19.3 Nominations Discussion

The McGriff card poses some problems. It is obviously not as good as the one we have, but it does give us a Tampa Bay card. He can't really play defense (though some might argue that you can hide bad defense at 1B) and he'll clog up the basepaths with his high obp. '99 ops+ (142) is right around his career average (134). This guy was a hitter (it is surprising that he didn't drive in more runs -- I know, RBIs are predicated on what surrounds you, and he must have been surrounded by some particularly low on-base guys). He might get my vote only to help the TB crowd. https://365.strat-o-matic.com/player/3384/1999/1/1999

The LeFlore card is interesting. The defense is pretty bad, a LeFlore that can run AND hit could be fun. I probably would have gone with the '77 card (slugging as well). On the fence about this one. https://365.strat-o-matic.com/player/736931/1670/1/70

Bobby Bonds was always one of my favorites when I was growing up in San Francisco. The guy could hit and was exciting to watch. For some reason he got a bum rap. The '77 card gives him an Angel card and is reasonably close to his career ops+ (136 vs 129). We definitely need more Bobby Bonds cards. https://365.strat-o-matic.com/player/731062/1670/1/70

Bill, Leflore is MUCH better vs LHP in 1976, while his 1976 & 1977 vs RHP are almost identical. 77 has a little more power vs LHP, but 76 is a much better OBP card, and, let's face it, if you take Ron Leflore, you aren't taking him to hit a few home runs. You're taking him to get on base and run>>>>>>>>>>>

For the record, I'm not against the Gonzalez card's inclusion in the set. Just looking for an example of where a consistent Hall of Famer for multiple seasons has "competition" from an outlier card where a guy did it once or twice. I think Williams/Gonzalez is a good example of that. And I'm not necessarily against some other outlier cards, I would just prefer to see other things added first.

Bob Watson, for example, had a nice career and needs a better card in the set. A better Watson season won't wow anyone and probably wouldn't get a ton of votes, but I'd rather see a guy with a very solid 19 year career get a better card over a flash in the pan.

Again, just my opinion.

Andy, I agree with you on most levels here. Watson and a number of guys from the '70s and '80s were consistently great for the era, but "pale" comparatively speaking to the glittery numbers of the 1930, 1999 & 1894 seasons. The problem as always is multiple priorities here: guys looking for sheer numbers, guys interested in maintaining a reasonable semblence to baseball history, and guys who win no matter what. God, how I envy them sometimes.

Bill, Leflore is MUCH better vs LHP in 1976, while his 1976 & 1977 vs RHP are almost identical. 77 has a little more power vs LHP, but 76 is a much better OBP card, and, let's face it, if you take Ron Leflore, you aren't taking him to hit a few home runs. You're taking him to get on base and run>>>>>>>>>>>

Looking at the cards, you're obviously correct. It would seem that there was a generalized power surge in '77 which would explain the better card in '76 over the much better stats of '77.

The McGriff card poses some problems. It is obviously not as good as the one we have, but it does give us a Tampa Bay card. He can't really play defense (though some might argue that you can hide bad defense at 1B) and he'll clog up the basepaths with his high obp. '99 ops+ (142) is right around his career average (134). This guy was a hitter (it is surprising that he didn't drive in more runs -- I know, RBIs are predicated on what surrounds you, and he must have been surrounded by some particularly low on-base guys). He might get my vote only to help the TB crowd. https://365.strat-o-matic.com/player/3384/1999/1/1999

Had forgotten this trade...

December 5, 1990: Traded by the Toronto Blue Jays with Tony Fernandez to the San Diego Padres for Roberto Alomar and Joe Carter.

That's some firepower moving about...

The McGriff card poses some problems. It is obviously not as good as the one we have, but it does give us a Tampa Bay card. He can't really play defense (though some might argue that you can hide bad defense at 1B) and he'll clog up the basepaths with his high obp. '99 ops+ (142) is right around his career average (134). This guy was a hitter (it is surprising that he didn't drive in more runs -- I know, RBIs are predicated on what surrounds you, and he must have been surrounded by some particularly low on-base guys). He might get my vote only to help the TB crowd. https://365.strat-o-matic.com/player/3384/1999/1/1999

The McGriff nomination is absolutely about adding another hitter to the Rays' limited options. McGriff should be represented in Tampa Bay and Atlanta, rather than just in San Diego, IMO.

Thanks,
Bill

So,
im not understanding why if someone has an entire stellar season or maybe 2 - like Fydrich for example,
would be a lower priority add (we have him- just an example).

Do think some ABs/IPs/Rp relief appearance minimums is entirely a good thing-
as someone with say 250 ABs or something with a great card to me would not really fit the set.

but if a player has an all-time great season and not an all-time great career its still more than worthy imo of being in the set- and I wouldn't want that mixed in with a 200 AB card.

As far as the Gonzalez example- imho his card is overpriced by at least a million to 2 million overpriced and I would choose TWs lower priced cards over him right now.
Point being that I don't think you can make the comparison to TW based on price.

The guideline for a 200/250 ab baseline is good I think. But I certainly wouldn't banish those under that completely. They are especially important in team adds, and sometimes get us the quirky players that don't change outcomes in general, but add to the fun (I'm thinking of Joe Evans and his triples). Usage limits would change things, but it is probably a good thing that those are limited to "gentlemen's agreement" leagues, because it would lead to a double salary scale (would Gates Brown be worth 5.07 mil if you could only use him for 100 abs (but what abs they would be)?).

Bobby Bonilla
1991 vs 1995

1991 he is a Pirate. Last I checked, PITT doesn't need much help with their hitting, esp. in RF.

1995 he is an Oriole. BAL could use the help.

Would Bobby Bonilla have two cards in 1995, AL and NL? He played for Mets and Orioles.
Mets 351 PA .325 BA .385 OBP .599 SLG .984 OPS 160 OPS+
Orioles 263 PA 333 BA .392 OBP .544 SLG .936 OPS 139 OPS+

The Mets card is exciting.

Bobby Bo left such a memorable mark in NY. Including how Madoff and Bobby Bo's contract played such an important role on Mets payroll, to this day.
http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/1665 ... uly-1-2035

Or his epic "just chillin" confrontation with Bob Klapisch
http://baseballanalysts.com/archives/20 ... tories.php

Would Bobby Bonilla have two cards in 1995, AL and NL? He played for Mets and Orioles.

Normally the season card would be attributed to the Orioles since he finished the season with them. Could always go with the '93 Mets card.