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, August 07, 2006

1983 Ballot Discussion

1983 (August 21)—elect 2
WS W3 Rookie Name-Pos (Died)

356 111.1 1957 Brooks Robinson-3B
315 102.5 1961 Joe Torre-C/1B
342 90.0 1964 Dick Allen-1B/3B
305 88.6 1963 Jim Wynn-CF
282 69.4 1962 Boog Powell-1B
166 50.1 1967 Doug Rader-3B
175 46.1 1963 Ken McMullen-3B
133 49.2 1965 Larry Dierker-P
152 41.4 1966 Felix Millan-2B
123 47.8 1965 Clay Carroll-RP
144 38.3 1962 Cookie Rojas-2B
118 45.9 1962 Dave Giusti-RP
125 42.0 1963 Al Downing-P
112 41.2 1967 Pat Dobson-P
123 33.5 1965 Willie Crawford-RF (2004)
114 37.5 1966 Tommy Helms-2B
113 37.6 1967 Gary Nolan-P
112 37.7 1967 Bill Singer-P
103 39.1 1962 Diego Segui-RP
122 31.2 1968 Bill Melton-3B
120 31.7 1969 Carlos May-LF
115 28.2 1966 Bobby Tolan-CF/RF

Players Passing Away in 1982
HoMers
Age Elected

1959 Satchel Paige-P

Candidates
Age Eligible

85 1935 Joe Dugan-3B
76 1948 Lloyd Waner-CF
76 1951 Bob Johnson-LF
71 1954 Frank McCormick-1B
71 1955 Dixie Walker-RF
59——Nestor Chylak-HOF Umpire
56 1960 Cass Michaels-2B
55 1967 Jackie Jensen-RF
52 1969 Wally Post-RF
51 1975 Ken Boyer-3B

Thanks, Dan!

John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 07, 2006 at 12:47 AM | 174 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 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2
   101. Chris Fluit Posted: August 10, 2006 at 09:11 PM (#2135840)
On to the pitchers:

1. Jose Mendez.
2. Dick Redding. I've been a firm supporter of both candidacies since I've started and looking at their numbers again I remain convinced.

3. Billy Pierce. The best white pitcher on the ballot, and the benchmark by which I support Mendez and Redding.

4. Burleigh Grimes. He moved up a couple of spots thanks to this exercise. He had more black ink than I was giving him credit for, and the second-best career value on the ballot.

5. Don Newcombe. I made the case for him a couple of elections ago and I stand by it, though Grimes' upward movement might cost him a ballot spot.

6. Rube Waddell. Wow. He was really dominant and not for as short a time as we sometimes think.

7. Hilton Smith.
8. Andy Cooper. I like the two early NeL pitchers, and I'm starting to warm to the two late ones now that I took a longer look.

9. Mickey Welch. Welch dropped more than any player at any position. He still has the best career numbers on the board, but he has no peak and his prime isn't even as impressive as Waddell, Pierce, Grimes or a war-credited Newcombe.

10. Vic Willis. He moved up a little based on the strength of his career numbers.

11. Tommy Bridges. Perhaps the longest prime of eligible pitchers, but he was never among the very best and even a bit of war credit doesn't make his career numbers stand out.

12. Lefty Gomez. A few dominant years to give him a stronger peak than Bridges, but he trails in terms of prime and career.

13. Leon Day. Perhaps the last NeL pitcher worth voting for, but even then the borderline is probably higher than his. Looks a lot like Virgil Trucks with one Cy Young-type season.

14. Virgil Trucks. I give Day and Trucks two full years of war credit but in the case of Trucks, there's just no hiding the lack of peak.

15. Dizzy Dean. Dropped even further than Mickey Welch. Has that great five-year peak, but his prime is shorter than everybody above him and even a couple below.

16. Bucky Walters. Slightly shorter peak than Dean, slightly longer prime.

17. Addie Joss. I don't penalize him for the short career due to his death, but his peak still doesn't match up to Walters or Dean.
   102. DavidFoss Posted: August 10, 2006 at 09:15 PM (#2135847)
page flip bump
   103. Sean Gilman Posted: August 10, 2006 at 09:26 PM (#2135856)
What do you think of Carl Mays, Chris?
   104. Juan V Posted: August 10, 2006 at 09:54 PM (#2135885)
Time for a prelim ballot

1) Billy Williams Slight reevaluation puts him on top over..

2) Joe Sewell Whom I still like.

3) Joe Torre Purely on offense (and positional credit for catching), he would´ve been #1 by a margin. But he wasn´t the greatest defensive catcher, and spent plenty of time elsewhere, so here he is.

4) Ralph Kiner

5) Jose Mendez Flip-flopped the positions for my #5-6 from ´82. The newest look makes me like Kiner´s prime better.

6) Alejandro Oms I believe I underrated him a bit last "year", so here he is now.

7) Dick Allen Even with all the off-the-field stuff, he has the merit. But I just don´t see him as a top-of-the-ballot guy, even without that stuff. I have followed his thread so far, and I´m giving him a small deduction for it.

8) Cupid Childs

9) Ken Boyer

10) Brooks Robinson I believe I had underrated the 3B gloves last "year", and this is more like it. Boyer and Brooks are similar in my scores, but Boyer has a slight offensive advantage, which puts him ahead

11) Quincy Trouppe

12) Billy Pierce

13) Cannonball Dick Redding

14) Gavvy Cravath I dropped the ball on him. Having added credit for his years outside MLB, he makes my ballot.

15) Bob Johnson

Dropoffs from ´82: Rube Waddell, Jimmy Ryan
   105. Chris Fluit Posted: August 10, 2006 at 10:57 PM (#2135942)
Re: my own post #101: I somehow got the eras mixed up for some of the Negro League pitchers. Smith and Day are the two late pitchers from the '40s. Cooper was in the '20s. That doesn't change the ranking but I wanted to correct my own misstatement nonetheless.

Re: post #103: I have Carl Mays as the next best MLB pitcher. I just stopped at Joss.
   106. Chris Fluit Posted: August 10, 2006 at 11:09 PM (#2135960)
As part of my re-eval, I ended up spending some significant time looking at the Negro League players.

By position, we've elected
7 pitchers
3 catchers
2 first basemen
1 second basemen
3 shortstops
2 third basemen
7 outfielders

By ear, we've elected
1 from the 1890s
3 from the 1900s
4 from the '10s
6 from the '20s
8 from the '30s
3 from the '40s

The only position that stands out as being underpresented is second-base, and possibly first.
Compared to the 1930s, every era stands out as being underrepresented, especially the '00s, '10s and '40s.

What does this mean? Maybe nothing. The '10s may not be underrepresented for long if Mendez and Redding go in between '85 and '89. But some of us may want to consider giving stronger support to a few others, like Bill Monroe, a second-baseman from the '00s, and to the stars of the '40s like Easter, Smith and Trouppe.
   107. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: August 11, 2006 at 12:54 AM (#2136125)
I think the representation issues at 2B may stem from the notion that players there were mostly one of two types. The first were skitter bugs (Dick Seay, Bonnie Serrell, Frank Warfield, Bingo DeMoss). The second were guys without enough athleticism to play short, center, or third but without big bats either: Cannaday, Bankhead, guys like that are the ones I'm talking about. Scales is their alpha guy. Remember, Jackie was a shortstop, not a 2B. I think Newt Allen and Sammy Hughes straddle these two typologies. James suggests that Hughes was a great all-around Ryne Sandberg player, but the very little I've seen on him says he was a line drive hitter with some doubles. Specifically, his performance in Mexico is like that, though it's only one season's worth of data. That said, Mexico was mostly a hitter's paradise. I don't think Allen did too much slugging. He did hit for average and draw some walks, but given his already strong reputation, if he slugged I think there'd have been 18 plaques on the rostrum last week.

To be fair, Doby was a 2B for Newark, and I believe Marv Williams was a much better player than the guys mentioned above.

Anyway with first base, I don't think the Leagues had a ton of great first basemen for the same kinds of reasons. The really good athletes migrated elsewhere on the diamond, and specifically the lefthanders probably went to CF and LF I suppose. Just looking at Bill James's top ten 1Bs, there are two very distinct strains. There were powerful, mostly lefthanded 1Bs, like Buck Leonard, Huck Rile, Edgar Wesley, Luke Easter, and the righty Mule Suttles. Then there's the Buck O'Neill, Alonzo Perry, George Giles, Tank Carr, Bob Boyd, Showboat Thomas group that didn't hit for power but had good gloves, some speed, and lots of line drive base hits---Bill Terry types. Ben Taylor's a bit of a tweener.

Or at least, that's been my impression. I hope someone will correct any misinterpretations I have here.
   108. Howie Menckel Posted: August 11, 2006 at 01:08 AM (#2136155)
looking to update the other positions over the weekend...

HOM Ps, by year, through 1982 election. Must have pitched 1 IP per G or 35 G, or MLE equivalent, and mainly this position to be listed:
1868-76 (1) - Spalding
1877
1878 (1) - Ward
1879 (2) - Ward Galvin
1880 (3) - Ward Galvin Keefe
1881-83 (4) - Ward Galvin Keefe Radbourn
1884 (4) - Galvin Keefe Radbourn Clarkson
1855-88 (5) - Galvin Keefe Radbourn Clarkson Caruthers
1889 (6) - Galvin Keefe Radbourn Clarkson Caruthers Rusie
1890 (8) - Galvin Keefe Radbourn Clarkson Caruthers Rusie Young Nichols
1891 (9) - Galvin Keefe Radbourn Clarkson Caruthers Rusie Young Nichols Griffith
1892 (6) - Galvin Keefe Clarkson Rusie Young Nichols
1893 (5) - Keefe Clarkson Rusie Young Nichols
1894 (5) - Clarkson Rusie Young Nichols Griffith
1895 (5) - Rusie Young Nichols Griffith Wallace
1896 (4) - Young Nichols Griffith Wallace
1897-98 (4) - Rusie Young Nichols Griffith
1899-00 (4) - Young Nichols Griffith McGinnity
1901 (6) - Young Nichols Griffith McGinnity Plank Mathewson
1902 (6) - Young Griffith McGinnity Plank Mathewson RFoster
1903 (7) - Young Griffith McGinnity Plank Mathewson RFoster TF Brown
1904-05 (7) - Young Nichols McGinnity Plank Mathewson RFoster TF Brown
1906-07 (7) - Young McGinnity Plank Mathewson RFoster TF Brown Walsh
1908 (8) - Young McGinnity Plank Mathewson RFoster TF Brown Walsh WJohnson
1909 (7) - Young Plank Mathewson RFoster TF Brown Walsh WJohnson
1910 (8) - Young Plank Mathewson RFoster TF Brown Walsh WJohnson Williams
1911 (8) - Plank Mathewson RFoster Brown Walsh WJohnson Williams Alexander
1912 (9) - Plank Mathewson RFoster Brown Walsh WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey
1913 (8) - Plank Mathewson RFoster TF Brown WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey
1914 (8) - Plank Mathewson RFoster TF BrownW Johnson Williams Alexander Faber
1915 (10) - Plank Mathewson RFoster TF Brown WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey Faber Ruth
1916 (9) - Plank Foster WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey Faber Ruth Covaleski
1917 (7) - WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey Faber Ruth Covaleski
1918 (3) - WJohnson Williams Covaleski
1919 (6) - WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey Faber Covaleski
1920 (5) - Williams Alexander Rixey Faber Covaleski
1921 (7) - WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey Faber Covaleski Rogan
1922-23 (8) - WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey Faber Covaleski Rogan Vance
1924 (9) - WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey Faber Covaleski Rogan Vance Lyons
1925 (11) - WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey Faber Covaleski Rogan Vance Lyons Grove Ruffing
1926 (12) - WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey Faber Covaleski Rogan Vance Lyons Grove Ruffing BFoster
1927 (11) - WJohnson Williams Alexander Rixey Rogan Vance Lyons Grove Ruffing BFoster Paige
1928 (11) - Williams Alexander Rixey Faber Rogan Vance Lyons Grove Ruffing BFoster Paige
1929 (12) - Williams Rixey Faber Rogan Vance Lyons Grove Ruffing BFoster Paige Hubbell Ferrell
1930 (11) - Williams Rixey Faber Vance Lyons Grove Ruffing BFoster Paige Hubbell Ferrell
1931 (10) - Williams Faber Vance Grove Ruffing BFoster Paige Hubbell Ferrell RBrown
1932 (11) - Williams Vance Lyons Grove Ruffing BFoster Paige Hubbell Ferrell RBrown Dihigo
1933 (9) - Lyons Grove Ruffing BFoster Paige Hubbell Ferrell RBrown Dihigo
1934 (8) - Lyons Ruffing BFoster Paige Hubbell Ferrell RBrown Dihigo
1935 (7) - Lyons Grove Ruffing BFoster Hubbell Ferrell RBrown (Dihigo)
1936 (7) - Lyons Grove Ruffing Paige Hubbell Ferrell RBrown (Dihigo)
1937 (7) - Lyons Grove Ruffing BFoster Hubbell Ferrell RBrown
1938 (7) - Lyons Grove Ruffing Hubbell Ferrell RBrown Feller
1939-40 (6) - Lyons Grove Ruffing Hubbell RBrown Feller
1941 (7) - Lyons Ruffing Paige Hubbell RBrown Feller Newhouser
1942 (7) - Lyons Ruffing Paige Hubbell RBrown Newhouser Wynn
1943-44 (4) - Paige RBrown Newhouser Wynn
1945 (3) - Paige RBrown Newhouser
1946 (3) - Paige Feller Newhouser
1947 (6) - Paige Feller Newhouser Wynn Lemon Spahn
1948 (5) - Feller Newhouser Wynn Lemon Spahn
1949-50 (6) - Feller Newhouser Wynn Lemon Spahn Roberts
1951 (5) - Feller Wynn Lemon Spahn Roberts
1952 (8) - Paige Feller Newhouser Wynn Lemon Spahn Roberts Wilhelm
1953 (7) - Paige Feller Wynn Lemon Spahn Roberts Wilhelm Ford
1954-56 (6) - Wynn Lemon Spahn Roberts Wilhelm Ford
1957 (6) - Wynn Spahn Roberts Wilhelm Drysdale Bunning
1958-60 (8) - Wynn Spahn Roberts Wilhelm Ford Drysdale Bunning Koufax
1961 (8) - Spahn Wilhelm Ford Drysdale Bunning Koufax Marichal Gibson
1962 (10) - Wynn Spahn Roberts Wilhelm Ford Drysdale Bunning Koufax Marichal Gibson
1963-65 (9) - Spahn Roberts Wilhelm Ford Drysdale Bunning Koufax Marichal Gibson
1966 (6) - Wilhelm Drysdale Bunning Koufax Marichal Gibson
1967 (5) - Wilhelm Drysdale Bunning Marichal Gibson
1968 (4) - Wilhelm Drysdale Marichal Gibson
1969 (4) - Wilhelm Bunning Marichal Gibson
1970 (4) - Wilhelm Bunning Marichal Gibson
1971 (2) - Marichal Gibson
1972 (2) - Marichal Gibson
1973 (2) - Marichal Gibson
1974 (1) - Gibson
Van Haltren would be 1887-88; 1890
Welch would be 1880-91
Waddell would be 1900-09
Mendez would be 1908-14, very roughly
Redding would be 1911-21, roughly
Grimes would be 1917-31
Walters would be 1936-45
Pierce would be 1949-63
   109. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: August 11, 2006 at 01:20 AM (#2136175)
Chris - what about Urban Shocker?
   110. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: August 11, 2006 at 01:24 AM (#2136182)
Shocker would be 1916-28.
Quinn would be 1909-33.
   111. Howie Menckel Posted: August 11, 2006 at 01:31 AM (#2136202)
Well, by this system Shocker would be 1919-27 and Quinn would be 1910-11, 1914-15, 1919-20, 1922-32.

I only listed Ps with 100+ votes pts last year.
   112. KJOK Posted: August 11, 2006 at 02:34 AM (#2136415)
<I>The only position that stands out as being underpresented is second-base, and possibly first.
Compared to the 1930s, every era stands out as being underrepresented, especially the '00s, '10s and '40s. <I>

I think Dr. C made some good points about positions. Probably 2B/SS/3B in the Negro Leagues should be one 'position', so if we've elected six, that's two per, and probably about right.

Regarding the 1940's, take a look at Howie's list, and I think vs. the 'white' Majors, there's not an under-representation of the 1940's?
   113. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: August 11, 2006 at 02:39 AM (#2136444)
Ah, cool Howie - I thought you were taking anyone that pitched in a season, thanks! Gotta promote my pets!
   114. Howie Menckel Posted: August 12, 2006 at 01:40 AM (#2137704)
HOM OFs, by year, through 1982 election. Must have played half a team's games and mainly this position to be listed:
1867 (1) - Pike OF-IF
1868 (1) - Pike
1869 (1) - McVey
1870 (1) - McVey
1871 (1) - Pike
1872 (1) - Pike OF-2B
1873 (2) - Pike OF-SS, Hines
1874 (2) - McVey, Hines
1875 (2) - Pike, Hines OF-2B, O'Rourke OF-3B
1876 (3) - Pike, Hines, O'Rourke
1877 (3) - Pike OF-2B, Hines, O'Rourke
1878 (5) - Pike, Hines, O'Rourke, Anson, Kelly
1879 (3) - Hines, O'Rourke, Gore
1880 (5) - Hines, O'Rourke OF-1S, Kelly OF, Gore, Stovey OF-1B
1881 (5) - Hines, Kelly, Gore, Brouthers OF-1B, Richardson
1882 (3) - Hines, O'Rourke, Gore
1883 (4) - Hines, O'Rourke OF-C, Kelly OF-C, Gore
1884 (5) - Hines, O'Rourke, Kelly OF-C, Gore, Ward OF-2B
1885 (5) - Hines, O'Rourke, Kelly OF-C, Gore, Thompson
1886 (8) - Hines, O'Rourke OF-C, Kelly OF-C, Gore, Stovey OF-1B, Richardson OF-2B, Thompson, Sutton OF-3S2
1887 (5) - Hines, Kelly OF-2C, Gore, Stovey OF-1B, Thompson
1888 (3) - Hines, O'Rourke, Stovey
1889 (6) - O'Rourke, Kelly, Gore, Stovey, Thompson, Hamilton
1890 (7) - O'Rourke, Gore, Stovey, Richardson, Thompson, Hamilton, Burkett OF-P, GDavis
1891 (7) - O'Rourke, Gore, Stovey, Thompson, Hamilton, Delahanty
1892 (7) - O'Rourke, Stovey, Thompson, Hamilton, Delahanty, Burkett, Caruthers
1893 (7) - O'Rourke, Thompson, Hamilton, Delahanty, Burkett, Kelley, Ewing
1894-96 (7) - Thompson, Hamilton, Delahanty, Burkett, Kelley, Keeler, Clarke
1897 (6) - Hamilton, Delahanty, Burkett, Kelley, Keeler, Clarke
1898-99 (8) - Hamilton, Delahanty, Burkett, Kelley, Keeler, Clarke, Sheckard, Flick
1900 (9) - Hamilton, Burkett, Kelley, Keeler, Clarke, Wagner, Sheckard, Flick, Crawford
1901 (10) - Hamilton, Delahanty OF-1B, Burkett, Kelley, Keeler, Clarke, Sheckard, Flick, Crawford, Hill
1902 (10) - Delahanty, Burkett, Kelley, Keeler, Clarke, Wagner OF-S1, Sheckard, Flick, Crawford, Hill
1903 (7) - Burkett, Keeler, Clarke, Sheckard, Flick, Crawford, Hill
1904 (7) - Burkett, Keeler, Sheckard, Flick, Crawford, Hill, Magee
1905 (8) - Burkett, Kelley, Keeler, Clarke, Sheckard, Flick, Crawford, Hill, Magee
1906 (9) - Kelley, Keeler, Clarke, Sheckard, Flick, Crawford, Hill, Magee, Cobb
1907 (8) - Keeler, Clarke, Sheckard, Flick, Crawford, Hill, Magee, Cobb
1908 (7) - Keeler, Clarke, Sheckard, Crawford, Hill, Magee, Cobb
1909 (8) - Keeler, Clarke, Sheckard, Crawford, Hill, Magee, Cobb, Speaker
1910 (8) - Clarke, Sheckard, Crawford, Hill, Magee, Cobb, Speaker, Wheat
1911 (9) - Clarke, Sheckard, Crawford, Hill, Magee, Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Jackson, Carey
1912 (8) - Sheckard, Crawford, Hill, Magee, Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Jackson, Carey
1913 (9) - Sheckard, Crawford, Hill, Magee, Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Jackson, Carey, Torriente
1914 (8) - Crawford, Hill, Magee OF-S1, Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Jackson, Carey, Torriente
1915 (8) - Crawford, Hill, Magee, Cobb, Speaker, W heat, Jackson, Carey, Torriente
1916 (11) - Crawford, Hill, Magee, Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Jackson, Carey, Torriente, Charleston
1917 (10) - Hill, Magee, Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Jackson, Carey, Torriente, Heilmann, Charleston
1918 (9) - Hill, Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Carey, Torriente, Heilmann OF-1B, Charleston, Ruth OF-P
1919 (8) - Hill, Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Jackson, Torriente, Ruth, Charleston
1920 (9) - Hill, Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Jackson, Carey, Torriente, Ruth, Charleston
1921 (9) - Hill, Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Carey, Torriente, Heilmann, Ruth, Charleston
1922 (9) - Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Carey, Torriente, Heilmann, Ruth, Charleston, Goslin
1923 (10) - Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Carey, Torriente, Heilmann, Ruth, Charleston, Goslin, Stearnes
1924 (13) - Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Carey, Torriente, Heilmann, Ruth, Charleston, Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Suttles, Bell
1925 (12) - Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Carey, Torriente, Heilmann, Ruth, Charleston, Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Bell
1926 (13) - Cobb, Speaker, Wheat, Carey, Torriente, Heilmann, Ruth, Charleston, Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Bell, PWaner
1927 (12) - Cobb, Speaker, Carey, Torriente, Heilmann, Ruth, Charleston, Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Bell, PWaner
1928 (11) - Cobb, Carey, Heilmann, Ruth, Charleston, Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Bell, PWaner, Ott
1929 (10) - Heilmann, Ruth, Charleston, Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Bell, PWaner, Ott, Averill
1930 (9) - Heilmann, Ruth, Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Bell, PWaner, Ott, Averill
1931 (10) - Ruth, Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Suttles, Bell, PWaner, Ott, Averill, Dihigo
1932 (8) - Ruth, Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Bell, PWaner, Ott, Averill
1933-34 (9) - Ruth, Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Bell, PWaner, Ott, Averill, Medwick
1935 (9) - Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Bell, PWaner, Ott, Averill, Medwick, Dihigo OF-P
1936 (10) - Goslin, Stearnes, Simmons, Bell, PWaner, Ott, Averill, Medwick, Dihigo OF-P, DiMaggio
1937 (9) - Stearnes, Simmons, Suttles, Bell, PWaner, Ott OF-3B, Averill, Medwick, DiMaggio
1938 (9) - Stearnes, Simmons, Bell, PWaner, Averill, Medwick, DiMaggio, Slaughter, WBrown
1939 (11) - Stearnes, Simmons, Bell, PWaner, Ott OF(3B), Averill, Medwick, DiMaggio, Slaughter, WBrown, TWilliams
1940 (11) - Stearnes, Suttles, Bell, PWaner, Ott OF-3B, Medwick, DiMaggio, Slaughter, WBrown, TWilliams, Irvin
1941 (10) - Suttles, Bell, PWaner, Ott, Medwick, DiMaggio, Slaughter, WBrown, TWilliams, Irvin
1942 (9) - Bell, PWaner, Ott, Medwick, DiMaggio, Slaughter, WBrown, TWilliams, Musial
1943 (6) - Bell, PWaner, Ott, Medwick, WBrown, Musial
1944 (5) - Bell, PWaner, Ott, Medwick, Musial
1945 (4) - Bell, Ott, Medwick, Greenberg
1946 (7) - Bell, DiMaggio, Slaughter, WBrown, TWilliams, Irvin, Doby
1947 (6) - DiMaggio, Slaughter, WBrown, TWilliams, Irvin, Doby
1948 (8) - DiMaggio, Slaughter, WBrown, TWilliams, Irvin, Musial, Doby, Ashburn
1949 (8) - DiMaggio, Slaughter, TWilliams, Irvin, Musial, Doby, Ashburn, Snider
1950 (7) - DiMaggio, Slaughter, TWilliams, Musial OF-1B, Doby, Ashburn, Snider
1951 (10) - DiMaggio, Slaughter, TWilliams, Musial OF-1B, Irvin OF-1B, Doby, Ashburn, Snider, Mantle, Mays
1952 (6) - Slaughter, Musial OF(1B), Doby, Ashburn, Snider, Mantle
1953 (8) - Slaughter, Irvin, Musial, JRobinson OF-3B, Doby, Ashburn, Snider, Mantle
1954 (11) - TWilliams, Irvin, Musial, JRobinson OF-3B, Doby, Ashburn, Snider, Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Kaline
1955 (10) - Slaughter, TWilliams, Doby, Ashburn, Snider, Mantle, Mays, Kaline, Clemente
1956 (11) - Slaughter, TWilliams, Irvin, Doby, Ashburn, Snider, Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson
1957 (11) - Slaughter, TWilliams, Doby, Ashburn, Snider, Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson
1958 (10) - TWilliams, Doby, Ashburn, Snider, Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson
1959 (8) - TWilliams, Ashburn, Snider, Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente
1960 (9) - TWilliams, Musial OF-1B, Ashburn, Snider, Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente
1961 (8) - Musial, Mantle, Berra, Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson
1962 (8) - Musial, Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson, Killebrew
1963 (8) - Musial, Snider, Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson, Killebrew
1964 (7) - Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson, Killebrew
1965-66 (6) - Mantle, Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson
1967 (5) - Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson
1968 (5) - Mays, Aaron, Kaline OF(1), Clemente, FRobinson
1969 (5) - Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson
1970 (5) - Mays, Aaron, Kaline OF-1B, Clemente, FRobinson
1971 (4) - Mays OF-1B, Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson OF-1B
1972 (3) - Kaline, Clemente, FRobinson
1973 (2) - Aaron, Kaline OF-1B
1974 (1) - Aaron
CJones would be 1876-80; 1833-87
Browning would be 1883 OF-SS, 1885-92
Duffy would be 1888-99, 1901
Van Haltren would be 1889, 1891-01, 1903
Leach would be 1905; 1907; 1909-15
Cravath would be 1908; 1912-18, roughly
Roush would be 1915-21; 1923-27; 1929; 1931
Johnson would be 1933-45
Keller would be 1939-43; 1946
Kiner would be 1946-55
Minoso would be 1949-50; 1951 OF-3B; 1952-61 and 1963
Boyer would be 1957 OF-3B
Cepeda would be 1960 OF-1B
BiWilliams would be 1961-73
   115. Dr. Vaux Posted: August 12, 2006 at 04:37 AM (#2137859)
1983 Preliminary

Some people move up this year!

1. Jake Beckley
2. Bob Johnson
3. Minnie Minoso
4. Norm Cash
5. Charley Jones
6. Ralph Kiner
7. George Van Haltren
8. Ernie Lombardi
9. Jimmy Ryan
10. Dutch Leonard
11. Frank Howard
12. Quiny Trouppe
13. Tommy Bridges
14. Billy Williams: he has the long-time very good-ness that I like, and his peak was plenty
high.
15. Rube Waddell

***

16. Dick Allen: He was a ]great hitter for ten years. RF indicates that he was a
reasonable 3B and 1B, but a bad OF. His career ended quickly and early, but that may have
been more due to teams not wanting him than an inability to play well (although his last
three years clearly show decline).
17. Orlando Cepeda
18. Gavy Cravath
19. Sam Rice
20. Burleigh Grimes
21. Wally Schang
22. Bob Elliott
23. Billy Pierce
24. Dizzy Trout: length and success are a nice combination.
25. Jack Quinn: Pitching to that age, especially in that era, is still quite an
accomplishment, and he was very good.
26. Eddie Cicotte: put his seasons in a different order, and he superficially looks better.
But he was never worse than average, often far above, and it seems like knuckleballers are
more prone to having isolated disaster years. Plus, his career ended because he was banned
from the game; he was 36, but wasn't slowing down.
27. Jim Wynn: a true star, and one of the underrated sort for which the HOM was
established. While his career flamed out quickly in his mid thirties, that may have been
because his superficially low batting average in 1976 made the Yanks and Brewers pull the
plug on him too soon the next year; today, his career might not have been over.
28. Tony Oliva: an outstanding performer, but "only" for parts of eleven seasons. Two more
of his 1973 might push him up a slot. He might have been a little older, but then again, he
might not have.
29. Brooks Robinson: both accounts and numbers proclaim his defensive value, he was an
excellent hitter in several seasons, and he hung on for a long time. It feels like he
should make it,though I'm not sure just how much better than Boyer he was.
30. Ken Boyer: if he had a little more production or a little more productive length, he'd
be higher. But add his defense, and he was very valuable for a reasonably long time. He
might eventually make it further up.
31. Edd Roush
32. Bucky Walters: further consideration pushes those others ahead of him.
33. Jose Mendez
34. Joe Torre: a sustained very-goodness, sprinkled with very, very-goodness; caught
apparently adequately enough.
   116. Howie Menckel Posted: August 12, 2006 at 03:08 PM (#2138009)
HOM Cs, by year, through 1982 election. Must have played half a team's games and mainly this position to be listed:
1861 - Pearce C-SS
1862-63 - Pearce
1864-65 - Pearce C-SS
1866-68
1869-70 - White
1871-73 - White, McVey
1874-76 - White
1877 - McVey
1878 - White, Bennett C-OF
1879 - White
1880
1881 - Bennett, Ewing C-SS
1882 - Bennett
1883-86 - Bennett, Ewing
1887 - O'Rourke C-3O
1888 - Bennett, Ewing, Kelly C-OF
1889 - Bennett, Ewing
1890 - Bennett, Ewing, Kelly C-SS
1891 - Bennett, Kelly
1892 - Kelly
1893-09
1910-17 - Santop
1918-19
1920 - Santop, Mackey C-UT
1921 - Santop, Mackey C-2B-3B
1922 - Santop, Mackey
1923-24 - Santop, Mackey, Hartnett
1925-28 - Mackey, Hartnett, Cochrane
1929 - Mackey, Cochrane, Dickey
1930 - Mackey, Hartnett, Cochrane, Dickey
1931-35 - Mackey, Hartnett, Cochrane, Dickey, Gibson
1936-38 - Mackey, Hartnett, Dickey, Gibson
1939 - Mackey, Hartnett, Dickey, Gibson, Campanella
1940-41 - Mackey, Dickey, Gibson
1942 - Dickey, Gibson, Campanella
1943 - Dickey, Gibson
1944-46 - Gibson, Campanella
1947-48 - Campanella, Berra C-OF
1949-57 - Campanella, Berra
1958 - Berra C(OF)
1959 - Berra
1960 - Berra C-OF
Bresnahan would be 1901; 1905-08; 1910-11; 1914-15
Trouppe would be 1938-39; 1941-49, very roughly
Torre would be 1961; 1963-68
Freehan would be 1963-73; 1975
   117. sunnyday2 Posted: August 12, 2006 at 03:16 PM (#2138014)
vaux, 4.5 gloves in the top 34, none in the top 10, 1 in the top 20, 2 in the top 28. No 2B, no SS in the top 34.
   118. sunnyday2 Posted: August 12, 2006 at 03:16 PM (#2138017)
OK, I missed Lombardi. The general pt still holds.
   119. Paul Wendt Posted: August 13, 2006 at 01:35 AM (#2138647)
jtm,
There could be a Richie Allen thread. He was a great player for a while, controversial too, might even draw some extra attention if it could be listed up at Baseball Think Factory.
   120. Howie Menckel Posted: August 13, 2006 at 01:39 AM (#2138653)
HOM 1Bs, by year, through 1982 election. Must have played half a team's games and mainly this position to be listed:
1860-71 - Start
1872 - Start, Hines
1873 - Start, Anson, O'Rourke 1B-OF
1874 - Start, Anson 1B-3B, O'Rourke
1875 - Start, Anson 1B-OF, McVey 1B-OC
1876 - Start, McVey
1877 - Start, Spalding, White 1B-OF, Sutton 1B-2B
1878 - Start
1879 - Start, Anson, McVey, Brouthers
1880 - Start, Anson
1881 - Start, Anson, White 1B-2O, Connor
1882 - Start, Anson, Brouthers, Connor 1B-O3, Stovey 1B-OF
1883 - Start, Anson, Brouthers, Connor, Stovey
1884 - Start, Anson, Brouthers, Stovey
1885 - Start, Anson, Brouthers, Connor, Stovey
1886-88 - Anson, Brouthers, Connor
1889-90 - Hines, Anson, Brouthers, Connor
1891 - Anson, Brouthers, Connor
1892 - Anson, Brouthers, Connor, Ewing
1893-94 - Anson, Brouthers, Connor
1895-96 - Anson, Connor, Ewing
1897 - Anson, Lajoie
1898 - Wagner 1B-3B
1899
1900 - Delahanty, Jennings
1901 - Jennings, Kelley
1902 - Jennings
1903
1904 - Kelley
1905-10
1911 - Lajoie 1B-2B
1912-14
1915 - Sisler 1B-OF-P
1916-17 - Sisler
1918 - Sisler, Magee 1B-OF
1919-20 - Sisler, Heilmann
1921-22 - Sisler
1923 - JWilson
1924 - Sisler, JWilson, Terry
1925 - Sisler, JWilson, Terry, Gehrig, Suttles
1926 - Sisler, Terry, Gehrig, Suttles, Dihigo UT
1927 - Sisler, Terry, Gehrig
1928 - Sisler, Terry, Gehrig, Suttles
1929 - Sisler, JWilson, Terry, Gehrig, Suttles, Lloyd, Foxx
1930 - Sisler, Terry, Gehrig, Suttles, Lloyd, Foxx, Charleston
1931 - Terry, Gehrig, Foxx, Charleston
1932 - Terry, Gehrig, Suttles, Foxx, Charleston
1933 - Terry, Gehrig, Suttles, Foxx, Charleston, Greenberg
1934-35 - JWilson, Terry, Gehrig, Suttles, Foxx, Charleston, Greenberg, Leonard
1936 - JWilson, Terry, Gehrig, Suttles, Foxx, Charleston, Leonard, Mize
1937 - JWilson, Gehrig, Foxx, Charleston, Greenberg, Leonard, Mize
1938 - Gehrig, Suttles, Foxx, Greenberg, Leonard, Mize
1939 - Suttles, Foxx, Greenberg, Leonard, Mize
1940 - Foxx 1B-C, Greenberg, Leonard, Mize
1941-42 - Foxx, Leonard, Mize
1943-44 - Leonard
1945 - Foxx 1B-3B, Leonard
1946 - Greenberg, Leonard, Mize, JRobinson, Musial 1B(OF)
1947 - Greenberg, Leonard, Mize, JRobinson, Musial
1948 - Leonard, Mize
1949 - Mize
1950 - Mize, Irvin 1B-OF
1951 - Mize
1952-54
1955-56 - Musial 1B-OF
1957-59 - Musial, FRobinson 1B-OF
1960 - FRobinson 1B-OF, Killebrew 1B-3B
1961 - Killebrew 1B-3B
1962-64 - Banks
1965 - Banks, Killebrew 1B-3B
1966 - Banks
1967 - Mantle, Mathews 1B-3B, Banks, Killebrew
1968 - Mantle, Banks, Killebrew
1969 - Banks
1970
1971 - Aaron 1B-OF, Killebrew 1B-3B
1972 - Aaron, Killebrew
Beckley would be 1888-1906
Cepeda would be 1958-59; 1961 1B-OF; 1962-64; 1966-70
Cash would be 1960-73
BiWilliams would be 1974 1B-OF
Freehan would be 1974 1B-C
   121. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 13, 2006 at 11:43 AM (#2138848)
jtm,
There could be a Richie Allen thread. He was a great player for a while, controversial too, might even draw some extra attention if it could be listed up at Baseball Think Factory.


Facetiousness recognized, Paul. ;-)
   122. yest Posted: August 13, 2006 at 12:12 PM (#2138850)
Howie do you have a list of all HoMers per year regardless of posiostion and playing time.
   123. Howie Menckel Posted: August 13, 2006 at 12:24 PM (#2138851)
yest,
I don't see it handy at the moment, and didn't see it pop up right away on a recent thread.
But we've mostly been rather consistent in HOMers per year, albeit uninentionally. Basically a long slow ramp-up from the 1870s til the 1920s, then that big spike from about 1925-40, then dropoff during the war, then right back to just ahead of the early 1920s numbers, and so forth.
I'll dig that up sometime this week.
And I might as well finish dispersing the positional lists over the next day or two..
   124. Howie Menckel Posted: August 13, 2006 at 12:26 PM (#2138852)
HOM 2Bs, by year, through 1982 election. Must have played half a team's games and mainly this position to be listed:
1870 - Pike
1871 - Barnes 2B-SS
1872-76 - Barnes
1877 - Wright
1878
1879 - Glasscock
1880-81
1882-83 - Richardson, McPhee
1884 - Richardson, McPhee, Connor 2B-OF
1885 - Richardson 2B-OF, McPhee
1886 - McPhee, Grant
1887 - Richardson 2B-OF, McPhee, Grant
1888 - Richardson, McPhee, Grant, Delahanty 2B-OF
1889 - Richardson 2B-OF, McPhee, Grant
1890-91 - McPhee, Grant
1892 - Richardson 2B-OF, McPhee, Grant, Ward
1893-94 - McPhee, Grant, Ward
1895-97 - McPhee, Grant
1898-99 - McPhee, Grant, Lajoie
1900-03 - Grant, Lajoie
1904 - Lajoie 2B-SS
1905
1906-07 - Lajoie
1908 - Lajoie, GDavis, E Collins 2B-SS
1909-10 - Lajoie, E Collins
1911 - E Collins
1912-13 - Lajoie, E Collins, HR Johnson
1914 - Lajoie, E Collins, Groh
1915-16 - Lajoie, E Collins
1917-19 - E Collins
1920-21 - E Collins, Hornsby
1922 - E Collins, Hornsby, Frisch 2B-3B
1923 - E Collins, Hornsby, Frisch
1924 - E Collins, Hornsby, Frisch, Lloyd, Dihigo UT
1925 - E Collins, Hornsby, Lloyd, Dihigo UT
1926 - E Collins, Hornsby, Frisch, Lloyd, Gehringer
1927-28 - Hornsby, Frisch, Lloyd, Gehringer
1929 - Hornsby, Frisch, Gehringer
1930 - Frisch, Gehringer
1931 - Hornsby 2B-3B, Frisch, Gehringer
1932 - Frisch 2B-3B, Gehringer, BiHerman
1933-35 - Frisch, Gehringer, BiHerman
1936 - Frisch 2B-3B, Gehringer, BiHerman
1937 - Gehringer, BiHerman
1938-41 - Gehringer, BiHerman, Doerr, Gordon
1942-43 - BiHerman, Doerr, Gordon
1944 - Doerr
1945 - JRobinson
1946 - BiHerman 2B-3B, Doerr, Gordon, JRobinson
1947 - Doerr, Gordon
1948-50 - Doerr, Gordon, JRobinson
1951 - Doerr, JRobinson
1952 - JRobinson
1953-75
Browning (!) would be 1882 2B-SS-3B
Childs would be 1890-1900
Fox would be 1949-64
   125. Chris Fluit Posted: August 13, 2006 at 11:08 PM (#2139635)
Re: post #109. I looked at 30 pitchers even though I only listed 17. However, I honestly overlooked Urban Shocker. I went ahead and evaluated him. He was certainly better than some of the guys that I had looked at (such as Larry Jackson) but I wouldn't have him ahead of anybody on my list.

Re: post #115. Vaux, I had the same question as sunnyday. 10 of your top 15 are either 1B or OF, including everyone in your top 7. You might want to consider giving some extra weight to glove positions and pitchers.
   126. Howie Menckel Posted: August 14, 2006 at 12:15 AM (#2139668)
HOM 3Bs, by year, through 1982 election. Must have played half a team's games and mainly this position to be listed:
1866 - Pike 3B-O2
1867-69
1870 - Sutton
1871-72 - Sutton, Anson
1873 - Sutton
1874 - Sutton 3B-SS
1875 - Sutton
1876 - Sutton, Anson
1877 - Anson 3B-C
1878 - Sutton, McVey
1879 - Kelly 3B-OC, Richardson
1880 - Richardson, Connor
1881 - Sutton, O'Rourke
1882 - Sutton, White, Ewing 3B-C
1883 - Sutton, White
1884-85 - Sutton, White
1886 - White
1887 - White, Ewing
1888 - White
1889
1890 - White 3B-1B
1891 - Dahlen 3B-OF
1892 - GDavis 3B-OF
1893-94 - GDavis
1895 - GDavis, JCollins 3B
1896 - GDavis 3B-SS, JCollins
1897-98 - JCollins, Wallace
1899 - JCollins, Wagner 3B-OF
1900-05 - JCollins
1906
1907-08 - JCollins
1909-14 - Baker
1915 - Groh
1916 - Baker, Groh, Hornsby 3B-SS
1917-18 - Baker, Groh
1919 - Baker, Groh, Hornsby 3B-S2
1920 - Groh Frisch
1921 - Baker, Groh, Frisch 3B-2B
1922 - Groh
1923 - Groh, Beckwith
1924 - Groh
1925 - Frisch 32S
1926-27 - Beckwith, JWilson
1928 - JWilson, Dihigo, Foxx 3B-1B/C
1929 - Beckwith 3B-SS
1930 - JWilson, Dihigo UT, Beckwith
1931 - Beckwith, JWilson
1932-33 - JWilson
1934-37 - Hack
1938 - Hack, Ott 3B(OF)
1939-46 - Hack
1947
1948 - Appling 3B-SS
1949-51
1952-54 - Mathews
1955-56 - Mathews, JRobinson
1957 - Mathews, Reese 3B(SS)
1958 - Mathews
1959 - Mathews, Killebrew
1960-65 - Mathews, Santo
1966 - Mathews, Killebrew 3B-1B, Santo
1967-68 - Santo
1969 - Killebrew 3B-1B, Santo
1970 - Killebrew, Santo
1971-73 - Santo
Browning (!) would be 1883, 3B-OF-1B
Leach would be 1899; 1901-04; 1906 3B-OF; 1908
Sewell would be 1929-32
Walters (!) would be 1934
Trouppe (!) would be 1940
Boyer would be 1955-56; 1958-67; 1968 3B-1B


Interestingly, electing Brooks would for the first time give us four HOMer 3Bs playing in the same year (1966). Boyer would make it 5....
   127. Howie Menckel Posted: August 14, 2006 at 01:57 AM (#2139756)
yest,
I posted this thru 1978, and little has changed in the pre-1950 tallies since then...

Looking at how many HOMers played in each league since 1902 (it took the AL one year to catch up). These are players with at least 10 G that year:

NATIONAL LEAGUE
1902-25 - 8 to 10 HOMers per year (well, 6 in 1918 and 7 in 1920-21)
1926-31 - 10 to 11 HOMers (well, 12 in 1926)
1932-33 - 14/13 HOMers (Rixey/Hornsby/Heilmann meet Hack/Medwick)
1934-42 - 10 to 12 HOMers
1943-46 - 8/6/4/8 HOMers
1947-54 - 10 to 12 HOMers
1955-57 - 13 to 15 HOMers (Koufax/Clemente/Drysdale meet the old guard)


AMERICAN LEAGUE
1902-06 - 10 to 12 HOMers
1907-10 - 13 to 14 HOMers (Young/Lajoie meet Johnson/Baker/Jackson)
1911-24 - 10 to 12 HOMers (well, 9 in 1915 and 1920, 14 in 1916)
1925-41 - 16 to 18 HOMers (well, 15 in 1930)
1942-45 - 14/9/5/6 HOMers
1946-51 - 13 to 14 HOMers
1952-59 - 9 to 10 HOMers

The NL only had more HOMers than the AL once from 1902-51. That was in 1946 (there were a few ties).
Then the NL took over in 1952 as DiMaggio, Newhouser, and Boudreau departed and TWilliams goes off to war. What a changing of the guard - the NL has led every year since then!


NEGRO LEAGUES
1902-09 - 3 to 4 HOMers
1910-19 - 6 to 7 HOMers (well, 8 in 1916)
1920-22 - 9 to 11 HOMers
1923-42 - 13 to 15 HOMers (well, 16 in 1931 and 12 in 1933 and 11 in 1938 and 1942)
1943-46 - 8 to 10 HOMers
1947-48 - 5 to 6 HOMers
   128. Howie Menckel Posted: August 14, 2006 at 02:59 AM (#2139829)
with my naive hopes of not seeming to be trying to monopolize the thread now dashed, I slink out with this:

HOM SSs, by year, through 1982 election. Must have played half a team's games and mainly this position to be listed:
1856-60 - Pearce
1861-63
1864 - Wright
1865
1866-67 - Pearce, Wright
1868-70 - Pearce, Wright, Barnes
1871 - Pearce, Wright
1872 - Pearce, Wright, O'Rourke SS-C
1873-75 - Pearce, Wright
1876 - Wright
1877- Sutton SS-3B
1878 - Wright
1879 - Barnes, Sutton SS-3B
1880 - Sutton SS-3B, Glasscock
1881 - Barnes, Glasscock
1882 - Wright, Glasscock, Kelly SS-OF
1883-84 - Glasscock
1885-86 - Glasscock, Ward
1887 - Sutton SS-OU, Glasscock, Ward
1888-89 - Glasscock, Ward
1890 - Glasscock, Ward, Delahanty SS-2O
1891 - Glasscock, Ward, Jennings
1892 - Glasscock, Jennings, Dahlen SS-3B
1893 - Glasscock, Dahlen
1894 - Glasscock, Jennings, Dahlen SS-3B
1895-96 - Jennings, Dahlen, HR Johnson
1897-98 - Jennings, Dahlen, HR Johnson, GDavis
1899 - Dahlen, HR Johnson, GDavis, Wallace SS-3B
1900 - Dahlen, HR Johnson, GDavis, Wallace
1901 - Dahlen, HR Johnson, GDavis, Wallace, Wagner SS-O3
1902 - Dahlen, HR Johnson, GDavis, Wallace
1903 - Dahlen, HR Johnson, Wallace, Wagner
1904-07 - Dahlen, HR Johnson, GDavis, Wallace, Wagner
1908 - Dahlen, HR Johnson, Wallace, Wagner, Lloyd
1909-11 - HR Johnson, Wallace, Wagner, Lloyd
1912 - Wallace, Wagner, Lloyd
1913-16 - Wagner, Lloyd
1917-18 - Lloyd, Hornsby
1919 - Lloyd
1920-22 - Lloyd, Beckwith SS-3B
1923
1924-25 - Wells, Beckwith
1926 - Wells
1927 - Wells, Dihigo UT
1928 - Wells, Beckwith
1929 - Wells, Dihigo UT, Cronin
1930-31 - Wells, Cronin, Appling
1932-35 - Wells, Cronin, Appling, Vaughan
1936 - Wells, Cronin SS(3B), Appling, Vaughan, WBrown
1937 - Wells, Cronin, Appling, Vaughn, WBrown
1938-39 - Wells, Cronin, Appling, Vaughan
1940-41 - Wells, Cronin, Appling, Vaughan, Boudreau, Reese
1942 - Wells, Appling, Vaughan, Boudreau, Reese
1943 - Wells, Appling, Vaughan SS-3B, Boudreau
1944 - Wells, Boudreau
1945 - Boudreau
1946-47 - Appling, Boudreau, Reese
1948 - Boudreau, Reese
1949 - Appling, Boudreau SS-3B, Reese
1950 - Boudreau, Reese
1951 - Boudreau SS(3B), Reese
1952-53 - Reese
1954-56 - Reese, Banks
1957 - Banks SS-3B
1958-61 - Banks
1962-75
Moore would be 1920-25, roughly
Sewell would be 1921-28

HOM DHs, by year, through 1982 election. Must have played half a team's games and mainly this position to be listed:
1973 (1) - FRobinson
1974 (4) - FRobinson, Kaline, Killebrew DH-1B, Santo DH-2B-3B
1975 (2) - Aaron, Killebrew
1976 (1) - Aaron
Cepeda would be 1973
BiWilliams would be 1975-76
   129. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 14, 2006 at 02:24 PM (#2140058)
with my naive hopes of not seeming to be trying to monopolize the thread now dashed, I slink out with this

Good thing you don't have to pay per pixel. ;-)

Great stuff, Howie!
   130. DL from MN Posted: August 15, 2006 at 06:26 PM (#2141741)
I've finally gone through the entire bunch of elected players and I've come up with my list of players I wouldn't have supported knowing what I currently know (not pHoM).

Averill, Earl
Jennings, Hugh
Jackson, Joe
Brown, Willard
Sisler, George
McGinnity, Joe
Lemon, Bob
Ferrell, Wes

I do have some questions about those players (What was McGinnity doing in his early 20s? Am I underestimating pitcher hitting?) but I'm pretty confident there were better players we haven't put in playing at the same time. Joe Jackson is out because I deducted 1919-1920.

Folks on the bubble?
Pud Galvin
Pee Wee Reese
Lip Pike

Other than those, I am pretty much in agreement with the quality of the selections. I also think I have to give pitching a small bonus for next year's election to ensure there are pitchers sprinkled throughout my pHoM. My median HoM is Billy Hamilton and the 25% and 75% are Bill Dickey and Red Faber, respectively.

My two elect-me votes Billy Williams and Joe Torre are right around the median. Other candidates I have ranked above the 75% line are Dick Allen, Brooks Robinson, Bob Johnson, Billy Pierce, Norm Cash, Jose Mendez, Jake Beckley and Quincy Trouppe. I think my top 32 candidates have a defensible case for induction.
   131. yest Posted: August 15, 2006 at 06:30 PM (#2141745)
I've finally gone through the entire bunch of elected players and I've come up with my list of players I wouldn't have supported knowing what I currently know (not pHoM).

Sisler, George


THANK YOU FOR WAITING TILL HE WAS ELECTED
   132. DL from MN Posted: August 15, 2006 at 06:33 PM (#2141750)
Sisler never made my ballot anyway before he was elected anyway.
   133. OCF Posted: August 15, 2006 at 11:22 PM (#2142089)
My response to DL from MN isn't so much a decision in restrospect but more of a "what did I think at the time":

I started voting in 1904. For each year, at what ballot position did I have the elected candidates? Here's the list:

"Elect me" positions:
Glasscock (1904), Radbourn (1905), Hamilton (1907), Delahanty (1909), Nichols (1911), Burkett (1912), Dahlen (1915), Davis (1915), Stovey (1916), Young (1917), Clarke (1917), Kelley (1919), Keeler (1919), Walsh (1920), Bennett (1921), Lajoie (1922), Mathewson (1922), Wagner (1923), Crawford (1923), Plank (1923), G. Johnson (1925), Magee (1926), J. Jackson (1927), Baker (1928), Sheckard (1930), Santop (1932), W. Johnson (1933), Wheat (1933), Cobb (1934), E. Collins (1935), Alexander (1936), J. Williams (1936), Torriente (1937), Heilmann (1937), Coveleski (1938), Faber (1939), Rogan (1940), Ruth (1941), Hornsby (1941), Vance (1942), Charleston (1943), Cochrane (1943), Gehrig (1944), Goslin (1945), Stearnes (1946), Simmons (1946), Grove (1947), Hartnett (1947), Gehringer (1948), J. Wilson (1948), Hubbell (1949), Waner (1950), Dihigo (1950), Foxx (1951), Cronin (1951), J. Gibson (1952), Ott (1952), Greenberg (1953), Dickey (1953), Vaughan (1954), Wells (1954), Leonard (1955), R. Brown (1955), Appling (1956), DiMaggio (1957), Beckwith (1957), Hack (1958), Paige (1959), Mize (1959), Newhouser (1960), J. Robinson (1962), Feller (1962), Campanella (1963), Reese (1964), Doby (1965), Slaughter (1965), Williams (1966), Ruffing (1966), Medwick (1967), Musial (1969), Berra (1969), Snider (1970), Spahn (1971), Roberts (1972), Ford (1973), Mantle (1974), Mathews (1974), Banks (1977), Clemente (1978), Mays (1979), Kaline (1980), Santo (1980), B. Gibson (1981), Killebrew (1981), Aaron (1982), F. Robinson (1982)

#2 (in an elect-1 year): Sutton (1908), Galvin (1910), McPhee (1913), Flick (1918)
#3: Wallace (1929), Speaker (1934), Lloyd (1935), Rixie (1968), Bunning (1977), Wilhelm (1977)
#4: Start (1912), Groh (1938), Frisch (1944), Marichal (1980)
#5: Rusie (1904), Lyons (1949), Boudreau (1958)
#6: Richardson (1905), Spalding (1906), 3F Brown (1925), Terry (1942), Wynn (1970)
#7: Grant (1926), McGinnity (1928), Drysdale (1975)
#8: Carey (1939), W. Foster (1945), W. Ferrell (1964)
#9: Averill (1961)
#10: McVey (1914), J. Collins (1921), Suttles (1956)
#11: Koufax (1972), Mackey (1974)
#12:
#13:
#14: Ashburn (1968)
#15: R. Foster (1932), Irvin (1963)

Off-ballot positions:

#17: B. Herman (1958), W. Brown (1976)
#19: Thompson (1929), Bell (1973)
#21: Caruthers (1930), Gordon (1976)
#24: Pearce (1931)
#25: Sisler (1979)
#28: Doerr (1972)
Not listed: Pike (1940), Jennings (1960), Griffith (1971)

Everyone that I've ever put into an "elect me" position has eventually been elected, with five exceptions: George Van Haltren, Larry Doyle, Joe Sewell, Billy Pierce, and Ralph Kiner. Kiner has slipped out of my top 15; the others are still on my ballot.

You'll note that most of DL from MN's questionable list weren't in elect me spots on my ballot when elected, but some of them were in the top 15. A number of my bottom group fall into the category of philosophical disagreements about the nature of the evidence: Pearce, Pike, Jennings, Caruthers, W. Brown, Bell. As for the others: I feel better about the elections of Herman, Gordon, Doerr, and Griffith than I do about Thompson or Sisler.
   134. Paul Wendt Posted: August 16, 2006 at 06:22 PM (#2143200)
DL from MN Posted: August 15, 2006 at 02:26 PM (#2141741)
I've finally gone through the entire bunch of elected players and I've come up with my list of players I wouldn't have supported knowing what I currently know (not pHoM).

Averill, Earl
Jennings, Hugh
Jackson, Joe
Brown, Willard
Sisler, George
McGinnity, Joe
Lemon, Bob
Ferrell, Wes


On Ferrell and Lemon you should read the volumes (but less than one standard CD-ROM) written by contemporary participants in the project.

On Jackson you should read the Constitution.

On Averill, the short story is that he was elected "so quickly" because "enough" voters considered his minor league achievements unusually "merit"-orious. Would the group have elected him slowly but surely without any record before 1929? I believe so(*) but suggest that it isn't worth your time to sift the evidence. (*And I would have voted for him if I had been voting.)
   135. Paul Wendt Posted: August 16, 2006 at 07:28 PM (#2143287)
128. Howie Menckel Posted: August 13, 2006 at 10:59 PM (#2139829)
with my naive hopes of not seeming to be trying to monopolize the thread now dashed


Check out Cupid Childs.

I do dislike the HOM site. Material such as Howie Menckel's near-annually updated tables should be maintained on the web, not posted again and again on discussion boards. Wiki wight work.
   136. DL from MN Posted: August 16, 2006 at 07:38 PM (#2143302)
The line of reasoning on Jackson is that he voluntarily chose to participate (actively or tacitly) in throwing baseball games. I believe it is entirely reasonable to wipe out any value he put up after he made that decision since he'd already decided not to help his team win a pennant. Without those two seasons, there isn't nearly enough there. With those seasons, he's in comfortably.

Averill's minor league seasons must have been more impressive than his major league seasons. I'm giving him minor league credit and he isn't close.

I like Tommy Bridges better than Lemon or Ferrell no matter how much error bar there is in the credit I give them for hitting.
   137. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: August 16, 2006 at 07:50 PM (#2143317)
As for not liking Hughie Jennings I say THBPTTHBPTTBHTPT!!!!!
   138. AJMcCringleberry Posted: August 16, 2006 at 08:29 PM (#2143419)
I believe it is entirely reasonable to wipe out any value he put up after he made that decision since he'd already decided not to help his team win a pennant.

Then why are you deducting 1919? That season was already played before he decided to throw games.
   139. Chris Fluit Posted: August 16, 2006 at 08:37 PM (#2143432)
135. I do dislike the HOM site. Material such as Howie Menckel's near-annually updated tables should be maintained on the web, not posted again and again on discussion boards.

That's a good idea. I've gone ahead and copied some of these lists to my computer as reference.
   140. DL from MN Posted: August 16, 2006 at 10:32 PM (#2143599)
You can't add value to getting a pennant when you decide to throw a World Series unless the point of the season was to win the American League championship.

I like Hughie Jennings, I'd just like a few more years of Hughie Jennings. I'm not a peak voter.
   141. Chris Fluit Posted: August 17, 2006 at 02:05 AM (#2144047)
Looking at Howie's lists, it really stands out to me that we haven't elected a second-baseman to the HoM since Jackie Robinson finished in 1952 or a shortstop since Ernie Banks finished in 1961.
   142. Howie Menckel Posted: August 17, 2006 at 02:10 AM (#2144055)
Thanks, although I'd probably want a companion compiler for accuracy re a 'permanent list.'

I mean, they're 95+ pct right, or something higher, but I'd want even better in that case.
Like consensus on pcts for a Caruthers type, or positions for a Negro Leaguer, etc.

I like the site, though I see what you mean.
   143. Paul Wendt Posted: August 17, 2006 at 09:12 PM (#2145052)
Chris Fluit Posted: August 16, 2006 at 10:05 PM (#2144047)
Looking at Howie's lists, it really stands out to me that we haven't elected a second-baseman to the HoM since Jackie Robinson finished in 1952 or a shortstop since Ernie Banks finished in 1961.


See the data on chronological distribution of long careers at different fielding positions, near the present end of the Cupid Childs thread. There are many big differences between neighboring fielding positions and neighboring 40-year periods.


Thanks, although I'd probably want a companion compiler for accuracy re a 'permanent list.'

I understand that feeling.

After the Hall of Merit reaches 2007 virtually, some publications will cover the Hall of Merit honorees as a group. I am sure that some graphical displays of HOM statistics, such as the date-and-fielding position distributions by Howie Menckel, will be published. I guess that will happen in advance of virtual 2007, for a variety of reasons. Of course, anyone whose main interest would be to influence HOM membership should begin thinking about any such effort now.
   144. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 17, 2006 at 09:34 PM (#2145076)
Of course, anyone whose main interest would be to influence HOM membership should begin thinking about any such effort now.

There are a million things that we could and should do, but I just have enough time to keep the trains running on schedule. Maybe Joe should look at giving the keys to someone else who can pick up where Joe and I leave off.
   145. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: August 18, 2006 at 12:39 AM (#2145182)
I would have no problem with giving the keys if another person wants to help.
   146. fra paolo Posted: August 18, 2006 at 11:31 AM (#2145397)
Busy work schedule, and various experiments to add more career weighting to my heavily prime biased ballot have delayed the preliminary. Here it is (without comments for some of my ballot regulars):

1) Ralph Kiner
2) Rube Waddell.
3) Dick Allen. Like the two above him, Allen's stats in his prime indicate he could carry an average team into championship contention.
4) Hugh Duffy. Gets a big promotion with the addition of his career value, thus making a lie of my 1982 comment about his stock being in decline.
5) Ken Boyer. The way I see it, he's got a better prime than Brooks Robinson, which surprised me.
6) Cupid Childs.
7) Joe Sewell.
8) Chuck Klein. A newcomer, whom I hadn't looked at carefully before. Gets moved down from where his raw stats would put him because of stiff competition at his position in his era.
9) Tony Oliva. He was very good in his prime, I'm not sure he isn't more deserving than Klein, since his case for being the 'best in his league' may be stronger than Klein's.
10) Orlando Cepeda.
12) Charley Jones
11) Bucky Walters.
13) Jimmy Wynn. An idiosyncratic choice. He doesn't have a tall peak, he doesn't score at all well on my career rating, but he has a long prime and in terms of Batting Runs + Fielding Runs he's arguably the most impactful of the CFers I've rated. In fact, his average of ABR+FR in his prime exceeds everybody's except Klein, Kiner, Allen, Olliva, and Childs. I haven't really had time to digest the implications of all this but I won't be surprised if he features even more highly on subsequent ballots. I think Win Shares underrates him.
14) Brooks Robinson
15) Elston Howard. I may have him too low, here. Catcher is a demanding position.

16) Edd Roush. His and Duffy's primes are quite close in my rankings, but Duffy beats him hands down on my career value measure. And Wynn has the better prime.
17) Nellie Fox. Falls off the ballot. I've never been entirely comfortable with his even being there. He may return on the basis of a strong career totals, but he really lacks peak or prime.
   147. fra paolo Posted: August 18, 2006 at 11:33 AM (#2145398)
top tens off ballot:
Billy Williams: He's not peaky enough to get on my ballot yet, especially with Kiner still around.
Jose Mendez: I don't have anything to add this time round to what I have said previously: I need to put in more work to reach an evaluation of his statistics that I'm comfortable with.
Bill Freehan: He didn't have the consistent batting prime I look for in players.
Billy Pierce: I think Walters is better.
Minnie Minoso: Not enough peak for me, but I'm giving him another look.

Esteemed newcomer:
Joe Torre: Like Freehan, not enough consistent batting prime.

Special mention
Alejandro Oms. He's really impressive, but I'm not sure whether he's a RF or CF. James rates him as an RF, I note. I'm making him a special project for 1984.
   148. DL from MN Posted: August 18, 2006 at 01:58 PM (#2145438)
> Joe Torre: Like Freehan, not enough consistent batting prime.

This is the same Joe Torre with 15 above average hitting seasons and 9 >25% above average.

Bluntly, I think your ballot is an inconsistent mess. Kiner #1, Klein on ballot, no Keller. Elston Howard on ballot; Trouppe, Freehan and Torre not. Tony Oliva on but not Billy Williams. It looks more like picking names out of a hat than a list shaped by a systematic look at the evidence and an attempt to integrate by position. Can you tell me how much more you like Walters than Pierce and why?
   149. fra paolo Posted: August 18, 2006 at 03:14 PM (#2145490)
Can you tell me how much more you like Walters than Pierce and why?

I've got three ML pitchers fighting for a place on my ballot: Waddell, Walters and Pierce.

I keep several forms of ranking. To start with, I define a prime period, using ERA+ to establish the limits of the prime.

I give weight first to Pitching Runs over the prime period dividing the total of pitching runs by the number of prime seasons. At present, the ranking on that one puts Waddell on top, followed by Pierce, then Walters.

Then, I look at a comparison over career, using HoF (not HoM) standards and monitoring. On that, Waddell is on top, followed by Walters, then Pierce.

Where I get a split result, as in this case. I look at a variety of other factors, starting with something I define as "height of ERA+ during prime" (Walters ahead of Pierce) and Top 5 ERA+ finishes (Walters ahead of Pierce, by virture of an extra #1; ;both had 5 To 5s over 8-year primes). At that point, I declared Walters the winner.

So, to answer your question. I don't like Walters a whole lot more than Pierce, and could easily envision Pierce getting on my ballot ahead of Walters in some subsequent election depending on what new calculations I might make.

Torre's problem lies in his 1967-9, years when he finished below his career average OPS+, between the two peak of 1964-6 and 1970-1. Freehan and Rizzuto have similar career 'gaps'.

Regarding Trouppe, I used a Runs Created style formula dividing hits and TBs by PAs, and during his peak (using MLE's posted on his thread) he comes out worse than Howard, once I adjust for environmen. Howard is also a darn good fielding catcher by Fielding Runs.
   150. DL from MN Posted: August 18, 2006 at 04:17 PM (#2145570)
Elston Howard has a couple gaps in his prime. Rizzuto's big gap is WWII. I don't consider HOF monitor over career all that worthwhile and I don't see much value in consecutiveness of prime.
   151. sunnyday2 Posted: August 19, 2006 at 01:26 AM (#2146945)
But it is an opinion that fra's is an especially messy, inconsistent ballot. We'll see about the consensus scores. Those who are tabulating have seen other ballots with only 3 of the 6-7-8 apparent contenders for election on it.

>Elston Howard on ballot; Trouppe, Freehan and Torre not.

I especially disagree with this statement. Catchers are tricky. This is defensible though it is not how I rank them. But Howard's big gap is the racial one. It is not self-evident that the other guys were better.

As for Oliva over Billy Williams, however, even speaking as a Twins fan, I sure don't get that one.
   152. Chris Fluit Posted: August 19, 2006 at 03:03 AM (#2147092)
Right, 'cause the racial gap didn't affect Trouppe.
   153. sunnyday2 Posted: August 19, 2006 at 03:50 AM (#2147202)
I'm sayin' consider Howard's entire record just as you consider Trouppe's entire record. Again: I don't see Trouppe as a slam dunk to the point of ridiculing the guy's ballot.
   154. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 19, 2006 at 12:32 PM (#2147485)
Questioning fra's or anyone else's ballot is to be encouraged, but diplomacy and tact should accompany it. Fra has tried to explain how he creates his ballots. Though I disagree with his method, I don't think he's just pulling names out of a hat. I honestly believe he's trying to create the best ballot possible.
   155. fra paolo Posted: August 20, 2006 at 12:28 AM (#2148186)
Williams and Torre are two players who come within a whisker of getting a better rating under my system, one that might easily propel them on my ballot, although I can't see Williams getting ranked above Kiner.

Likewise, Trouppe's hitting fell just short of Howard, on a paper-thin margin, and I was impressed by Howard's fielding runs total.

I'm sure everybody has hard decisions to make between one player and another, and I'm always willing to explain why I opted for Howard over Trouppe or Walters over Pierce or even Boyer over Brooks (which I've decided to reverse, on similar grounds to why I put Duffy ahead of Roush this time round).

Oliva should probably have been replaced by Cravath to begin with. Cravath was on my 1981 ballot and was pushed off my 1982 ballot by Aaron and Robinson. I overlooked him by accident when I was preparing this preliminary.

Unfortunately, the hard disk on my laptop with my HoM spreadsheet appears to have died, so I'm probably going to have to work with my handwritten notes (which are not extensive, only a couple of lists in career and peak order) and from memory for the final ballot I'll be posting tomorrow.
   156. Chris Fluit Posted: August 20, 2006 at 04:23 AM (#2148400)
DL from MN was the guy making fun of fra paolo's ballot, not me. Personally, I agree with fra paolo regarding the ranking of Kiner, Klein and Keller. I think he has all three of them too high (or the two that he's listed, at least) but I do think he has them in the right order.
   157. fra paolo Posted: August 20, 2006 at 01:23 PM (#2148508)
OK, I extended the primes for Torre and Williams (and added Freehan and Minoso) by adjusting my threshold a little, and here's how I rank them purely on their primes:

Catcher
Howard averages 1.6 wins over a 7-year prime. (Catching 102 games per season)
Torre averages 1.4 wins over a 10-year prime. (And only caught 71 games per season)
Freehan averages 1.2 wins over an 8-year prime. (116 games per season)

Torre has a much higher peak with the bat, but he's hammered by his fielding. Howard was a spectacular fielder for a catcher, better than Freehan, it looks to me.

Leftfield
Kiner averages 5.4 wins over a 5-year prime. (This approaches inner circle production.)
Minoso averages 3.1 wins over a 10-year prime.
Williams averages 2.7 wins over a 12-year prime.

Since I definitely prefer peak over length when it comes to position players, I'd even put Minoso ahead of Williams as a more meritorious leftfielder. (Minoso, by the way, was always listed in my rankings, unlike Freehan.)
   158. Chris Fluit Posted: August 21, 2006 at 01:45 AM (#2149056)
Looks fine to me, fra paolo. One question to me though: Where would Trouppe fit in with the three MLB catchers?
   159. sunnyday2 Posted: August 21, 2006 at 01:24 PM (#2149945)
1984 will be nothing more than 1983, the sequel.

But starting in '85 we will be electing several backloggers. I plan to re-eval everybody on my ballot by then. If not Lou Brock, then we are trending toward Mendez, Freehan and Sewell. That would be pretty catholic.
   160. TomH Posted: August 21, 2006 at 01:43 PM (#2149959)
'catholic' in the sense of....? universal? I obviously am missing your point, sunny
   161. fra paolo Posted: August 21, 2006 at 01:59 PM (#2149976)
Chris,

The formula I used to compare Howard with Trouppe is on a spreadsheet on my dying hard disk. I managed to extract some data this morning, but it was all work related. However, I'd guesstimate that my order would be
1. Howard
2. Trouppe
3. Torre
4. Freehan

With Trouppe getting the advantage because no-one seems to have had anything to say about his fielding, good or bad. I'd also make the assumption that he caught at least as many games as Torre.
   162. DL from MN Posted: August 21, 2006 at 02:50 PM (#2150032)
I didn't want to come across as mocking his ballot, just harsh. I'm having a problem with using rate stats to compare the best 5 years of Kiner with the best 12 years of Williams. Wouldn't you want to use the best 5 years of each (or best 7) for the rate stat comparisons? Otherwise you're penalizing Billy Williams for putting up valuable seasons Kiner where didn't play. I think this is coloring your Boyer v. Robinson on the ballot you have posted above also.

Likewise I'm not much on black ink for career comparisons. You're already using "wins" of some sort, just add them up for the career.
   163. fra paolo Posted: August 21, 2006 at 04:31 PM (#2150164)
Actually, DL, the preliminary ballot included a comparison of Kiner vs Williams on their best consecutive five seasons. And Kiner won.

I know you don't value consecutive seasons, but I do.
   164. DL from MN Posted: August 21, 2006 at 06:26 PM (#2150417)
Fair enough
   165. sunnyday2 Posted: August 21, 2006 at 06:38 PM (#2150452)
1984 will be nothing more than 1983, the sequel.

But starting in '85 we will be electing several backloggers. I plan to re-eval everybody on my ballot by then. If not Lou Brock, then we are trending toward Mendez, Freehan and Sewell. That would be pretty catholic.
   166. sunnyday2 Posted: August 21, 2006 at 06:44 PM (#2150462)
Oops, how the hell did that happen?

Well my main point was that we will be electing backloggers, so let's be sure we have the right ones.

Catholic in the sense of "diverse" or "universal," if that's a correct usage. A NeLer, a relative old-timer and a more contemporary guy. I suppose it would be even more catholic if we elected an arm, a bat and a glove....

Not in the sense of being a religious thing.
   167. rawagman Posted: August 21, 2006 at 09:48 PM (#2150940)
Somethig that;s been bugging me a bit as this election moves on. Without going into totals, it is fairly clear that newcomer Dick Allen has received ample support from the electorate. Fair enough. He was a great hitter.
But I think it is reasonable to suggest that he was a hitter only. His fielding was poor, he played a low-leverage glove position and had character issues.
Let's compare this newcomer bat with two backlog bats (Kiner, Cravath) I could throw Browning and Jones into the mix, but they ae 19th C, and that requires a different methodolgy than a straight up comparison.
Name Career OPS+ Grey ink Black ink seasons(AB+BB/600) Ink/season(gr.+5xbl.)
Allen 156 159 27 12.04 24.42
Cravath 149 110 46 7.52 45.21
Kiner 150 145 52 10.36 39.09

As a measurement of peak over career, I think this says something. You may look at the seasonal differences as meaning something, but many of you will agree to 3 years of credit being deserved by Cravath. That would push him into Kiner territory, both around 1.5 seasons behind Allen. It may also be fair to say that as Allen played over the longer schedule, some of those extra at-bats would be rubbed out (I think it's pretty fair to say that if a player can play 154 games in a season without durability issues, he can probably handle 162 games just as well). I would be inclined to drop a half-season's difference career-wise.

What we're left with is more votes to the guy who played the one (1) extra season and had the higher OPS+, but scores well lower on the ink tests. ALl 3 were marginal glovemen.

Food for thought in this next, backlog election.
   168. rawagman Posted: August 21, 2006 at 09:52 PM (#2150946)
The formatting sucked there, but essentially, the ink value per season scores are as follows:
Cravath: 45.21
Kiner: 39.09
Allen: 24.42.

The argument that it is harder to compile ink in the 60's than in the 40's and the 10's is valid. But how much harder?
   169. sunnyday2 Posted: August 21, 2006 at 09:58 PM (#2150961)
>The argument that it is harder to compile ink in the 60's than in the 40's and the 10's is valid.

Bingo.

As flawed as they are I prefer HoF Standards and HoF Monitor to ink. But prefer none of them to many other measures.
   170. jimd Posted: August 21, 2006 at 10:07 PM (#2150973)
As flawed as they are I prefer HoF Standards and HoF Monitor to ink.

I ignore them all, though I'd listen if someone has a compilation of them that has been park-adjusted and position-adjusted. Otherwise, your marginal PHOMers are just a bunch of OF-1B who played in good hitter's parks.
   171. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 21, 2006 at 10:15 PM (#2150983)
I ignore them all, though I'd listen if someone has a compilation of them that has been park-adjusted and position-adjusted. Otherwise, your marginal PHOMers are just a bunch of OF-1B who played in good hitter's parks.

Exactly, Jim. AFAIAC, there are far superior methods or stats that show a much clearer picture of a candidate's quality than Black Ink, Gray Ink, etc.
   172. Mike Webber Posted: August 21, 2006 at 10:18 PM (#2150987)
Name Career OPS+ Grey ink Black ink seasons(AB+BB/600) Ink/season(gr.+5xbl.)
Allen 156 159 27 12.04 24.42
Cravath 149 110 46 7.52 45.21
Kiner 150 145 52 10.36 39.09


Some points:

Cravath played in the best homer park in the NL, and a BIG chunk of his Ink Scores are homer related. Oh, he could mash, but he was well suited to the park.

Todd Helton for example: 146 133 16 8.88 23.94

Kiner also was suited for his park (or in his case the park was tailored to fit him). He has no decline phase to his career so his "average ink" is high.

Allen played in neutral parks, and also played in leagues with 10 to 14 teams. Those extra competitors can chip away at your ink.
   173. rawagman Posted: August 21, 2006 at 10:23 PM (#2150992)
can anyone point me to a quick source for all-time park factors?
   174. DavidFoss Posted: August 21, 2006 at 10:45 PM (#2151015)
can anyone point me to a quick source for all-time park factors?

For teams, the team pages at bb-ref.

e.g http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/ATL/attend.shtml

For years, the year pages at bb-ref.
Page 2 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
BFFB
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.7202 seconds
49 querie(s) executed