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 15, 2006

1976 Results: “Flash” and “Esse Hombre” Get Their Hall of Merit Plaques!

In his 21st election, Yankee and Indian star Joe Gordon got his HoM ticket stamped with 42% of all possible points.

In his 19th year of eligibility, Negro League slugger Willard Brown also achieved immortality by earning 38% of all possible points. He is now our 25th NeL selection.

Rounding out the top-ten were: George Sisler (missed it by this much), José Méndez , Minnie Minoso , Cannonball Dick Redding , Ralph Kiner, Joe Sewell (back in the top-ten after a long absence), Dobie Moore, and Hugh Duffy .

RK   LY  Player                   PTS  Bal   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1    5  Joe Gordon               511   34   1  6  4  2  1  2  4  1  4  2  1  3  1  1  1
 2    3  Willard Brown            464   32   4  1  2  2  4  2  2  4  1  3  2     3     2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3    4  George Sisler            460   33   2  3     6     5  1  2     4  3     4  2  1
 4    6  José Méndez              421   26   5  1  3  3  4  1  1  2  1  1     1  1  2   
 5    7  Minnie Minoso            403   35      2  2     1  3  1  3  3  6  2  2  2  3  5
 6    8  Cannonball Dick Redding  384   25   5  1  1  4  2  1  1  1  2  1  1  2        3
 7   12  Joe Sewell               352   26   1  2  1  3  1  4     3  1  1  3     4  1  1
 8   11  Ralph Kiner              348   27      3  1  1  4  1  2  3     1     5  2  2  2
 9    9  Dobie Moore              340   23   3  2     4  2  1  1  1  2     1  2  1  2  1
10   10  Hugh Duffy               328   21   2  2  3     2  4  3  1        1  1  1     1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11   16  Jake Beckley             315   21   4  1  3  1  2        1  1  2  1  1  1  1  2
12   14  George Van Haltren       298   19   2  3  1  1     1     4  3  3  1            
13   13  Pete Browning            291   20   3  2  2        1  1  4     2     1     1  3
14   19  Ken Boyer                290   24   2     1  2  2  1  3  1     1     1  1  6  3
15   18  Billy Pierce             288   22   2     1  2  2  2  2     3  1     2  1  1  3
16   15  Cupid Childs             287   21      3  2  1  3  1     2        3  2  2     2
17   17  Rube Waddell             276   19      2  5     1  2     3     1     4  1      
18   20  Nellie Fox               248   18   1     1  3  2  2  1     3  1  1  1     1  1
19   26  Charley Jones            227   14   1  3     1  1  2  3     1     1        1   
20   21  Quincy Trouppe           216   16         3  1  4     1     1  2  1     2  1   
21   24  Bucky Walters            215   18      1  1  1     1  3  2  1  1     1  2  2  2
22   23  Edd Roush                208   16   2  1     2  1  1           1  2     2  1  3
23   22  Mickey Welch             195   11   3  1  2  1        2           1  1         
24   25  Tommy Leach              188   14      2  1  1  1     1  2        1  1  4      
25   27  Roger Bresnahan          185   14   2     1        1  1  2     2  1  1  2  1   
26   29  Bob Johnson              166   13      2     1  1        2        1  5        1
27   30  Gavy Cravath             165   12      1  1  1     2  1  2  1  1           2   
28   28  Alejandro Oms            164   14   1     1     1     1  1  1  2  1     1  3  1
29   32  Bob Elliott              162   14               2  1  2  1  1     2  4        1
30   31  Burleigh Grimes          146   10   1  1     2        1     1  2  1        1   
31   34  Charlie Keller           145   10   2  1     1     1           1  1     1  1  1
32   33  Larry Doyle              140    9   1     2     3           2           1      
33   35  Wally Schang              99    7   1              3        1  1           1   
34   36  Dizzy Dean                88    9                     1     2     3        2  1
35   37  John McGraw               88    5      2           2        1                  
36   50  Ben Taylor                70    6      1              1     1           1  1  1
37   42  Vic Willis                69    7               1           1     1  2     1  1
38   38  Tommy Bridges             66    6            1  1              1        1  2   
39   44  Sam Rice                  57    6                     2              1     2  1
40   45  Jimmy Ryan                56    6                     1           1  1  2  1   
41   39  Vern Stephens             52    4            2                    1     1      
42   40  Addie Joss                51    4         1        1           1           1   
43   51  Elston Howard             50    6                           1        1  2  1  1
44   41  Bill Monroe               49    4         1                 1     1  1         
45   43  Pie Traynor               47    3      1              1           1            
46   49  Phil Rizzuto              45    4            1              1     1           1
47   46  Carl Mays                 43    4                           2  1        1      
48   48  Lefty Gomez               38    3               1              2               
49   52  Dutch Leonard             35    3                  1              2            
50T  56T Ernie Lombardi            34    3                           2     1            
50T  47  Ed Williamson             34    3                     1        1     1         
52   55  Tony Mullane              33    4                           1           1  1  1
53   53  Fielder Jones             32    2         1           1                        
54   73T Dave Bancroft             30    3                              1  1  1         
55   54  Frank Chance              28    2         1                       1            
56   59  Rabbit Maranville         27    2         1                          1         
57   58  Gil Hodges                26    2                     1     1                  
58   56T Ed Cicotte                23    2               1                          1   
59   69T Virgil Trucks             21    2                           1        1         
60   60  Fred Dunlap               19    2                              1        1      
61  n/e  Luke Easter               18    1         1                                    
62   71T Hack Wilson               16    2                                 1           1
63   61  Chuck Klein               15    1                  1                           
64T  67T Herman Long               14    1                     1                        
64T  62T Red Schoendienst          14    1                     1                        
64T  64T Dizzy Trout               14    1                     1                        
67T  67T Artie Wilson              13    1                        1                     
67T  64T Bob Friend                13    1                        1                     
67T  62T Sam Leever                13    1                        1                     
70T  69T Bus Clarkson              12    1                           1                  
70T  64T Bobby Veach               12    1                           1                  
72T n/e  Buzz Arlett               10    1                                 1            
72T  71T Wilbur Cooper             10    1                                 1            
72T  73T Dom DiMaggio              10    1                                 1            
75   75  Curt Simmons               8    1                                       1      
76  n/e  George J. Burns            7    1                                          1   
77T n/e  Dick Bartell               6    1                                             1
77T n/e  Wally Berger               6    1                                             1
77T n/e  George Kell                6    1                                             1
Ballots Cast: 51

 

John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 15, 2006 at 06:00 PM | 169 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 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 16, 2006 at 12:07 AM (#2021340)
Congratulations are in order for our two new inductees!

Though Sisler would have been a fine choice, it's nice clearing up the top part of my ballot of backloggers for a change. :-)
   2. OCF Posted: May 16, 2006 at 12:10 AM (#2021351)
Consensus scores:

Average: -14.5. Third lowest in history, surpassed by 1968 (-15.4) and 1967 (-15.0).

Michael Bass: -6
Chris Fluit: -7
Rob Wood: -8
Howie Menckel: -9
Ardo: -9
TomH: -10
...
Chris Cobb: -12
...
OCF: -13
...
Tiboreau: -14
AJM: -14 (medians)
...
John Murphy: -15
...
DL from MN: -20
Joe Dimino: -20
Jim Sp: -20
yest: -22 (even though we nearly elected Sisler)
EricC: -23
karlmagnus: -25
KJOK: -25

Maybe by later this week I'll try doing the voter-to-voter similarity score, but not today or tomorrow.
   3. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 16, 2006 at 12:16 AM (#2021368)
Wow! I'm right in the middle now. Don't know how long that wiill last (or will I keep moving up?)
   4. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 16, 2006 at 12:38 AM (#2021441)
HOF-not-HOM through 1975

1. Bancroft
Dave
2. Beckley
Jake
3  Bender
Chief
4  Bottomley
Jim
5  Bresnahan
Roger
6  Chance
Frank
7  Chesbro
Jack
8  Clemente
Roberto**
9  CombsEarle
10 Cuyler
Kiki
11 Dean
Dizzy
12 Duffy
Hugh
13 Evers
Johnny
14 Gomez
Lefty
15 Grimes
Burleigh
16 Hafey
Chick
17 Haines
Jesse
18 Hooper
Harry
19 Hoyt
Waite
20 Johnson
Judy
21 Kelly
George
22 Kiner
Ralph
23 Lindstrom
Freddie
24 Manush
Heinie
25 Maranville
Rabbit
26 Marquard
Rube
27 McCarthy
Tommy
28 McGraw
John 
29 Pennock
Herb
30 Rice
Sam
31 Roush
Edd
32 Schalk
Ray
33 Sisler
George
34 Tinker
Joe
35 Traynor
Pie
36 Waddell
Rube
37 Waner
Lloyd
38 Welch
Mickey
39 Youngs
Ross

And HOM not-HOF

1  Ashburn
Richie
2  Barnes
Ross
3  Beckwith
John
4  Bennett
Charlie
5  Brown
Ray
6  Brown
Willard
7  Caruthers
Bob
8  Dahlen
Bill
9  Davis
George
10 Dihigo
Martin
11 Doby
Larry
12 Doerr
Bobby
13 Drysdale
Don
14 Ferrell
Wes
15 Foster
Rube
16 Foster
Willie 
17 Glasscock
Jack
18 Gordon
Joe
19 Gore
George
20 Grant
Frank
21 Groh
Heinie
22 Hack
Stan
23 Hill
Pete
24 Hines
Paul
25 Jackson
Joe*
26 JohnsonHome Run
27 Lloyd
John Henry
28 Magee
Sherry
29 Mathews
Eddie
30 McPhee
Bid
31 McVey
Cal
32 Mize
Johnny
33 Newhouser
Hal
34 Pearce
Dickey
35 Pike
Lip
36 Richardson
Hardy
37 Reese
Pee Wee
38 Rogan
Bullet Joe
39 Rusie
Amos
40 Santop
Louis
41 Sheckard
Jimmy
42 Slaughter
Enos
43 Snider
Duke
44 Start
Joe
45 Stearnes
Turkey
46 Stovey
Harry
47 Suttles
Mule
48 Sutton
Ezra
49 Torriente
Cristobal
50 Vaughan
Arky
51 Wells
Willie
52 White
Deacon
53 Williams
Smokey Joe
54 Wilson
Jud

*  not eligible for the HOF
** not eligible for the HoM until 1978. 
   5. Jeff M Posted: May 16, 2006 at 12:56 AM (#2021517)
I forgot which week this was and didn't get my ballot submitted. There goes the perfect voting record.

I'm ticked off at myself, but my ballot would not have changed anything. I would have had Gordon 13th, Brown 4th and Sisler 5th. There's some comfort in that, I guess.

I think it is all Joe's fault...setting a bad example. :)
   6. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 16, 2006 at 01:01 AM (#2021540)
I'm ticked off at myself, but my ballot would not have changed anything.

Since it wouldn't change anything, unless someone objects, why don't you post it so you can preserve your record?
   7. Max Parkinson Posted: May 16, 2006 at 01:46 AM (#2021690)
I would be in favour of that. We've allowed voters past 8 EST before, especially if it didn't affect the results...
   8. Howie Menckel Posted: May 16, 2006 at 02:13 AM (#2021751)
Whew, that's tough on the commish, loses his perfect record because of who he voted for.
But that ain't my bailiwick, either...
   9. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 16, 2006 at 02:17 AM (#2021758)
I feel your pain Jeff. Mine cost Gordon a year in his election too.

At least he still got in while he's alive.
   10. Howie Menckel Posted: May 16, 2006 at 02:29 AM (#2021768)
Browning now only one year away from leaving the 6th spot he's held for decades.. Sisler's narrow escape should put him soon into the all-time top 10... Leach and Bresnahan, still twins after all these years, both pass Stovey for 18-19... Mendez finally knocks Joe Start out of the top 25.

TOP 25, ALL-TIME
VAN HALTREN 20622.5
BECKLEY 19418
DUFFY 19060.5
Griffith 17924
Jennings 16976
BROWNING 16796.5
CHILDS 14697
WADDELL 14394
WELCH 13901
Pike 13399

SISLER 12576
Thompson 12349
Bennett 11503
RYAN 11306.5
Rixey 10789
Caruthers 10704
Beckwith 9896
TLEACH 9644
BRESNAHAN 9579
H Stovey 9576

SEWELL 9520
CJONES 9091
Mackey 8930
REDDING 8890
MENDEZ 8607

OTHERS IN THE TOP 25 ACTIVE
(Roush 6604, Moore 6533, Doyle 6214, Monroe 5959, Cravath 5027, Williamson 4940, Grimes 4837, Schang 4431, McGraw 4216, Walters 3776)

almost
(Kiner 3740, Oms 3202, McCormick 3148, Joss 2990, Willis 2824)
   11. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 16, 2006 at 02:42 AM (#2021775)
Jake Beckley jumping from 16 to 10, see what my missing a ballot does!
   12. Chris Cobb Posted: May 16, 2006 at 03:00 AM (#2021785)
I'm glad to see Brown and Gordon go in this year!

Sisler looks well-positioned for the next backlog spot that will open up in 1979 (unless of course he beats out Bunning in 1977 -- unlikely but imaginable). After that, the next shot for everybody on the ballot now will be in 1985, I think, as we have

1977
Banks
Bunning

1978
Clemente
Wilhelm

1979
Mays
________

1980 - elect 3
Kaline
Santo
Marichal

1981
Gibson
Killebrew

1982
Aaron
F. Robinson
B. Williams (elect 1983)
Freehan (elect 1984 or 1985)

1983
Allen
Br. Robinson (elect 1984 or 1985)
Torre (elect 1984 or 1985)

1984
See Above

1985 -- elect 3
Lou Brock (will he go in??)

Since 1985 is an "elect three" year, even if Brock is elected along with the odd man out of Torre, Freehan, and Brooks Robinson, one from the backlog will go in as well. To the backlog we will have added by 1985 F. Howard, Aparicio, Cepeda, Cash, Pinson, W. Davis, Oliva, Fregosi, Munson, and Hunter. I think we'll elect someone from the older backlog ahead of any of these guys, but who knows?
   13. Paul Wendt Posted: May 16, 2006 at 03:08 AM (#2021790)
Alert! a new statistic for omphaloknepsians

15 or more points per vote
--
 
1    5  Joe Gordon               502   33   1  6  4  2  1  2  4  1  4  2  1  2  1  1  1
 4    6  José Méndez              421   26   5  1  3  3  4  1  1  2  1  1     1  1  2   
 6    8  Cannonball Dick Redding  384   25   5  1  1  4  2  1  1  1  2  1  1  2        3
10   16  Jake Beckley             315   21   4  1  3  1  2        1  1  2  1  1  1  1  2
11   10  Hugh Duffy               305   20   2  1  3     2  4  3  1        1  1  1     1
12   14  George Van Haltren       298   19   2  3  1  1     1     4  3  3  1            
21   26  Charley Jones            211   13   1  3     1     2  3     1     1        1   
23   22  Mickey Welch             195   11   3  1  2  1        2           1  1         
32   33  Larry Doyle              140    9   1     2     3           2           1      
--
34   37  John McGraw               88    5      2           2        1                  
45   43  Pie Traynor               47    3      1              1           1            
53   53  Fielder Jones             32    2         1           1                        
61  n
/e  Luke Easter               18    1         1                                    
63   61  Chuck Klein               15    1                  1 
   14. Paul Wendt Posted: May 16, 2006 at 03:10 AM (#2021791)
(advert displayed below, 23:05 EDT)
Wholesale Batting Cages

Should we buy a dozen for when we build the concrete Hall of Merit?
   15. Paul Wendt Posted: May 16, 2006 at 04:02 AM (#2021830)
June 24 dedication of Sam Thompson historical marker.
Did I post that in the wrong place before visiting the other hot topics? Or lose it?
Well, it's not for tonight.
   16. TomH Posted: May 16, 2006 at 12:12 PM (#2021922)
I'm the ONLY one who had Gordon #1?

I so proud of me!
   17. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: May 16, 2006 at 01:29 PM (#2021965)
First Ashburn, then Doerr, now Gordon. These guys define the borderliner that lacks much peak, but who gets plenty of help from WARP's defensive scheme and love of up-the-middle guys. I've been an odd man out on all three, and I still think that's the best position to take on these guys.

Or to put it another way, Friends of Cupid Childs should be extremely agitated by Doerr's and Gordon's elections, while the Nellie Fox hounds should be drawing up rallying slogans since he's the natural successor to them among borderline second baseman. Look, maybe I'm wrong about this, but I think we're taking too many borderliner 2Bs and we're not being particularly consistent in evaluating them. And if we elect more of these guys (or Sewell for that matter), we're just playing the dreaded if-one-then-the-other game. How about neither instead?

Nellie Fox's career is damn near as close to Gordon and Doerr as anyone needs and he's not outside the realm of a future backlog election. Lou Whitaker's going to be a candidate just like all three of them. Are we going to take all four of those guys? And then how far down into the depths of borderlinerland are we going to reach? Bret Boone? Dave Lopes? Why not Bobby Avila? Why not Marv Williams? Where's the support for Lazzeri? Knobby? Evers?

Why not Doyle? What about Childs?

Right now, through "1977," Joe Morgan, Bobby Grich, Rod Carew, and Pete Rose have already established the credentials that are putting them on their way toward a HOM career, and a much more accomplished one than any of the guys mentioned above, so it's not like we don't know what HOM 2Bs look like. Then why are we electing second baseman who will ultimately look like some of our weakest selections?
   18. DL from MN Posted: May 16, 2006 at 02:00 PM (#2021993)
> why are we electing second baseman who will ultimately look like some of our
> weakest selections?

Beats electing outfielders or pitchers who will ultimately look like some of our weakest selections.

I'm amazed. I went from top of consensus to bottom of consensus in 6 years.
   19. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 16, 2006 at 02:00 PM (#2021994)
First Ashburn, then Doerr, now Gordon. These guys define the borderliner that lacks much peak, but who gets plenty of help from WARP's defensive scheme and love of up-the-middle guys.

Since I don't look at WARP beyond the NA for non-pitchers, their defensive system means squat to me. I'm working with Win Shares.

Why not Doyle? What about Childs?

I'm not a fan of Doyle, but I had Childs above Gordon, so I agree he belongs if Gordon does (and the latter does, IMO). Which backlogger dominated his position like Cupid did?

Right now, through "1977," Joe Morgan, Bobby Grich, Rod Carew, and Pete Rose have already established the credentials that are putting them on their way toward a HOM career, and a much more accomplished one than any of the guys mentioned above, so it's not like we don't know what HOM 2Bs look like. Then why are we electing second baseman who will ultimately look like some of our weakest selections?

Is Grich appreciatively better than Gordon or even Doerr after taking into account WWII and the longer careers of later generations?
   20. Chris Cobb Posted: May 16, 2006 at 02:02 PM (#2021999)
Then why are we electing second baseman who will ultimately look like some of our weakest selections?

Whoever we elect in a backlog year is going to look like some of our weakest selections, so "weak selection" is no argument for 1976. Gordon is demonstrably better than Childs, Fox, and Doyle, and it is not clear after 1976 that any of them will be elected, so the argument that we are setting a dangerous precedent in electing Gordon doesn't wash either.

The relevant question, and it is always the relevant question, is "Is he the best player eligible?"
   21. Michael Bass Posted: May 16, 2006 at 02:27 PM (#2022025)
I'd also add that even after these elections, we have less 2B than 1B, SS, or the 3 OF positions (multiplying 2B by 3 to make that comparison). So it's not as though we've started turnstyling every random 2B through the door, overflowing the HOM with the position.

And, echoing what DL and Chris said, whoever we elected this year was going to look like one of our weakest selections. Hell, whoever we elected this year was almost certainly going to *be* one of our weakest selections. Welcome to late-stage backlog elections.
   22. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: May 16, 2006 at 02:54 PM (#2022067)
While I agree with Gordon's selection, I don't see how he is demonstrably better than Childs. Could you explain that one? Is it WARP?

I had Gordon and Doerr about even with Childs ahead of them. Childs was #2 on my 1976 ballot, PHOM 1939, while Gordon was #9, PHOM 1976, and Doerr is going to be PHOM soon.
   23. Fridas Boss Posted: May 16, 2006 at 03:08 PM (#2022088)
The HoM is very cool, I'm glad you guys are putting it on.

Quick question, why would you use the amount of Hall of Famers as your benchmark for how many Hall of Merit'ers you elect, especially given that you espouse that the Hall of Fame needs "correcting"? Shouldn't the number of HoM inductees be a more objective benchmark?
   24. DavidFoss Posted: May 16, 2006 at 03:12 PM (#2022091)
Check the 'Number of Electees' thread. The number of HOM-ers was fixed by the number of HOF-ers back in 2002 or so and the 'per year' totals are set up to be proportional to the number of teams in MLB a few years before the election. Since 2002, the HOF has been stingier than the HOM is slated to be, but with the big Negro League induction this year, they've caught up.
   25. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 16, 2006 at 03:24 PM (#2022108)
Shouldn't the number of HoM inductees be a more objective benchmark?

Joe Dimino's vision was to create a separate HoM, not just to enshrine the best players, but to be used as a comparative study. I know some people will argue that the real HOF is the BBWAA and we should have used a much smaller model instead, but I would disagree. When the BBWAA was felt to be stingy with their inductees, the Vets' Committee ramped it up because the average fan wants a large HOF instead of a smaller one.

Of course, the size is strictly arbitrary and you and others may have a smaller or larger institution in mind. Regardless, the visitor to this site has an excellent idea of who the inner-circle and borderline HoMers are, which is not always the case with the HOF.
   26. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 16, 2006 at 03:25 PM (#2022109)
Childs was #2 on my 1976 ballot

Great minds think alike. :-D
   27. Devin has a deep burning passion for fuzzy socks Posted: May 16, 2006 at 04:42 PM (#2022193)
I took another look at the "voting points" for 1976, essentially how many points were given to all the players active in a given year. The file's posted at the Yahoo site. (BTW, I first tried to upload a file with 3 years included and it told me that we weren't authorized to have that much space. We may need to do some editing in the near future.)

Anyway, here's the way the trends ran:

Climbed to a peak in 1888 (2022 points)
Dropped down until 1895 (1355 points)
Back up quickly for 1898-1901 (2180 points)
Right back down to the low point (except the ends) in 1904-06 (1191 points)
Climbed up steadily until 1920 (3024 points)
Slipped back a bit for 1921-26 (about 2850)
Dropped for 1927-31 (about 2100)
Another drop for 1932-37 (about 1500)
Back up for 1939-45 (about 2150)
Steady climb to overall high point in 1949-50 (3205 point)
Drop 500 points/year for next 3 years
Slowly slide off through 1964 (1400-1250 points) and drop quickly after that.

(This method ignores absences due to wars, blacklists, injuries)

The average is at it highest in the 1890s (except for Charley Jones hanging out by himself in 1875-77), and at it's lowest in the early 1930s.

It's a little surprising to me to see the high point in the early 20s, but that includes Sisler, Mendez, Redding, Sewell and Moore, so I guess it makes sense. I still think the 1900s are being overlooked to a degree. The dip in the 1930s is because we've pretty much picked out every good candidate already - the highest candidates left are Trouppe, Walters, and Bob Johnson. And if you take the electees out (to look forward), after the post-1931 dropoff, it doesn't come back up until 1949, which makes it look like we're pretty much done with the Forties as well.
   28. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: May 16, 2006 at 05:04 PM (#2022226)
First off, no, I don't think that Gordon and Doerr and Fox and Lazzeri and Doyle and Childs are the equal of Grich. None. And I don't think it's terribly close either. But i'll leave thatfor later.

I also agree with John that Childs dominated his position in a way that none of the backloggers at 2B does, weak position or not. We can't vote, say, Sewell for having dominance over position but not Childs. Except that I think the warp factor comes into play for sewell, penalizing childs but not sewell (to the same extent). but i haven't studied the matter, and i'm probably wrong.


In other news, if we hadn't decided to mirror the Hall's numbers, we'd still be arguing about how big the HOM should be. Good decision to keep track with the HOF.
   29. DanG Posted: May 16, 2006 at 05:32 PM (#2022270)
test
brackets
1976SislerMendezMinosoRedding 

arrows
1976SislerMendezMinosoRedding
   30. DanG Posted: May 16, 2006 at 05:37 PM (#2022275)
test
brackets
1976SislerMendezMinosoRedding 

arrows
1976SislerMendezMinosoRedding
   31. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: May 16, 2006 at 07:17 PM (#2022399)
Now if only we agreed on the other 14 spots John...
   32. sunnyday2 Posted: May 16, 2006 at 07:21 PM (#2022407)
As to Childs and all the other 2Bs, it cannot really be a secret that the dreaded timeline (aka WARP3 competition adjustments or whatever the rhetoric for that voodoo is) has something to do with it, can it?
   33. Mike Webber Posted: May 16, 2006 at 07:45 PM (#2022458)
Dan G and everyone

I always do my test posts on an old game chatter - a good suggestion from someone. At the end of any given Royals chatter you are likely to see some damn graph about Edd Roush's win shares.
   34. DanG Posted: May 16, 2006 at 07:57 PM (#2022489)
Good suggestion, Mike.

Now, how the heck do you make an Excel chart look right?
   35. jimd Posted: May 16, 2006 at 09:31 PM (#2022704)
BBWAA Voting for 1976

Name Votes PCT
Robin Roberts 337 86.86
Bob Lemon 305 78.61

Gil Hodges 233 60.05
Enos Slaughter 197 50.77
Eddie Mathews 189 48.71
Pee Wee Reese 186 47.94
Nellie Fox 174 44.85
Duke Snider 159 40.98
Phil Rizzuto 149 38.40
George Kell 129 33.25
Red Schoendienst 129 33.25
Don Drysdale 114 29.38
Roger Maris 87 22.42
Richie Ashburn 85 21.91
Alvin Dark 62 15.98
Walker Cooper 56 14.43
Elston Howard 55 14.18
Mickey Vernon 52 13.40
Ted Kluszewski 50 12.89
Don Larsen 47 12.11
Roy Face 23 5.93
Lew Burdette 21 5.41
Don Newcombe 21 5.41
Ken Boyer 15 3.87
Del Crandall 15 3.87
Vern Law 9 2.32
Bobby Thomson 9 2.32
Harvey Haddix 8 2.06
Dick Groat 7 1.80
Bill White 7 1.80
Vic Wertz 5 1.29
Johnny Podres 2 0.52
Larry Doby 0 0.00

Fox was the big mover, from 21% the year before.
Rizzuto received a small "last chance" bump.
Newhouser, Cavaretta, and Sain had passed over to the VC.
   36. DavidFoss Posted: May 16, 2006 at 09:44 PM (#2022721)
Now, how the heck do you make an Excel chart look right?

Get rid of TAB characters. Fill with spaces. TAB characters get ignored in our posts.
   37. sunnyday2 Posted: May 16, 2006 at 09:48 PM (#2022730)
If I were the BBWAA I'd be petitioning the U.S. Congress to make it illegal for anyone to publish their old HoF votes. They'er that embarrassing.
   38. DanG Posted: May 17, 2006 at 01:48 PM (#2024033)
Get rid of TAB characters. Fill with spaces. TAB characters get ignored in our posts.

Right, and used a fixed-width font like Courier. And use brackets, not arrows. Thanks David (and Dr. Chaleeko). I think this should look OK.

Here are the top four unelected finishers in every election. Sisler is still next in the queue, while Minoso and the NeL pitchers have pushed ahead of GVH and Beckley.
1898 Williamson  O'Neill     Jones,C     Welch
1899 Browning    Williamson  O'
Neill     Dunlap
1900 Browning    Williamson  Mullane     Welch
1901 Browning    Williamson  Welch       McCormick
1902 Browning    Williamson  Welch       McCormick
1903 Browning    Williamson  Welch       McCormick
1904 Browning    Griffin     Williamson  Welch
1905 Browning    Tiernan     Griffin     McCormick
1906 Browning    Tiernan     McCormick   Williamson
1907 Duffy       Childs      Browning    Tiernan
1908 Duffy       Childs      Tiernan     Browning
1909 Ryan        Duffy       Van Haltren Childs
1910 Duffy       Ryan        Van Haltren Childs
1911 Duffy       Ryan        Van Haltren Childs
1912 Duffy       Ryan        Van Haltren Childs
1913 Duffy       Ryan        Beckley     Van Haltren
1914 Duffy       Ryan        Beckley     Van Haltren
1915 Duffy       Ryan        Van Haltren Beckley
1916 Waddell     Duffy       Ryan        Van Haltren
1917 Waddell     Duffy       Van Haltren Beckley
1918 Waddell     Van Haltren Ryan        Beckley
1919 Waddell     Van Haltren Ryan        Beckley
1920 Waddell     Duffy       Van Haltren Beckley
1921 Waddell     Bresnahan   Beckley     Duffy
1922 Waddell     Beckley     Bresnahan   Duffy
1923 Beckley     Ryan        Waddell     Van Haltren
1924 Beckley     Waddell     Ryan        Duffy
1925 Van Haltren Beckley     Ryan        Waddell
1926 Beckley     Van Haltren Ryan        Waddell
1927 Beckley     Van Haltren Ryan        Waddell
1928 Beckley     Van Haltren Ryan        Wad
/Bresn
1929 Beckley     Van Haltren Ryan        Bresnahan
1930 Van Haltren Beckley     Ryan        Bresnahan
1931 Van Haltren Beckley     Childs      Bresnahan
1932 Van Haltren Beckley     Waddell     Duffy
1933 Van Haltren Beckley     Waddell     Welch
1934 Beckley     Van Haltren Waddell     Welch
1935 Beckley     Waddell     Van Haltren Welch
1936 Beckley     Van Haltren Waddell     Sisler
1937 Beckley     Waddell     Sisler      Welch
1938 Beckley     Sisler      Waddell     Welch
1939 Sewell      Sisler      Beckley     Waddell
1940 Sewell      Sisler      Beckley     Leach
1941 Sewell      Leach       Sisler      Beckley
1942 Sewell      Van Haltren Leach       Beckley
1943 Beckley     Sewell      Van Haltren Sisler
1944 Van Haltren Beckley     Sewell      Sisler
1945 Sewell      Sisler      Van Haltren Beckley
1946 Sisler      Beckley     Duffy       Van Haltren
1947 Beckley     Sisler      Sewell      Van Haltren
1948 Sisler      Beckley     Van Haltren Sewell
1949 Sisler      Beckley     Sewell      Van Haltren
1950 Sisler      Beckley     Van Haltren Sewell
1951 Sisler      Beckley     Van Haltren Sewell
1952 Sisler      Van Haltren Beckley     Sewell
1953 Van Haltren Beckley     Sisler      Welch
1954 Sisler      Beckley     Van Haltren Redding
1955 Beckley     Sisler      Van Haltren Sewell
1956 Sisler      Beckley     Van Haltren Redding
1957 Sisler      Beckley     Van Haltren Duffy
1958 Sisler      Beckley     Van Haltren Childs
1959 Sisler      Van Haltren Beckley     Childs
1960 Sisler      Van Haltren Beckley     Childs
1961 Sisler      Van Haltren Beckley     Childs
1962 Sisler      Van Haltren Beckley     Duffy
1963 Van Haltren Sisler      Beckley     Childs
1964 Van Haltren Sisler      Beckley     Duffy
1965 Van Haltren Sisler      Moore       Beckley
1966 Sisler      Van Haltren Beckley     Childs
1967 Sisler      Van Haltren Beckley     Redding
1968 Van Haltren Sisler      Beckley     Moore
1969 Van Haltren Sisler      Redding     Beckley
1970 Van Haltren Sisler      Redding     Mendez
1971 Sisler      Redding     Van Haltren Kiner
1972 Van Haltren Sisler      Redding     Minoso
1973 Sisler      Redding     Mendez      Minoso
1974 Sisler      Mendez      Minoso      Redding
1975 Sisler      Mendez      Minoso      Redding
1976 Sisler      Mendez      Minoso      Redding 
   39. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 17, 2006 at 03:04 PM (#2024106)
Now if only we agreed on the other 14 spots John...

Heh.
   40. sunnyday2 Posted: May 17, 2006 at 03:35 PM (#2024135)
Great stuff Dan B. Basically it breaks down into a series of "eras."

1898-1906 The Browning Era: Browning and Williamson the leaders, but dropped off the cliff when the four-some of Duffy, Ryanb, GVH and Beckley became eligible circa 1907-09-13.

1907-1915 The Duffy Era: Duffy-Ryan-GVH in that order with Beckley becoming eligible toward the end of the era, initially slotted 3rd behind Duffy and Ryan and ahead of GVH. Childs was in the mix through this era, too.

1916-1922 The Waddell Era: Waddell was #1 for 7 years right from his first year of eligibility. Duffy and GVH (tie), then Beckley, Ryan and Bresnahan follow. GVH and Beckley both pass Ryan, and GVH catches Duffy who had led him by a wide margin previously.

1923-1938 The Beckley-GVH Era: Beckley passes up Duffy and GVH after previously passing Ryan. It took 4 years for him to pass Ryan and another 4 to pass Duffy. But then GVH also passes Duffy, and by a wide margin. In fact, it's Beckley, GVH, Waddell, Ryan with Duffy dropping all the way to 8th in this era. Waddell passed Duffy in 1916, Beckley passed him for good in 1921, and GVH only passed him for good in 1925.

1939-1945 The Sewell Era: Sewell held sway for 5 of 7 years after his eligibility, with Beckley and GVH each in the lead one time. But Sisler passed Beckley and GVH in 1945 and Sewell in 1946 despite being eligible way back in 1946.

1946-1972 The Sisler Era (I): Sisler is #1 17 times, GVH 8 times and Beckley twice. Nobody else is really in the mix, not consistently. Nobody new cracks the leader board (of course, many are not on this list because they got elected). But no new consensus borderliners. I mean, nobody is even on the list for a year, even, except Kiner one time. Otherwise it is all the old backlog--Sewell, Childs, Duffy, Welch--though two of the old backlog--Redding and Moore--get in there a few times between them.

1973-1976 The Sisler Era (II): Sisler still on top but now Mendez, Minoso and Redding move ahead of the classic group of Beckley and GVH plus the Duffys and Sewells and Childs.

In summary, through 1923 and again in 1939 the standings were shaken up my newly eligibles--Browning, Duffy, Ryan, Waddell and Sewell. The mere appearance of a new toy seemed to dramatically affect the ratings of other players, specifically as it relates to the relative position of Duffy, Beckley, GVH, Ryan, guys like that. The appearance of Sewell coincided with the rise of George Sisler to the top of the backlog.

But in 1923 and 1946 there were shifts unrelated to newly eligible--at least new borderliners--I should go back and look at who the new eligibles were who were elected, maybe that was a factor. But in 1923 Waddell dropped and Duffy continued his decline, and Beckley and GVH moved up and stayed up for 50 years. In 1946 Sewell dropped and Sisler took over.

From this, the guys who have most dramatically dropped from favor are indeed Duffy, Waddell and Sewell. The guys who jumped up long after initially becoming eligible are Beckley, GVH and Sisler, and more recently (and remaining questionable as to their staying power) Redding and Mendez.

It might be useful to take a fresh look at Sisler and Sewell. I'm not sure there's much to be gained by going back over the bones of Duffy, Beckley and GVH. But then how about Waddell, Redding and Mendez, too?
   41. sunnyday2 Posted: May 17, 2006 at 04:11 PM (#2024192)
Just to summarize, hopefully more clearly.

There are only a few players over the years whose evaluation here has changed dramatically from what it started out to be.

Moved dramatically down--Duffy, Sewell, Waddell

Moved dramatically up--Sisler, Redding, Mendez

Moved up and then back down again--Beckley, GVH

These are the guys of whom it makes sense (to me) to ask, especially as we head into the backlog years of the '80s, why did the evaluation change? Are the reasons for that good reasons, or not? Or were we right the first (or in Beckley's and GVH's cases, the second) time?

There are other guys who dropped, of course, such as Browning and Williamson and Ryan and Childs, but my sense is that that is just because we have a vastly larger backlog. I'm not sure the evaluation of these players has really changed, thre's just more competition.

Personally I have the players in question rated as follows:

1. Sisler
2. Waddell
3. Mendez
(gap)
4. Duffy
5. Redding
6. Sewell
(gap)
7. Beckley/GVH interchangeable

This is not to say that these players are better than Minoso, Kiner and Moore, the players who are sprinkled in amidst these guys at the head of the backlog. Those 3 would remain part of the overall analysis. But these 7 are the ones whom we have evaluated very differently at different times. They remain conundrums. If somebody thinks this is wrong, now's the time to say!
   42. Daryn Posted: May 17, 2006 at 04:55 PM (#2024251)
I have 5 of the 7 on my ballot and Sewell and Duffy just off. I think it is siginificant that at one time or another all seven of these guys were highly regarded. I also think most (maybe all but Rube) of them will get in eventually. Rahter than looking at it retrospectively, I'd encourage people prospectively to stick to their beliefs and not give up on someone because they have been waiting a long time.
   43. Paul Wendt Posted: May 17, 2006 at 05:22 PM (#2024300)
DL from MN
I'm amazed. I went from top of consensus to bottom of consensus in 6 years.

Even someone quite knowledgeable about baseball playing history before arriving here (such as yourself if we know each other) probably needs a little time to secure all the judgments involved in voting and relies for a while on the judgments of others.


I always do my test posts on an old game chatter - a good suggestion from someone. At the end of any given Royals chatter you are likely to see some damn graph about Edd Roush's win shares.

Thanks, I knew there must be a better place to experiment than those overworked clinicians struggling with bird flu Eastern Europe.

Now what about those colors? Are the colors random?
"* not eligible {green}for{/green} the HOF" -john murphy #4
   44. sunnyday2 Posted: May 17, 2006 at 05:32 PM (#2024312)
Oh, and just for the record:

(Moore)
(Kiner)
1. Sisler
2. Waddell
3. Mendez
(gap)
(Minoso)
4. Duffy
5. Redding
6. Sewell
(gap)
7. Beckley/GVH interchangeable
   45. DavidFoss Posted: May 17, 2006 at 05:40 PM (#2024327)
"* not eligible {green}for{/green} the HOF" -john murphy #4

I'm going to guess that the 'code' tag highlights certain keywords in computer languages.

for else if then while begin end and or xor nor int double bool 


Not sure which of those will get highlighted... probably depends on the editor.
   46. DavidFoss Posted: May 17, 2006 at 05:44 PM (#2024338)
The cool one was the pairs of O'Neill entries in the other thread. The two ' characters marked a "string literal" which got highlighted as red.

blue blue blue 'red red red' blue blue blue 
   47. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 18, 2006 at 12:09 PM (#2025504)
Since no one complained about it, Jeff's ballot has been included with the tally.

"* not eligible {green}for{/green} the HOF" -john murphy #4

I'm going to guess that the 'code' tag highlights certain keywords in computer languages.


It certainly wasn't anything special that I was doing. :-) Weird.
   48. OCF Posted: May 18, 2006 at 11:44 PM (#2026691)
Since no one complained about it, Jeff's ballot has been included with the tally.

Thereby bumping Pete Browning up into the top 15. Jeff M's consensus score is -15. The electorate average is still -14.5, and everyone else's score moved by miniscule amounts. AJM is now the unique median scorer. If I ever to that voter-to-voter score thing, he'll be included - but there are still finals to grade.
   49. Howie Menckel Posted: May 19, 2006 at 12:43 AM (#2026759)
I love that chart, DanB!
So good, I can't even digest it full 'til the weekend.
   50. Paul Wendt Posted: May 19, 2006 at 03:30 AM (#2026943)
I'm going to guess that the 'code' tag highlights certain keywords in computer languages.
. . .
Not sure which of those will get highlighted... probably depends on the editor.

The cool one was the pairs of O'Neill entries in the other thread. The two ' characters marked a "string literal" which got highlighted as red.


I see. People who use {code} rather than {pre}, in whatever style brackets the "editor" recognizes, are posing as contributors of code rather than preformatted text (nor surprise there), and there will be no un/pleasant surprises for me unless I abandon {pre}. The editor, I suppose, is incorporated in the program (blogware?) that manages this part of the thinkfactory website, converting text that we enter in composition windows into code (of another kind) that is transmitted to visitors by http.
   51. Paul Wendt Posted: May 19, 2006 at 03:34 AM (#2026947)
I love that chart, DanB!

Yes, DanG, not danb.

"Browning Williamson" is by far the most fun to say fifteen times real fast.
   52. DavidFoss Posted: May 19, 2006 at 03:46 AM (#2026952)
posing as contributors of code rather than preformatted text (nor surprise there), and there will be no un/pleasant surprises for me unless I abandon {pre}

Yeah, for some reason, computer code is always displayed with a fixed-width font. That happens to also be the key to making our tables line up.

Testing below...

pre-tag:
for else if then while begin end and or xor 'red' blue 

code-tag:
for else if then while begin end and or xor 'red' blue 
   53. DavidFoss Posted: May 19, 2006 at 03:48 AM (#2026954)
blue 'red' case switch static auto const goto return struct break continue 
   54. DavidFoss Posted: May 19, 2006 at 03:53 AM (#2026957)
blue 'red' do char extern enum signed short void volatile sizeof

default friend inline private public operator mutable template throw using

virtual this register 
namespace new delete true false explicit catch asm double 
   55. DanG Posted: May 19, 2006 at 03:58 AM (#2026959)
I feel like I've made a great contribution--not only a well-received chart, but a fun new pastime of code testing! The best discourse we've had since the "70 and Out" thread a year ago.

(Thanks, Paul, for pointing out my correct name.)
   56. yest Posted: May 19, 2006 at 06:06 AM (#2027011)
A list of eligible HoFers
HoMers in bold
all HoFers with significant playing careers are included
1936
Ty Cobb, Babe Ruth, Honus Wagner, Christy Mathewson, Walter Johnson
1937
Nap Lajoie, Tris Speaker, Cy Young , Connie Mack, John McGraw, George Wright
1938
Pete Alexander
1939
George Sisler, Eddie Collins , Willie Keeler , Lou Gehrig, Cap Anson , Charlie Comiskey , Candy Cummings , Buck Ewing , Charles Radbourn , Al Spalding
1942
Rogers Hornsby
1945
Roger Bresnahan , Dan Brouthers , Fred Clarke , Jimmy Collins , Ed Delahanty , Hugh Duffy , Hughie Jennings , King Kelly , Jim O’Rourke , Wilbert Robinson
1946
Jesse Burkett , Frank Chance , Jack Chesbro , Johnny Evers , , Clark Griffith, , Tommy McCarthy , Joe McGinnity , Eddie Plank , Joe Tinker , Rube Waddell , Ed Walsh
1947
Carl Hubbell , Frankie Frisch , Mickey Cochrane , Lefty Grove
1948
Herb Pennock , Pie Traynor
1949
Charlie Gehringer , Mordecai Brown , Kid Nichols
1951
Mel Ott , Jimmie Foxx
1952
Harry Heilmann , Paul Waner
1953
Al Simmons , Dizzy Dean , Chief Bender , Bobby Wallace , Harry Wright
1954
Rabbit Maranville , Bill Dickey , Bill Terry
1955
Joe DiMaggio , Ted Lyons , Dazzy Vance , Gabby Hartnett , Frank Baker , Ray Schalk
1956
Hank Greenberg , Joe Cronin
1957
Sam Crawford
1959
Zack Wheat
1961
Max Carey , Billy Hamilton
1962
Bob Feller , Jackie Robinson , Bill McKechnie , Edd Roush
1963
John Clarkson , Elmer Flick , Sam Rice , Eppa Rixey
1964
Luke Appling , Red Faber , Burleigh Grimes , Miller Huggins , Tim Keefe , Heinie Manush , Monte Ward
1965
Pud Galvin
1966
Ted Williams , Casey Stengel
1967
Red Ruffing , Lloyd Waner
1968
Joe Medwick , Kiki Cuyler , Goose Goslin
1969
Stan Musial Roy Campanella , Stan Coveleski , , Waite Hoyt,
1970
Lou Boudreau , Earle Combs , Jesse Haines,
1971
Dave Bancroft , Jake Beckley , Chick Hafey , Harry Hooper , Joe Kelley , Rube Marquard , Satchel Paige
1972
Sandy Koufax , Yogi Berra ,Early Wynn, Lefty Gomez , Ross Youngs , Josh Gibson , Buck Leonard
1973
Warren Spahn , George Kelly , Mickey Welch , Monte Irvin
1974
Mickey Mantle , Whitey Ford , Jim Bottomley , Sam Thompson , Cool Papa Bell
1975
Ralph Kiner , Earl Averill , Bucky Harris , Billy Herman , Judy Johnson
1976
Robin Roberts, Bob Lemon , Roger Connor , Freddy Lindstrom , Oscar Charleston
1977
Amos Rusie , Joe Sewell , Al Lopez , Martin Dihigo , Pop Lloyd
1978
Eddie Mathews, Addie Joss
1979
Hack Wilson
1980
Duke Snider, Chuck Klein
1981
Johnny Mize , Rube Foster
1982
Travis Jackson
1983
George Kell
1984
Don Drysdale, Rick Ferrell , Pee Wee Reese
1985
Enos Slaughter , Arky Vaughan
1986
Bobby Doerr, Ernie Lombardi
1987
Ray Dandridge
1989
Red Schoendienst
1991
Tony Lazzeri
1992
Hal Newhouser
1994
Leo Durocher , Phil Rizzuto
1995
Leon Day , Vic Willis , Richie Ashburn
1996
Bill Foster , Ned Hanlon
1997
Nellie Fox, Willie Wells
1998
George Davis , Larry Doby , Joe Rogan
1999
Joe Williams
2000
Bid McPhee , Turkey Stearnes
2001
Hilton Smith
2006
Ray Brown, Willard Brown, Andy Cooper, Biz Mackey, Mule Suttles, Cristobal Torriente, Jud Wilson, Frank Grant, Pete Hill, Jose Mendez Louis Santop, Ben Taylor, Sol White
   57. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: May 19, 2006 at 01:48 PM (#2027102)
"Browning Williamson" is by far the most fun to say fifteen times real fast.

That's because it's got smooth character.

You know the HOM has come a long way, baby....And it's got the taste that's right for me!

Welcome to HOMboro country.
   58. Daryn Posted: May 19, 2006 at 02:10 PM (#2027119)
That's because it's got smooth character.

You know the HOM has come a long way, baby....And it's got the taste that's right for me!

Welcome to HOMboro country.


Okay, no more for him.

/bartender voice
   59. sunnyday2 Posted: May 19, 2006 at 02:57 PM (#2027170)
HoF/not HoM

10 high borderline candidates: Sisler, Duffy, Waddell, Roush, Beckley, Welch, Kiner, Sewell, Fox, Mendez

10 sons of the middle border: Chance, Bresnahan, Dean, Grimes, Joss, Wilson, Rizzuto, Willis, H. Smith, Taylor

5 sons of the low borderline: Traynor, Rice, Wilson, Klein, Lombardi

5 acquired tastes, could be anywhere from high borderline to HoVG depending on your taste: McGraw, Maranville, Bancroft, Gomez, A. Cooper

10 HoVG: Tinker, Evers, Cuyler, Hoyt, Hooper, Youngs, Bottomley, Schoendienst, Lazzeri, S. White

5 HoAVG (Almost Very Good): Pennock, Schalk, Manush, Combs, T. Jackson

5 HoG (Hall of Good--not quite Very Good, not quite Almost Very Good, not a total embarrassment, but Good--i.e. HoGs): Kell, R. Ferrell, Dandridge, J. Johnson, L. Day

10 HoYGBK (You Gotta Be Kidding): Cummings, McCarthy, Bender, H. Wright, L. Waner, Hafey, Haines, Marquard, G. Kelly, Lindstrom
   60. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 19, 2006 at 03:08 PM (#2027180)
That's because it's got smooth character.

You know the HOM has come a long way, baby....And it's got the taste that's right for me!

Welcome to HOMboro country.


I guess we can infer from that post that Eric's voice sounds like Krusty the Clown's. ;-)
   61. rawagman Posted: May 19, 2006 at 03:26 PM (#2027198)
Bender - not even HoG?
   62. DavidFoss Posted: May 19, 2006 at 03:36 PM (#2027213)
HWright flies in easily as a manager/executive. Its not quite fair to include him in the HoYGBK.
   63. sunnyday2 Posted: May 19, 2006 at 04:09 PM (#2027246)
>Bender - not even HoG?

If no objection to Haines:

Haines 108 with 210 wins in 3208.2 IP, peak ERA+ 149-45-31-26-25-21-20 (7 years ? 120)
Bender 111 with 212 wins in 3017 IP, peak ERA+ 150-46-46-45-27-25 (6 years >120 though with a better median it's true)

But considering Bender came along 15 years before Haines and Haines threw most of his innings in the '20s, the workload difference is monumental.

So if Haines isn't a HoG, I can't see how Bender is.

Caveat: There are plenty of borderline calls there, especially as I was trying to create groups in base 5.
   64. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: May 19, 2006 at 04:15 PM (#2027249)
H-h-h-h-h-heyyyyyy, kids!

I've got full flavor with just half the tar!

[Cough!]
   65. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: May 19, 2006 at 04:20 PM (#2027254)
Seriously, I think Bender has an argument as worst HOF pitcher (Non-Inventing-the-Curve Department) and possibly one as the worst HOF. Or if G Kelly is too much a slam dunk for you, Chief is second chair, to Highpocket's first violin of pity.
   66. rawagman Posted: May 19, 2006 at 04:21 PM (#2027257)
I was referring to Bender's mroe impressive peak.

Anyway, they are both so far down the charts, it really makes no difference.
Baseball naval gazing.
   67. rawagman Posted: May 19, 2006 at 04:25 PM (#2027261)
I have always been a supporter of Tommy McCarthy was the worst HoF'er. Without a doubt.

As for pitchers, Rube Marquard falls below even Bender and Haines in my estimation.
The contexts are totally off, of course, but Marquard is a poor man's Jaime Moyer.
   68. ronw Posted: May 19, 2006 at 09:34 PM (#2027464)
Hall of Famer Happy Jack Chesbro says:

"Hey, I didn't make sunnyday's list! That must mean I'm a HOMer!"
   69. Paul Wendt Posted: May 19, 2006 at 11:27 PM (#2027638)
yest Posted: May 19, 2006 at 02:06 AM (#2027011)
A list of eligible HoFers
HoMers in bold
all HoFers with significant playing careers are included


nicely done, easy to read or to skim.

a few spaces are missing.

you need to insert the entire separator " , " after "Musial" and it may be useful at the beginning of each line of names, too (eg, before "Stan"
   70. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 19, 2006 at 11:40 PM (#2027693)
I have always been a supporter of Tommy McCarthy was the worst HoF'er. Without a doubt.

At least McCarthy had some pioneer credentials (not that they are necessarily factual, of course) to go with his playing career. Highpockets Kelly doesn't.

I'll go with Kelly as the worst player and Marquard as the worst pitcher.
   71. Rob_Wood Posted: May 20, 2006 at 03:47 AM (#2028447)
Everybody has their worst selections. My worst hitter selections are Schalk, Lindstrom, and Kelly.
My worst pitchers are Chesbro, Marquard, and Haines.
   72. yest Posted: May 21, 2006 at 03:12 AM (#2030150)
the way I look at at the worst HoF pick is the one with the least possible argumant even if one of the ones with worse argumants are actuly worse eg. Bulkey vs Manley. Bulckey was definatly the worse choice due to doing nothing but he was the first NL pres. which rightly or wrongly is an argumant for the HoF based on that I'm going with Haines
   73. rawagman Posted: May 21, 2006 at 06:05 AM (#2030238)
You can't really judge the executive wing like that. They don't have stats.
   74. sunnyday2 Posted: May 21, 2006 at 11:56 AM (#2030278)
Worst position players: McCarthy, Lindstrom, L. Waner (from worst to not as worst). Kelly was not quite as bad as his rep.

Worst pitchers: Marquard and Haines with Pennock third, but there is quite a gap between Haines and Marquard. Bender is 4th worst.

Overall (this is MLers, btw, not including NeLers)

1. McCarthy--the worst of the worst
2. Marquard
3. Haines
4. Lindstrom
5. L. Waner
6. Kelly
7. T. Jackson
8. Hafey
9. Pennock
10. Bender
   75. rawagman Posted: May 21, 2006 at 12:15 PM (#2030283)
Whatever credit they think McCarthy deserved, he went in as a player. My understanding is that so did Candy Cummings. Any take on what Candy accomplished before professional baseball? Does he deserve any unlisted credit?
Not talking about the curveball.
   76. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: May 22, 2006 at 11:05 AM (#2031852)
I don't really think it's close that McCarthy is the worst HoFer. Would you rather have Tino Martinez or Mickey Rivers? Although, Schalk wasn't even as good as Jim Sundberg. Wasn't really close to Sundberg actually. Sundberg was underrated though - I suppose you could make a case that he was better than Tino. McCarthy, Kelly, Schalk as the 3 worst for me.

Pitching wise, I'd go with Bender or Marquard. I like Happy Jack a smidge more, because at least he had the one monster year. Haines at least has a decent sized career advantage on them. Forced to choose I take Marquard.

Addie Joss would round out my top 5 for the worst MLB pitchers in the Hall.
   77. rawagman Posted: May 22, 2006 at 11:28 AM (#2031857)
Addie Joss = Ross Youngs.

Great player. Tiny, tragic career.
If Ray Chapman played for 2 more seasons, he'd also be enshrined.
If Ray Chapman played for The Giants in the 20's, or the Cards in the 30's, he'd be in.
   78. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 22, 2006 at 12:06 PM (#2031862)
4. Lindstrom

Lindstrom was a damn good player until he moved to center and "decided" to be out of baseball by the age of 30. With a long enough career at the "hot corner," he would be on my ballot.

I'll take him over Kelly any day. He still stinks as a HOF choice, though.
   79. Esteban Rivera Posted: May 22, 2006 at 09:32 PM (#2032245)
Since the subject is HOF choices and because I feel like stirring up the nest a bit today, here is the first phase screening ballot for this coming Veteran's Committee election. 2007 VC Screening Ballot

To save Joe the time I'll say it: "How could they leave off Deacon White!?!"

Let the ommission complaining begin!
   80. karlmagnus Posted: May 22, 2006 at 09:56 PM (#2032261)
At least they've got Parisian Bob on it this time. Bet he doesn't make it to the final list!
   81. Esteban Rivera Posted: May 22, 2006 at 10:08 PM (#2032270)
I think Caruthers benefitted from all the Pedro Martinez 200 win hoopla, i.e. it got his name out there.
   82. EricC Posted: May 22, 2006 at 11:00 PM (#2032321)
"How could they leave off Deacon White!?!"

If you or Joe hadn't said it, I would have. Do they still have an open "Pioneer" category for the HoF? White has a case to be elected as a pioneer, in addition to his overwhelming case for being elected as a player.
   83. DavidFoss Posted: May 22, 2006 at 11:07 PM (#2032330)
<u>HOM-ers in the VC Final 200</u>
Caruthers, Bob
Dahlen, Bill
Ferrell, Wes
Glasscock, Jack
Gordon, Joe
Groh, Heinie
Hack, Stan
Magee, Sherry
Stovey, Harry

<u>MLB HOM-ers not in the Final 200</u>
Barnes, Ross
Bennett, Charlie
Gore, George
Hines, Paul
Jackson, Joe*
McVey, Cal
Pearce, Dickey
Pike, Lip
Richardson, Hardy
Sheckard, Jimmy
Start, Joe
Sutton, Ezra
White, Deacon

I don't know if NeL HOM-not-HOF-ers are eligible for this list so I left them off.
   84. EricC Posted: May 22, 2006 at 11:09 PM (#2032332)
McCarthy, Kelly, Schalk as the 3 worst for me.

From 1913 to 1922 (ignoring the FL), Schalk led the major leagues in WS for a catcher twice, finished 2nd 5 times, and 3rd once. Using a strict "all-star" cutoff as being among the top 2 at a position, Schalk was a 7-time all star, as well as having enough career to set the then-record for games caught. While not quite a HoFer, I hope that those who think that Schalk was one of the worst HoF selections can at least see that, in context, he does have a case.
   85. DavidFoss Posted: May 22, 2006 at 11:13 PM (#2032339)
Let the ommission complaining begin!

Considering the high amount of HOVG filler in the final 200 -- no offense Grandma! -- I'm surprised they snubbed so many HOM-ers. Its basically pre-1890 guys, Jimmy Sheckard and the ineligilbe Joe Jackson. There are some pre-1890 guys on the list, though (Stovey, Browning, Glasscock).
   86. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: May 22, 2006 at 11:32 PM (#2032367)
Considering the high amount of HOVG filler in the final 200 -- no offense Grandma!

Hey, I didn't vote for the real Grandma either, David. :-)
   87. Chris Cobb Posted: May 23, 2006 at 02:34 AM (#2032793)
Most of the omissions are players with significant 1870s playing time. I'm guessing that either a) they didn't adjust much for the very short seasons prior to 1883 or b) they didn't look at pre NL data at all (and if you take away the NA years Deacon White's career looks much less impressive) or c) both. If the NA is not being counted as a major league, some of our electees not only aren't impressive, but don't fulfill the ten-year criterion. Unless I missed someone, they appear not to have included a single player who peaked before 1883, whether we elected them or not.

For the 1880s, they included Browning and Mullane in addition to some of our electees, so it sure looks to me like they had some sort of statistical filter going that effectively screened out all players from the first decade and half of professional baseball.
   88. sunnyday2 Posted: May 23, 2006 at 10:33 AM (#2033057)
Thanks for the info. I had completely forgotten that another VC process was starting.

>HOM-ers in the VC Final 200
Caruthers, Bob
Dahlen, Bill
Ferrell, Wes
Glasscock, Jack
Gordon, Joe
Groh, Heinie
Hack, Stan
Magee, Sherry
Stovey, Harry

Aside from the VC's unwillingness to reach back into the 19th century too much/too far, you'd have to admit they did a fair job of getting the rest of the obvious candidates. Only Jimmy Sheckard is missing among HoMers who did NOT play in the 19C. While I was a big FOBC, I am shocked that they got him. Do you think they looked at our plaque room?

From the list above, Dahlen would be my fave. I mean, they're not gonna get (that is, elect) more than one of these guys (if any), are they? Wasn't it Santo and Oliva and ??? that were at the top of the ballot last time? But just as clearly, every one of these guys would be a better choice than about 2/3 of the VC choices over the years. Still in all likelihood they're not gonna elect any of 'em. Not with the current system.
   89. DL from MN Posted: May 23, 2006 at 01:28 PM (#2033114)
I think Hodges was 3rd.

I'd like to see them drop the number on thie final ballot to 10 or even 5. If there are only 5 candidates, perhaps that electing body could be convinced to research all 5. With 20 guys on the ballot there is just too much to pick from. Also, I don't think people are going to vote for more than a couple candidates at the most so a large ballot makes an election less likely.
   90. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: May 23, 2006 at 01:58 PM (#2033129)
Does anyone really think that Joe Morgan will research anyone? Remember, he claimed in an ESPN chat recently that he doesn't need to read baseball books because he learned everything about baseball that he'll ever need to know on the field. I'm assuming that includes baseball encyclopedias.

See blogspot.firejoemorgan.com for more details. Funniest baseball blog on the net. [Not to say that we're not funny, but....]
   91. DanG Posted: May 23, 2006 at 02:03 PM (#2033136)
In baseball it's three strikes and you're out. If the VC shoots another blank, I'm hopeful of reform to this abominable process.

As for pioneers, no pioneer players are being considered for the contributors election. It says "managers, executives and umpires".

It makes me slightly hopeful that somewhere down the line there will be a scholarly analysis done of the 1860's-1870's players, since (like the Negro leaguers before them) they're not being given even token representation in the current elections. They're outside the consideration set of either one of the VC elections.
   92. yest Posted: May 23, 2006 at 03:18 PM (#2033201)
I was just wondering if the HoF players compair their own statics to the players on the ballots when they vote?
HOFers who were power hitters voting for power hitters more then
HOF who were contect hitter voting for contact hitters
HOF who were great fielders voting for fielding more the hitting

which players are not voting for players they never saw
or only voting for players in the same leauge (players they saw regeruly or who espeachley beat up on their team)



or who's voting for teammates and who's snubbing them
   93. sunnyday2 Posted: May 23, 2006 at 03:26 PM (#2033212)
I thnk the bottom line is they're not voting for anyone who was not as good as they were. i.e. no one.
   94. DL from MN Posted: May 23, 2006 at 04:22 PM (#2033264)
I don't think any of them will "research" the players but if you reduced it to 10 and sent along a 3 page executive summary I believe they would read it. Reminding them that Santo played in 9 All-Star games and had 5 gold gloves wouldn't hurt. It will be more difficult to convince them Bill Dahlen was terrific but it would help him if he wasn't competing against 18 other dead players they have never heard of.
   95. DavidFoss Posted: May 23, 2006 at 04:51 PM (#2033291)
but a fun new pastime of code testing!

Ooooh... a new color! 'Comments' are orange!

blue
'red'
#orange
/* test */
// test 
   96. DavidFoss Posted: May 23, 2006 at 04:52 PM (#2033294)
blue /* test */ blue 
   97. Chris Cobb Posted: May 23, 2006 at 04:54 PM (#2033297)
It will be more difficult to convince them Bill Dahlen was terrific.

Proposed executive summary for Bill Dahlen.

Bill Dahlen - a top-notch defensive shortstop in the class of Phil Rizzuto and Ozzie Smith, he also hit like Alan Trammell. A starting shortstop for 18 years, he played on 4 pennant winners. John McGraw traded for him before the 1904 season, and the Giants topped the NL 1904-05, replacing Pittsburgh as the best team in the National League.
   98. yest Posted: May 23, 2006 at 04:54 PM (#2033298)
BTW Hodges and Santo were first being 8 votes short
   99. Chris Fluit Posted: May 23, 2006 at 05:01 PM (#2033304)
Here's the complete list from the 2005 election:

Gil Hodges 52 65.0%
Ron Santo 52 65.0%
Tony Oliva 45 56.3%
Jim Kaat 43 53.8%
Joe Torre 36 45.0%
Maury Wills 26 32.5%
Vada Pinson 23 28.8%
Luis Tiant 20 25.0%
Roger Maris 19 23.8%
Marty Marion 16 20.0%
Ken Boyer 15 18.8%
Joe Gordon 14 17.5%
Carl Mays 12 15.0%
Minnie Minoso 12 15.0%
Dick Allen 12 15.0%
Curt Flood 10 12.5%
Wes Ferrell 9 11.3%
Mickey Lolich 9 11.3%
Don Newcombe 8 10.0%
Sparky Lyle 7 8.8%
Elston Howard 6 7.5%
Bobby Bonds 4 5.0%
Rocky Colavito 4 5.0%
Thurman Munson 2 2.5%
Smoky Joe Wood 2 2.5%
   100. dan b Posted: May 23, 2006 at 05:03 PM (#2033308)
While I was a big FOBC, I am shocked that they got him. Do you think they looked at our plaque room?

My guess is they looked at NHBA. James had Caruthers ranked in his top 100. They have guys that James ranked but we have passed on like Virgil Trucks and Dummy Hoy. James also ignored anything that happened before 1876, thus no Ross Barnes or Joe Start in his rankings.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Francis
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats

 

 

 

 

Page rendered in 0.6996 seconds
49 querie(s) executed