Le Grand Orange [Merged Threads]

Fuzzy Bear · 12-02-2002, 06:22 PM

Rusty Staub has a better case for the HOF than I ever imagined!

His final counting stats, in and of themselves, do not shout HOF! and that's the main reason he's not in:

BA-------------------------.279
HR--------------------------292
RBI-----------------------1,455
HITS----------------------2,705
OBP------------------------.362

However, some pertinent facts need to be considered:

1. Rusty Staub has more career hits than all but three (3) players who are NOT in the HOF. Only Andre Dawson, Vada Pinson, and Al Oliver are ahead of Staub.

2. Staub played 4 years in the Astrodome (1965-68), during the worst hitter's era in the worst hitter's park ever! He lost counting stats over those four years because he played under the worst conditions for a hitter ever in the history of baseball, in my opinion. Had he played in Wrigley Field, IMO, during those Astrodome years, he would have won at least one MVP award, one batting title, and have accumulated the most hits by any player not to be in the HOF by a wide margin.

3. Staub also played his first two years in Colts' Stadium, again in the pitcher's era, in an extremely pitcher-friendly environment (though not as bad as the 'dome). Had he played for the Cubs or the Red Sox, or even the Tigers from 1963-68, he would have hit 400 HRs and achieved close to 3,000 hits.

4. Staub was, IMO, the NL's MVP in 1967. He received little support, of course, because he played on an expansion loser, and was overshadowed by Clemente and Cepeda, but I believe that his season, given the context of the park he played in, and the era he played in, was actually more valuble. (Things like this cost Staub a lot of black and grey ink; the black-ink, grey-ink system cheats many players who played in the Astrodome for much of their careers.)

5. Staub's tenure with the Mets was another term in a park that has been a traditional pitcher's park. Shea affects BA more than power; this cost Staub hits.

6. Staub played for mostly losing teams, but he DID play for a pennant winner (the 1973 Mets), and was a key figure in their surge to the pennant in September, 1973.

7. Staub was a broad-based player; he didn't have speed, but he had everything else. He wasn't Matty Alou and he wasn't Dave Kingman, and he has an arm. Players with broad-based skills are often overlooked in HOF voting, whereas players that do one thing exceptionally well, particularly hitting HRs or hitting for a high average, tend to do much better with the writers.

I realize that there are a lot of "buts" here, and I am skeptical of candidacies that are full of "buts", however, I believe that Staub, while not my first pick for the HOF, is much better than players who are heavily touted here. I think Staub was a better player than Jim Rice and Dwight Evans, and unless you factor in a whole lotta defense for Dewey, it's a clear call, IMO. I am saying that Rusty Staub would not detract from the HOF if elected, and is a better selection than certain recent selections.

So how about it? Does Rusty Staub belong in the HOF? Is he of that caliber, and by what standard? Also, is he better than Tony Perez and Larry Doby (recent inductions)? Is he better than Jim Rice and Dwight Evans (two current candidates with active supporters)? Whose HOF case does Staub's compare to? There are a lot of aspects to this particular HOF discussion, and a lot of areas where people can be of two minds, so I hope for a wide-open discussion on a pretty wide-open topic.

LeGrandOrange · 12-02-2002, 08:34 PM

Thanks for starting this post for me.
I personally think Larry Doby should have nothing to do with this post, first of all...because Doby is in as the yang to Jackie Robinson's yin, and he was also good enough in his short time to warrant a legitimate selection.

I think a lot of the reason I began campaigning for his candidacy was that he put up a lot of numbers that players before him put up and got into Cooperstown with. The obvious comparison is Tony Perez, and much like I can with Al Oliver, I can argue that if Rusty Staub played on higher profile teams with the numbers he put up, he'd be in by now.

The only reason Perez is in the hall is his affiliation with the Big Red Machine, other than RBI Rusty's numbers are quite similar to Atanasio's. Staub however can match that difference by the difference he had in getting on base, he got on base 350 more times in his long career, and he only has about that many more PA's. The OBP was quite above average for him. He's the only player to reach base 4,000 times not in, the "brothers" Evans are the next best players who aren't in.

I just sense a double standard with Staub, because the big numbers he had for his career were replicated by others in the modern era, but the others are in. And what I'm equally surprised that he has yet to get support based on intangibles...borderline candidates get swayed in votes by popularity, and Staub was quite popular, yet it hasn't swayed in any votes. Staub is why the Expos lasted 34+ seasons. It may have left elsewhere much sooner if les gens didn't have a player like the Big Orange to cheer for. And while he left after 3 seasons, the best 3 of his career, he set the foundation for this club.

I agree he's not the worthiest of candidates, his HOF Monitor is even worse than Mazeroski's, but Bill James should not sway anybody's hall consideration. (Except for the other 3 OF's from 1975.

) Tony Pena has like a 98 HOF Monitor, Bob Boone is like 100...do you really consider them hall of famers? As a result the stat, like a few other Jamesian creations, is somewhat flawed. Never mind that they're catchers.

But this isn't about Tony or Bob. It's about Rusty. And my thinking is that if others like him can get in with T&A (Tenure & Accomplishments), why not Staub?

That's all I got to say. If I was neutral he would not be the first guy I'd put in but he'd be among them...

pwdennis · 12-02-2002, 09:50 PM

I saw Le Grande Orange play a number of times and he was a real player. I would regard him as superior to the Tony Perez, Dave Parker, Al Oliver types - right in there with Dwight Evans and Jim Rice

Cesar Cedeno and Jose Cruz are two other Astros who may have lost HOF careers to the Astrodome

sweaver · 12-02-2002, 10:00 PM

In 1967, Ron Santo was the best player in the NL. Cepeda was a reasonable pick, not too far below Santo's quality. Staub was behind both of them, as well as Aaron and Clemente. Mays had a bad year.

I rate Staub about even with Al Oliver. I don't believe either is Hall of Fame worthy, but I wouldn't storm the gates if either is elected.

LeGrandOrange · 12-02-2002, 10:04 PM

I'm a Dave Parker fan for some reason or another, and I vote for him often for Cooperstown in mock HOF ballots. I think I will this year too although I need to analyse the ballot more before I do. Staub deserves to be in more than the Cobra. He was a better hitter than Cobra anyway.
What I kind of wonder is how Parker stays on multiple ballots while Staub doesn't.

Does anyone know where I can find the 1991 voting for the HOF that Staub was first eligible for?

LeGrandOrange · 12-02-2002, 10:05 PM

Scratch what I said, I found ballots and Staub was six-and-done. My mistake.

Fuzzy Bear · 12-03-2002, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sweaver
In 1967, Ron Santo was the best player in the NL. Cepeda was a reasonable pick, not too far below Santo's quality. Staub was behind both of them, as well as Aaron and Clemente. Mays had a bad year.

I love Santo, and he IS the #2 HOF injustice outstanding, behind only Gary Carter.

However, I wonder if anyone has the Home/Road batting stats for Staub, Santo, Clemente, and Cepeda for 1967. I'll bet that Staub was BY FAR the best hitter in the NL on the road in 1967.
I'd love to see the data.

Fuzzy Bear · 12-03-2002, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by LeGrandOrange
I personally think Larry Doby should have nothing to do with this post, first of all...because Doby is in as the yang to Jackie Robinson's yin, and he was also good enough in his short time to warrant a legitimate selection.

I basically agree with your assessment of Doby, both in ability and his place in baseball history (the second black PLAYER and the second black MANAGER). I mention Doby because (A) it is not a unanimous consensus that his selection was correct and (B) like Staub, he was a player who was overlooked in HOF voting because he was a broad based player (with more speed than Staub, BTW) who didn't have an eye-popping counting stat (400 HRs, 3,000 hits, a .300 BA) to point to. I will fight to the death to protect Doby's plaque from falling prey to a misapplied crowbar.

12-06-2002, 03:35 PM

Rusty Staub was one of my favorite players growing up. As a teenager in the New York area, I got a chance to see Staub function primarily as a pinchhitter there at the end. For my money, he was the best pinch hitter I've ever seen, although, of course, that opinion was based upon probably about 20 at-bats.\]

That being said, he's not a Hall of Famer. I know he played in a time when offenses were down, and in some bad parks, but he was a corner outfielder/ first baseman with nice power and nice batting averages. From ages 25-27, the prime of his career in Montreal, he averaged 26 homers a year. From 28-31 with the Mets, he averaged 16 homers, but most disappointing is that from 32-35, in Detroit, this lefthanded power hitter hit 15, 22, 24 and 12 (the last year was only partly in Detroit).

Even when he was in Houston, his homer numbers were 6,8,14, and 13. Let's assume they were all hit on the road. That still isn't a very impressive total if he was playing at a neutral hitters site.

Sure, if he played at Wrigley, and if he had played in the 90s, and if he had been superlative at one thing rather that good at a bunch of things, then maybe he is in the HOF. I don't disagree with looking to see meaning beyond the numbers. I think though that if you have to come up with 2 or more arguments like this, the player shouldn't be in the HOF.

LeGrandOrange · 12-06-2002, 06:05 PM

Valid points. Staub was an average slugger, he was above average as an actual hitter.

I still think he's worthier than Tony Perez, but I've said that already...

12-07-2002, 10:22 AM

Having spent a great deal of time researching and analyzing the career and "Hall of Fame worthiness" of Tony Perez, I can say with complete confidence that Perez was a lesser player than Staub by quite a fair margin.

sweaver · 12-07-2002, 11:56 AM

Staub had 358 career Win Shares, Perez 349. That's pretty close.

Rinkster · 12-07-2002, 09:03 PM

Someone above pointed out Staub's home run totals are not really all that impressive.

So what?

I don't give a rat's butt about only having players that could slam the ball over the fence in the Hall of Fame. Hell, put in Dave Kingman and Jose Canseco. There is nothing I hate more than the argument that only home run hitters or guys with a high OBP deserve to be in the Hall of Fame.

What the Hall lacks are complete players, players that could do a lot of things. Staub comes pretty close. There are two many one-dimensional players going into the Hall, and the only reason is that what they did very well is easy to spot. Players that may not have eye-catching home run totals but still hit there fair share of home runs (with good extra-base power), speed, and defensive ability are just as worthy as a home run hitter.

Like I said before, Staub is much more worthy than most people realize. I'd put a Minnie Minoso or a Vada Pinson into the Hall of Fame before a Jose Canseco or a Jim Rice.

Max Power · 12-07-2002, 09:22 PM

BTW, this is his NetShrine entry:

Daniel Joseph "Rusty" Staub
"Le Grande Orange"

1963 - 1985 (Houston NL, Montreal NL,
New York NL, Detroit AL, Texas AL)
2,716 career hits. Lifetime .362 OBA.
Only 5 players drove in more runs
during the 1970's.

Fuzzy Bear · 12-09-2002, 07:09 PM

I do want to restate that I don't believe that Rusty Staub is 1st in line for the HOF.

I am SURPRISED at how favorably I view his case, and I am SURPRISED THAT I AM SURPRISED!

I am not sure I would vote for him for the HOF if he were on this year's ballot. He is, however, a vastly underrated ballplayer, in my opinion. He's a Bill James "Definition D" HOFer, and while that is not quite the actual standard that the HOF has used over time for enshrinement (Definition C is probably the real standard), there are Definition D players enshrined.

He's better than Tony Perez, too!

12-02-2002, 06:22 PM	#1
Fuzzy Bear NetShrine's Evangelist Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Living by faith, and not by sight! Posts: 2,194	Le Grand Orange! Rusty Staub has a better case for the HOF than I ever imagined! His final counting stats, in and of themselves, do not shout HOF! and that's the main reason he's not in: BA-------------------------.279 HR--------------------------292 RBI-----------------------1,455 HITS----------------------2,705 OBP------------------------.362 However, some pertinent facts need to be considered: 1. Rusty Staub has more career hits than all but three (3) players who are NOT in the HOF. Only Andre Dawson, Vada Pinson, and Al Oliver are ahead of Staub. 2. Staub played 4 years in the Astrodome (1965-68), during the worst hitter's era in the worst hitter's park ever! He lost counting stats over those four years because he played under the worst conditions for a hitter ever in the history of baseball, in my opinion. Had he played in Wrigley Field, IMO, during those Astrodome years, he would have won at least one MVP award, one batting title, and have accumulated the most hits by any player not to be in the HOF by a wide margin. 3. Staub also played his first two years in Colts' Stadium, again in the pitcher's era, in an extremely pitcher-friendly environment (though not as bad as the 'dome). Had he played for the Cubs or the Red Sox, or even the Tigers from 1963-68, he would have hit 400 HRs and achieved close to 3,000 hits. 4. Staub was, IMO, the NL's MVP in 1967. He received little support, of course, because he played on an expansion loser, and was overshadowed by Clemente and Cepeda, but I believe that his season, given the context of the park he played in, and the era he played in, was actually more valuble. (Things like this cost Staub a lot of black and grey ink; the black-ink, grey-ink system cheats many players who played in the Astrodome for much of their careers.) 5. Staub's tenure with the Mets was another term in a park that has been a traditional pitcher's park. Shea affects BA more than power; this cost Staub hits. 6. Staub played for mostly losing teams, but he DID play for a pennant winner (the 1973 Mets), and was a key figure in their surge to the pennant in September, 1973. 7. Staub was a broad-based player; he didn't have speed, but he had everything else. He wasn't Matty Alou and he wasn't Dave Kingman, and he has an arm. Players with broad-based skills are often overlooked in HOF voting, whereas players that do one thing exceptionally well, particularly hitting HRs or hitting for a high average, tend to do much better with the writers. I realize that there are a lot of "buts" here, and I am skeptical of candidacies that are full of "buts", however, I believe that Staub, while not my first pick for the HOF, is much better than players who are heavily touted here. I think Staub was a better player than Jim Rice and Dwight Evans, and unless you factor in a whole lotta defense for Dewey, it's a clear call, IMO. I am saying that Rusty Staub would not detract from the HOF if elected, and is a better selection than certain recent selections. So how about it? Does Rusty Staub belong in the HOF? Is he of that caliber, and by what standard? Also, is he better than Tony Perez and Larry Doby (recent inductions)? Is he better than Jim Rice and Dwight Evans (two current candidates with active supporters)? Whose HOF case does Staub's compare to? There are a lot of aspects to this particular HOF discussion, and a lot of areas where people can be of two minds, so I hope for a wide-open discussion on a pretty wide-open topic.

12-02-2002, 09:50 PM	#3
pwdennis NetShrine All-Century Team Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Winter Springs, FL Posts: 2,503	I saw Le Grande Orange play a number of times and he was a real player. I would regard him as superior to the Tony Perez, Dave Parker, Al Oliver types - right in there with Dwight Evans and Jim Rice Cesar Cedeno and Jose Cruz are two other Astros who may have lost HOF careers to the Astrodome __________________ "I would submit that if the world survives for a million years, perhaps its finest hour may be that in the last half of the 20th century, when the power to blow up the world rested in the hands of a few men in two very unsophisticated and suspicious countries, we didn't do it, and one American, Richard Nixon, moved the cold war away from permanent confrontation toward victory. How could any wrong that he did compare with that?" - John Sears

12-07-2002, 09:03 PM	#13
Rinkster NetShrine Fan Favorite Join Date: May 2002 Location: Lawrence, KS Posts: 78	Someone above pointed out Staub's home run totals are not really all that impressive. So what? I don't give a rat's butt about only having players that could slam the ball over the fence in the Hall of Fame. Hell, put in Dave Kingman and Jose Canseco. There is nothing I hate more than the argument that only home run hitters or guys with a high OBP deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. What the Hall lacks are complete players, players that could do a lot of things. Staub comes pretty close. There are two many one-dimensional players going into the Hall, and the only reason is that what they did very well is easy to spot. Players that may not have eye-catching home run totals but still hit there fair share of home runs (with good extra-base power), speed, and defensive ability are just as worthy as a home run hitter. Like I said before, Staub is much more worthy than most people realize. I'd put a Minnie Minoso or a Vada Pinson into the Hall of Fame before a Jose Canseco or a Jim Rice. __________________ I live in the same town as Bill James and ESPN's John Sickels...wondering if they are hermits

12-07-2002, 09:22 PM	#14
Max Power NetShrine Creator & Curator Join Date: May 2002 Location: NetShrine WHQ Posts: 5,548	BTW, this is his NetShrine entry: Daniel Joseph "Rusty" Staub "Le Grande Orange" 1963 - 1985 (Houston NL, Montreal NL, New York NL, Detroit AL, Texas AL) 2,716 career hits. Lifetime .362 OBA. Only 5 players drove in more runs during the 1970's. __________________ Steve, Forum Administrator "They come and they go, Hobbs. They come and they go." That's why there's NetShrine.com

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

12-02-2002, 08:34 PM	#2
LeGrandOrange Membership Suspended 4/11/04 Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tacoma, WA Posts: 3,783	Thanks for starting this post for me. I personally think Larry Doby should have nothing to do with this post, first of all...because Doby is in as the yang to Jackie Robinson's yin, and he was also good enough in his short time to warrant a legitimate selection. I think a lot of the reason I began campaigning for his candidacy was that he put up a lot of numbers that players before him put up and got into Cooperstown with. The obvious comparison is Tony Perez, and much like I can with Al Oliver, I can argue that if Rusty Staub played on higher profile teams with the numbers he put up, he'd be in by now. The only reason Perez is in the hall is his affiliation with the Big Red Machine, other than RBI Rusty's numbers are quite similar to Atanasio's. Staub however can match that difference by the difference he had in getting on base, he got on base 350 more times in his long career, and he only has about that many more PA's. The OBP was quite above average for him. He's the only player to reach base 4,000 times not in, the "brothers" Evans are the next best players who aren't in. I just sense a double standard with Staub, because the big numbers he had for his career were replicated by others in the modern era, but the others are in. And what I'm equally surprised that he has yet to get support based on intangibles...borderline candidates get swayed in votes by popularity, and Staub was quite popular, yet it hasn't swayed in any votes. Staub is why the Expos lasted 34+ seasons. It may have left elsewhere much sooner if les gens didn't have a player like the Big Orange to cheer for. And while he left after 3 seasons, the best 3 of his career, he set the foundation for this club. I agree he's not the worthiest of candidates, his HOF Monitor is even worse than Mazeroski's, but Bill James should not sway anybody's hall consideration. (Except for the other 3 OF's from 1975. ) Tony Pena has like a 98 HOF Monitor, Bob Boone is like 100...do you really consider them hall of famers? As a result the stat, like a few other Jamesian creations, is somewhat flawed. Never mind that they're catchers. But this isn't about Tony or Bob. It's about Rusty. And my thinking is that if others like him can get in with T&A (Tenure & Accomplishments), why not Staub? That's all I got to say. If I was neutral he would not be the first guy I'd put in but he'd be among them...

12-02-2002, 10:00 PM	#4
sweaver Netshrine Cleanup Hitter Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Mountain State Posts: 8,883	In 1967, Ron Santo was the best player in the NL. Cepeda was a reasonable pick, not too far below Santo's quality. Staub was behind both of them, as well as Aaron and Clemente. Mays had a bad year. I rate Staub about even with Al Oliver. I don't believe either is Hall of Fame worthy, but I wouldn't storm the gates if either is elected.

12-02-2002, 10:04 PM	#5
LeGrandOrange Membership Suspended 4/11/04 Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tacoma, WA Posts: 3,783	I'm a Dave Parker fan for some reason or another, and I vote for him often for Cooperstown in mock HOF ballots. I think I will this year too although I need to analyse the ballot more before I do. Staub deserves to be in more than the Cobra. He was a better hitter than Cobra anyway. What I kind of wonder is how Parker stays on multiple ballots while Staub doesn't. Does anyone know where I can find the 1991 voting for the HOF that Staub was first eligible for?

12-02-2002, 10:05 PM	#6
LeGrandOrange Membership Suspended 4/11/04 Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tacoma, WA Posts: 3,783	Scratch what I said, I found ballots and Staub was six-and-done. My mistake.

12-06-2002, 03:35 PM	#9
digger Posts: n/a	Rusty Staub was one of my favorite players growing up. As a teenager in the New York area, I got a chance to see Staub function primarily as a pinchhitter there at the end. For my money, he was the best pinch hitter I've ever seen, although, of course, that opinion was based upon probably about 20 at-bats.\] That being said, he's not a Hall of Famer. I know he played in a time when offenses were down, and in some bad parks, but he was a corner outfielder/ first baseman with nice power and nice batting averages. From ages 25-27, the prime of his career in Montreal, he averaged 26 homers a year. From 28-31 with the Mets, he averaged 16 homers, but most disappointing is that from 32-35, in Detroit, this lefthanded power hitter hit 15, 22, 24 and 12 (the last year was only partly in Detroit). Even when he was in Houston, his homer numbers were 6,8,14, and 13. Let's assume they were all hit on the road. That still isn't a very impressive total if he was playing at a neutral hitters site. Sure, if he played at Wrigley, and if he had played in the 90s, and if he had been superlative at one thing rather that good at a bunch of things, then maybe he is in the HOF. I don't disagree with looking to see meaning beyond the numbers. I think though that if you have to come up with 2 or more arguments like this, the player shouldn't be in the HOF.

12-06-2002, 06:05 PM	#10
LeGrandOrange Membership Suspended 4/11/04 Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Tacoma, WA Posts: 3,783	Valid points. Staub was an average slugger, he was above average as an actual hitter. I still think he's worthier than Tony Perez, but I've said that already...

12-07-2002, 10:22 AM	#11
BigKlu Posts: n/a	Having spent a great deal of time researching and analyzing the career and "Hall of Fame worthiness" of Tony Perez, I can say with complete confidence that Perez was a lesser player than Staub by quite a fair margin.

12-07-2002, 11:56 AM	#12
sweaver Netshrine Cleanup Hitter Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Mountain State Posts: 8,883	Staub had 358 career Win Shares, Perez 349. That's pretty close.

12-09-2002, 07:09 PM	#15
Fuzzy Bear NetShrine's Evangelist Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Living by faith, and not by sight! Posts: 2,194	I do want to restate that I don't believe that Rusty Staub is 1st in line for the HOF. I am SURPRISED at how favorably I view his case, and I am SURPRISED THAT I AM SURPRISED! I am not sure I would vote for him for the HOF if he were on this year's ballot. He is, however, a vastly underrated ballplayer, in my opinion. He's a Bill James "Definition D" HOFer, and while that is not quite the actual standard that the HOF has used over time for enshrinement (Definition C is probably the real standard), there are Definition D players enshrined. He's better than Tony Perez, too!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Trade Hillenbrand? [merged threads]	soxfan121	2002 Active Player News, Analysis, & Commentary Archives	35	12-18-2002 07:12 PM
Red Sox GM Position [Merged Threads]	gyb13	2002 Hot Baseball Chatter Archives	40	11-14-2002 10:22 AM
How To Pitch Bonds [Merged Threads]	VNV Nation	2002 Active Player News, Analysis, & Commentary Archives	45	10-24-2002 12:26 AM
Red Sox Offseason Moves [Merged Threads]	soxfan121	2002 Hot Baseball Chatter Archives	33	10-22-2002 04:59 PM
Mets Kickback Scheme [Merged Threads]	KCBOOMER	2002 Hot Baseball Chatter Archives	4	10-03-2002 04:35 PM