I don't know why Larkin is assumed clean. I mean, he hit 33 HRs in 1996 while hitting a total of 32 in the 3 seasons prior. Mike Mussina has a 0% chance on his 1st ballot. If he hadn't come out and finally won 20 in his last season, I don't think he'd have been a HOFer (and by that I mean retired after 2007 or stunk like he did in 2007, not that 1 win could have been the difference).
That is the same number as Ernie Banks, Ron Santo, Barry Larkin, Andre Dawson, Cal Ripken, and Ryne Sandberg combined.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p>So if the only HOF votes that counted were by the ones who had the guts to reveal their ballots, Craig Biggio would be Cooperstown-bound.</p>— Steve Campbell (@ReformedWriter) <a href="https://twitter.com/ReformedWriter/status/289140899433299969" data-datetime="2013-01-09T22:45:37+00:00">January 9, 2013</a></blockquote> <script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Barry Larkin is not a power hitter and he hit .338 in the playoffs, .862 OPS. If we'd had that from Bagwell we might have won a World Series or two.
He was in six different series, he did that in two series. He hit .083, .143, .154, and .259 with 0 home runs and 2 doubles in the rest. That pretty much sucks.
I'm just saying you can't compare Bagwell's postseason with Larkins just because he didn't hit any homers. Larkin wasn't a home run hitter and he hit really well in three of his four series. I have no problem with Bagwell but he did suck in the playoffs more often than not.
Biggio had 3500 more plate appearances which is why he has those huge advantages. You take away the threat of Biggio's elbow pad which was a joke and that short porch at MMP which inflated his power numbers late in his career and Biggio's numbers look a bit different. And the thing about the Astrodome is that while it might have hurt his homerun numbers the big alleys helped his double numbers. Biggio is one of the most mechanical looking infielders I've ever seen. Great player but I'll take Larkin.
Part of being a good player is being available to actually play. Biggio has 3500 more plate appearances because he played in about 150 games a year and Barry Larkin played in about 120. It's the difference for playing some random middle infielder for only 12 games a year versus playing that end of the bench infielder for a quarter of the season.
Biggio played exactly one additional year; those plate appearances (the rough equivalent of five year's worth) were earned and are not irrelevant in this discussion - who cares how great you are if you're in the locker room? Larkin played 140+ games 7 times in 19 years; Biggio 16 in 20 years. (Technically, if you wipe out their rookie seasons - 41 & 50 games each - and the '94 and '95 strike-shortened seasons, it's really 16 and 17 *full* seasons (ie 162 games), though it should be noted that Biggio played every game in '94 and '95, meaning, in 19 start-to-finish ML seasons, Biggio played 86% of the games - 86% = 140/162 - in 18 of 'em. Again, not irrelevant.) But, OK - let's lop off the final five years of Biggio's career to make the PAs more equal. Biggio's line: .288/.377/.434/.811. Larkin: .295/.371/.444/.815. Biggio'd finish with more runs, doubles, walks and stolen bases. He'd trail in hits by 45; HRs by 3; RBIs by 91. The discrepancies can, more or less, be traced to their usual place in the batting order: Larkin hit mainly 3rd, or (not as often) 2nd; Biggio, of course, lead-off. Larkin was a better defensive player; Biggio more durable and played two premium defensive positions well enough (winning more GGs, BTW). BTW, Larkin never led the league in any category. Ever. Biggio led in doubles three times, runs twice and SBs once. (Plus plate appearances several times and, of course, HBPs.) Larkin did win an MVP - and Biggio actually finished with a higher WAR that year. (And he'd tally more top 10 MVP finishes overall, 3-2.) As I posted previously, it's hard to mount a definitive case that Larkin was better - and that's after we wiped five years off Biggio's resume. They were very eerily similar.
Has there been someone with 3k hits that did not get in first ballot ? Is it common? I'm disappointed Biggio didn't get the call but he shouldn't have to wait long. I'm not sure Bagwell gets there ever. Eventually roided guys will start to get in and bagwell is pretty average amongst that group. I know there's no proof Bagwell roided but there's gotta be quite a few writers assuming so based on appearance... Overall disappointing this should be a awesome HOF class and to me the writers decided to make themselves the story.
Lets wipe out all of Biggio's seasons after age 36 and compare. That's awesome. Even with that Larkin still has a higher OPS? What is Biggio's OPS without the 200 HBP advantage? We don't gauge how good a player is by the size of their elbow pad do we? Of course you've historically had a funny way of seeing what you want to see so whatever. As a catcher, Biggio led the league in steals allowed three times and led the league in passed balls once. I guess that's playing the position well enough for some people. Career WAR, 67.1 for Larkin, 62.1 for Biggio. If you want call them a wash offensively, that's fine. Larkin was just better defensively and stealing bases. I mentioned Larkin because he's a comparable contemporary of Biggio's, not because I think Biggio sucks.
Woody Williams did not even get one vote, waat? Many Astros on this year. Think we could get 2 next year. Will be close for Bagwell.
Oh, boy. I've been waiting to unleash on someone all day. F**k you, really, just get the f**k out of here. Pathetic piece of s**t. Here's hoping something really heavy lands on your shoulder and f**ks it up for a while.
