bump

1.6, 1.8, 3.4, 8.2, 3.1, 1.2, 1.9, 5.2, 8.1, 5.3, 3.5, 5.3, 5.1, 2.0, 0.7, 0.4

two issues
1: he put up 3.1 WAR over 3 seasons(ages 34-36)- if he'd put up 10.0 over his age 33-37 seasons he would have cleared the HOM's magical 60.0 line

2: from 24-25 he put up 11.3, from 29-30 he put up 13.3- had he put up 12.0 over ages 26-27 (instead of 3.1) he would have sailed over the HOM's magical 60.0 line.

Clear example of someone with HOF/HOM "talent" who couldn't quite get all the pieces to add up IMHO

Pull out one of 1995 or 1996 and replace with another year like 1993 or 1998 and he's in I think... didn't happen though.

John Olerud comps nicely to Tony Perez. Similar profile. Olerud slightly better hitter, Perez adds value from his days at 3B, but I think Olerud was a better fielder at 1B, as far as I can tell and Perez played a little bit longer. Both well off my ballot, but in the consideration set.

Bill James, from his pay site:

In recent years it has been suggested that the Cy Young Award for Felix Hernandez or the Hall of Fame selection of Bert Blyleven show how far sabermetrics has come in winning general acceptance. Well, let me suggest that the near-unanimous rejection of John Olerud shows how far we haven’t come. If John Olerud had hit .324 in his career¹, I suggest, his value would have been considered self-evident, and people would think of him as a Hall of Famer. He would have scored about 50 less runs; he would have driven in about 70 more—which would have given him six hundred-RBI seasons, rather than three.

In my analysis, John Olerud rates as an obvious Hall of Famer.

He has Olerud's career won-lost record at 282-121.

Apparently, a big part of it is defense:

why [does] Olerud’s defense [rate] so well?

There is no easy answer; it is just that everything is positive. He committed 45 fewer errors in his career than a league-average first basemen. The third basemen and shortstops on his teams were charged with 58 fewer errors than expectation (adjusted for Olerud’s playing time.) His “arm rating”, based on an estimate of the number of plays he initiated at other bases, is very good. His teams were very good defensively, and our system assumes that if a team is good defensively, then the individuals on the team must receive credit for that. Olerud does not rate as the equal of Keith Hernandez, but he does rank as a very, very good defensive first baseman.

¹ i.e., if Olerud had had 500 fewer walks and 325 more singles in 325 more at-bats.

In my analysis, John Olerud rates as an obvious Hall of Famer.

I don't know about obvious, but I think he's a much stronger candidate than the consensus seems to, either in HoF or HoM voting. I've just started thinking about a ballot for next year, but at first glance I could see Olerud near the top.