Jim Thome...HOF?

Jim Thome hit his 500th career homerun in dramatic fashion on Sunday evening. It was a walk-off blast...pretty exciting.

Now that Thome has hit the magic number (if it's still considered that) the question becomes...is Thome a hall of famer.

My intial reaction is no...which is not a good sign. For an educated baseball fan... whether a given player is a potential hall of famer... should be (normally) a quick response. In that regard, Thome has failed my first test.

Let's go to the numbers:

BA/OBP/SLG is .281/.408/.562
--that's solid...that's a OPS of 970....that's really solid. That's HOF solid. That's a higher OPS than Alex Rodriguez, Chipper Jones, Carlos Delgado, Jeff Bagwell and Ken Griffey Jr. Other than Delgado those players are no doubters for the HOF. With an OPS that high for that long of a career...that shows that Thome has been consistently good for many number of years.

That's my biggest criteria...being a dominant player at your position for a number of years. He passes this test.

Now let's dive a little deeper...

He only made 5 all-star games. That's not overly solid. But--and I think this is why all-star appearances are sometimes overrated--his potential spot was taken by Mike Sweeney--who was like the Royals lone representative for a number of years. The fact that every team has to be represented hurts some players chances of making the team. One could make the case that Thome was hurt by this.

Never won an MVP award...this hurts...way more than the all-star appearances. In fact the highest he ever finished was 4th (2003). He's only finished in the top ten 4 times. This is very damaging. The numbers say he was dominant but the perception wasn't always there (which is what MVP voting says). I'm having a hard time getting around this...

As I'm typing this... baseball "guru" Steve Phillips is on Sportscenter giving his take. Basically saying the same things...very good player...good guy...no MVP's...not dominant...wouldn't get his vote (which he doesn't have--and that's good). He goes on to say...and I don't think this makes a lot of sense....that if Thome gets close to 600 home runs than he would be a HOF in his eyes.

I find that illogical...Thome is 37...does Phillips think that in the next couple of years that Thome is going to be more dominant...or win an MVP award. Unless your Barry Bonds...you don't get better after your 37th birthday (and that wasn't all natural). That logic just doesn't make sense to me. If Thome gets close to 600 home runs it's going to be by seasons that are sub-par to his best seasons. He's not going to get better...odds are he's going to get worse and worse year after year. He's past his prime...if Steve Phillips criteria is that a player has to be dominant than Thome is well past that. I guess I'm just being critical of Phillips's own criteria/argument for a potential hall of famer.

In essence...I'm really on the fence...but maybe like Frank Thomas...Thome's numbers look better when one (I think it's safe to assume) that he did everything on the up and up. He's never been linked to steroids. In this regard...his numbers do look better...they aren't inflated...and maybe that helps his case.

Ultimately if I had a vote...I would vote him in. It's not my most confident stance on a player's HOF potential but I can stand by it.