1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Frank Thomas - Hall of Famer?

Discussion in 'Sports Forum' started by Andy T., Apr 28, 2008.

?

Should Frank Thomas make the Hall of Fame?

  1. Yes

    5 vote(s)
    62.5%

  2. No

    2 vote(s)
    25.0%

  3. On the Fence

    1 vote(s)
    12.5%
Top Posters
  1. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    #1 Andy T., Apr 28, 2008
  2. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    I voted "Yes" based on his gaudy stats which are just too hard to ignore. Yes, he was one dimensional. Yes, he was a GIDP machine. Yes, he played in a hitter's era. But the man has the 12th highest OPS of all-time. He has two MVP's and was considered among the best hitters in the game for at least 5 years. 500 homers; .300 BA, .420 OBP!, 1600 RBI's. And he has escaped any steroid controversy. I would be surprised if he juiced. His body type was the same at 21 as it is now. I guess he could have been juicing back then and has continued to do so, but I don't think that is the case. At least I hope so. I always liked the Big Hurt and enjoyed watching him play. One of my best baseball memories was seeing him and Griffey Jr. homer in the same game at old Riverfront Stadium in 2000 (the last year of its existence).
     
    #2 Andy T., Apr 28, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 28, 2008
  3. PastorSBC1303

    PastorSBC1303 Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2003
    Messages:
    15,125
    Likes Received:
    1
    Even though he played for the White Sox I voted yes.
     
    #3 PastorSBC1303, Apr 28, 2008
  4. Rubato 1

    Rubato 1 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2006
    Messages:
    1,167
    Likes Received:
    0
    Absolutely. If anyone in the 'juice' era gets inducted, he should. It would be great to see how he would stand above others (eg Bonds) if ther had been no steroids...

    He should have an asterisk by his name saying that he did not use P-E-D's. I saw hime blast several two- and three-run homers at Comiskey.
     
    #4 Rubato 1, Apr 28, 2008
  5. 4His_glory

    4His_glory New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    2,884
    Likes Received:
    0
    I vote yes based on his stats. Pretty outstanding.
     
    #5 4His_glory, Apr 28, 2008
  6. TomVols

    TomVols New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Before I give you my opinion, let me throw this out: There are some awfully "fencey" candidates who are comparable to Big Hurt statistically. Palmerio, Bagwell, Thome, Helton, etc. Are we opening a pandora's box if Thomas goes in? Does his lack of "October" hurt him at all?

    Interesting that he's outside the top 15 of his era in BA. I would not have guessed that. A lifetime .224 hitter in the Post Season. But 3rd in runs produced in his era.

    Of course, to hear the BooYah boys, he hit 500 homers, so his ticket is punched.

    Final analysis: I say put him in. I have no problem with him being in the Hall. However, his era has some candidates (see above) and some issues (juicing, live ball, weaker pitching) that may mitigate his candidacy. And I still resent this 500 HR thing (or 3,000 hits, or 300 wins, etc.) that the Paris Hilton types believe automatically sends someone to Cooperstown. But go ahead and put him in, although I would love to see how he matches up against some guys that should be in who aren't (the power hitter types like Dale Murphy, etc.)
     
    #6 TomVols, Apr 28, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 28, 2008
  7. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    More on them below.

    No, it doesn't matter, nor should it. Since when was having good postseason numbers a requirement for the Hall? Good post-season numbers can certainly help someone (think, Curt Schilling), but they should not hurt someone (think, Ernie Banks).

    So what? I thought you were a little more advanced than thinking isolated BA numbers meant anything. Look at his OBP, which is much more important than BA. Look at his SLG. Looks at his OPS+. All outstanding.

    I agree that 500 homers "ain't is good as it once was" to quote the great American poet, Toby Keith. But Frank has other assets than homers. OBP for one. Most feared hitter for several years, two. Multiple MVP's, three.

    Frank Thomas is comparable to Jim Rice, save one huge factor - OBP. Rice couldn't take a walk while Frank could. And Frank has had a little longer career. I think Rice is borderline, but I would be fine if he makes it. Thomas is above borderline, but he certainly isn't a first ballot kind of guy. I would rank Thomas ahead of Rice in overall greatness.

    As for the other guys you mention above:

    Bagwell - he is borderline due mainly to his shorter career. If he could have just put in a couple more decent seasons, he would be a lock. Has he been implicated in any steroid use? I don't recall that he has. Barring that, I am inclined to put him in. His numbers are quite impressive and he was good fielder (1 GG). He also had an MVP and several other top 10's.

    Thome - he is still plugging away. I think he gets in, even if he retired today. He's borderline right now, but I think he'll end up with 575 - 600 homers, which will make him a lock. He has great OBP and OPS numbers.

    Helton - Too early to tell; only 34 and still plugging away. His power numbers have declined which raises some suspicion in my mind about PED use. There's also the Coors Field factor.

    Palmeiro - If it weren't for his PED use, he would be a lock. But until we hear evidence to the contrary, I don't think he should get in.
     
    #7 Andy T., Apr 29, 2008
  8. TomVols

    TomVols New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2000
    Messages:
    11,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since the voters and media have, intentionally or not, made them a high water mark. Plus, the average fan is watching more in the postseason, thus accomplishments in October tend to stand out. We talked about this relative to Jeter, and others.
    I don't deny he has good numbers. (I'm not ceding the OBP argument, btw). All I was doing was point out something that surprised me. Relax, friend. :thumbs:
    I don't like making any one stat a benchmark for induction. And "most feared hitter?" Where is that in the stats? That's not a (gasp) intangible, is it? :laugh:

    I'd love to go into more about Frank vs. some of the others you and I mentioned, and you bring up some good points, but I'm flat out of time. Need to go tend to my little one. My new daughter has selfishly taken me away from some of my other pasttimes. Babies can be so demanding in that way, can't they? ;) In fact, it's taken me about 45 mins just to write what I have thus far :)
     
    #8 TomVols, Apr 29, 2008
  9. Andy T.

    Andy T. Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,147
    Likes Received:
    0
    For the record, babies are more important that Hall of Fame debates. :)
     
    #9 Andy T., Apr 30, 2008
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Loading...