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

Sunday, October 16, 2005

1963 Ballot Discussion

1963 (October 31)—elect 2
WS W3 Rookie Name-Pos (Died)

207 73.6 1948 Roy Campanella-C (1993)
229 66.3 1944 George Kell-3B (living)
173 57.9 1941 Walker Cooper-C (1991)
141 48.3 1942 Steve Gromek-P (2002)
127 30.9 1947 Eddie Robinson-1B (living)
110 28.6 1942 Ron Northey-RF (1971)
095 33.6 1948 Wes Westrum-C (2002

1963 (October 16)—elect 2
HF% Career Name-pos (born) BJ – MVP - All-Star

16% 44-57 Artie Wilson-SS (1917) – 1 – 3*
04% 42-58 Piper Davis-2B/1B (1917) – 0 – 4*

Players Passing Away in 1962

HoMers
Age Elected

59 1943 Mickey Cochrane-C

Candidates
Age Eligible

77 1928 Burt Shotton-CF/LF
75 1929 Spotswood Poles-CF
74 1924 Dick Hoblitzel-1b
73 1933 George Mogridge-P
70 1934 Steve O’Neill-C
68 1933 Frank Snyder-C
68 1934 Les Mann-LF/CF
62 1941 Max Bishop-2B
60 1943 Ben Cantwell-P
56 1949 Rip Radcliff-LF
55 1946 Red Kress-SS
55 1959 Bobo Newsom-P
51 1947 Joe Vosmik-LF

As always, much obliged to Dan and Chris!

John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 16, 2005 at 02:10 PM | 94 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.

   1. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 12:23 AM (#1689664)
Campy is the only real candidate, but what a candidate!
   2. Chris Cobb Posted: October 18, 2005 at 12:28 AM (#1689671)
1963 is fixing to be a pretty straightforward election year, given Campy's credentials and Irvin's performance in 1962.

Looks like the longer-term backloggers will have to wait until at least 1964.

Kell and Cooper are v. good players, but neither is a serious candidate.
   3. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 12:33 AM (#1689684)
1963 is fixing to be a pretty straightforward election year, given Campy's credentials and Irvin's performance in 1962.

I suspect the latter's numbers will only improve, too. I agree with you, Chris: '63 is a foregone conclusion.
   4. OCF Posted: October 18, 2005 at 02:06 AM (#1689873)
Irvin: shiny new toy, or initially placed with too much caution?

I'd like to see a supporter lay out the case for putting him in an elect-me slot, ahead of Ruffing, Medwick, Ferrell, et al.
   5. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: October 18, 2005 at 02:41 AM (#1689931)
Fun fact: Eddie Robinson was (unless anyone can prove differently) briefly the White Sox all-time HR king with 72.

It took the live ball a while to come to the South Side. Heck, 20 years ago Bill Melton was still home run king.
   6. Howie Menckel Posted: October 18, 2005 at 03:19 AM (#1690058)
Like OCF, I wouldn't mind seeing Monte put under the microscope.
I had him 8th, so I'm right in the middle on him in many ways.

We're not doing charity work here; Ruffing and Medwick (neither a huge favorite of mine) have gotten dissected pretty strongly. It's fair to do the same with Irvin on the cusp, as well.
   7. sunnyday2 Posted: October 18, 2005 at 03:27 AM (#1690087)
I was all set to slot Dobie Moore at #1. He and Campy are actually similar in interesting ways.

• Both got a late start at their highest level--Moore in the NeLs after a stint in the Army (playing ball with the Wreckers), Campy in the MLs after a stint in the NeLs.

• Both among the best hitters ever at an important defensive position.

• Both with career ending injuries sustained off the field.

But having found Campy's thread and his NeL record--and he played there much longer than I would have thought--pushes Campy out ahead, quite clearly.

Prelim

1. Roy Campanella--PHoM 1963

(GAP)

2. Dobie Moore
3. Joe Medwick
4. George Sisler
5. Tommy Bond
6. Pete Browning
7. Monte Irvin (up from #10)--slightly overrated, but a HoMer regardless--PHoM 1963
8. Ralph Kiner
9. Rube Waddell
10. Jose Mendez
(10a. John Beckwith)

11. Addie Joss
12. Ed Williamson
13. Willard Brown
14. Charley Jones
15. Dick Redding
(15a. Stan Hack)

Drops out: Joe Gordon (13)

16-20. Gordon, Stephens, Doyle, Doerr, Trouppe
21-25. Duffy, Rixey, Keller, Cravath, Tiernan
26-30. Cicotte, (Stovey), Childs, B. Johnson, Dean, Oms
31-35. Clarkson, H. Smith, Sewell, Griffith, Roush
36-40. McCormick, Mackey, Byrd, Elliott, Bresnahan
41-45. H. Wilson, Klein, Traynor, Berger, (Keeler), Mullane
46-50. Gomez, A. Cooper, Lundy, Estalella, Ferrell

Required: Ruffing #51, Van Haltren #72, Bell #64
Newbies: W. Cooper is among the top 25 ML catchers all-time, while Kell is about #32 at 3B and Artie Wilson is #18 among NeL position players--behind Ray Dandridge, so that is sort of the kiss of death. Only Cooper among the three is anywhere near the top 100 right now.
   8. Chris Cobb Posted: October 18, 2005 at 03:57 AM (#1690264)
It's too late to make the case tonight, but I think close analysis will show that Irvin was underrated rather than overrated in his first year on the ballot.
   9. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: October 18, 2005 at 04:00 AM (#1690271)
Chris are you saying that Irvin should be above either Jackie or Feller?
   10. OCF Posted: October 18, 2005 at 06:26 AM (#1690438)
Chris are you saying that Irvin should be above either Jackie or Feller?

Chris can speak for himself, of course, but I doubt that he's saying that. Irvin was on 35 ballots, including 16 top-5 votes (almost none of them elect-me, because those belonged to Feller and Robinson). Maybe Chris wants to suggest that he could have been on 45 ballots, including 30 top-5 votes.

Since I didn't have him there - in fact, I had him just off-ballot - I do want to hear Chris make that case, which goes to what I asked for: reasons to put Irvin above Ruffing/Medwick/Ferrell and the other backloggers.
   11. sunnyday2 Posted: October 18, 2005 at 11:27 AM (#1690582)
I see Chris' point. I agree that Irvin is HoM- and therefore ballot-worthy. I just didn't have him at #3 in 1962 and won't have him at #1 in 1963. But that doesn't make him overrated, it makes Moore, Medwick, Sisler and Browning underrated.
   12. sunnyday2 Posted: October 18, 2005 at 11:44 AM (#1690587)
Huge year for catchers, BTW. Campy and Walker Cooper newly eligible and Cochrane, O'Neill and Snyder all passed away.

Campy 373 33-33-28/134/27.6 (#3)
Mickey 275 31-30-28/142/30.1 (#4)

The career total only uses the MLEs, I am sticking to his "real" ML peak.

Both rated A in the field by WS.

Campy .276/.360/.500/123 in 4,750 PAs "real" ML record only
Mickey .320/.419/.4789/127 in 6,000 PAs

Other than career total WS, I'm just adding in Campy's NeL record informally here. Cochrane has just a slightly better "real" ML peak. But the truth is they were substantially equal in value (per season) as MLers.

Cochrane then had a 25 percent longer "real" ML career and had 10 seasons of 400 ABs or more to Campy's 6. But add even a conservative 6 additional MLE seasons and it is Campy who had the longer career at substantially the same level of play. I don't see how one could fairly rank Cochrane ahead of Campy, which is to say unless you don't acknolwedge his play pre-1947.

Cooper played 18 years to Campy's 10 but ended up with substantially equal numbers of PAs.

Campy 373 33-33-28/134/27.6 (#3)
Cooper 173 23-19-18/82/19.0 (#33)

Campy .276/.360/.500/123 in 4,750 PAs
Cooper .285/.332/.464/116 in 4,700 ABs

Cooper is rated a C catcher.

Cooper missed most of 1945 to MS, but 3 of his best years were '42-'43-'44. Those were 3 of his top 6 years in games played. So his record overall is due a small discount. Still a 116 catcher in 5,000 PAs even at a C was a valuable man. But even if he had hit as well as Campy, his C rating would make his a much inferior ML career, and then adding in Campy's NeL record....
   13. Chris Cobb Posted: October 18, 2005 at 01:25 PM (#1690646)
Chris can speak for himself, of course, but I doubt that he's saying that. Irvin was on 35 ballots, including 16 top-5 votes (almost none of them elect-me, because those belonged to Feller and Robinson). Maybe Chris wants to suggest that he could have been on 45 ballots, including 30 top-5 votes.

Exactly what I was implying. Since I didn't rank Irvin ahead of Robinson or Feller on my own ballot, I would hardly argue that Irvin ranks ahead of either of them. He was not _far_ behind them in my reckoning, however, and he was well ahead of any other eligibles.
   14. Rusty Priske Posted: October 18, 2005 at 02:11 PM (#1690718)
Prelim.


Hmmmmmmmmmmm.

I know people think I underrate catchers. I'm not convinced you are wrong. I gave Campy a big NeL bonus, and he still isn't number 1.

OTOH, every player above him is someone I have already put in my PHoM, so I don't see this as an insult to Roy. He is definitely a HoMer in my eyes...I just think there are others we have overlooked more.

Having said all that, here is my Prelim:

PHoM: Satchel Paige and Roy Campanella

1. George Van Haltren
2. Red Ruffing
3. Willard Brown
4. Joe Medwick
5. Eppa Rixey
6. Mickey Welch
7. Jake Beckley
8. Roy Campanella
9. Cool Papa Bell
10. Biz Mackey
11. Monte Irvin
12. Dobie Moore
13. Tommy Leach
14. Hugh Duffy
15. George Sisler

16-20. Roush, Rice, Ryan, Childs, Griffith
21-25. Powell, Trouppe, White, H. Smith, Streeter
26-30. Doyle, Strong, Doerr, Gleason, McCormick
   15. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 18, 2005 at 02:40 PM (#1690759)
No surprises here.

1. Campy: Note that in the MLEs I posted Roy shouldn't be getting xc for his teenage years. I suspect most voters would agree that he should start getting credit somewhere in his early 20s, though which year is a matter of taste. I put them all up there to give a sense of the arc of his career.

2. Jose Mendez: IIRC Chris has said recently that Mendez's MLEs need to be updated to the latest methodology. That will hopefully help voters with reasonable doubt cast aside that doubt and cast a vote for Mendez.

3. Leroy Matlock: I'm his onliest friend, but I see him as the best of the Ferrell-Walters bunch.

4. Bucky Walters
5. Quincy Trouppe: Best catcher available. His peak is better than Mackey's, and with career that takes his time in ND into account, his career total isn't too far behind Biz's.

6. Charley Jones
7. Wes Ferrell
8. Monte Irvin: I think Jones is probably slightly superior as a LF candidate, but for timeliners Irvin would be the best corner outfielder out there.

9. Roger Bresnahan: Close to Trouppe's peak, not as much career.

10. Hugh Duffy: Best CF available.
11. Cupid Childs: Best 2B available.
12. Joe Medwick
13. Dobie Moore: Best SS available.
14. Willard Brown
15. Biz Mackey

16-20: Wilbur Cooper, Ruffing, Sisler, Williamson, Browning
   16. TomH Posted: October 18, 2005 at 02:45 PM (#1690768)
While I agree with the call for more discussion on Irvin, it's of course very difficult to place him next to pitchers. He seems well above the backlog hitters by our best attempts to project his career.

I can't put him above Ferrell, tho. Just a few raw numebrs for those tired of WARPing and WSing:

From 1929-36, Wes Ferrell (whose bbref page btw is open for only a $10 sponsorship; if no one else takes it, I'll grab it when we elect him) finished first in IP twice, and top 4 three other times. A workhorse.

He finished top 7 in ERA+ 7 of the 8 years; a consistently very good pitcher.

His OPS at the plate those years were 670, 777, 994(!), 635, 834, 828, 960(!), 773. Basically he hit like a good third baseman or center fielder, or a defensive corner OFer.

His W-L record was 161-94, for teams that were hardly even contenders, never mind pennant winners. Not bad teams, just barely above average (below average without Wes!).
   17. Chris Cobb Posted: October 18, 2005 at 02:49 PM (#1690773)
Note that in the MLEs I posted Roy shouldn't be getting xc for his teenage years. I suspect most voters would agree that he should start getting credit somewhere in his early 20s, though which year is a matter of taste.

I would argue that, at minimum, Campy's MLE credit should begin with a part-season in 1943. He was definitely above-average offensively for a catcher, and most likely defensively as well (I'm working on a study of early-career catcher fielding development) by that point in his career. With the war starting to pull in a considerable number of major-leaguers, it seems highly unlikely that Campy wouldn't have been brought up to the majors. Obviously, his MLEs for 1943-45 need a competition discount, but what the fact of the war does is remove any likelihood that Campy, had he been white, would have remained stuck in the minors when his skills made him competitive in the majors.
   18. andrew siegel Posted: October 18, 2005 at 02:55 PM (#1690779)
I'm just slotting in Campy and moving them up, except that I have a big jumper taking the number 15 slot:

(1) Roy Campanella (new)--I once thought he was the best catcher not named Josh, but now believe he had a few too many injuries and a little too much inconsistency to make the top 5. He's still easily a top 10 catcher and almost certainly a top 100 player.

(2) Monte Irvin (3rd)-- Harry Heilmann with a better glove. Makes the HoM with seventy-five slots to spare.

(3) Dobie Moore (4th)
(4) George Van Haltren (5th)
(5) Wes Farrell (6th)
(6) Cupid Childs (7th)
(7) Eppa Rixey (8th)
(8) Alejandro Oms (9th)
(9) Hugh Duffy (10th)
(10) Red Ruffing (11th)
(11) George Sisler (12th)
(12) Joe Medwick (13th)
(13) Edd Roush (14th)
(14) Jimmy Ryan (15th)

(15) Quincy Trouppe (nr/about 28th)-- His translated numbers would have him even higher. I have lots of prejudices against him-- he's a guy I never heard of before this project, he played in a weird collection of leagues, he was a Negro League star in an era where I think the competition wasn't at its peak--but, taking small discounts for the iota of truth in each prejudice, he's still HoM-worthy.

Mr. Beckley continues to sit in 16th place, with Joe Sewell, Bob Johnson, Ralph Kiner, and the Gordon-Doerr pairing trailing in some order.
   19. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 04:02 PM (#1690907)
Here's the deal with Campy: he has a great argument for the second-best catcher of all-time behind Gibson.
I'm not saying that he is, only that he is definitely in the conversation.

If you're slotting players ahead of him on your ballot who can't remotely say the same thing for themselves, then you have to question your system.
   20. TomH Posted: October 18, 2005 at 05:14 PM (#1691024)
I completely agree with John's last sentence.

I disagree with his first one, unless you change "great argument" to "somewhat plausible" argument, meaning Campy COULD be as good as Yogi or Bench or Piazza if you stretch it, but in that case so could 5 or 6 other catchers.

One of my biggest regret of our Survivor exercise of 2001 was that we missed including Campanella in our initial top 100 players.
   21. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 05:25 PM (#1691044)
I disagree with his first one, unless you change "great argument" to "somewhat plausible" argument

The latter is what I meant, Tom.
   22. Rusty Priske Posted: October 18, 2005 at 05:46 PM (#1691083)
Questioning my system is pretty much a weekly exercise. :)
   23. Rusty Priske Posted: October 18, 2005 at 05:57 PM (#1691105)
I may have found the problem. I've been looking over the MLEs and I think I have underrated the value of Campy's NeL days. I thought I gave him a good credit for it, but it seems I was still too low.

I'm going to run the numbers again but it looks like he will be in the top 3 at a minimum. Possibly 1.

I'm glad I kept at it.
   24. sunnyday2 Posted: October 18, 2005 at 06:22 PM (#1691146)
>PHoM: Satchel Paige and Roy Campanella

Anybody know if Campy ever caught Satchel?
   25. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 18, 2005 at 07:18 PM (#1691219)
Anybody know if Campy ever caught Satchel?
That would be interesting to know. Satch was mostly a Western guy during Campy's tenure IIRC, but I think he used to lease himself to teams all over the country, so it could be. Interestingly, I don't think they would ever have faced one another (let alone been the battery) in an MLB game that meant anything.
   26. Daryn Posted: October 18, 2005 at 07:46 PM (#1691261)
If you're slotting players ahead of him on your ballot who can't remotely say the same thing for themselves, then you have to question your system.

I wish we'd see less of comments like this. Campanella would have been mid-ballot for me if I only considered his Major League stats. I strongly prefer career to peak. I respectfully and strongly disagree with people who keep a guy with 3200 equalized career hits (and 2900 real career hits) off ballots as lean as the current ones. I even more strongly disagreed with those who voted for Jennings. But I don't think their systems are broken. They emphasize different things. I can't defend the one or two or three really outlier systems we see voting here, but I don't think their systems are broken. Gadfly, to pick on one guy, obviusly focuses on different things than the majority and some years it will lead to lowly rate some extremely popular candidates. But I don't think his system is broken (and, equally to the point, if I did I wouldn't say it).

That said, might as well post my prelim. I can tell you, my system isn't broken, no matter what you think of my most-outlier candidate Burleigh Grimes.

One ML hitter in my top 9. 7 pitchers on the ballot. 4 NeLers on the ballot.

1. Roy Campanella – historic peak and obscene defence overcomes ML career length and numbers problems. I struggle with this placement – before taking into account defense and NeL credit, I had him 8th. I am giving him credit for 3.5 strong years prior to 1948. I hope that is not an overcorrection. In the end, it won’t matter where I place him, but still.

2. Mickey Welch – 300 wins, lots of grey ink. RSI data shows those wins are real. Compares fairly well to Keefe. I like his oft repeated record against HoMers.

3. Jake Beckley -- ~3000 hits but no black ink at all. Crawford (HOMer) and Wheat (HOMer) are two of his three most similars. 3200+ hits adjusted to 162 games.

4. Eppa Rixey – see Grimes comment. Nice to see him reaching the top 10.

5. Red Ruffing – fits nicely in between Rixey and Grimes – definitely better than Grimes, perhaps better than Rixey.

6. Burleigh Grimes – as a career voter, I have difficulty seeing the vast difference others see between Rixey and Grimes. There is not much of a spread between here and Griffith (who is at 17 this week), a five person group of whiteball pitchers that includes Waddell and Ferrell.

7. Cool Papa Bell – I have decided to move Bell up from the outfield glut to here. As flawed as they may be, I have chosen to rely, in part, on the 1952 Courier poll and more importantly the 1999 SABR poll. I know the former has its flaws but it doesn’t appear to canonize Bell (he is a 2nd team all-star there). I know the SABR poll takes into account non-playing influence, but it has Bell ahead of Charleston and Gibson, among others, and that must mean something (particularly when it accords with all the anecdotal evidence and a possible Cobb MLE of over 4000 hits).

8. Dick Redding – probably the 6th best blackball pitcher of all-time (behind, at least, Williams and Paige and likely behind the Fosters and Brown), and that is good enough for me.

9. Biz Mackey – I vote career over peak, so I like Mackey the best of the eligible catchers. It is close though, and Mackey is not that much ahead of Schang.

10. George Sisler – I like the hits, the OPS+ and the batting average.

11. Ralph Kiner – He is my highest peak/prime only candidate. I cannot ignore seven consecutive home run titles.

12. Wes Ferrell – Wes has been hanging around in my 20s for a decade or so. I finally realized the significance of his 100 OPS+.

13. Monte Irvin – Cobb’s MLE’s help, as does the comparison to Griffey. That said, Griffey would be #1 on this ballot. Like Suttles and Beckwith before him, I have some real trouble placing him correctly on the ballot, or off it for that matter.

14. Rube Waddell -- I like the three times ERA+ lead, the career 134 ERA+, the .574 winning percentage, the 46 black ink points, and, of course, all those strikeouts (plus the 1905 Triple Crown). I simply don’t understand how Vance and Newhouser get elected easily and Rube gets hardly any votes.

15. Joe Medwick – 10 time all-star, great 1935-1938 peak. Edges ahead of the outfield glut. Makes the ballot at the expense of Bresnahan, who drops to Schang territory (27-28) as a result of my reevaluation of catchers – which was caused by my difficulty in assessing Campy’s career.
   27. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 08:25 PM (#1691339)
then you have to question your system.

I wish we'd see less of comments like this.


What did I say that was wrong, Daryn? I said question it, not that you had to change it or that it was necessarily wrong. But question it? I hope we all do that every time we set up our ballots. I know I've chucked out what mysystem has spit out on occasion and will do in the future.
   28. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 18, 2005 at 08:27 PM (#1691343)
I respectfully and strongly disagree with people who keep a guy with 3200 equalized career hits (and 2900 real career hits) off ballots as lean as the current ones.

If you're talking about Beckley, I like him, too. :-)
   29. ronw Posted: October 18, 2005 at 11:57 PM (#1691766)
I respectfully and strongly disagree with people who keep a guy with 198 wins and a 110 ERA+ out of the Hall of Merit.

Oh, wait, no I don't. Never mind.
   30. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 12:17 AM (#1691789)
For a minute there, I thought someone was going to be very "Happy" to receive a vote after all of these "years." :-D
   31. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 12:20 AM (#1691791)
IMPORTANT: If a link is inoperable, please use this link to locate the thread in question: Hall of Merit Archives
This eventually will be the only place to locate old and new threads once we set up the categorization process (election results, ballot discussion threads, ballots, etc.).

This message will appear at the top of our Important Links until we make the changeover.
   32. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 12:23 AM (#1691793)
This new archive will show up in the Hot Topics section eventually. I think everyone will be very pleased once we make the final go on it.
   33. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 01:17 AM (#1691849)
BTW, I had a chat with Jim Furtado and he said that the last poster who commented on a thread will be reappearing again in the Hot Topics section shortly.
   34. KJOK Posted: October 19, 2005 at 01:45 AM (#1691876)
Here's the deal with Campy: he has a great argument for the second-best catcher of all-time behind Gibson.
I'm not saying that he is, only that he is definitely in the conversation.

If you're slotting players ahead of him on your ballot who can't remotely say the same thing for themselves, then you have to question your system.


Interestingly, Bresnahan and Campanella had about the same major league career length. Some comparisons:

OWP
Bresnahan - .666
Campanella - .586

RUNS CREATED ABOVE POSITION (takes into consideration Bresnahan's CF time):
Bresnahan - 259
Campanella - 206

WARP1 (Includes defense)
Bresnahan - 75
Campanella - 64

POW (Includes defense)
Bresnahan -23
Campanella - 24

This doesn't include Campanella's NegLg time, but it doesn't include Bresnahan's minor league time either.

Bresnahan was the better offensive player, and Campanella had more defensive value, but it's not at all clear that Bresnahan was not the better player overall. Factor in that Bresnahan was the best catcher from 1880's - 1915 while Campanella was not even the best catcher of the 1950's, and for now I have Bresnahan higher on my ballot.
   35. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: October 19, 2005 at 02:06 AM (#1691891)
I agree KJOK that Bresnahan has sort of slipped through the cracks. Part of his problem with me is that he wasn't a full-time catcher and didn't play enough in season (only 400 PA 6x). That's what keeps him behind Schang and Lombardi for me. But he should probably be closer to the radar than he is . . .
   36. Chris Cobb Posted: October 19, 2005 at 02:31 AM (#1691910)
OWP
Bresnahan - .666
Campanella - .586


I find this stat a bit hard to believe, considering these comparisons:

EQA
Bresnahan - .300
Campanella - .292

OPS+
Bresnahan - 126
Campanella 124

Is there a good explanation of why Bresnahan's OWP is 13% higher than Campy's, when his other offensive rate stats exceed Campanella's by much less?

This doesn't include Campanella's NegLg time, but it doesn't include Bresnahan's minor league time either.

What is Bresnahan's story for the years between his brief ML stint as a pitcher in 1897 and his return to the majors as one half of John McGraw's catching squad in 1901? It sure looks like he was pretty green when he started catching for McGraw. Is there an argument to be made that he merits some MLE credit for these years, since there's a pretty compelling argument that Campanella merits a healthy chunk of MLE credit for his NeL and minor-league play.

Bresnahan was the best catcher from 1880's - 1915 while Campanella was not even the best catcher of the 1950's,

True, but it's quite possible, isn't it, that Campanella was the best catcher of the 1940s? Berra was a little better in the early 1950s, true, but that doesn't diminish Campanella's stature much.
   37. sunnyday2 Posted: October 19, 2005 at 03:33 AM (#1692005)
Yeah, I mean, really, Campy played in the NeL for, what?, 12 years and Rajah apparently had 3 years in the minors. I would sure give Bresnahan more credit than Campy on those respective seasons. Not.
   38. KJOK Posted: October 19, 2005 at 03:40 AM (#1692019)
OWP
Bresnahan - .666
Campanella - .586

I find this stat a bit hard to believe, considering these comparisons:

EQA
Bresnahan - .300
Campanella - .292

OPS+
Bresnahan - 126
Campanella 124


There IS a typo - Bresnahan's OWP is .651, not .666.

EQA? I'd recommend ignoring since it's formula values are incorrect.

OPS+ would not include the baserunning advantage of Bresnahan. Not sure it's a big impact, but OPS+ also uses 3 year park factors while OWP uses 1 year factors.

OWP is based on park/league adjusted Runs Created. I'd trust linear weights a little more, but Runs Created more than OPS+ and much more than EQA to determine offensive rate effectiveness.
   39. Chris Cobb Posted: October 19, 2005 at 04:18 AM (#1692047)
There IS a typo - Bresnahan's OWP is .651, not .666

OK. A 10% difference in OWP is credible.
   40. KJOK Posted: October 19, 2005 at 06:33 AM (#1692118)
Yeah, I mean, really, Campy played in the NeL for, what?, 12 years and Rajah apparently had 3 years in the minors. I would sure give Bresnahan more credit than Campy on those respective seasons. Not.

There are probably only 2 years, '44 & '45, where Campaneris was undisputedly a Major League star quality player. Adding in additional years will likely actually reduce Campy's rate stats.

Regardless, that's besides the point. The point is they both had about the same major league time, and Bresnahan was the better player during their MAJOR LEAGUE careers.
   41. KJOK Posted: October 19, 2005 at 06:35 AM (#1692119)
Uhg - CAMPANELLA not CAMPANERIS...
   42. KJOK Posted: October 19, 2005 at 06:45 AM (#1692127)
</I>There IS a typo - Bresnahan's OWP is .651, not .666

OK. A 10% difference in OWP is credible. </I>

Actually, I think the explanation for all the difference is that Bresnahan's offensive value is very OBP heavy relative to park-adjusted league, and relative to Campanella.
   43. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 01:29 PM (#1692328)
I don't think the Duke of Tralee was as good as Campy, but I still hope that Kevin's posts could at least spur some more votes for him (since I have him high on my ballot).
   44. Paul Wendt Posted: October 19, 2005 at 04:36 PM (#1692659)
> EQA
> Bresnahan - .300
> Campanella - .292

EQA? I'd recommend ignoring since it's formula values are incorrect.


Can you be more specific, Kevin?

By the way, has EqA been revised during the HOM years? (I don't know whether any of the WARP revisions have concerned offense.)
   45. OCF Posted: October 19, 2005 at 04:53 PM (#1692698)
...only 2 years, '44 & '45, where Campaneris was ...

Pretty good, for a toddler living in Cuba!
   46. PhillyBooster Posted: October 19, 2005 at 08:18 PM (#1693063)
I agree with John. KJOK's arguments don't convince me that Bresnahan was better, but they reinforce my belief that Bresnahan is properly high on my ballot.

Other voters' improper omission of Bresnahan is unfairly harming my Consensus Score.
   47. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 19, 2005 at 08:46 PM (#1693120)
Other voters' improper omission of Bresnahan is unfairly harming my Consensus Score.

Rapscallions!
   48. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 19, 2005 at 09:08 PM (#1693162)
Other voters' improper omission of Bresnahan is unfairly harming my Consensus Score.

By god it's downright Rove-like!
   49. PhillyBooster Posted: October 19, 2005 at 09:12 PM (#1693169)
As I explain at the Bresnahan thread, if everyone would just drop Medwick from their ballots and at Bresnahan, you'd all be doing a lot better, and acting more fairly to those of us with more empirically correct ballots.
   50. Chris Cobb Posted: October 19, 2005 at 09:41 PM (#1693248)
Well, I am meeting Phillybooster halfway: Medwick is not on my ballot, but neither is Bresnahan.

I'm reviewing him, but his lack of playing time is a huge issue. It's not just that catchers missed a lot of games in those days. Bresnahan's durability was below the median for a catcher, and even in the seasons when he wasn't catching, he missed a lot of games.

Bresnahan has essentially 8 seasons as his teams' #1 catcher. During that time, he placed at or above the median games caught for his team in 3 of those seasons. He was also seeing some playing time at other positions, so his durability was maybe average. Then he has 4 PT seasons as his teams' #2 catcher, and 3 seasons in which he was an outfielder/utility player. In these three seasons, he averaged about 113 games played in 140-game seasons.

Lack of playing time in the context of individaul seasons is a serious drag on Bresnahan's value.

Campanella, on the other hand, was a highly durable catcher relative to his peers. If one tracks his minor-league games played against the National League, he has a 12-year career as a #1 catcher for his teams. In that time, he was at or above the median in games caught 11 times, and he would have led the league in games caught 5 times.

I think that has significant value.
   51. KJOK Posted: October 19, 2005 at 11:50 PM (#1693479)
EQA? I'd recommend ignoring since it's formula values are incorrect.

Can you be more specific, Kevin?


Numerator = (H + TB + 1.5*(BB + HBP) + SB + SH + SF)

Walks and HBP are not 50% "better" than hits, and a SH and SF are not as valuable as hits (although this is partially offset by including these items in the denominator).

Denominator = (AB + BB + HBP + SH + SF + CS + SB/3)
   52. jimd Posted: October 20, 2005 at 12:13 AM (#1693498)
Numerator = (H + TB + 1.5*(BB + HBP) + SB + SH + SF)

Note that "hits" are also included in TB. A single has a value of 2.0 compared to the 1.5 for a BB. This is like OPS but with BB+HBP amplified.
   53. andrew siegel Posted: October 20, 2005 at 12:18 AM (#1693504)
If H and TB are both counted and walks are multiplied by 1.5, then walks aren't valued 50% more than hits, they are valued 33% less than singles (a single being a hit and a total base), 50% less than doubles (a double being a hit and two total bases), etc.
   54. andrew siegel Posted: October 20, 2005 at 12:18 AM (#1693505)
as jim said
   55. KJOK Posted: October 20, 2005 at 05:36 AM (#1693965)
For one critique of EQA, you can read here:

http://stats.mostvaluablenetwork.com/2005/08/03/
   56. KJOK Posted: October 20, 2005 at 05:36 AM (#1693966)
"http://stats.mostvaluablenetwork.com/2005/08/03/"
   57. KJOK Posted: October 20, 2005 at 05:37 AM (#1693968)
One more try...

EQA Critique
   58. Jim Sp Posted: October 20, 2005 at 10:49 PM (#1695468)
Cooper #24, Kell #75.

1)Campanella--Clearly qualified.
2)Irvin--I have no doubt that the war plus the integration transition hide a lot of his merit.
3)Gordon--Fixed my war credit, he and Doerr moved up. PHoM in 1958.
4)Doerr-- PHoM in 1958.
5)Sewell--109 OPS+, reasonably long career, good shortstop (A- Win Shares). Yes, I am allowing for his switch to 3B at the end of his career. PHoM in 1939.
6)Stephens-- PHoM in 1961. Looks underrated to me.
7)Elliott--I like him better than Hack. Second greatest 3B to date, after Baker. PHoM in 1960.
8)Medwick-- PHoM in 1960.
9)Schang--His rate stats would put him in the HoM, but a look at each individual year isn’t impressive. Still, a hitting catcher with his career length isn’t common...Bill James rates him a C+ fielder in Win Shares, but says he was a good catcher in the NHBA. PHoM in 1938.
10)Mackey--#2 on my 1949 prelim, but more data on his hitting has dropped him to here.
11)Cool Papa Bell--If Max Carey is in, Cool Papa should be too.
12)Bob Johnson--A very underrated player. Usually I'm a WS guy but this time I think Warp has it right.
13)Doyle— His hitting is legitimately outstanding, he played 2nd base, and a C+ defender by Win Shares. 126 career OPS+, compare to contemporary George Cutshaw, who was a regular 2B for 11 years with an OPS+ of 86. #19 all time in innings at 2B. Regularly in the 2B defensive Win Shares leaders, WS Gold Glove in 1917. Top 10 in Win Shares 1909-12, 1915. PHoM in 1926.
14)Rizzuto--Lots of war credit.
15)Beckley— Behind the big 3, much better than 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, we’re not talking about Ed Kranepool here. PHoM in 1913.

Ruffing#21.
Ferrell—one of the top 100 pitchers of all time, but not on my ballot currently.
Rixey—#16
Griffith In my PHoM but off the ballot at #29.
Sisler--I don’t see his case being very strong. His peak was not long enough to merit election, though he certainly was a great hitter for a few years.
Van Haltren--Good player, part of the OF glut with Ryan and Duffy.
   59. DavidFoss Posted: October 20, 2005 at 11:45 PM (#1695534)
From the link above:

"EQA is a statistic that even BP has acknoweldged came about accidently, through much random tinkering to help its accuracy. It doesn’t make any more sense than Runs Created, Equivalent Runs, or a million other run estimators whose accuracy is based solely on the fact that they were fitted to the data."

I have no problem with statistics that are derived empirically as long as people are honest about it. Its often said that its easy to "fit the data" the tweaks. This is true, but they fit the data in 1998 or so and have had several years of new data to test to see how predictive their model is. Empirical correlations are commonplace in engineering and its not necessarily anything to be ashamed of. Now if BP is overselling their stat, then that's another story. :-)

My usual question when it comes to these types of numbers is where there is a good site that contains validations of all of these run estimators. There are so many of them (RC, LW, BaseRuns, EQA, xR, TA, BPA, OPS, GPA, etc). It would be really cool if there was some giant table that explains how they are validated and how each one does each year and how they do in previous eras, etc. Maybe such a webpage exists, but I can never find it. It'd be a good thing to have when you are talking with non-sabremetric types that just don't believe the new metrics and it would also be good for us in that variations in how different metrics perform relative to each other as contexts change are often instructive.
   60. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 21, 2005 at 12:18 AM (#1695576)
It would be really cool if there was some giant table that explains how they are validated and how each one does each year and how they do in previous eras, etc. Maybe such a webpage exists, but I can never find it.

If there isn't one, there definitely should be.
   61. Daryn Posted: October 22, 2005 at 12:49 PM (#1697741)
My prelim ballot is at 26 of this thread. I'm going on vacation today, returning the 31st, but I may not get to post my ballot in time. Please use my prelim ballot as my real ballot. See my comments regarding required disclosures from my last ballot.

Thanks.
   62. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 22, 2005 at 02:40 PM (#1697787)
I'll take care of it, Daryn. Have fun!
   63. Daryn Posted: October 22, 2005 at 06:00 PM (#1697937)
Will do. I was scheduled to land in Cancun tonight, but unfortunately there is no Cancun right at the moment.

The Dominican Republic will have to do.
   64. KJOK Posted: October 23, 2005 at 12:15 AM (#1698320)
It would be really cool if there was some giant table that explains how they are validated and how each one does each year and how they do in previous eras, etc. Maybe such a webpage exists, but I can never find it.

This isn't exactly what you're talking about, but it's a pretty good series on run estimators:



A Brief History of Run Estimation
   65. karlmagnus Posted: October 24, 2005 at 03:11 PM (#1701290)
Don't we need a thread for Sal Maglie, urgently? I know he wasn't NEL, but a similar career jumping all over everywhere, so we similarly need an extra week, I think. The quality looks good.
   66. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 24, 2005 at 03:35 PM (#1701344)
Don't we need a thread for Sal Maglie, urgently? I know he wasn't NEL, but a similar career jumping all over everywhere, so we similarly need an extra week, I think. The quality looks good.

I have to agree, karlmagnus. I'll post it right away.
   67. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 24, 2005 at 03:36 PM (#1701347)
I concur, Karl.
   68. OCF Posted: October 24, 2005 at 03:37 PM (#1701349)
Will do. I was scheduled to land in Cancun tonight, but unfortunately there is no Cancun right at the moment.

The Dominican Republic will have to do.


Tropical Storm Alpha?
   69. Howie Menckel Posted: October 25, 2005 at 07:12 PM (#1703476)
Top Votegetters who are in neither the Hall of Fame nor the Hall of Merit (with their 1962 voting rank, among all players eligible for the 1962 ballot)

Wes Ferrell SECOND
Biz Mackey SIXTH
George Van Haltren NINTH
Cupid Childs 13TH
Pete Browning 14TH
Dick Redding 15TH
Willard Brown 16TH
Dobie Moore 18TH
Jose Mendez 19TH
Alejandro Oms 23RD
Joe Gordon 24TH
Charley Jones 25TH
   70. Howie Menckel Posted: October 25, 2005 at 07:14 PM (#1703478)
I mean, ", among all players eligible for the 1963 ballot"
   71. Howie Menckel Posted: October 25, 2005 at 07:16 PM (#1703488)
We're mostly just electing Hall of Famers now into the HOM, so we're holding steady at 29 members of the "Hall of Merit electee, but not in the Hall of Fame" category

My count is 57 Hall of Famers who are not in the Hall of Merit
And 89 (and growing) who are in both Halls

But your mileage may vary
   72. ronw Posted: October 25, 2005 at 07:59 PM (#1703582)
Howie:

I've got 90 in both Halls, but all my other numbers match.

Both halls have:

Alexander, Pete
Anson, Cap
Appling, Luke
Averill, Earl
Baker, Frank
Boudreau, Lou
Brouthers, Dan
Brown, Mordecai
Burkett, Jesse
Carey, Max
Charleston, Oscar
Clarke, Fred
Clarkson, John
Cobb, Ty
Cochrane, Mickey
Collins, Eddie
Collins, Jimmy
Connor, Roger
Coveleski, Stan
Crawford, Sam
Cronin, Joe
Davis, George
Delahanty, Ed
Dickey, Bill
Dihigo, Martin
DiMaggio, Joe
Ewing, Buck
Faber, Red
Feller, Bob
Flick, Elmer
Foster, Bill
Foster, Rube
Foxx, Jimmie
Frisch, Frankie
Galvin, Pud
Gehrig, Lou
Gehringer, Charlie
Gibson, Josh
Goslin, Goose
Greenberg, Hank
Grove, Lefty
Hamilton, Billy
Hartnett, Gabby
Heilmann, Harry
Herman, Billy
Hornsby, Rogers
Hubbell, Carl
Jennings, Hugh
Johnson, Walter
Keefe, Tim
Keeler, Willie
Kelley, Joe
Kelly, King
Lajoie, Nap
Leonard, Buck
Lloyd, Pop
Lyons, Ted
Mathewson, Christy
McGinnity, Joe
McPhee, Bid
Mize, Johnny
Newhouser, Hal
Nichols, Kid
O'Rourke, Jim
Ott, Mel
Paige, Satchel
Plank, Eddie
Radbourn, Charley
Robinson, Jackie
Rogan, Bullet
Rusie, Amos
Ruth, Babe
Simmons, Al
Spalding, Al
Speaker, Tris
Stearnes, Turkey
Terry, Bill
Thompson, Sam
Vance, Dazzy
Vaughan, Arky
Wagner, Honus
Wallace, Bobby
Walsh, Ed
Waner, Paul
Ward, Monte
Wells, Willie
Wheat, Zack
Williams, Joe
Wright, George
Young, Cy
   73. ronw Posted: October 25, 2005 at 08:00 PM (#1703584)
HOM not HOF

Barnes, Ross
Beckwith, John
Bennett, Charlie
Brown, Ray
Caruthers, Bob
Dahlen, Bill
Glasscock, Jack
Gore, George
Grant, Frank
Groh, Heinie
Hack, Stan
Hill, Pete
Hines, Paul
Jackson, Joe
Johnson, Grant
Magee, Sherry
McVey, Cal
Pearce, Dickey
Pike, Lip
Richardson, Hardy
Santop, Louis
Sheckard, Jimmy
Start, Joe
Stovey, Harry
Suttles, Mule
Sutton, Ezra
Torriente, Christobal
White, Deacon
Wilson, Jud
   74. ronw Posted: October 25, 2005 at 08:02 PM (#1703587)
I take an earlier comment back. I have 60 HOF not HOM

Bancroft, Dave
Beckley, Jake
Bell, Cool Papa
Bender, Chief
Bottomley, Jim
Bresnahan, Roger
Campanella, Roy
Chance, Frank
Chesbro, Jack
Combs, Earle
Cuyler, Kiki
Dandridge, Ray
Day, Leon
Dean, Dizzy
Doerr, Bobby
Duffy, Hugh
Evers, Johnny
Ferrell, Rick
Gomez, Lefty
Griffith, Clark
Grimes, Burleigh
Hafey, Chick
Haines, Jesse
Hooper, Harry
Hoyt, Waite
Irvin, Monte
Jackson, Travis
Johnson, Judy
Joss, Addie
Kell, George
Kelly, George
Kiner, Ralph
Klein, Chuck
Lazzeri, Tony
Lindstrom, Freddy
Lombardi, Ernie
Manush, Heinie
Maranville, Rabbit
Marquard, Rube
McCarthy, Tommy
McGraw, John
Medwick, Joe
Pennock, Herb
Rice, Sam
Rixey, Eppa
Rizzuto, Phil
Roush, Edd
Ruffing, Red
Schalk, Ray
Sewell, Joe
Sisler, George
Smith, Hilton
Tinker, Joe
Traynor, Pie
Waddell, Rube
Waner, Lloyd
Welch, Mickey
Willis, Vic
Wilson, Hack
Youngs, Ross
   75. Chris Cobb Posted: October 25, 2005 at 08:09 PM (#1703603)
Howie, thanks for this info!

We're mostly just electing Hall of Famers now into the HOM,

We've moved past the period with the most (and most egregious) HOF mistakes, so we won't be disagreeing as much with Cooperstown henceforth, and most of our departures from Cooperstown picks will be coming from the backlog, I'd guess. Between now and 1980, Minnie Minoso and Ken Boyer look like the only new eligibles not in Cooperstown with even a chance at election. In 1980, of course, we get to elect Ron Santo, who (I predict) will be the first non-HoF player to be a first-ballot HOMer since (I think) Ray Brown in 1955.

It looks like Ferrell will become #30 of the HOM-not-HOF group, sometime in the next five elections.
   76. karlmagnus Posted: October 25, 2005 at 08:22 PM (#1703635)
Don't we have to get from 30 to 60 HOM not HOF before 2007, assuming we don't elect huge numbers of the current HOF-not-HOM (which we seem unlikely to do?) Where will they come from?
   77. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: October 25, 2005 at 08:32 PM (#1703664)
Well most of our upper backlog (Medwick, Ruffing, Kiner, Rixey, Sisler) are all HOFers.
   78. DavidFoss Posted: October 25, 2005 at 08:41 PM (#1703688)
Well most of our upper backlog (Medwick, Ruffing, Kiner, Rixey, Sisler) are all HOFers.

Exactly, the two numbers just have to be equal and that can be done by increasing the HOM not HOF list as well as decreasing the HOF not HOM list.

I did a scan of the Newly Eligible HOF-ers tracking them against the number of elect-me spots a while back. Someone had posted the eligibility dates of all the HOF-ers up until the present day. I can't seem to find it now. Anyhow, from what I recall the difference between the two list totals slowly decreases until the elect-3's start becoming regular in the early 80s. At that point the difference drops like a rock -- we'll be inducting non-HOFers and HOF-not-HOM-ers en masse.
   79. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: October 25, 2005 at 08:46 PM (#1703699)
Here's the guys in the top 15 last year:
1. Irvin HOF
2. Ferrell
3. Ruffing HOF
4. Mewick HOF
5. Rixey HOF
6. Mackey
7. Griffith (HOF)
8. Sisler HOF
9. GVH
10. Bell HOF
11. Beckley HOF
12. Duffy HOF
13. Childs

Of course, Mackey (and Brown, #16, could be HOFs by next February....)
   80. Howie Menckel Posted: October 25, 2005 at 10:05 PM (#1703835)
Yes, 90 in both Halls - I have the same list, forgot to update the number itself, I guess.
Also, this is just updated from Ron's list, so give him the credit.
   81. Howie Menckel Posted: October 25, 2005 at 10:12 PM (#1703844)
Well, my list actually has 58 HOF not HOM, not 57.
I was not including Campanella or Kell since they haven't had a chance yet at the "both" list.
   82. sunnyday2 Posted: October 25, 2005 at 10:21 PM (#1703853)
According to my calculations, NOT being in the HoF is worth a bonus of approximately 34.6 points in HoM voting. Or being in the HoF gets a penalty of 34.6 points. One or the other. Or maybe a bonus of 17.3 if no and a penalty of 17.3 if yes. Or...never mind.
   83. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 25, 2005 at 10:44 PM (#1703878)
According to my calculations, NOT being in the HoF is worth a bonus of approximately 34.6 points in HoM voting. Or being in the HoF gets a penalty of 34.6 points. One or the other. Or maybe a bonus of 17.3 if no and a penalty of 17.3 if yes. Or...never mind.

:-)

Of course, I doubt anybody is actively deducting points from a candidate because he's a HOFer, while I have a feeling some players have been boosted due to the Cooperstown honor. In regard to the latter, I have heard voters question the lack of HoM support for a candidate when that player received substantial support from the HOF electors.

Mind you, I'm not criticizing this attitude. I think the opinions of the BWAAA or the Veterans Committee shouldn't be ignored.
   84. jimd Posted: October 25, 2005 at 10:51 PM (#1703884)
As of 1962 (real time):

HOM not HOF (62)
White Hines Gore Barnes Clarkson
Ward Keefe Connor Glasscock Rusie
Richardson Sutton Galvin Start McPhee
McVey Davis Dahlen Stovey Flick
Kelley Bennett Johnson Grant Magee
Jackson Hill Thompson Sheckard Caruthers
Pearce Santop Foster Lloyd Williams
Torriente Groh Coveleski Faber Rogan
Pike Charleston Goslin Foster Stearnes
Wilson Dihigo Gibson Vaughan Wells
Leonard Brown Appling Suttles Beckwith
Herman Hack Boudreau Paige Mize
Newhouser Averill

In Common (57)
Cobb Wagner Mathewson Johnson Lajoie
Speaker Young Wright Alexander Collins
Keeler Anson Ewing Radbourn Spalding
Ruth Hornsby Gehrig Brouthers Clarke
Collins Delahanty Kelly O'Rourke Burkett
McGinnity Plank Walsh Frisch Cochrane
Grove Hubbell Gehringer Brown Nichols
Foxx Ott Heilmann Waner Simmons
Wallace Dickey Terry Lyons Vance
Hartnett Baker Greenberg Cronin DiMaggio
Crawford Wheat Jennings Carey Hamilton
Feller Robinson

HOF not HOM (18)
McGraw Sisler Bresnahan Duffy Chance
Chesbro Evers Griffith McCarthy Tinker
Waddell Pennock Traynor Dean Bender
Maranville Schalk Roush
   85. karlmagnus Posted: October 26, 2005 at 12:43 AM (#1703975)
For those who might have missed it, a nice article by Dan Shaughnessey (surprise!) on HOM'er Shoeless Joe

http://www.boston.com/sports/baseball/articles/2005/10/25/still_a_hero_in_hometown/
   86. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: October 29, 2005 at 11:40 PM (#1711045)
Hey

Can John, Joe or someone please try and get a hold of Jim Furtado to have him put a link to the Hall of Merit on the front page of thinkfactory? I have had some real trouble in recent weeks, since the switch, finding the main site. It isn't even in the blogpen complete link anymore.

Thanks
   87. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: October 29, 2005 at 11:56 PM (#1711073)
Can John, Joe or someone please try and get a hold of Jim Furtado to have him put a link to the Hall of Merit on the front page of thinkfactory?

If it's not in the Updated Blog section in the right-hand corner, it will appear in the Other Blog section right below it, Mark.
   88. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: October 30, 2005 at 08:06 PM (#1711668)
thanks john
   89. DavidFoss Posted: October 30, 2005 at 11:59 PM (#1711907)
Obitutary notice. The oldest living HOF-er, Al Lopez died. Anyone know who takes over that particular honor?
   90. Guapo Posted: October 31, 2005 at 12:11 AM (#1711919)
Phil Rizzuto (born 1917)
   91. Howie Menckel Posted: October 31, 2005 at 02:37 PM (#1712403)
Associated Press


MIAMI -- Al Lopez, a Hall of Fame catcher and manager who led the Cleveland Indians and Chicago White Sox to American League pennants in the 1950s, died Sunday at 97.
A family friend at his bedside said that with his last words, Lopez mumbled something about "hall" and "merit" before slipping away.
   92. sunnyday2 Posted: October 31, 2005 at 02:42 PM (#1712408)
Talk about mind over matter! The guy dies three days after his old club wins its first Series in 80-some years. This is no coincidence.
   93. Daryn Posted: October 31, 2005 at 05:55 PM (#1712744)
The Dominican Republic will have to do.

Tropical Storm Alpha?


I'm sure you were all worried about me. I'd just like to take this moment to vent about weather forecasters. I left for the Dominican Republic at 6:00am on October 23, to arrive at 10 am. At 2 am I checked the best websites regarding tropical storms, including the National Hurricane Center, and they all said that Tropical Storm Alpha had just made land fall over the DR and that 12 inches of rain and floodwater were expected. All the wetather forecast websites predicted rain and thundershowers for the entire next 7 days.

Needless to say I was quite worried we wouldn't get to go anywhere, and if we did, that the weather would be horrible. When we landed in the DR, it was a little drizzly. It cleared up by 3 pm. Over the next 7 days there was about 4 hours of rain, maybe 6. The rest of the time it was sunny (very few clouds), 90 Degrees, and close to the best overall weather I've ever had in the Caribbean (I've been there about 30 times).

A good time was had by all -- and the World Series in Spanish is fun to watch.
   94. Adam Schafer Posted: October 31, 2005 at 07:54 PM (#1712979)
Howie Menckel Posted: October 31, 2005 at 09:32 AM (#1712399)
Yeah, Mike Ivie may rank 3rd.
Then there's Frank Isbell, a pair of Iorgs, and a bunch of guys with the last name of Irwin.
I'll leave it there, so as not to hijack the ballot thread. Further comment probably belongs on "ballot discussion."


What about Jason Isringhausen and Raul Ibanez?

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
James Kannengieser
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 1.0792 seconds
49 querie(s) executed