Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

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

Tuesday, January 23, 2018

2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion

2019 - (December 2018) - elect 3

Top 10 Returning Players

Luis Tiant (240), Sammy Sosa (238), Kenny Lofton (236), Andruw Jones (220), Jeff Kent (207), Ben Taylor (197), Johan Santana (186), Buddy Bell (139), Bobby Bonds (124), Jorge Posada (105)

Newly eligible players

Roy Halladay	64.7	225.5	50.6	57.6	127	45
Todd Helton	61.2	316.5	46.4	53.8	175	59
Andy Pettitte	60.8	228.7	34.1	47.5	128	44
Mariano Rivera	57.1	272.5	28.9	43	214	30
Lance Berkman	51.7	310.7	38.9	45.3	98	44
Roy Oswalt	50.2	175.3	40.1	45.1	59	34
Miguel Tejada	46.9	278.6	36.5	41.7	149	44
Placido Polanco	41.3	215.4	32.2	36.8	42	26
Freddy Garcia	35.7	136.4	28.3	32	38	23
Derek Lowe	34.5	175.6	28.4	31.4	51	19
Kevin Youkilis	32.7	144.3	31.2	31.9	29	23
Vernon Wells	28.7	186.6	26.2	27.4	52	19
Ted Lilly	27	114.3	24.8	25.9	12	16
Travis Hafner	24.8	142.5	24.6	24.7	31	19
Jason Bay	24.3	162.5	24.5	24.4	47	21
Michael Young	24.2	231.2	21.1	22.7	112	36
Darren Oliver	22.6	119.3	17	19.8	20	9
Jon Garland	22.4	117.5	19.5	21	17	9
Ramon Hernandez	21.6	156.7	18.7	20.2	43	26
Ryan Dempster	19.3	133.7	23.8	21.5	26	12
Juan Pierre	16.9	178.2	16.4	16.7	63	23
Octavio Dotel	15.4	95.5	14	14.7	25	13
Jake Westbrook	13.3	78.4	14.6	13.9	14	3
Jose Contreras	13.2	67.8	13.3	13.3	17	7
DL from MN Posted: January 23, 2018 at 12:35 PM | 121 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. DL from MN Posted: February 06, 2018 at 12:43 PM (#5620351)
Is anyone else using a JAWS-like system? If so how do you rate Hilton Smith, Ben Taylor, Dick Redding? My guess is Ben Taylor would be around Eddie Murray or Helton.
   102. Michael J. Binkley's anxiety closet Posted: February 06, 2018 at 02:00 PM (#5620446)
I use a JAWS-like system as one of the inputs for my player calculations. The one difference is that unlike JAWS, I don't divide the value by 2. So in my system, using Dr.Chaleeko's MLE's, I have Taylor at a JAWS value of 114.12 (I do include a slight defensive regression to the mean for the NeL players). For comparison (and these are the value using my WAR calculations, not bWAR):

Palmeiro - 119.96
Murray - 119.86
Sisler - 113.79
Easter - 113.74
Hernandez - 113.46
McCovey - 111.81
McGwire - 111.52
Killebrew - 109.30
Terry - 101.92
Beckley - 101.36
Giambi - 100.75 (will make my PHoM soon after eligible)
Helton - 100.11

I have Hilton Smith at 113.82, just below Coveleski, Bunning, Drysdale and just above Haladay, Sutton, Shocker.

I have not run Redding yet because I'm waiting for Dr. Chaleeko to publish MLEs for him later this year.

And speaking of Dr. Chaleeko, I believe he votes now on a JAWS-like system based upon his own WAR calculation, but he indexes all of his numbers on a 100 scale, like Hall Rating at The Hall of Stats, which gives him a final CHEWS+ number.
   103. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: February 09, 2018 at 05:49 PM (#5622800)
Yes, that's correct. JAWS-like, but also Hall-Rating-like with a dash of my special sauce. One of the big things I'm learning in doing this new round of MLEs is that the Dick Redding fans out there are onto something. Though not a guarantee, it is a strong likelihood that I'm going to include him on my ballot. He appears to me like a superior candidate than Hilton Smith.

One thing, though. Redding couldn't hit the floor if he fell out of bed. Doesn't end up mattering much, but, for a Negro Leagues pitcher, it's fairly unusual. I'll be setting his MLEs out for your review later in the year, probably late Spring/early summer.
   104. Kiko Sakata Posted: April 20, 2018 at 10:09 PM (#5657342)
I thought maybe it was time to get a bit more active here and maybe activate this thread a bit.

(note: I didn't actually see this thread on the HOM main page; I got here by clicking the 2018 Discussion Thread and changing "2018" to "2019" in the link name.)

I've been busy with other things lately, including my second book, which I decided to self-publish on Amazon, where it's available in either paperback or for the Kindle (I don't know what the deal is with my first book not having a Kindle version - sorry to those of you who asked for one). Here's an article describing my new book for anybody interested - it looks at the top 150 players (based on my player won-lost records) for the first 50 years since MLB expansion.

Anyway, some thoughts on the 2019 ballot. First, big thanks to Dr. Chaleeko for his new MLE numbers. I have not had a chance to fully absorb them although I feel more comfortable that Ben Taylor will make my ballot. I'm also inclined to give a closer look to Dick Redding and maybe Bus Clarkson. And I need to read through Dr. C's posts on his website more systematically to see who else I might need to look more closely at.

Here's what spits out of my system at the present moment. This only includes guys whose careers fall in the years covered by Retrosheet - basically, 1925 - 2017, with some games missing before 1941.

1. Mariano Rivera
2. Roy Halladay - Mariano and Roy are a clear 1-2; I could see flipping them, though.
3. Tommy John
4. Jorge Posada
5. Andy Pettitte
6. Vern Stephens
7. Dizzy Dean - I'm missing some games during his prime seasons, so may be inclined to dig a little deeper into his numbers
8. Dwight Gooden - I mentioned on the previous page - the fact that my pHOM would have a LOT more pitchers really shows up in this ballot, which is excessively pitcher-heavy - perhaps too much so
9. Jeff Kent
10. Orel Hershiser
11. Johan Santana
12. Luis Tiant - that's 9 pitchers in my first 12
13. Toby Harrah - without adjustments, I'm pretty sure we're down to the point where guys from outside the years of my system will push everybody from here down off my ballot
14. Jim Kaat
15. Dave Concepcion
16. Roy Oswalt
17. Schoolboy Rowe - same caveat as Dizzy Dean (and Rowe's longtime teammate who gets more love here in HOM-land - Tommy Bridges)
18. Gil Hodges
19. Curt Simmons - honestly, I'm as surprised as you are
20. Lance Berkman
21. Bert Campaneris
22. David Wells - this one surprises me a bit too (or did the first time I saw him pop up fairly high on one of these lists - he's in my book)
23. Dennis Martinez - I zero out negative WOPA and WORL numbers, which I think may be overly generous to Martinez, who had a couple of really bad seasons in what should have been his prime that I'm not dinging him for.
24. Darryl Strawberry - speaking of positional balance, I have only 2 OF in my top 25, basically for the same reason I have 17 pitchers - I think the HOM has way too few P and offsettingly, too many OF
25. Dutch Leonard (the one who pitched from 1933 - 1953)

Retrosheet should do another release in June. As of now, I'm sure this will include deduced games for 1940 - we're finished with them. It might also include deduced games for 1939 - we're at Labor Day in deducing them. Dave Smith suggested that he's hoping to release the missing seasons back to at least 1921 and possibly 1920. So, some of these numbers may change later in the year and some earlier players may bubble up as I get more data on them.

Guys I'm particularly interested in seeing what additional data may tell us would include Wally Schang, Kiki Cuyler, Urban Shocker, Dave Bancroft, maybe Pie Traynor. And we'll see who else might pop out. I'll still be missing a lot of the careers of Schang and Bancroft, who began their careers in the Deadball Era. So, it may take a few more years for Retrosheet to get back to their rookie seasons.

I'm also leaning toward including Johnny Evers on my ballot this year based on the discussion we had on him near the end of the last page of this thread.

Okay, mostly this was an excuse to mention my new book to y'all. But I am hoping to dig into putting this ballot together over the next few weeks, so I thought it'd be good to organize my current thoughts.
   105. Jaack Posted: April 21, 2018 at 11:10 AM (#5657476)
Taking a look at your ballot Kiko, what's your thought process for Hodges over Berkman?

I have their careers as pretty similar except that Berkman was just a substantially better hitter. I don't see how Hodges can make up the gap in hitting on his relatively advantages (slightly longer career, a bit better in the field).
   106. Kiko Sakata Posted: April 21, 2018 at 06:31 PM (#5657692)
Taking a look at your ballot Kiko, what's your thought process for Hodges over Berkman?

Positional averages.

Gil Hodges was the best first basemen of the 1950s - with the caveat that this is because the better hitters were playing more important fielding positions: Stan Musial, for example, would have crushed Hodges in value if he'd just been an everyday first baseman for the entire decade.

I calculate positional averages empirically every season. This can lead to quirks. Gil Hodges' best season was probably 1952 or 1953. In 1953, first basemen had a lower overall winning percentage than third basemen or any of the three outfield positions.

Berkman kind of suffers from the same thing in reverse. He played in an era where there were a ton of good to pretty good first basemen and corner outfielders - think guys like John Olerud, Carlos Delgado, Moises Alou, Greg Vaughn, to name a few guys who weren't as good as Berkman and don't show up in my (or many other peoples') consideration sets, but were better than the non-Hodges, non-Musial first basemen of the 1950s (Mickey Vernon, Ted Kluszewski, Earl Torgeson, et al.).

So, Hodges' positional average in 1953 is .514 which is low for a first baseman in a non-DH league. For his career, Hodges' positional average is .518. Berkman's positional average in his best season (2008) is .524 (also as a first baseman). For his career, Berkman's positional average is slightly greater than Hodges' (.520) despite Berkman having played a lot of outfield (including a couple of seasons' worth of games in center field).

The numbers in #104 just fall out of my system. So, I'm not necessarily defending it so much as explaining it. I go back and forth on whether it's a fair way to rate Hodges and Berkman. If you dropped Berkman's positional average (and his replacement level, which is keyed off of positional average) by, say 0.01 (the gap between he and Hodges in 1953/2008), that would give Berkman an additional 2.4 WOPA and WORL (1% of his career pWins, which were about 240) and I'm pretty sure would push Berkman ahead of Hodges (you'd get the same effect by raising Hodges' positional averages by .01, which probably would make more sense as an adjustment).

My system also really likes Gil Hodges' fielding and he looks a good bit better in context (pWins) than out of context (eWins) although the latter is also true of Berkman, just a little less so (and my system doesn't HATE Berkman's fielding; it just sees him as average). But mostly it's the positional averages.
   107. Jaack Posted: April 22, 2018 at 01:11 PM (#5657983)
Hmmm... would it possible to do your positional adjustments treating 1B/LF/RF as one position? It seems like the best of the bat first players in Hodges' era were in corner OF as opposed to 1B.

If Ted Williams or Ralph Kiner had played a lot of 1B in the 50s (not a stretch in anyway) I'd guess Hodges would look worse despite no change in his own value. The weakness of 1B in the 50s doesn't seem to be a institutional issue like the weakness of shortstops in the 60s or 3B in the 20s.
   108. Kiko Sakata Posted: April 22, 2018 at 02:49 PM (#5658020)
That makes some sense Jaack. The 1950s were an odd time. There are several years where CF has a higher positional average than LF or RF because outside of Williams and Musial, the best hitting outfielders all tended to be center fielders - Mays, Mantle, Snider, Doby. The 1950s also see a bit of a quirk at catcher with Berra and Campanella. With 16 teams, 1 or 2 or 3 guys can really throw things off (I use means, not medians - I could try to shift to medians, but I'm not entirely sure how to do that taking into account backups in a way that maintains my ties to actual wins).

In some theoretical sense, the replacement pool for a position includes everybody at a defensive position higher along the spectrum (i.e., a more valuable defensive position). So, Eddie Mathews and Willie Mays and Ralph Kiner and Ted Williams and even Yogi Berra are potential first basemen. While Gil Hodges is not so much a potential third baseman or center fielder (although from what I've read, Hodges himself could have probably been a decent 3B).

One thing I've definitely thought about was trying to smooth out the positional averages, either use averages across all seasons I calculate or even do something like 10-year moving averages to allow for some shifting but of a more gradual nature. That makes all the sense in the world to me in calculating eWOPA and eWORL. But for pWOPA and pWORL, where I'm tying to actual wins, part of me feels like single-season empirical averages is the obvious "right" answer. The key to a team winning is to be better than its opposition on a position-by-position basis. One of the advantages of the Dodgers of the 1950s was that they were better than everybody else at first base (and second base and catcher and shortstop and, except for the Giants in the NL, in center field).

This is on my list of things I want to play around with. Maybe I'll push it up toward the top of the list.
   109. Kiko Sakata Posted: April 22, 2018 at 02:54 PM (#5658022)
Actually, thinking about it, I think I know theoretically how I'd shift to medians. I'm just not entirely sure how to write the program to do it. But that may be the direction to go here.
   110. Bleed the Freak Posted: April 23, 2018 at 08:35 PM (#5658757)
Thanks for posting Kiko, I'm in the process of folding in your updates from new Retrosheet data and p/e wins.

Maybe I will have something soon to discuss, biggest winners and losers in the old vs new, etc.

I don't see how you are getting Concepcion > Campaneris, although reviewing your numbers, I see them as close but a flip the other direction?

I am getting Rowe and Leonard much lower than you have him reviewing your W-L records, and that's with extrapolating for missing games, and Simmons a bit lower.

Other guys I see doing quite well in your recent update, from your raw figures, do you adjust 20/30s OF lower?
Kiki Cuyler (still missing a couple of years)
Tommy Henrich (Even with moderate WWII credit)
Bob Johnson (minor MLE credit)

Sammy Sosa
Vladimir Guerrero
Larry Jackson
Don Newcombe (although quantifying his non-MLB career is prickly)
Andruw Jones
Dolf Luque (how do you view his Negro league career/integration credit)
Dale Murphy
Johnny Pesky (with peak/prime MLE/WWII credit)

A big glut starts to form after this that includes the guys you show in your top 25, sans Rowe, Simmons, and Leonard
   111. Kiko Sakata Posted: April 24, 2018 at 02:31 PM (#5659183)
I don't see how you are getting Concepcion > Campaneris, although reviewing your numbers, I see them as close but a flip the other direction?

I tend to see Concepcion, Campaneris, and Toby Harrah pretty similar in my system. By pWins, they go Concepcion, Campaneris, Harrah; by eWins, I think they go exactly the reverse. Basically, Harrah's the best hitter, but worst fielder and played the least SS. Campaneris is the best baserunner; Concepcion is the best fielder. I'm pretty sure that I could tweak my weights in such a way to put those three in whichever order I'd like. So it's entirely possible that I'll change my mind by the time actual voting rolls around. But one of the things that I like about my system is that it's comprehensive enough that it doesn't automatically spit out a single set of "right" answers: it's perfectly reasonable to me to look at the numbers and declare Campaneris clearly better than Concepcion.

Speaking of tweaking my weights, I need to re-evaluate my weights, because I think I may want to try to get a few more outfielders closer to my ballot - probably at the expense of fewer pitchers. I think for the most part you've identified the outfielders who my system likes - although I would add Darryl Strawberry. Actually, another guy who popped up in the top 150 list I did for my book who really surprised me was Jose Canseco (he's #102; Strawberry is #82 in my Top 150 from 1961 - 2010). I think the weights I used there ended up being pretty peak-heavy and both Strawberry and Canseco had pretty strong peaks in the late 1980s (which was also a pretty low run-scoring environment relative to what came later, which I think masks some of their value). Anyway, I may re-work my weights somewhat and end up with a list that's a bit less pitcher-heavy.

Another thing that I have not done is work out WWII credit. I'm deducting value for players who played in the war years (which hurts Bob Johnson, for example), but I'm not giving extra credit to guys who are missing seasons there. At this point, I think the only two players for whom it might matter would be Henrich and Pesky (I've looked at Rizzuto and he's too far down in my system to be helped enough to put him on-ballot). But I should definitely try to figure out exactly how much they would benefit.

Cuyler should get an automatic re-evaluation when I incorporate Retrosheet's summer release. And, as I said, I still need to figure out where to fit Negro Leaguers and pre-1925 players (Schang, Shocker?, Evers?) into my consideration set / ballot.
   112. DL from MN Posted: April 25, 2018 at 10:24 AM (#5659797)
Look at WWI credit in addition to WWII credit. Urban Shocker gets WWI credit from me.
   113. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: April 27, 2018 at 01:04 PM (#5661662)
Just an FYI that Sammy Bankhead is worth your review. The MLE I’ve worked up paints a strong picture of his career value, and next week you’ll see that Bankhead is as strong a candidate as Buster Clarkson. There are many others who are worth a new look as well but because Bankhead’s discussion page was thinly populated, it seemed important to mention.

Generally, I’m about halfway through my position by position MLEs. There are a number of candidates whose cases merit a lengthy review. Either my MLEs are poorly calibrated (possible!), the NLDB stats paint a different picture than previous stats had, and/or our previous MLEs and qualitative assessments weren’t quite accurate. All those things are possible and even likely. We have much more and better info now, after all. PS: Gary Ashwill should win the Nobel Prize or something.

I’m not looking right at my numbers this second, but OTTOMH in addition to Bankhead, we may want to look closely at Taylor, Redding, Newcombe, Byrd, Dandridge, Serrell, Marv Williams, Marrero, Hilton Smith, Pettus, Silvio Garcia, maybe Rev Cannady, maybe Carlos Moran, maybe Julian Castillo. That’s before we even look at the outfield and half the remaining pitchers.

So I just want to say this because we are going to need to have a robust discussion of these Negro Leagues stars, and there are not only allvthe questions about the Negro Leagues in general, ther s also going to be questions about fairness to certain eras and positions.
   114. theorioleway Posted: May 16, 2018 at 11:22 PM (#5673958)
Dr. Chaleeko - thanks for your work on this - it's really great stuff! I'm looking forward to see how the baserunning adjustments work out. Did I miss Perucho Cepeda in all that you've done, is he still coming, or is there just not enough info on him?

In regards to your last paragraph - I feel like you posted before your calculations on how many players should be inducted per era - can you remind me where you posted that?

Thanks again!
   115. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: May 17, 2018 at 05:44 PM (#5674572)

Somewhere in the last three years. Prolly in the discussion thread not the ballot.
   116. Bleed the Freak Posted: May 20, 2018 at 11:30 AM (#5675946)
Oriole, 2018 ballot discussion thread, posts 261 and 264 look at positional and era balances:

261. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 03, 2017 at 01:48 PM (#5585129)
I've updated my position counts for the HOM. It now includes all appearances data from the NLDB, as well as some from select players' minor leagues time (Campy, Jackie, Irvin, Grant, Minoso, and Trouppe). I've seen a couple different ways that people prefer to assess position, so here's a few ways we could look at it. The totals below are all rounded.

PRIMARY = The position the guy played the most (i.e.: Ernie Banks is at 1B)
SUM ALL = The sum across all HOMers at every position of the percentage of appearances (i.e.: Ernie Banks counts 51% toward 1B, 45% toward SS, 3% toward 3B, and 1% toward LF)
SUM 33%: Similar to SUM ALL but only counting positions where a player made at least 33% of his appearances (i.e. Banks only counts 51% toward 1B, 45% toward SS, and everything else is ignored)
SUM 25%: Ditto but with a 25% threshold

PRIMARY 20 29 22 17 26 24 25 24 3 69 4
SUM ALL 18 29 22 20 23 27 26 24 5 58 12
SUM 33% 17 23 20 15 21 20 21 18 2 57 4
SUM 25% 18 24 20 16 22 22 21 18 2 57 6
AVERAGE 18 26 21 17 23 23 23 21 3 60 6

Based on any of these means of reckoning position, we remain well short at catcher and third base, and mildly so at second base. If we were to elect Chipper, Rolen, and Thome as three of our four, which seems pretty likely, it would have a very positive effect at 3B, of course. Here's how it would play out by each of the four methods above:
-PRIMARY: Adds 2 3Bs, total of 19 3Bs
-SUM ALL: Adds 2.02, total of 22
-SUM 33%: Adds 1.82, total of 16 (rounding error, goes from 14.6 to 16.4)
-SUM 25%: Adds 1.82, total of 18

I've also now updated my figures for comparing eras to one another. What I do is for every season, I determine what percentage of players' careers fell into that season. Then, I compare that to a theoretical "ideally balanced" HOM in which ease season has representation in proportion to the number of team-seasons played that year vs the number of team-seasons in all of history. But I also back out some career percentages from this theoretically balanced figure from recent seasons to account for the fact that some HOMers are still playing now. I base that on active players who already have a very strong chance (IMO). Finally, I subtract the actual career percentages that we've elected from the theoretically balanced figure to determine whether a given season are over or under the theoretical balance. Once that's done, I gang together groups of seasons that have a representation trend. Here's what those look like.

1871-1875: -0.90 vs theoretical balance, 83% of theoretical balance
1876-1890: +0.98, 105%
1891-1908: +6.04, 123%
1909-1921: -2.64, 89%
1922-1942: +9.46, 122%
1943-1945: -2.39, 60%
1946-1960: +3.54, 114%
1961-1968: -0.61, 96%
1969-1990: -9.28, 84%
===includes allowances for not-yet-eligible players===
1991-1998: -1.59, 92%
1999-2008: -1.02, 92%
2009-2011: -1.28, 24%
   117. DL from MN Posted: May 21, 2018 at 10:12 AM (#5676337)
Thanks for reposting. "Need a catcher" lines up really well with "Need a player from 1909-1921" for Wally Schang. I also think the past elections have us short on pitchers.
   118. Kiko Sakata Posted: May 22, 2018 at 09:35 PM (#5677736)
A few semi-random comments (all related to the 2019 Hall-of-Merit ballot, so not entirely random).

Thank you very much, Dr. C. I love the new work on Negro Leaguers. I could very easily see myself including 3 - 5 Negro Leaguers on my next ballot (at this point, I'd say Ben Taylor and Bus Clarkson will definitely be on my ballot, just not sure how high yet and who might join them).

Returning to my conversation with Jaack in #105 - #107, I took a look at what would happen if I shifted my positional averages from means to medians and, as best I can tell, at least for the years I examined (which were focused specifically on Gil Hodges), the answer is, "Nothing; it barely changes anything." There's still a case to be made that positional averages should be "smoothed" by perhaps averaging across multiple seasons. For pWins, which tie to team wins, I think what I do is correct: tie to actual results within the specific season, if we're interested in actual wins, we should look at actual results. But for eWins, it may make sense to do some kind of multi-year average. That said, I think if your result is suggesting that the average third baseman is above average (as, for example, BB-Ref's WAA says for the 1970s) then you're probably doing it wrong.

Looking at the weights I used in #104, I modified them for two reasons. First, I adjusted them to tie to what I did in my newest book, Baseball Player Won-Lost Records: 150 Players, 50 Years. That still leaves the problem that I pointed out in #104 - it produces an EXTREMELY pitcher-heavy ballot, because my pHOM would probably have an additional 20-25 pitchers who would replace 20-25 first basemen and outfielders, mostly. So, for example, I think Sammy Sosa is a perfectly cromulent HOMer, and he'd probably be in the lower levels of my personal HOM (he's #146 in my top 150 players from 1961 - 2010 in my book), but he ends up below 20 or 30 pitchers who I would have had in my personal Hall of Merit years ago, but who are still hanging around taking up space on my ballot - most prominently Tommy John (who turns 75 today - Happy Birthday!), but also Dwight Gooden, Orel Hershiser, and several more. I don't REALLY want to vote for 12 pitchers on my 15-player ballot, so I bumped down pitcher values by about 10% just to let a few non-pitchers bubble up. To be perfectly honest, I'm not sure if this falls entirely within the spirit of the HOM rules. So, if somebody objects and says, "No, no, you really should vote for 12 pitchers" I might do so.

Anyway, here's what I came up with for players who fall entirely within my system (since 1925, with some data extrapolated between 1925 and 1940). Rivera and Halladay are a clear top 2, with the order debatable, I think. Other top pitchers who show up, then, include:

Tommy John (really, guys, he was great; y'all need to jump on the Tommy John bandwagon)
Dizzy Dean (he will, admittedly, only appeal to peak voters; I try to think of myself as open-minded on that topic - Tommy John is mostly a career candidate, after all - although he also had an excellent extended prime)
Dwight Gooden
Andy Pettitte
Johan Santana
Luis Tiant
Orel Hershiser

All of these guys seem well qualified for the HOM and I'd kind of like to include them all, but I suspect space considerations will bump at least one or two of them off the end of the ballot. You can tweak the weights to get these guys probably in whatever order you'd like depending on how you feel about pWins vs. eWins and career vs. prime vs. peak.

Non-pitchers who show up well in my latest weighting (since 1925 with no additional credit for missing time):

Jorge Posada
Vern Stephens
Jeff Kent
Dave Concepcion
Darryl Strawberry
Gil Hodges
Lance Berkman
Bert Campaneris
Toby Harrah
Andruw Jones

Again, I'd be fine with all of these guys in the Hall of Merit, but almost certainly won't have room for all of them on my ballot.

Finally, I modified one of the player pages on my website, the Value Decomposition table. I wrote a little article about it here.

Basically, I added a table at the end of this page that breaks down my "key stat" (the stat in my link above with the various weights) by season. The first link in the last paragraph is to Tommy Henrich, who is missing 3 seasons due to World War II. It's a little hard to know how much credit to give him for those seasons. His years immediately before and after (1942, 1946) were okay, but not great, whereas his 1941 and 1947 seasons were two of the top three seasons of Henrich's career. If you just take a simple average of those four years, that'd be a key stat of 17 per season, times 3 would bump him up from a "Key Stat" of 140 to 191, which would put him about even with Jorge Posada as the top non-pitcher on my ballot. I'm not sure I want to go that high, but certainly that suggests that Tommy Henrich is a definite candidate in my system.

Other guys who are worth looking at this table for to try to fill in some gaps in my data would include Kiki Cuyler, Urban Shocker, maybe Johnny Pesky (I think you'd have to be very generous w/ WWII credit to get him on-ballot), perhaps Pie Traynor to address era and positional issues (although I don't see enough there in the seasons that I have), and, since I think he's a required disclosure, here's Phil Rizzuto.

For now, this only works on the default weights, but I thought people might still find it useful. I'm also going to try to modify my player pages either tonight or in the next couple of days to make missing seasons more obvious for people who want to try to eyeball their own missing-game credits.

I think that's all for now. I'll wait until Dr. C. finishes his Negro League MLEs before I comment on them. And I'll probably wait until after Retrosheet's June/July release before talking about players who pre-date my system, just to see if the next Retrosheet release picks up any more seasons for any of them.
   119. Kiko Sakata Posted: May 29, 2018 at 02:19 PM (#5681462)
Hi, guys, I have a self-serving request for which I apologize if anybody finds it tacky.

At least two or three people on this side mentioned that they were hoping to buy my (first) book on the Kindle but it hasn't been released in that version yet. I talked to McFarland about this and their story is that they gave the relevant file(s) to Amazon and it's the latter's decision when to make the Kindle version of a book available. I don't understand what goes into this, but on the Amazon page for the book - here - about halfway down the page on the right is a little box that says "Tell the Publisher! I'd like to read this book on Kindle". If you have a minute, could some of y'all please click through to the page and click there? Hopefully that will lead to the Kindle version of the book being released.

Thanks! And again, my apologies for the self-serving tackiness of this post.
   120. Howie Menckel Posted: May 29, 2018 at 02:55 PM (#5681516)
in case anyone wonders, I saw no 'catch' there

I clicked the button, and a "thank you" etc came on the screen. ballgame over
   121. Bleed the Freak Posted: May 29, 2018 at 08:23 PM (#5681782)
I don't own a kindle, but clicked and had the same result as Howie:

"Thank you for requesting Player Won-Lost Records in Baseball: Measuring Performance in Context by Tom Thress (Author) in Kindle Edition. Our goal is to make every title available for Kindle. We will pass your specific request on to the publisher."
Page 2 of 2 pages  < 1 2

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.



<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF


Thanks to
for his generous support.


You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

Most Meritorious Player: 1944 Discussion
(9 - 1:32pm, Jun 13)
Last: DL from MN

George Shively
(11 - 5:16pm, Jun 12)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Latin American Players and Pitchers Home Page
(76 - 5:15pm, Jun 12)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Most Meritorious Player: 1943 Results
(7 - 6:46pm, Jun 08)
Last: Chris Fluit

Most Meritorious Player: 1943 Ballot
(15 - 4:05pm, Jun 06)
Last: DL from MN

Luis Aparicio
(70 - 9:21am, Jun 06)
Last: Bleed the Freak

Most Meritorious Player: 1943 Discussion
(13 - 10:45am, Jun 03)
Last: Chris Fluit

2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(121 - 8:23pm, May 29)
Last: Bleed the Freak

Don Newcombe
(107 - 1:22pm, May 24)
Last: . . . . . .

Hank Thompson
(20 - 9:02pm, May 09)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Artie Wilson
(47 - 8:58pm, May 09)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Most Meritorious Player: 1942 Results
(6 - 6:17pm, May 03)
Last: Chris Fluit

Silvio Garcia
(23 - 5:08pm, May 03)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Bus Clarkson
(233 - 5:06pm, May 03)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

Most Meritorious Player: 1942 Ballot
(13 - 4:02pm, May 02)
Last: DL from MN


Page rendered in 0.4145 seconds
41 querie(s) executed