Other Sports: Philadelphia Phillies: The Road To .500 (2023 Edition)

[Kermit the Prog]

I think Utley is gaining more steam over the years because what the voters looking is changing. I think in the past longevity, counting stats, & benchmark numbers drove things but now in a more analytical era different things are being brought to the table which is in Utley’s favor potentially. He was 7+ WAR player from 2005 to 2009 which is in pretty elite territory as a five year peak for any player let alone a 2B.

I think the fact he won 4 Silver Slugger Awards during that run kind of show the public perception then & what the analytics suggest he probably should have won an MVP & some Gold Gloves in there as well.

I don't know if anyone else remembers this, but I am confident I am recalling it correctly. The first time Utley was called up - in fact, one of his earliest games - he snapped at the umpire and was reprimanded on his way back to the dugout. The Chase we all got to know thereafter was a far more controlled player, but there was a lot of emotion and what I perceived to be a lack of maturity in that moment which made me think he's just another in a line of "meh" rookies stretching back to just after Juan Samuel. The fact he pulled it all together and conducted himself professionally almost immediately thereafter was noticeable until it became routine.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

I don't know if anyone else remembers this, but I am confident I am recalling it correctly. The first time Utley was called up - in fact, one of his earliest games - he snapped at the umpire and was reprimanded on his way back to the dugout. The Chase we all got to know thereafter was a far more controlled player, but there was a lot of emotion and what I perceived to be a lack of maturity in that moment which made me think he's just another in a line of "meh" rookies stretching back to just after Juan Samuel. The fact he pulled it all together and conducted himself professionally almost immediately thereafter was noticeable until it became routine.

We had a prospect (it may have been Utley or Hamels) that got in to some kind of bar fight or something early on in the minors. Was that Utley? Maybe it was Josh Outman or Hamels? I remember it being a pitcher but I think it was in an actual Sports Illustrated physical magazine or something that I read about it.

 

[swami24]

My take on people who want to be umpires:
20% love of the game
80% power trip of controlling the game

Once you figure that out, you quickly learn that yelling will only hurt you in the long run. Respect blue, and they will respect you.

 

[Kermit the Prog]

We had a prospect (it may have been Utley or Hamels) that got in to some kind of bar fight or something early on in the minors. Was that Utley? Maybe it was Josh Outman or Hamels? I remember it being a pitcher but I think it was in an actual Sports Illustrated physical magazine or something that I read about it.

It was Hamels

 

[Halladay]

We had a prospect (it may have been Utley or Hamels) that got in to some kind of bar fight or something early on in the minors. Was that Utley? Maybe it was Josh Outman or Hamels? I remember it being a pitcher but I think it was in an actual Sports Illustrated physical magazine or something that I read about it.

That was Hamels in 2005. Broke his hand. He had injury issues in the minors but he was a very durable pro.

Today in Philly Sports History: Hamels Breaks Hand in Bar Fight, 2005

When you think of Cole Hamels, the phrase “bar brawl” isn’t exactly the first thing that comes to mind. Our young lefty has developed a rep in recent years for being a little Hollywood by Philadelphia standards, a man whose career is far too finely structured for such a messy encounter as this...

www.nbcsportsphiladelphia.com

 

[swami24]

wow, total forgot about that broken hand episode

 

[Flybynite]

Damn. Did they hire Sam Hinkie as GM and I not see it?

 

[Captain Dave Poulin]

Damn. Did they hire Sam Hinkie as GM and I not see it?

Holy f***.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

Damn. Did they hire Sam Hinkie as GM and I not see it?

This means leaders like they allowed the most, not like they held batters to the fewest? Yikes.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

I think Utley is gaining more steam over the years because what the voters are looking for is changing. I think in the past longevity, counting stats, awards, & benchmark numbers drove things but now in a more analytical era different things are being brought to the table which is in Utley’s favor potentially. He was 7+ WAR a year player from 2005 to 2009 which is in pretty elite territory as a five year peak for any player let alone a 2B.

I think the fact he won 4 Silver Slugger Awards during that run kind of shows the public perception then & what the analytics suggest today he probably should have won an MVP & some Gold Gloves in there as well.

Yep, all of this. Utley's (and Mauer's) case is simple to me. Either he's a HoFer or you don't want to conform to what the Hall is in practice. If you prefer a super small Hall, that's fine. But let's look at what's that is actually saying if you try to implement it as such.

Hornsby's the best 2B ever. He's got to be above any bar. Same goes for Eddie Collins, Lajoie, and Gehringer. Those guys were all functionally done by the time WWII starts, with only Gehringer having a couple of strong years left. But even he's done as an effective player 2 years before the end of the war. We're at ~80 years post War now.

Morgan's clearly the best guy in that period. He's above any bar. Robinson's got to be in for other reasons, but his sustained (7 year) peak is not clearly better than Utley's. I understand preferring it for sure, but they're in the same rough area. Then there's Carew. Comparable sustained peak. Certainly better longevity. But the MVP came at 1B and by the time he was done, played more at First than he did at Second.

There are no other 2B in the Post-War period you can even form an argument were clearly better players. Canó is in the same area. So is Sandberg. But neither has a case to be clearly better. The only arguments guys already in like Alomar and Biggio have over Utley are extra years where they were good but not great. At that point, what are we doing? It can't be that there are only 2.5 HoF 2Bs in 80 years and it can't be that breaking into the Majors at 20 instead of 25 determines who makes the Hall.

I think when the old timers really start to cycle out, Bobby Grich will finally get in too. Hopefully they do it before he passes.

 

[Chinatown88]

Getting high school flash backs to sabermetrics Yankees classmate telling me Dan Uggla > Utley and Pedroia.

Utley is a Hall of Famer. I don't think he gets in first ballot but I hope he does. He's got the numbers, he's got the longevity.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

Why are 2nd basemen historically not HOF players? It’s not as demanding as SS but the dearth of great bats is something I don’t understand

 

[Kermit the Prog]

Why are 2nd basemen historically not HOF players? It’s not as demanding as SS but the dearth of great bats is something I don’t understand

My take on this is sports writers in the past leveled the statistical playing field where counting stats were irrespective of position. Imagine Babe Ruth manning the hot corner or turning a DP at second base. Different skill sets, body types (at least until Ripken came along), etc. Home runs and batting average appeared to be the primary driver for consideration, along with cresting the 3,000 hit plateau. 2B, SS, and C have traditionally not been the power positions, which skunked the chances of a lot of players who would have otherwise had a better chance to be inducted. The biggest game changer was Ozzie Smith, where he made it in primarily on his glove. Don’t get me started, however, on how Rabbit Maranville and Phil Rizzuto got in.

 

[GKJ]

Have patience.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

Have patience.

Here's my issue. I am definitely coming around to Utley being in the HOF and definitely rooting for him. I'd vote for him but that is mainly because I love him. He is definitely comparable to other 2Bs and better than others that are already in. My problem still is that I think HOF should be the best players of all time. No caveats about eras, or positions, or rule changes or whatever. My thought has always been if you have to argue for a guy to be in the HOF, he shouldn't be in. It should be reserved for the no-brainers. That being said, it clearly isn't that way and hasn't been like that, probably ever. I think it ultimately cheapens what the HOF means if we are consistently lowering the bar to allow more people in, but that's where we are.

Every time you let someone in who is "comparable" but not as good, that opens the door for another guy who is "comparable" to him but not as good, and so forth and so on. The example I have always used is Ian Kinsler. He has about the same stats as Utley. More doubles and stolen bases and almost the same HRs in fewer games. The only place Utley really has him the slash line and fielding. I don't care what argument you make Ian Kinsler does not belong in the HOF. But if Utley gets in, why wouldn't Kinsler? 50+ WAR and beats Utley in a number of categories in fewer games. By those metrics he should be in. Then after Kinsler gets in I am sure you can find comparables to him. And so forth and so on.

I love Utley. I hope he gets in. I want him in because I love him. But I don't like the idea of consistently lowering the bar.

 

[FLYguy3911]

Have patience.

I hate these arbitrary stat cut off tweets. He has almost 200 fewer stolen bases than Sandberg.

 

[GKJ]

Here's my issue. I am definitely coming around to Utley being in the HOF and definitely rooting for him. I'd vote for him but that is mainly because I love him. He is definitely comparable to other 2Bs and better than others that are already in. My problem still is that I think HOF should be the best players of all time. No caveats about eras, or positions, or rule changes or whatever. My thought has always been if you have to argue for a guy to be in the HOF, he shouldn't be in. It should be reserved for the no-brainers. That being said, it clearly isn't that way and hasn't been like that, probably ever. I think it ultimately cheapens what the HOF means if we are consistently lowering the bar to allow more people in, but that's where we are.

Every time you let someone in who is "comparable" but not as good, that opens the door for another guy who is "comparable" to him but not as good, and so forth and so on. The example I have always used is Ian Kinsler. He has about the same stats as Utley. More doubles and stolen bases and almost the same HRs in fewer games. The only place Utley really has him the slash line and fielding. I don't care what argument you make Ian Kinsler does not belong in the HOF. But if Utley gets in, why wouldn't Kinsler? 50+ WAR and beats Utley in a number of categories in fewer games. By those metrics he should be in. Then after Kinsler gets in I am sure you can find comparables to him. And so forth and so on.

I love Utley. I hope he gets in. I want him in because I love him. But I don't like the idea of consistently lowering the bar.

If you go by this, in 20 years, nobody is going to make the hall of fame

I hate these arbitrary stat cut off tweets. He has almost 200 fewer stolen bases than Sandberg.

They also weren’t stealing as many bases in 2008.

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

If you go by this, in 20 years, nobody is going to make the hall of fame

That's how I think it should be. If you don't look at the player and immediately think HOF, they shouldn't be in. They are not one of the greatest of all time if they aren't one of the greatest of all time. I'm not saying there should be required magic numbers or anything like that, what I am saying is it needs to be obvious. Sometimes, that does mean a magic number, that makes it easier. But there are plenty of other examples of guys that don't hit those numbers but they are no-brainers. I could make a case for Jimmy Rollins, and he may well eventually get in eventually, but he's not a guy that I think about being a HOFer. There's guys that aren't in that should be in who also didn't hit the magic numbers. You look at a guy like Orel Hershiser or Kenny Lofton, guys who didn't get the 300 wins or 3k hits or what have you, but were just amazing players. I'm not an advanced stats guy but Kenny Lofton has nearly 70 WAR for his career and was ridiculous in the field and stole bases like it was nothing. IDK if he is still eligible or if he fell off the ballot, but he would be in there for sure despite not hitting any hits or HR milestones. There's going to continue to be players like that regardless of the 3k hits or 300 wins or 500HR numbers that are going to dwindle moving forward. Guys that you just look at when they play (and their stats) and just know they are in.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

That's how I think it should be. If you don't look at the player and immediately think HOF, they shouldn't be in. They are not one of the greatest of all time if they aren't one of the greatest of all time. I'm not saying there should be required magic numbers or anything like that, what I am saying is it needs to be obvious. Sometimes, that does mean a magic number, that makes it easier. But there are plenty of other examples of guys that don't hit those numbers but they are no-brainers. I could make a case for Jimmy Rollins, and he may well eventually get in eventually, but he's not a guy that I think about being a HOFer. There's guys that aren't in that should be in who also didn't hit the magic numbers. You look at a guy like Orel Hershiser or Kenny Lofton, guys who didn't get the 300 wins or 3k hits or what have you, but were just amazing players. I'm not an advanced stats guy but Kenny Lofton has nearly 70 WAR for his career and was ridiculous in the field and stole bases like it was nothing. IDK if he is still eligible or if he fell off the ballot, but he would be in there for sure despite not hitting any hits or HR milestones. There's going to continue to be players like that regardless of the 3k hits or 300 wins or 500HR numbers that are going to dwindle moving forward. Guys that you just look at when they play (and their stats) and just know they are in.

Yeah I agree in sentiment but it’s clear HOF’s want more players for tourism, publicity and all that

 

[DrinkFightFlyers]

Yeah I agree in sentiment but it’s clear HOF’s want more players for tourism, publicity and all that

Yeah, the HOF clearly doesn't operate the way I want it to haha. I wouldn't have voted for a lot of the guys that are in (or will soon be in) and I'm sure there's guys I would vote for that won't get in (or didn't get in) but I don't get a ballot unfortunately.

 

[Flybynite]

 

[trostol]

So we're getting him and Ohtani..awesome

 

[DancingPanther]

Welp

 

[DancingPanther]

Here's my issue. I am definitely coming around to Utley being in the HOF and definitely rooting for him. I'd vote for him but that is mainly because I love him. He is definitely comparable to other 2Bs and better than others that are already in. My problem still is that I think HOF should be the best players of all time. No caveats about eras, or positions, or rule changes or whatever. My thought has always been if you have to argue for a guy to be in the HOF, he shouldn't be in. It should be reserved for the no-brainers. That being said, it clearly isn't that way and hasn't been like that, probably ever. I think it ultimately cheapens what the HOF means if we are consistently lowering the bar to allow more people in, but that's where we are.

Every time you let someone in who is "comparable" but not as good, that opens the door for another guy who is "comparable" to him but not as good, and so forth and so on. The example I have always used is Ian Kinsler. He has about the same stats as Utley. More doubles and stolen bases and almost the same HRs in fewer games. The only place Utley really has him the slash line and fielding. I don't care what argument you make Ian Kinsler does not belong in the HOF. But if Utley gets in, why wouldn't Kinsler? 50+ WAR and beats Utley in a number of categories in fewer games. By those metrics he should be in. Then after Kinsler gets in I am sure you can find comparables to him. And so forth and so on.

I love Utley. I hope he gets in. I want him in because I love him. But I don't like the idea of consistently lowering the bar.

I'm not sure how can argue Utley's sustained peak as lowering the bar.

 

[LegionOfDoom91]

I'm not sure how can argue Utley's sustained peak as lowering the bar.

He still is 14th all time in WAR for 2B. So even in totality that’s still relatively high.