Warning: The following Writing is a long and rambling one about baseball and players that once wore Kansas City Royals uniforms. If your interest in baseball is akin to the interest dachshunds have in philosophy dissertations, this may not be the post for you. That is all.
The Kansas City Royals recently announced that they are opening the voting for their team Hall of Fame to fans around the world. This, dear readers, is not something I can ignore. The inaugural ballot contains the names of 18 former Royals; 18 names synonymous (or anonymous) with the success (or failure) of the club over its 42 years of existence. Here's my take on the voting.
Brian Anderson
Case for induction: He arrived in Kansas City via trade in 2003 (the only season the Royals have been near playoff contention since the 1994 strike) and won five of his seven starts down the stretch. He pitched two complete games and had fans genuinely excited about his future with the team.
Case against induction: His future with the team. In 2004, Anderson won six games while posting a 5.64 earned run average (note to those lacking baseball stat knowledge: an earned run average over 5 is generally considered horrendous). In 2005, he started just six games, with a 6.75 ERA.
Verdict: No, no, no
Kevin Appier
Case for: He is one of the best pitchers in team history. His 1993 season (18 wins, 2.56 ERA, 186 strikeouts) was worthy of that season's Cy Young award, but voters were seemingly swayed by the fact that Jack McDowell won more games. Finished third in Rookie of the Year voting in 1990 and was an all-star in 1995.
Case against: The Royals traded him in 1999 and essentially got three unsalted sunflower seeds and a dip of pre-chewed tobacco in return... No, this is nothing against Appier, but I have to get potshots in on horrible trades when I have a chance.
Verdict: Absolutely
Al Cowens
Case for: Cowens was an every day outfielder for three Royals teams that made the postseason. In 1977 he hit 23 home runs, knocked in 112 RBI, won a Gold Glove and finished second to Rod Carew in MVP voting.
Case against: Though he played in KC for his first six seasons, he played for three more teams after his departure. Aside from 1977, he never hit more than 9 home runs or batted over .295 for Kansas City.
Verdict: The toughest call on the ballot for me. At his best (1977) he was one of the very best, but he was basically a league-average hitter every other season he played in KC. Beyond that, his career postseason numbers (.228 on-base percentage, .291 slugging percentage& another note to those illiterate in the baseball stat vernacular: trust me, that's bad) were weak. Can ONE transcendent season catapult a player to the hall of fame? I vote no.
Al Fitzmorris
Case for: Pitched eight seasons for Kansas City, winning 70 games with an ERA under 3.50. Fitzmorris showed versatility, beginning his career as a strong reliever and evolving into a dependable starter.
Case against: Fitzmorris was steady and dependable, but never among the very best.
Verdict: No... Prepare for a lot of these.
Jason Grimsley Case for: Grimsley put together two pretty strong seasons as a set-up man for the Royals.
Case against: Grimsley put together one wildly underwhelming season as a set-up man for the Royals. Also, set-up men don't make halls of fame. He was implicated in the great steroid investigation of 2006 and also played burglar in Cleveland's Great Bat Caper of 1994.
Verdict: No, but if he really wants in, he might sneak in through some vents
Bo Jackson
Case for: Bo knows fame. He hit home runs so hard that folks sympathized with the baseballs. He made throws from the outfield that seemed to defy laws of nature. He once ran UP an outfield wall. He's one of the greatest athletes in history, he was subject of one of the most memorable marketing campaigns ever, and he was even featured in a Saturday morning cartoon alongside the greatest basketball player and the greatest hockey player ever.
Case against: His actual career with KC was cut short due to a devastating football injury. He played football for the Raiders, which is unforgivable in some cases. He struck out a ton and rarely took a walk.
Verdict: Yes. Sure, his career numbers aren't stunning, but the Royals have never had a player as nationally renowned as Bo at his peak. Beyond that, at his peak, Bo was a great player. What if he'd never gotten hurt? is one of the great hypothetical questions in baseball.
Mike Macfarlane Case for: Mac played 11 seasons for the Royals, hitting double-digit home runs in five of them. Served as a baseball magnet (that, or he made really bad first impressions), leading the league in beanballs-received twice. Case against: You're going to notice a developing theme... MacFarlane was good, but never great. To me, a Hall of Fame honors those who, at their peaks, were among the very best in the sport. For MacFarlane, that was not the case.
Verdict: No
Darrell May
Case for: He had a 3.77 ERA and tallied 10 victories in 2003.
Case against: May led the league in losses (19) and surrendered 38 home runs in 2004, leading the author to pound his head against a variety of inanimate objects. May's career record in Kansas City is 23-37.
Verdict: No sir
Brent Mayne
Case for: He played nine seasons in Kansas City.
Case against: He had a .305 on-base percentage and 20 home runs over those nine seasons.
Verdict: No
Jose Offerman
Case for: Offerman could work an at-bat and had good speed. In 1998, he had an on-base percentage of .403, he hit 11 triples, and he stole 45 bases.
Case against: He may have been allergic to leather. He came to the Royals as a shortstop, but committed 10 errors in just 36 games at the position. After his first season in KC, he never played another game at shortstop... Never. Though his offense was nice, he was never an all-star in his three seasons in Kansas City. Verdict: No, with 10 E's on the end
Darrell Porter
Case for: Porter was a three-time all-star over four seasons in Kansas City. He also finished in the top ten in MVP voting in 1978 and 1979. With 20 home runs, 112 RBI, and a league-leading 121 walks in 1979, he owns the best single-season ever by a Royals catcher. (Take THAT, Sal Fasano!) Wore glasses during games& Ahh, those were simpler times.
Case against: Only played four seasons in Kansas City. Played for the Cardinals AGAINST the Royals in the 1985 World Series.
Verdict: Yes. At his peak, he was one of the best catchers in baseball and he played a big role on postseason teams in 1977, 1978, and 1980.
Joe Randa
Case for: Gave the Royals a solid regular at the hot corner from 1999 through 2004. He also played for KC earlier in his career and served as a piece in the deal that brought Jay Bell and Jeff King to Kansas City. Earned the nickname "The Joker " because of a seemingly natural smile that rarely left his face.
Case against: Never a great player; never an all-star. Randa was a steady third baseman, but he topped out at 16 home runs in an era where knocking 40 was not uncommon.
Verdict: No, but I bet he's still smiling.
Kevin Seitzer
Case for: Seitzer played six seasons in KC, compiling an OPS+ of 115 over that time. In 1987, he was an all star, finished second in Rookie of the Year voting to some nobody named Mark McGwire, and led the American League in hits. He currently serves as the Royals' hitting coach.
Case against: Seitzer was good, but never great. If the Hall of Fame is simply for those who were good in their time in Kansas City, they're going to have to plan an expansion for the stadium.
Verdict: No
Scott Service
Case for: Service, a reliever for Kansas City from mid-1997 to 1999, struck out 95 batters in just 82.2 innings pitched in his first full season in KC.
Case against: In his second season as a Royal, Service gave up an average of 10 hits and five walks per 9-innings with an ERA over 6.
Verdict: No, though I'm fairly certain he must have a family member in the committee that put the ballot together.
Michael Tucker
Case for: His at-bat music at Kauffman Stadium was incredibly catchy. His first tenure with the club ended when he was traded for future all-star and Gold Glove winner Jermaine Dye.
Case against: It's not a great sign when your career highlights involve a beat from a Mystikal track and the fact that a team once traded you for a far superior player.
Verdict: No
U.L. Washington
Case for: Played shortstop for three Kansas City postseason clubs. Stole 40 bases in 1983. Had the name U.L. Washington, which sounds an awful lot like a pseudonym for someone in the witness protection program.
Case against: Never carried an on-base percentage over .338. Led the league in errors at SS in 1983. At his best, he was a league-average shortstop.
Verdict: No
John Wathan
Case for: John Wayne Wathan (a.k.a, The Duke) provided the Royals with an incredibly versatile utility player during some of their most successful seasons. He played on seven postseason teams from 1976-1985 and logged games at catcher, first base, right field and left field over that stretch. Wathan gave great credence to the phrase runs well for a catcher, once stealing 36 bases in a season. (Six more than any Royal in 2010.)
Case against: Measured with OPS+ (basically a fancy way of determining a player's value at the plate) Wathan was subpar. His career OPS+ is 83, while the total of an average player is typically considered to be 100. He only played 100+ games in a season three times, and - at his best - he was not an all-star level player.
Verdict: No. Sorry, Duke.
Kris Wilson
Case for: He once wore a Royals uniform during Major League baseball games.
Case against: He pitched during some of the aforementioned games, compiling a 5.32 ERA over 90 games with the team.
Verdict: Nope
There you have it; 18 players on the ballot, and I find three to be worthy candidates. After 1,700+ words on the subject, two things seem clear. 1. I may need to be more lenient. 2. You may have too much time on your hands.
Case for induction: He arrived in Kansas City via trade in 2003 (the only season the Royals have been near playoff contention since the 1994 strike) and won five of his seven starts down the stretch. He pitched two complete games and had fans genuinely excited about his future with the team.
Case against induction: His future with the team. In 2004, Anderson won six games while posting a 5.64 earned run average (note to those lacking baseball stat knowledge: an earned run average over 5 is generally considered horrendous). In 2005, he started just six games, with a 6.75 ERA.
Verdict: No, no, no
Case for: He is one of the best pitchers in team history. His 1993 season (18 wins, 2.56 ERA, 186 strikeouts) was worthy of that season's Cy Young award, but voters were seemingly swayed by the fact that Jack McDowell won more games. Finished third in Rookie of the Year voting in 1990 and was an all-star in 1995.
Case against: The Royals traded him in 1999 and essentially got three unsalted sunflower seeds and a dip of pre-chewed tobacco in return... No, this is nothing against Appier, but I have to get potshots in on horrible trades when I have a chance.
Verdict: Absolutely
Case for: Cowens was an every day outfielder for three Royals teams that made the postseason. In 1977 he hit 23 home runs, knocked in 112 RBI, won a Gold Glove and finished second to Rod Carew in MVP voting.
Case against: Though he played in KC for his first six seasons, he played for three more teams after his departure. Aside from 1977, he never hit more than 9 home runs or batted over .295 for Kansas City.
Verdict: The toughest call on the ballot for me. At his best (1977) he was one of the very best, but he was basically a league-average hitter every other season he played in KC. Beyond that, his career postseason numbers (.228 on-base percentage, .291 slugging percentage& another note to those illiterate in the baseball stat vernacular: trust me, that's bad) were weak. Can ONE transcendent season catapult a player to the hall of fame? I vote no.
Case for: Pitched eight seasons for Kansas City, winning 70 games with an ERA under 3.50. Fitzmorris showed versatility, beginning his career as a strong reliever and evolving into a dependable starter.
Case against: Fitzmorris was steady and dependable, but never among the very best.
Verdict: No... Prepare for a lot of these.
Case against: Grimsley put together one wildly underwhelming season as a set-up man for the Royals. Also, set-up men don't make halls of fame. He was implicated in the great steroid investigation of 2006 and also played burglar in Cleveland's Great Bat Caper of 1994.
Verdict: No, but if he really wants in, he might sneak in through some vents
Case for: Bo knows fame. He hit home runs so hard that folks sympathized with the baseballs. He made throws from the outfield that seemed to defy laws of nature. He once ran UP an outfield wall. He's one of the greatest athletes in history, he was subject of one of the most memorable marketing campaigns ever, and he was even featured in a Saturday morning cartoon alongside the greatest basketball player and the greatest hockey player ever.
Case against: His actual career with KC was cut short due to a devastating football injury. He played football for the Raiders, which is unforgivable in some cases. He struck out a ton and rarely took a walk.
Verdict: Yes. Sure, his career numbers aren't stunning, but the Royals have never had a player as nationally renowned as Bo at his peak. Beyond that, at his peak, Bo was a great player. What if he'd never gotten hurt? is one of the great hypothetical questions in baseball.
Mike Macfarlane
Verdict: No
Case for: He had a 3.77 ERA and tallied 10 victories in 2003.
Case against: May led the league in losses (19) and surrendered 38 home runs in 2004, leading the author to pound his head against a variety of inanimate objects. May's career record in Kansas City is 23-37.
Verdict: No sir
Case for: He played nine seasons in Kansas City.
Case against: He had a .305 on-base percentage and 20 home runs over those nine seasons.
Verdict: No
Case for: Offerman could work an at-bat and had good speed. In 1998, he had an on-base percentage of .403, he hit 11 triples, and he stole 45 bases.
Case against: He may have been allergic to leather. He came to the Royals as a shortstop, but committed 10 errors in just 36 games at the position. After his first season in KC, he never played another game at shortstop... Never. Though his offense was nice, he was never an all-star in his three seasons in Kansas City. Verdict: No, with 10 E's on the end
Case for: Porter was a three-time all-star over four seasons in Kansas City. He also finished in the top ten in MVP voting in 1978 and 1979. With 20 home runs, 112 RBI, and a league-leading 121 walks in 1979, he owns the best single-season ever by a Royals catcher. (Take THAT, Sal Fasano!) Wore glasses during games& Ahh, those were simpler times.
Case against: Only played four seasons in Kansas City. Played for the Cardinals AGAINST the Royals in the 1985 World Series.
Verdict: Yes. At his peak, he was one of the best catchers in baseball and he played a big role on postseason teams in 1977, 1978, and 1980.
Case for: Gave the Royals a solid regular at the hot corner from 1999 through 2004. He also played for KC earlier in his career and served as a piece in the deal that brought Jay Bell and Jeff King to Kansas City. Earned the nickname "The Joker " because of a seemingly natural smile that rarely left his face.
Case against: Never a great player; never an all-star. Randa was a steady third baseman, but he topped out at 16 home runs in an era where knocking 40 was not uncommon.
Verdict: No, but I bet he's still smiling.
Case for: Seitzer played six seasons in KC, compiling an OPS+ of 115 over that time. In 1987, he was an all star, finished second in Rookie of the Year voting to some nobody named Mark McGwire, and led the American League in hits. He currently serves as the Royals' hitting coach.
Case against: Seitzer was good, but never great. If the Hall of Fame is simply for those who were good in their time in Kansas City, they're going to have to plan an expansion for the stadium.
Verdict: No
Case for: Service, a reliever for Kansas City from mid-1997 to 1999, struck out 95 batters in just 82.2 innings pitched in his first full season in KC.
Case against: In his second season as a Royal, Service gave up an average of 10 hits and five walks per 9-innings with an ERA over 6.
Verdict: No, though I'm fairly certain he must have a family member in the committee that put the ballot together.
Case for: His at-bat music at Kauffman Stadium was incredibly catchy. His first tenure with the club ended when he was traded for future all-star and Gold Glove winner Jermaine Dye.
Case against: It's not a great sign when your career highlights involve a beat from a Mystikal track and the fact that a team once traded you for a far superior player.
Verdict: No
Case for: Played shortstop for three Kansas City postseason clubs. Stole 40 bases in 1983. Had the name U.L. Washington, which sounds an awful lot like a pseudonym for someone in the witness protection program.
Case against: Never carried an on-base percentage over .338. Led the league in errors at SS in 1983. At his best, he was a league-average shortstop.
Verdict: No
Case for: John Wayne Wathan (a.k.a, The Duke) provided the Royals with an incredibly versatile utility player during some of their most successful seasons. He played on seven postseason teams from 1976-1985 and logged games at catcher, first base, right field and left field over that stretch. Wathan gave great credence to the phrase runs well for a catcher, once stealing 36 bases in a season. (Six more than any Royal in 2010.)
Case against: Measured with OPS+ (basically a fancy way of determining a player's value at the plate) Wathan was subpar. His career OPS+ is 83, while the total of an average player is typically considered to be 100. He only played 100+ games in a season three times, and - at his best - he was not an all-star level player.
Verdict: No. Sorry, Duke.
Kris Wilson
Case for: He once wore a Royals uniform during Major League baseball games.
Case against: He pitched during some of the aforementioned games, compiling a 5.32 ERA over 90 games with the team.
Verdict: Nope
No comments:
Post a Comment