Thread: HOF - Fred "Crime Dog" McGriff

Since the Crime Dog retired from baseball, all I have heard from professional commentators is that Fred McGriff will not get inducted to the Hall of Fame.

At first I somewhat agreed with them, but after a while it was hard to not be impressed by 493 HR's, almost 2,500 hits, 1,500+ RBI's, and a lifetime OPS of .886.

Even though McGriff Played in the "Steroids Era", his body never changed, he remained a lanky, tall player through the duration of his career. I feel confident in saying Crime Dog was not a cheat.

McGriff never won a Gold Glove, but I do remember him being a very good defensive first baseman and he was a key contributor to the highly successful ATL Braves of the mid-90's. (1995 WS Championship included)

I am now of sound mind that Fred "Crime Dog" McGriff should be a member of the Hall of Fame.

How about you?

He gets one of my fake HOF votes. Kind of b.s. to think seven home runs might keep him out of the HOF.

Yeah, I think if you're going to punish guys like McGwire, Sosa etc for roiding up then the voters should also reward a guy like McGriff who (everyone believes) didn't roid up.

Originally Posted by gunnarthor

Yeah, I think if you're going to punish guys like McGwire, Sosa etc for roiding up then the voters should also reward a guy like McGriff who (everyone believes) didn't roid up.

Hes a borderline candidate but like you said, if we're going to punish the juicers, you also have to reward the guys who weren't linked to steroids.

I dont think "Crime Dog" is a HOFer myself, but wouldnt argue a bit if he made it. Also liked him, and do think he gets lost in the steroid era.

If I was an HOF voter, I would ignore Bonds, McGwire, Palmeiro, and Sosa's offensive output when analyzing and coming to a conclusion on where Crime Dog stood as a candidate for the HOF. I am of the belief that McGriff is not a first or second ballot HOFer, but should get in before the conclusion of his eligibility, whether that be 3 years or 15 years. The sad thing to me is that McGriff is entering his 3rd year on the ballot and his percentage of votes dropped from 20.5% to 17.9% between his 1st and 2nd years of eligibility. Damn, those percentages were not good to begin with. I hope the HOF voters come around on the McGriff equation.

Still dont understand how/why a voter can put someone on the ballot one year, but not the next. Ive always thought that once a player makes a voters ballot, they are there till inducted or untill taken off the ballot. How does a retired player get worse.
Those type of voters should lose their ballot

I think he's definitely a HOF guy.

I think whats hurt him is during his career, he was never the best player during his era (only one top 5 finish in MVP..4th in 93).
He was just incredibly consistent (never more than 37HR--7 straight tho & 10 total over 30....107rbi his high--8yrs over 100) and performed in the playoffs (.917OPS in 50gms).
I also think he fell off the radar somewhat to fans/media by signing & basically finishing his career w/Tampa (other noncontenders)
think he'll be the type who gets in 6/7 yrs in when his numbers stand out more from the steroid guys....who definately hurt him
Im a lil bit of a HOF snob cause I still think Dale Murphy deserves to be in over Jim Rice/Gary Carter types. Best player in game (opinion) for an 8 yr stretch in 80s....2 time MVP, 7 time All Star, 5 time gold glove

If Andre Dawson's in the Hall of Fame, why not Fred McGriff?

Originally Posted by TK10

If Andre Dawson's in the Hall of Fame, why not Fred McGriff?

2 different kinds of animals. I think Dawson is better (MVP, more of an impact player), but Crime Dog should be in no buts about it. McGriff was sneaky and steady in putting up his career statistics, but was great none the less!

Originally Posted by TK10

If Andre Dawson's in the Hall of Fame, why not Fred McGriff?

I don't like using borderline (or worse) players in the hall as reasoning to let other borderline candidates in. You'll end up in a never ending spiral of lowering standards.


That said, I wouldn't object to his election.

Originally Posted by greengoblinrulz

Im a lil bit of a HOF snob cause I still think Dale Murphy deserves to be in over Jim Rice/Gary Carter types.

Rice was a putrid addition that put a big dent in the selection standards.

The couple threads on HOFers had me go back & look at some numbers & they are astounding.
Joe Carter didnt get the votes (3.8%) to last past a year.
Guys like Dave Parker are greatly forgotten how dominant they were (his WAR in 86/87 was a combined -1.6 when he had 57HR 213RBI...how's that happen??) but he's lasted the maximum 15yrs on ballot in mid teens for votes.
Steve Garvey's first year was 41.6% but his last, 15yrs later, were 21.1%....he only had about 7 solid yrs, ala Tony Oliva

I am of the thought that Dave Parker should be in the HOF. I have read in some places that he was involved with cocaine in the late 70's, early 80's and that had lead to his non-inclusion. If that is the case - shame on the voters. The Cobra was great!

Originally Posted by greengoblinrulz

I think whats hurt him is during his career, he was never the best player during his era (only one top 5 finish in MVP..4th in 93).
He was just incredibly consistent (never more than 37HR--7 straight tho & 10 total over 30....107rbi his high--8yrs over 100) and performed in the playoffs (.917OPS in 50gms).
I also think he fell off the radar somewhat to fans/media by signing & basically finishing his career w/Tampa (other noncontenders)
think he'll be the type who gets in 6/7 yrs in when his numbers stand out more from the steroid guys....who definately hurt him
Im a lil bit of a HOF snob cause I still think Dale Murphy deserves to be in over Jim Rice/Gary Carter types. Best player in game (opinion) for an 8 yr stretch in 80s....2 time MVP, 7 time All Star, 5 time gold glove

Dale Murphy was indeed prime time. His last 5-6 years were awful and I think that left an impression. Sometimes your last impression is the one people remember... the voters most importantly. If he gets in someday, I would not be opposed.

Originally Posted by Brock Beauchamp

Hes a borderline candidate but like you said, if we're going to punish the juicers, you also have to reward the guys who weren't linked to steroids.

Here is the thing about that era (and the previous one btw, 'cause rhoids were around then too) : Nobody knows whether anyone used unless someone was caught.

My personal view about this thing (steroids) has changed so many times. Mainly because the caught/not-caught thing is so random (and hey is Braun "caught"? In my mind the way he got out of it was the way OJ got out of another it...)

Originally Posted by Bark's Lounge

I am of the thought that Dave Parker should be in the HOF. I have read in some places that he was involved with cocaine in the late 70's, early 80's and that had lead to his non-inclusion. If that is the case - shame on the voters. The Cobra was great!

yeah
the coke scandal in the 80s was pretty big. Lots of people involved including Keith Hernandez and our beloved HOFer Paul Molitor.

Originally Posted by thrylos98

Originally Posted by Bark's Lounge

I am of the thought that Dave Parker should be in the HOF. I have read in some places that he was involved with cocaine in the late 70's, early 80's and that had lead to his non-inclusion. If that is the case - shame on the voters. The Cobra was great!

yeah
the coke scandal in the 80s was pretty big. Lots of people involved including Keith Hernandez and our beloved HOFer Paul Molitor.

Hey Thrylos. I do not know much about this subject other than what I typed (other than I knew Molitor was a user). What is the story on the cocaine thing?

Parker was the first million dollar player, was a 2 time batting champ, 7time all star, 3 time gold glover, won 2 World Series as well as an MVP with a 2nd, 2 3rd's & a 5th showing how dominant he was.
His coke use & his knee issues (had em both replaced) blew his 81/83 seasons....anything outta those 3 & he may have some more HOF ammo. He was really good.
Think he shoulda made it before Dawson/Rice.

As for Murphy, no doubt his last 4 yrs really hurt his induction. He just couldnt get to 400HRs (at that time was a milestone for a HOF), but is a perfect example of how sometimes the HOF numbers of that era dont tell the whole story. He didnt have the hits because he was a walk machine, well before OBP was important and scored a ton more runs than Dawson/Rice