Let's win it for . . .

[Pat]

He was always a 3B playing 2B. He had a lot of errors and I think he had a poor turn DP. But, he played more games at 2B then 3B, so it really doesn't matter. He was a second basemen. Granted, he wasn't a good defender at the position, but thats the position he played.

He's Dan Uggla.

[Ryan]

Food for thought...

Player 1: .263 batting average
Player 2: .258 batting average

Player 1: 995 RBI
Player 2: 996 RBI

Player 1: .835 OPS
Player 2: .843 OPS

Player 1: 300 HR
Player 2: 293 HR

Player 1: 5 stolen bases
Player 2: 174 stolen bases

Neither player was a defensive stud. Player 1 played on majority of losing teams. Player 2 played on majority of winning teams, including two that won the Brewmaster's. Neither won a defensive award or were ever considered "good" in the field.

Spoiler

Player 1 is Wilton Harcourt.
Player 2 is Dave Robbins.

I think it depends on plate appearances. Which I did not look up.

Also, it depends on which portion of their 'careers' they spent in the league. If both guys had the same amount of prime years in the league (which I also did not look up), meaning maybe they started at age 28 or 29, and similar career PA's, then they both deserve it.

[Pat]

I think it depends on plate appearances. Which I did not look up.

Also, it depends on which portion of their 'careers' they spent in the league. If both guys had the same amount of prime years in the league (which I also did not look up), meaning maybe they started at age 28 or 29, and similar career PA's, then they both deserve it.

Harcourt actually has had 700+ PAs.

I just mentioned Robbins to further show Carlos' point. Robbins is not going to be HOF worthy when the voters go to the polls and you could argue, from an offensive standpoint, he was the superior player to Harcourt.

[Ryan]

Robbins actually has had 700+ PAs.

I just mentioned Robbins to further show Carlos' point. Robbins is not going to be HOF worthy when the voters go to the polls and you could argue, from an offensive standpoint, he was the superior player to Harcourt.

Yeah, I meant career PA's.

[Z]

By my memory, Harcourt was almost always rated a 4 at both second base and third base. He was at 5 at second base in 1980 and 1981, but it was short lived.

Uggla's the right idea, though I'd compare him more favorably to Jeff Kent.

[Ryan]

Robbins actually has had 700+ PAs.

I just mentioned Robbins to further show Carlos' point. Robbins is not going to be HOF worthy when the voters go to the polls and you could argue, from an offensive standpoint, he was the superior player to Harcourt.

Yeah, I meant career PA's.

And actually, Robbins has about 800 more PA's than Harcourt, so I'd give Harcourt the edge here.

[Pat]

http://www.simgamingnetwork.com/blb/...al&year=career

[Z]

Robbins actually has had 700+ PAs.

I just mentioned Robbins to further show Carlos' point. Robbins is not going to be HOF worthy when the voters go to the polls and you could argue, from an offensive standpoint, he was the superior player to Harcourt.

Robbins was probably the superior offensive player. But if you're going to build your team around one of those guys, you're going to pick Harcourt because it's a lot easier to find comparable offensive production in left field than at second base. Hence, Harcourt is more valuable.

[Pat]

By my memory, Harcourt was almost always rated a 4 at both second base and third base. He was at 5 at second base in 1980 and 1981, but it was short lived.

Uggla's the right idea, though I'd compare him more favorably to Jeff Kent.

Kent is a career .290 hitter. The comparison ends there.

[Z]

Yes, but you agree that there are better ways to judge hitters than batting average, right?

OPS+, for example.

Jeff Kent: 123 career OPS+, 142 OPS+ in his best five season stretch from 1998-2002.

Wilton Harcourt: 141 career OPS+

Granted, there's probably more parity in MLB, especially in the late 90s, but still, it's a fair comparison.

[Pat]

Of course, but it isn't going to be easy for a .260 hitter to get into the Hall of Fame unless you play defense like Ozzie Smith.

[Carlos]

Eww, lets not mention MLB. This is a different league with different players. Lots of things we do as GMs now are more modern than what was going on in the MLB 80s. It's not fair in many aspects.

Anyway, my point was never to say that Harcourt isn't a Hall of Famer. I personally don't think he is with a quick look, but my opinion isn't the only one that matters. I think he is definitely the type of player that elicits the need for a vote which is good for the league and the Hall.

If Harcourt makes it it'll be because the minimum number of Owners will agree he goes in. He won't be 100%, but hey, there will be plenty of time to support him and who knows what happens a couple years after his retirement.

[Gyrodork]

"You can put lipstick on a pig...but it's still a pig."

Hey!