Posted on 01/05/2005 5:58:20 AM PST by GreatOne
Imagine the sight of Albert Belle stepping up to the lectern in Cooperstown in 2006 and giving an impassioned speech about his love of baseball.
Can't picture it?
Neither can I.
But that won't stop me from voting for Belle when his name appears on the Hall of Fame ballot next December, his first year of eligibility.
The voting guidelines ask that eligible Baseball Writers Association of America voters consider a player's "record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contributions to the team(s) on which he played." Obviously, there are many who consider Belle's anti-social behavior to be a character defect, considering he once chased some kids in his truck after they egged his house one Halloween, threw a ball at a photographer and launched into an obscenity-laced tirade against a female television reporter.
But if "character" really were a factor in Hall of Fame voting, players like Ty Cobb never would have made it in. There are few saints in the Hall of Fame, including one of this year's inductees, Wade Boggs.
Looking at the pitiful vote totals the surly Jim Rice has received in his 11 years on the ballot, I realize voting for Belle is a lost cause. But I never saw a more feared hitter than Belle in his prime.
Playing in an era with Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa and Mark McGwire, Belle was the most dominant slugger of the 1990s, driving in more runs (1,099) than any other player. He earned five Silver Slugger awards with Cleveland and the White Sox and finished among the top 10 in MVP voting five times despite his famous disdain for sportswriters.
Some believe Belle's ornery demeanor was solely responsible for his second-place MVP finish in 1995, when he finished eight points behind Boston's Mo Vaughn despite playing for a pennant winner and being the first player in history with 50 home runs and 50 doubles.
Belle ranks 17th in major-league history with a .564 slugging percentage, making him one of the game's greatest power hitters. Few realize Belle's .655 slugging percentage with the Sox in `98 was higher than Sammy Sosa's .647 percentage with the Cubs during his 66-home run season that year.
After retiring at the age of 34 in the spring of 2001 because of degenerative arthritis in his right hip, Belle basically disappeared from view. He lives in Scottsdale, Ariz., and follows the Minnesota Vikings around. Belle told Minneapolis Star-Tribune columnist Patrick Reusse last week that the low point for him as a Vikings fan was being at Soldier Field last month during the Vikings' 24-14 loss to the Bears.
"What was so upsetting was to see Chad Hutchinson have a great game," Belle said. "I told the people I was with at the game, `Watch him the rest of the year. He's going to be garbage.' And he has been."
Belle's numbers are on par with those of Kirby Puckett, who was a first-ballot Hall of Famer and a friend to any sportswriter who was in need of a quote. Belle finished with 381 home runs and 1,239 RBIs in a 12-year career, numbers that are much higher than the 207 homers and 1,085 home runs Puckett produced in a similar 12-year career that was cut short by glaucoma.
Belle's .369 on-base percentage was higher than Puckett's .360, though he hit .295 in his career to Puckett's .318.
Puckett's image took a hit because of some questionable behavior after his retirement, well after he had been inducted into the Hall of Fame.
Belle can't erase his past. He only can hope enough voters ignore his image and look at the numbers he put up in a relatively short period of time.
I only interviewed Belle once in my career, during the 1997 All-Star Game, so my support has nothing to do with any kind of personal relationship. But I voted for Puckett and I'll do likewise for Belle for one simple reason.
He deserves it.
I don't agree with the comparisons to Kirby Puckett, who was a hitting machine, with 600 more hits and a lifetime batting average of .318. Puckett was also always considered to be one of baseball's good guys (unless, of course, you were married to him).
Go here for the Patrick Reusse column about Albert Belle. Good read.
That is considered a character defect? Dale Murphy should get in before Belle. He had over 400 HRs and was (I think) a three time MVP. He just played on bad teams.
Fair or not, sometimes a person's choices bring consequences. If Belle chose to be an assh*le, perhaps some future would-be assh*le will learn something from his outcome.
My one encounter with Belle was in a fitness club and I asked him to move so I could do some wrist curls on a bench he was occupying. He moved.
I agree on Belle. I'd put him in. Jim Rice too. This fixation on career numbers drives me nuts.
I cannot understand why Jack Morris is not in. His post season pitching was masterful.
For me, Belle is a borderline HOF candidate. He was very good, but I would have liked a bit more longevity. I think the author is remiss in his comparison of Belle and Puckett, though, by failing to note that Puckett was also an outstanding defensive player, winning 6 Gold Gloves as a centerfielder. That is not an insigificant part of Puckett's HOF resume.
Jim Rice I can see. I'm not so sure about Belle.
How many teams did Albert "Don't call me Joey" Belle play for? I was always impressed with his talent but then again, I like Barry Bonds too (Hey, no steroid is going to help you see and make contact with a 95mph baseball).
Also, didn't Joey get busted for corking? Sounds like he should just take a seat over in the corner next to Pete Rose. Afterall, integrity apparently counts, right?
OK. I won't fixate on career numbers, although, in some part, surely you can see that career numbers are the way to quantify a player's achievements. Without those career numbers, though, I'm wondering on what you would base your elections to the hall.
Albert Belle simply didn't (in my ever so humble opinion) have a long enough career to demonstrate that he was a player for the ages. 93-98 were, without doubt, great years statistically. As an O's fan living in Baltimore with a stat crazy teenage son, I'll say that his 37 homers and 117 rbi in 99 were the quietest big numbers put up in Baltimore for a long time.
His outfield play was horrendous, at least what I saw in his 2 years here in B'more. Not an all-around great player.
I just don't see him a hall of famer.
No on Belle. Good slugging numbers for the years he played, but in an inflated era. Didn't play long enough. Bad defensive outfielder and baserunner. OF/1b have to have the best numbers.
"There are few saints in the Hall of Fame, including one of this year's inductees, Wade Boggs."
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't he get caught cheating on his wife?
The more I think about it, the more I come down against Belle. He and Juan Gonzalez were very similar players. Gonzalez has the better career numbers, and I'm not so sure he's a HOF player, either. I couldn't justify putting Belle in, but not Gonzalez. And I'm not comfortable saying yes, both are HOF material. I think in the end I say Belle and Gonzalez are among that group of players who were very good, but fall just a bit short of the standard needed to get into the HOF.
And Reinsdorf learned never to put up huge bucks for a player again. Sigh....
If they're gonna only use hitting stats, then they'll have to create a hitters Hall of Fame. Even then Belle should have no chance. In 8 years there will be plenty of 450 HRs guys hovering who don't belong in the Hall, guys who had 8 big years and then just stuck around being average(Griffey). Gonzales, Frank Thomas, Belle are pouty, lousy fielders who never hustled, and killed a team with there laziness, bad attitude, and chronic injuries. The hall is for the 15 year total package guy who you could always count on in any situation.
One thing that separates baseball (from an offensive standpoint, at least) from other sports is that longevity truly does matter -- because it really isn't the kind of sport where careers are cut short by injury on a regular basis. An NFL running back like Gale Sayers or Terrell Davis can make the Hall of Fame on the basis of five or six great seasons, but an outfielder in Major League Baseball simply can't do the same thing on the basis of 8-10 dominant years.
As a fellow Orioles fan, watching him "play" for the Os was painful. His big numbers were quiet because he was always hitting solo homers when the game was out of hand. He goes in the Glenn Davis category of "I want my money back". No HOFer would have fans thinking that.
Orioles fans hurt at the name Glenn Davis the way Bosox fans cringe at the name Bill Buckner.
Curt Schilling, Pete Harnisch and Steve Finley. Ouch.
No, but steroids can turn a 300 foot flyout into a 325 foot homer.
I think Andre Dawson belongs in the HOF. I'm borderline on Jim Rice, perhaps leaning slightly in favor. The others, I'm in agreement with you.
Some years ago, I read a fascinating essay by a baseball writer who had come up with a mathematical formula to predict entry into the baseball Hall of Fame, and he boasted something like 99% accuracy--it only missed two players, and one of which was in the Hall after being killed in World War II or something like that, with the clear implication that he made it on a sympathy vote.
Anyone else out there remember this article? And if so, I wonder how Belle stacks up when his numbers are put into the formula?
I think it does.
This is a joke, right? Steroids does not improve your vision. If you can't see and hit a 95 MPH fastball, no drug in the world will help you. Bonds has always had 20-15 vision. Why the Bonds' average change? Steriods has turned his 380 foot fly out into a 405 foot HR, turned grounds outs into smashed singles, flyouts into gappers, etc. He's now such a long ball threat, they put on a huge shift which they didn't do before the roids, with the 3rd baseman playing behind second. They're willing to give up a single, which they didn't do pre-roids shift. When Bonds has two strikes and gets an outside pitch, he hits a dink single down the 3rd base line. Give the man 20-60 vision and he's career is over, with or without roids. He's still just average compared to Ruth, who hit more home runs than most teams in the league. Ruth's left center fence was 498, RC was 488, center was 463. Bonds may not have hit 300 home runs if he played in that home park, as his HR's avg. barely 400 feet.
I don't disagree with everything else you said, but, right or not, I think Griffey is a stone-cold lock for the Hall of Fame. He'll finish his career with 550-600 home runs, but even if he retires today, he'll have over 500 home runs, and that puts him in, period.
Not only will he go, he'll be a first ballot guy.
Roger Maris needs to be in the Hall of Fame.
"Dale Murphy should get in before Belle. He had over 400 HRs and was (I think) a three time MVP. He just played on bad teams."
His outfield play was horrendous, at least what I saw in his 2 years here in B'more. Not an all-around great player.
With all due repect, you seem to be forgetting that the reason why Belle left the game so early was due to a degenerative hip condition; man couldn't run anymore his last year or so in Baltimore. His shortness of career is long enough and prolific enough to join Koufax and Puckett.
He played for 3 teams - Indians ('89-'96), White Sox ('97-'98), and Orioles ('99-'00).
I'd agree with you regarding the homers, but I think you need to distinguish between home runs and r.b.i.'s - the man was an r.b.i. machine, and would have easily finished in the top 10 all-time if he had played another 5-6 years. Same goes for Carlos Delgado, Jim Thome, Manny Ramirez, and Juan Gonzalez when they're up. Knocking in runs don't just come from home runs.
See my post at #32. I think that injuries should not bar Gonzalez and Belle from the HOF.
Steroids actually do help improve your eyesight. When I found that out, I gave up being a Bonds fan/believer, and took him off my all-time team. He arrogantly went after Ruth, let's see Ruth playing under the modern weight-lifting regime, let alone steroids.
Belle doesn't belong in that class because of his injuries (and I'd exclude Rice from the sheer greatness of his overall numbers). I think that Mattingly should also get more consideration because his career was also hampered by injuries at the end.
This probably isn't what you were thinking of, but go to www.baseball-refernce.com, and at the bottom of the page for each player is Bill James' HOF creditials.
I don't see why people argue for Dawson. Only had 4 years with 100+ r.b.i.'s, only 3 seasons with 30+ home runs, and only 2 seasons with 180+ hits. Yes, I see that he won a Gold Glove 8 times, and was an All-Star 8 times, but I don't see him as one of the all-time greats. Rice, on the other hand, had 8 years with 100+ r.b.i.'s, 4 years with 30+ home runs, and 6 years with 180+ hits (including 4 years with 200+). He also was in the top 5 for MVP voting 6 times. Definitely should be in, and probably would if he didn't tail off after turning 34.
Not necessarily defending Belle, but Ty Cobb was the definitive a-hole, and of course he belongs in the HoF.
Don't forget the Human Growth Hormone for a big boost in visual acuity.
I think that it's more than fair to say that Smith was the greatest-fielding shortstop of all time, and that alone should get him in. Trammell is in the same category as Davey Concepcion and Larry Bowa - good, but not great, shortstops, although I could easily be persuaded that they are similar to the problem with relief pitchers (Gossage, Sutter, Smith) and should be allowed in.
Belle's homer, RBI and BA average totals simply aren't of HOF caliber.
I always thought the same thing, but over the last few months I've learned quite a bit to the contrary. Here in New York, there has been a lot of talk about Jason Giambi's chronic injuries last season and his testimony in the BALCO criminal proceedings in which he admitted to using steroids in the past. One of the things that was discussed in these articles was the fact that his vision has been somewhat impaired over the last couple of years. Apparently there is evidence that some of these steroids can actually enhance a person's vision or at least delay the onset of the normal age-related decline in vision.
This would explain why the "vision" thing also works in reverse. Not only can steroids turn a .320 hitter into a .360 hitter . . . Giambi's elimination of these steroids may have been a major factor in his decline from a .320 hitter to a .260 hitter.
Albert did get shafted by not winning the MVP that year. No way Mo Vaughn should have won the award over Belle. But the MVP is basically a popularity contest. Ted Williams lost the MVP award once because a Boston sportswriter left his name deliberately off his ballot...and Ted had won the Triple Crown that season!
Because Smith was the greatest fielding shortstop of all time, while Trammell played with other shortstops who could be considered good, but not great - Concepcion and Bowa. Could also be a bias against shortstops, like there is for relievers.
What sets Dawson apart from the others is that he had that revival of sorts at the end of his career. He came back to play for the Cubs and had an MVP-type season right away; apparently he decided that he could extend his career by doing two things: 1) playing on grass as much as possible, and 2) playing as many day games as possible (he always felt he could see the ball better in the daytime than at night). The Cubs were a natural fit for him, so he basically went to them and agreed to play for something close to the league minimum, with lots of incentive-based bonus money in his contract.
Longevity counts. 2700+ hits. 400+ HR. 8 Gold Gloves. 300+ SB. Won 1 MVP, and finished 2nd two other times. Top 10 in SPC 8 times (once more than Albert Belle), Top 10 in total bases 10 times (3 more than Belle). An all around great player who doesn't get the credit he's due because he spent the best half of his career in Montreal.
Trust me, seeing as the O's were saddled with his salary for several years after he stopped playing, I really don't think I'm forgetting much about the very forgettable play of one Albert Belle.
His horrendous outfield play was NOT the result of his degenerative hip condition. Let's not forget his 17 stolen bases in 99, the 2nd highest year of his career. He was a terrible right fielder.
Puckett played 12 complete seasons to a .318 BA, a leader who always gave 110%. Not so Mr. Belle.
I agree on the longevity regarding Koufax, but after looking through pitchers in the hall from the "modern" era, none of them had a 4 year stretch as a starter like Koufax did in his last 4 years. 97 W 27 L ERA for that 4 year stretch 1.86 with 31 shutouts. (As a comparison, both Steve Carlton and Nolan Ryan each had 1 year with an era under 2.00)
In addition, I'd say Trammell can blame his failure to get into the Hall of Fame on one player: Alex Rodriguez. He has changed the way the shortstop position is defined from an offensive standpoint by putting up the kind of offensive numbers one would expect from outfielders or first basemen. As a result, from this point forward the accomplishments of any shortstop who was considered "great" in a previous era will always be diminished (unwittingly, perhaps) in the eyes of today's voters.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.