I never thought of these guys as people that would be in the HOF but both guys could join the 500 HR club this year and there stats are pretty much equal.

So do you guys think that these 2 are Hall of Fame material or do you just think that they will be the first players with 500 HRS not to go into the HOF.

Good question. I can see Palmiero going in, not McGriff. Both are better than average but as far as consistency goes, my vote would go to Palmiero. Though I am swayable since I don't know enough about McGriff. I think what turns me off from McGriff--for some reason I can't explain--is the number of teams he's been on. I don't know why this turns me off.

500 hrs right now is a ticket to the hall in the future maybe not but now yes

PALMIERO YES, MCGRIFF MAYBE.

I'll say Palmiero and his "wood" maybe, but I don't see McGriff. .286 lifetime average just isn't good enough in my opinion.

and how many years has mcgriff hit 30 hr and 100 rbi straight, I say he is in, batting avg doesn't matter for power hitter as much as the little guys, because there would be a lot less people in the HOF.

Since they both will get 500 Hr's I think they will both get in. However I think the HOF needs to re-evaluate the whole 500 Hr thing. It just doesn't seem to be too magical of a # anymore when it comes to HR's. There are going to be a lot more guys in the future reaching this milestone while on the other side how many 300 win pitchers are you going to see in years to come. Not many. After clemens, Maddux(don't know if he can get anyone out this year LOL) and possibly Glavine who has legitimate shots at it. 500 Hr's just seems so much more attainable in this day and age. Just my opinion.

I agree with gioperation on this. McGriff is a power hitter - He has a knack for 30 or more home runs and 100 rbi's almost every year.

I doubt either will get in. Their names don't carry the weight of somebody who can get in. I just can't see it.

Tim

I agree with assessments of McGriff; however, if he continues chugging along --- as a starter, not as a bench player --- and continues accumulating stats, he'll eventually be elected.

Of course, Dale Murphy had a wonderful career, which tailed off at the very end, and he hasn't been elected.

Don't think Jim Rice has been elected either.

Palmeiro --- if he gets 3000 hits and 500+ homers, he just hit 493rd yesterday --- should get in eventually.

Neither are 1st ballot hall of famers, however.

well I believe mcgriff may have hurt his chances by leaving Atlanta and if Texas can finish with a couple of playoff runs raffy baby will get a little more spotlight. Because their is no question that both of those guys can swing the bat, but to make it a lock their teams need to either be big market teams and make some playoff runs, I think mcgriff being in either chicago or La will get good exposure esp if he can hit 30 bombs and 100+ rbi's to finish out his career he will have a good chance.

just like mark grace, if he would have stayed in chicago, he would have a better chance to make the HOF, being in AZ hurts his chances.

I thought Grace was headed for the Hall as well; now, he sits on the bench for Arizona.

sheesh!

doesn't that suck, sell their soul for a championship.

The thing that got me was I thought that Palmiero had better numbers than McGriff but when I looked at them they are almost identical.

So basically it seems that both should go in or both would be denied.

But if Palmiero can get 3000 hits and 500 hrs then he is a lock for the hall. Only 3 other guys in baseball history has done that.

Originally posted by podstock
I thought Grace was headed for the Hall as well; now, he sits on the bench for Arizona.

sheesh!

Grace has the most hits of any player in the 90s. That is pretty impressive.

I think that both Raffy and McGriff should be hallers. 500 is still an amazing number and with the way that pitchers are coming up into the ranks I think it's going to get harder for guys to do it. Look at the field now, it's only the top of the line players that are hitting dingers consistently. Besides, with over 1500 RBI's and career batting averages in the .280 to .290 range, and close to 500 HR, these guys should be shoe-ins.

Originally posted by bodhi
I think that both Raffy and McGriff should be hallers. 500 is still an amazing number and with the way that pitchers are coming up into the ranks I think it's going to get harder for guys to do it. Look at the field now, it's only the top of the line players that are hitting dingers consistently. Besides, with over 1500 RBI's and career batting averages in the .280 to .290 range, and close to 500 HR, these guys should be shoe-ins.

More people are hitting more home runs for a longer period which will make the 500 HR club expand big time. Before when you thought of the great HR hitters of all time most of them could be found in the 500 HR club. They were baseball's best ever. But the fact that we are discussing if these guys are HOFers or not means that these guys are not GREAT players. The Hall of Fame is only for the great players. Not the above average or good players. Just the great ones. There are many players who I think were better than these two and that are still not in the HOF.

Anyway all of these guys could easily make it to the 500 HR club after these two:

Ken Griffey Jr. 468
Juan Gonzalez 405
Jeff Bagwell 380
Frank Thomas 376
Mike Piazza 347
Jim Thome 334
Manny Ramirez 310
Alex Rodriguez 298

The totals are outdated because they are from before the season started but I don't see why any of those players above could not reach 500.

Plus I would also like to point out that all of those players above are already in the top 100 for most home runs for a career.

It's amazing when you ponder the drop-off in Griffey's career.

Before moving home to Cincinnati, he was on pace to get to Aaron's home run record, not to mention 3000+ hits and 1500+ RBIs.

Then, he demanded to go to Cincinnati, and the baseball gods let him have!

lol

Griffey should've stayed in Seattle.

but then again players willnot play for 15 or 20 years anyone, most players will play for about 10 max these days, so a player would have to avg 50 jack a year with pretty good if you ask me, with raffy palmiero think about his avg which is pretty good, and a position players which makes him a little better than a person that on DH'es where he has less chance of injury.

500 IMO and you should be put in a list of all time greatest HR hitters. until people are hitting 100 jacks a year, 500 will still be a great number.

Originally posted by gioperation
but then again players willnot play for 15 or 20 years anyone, most players will play for about 10 max these days, so a player would have to avg 50 jack a year with pretty good if you ask me, with raffy palmiero think about his avg which is pretty good, and a position players which makes him a little better than a person that on DH'es where he has less chance of injury.

500 IMO and you should be put in a list of all time greatest HR hitters. until people are hitting 100 jacks a year, 500 will still be a great number.

Why won't players play for 15 or 20 years? They are will continue. Check out how many years Palmiero and McGriff have been playing.

Why would someone only play 10 years if they are making millions of dollars a year? Is Arod going to quit in 3 years because he's played 10 years? No.

500 HRs was a big number before 1995 because nobody hit over 50 HRS a season and very few hit around 40-50. Now players easily hit 40. I will say that better pitching has brought down a lot of these HR numbers but that may also be some of the players giving up their steriods because baseball may actually test for them.

Anyway now if you hit 40 HRS a season you just have to play 13 years and you will have over 500. Yes hitting 40 HRS a season is great but then you get players hitting 30 HRS a season and playing for 20 years and they'll have 600 HRS.

Its easier now for players to play longer because of technology and medicine. Unless your Griffey I don't see how anyone will struggle with injuries anymore to get to 500.

pwaldo..you make good points.

I simply don't see too many players playing 10-15 years b/c of the astounding amount of money they make.

Take Ruben Sierra, for example. He came to the majors at 19 (or 20-y/o). His few 3-4 seasons were superb, and had him on par for Hall of Fame statistics. (His Fleer rookie card was worth $15-20, fwiw)

Then he got a massive contract in the mid 90s (by the A's).

What happened? He got fat, lost interest in baseball, and lost his skills.

Tony LaRussa, then manager of the A's, used to call Sierra the village idiot.

Now, even though Sierra is nearing his 15th season, his statistics are nowhere near what they project to be.

Same for Frank Thomas

Even Canseco dramatically plummeted towards the end of his career.

Sure, players make "last" out 10-15 years as they cling to as much money as they can make....but very few become the McGwires/Bonds/Sosa ---- who have pretty good careers, then absolutely blossom into their late 30s and early 40s.

However, I agree with you. As time goes on, and diluted pitching continues, it should be no problem to get 500 homers.

I don't know for some reason I do see some players getting lazy with the amount of money they make but why would somebody like Sosa who can challenge Aaron's record give up. Unless he gets hurt or has a few bad years I don't see how this guy cannot break the record. There is just too much fame and money to be made involved.

But to be fair didn't Sierra comeback a year or 2 ago and put up some decent numbers.

But you are right. Half of the people will fade away while the other half continue to stay around.

It's all about money, pwaldo.

If I were an athlete, paid $10M for about 5 years; I could see myself being bored and wanting to just have fun in life.

That's why I so admire the likes of Kobe and Jerry Rice --- the motivation to achieve immortality is so great that they spend almost every day of their off-season keeping in shape, trying NOT to be the next

Shawn Kemp
Vin Baker

or any other athlete that got fatter (weight wise) than their contracts.

lol

Something else to consider: baseball has changed in the last ten-fifteen years, right? The Jacks are higher in the past ten years than in any other ten year period in the history of baseball. Players coming out of these past years and starting before these past years may be upping the HOF ante. In other words, with the change in baseball, the Hall will follow in how it qualifies a player.

So what the hell am I talking about as I take another gulp of my Sugar Hill Golden Ale? McGriff and Palmiero may be the litmus test of this change in baseball. If not them, then its a matter of time before this will happen.

I agree, but when they are young they are playing for the game and the fun of playing, but as they get a little older as I have starting to notice with me (being 30) you don't bounce back as quickly and you start to feel those pains and you say is it worth it going out there and diving for a ball, when I will pay for it for 2 weeks. heck no not when you know that your family is taken care of for the rest of your and their life too.

back in the days players played a little longer because #1 they can't get get full pension until having a total of 10 years in the big leagues, for some players that may really be 12 or 13 years because of being sent down to the minors a few times early in their careers, hitters peak early on avg and pitchers start hitting their peaks around 28-31 and at that point you can tell if they are going to stars for sure. For instance mark prior is a young phenon, who really is peaking at his young age what will happen when he get his 6 years in when the cubs no longer own him, he will break the bank cause the cubs have taken him to the cleaners, that is when you can tell if he is really going to be good, why because at this point he is pitches for that huge contract.

I learned this from my buddy Latroy Hawkins, I didn't know that the team controls everything up until the 6th year when you can become a free agent and it was evident with arod, griffey, and jeter. they all broke the bank when they had 6 years in the league, now look they are still playing at the top of their games though. But I am sure some others was like what the hell I jsut signed a multi-year multi million dollar contract, that is guaranteed for XXX years I really don't have to be a stud until the final year and kill it, so that I can sign an another phat contract. Plus here is another thought, they report to spring training in Feb play til sept provided that they don't make the playoffs and they get 5 months off to enjoy themselves, or do they some play winter ball which can be 2 different sessions if the teams so chooses they may play in arizona fall league or in PR and those countries or even both. Some don't get a choice they have to, so what I am saying they don't get a break from playing hence dead arms and being mentally drained by the end of the year.

some of the players simply hate the game that we love so much because of all the crap that goes on behind the scenes. That is why some say and I will say that most of the players will be 10 years big league time and then they will out.

ah yeah the reason players played so long back in the day was the salaries were not as high as today wages and after 10, if they didn't invest and save properly they get to retire on the 80K pension that they get. so going from a few hundred $$$ to 80K could really be a culture shock, you might have to move back into a regular house.

MLB owners are pimps like iggy and radio

just my thoughts

This is a good question!

When it comes down to it I think both will likely make the HOF.

I think Raf is a pretty easy call. He has quietly been a rock his entire career. I wouldn't be surprised if he made it on the second ballot, maybe the first if there isn't a lot of competition.

McGriff is a little tougher to call. He's moved around so much that I think it kinda hurts his case. Not that your team is supposed to matter but it does. I feel McGriff should have really retired by now but I'd say he's about 50/50 for the hall. I'd be fine with it either way.


BGray

imagine the greater exposure Palmeiro would've had if he'd stayed in Chicago as a Cub.

Only in Chicago can you have losing seasons, and still be in the spotlight.

Mark Grace should've stayed as well. Instead, he now lingers on the bench.

Originally posted by podstock
imagine the greater exposure Palmeiro would've had if he'd stayed in Chicago as a Cub.

Only in Chicago can you have losing seasons, and still be in the spotlight.

Mark Grace should've stayed as well. Instead, he now lingers on the bench.

Yeah but Mark Grace one a championship by leaving Chicago. That's the only time I would agree with a player leaving a team like that.