I'd love to see the argument against him.  I'm guessing that I don't, since there isn't one.

I agree... To me hes a no doubter. 

There's no argument against him.  There is an argument for a maybe.  Bagwell had an unexplained jump in power, a couple of years after leaving the minors.  There have been allegations made about enhancement use by less than credible sources.  Without the power bump, it's not clear where he would have been. 

Based on his performance at face value, he's a Hall of Famer.  Same as McGwire.  I am however not convinced that, on a level playing field, he was a better player than Fred McGriff.  I'm hoping that McGwire, Bagwell, McGriff, Palmeiro remain on the ballot for 7 years or so, and that Frank Thomas is a first ballot selection before any of the others is inducted.  After that, the voters can make a decision on the others based on all the information that is available then. 

I've never seen Bagwell closely linked to Sosa/McGwire/Bonds.  Maybe I missed it, but I didn't know he was assumed guilty like the others.

Bagwell is easily a HOFer. As other have written, I would love to see someone from the 39% here who think he isn't try to make a case.

The first 9 years of his career were played in the offence strangulation machine known as the Astrodome. The following are the batting park factors (according to bbref) from '91-'99: 94, 96, 96, 95(MVP year), 93, 91!!!, 96, 98, and 94. BBWAA please for the love of the baseball gods, put this guy in and let Biggio join him 5 years after he retires. I have no doubt he would've hit .300 with 500 HR had he not played half his games over those nine years in that tin palace. Did he benefit from Minute (as in small) Maid Park's dimensions? No doubt, but only from 2000-2004. He was a not so effective pinch hitter in 2005 and did not play in 2006. That's basically 14 seasons with 449 HR. I'm sure he could've come up with the approximately 6 HR per season over the 9 seasons he required to reach the "magic mark", had his home park not been so cavernous. Then again, we are dealing with the BBWAA, who have kept out many a deserving HOFer and made some dubious choices in their time.  ;)

I always assumed he was guilty like the others.

No way he should be in the Hall. Same with the others who most likely jused the juice.

 

The arguments that I've seen -- to which I don't subscribe -- are based on certain round numbers not having been achieved, such as 500 HR and a .300 batting average. As per usual, OBP gets overlooked (a sure sign that the saber-revolution has not yet achieved its goals) and no doubt his detractors haven't properly weighed the value of his career .408 OBP.

If Bagwell's a kid who breaks in during the late 70s he hits 350 career home runs.

He was a very good player but never the best at his position for any extended length of time during the era in which he played.

 

 

If you were to pit the merits of Bagwell against Frank Thomas, I believe Frank would be brushing Jeff aside on his way to the hall. There have been plenty of monster performing first basemen with power and OBP since the days when Fred McGriff was a pup. How many of these will be admitted? Everybody with great statistics is admitted?

Does Jeff get in because he's made more in salary than his peers? ($40 million more than Frank so far -- somewhat surprising to see Frank has never cracked $10-mil).

Will Jason Giambi be admitted to the elite of the truly famous ballplayers? As far as I'm concerned, if Bagwell is HOF, then so is Albert Belle, Sammy Sosa, David Ortiz, Carlos Delgado, Paul Konerko and Fred McGriff.

Perhaps I am going off the deep end to make some debate, but really: what reasons are there to put in Bagwell before McGriff, other than Bagwell spent his career playing for one team, and Bagwell never suited up for the Devil Rays? Yes, Fred probably played three seasons longer than he should have, likely chasing the 500-homer mark. He was never beloved by a fan base for more than a decade like Jeff. But is that what does it, because I really don't understand why some guys get in the Hall. Is it all about the longevity with a team to be absolutely adored by its fans? Does moving around kill that momentum to get in the Hall? If Mike Piazza remained forever with the Dodgers, would he be a shoo-in? Is it why Ozzie Smith got in and Omar Vizquel might not?

Here's hoping you're on the right track, Vernon.

BP weighs in.

There are now more than 118,000 votes in the SportsNation poll, and it says "yes" by a 59-41 margin. The Batter's Box poll at this writing is at 56-44 "yes," with just over one percent as many participants. So statistically, the polls are close to identical in results.

For what it's worth, despite the good arguments posed here, I have always thought of Bags as a HOF guy, even before I moved to Texas.

"Perhaps I am going off the deep end to make some debate, but really: what reasons are there to put in Bagwell before McGriff, other than Bagwell spent his career playing for one team, and Bagwell never suited up for the Devil Rays? "

Well, Bagwell had a better OBP (.408 to .377) a better SLG (.540 to .509)  and a better OPS+ (150 to 134). Those are rather large differences. Bagwell is 30th all time in adjusted OPS (Tied with guys like Lajoie and Wagner), McGriff is outside the top-100.

"If Mike Piazza remained forever with the Dodgers, would he be a shoo-in?"

He's a shoe-in no matter what.

' For what it's worth, despite the good arguments posed here'

This was sarcastic right?  "Good" arguments?

Paul Konerko belongs in the HOF if Bagwell gets in?  Hi-larious.

Thomas, Palmeiro, McGwire,  Bagwell, Delgado, Helton.

How many 1st baseman from the 90's and early part of the 21st century can make the hall?

Whether Bagwell makes the Hall will be determined by the performance of some of the above listed players over the next handful of seasons.

Barring injury or the sudden production of a more accurate birth certificate Pujols will make each of these men look silly over the next 5 years.  

The fact that his OPS numbers are so strong won't make up for his failure to hit key career milestones at an offensive position particularly as the standard of excellence will continue to rise while he waits to gain entry.

I have a feeling  Bagwell will narrowly miss the Hall (and when I was in high school I modelled my batting stance after the guy).

.297/.408/.540, with an OPS+ of 150, while stealing 202 bases, getting caught 78 times and playing very good defence is not good enough for the Hall of Fame? Better close the doors than because I think perfection has suddenly become a requirement for entry into the Hallowed Hall of the great game of failure. Frank Thomas by a wide margin over this guy? Sure "Big Frank" gets in but Bagwell's right there with him. Anyone who ever saw the "Big Hurt" play 1B knows why the man is a DH and his wheels, well he's a base at a time kind of guy. He also played in one of the best hitting environments in the majors every year until last year. Bagwell was in the Astrodome for 9 years. Many a slugger lost the ability to hit the long ball upon becoming an Astro, not Bagwell and his game was so much more than that. By the way his number 1 comp at BBRef: Frank Thomas, yeah the modern Frank Thomas, go figure.

I voted no. This is without looking at stats or anything and I just feel when one says Jeff Bagwell I don't think Hall of Famer. I think of a guy with the Astros for a very long time who probably was decent. That's the only argument I have for defending my vote albeit it's a weak argument..

Jeff Bagwell was my favorite player that wasn't a Blue Jay as a kid. I don't know what it was - must have been that batting stance. As a kid you would talk about "man, it's so smart, it makes the strike zone smaller so he's harder to pitch too.." then (like Newton must have) spend hours "Bagwell-ifying" your own batting stance.

He sure does get my vote!

In the two seasons of 1999 and 2000, Jeff Bagwell scored 295 runs.  That's over two seasons.

Jeff's best OPS+ seasons were 213, 179, 169, 168, 158, 152.  From his first year in the league (1991) to 2002, his lowest OPS+ was 134, which happens to be Fred McGriff's career OPS+.

He had some speed, he drew a ton of walks, he had a lot of power, and terrific durability during his peak years.  If it wasn't for the strike in '94, he might have challenged the Maris record.  Until Albert Pujols came along, Jeff Bagwell was the best first baseman in the National League for a decade.  That's good enough for me.

I voted yes -- very good for a very long time does it for me. All the HOF standards have him above the average, Bagwell's got an MVP, won Rookie of the Year, and would have two MVPs if Larry Jones didn't set Atlanta on fire in '99.

The Batter's Box poll at this writing is at 56-44 "yes," with just over one percent as many participants. So statistically, the polls are close to identical in results.

Mick, you're killing me.

The nub of it is captured in the BP reference that Chuck linked to.  The five top-rated first basemen are Lou Gehrig, Cap Anson, Jeff Bagwell, Eddie Murray and Rafael Palmeiro.  Jimmie Foxx, Frank Thomas, Roger Connor, Dan Brouthers and John Olerud follow next. 

If one treats the mid-late 90s entirely at face value, we end up with Rafael Palmeiro as a greater player than Willie McCovey, and a far better player than Fred McGriff. 

Come on chengy, you can do better than that. What's the point of posting on Da Box without any kind of argument whatsoever. In fact your post reminded me of a quote from Potter Stewart, the former Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. This was a little before my time, so I used Wikipedia to track it down. In the obscenity case Jacobelli v. Ohio (1964), he stated: "Hard-core pornography is hard to define, but I know it when I see it." He would later recant his view in Miller v. California, and he accepted that his prior view was simply untenable. How about you? Do you think that at some point in the future your statement that "When somebody says Jeff Bagwell, I don't think Hall of Famer." might become untenable? I don't mind if you disagree that he's a Hall of Famer, but at least make a reasonable argument and that argument will probably have to contain some statistics, since they are the language of baseball, whether we like it or not.

"When somebody says Jeff Bagwell, I don't think Hall of Famer."

Sadly, this same "strategy" is employed by many of the actual HoF voters. You'd think they'd be tasked with employing more sophisticated means to take a measure of a man's career.