2016 MLB thread. THE CUBS HAVE BROKEN THE CURSE! Chicago Cubs are your 2016 World Series champions

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Greatness of Frank Thomas.

All the great players in the Hall of Fame have stories about them, anecdotes that capture glimpses of how they were exceptional, even among the already exceptional. Anecdotes developed in part out of exaggeration but largely founded on inconceivable truth. Here’s an old anecdote about Frank Thomas:

“We had this competition, even when he was a freshman, in which we’d wager a Coke on whether he could guess—within one mile an hour—how fast a pitcher was throwing. We had a radar gun. He’d call out the velocity. He was always on. Almost never fooled.”

It’s been my understanding that policemen are trained to do this with vehicles. Frank Thomas wasn’t a policeman, but he was sort of an officer of home plate in a way, and he was liberal with discipline. What was apparent, even early in college, was that Thomas had an unusually gifted sense of the zone. He went on to pair that with one of the best swings ever and now he’s on his way to Cooperstown, a part of baseball immortality. Pretty simple. Thomas was just one of the best at something, and also one of the best at a related something. That allowed him to be one of the best overall.

Even with first-ballot Hall of Famers, it’s been some years since their careers ended. And then the ends of those careers seldom resemble the starts and middles of those careers, so even though in this case, Thomas played as recently as 2008, it’s been a while since he was really Frank Thomas, the guy who earned this honor on the field. The more time that passes, the easier it is to forget about performances, to focus instead on what’s more recent. I think it’s helpful, then, in cases like this, to compare players to more recent players to lend greater perspective. Thomas hasn’t been at his peak for a while. But what did his peak look like? How can we explain him in more contemporary terms?

Thomas was drafted in 1989, and he was in the majors in 1990. He hit instantly, and he was consistently unbelievable all the way through 1997. Through that year — Thomas’ age-29 season — he posted a 177 wRC+, batting .330 while slugging .600. Through his own age-29 season, Albert Pujols posted a 169 wRC+, batting .334 while slugging .628. Over the past four years, Miguel Cabrera has posted a 176 wRC+, batting .337 while slugging .612. Frank Thomas at his best was Albert Pujols at his best and Miguel Cabrera at his best. And Thomas’ best lasted several seasons. He didn’t do much of anything in other areas, but he didn’t have to, being an all-time great destroyer of pitched baseballs.

Pujols makes for an interesting comparison, defense aside. One of the things that made Pujols so special was the way he consistently put the bat on the ball, striking out amazingly infrequently for a power hitter. Thomas, for his entire career, struck out in 14% of his plate appearances. The league average was north of 16%. Meanwhile, he walked in 17% of his plate appearances, and after his limited rookie season, Thomas didn’t strike out more often than he walked in a year until 2001. His career contact rate was 85%, against an 80% average. From 1991 through to the end, that mark never dropped into the 70s.

Let’s go back to Thomas’ peak for a minute. Since 1900, 1,248 players have batted at least 2,500 times through their age-29 seasons. We’ve already established that Thomas was incredible for the first half of his career, but just for fun, let’s look at the top of all those players when we sort by wRC+:

(1) 208 — Babe Ruth
(2) 193 — Ted Williams
(3) 179 — Rogers Hornsby
(4t) 177 — Ty Cobb, Frank Thomas
(6) 176 — Lou Gehrig
(7t) 173 — Stan Musial, Mickey Mantle

It’s not just Thomas among a group of Hall of Famers — it’s Thomas among a group of the absolute cream of the Hall-of-Fame crop. Those are the best players ever, and Frank Thomas, and Thomas did that in the 90s. It’s easy to forget, because people didn’t cover baseball the way they do now, and it’s been a lot of time. But Thomas’ numbers require zero massaging. He was one of the very best hitters in the history of the planet.

Thomas slumped at 30 and 31, where by “slumped” I mean he posted consecutive wRC+ marks of 126. But he did perform worse, as he played through some injuries and some personal problems, and the scene occasionally grew ugly at his own home ballpark. This was written in March 2000:

Thomas was once on a very fast and certain track to Cooperstown, there to join the two hitters to whom he was most often compared, Ted Williams and Lou Gehrig, but today there is nothing either swift or sure about his journey to baseball immortality.

Thomas turned 32 during 2000, when he went deep 43 times. Since 1900, 357 players have batted at least 2,500 times onward from their age-32 seasons. Among them, Thomas ranks tied for 35th in wRC+, even with Tony Gwynn, right between Jeff Bagwell and David Ortiz. The late-career version of Frank Thomas was just as productive as the late-career version of Ortiz, who remains one of baseball’s most feared franchise icons. That’s notable because of how good Thomas was, and that’s notable because of how even that performance seemed short of what Thomas could’ve been. That was his decline.

When you add it all up together, Frank Thomas is unquestionably one of the greatest hitters in the history of baseball. He was, in a sense, close to perfect. That is, as close to perfect as humans can get as major-league baseball hitters. He walked all the time. He struck out less often than he walked. He hit the crap out of the ball, and didn’t waste his time with grounders; Thomas also has one of the lowest groundball rates in baseball history. He knew what he could do, and he did it, and his powerful uppercut was never exploited because it was effectively unexploitable. Thomas posted one double-digit wRC+ — a 90 in 2001, when he played 20 games. He was average in his final year, as a 40-year-old. Over time, Thomas regressed, from one of the highest levels ever.

If we’re going to talk about implications, Thomas was a pure offensive force who collected 57% of his plate appearances as a designated hitter. He made the Hall of Fame on the first ballot. Edgar Martinez was a pure offensive force who collected 72% of his plate appearances as a designated hitter. Martinez wound up with a 147 wRC+, and a 66 WAR. Thomas wound up with a 154 wRC+, and a 72 WAR. Martinez isn’t close to making it in, based on current vote totals, but Thomas’ inclusion might represent the most promising step forward. If Thomas can make it in this easily, then Martinez shouldn’t be all that far behind. Shouldn’t be. Will be, but could make it yet.

The other implication is that Frank Thomas is becoming a member of the Hall of Fame. Thus completes his course as modern superstar — Thomas was once highly touted, then he was highly successful and highly beloved. Then he started to draw criticism, due and undue, so he had to overcome local adversity. Toward the end, there was pain and decline and departure. That was followed in time by forgiveness for any and all perceived sins by the original city. Now Thomas will represent that city and franchise in the Hall of Fame museum. In the little picture, it was easy for people in the late 90s to believe that Thomas had turned too much of his attention to his music business. In the big picture, Thomas spent 20 years in the game, many of them as the very model of a human sort of perfection.

Thomas hit well enough for the other stuff not to matter. Hitters better than this most assuredly do come around. Maybe a few times a century, or so.
 
Mo Rivera should be close to 100% I would think. He'll be another good test.
 
Mo Rivera should be close to 100% I would think. He'll be another good test.
Agree but you're gonna find voters that won't vote for him because he played during the steroid era or because he's a closer. Voters for baseball hof always come up with some bogus reasons not to vote for a player. Say that Barry Bonds wasn't involved with peds and there was no suspicion of him taking them, you'd still have voters that wouldn't vote him in just because they thought he was rude to the media. 
 
I'm 100% certain some voters will argue that he's not a first ballot HoFer because he's a closer.
 
If I had the vote I'd probably make Bonds & Clemens wait.

I wouldn't have voted for them the first few years on the ballot. Eventually vote for them, but first try like hell to get other guys in first.

I'd vote for:
1. Maddux
2. Glavine
3. Mussina
4. Thomas
5. Piazza
6. Mattingly
7. Raines
8. Biggio
9. Martinez
10. McGriff
 
Last edited:
Biggio was 2 votes away from getting in?!

That guy is NOT a HOF'er. That's for damn sure. Glad he didn't make it.
 
I've never been a fan of Le Batard, but that was cool of him to give away his vote for the HOF.  The HOF is a joke and so are most of the baseball writers not named Tim Kurkjian, Buster Olney, Jayson Stark, and Dan Le Batard
mean.gif
.
 
Yea? I'm curious to hear how you and Dland think he's not a HOF'er. Is it just because he played forever?

I'm one of the biggest Astros fans you'll ever find, and I don't believe Biggio is a HOF'er either. He's the perfect example of a player who stuck around way too long to accumulate numbers. He wanted to reach the 3000 hit milestone and was pretty public about it.

The last X number years of his career, he was not a good ball player. Obviously, he had some monster years in his peak in the mid to late 90's. That peak with his prolonged career is not HOF worthy to me.

Bagwell > Biggio.

Bagwell had the later portion of his career ruined by a shoulder injury. He was able to stick around a couple more years to reach 500 homers, he'd be a HOF lock. The better player at his peak and prime was Jeff Bagwell, not Biggio, and Bagwell is getting no respect for the career he had.
 
FYI Here is a list of notables coming up:

2015: Pedro Martinez, Randy Johnson, John Smoltz, Gary Sheffield

2016: Ken Griffey, Jr., Trevor Hoffman

2017: Ivan Rodriguez, Manny Ramirez, Vlad Guerrero
 
Question: was it 15 blank ballots this year? Or was that wrong. I just read from SI.com there was only one this year:

A whopping 50 percent of the voters used all 10 slots, up from 22 percent last year — a figure that points towards the organization recommending that the Hall of Fame change its rules to allow for more votes per ballot. There was only one blank ballot this year, compared to five a year ago.
 
 
Yea? I'm curious to hear how you and Dland think he's not a HOF'er. Is it just because he played forever?
I'm one of the biggest Astros fans you'll ever find, and I don't believe Biggio is a HOF'er either. He's the perfect example of a player who stuck around way too long to accumulate numbers. He wanted to reach the 3000 hit milestone and was pretty public about it.

The last X number years of his career, he was not a good ball player. Obviously, he had some monster years in his peak in the mid to late 90's. That peak with his prolonged career is not HOF worthy to me.

Bagwell > Biggio.

Bagwell had the later portion of his career ruined by a shoulder injury. He was able to stick around a couple more years to reach 500 homers, he'd be a HOF lock. The better player at his peak and prime was Jeff Bagwell, not Biggio, and Bagwell is getting no respect for the career he had.
I dont think he is a Hall of Famer because he simply was never considered one of the top players in the game.  Even in his prime.  I just dont see how ANYONE is worthy of being in the Hall of Fame....an honor reserved for the best players in Major League history....when at no point was he even considered one of the best players of his era.  At no point, no season, would anyone have considered Biggio one of the best.  Hell, in Biggio's prime, he wasn't even the best player on his own team.  And the guy he was not as good as is not in the Hall.

He was solid.  Good.  Very good.  Not great.  And the Hall should be reserved for the Greats.
 
Last edited:
FYI Here is a list of notables coming up:

2015: Pedro Martinez, Randy Johnson, John Smoltz, Gary Sheffield

2016: Ken Griffey, Jr., Trevor Hoffman

2017: Ivan Rodriguez, Manny Ramirez, Vlad Guerrero


That puts Mo at 2018 then, right? Or he has to wait til 2019?


The only ones you listed that can't get in are Ivan and Manny. Rest of those names are clean enough to get in fair and square, yes?
 
Last edited:
I thought biggio was one of them best defensive 2b of the 90s and the only reason they don't wanna put him in the hall is because his career best power numbers were posted after age 35
 
So if no Biggio, then why is Alomar a yes?
12x All Star versus 7x

10x Gold Glover versus 4x

.300 career hitter versus .281

I agree, it is relatively close, but I think as a whole Robbie is definitely more deserving.  Not to mention Robbie's career postseason numbers are substantially better than Biggios.
 
That puts Mo at 2018 then, right? Or he has to wait til 2019?


The only ones you listed that can't get in are Ivan and Manny. Rest of those names are clean enough to get in fair and square, yes?
I don't know if Sheffield gets in. He was involved in that Balco mess and admitted that he used a cream not really knowing what it was. 
 
Biggio was 2 votes away from getting in?!

That guy is NOT a HOF'er. That's for damn sure. Glad he didn't make it.

Yea? I'm curious to hear how you and Dland think he's not a HOF'er. Is it just because he played forever?

I mean...Playing 20 whatever years that he did is commendable, but essentially what you're saying is that all you have to do is play for a really really long time, be good to very good and reach a milestone of some kind (in this case hits).

And like Dland alluded to -- he was never considered one of the greatest of his time. In his entire duration of playing, can we honestly say he was a top 20 player in the game? If you can, then you're really pushing it, because I don't think you can (without thinking of a list).

He's what I would call just a solid baseball player. Definitely someone you want on your team, but not HOF caliber. We're talking the best of the best...Or at least supposed to be. And while we're on this subject, wouldn't we think that a HOF caliber player, who didn't hit for power would be elite in some other way? Because he's not. Only 1 season...ONE...where he had 200 hits or more. A career .281 hitter that didn't hit for power is meh...Solid, but not HOF.

I think it's a joke because I know what these writers are doing. They stripped that era of all the juicers, which is just about all of the real elite players in that era, and voting in what's left over. Biggio was clean among the dirty, but also a notch or two below the best of the best. Him in the HOF makes this look even more pitiful to me.
 
Last edited:
I think it's a joke because I know what these writers are doing. They stripped that era of all the juicers, which is just about all of the real elite players in that era, and voting in what's left over. Biggio was clean among the dirty, but also a notch or two below the best of the best. Him in the HOF makes this look even more pitiful to me.
Been saying this exact thing for a while now.  We are about to see a trend for the foreseeable future where the voters will be voting in nothing but sure fire HOFers (Maddux, Randy Johnson, Mariano types), and players that have no business being HOFers.  But the latter will be getting in because voters will take the moral high ground on (supposed) steroid users. 

Its a joke.
 
I think it's funny that people just assume player X is clean and player Y is dirty. Get real lol
 
I think it's funny that people just assume player X is clean and player Y is dirty. Get real lol

It's the perception. I don't think we really give a ****. I know I don't. It comes down to what the voters/writers think and with what we see...They think Biggio is clean and most the others are dirty. That's half the reason why it's ridiculous.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom