Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : But who else is in Mauer's offensive class? Where does the offense end and the defense begin in the voter's minds?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    I don't have the answer for that. Some wanted Schalk removed from the HOF (Lifetime .250-ish avg, but in the DB ERA); he was great defensively. The HOF is always controversial, as a general rule. Just a guess, but I don't think Varitek shall make it; and given the precedence with Schalk, that is controversial. As far as Babe's post is concerned; ignore drooling children.


     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from The---Babe---. Show The---Babe---'s posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : I don't have the answer for that. Some wanted Schalk removed from the HOF (Lifetime .250-ish avg, but in the DB ERA); he was great defensively. The HOF is always controversial, as a general rule. Just a guess, but I don't think Varitek shall make it; and given the precedence with Schalk, that is controversial. As far as Babe's post is concerned; ignore drooling children.

    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    LOL...my post is spot on. If he was such a great catcher, why did they have to have a police escort to get mirabelli to the park to catch wake?

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : LOL...my post is spot on. If he was such a great catcher, why did they have to have a police escort to get mirabelli to the park to catch wake?
    Posted by The---Babe---[/QUOTE]

    That was the one thing he was awful at; why, I don't know, but every player has their weaknesses; Mantle struck out alot.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    I must address Babe's post: Try researching Tek's career, Babe. He caught Wakefield for years. As for CERA, you are confusing a cerebral skill with a physical one. Calling a great game has nothing to do with his arm strength. He has a .994 career Fielding pct. if I recall correctly.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    I would think Dwight Evans & Graig Nettles are more debatable. Richie Allen, too (But not for defense, LOL). Ron Santo is the ultimate injustice, for both ways.

    Mattingly falls into the what if he wasn't injured discussion. Radatz also.

    Koufax has proved that not having a long prime is everything. Him, Pedro & Maddux are still the best I ever saw.
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : That was the one thing he was awful at; why, I don't know, but every player has their weaknesses; Mantle struck out alot.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    On the contrary, he caught Wake credibly. Even outdid Mirabelli a couple of years. The decision was made to rest him once every 5 starts, and it made sense with Wake because catching Wake takes a physical toll.

    Furthermore, Tek's CS rate is skewed by the fact that RedSox pitchers don't deploy the side-step and historically are poor holding base-runners. Will the voters acknowledge this?
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : On the contrary, he caught Wake credibly. Even outdid Mirabelli a couple of years. The decision was made to rest him once every 5 starts, and it made sense with Wake because catching Wake takes a physical toll. Furthermore, Tek's CS rate is skewed by the fact that RedSox pitchers don't deploy the side-step and historically are poor holding base-runners. Will the voters acknowledge this?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    I was going on what the sportswriters said, I stand corrected. (I believe I heard that they did everything in their power to avoid having him catch Wake; I also heard there was a game where he had several passed balls in 1 inning. )

    As far as the voters are concerned, I'm going to guess no; but what do I know?
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]Sorry, harness; I disagree. There are only 13 catcher's in the HOF, and all could man the tools of ignorance quite well (Which he really can't). Also, a .301 Lifetime BA in the era he played in is not exactly immortal. And now I'm about to show my Yankee bone: If Munson & E. Howard never got close, I think that says something right there. (FTR, I always thought Berra was overrated). I could think of other outstandig receivers who never got even a whiff: Freehan, Parrish, Sundberg, Torre, and others right now I can't recall. I would think Varitek has a better chance, and even in his case I believe he's a long shot.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    We're throwing out names, so let's look at them.

    Parrish IMO should be in the Hall. He had 324 career homers and 1,070 RBIs, .252 BA and .753 OPS. Nice numbers for a catcher and he was a catcher. He played 1,988 games, 1,818 as a catcher and just 42 at another defensive position. I think he tops the list of catchers who should be in the Hall.

    If Torre played another 400 or 500 games as a catcher and had the same numbers, he definitely should be in the Hall -- 252 career homers, 1,185 RBIs, .297 Career BA; 5 100-RBI seasons, one batting title. But of his 2,209 games played, he played about 903 games -- less than half of his career games played. So he just falls in to the Hall of the Very Good.

    Freehan was a nice catcher, long career but doesn't have HOF numbers even as a catcher. Tek's numbers might be slightly better, but overall, offensively, Freehan is a nice comparison to Tek. I'm not sure how Freehan was rated defensively. If Tek goes in, Freehan should go in. Although I'm inclined to say no on both, even taking defense, handling pitchers and intangibles into consideration.

    Sundberg might be best player on the list defensively, but you still have to have offensive numbers, and they fall way short.

    Munson didn't play long enough, had little power, and was already in decline power-wise when he died. He had just four or five seasons that fall into the very good to excellent category. He was 32 when he died so it's hard to see him putting up many more great seasons -- if any in that category.

    Elston Howard falls into the Freehan-Tek category for career numbers. Was MVP one year and had a couple of years that stood out for a catcher in his era. I might put him above Freehan and Tek, but he's borderline at best. 

    Since this is a thread about Martinez, I can't leave Martinez out, I think he falls into the Torre category when all is said and done. Right now, he ranks above Tek and Freehan when it comes to offensive numbers in BA and OPS. He's behind in HR, RBI because he hasn't played long enough. By the time his career is over, he'll have nice overall numbers but not many of those numbers will be as a catcher. He's played about 850 of 1,077 games as a catcher. By the time his contract is up after the 2014, at best, he'll have 1,000 as a catcher (probably slightly under in the 950 range) in about 1,550 games and his percentage of games caught will continue to go down. So while he'll have decent numbers, no to him in the HOF, especially since he'll be lucky IMO to reach 1,000 games as a catcher.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]I would think Dwight Evans & Graig Nettles are more debatable. Richie Allen, too (But not for defense, LOL). Ron Santo is the ultimate injustice, for  both  ways. Mattingly falls into the what if he wasn't injured discussion. Radatz also. Koufax has proved that not having a long prime is everything. Him, Pedro & Maddux are still the best I ever saw.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    Position has a lot to do with expectations of offensive output.
    Weighing Tek's all-around game against the current HOF'ers: How does he rate in your opinion? Does VMART rate higher with 4-year numerical projection?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    You claim Munson had no power; nothing is further from the truth, at least before he hurt is shoulder in '78. He had to deal with the OLD YS death valley and the OLD NEW YS death valley in the late 70s before they brought the fences in. (I went to a game personally in '73 where I saw him hit a 450+ feet out). He was also a doubles machine.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re:Runners have always run on him with abandon. 
    Posted by The---Babe---[/QUOTE]

    Making stuff up as you go along, I see. Tek had just one really bad year throwing out runners -- 13 percent in 2009. The rest of the time, he was always over 21 percent and in the high 20s in his prime, which is very respectable, especially considering the Red Sox philosophy about the the slide step and holding runners.

    And since you seem to be oblivious about it, stolen bases are as more about the pitcher than the catcher.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]You claim Munson had no power; this is not true. He had to deal with the OLD YS death valley and the OLD NEW YS death valley in the late 70s before they brought the fences in. (I went to a game personally in '73 where I saw him hit a 450+ feet out). He was also a doubles machine, and hit .340 one yr (Ironically at Shea during the refurbishing of YS , which was no hitter's friend either, but at least better).
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    True, but whatever power he had appeared to be in decline by 1979 when he was 32. He might have been a regular catcher for three or four more years -- 'til he was 35 or 36 -- but it's fair to believe that his numbers would have been mediocre in those years. Remember, he was a catcher with a lot of wear and tear and catcher's stats back then typically declined from 32 on.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from The---Babe---. Show The---Babe---'s posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]I must address Babe's post: Try researching Tek's career, Babe. He caught Wakefield for years. As for CERA, you are confusing a cerebral skill with a physical one. Calling a great game has nothing to do with his arm strength. He has a .994 career Fielding pct. if I recall correctly.

    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    I'm not confusing anything. I'll give you your voodoo CERA, but he was still not a standout defensive catcher. Fielding % means squat. Posada has a Fielding % of .992 and far superior offensive numbers and double the amount of rings. Does that put him in the HOF?

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Boomerangsdotcom. Show Boomerangsdotcom's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    Victor is still considered by most analysts as one of the elite catchers in the game:

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : True, but whatever power he had appeared to be in decline by 1979 when he was 32. He might have been a regular catcher for three or four more years -- 'til he was 35 or 36 -- but it's fair to believe that his numbers would have been mediocre in those years. Remember, he was a catcher with a lot of wear and tear and catcher's stats back then typically declined from 32 on.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]

    Agreed, and check my corrections to my previous post, there were some inaccuracies.

    Also, In '75-'77, he was the first player in a decade or two to have 3 consecutive .300, 100 RBIs season; and as a catcher. 

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]Victor is still considered by most analysts as one of the elite catchers in the game: http://www.fangraphs.com/fantasy/index.php/updated-catcher-rankings-july-2011/
    Posted by Boomerangsdotcom[/QUOTE]

    This link is strictly offensive #s; nobody's disputing that; but it helps when being compared to catchers who have to don the position practically full time.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : I'm not confusing anything. I'll give you your voodoo CERA, but he was still not a standout defensive catcher. Fielding % means squat. Posada has a Fielding % of .992 and far superior offensive numbers and double the amount of rings. Does that put him in the HOF?
    Posted by The---Babe---[/QUOTE]

    That's a damn good question. What do you think?
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : Position has a lot to do with expectations of offensive output. Weighing Tek's all-around game against the current HOF'ers: How does he rate in your opinion? Does VMART rate higher with 4-year numerical projection?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    Thanks for your valued opinion of my opinion. Yes to VMart's projection making him rate higher, but I still don't think he make it. I need to think over the others, but he's definitely better than Schalk.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from susan250. Show susan250's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]No, but has anyone noticed what a dominant pitcher Justin Masterson has become? He made the Yanks look weak last night and his ERA is 2.88.
    Posted by tbrod[/QUOTE]

    I always liked him.  I agree that he is becoming a good pitcher and he could have helped the Red Sox this year if he wasn't traded. 
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from The---Babe---. Show The---Babe---'s posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : Making stuff up as you go along, I see. Tek had just one really bad year throwing out runners -- 13 percent in 2009. The rest of the time, he was always over 21 percent and in the high 20s in his prime, which is very respectable, especially considering the Red Sox philosophy about the the slide step and holding runners. And since you seem to be oblivious about it, stolen bases are as more about the pitcher than the catcher.

    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]

    No, I am not making stuff up. He may have had halfway decent % but the bottom line is runners run on him frequently because they know they can steal on him. Look at this year. OK % but still among the league leaders in stolen bases against (that's both him and salty).

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : We're throwing out names, so let's look at them. Parrish IMO should be in the Hall. He had 324 career homers and 1,070 RBIs, .252 BA and .753 OPS. Nice numbers for a catcher and he was a catcher. He played 1,988 games, 1,818 as a catcher and just 42 at another defensive position. I think he tops the list of catchers who should be in the Hall. If Torre played another 400 or 500 games as a catcher and had the same numbers, he definitely should be in the Hall -- 252 career homers, 1,185 RBIs, .297 Career BA; 5 100-RBI seasons, one batting title. But of his 2,209 games played, he played about 903 games -- less than half of his career games played. So he just falls in to the Hall of the Very Good. Freehan was a nice catcher, long career but doesn't have HOF numbers even as a catcher. Tek's numbers might be slightly better, but overall, offensively, Freehan is a nice comparison to Tek. I'm not sure how Freehan was rated defensively. If Tek goes in, Freehan should go in. Although I'm inclined to say no on both, even taking defense, handling pitchers and intangibles into consideration. Sundberg might be best player on the list defensively, but you still have to have offensive numbers, and they fall way short. Munson didn't play long enough, had little power, and was already in decline power-wise when he died. He had just four or five seasons that fall into the very good to excellent category. He was 32 when he died so it's hard to see him putting up many more great seasons -- if any in that category. Elston Howard falls into the Freehan-Tek category for career numbers. Was MVP one year and had a couple of years that stood out for a catcher in his era. I might put him above Freehan and Tek, but he's borderline at best.  Since this is a thread about Martinez, I can't leave Martinez out, I think he falls into the Torre category when all is said and done. Right now, he ranks above Tek and Freehan when it comes to offensive numbers in BA and OPS. He's behind in HR, RBI because he hasn't played long enough. By the time his career is over, he'll have nice overall numbers but not many of those numbers will be as a catcher. He's played about 850 of 1,077 games as a catcher. By the time his contract is up after the 2014, at best, he'll have 1,000 as a catcher (probably slightly under in the 950 range) in about 1,550 games and his percentage of games caught will continue to go down. So while he'll have decent numbers, no to him in the HOF, especially since he'll be lucky IMO to reach 1,000 games as a catcher.
    Posted by royf19[/QUOTE]

    This is clearly the best post on this thread. What grabs my attention is that several think Parrish deserves to be in the HOF. Comparing his OPS with Tek's, the real difference is era and power. OTOH, Parrish doesn't have the accolades Tek has. Nor does VMART. Championships won at most every level. No-hitters caught.

    If Parrish warrants attention, it should open the door for others.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : That's a damn good question. What do you think?
    Posted by harness[/QUOTE]

    No, but I'm not a Posada fan. FWIW, he was ranked #10 in the greatest catcher list of all time I posted; which is a sorry list that just about completely forgets the old timers, like Cochrane, Hartnett, Lopez, Lombardi, Ferrell, and others.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from harness. Show harness's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : No, but I'm not a Posada fan. FWIW, he was ranked #10 in the greatest catcher list of all time I posted; which is a sorry list that just about completely forgets the old timers, like Cochrane, Hartnett, Lopez, Lombardi, Ferrell, and others.
    Posted by nhsteven[/QUOTE]

    Will this poll sway voters?
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from royf19. Show royf19's posts

    Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?

    In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Is Victor Martinez a HOF'er? : No, I am not making stuff up. He may have had halfway decent % but the bottom line is runners run on him frequently because they know they can steal on him. Look at this year. OK % but still among the league leaders in stolen bases against (that's both him and salty).
    Posted by The---Babe---[/QUOTE]

    What don't you get about SBs being more on the pitcher. Players run not because they can steal on him but because they can steal on the pitchers who don't hold the runners close and don't use the slide step. If you paid attention at all, there's a large percentage of those stolen bases where no catcher would have a chance.

    An example is a SB in the last game Tek caught. He had a quick release, a perfect throw and nearly had the runner. But it took all that to make it close as the runner got a huge jump on the pitcher.

    You can be stubborn all you want and igore that fact, but any professional scouting report will tell you that is the biggest reason for the stolen bases against the Red Sox.
     

Share