ATG 8 Player Addition #3 Nomination Thread

1953 Mickey Vernon, AL batting champ, bulletproof

One thing I find surprising is that there are a lot of ATG's with limited playing time for a season.

I would think you would want at least 400 AB's for a non-pitcher or 175 or IP's for a starter, maybe base it upon games appeared in for a reliever. How can someone be an ATG if they played a smaller role than this??

I know some players may have had good statistical seasons with limited AB's, but if they are an ATG they should have a season where they would meet participation requirements.

One thing I find surprising is that there are a lot of ATG's with limited playing time for a season.

I would think you would want at least 400 AB's for a non-pitcher or 175 or IP's for a starter, maybe base it upon games appeared in for a reliever. How can someone be an ATG if they played a smaller role than this??

I know some players may have had good statistical seasons with limited AB's, but if they are an ATG they should have a season where they would meet participation requirements.

There is a history that comes along with ATG. As the 8 indicates, this is the eighth "version" of ATG, those versions being at times not much more than additional players or the application of some make-up (lipstick on a pig, some might argue). The ATG originally stood for All Time Great Teams, thus the number of players with fewer (abs, innings...) than what some might find acceptable. With time, as SOM players argued that such and such a baseball great deserved a better card than what that particular team provided him with or that certain baseball greats or semi-greats not represented deserved their due, the card numbers have increased. Some think too much so (I am not one of those). With numbers come the opportunity to create franchise leagues, full scale regional birthplace leagues, birthdate leagues, 45 mil dollar leagues and all sorts of possibilities in regular auto leagues. I understand your perplexity about wanting full season numbers, but I could turn your numbers back on you and say (in good jest) why 400 abs, seems a bit arbitrary, how about 350, still going down for 15 games. Same for innings and games played.

I would suggest getting past the nomiker "All Time Greats": they're there (for the most part), but they have to play with someone and a 50 cent shortstop with 112 abs is, at times, just what you need. The guys with lower abs often provide opportunities to platoon (offensively and defensively). And for my money (and believe me, I've shelled out a lot), the great thing (besides the comraderie of your opponents) is the discovery of those forgotten names in baseball history. When you think about the number of kids who play baseball, who dream about playing major league baseball, and the number that actually make it, even for a cup of coffee, then those who make it are All Time Greats in my book.

Hope to see you in a league soon.

Bill

Great post, Bill! Right on target for those of us who love franchise leagues. Your point about the ATG moniker is an excellent suggestion. "All Time Baseball" would get my voye.

Tom

I am generally opposed to someone who maybe only had 50 ABs and is in because he hit .350 in those limited ABs.
But many of the lesser playing time cards serve a purpose. Generally speaking a player who had say 600 ABs did so because they started and usually started at one position, especially if the season in question was in their prime and one of their better seasons. But every team needs some utility players. Guys who can play all OF slots or multiple infield slots. These utility players often have fewer ABs because they were coming off the bench.

So an Oquendo who was a super sub is needed. I tend to be on the side of eliminating cards like Gates Brown who are only here because they had a fluke season and thus had a fluke card. But as George said there is a history here and sometimes you just gotta move forward.

Hopefully in the future we can avoid fluke cards while being creative enough to find utility guys like Oquendo to include in the set. I would love to see some of the better historians than myself identify some cards of capable and ideally career utility guys. Ben Zobrist?

As a long time suffering Mariners fan I would like to see these cards added to the M's franchise
Alex Rodriguez 2000
Dan Wilson 1996
Randy Johnson 1995
Tino Martinez 1995
Bill Risley 1994
Mike Moore 1988
Phil Bradley 1985
Bill Wilkinson 1987
Matt young 1983
Bill Caudill 1982
Bob Stoddard 1982
Tom Paciorek 1981

I am generally opposed to someone who maybe only had 50 ABs and is in because he hit .350 in those limited ABs.
But many of the lesser playing time cards serve a purpose. Generally speaking a player who had say 600 ABs did so because they started and usually started at one position, especially if the season in question was in their prime and one of their better seasons. But every team needs some utility players. Guys who can play all OF slots or multiple infield slots. These utility players often have fewer ABs because they were coming off the bench.

So an Oquendo who was a super sub is needed. I tend to be on the side of eliminating cards like Gates Brown who are only here because they had a fluke season and thus had a fluke card. But as George said there is a history here and sometimes you just gotta move forward.

Hopefully in the future we can avoid fluke cards while being creative enough to find utility guys like Oquendo to include in the set. I would love to see some of the better historians than myself identify some cards of capable and ideally career utility guys. Ben Zobrist?

Besides Zobrist, how about:

1966 Felipe Alou
1964 Don Zimmer
1979 Joel Youngblood
2006 Chris Woodward
1914 Possum Whitted
1930 George Watkins
1902 Honus Wagner
2006 Jose Valentin
1970 Cesar Tovar
1936 Billy Sullivan, Jr.
1989 Pat Tabler
1972 Rennie Stennett
1906 Sammy Strang
2002 Scott Spiezio
1955 Al Smith
1994 Craig Shipley
1894 George Shoch
1989 Kevin Seitzer
1913 Tillie Shafer
1966 Bob Saverine
1989 Ernie Riles
2008 Juan Rivera
1976 bill Robinson
1925 Harry Rice
1995 Jeff Reboulet
1993 Tony Phillips
1883 John Morrill
1890/1891 Doggie Miller
1993 Jeff McKnight
2004 John Mabry
1919 Sherry Magee
1910 John Knight
1915 Marty Kavanagh
1887 King Kelly
1921 Rogers Hornsby (.397/.458/.639 eligible at 1b,2b,3b,ss,lf)
1962/1963 Chuck Hinton
1969 Woodie Held
1970 Tommy Harper
1942 Augie Galan
1974 Pepe Frias
1997 Jeff Frye
1912 Clyde Engle
1962 Don Demeter
2008 Ronny Cedeno
1986 Gary Carter
1904 Roger Bresnahan
1932 Lyn Lary
1924 Ray Blades
2005 Pablo Ozuna
2008 Willie Harris


Okay, a lot of these guys aren't career utility players, but these are all years with at least five eligible positions. Sure, some of these are 1b, 3b, lf, rf, cf. But Chuck Hinton, for example, would be a good add (1962 -- .310/.361/.472, 2b, ss, lf, cf, rf and 1963 -- .269/.340/.426 1b, 3b, ss, lf, rf, cf) as would Marty Kavanagh (.295/.378/.452 1b,2b,3b,ss,lf) or Craig Shipley (.333/.362/.475 1b, 2b, 3b, ss, lf, cf) or Jose Valentin (.271/.330/.490 1b, 2b, 3b, ,lf, rf) or Jeff Frye (.312/.352/.433 at all positions except catcher).

Bill

1997 Darryl Kile; was 19 - 7; 2.57 era; 1.18 whip, 255.2 IPs in 34 starts, with 4 shutouts

Ken

how about some of the 1980 Astros. The did win the NL West...a first for them I believe.

JR Richard 1980
Joe Sambito 1980
Cesar Cedeno 1980

It would nice if there was a qualifying method, such as x times an al-star, or x in Cy Young or MVP Voting, etc. etc.

I'd think some form of a points system would be helpful,

It would work well also IMO to have a separate rating system for a franchise league - take their 3 best season with that franchise and average them, perhaps even their best 3 contiguous seasons with that franchise. I think then you are focusing more on true "faces of the franchise" instead of one hit wonders.