I could care less who is in the HOF. But Albert Belle, I have a soft spot for. I drafted him in an office pool when he was Joey Belle and threw a ball at a fan and...I forgave him and drafted him in a subsequent pool as Albert Belle and won, based largely on his monster season ( can't remember the year, he hit a ton of doubles though ).

Anway, last season I had a sit down with Ottawa AAA pitching coach Rod Nichols and the subject of Belle came up. The two were teammates with the Indians. Nichols told me without a hint of sarcasm that Belle was an " awesome " teammate and I think this verbatim, " best teammate I ever had. " Nichols said Belle hated the media because they interfered with his work. He described Belle as the hardest worker he's seen in baseball, video, working out, hitting...relentless.

You know what they say though, it's the writers' HOF, not the players...

I love Albert Belle because there are not nearly enough Albert Belles in baseball. There's one in every baseball movie, the mustache-twirling ######### all-world hitter who plays for the Evil Rivals, but I can't think of a single active one now. (Barry's too much of an argument magnet to pull it off.)

Plus the not-a-lot-of-walks/high-batting-average/huge-XBH-totals slugger archetype is always underrepresented, and Belle's the best recent one I can think of.

Also, great final line, Zeth.

Yeah, I didn't mention that in the article because it's insufferably long to begin with, but Omar Vizquel's complaints aside--is there anybody Omar Vizquel likes?--just about everybody that ever hung around Albert Belle says he was the hardest working sumbitch they ever saw, and as I did mention in passing, during the majority of the time when he wasn't crazy, it seemed like his teammates liked him.

Not that it forgives his serious issues off the field, but on the field and in the clubhouse, Belle seemed to be quite respected.

Belle was the most feared hitter of his era. He was also the most feared player of his era. Belle was also the most feared man in Cleveland much of his career. When he moved to Chicago, Cleveland became a much more peaceful town because there was so little fear. But, Chicago lived in fear, even on the South Side. That's how scary Belle was. Frank Robinson once visited the Orioles at spring training and peed his pants when Belle walked in. And Robinson was more feared than even the "most feared hitter in baseball" (patent pending) Jim Rice. I heard that Rice won't even be within two zip codes of Belle because nobody's afraid of him when Belle's in the general vicinity.

For that reason alone Albert Belle should be in the Hall of Fame.

Eugene, you win the thread.

Belle was a great hitter and as I'm a "more peak than career" kinda, I would probably support Belle. But it might be close. There are lots of great peak guys at the corners and although it wasn't his fault, his career ended early. Also, his defense wasn't great (I suspect it kinda stunk actually ... and I don't think anybody ever said he was the hardest-working sumbitch on defense) which makes the Dawson and Evans comps particularly difficult to make based on hitting stats alone.

Eugene, great post but Bob Gibson should have had a cameo.

Probably the most logical player to compare him to would be a certain HoF LFer for the 50's Pirates, Ralph Kiner (they're both 9th on each other's comp lists):

Peak OPS:

Kiner 186 184 173 156 141

Belle 193 177 171 158 145

Career length: Kiner 6256 PA Belle 6673, and that's with about 75 games lost to a strike for Belle. Belle has more than 200 more RBI, FWIW.

HoF Monitor is almost dead-even, in the 130's for both. Kiner has more Black Ink because of a smaller league.

I always liked Belle. He was my pick in the 90's as the guy most likely to win the triple crown. Look at his second half stats in '95 and '98. Unbelievable. I kept waiting for the year he'd finally put together a complete season like this and blow everybody else out of the water. Sadly, it never happened.

That said, he's not a Hall of Famer. People exaggerate just how dominant he was compared to his peers. A 143 OPS+ is great, but in a short career without a decline phase it's just not enough to warrant enshrinement. I looked it up a couple years ago when Belle first became eligible for the HOF and found something like a dozen guys from his era who were definitely better than him as a hitter (higher OPS+ AND more PA's), and several more who were debatable (either a higher OPS+ in less PA's, or a slightly lower OPS+ in more PA's). He doesn't stand out as much as his supporters would like you to believe.

Just off the top of my head, guys who were better or comparable hitters to Belle (and to be fair, I'm only going to use those who were regulars for at least a few years during the same time as Albert): Barry Bonds, Frank Thomas, Mark McGwire, Ken Griffey Jr, Manny Ramirez, Jim Thome, Edgar Martinez, Chipper Jones, Mike Piazza, Jeff Bagwell, Carlos Delgado, Alex Rodriguez, Vladimir Guerrero, Brian Giles, Jim Edmonds, Lance Berkman, Larry Walker, Todd Helton, Gary Sheffield, Jason Giambi. Anyone else?

To be honest, considering career length, Fred McGriff isn't terribly far behind either. Belle probably has three years that surpass McGriff's best, but after that I'd bet that Freddy overtakes him pretty quickly and convincingly.

Kiner made the HOF because he led the league in homers seven straight years. That's a pretty damn impressive stretch, and one Belle didn't come close to matching.

Belle led his league once. I realize era adjustments need to be made because of the smaller league and weaker talent pool, but that's more an argument for the HOM than the HOF. On the surface, what Kiner did easily outdistances Belle as far as dominance over his peers goes.

Plus the not-a-lot-of-walks/high-batting-average/huge-XBH-totals slugger archetype is always underrepresented, and Belle's the best recent one I can think of.

I disagree. Bell did walk a lot. He has as many 100BB seasons as Arod. He's had 4 seasons with a .400+ OBP. Rice's higherst OBP season was .384, while Bell beat that in 5 seasons. Rice has 54 points (OBP-AVG), while Bell has 74, and Arod 83. Bells .564 SLG is 17th best ALLTIME. His career BA was under .300.

Bell doesn't fit the "not a lot of walks" or the "high BA" but he was a slugger, and a very good one

There is simply no way to imagine Dick Allen was a better player, or a more desirable player to have on your team, than Albert Belle.

Was Albert (143 OPS+, .656 OWP) better than Dick Allen (156 OPS+, .741 OWP)? Hmmm...

Was Albert (143 OPS+, .656 OWP) better than Dick Allen (156 OPS+, .741 OWP)?

Paging Harvey's Wallbangers...come in, Harvey's Wallbangers.

Reviewing the numbers, Edmonds and Berkman should be taken off my list in post #8. That still leaves 18 of Belle's peers who hit better or essentially equal to him. And as an average corner outfielder, he doesn't really add much to his case in other aspects of the game.

Sorry, but Belle's HOF case isn't a strong one.

...Barry Bonds, Frank Thomas, Mark McGwire, Ken Griffey Jr, Manny Ramirez, Jim Thome, Edgar Martinez, Chipper Jones, Mike Piazza, Jeff Bagwell, Carlos Delgado, Alex Rodriguez, Vladimir Guerrero,
Brian Giles,.... Larry Walker, Todd Helton, Gary Sheffield, Jason Giambi.

So... what do you make of the point that on your modified list of 18 you've got, on the numbers anyway, only 4 guys who aren't at least borderline HOF candidates--how doesn't that help Belle's case?

Plus, if we're talking about how good they were at their best, Belle was a better hitter than all of them except Bonds, Thomas, McGwire, and maybe Ramirez, and, as most of these guys were first basemen or DH's, he had more defensive value than half of them.

Bonds, Thomas, McGwire, Griffey, Ramirez, Chipper Jones, Piazza, Bagwell, Rodriguez... those guys all had better/more valuable careers than Belle, because they sustained their excellence longer and/or had decline phases. But then, those guys are all inner-circle, first-ballot Hall of Famers, except McGwire and maybe Chipper.

I'm not really this much of an Albert Belle fanboy, by the way, but it is fun to try and support his case.

I just looked over the numbers for myself, just glossed over them really, and the 'maybe' can be removed from Manny Ramirez above; Jim Thome and Jeff Bagwell were also right there with Belle as pure hitters, at their best. Booey's point is a bit overstated, but generally valid; I guess the same can be said of my point(s).

Nice article, Zeth. However, this is the second time I've seen you use the word "cognoscenti." That word has a punctilious once in a lifetime limit.

Notice how I just burned a lifetime quota on two words.

OPS+....plate appearances:

Belle - 143, 6673
Bonds - 182, 12606
Thomas - 157, 9785
McGwire - 162, 7660
Martinez - 147, 8672
Jones - 143, 8143
Bagwell - 149, 9431
Walker - 140, 8030
Helton - 143, 6755
Delgado - 139, 7859
Giambi - 147, 7211
Sheffield - 143, 10153
Guerrero - 148, 6819
Rodriguez - 147, 8482
Giles - 139, 6929
Piazza - 142, 7745
Griffey - 140, 10167
Ramirez - 154, 8352
Thome - 150, 8427


Looking at plate appearances and considering players decline phase, Belle appears to be only a smidge ahead of Giles (who isn't anybody's idea of a HOFer), and about on par with Helton, Walker, and Delgado (if Carlos retired now). But Delgado wouldn't come close to making the Hall if he called it quits tomorrow, and with his superior defense and speed it's hard to argue that Belle was better than Walker, either. And Walker still isn't getting elected. Helton might, but his OPS+ is more OBP heavy (thus more valuable), and as a gold glove fielder and team leader he's probably a shade ahead of Joey.

Everyone else is clearly ahead of Belle, including non-HOFers Martinez and Giambi (who wouldn't make it even if he hadn't plunged needles into his a$$).

Sorry, Albert. My point stands.

#14 - Yes, the majority of these guys are HOFers. But the closest comps to Belle on this list are the ones who aren't.

Too many of Albert's supporters would like you to believe he was one of the five or six best hitters of his generation. He wasn't. He probably doesn't crack the top fifteen.

Too many of Albert's supporters would like you to believe he was one of the five or six best hitters of his generation. He wasn't.

This all depends on your timepoint and your peak vs. career orientation. He led the league in TB 3 times, he was #1 in OPS once and #2 twice, he hit 50 HR and 50 doubles in the same season, he led in RBI 3 times with 3 more top 5 finishes. From 1994-1998, especially if we conveniently overlook 1997 :-), Belle was about as good a hitter who's every played and not named Ruth, Bonds, Williams, Cobb.

I'm not gonna defend him for the HoF ... and I'll admit, been a while since I looked at his numbers, and my memory was that his OPS+ was more around 153 not 143 ... but I'll defend his supporters a bit. The argument for Belle is all about a 5/6-year peak of dominance -- and he was pretty damn dominant in that period. That's not enough for me, it's not enough for you ... but it's got nothing to do with number of games played or how his off-years drag down his career rate stats, etc.

Like Rice, the argument against Belle isn't that he wasn't a great player for a time, it's that he wasn't a great player long enough and he didn't bring enough stuff other than hitting to the table.

I will say these peak cases are going to be hard to judge in this era. There are a lot of seemingly amazing peaks -- e.g. Helton had 5 straight years of 1000+ OPS -- and the adjustments for era, park, etc. are going to matter a lot and it's going to be extra easy for folks to cherry-pick stats to support (or argue against) certain players. That's without even considering the steroid mess.

Now having said that, judging the career cases might be even harder. :-) If Luis Gonzalez can manage to be a fairly full-time player for 2 more seasons, he'll finish with 1500 runs and 1500 RBI. Almost everybody with one or the other is in the HoF (obviously Gonzalez compares favorably with those who aren't) and I'm pretty sure everybody with both is in.

What an under-rated player. Not an HoFer though.

1500 runs and 1500 RBI [...] I'm pretty sure everybody with both is in

All eligibles with both are in. Rafael Palmeiro is likely to be the first to be excluded.

If Luis Gonzalez can manage to be a fairly full-time player for 2 more seasons, he'll finish with 1500 runs and 1500 RBI. Almost everybody with one or the other is in the HoF (obviously Gonzalez compares favorably with those who aren't) and I'm pretty sure everybody with both is in.

There are 28. All are either in or not yet eligible. The not ins are Griffey, Palmeiro, The Rod, Sheffield, and Bagwell. There are 7 more in the 1400-1499 range: Sosa, Frank Thomas, Eddie Mathews, Billy Williams, Robin Yount, Goose Goslin, and Charlie Gehringer. LuGo will join their ranks by May.

Very good points, all, Walt, except that Jim Rice wasn't a historically great hitter even at his best. Belle was. As I mentioned in passing, Belle had five seasons that were better--substantially better--than Rice's best season.

From 1994-1998, especially if we conveniently overlook 1997 :-), Belle was about as good a hitter who's every played and not named Ruth, Bonds, Williams, Cobb.

Frank Thomas: 1990-1997. Mark McGwire: 1995-2000. Mickey Mantle: 1952-1961 (or really, for his whole career). Rogers Hornsby: 1920-1929. Lou Gehrig: 1927-1937.

Frankly, most of those blow him out of the water. And that's even if we ignore 1997. And there are plenty more who have an edge, even if they're in the same rough area (McCovey, Bagwell, Wagner, Foxx, Musial, Shoeless Joe, Pujols, even Giambi if you toss out 04 had a better run than Belle)

Albert was good. Very, very good. But not historically great, even in his peak, which is his only argument.

Albert Belle was Dick Allen's little brother. Allen was the better hitter, Allen the better baserunner, and before he got hurt played a more challenging defensive position and was ok.

Anyone who thinks Albert Belle was a better ballplayer than Dick Allen needs to get new glasses or file medical malpractice on their Lasik treatment. 'Cause they ain't seeing straight.

And since I don't think Dick deserves the HOF I would hope the wunderkids around here can gather where I stand on Albert's candidacy.

Hitters like Albert aren't a dime a dozen but nor are they that rare.

Fight for Alan Trammell getting in. Don't waste your time on this schmoe.

#23 - Exactly.

People often like to focus on "best five years" as a players peak, but in this case it's basically cherrypicking stats to favor Belle, since he only HAD five great years (actually only four, plus a few more very good ones). Even so, half the guys on my list were better or essentially equal to Albert during their best five seasons. And again, my list was just of his direct peers...If we looked at everyone in baseball history, his peak wouldn't look "historic" at all.

Give me a few minutes to look up some numbers...

And again, my list was just of his direct peers...If we looked at everyone in baseball history, his peak wouldn't look "historic" at all.

Here's a few, some HOFers, some non, but none of them near all time great hitter status, all with similar peaks (OPS+ wise).

Charlie Keller
Chuck Klein
Johnny Mize
Hank Greenberg
Gavvy Cravath
Jim Thome
Willie Stargell.

Top five seasons, OPS+: (average in parenthesis)

Bonds- 268,263,259,231,205 (245.2)
McGwire- 216,200,196,177,176 (193.0)
Thomas- 211,181,180,179,178 (185.8)
Bagwell- 213,178,168,162,158 (175.8)
Giambi- 198,187,172,161,153 (174.2)
Ramirez- 186,184,173,165,161 (173.8)
Sheffield- 189,176,170,164,162 (172.2)
Thome- 197,170,167,157,156 (169.4)
BELLE- 193,177,171,158,145 (168.8)
Martinez- 185,166,165,164,158 (167.6)
Rodriguez- 177,173,162,160,160 (166.4)
Piazza- 185,172,166,155,152 (166.0)
Griffey- 171,170,165,155,152 (162.8)
Walker- 178,163,160,158,151 (162.0)
Jones- 168,166,160,154,153 (160.2)
Delgado- 181,161,161,150,147 (160.0)
Helton- 165,165,163,160,147 (160.0)
Guerrero- 162,160,157,156,154 (157.8)
Giles- 177,157,156,150,146 (157.2)


All time great peak? Even amongst his own peers, Belle comes out 9th. And keep in mind that this five year peak list was made specifically to favor Albert. Most of these guys had several more dominant years than him, so the longer you extend it (best six years, seven years, ten years, etc) the further Joey would drop.

Is having the 9th best peak of your era really "historic?" I'd have to say no...

And yes, I'm aware that everyone ahead of Belle on my list is a HOFer (based solely on numbers) except for Giambi. But they're HOFers because they lasted longer than guys like Belle. None of them - with the possible exception of McGwire - is a HOFer soley because of their five year peak, and Mac's peak was much greater than Joey's.

When five years is all you've got in your favor, you've got to be higher than ninth place...

In the Hall of Merit 2008 election, Belle finished 30th in the voting. 11 out of 50 voters chose to put him in their top 15, resulting in 125 points for Belle. Looking only at "bat" candidates (LF/RF/1B), here's how others on that ballot compared to him:

Tim Raines: 1st, 1172 points (overwhelmingly elected)
Reggie Smith: 4th, 319 points (Smith is very likely to be elected to the HoM in 2009)
Bob Johnson: 10th, 240 points
Gavy Cravath: 11th, 226
Ken Singleton: 16th, 198
Tony Perez: 17th, 182
Lou Brock: 26th, 142

Albert Belle: 30th, 125

Norm Cash: 32nd, 118
Bobby Bonds: 33rd, 111
Rusty Staub: 37th, 90
Orlando Cepeda: 49th, 57
Chuck Klein: 53rd, 50
George Burns: 64th, 40
Frank Chance: 67th, 37
Jim Rice: 74th, 27
Tony Oliva: 76th, 23
Luke Easter: 76th, 23
Sam Rice: 78th, 22
Dave Parker: 78th, 22
Bobby Veach: 80th, 21
Frank Howard: 81st, 19
Brian Downing: 84th, 16
Jose Canseco: 85th, 15
Don Mattingnly: 86th, 14
Jack Clark: 86th, 14
Jack Fournier: 98th, 8
Mickey Vernon: 99th, 7
Harold Baines and Hack Wilson received no votes, although they had in previous elections.

So that's our take: Belle is a reasonable Hall of Fame candidate in the same sense that Singleton, Perez, Brock, Cash, Bonds, and Staub are reasonable candidates. (Singleton would be a particularly interesting comparison.) He's probably better than at least some non-joke Hall of Famers. He's got a better case than Jim Rice (or Dave Parker or Jose Canseco), to whom he can be directly compared. He's not as good a candidate as Dick Allen or Mark McGwire (both elected in previous elections). He's a peak-value "bat" candidate. Since his peak occured in a high-offense context, the raw numbers look impressive. Correct for context, and it's not as high a peak as Will Clark (also elected in a previous election.)

Again, for comparison's sake:

Albert Belle - 143 OPS+, 6673 PA's
Norm Cash - 139 OPS+, 7910 PA's
Reggie Smith - 137 OPS+, 8050 PA's

Considering his big deficit in plate appearances, is Belle really better than either of these guys?


Actually, this guy is a good comp for Belle, peak and career wise:

142 OPS+, 7353 PA's. Top seasons: 178,170,170,153,149,147,144,138...

With a full seasons worth of plate appearances on Albert, he's got to be considered a better hitter...and he's still not in the HOF. I don't think he ever even came close when he was on the ballot. Anyone have an idea who it is? He played in the 60's and 70's.

Tacking on to Booey...

I like to use BB-Ref's Park-Adjusted Batting Runs, since they are based on linear weights, and are counting stats so they already give credit for playing time. Albert Belle rankes 79th all time in BR*, which isn't too shabby. But there are more than a couple guys ahead of him who aren't going in, along with a bunch of guys who are really close to him and provided value in other ways. Some snippets:

26. Edgar Martinez 566
27. Jim Thome 557
42. Raffy 498
49. Dick Allen 476
52. Jason Giambi 469
56. Fred McGriff 447
59. Larry Walker 440
62. Todd Helton 428
66. Carlos Delgado 416
69. Will Clark 405
71. Bob Johnson 392
72. Jack Clark 389
73. John Olerud 387
74. Brian Giles 384
74. Ralph Kiner 384
76. Pete Browning 380
77. Al Simmons 377
78. Albert Belle 372
80. Norm Cash 371
81. Ken Singleton 366
83. Dwight Evans 362
84. Reggie Smith 356
84. Rusty Staub 356
88. Bobby Abreu 354
88. Frank Howard 354

Anyway, you get the point. It's hard to argue that Belle belongs in over a lot of these guys, taking everything into account.

#30 - Frank Howard?

#32 - Yeah, it's Frank Howard. He had a similar peak to Belle, a longer career, and little love from HOF voters. Not sure if he's in the HOM or not, but he's got a better case than Joey...

How could anyone not love Albert Belle? First he helps to revive a franchise that had been in a complete funk for 30 years, and then even better, he helps drive a stake into Peter Angelos's evil little heart.

And even though I was rooting for Baltimore to beat the Indians in the 1996 ALDS, that late game grand slam he hit off Benitez to win game 3 was one of the more dramatic, if forgotten, home runs I've ever seen. He isn't a Hall of Famer, but I'm sure glad he played the game.

And FWIW I've heard more than one person who was connected with the Indians at the time who said that he was by far the best read player on that team, and probably the smartest. I liked hearing that simply because it went so much against his general public image.

Yeah, it's Frank Howard. Not sure if he's in the HOM or not, but he's got a better case than Joey...

He's not in the HoM, and he draws less support than Belle. He's not even the most popular Howard in the voting; that would be Elston. You'll see him in my post #29, down in the "he's got a couple of supporters" range. I used to vote for him but he has slipped off my ballot. What he has going for him: he did indeed have a massive (albeit fairly brief) offensive peak. Since it happened in a low offense environment, the MSM didn't take that much notice. What he has going against him: defense. Booey, Shock and I have been throwing around a lot of names of bat-first candidates, but Howard might have the least defensive value of any of them (although Singleton was no prize.)

Anyway, you get the point. It's hard to argue that Belle belongs in over a lot of these guys, taking everything into account.

Actually, it's easy, if one of the things you take into account is that his career ended prematurely. Whether one wants to take that into account is a separate question. Generally speaking, I don't think we should, but I don't think the argument is ridiculous, either. Give him 100 more BR/A and he's clearly in the HOF range.

All right David, since you represent Oriole fandom: care to take on Singleton versus Belle? (The one thing you can say about Singleton is that it doesn't look like his career ended prematurely. I think many of us simply act as if 1984 never happened when analyzing his record.)

I'm not arguing for Belle to be in the HOF, but don't understand comparing Belle to first basemen and DHs and not crediting him for playing a tougher defensive position. If Belle was either a CF, SS or C, would there be any doubt he's in the HOF? If he solely DH'd like Martinez, of course not. But he's somewhere in the middle, which is why I so far find the arguments he's not a HOF'er incomplete and unpersuasive. When is someone going to discuss his defensive value, which should end the argument completely.

All right David, since you represent Oriole fandom: care to take on Singleton versus Belle? (The one thing you can say about Singleton is that it doesn't look like his career ended prematurely. I think many of us simply act as if 1984 never happened when analyzing his record.)

Singleton was my favorite player growing up; everyone else liked Eddie the most, and I didn't want to pick the same player everyone else did.

For the Orioles, it's a no brainer, of course; Belle was only in Baltimore for two years. For their careers, well, as I said, I generally don't believe in giving credit for injury-shortened careers. (At least not injuries related to playing; if he got hit by a bus, that's different.) If you don't give Belle extra consideration, then you've got Belle on peak and Singleton on career, by any metric which takes value and replacement level into consideration. Hell, neither one's really a HOFer, but both are just below the line.

Then again, while I have nothing against Belle inherently, it is his fault the Orioles have been bad for so long. Angelos was so embittered by the Belle injury that he decided he'd rather sign lousy players to 3 year deals for 25 million instead of great players to 5 year deals for 60 million. So I think he deserves demerits for that.

"Giles (who isn't anybody's idea of a HOFer)"

Nobody appreciates Giles. If it didn't happen in New York or California, I guess it didn't happen.

I'm not arguing for Belle to be in the HOF, but don't understand comparing Belle to first basemen and DHs and not crediting him for playing a tougher defensive position. If Belle was either a CF, SS or C, would there be any doubt he's in the HOF? If he solely DH'd like Martinez, of course not. But he's somewhere in the middle, which is why I so far find the arguments he's not a HOF'er incomplete and unpersuasive. When is someone going to discuss his defensive value, which should end the argument completely.

First of all, Edgar didn't solely DH. He played nearly 600 games at 3rd base. Now, that doesn't have as much defensive value as Belle's 1300 games in the outfield, but the difference between the two is dwarfed by Edgar's massive offensive edge.

Second, it's not like Belle was some king of all world defender in LF anyway. He properly deserves credit for being out there every day, but that's about it. That's not nearly enough to overcome a 100+ adjusted batting runs difference between him and those listed in #31.

Third, which has more defensive value, 1300 games at left and right field (Belle), or 200 games in LF and 2100 games at first base (Raffy)? Or 500 games at 3B and 1100 games at first (Thome)? Or 250 games in LF, 650 games at 3B, and 800 games at 1B (Allen)?

And fourth, most of these 1B/DH types were brought into the discussion to refute the notion that Belle's peak was of historic magnitude. I believe the quote was "Belle was about as good a hitter who's every played and not named Ruth, Bonds, Williams, Cobb."

But then, those guys are all inner-circle, first-ballot Hall of Famers, except McGwire and maybe Chipper.

Chipper is probably one of the most underrated players of his generation. For offensive value, using something like BRAA, since he was a pretty decent basestealer until age 27, he compares favourably with any 1b / DH / poor defensive corner OF type, 540.

Even using Batting Runs, he still is OK compared to 1b / DH / poor defensive corner OF types, with 476.

This is without even taking into account position.

#40 - Do you think Giles DOES deserve HOF consideration? I agree he's been horribly overlooked for much of his career, and if he played for a contender he'd have been a serious MVP candidate for a few years in his prime, but he's still not even particularly close to a Hall of Famer.

And what he's done the past few years HAS happened in California, and still no one's noticed...

Then again, while I have nothing against Belle inherently, it is his fault the Orioles have been bad for so long. Angelos was so embittered by the Belle injury that he decided he'd rather sign lousy players to 3 year deals for 25 million instead of great players to 5 year deals for 60 million. So I think he deserves demerits for that.

I'm still amazed how stupid the Orioles are about that contract. In the end, it only cost them 2 years, $25 million plus whatever the insurance was, and Belle still gave the team a very good season and an average season, so it's highly unlikely that the Orioles lost more than a few million on the deal.

Of course, I know you know this, since we've been having this discussion for 10 years now!

Two other people to compare Belle too:

1. Kirby Puckett. Different position, different mix of offensive and defensive value. Similar in having a career suddenly end with no decline phase. Different in the BBWAA voter interpretation of that sudden career end, a difference rooted in their relationships to the media when active.

2. Ross Youngs. Good player, but career ended at the age of 29 by Bright's disease; died about a year after he stopped playing. Yes, Ross Youngs is in the Hall of Fame. No, he doesn't really belong - but an OBP-heavy 130 OPS+ for a RF with an arm means he's not a total joke.

a long time ago, when i lived in new orleans, i put together a fanzine that i never printed, and i commissioned a friend of mine to write a long article about mel ott, a native new orleanian. i wrote a sidebar about who was the best native born louisianian major leaguer. traditionally, its mel hands down. and if you compare him to other louisianians, like rusty staub and bill dickey and some others, he still pretty much outclasses them. but at the time i wrote the sidebar, 1997, belle had been in the league about 8 years or so, so i took his career and lined up mel with him for the same ages, and concluded that belle was on the way to being a better player. he hit for more power, didn't walk as much as mel (who i think may still be in the top ten alltime). but it wasn't a lock, and the judgement would have relied on peak value. belle had to play a monstrous number of games to approach some of mel's counting stats. belle's first full season was his age 24. he had played only 71 games before that. mel ott had played in 831 games by his age 24 season, and played for 15 more years. we all know what happened.

Top OPS+ (2000 PA), born in LA.