Barry Larkin Elected to Hall of Fame

[CrimsonCane]

I think Swift just aged like 50 years or so in this thread. I can practically see the dust collected by this line of thinking. Batting average? Gold gloves? Sniff test-like arguments?

[Bobbob1313]

I don't see how Larkin's induction helps Sheffield or Posada. They aren't similar players in any way whatsoever.

[Swifty]

CC, doesn't the Hall of Fame (emphasis on fame) make this less than formulaic? It's not the Hall of .850+ OPS.

I think the standard used to define 'fame' - in much the same way we actively parse the concept of 'valuable' - makes it a process that takes into consideration the totality of the eligible player's career, not the least of which is your so labeled "sniff test."
--------------------

I don't see how Larkin's induction helps Sheffield or Posada. They aren't similar players in any way whatsoever.

All without exceptional individual accolades, sub 3,000 hits, sub .300 BA, reasonably long career. I think Larkin, in every way, is a fringe candidate. I think if writers take a "stand" against the steroid era (which, I realize Sheffield is a part of, though his guilt may be glossed over more than others) the "rising tide" will lift all ships. There's nothing exceptional about Larkin's career, he just did it for a long time and was among the best at his position, but I don't think was ever the consensus "best" or even next-best. You put the one high quality accolade - Larkin's D, Sheff 500 HR, Posada's titles - and there you go, an explained in HoFer.

[Jay]

11 shortstops had larger career WAR according to fangraphs. Of those 11, 3 are not currently in the hall of fame. Of those 3, 2 are active. The only better shortstop according to career WAR who was not inducted to the hall of fame is Bill Dahlen. Dahlen's offensive numbers are significantly worse than the rest of this group. He certainly proves he has been one of the most valuable shortstops to his team over his career.

Yes I understand this method of evaluating players is flawed but that is only in the case if the player in question has a shorter career for a legitimate reason.

[emkayseven]

CC, doesn't the Hall of Fame (emphasis on fame) make this less than formulaic? It's not the Hall of .850+ OPS.

I think the standard used to define 'fame' - in much the same way we actively parse the concept of 'valuable' - makes it a process that takes into consideration the totality of the eligible player's career, not the least of which is your so labeled "sniff test."
--------------------


All without exceptional individual accolades, sub 3,000 hits, sub .300 BA, reasonably long career. I think Larkin, in every way, is a fringe candidate. I think if writers take a "stand" against the steroid era (which, I realize Sheffield is a part of, though his guilt may be glossed over more than others) the "rising tide" will lift all ships. There's nothing exceptional about Larkin's career, he just did it for a long time and was among the best at his position, but I don't think was ever the consensus "best" or even next-best. You put the one high quality accolade - Larkin's D, Sheff 500 HR, Posada's titles - and there you go, an explained in HoFer.

out of curiosity how would you rank the SS of his era?

[Swifty]

out of curiosity how would you rank the SS of his era?

He's in a tough spot because of his era sort of spanning two separate waves of players, but during the time he played he was definitely behind Smith, Ripken, Yount, Jeter, ARod and probably Vizquel.

[emkayseven]

He's in a tough spot because of his era sort of spanning two separate waves of players, but during the time he played he was definitely behind Smith, Ripken, Yount, Jeter, ARod and probably Vizquel.

Ripken I can understand and is the one I'm really thinking of.

Yount played CF literally the entire time their careers overlapped so...no.

Jeter and Larkin overlapped from 1995-2004. In that time Jeter's OPS+ was 120 and Larkin's was 116. Jeter stole 10 more bases (201-191) in that span. Remarkably close if you ask me and more impressive since Larkin was on the downside of his career and Jeter in the upswing of his. Defensively neither was particularly strong in that span, but Larkin was much much better (especially in the face of Jeter's "diving stops" and Gold Gloves) - a -0.7 dWAR for Barry and a -10.0 (!) dWAR for Derek.

ARod could be considered since his power was something unseen from SS before. Of course, now we know he had the help of PEDs. Do we know Larkin didn't? No, but we do know for certain that ARod did. It's really hard for me to take any admitted or proven cheater at face value.

Smith is really the only other guy I think can go toe to toe. But their strengths were completely different. Ozzie might as well have used a noodle for a bat. In their overlapping times Larkin out-OPS+ed him 121-94. Even for one of Ozzie's strengths, baserunning, over that span Ozzie stole 308 bases and was caught 75 times (80.4%) and Larkin stole 275 and was caught 51 times (84.4%). Defensively Ozzie was the guy but unless I had a 2B or 3B who was a slugger but a butcher in the field, I take Larkin over Ozzie every time.

I'll give you Ripken (who was playing 3B toward the end of their shared career anyway), and I would say that depending on opinion Jeter, Smith and Larkin are bunched really close and for my money, I'd have taken Larkin over the other two. Either way you have a guy who AT WORST ran a SLIGHT second best in his league at his position (and ONLY if you really, really, REALLY favor defense) for a long long time.
--------------------
Also Vizquel is a bigger joke than Ozzie. Hell of a fielder but even worse hitter. He had a .699 OPS and 85 OPS+ in the time he shared with Larkin and got caught stealing 1/3 of the time. Never understood the intense Omar love.

[Swifty]

But MK, this is all to my point. Fringe. Not undeserving, not no way no how, just fringe.

[emkayseven]

To my mind he isn't a fringe candidate. I think if you are in the discussion for best or second best at your position for 15 years that is a pretty solid pick. Then again, I've become a "big hall" guy as of late and myself from 5-6 years ago might vehemently disagree with me now.