Carl Crawford future HOF?

[jake33]

From another post, I thought it would be interesting to look at if carl Crawford is a Hall of Fame caliber player. While probably not a first ballot HOF'er, in my mind, I think it will be a no brainer that he is.

Often, I think it is a bad arguement to say that a certain player is better than the worst guy in the HOF. I personally think Don matting is a HOF, but he will never get in and I could pull up arguements for that player. Crawford on the other hand really sticks out to me.

I think if CC gets to 3,000 hits, wins 1 world series, and gets to 810 steals (to put in top 5 all time) it will be very hard to deny him. That along with no steroid issues and if he stays clean from off field problems.

To get to these numebrs CC would have to do the following over the next decade (he will only be 38 years old at that time too)....

Right now averages 177 hits in a full season, He will need to average 152 hits to get to 3,000 - I think that is very reasonable.

He will end up with around 250-300 career homeruns. That would put him at least 20 more than Paul Molitor. Rickey Henderson has 297 Home runs, 300 would be a major number for this type of player. He will have to hit his regualr mid-to Upper Teens in annual HR's do hit 300.

He currently has 105 career Triples, Next year he should pass Paul Molitor's career total. Rickey Henderson has only 66 career triples. Borderline HOF'er Craig Biggio has in the mid 50's.

CC has currently 4 All Star Appearances. Paul Molitor has 7, Biggio has 7, Rickey Henderson has 10. CC will probably have 7-10 by the end of his career. 10 would be huge for him.

Stolen Bases. His numbers should stick out in an area where the stolen base has goneaway. With that, the stolen base has lost some value though... CC averages about 48-50 per full season. He will pass Biggio next season and in 3 years will likely pass Molitor. To get to top 5 all time in steals he will need to average EXACTLY 40 pers season for the next decade. As he gets older this will be tougher to get to, but if he plays until he is 41, it should not be a problem at all, of coarse baring missing an entire season with injury. The top 4 in steals are all in the HOF.

He has a .296 career BA, he'll probably end up conservatively speaking around .288 or better. Not GREAT, but I do not think it will greatly damage him.

With Boston, he has a shot year in and year out to win a world series, shouldn't be held against him if he doesn't win one. But it will greatly help as it did for Kirby Puckett.

Curious on which cases you can see that will hurt Crawford. Obiviously switching teams mid career makes him lose his identity with 1 certain team. For example: Fred McGriff. If McGriff would have played 18 years with toronto, he would have a much better chance of getting in the HOF, I am not sure which team is "Fred's team." If Kirby Puckett or Ryne Sandberg would have played for 5-6 teams, I do not think they would have gotten in the HOF.

[Manram]

Although I think it is still a little early to tell, if he keeps on putting up the stats he has from the past years for 8-9 more years than i think so. but a little early to tell

[jake33]

yes, if he retired today, he would not be. The idea is that he can do the same or worse in most categories to get there. If he was going to get exposed, it would have happened within the last 9 seasons he has played...

[Neal]

If he gets to 3K hits, he is w/o a ring or mvp ... although playing with his new team, I would imagine he gets a ring.

He has been a very consistent player that has spent his entire career in as close to a third world baseball market as one can get. Tampa has only been good for the past three seasons.

[jake33]

He does have an All Star Game MVP and Silver Slugger right now, but those do not hold a ton of value for determining HOF. Unlike the NFL, MLB does not put as much value on short term success for HOF recognition.

[Chris78]

It is way too early to even mention his name as a Hall of Famer, as he has only played for 9 seasons (you need to play 10 seasons to even be considered). He has the potential to become one, but he probably needs to be good for another 10 years or so.

The only name you can mention at this point for that short of a time period would be Albert Pujols. He has now played the 10 seasons, but honestly, I thought he was the one exception that could be made for a Hall of Famer prior to 10 years.

Chris

[Fnazxc0114]

He is a sub 300 lifetime hitter with no power. If he gets to 3000 hits he will get in, but if he doesnt he wont have a chance.

[jake33]

I agree.

3,000 will be the key for him getting in. Which is only 152 hits for the next decade or 127 hits per season until he is 40.... 300 HR's would be a bonus... If he doesn't get to that number, he'll be mostly a rich man's vince coleman.

If he gets to 3,000 he will draw some comparisons to rickey henderson and CC will probably have a slightly better batting average than Rickey.

As for Pujols, I have heard a lot of bad stuff about him off the record, if some things ever come into national spotlight, ti will hurt him, but yes Pujols would almost be a lock even if he retired today.

[legaleagle92481]

I agree.

3,000 will be the key for him getting in. Which is only 152 hits for the next decade or 127 hits per season until he is 40.... 300 HR's would be a bonus... If he doesn't get to that number, he'll be mostly a rich man's vince coleman.

If he gets to 3,000 he will draw some comparisons to rickey henderson and CC will probably have a slightly better batting average than Rickey.

As for Pujols, I have heard a lot of bad stuff about him off the record, if some things ever come into national spotlight, ti will hurt him, but yes Pujols would almost be a lock even if he retired today.

Rickey is a bad comparison because he was one of the greatest players to ever play the game and by far the best leadoff hitter. In his prime he was the single most high impact force in baseball in his prime his mere prescence on base altered games the way it unnerved pitchers. He was stealing 80 plus bases year in and year out with ease. When he retired he was the alltime leader in three major categories to go with his 3,000 hits. He had two rings and an MVP (along with two other top three finishes). He got 94.8% of the HOF vote when eligible. Rickey's averages are hurt by the fact that he played until age 44 many seasons beyond when his skills eroded to the point that he was no longer Rickey out there. Carl started young so he has alot of hits but the 30s are brutal on guys who started young look at Griffey Jr. A more realistic comparison is Edgar Renteria who had more hits then Carl at age 30 and since then has rapidly declined to the point that he will fall over 700 hits short and be retired at 33. Four or so years ago when he was Carl's age, people were use the HOF argument for Edgar as well and now that seems like a joke. If Carl warrants a discussion, why doesn't Adrian Beltre who is around two years older than Carl but who also has about 1,900 hits at age 31. If he gets 150 a year and plays until he is 40 he will have well over 3,000. He also almost won an MVP once, has a homer title and plays stellar defense at a premium fielding position. He also has over 1,000 RBIs and nearly 300 homers.