The Astros' Hall of Fame & Retired Numbers are drunk

Don't read Titus Andronicus then.

 

Someone let me know when Billy Spiers is inducted.

 

2026: Billy Spiers, Casey Candaele

 

I remember another guy who had a magical six year run (Koufax). Not saying Scott was Koufax but he was certainly one of (if not the) most dominating pitchers in the game during that time frame and he gave Stros fans some AWESOME memories during that time. There's absolutely NO reason why his # shouldn't be retired.

 

Weren't you literally part of the creation of the Astros HOF? I remember you including me in a discussion of how it was going to be installed at MMP.

If I had my way, Billy Spiers would be in the Astros HOF.

EDIT: and I'm apparently not alone!

 

Two rings. Batting Title. Gold Glove. 6+ years. He has accomplished more than any 80s Astro or inaugural member Shane Reynolds.

 

I'm more interested in whether or not Verlander goes into the Hall of Fame as an Astro or Tiger. Before last year I would've assumed Tigers given his longevity in Detroit and his fondness for the organization. However, the two World Series and Cy Youngs in Houston make me think we have a chance that he goes into Cooperstown as an Astro especially if he wins a third title here.

 

I think the team's HOF should be for the top 5%ish players but should be considered based on eras and not as a single pool.

For instance Jimmy Wynn should not be eliminated in favor of Lance Berkman simply because of stats and performance. He should be compared to his contemporaries.

I would suggest 3 eras for now with a 4th era scheduled to he initiated at a TBD time in the future. The end of the 4th era and start of a 5th will be determined by a major change for the team.

1) 1962-1988 origin until the largest modification of the Astrodome.

2) 1989-1999 last seasons of the Astrodome

3) 2000-2012 Enron/MMP in the NL.

4) 2013-current the Golden Age.

The HOF should be exclusive enough to not have more than 1 player for each 4-6 years of existence.

4-8 players from era 1
2-3 players from era 2
2-4 players from era 3.

Similar to MLB, there will be a rotating schedule for future consideration.

Example:
2024 nominations for era 1 are considered and voted for.
2025 nominations for era 2 are considered and voted for
2026 nominations for era 3 are considered and voted for
2027 vote to determine end of current era. If so, then initial 2-3 player class. If not, then review again in 4 years. End of current era can be any year since the previous consideration.
2028 nominations and vote for era 1
2029 nominations and vote for era 2
2030 nominations and vote for era 3
2031 vote to establish end date of era 4, and/or vote for era 4 if established in 2027.

 

My take. Retired numbers are dumb. There are a limited number of 2 digit numbers

Hall of Fame....I'd cater to fans such that each generation has their favorites. As a side note, they should already be planning a 2017-202X area of the stadium being devoted to the players that brought in the championships. Like in 30 years, anyone on the Championships teams not already elected in should be elected in as a group.

 

As far as fame goes...these moments belong in the hall











https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PeiAe8uED-s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzsGLPE_zvU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOyDnrAZmhA

 

Why? Isn't it natural for teams that actually had actual success to have more HOF/Mt. Rushmore players? This isn't the all-star game where even the crappiest of crappy teams get a member. Absolutely no one that spent the bulk of their careers in the dark years should ever make it to the Astros HOF. With all due respect to Bud Norris, Brett Wallace, and LJ Hoes, but no one is coming to buy their commemorative jersey. This era should have more Astros HOF members due to the sheer fact of wins and rings.

 

Typically, most players that spend the bulk of their years in a 4-year period kind of suck because they weren't good enough to have much of a career outside those 4 years. The best player from that era deserves to be in the Hall.

 

No, we are good - we are just having a debate or really a discussion -

As far as Ryan and me saying he could have easily had an era lower with a better defense - that is based on his FIP, which if I remember was around 2.80 with the Astros. Also, the park factor is less than you would think, it was 95 out of 100 when Ryan pitched for the Angels and it was 95 for the Astros in the 1980's. Both were strong pitchers park - and Ryan has said that the Angels park especially was beneficial to him because of the time games started - twilight, which made the ball very hard to pick up.

I think the strongest argument against Ryan having his number retired is WAR, he had more WAR with the Angels than Astros - but still, he pitched very well with the Astros nearly a decade and is a first ballot Hall of Famer. He is the rare player that was so good for so long, that he deserves to have his number retired 3 places. Also, remember he set the all time career strikeout record with the Astros.

First - I never said I think Mike Scott was a Hall of Famer or that he should have his number retired. He wasn't good enough long enough. He was older when he finally broke through, and he got hurt. What I am saying is that the 5 year prime of his career, he did pitch like a Hall of Famer and he certainly did. He accumulated 25 WAR in 5 years, won a Cy Young, almost won another and finished in the top 10 another time.... he won 86 games in that 5 year period. Yes, 86 was by far his best year but his worst season in that string was a 3 WAR season.

My only point on Scott is that he was not a one year wonder, he was an ace the year before 86 and he was an ace after 86 until he hurt his shoulder.

Justin Verlander is an interesting case - you balance longevity compared to peak greatness.

This will be the 7th season that Verlander has been an Astro - and he has won two WS, been to 4 WS - won two Cy Young, finished 2nd once.... and has a 75% winning percentage, and an era with the Astros of 2.29 and lead the league in WHIP 3 times with the Astros. He also was ALCS MVP once.

 

I'm not saying there should be players from every 4-6 seasons.

I'm saying there should not be more than 1 player for each 4-6 years of existence.

If a team has been around 60 years it shouldn't have 60 hall of farmers. It should have 10-15 at the most. Otherwise its the hall of good or hall of years played.

 

I get debating this stuff, as it's what separates baseball (in my opinion) from every other sport. That said, where did I EVER SAY OR IMPLY that Scott was "on the same planet as Sandy Koufax"?????

I specifically said Scott had a "magical six year run" and followed that up with "NOT SAYING SCOTT WAS KOUFAX".

If you want to debate maybe work on your comprehension skills.

"Scott had 'A' truly dominant season"?

Good grief!!!