HOF elections - Jim Kaat?

[beast of the east]

I'm really thrilled that GIl Hodges has finally been elected to the HOF.  I'm way too young to have seen him as a player, but knowing his stat line and influence on the Mets 1968-72 teams (and probably 73 also) really think he belongs.   Also really happy that Joan Hodges is alive to know this.   I may consider a trip to Cooperstown for inductions, because many former Mets should be in attendance.

Jim Kaat was a very good pitcher who pitched a long time.   Off the top of my head, I can think of a bunch of pitchers in that era who were as good or better at their best.   In no particular order: Bob Veale, Jim Maloney, Sam McDowell, Chris Short.   I'm not even sure if Kaat was better than Mel Stottlemyre or Claude Osteen.    This is all from memory, and not a comparison of stats.

Any thoughts? 

 

[monte]

I'm really thrilled that GIl Hodges has finally been elected to the HOF.  I'm way too young to have seen him as a player, but knowing his stat line and influence on the Mets 1968-72 teams (and probably 73 also) really think he belongs.   Also really happy that Joan Hodges is alive to know this.   I may consider a trip to Cooperstown for inductions, because many former Mets should be in attendance.

Jim Kaat was a very good pitcher who pitched a long time.   Off the top of my head, I can think of a bunch of pitchers in that era who were as good or better at their best.   In no particular order: Bob Veale, Jim Maloney, Sam McDowell, Chris Short.   I'm not even sure if Kaat was better than Mel Stottlemyre or Claude Osteen.    This is all from memory, and not a comparison of stats.

Any thoughts? 

By my standards, probably 25% of the guys in the hall don't deserve to be there. IMO the hall should be reserved for the greatest of the greats. Or at the very least, guys who were considered amongst the very best during the time they played. I like to use all-star game appearances as somewhat of a gage. I also use MVP/Cy Young finishes. Not necessarily number of awards, but how they ranked in the voting, year in and year out. So take what I say with that in mind.
From an emotional standpoint(even though Im a lifelong Yankee fan), we're all glad that Gil got in, However I do not believe he was ever considered one of the greats of his era. Jim Kaat, not even close. The pitchers you mention were good-very good, not great. Although I'd make a case for Stott if his career wasn't cut short. He was a true ace/stopper on some really crappy Yankee teams.  I'll say this much, I loved watching Kitty Kaat pitch, with his quick delivery, and I loved him as a Yank announcer. Like you, I haven't looked at stats, but it would seem to me that he was a bit of a compiler. 

 

[newsman13]

Kaat is kind of like Don Sutton...a guy who hung around long enough to compile enough wins to merit consideration.  Kaat was on some bad teams.  Still...in 25 years...which is HOF worthy in itself, he compiled 283 wins.  I doubt anyone pitching today will ever reach that milestone.

 

[beast of the east]

I'm really thrilled that GIl Hodges has finally been elected to the HOF.  I'm way too young to have seen him as a player, but knowing his stat line and influence on the Mets 1968-72 teams (and probably 73 also) really think he belongs.   Also really happy that Joan Hodges is alive to know this.   I may consider a trip to Cooperstown for inductions, because many former Mets should be in attendance.

Jim Kaat was a very good pitcher who pitched a long time.   Off the top of my head, I can think of a bunch of pitchers in that era who were as good or better at their best.   In no particular order: Bob Veale, Jim Maloney, Sam McDowell, Chris Short.   I'm not even sure if Kaat was better than Mel Stottlemyre or Claude Osteen.    This is all from memory, and not a comparison of stats.

Any thoughts? 

By my standards, probably 25% of the guys in the hall don't deserve to be there. IMO the hall should be reserved for the greatest of the greats. Or at the very least, guys who were considered amongst the very best during the time they played. I like to use all-star game appearances as somewhat of a gage. I also use MVP/Cy Young finishes. Not necessarily number of awards, but how they ranked in the voting, year in and year out. So take what I say with that in mind.
From an emotional standpoint(even though Im a lifelong Yankee fan), we're all glad that Gil got in, However I do not believe he was ever considered one of the greats of his era. Jim Kaat, not even close. The pitchers you mention were good-very good, not great. Although I'd make a case for Stott if his career wasn't cut short. He was a true ace/stopper on some really crappy Yankee teams.  I'll say this much, I loved watching Kitty Kaat pitch, with his quick delivery, and I loved him as a Yank announcer. Like you, I haven't looked at stats, but it would seem to me that he was a bit of a compiler. 

I've always thought there should be two rooms in the HOF.   One for the all time greats - Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle, Mays, Dimaggio,Cobb, Koufax, Gibson etc.    Paul Molitor or Don Sutton would have to buy an admission ticket like other fans to even get into that room.

 

[MainMan]

Gil Hodges should be credited with arguably the greatest managerial feat of all time in baseball: taking a punchline of a franchise with a bunch of no-name position players (and yes, ok, exceptional pitching) and made them world champions. 

Combined that with a borderline HOF playing career and untimely death and he should have been in much earlier.
7 years in a row of 100+ RBIs, 
8 time all star 
3 gold gloves 
 

 

[Spocky Ramone]

Gil Hodges should be credited with arguably the greatest managerial feat of all time in baseball: taking a punchline of a franchise with a bunch of no-name position players (and yes, ok, exceptional pitching) and made them world champions. 

Combined that with a borderline HOF playing career and untimely death and he should have been in much earlier.
7 years in a row of 100+ RBIs, 
8 time all star 
3 gold gloves 

 

Only one player hit more home runs in the 50’s than Gil (some guy patrolling center field in Flatbush).

 

[Spocky Ramone]

Kaat is kind of like Don Sutton...a guy who hung around long enough to compile enough wins to merit consideration.  Kaat was on some bad teams.  Still...in 25 years...which is HOF worthy in itself, he compiled 283 wins.  I doubt anyone pitching today will ever reach that milestone.

Difference is that Sutton hit the benchmark numbers (300+ wins, 3000+ strikeouts).

 

[newsman13]

Kaat is kind of like Don Sutton...a guy who hung around long enough to compile enough wins to merit consideration.  Kaat was on some bad teams.  Still...in 25 years...which is HOF worthy in itself, he compiled 283 wins.  I doubt anyone pitching today will ever reach that milestone.

Difference is that Sutton hit the benchmark numbers (300+ wins, 3000+ strikeouts).

OK...but Sutton played on outstanding Dodger teams while Kaat (17 wins short of 300) played for some crappy teams...i.e. Washington Senators which moved to Minnesota.  Imagine if DeGrom's win numbers fall short when his  HOF consideration is being applied.
 

 

[Spocky Ramone]

Kaat is kind of like Don Sutton...a guy who hung around long enough to compile enough wins to merit consideration.  Kaat was on some bad teams.  Still...in 25 years...which is HOF worthy in itself, he compiled 283 wins.  I doubt anyone pitching today will ever reach that milestone.

Difference is that Sutton hit the benchmark numbers (300+ wins, 3000+ strikeouts).

OK...but Sutton played on outstanding Dodger teams while Kaat (17 wins short of 300) played for some crappy teams...i.e. Washington Senators which moved to Minnesota.  Imagine if DeGrom's win numbers fall short when his  HOF consideration is being applied.

 

I totally agree with your Wins point, but he didn’t get to 3,000 K’s in 25 years.  Sutton had 3,500+ in 23 years.  Btw, Sutton never struck me as being a HOFer…

 

[Knight]

Just remember, the great Sandy Kovax only won 165 games vs. 87 losses.

 

[BrookJersey Redmen]

I was surprised someone in this string noted that Gil Hodges had 3 Glove Gloves, I figured more, I remember my dad telling me he was a magnificent first baseman who made plays other players couldn't make. Like Keith Hernandez.

Plus, as a manager, when he pulled that play, where he found the ball in the dugout that had just hit off of the batter's shoe, and walked out to home plate and showed the ump the shoe polish on the ball, and the hit-by-pitch was called, he presaged the video review by 45 years.

Finally, an outfielder was loafing during the game, and after one atrocious loaf, Gil slowly walks all the way out to the outfield, and walks back to the dugout with the player and sends in his substitute, he was Bill Parcells before Bill Parcells. Both winners.



 

 

[bamafan]

Just remember, the great Sandy Kovax only won 165 games vs. 87 losses.

Hey Knight have you been hanging around with Mike Francessa lately? He pronounces Sandy Koufax's  name like you spelt it - Ko Vax instead of Ko Fax. /media/kunena/emoticons/wink.png/media/kunena/emoticons/smile.png/media/kunena/emoticons/grin.png

 

[Andrew]

I am more of an analytics guy so the fact that Sutton won more games then Kaat means little to me. However Sutton was the better pitcher. Lower ERA and a substantially lower WHIP. 

 

[MarkRedman]

Just remember, the great Sandy Kovax only won 165 games vs. 87 losses.



That's true but Koufax was literally unhittable for 5 years
I believe that he retired prematurely at age 30 because of arm trouble
His issues probably could have been treated with today's technology
 

 

[MarkRedman]

I'm really thrilled that GIl Hodges has finally been elected to the HOF.  I'm way too young to have seen him as a player, but knowing his stat line and influence on the Mets 1968-72 teams (and probably 73 also) really think he belongs.   Also really happy that Joan Hodges is alive to know this.   I may consider a trip to Cooperstown for inductions, because many former Mets should be in attendance.

Jim Kaat was a very good pitcher who pitched a long time.   Off the top of my head, I can think of a bunch of pitchers in that era who were as good or better at their best.   In no particular order: Bob Veale, Jim Maloney, Sam McDowell, Chris Short.   I'm not even sure if Kaat was better than Mel Stottlemyre or Claude Osteen.    This is all from memory, and not a comparison of stats.

Any thoughts? 

By my standards, probably 25% of the guys in the hall don't deserve to be there. IMO the hall should be reserved for the greatest of the greats. Or at the very least, guys who were considered amongst the very best during the time they played. I like to use all-star game appearances as somewhat of a gage. I also use MVP/Cy Young finishes. Not necessarily number of awards, but how they ranked in the voting, year in and year out. So take what I say with that in mind.
From an emotional standpoint(even though Im a lifelong Yankee fan), we're all glad that Gil got in, However I do not believe he was ever considered one of the greats of his era. Jim Kaat, not even close. The pitchers you mention were good-very good, not great. Although I'd make a case for Stott if his career wasn't cut short. He was a true ace/stopper on some really crappy Yankee teams.  I'll say this much, I loved watching Kitty Kaat pitch, with his quick delivery, and I loved him as a Yank announcer. Like you, I haven't looked at stats, but it would seem to me that he was a bit of a compiler. 

I've always thought there should be two rooms in the HOF.   One for the all time greats - Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle, Mays, Dimaggio,Cobb, Koufax, Gibson etc.    Paul Molitor or Don Sutton would have to buy an admission ticket like other fans to even get into that room.



There should be one room for the all time greats only. To me, that's what the HOF should be all about. The best of the very best of all time.

These others guys (Molitar, Sutton and countless others) were excellent ballplayers but are a cut below the best of the very best and do not belong in the Hall of Fame IMO. I can't argue if you want to create something else to honor and recognize these excellent players but they're not HOFers to me.

 

 

[beast of the east]

Sutton was nowhere as good as Orel Hershiser or Kershaw.

 

[Andrew]

Sutton was nowhere as good as Orel Hershiser or Kershaw.

I would argue that Sutton was as good if not better then Hershiser looking at the stats. Hershisher did. win a Cy Young and had arm problems. He still might get into HOF.
I wouldn't even compare the other two to Kershaw. He is one of the most dominant pitchers of his era and won three Cy Young's in four years.
 

 

[beast of the east]

Sutton was nowhere as good as Orel Hershiser or Kershaw.

I would argue that Sutton was as good if not better then Hershiser looking at the stats. Hershisher did. win a Cy Young and had arm problems. He still might get into HOF.
I wouldn't even compare the other two to Kershaw. He is one of the most dominant pitchers of his era and won three Cy Young's in four years.

 

Kaat made the All Star team 3 times in 25 seasons, never won a CY young, and only figured prominently in voting twice.  Of course, for much of his career, there was just one award.  Consider that for 22 seasons, Kaat was not even considered one of the best 50 players in baseball in terms of All-star status.   

I named those pitchers off the top of my head who were dominant, even for bad teams (Veale and McDowell come to mind).   In their prime, I don't think teams would trade those guys straight up for Kaat.

 

[Andrew]

Sutton was nowhere as good as Orel Hershiser or Kershaw.

I would argue that Sutton was as good if not better then Hershiser looking at the stats. Hershisher did. win a Cy Young and had arm problems. He still might get into HOF.
I wouldn't even compare the other two to Kershaw. He is one of the most dominant pitchers of his era and won three Cy Young's in four years.




 

Kaat made the All Star team 3 times in 25 seasons, never won a CY young, and only figured prominently in voting twice.  Of course, for much of his career, there was just one award.  Consider that for 22 seasons, Kaat was not even considered one of the best 50 players in baseball in terms of All-star status.   

I named those pitchers off the top of my head who were dominant, even for bad teams (Veale and McDowell come to mind).   In their prime, I don't think teams would trade those guys straight up for Kaat.

 Maybe Hershiser is a little better then Kaat. The difference is small to me either way. I hope Hershisher gets into the HOF. I probably should have just pointed out that Kershaw is at an entirely different level. 


 

 

[beast of the east]

Just remember, the great Sandy Kovax only won 165 games vs. 87 losses.



That's true but Koufax was literally unhittable for 5 years
I believe that he retired prematurely at age 30 because of arm trouble
His issues probably could have been treated with today's technology

 

Koufax retired at 32 because of an arthritic left elbow.  Ironically, he was a horrible hitter, but originally hurt it sliding into second on a double.   He knew his final season was it, but he won 27 games, completed 27 out of 41 starts, with a 1.73 ERA in 1966.   Amazing pitcher.  Cannot think of anyone better in his prime.