Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Sports' started by TomVols, Jul 13, 2007.
Why is this man not in the Hall?
He had a great curve ball, if I recall correctly. He was very good. I don't think he was every the top of his day. He played for a very long time. I will say he was the best player from the Netherlands, if I recall correctly.
I dont really know, he deserves to be in the HOF
I agree fully. Bert Blyleven had the misfortune of playing on several of the poorer hitting teams in the leagues, during his career, winning 287 decisions. Had he played on a few teams with better offensive capabilities, he would no doubt have won over 300 career games, virtually assuring him of HOF selection, already.
He won far more career games than did Whitey Ford, Catfish Hunter, Don Drysdale, Dizzy Dean, or Juan Marichal, to name five.
He had a much better career ERA than did Early Wynn, Robin Roberts, or Dennis Eckersley, to name three.
He had more career strikeouts than all who ever played the game except Nolan Ryan, Steve Carlton, and (still playing) Roger Clemens.
He pitched an unheard of today, 242 complete games in his career, including 25 one year and 24 twelve years later. 25 complete games is usually more than a career, for most pitchers of today.
And he threw arguably, the best curve ball in the history of the game.
To me, he should be "slam-dunk" in!
To take one of the 5, Dizzy Dean, he was never the picture that Dean was before he got hurt, but few ever were. Dean was number one for a time in all of baseball, that is why Dean is in the Hall and Bert isn't.
I recall Wade Hoyt who use to do the Reds games saying that Dizzy Dean was as good as any picture he had ever seen and they say Wade was a good picture in his day. All I know about Dean is what I've read and his game of the day on radio and the game of the week on TV when I was in HS. I saw Bert play many times when I lived in Bloomington, Mn., for the most part he wasn't even the best picture on the team. I don't even think he was as good as Jim Katt(spelling might be wrong) or as good as Jim Perry was for a few years or as good as the picture from Cuba that came with them from Washington, but he was a good.
I've never understood why guys are penalized both for being on good teams and poor teams. I will be naming some others who have been penalized for being on good teams. The bromide there is that the other players made that person better. But a good player on a bad team is punished because he was made to look better because of his poorer teammates, and that he did not make his teammates better. Circular reasoning at its finest.
I think he should probably be in, but I don't think it is a slam dunk. I am being generous, considering he played for the '87 Twins. Did you know that he holds the record for most homers allowed in a season with 50 in 1986?! And he gave up 3rd highest total in 1987 with 46! He has some pluses and minuses for his Hall resume.
Those are not weighty given the number of innings pitched. I think his positives far outweigh his negatives.
I'm sure you're going to love my next one, Andy
:laugh: Now we all know this is the real reason why you do not consider him a slam dunk
I think his positives outweigh his negatives, but I would not use the word "far" like you do.
I've already seen the title. Ain't no way, man.