Does Barry Larkin deserve the Hall?

Kelric · 04-19-2002, 04:14 PM

If Larkin plays only one season in OOTP and hits around .270 for the year with decent numbers, do you put him in the Hall based on his career numbers? I'm not too sure how good of a defender he has been in real life, so a few Gold Gloves might be a deciding factor.

Personally I tend to vote him in because I like the guy, but I'm wondering what the rest of you do?

Khaos · 04-19-2002, 04:20 PM

I don't see him as a hall of famer. Good player, but not great.

Hootiefish · 04-19-2002, 05:15 PM

I am going to have to say no to Larkin. Alot can be said for a great player who spent his entire career with one team. But, I am of the opinion that Hall of Famers should have legendary careers, not just great ones. Heck, I don't even agree that Sosa should make the Hall. I think I am going to get nailed for that one.

Geiiga · 04-19-2002, 05:16 PM

He's neither Ozzie Smith nor Cal Ripken. He's not a player that went out and dominated year after year. Hell, I'm surprised to find out he's still playing.

rallymonkey1982 · 04-19-2002, 05:21 PM

Larkin is not a hall of famer, but he would be a shoe-in for the hall of good. He's been very good for many years, but I don't think he's really been a top player for enough years

ELDoro · 04-19-2002, 05:42 PM

I think Barry Larkin is a hall of famer. When you say hes no Ripkin....... if Larkin had the steak would that change things??? Barry's numbers match up against Cal's.....and Larkin's defense in his early years was amazing. If you watch some tape of the 1990 season or WS you'll see Larkin make some amazing plays that a lot of the top shortstops of today couldnt make. Hes won a number of gold gloves, an MVP award, and has a ring.
Larkin was also one of the guys that set the standard for SS today. Guys who can hit for average,power,speed, and defense. Hes also had a 51 SB season along with many 30 SB seasons.
Larkin also does many things that other players wouldnt think of doing. He sacrafices his numbers for the better of the team. Every time there is a man on 2B with no outs he will hit a grounder to the right side to get the man over and that doesnt show up in the books.

Dxgarnett · 04-19-2002, 05:45 PM

Nah.

Chris.

TheRockCT · 04-19-2002, 05:49 PM

Guys like catcher Ray Schalk (11 career HR, .253 career avg., .981 career fielding percentage), shortstop Dave Bancroft (32 HR, .279 avg, .944 FP), shortstop Rabbit Maranville (28 HR, .258 avg., .952 FP, outfielder Monte Irvin (99 HR, .293 avg, .983 FP), shortstop Bobby Wallace (34 HR, .268 avg., .938 FP)and outfielder Harry Hooper (75 HR, .281 avg, .966 FP) say hello.

A seventeen year career (so far) with a career line of 181 career HR, .299 avg, 362 steals, and .974 career FP is by no means outstanding. But no one should be surprised if he ends up in the Hall.

Anonymous Ghost · 04-19-2002, 07:20 PM

It's a really interesting subject, and each side can make a very strong case.

The case for Larkin:

- 11 time All Star
- 102 HOF monitor score (avg HOF ~100)
- 4 Gold Gloves
- Easily the most dominating shortstop in the NL for the decade of the 1990s
- 1995 MVP
- performed very well in the postseasons he played in

The case against Larkin:

- will not achieve any major milestones
- almost certainly was overrated defensively for the past several years
- only 851 RBIs over 16 seasons, despite playing about half his career in one of the greatest offensive eras
- finished in the top 10 in NL MVP votes only twice in his career (won it 1995, finished 7th in 1990)
- never led his league in a single category and Gray Ink score is only 66 (avg HOF ~144)
- of the 10 players that he is most similar to, only 3 are in the HOF (Arky Vaughn, Bobby Doehr, Tony Lazzeri) - although Biggio has a very good shot as well.

Ultimately, Larkin appears to me to have very similar credentials to that of one of the players he is similar to: Alan Trammell. Trammell was a very good player for almost two decades, but will likely never be enshrined. If Larkin were selected, he wouldn't be the worst player ever given that honor - but in my opinion it would not be an injustice if he did not make it in.

HRBL Owner · 04-20-2002, 01:54 PM

booo

Shorty · 04-20-2002, 02:08 PM

I am very biased as he is my favorite player, but I say YES, if he gets to 2500 hits, and maintains his BA by the .300 mark.

Along with the Gold Gloves he did win, if Ozzie weren't there, I think that number would be bigger.

Sloan · 04-20-2002, 02:36 PM

Well, I'm from Detroit so I'm an Alan Trammell fan, and he doesn't look likely to get in.

Trammell

AB 8288
H 2365
HR 185
RBI 1003
SB 236
AVG .285

4 Gold Gloves
6 time All Star
1984 World Series MVP

Larkin
AB 6843
H 2048
HR 181
RBI 851
SB 362
AVG .299

3 Gold Gloves
11 Time All Star
1 NL MVP

Larkin's stats are a little better though. . .

JimServo · 04-20-2002, 03:07 PM

Alan Trammell, and Larkin should probably get in. However, I don't like the argument that because THIS guy is in the hall, then THIS guy should be in the hall. For more on those questionable picks (Bancroft, Schalk) be sure to read Bill James's The Politics of Glory. Classic stuff.

TheRockCT · 04-20-2002, 04:44 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JimServo:
Alan Trammell, and Larkin should probably get in. However, I don't like the argument that because THIS guy is in the hall, then THIS guy should be in the hall. For more on those questionable picks (Bancroft, Schalk) be sure to read Bill James's The Politics of Glory. Classic stuff.<hr /></blockquote>For those who haven't read this, could you elaborate or expand upon your reasoning? For what reasons other than statistical production on offense and defense should a player get into the Hall of Fame? So why is the argument that I began regarding players like Dave Bancroft and Ray Schalk apparently not a valid or strong case? I would be interested in reading the source that you stated, but until then if you could just offer up or divulge a handful of reasons on why the comparison of people that are on the borderline of the Hall (Larkin & Trammell) and those who have been questionably let in is not a good argument to make, that would be great.

Scott Vibert · 04-20-2002, 04:46 PM

IMO, no.

Shorty · 04-20-2002, 05:02 PM

Here's what Peter Gammons had to say in the April 11th Mailbag response to a question about this very topic.

What do you think about the possibility of Reds shortstop Barry Larkin, now in his 17th year, being elected to the Hall of Fame? Along with Cal Ripken, he was the best shortstop of his generation. He's an 11-time All-Star and was the '95 NL MVP. He won three Gold Gloves (once Ozzie finally retired). His numbers don't stack up with Jeter's and A-Rod's, but the game is different now. -- Doug, Erlanger, Ky.
PWG --

There's no question that the numbers Jeter, A-Rod and Garciaparra have put up will hurt him. So will the injuries, which have dogged him three of the last five seasons going into 2002. He is very close, with a .299 average, the potential of having 200 homers, 2,500 hits, 1,000 RBI and more than 400 steals and some great defensive years, as well as an MVP. He may fall short because he lapsed into the A-Rod era, but let's see how he finishes.

Jason Moyer · 04-20-2002, 05:04 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by Shorty:
I am very biased as he is my favorite player, but I say YES, if he gets to 2500 hits, and maintains his BA by the .300 mark.<hr /></blockquote>If 2500 H and a .300 average is the key, why isn't Al Oliver in the Hall of Fame?

Personally, I think if Barry Larkin is in the hall then you need to have people like Alan Trammel, Keith Hernandez, Gary Carter (oh, wait, he *should* be in), Dave Kingman, Greg Luzinski, Dick Allen, Dale Murphy and so on in there too. These were all good players who, in their prime, were probably a bigger asset to their teams than Larkin (even as a SS) and have put up numbers that are just on the cusp of not being hall-of-fame worthy.

Jason

Jason Moyer · 04-20-2002, 05:57 PM

<blockquote>quote:<hr />Originally posted by JimServo:
Alan Trammell, and Larkin should probably get in. However, I don't like the argument that because THIS guy is in the hall, then THIS guy should be in the hall. For more on those questionable picks (Bancroft, Schalk) be sure to read Bill James's The Politics of Glory. Classic stuff.<hr /></blockquote>I dunno about the politics of Schalk, but I was pretty sure he was in because he revolutionized the catcher position...

Personally, I'm just surprised Richie Ashburn ever made the hall, especially playing in the same league as someone like Mays.

Jason

pcm72 · 04-20-2002, 06:12 PM

The Hall has some problems to begin with.

Honestly as a Reds fan I believe Larkin deserves to be in the HOF. He's been the NL's best overall SS for most of his career. Yes Ozzie was a better fielder based on stats but Barry could hit much better than Ozzie. And yes other players may have had better seasons but Barry has been consistant when he's not injured.

Hell there is a group of people in Cincy who believe that if Ozzie Smith is a hall of fame player, then Dave Concepcion is a hall of fame player.

The Hall has kept players out who deserve to be in and brought players in who have no right being in there.

The_Offspring187 · 04-20-2002, 06:37 PM

Sosa doesn't deserve to be in the Hall?

Interesting.

Let's see, he's 33 years old and has 456 career homeruns. You talk as if he's retiring tomorrow. Sheesh, if the guy retires with more than 600 homers, he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, end of story.

He put baseball back on the map when baseball sorely needed some heroes. He and McGwire captivated an entire nation in 98 with their historic chase and made some people come back to baseball after the strike soured them.

Sammy Sosa is the true rags to riches story. He started out as a boxer in the Dominican Republic, but his mother told him she wouldn't watch him fight. So at the age of 14, he decided to pick up a broom handle (or stick, whatever they used down there) and play "baseball" for the very first time. They used a milk cartons for gloves, rolled up socks for balls, and sticks/broom handles for bats (I read a bio on Sosa so I know quite a bit of stuff about him, not to mention he's my fave player). He went on to become one of the most recognized and revered Latin American players EVER. He has over 200 career stolen bases. He was the only Cub to go 30-30 in a season, and he did it twice. He won an MVP Award and competed for another last year. He drove in 158 RBIs and 160 RBIs, two of the highest totals in the history of the National League. He has consistently improved himself each year since 1997, and he plays harder than almost all the other high-priced players. He has great hustle, he has improved his fielding, hell last year he hit an inside the park homerun for his 63rd homer! He's a true role model for kids, a great ambassador for the sport of baseball, plus he's a damn good player. Like him or not, he is a good/great player. He has 1813 career hits in 1740 career games. Not that bad at all, averaging over a hit a game. He's got a .544 career slugging percentage.

Right now, I dunno if he'd make the Hall or not. But if he retired right now due to an injury or something, I think he could make it because of the potential he had to do even better things. Hitting 456 career homers is pretty special, especially when you are only 33 years old. I've heard of a few guys that were elected because their careers ended early and if they had continued, they probably would've been legendary. They take age into consideration too. I read about this somewhere but I can't remember where.

Oh well, I just had to respond seeing as how I'm a Cubs fan and all. Don't take it as a personal rip on you, but just more of a defense of Sammy.

04-19-2002, 04:14 PM	#1
Kelric Hall Of Famer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Greater Boston Area Posts: 3,992	Does Barry Larkin deserve the Hall? If Larkin plays only one season in OOTP and hits around .270 for the year with decent numbers, do you put him in the Hall based on his career numbers? I'm not too sure how good of a defender he has been in real life, so a few Gold Gloves might be a deciding factor. Personally I tend to vote him in because I like the guy, but I'm wondering what the rest of you do?

04-19-2002, 04:20 PM	#2
Khaos Major Leagues Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Canfield, OH Posts: 473	I don't see him as a hall of famer. Good player, but not great. __________________ squish

04-19-2002, 05:15 PM	#3
Hootiefish Minors (Single A) Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Blacksburg, VA Posts: 55	I am going to have to say no to Larkin. Alot can be said for a great player who spent his entire career with one team. But, I am of the opinion that Hall of Famers should have legendary careers, not just great ones. Heck, I don't even agree that Sosa should make the Hall. I think I am going to get nailed for that one. __________________ "Duffman says alot of things! Ooh, yeah!" -- Duffman

04-19-2002, 05:16 PM	#4
Geiiga Minors (Double A) Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: USA Posts: 195	He's neither Ozzie Smith nor Cal Ripken. He's not a player that went out and dominated year after year. Hell, I'm surprised to find out he's still playing. __________________

04-19-2002, 05:21 PM	#5
rallymonkey1982 Major Leagues Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Orange County Posts: 436	Larkin is not a hall of famer, but he would be a shoe-in for the hall of good. He's been very good for many years, but I don't think he's really been a top player for enough years __________________ "This is sort of like living the American dream. You get to come the ballpark and get a free beer." - Arte Moreno My Life

04-19-2002, 05:42 PM	#6
ELDoro All Star Reserve Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Dayton, OH Posts: 535	I think Barry Larkin is a hall of famer. When you say hes no Ripkin....... if Larkin had the steak would that change things??? Barry's numbers match up against Cal's.....and Larkin's defense in his early years was amazing. If you watch some tape of the 1990 season or WS you'll see Larkin make some amazing plays that a lot of the top shortstops of today couldnt make. Hes won a number of gold gloves, an MVP award, and has a ring. Larkin was also one of the guys that set the standard for SS today. Guys who can hit for average,power,speed, and defense. Hes also had a 51 SB season along with many 30 SB seasons. Larkin also does many things that other players wouldnt think of doing. He sacrafices his numbers for the better of the team. Every time there is a man on 2B with no outs he will hit a grounder to the right side to get the man over and that doesnt show up in the books. __________________ MLNB Commish: https://statsplus.net/mlnb/

04-19-2002, 05:45 PM	#7
Dxgarnett All Star Reserve Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Houston Posts: 614	Nah. Chris. __________________ Buckcheeks was here.

04-19-2002, 05:49 PM	#8
TheRockCT All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: TN Posts: 1,083	Guys like catcher Ray Schalk (11 career HR, .253 career avg., .981 career fielding percentage), shortstop Dave Bancroft (32 HR, .279 avg, .944 FP), shortstop Rabbit Maranville (28 HR, .258 avg., .952 FP, outfielder Monte Irvin (99 HR, .293 avg, .983 FP), shortstop Bobby Wallace (34 HR, .268 avg., .938 FP)and outfielder Harry Hooper (75 HR, .281 avg, .966 FP) say hello. A seventeen year career (so far) with a career line of 181 career HR, .299 avg, 362 steals, and .974 career FP is by no means outstanding. But no one should be surprised if he ends up in the Hall. __________________ GM, Vermont Emperor Penguins - POTD POTD Champions: 2011, 2012, 2013 GM, Monterrey Aztecs* - NABA *NABA Champions: 2013

04-19-2002, 07:20 PM	#9
Anonymous Ghost All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 751	It's a really interesting subject, and each side can make a very strong case. The case for Larkin: - 11 time All Star - 102 HOF monitor score (avg HOF ~100) - 4 Gold Gloves - Easily the most dominating shortstop in the NL for the decade of the 1990s - 1995 MVP - performed very well in the postseasons he played in The case against Larkin: - will not achieve any major milestones - almost certainly was overrated defensively for the past several years - only 851 RBIs over 16 seasons, despite playing about half his career in one of the greatest offensive eras - finished in the top 10 in NL MVP votes only twice in his career (won it 1995, finished 7th in 1990) - never led his league in a single category and Gray Ink score is only 66 (avg HOF ~144) - of the 10 players that he is most similar to, only 3 are in the HOF (Arky Vaughn, Bobby Doehr, Tony Lazzeri) - although Biggio has a very good shot as well. Ultimately, Larkin appears to me to have very similar credentials to that of one of the players he is similar to: Alan Trammell. Trammell was a very good player for almost two decades, but will likely never be enshrined. If Larkin were selected, he wouldn't be the worst player ever given that honor - but in my opinion it would not be an injustice if he did not make it in.

04-20-2002, 01:54 PM	#10
HRBL Owner Minors (Rookie Ball) Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 20	booo __________________ I always got OOTP problems! =) HRBL Owner. Go Redsox!

04-20-2002, 02:08 PM	#11
Shorty All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Cincinnati, Ohio Posts: 992	I am very biased as he is my favorite player, but I say YES, if he gets to 2500 hits, and maintains his BA by the .300 mark. Along with the Gold Gloves he did win, if Ozzie weren't there, I think that number would be bigger. __________________ Here we go Redlegs here we go!

04-20-2002, 02:36 PM	#12
Sloan Bat Boy Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Michigan Posts: 3	Well, I'm from Detroit so I'm an Alan Trammell fan, and he doesn't look likely to get in. Trammell AB 8288 H 2365 HR 185 RBI 1003 SB 236 AVG .285 4 Gold Gloves 6 time All Star 1984 World Series MVP Larkin AB 6843 H 2048 HR 181 RBI 851 SB 362 AVG .299 3 Gold Gloves 11 Time All Star 1 NL MVP Larkin's stats are a little better though. . .

04-20-2002, 03:07 PM	#13
JimServo Major Leagues Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Near Philadelphia, PA Posts: 418	Alan Trammell, and Larkin should probably get in. However, I don't like the argument that because THIS guy is in the hall, then THIS guy should be in the hall. For more on those questionable picks (Bancroft, Schalk) be sure to read Bill James's The Politics of Glory. Classic stuff. __________________ "When I was a small boy in Kansas, a friend of mine and I went fishing and as we sat there in the warmth of the summer afternoon on a river bank, we talked about what we wanted to do when we grew up. I told him that I wanted to be a real major league baseball player, a genuine professional like Honus Wagner. My friend said that he'd like to be President of the United States. Neither of us got our wish." -Dwight D. Eisenhower

04-20-2002, 04:44 PM	#14
TheRockCT All Star Starter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: TN Posts: 1,083	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by JimServo: <strong>Alan Trammell, and Larkin should probably get in. However, I don't like the argument that because THIS guy is in the hall, then THIS guy should be in the hall. For more on those questionable picks (Bancroft, Schalk) be sure to read Bill James's The Politics of Glory. Classic stuff.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">For those who haven't read this, could you elaborate or expand upon your reasoning? For what reasons other than statistical production on offense and defense should a player get into the Hall of Fame? So why is the argument that I began regarding players like Dave Bancroft and Ray Schalk apparently not a valid or strong case? I would be interested in reading the source that you stated, but until then if you could just offer up or divulge a handful of reasons on why the comparison of people that are on the borderline of the Hall (Larkin & Trammell) and those who have been questionably let in is not a good argument to make, that would be great. __________________ GM, Vermont Emperor Penguins - POTD POTD Champions: 2011, 2012, 2013 GM, Monterrey Aztecs* - NABA *NABA Champions: 2013

04-20-2002, 04:46 PM	#15
Scott Vibert Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: My Computer Posts: 8,249	IMO, no.

04-20-2002, 05:02 PM	#16
Shorty All Star Reserve Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Cincinnati, Ohio Posts: 992	Here's what Peter Gammons had to say in the April 11th Mailbag response to a question about this very topic. What do you think about the possibility of Reds shortstop Barry Larkin, now in his 17th year, being elected to the Hall of Fame? Along with Cal Ripken, he was the best shortstop of his generation. He's an 11-time All-Star and was the '95 NL MVP. He won three Gold Gloves (once Ozzie finally retired). His numbers don't stack up with Jeter's and A-Rod's, but the game is different now. -- Doug, Erlanger, Ky. PWG -- There's no question that the numbers Jeter, A-Rod and Garciaparra have put up will hurt him. So will the injuries, which have dogged him three of the last five seasons going into 2002. He is very close, with a .299 average, the potential of having 200 homers, 2,500 hits, 1,000 RBI and more than 400 steals and some great defensive years, as well as an MVP. He may fall short because he lapsed into the A-Rod era, but let's see how he finishes. __________________ Here we go Redlegs here we go!

04-20-2002, 05:04 PM	#17
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,106	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by Shorty: <strong>I am very biased as he is my favorite player, but I say YES, if he gets to 2500 hits, and maintains his BA by the .300 mark.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">If 2500 H and a .300 average is the key, why isn't Al Oliver in the Hall of Fame? Personally, I think if Barry Larkin is in the hall then you need to have people like Alan Trammel, Keith Hernandez, Gary Carter (oh, wait, he should be in), Dave Kingman, Greg Luzinski, Dick Allen, Dale Murphy and so on in there too. These were all good players who, in their prime, were probably a bigger asset to their teams than Larkin (even as a SS) and have put up numbers that are just on the cusp of not being hall-of-fame worthy. Jason __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

04-20-2002, 05:57 PM	#18
Jason Moyer Hall Of Famer Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 5,106	</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">Originally posted by JimServo: <strong>Alan Trammell, and Larkin should probably get in. However, I don't like the argument that because THIS guy is in the hall, then THIS guy should be in the hall. For more on those questionable picks (Bancroft, Schalk) be sure to read Bill James's The Politics of Glory. Classic stuff.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial">I dunno about the politics of Schalk, but I was pretty sure he was in because he revolutionized the catcher position... Personally, I'm just surprised Richie Ashburn ever made the hall, especially playing in the same league as someone like Mays. Jason __________________ "I pretty much popped everything cold turkey. We were doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses." -- Tom House "I was very fortunate to have a pitching coach by the name of Tom House...Tom, I really miss those days that we spent in the weight room and out on the field working together." -- Nolan Ryan's HoF Induction Speech

04-20-2002, 06:12 PM	#19
pcm72 Bat Boy Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 6	The Hall has some problems to begin with. Honestly as a Reds fan I believe Larkin deserves to be in the HOF. He's been the NL's best overall SS for most of his career. Yes Ozzie was a better fielder based on stats but Barry could hit much better than Ozzie. And yes other players may have had better seasons but Barry has been consistant when he's not injured. Hell there is a group of people in Cincy who believe that if Ozzie Smith is a hall of fame player, then Dave Concepcion is a hall of fame player. The Hall has kept players out who deserve to be in and brought players in who have no right being in there.

04-20-2002, 06:37 PM	#20
The_Offspring187 Major Leagues Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Tennessee Posts: 484	Sosa doesn't deserve to be in the Hall? Interesting. Let's see, he's 33 years old and has 456 career homeruns. You talk as if he's retiring tomorrow. Sheesh, if the guy retires with more than 600 homers, he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame, end of story. He put baseball back on the map when baseball sorely needed some heroes. He and McGwire captivated an entire nation in 98 with their historic chase and made some people come back to baseball after the strike soured them. Sammy Sosa is the true rags to riches story. He started out as a boxer in the Dominican Republic, but his mother told him she wouldn't watch him fight. So at the age of 14, he decided to pick up a broom handle (or stick, whatever they used down there) and play "baseball" for the very first time. They used a milk cartons for gloves, rolled up socks for balls, and sticks/broom handles for bats (I read a bio on Sosa so I know quite a bit of stuff about him, not to mention he's my fave player). He went on to become one of the most recognized and revered Latin American players EVER. He has over 200 career stolen bases. He was the only Cub to go 30-30 in a season, and he did it twice. He won an MVP Award and competed for another last year. He drove in 158 RBIs and 160 RBIs, two of the highest totals in the history of the National League. He has consistently improved himself each year since 1997, and he plays harder than almost all the other high-priced players. He has great hustle, he has improved his fielding, hell last year he hit an inside the park homerun for his 63rd homer! He's a true role model for kids, a great ambassador for the sport of baseball, plus he's a damn good player. Like him or not, he is a good/great player. He has 1813 career hits in 1740 career games. Not that bad at all, averaging over a hit a game. He's got a .544 career slugging percentage. Right now, I dunno if he'd make the Hall or not. But if he retired right now due to an injury or something, I think he could make it because of the potential he had to do even better things. Hitting 456 career homers is pretty special, especially when you are only 33 years old. I've heard of a few guys that were elected because their careers ended early and if they had continued, they probably would've been legendary. They take age into consideration too. I read about this somewhere but I can't remember where. Oh well, I just had to respond seeing as how I'm a Cubs fan and all. Don't take it as a personal rip on you, but just more of a defense of Sammy.