9 Responses to “Keeping Score: Piniella for Hall Is a Tough Call – Bats Blog – NYTimes.com”

1. jeff schwitzer Says:
   July 23rd, 2010 at 10:44 am

   Pinella, pretty good player, long time manager no way a HOF'er

2. Frank Says:
   July 23rd, 2010 at 12:12 pm

   HOF for Piniella? Not before we see Houk {among others} voted in.

3. Joe B Says:
   July 23rd, 2010 at 1:53 pm

   A world championship early on, then kind of never did anything else. Won a couple more division titles - but when you're in teh same class as LaRussa, Torre and Cox, you better have exceptional numbers and he doesn't. So no HOF.

4. David in Toledo Says:
   July 23rd, 2010 at 2:03 pm

   I wish someone with a megaphone would crusade against the stupid rule that keeps managers from being considered for the Hall until they are retired. Everyone who is clearly going to be selected for the Hall ought to be allowed to smell the roses (that is, to be inducted before they're dead) if at all possible.

   LaRussa, Cox, and Torre should be voted on (and voted in) now. Torre should have been voted in by the crazy always-changing Veterans' Committee voters the last time, because they were entitled to consider both his playing career (right on the margin) together with his additional contributions to the game (which should have made him a slam dunk, but apparently the Veteran voters didn't get the message).

   Then we could turn to the case of Pinella looking at a clean slate.

5. Lawrence Azrin Says:
   July 23rd, 2010 at 2:49 pm

   I understand the argument of combined player/manager contributions pushing a candidate into the HOF who may be just short as either a player OR a manager, but Pinella wasn't really a great player. He was solid, but never in the Top-10 in WAR or in Batting Runs; made only one all-star game. Plus, the competition for managers is rather steep, and he's more than just a bit short of qualifying.

   Besides, I believe that the baseball HOF is about EXCELLENCE, and being merely very good in one area isn't good enough. Gil Hodges is the the closest to qualifying under the "Cumulative acomplishment" concept, but his short but impressive managerial career (admittedly cut short by death) isn't enough to make up for the shortcomings in his record as a player.

6. David in Toledo Says:
   July 23rd, 2010 at 2:49 pm

   Since the earlier discussion of Pinella gets into the question of whether playing and managing "credit" can be combined by Hall of Fame voters, here is the relevant section from Cooperstown's rules:

   http://baseballhall.org/hall-famers/rules-election/vet-committee-players

   "6B. Those whose careers entailed involvement as both players and managers/executives/umpires will be considered for their overall contribution to the game of Baseball. . . ."

   On a tangent, it might be interesting to compile the best team possible of those who were long-time players and managers, but not in the Hall at present. Using a 1400-game manager cutoff, a team like Hodges, 1b; Davey Johnson, 2b; Jim Fregosi/Al Dark, ss; Joe Torre, 3b (yes, he played more games at catcher but he hit best at 3b); Dusty Baker/Lou Pinella/Felipe Alou/Bill Virdon, of; Mike Scoscia/Johnny Oates, c; reserves Billy Martin, Jimmy Dykes, Mike Hargrove. Pitchers are hard to come by: Fred Hutchinson (he should be in Cooperstown), Roger Craig. . . .

   Additions or substitutions?

7. David in Toledo Says:
   July 23rd, 2010 at 2:57 pm

   While I respect Gil Hodges's fine record in baseball, by way of comparison with Joe Torre (who admittedly has been able to live longer), please consider the following:

   Hodges, 263 win shares as a player, 660 wins as a manager.
   Torre, 315 win shares as a player, 2297 wins and counting as a manager.
   You don't have to love win shares to see that a 315-263 difference tracks reality.

8. David in Toledo Says:
   July 23rd, 2010 at 6:37 pm

   Okay, I'm on vacation. My tangent (comment #5) raised a question to me. Listed there is a team of very good players but no Hall of Fame players. Forget the pitching problem. Is the rest of the roster good enough to win a World Series if each player has a typical full-season year?

   How to check? Further question: How many World Series winners have had NO Hall of Fame players on their rosters? Any?

   Answer: From 1975 (The [Big Red] Machine) through 2000 (25 years), TWO teams won the Series without a Hall or (IMO) likely Hall player. Some had 3-4 (1995 Atlanta, 1996 Yanks). Some got by with one (1997 Florida, Sheffield; 1991 Twins, Puckett; 1990 Reds, Larkin; 1986 Mets, Carter). One barely scraped by (1988 Dodgers, 43-year-old Don Sutton).

   But it is possible to win the Series without someone chosen for the Hall of Fame. Which two teams from 1965 through 2000? (One team includes two of the 14 players mentioned in comment 5. The other team includes four players each of whom has supporters championing his marginal Hall of Fame case.)

9. Jerry Says:
   July 23rd, 2010 at 11:21 pm

   I'd have supported Lou for the Hall if he won a title with the Cubs. Which I guess is still theoretically possible, but immensely unlikely. Baring that, he comes in below my HOF standards.

   I'd compare him to Tom Coughlin in the NFL - long career, highly regarded, lots of good seasons, one championship. I similarly think Coughlin could be a Hall of Famer, but only if he wins again.