[simple simon]

Jeff Bagwell's career in baseball is expected to officially come to an end this week.

The Houston Chronicle reported Tuesday that Bagwell will announce his retirement once a post-career personal services contract is finalized between the slugging first baseman and the Houston Astros.

The newspaper reported that the contract should be finalized by Friday. Bagwell's agent, Barry Axelrod, and Astros general manager Tim Purpura both told The Chronicle on Monday that the deal is being finalized.

ESPN.com - MLB - Astros' Bagwell reportedly set to retire this week

[simple simon]

id say he is a 1st ballot HOFer

any objections ?

[JackAigner]

You're absolutely right. He's one of the best ever at first base. Certainly, he was the best all-around first baseman of his era. Not quite the hitter Frank Thomas was (though Thomas played in a much better hitter's park), but way better at everything else. One of the greatest guys to ever play, too, along with his keystone partner, Craig Biggio. They'll both be in the Hall six years from now.

[legend]

Only first baseman to hit 400 homers and steal 200 bases, franchise leader in homers and RBI, holds many single season records for the Astros. Played poorly in the post-season, hitting .226 in nine series, but look at A-Rod and what he does, or Willie Mays for that matter. Hall of Famer, maybe not first ballot though but deserves to go in.

[EmpireWF]

I agree he's a hall of famer but certainly not on the first ballot. He deserves to be in since he was among the best first baseman of his generation and a consistantly dominant hitter.

[MJHMarc]

Originally Posted by legend

Only first baseman to hit 400 homers and steal 200 bases, franchise leader in homers and RBI, holds many single season records for the Astros. Played poorly in the post-season, hitting .226 in nine series, but look at A-Rod and what he does, or Willie Mays for that matter. Hall of Famer, maybe not first ballot though but deserves to go in.

The franchise leader doesn't hold that much weight, since the Astros haven't been around for all that long. Now if it were the Yankees, we would be talking.

[JackAigner]

I don't think the franchise leader argument carries a lot of weight, but Bagwell deserves to be in there on his own merit. He was the best or among the best offensive players in the game for around a decade. He'd be just about the best defensive first basemen of any that are in the hall. Probably one of the smartest players among superstars of all time. Probably the best baserunner ever among first basemen. Bill James ranked him the 4th greatest first baseman of all time several years before his career ended and you can certainly make the argument for him, considering all aspects of his game.

By the way, Bagwell's home run stats would lead most other clubs, considering most clubs haven't had someone of his caliber play for them for any length of time, let alone his whole career.

[MJHMarc]

Fourth best 1B of all-time? I think that is a stretch.

[Gotham Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by legend

Only first baseman to hit 400 homers and steal 200 bases, franchise leader in homers and RBI, holds many single season records for the Astros. Played poorly in the post-season, hitting .226 in nine series, but look at A-Rod and what he does, or Willie Mays for that matter. Hall of Famer, maybe not first ballot though but deserves to go in.

Ditto...Haller but ont 1sr ballot...he is going to have to wait 5-10...

[JackAigner]

Bagwell was better than a bunch of guys who have recently gone first ballot - Tony Gwynn, Cal Ripken come to mind...maybe the writers don't understand this, but that's another story. There's a lot of rather obvious things they don't realize as a group.

So, if I spot you Gehrig and Foxx, who else would you rank above him? Murray? McCovey? Greenberg? They were all greats, but I don't think you can make a very strong argument for any of those guys being better than Bagwell, especially if you base it on the best five or seven years of their careers, in which Bagwell certainly ranks as one of the all-time greats at any position. McGwire is around there somewhere (if you put the steroid argument aside), and Bagwell was better than him at most aspects of the game. Thomas ranks closer than he did a few years ago and has a slight lead offensively (in a better offensive park, of course), but he's not been overall as valuable as Bagwell, in my opinion. Look at how their teams have fared. Bagwell was probably the most well-rounded of any of these guys besides those who are above him. The best baserunner and easily the best defensive. Also one of the smartest players out of the superstars. In any event, even if he belongs a few spots down, there aren't any non-first ballot hall players around him. Just a great, no-bull ballplayer, no matter where you rank him. I miss watching him play.

[Gotham Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by JackAigner

Bagwell was better than a bunch of guys who have recently gone first ballot - Tony Gwynn, Cal Ripken come to mind...maybe the writers don't understand this, but that's another story. There's a lot of rather obvious things they don't realize as a group.

So, if I spot you Gehrig and Foxx, who else would you rank above him? Murray? McCovey? Greenberg? They were all greats, but I don't think you can make a very strong argument for any of those guys being better than Bagwell, especially if you base it on the best five or seven years of their careers, in which Bagwell certainly ranks as one of the all-time greats at any position. McGwire is around there somewhere (if you put the steroid argument aside), and Bagwell was better than him at most aspects of the game. Thomas ranks closer than he did a few years ago and has a slight lead offensively (in a better offensive park, of course), but he's not been overall as valuable as Bagwell, in my opinion. Look at how their teams have fared. Bagwell was probably the most well-rounded of any of these guys besides those who are above him. The best baserunner and easily the best defensive. Also one of the smartest players out of the superstars. In any event, even if he belongs a few spots down, there aren't any non-first ballot hall players around him. Just a great, no-bull ballplayer, no matter where you rank him. I miss watching him play.

Better than Riken and Gwynn?...you couldn't find 10 writers or poster in GTG who would push that agenda.

I like Bags...but as a firstbaseman compared to other firstbaseman he can't compare to how Ripken compares to other shortstops, nor does he have Tony's batting titles, lifetime stats, strings of .300 seasons etc...Ripkens and Gwynn can be argued to be the best of their generation...Bags is only among the best of his generation, and not would fall short of an any All-Time team.

[JackAigner]

Well, I take your point, but Bagwell could certainly be argued to be the best first baseman of his generation, as could Ripken and Gwynn for their spots. I'm always partial to Bill James' rankings since I think he's come up with the best (not perfect) objective system yet. His personal biases do play a part, though. Cal Ripken has some competition among shortstops from his era, as well, though you're right that he's probably the best of all of them. Gwynn was certainly just among the best outfielders (although the best hitter for average of the group), but probably the best rightfielder. I'm not knocking either of those guys, certainly, and I think many people actually underrate them, but there's no doubt that Bagwell at least deserves mention in the same breath and at most was slightly but distinctively better.

As far as falling short of an All-Time team, well, yeah...Gehrig and Foxx played the same position. Cal Ripken might make it as Honus Wagner's backup, but he'd have to beat out a few tough competitors. Tony Gwynn might be useful as a pinch hitter, but he's got even more guys ahead of him. I mean, they were all smart players, all played defense well, at least in their prime, I would say they are all in the top 5 All-Time among their positions, but Bagwell had the most offensive value.

[MJHMarc]

Originally Posted by Gotham Dark Knight

Better than Riken and Gwynn?...you couldn't find 10 writers or poster in GTG who would push that agenda.

I like Bags...but as a firstbaseman compared to other firstbaseman he can't compare to how Ripken compares to other shortstops, nor does he have Tony's batting titles, lifetime stats, strings of .300 seasons etc...Ripkens and Gwynn can be argued to be the best of their generation...Bags is only among the best of his generation, and not would fall short of an any All-Time team.

Excuse me, Gotham Dark Knight, but I am the first one on this list.

I have the right to hold my own opinion, whereas I feel that Bagwell is superior to Cal Ripken Jr (primarily famous for his cons. game record) and Tony Gwynn.

[EmpireWF]

It's funny, I've been hearing more anti-Ripken arguments as of late then I did since he retired. The big argument being that while he was great early in his career, he tailed off a bit at the latter end. Plus the consecutive game record was strictly for himself and hurt the Orioles as a team more than it helped. Still, he was my favorite player and I don't think any less of him.

Bagwell's health surprised me when I checked out his stats. For a good 3-4 year stretch in the middle of his career, he played 162 games. That's pretty damn amazing. His power numbers are awesome and he was an MVP, Rookie of the Year and even led the NL in doubles on year.