Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Hall of Merit > Discussion
Hall of Merit
— A Look at Baseball's All-Time Best

Monday, May 17, 2004

1926 Ballot

The 1926 Ballot. Top Newbies:

***1926 (May 16)—elect 2
WS W3 Rookie Name-Pos (Died)
294 80.3 1910 Joe Jackson-LF/RF (1951)
247 73.1 1908 Eddie Cicotte-P (1969)
289 59.0 1907 Larry Doyle-2b (1974)
202 51.8 1908 Gavvy Cravath-RF (1963)
174 43.1 1911 Claude Hendrix-P (1944)
171 43.1 1908 Buck Herzog-2b/3b/SS (1953)
148 51.6 1912 Ray Chapman-SS (1920)
191 35.7 1908 Fred Merkle-1b (1956)
127 46.5 1905 George McBride-SS (1973)
175 36.6 1914 Benny Kauff-CF (1961)
160 34.4 1910 Fred Luderus-1b (1961)
152 33.4 1912 Buck Weaver-SS/3b (1956)
123 36.4 1915 Happy Felsch-CF (1964)
129 35.8 1913 Dick Rudolph-P (1949)
089 19.5 1910 Bill Rariden-C (1942)

Does anyone have the list of newly eligible Negro Leaguers?

Don’t forget you can impose a one-year protest based on character issues, by not including players you otherwise would have voted for.

Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 17, 2004 at 09:23 AM | 209 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 > 
   1. Rusty Priske Posted: May 17, 2004 at 12:32 PM (#631499)
My PHoM inductions for 1926 are Frank Grant and Elmer Flick.



1. Sherry Magee (1,x,x) PHoM-1925
2. Bobby Wallace (2,3,4) PHoM-1920
3. Jimmy Sheckard (3,4,5) PHoM-1919

With a weak year for new candidates, my top picks remain the same. These should be "sure-things" for induction...if not soon then eventually.

4. George Van Haltren (7,9,10) PHoM-1912

GVH is the overlooked man by us, imo. I was even starting to overlook him, despite being a booster. I hope he gets his due.

5. Bob Caruthers (5,6,8)PHoM-1919

Doesn't it seem that the more some people touted Caruthers, the more others downgraded him? I hope I am wrong.

6. Frank Grant (8,8,12) PHoM-1926

Slow and steady wins the race?

7. Jake Beckley (10,10,11) PHoM-1913

Next to GVH, he is the earliest player inducted into my PHoM that is not in the HoM as of yet.

8. Dickey Pearce (12,14,x)

I am on the bandwagon.

9. Mickey Welch (9,12,13)

Numbers to strong to ignore, yet he doesn't hold up under scrutiny compared to the top guys.

10. Jimmy Ryan (11,13,14) PHoM-1914
11. Rube Foster (13,11,6)

These two are under-represented, imo, but they are not so strong candidates that this is a huge thing.

12. Joe McGinnity (14,15,x)

I don't understand the strength of support for him.

13. Tommy Leach (15,x,15) PHoM-1921

Perfect example of jumping the gun.

14. Bill Monroe (x,x,x)
15. Hugh Duffy (x,x,x)

No new strong candidates and two inductions last year lets these two squeak back on.

16-20. Jackson, Mullane, Powell, McCormick, Doyle
21-25. Griffith, Childs, Willis, F.Jones, Waddell
26-30. Thompson, White, Gleason, Cross, Bresnahan

I didn't disqualify Jackson for the year, but his, uh, problems led to a career too short to make it very high on my ballot. He just misses at 16.
   2. sunnyday2 Posted: May 17, 2004 at 01:11 PM (#631503)
Rusty, how do you do it? Always first, I mean??? Ah, these are times that try men's souls...and baseball rating systems. Still a peak, prime voter--using WS and WARP to cancel out their quirks--no timeline, value is value, a pennant is a pennant. * are in my PHoM.

1. Dickey Pearce* (4-2-1 last week)
2. Bob Caruthers* (3-3-3)
2. Harry Wright* (7-4-2)

Pearce and Wright are the #2 and 3 players of their time, analogous to Brouthers and Connor, or Mantle and Snider. Made my PHoM way back in 1913 and 1914. Caruthers has the best peak post-Tommy Bond.

4. Sam Thompson* (8-5-4)

Thompson and Caruthers went into my PHoM together in 1905.

5. Bobby Wallace** (x-10-10)

Has moved up quickly now and goes into my PHoM today (**). For those who think I over-represent the 19th century, note that I've mostly finished with the 19th and moved on to the 20th now in my own PHoM picks.

6. Charley Jones* (9-7-5)
7. Ed Williamson* (11-6-6)
8. Cupid Childs* (8-9-8)

Jones better than Kelley, Williamson comps J. Collins, and as a peak voter I like Childs better than McPhee.

9. Jimmy Sheckard** (9-11-9)

Just a bit better than Magee, makes my PHoM this year. Also better than at least one HoM LFer.

10. Hughie Jennings (10-11-13)
11. Jim McCormick (x-x-x)
12. Lip Pike (14-x-12)

OK, OK, so maybe I'm obsessing on the 19th century. I haven't finished a grand reconsideration of pitchers but I did bring McCormick (and Bond) back into consideration, and I guess I like Jim better than McGinnity.

13. Sherry Magee (new to my ballot)
14. Bill Monroe (x-12-14)
15T. Fred Dunlap (15T-15-x)
15T. Frank Grant (15T-x-x)

Three almost interchangeable 2Bs, with Sol White and Larry Doyle close behind.

Drops off: 17. Pete Browning(x-x-15)--drops behind Magee in the OF not-glut.

Next:
18. Tommy Bond (x-x-x)--didn't want to put him back on my ballot until I've done a more thorough reconsideration of pitchers, but he is back.
19. Mickey Welch has never been on my ballot, but I brought him into consideration and he competes better now than he did against Clarkson and Keefe.
20. Larry Doyle

21. McGinnity, 22. Duffy, 23. VanHaltren, 24. Ryan, 25. Sol White, 26. Tiernan, 27. Griffith, 28. Waddell, 29. Rube Foster, 30. Long. The pitchers could move up if I ever get around to my reconsideration thereof.

I don't see Gavvy Cravath at this point--comparable to Tip O'Neill.
   3. PhillyBooster Posted: May 17, 2004 at 01:34 PM (#631522)
1. Frank Grant (1) -- Now that Grant "Home Run" Johnson has opened the gates for players named "Grant," I hope that the rate of players named Grant does not remain as low as 1 in 46 for long. Were it not for pioneers like Frank and Johnson, we would never have gotten such later greats as Mudcat Grant. BTW, Mudcat Grant used to sponsor all the b-r.com pages of his "12 Black Aces," which probably made him the most famous sponsor. I guess he didn't renew his sponsorship this year.

2. Bob Caruthers (2) -- No good reason. Just picked his name out of a hat.

3. Joe Jackson (n/e) -- Elmer Flick with a better backstory. I give him full credit for his accomplishments, including all of 1919 and reasonable extrapolation for the war-shortened 1918, but do not do any extrapolation for the post-1920 period. Great peak, perennial MVP candidate. "Most similar" to a HoFer every year of his career. Actually, if Flick were still eligible, he'd be 6th on my ballot.

4. Gavvy Cravath (n/e) -- Full credit for the calibre of player he was. As a cog in the labor wheel, he had no control of whether a major league team gave him a job. The Edgar Martinez of his day, to a higher degree, in that he was good enough to excel, but never got a job until he was already toward the end of his peak. About 8 full seasons in the majors, and about an equal amount in the best minors around. I can't imagine extrapolating forward for Frank Grant, and not grant at least an easier interpolation for Cravath's 3 great years in Minneapolis. Grant's exclusion may be more invidious and "evil", but when looking at players as individuals, I feel that it's only fair to consider whether the player did ALL he could do. Cravath played well enough to be a major leaguer in numerous seasons when he was not given a job. Management stupidity simply should not be held against him. I also gave Cravath full credit for an All-Star type season in 1907 in Los Angeles, and 4 "average" type seasons for his first 4 PCL years. That gets him to the equivalent of a 300-350 WS players with a great peak. An easy choice here.

5. Jake Beckley (5) -- great hitter at an important position. Best in his league for years, second best to HoMers for more years. I don't discount his "peak" because it was somewhat flattened into a lengthy "prime." He was great for the whole period.

6. Roger Bresnahan (6) -- Catchers are "different". Compare Bresnahan to the other catchers eligible and see how he stands out. If he weren't ballot-worthy, there'd be a dozen guys who were somewhat similar. There aren't. I can only assume that the stats we have miss his greatness somehow.

7. Joe McGinnity (7) -- Best pitcher on the ballot.

8. Lip Pike (8) -- Best NA player available. Compares well to McVey, Wright, etc. Also, best centerfielder at an underrepresented position.

9. Sherry Magee (12) -- Lower peak than Jackson, but about 3000 more plate appearances.

10. Rube Foster (9) -- Not a demotion, but an artificially low placement of Magee last year as I gave him no benefits of any doubt. Foster is above my personal In/Out Line.

11. Ed Williamson (10) -- Is simply not that much worse than Ezra Sutton.

12. Sam Thompson (11) -- On the one hand, rightfield was not an important defensive position. On the other, it's not like you could replace them with defensive specialists and suddenly have a lot of defensive production in right field, so the replacement level for RF is probably lower than CF and LF. That gives Sam a distinct disadvantage in Win Shares, and probably underrates him in other stats that set the replacement level too high.

13. Dickey Pearce (15) -- Most valuable shortstop available, but there's certainly no shortage of SS in the HoM. With Ed and Sam in my "borderline" category.

14. Cupid Childs (13) -- He may be head and shoulders above the White Dunlap, but give me the Black one for my rotisserie team.

15. George van Haltren (14) -- He and Williamson are part of my "reconsideration brigade" of players who fell too low through neglect. Looks like he got reconsidered by a bunch of people last week. Best centerfielder if you don't like Pike.

16-20: Welch, Wallace, Chance, Sheckard, Clements
21-25: Griffith, Evers, Jennings, S. White, Browning
26-30: Doyle, McGraw, Duffy, Tinker, McGuire
   4. karlmagnus Posted: May 17, 2004 at 01:35 PM (#631525)
THIS SERVER SUCKS!

For Meyerle, Pike and the catchers I take adjusted hits as actual hits *130/actual games, normalizing them in each season to 130 games, with the exception of mini-seasons at the end where they were clearly winding down.

Jackson, Cicotte and Larry Doyle make this a strong class. If Cravath had had a full career he'd have been on the ballot towards the bottom, but his ACTUAL major league career was too short to make it even to #30 or so, and his numbers were about 10% worse than Jackson's (which still makes him prettty good.)

1. (8-9-8-14-13-11-8-5-4-5-4-5-4-2-2-2-1-2-1-1-1-1-1-2-1-1) Bob Caruthers 218-99 is more and more impressive when you compare Rusie, Griffith and McGinnity, let alone Walsh (Caruthers won 23 more games than Walsh and lost 27 fewer, pitching about 100 fewer innings in his career -- and Walsh had a career OPS+ as a hitter of 50.) As a batter TB+BB/PA .483, TB+BB/Outs .793, so better than Nap and close to Stovey. If he’d just concentrated on pitching, added 50% to his career length, and gone 327-149, he’d have been in on the first ballot. Magnificent peak: 1886-87 59-23 and an OPS+ of 180 on 681AB beats anyone (Ruth’s best 2-way years, 1917-18, he was 37-20 and OPS+ of 182 on 440AB.) Compare with Ward, whose TB+BB/PA was .374 and TB+BB/Outs .545 and W-L was 164-102 (ERA+118) Caruthers was a better hitter and much better pitcher - so why have we elected Ward and not Caruthers?

2. (N/A) Joe Jackson. TB+BB/PA .544, TB+BB/Outs .910. An even better hitter than Caruthers, but suffers because he doesn't have Caruthers' (hitting plus pitching) career length. Approximately 20% better than Elmer
Flick, who had the same career length.

3. (15-14-11-12-10-9-6-8-7-7-6-7-6-3-3-3-2-3-2-2-2-2-4-5-4-2) Mickey Welch - 307-210 still impresses me a lot, particularly compared to the short career dead ball era pitcher glut. 1885 looks like a pretty good peak too; 44-11 with a 1.67 ERA is pretty impressive, compared for example to Clarkson’s 49-19 at 2.73 in 1889. Welch not as good as Clarkson, but not that far off. Better than the 00s pitchers, all of whom were pitching in favorable conditions, none of whom (other than Young, Matty and Plank) got near 300 wins. Equal sixth all time in Complete Games; 8 of top 10 already in HOM.

4. (N/A-9-9-10-7-7-5-5-4-3-5-6-5-3) Jake Beckley. Played only 3 seasons of more than 140 games in his first 16. Adjust his 2930 hits to full length seasons, taking account of each season, and he gets to 3,238, agonizingly close to Nap's 3242 (Nap played a few short seasons early on, too, but no more than 50 hits worth of discount). TB+BB/PA .455, TB+BB/Outs .707 not as good as outfielder glut - but much of his career was played in the dead ball ‘00s, and as others have suggested 1B was a marginally more important fielding position than LF or RF then. Played for un-famous teams. We're not giving him enough respect; he should be a slam-dunk HOM'er, as he was significantly better than Keeler and very nearly as good as Crawford.

5. (N/A-6-7-4-4-3-3-3-4-7-8-7-5) Joe McGinnity. 246-142 is better than either Griffith (237-146) or Rusie (245-174) though not than Caruthers’ 218-99. Peak at 35-8 (1904) better than Griffith or Rusie, too. Career ERA+ only 121, but I think that's a fairly meaningless stat, since ERA was only invented in 1913 -- these guys tended to let up in blowouts, preserving their W/L (which they cared about) but not their ERA (which they'd never heard of.)

6. (N/A-6-5-9-8-9-8-7-10-11-8-9-7-7-6-6-9-9-8-
6) Hugh Duffy TB+BB/PA of .489 and TB/Outs of .788, but this in the high-offense 1890s, and he’s way below Beckley on total hits. Like the 1894 peak, though - and it’s ’94 not ’93, pitchers had had a year to adjust. Behind Beckley on counting considerations. Moves back above Thompson on fielding considerations, since the Beaneaters' WS figures were fudged and he
was supposed to be really good.

7. (N/A-13-13-14-12-11-7-6-6-5-6-5-4-4-6-9-8-6-6-5-5-8-10-9-7) Sam Thompson Only 2,136 hits adjusted to 130 game season. However TB+BB/PA was .534 and TB/Outs .865, among the highest figures on the ballot, so high peak. Even though this figure is inflated by his having no decline phase, and by his big years coinciding with hit gluts, each new outfielder makes Thompson look a little more special.
   5. karlmagnus Posted: May 17, 2004 at 01:37 PM (#631526)
UTTER WASTE OF TIME

8. (12-15-N/A-11-10-12-10-10-9-8-11-12-10-10-8-8-8-7-10-11-10-8) Harry Wright Better than Pearce, but how good was he really compared to the rest? But I’m convinced by the anecdotal evidence that he has to have been at least as good as this. Moving steadily up the ballot, it seems.

9. (N/A-8-7-11-10-10-13-14-13-14-12-12-12-8-11-12-11-9) Frank Grant. The most plausible comparison I’ve seen was to Hardy Richardson, although others are comparing him to the (IMHO) somewhat inferior McPhee or, more recently, Collins. With the figures we have now got, TB+BB/PA .442, TB+BB/Outs .737, assuming (rough guess) 200BB, which makes him slightly better than Richardson and significantly better than McPhee, but against lesser competition. Moved him up a bit in '21, as I think he's better than Johnson and Monroe, his next serious NL competitors.

10. (N/A) Eddie Cicotte. 208-149 and an ERA+ of 123, but IMHO should get about 25% of the additional benefit of the career he should have had, which would have been close to 300 wins. Also gets patented Karlmagnus Knuckleballer Bonus, which will come in useful when considering Hoyt Wilhelm, Niekro and above all Tim Wakefield -- a slam dunk 1st balloter by the time he retires. (Yes, there IS a rationale for this; knuckleballers have their decline phase at the beginning of their careers, so early terminated knuckleballers miss their best years, unlike other pitchers and are thus doubly penalized.) Desperately unlucky -- if the Red Sox hadn't sold him in July 1912 he'd have been on 4 WS winners, and have worked for friendly Frazee instead of cheapskate Comiskey. Also, no Red Sox in series in 1919 (they finished 66-71 without Cicotte) means no Black Sox scandal. Conversely, does Cicotte-led Red Sox with winning record mean no Ruth sale?

11. (N/A-7-9-12-13-12-10) Bobby Wallace. Decent length career, TB+BB/PA .402, TB+BB/Outs .596, mostly in the deadball era, and he wasn't a bad pitcher for a year or two. Slides down below Wright and Grant based on apparent consensus that he was nothing all that special, whereas Wright and Grant were. Much longer career than Doyle.

12. (N/A-14-13-15-N/A-15-N/A-14-N/A-13-14-13-11) Clark Griffith Moves up a bit, as he pitched for poor teams, and pitching in the 1890s was unquestionably more difficult than in the Dead Ball era. 237 wins is not outstanding, but his winning percentage is good and his 1898 peak is nice - though Welch’s 1885 is better.

13. (N/A-10-9-8-7-6-7-8-5-12-10-10-10-10-14-15-14-12) Jimmy Ryan Counting stats similar to Van Haltren and better than Duffy, peak slightly better than Van H, not as good as Duffy, rate stats also not as good as Duffy. Hence, on balance should be below Duffy. TB+BB/PA .485, TB+BB/Outs .773.

14. (N/A-13-12-13-13-12-14-15-12-13-11-11-11-11-15-N/A-15-13) George van Haltren Counting stats almost like Delahanty, but again need to be deflated for the 1890s. TB+BB/PA .469, TB+BB/Outs .765, not overwhelming for the 90s. No peak to speak of - what happened to him in 1893-95, when he should have been in his prime?

15. (N/A-9-12-11-14-13-14-12-11-12-13-11-11-9-9-9-13-N/A-14) Levi Meyerle. Normalize 1871-77 season by season to 130 games and he gets 1,577 hits, only 15 less than Pike in 1 less season. Better peak, too. TB+BB/PA .482, TB+BB/Outs .751, though this, like McVey and Pike’s figures, includes no “decline” phase. Also, he was a 3B. Why did Meyerle quit? -- unlike Pike, he was nowhere near done in 1877. OPS+164 vs 152 for McVey and 155 for Pike. Dropped a few spots based on apparently undistinguished pre-71 career, though I still think he should be seriously considered on peak grounds.
   6. karlmagnus Posted: May 17, 2004 at 01:38 PM (#631527)
POSTING IN 4 PARTS

OFF BALLOT

16. Cupid Childs (N/A) Don't know why I haven't been rating him; he should certainly be around here. TB+BB/PA .455, TB+BB/Outs .772, plus he was a 2B, but only 1720 hits and it was the 90s. Better than Doyle, not as good as Meyerle, slot him between the two.

17. (N/A-15-N/A-15-15-N/A) Deacon McGuire No fewer than 2,821 hits, adjusted to 130-game seasons over 1884-1906, which works just as well for catchers as it does for 1870s players, with the same rationale behind it. Rate stats unexciting though -TB+BB/PA .412, TB+BB/Outs .630, less good than McPhee (but catcher more difficult than 2B.) Unadjusted or adjusted, almost twice as many hits as Bennett; Bennett’s rate stats better, but this reflect his lack of McGuire’s extended decline phase. If you take the 15 seasons 1887-1902 (he missed 1889), and compare it with Bennett’s 15 year career, McGuire has 1,436 hits vs. 978, and rate stats of 435/675 vs. 454/689. Not much in it compared with Bennett, but a significantly longer career.

18. Larry Doyle TB+BB/PA .444, TB+BB/Outs .677, 1887 hits, so would be just below Sheckard, but he's a 2B, which moves him a bit higher.

19. Sherry Magee Better than Sheckard, but flattered by playing several more years in high scoring '10s and at Baker Bowl. TB+BB/PA .458, TB+BB/Outs .705, and with only 2,169 hits still distinctly below the '90s trio of outfielders.

20. (N/A-15-14-14-N/A) Jimmy Sheckard Only 2,084 hits, but a walk machine. TB+BB/PA .440, TB+BB/Outs .691, but that's in the low scoring 00s. Will return to ballot in late 20s, if others haven't elected him by then. Just not that special, overall, however -- short career and rate stats don't overwhelm you.

21. (N/A) Tony Mullane. Better W/L than Willis, same ERA+ as Willis, plus he could hit a bit (1884 was a pretty productive season, albeit in the weak AA.) Therefore he should rank above Willis.

22. (9-12-12-11-9-10-10-13-12-15-14-N/A) Lip Pike - Like Start, give some credit for missing 1860s. However, normalize 1871-78 season by season and he gets 1,592 hits after 26 - not quite an obvious HOM-er. 4 “normalized 200-hit” seasons, but only just, whereas Meyerle’s 1871 peak normalizes to 320 (obviously a random fluctuation, but in the right direction!)TB+BB/PA .478, TB+BB/Outs .713 Also, unlike McVey who was clearly damn good in 1880, Pike was through by 1881.

23. Dickey Pearce, -- Poor 1872, so even if you add 1871-2-3 together it’s unimpressive. Not convinced he's a HOM'er, but anecdotal evidence from the 1860s puts him at least here.

24. (N/A-15-N/A) Pete Browning (mostly AA -- Only 1,986 “normalized” hits (adjusting 1883-92 to 130-game seasons, and with no AA discount,) However, TB+BB/PA .511, TB+BB/Outs .855, in a more hitter-hostile era than Tiernan or Thompson

25. Roger Bresnahan. Extrememly short career -- only 1,690 "normalized" hits, and he was playing with padding unlike Bennett, McGuire and Clements. But TB+BB/PA .447, TB+BB/Outs .719, exceptional for the dead ball era (higher than Sheckard, for example.) Sort of a catcher's Ed Walsh, so dropped him closer to where Walsh was.
   7. karlmagnus Posted: May 17, 2004 at 01:39 PM (#631529)
PLEASE, PLEASE GET IT FIXED

26. (N/A-11-13-12-15-14-N/A) Jack Clements. Let's keep the catchers together! Normalizing for Clements over 1885-1898 gives him a normalized 2,004 hits, not bad for the most difficult fielding position. TB+BB/PA .455, TB/Outs .696, pretty impressive for a catcher and slightly better than Bennett and McGuire, but he played more in the 1890s than Bennett.

27. (N/A) Rube Foster. Include the managerial capability, and he should be MUCH higher -- but as a player he appears to be well below Johnson

28. Sam Leever. On looking at the W/Lpct leaderboard, Leever, the kingpin of the deadball era Pirates, impresses me at 194-100 as having a better record than Walsh and a much better one than Waddell. Put him just above Bender, who's also not quite as good.

29. Chief Bender 212-127 moderately impressive, certainly compared to Waddell or Walsh, and would be 208-111 if you ignore his 4-16 in the Federal league. Somewhat unimpressive peak, though; 1910 his best year, but it looks like he just got lucky and had good run support.

30. (N/A) Bill Monroe Examination of Home Run Johnson leads me to realize that Monroe wasn't as good; moved him down a bit, now significantly short of Collins. On NL players I will keep an eye on consensus, though -- I'm prepared against the consensus to stand by my negative view on Walsh/Flick, or my positive view of Caruthers/ Welch/Beckley, but not with these guys.

31. Vic Willis 249-205 means he played a lot, but relatively little peak; he has 10 more wins and 60 more losses than Griffith or McGinnity - hence LESS valuable, on balance.

32. Mike Tiernan - only 1,983 normalized hits, now some way off bottom of ballot. TB+BB/PA .518, TB+BB/Outs .850, so close to Browning though well behind Thompson

33. Hughie Jennings: Great peak (though not a historic peak like Koufax, Radbourn or McVey.) But his career numbers are mediocre. TB+BB/PA .414, TB+BB/Outs .672, in the high-average 90s, so even his “rate” stats not overwhelming.

34. Jesse Tannehill. Substantially better record (197-116) than Waddell, for largely mediocre Pirates and Red Sox teams. Hence placed just above Waddell.

35. Rube Waddell Short career but very high peak, but under 200 wins so probably not HOM-worthy. 193-143 not at all special (40 less wins) compared to Griffith or McGinnity. Fielding and hitting negative, not positive -- I don't buy it.

36. Tommy Leach TB+BB/PA .416, TB+BB/Outs .620. Not quite yawn, another outfielder, as he also played 3B. Not as good as Sheckard or Collins, and certainly gets no additional bonus since his career stretched 5 years into the high hitting 10s.

37. Lave Cross gets lots of points for length of career and hits, but his rate stats are appalling TB+BB/PA .404, TB+BB/Outs .599, substantially worse than McPhee, and it’s mostly 90s (Sutton was .404/.588, but 20 years earlier) - if you knock out the decline phase, the rate stats are still unexciting and the counting stats then mediocre as well.

38. (N/A-15-N/A) Tom York 2,122 “normalized” hits, doing it season by season as seasons were lengthening. Primarily OF. Never above 200 “normalized” hits per season though - really no peak at all TB+BB/PA.412, TB+BB/Outs.596, not very impressive.
   8. Brad Harris Posted: May 17, 2004 at 03:37 PM (#631632)
1. Joe Jackson - Without the spectre of the 1919 World Series fix, he'd easily be elected this year; let's see how close he comes anyway.

2. Bob Caruthers - Best available pitcher, imo

3. Sherry Magee - I'll take Magee over Sheckard where others won't.

4. Jimmy Sheckard - Still holding in my top 5.

5. George Van Haltren - moving up after further consideration. Best CF not enshrined.

6. Eddie Cicotte - Like Jackson, I'm not deducting anything for the '19 World Series.

7. Gavvy Cravath - Greater consideration now given for pre-ML years. Being stuck in the minors wasn't his "fault".

8. Larry Doyle - have dropped him somewhat as he seems closer to other middle infielders than he did initially.

9. Addie Joss - I'd take him over Waddell or any other post-1900 short-career hurler at this point.

10. Sam Thompson - awesome extended peak (second best after Jackson).

11. Dickey Pearce - I've dropped Bobby Wallace in favor of Pearce. Wallace was very good, but I think Pearce was genuinely great, relative to their respective eras.

12. Cupid Childs - I'll concede: he's JUST behind Doyle (who gets the edge due to playing against stronger competition)

13. Lip Pike - he and Pearce are last of the "old" old-timers who merit election.

14. Bobby Wallace - combination of solid peak/great career numbers push him up over the bubble of players in the #16-#30 slots.

15. Clark Griffith - the Old Fox did more well than just managing.
   9. Rusty Priske Posted: May 17, 2004 at 04:14 PM (#631697)
Sunnyday, the odd thing is, I have no idea why I am always first. :) This morning I opened up the page after I got to work and said, "Oh look, the ballot is up." I don't sit here hitting reload all day just hoping. :)
   10. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 17, 2004 at 04:40 PM (#631732)
A little boost for some outfielders…

I use a combination of peak and career for the rankings. Therefore, career guys will mix with peak guys on my ballot. I also view each position on an equal basis. This doesn't mean that I have a quota to fill each position for my top ten. Sometimes a position will not have a viable candidate for a certain "year."

I use Win Shares as the base for my ranking system, though I am now using a modified version (any negative values are converted into zeroes) of BRAR, FRAR and PRAR for the NA.


1) Dickey Pearce-SS/C (1): All-around player at the position and arguably the best player of his time. Considered the best before George Wright (1856-1866). Caught many games as a catcher (even was an All-Star at the position one year). Even with my conservative evaluation, he has to rank near the top. He played for over twenty years in the best leagues or on the best teams of the 1850s and '60s. Even though his NA and NL was meager (he was 35 in '71), he still had the most value after 35 until Dahlen and Davis, FWIW.              

According to our Constitution, he definitely falls within the scope of this project.

2) Cupid Childs-2B (3): Best second baseman of the '90s. Too short of a career to knock out McPhee for tops for the 19th century, but not that far behind. Considering the average second basemen of his era, he was fairly durable. Best major league second baseman for 1890, (almost in 1891), 1892, 1893, 1894, 1895, 1896 and 1897.          

Childs was the best major league second baseman more times in a season than Doyle was the best NL second baseman. IMO, there's no way that the Laughing One goes above the Little Fat Man.

Childs has the most seasons as the best player at his position who is not in the HoM and compares favorably in that regard with the majority of HoMers, IMO. That doesn't mean he belongs as high as I have him, but he should be hitting everyone's ballot somewhere. Please take another look at him.

3) Lip Pike-CF/RF/2B (15): I noticed a screwup on my spreadsheet that caused him to be much lower than he should have been. Considered the fastest man of his time. Major star prior to the NA. Two things hold him back somewhat: durability and how good of a player he was at his position compared to his competition pre-NA (Pearce is not affected as much by the latter in my analysis, obviously). Best major league rightfielder for 1871 and 1873. Best major league centerfielder for 1874-1876.

4) Charley Jones-LF/CF (4): Like York below, he was playing a more difficult position than the one that it evolved into. I gave him a little more credit for his (unfairly) blacklisted years. Best major league leftfielder for 1877, 1879 and 1884. Best AA centerfielder for 1883. Best AA leftfielder for 1885 (close to being the best in the majors).

5) Tom York-LF (13): I know some here looking at his OPS+ must be saying to themselves "Murph has him over guys like Magee or Sheckard?!?" Fair question, but, IMO, York was a more dominating player at his position than Magee or Sheckard were during their time. Long enough career and many times as the best at his position (when left field was more like centerfield today) deserves a ballot spot.Best leftfielder of the 1870s. Best major league leftfielder for 1873, 1875, 1877 and 1878 (extremely close in 1872 and 1881).

6) Vic Willis-P (5): Why does this man receive such little respect? Willis, Brown and McGinnity are very close, IMO. Best major league pitcher for 1899. Best NL pitcher for 1901.

7) Joe McGinnity-P (6): Durability, in the defense of your team, is no vice! :-) Best major league pitcher for 1900 and 1903. Best NL pitcher for 1904.

8) Roger Bresnahan-C-CF (7): Greatest catcher of the Deadball Era not named Santop or Petway. The poor man's Buck Ewing (Johnny Kling was the poor man's Charlie Bennett) is still good enough to be here on my ballot. Slightly better than Noisy behind the plate, but the Duke played longer and at other positions. Best major league catcher for 1905, 1906 and 1908. Best major league centerfielder for 1903.

9) Bill Monroe-2B/3B (9): I think he's worthy. Long career and nice peak. Many considered him a better hitter and fielder than Jimmy Collins as a third baseman. McGraw said (I'm assuming somewhat hyperbolically) that Monroe was the greatest of all-time. This may be too low for him.

10) Frank Grant-2B (10): Stellar hitter, baserunner and fielder at a top defensive position (and a lengthy career): what's not to love?
   11. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 17, 2004 at 04:42 PM (#631735)
...and now ... the rest of the ballot! :-)

11) Hugh Duffy-CF/LF/RF (12): "Only" the third best centerfielder of the '90s, but that position was very strong for that decade. Best major league rightfielder for 1890 and 1891. Best major league centerfielder for 1892, 1893 and 1894.

12) Frank Chance-IB-C (11): Best first baseman for the first decade of the 20th century. Even more so than Beckley, the Peerless Leader shouldn't be compared with the ABC boys ore the post-1920 crop of first baseman. The cream-of the-crop from Franklin Adam's famous trio. Best major league first baseman for 1903, 1904. 1905, 1906, and 1907 (close in 1908). Best NL first baseman for 1908.

13) Harry Wright-CF/P (n/a): Revisits my ballot. Not just "The Father of Professional Baseball," but a truly great player in his own right. I'm not sure of how good he was at his peak, but I'm confident it was high enough combined with a lengthy career for the time. Another player that will take a hundred "years" (maybe) to be elected who is on my ballot. :-) Best all-around centerfielder for his time. He was also a terrific pitcher (he possibly invented the change of pace). Chosen to represent New York as starting centerfielder for the famous All-Star game of '58.    

BTW, there is some doubt that he was born, not in 1835, but 1832 (making his NA numbers that much more impressive).    

14) Rube Waddell-P (14): If he had been a little more serious and quit the horse playing... Best AL pitcher for 1905.

15) George Van Haltren-CF/P (n/a): Well, somebody had to bring up the rear... Long career of quality play. Best AA leftfielder for 1889 and 1891.

Wallace, Sheckard, Magee and Thompson are close. Caruthers, after further consideration, moves closer to this bunch.
   12. Howie Menckel Posted: May 17, 2004 at 04:50 PM (#631745)
Hey, Rusty,
If the Internet Gods didn't eat it, I was the "first first," in 1898 - and probably never again!!

I like the Flick-Shoeless comparison; I will take a closer look at that..
   13. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: May 17, 2004 at 06:52 PM (#631924)
No Black Sox this year. Next year Joe Jackson will make a very strong debut - not sure where, but definately above Sam Thompson. Eddie Cicotte probably won't make the ballot (he's no Silver King). The ballot, part I:

1. Sherry Magee. Not getting the respect I think he deserves. The player he most reminds me of, among all that I've seen here, is Joe Kelley (another player who did time at the top of my ballot). Quickie comparison
...............SM..JK
Years.......16....18
100 games...14....13
Total OPS+..137...133
best OPS+...174...165
2nd OPS+....168...161
3rd OPS+....156...155
4th OPS+....145...147
5th OPS+....137...137
6th OPS+....136...137
7th OPS+....135...137
8th OPS+....134...133
9th OPS+....128...131
10th OPS+...128...125
SBs.........441...443

2. Jimmy Sheckard. Those Cubs remind me of the Beatles. A bunch of tremendous talents all in their primes together - but when those glory years were done, the decline phases of the different members wasn't nearly as strong as one would've guessed. Sheckard's the only exception. He's the only guy to not only have a strong prime, but also a heckuva career. Strong offense & great defense.

3. Joe McGinnity. More quantity than quality, but he rates high with both. No one here could dominate a league like Iron Joe. Once ranked 3rd in the leauge in ERA+ while pitching 20% more innings than anyone else. Not bad. Only pitched ten years, but backed enough into those ten years to end up this high.

4. Frank Grant. Could hit, had power, had speed, great defense - all in his early 20s at the highest level he could play at. All he lacked was a chance. In the book "Cool Papas & Double Duties" an expert panel of 25 (20 of whom were on the SABR Negro Leagues committee) picked him as the best blackball 2Ber not in the HoF. There are no blackball 2Bers in the HoF. To be fair, he may have gotten more votes for being the first than being the best.

5. Jake Beckley. Began as the best non-ABC first basemen in the league & remained the best of the very good for almost two full decades as a starter. Even with his non-peak he was the best 1Bman in baseball at the turn of the century for a few years. 1 OPS+ under 100 in his first 18 seasons.

6. Bobby Wallace. The things who learn in the HoM. . . . This guy wasn't even on my radar, but his defensive value - though hidden because he split time between SS & 3B was very high both in terms of peak & career value. He was to SS offense what Beckley was to 1Bman offense. And he could pitch a little.

7. Dickey Pearce. Best player of his day, a defensive whiz, & he lasted forever. All good signs to me & I think the HoM can house another 1860s player.

8. Mickey Welch. Thank you retrosheet. Turns out he earned those 300 wins. Offensive support only gave him 3-4 wins. Defensive support, though a little above average, was actually worse the defensive support of all major non-Galvin pitchers in the 1880s. Usually matched up against tougher opposing pitchers when he & Keefe were on the same team. In 1885, against the Cubs, he faced off against John Clarkson 7 times & won every game.

9. Sam Thompson. Could hit a little. And Fred Astaire could dance a little.

10. Tommy Leach. Mutlitalented player. Terrific defense at two positions & he was a good hitter. Fine player for a long time.

11. Bob Caruthers. In his favor: His great W/L percentage, the fact that even adjusting for his run support leaves him with a great W/L record, & his bat. He could dominate. Downside: an innings problem - both in seasons (where he rarely ranked that high) & career IP; his opponents had a low median winning percentage, & he pitched in the AA. Pluses get him on the list, but negatives keep him low on it.

12. Clark Griffith. Personal favorite 1880s pitcher. Nice career, nice prime. The median winning percentage of his opponent is the highest of the four pitchers I've got on the ballot.

13. George Van Haltren. Very good player for an extended period of time who could do numerous things well. Nice career. Nice peak. Could pitch.

14. Jimmy Ryan. GVH without the ability to pitch.

15. Joe Tinker. The secret weapon on those great Cubs teams. Best glove on the ballot bar none. And an above average hitter for a SS. If he'd had a normal decline for a player with his prime, he'd be in the top third of my ballot.
   14. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: May 17, 2004 at 06:54 PM (#631927)
Runners-up:

16. Herman Long. Only SS whose glove rivals Tinker's.
17. Cupid Childs. Great run by the best 2B of his day.
18. Larry Doyle. Not sure how to compare CC & LD, so I'll start conservative with the newbie & keep him lower than Childs. Will look at them more in the next few weeks - at least one will likely jump onto the ballot soon.
19. Charlie Jones. Great hitter for a while. First really good Deep Southerner (first Deep Southerner of any type?) I get the feeling he would have been an NA standout from 1871/2 if he'd been born in Pennsylvania.
20. Gavvy Cravvath. Toughie to figure. The late start of this CAer reminds me of the late start of the above NCer. Gets some minor league credit, but loses some due to park factors (a homer champion hitting all his homers at home? Sure you could argue that it shows he's really taking full advantage of his home park, but I'd like to see my sluggers be able to hit the ball in other parks also.
21. Tommy Bond. With pre-93 pitchers, I'm willing to look more at peak, because I worry that a guy with better career numbers might just be some rubber-armed Steve Traschel (like Bobby Mathews). Best remaining player from the 1870s.
22. Silver King. Another pre-'93 pitcher with a strong peak/primer.
23. Bill Monroe. A see more sizzle than steak, but he seems to have been a good player.
24. Pete Browning. Could freakin' hit. But not long enough.
25. Addie Joss. Could freakin' pitch. But not for enough innings.
26. Ed Williamson. Very good third baseman. Similar, though clearly inferior, to Jimmy Collins.
27. Johnny Evers. Another of those Cubs whose career fizzled out too soon.
28. Jack Clement. My choice for best cather available. Bresnahan was a better hitter, but Clement did more hitting at catcher.
29. Rube Foster. He turned into the Stay Puft Marshmellow Man too quickly for me to see him as a HoMer.
30. Rube Waddell. The king of unearned runs - & considering how important his ERA+ is to his candidacy, that really hurts.
31. Hugh Duffy. Needs either better rate stats or more games. He's a tweener - in a bad way.
32. Charlie Buffinton. A very good pitcher during his time.
33. Roger Bresnahan. Not enough games at catcher to get in as a catcher & not nearly enough games to get in as anything else.
34. Lave Cross. OK for a long time. Great defense, but banal offense.
35. Harry Davis. My choice for best 1Bman from the 1900's.
36. Lip Pike. I prefer longer careers from my semi-documented. What happened to him at age 33?
37. John McGraw. Great peak, but not nearly enough games.
38. Tony Mullane. Very good in a weak league. Never dominated. Voluntarily sat out a year so gets no bonus points for that from me.
39. Hughie Jennings. Five great years & not much else - lands you this low on my ballot.
40. Frank Chance. Best peak of any 1Bman between ABC & Sisler.
41. Roy Thomas. There was an OBP God & he lived in Philly, but not for long enough.
42. Jim McCormick. Good pitcher for a while.
43. Vic Willis. Banal W/L record despite average run support & some very good defensive support.
   15. Chris Cobb Posted: May 17, 2004 at 09:12 PM (#632175)
1926 Ballot

See prelim ballot for further discussion.

Leading Candidates This is the group that I'm clear should be elected.

1. Dickey Pearce (2) Reaches the number one spot on my 23rd year of voting. I rank him below players ranked in the top 10 players a decade, but above anyone else.
2. Jimmy Sheckard (3) Defense put him ahead of Magee. 382 CWS. Total peak 84. Peak rate, 99-03, 33.63.
3. Joe McGinnity (4) His combination of durability and quality gives him really outstanding peak value. 301 CWS, tp 157, pr, 99-04 = 34.95/365 IP.
4. Bobby Wallace (5) 403 CWS. Total Peak 48. Peak rate 01-05 = 28.04 Low peak places him below McGinnity and Sheckard.
5. Sherry Magee (6) 382 CWS, tp 73. Peak rate, 05-10 = 33.75.
6. Frank Grant (7) fifth-best infielder of 1890s.

Good Candidates. This group of players, ranked 7-15, all merit election but are not good enough to demand it.

7. Mickey Welch (14) Welch continues rapidly up my ballot. I'm now sure that omission of Welch was a serious error. With no competition discount, he'd rank between Pearce and Sheckard. 415 CWS. Total Peak 184. Peak rate, 84-89 = 26.44 WS/365 IP
8. Lip Pike (8) great player; 1870s underrepresented. 334 CWS. Total peak 74. Peak rate, 71-78 = 34.85WS/162.
9. Clark Griffith (9) Fourth-best pitcher of the 1890s. Being underrated by the electorate. 294 cws; 114 total peak; peak rate, 94-01 = 29.23 ws/365 ip
10. Hughie Jennings (10) 272 CWS. Total peak 81. Peak rate, 94-98 = 41.19WS/162.
11. Hugh Duffy (11) Very similar to Van Haltren; his peak nudges him ahead. 352 CWS. Total Peak 73. Peak rate, 90-95 = 33.74WS/162.
12. George Van Haltren (12) 393 CWS. Total peak 57. Peak Rate, 93-98 = 29.40WS/162.
13. Tommy Leach (13). 374 CWS. Total peak 57. Peak rate, 01-09 = 29.96 WS/162
14. Rube Foster (22) A big move up. I now see him as an ML-avg. pitcher in 1902, an outstanding pitcher 1903-08, excellent in 1909 before breaking his leg, a slightly above avg. ML pitcher in 1910-11, and a somewhat below-avg. ML pitcher in 1912-14. So his estimated career totals are 300 cws, 105 total peak, peak rate, 03-08 36.00 ws/365 ip. Those estimates place him about where Walsh and Brown would have been if they hadn't been elected. It would be consistent with the group's valuing of early twentieth-century pitchers to elect Foster also.
15. Bob Caruthers (16) Back on my ballot this year. Second-best 1880s candidate remaining. 316 cws; total peak 134. Peak rates, 85-89: 28.63 WS/365 IP; 28.87 WS/162 g in the field.

Fair Candidates. All of the players in this next group have some arguments in their favor, but they all come short in value of the group of 9 "good candidates" above.

16. Roger Bresnahan (17). Just misses this year's ballot as Foster leaps ahead of him. 313 CWS (catcher-adjusted). total peak 68 (catcher adjusted). Peak rate, 03-08 = 34.95
17. Bill Monroe (18)
18. Larry Doyle (n/e) Very similar to Childs and Williamson, but slightly better due to sustaining a high level of play a bit longer. 319 cws; 46 total peak; peak rate, 09-15 = 30.15
19. Cupid Childs (19) I'm not convinced that he deserves tremendous credit for being the best at his position between 1890 and 1898; there were no top-notch second-basemen then. 293 cws; 52 total peak; peak rate, 90-96 = 32.04
20. Ned Williamson (20) Small competition discount for 1880s places him below Childs. 305 cws; 59 total peak, peak rate, 79-85 = 31.99
21. Charlie Jones (21)
22. Herman Long (22)
23. Fielder Jones. (24)
24. Gavvy Cravath (n/e) I give him major-league equivalent credit for his last three years of PCL play and his nearly three years of AA play, but that doesn't add enough value to bring him onto the ballot. 331 cws; total peak 50; peak rate, 13-17 = 32.49
25. Tony Mullane (41) Falls between Bob Caruthers and Jim McCormick among1880s pitchers. Might rank higher. 346 cws; 117 total peak; peak rate 83-84, 86-88 = 26.55 ws/365 ip.
26. Jim McCormick. (25)
27. Joe Tinker. (26)
28. Johnny Evers (27)
29. Rube Waddell (28)
30. Jake Beckley (29)
31. Frank Chance (30)
32. Addie Joss (31)
33. John McGraw (32)
34. Harry Wright (33)

Off-off ballot.

35. Jimmy Ryan. (34)
36. Lave Cross. (35)
37. Pete Browning (36)
38. Roy Thomas. (37)
39. Sam Thompson. (38) At number 12 among eligible outfielders, he’s a long way from my ballot. It may be about time for me to revisit him, however. 304 cws; 49 total peak; peak rate, 91-5 = 29.71
40. Billy Nash (39)

Left out of Rankings

Joe Jackson
Eddie Cicotte
   16. Patrick W Posted: May 17, 2004 at 10:54 PM (#632295)
Don’t count my ballot once, shame on you; omit it twice, .… well shame on you again, but let’s turn in this ballot a little earlier and avoid the problem altogether. Possibly my most balanced ballot to date: 4 IF, 4 SP, 7 1B-OF.

1. Bobby Wallace (1), StL. (A), SS (‘94-‘14) (1920) – Now that Johnson is no longer under consideration, I see Bobby as the clear leader in career value. Peak/Prime is not MVP-quality, but it’s just below that echelon and not a detriment to his worthiness.
2. Frank Grant (5), Meriden, Conn. (--), 2B (’86-’03) (1919) – Best black player in the 19th Century. 18 yr. Career, and the limited IL data we have say he was a phenomenal player. Grant looks to be in a class by himself during his own era, but Johnson is probably a safer bet if you have to guess about greatness.
3. Sam Thompson (4), Phila.(N), RF (‘85-‘98) (1902) – It’s a difficult debate on how much extra credit to give for MVP seasons. While I debate Thompson’s peak vs. Sheckard’s fielding, I’ll drop Sam below the bonus point threshold.
4. Jimmy Sheckard (3), Bkn.–Chic. (N), LF / RF (‘97-‘13) (1919) – In my early attempts to quantify ‘peak’ (i.e. give it a hard value, rather than a subjective consideration), Sheckard ranks very well. Among the top 25 here (no peak-only guys) he ranks as #2 peak and #4 car + pk.
5. Jimmy Ryan (6), Chic.(N), CF / RF (‘85-‘03) (1926) – This year, Ryan’s MVP-caliber 1888 gives him the edge over VH’s lack of same. Looks like the Personal Hall of Merit and the Real Thing part ways forever with this selection.
6. George Van Haltren (7), NY(N), CF / LF (’87-’03) (1926) – Essentially the equal of Sheckard & Ryan offensively, his lesser peak puts him third in the group.
7. Joe Jackson (n/a), Clev. – Chic. (A), LF / RF (’08-’20) – His career numbers get a small wartime bump for 1918; the peak voters obviously don’t need this to have him higher than this, as a career voter he’d be down about 5 spots without it. I’m not sure if I can separate Sheckard, Ryan & VH and I’m not sure if Joe is better than those three; so the easy thing is to start conservative. A lesser penalty than omitting him from the ballot entirely, but it does keep him out of my Hall for one year at least. Of the people who think Jackson should be in the HoF, what percentage do you think realize that he’d wear a Cleveland hat if he made it?
8. Bill Monroe (8), Phila. – Bkn. (--), 2B / 1B (‘96-‘14) – From BaseballLibrary.com: “a star infielder”, “An exciting second baseman”, “A strong hitter, Monroe usually hit in the middle of the order on strong clubs.” If you have to consider subjective credit, these are the kinds of superlatives you want to vote for. For comparison purposes, Pearce’s bio has comments like “One of baseball's most famous early players” & “A good hitter, and fast”. Maybe it’s too speculative, but the former comments read like a better HoMer. Only the translated stats in the group folder at Yahoo can put Johnson in the Hall first.
9. Eddie Cicotte, Chic. (A), SP (’08-’20) – The equal or better of Brown in most metrics I consider. If wishing could make Buck Weaver a better player than Cicotte, I’d switch ‘em. But this project doesn’t work like that, and I can’t let 2 games mean more than 13 years.
--. Harry Stovey, Phila. (AA), 1B / LF (’80-’93) –
--. Mordecai Brown, Chic. (N), SP (’03-’16) –
--. Joe Start, Atlantic-Bkn (NABBP)-N.Y.Mut.(NL), 1B (‘60-’86) –
10. Jake Beckley (11), Pitt. – Cinc.(N), 1B (’88-’07) – No. 3 on this ballot for BRAR and No. 2 for Translated AB’s. WARP shows a 3-year lull in his career from age 28-30 which costs him about 5 spots on this list. I guess this is either caused by the two trades around this time, or the reason for the trades.
11. Fielder Jones (12), Chic.(A), CF / RF (’96-’08) – His league/era difficulty adjustment is the 2nd best (least penalizing) among the hitters in consideration (Crawford) – and the rest trail by a fair amount. I don’t see the American League as inarguably superior to the National in the first decade. Reducing the difficulty % (from W1 to W2) for everyone by ½ drops him to the brink of the ballot.
   17. Patrick W Posted: May 17, 2004 at 10:54 PM (#632297)
PART 2

12. Clark Griffith (24), Chic. (N) - NY (A), SP (’91-’14) – As so often happens with my ballot, my reexamination of one player helps a different player much more than the player under consideration. Looking at McGinnity, I see Griffith as the better of the two. Lesser 3-yr peak than Waddell or Joe, all 3 equal at the 5-yr peak, Griffith on top at 10-yr prime. Net result: peak equals out for these three pitchers. I was overlooking the hitting stats; Griffith wasn’t killing his team at the plate like the other two, so he becomes the 2nd best pitcher on the ballot.
13. Rube Waddell (13), Bost. (N), SP (’97-’09) – Looking again, Waddell’s not better than Brown. In my opinion, Rube was the best pitcher among the eligible in terms of preventing runs, but because he didn’t last as long as the others Cicotte, Brown & Griffith pass him in overall value.
--. Ezra Sutton, Bost. (N), 3B (‘71-’88) –
14. Cupid Childs (15), Clev. (N), 2B (’90-’01) – Looks good under peak, even with fielding discount.
15. Joe McGinnity (17), NY(N), SP (‘99-‘08) – Among the elected pitchers (not incl. Spalding or Ward) Iron Joe would rank last on my rankings comparing runs prevented. My ballot & the electorate consensus are radically off in our feelings toward these pitchers, but even among pitchers I don’t see why McGinnity would have more votes than Waddell or Griffith. He does jump the line to get on the ballot (enough to get him over the top, perhaps?), but likely will fall short of my own little club.


16. Mike Griffin (--), Bkn.(N), CF (‘87-‘98) – Looking for the right place to put Magee, I see I had overlooked Griffin after he slid beyond the top 25. With credit for a slightly better prime, Griffin is better than Magee, although the two are very close.
17. Lave Cross (10), Phila.(N,A), 3B (’87-’07) – My uncertainty on the fielding numbers has caused me to add a slight penalty to the fielding runs. Trying to justify my placement of IF, OF and SP’s at the back of the ballot, Cross at the top now seems like a big red flag that I have bungled the correct order. His value is much closer to Magee than to Beckley.
18. Sherry Magee (18), Phila. (N), LF (’04-’19) – Value rises to the level of the infielders on this list. Since my ballot doesn’t lack for 1B-OF types, he is off the ballot. Top ten career hitter among eligibles.
19. Herman Long (16), Bost. (N), SS (’89-’03) – Cross is still better than Long, so Herman falls when Lave does.
20. Jim McCormick (14), Clev. (N), (‘78-‘87) – I had him nearly tied with Waddell in career value, but it looks like I wasn’t applying the timeline penalty accurately towards McCormick as with the others. Fielding penalties hurt him a little more than the other pitchers too. Caruthers & Welch are the other remaining pitchers under consideration from the ‘80s, and McCormick is clearly the best from that group.
21.-25. A complete mess, now truncated for brevity and a lack of faith in its order.

Bob Caruthers – He’s half the pitcher compared to the rest of this group, and less than half the hitter of those on this ballot. I see Caruthers as 50 RAR below what he needs to sniff the ballot, 100 before election becomes a possibility. I cannot see how he will be looked at as anything other than a mistake election. Look to Browning for your third AA HoMer.

Dickey Pearce – It seems pretty clear that there need to be significant discounts for Pearce’s era due to inferior competition. An electee from this era would need to demonstrate a clear superiority over the competition to merit ranking with those from more recent times. In my opinion, Pearce is not clearly better than the competition he played against in the pre-professional era (i.e. ’67-’68). And I will not support someone on fame alone. His numbers in the professional era don’t show me any reason to support him either. It is entirely possible (probable?) that his career extends as long as it does based on fame as much as anything. Until something changes, I cannot support his candidacy for election.

Magee, Caruthers & Pearce are in last year’s top ten, but not in my top 15.
   18. OCF Posted: May 18, 2004 at 12:18 AM (#632366)
Patrick, if it had been up to me I would have counted yours. See post #288 in the 1925 Ballot thread.
   19. Patrick W Posted: May 18, 2004 at 12:27 AM (#632369)
I did see. Your remark (& consensus score grade!) was appreciated.
   20. Michael Bass Posted: May 18, 2004 at 12:33 AM (#632376)
I am mainly using WARP3, Win Shares, OPS+, ERA+. I am more a career voter than anything, but that's hardly an exclusive description.

1. Frank Grant (1) - A lot has been written on him here, and I've read most of it (I think). The weight of the evidence seems to be that he was the best player of the 19th century Negro Leagues, and while measures the quality of the leagues at this time are speculative at best, my gut is that the best Negro Leaguer from any significant period of time would almost certainly have been a sure-fire HOMer if not banned.

2. Bobby Wallace (3) - Amazing career longetivity (at least as compared to most of the others eligible for this ballot). Had an above average bat, and carried it at shortstop. Was by all the measures I can find a really strong fielder.

3. Bob Caruthers (4) - Wonder if you'll find any other ballots with these two back to back. Seemingly an odd placement for Caruthers on a career ballot, but I've discounted for the AA as much as I can, and I still think he packed more value into his few productive years than any other pitcher on the ballot did in more seasons. I think people looking at him separately as just a pitcher and just a hitter are making a huge mistake.

4. Jimmy Sheckard (5) - His bat was rarely outstanding, but consistently very good over a long career. I hesitate to give too much credit to even the best defensive corner outfielders, but every measure of his defense is awesome. James even has him as an "A" mixed in with center fielders.

5. George Van Haltren (6) - Like Sheckard, rarely a great hitter, but very good so many seasons that his value adds up very nicely over time. Not as outstanding of a defensive player as Sheckhard, but at a more important position in center. I understand why peak/prime voters don't like him, but I'm a career guy, and I do.

6. Jimmy Ryan (7) - Hey, another OF with a long career! Little more inconsistant than the above two. Slightly more top 10 OPS+ seasons, but also more mediocre seasons. Defense is mixed; seems to be rated well, but that he was moved off center at age 31 worries me. Further investigation seems to indicate he was moved not because of his deficiencies, but because the new CF was amazing, so I'm inclined to give him strong credit for his D.

7. Sherry Magee (11) - Offense like Thompson, though a little less. Defense is in question, but probably okay-ish at least. He's moved up relative to my last value because looking to his bat as compared to Jones', it just seems unlikely that the difference in defense was that much, as Jones wasn't a shortstop or catcher.

8. Fielder Jones (9) - Not a great hitter. Comparable to Wallace with the bat, but a little better. OPS+ does understate him a bit, as he is OBP heavy. What gets him on my ballot this high is his fielding. All the measures I look at have him as one of baseball's greatest centerfielders.

9. Sam Thompson (10) - Defense seems a mixed bag of reputation vs. stats. I'm going with stats here. Will listen to reasons why he was a better defender than I'm rating him. Seems as though he had a nice arm, something that nearly always ends up in an OF being overrated defensively. Bat's not in question, though, he was a better pure hitter than any of the OFs above him, except maybe Magee. Career kinda short, though, and that combined with his defense drops him to the bottom of the OF glut.

10. Clark Griffith (13) - Very good pitcher for a quality innings number. Helps in my mind (though I'm guessing in very few others) that he was useful as a reliever/spot starter after his prime days were over. For the record, this is a pretty big dropoff point on the ballot, any of the next 10 guys could be placed here, as Griffith is ahead by very little.
   21. Michael Bass Posted: May 18, 2004 at 12:34 AM (#632377)
11. Rube Foster (--) - Initially did not have him nearly this high. I really think there is an overcorrection here for his non-player work, to the degree that we're underrating him as a pitcher. I don't think he's better than Griffith though, so this is where he stays for the time being.

12. Lip Pike (12) - No one on this ballot am I less comfortable with. For the recorded stats we have, he hit the living crap out of the ball as long as he played. Pre-1871 ball was so disorganized that I discount it in a major way, but seems as though he was good there, so he gets a minor plus. I don't have the first clue what to make of his defense, though it was seemingly bad. Has dropped on this ballot (relative to returnees), because I'm just unconvinced of his greatness, and he played in a time where competition just wasn't all that great.

13. Joe Jackson (new) - I don't believe in the "one season" rule, so I'm not electing to use it. I am not considering his 1919 season, as his participation in the fiasco rendered that season pretty well worthless. I am considering his 1920 season. Defense is not a plus for him, offense is, as he has a better rate bat than anyone else on the ballot. I'm a career guy though, and he has over 1000 less ABs in my consideration than anyone else above him, including some who played in an era with less games.

14. Cupid Childs (14) - Pretty strong hitter, and OPS+ again understates him because he was OBP heavy. Didn't have an exceedingly long career, but it wasn't short, either. Very good defensive player at second, though I believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that second was considered an offensive position at the time along the lines of third base today.

15. Tommy Leach - YAO (yet another outfielder). Worse hitter than Jones even. Lotta career. Great defender by most measures. Can't rate him higher, even as a big career guy, though, with that bat in the outfield. At least Jones had his OBP working for him.

Next 12 (and comments for top returners, along with a few others)


16. Bill Monroe - I don't believe he's better than Grant as many do. That there's a serious discussion of the issue leans toward Monroe's possibly moving up my ballot. Likely will debut on the ballot next year.

17. Jake Beckley - You'd think I'd like him as a career guy, but I don't much. His hitting is un-special for a first baseman, and I'm not giving extra credit for the dearth of HOM 1Bs in this era, unless someone can point to a reason that 1B was considered an important position or a hard position to play at the time. This just seems to be a period where most of the great players were atheltic enough to play elsewhere.

18. Vic Willis

19. Joe McGinnity - I was a bit harsh on him the first ballot. I still don't see him as any better than this group of the pitcher glut, but he'd probably make my ballot eventually if he wasn't a sure election this year.

20. Rube Waddell

21. Eddie Cicotte - Also docked the 1919 season. With that added in, I think he'd be right in the Griffth/Foster range. As is, he, like Jackson, finds himself at the bottom of the glut at his position.

22. John McGraw

23. Roger Bresnahan - Was much lower on my first ballot, moves up now out of the realization that I needed to give catchers some bump, or they would always be severely underrepresented on my ballots. Doesn't get as much of a bump as he might, because he wasn't a catcher as long as you'd think.

24. Hughie Jennings

25. Pete Browning

26. Frank Chance

27. Dickey Pearce - Stat record unimpressive to me. Yes, he was past his prime, but this wasn't exactly the height of competition in the early 1870s, so I feel that a HOMer would have been better. While one of the commenters (John?) reasonably asked to find a 19th century SS as good as him at his age, I say that given the level of competition, his stats indicate such a low level of play that like most 19th century SS he would have been phased out in a later era. As I said in the Pike comment above, pre-1871 ball was so loosely organized and the level of play so low, that anecdotoal evidence from that era doesn't so much for me. If he'd been good in the NA, I might take the anecdotal evidence more seriously, but he wasn't, so I'm not. Ranked this high because there's some evidence that he was great (albeit evidence I don't really believe). I'm 100% convinced none of the guys below him were great, so here he stands.
   22. Michael Bass Posted: May 18, 2004 at 12:38 AM (#632379)
Gah, Leach was also 15th on last year's ballot. Knew I'd screw that up somehow. :)
   23. TheGoodSamaritan Posted: May 18, 2004 at 01:50 AM (#632441)
I will paste the ballot in pieces because I am afraid that it might be cut off half way. The players in my 2 "bonus" slot has not changed from last year since I do not have to vote for Shoeless Joe Jackson in his first year.

01. Wallace SS - Using a combo of career WARP3 and a 5 consecutive years peak WARP3, I have Wallace being more qualified for the HoM than HoMers Jack Glasscock and Monte Ward. When Hans Wagner was moved to shortstop full-time, Wagner said that he tried to copy Wallace's fielding style, implying that Wallace was considered the best-fielding shortstop of his time.

02. Monroe 2B - I have been thinking about Monroe for some time now. I might be wrong, but if there is only one Negro League second baseman that I could elect into the HoM, it probably would be Monroe. When I think of Bingo DeMoss or Newt Allen, I think of players like Red Schoendienst, Nellie Fox or Frank White. Great career players, very good chance to get into the HoM, but not impact players. When I think of Monroe, I think of a Charlie Gehringer who played in the deadball era, somebody who is a force in his league. He is one of the few 2B of the Negro League that is considered one of the best player of the entire league. Dirk Knemeyer wrote that "Monroe stands with John Henry Lloyd as the finest Negro League players of their generation."

03. McGinnity SP - The Iron Man didn't do that well on the WARP figures, especially in the peak department, but I have him being the best pitcher in his league 3 times and the MVP for one of those years (1903) and not too many pitchers could match that.

04. Caruthers SP - The last great 19th century pitcher to not make it into the HOM.

05. Sheckard LF - None of the outfielders on the ballot -- Magee, Duffy, Van Haltren, Ryan, Thompson, Tiernan, Jones -- really stands out, aside from Joe Jackson. I have Sheckard being the best of the bunch, but not by a lot.

06. Ryan CF - I think he is the best CF of the bunch, but am not 100% sure. His WARP numbers are almost the same as the average HoM CF already voted in. Very close in value to Van Haltren.

07. Van Haltren CF

08. Magee LF - I have him winning the MVP in 1910, stopping Hans Wagner's 6 year run. WARP doesn't really like Magee, regarding him to be a poor defensive player with a FRAA of -151.

09. Bresnahan C - He is the classic Win Shares Love Him, WARP Hate Him player (along with Hugh Duffy and Sherry Magee). The WARP numbers for him are not that good because they have him to be very much below average fielder at a FRAA of -119. Win Shares has Bresnahan to be a C+ fielder, which I think is about average. The peak WARP numbers for Bresnahan are also very low. OTOH Win Shares loves Bresnahan as seen with his high ranking as the #16 all-time best catcher of all time, one slot above Buck Ewing, and his Win Shares per 648 PA. A person named Cyril Morong did a ranking of all the players with 5000 PA by their Win Shares per 648 PA and Bresnahan is ranked 6th in the catcher's list. Bresnahan is also ranked 45th(!) overall in Win Shares per 648 PA over players like Ed Delahanty (27.41), Roger Connor (26.60), Hughie Jennings (24.52) and Charlie Bennett (23.60).
   24. TheGoodSamaritan Posted: May 18, 2004 at 01:57 AM (#632452)
10. Thompson RF

11. Grant 2B - I think I have Grant pegged differently than anybody else in terms of Grant vs. Monroe. Both are among the best of their generation, but I think Monroe is the better player.

12. Tiernan RF

13. Chapman SS - I don't think there is any argument that Chapman was the best shortstop of his generation before he died, and as Bill James wrote in his first Historical Abstract that his stats would have looked even better with the lively ball coming (but would baseball have had a lively ball if Chapman wasn't killed?). Actually there was talk that Chapman might retire after the 1920 season to help run his father-in-law's company, but who knows if he would have actually gone through with it because he was only 29 years old that season. I would personally think the competitive fire of a 29 year old would had kept him playing at least for a couple of more years. Mike Sowell's "The Pitch that Killed" is a great book on the whole Chapman-Mays saga.

14. Foster SP - As I wrote before, I have Foster ranked about the 9th greatest pitcher in Negro League history. Foster will get in the 'builders' wing of the HoM (if there is one), but right now I don't have him being a strong candidate as a player to get into the HoM for at least a decade or so.

15. Cravath RF - Good peak, but it wasn't good enough overcome his short career. On the edge of my ballot as of now.

off ballot:
Joe Jackson, Eddie Cicotte, and Buck Weaver - When the Black Sox scandal broke, the only player that Walter Johnson said he felt sorry for was Joe Jackson. Johnson felt that Jackson got used in the whole thing. Personally I don't agree with Johnson. The Black Sox players did get treated badly by Charley Comiskey, but that does not condone their actions. The only player I feel sorry for, not surprisingly, is Buck Weaver, who didn't take a single red cent, etc, etc. BTW is it me or does anybody else get the vibes that Bill James really don't like Buck Weaver? Anyways, Weaver was a solid player but not someone I would project to be a HoM player even if his career had not stopped in 1920 like Ray Chapman. For the first year I was going to vote Weaver ahead of Jackson and Cicotte, but since Weaver does not make my ballot, neither does Jackson or Cicotte.

Benny Kauff - There is a good 3 piece article on hardballtimes.com about Benny Kauff written by Craig Burley on how unfair Kauff's ban from baseball was. If Judge Landis had other evidence to ban Kauff, as Bill James hinted in the new Historical Abstract, he should had disclosed it. As it stands right now, it is a blemish on baseball that Kauff was banned.

Laughing Larry Doyle - Larry Doyle does not do very well on WARP because DT regards his defense to be very bad, -236 FRAA bad. To me Doyle was already a boarderline candidate, and DT's distain for his defense does not help his argument in making my ballot.

Rube Waddell - For someone who needed a great peak to make it on my ballot, I only have Rube Waddell winning one Jim Creighton award in his career (1905), and that is not enough in my opinion when he is compared to somebody like Ed Walsh and McGinnity.

Lip Pike - I think we have elected enough great but short-career players from the NA like Barnes, Spalding, McVey and Wright, who are clearly better than Pike. As for Pike's peak, I do not have Pike winning a MVP or being the best positional player in any of his years in the "majors".
   25. TheGoodSamaritan Posted: May 18, 2004 at 01:59 AM (#632453)
Dickey Pearce - When I think about the stuff that is written about Dickey Pearce, I would picture Herman Long and sometimes maybe Roger Peckinpaugh. As John Murphy wrote about Pearce, "He played for over twenty years in the best leagues or on the best teams", I think the same also applies to Long and somewhat Peckinpaugh. Long played a major role for the team that Bill James considers as the best 19th century team of all time and played for a long time and played it very well with excellant defense. Peckinpaugh also played for a long time and was once actually voted MVP of his league. To recap: for me, the upside of Pearce is Herman Long and the downside is Roger Peckinpaugh and both are not in my top 15 so therefore neither is good ol' Dickey.
In last year's ballot page, before the whole HoM stuff got moved to another server/site, John Murphy wrote that I put a "timeline bias" against Pearce: You're trying (and please tell me if I'm wrong) to compare them in a room after teleporting them from their respective times without examining their eras. It's the same thing as comparing a turn-of-the-last century player with the behemoths that are part of our time. Power-wise, today's player is going to destroy them on average, but that doesn't mean we should place the earlier generation on a lower tier of quality for this project.
I don't think I wrote anywhere that I am judging Pearce without regard to his era. Pearce was a great player for "the best leagues or on the best teams" (in his era), and so was Herman Long. I am comparing the value that the players had for their teams. The modern players might have more power than the earlier generation but that doesn't mean that they had more value to their teams. Just because somebody like Andres Galarraga has 300+ more HRs than Sam Crawford doesn't mean that he has more value to his teams. Since we don't have a lot of stats for Pearce, when I think of Pearce's value to his team, I think that his upper limit is about the same value as Herman Long's value was to his teams and that is very, very good, but not HoM good in my view.
   26. DavidFoss Posted: May 18, 2004 at 02:49 AM (#632519)
Another wide open ballot!

1. Lip Pike (5-4-2) -- 155 OPS+ CF in the NA/NL. Solid pre-NA play includes time at 2B. Brooklyn's best hitter in '70, second to Start in '69.
2. Frank Grant (7-6-4) -- Top african american player from the 19th century. Best candidate pre-Homer.
3. Sam Thompson (8-7-5) -- I like peak. An earlier start would make a vote for him easier. Could certainly hit. Held his own teamed with Brouthers in DET and Delahanty/Hamilton in PHI.
4. Joe Jackson (ne) -- Lost out on endorsements from Nike because... well, he didn't wear shoes. With the extra money, he probably would not have needed to take money for throwing the World Series. Even docking him for 1919 & 1920, his numbers are still excellent -- Charlie Keller on steroids (similar length but ~170 to 152 advantage in OPS+). He's got more full seasons than Keller does, too. Ironically , he probably does deserve some war credit for 1918. Don't like voting for him, but don't see the point in a one-year boycott and can't really place him lower than here.
5. Joe McGinnity (9-8-6) -- Plank's ERA+ without the career length and Brown's W/L record without his ERA+. Joe had some great teammates as well.
6. Sherry Magee (ne-7) -- About dead even with Sheckard. Magee hit better, Sheckard fielded better. Win Shares likes Magee on career despite the fact that his career was one full season shorter... edge in peak as well. WARP really likes Sheckard... both peak and career with a huge edge in fielding runs. These two could swap positions easily.
7. Jimmy Sheckard (13-9-8) -- I was leaning towards placing him with the 90s OF glut, but has a higher peak than Van Haltren / Ryan and arguably Duffy with roughly equal career rates and value.
8. Richard J. "Don't Call Me Dickey" Pearce (11-11-9) -- True Pioneer. With Start, the star of the greatest team of the '60s -- Brooklyn Atlantics. Much of his value comes before the end of the Civil War when few played organized ball outside of NYC. The game got so much bigger starting around '66. Might drop to HWright pioneer status due to this, but have him here for now. But, gosh... he played a long time, played consistently full-time, played for winners and was renown enough to host his own for-profit exhibition matches before the clubs were paying people.
9. Rube Foster (nr-nr-10) -- Decided to enter him into my ballot here. Great early pitcher. More known as a pioneer, but I like those kinds of guys.
10. John McGraw (10-10-11) -- 135 OPS+ is aided by the fact that its OBP heavy. Short career is keeping him from climbing up the ballot like the others are doing.
11. Gavvy Cravath (ne) -- Very good five year peak.
12. Charley Jones (nr-nr-13) -- I must admit, I had not been considering him. I guess I'm still sorting about my ballot on the third try. Late start (for the era) and unfairly blacklisted. Appears to be a hybrid or Pike/Stovey/Thompson, guys I've ranked fairly highly... may go higher
13. Bobby Wallace (12-13-12) -- Very long career. Lots of win shares, could hit a little before 1910, but mostly defensive value here. Low peak has me nervous, pitching numbers push him ahead of Jennings this week.
14. Hughie Jennings (14-12-14) -- I like peak and boy does Hughie have peak. Short career, poor seasons outside his peak slip his career OPS+ down to 117.
15. Bob Caruthers (nr-14-15) -- His peak value is becoming too hard to ignore, especially on a ballot this thin.
16. Clark Griffith -- I took a second look at him and he compares well to McGinnity.
17. Larry Doyle (ne) -- Fine second baseman for great Giants teams. Solid peak, short career keeping him this low.
18. Mickey Welch (nr-nr-nr) -- 300 game winner. Played for great teams in an easy era to win games. Meager 113 ERA+ is keeping him low on the ballot.
19. Roger Bresnahan (15-15-nr) -- Great five year peak at C. 126 OPS+ is OBP-heavy. Didn't appear to play full-time outside his peak though... even accounting for lower playing time of the catcher position.
20. Pete Browning -- The man could hit. His 162 OPS+ is partly inflated by his great early AA numbers, but his great PL season almost makes you want to ignore the discount. His durability becomes an issue starting in '88.

Next group... Van Haltren, Leach
   27. Rob_Wood Posted: May 18, 2004 at 03:15 AM (#632538)
My 1926 ballot:

1. Joe Jackson -- one of the all-time great hitters
2. Sam Thompson -- great hitter, will make it someday
3. Sherry Magee -- tremendously overlooked star
4. Bobby Wallace -- career value shortstop
5. Larry Doyle -- I cannot believe that many voters have him below the top 15
6. Jake Beckley -- consistently very good for a long time
7. Jimmy Sheckard -- sporadic great player
8. Dickey Pearce -- early star (please consider)
9. Rube Waddell -- great strikeout artist
10. Addie Joss -- one of the best in his era
11. Charley Jones -- another overlooked star
12. Roger Bresnahan -- multitalented pioneer
13. Lip Pike -- another early star that I like
14. Joe McGinnity -- barely makes my ballot
15. Cupid Childs -- makes a reappearance

Again, I have not included Frank Grant on my ballot (he's in my 20's). I see no evidence to convince me that he was better than guys like Cupid Childs, George Van Haltren, Johhny Evers, Jimmy Ryan, et al.
   28. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 18, 2004 at 03:25 AM (#632544)
Patrick, sorry about your ballot not being counted. I haven't been doing the tally's I assumed they were all counted.

I dropped the ball on Patrick's e-mail. If I had realized it wasn't in the tally (which was sent to me last Monday, though I didn't get it published until Saturday night), I would have added it.

Won't happen again . . .
   29. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 18, 2004 at 04:07 AM (#632569)
I've updated the 1925 tally to include Patrick W's vote. I did this for two reasons:

1) He intended to vote, and I screwed up not posting it.

2) One of the reasons for releasing the full tally is so we know where candidates stand. Obviously Patrick is intending to vote again this year, so including his vote makes this more indicative of where the group is at this time.
   30. Jim Sp Posted: May 18, 2004 at 05:00 AM (#632597)
Decided to boycott Jackson for a year, he's on the ballot too early anyhow.

1)Magee--HoF oversight, and not even on the 2005 Veterans committee ballot.
2)Doyle—Compare to contemporary George Cutshaw, who was a regular 2B for 11 years with an OPS+ of 86. Doyle’s 126 OPS+ at 2B is only exceeded by Hornsby, Lajoie, Collins, Morgan, Robinson, Richardson, and Dunlap. #19 all time in innings at 2B, how bad a fielder could he have been? Regularly in the 2B defensive Win Shares leaders, WS Gold Glove in 1917. Could be #1 but the resounding lack of support he’s getting is giving me (slight) pause.
3)Beckley—Apparently I am Beckley’s best friend. Keeler’s election convinced me to stop downgrading Beckley. Beckley is the better fielder, about the same as a hitter for his career, and at an underrepresented position that with more defensive value. Behind the big 3, much better than any other dead-ball 1B. Win Shares best fielder at 1B in 1893, 1895, 1899, and 1900. Add in 2930 hits, with power and walks. No peak but a lot of consistent production.
4)Waddell—Waddell has a run of 7 years (1902-1908) in which he was blowing people away, striking out people at rate that is extremely high for the era. Each year allowing at least 20% fewer runs than an average pitcher, in three of those years with an ERA+ over 165. 134 ERA+ in 3000 IP is worthy, his W/L record isn’t impressive because his run support wasn’t impressive. A seven year peak for a pitcher is much more rare than a seven year peak for a hitter, I give the short peak pitchers a lot more credit than the short peak hitters.
5)Wallace—long career, good hitter, played shortstop well, and gets a boost for his pitching. A shortstop with a long career who can hit belongs in the HoM.
6)Cravath—I’m tempted to put him above Beckley, but I’ll be a little less aggressive with him in his first year.
7)Bresnahan--Best hitting year was as a CF, not a C, so that hurts him a bit.
8)Griffith—Comp is Marichal, plus he could hit.
9)McGinnity—Win Shares NL best pitcher in 1900, 1903, and 1904. Terrible hitter.
10)Lave Cross—great fielder. Caught some too. Only hit well in weak leagues, but still that’s a lot of career value…2645 career hits with a lot of defensive value. All time leader in Win Shares / 1000 innings at 3B.
11)Joss—Comp is Koufax…a terrible hitter.
12)Pearce—placement is quite subjective, putting him above Childs and McGraw feels right.
13)Bill Monroe—the Biographical Encylopedia makes him sound like a great player, but the other information I’ve seen hasn’t been so convincing. I have him ahead of Grant but I could be wrong…
14)Welch— Better than Galvin. His 1885 season (44-11, 1.66 ERA, 492 IP) is a great peak year, he had 3 other great years (1884, 1888, 1889) plus another 6 good seasons. Welch played every year in the toughest league. He could hit a little (68 OPS+). Career 307-210…he deserves some of the credit for that.
15)Leach--Great fielder at both 3B and CF. Historically a unique player, if only he hit a little better. Or had stayed at 3B.

Frank Grant—It’s pretty clear he would have been a good major league player. I still haven’t seen any evidence that he was better than Cupid Childs. As I understand the rules, that’s who we’ve got to compare him to on this ballot, and he doesn’t get pioneer credit although if anyone deserves it, it would probably be him. He’s close to my ballot but not there yet.
Sam Thompson—short career hurts him, but the man could hit.
Bob Caruthers— Short career, and AA discount hurts him. See also Tony Mullane, Silver King, Guy Hecker, Jack Stivetts, Dave Foutz, and Will White.
Sheckard--Not quite. On the top of the outfield glut, just off the ballot.
Lip Pike-- The quality of competition was not good. I think we’ve taken enough of the 1870’s crowd.
   31. Jim Sp Posted: May 18, 2004 at 05:04 AM (#632599)
I suppose Van Haltren really should get a comment. He's in my top 30, not my top 15.
   32. Adam Schafer Posted: May 18, 2004 at 06:11 AM (#632627)
I have debated over and over whether to do it or not, and I'm still only 51% for it, but I'm going to not vote for Joe Jackson this year. He'll debut strongly on next years ballot though.

1. Mickey Welch (1) - He wasn't quite as good as Keefe, but really wasn't much worse at all. I like to think of it as something like Glavine was to Maddux. Not quite as good, but would've been the #1 starter on most any other team. They pitched in the same park in the same era for too long for their extremely similiar stats to be coincidental. Welch pitched much too long for his career to be considered all luck.

2. Joe McGinnity (2) - I've toyed with the idea of making him #1

3. Sam Thompson (4) - 10 great years. Excellant peak. I'm more of a career type of person than I am peak, but Sam has a great mix of both.

4. Sherry Magee (5) - Not the typical player that I'd place this high on the ballot, BUT lack of better options, a batting title, 4 RBI titles, and a great mix of speed and power are impossible to ignore.

5. Bobby Wallace (6) - Career, career, Career. That's what I keep saying I like. I like Bobby's, I really do. I would really like to see SOME peak.

6. Jake Beckley (8) - Again, I'm a career lover

7. Rube Waddell (9) - The top 5 in strikeouts for 10 consecutive years. he's #10 in the all-time ERA leaders.

8. Roger Bresnahan (10) - It's no secret that I love catchers. I would've ranked Roger higher had he caught more and played the OF less during his peak years.

9. Lip Pike (11) - I can see him finally getting in one of these days.

10. Hughie Jennings (12) - Nothing new to add to Jennings, except that he moves up above my OF glut

11. George Van Haltren (13) - I've been a moderate supporter of Van Haltren, unfortunately he'll never make the HOM, but he's still the 13th best player eligible in my opinion. Good career, very modest peak.

12. Jimmy Ryan (14) - See Van Haltren

13. Bobby Carruthers (15) - Leap frogs over Griffith as I take a longer look at Bobby

14. Clark Griffith (n/a) - He's still hanging around the bottom, I'd like to see him move up

15. Jimmy Sheckard (n/a) - makes my ballot with the induction of 2 last year

Not enough time to cover the final few spots that I normally list, but my take on Grant has been documented time and time again. I just don't feel comfortable with him. Dickey Pearce would be ranking 23rd-25th for me.
   33. Jeff M Posted: May 18, 2004 at 12:48 PM (#632656)
At the risk of being the curmudgeon again, I would like to reiterate my suggestion that we limit the information on the ballot itself. I think full write-ups on players #16-infinity is better suited to the ballot discussion thread.

Alternatively, Rusty and PhillyBooster have a nice and economical solution to providing the names of #16 and beyond.

Since we have a ballot discussion thread each year for full explanations on everyone, IMO it is more courteous to fellow HOM members to restrict the ballot to the required information (top 15 and explanations for omission of any consensus top ten-ers).

I realize it is easier to post everything here so you can cut and paste it next time, but it clutters up this thread (and I imagine it isn't so easy on those who count votes). And it's really tough if you want to print anything.
   34. OCF Posted: May 18, 2004 at 04:38 PM (#632845)
I was wondering who TheGoodSamaritan might be, when I noticed a very strong resemblence between his ballot and the ballot cast last year by "ed". It's that vote for Tiernan that gives it away.
   35. OCF Posted: May 18, 2004 at 04:41 PM (#632855)
1925 ballot.

1. Sherry Magee (----, 2) The voters have him all over their ballots, including off. He does have 350 WS - that's hard to ignore. As a hitter, I have his value very close to Clarke. Clarke has a little bit more career above average, but Magee made far more of his biggest years, especially 1907 and 1910, than Clarke (1897, 1902). The comparison to Flick goes the other way - I like Flick's big years a little more than Magee's, but Magee had more career above average. Magee is the biggest hitter I'm considering on this ballot.
2. Jimmy Sheckard (2, 3, 4, 3, 3) Not the hitter Magee is, but a better defensive outfielder.
3. Larry Doyle (new) Try as we might, it's hard not to undervalue hitters in low-offense times and overvalue hitters in high-offense times. Doyle was a hitter. His WARP rating is destroyed by his defense - and I'm not buying it, not completely. Was there ever a manager more obsessed with the "right way" to play baseball than John McGraw? And McGraw was satisfied with Doyle as his 2B.
4. Bobby Wallace (5, 8, 9, 5, 4) He's got the long career that Jennings doesn't have, and his hitting is quite a bit better than Long. Not historically unique - we'll see plenty of other shortstops quite a bit like him.
5. Clark Griffith (15, 16, 18, 8, 5) RA+ PythPat of 211-136, equivalent to 203 FWP. The 4th-best pitcher of his own times. What I said about Magee and Doyle as hitters in low-scoring times also applies to pitchers in high-scoring times.
6. Joe McGinnity (5, 5, 6, 7, 7) RA+ PythPat of 221-161, equivalent to 189 FWP. Some great individual seasons.
7. Frank Grant (14, 15, 17, 9, 8) As some others have pointed out, we're not exactly overrun with 1890's-1900's second basemen.
8. Gavy Cravath (new) For me to put him this high implies at least a little credit for his minor league work, as his major league totals by themselves don't really lift him out of the Tiernan-Thompson-Browning group. Put forth an argument that the home run could be a valuable offensive weapon.
9. Rube Waddell (12, 13, 14, 10, 9) RA+ PythPat of 198-131, equivalent to 186 FWP. Those of you who downrate him because he allowed a lot of unearned runs - take note that I've always used RA, not ERA, and he still ranks up here.
10. Jimmy Ryan (6, 9, 10, 11, 10)
11. Hugh Duffy (7, 10, 11, 12, 11)
12. George Van Haltren (8, 11, 12, 13, 12) These three guys have been here on my ballot forever.
13. Roger Bresnahan (4, 7, 13, 14, 13) Maybe he doesn't deserve a lot of special credit for being a catcher, but he's still a terrific ballplayer. Be wary of using OPS to value him - that underrates him.
14. Vic Willis (9, 12, 16, 15, 14) Benefited from great Beaneater defenses, as Brown benefited from great Cub defenses. But adjust for that, and he's still adjusted RA+ PythPat 246-198, equivalent to 184 FWP.
15. Mickey Welch (----, 15) Look who's back. (He was on my ballot 1904-1908). Little bits of new evidence seem to be accumulating in his favor.
16. Johnny Evers (--, 8, 16, 16) So I overdid it with him the first time out. But do take a look at his offense, especially after he took a great leap forward in 1908.
17. Frank Chance (13, 14, 15, 17, 17) Too little playing time, but what there is is wonderfully effective.
18. Roy Thomas (16, 17, 19, 18, 18) I'm not giving up on him.
19. Joe Tinker (-, 17, 18, 20, 19)
20. Jake Beckley (18, 19, 21, 20, 20)
21. Sam Thompson (19, 20, 22, 21, 21) I should take another look at Tiernan.
22. Andrew Foster (--, 23, 22, 22) Strictly as a pitcher, best guess is somewhere on the McGinnity-Waddell-Chesbro scale. Effective career seems to be brief. As an owner/organizer, has great value.
23. Hughie Jennings (20, 21, 24, 23, 23) If I completely trusted his defensive stats, I'd have him higher.
24. Bob Caruthers (-----, 24)
25. Herman Long (--, 25, 24) May deserve some of the credit initially assigned to Kid Nichols. Not as good a hitter as Wallace or Tinker.

I've never had Pearce or Pike; you've heard my reasons.

Boycott? Why, yes.
   36. jhwinfrey Posted: May 18, 2004 at 04:48 PM (#632870)
This is my first ballot, please be gentle :)
I'll consider Joe Jackson and Eddie Cicotte for 1927. Until then...

1. Mickey Welch--I give him extra credit for being the first pinch-hitter in MLB history.

2. Frank Grant--As I continue to read and learn more about the negro leagues, it becomes clear to me that these guys are still under-rated, particularly the "second-tier" guys like Grant and Monroe that don't get the press of Paige, Gibson, Charleston, et al.

3. Joe McGinnity--Won both ends of a doubleheader at the age of 44 in the minors.

4. Bob Caruthers--In his 6 300+ IP seasons, his ERA+ ranged from 111 to 158. And he got a ton of W's.

5. Rube Waddell--Anyone who had a provision in their contract prohibiting them from eating animal crackers in bed gets my vote.

6. Jake Beckley--Just a half season away from 3000 hits.

7. Dickey Pearce--A pity we don't have numbers for his full career. Still, this is where I think he goes.

8. Sam Thompson--Founder of the 20/20 club.

9. Roger Breshnahan--The best catcher in the game at the turn of the century.

10. Addie Joss--He completed 234 of his 260 starts and is the all-time leader in WHIP. That's enough for me to overlook the shortness of his career.

11. Pete Browning--The "Louisville Slugger" deserves to be in the HoM.

12. Tony Mullane--I give him extra credit for the time he missed due to contract disputes, and for the fact that he was ambidextrous. Which is pretty cool.

13. Lip Pike--He has the numbers, but he also had an impact on the early professional game.

14. George Van Haltren--A solid player for a long time.

15. Bill Monroe--see Frank Grant. For now, I'm not convinced that Monroe was nearly as good as Grant.

16-20: Griffith, Willis, Duffy, Ryan, Jennings
21-25: Magee, Wallace, Sheckard, Doyle, Cravath

Magee and Sheckard don't have the peak value to make my ballot, plain and simple.

Thanks for the opportunity to contribute the Hall of Merit, a truly great project.
   37. Daryn Posted: May 18, 2004 at 04:55 PM (#632882)
A record 41 players under consideration: 28 hitters, 13 pitchers.

Still Rube Foster's best friend.

1. Joe Mcginnity (p) – Led league in wins 5 times, averaged 25 wins a year, led league in IP 4 straight years. In my view, equal to the last pitcher we elected.

2. Joe Jackson (of) – really only had 9 years, but 9 years in the top five of OPS and OPS+. That’s good. I like the .356 batting average too. 170 OPS+ outrageously good even considering he missed his decline phase. It appears from a quick scan, that Jackson finished second in the league to Cobb about 20 times in his career in significant categories. If it weren’t for Cobb, his black ink score would be phenomenal for his short career. As you may have guessed, I am ignoring the game fixing. If you completely ignore the game fixing, I don’t see how you put him behind any white hitter on this ballot.

3. Frank Grant (2b)– no stats, gut pick based on descriptions of a great excluded player. Best blackball player before there was blackball.

4. Andrew Foster (p) – While his legend is a bit enhanced by his managerial and executive accomplishments, he was a truly great pitcher. Wagner said he might have been the best. McGraw and Chance said similar things. Career spanned 1897-1912. Undeniably great from 1902 to 1907 – four 50 win seasons, at least. Likely also great but without opportunity to prove it 1899 to 1901 and great but in a self-imposed reduced role from 1908 onwards. There is a lot of info on this site supporting Rube’s candidacy.

5. Mickey Welch (p) – 300 wins, lots of grey ink. RSI data is helping Welch, not hurting – those wins are real. Welch is the last person on my ballot that I really care about being in the Hall of Merit; and sadly he looks like the person on my ballot who has one of the worst chances of making it in.

6. Sherry Magee (of) – this is as low as I could start him. He could have been as high as third. 7 times top 6 in OPS and OPS+, 3 times leading the league in rbis and extra base hits. Really great offensive player in the deadball era, and his career spanned 14 good years.

7. Jake Beckley (1b) -- ~3000 hits but no black ink at all. My type of hall of meriter. The Beckley supporters have done some pretty good analysis of how strong his career was, even absent a real peak. Baseballreality.com has him as the best first baseman in baseball for a long time.

8. Sam Thompson (of) – 8 dominating years, great ops+, lots of black ink in multiple categories. Only poor defence keeps him this low.

9. Bob Caruthers (p/of) – nice Winning percentage, great peak, short career, surprisingly low era+, 130 ops+ as a hitter . I am convinced that this guy should be in (which was my original thought in any event). This is also my cut-off line – people below this could make the Hall of Merit, but it doesn’t matter to me.

10. Dickey Pearce (ss) – likely the best or second best player in the 1860s and played well for an old shortstop for about 5 of his 7 years post-1870. If I knew he were one of the top 2 players in the game in the 1860s he’d be placed a little higher. The uncertainty used to keep him off my ballot but now places him here – plus, I’m still not really sure it was “baseball” when Pearce was in his 20s. Nothing in the Constitution seems to suggest we should only consider players who had significant post-1870 careers.

11. Roger Bresnahan (c) – Great OBP, arguably the best catcher in baseball for a six year period. Counting stats, like all catchers of this time and earlier, are really poor.

12. Bobby Wallace (ss) – like Sheckard, too many Win Shares to ignore, but unless he was a great defender (and people seem to think he was, .34ws/1000 from an A) he doesn’t belong close to this high.

13. Jimmy Sheckard (of) – I can’t ignore 339 win shares and he did walk a lot – throw in above average defense, a home run title and strong seasons 8 years apart and I guess I wouldn’t be embarrassed if he got in.

14. Tommy Leach (of/3b)– slightly inferior to Sheckard, better fielder, worse hitter. I don’t like either of them really. Apparently I like peak a little more than I thought. Going into this I thought that 300 WS would make a candidate an easy choice. Back on the ballot.

15. Lip Pike (of) – 4 monster seasons, career too short. I re-evaluated him (he was as high as 9th on my ballot) – I was giving him too much credit for his age 21 to 25 years. His is the kind of peak I can support. Back on the ballot.
   38. Daryn Posted: May 18, 2004 at 04:56 PM (#632884)
The rest

16. Bill Munroe – I think he was pretty good. Any blackball player that is even talked about as among the best 70 years later is pretty good. I’ll take McGraw’s word for it.

17. Clark Griffith – jumps close to my ballot from nowhere based a lot on the commentary in the 1917 thread and his 921 similarity score with mcginnity. Only been on my ballot once.

18. Chief Bender – he fits in somewhere between here and Joss. Once he gets to 15th I’ll make sure I think he really is better than Waddell.

19. Gavvy Cravath – I’m not sure how to treat his non-ML time, but I do think one of the purposes of the HoM is to take into account great achievers outside the majors. That is partly why I have 5 ½ such players in my top 20.

20. Tinker – my favourite of the t-e-c triumvirate and I’ll probably keep him ahead of Jennings, but always behind Wallace. Perhaps spectacular defense – someone has to be responsible for the 06-08 Cubs. Never been on my ballot.

21. Hughie Jennings – To those who say he was the best player in baseball for a time – I ask was he better than Delahanty?. Never been on my ballot.

22. Cupid Childs – nice obp.
23. Pete Browning – Joe Jackson’s most similar player, and they are pretty close – I have him as about 4/5ths of Jackson. Newly on my radar screen. Right now 16 through 22 are in a dead heat. I may go with the consensus in ordering them.

24. Larry Doyle – not a bad hitter for a second baseman and it wasn’t a particularly strong decade for NL second sackers.

25. Johnny Evers – not bad, better than Chance, worse than Tinker. Only here for his defence.

26. George Van Haltren – 40 wins, 2500 hits, never dominated. May never make it back to my ballot.

27. Hugh Duffy – 10 strong seasons, good black ink. May never make it back to my ballot.

28. Jimmy Ryan – 2500 hits, good speed, lots of runs. May never make it back to my ballot.

29. Rube Waddell – His career is too short for me. Pitchers especially, I like to see a long career because only a few really stand out on peak alone. Neither Rube nor anyone below him has ever been on my ballot.

30. Ed Cicotte — 5 good years mixed in with a few more not so good years. Best pitcher in baseball in 1917 (and that was his third best season)?

31. Jim McCormick
32. Addie Joss –Not sure what to do about these <200 win pitchers.

Also ran (33 through 41 in no order) -- Ed Williamson, Levi Meyerle, Tony Mullane, Vic Willis, Sol White, Roy Thomas, Lave Cross, George Mullin and Frank Chance.
   39. OCF Posted: May 18, 2004 at 05:40 PM (#632946)
Welcome, jhwinfrey. I'd only ask that you take another look at the biggest seasons of some deadball hitters (for instance, Magee's 1907 or 1910) in the run context of the times before dismissing them as not having enough peak.

The first line of my post #35 should have been "1926 ballot". You know how that happens.
   40. robc Posted: May 18, 2004 at 05:47 PM (#632956)
Very similar to my past ballots, little has changed. You will find no black sox on my ballot, but they are in my consideration set for this year.

1. Bobby Wallace - Clearly the best career on the ballot now.
2. Jimmy Sheckard - Sheckard and Thompson are effectively tied.
3. Sam Thompson - Hopefully Sam makes it in soon, just not this year.
4. George Vanhaltren - Strong career value, dont understand why he isnt doing better.
5. Lave Cross - I understand the peak guys not voting for him, but best 3rd base career on the ballot, by far.
6. Jimmy Ryan - The lack of voting in any of the CF glut has neared the point of underrepresentation.
7. Jake Beckley - The anti-jennings.
8. Sherry Magee - Moves onto the ballot this week. Gets to wait for others to clear off in front of him.
9. Frank Grant - Moves past Childs this week. The best of the negro leaguers so far, in my opinion.
10. Cupid Childs - Has been all over my ballot.
11. Hughie Jennings - I started as a pure career voter, slower shifted towards peak, and have backup off a little.
12. Herman Long - Here begins the guys that probably dont belong in the HoM.
13. Bob Caruthers - His pitching alone wouldnt have him near my ballot.
14. Joe McGinnity - Back on my ballot after a long absence.
15. Fielder Jones - More from the land of filler.

Others:
24. Dickey Pearce - At the rate new players are not making the ballot, he could actually make it on to mine some day. Actually, no, it seems unlikely. Some say I timeline, but I dont, I "quality of opposition line", and his was poor for the peak of his career.
   41. KJOK Posted: May 18, 2004 at 07:07 PM (#633047)
Using OWP, playing time, and defense (Win Shares/BP) for position players, applied to .500 baseline. Using Runs Saved Above Average and Support Neutral Fibonacci Wins for Pitchers.

1. JOHN McGRAW, 3B. .727 OWP. 459 RCAP. 4,909 PAs. Def: AVERAGE. Was CAREER ALL-TIME OBP% leader until Ruth qualifies in 1923, EVEN adjusting for League, and is STILL #3 behind Williams and Ruth. He didn’t have a long career, but he’s being discounted for low playing time way too much as he provided more value in those few appearances than all of his contemporary 3rd baseman.

2. JOE JACKSON, LF/RF. .780 OWP. 449 RCAP. 5,690 PA’s. Def: AVERAGE. Best hitter of his generation except for Cobb. Had “MVP-type” years 1911-1913.

3. PETE BROWNING, CF/LF. .745 OWP. 478 RCAP. 5,315 PAs. Def: POOR. Baseball’s premier hitter in the 1880’s.

4. HUGHIE JENNINGS, SS. .607 OWP. 263 RCAP. 5,650 PAs. Def: EXCELLENT. Best SS of the 1890’s.

5. ROGER BRESNAHAN, C. .651 OWP. 282 RCAP, 5,373 PA’s. Def: AVERAGE. Best Catcher between Ewing and Cochrane/Dickey.

6. RUBE WADDELL, P. 254 RSAA, 222 Neut_Fibonacci_Wins, and 134 ERA+ in 2,961 innings.

7. JOE McGINNITY, P. 238 RSAA, 208 Neut_Fibonacci_Wins, and 121 ERA+ in 3,441 innings.

8. FRANK CHANCE, 1B. .720 OWP. 308 RCAP. 5,099 PAs. Def: VERY GOOD. Excellent hitter and good fielder back when 1st base was more important defensively. Leader of one of the greatest teams in history.

9. CUPID CHILDS, 2B. .609 OWP. 354 RCAP. 6,762 PAs. Def: AVERAGE. Best 2nd baseman of the 1890’s.

10. BOBBY WALLACE, SS. .522 OWP (.546 thru 1910). 195 RCAP (211 thru 1910). 9,612 PAs. Def: VERY GOOD. Hung around ala Pete Rose after 1910. Also outstanding defensive 3B in the 2 years he played there.

11. TOMMY LEACH, CF/3B. .552 OWP, 121 RCAP, 9,051 PA’s. Def: EXCELLENT – 3B, VERY GOOD – CF. Just slightly below Collins defensively, and he played longer. Basically did everything well, but doesn’t have the one outstanding area to get noticed.

12. LARRY DOYE, 2B .632 OWP, 273 RCAP, 7,382 PA’s. Def: FAIR. Best hitting 2B between Lajoie and Hornsby.

13. BOB CARUTHERS, P/RF. 179 RSAA. 177 Neut. Fibonacci Wins, 123 ERA+. .668 OWP. 243 RCAP. 2,906 PAs. Only shortness of career keeps Caruthers from being an “inner circle” superstar.

14. SHERRY MAGEE, LF . .676 OWP, 337 RCAP, 8,547 PA’s. Def: VERY GOOD. Longevity puts him above Sam Thompson in the outfield glut area.

15. SAM THOMPSON, RF. .684 OWP. 387 RCAP. 6,510 PAs. Def: AVERAGE. Right between Magee and Sheckard in OF glut.

LEFT OFF THE BALLOT:
TONY MULLANE, P. 241 RSAA, 240 Neut_Fibonacci_Wins, and 118 ERA+ in 4,531(!) innings. AA discount puts him off ballot until I finish my AA vs. NL study.
FRANK GRANT, 2B. There’s evidence he was a very good minor league player for a long time, but hard to put him in top 15 ahead of these guys based on that evidence.
BILL MONROE, 2B. Very similar to Grant in that the Negro Leagues were not yet established so we have very little to make comparisons with.
JIMMY SHECKARD, LF. .626 OWP. 135 RCAP. 9,117 PAs. Def: EXCELLENT. Another player who was good but not great offensively, played a long time, AND had great defense, although it was in LF. Similar to Hugh Duffy.
GAVVY CRAVATH, RF. .709 OWP. 238 RCAP. 4,644 PA’s. Def: FAIR. Poor defense plus a lack of appreciation of “sluggers” in a singles, sac and SB world may have kept him from major leagues sooner.
DICKEY PEARCE, SS. He WAS basically, along with Harry Wright, the old guy in the league 1871-1877, and his fielding was still league average, but didn’t hit nearly as well as Harry (who played CF). May have been Ozzie Smith, but hard to tell.
LIP PIKE, CF. Perhaps best hitting CF of the 1870’s, but short career puts him off ballot.
GEORGE VAN HALTREN, CF. .620 OWP. 167 RCAP. 8,992 PAs. Def: FAIR. A notch below the elite OF’ers both offensively and defensively.
JAKE BECKLEY, 1B. .596 OWP. 245 RCAP. 10,492 PAs. Def: AVERAGE. Another good for a long time player who is just below elite status.
JIMMY RYAN, CF/RF. .609 OWP. 205 RCAP. 9,114 PAs. Def: AVERAGE. Not quite up to top OF hitters, and only average defense won’t move him up.

HUGH DUFFY, CF/LF. .623 OWP. 154 RCAP. 7,838 PAs. Def: VERY GOOD. Just not in the elite OF class offensively.
EDDIE CICOTTE, P. 183 RSAA, 209 Neut. Fibonacci Wins, and 123 ERA+ in 3,223 Wins. Not all that far from McGinnity in value/performance.
   42. ronw Posted: May 18, 2004 at 07:53 PM (#633140)
1926 Ballot (MVP candidates, All-Star candidates, and total HOM seasons are my own generalizations based on raw WS and yearly competition. I'll gladly incorporate WARP when they finally complete their fix.)

1. Frank Grant It is a shame that Johnson came along to eclipse him. I believe he should have been elected by now. Deserves a high ranking when considering the dearth of outstanding 2B candidates playing in 1890-1915 (Lajoie excepted).

2. Dickey Pearce Until 1925, I had been considering the project to run from 1871, with pre-1871 contributions only available to those players who made significant post-1871 contributions. However, John Murphy pointed out that the literal language of the constitution requires us to consider pre-1871 players. Especially given my career slant, I am still sorting out whether I should have Dickey Pearce #1. He’ll be there next year if Grant is elected.

3. Joe McGinnity I think very comparable to electee Walsh, and has been on the ballot long enough. MVP Candidate 1899-1900, 1903-1904. All-Star candidate 1901-1902, 1905-1907. (9 HOM seasons)

4. Joe Jackson No boycott from me, and with war credit, vaults ahead of Beckley, Sheckard and Magee from my preliminary ballot. MVP Candidate 1911-13, 1916-17, 1919-20, All-Star candidate 1914-15, War credit 1918 (10 HOM seasons).

5. Jake Beckley Every year, as fewer 1B come along to challenge him, Beckley looks more and more unique. In his 16 All-Star seasons, he only averaged about 60% of MVP value, so that hurts him with peak voters. Never an MVP candidate, All-Star candidate 1888-1895, 1897, 1899-1905. (16 HOM seasons)

6. Jimmy Sheckard If Sheckard and Magee were 15 and 16, I would tie them at 15. Because I have to pick one, I’m going with the person who has been on the ballot longer. MVP Candidate 1901, 1903, 1911. All-Star candidate 1899-1900, 1902, 1905-1907, 1909-1910, 1912. (12 HOM seasons)

7. Sherry Magee - Nearly identical in value to Sheckard. MVP Candidate 1906, 1907, 1910, All-Star Candidate 1905, 1908-1909, 1911-1915, 1918. (12 HOM seasons)

8. George Van Haltren I think he stands ahead of the CF glut. Never an MVP candidate, All-Star candidate 1888-1901. That is 14 consecutive solid years, the majority in a tough consolidated league. (14 HOM seasons)

9. Jimmy Ryan I like Jimmy. Hopefully he will be elected in some future down period. MVP candidate 1888. All-Star candidate 1886-1887, 1889-1892, 1894-1899, 1902. (14 HOM seasons)

10. Bobby Wallace I do like long careers. To make my ballot, a long career player still needs a decent amount of solid play. Wallace had that solid play. I don't think ever an MVP candidate, but All-Star candidate 1897-1899, 1901-1908, 1910. (12 HOM seasons)

11. Hugh Duffy Part of the now underrepresented CF block. We have Hamilton from the 1890's, and no 1900's CF representatives. The teens will have a few, however. I'm not sure Duffy is so different from Joe Kelley. MVP candidate 1893-1894, All-Star candidate 1889-1892, 1895-1899. (11 HOM seasons)

12. Fielder Jones Doesn't seem too much different from Kelley or Duffy, when you factor in his fielding. MVP candidate 1908 (his last real year). All-Star candidate 1896-1898, 1900-1907. (12 HOM seasons)

13. Roger Bresnahan Not as high as I once had him, but I think this unique talent belongs on the ballot, and should eventually be enshrined. MVP candidate 1906, 1908 All-Star candidate 1903-1905, 1907, 1911, 1914. (8 HOM seasons)

14. Vic Willis He keeps showing up on my list. It’s hard to believe that he may be my highest ranked pitcher if McGinnity gets in. Barely ahead of the pitcher glut (Mullane, Welch, Caruthers, Waddell, Griffith). MVP Candidate 1899, 1901-1902. All-Star Candidate 1898, 1903-1904, 1906-1909. (10 HOM seasons)

15. Tommy Leach Sometimes I think people tend to short-change multi-position players, because they don’t rank at the top of their respective positions. He reminds me a little of Robin Yount, especially with the position switch. Barely edges newcomer Larry Doyle. Never an MVP Candidate, All-Star Candidate 1901-1909, 1913-1914 (11 HOM seasons)

MISSING OUT

Larry Doyle – To me, solid career length gives him greater value than Childs. MVP candidate 1912, 1915, All-Star candidate 1908-11, 1914, 1916-17, 1919-20. (11 HOM seasons)

Lip Pike – Number 17 on my ballot now, will be #16 in 1926.

Bob Caruthers – Poor Bob just misses again (he’s at #18), but I don’t have an irrational bias against him. He just doesn’t measure up on my career-weighted system. MVP candidate 1885-1889, All-Star candidate 1890-1892. (8 HOM seasons)

Sam Thompson – Some of the top returnees are just missing my ballot, and may make it later in the 20’s. Thompson is probably not one of them. MVP candidate 1887, 1895, All-Star candidate 1886, 1889-1894. (9 HOM seasons)
   43. Al Peterson Posted: May 18, 2004 at 08:19 PM (#633188)
1926 ballot. Since the 1919 World Series fix is recent history I have no choice but to boycott Joe Jackson and other Black Sox players this year.

1. Sam Thompson (1). Patiently waiting his turn. During 10 year period (1886-1895) was top 10 in league in total bases 9 times. .308 EQA, .684 OWP, man could hit a little.

2. Joe McGinnity (2). Eight straight years 20+ Wins, 300+ Innings. Iron Joe is quite accurate.

3. Jimmy Ryan (3). Giving credit of CF being more valuable than LF in terms of defensive spectrum. Being very good for long periods of time gets some points from me. Interesting note: was tried at SS for Chicago in 1889 after Ed Williamson flamed out.

4. George Van Haltren (4). Similar arguments to Ryan, just a little less to them.
5. Sherry Magee (5). Better hitter than Sheckard, not as good a fielder. The batting numbers are good enough to nudge him over his fellow leftfielder.

6. Frank Grant (7). Still convinced we're dealing with a quality player who deserves recognition. Was described as great ballplayer in the IL when the talent dispersion was down to the minor leagues more heavily than later eras.

7. Rube Waddell (10). Won six straight strikeout titles - dominance you don't get everyday. His 1902 season: 12-8 out in LA to start season, brought back to Philly by Connie Mack in June and went 24-7. That's a lot of pitching...

8. Pete Browning (8). Don't know why I soured on him to such an extreme. Even with league discounts he swung some mean lumber. Let me throw out some numbers. Career OPS+ = 162 which puts him in company with names like Foxx, McGwire, Frank Thomas. Discount it because of AA play? At the OPS+ = 147 level you're talking Heilmann, McCovey, and Schmidt. That's some pretty lofty company. Batting Average Placement within league 1882-1891: 1, 2, 3, 1, 2, 2, 3, -, 1, 3. Had a career .341 average in a league environment of .257 . Offensive Winning Percentage - .745. His guy was a WOW when hitting. He might not be the ideal multi-dimensional player but when you are this much an outlier at part of the game its going to get a bonus from me.

9. Jimmy Sheckard (9). Another well-rounded player, successful for the great Cub teams. The comparisons to Magee show them on the same plane - I have a harder time believing Sheckard was so awesome defensively, Magee so wretched.

10. John McGraw (11). Limited playing time but what he did with it is nonetheless outstanding. Positional bump as well. Cons include just not playing enough but was on base all the time when participating.

11. Bob Caruthers (13). My tug-of-war with his value continues. I'm more sure now that if push came to shove Freedom Bob deserves in before the rest below him. Affected pennant hopes greatly per individual year with his play yet due to short career couldn't affect a large number of pennants.

12. Jake Beckley (14). Tougher and tougher to ignore with dearth of 1B for a number of years; career totals eventually add up to quite the player despite lack of peak. Not being one of the ABC trio at 1st base doesn't mean you were bad.

13. Hugh Duffy (15). Couple of great spikes to go with other uneven performances. Gets bump based on contemporary opinion as being one heck of a ballplayer. Win Shares love the D.

14. Dickey Pearce (16). Impressed by the fact he was a regular in the NA at an age that was very old compared to most players. Still unsure as to career arc - was he a Cal Ripken, Alan Trammell, Dave Concepcion, none of the above? The reviews from early baseball are glowing - the issue of competition level at an unorganized, evolving time is frustrating.

15. Gavvy Cravath (-). Get's a lift from noteworthy performance in minors between stints in the majors to go along with peak achievement at the major league level at an advanced age. Ten years too early to reap benefits of the lively ball.

Others:
16-20: Leach, Childs, Wallace, Mullane, Bresnahan
21-25: Jennings, Griffith, Doyle, Foster, C Jones

Wallace is one of many SS with others in front of him. Pike is down in the low 20s on the ballot. I'd rather have either Pearce or Charley Jones over him.
   44. favre Posted: May 18, 2004 at 10:32 PM (#633367)
Jackson would debut either #1 or 2 on my ballot if it weren’t for the scandal; Cicotte would be 29th.


1.Lip Pike

Pike averaged about 34 aWS per season during an eight-year stretch (275 aWS in 10-year documented career; -5 WS for two token appearances; 270/8=33.85). While I concede the difficulties of adjusted win shares for the NA era, that’s still quite a prime. His OPS+ of 155 is higher than anyone on the ballot except Browning. He had speed, hit for doubles power, and led the league in home runs four times—OK, he led with four home runs each time, but let’s face it: even if you’re inclined to give a big NA discount, the guy could flat-out hit. He did this all while playing CF/2B. His documented record is outstanding, and he played for five years before the creation of the NA.

2.Dickey Pearce
3.Frank Grant

No one on the ballot had a bigger impact on his time than Pearce. He must have had tremendous defensive value and was still playing shortstop in his ‘40s. Baseball was enormously popular by the late 1850s, and already had a national organization to establish rules and conduct, so I have no difficulty placing him this high on the ballot.

See post #38 in the 1917 ballot discussion for my defense of Frank Grant. Basically, there’s too much circumstantial evidence of his ability for me to ignore, and little or no circumstantial evidence that suggests he wasn’t a great player.

4.Joe McGinnity
5.Sherry Magee
6.Sam Thompson

Like most others, I have Brown and McGinnity close together in career value. Iron Joe did it in less time and worse defenses than 3F.

Magee was almost as good a hitter as Thompson, but had a better career, was a better fielder, and played in an era with less offense. Thompson was the best power hitter of his generation in his prime, could get on base, and had decent speed.

7. Bobby Wallace
8.Jake Beckley
9. Clark Griffith

The players with very good careers but little or no peak. Wallace’s value as a fielder and pitcher gives him the edge over Beckley. I am struck by the fact that, in 1926, we’ve since few quality first basemen in the past thirty years; Beckley’s career simply surpasses other 1B from that time period.

Between 1895-1901, Griffith never had a season ERA+ lower than 119. In those seven seasons, Griffith was 154-87, .639 WP; his team’s WP was .449 without him. He did this in a hitters’ era. Only fairly low IP, relative to his league, keeps him this far down the ballot.

10.Rube Foster
11.Rube Waddell
12.Jimmy Sheckard
13.Tommy Leach

Waddell earned 3 ERA+ titles and threw huge amounts of strikeouts. Obviously it is difficult to compare him to Foster, a player whose statistical record is sketchy at best. That said, I’m pretty sure that Foster was the best pitcher in black baseball from 1903-8, and likely again in 1912. It seems he could hit. While I don’t want to give him HoM credit for his managerial/entrepreneurial success, he was clearly very intelligent, a useful trait for a pitcher (or any other position). It’s a tough call, but with the evidence I see, I think I would rather have Foster on my team than Waddell.

Truthfully, I’m not overjoyed with having Sheckard this high. Still, he was part of a tremendous fielding team (which makes me trust his fielding stats a little more) and walked a ton. Leach was an excellent fielder at both 3B/CF and could hit.

14.Ned Williamson
15.Cupid Childs

Williamson and Childs make it back on my ballot. I think they are fairly comparable hitters, but Williamson had more defensive value. Doyle is also a comparable hitter to these guys, but his fielding value is debatable. He comes in at #16.

16.Larry Doyle
17. Hugh Jennings
18.Bob Caruthers

Parisian Bob continues to inch toward my ballot. He and Foster have similar arguments for induction: they were the best pitcher in a weaker league that still had a few legitimate stars, and both could hit. Foster did have a better career, but I can’t see having him at #10 and Caruthers in the low ‘20s.
   45. TheGoodSamaritan Posted: May 19, 2004 at 03:29 AM (#634233)
Yes OCF, I've been exposed. I should have disclosed that I am the artist formerly known as ed, but I thought you would have known that it was me since I was using 90% recycled material for my ballot, and oh yes, my "appreciation" for Slient Mike Tiernan. I did not find out my consensus score grade until yesterday because I never did went back to look at the 1925 ballot page after the site got transferred to the other server, but I think my vote for Mike Tiernan was probably the only thing keeping Daryn from eating my dust. I didn't know that I was so in tune with "the masses".
   46. TheGoodSamaritan Posted: May 19, 2004 at 03:32 AM (#634243)
oh yeah, BTW good stuff with the consensus score grade OCF.
   47. Sean Gilman Posted: May 19, 2004 at 07:41 AM (#634573)
1926

1. Lip Pike (1)--Not quite as good in the NA as McVey, but better before; much better in the NA than Start, not as good before. Very underrated. I’ve never been able to understand the anti-1870s crowd. A pennant is a pennant. How one could rank, say, Sam Thompson ahead of Pike I have no idea. Played the infield, played the outfield. The greatest power/speed combination of his time. Great peak and a reasonably long career for his time (1866-1878). (1919)

2. Jimmy Sheckard (3)--Looks pretty much identical to Keeler to me. Makes my PHOM this year.

3. Bobby Wallace (4)--I was a big fan of McPhee and Sutton too. Guess I like the defense. Also makes My PHOM this year.

4. Joe McGinnity (5)--A lot like Browning: big peak, not so much career value.

5. Pete Browning (6)--AA discount and short career keeps him from being at the top of the ballot. The man could hit. We know Win Shares likes him better than Sam Thompson, but did you now the BP stats show Browning to be the better hitter? Thompson’s edge in WARP is only in fielding and pitching (remember Browning’s -37 PRAR?) and Davenport’s AA discount. Considering the problems Davenport’s had with 19th century OF fielding and the admitted anomoly with Browning’s pitching and the unknown natue of his AA discount, I don’t know how one could rate Thompson ahead based on WARP.

6. Dickey Pearce (8)--The best shortstop of his time.

7. Bob Caruthers (9)--His WARP1 and 3 Pennants Added are essentially the same as Pete Browning’s, which is interesting. . .

8. Hughie Jennings (10)--Like Sam Thompson, only a slightly better peak and he was a shortstop instead of a right-fielder. That’s how close numbers 8 and 17 are on my ballot.

9. Charley Jones (16)-- First time on my ballot for Charley. Finally decided to give him some credit for blacklisted years, which bumps him up ahead of Magee and a bunch of other players, not because i give him a lot of credit, but because they’re all so tightly-packed.

10. Sherry Magee (11)--Not much seperates him from Sheckard, but he does look distinctly inferior in both career and peak value by both WARP and Win Shares (I use best 3 Seasons and Best 5 Consecutive Seasons BTW, though I’m planning to redo them all to try to be more comprehensive).

11. Roger Bresnahan (12)--Great rate stats, but he just didn’t play enough to generate the value of the higher ups on the ballot. Ranks ahead of Childs and Grant only because of the bonus I give him for being a catcher.

12. Cupid Childs (13)--Nice to see Cupid getting some love. . .

13. Frank Grant (14)--Still have him as not-quite-Cupid Childs.

14. Hugh Duffy (15)--I’ve been overrating Duffy, everytime I look at him vs. Ryan and Van Haltren, they all look the same. Duffy’s got small (very small) edges on them in pennants added and win shares peak numbers.

15. Joe Jackson (-)--Not giving him credit for the war year, maybe I will next year if he’s still around. Even with that, I’m not sure he really distinguishes himself from all the other outfielders.

16. George Van Haltren (17)
17. Sam Thompson (18)
18. Larry Doyle (-)--Somewhere in-between Cupid Childs and Ed Williamson.
19. Jimmy Ryan (19)
20. Ed Williamson (20)
22. Gavy Cravath (-)--Even with credit for minor league years, his peak just isn’t high enough to move ahead of Thompson or Van Haltren, and Ryan has much more career value.
23. Rube Waddell (21)
24. Jake Beckley (22)
25. Jim McCormick (23)
   48. Jeff M Posted: May 19, 2004 at 02:49 PM (#634676)
1926 Ballot

1. Magee, Sherry -- A classic case of why we are engaged in this project. I noticed today that his percentage HOF vote is lower than Kent Hrbek's. I have Magee as the best leftfielder we've seen in a while...ahead of Joe Kelley. I thought he would be more mid-ballot, but he belongs at #1 or #2, and there's quite a distance in my system between he and Browning.

2. Browning, Pete -- Hasn't budged on my ballot in a long long time. I have discounted his 82-85 and 89 seasons but he proved in the PL that he was no fluke. I think he's a HoMer because he was easily one of the best hitters we've evaluated. He was an outfielder, so I doubt his suspect defense detracts much from his overall value. This spot actually would have gone to Jackson, if it weren't for the one year boycott.

3. Bresnahan, Roger -- I was surprised to see that in my system he was quite a bit better as a hitter than Charlie Bennett, though certainly not as good defensively. If you stack Bresnahan's WS and WARP1 numbers against the catchers actually elected to the HoF, he looks very very solid.

4. McGinnity, Joe -- Solid WS numbers. Fantastic winning percentage and excellent Wins Above Team. Has some nice counting stats and good grey ink scores. Would probably have won two Cy Young Awards. Suffers a bit in the WARP system...otherwise, he'd be higher. I'm starting to wonder if his chance for election has slipped by.

5. Monroe, Bill -- His alleged comp is Jimmy Collins. He certainly appears every bit as good as Grant, but competition was stiffening in his era, so he deserves a bit more credit.

6. Jones, Charley -- I give no additional credit for blacklisted seasons. He hit about as well as McVey, with power, but with a smaller WS peak and fewer WS per 162 games. I think he has been overlooked from the beginning. Even those who see his skills have put him to the side in favor of more glamorous players -- thus, he's not really a factor in the consensus voting.

7. Leach, Tommy -- His numbers are deflated by the era, but normalized he looks very good. I've got him with 7 gold gloves at two different tough positions. He's just below my election line.

8. Caruthers, Bob -- WARP1 helped him leap higher on my ballot. Also, I stepped away from the numbers and looked at the big picture, and he was one hell of a baseball player. No way he's the best player eligible, though.

9. Duffy, Hugh -- Like most of the glut outfielders, he's appeared just about everywhere on the ballot. He has some good counting stats, good grey ink and scores well on WS and WARP1 measures. In my system he bests Thompson based primarily on pennants added.

10. Grant, Frank -- Some of this is based on comparisons to Dunlap, who I don't value as highly as others. I haven't moved Grant's ranking, but I wonder if I subconsciously value Johnson and Monroe higher because Grant has been on the ballot so long.

11. Griffith, Clark -- This is where he's been so this is where he stays. An excellent win pct on some bad teams. I boost his win totals and win pct by approximately 1/2 of his Wins Above Team, which are outstanding. Has a nice career Linear Weights total also.

12. Waddell, Rube -- Comparable to Griffith, but win totals are far less impressive. Can't see putting him ahead of Griffith, unless you overvalue strikeouts.

13. Thompson, Sam -- Another pure hitter with questionable outfield defense. I don't think he was anywhere near as good a hitter as Browning. He didn't have an incredible peak or career, from a WS perspective, as outfielders go.

14. Larry Doyle -- He was consistently in the grey ink and his WS numbers hold up very well against HOF second basemen. 8 STATS All-Star teams. WARP doesn't like him nearly as much, probably because WARP seems to put too much weight on fielding (as if it is half the game), and he wasn't so hot in that department.

15. Jimmy Sheckard -- Bounces on and off my ballot, depending on how many we elect and how many newcomers are HoM worthy. I think he was an excellent player, but he just doesn't excite me as a HoMer.

Top Ten-ers Not on My Ballot:

Pierce, Dickey -- I continue to have him just outside the ballot range. In part, it is because I have a hard time measuring him against other shortstops, since we don't have as much head-to-head data. I also think we are a little saturated with shortstops in the HoM right now. He's ranked #17 (or #16 if you ignore Joe Jackson).

Wallace, Bobby -- I've stated my thoughts on Wallace many times, but in essence, his WS numbers are not that impressive in relation to existing HoF shortstops (he's kind of at the bottom of the stack) and he was only the best shortstop in the league once. He's ranked #22 in my system, behind Willis and ahead of Chance.
   49. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: May 19, 2004 at 04:04 PM (#634797)
My 1926 ballot, PHoM'ers:

1. Joe Jackson: First, why I’m not boycotting him. Although he did take money, I don’t think he tried to throw the 1919 WS (.375/.394/.562). And many ballgames were fixed and actually thrown during his era (ahem, Hal Chase)—Jackson simply had the misfortune to get caught being involved. Now, onto the fun stuff. Jackson is tops among eligibles in OPS+ (his 170 is 7th alltime, just ahead of Ty Cobb) and dominates all-time-adjusted EqA (.329, next is Browning at .312). Despite the shortening of his career, his career WARP3 ties Van Haltren, Sheckard, and Ryan in the 90-95 range which is second on this ballot to Wallace. The 183 Gray Ink is third. The only think he’s missing is a high Black Ink total, and it’s not his fault he played in the same league as Cobb and Speaker. Far and away the best player on this ballot, IMO, and a slam-dunk first-ballot HOMer.

2. Sam Thompson: Second in both Ink categories, fifth on OPS+ and has way more PA than anyone ahead of him, third in all-time-adjusted EqA, and third in OPS+ among eligible hitters (as far as I can see), only career WARP3 is middling. A shortish career, but what a peak. Great RBI man, lowest OPS+ during his first 11 years was 122. A bit overshadowed by teammates Hamilton and Delahanty in the Phillies' 1894 three-.400-hitter outfield (despite finishing 2nd in the league with a .686 SLG), but a superstar in his own right. Welcome to the Hall, Sam.

3. Rube Waddell: Why so little love? For those of us who believe in DIPS, Waddell is a beacon: from 1902-08, he struck out 1/3 more batters per 9 than the league's second-place finishers in K's per 9, including 1902 when he fanned hitters 82% more often than next-best finisher Jack Powell. If you do make the Tinker/Evers argument against Brown, you've gotta love Rube, who clearly got vastly more outs of his own doing than any of his contemporaries. His 1902, '04, and '05 seasons were ones for the ages (ERA+ of 179, 165, 179), and his career ERA+ of 134 is 22nd all-time. The 46 Black Ink just seal the deal. Rube and Dazzy Vance--as much or more even than Walter Johnson--were the two great strikeout kings of the pre-strikeout era, and neither is given their due. Both should rank high in the HoM.

4. Sherry Magee: At least he's getting the credit he deserves. 137 OPS+, strong Ink (tops in Gray), great peak years, long career.

5. Gavvy Cravath: Basically interchangeable with Browning. Despite the short career, tops this ballot on Black Ink at 46; is third in OPS+ and fourth in EqA. Stupidity of ML owners in his 20s can’t be held against him, his minor league record shows he would have been at least a well-above-average ML regular. Also, in an era when fielders determined hitters’ fortunes to a much greater degree than today (low HR, BB, and K rates = way more balls in play), Gavvy deserves credit for creating runs without the help of crappy gloves and errant arms via the longball and good walk totals.

6. Pete Browning: Basically interchangeable with Cravath; slight edge to Cactus Gavvy because of league. But I see only a few fans here of a simply extraordinary hitter. American Association or no, you can't argue with a 162 OPS+ and .312 all-time-adjusted career EqA. A top-five hitter in his day (surpassed only by Brouthers, Kelly, Anson, Connor, IMO). He could flat out hit. Give credit where credit is due.

7. Addie Joss: So he died of meningitis. There’s just no arguing with a 142 ERA+, 8th alltime for a starting pitcher. As great as any pitcher of his era, and would be remembered that way if he had, well, stayed alive. Cooperstown was right to waive the ten-year rule and let him in, and so should we.

8. Bob Caruthers: Because anyone who, over a career, posts a 123 ERA+ and 135 OPS+ deserves to be in my HoM, American Association be damned. In 1886, he led his league in OPS and was second in ERA. That's just astounding. He almost repeated the feat in 1887, when he was third in the league in OPS, while fourth in ERA and led in WHIP. He wasn't a great enough pitcher or a great enough hitter for long enough to pass guys like Joss and Browning, but his two-way excellence just has to be recognized.

9. Bobby Wallace: I used to *really* not like him, but his 108 career WARP3 just blows everyone else away (Van Haltren is second at 94.2). Nice long career, and his 1899 and 1901 seasons were excellent according to WARP3, with the bat and the glove. It’s tough for me to put him higher with a .268 career EqA, but he just makes my PHoM.
   50. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: May 19, 2004 at 04:06 PM (#634802)
===== PHoM Line

10. Joe McGinnity: Strong 121 ERA+ backs up phenomenal black ink of 64, fueled mainly by his iron durability. A few more knock-‘em-dead seasons like '04 would make me more of a fan—only three other seasons above 120 ERA+ and none over 150--but the man could carry a team on his back.

11. Clark Griffith: He wouldn't make my personal HoM, but a 121 ERA+ and 71.4 career WARP3 slip him into the top 10.

12. Frank Grant: I’m iffy on the early Negro Leaguers, but strength of support elsewhere makes me put him ahead of guys that I don’t even see as borderline HoM candidates.

13 Charley Jones: If he hadn't been blacklisted in 1881 or 1882 he'd be higher. I can't drop a 149 career OPS+ and .294 all-time-adjusted EqA any lower, but I can't put someone with such unimpressive career totals any higher.

14 Hugh Duffy: I'm swayed by his very strong Black Ink (38), and the fact that the rising tide of 1894 lifted his boat WAY higher than anyone else's. But he wasn't the same player from 1896-1900. Lifetime 122 OPS+ is strong but not strong enough to bump him into top 10.

15 (3-way tie): Jimmy Sheckard, George Van Haltren, Jimmy Ryan. These three are identical twins: 93-94 WARP3, .286-.289 EqA, 120-124 OPS+, 116-124 Gray Ink. Sheckard has a lead in Ink but he’s lowest on OPS+. Can’t pick between ‘em, so two points per.

Missing the cut: Dickey Pearce. Again, with no quantitative evidence from the 1860’s and nothing to extrapolate backwards from 1870’s, he’s just anecdotal, and gets less support than Grant. I just don’t think pre-NA baseball was similar enough to the current game to elect players from this era. I’d be much more inclined to take Lip Pike than Pearce (but no, I didn’t vote for him either).
   51. jimd Posted: May 19, 2004 at 05:07 PM (#634894)
Jackson's career WARP3 ties Van Haltren, Sheckard, and Ryan in the 90-95 range which is second on this ballot to Wallace.

It does NOT. Jackson's career WARP-3 total is 80.3, compared with 94.2, 93.5, 93.2 for the others, respectively.

Maybe you confused his WARP-1 total with his WARP-3 total. In that case the others have the following totals: 121.1, 130.7, 119.2. Even with BP's quality adjustment or "timeline", Jackson does not close the gap. He needs some more years of playing time.
   52. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: May 19, 2004 at 05:28 PM (#634946)
Yep, you're right, I just mis-copied the number into my spreadsheet. That doesn't change my ballot, but it does close the gap between him and Thompson from a lot to a little. Thanks for the correction.
   53. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: May 19, 2004 at 06:11 PM (#635050)
Missing the cut:

Eddie Cicotte: Boycotted this year due to my belief that he, unlike Jackson, did try to throw the 1919 WS (two losses, 2.91 ERA compared to 1.82 in the regular season). Next year, he's ahead of McGinnity, behind Wallace, and out of my PHoM.

Jake Beckley: A Black Ink score of One, and less WARP3 in more PA than Sheckard/Ryan/Van Haltren.

Larry Doyle: If I'm going to vote for a hitter with under 60 WARP3, they better have had a sick peak (Browning, Cravath). A .285 EqA isn't gonna do it.

Frank Chance: Love the .301 EqA and 135 OPS+, but Ink scores are too low given his paltry 57 WARP3.

Cupid Childs: 119 OPS+, 6 Black Ink, 75 Gray Ink? Weak. I voted for Wallace based on his 108 WARP3; but Childs' 76 ain't gonna get it done.

Roger Bresnahan: Need more WARP3 to compensate for paltry Ink and unremarkable OPS+. Prospectus has him as a below-average fielding catcher.

Hughie Jennings: 117 OPS+, no Black Ink, short career. Very similar to Childs, but slightly worse everywhere.

Mickey Welch: 113 ERA+, three Black Ink, 46.4 WARP3? Pass.
   54. Rick A. Posted: May 19, 2004 at 08:27 PM (#635295)
Sorry if this shows up more than once. I posted this, but it seems to have disappeared.

1926 Ballot
Bobby Wallace and Charley Jones enter my PHOM. I'm boycotting the Black Sox this year.

1.Dickey Pearce Best SS of 1850’s and 1860’s. 20+ year career, acknowledged the best by contemporaries, played on the best team (Brooklyn Atlantics) for much of that time.
2.Frank Grant –Could move up or down based on new info. Might have been better than McPhee, based on IL stats and length of career.
3.Bobby Wallace – Not a very high prime, but a nice, long career. Seems more like Bid McPhee to me than Jake Beckley.
4.Charley Jones – 96% of value is above average. Truly great hitter who missed 2 years in his prime.
5.Lip Pike – 95% of documented career is above average. Fresh look at Charley Jones, Pike, and Browning made me change my order of them.
6.Sherry Magee – Better than Sheckard.
7.Pete Browning – 61% of value is prime, 89% of value is above average.
8.Ed Williamson – Moves up from #20. I’m not giving him credit for playing being a thirdbaseman playing shortstop, as discussed in the PHOM thread. Just realized I was undervaluing him. We’re on track to elect 8 deadball pitchers, and I’m fine with that, but shouldn’t we elect the second best thirdbaseman from th 1880’s. Great defensive player and very good hitter.
9.Joe McGinnity - 83% of value is above-average. Good prime value. Moved up due to comparison w/Brown.
10.Bob Caruthers – OK, the arguments for Caruthers have convinced me that he deserves a place on my ballot. Good-to-great pitchers who can hit the crap out of the ball are very rare indeed.
11.Rube Foster - Moved up due to re-evaluation and new info.
12.Jimmy Sheckard – Just a step behind Keeler. 84% of value is above average.
13.Cupid Childs – Good hitter. Not as good defensively as McPhee. 84% of career above average.
14.Hughie Jennings – 77% of value is prime alone. Unfortunately, that’s all he’s got. Still that’s enough to get him this high. Re-evaluated 1890’s infielders since they seemed to get beat up during their playing days.
15.Bill Monroe – Probably should be ranked higher, but I have a hard time putting him above Childs.
   55. Rick A. Posted: May 19, 2004 at 08:30 PM (#635299)
Part 2

16.Hugh Duffy –. 82% of career is above-average. Great defense. Took another look at him and he moved up a couple of spots
17.Sam Thompson – 85% of value is above average. Great hitter. Getting crowded out due to evaluation of pitchers and new eligibles.
18.Vic Willis – Very close to McGinnity.
19.Mike Tiernan – 80% of value is above average.
20.George Van Haltren – 9% of value is prime, but 73% of value is above average. I tend to really like steady careers like Van Haltren, Griffin, Beckley, but just can’t see him jumping over anyone on my ballot.
21.Rube Waddell –Moved up some with RSI info. Impressive SO ability.
22.Larry Doyle – Not as good as Childs, but slightly better than Dunlap
23.Mike Griffin – Good combo of offense and defense. Every season is above average. A little higher prime or more career would move him up some.
24.Clark Griffith –Moved up since he did win lots of games even with average peripheral stats.
25.Tommy Leach – Good peak and decent career. May need to rank higher
26.John McGraw – Good prime value. Would be higher if he played a little more.
27.Frank Chance – see McGraw
28.Fred Dunlap – Moved up in re-evaluation
29.Jake Beckley- As I wrote about Van Haltren, I really like long careers. However his lack of prime value has him ranked lower than Van Haltren
30.Mickey Welch – May need to look at him again.
31.Tony Mullane –
32.Jimmy Ryan - Good career value and prime value, but too many below average seasons to make it on the ballot. Only 60% of career value is above average.
33.Addie Joss – First 8.5 years were very good, but I need a longer career to place him higher.
34.Herman Long –Very solid player. Better prime than Wallace, but Wallace’s career blows him away.
35.Sol White –


Still not sure what to do about Gavvy Cravath. Right now he's ranked at #42. If I give him credit for minor league seasons, he'd probably climb to about #25. I'll decide what to do about him by the next ballot.
   56. Jeff M Posted: May 19, 2004 at 11:49 PM (#635645)
I used to *really* not like him, but his 108 career WARP3 just blows everyone else away...

In my opinion this is another example of WARP treating fielding as if it is 50% or more of the game, thus inflating the numbers of the best fielders. That approach doesn't match the way the game is played. Wallace's WARP number is composed 2/3 of fielding and 1/3 of hitting. Wallace gets nearly as many fielding runs above replacement in 1901 as Dan Brouthers gets hitting in 1889 (I just picked Brouthers out of the air because we can all agree he was a great hitter). That's seems highly unlikely, since even the most liberal estimates of defense don't make it more than 40% of the game (and that's mostly in the very early years).

Take Wallace's 1901 season. He played 134 games at short. He had 72 FRAR.

Compare Dan Brouthers in 1889, when he played 126 games and had 73 BRAR. In 1889, Brouthers was a .373/.462/.507 man, with 105 Runs Scored and 118 RBI.

If Brouthers' fielding was at replacement level (which it was, approximately) and Wallace's hitting had been at replacement level (which it wasn't, he was better), then WARP would say Brouthers' excellent hitting was really no better than Wallace's excellent fielding. That just seems impossible.

According to WARP, Wallace saved a half run above replacement every single game, simply by handling a PO or Assist 6.5 times a game...who knows how many a replacement player would save, but presumably more than 0.

By comparison, Brouthers produced a half a run above replacement in every game he batted that year, and he had about 4.5 PAs per game. Essentially, his batting in 1889 (a good year for a very good player) was no more valuable than Wallace's fielding in 1901, even though Wallace,from a defensive position only touched the ball 2.5 times a game more.

I can't believe that any defensive player is in a position to save a full run above replacement every 13 chances. And in Wallace's 1901, 1/3 of his chances were POs, which seem to me to be less likely to be run savers.

I'm not denigrating Wallace's fielding ability...it was obviously exceptional. And I'm not suggesting that WARP be ignored. However, I think it needs to be balanced with other methods, because time and time again, it overinflates the performances of great defenders. (I made this same argument before about Charlie Bennett, whose election I advocated: according to WARP he saved a half run per game above replacement from the catcher's spot).
   57. jimd Posted: May 20, 2004 at 01:55 AM (#636074)
For a SS (or other IFer), each play made that an average SS would not make probably converts a single into an out. This is equivalent to changing a single to an out in an offensive player's record.

According to the adjusted league Batting Averages at baseball-reference.com, Brouthers produced about 52 extra hits in 1889 (some are for extra bases and there are also walks but I didn't go that deep). I know BP does a lot of adjusting beyond Range Factor, but using just that crude measure, Wallace made 110 extra plays.

Brouthers may be doing quite well in catching up to Wallace in value after BP's adjustments.

We have to remember that during the deadball era, infielders are making many more plays than today. The RF in 1901 for SS's was about 50% higher than today. To me, this implies that the position may be somewhat more important than the value actually credited by Win Shares.
   58. jimd Posted: May 20, 2004 at 02:02 AM (#636091)
Brouthers 52 extra hits and Wallace's 110 extra plays are when compared to average, not replacement. (Just making that clear since I didn't say so above.)
   59. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: May 20, 2004 at 03:52 AM (#636484)
I want to make an edit to my ballot. I have reconsidered Lip Pike (who I just said I prefer to Pearce), and can't ignore a 155 OPS+, .308 EqA, and 26 Black Ink. Pike moves to 9, everyone else moves down one slot, and the three-way tie for no. 15 is eliminated. Revised:

1. Joe Jackson
2. Sam Thompson
3. Rube Waddell
4. Sherry Magee
5. Gavvy Cravath
6. Pete Browning
7. Addie Joss
8. Bob Caruthers
9. Lip Pike
10. Bobby Wallace
11. Joe McGinnity
12. Clark Griffith
13. Frank Grant
14. Charley Jones
15. Hugh Duffy
   60. DavidFoss Posted: May 20, 2004 at 07:03 AM (#636811)
As for Bobby Wallace in 1901...

Rather than compare Wallace to Brouthers from a decade earlier. It may be instructive to compare him to his teammate Jesse Burkett. WARP3 has them almost identical (JB-9.8 / BW-9.6). Win Shares has a huge gap... JB is the MVP with 38 (35.2H/2.7F) and BW has 26 (18.8H/7.1F).

The hitting comparison is about right. WARP also has about a 2-to-1 ratio of BRAR. Its the FR that is very different. Wallace makes up all the ground with his fielding numbers.

I checked the team totals for WARP3 in 1901 and found that they do match the standings fairly well. A zero WARP3 team would have won about 21 games that year. For six teams, the difference between wins and WARP was between 20 and 23. The two "outliers" had differences of 17 and 26. I knew that Win Shares correlated with wins by definition, but I was surprised that WARP3 correlated this well.

The big difference appears to be in the split of Hitting/Fielding/Pitching. For WARP the percentage contribution split was 52H/28F/20P and for WS the split was 61H/13F/26P. St Louis was 1st in RS and 5th in RA while playing in a moderate pitchers park, so I tend to agree with Win Shares higher hitting percentage... but the big difference is the split between pitching and fielding.

Another example: 1906 Cubs: WARP: 30H/30F/40P WS: 47H/14F/39P

Anyhow, apologies if this had already been pointed out before.
   61. PhillyBooster Posted: May 20, 2004 at 01:53 PM (#636865)
For those who haven't voted yet, I'm just writing to say, don't bother. You're vote won't make a difference anyway.


ACTUALLY, this year is redefining "wide open ballot" by a large margin. Previously, the winner with the lowest number of Points Per Ballot cast was Harry Stovey, who won in 1916 with only 15.16 points per ballot. But that was a one-electee year, so he didn't get any bonus points for second place votes. The lowest number of points per ballot by an inductee in a 2-electee year was last year when Three Finger Brown came in second with 15.96 points per ballot cast. Those are the only two elections with a winner getting fewer than 16 points per ballot cast.

We are working on breaking those limits by a large margin. So far, with 27 ballots in, no candidate has earned even 14 points per ballot cast.
   62. andrew siegel Posted: May 20, 2004 at 02:40 PM (#636919)
Here's my ballot, truncated due to queasiness regarding the new server. In the end, I decided to boycott the Black Sox for one season but then consider them without any penalty in future seasons. I'd give you my reasons, but you wouldn't care. For the record, Jackson would be number 1 on my ballot and Cicotte would be number 17.

(1) Jimmy Sheckard (2nd)-- I wouldn't bet a finger that he is better than the OF's I've got in the twenties (Thompson, Tiernan, Browning, Cravath) but I've got to rank them no matter how close the top 30 are and his combination of career, peak, and prime plus offense, defense, and speed pushes him into the Stovey-Kelley-Keeler range and to the top of this ballot.
(2) Frank Grant (3rd)-- His time has come.
(3) George Van Haltren (5th)-- His time is coming. A top 15 player for almost 15 years; that's hard to do.
(4) Cupid Childs (7th)-- If Larry Doyle is a ballot candidate with less offense and a lot less defense, Childs needs to be in the top tier.
(5) Joe McGinnity (6th)-- I love his combination of quantity and quality but am sobered by the calculations showing that his total value wasn't that much higher than Addie Joss (who I had in the 30's). For now Joss moves up a dozen spaces and McGinnity down one but I continue to reevaluate pitchers.
(6) Hughie Jennings (8th)-- To my mind, the best peak on the ballot.
(7) Bobby Wallace (9th)-- I might have him too high or too low; I wish I could get a handle on how much WS underrates 19th century defense.
(8) Sherry Magee (10th)-- Broadly similar to Sheckard, but loses little points here and there until the gap is seven spots.
(9) Charley Jones (11th)-- As a prime voter who doesn't care so much about the mild differences in career length, I think he's a great ringer for Magee.
(10) Jimmy Ryan (13th)-- The next three are essentially tied for me; they sit right on my HoM bubble.
(11) (N)ed Williamson (12th)
(12) Hugh Duffy (14th)
(13) Lip Pike (15th)-- Lip remains another enigma-- a great set of skills, some gaudy but inconsistent numbers, and a long legacy of disappointed teams.
(14) Bill Monroe (off/16th)-- I feel less sure about his placement than any of the other excluded players, but this spot (general vacinity of Dunlap and Doyle, but a bit higher) feels about right.
(15) Roger Bresnahan (off/17th)-- If he'd played more or played more catcher, he'd be in the top 5.
   63. andrew siegel Posted: May 20, 2004 at 02:56 PM (#636949)
SOME COMMENTS:

Sam Thompson-- He's right around number 20 on my list. Like Browning, Tiernan, and Cravath, he's done in by the combination of poor fielding, few seasons, and lots of injuries. I may be grossly underrating this group, but I'm fairly confident they should rise or fall together.

Bob Caruthers-- I may be missing the boat, but I don't see him above say number 25. He was a B+ with a short career who simply didn't have enough plate appearances to showcase his hitting skills; if he's number 1, then Jim Whitney and Tony Mullane should be in the top 10 and Dave Foutz in the top 20.

Dickey Pearce-- As I've said many times before, the baseball of the post-1868 era appears to have been on par with that of the early NA, while the pre-civil war game was regional and elemental. I think the best way to handle timelining is to have a firm start date (I prefer 1866) and count all seasons after that date as equal while disregarding anything before then. Based on that system, Pearce ranks in the 20's. Given his age in 1866, I consider that a great compliment rather than a diss.

Larry Doyle-- He's number 17 on my list (19 if you count Jackson and Cicotte), right behind Dunlap. He was a stellar hitter for a 2B and gets some credit for a comparatively long career, but, on my reading, Childs and Dunlap were both better than him with both the glove and the stick.

Gavvy Cravath-- I like him a lot and give him credit for the time he should have been a solid major leaguer but was held back by poor talent evaluation. Nonetheless, he's a one dimensional OF with a relatively short career and a big bat. The line for those guys (Thompson, Browning, Tiernan) starts around number 20.
   64. OCF Posted: May 20, 2004 at 04:07 PM (#637062)
The flip side of what Jeff M. said in #56 about Wallace is Doyle. Doyle was a for-real hitter who played 2B without an outstanding glove, and WS likes him a lot better than WARP. It's the same issue.

What PhillyBooster said in #61 also shows up in consensus scores. With 27 votes in, it's too early to say what those scores will really be, but tentatively they range from +10 to -16, and the highest possible score would be a mere +17. No matter who you put in the #1 and #2 spots, you're substantially overrating them compared to the rest of the electorate.
   65. mbd1mbd1 Posted: May 20, 2004 at 04:44 PM (#637110)
1926 ballot:

1. Sherry Magee (1) - How is he not getting more love? He had 16 solid seasons and tons of Ink. He's not the dominant #1 eligible that we've seen before, but he deserves a spot in the HoM.
2. George Van Haltren (2) - Let the record show that I was high on GVH last ballot.
3. Frank Grant (4) - He keeps on climbing my ballot.
4. Jimmy Sheckard (7)
5. Jake Beckley (6) - Sheckard jumps a spot over Beckley this week...he has a slight edge in WS, WARP3, and was probably a better fielder too (~500 RAR vs. ~300 RAR).
6. Joe McGinnity (8) - He keeps climbing, too.
7. Jimmy Ryan (9) - He and GVH are so close, yet they're 5 ballot spots apart. This is a really flat ballot.
8. Bob Caruthers (11) - He started out at 8 on my first ballot in 1922, and he's slowly working his way back up.
9. Sam Thompson (10) - I cooled on him last week because of career length issues - basically he played 12 full seasons. It's too bad, because he was a hell of a hitter and if he had broken in maybe a couple of years earlier, he'd be a NB for me.
10. Bobby Wallace (13) - Moving on up, part III. He's growing on me little by little.
11. Hugh Duffy (12) - Like Sam, I wish he could have hung around a little longer.
12. Vic Willis (14) - 4000 IP at 118 ERA+ is huge and the nice Ink helps too.
13. Joe Jackson (NA) - Shoeless probably had the most talent of anyone on this ballot, but he wasted it by breaking the rules. I'm not boycotting the Black Sox this year...as a career voter he gets penalized enough by having a record that's only a fraction of what could have been. It will be interesting to see where he ends up in the tally. He'd be a great test case for career vs. peak voting tendencies if he didn't have all the baggage.
14. Rube Waddell (15) - Only Joss has a higher career ERA+, and Waddell pitched 600 more innings.
15. Mickey Welch (NA) - Welch makes my ballot for the first time after hovering in limbo for five years. He's got huge WS but middling WARP3.

Just missing (16-20): Cicotte, Leach, Griffith, Doyle, Browning. Cravath is at 22, and none of the other new eligibles are within sniffing distance.

My take on Dickey Pearce: I think the relevant question is, at what point did a major league develop? For me, that happened with the formation of the NA in 1871. I'm not so worried about the 1860's baseball being different from the modern game. I guess it's the quality of competition question. I don't doubt that Pearce was a considered a great player. But there are guys who hit 50 home runs in church league softball who are considered great within their contexts - and we aren't voting them into the HoM. The line has to be drawn somewhere....and Dickey is the unfortunate victim of his own birthday. (Adding insult to injury, he only got to celebrate it every fourth year!)
   66. Brad G. Posted: May 20, 2004 at 05:35 PM (#637183)
1926 Ballot:

1.Sherry Magee- While WARP favors Sheckard in LF and Win Shares gives Jackson the edge, Magee proves to be the most consistent across the board. His Career Win Share total of 354 leads all hitters in my current consideration set, and his impressive showing in Ink only enhance his value in my eyes. Quite a slugger and an easy choice for HoM candidate.

2.Joe McGinnity- How long will the Iron Man last? Well, until he’s elected to the Hall, which is an eventual sure thing if there ever was one. I feel he’s the strongest eligible pitcher, looking good across the board with the noticeable exception of WARP ratings.

3.Sam Thompson- Quite an impactful player in his day… check out the Black & Gray Ink.

4.Jimmy Sheckard- Career Win Shares = 339, WS3 = 96, Career WARP1 = 130.7, Career WARP3 = 93.5, Career Runs Created = 1067, Black Ink = 19, Gray Ink = 124. Earns a Defensive “A” in WS. Long, steady career; very good all-around player.

5.Bobby Wallace- Career WS = 345, Career WARP1 = 155.5, Career WARP3 = 108. These are great numbers, SS or not.

6.Hugh Duffy- Career Win Shares = 295, Win Share 5-year Peak = 144 (!), Career WARP3 = 81, Career Runs Created = 1229, Black Ink = 38, Gray Ink = 147. A+ Centerfielder with 5 WS Gold Gloves, according to James, who ranks him #20 Centerfielder of all time.

7.Bob Caruthers- 119 Wins over .500 in his career. His career has been meticulously dissected on these pages. This is where I’ve consistently placed him.

8.Joe Jackson- No ban, just no inclusion of hypothetical stats in my analysis. I was anxious to vote for Joe, figuring he was an obvious HoMer. I’m sure he’ll get in- it’s just not that obvious to me anymore. Could go up next year.

9.Rube Foster- Probably the best Negro League Pitcher of All Time up through 1908. I feel his on-field performance continues to be overshadowed by his other contributions to the game.

10.Frank Grant- Subjective and consistent placement. I hope we don’t dismiss him in the wake of HR Johnson’s election.

11.Jimmy Ryan- - Career WS = 316, Career WARP1 = 119, Career WARP3 = 84.5, Career Runs Created = 1338, B+ WS Defender.

12.George Van Haltren- Career WS = 344, WARP1 = 121, Career Runs Created = 1286.

13.Rube Waddell- Another pitcher who ended up very high in the Ink stats. Career Win Shares = 240; WS5 = 145.

14.Jake Beckley- Career WS = 318, Career WARP1 = 116. Career Runs Created = 1461, which exceeds Dan Brouthers’ 1445.

15.Roger Bresnahan- A 15% Catcher Bonus eeks him onto the list. I have Duke Farrell as the next best eligible catcher, and he’s miles away.

16-21: Cravath, Browning, Monroe, Leach, Doyle, Griffith


Missing: Dickey Pearce- Perhaps he’s being docked too much for the era he’s playing in. Still, I don’t see him as better than Hughie Jennings. Would probably place around #25.
   67. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: May 20, 2004 at 07:34 PM (#637514)
Posted by Jack Chesbro on May 20, 2004 at 01:35 PM (#6371834)


ACTUALLY, this year is redefining "wide open ballot" by a large margin. Previously, the winner with the lowest number of Points Per Ballot cast was Harry Stovey, who won in 1916 with only 15.16 points per ballot. But that was a one-electee year, so he didn't get any bonus points for second place votes. The lowest number of points per ballot by an inductee in a 2-electee year was last year when Three Finger Brown came in second with 15.96 points per ballot cast. Those are the only two elections with a winner getting fewer than 16 points per ballot cast.

(gets ready for his close up).
   68. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 20, 2004 at 07:50 PM (#637554)
(gets ready for his close up).

Jack, unless you mean the toothpaste, fuhgedaboutit!
   69. Sean Gilman Posted: May 20, 2004 at 08:07 PM (#637614)
i'll post Tom's ballot:


-----

1926 Ballot
review of Hanrahan's value system: career value with a fairly high
replacement level (slightly below average). Something like WARP3
minus 2.5 wins per full year, or WS minus 13 per year adjusted for
league quality, or OPS+ over 96 adjusted for defense and timeline and
maybe speed. I don't believe in much extra value for "peak". Some
subjective estimating of ability across time and place.

1- Sam Thompson (1)
Best full-career Hitter. Add a bit to his career totals for lost time
before age 25, and make an educated guess at how he would hit in the
live ball era, and he's a monster. Win Shares does not do him
justice. BP translated stats show him with a +66 OPS advantage over
Magee; NOT a small thing!

2- Frank Grant (3)
Best black player, by consensus, of the 1800s. And possibly longer.

3- Clark Griffith (4)
He Won Lots of Games, Pitching for Lousy Teams, even often Facing the
Toughest Opponents. Where Is The Love?

4- Bobby Wallace (2)
Huge amount of career value. Even as I discount WS and WARP for their
too-low replacement level, Wallace still meant many wins over a team
having to play a mediocre shortstop for a generation. Good hitter,
made 8-10 fewer errors per year than most shortstops, good range.
Think Dave Concepcion, except with more power, a longer career, oh
plus he pitched well for 2 years also. Take that, Joe Morgan!

5- George Van Haltren (6)
Hit. Ran. Played defense. Pitched. Long career. Solidly on my ballot.

6- Joe Jackson (new)
I give Jackson little credit for his 1919 season (helping win the
pennant, but maybe helping lose the World Series). Great, great
hitter. It is likely he would have been even better post-1920, given
his power hitting style. Even with a short career (and I'm a career
voter) and not much defensive value, he winds up here.

7- Lip Pike (7)
It all depends on the murky timeline adjustment. But he was better
than Charlie Jones, who was a fine hitter himself in Pike's era. Even
timelining like WARP does, his adjEqA is higher than Sherry Magee's;
not bad for a guy who could play 2B as well as CF. The more "very
good" OFers who come along, the more Mister Pike stands out. My last
vestige of pre-1880 HoM worthiness.

8- Jim McGinnity (8)
Con: Same ERA+ as Griffith. Similar IP. Couldn't hit quite as well,
slightly lower WARP, possibly better defense behind him, W-L record
adjusted for support not that great.
Pro: Great '05 series, good minor league stats, and he allowed few
unearned runs.

9- Rube Waddell (10)
Same big years as McGinnity, less other stuff tossed in. Six time
leader in KOs, 3 ERA+ titles help.

10- Jimmy Sheckard (11)
A lot like Van Haltren. Almost.
Dropped him a tad for his inglorious 0-for-21 in the 1906 World
Series, and because he doesn't stand out among the other glut of
OFers.

11- Bob Caruthers (12)
Great W-L record result of his fine pitching AND bat. But a short
career, in a weaker league, and he had good taste in teammates, too.

12- Jim McCormick (13)
Awesome 56+ Wins Above Team. Lots of IP. Also pitched behind poorer
defenses than most Ps on this list, so ERA+ doesn't tell the whole
story. Plus he could hit.

13- Sherry Magee (off)
Superior to Sheckard with the lumber, by about 8-10 runs a year. Not
nearly as good with the leather.

14- Addie Joss (14)
Bonus points for his great pennant exploits.

15- Ed Williamson (15)
Decent hitter. Great defense. Underrepresented position. And many of
the guys he played with and against thought he was the best. Back on
(and climbing slowly) after years in limbo.

Next would be these 7, all of whom I'm disappointed to leave off
(maybe they'll all be `on' by 1932):
H Jennings, J McGraw, J Beckley, R Bresnahan, C Childs, D Pearce, C
Jones

Quality of play circa 1860 (they hadn't even codified the concept of
a "ball" as an unhittable pitch until 1863!) leads me to put somewhat
limited stock in Pearce's rep. Also, Joe Start was MUCH better post
age 35 than Pearce. John and Julio Franco are fine players post age
40, but that won't get them in the HoM.

Also near the edge: R Foster, J Ryan, H Duffy, L Doyle

Larry Doyle sure could hit for a 2Bman. But was he better than
Childs? Doesn't look like it to me at first glance. McGraw and
Bresnahan could hit well, too, at even more important positions.
   70. jimd Posted: May 20, 2004 at 09:03 PM (#637842)
Read previous ballots if you want more depth on my reasons for all but the latest eligibles.

1) B. Caruthers -- If you think Bob's career was short, well Jackson's was relatively shorter. When Bob was pitching, the 140 game schedule required teams to have 3 starters, 2 couldn't cover all the games. In Jackson's time teams needed 3 starting outfielders (we knew that ;-). Both played during eras when there were at least 16 teams active each year. So the sample pool sizes are roughly comparable; starting pitchers, late 1880's vs starting OF'ers, 1910's.

There were 16 pitchers who were Bob's peers (careers overlap at least half of Bob's) who pitched at least as many seasons. There are 24 outfielders who were Joe's peers who played at least as many seasons. At least by this measure of "difficulty", Bob's career was definitely "longer" than Joe's. (Pardon the formatting.)

14 Galvin                                20 Cobb (all counts are through 1925)
13 Terry                                 17 Crawford, Speaker
12 Keefe, Mullane                        16 Wheat, Hooper
11 Welch, Radbourn, Weyhing              14 Milan, Carey
10 Clarkson   9 Cunningham               13 Magee, Schulte, Paskert, Burns    
 8 Whitney, Buffinton, Chamberlin, King  12 Veach   11 Cy Williams

 7 Bob, Baldwin, Gleason, Staley         10 Oldring, Lewis, Walker, Strunk, 
                                            Flack, Griffith, Roush
 6 Hecker, Morris, Foutz, Getzien, Hart   9 Joe, C.Wilson, S.Collins, Mann, Tobin

Outfielders get credit for 1 season if they play in over half the games; pitchers get credit for 1 season if they made at least 18 starts. Caruthers made at least 32 starts in each of his 7 seasons (as befits an ace; no funny business here); 18 GS is below the median for a third starter during this period (usually low 20's) to ensure proper credit for all reasonable third starters. All along the scale there's a pretty consistent 2:3 relationship (particularly if you peer into the "future" and give credit to Cobb, Speaker, etc. for the rest of their careers); two seasons as a starter in the 1880's is about as difficult to achieve as three seasons as an outfielder in the 1910's.

You can't diss Caruthers for a short career and then vote for Jackson; Joe's career is relatively shorter.

2) B. Wallace -- Made my PHOM in 1921, instead of Collins. Are we still in the "best-athlete" stage where they tend to play SS, resulting in a shortage of really good 3B and 2B players? Wonder if you'll find any other ballots with these two back to back. ;-) It may seem like my ballot caters to peak players, but it only looks that way because the rest of you highly estimable voters have already elected most of the good career players, leaving many of the good peak guys behind.

3) J. Sheckard -- Surprised me. The best NL OF'er of the early oughts, by peak. He didn't last as long as Clarke, which drops him to just above the glut. In my revised PHOM, instead of Joe Kelley (who is now also in).

4) H. Jennings -- Using rolling 5-year peaks for WARP-3, only he and Tommy Bond, on this ballot, can claim to have been the "best player in baseball". All of the others have already been elected or are not yet eligible; elected to my PHOM a decade ago.

5) D. Pearce -- Reflecting on him and his long career at a top defensive position in the undocumented dawn of the game, I think he belongs. (Basically, the Joe Start argument, with less documented evidence.)

6) T. Bond -- Both WARP and Win Shares places him as the best player in the game during the late 1870's. Career prematurely shortened by the rule change that moved the pitching box back 5 feet in 1880. You just don't modify at will the break on that "curved-ball" you've been throwing for five years.

7) Rube Foster -- Legendary peak for a short time in the oughts. Very good pitcher for some time afterwards. Those who vote peak should re-examine him. Still a lot of questions, but he has the potential to get a #1 vote, depending on the answers.

8) J. Ryan -- Here comes the glut. Much better peak when compared with his contemporaries than Van Haltren, but not up to Sheckard's level either.

9) F. Grant -- Stalled and waiting for new information.

10) George Van Haltren -- He and Wallace have the best careers left on the current ballot, now that the really good career players have been inducted. Wallace has the better peak, though that's not difficult to do. GVH is the Beckley of outfielders, though better, unless Jake deserves more defensive credit than I'm giving (via WARP).
   71. jimd Posted: May 20, 2004 at 09:04 PM (#637847)
1926 Ballot: Part II

11) S. King -- Not likely to go anywhere soon, but this is where he rates.

12) S. Magee -- Moves onto the ballot due to my popular support feedback credit (This portion of the ballot is so crowded that it makes a difference; it doesn't do much at the top.)

13) F. Jones -- Reached the top of the OF heap before he walked away. Not enough peak for the peak voters to really get excited about and not enough career for the career voters. Some of each will work on my ballot.

14) S. Thompson -- He's back, for longer than I thought.

15) J. McGinnity -- Close enough to not be worth explaining why not.

Just missing the cut are:
16-20) Ned Williamson, Jim Whitney, Fred Dunlap, Herman Long, Cupid Childs,
21-25) Gavy Cravath, Jim McCormick, Lave Cross, Lip Pike, Rube Waddell,
26-30) Hugh Duffy, Jake Beckley, Roy Thomas, Charlie Buffinton, Billy Nash

Cravath may be the most significant victim of the inefficiencies of major league talent procurement that we will run into; it also may be that his skills did not meet the perceived requirements of most clubs during the heart of the deadball era. Philly had a unique park and he had some unique abilities. I'd love to push Gavy higher, but I've nearly doubled his career value and he still scores as just another pretty good player. Right park, wrong era.

If they had played it honest, and still had had their careers end after 1920: Cicotte rates behind Beckley; Jackson rates behind Ryan (giving Joe credit for 1918).

If you'd like a pretty good modern comp for Joe Jackson, check out the BP card for Manny Ramirez. Similar EQA, similar fielding ratings (LF and RF), similar WARP-3 totals, similar career length, same calendar ages after 1920 and 2003. Jackson did have a better peak, but not that much higher; Manny has been more consistent. If Manny's career was finished now, is he HOM qualified?
   72. DavidFoss Posted: May 20, 2004 at 10:01 PM (#637986)
If Manny was eligible in 1926 against the current backlog -- with those WARP3 numbers -- he'd rank very high. I will concede that career-value oriented players may balk at Joe's 80.3 WARP3, but peak/prime voters have got to love this guy's numbers.

Its fun to rank candidates against Joe Kelley or Manny Ramirez... but its all about who else is on the ballot.
   73. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: May 20, 2004 at 10:23 PM (#638025)
I am doing a complete revision of my ballot as I have now realized that some players I assumed were in the HoM because they aren't discussed are not. I'd like to get these guys some attention. Here is my new and improved ballot!

1. Joe Jackson: First, why I’m not boycotting him. Although he did take money, I don’t think he tried to throw the 1919 WS (.375/.394/.562). And many ballgames were fixed and actually thrown during his era (ahem, Hal Chase)—Jackson simply had the misfortune to get caught being involved. Now, onto the fun stuff. Jackson is tops among eligibles in OPS+ (his 170 is 7th alltime, just ahead of Ty Cobb) and dominates all-time-adjusted EqA (.329, next is Browning at .312). Despite the shortening of his career, his 80 WARP3 is solid. The 183 Gray Ink is third. The only think he’s missing is a high Black Ink total, and it’s not his fault he played in the same league as Cobb and Speaker. Far and away the best player on this ballot, IMO, and a slam-dunk first-ballot HOMer.

2. Sam Thompson: Second in both Ink categories, fifth on OPS+ and has way more PA than anyone ahead of him, third in all-time-adjusted EqA, and sixth in OPS+ among eligible hitters (highest of anyone with 6,000 PA), only career WARP3 is middling. A shortish career, but what a peak. Great RBI man, lowest OPS+ during his first 11 years was 122. A bit overshadowed by teammates Hamilton and Delahanty in the Phillies' 1894 three-.400-hitter outfield (despite finishing 2nd in the league with a .686 SLG), but a superstar in his own right. Welcome to the Hall, Sam.

3. Rube Waddell: Why so little love? For those of us who believe in DIPS, Waddell is a beacon: from 1902-08, he struck out 1/3 more batters per 9 than the league's second-place finishers in K's per 9, including 1902 when he fanned hitters 82% more often than next-best finisher Jack Powell. If you do make the Tinker/Evers argument against Brown, you've gotta love Rube, who clearly got vastly more outs of his own doing than any of his contemporaries. His 1902, '04, and '05 seasons were ones for the ages (ERA+ of 179, 165, 179), and his career ERA+ of 134 is 22nd all-time. The 46 Black Ink just seal the deal. Rube and Dazzy Vance--as much or more even than Walter Johnson--were the two great strikeout kings of the pre-strikeout era, and neither is given their due. Both should rank high in the HoM.

4. Sherry Magee: At least he's getting the credit he deserves. 137 OPS+, strong Ink (tops in Gray), great peak years, long career.

5. Mike Tiernan: 138 OPS+ over nearly 7,000 PA is HoM-worthy, .305 EqA is very strong. A better mix of career and peak than anyone below him. Just solid all around.

6. Gavvy Cravath: Basically interchangeable with Browning. Despite the short career, tops this ballot on Black Ink at 46; is fourth in OPS+ and fifth in EqA. Stupidity of ML owners in his 20s can’t be held against him, his minor league record shows he would have been at least a well-above-average ML regular. Also, in an era when fielders determined hitters’ fortunes to a much greater degree than today (low HR, BB, and K rates = way more balls in play), Gavvy deserves credit for creating runs without the help of crappy gloves and errant arms via the longball and good walk totals.

7. Pete Browning: Basically interchangeable with Cravath; slight edge to Cactus Gavvy because of league. But I see only a few fans here of a simply extraordinary hitter. American Association or no, you can't argue with a 162 OPS+ and .312 all-time-adjusted career EqA. A top-five hitter in his day (surpassed only by Brouthers, Kelly, Anson, Connor, IMO). He could flat out hit. Give credit where credit is due.

8. Bob Caruthers: Because anyone who, over a career, posts a 123 ERA+ and 135 OPS+ deserves to be in my HoM, American Association be damned. In 1886, he led his league in OPS and was second in ERA. That's just astounding. He almost repeated the feat in 1887, when he was third in the league in OPS, while fourth in ERA and led in WHIP. He wasn't a great enough pitcher or a great enough hitter for long enough to pass guys like Joss and Browning, but his two-way excellence just has to be recognized.

9. Vic Willis: 4,000 IP of 118 ERA+, excellent Gray Ink. Three great years, three good ones, and a bunch of average seasons with good durability puts him over the top.

10. Addie Joss: So he died of meningitis. There’s just no arguing with a 142 ERA+, 8th alltime for a starting pitcher. As great as any pitcher of his era, and would be remembered that way if he had, well, stayed alive. Cooperstown was right to waive the ten-year rule and let him in, and so should we.
   74. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: May 20, 2004 at 10:24 PM (#638029)
11. Bobby Wallace: I used to *really* not like him, but his 108 career WARP3 just blows everyone else away (Van Haltren is second at 94.2). Nice long career, and his 1899 and 1901 seasons were excellent according to WARP3, with the bat and the glove. It’s tough for me to put him higher with a .268 career EqA, but he just makes my PHoM.

12. Lip Pike: Quite simply one of the best hitters of his generation. Basically identical to McVey, who is in my PHoM as well as the real HoM, except he was an outfielder, which hurts him a little. Great peak/short career would put him tied with Cravath and Browning, except that he only had 2,000 career PA. I know that’s how long the season was in those days, but it still makes a difference to me.

====PHoM Line

13. Joe McGinnity: Strong 121 ERA+ backs up phenomenal black ink of 64, fueled mainly by his iron durability. A few more knock-‘em-dead seasons like '04 would make me more of a fan—only three other seasons above 120 ERA+ and none over 150--but the man could carry a team on his back. I consider him Willis with 550 fewer IP.

14. Clark Griffith: He wouldn't make my personal HoM, but a 121 ERA+ and 71.4 career WARP3 slip him into the top 10.

15. Frank Grant: I’m iffy on the early Negro Leaguers, but strength of support elsewhere slips him on my ballot.

Missing the cut:

Dickey Pearce. Again, with no quantitative evidence from the 1860’s and nothing to extrapolate backwards from 1870’s, he’s just anecdotal, and gets less support than Grant. I just don’t think pre-NA baseball was similar enough to the current game to elect players from this era.

Eddie Cicotte: Boycotted this year due to my belief that he, unlike Jackson, did try to throw the 1919 WS (two losses, 2.91 ERA compared to 1.82 in the regular season). Next year, he's ahead of McGinnity, behind Pike, and out of my PHoM.

Charley Jones: Love the 149 career OPS+ and .294 all-time-adjusted EqA, but peak not at the same level as Browning/Cravath, or his contemporary Pike.

Hugh Duffy: I'm swayed by his very strong Black Ink (38), and the fact that the rising tide of 1894 lifted his boat WAY higher than anyone else's. But he wasn't the same player from 1896-1900. Lifetime 122 OPS+ is strong but not strong enough.

Jake Beckley: A Black Ink score of One, and less WARP3 in more PA than Sheckard/Ryan/Van Haltren.

Larry Doyle: If I'm going to vote for a hitter with under 60 WARP3, they better have had a sick peak (Browning, Cravath). A .285 EqA isn't gonna do it.

Frank Chance: Love the .301 EqA and 135 OPS+, but Ink scores are too low given his paltry 57 WARP3.

Cupid Childs: 119 OPS+, 6 Black Ink, 75 Gray Ink? Weak. I voted for Wallace based on his 108 WARP3; but Childs' 76 ain't gonna get it done.

Roger Bresnahan: Need more WARP3 to compensate for paltry Ink and unremarkable OPS+. Prospectus has him as a below-average fielding catcher.

Hughie Jennings: 117 OPS+, no Black Ink, short career. Very similar to Childs, but slightly worse everywhere.

Mickey Welch: 113 ERA+, three Black Ink, 46.4 WARP3? Pass.

Jimmy Sheckard, George Van Haltren, Jimmy Ryan. These three are identical twins: 93-94 WARP3, .286-.289 EqA, 120-124 OPS+, 116-124 Gray Ink. Sheckard has a lead in Ink but he’s lowest on OPS+. All very good, none Meritorious.
   75. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 20, 2004 at 10:47 PM (#638057)
Dan: Please: no more revisions! I have enough problems tabulating these votes as it is! :-(
   76. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: May 20, 2004 at 10:50 PM (#638062)
Sorry, sorry, sorry. If I change my mind again I'll just wait until 1927.
   77. sunnyday2 Posted: May 20, 2004 at 10:50 PM (#638065)
John, you missed the real purpose of the revision, and it was meant to annoy YOU! i.e. another chance to bash Dickey Pearce! :-)

OK, everybody, you can relax again for awhile. I am going back to my own read-only computer again. Bye.
   78. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 20, 2004 at 11:13 PM (#638098)
John, you missed the real purpose of the revision, and it was meant to annoy YOU! i.e. another chance to bash Dickey Pearce! :-)

LOL
   79. OCF Posted: May 21, 2004 at 03:25 AM (#638663)
Rosenheck Ballot III has a lower consensus score than Rosenheck Ballot II or Rosenheck Ballot I. He also relinquished his claim to Best Friend of Addie Joss, handing that back to Brad Harris, but claimed the title of Best Friend of Mike Tiernan.
   80. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 21, 2004 at 09:44 AM (#639008)
1. Bobby Wallace (2) - I see him as basically slightly below Alan Trammell. Outstanding offense, from a very good defensive SS, with a fairly high peak to boot.

2. Frank Grant (3) - Favre, you've convinced me he belongs. The one line I remember from your post is that there is no evidence that suggests he wasn't a great player. We don't have 100% convincing evidence he was, but all the evidence points to the fact that he was and that's enough for me, considering the reason's why the evidence is murky (he wasn't allowed to play).

I vehemently disagree with people who won't rank him because the experts haven't placed him among the top 2B in Negro League history. Almost none
of the 19th Century stars rank on the lists of the greats at their positions, so we CANNOT compare Grant to lists that consist mostly of players from the 'future'. It's markedly unfair, and not a standard that any of the other players here have been held to. No one isn't voting for Willie Keeler because he ranked below Ken Griffey Sr. and Dixie Walker, and we cannot penalize Grant for being below Newt Allen and George Scales in the NHBA, it's an unfair double-standard.

It would be a major mistake if we don't induct Grant we haven't made one yet, so let's not forget about him guys. I think the best Negro Leaguer of the 19th Century, a player for whom we have no evidence that he wasn't a star; should be in the Hall of Merit.

3. Sam Thompson (6) - Great hitter, lousy fielder. Would rate higher if he had left carpentry a few years earlier. His greatness is overstated by having his best years in high offense leagues, but man could he mash, his SLG in the context of his leagues is outstanding (.505 vs. .376).

4. Jake Beckley (7) - Very good player for a very long time, much better than an average player. Good for 22-25 WS a year for about 13-14 years. That has a lot of value in my opinion. I also believe that 1B defensive was more important in his time, and that gets him a subjective nudge forward from where modern methods place him. I see him as more Rusty Staub than Harold Baines.

5. Joe McGinnity (5) -I thought he was the Hughie Jennings of pitchers, but there's more than than I realized. Three very good iron man years where he pitched a ton of innings, but he had a short career and two years with an ERA+ over 140. But most of the pitchers we're comparing him to had short careers, and he pitched enough innings that he didn't have to be the best pitcher (per game) in the league to have enormous value. Nice career, great player for a short span. I said I'd probably vote for Clark Griffith before McGinnity, but I was wrong.

6. Bill Monroe (8) -Still not convinced he was better than Grant or Johnson, but I am confident he should be ranked near the Thompson level.

7. Jimmy Ryan (10) -Good, not great defensive CF, which is probably why he was eventually shifted to RF. One heckuva hitter though. I can't see ranking Sheckard ahead of Ryan.

8. Sherry Magee (11) -I see him as slightly below Ryan, slightly above Sheckard, so naturally he slots here.

9. Jimmy Sheckard (12) -He's close to Kelley or Keeler - but closer to (and a notch behind) Ryan. This is a tight ballot and I think this is the right spot for him. If he was a little better or played a little longer he might have been #1. I can't see ranking him ahead of Beckley or Ryan.

10. Ed Williamson (13) -Look who's back . . . The next few elections are incredibly important, and I'm really serious about taking a second look at everyone. His career is quite comparable to Jimmy Collins'. Both had a 113 career OPS+, and Williamson's was more OBP driven than Collins'. Leach's career OPS+ was only 109 and like Collins, not OBP driven. Both Collins and Williamson were great defensive players, Williamson was actually better, good enough to play about 3 1/2 years as a SS (wheras Leach's non-3B time was spent in CF).

Why is Collins ahead of Williamson? I agree that a pennant is a pennant (I may have even coined the phrase?), but I do timeline slightly (if you
don't, your HoM will have too many 'old' players - because it was easier to dominate), basically as a tie-breaker, and that's why I rate Williamson behind Collins, who's career is basically 20 years post-Williamson. It's entirely justifiable to rate Ed ahead of Jimmy though, I wouldn't fault anyone there. He shouldn't have fallen as far of the radar as he did. Neither are in Ezra Sutton's class, and that's probably why it was easy to lose site of him. But I can't see voting for Tommy Leach ahead of Williamson. He deserves another run through the guantlet.
   81. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 21, 2004 at 09:45 AM (#639009)
11. Rube Waddell (9) -Not quite as good as Joss at his best, but he pitched about 2 more seasons, enough to edge him forward. He drops this week as my pendulum has swung back to the position players slightly.

12. Gavvy Cravath (n/e) -I ran a little quick and dirty WS comparison on Cravath at age 32-34 to find similar players, and four turned up - Bret Boone, Sam Crawford, Gary Sheffield and Billy Williams. The others are slam dunk Hall of Famers (if Sheffield ages like Cravath, Crawford or Williams he will be automatic), except for Boone these guys averaged:

Age 28 - 25 WS
Age 29 - 30 WS
Age 30 - 26 WS

Of course, cravath could've been a late bloomer, like Boone (we know Cravath was better than Boone from 28-30 based on his Minneapolis numbers). At 27, Boone had 10 WS, Cravath 12 (in limited playing time 20 projected to a full season). From age 23-26 and 28-30 Boone compiled 82 WS. I could see this as a conservative estimate for Cravath. I could also see giving him credit for 39 WS age 23-26 and 81 WS age 28-30. I think that's what I'll do for now - it's not perfect, but it's a reasonable estimate of where Cravath might have been had he not been held back. That would peg him as a 320 WS player, which about where I see him. Carefully worked out opinion is the best we can do sometimes.

13. Clark Griffith (14) -Like McGinnity I've been won over that he's better than I thought. Was never as good as Waddell, McGinnity or Joss (each had 3 years better than Griffith's best year, according to Chris Cobb's data), but still pretty good and he was effective longer than all of them. He gets a bump this week because the gap is a lot closer than I realized earlier.

14. Bob Caruthers (15) -A major step forward. For my thoughts on how I came around here (relatively speaking, see the ballot discussion thread).

15. Addie Joss (16) -I'm dumbfounded at his lack of support. A truly great pitcher, in the Koufax/Dean mold. It takes a lot to get me on board with a 'peak only' candidate, but Addie's got the goods. He never had a year where he wasn't at least a very good pitcher, and if it wasn't for his death, he'd be talked about with greatest of the great. He doesn't get any extra credit for dying young or anything, just saying that he was a truly great pitcher. I nudged him down some, and he's off my ballot for the first time since he became eligible - but I think peak voters should love him.
   82. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 21, 2004 at 09:48 AM (#639010)
(I have to shave 6 characters off of this post, LOL, now it's 85 after this sentence)

Close but no cigar:

16. George Van Haltren (17) - Nice, long, consistent career, very good player for a long time. Not a bad fielder, but not a great one either, pretty good hitter. Never had a monster year, he didn't make any Stats All-Star teams, but he also played mostly in a one-league era, where only 3 All-Star OFs were named per year, not 6. Moved him up a little a few years back, decent pitcher too.

17. Roger Bresnahan (18) - An incredible hitter for a catcher. Lots of walks, but he really didn't play all that much. He's a tough one to rank, like Frank Chance, this is an incredibly tight group of candidates. Questions about the quality of his league, as well as his inability to stay in the lineup have caused me to drop him some this week.

18. Tommy Leach (19) - One of the best 'slash' players of all-time. When you consider his defensive contribution, career length and that he had some pop (career SLG + .021), it's a nice package. Well-rounded players always tend to be underrated. I wish I could rank him higher.

19. Hughie Jennings (20) - Great peak, but it was just 5 years, there's not a lot on the resume besides that. I will recalculate the pennants added thread soon, allowing for the fact that WARP probably adds 2 extra wins per full season, because of the low fielding replacement level. That may give the high peak short career guys a little boost. I suppose that I could be considered having a double standard here with Waddell and Joss higher on the ballot, but they all had more than 5 years as great players, peaks that were almost as high, and at least some 'bulk' to their careers. Paul Wendt asked me to take another look at Jennings last week, and I've nudged him up some.

20. Lave Cross (21) - Another very good player for a very long time. Had big years in 1894, 1898, 1899 and 1902.

21. Joe Tinker (22) - Another one that's kind of tough. I believe he was a historically great defensive player, along the lines of Ozzie Smith.

His offensive was very good for a shortstop (better than Ozzie's). His career was short, or it wouldn't be a question. If it's March 1898, and I know in advance that I can have either Chance or Tinker I think I'd take Tinker. I could easily be convinced to flip-flop there, but for now I'm going with Tinker slightly ahead.

22. Johnny Evers (23) - Man these poem guys were good, it's amazing that none of them had a long career. All 3 had high enough peaks to warrant a spot near the top (Evers had 6 WARP1's over 9.0), but they just didn't play long enough.

23. Frank Chance (24) - Great player, short career and wasn't durable during his short career, decreasing the impact he could have on any one pennant race. What a great team, the most similar team to the 1996-2000 Yankees that I can think of, in terms of balance vs. superstars. The
antithesis of the current Giants.

NOTE: I swear it just worked out that these 3 are 21-22-23 (and in correct poetic order!), it's not for effect . . . just the way I see it.

24. Roy Thomas (25) - Really good player, but no power at all. I moved him up finally in 1921. He was a great defensive player. I absolutely love the type of game he played. I now believe he was better than Fielder Jones.

25. Lip Pike (26) - I've been convinced he has enough pre-1871 to move him up from where I used to rank him, but he slipped upon a closer look in 1921.

Not as close and still no cigar (but these are all players I could support for eventual induction:

26. Mike Griffin (27) - Amazing defensive CF and a pretty good hitter too. Five years of adjW3 over 8.0. It's a shame to drop him off, but we only get 15 spots.

27. Vic Willis (28) - I could rank him higher, but I don't see greatness. I see very goodness. He's Dennis Martinez compared to the other guys on the ballot being Dave Stieb, David Cone or Tom Glavine.

28. Rube Foster (--) - I think he was more innovator than player, but he was very good when he played - I see him like a McGraw somewhat. Could be convinced to move him up, give it a shot if you'd like.

I probably couldn't support these guys for election at any point:

29. Fielder Jones (29) - Very good player, mid-glut I suppose, I have him ranked a little below Griffin, who was a little better in a shorter career. Similar to Thomas, but not as good.

30. Hugh Duffy (30) - He had a nice career, but his 2nd best year was in a weak AA (1891), and distorts his eyeball peak value a little bit. I'd take the career of Mike Griffin over Duffy's. It's close, but he's at the bottom of the Hamilton-Stovey-Thompson-Griffin-Duffy logjam. I'd almost take Tom York, but Duffy had a better peak, and even a modest timeline adjustment seals the close race. Probably the most overrated player by the group.

31. Miller Huggins (31) - valuable little player, getting on base and playing a solid 2B for a very long time.
   83. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 21, 2004 at 10:00 AM (#639015)
By the way, the Black Sox (and others of their ilk) will have to wait a year before I'll consider them. I have some sympathy for Jackson and Cicotte, but I'm still making them wait.
   84. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 21, 2004 at 10:33 AM (#639018)
Shoot, I forgot to slot Larry Doyle and Benny Kauff, aargh.

I see Doyle as a little behind Santo. Santo was a great defensive player, Doyle was not (though in their times the value of their defensive positions was similar). They were equal as hitters, but Santo played the equivalent of 2 more seasons, both started at 20 and were done before 35.

Let's rank Larry Doyle, slotting him between Griffith and Caruthers.

On to Kauff - I give a 12% discount for the Federal League - that's what I've deduced as Prospectus' discount.

Using WS as a foundation the four players that show with similar numbers to Kauff at age 24-27 (his 1914-17) are Bobby Bonds, Goose Goslin, Frank Thomas (the great FT) and Paul Waner. He truly was a great player.

Can someone tell me whether or not 1918 was a military issue for him?

That comparable list is unbelievable. Like Kauff they were great at 24-25, slipped a little but were still near great at 26-27. I see no reason that Kauff wouldn't have finished his career similarly.

Those guys all had 1-3 productive seasons before age 24, so I wouldn't rank Kauff as highly as them because his career would be shorter, even when adjusted.

Landis robbed him of the 2nd of half of his career. There is no doubt he was a great player before that. I feel that I must credit him for the injustice and it's well within the bounds of our rules to do that.

My conservative ranking of Benny Kauff will see him as 11th.

That makes my 11-15:

11. Kauff
12. Waddell
13. Cravath
14. Griffith
15. Doyle
   85. karlmagnus Posted: May 21, 2004 at 12:49 PM (#639034)
Joe, let us not discuss why you've left poor Parisian Bob off your ballot again, let's instead compare Benny Kauff to Addie Joss, your other victim. Joss gets close to 200 wins; another couple of seasons and he'd have been somewhere ahead of McGinnity in the line, close to a slam dunk. Kauff, on the other hand, had less than 1000 hits -- you have to DOUBLE his career before he looks like a viable candidate. Furthermore, he was clearly slowing down by 1920, with a BA less than the league average, and only 43 hits in 55 games. Baseball Reference gives him extraordinarily high figures for OPS+, but if you look it's because they're making a cuckoo adjustment for park effect for the Polo Grounds, normally thought of as a decent hitters' park -- his unadjusted OPS is nothing at all special. Add to that the fact that his 2 best years were in the Federal League, and you have a guy who couldn't carry Parisian Bob's jockstrap -- or Joss's, and Joss isn't on my ballot.

Presumably from your comment Landis banned Kauff for being Native American, thus giving him racism points, but the raw stats are just not there.

If you're not considering Shoeless Joe and Cicotte you should also look askance at Kauff -- the Rothstein book strongly suggests that the Giants threw the '17 Series. I had thought that not relevant, since nobody was about to elect Zimmerman, but Kauff was equally a keystone of that team.
   86. ronw Posted: May 21, 2004 at 02:24 PM (#639139)
Joe:

Kauff did serve in the military in 1918.
   87. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 21, 2004 at 04:07 PM (#639296)
Shoot, I forgot to slot Larry Doyle and Benny Kauff, aargh.

... and Pearce, Joe.
   88. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 21, 2004 at 04:18 PM (#639312)
Baseball Reference gives him extraordinarily high figures for OPS+, but if you look it's because they're making a cuckoo adjustment for park effect for the Polo Grounds, normally thought of as a decent hitters' park -- his unadjusted OPS is nothing at all special.

The Polo Grounds, while great for hitting homers (if you could pull the ball), was basically a neutral park (it hurt BA greatly).

Beyond that, I would have Caruthers over Kauff.

Joe:

Miller Huggins over Childs (not to mention that Childs should be in Doyle territory at least)?!? I'm assuming you forgot about him.
   89. Jeff M Posted: May 21, 2004 at 05:35 PM (#639412)
...let's instead compare Benny Kauff to Addie Joss, your other victim.

This may be a first, but I seem to agree with Karl on this one...because my system rates Kauff and Joss as tied.

On the other hand, I've got them tied for 35th. :-)
   90. TheGoodSamaritan Posted: May 21, 2004 at 05:37 PM (#639417)
OCF wrote: Rosenheck Ballot III... claimed the title of Best Friend of Mike Tiernan.

Hey!...

karlmagnus wrote: Presumably from your comment Landis banned Kauff for being Native American, thus giving him racism points, but the raw stats are just not there.

If you're not considering Shoeless Joe and Cicotte you should also look askance at Kauff -- the Rothstein book strongly suggests that the Giants threw the '17 Series. I had thought that not relevant, since nobody was about to elect Zimmerman.


I don't think Landis banned Kauff because he was Native American, since there was many Native American playing or have played in the league already -- Chief Bender, Chief Myers, Jim Thorpe, etc., but because Landis believes that Kauff was guilty of the charges that he ran a stolen automobile ring even though the court ruled Kauff innocent. Also I don't think there was any evidence that Kauff threw any games. Actually Zimmerman and Hal Chase wanted Kauff to throw a game, but he refused and told everything to Christy Mathewson, who in turn told John McGraw. If you want to know more about Kauff goto hardballtimes.com and read Craig Burley's 3 piece article on him.
   91. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 21, 2004 at 05:51 PM (#639435)
I don't think Landis banned Kauff because he was Native American, since there was many Native American playing or have played in the league already -- Chief Bender, Chief Myers, Jim Thorpe, etc., but because Landis believes that Kauff was guilty of the charges that he ran a stolen automobile ring even though the court ruled Kauff innocent. Also I don't think there was any evidence that Kauff threw any games.

Correct on both points, Jeff. Extrapolating a career for him seems fair, but extremely difficult. BTW, Kauff was Native-American? I never heard that.
   92. Sean Gilman Posted: May 21, 2004 at 07:10 PM (#639584)
I thought people thought he was Jewish. . .
   93. Arrieta, Gentile Arrieta Posted: May 21, 2004 at 10:37 PM (#639870)
Joe, if you're going to give Benny Kauff credit for playing more seasons than he actually did, shouldn't you wait until 5 years after the rest of his career is over before voting for him?

It's 1925 and your Benny Kauff is still playing, and may have a few years left. I'd think this guy isn't eligible yet.
   94. Dolf Lucky Posted: May 22, 2004 at 12:10 AM (#639993)
1 (1)Sam Thompson--Fantastic rate stats, plus some extra credit for racking the counting numbers.

2 (-) Joe Jackson--Conversely, Jackson is regularly counted as one of the all-time great hitters, and played on some pretty good teams, but never logged the huge R/RBI totals.

3 (3)Bobby Wallace--Best career totals on the ballot. Probably never an MVP candidate if the award was around, but great defense to go with the above average hitting and played forever.

4 (4)Bob Caruthers--Too weird of a career to compare to anyone else. Burned the candle at both ends, but burned it super bright. Huge peak, and a few points for versatility.

5 (6)Jimmy Sheckard--Long career at a strong rate, but really not great enough of a hitter to justify much higher.

6 (-)Eddie Cicotte--A higher ERA+ than Joe McGinnity, in a similar number of innings. Had a better peak than Joe too. I'm not here to judge his innocence, but his merit.

7 (7)Hughie Jennings--Best peak on the board, and it's not particularly close. Keeps it going at all into his 30s and he's a lock.

8 (8)Sherry Magee--Pretty good numbers, but compared to Sam Thompson: lower WARP2 score despite playing considerably longer.

9 (9)Joe McGinnity--As mentioned before, a tad shy of Cicotte, but a good comparison. Strong enough to merit entry eventually, I think.

10 (11)Rube Waddell--Referenced in previous years, I like keeping Rube and Iron Man together as they present an interesting contrast. Rube has the ERA+, Joe has the wins, both were not too bad.

11 (12)Jimmy Ryan--Only once in the top 5 in league OPS+, defense not as good as some of the others...just not an elite pick.

12 (10)Herman Long--Unfortunately, no real peak to speak of. Good career, but not great.

13 (14)George VanHaltren--Similar career to Sheckard, but much weaker peak.

14 (13)Cupid Childs--Great peak, but fizzled too soon.

15 (15)Jim McCormick--Consistently great for 8 or 9 straight seasons, managed 265 wins in no time.

Top 10 ommissions: Frank Grant--Besides my disdain for "bio-only" candidates, I really can't see Grant as being any better than Cupid Childs, who only rates 14th.

Dickey Pearce--As tempting as it is to vote for a guy who posted an OPS+ of 36 at age 36, I'm going to pass this time around.
   95. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: May 22, 2004 at 01:47 AM (#640152)
Posted by Innings Pitched on May 21, 2004 at 08:10 PM (#639999)

Eddie Cicotte--A higher ERA+ than Joe McGinnity, in a similar number of innings. Had a better peak than Joe too.

(a-hem)
   96. Arrieta, Gentile Arrieta Posted: May 22, 2004 at 12:52 PM (#640404)
1926 ballot:

1. Frank Grant: Best black player of the 19th century; his case was best made by favre several elections ago. As I recall, it was: all the evidence indicates he was a great player. Nothing suggests he wasn’t. To argue he wasn’t, you have to dismiss many or all of the points in his favor as meaningless.

2. Joe McGinnity: Terrific career, a bit short in years. 2CYA, 5 STATS AS, workhorse, led league in wins 5 times, innings 4 times.

3. Sherry Magee: The great forgotten player of the deadball era. Tops among current eligibles in win shares, good black and gray ink. STATS puts him on 8 all-star teams, I have him as a backup 4 more times. 12 is a lot: everybody to date with 10 or more is in the HOM except Beckley, who’s only on 3 starting squads(backup 7x).

4. Sam Thompson: MVP, 6 STATS AS. Strong Warp3, WS not so strong. While stats are somewhat bloated by the era, still a standout among his contemporaries.

5. Jake Beckley: At or near the top at his position for about 10 years. Long, steady career, lots of gray ink. 3 STATS AS.

6. Pete Browning: Monster hitter, even considering AA discount. 8-time STATS all-star.

7. Bobby Wallace: Long steady career like Beckley, good WS. Only 1 AS but a backup 7 more times.

8. Bob Caruthers: Terrific pitching record, good hitter. A lot of value largely packed into 8 years. Short career and playing in the “wrong” league hurts his ranking some.

9. Hugh Duffy: Solid WS and WS/162, excellent defense in CF. Warp3 doesn’t like him as well.

10. Bill Monroe: Made 4 of Holway’s first 6 all-star teams, the last in his next-to-last year at age 37.

11. Mickey Welch: Those 300 wins put him on the list. Not dominant, but pitched a lot, pitched well.

12. Rube Waddell: MVP/CYA in 1905, good ERA & ERA+, lots of strikeouts.

13. Roger Bresnahan: Looks like the best catcher post-Bennett and there’s nobody looming on the horizon to challenge him.

14. Clark Griffith: Back on after several years off. McGinnity-like (McGinnitian?) career spread out over more years.

15. Larry Doyle: No questions about his offensive credentials. There are some about his defensive ability, but if he were substandard, wouldn’t McGraw have moved him elsewhere? C+ suggests adequacy or better; he did manage 1 WSGG but with a very low score. Marginal ink. Marginal section of ballot.



In 1925 top 10, off ballot:

Jimmy Sheckard: Win shares and Warp3 really like him. A few very strong seasons mixed with so-so ones. He’s not at or near the top in his position often enough to suit me.

Dickey Pearce: Yes, he invented shortstopping and was a top player of the early game despite a very unlikely physique. I get a picture more of a scrappy, heady, overachieving fireplug than of a star. I have doubts about the state of the early game and the level of competition, and am a little resistant to intense lobbying campaigns. That is not to say I’m not listening. He’s on the outskirts.
   97. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: May 22, 2004 at 02:23 PM (#640414)
Correction to my ballot: Sam Thompson is not both fifth and sixth on the ballot in OPS+. He is just sixth. If someone can delete my saying he is fifth, and this comment, that would be super.
   98. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 22, 2004 at 03:11 PM (#640425)
Joe, if you're going to give Benny Kauff credit for playing more seasons than he actually did, shouldn't you wait until 5 years after the rest of his career is over before voting for him?

Now that's an interesting question. I think I have to side with Don on this one.
   99. Sean M Posted: May 22, 2004 at 03:33 PM (#640433)
After missing the last election, I have returned...

1)Joe Jackson: Perhaps the best pure hitter we have seen yet, ban or no ban.

2)Frank Grant: Still deserving, especially now that Homerun is in.

3)Sam Thompson: I fail to see how we look past Barne's controversies, yet do not give Sam the benefit of anything.

4)Bob Caruthers: Easily the best pitcher available, now that Plank and Brown are in.

5)Rube Waddell: A true legend, with unreal K numbers, I believe he was not a mistake for the HOF.

6)Dickey Pearce: Best player of his time, a title that always means something.

7)Sherry Magee: Tough between he and Sheckard, but I give Magee the slight nod.

8)Jimmy Sheckard: Supreme early cenury slugger, see 7.

9)Rube Foster: Undoubtedly a top notch performer, sadly his support is slipping.

10)Eddie Cicotte: Similar to Brown somewhat, needed the rest of his career to prve it.

11)Hughie Jennings: A few dominating seasons all-round, best SS on the ballot.

12)Joe McGinnity: Numbers hard to ignore, perhaps he should rank higher.

13)Mickey Welch: 300 wins and still hanging on...

14)Jake Beckley: If only 3000 hist had meant something back then.

15)Bob Wallace: Nice long career.

15-25: Tinker, Chance, Bresnahan, Griffith, Childs, Pike, Cravath, Monroe, Duffy, Browning
   100. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 22, 2004 at 05:55 PM (#640468)
"Joe, if you're going to give Benny Kauff credit for playing more seasons than he actually did, shouldn't you wait until 5 years after the rest of his career is over before voting for him?

It's 1925 and your Benny Kauff is still playing, and may have a few years left. I'd think this guy isn't eligible yet."

Great call Don - I never thought of that - heh.

Joss gets no extrapolation because he died. That's part of his skill set. Kauff's being banned because Landis, 'thought he mighta maybe done sumptin' is not Kauff's 'fault'. I stand by his extrapolated career.

Thanks John you are correct about the Polo Grounds affect on AVG.

Kauff was slipping Karl? His average was below the park-adjust league average .274 vs. .275. But his OBP was 51 points above and his SLG was 80 points above, if you are going to knock the guy, at least be fair and even minded about it. Who cares what his batting average was? He produced runs.

He played 6 full seasons (if give him credit for his 1918 miltiary service) and 35% of another before his unjust ban. His OPS+ was between 127 and 143 all of MLB seasons and I properly discounted his Federal League numbers.

It's an extreme case, but it's one that needs to be made.

He'll re-appear on my ballot for his age 44 season in 1934 unless someone can convince me that he wasn't a great player - as great a player as the comps I mentioned.

*******

Childs - short career, was pretty good, but not great in my opinion. Nice player, a notch below Huggins.

Pearce - I'm still torn on him John. I did forget that I promised to re-evaluate him this week. Previously I did not consider him, because I felt he was outside the scope of this project (spots were not allocated in the calculations for pre-1871 stars with little to no post 1871 contributions).

I believe he was a great player, but how great is hard to tell. I'm going to take the Outfielders and Williamson ahead of him.

That means he will slot 11th this week. That makes my final ballot:

1-Wallace
2-Grant
3-Thomspon
4-Beckley
5-McGinnity
6-Monroe
7-Ryan
8-Magee
9-Sheckard
10-Williamson
11-Pearce
12-Waddell
13-Cravath
14-Griffith
15-Doyle


Sorry for the issues surrounding it this time.
Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
TedBerg
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 1.6809 seconds
49 querie(s) executed