than MY), but I’m interested.
Well, I must interject a couple of points....
First, I’ll disclose- I’m a Cardinals homer. I was at the game when Brock got his 3000th hit. I was only 3, but I was there with my dad. But I can be objective.
Yes, Brock’s SB% wasn’t as high as you’d hope. And he was a bad defender. But at the time he retired, he had the 3000 hits and he was the all time leader in SB by a good margin. And that’s back when people cared about and valued batting avg, hits, and the SB. He was also an outstanding postseason performer. In 21 World Series games, he had a line of .391/.424/.655 SSS, yes. But that’s pretty great. He was a valuable part of 2 World Series Champions (should have been 3….damn you Curt Flood).
Is he Musial or Gehrig or Mays? Of course not.
But is he a Hall of Famer? I say yes.
If you want to say he’s on the bottom rung of the Hall of Fame ladder, I won’t argue. But I do think he deserves his spot in Cooperstown.
I looked over the 3,000 hits list during the commercial to see if I could find anyone else I thought didn't belong.
I was actually surprised by how clearly most of them belong. The only ones that seem borderline at best are the aforementioned Brock and Palmeiro, who was debated heavily even before the steroid talk. The rest are so far ahead of them, let alone MY, it’s not even funny.
At this point in his career, I’d be willing to bet Molitor wasn’t to far ahead of Young, but he left no doubt by the time it was over.
Brock and Palmeiro
On Palmeiro, I feel that he deserves to be in the HOF for being as good as he was for as long as he was. He was never an MVP winner, but over his 20 year career, you aren’t going to find many people better than him. I don’t think Palmeiro’s career should be discounted because his competition always included some absolutely amazing seasons from various hitters. His combination of hitting for power and for contact makes him HOF worthy for me. You don’t have players in the 500 HR club and the 3000 hit club.
I’ve never really looked at Brock’s career too closely, but after looking at it now I do think he was HOF worthy too. Maybe not the best HOFer there is, but he was good enough for long enough to put him in the Hall. He does seem more like the Juan Pierre type, but he was also playing in a different era where the contact hitter was more valuable. Pierre has 2 seasons with an OPS+ over 100 with that second one coming last season in 425 PAs. Brock went 12 years with an OPS+ of at least 107.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
I suppose I can't say it's wrong to put Brock in the Hall of Fame.
But I will say if Brock is in there it needs to be humongous. In no small part because his Dunn-like defense.
After writing this sentence, I decided to go over to Baseball Projection to see if Rally’s WAR is nicer to Brock than I am. In fact, I think it’s worse. 39.1 over his career, total. No seasons over 6, only four seasons over four. TEN seasons below average.
The thing with OPS+ is that 100 is average, but left fielders should be well above average. And he was actually hurting his team at that low-value position, to boot.
I would probably put Palmeiro in, but I’m also biased. I do think there was room for debate, though. Brock, I think, is far below the standard of even this Hall of Fame. He’s not the worst guy there, but well below what it typically takes to get in.
Another note on Brock:
For all his running around on the basepaths, he was only 75% successful, meaning he was basically breaking even on his steal attempts. He did have a good run of years where he was a positive, but usually not by much. Only twice did he break 80%.
On Brock
Again, he played in a different era. As a LF, he still had a 103 OPS+ compared to other LFs. And if Brock didn’t get to 3000 hits, then yeah, he probably doesn’t deserve to be in the HOF. But he was able to always be an above average hitter who accomplished something few others have. He might be the worst member of the 3000 hit club, but he’s still a member.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
If Brock is in...
…shouldn’t Greg Luzinski be in, as well?
Bad defensive left fielder, 12 years with an OPS+ of at least 107, and in Luzinski’s case, several truly dominant offensive seasons, which you can’t say about Brock.
by Adam J. Morris on Mar 8, 2010 9:27 AM CST up reply actions
If he played a little longer
He probably has more of a shot. When you aren’t that MVP winner, you’re going to have to be more like Raffy who stuck around long enough to make is resume HOF worthy.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
But...
…Luzinski was as good a player, overall, as Brock. Probably a little better.
If Brock is a worthy HOFer, why isn’t Luzinski?
by Adam J. Morris on Mar 8, 2010 5:04 PM CST up reply actions
The Bull is an interesting name
that doesn’t get brought up much. In the same vein as Frank Howard and Dick Allen. If it weren’t for Joe Morgan and George Foster, you’d hear his name a lot more.
'Waiting for a girl and she gets me into fights
Waiting for a girl we get drunk on Friday night'
Why draw the distinction between inclusion and consideration?
You either think he should get in if he retires with 3000+ hits or you don’t. Who cares if he’s “considered”? What matters is the end result. Should he get in or not?
"Ok, post your favorite moment of the Tom Hicks era
Mine is today when he sold the team." - t ball
just an FYI, looks like 4-5 ST games will be televised
1st being March 15th.
"Clearly, I've been wrong. VY is awesome." - AJM
cool, thanks
what network? MLBN?
A baseball game is simply a nervous breakdown divided into nine innings.
3/15, 8pm, FSSW
channel 676 on direcTV
hopefully it doesn’t change.
"Clearly, I've been wrong. VY is awesome." - AJM
But ...
almost everything LSJ says about MY actually is MY hating. Important distinction to remember Brooks.
"Ok, post your favorite moment of the Tom Hicks era
Mine is today when he sold the team." - t ball
Oh
I’m not around as much so I didn’t know his history on the subject. My bad.
by LoneStarBallUser on Mar 7, 2010 6:02 PM CST up reply actions
It's along the same lines as my opinion on everything Gonzo several years back.
No matter what the man did that was good, I couldn’t bring myself to be anything but negative about him. LSJ is the same way with MY, only douchier.
"Ok, post your favorite moment of the Tom Hicks era
Mine is today when he sold the team." - t ball
you guys are both douchebags
there’s very little justification for hating someone on your own team unless they do something horribly offensive.
I dunno, I think there's plenty of reason to hate them.
At least as much as there is players on any team. You’re just kind of being an idiot if you want them to fail (unless their failing somehow helps the team).
I can understand getting pissed about Manny’s loafing about at times. I actually like Manny probably BECAUSE he’s never been on my team. If I had to experience that stuff on the Rangers, no matter how good he was, I would never have been able to embrace him.
But I also would have loved to have him on the team. . .
The loafing is what killed Juan for me.
"Ok, post your favorite moment of the Tom Hicks era
Mine is today when he sold the team." - t ball
If he played for us now, it probably would me too.
To be that bad in the field and not even try would make me want to bust his fucking head.
That and all the stories about how whiny he was.
To be fair, I didn't really get obsessive about hating Juan until the last season he was here ...
when he had that mysterious leg injury that kept him on the shelf for the last half of the season. I would begin every morning posting on the ESPN boards that it was a great day because Juan was still on the DL and not otherwise polluting the team.
As I recall, Brooks did call me out on that one morning when he was having a heavy flow day.
"Ok, post your favorite moment of the Tom Hicks era
Mine is today when he sold the team." - t ball
That last year and the mysterious injury. . .
. . . if I recall, was the year Johnny Oates wanted him to go on deck late in a game to make the pitcher think he had to pitch to the guy at the plate, and Juando refused because, I believe, he basically worried about looking good.
You cut me deep, Brooks.
"Ok, post your favorite moment of the Tom Hicks era
Mine is today when he sold the team." - t ball
They actually seem like pretty similar situations.
Both were kind of overrated, neither played good defense, and neither had particularly likable personalities.
The difference being that Gonzo didn’t even seem to fucking try. And while MY is mostly boring and occasionally douchey, Gonzo was an out-and-out whiny-assed bitch. And yet, I hate MY more. That probably has a lot to do with knowing less now than I did then; in hindsight, I’m not sure how I could tolerate Igor. Probably because he was better (I think, could be wrong) and wasn’t overrated for the same annoying scrappy leadership shit that the media runs away with.
Everything LSJ says about almost any player
is hating.
Freude, schoener Goetterfunken,
Tochter aus Elysium,
Wir betreten feuertrunken,
Himmlische dein Heiligtum.
and manager
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
OT: Wikipedia people are psychotic.
I think there are people that just take control of an article and won’t let anyone else edit it, correct or not.
Not sure why I’m bothering.
Yeah, the wiki-nerds take themselves and their task pretty seriously
Even if it’s a page that probably garners less than 5-10 hits per day.
I kind of enjoy fucking with them from time to time too.
Morality you can fake. Fun you either have or you don't.
by LSJ on Mar 7, 2010 4:44 PM CST up reply actions
I posted Cole Hamels's FIP, LD%, GB%, HR%, FB% and BABIP for 2009.
Since, you know, they were exactly the same as the year before pretty much. No inference, just the stats. That’s apparently “original research.”
3000 hits
I would like Young to reach that milestone. Wouldn’t it mean that he stayed healthy and was productive for the Rangers, it would help the Rangers be the team we all want them to be? Michael Young has developed into a very good hitter and I hope he is able to continue to be so.
I soloed in the Mile High Club!
As I've said, the odds are definitely against him.
But when has that not been the case with MY? It will be fun to watch him the next several years to see if the predictors are correct or if he can be a “special” case like Molitor. If he reaches 3000 hits, he will have accomplished something that, based upon the research above, should certainly land him in the HOF in my opinion, given that he will have likely reached that milestone while not being a good hitter until much later than most of the other members. He will also have collected a number of hits in his later years that few other players in MLB history have collected—which would also make him a special player. If he gets there, I think he’s in the HOF and I think he’ll have earned it. Like probably everyone, except maybe LSJ, I’m rooting for him. However, like probably everyone, I’m agreeing that the odds are stacked pretty high against him.
"Ok, post your favorite moment of the Tom Hicks era
Mine is today when he sold the team." - t ball
Wait, I'm confused.
he will have accomplished something that, based upon the research above, should certainly land him in the HOF in my opinion, given that he will have likely reached that milestone while not being a good hitter until much later than most of the other members.
Is this not how you meant to word it, or would you actually give him extra credit for reaching the milestone on a different timeline than normal?
I will say I actually think there’s a good chance I might agree with MY being a Hall of Famer if he has the kind of career that gets him to 3,000 hits. Not because of the milestone but because of the kind of seasons that would be added to his resume, most likely, if he got to that point. This is not related to the question above.
Sure.
The guys he’s being compared to had usually had two good seasons before MY had his first. If you’ll remember, MY basically transformed himself into a good hitter and will have reached the milestone with a later start. I think that is noteworthy on a HOF resume. Coupled with what I said about the kinds of seasons he’d have to have from here on out (which you reiterated in your 2nd paragraph), I think that would make his accomplishment that much more “special”. I’m not saying consider the late start in a vacuum, but when you consider it with everything else, I think it gives him a bump.
"Ok, post your favorite moment of the Tom Hicks era
Mine is today when he sold the team." - t ball
Wait.
I don’t get that at all. You actually think he belongs in the Hall of Fame more for getting good at a later point in his life? Why? How does that make him better? If a player does it earlier, how does that make him worse?
The one possibility I could see is if there's evidence he should have been in the Majors earlier. . .
. . . and was held back by his organization for reasons outside of his own abilities and performance. If valuable years were cost him because of his team and not because he just wasn’t good enough, I’d say that’s pretty important to look at. That doesn’t seem the case with MY.
I think I see what Athos is saying, though he can clearly respond for himself.
The argument here would rest on the nature of “fame” in that MY becomes a more interesting story than a player who displayed a talent for hitting the ball early on. In a nutshell, he’s so gritty that he overcomes a lack of ability through sheer gumption, and a certain breed of baseball writer eats that up (I like stories of perseverance too, but most folks on this board are rightly wary of grit and its baggage).
Okay.
I would completely disagree with that being a good argument for Hall of Fame inclusion because of the path it would take you down with other players, but it certainly makes sense, at least.
I can see that sort of being the case
Not sure how much that may have delayed his starting role on an ML team as opposed to just not being that good, but the story with him was always that Toronto had a logjam of MI prospects and Young could have gotten a little delayed because of that (spending full seasons in A ball and high A ball)
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
It's possible then.
I do think that’s possibly true with Kinsler. I think a couple people at BP have brought that up, as well. No Soriano, he might have hit All-Star level younger and with another 3-9 months in the majors.
I seriously doubt if Kinsler gets to that point that playing time will be the difference between the Hall of Fame for him.
Agreed on Kinsler
If he keeps doing what he’s been doing up to this point, he’s not going to need counting stats to be considered HOF worthy.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
My thinking is more along the lines of MY achieving a high milestone with a later start.
I think that is a plus in his favor if he hits the same milestone in less time and starting at a later age. That’s really all I was trying to say.
"Ok, post your favorite moment of the Tom Hicks era
Mine is today when he sold the team." - t ball
Okay, but I'm trying to figure out why that's a plus.
Do you think the late start was because he was a late bloomer or because the team held him back? If it’s the latter then that makes sense. If it’s the former then I don’t see how it’s a plus or minus in his favor, it’s just the way he ages.
He's obviously a late bloomer.
The knock on him that first couple of years was that he wouldn’t be a good hitter in the bigs. Out of nowhere he just seemed to put it all together. I really don’t see the point as a difference maker, but more of a nudge in his favor, if that makes any sense.
"Ok, post your favorite moment of the Tom Hicks era
Mine is today when he sold the team." - t ball
I'm sorry, I'm really trying not to be condescending for once. . .
. . . but, no, it doesn’t make sense. I just don’t see what makes a late bloomer better than an early bloomer or a normal bloomer if all things otherwise are equal.
I'm not saying it makes him better than the other guys that get 3000.
I’m saying that accomplishing the feat in less time and starting later ought to give him a bump when it’s time to consider him for HOF (assuming he makes it to 3000). I don’t think it’s a huge deal, just something that ought to be noted.
"Ok, post your favorite moment of the Tom Hicks era
Mine is today when he sold the team." - t ball
I put the over/under at 2600 hits
It is going to be hard for him to remain a regular as his skills decline.
Vladimir Guererro - 2010 AL MVP
His contract helps him for that
He’s going to have to eventually move to DH, but his starting role and the Rangers lack of 3B prospects will make sure Young starts barring a horrible decline in the near future.
By 2028, Mark Teixeira will be in the HOF.
"I am one of the biggest Texas Ranger fans out there but I'm also one of the smartest. Deal with it."
-The Outlaw
His contract
only impacts him through his age 36 season.
It’s tough to see him being in high demand as a DH. Even with his career 300 BA, he only has a career 349 OBP which isn’t much better than an average player. He has limited at best power, but with the move to 3B and perhaps DH, I suppose he is free to take whatever supplements he needs to bulk up for power
"I don't condone steroids or any other type of growth hormones or anything else, but I could care less, and, for the most part, I don't think the fans give a (bleep). The people that care about it are the people that probably don't like baseball," - Jim Leyland
" his 1,416 hits during his Age 26-32 seasons are the sixth-most in MLB history, "
cool stat
Fanatics - my webcomic
Very much, even.
"Back on the scene, with a gangsta lean" RW
"When you have a weapon on your shoulder like he has, you can be cool." RW on Perez
And the little bastard threw it for a swinging strike three in a 3-2 count. He’s blessed. And ballsy.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
