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, January 28, 2008

Ranking Hall of Merit players not in the Hall of Fame: Group 2, careers span 1943-87

Group 2 is currently under jurisdiction of the Veterans Committee, those players whose career spanned 1943-1987

Dick Allen (1983)
Ken Boyer (1991)
Darrell Evans (1995)
Bill Freehan (1985)
Bobby Grich (1992)
Minnie Minoso (1987)
Graig Nettles (2006)
Billy Pierce (1987)
Ron Santo (1980)
Ted Simmons (1994)
Joe Torre (1984)
Jimmy Wynn (1996)

Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 12:24 AM | 89 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 12:35 AM (#2677200)
Interesting that all of these guys were elected 1980 or later by us. A player who started in 1943, and retired in 1960 would have been on the ballot from 1966, are we saying the Hall got pretty much everyone from the 1950s, except Minoso and Pierce?
   2. Rafael Bellylard: Built like a Panda. Posted: January 28, 2008 at 02:43 AM (#2677279)
And only one pitcher in this group.
   3. Chris Cobb Posted: January 28, 2008 at 03:03 AM (#2677283)
Here's a quick prelim to get the ball rolling. This group is much weaker than the BBWAA Jurisdiction Ballot. Only Grich and Santo are comparable to the top half of our previous ballot. Then there is a set of deserving but undistinguished HoMers, and then at the end some of the weakest of the HoM’s inductees. Fully half of this cohort I would rank below everyone in the BBWAA cohort.

1) Bobby Grich – 344. About even with Tim Raines in overall value, but even more woefully underrated.
2) Ron Santo – 295. At least there’s a vigorous campaign on his behalf. Very deserving. I expect Grich and Santo will be the Blyleven/Raines of this ballot, with Allen grabbing a few first-place votes, like McGwire.

3) Dick Allen – 277. Deadly hitter, but of questionable value otherwise.
4) Darrell Evans – 275. Long, valuable career, with a few great seasons early, followed by a deep trough and a long plateau.
5) Ted Simmons – 270. Great hitting catcher, with ok defense but terrible baserunning. My placement of him now is quite a bit lower than it was before I brought in Dan R’s numbers, which include baserunning.
6) Graig Nettles – 254. Best fielding third baseman of his generation, and a good bat.

7) Billy Pierce – 244. In the Saberhagen/Stieb category of HoM pitchers: overlooked, deserving, but in the lower tier of the HoM.
8) Joe Torre – 236. See Simmons, but with even better bat and worse defense. Drops significantly with addition of Dan R’s WAR to my rankings. However, multi-position players are often affected strangely in that system, so I am putting Torre a bit higher than the numbers warrant until I can see clearly how, if at all, his WAR is affected by his multi-positionality.
9) Minnie Minoso – 241. Minoso and Wynn are right on the borderline. Their careers weren’t short, but they weren’t especially long. Their peaks were high, but not extremely high.
10) Jimmy Wynn – 240.
11) Ken Boyer – 232. His peak would have been HoM-worthy if it had lasted a couple of more years. As it is, he is slightly below my in-out line. The Coop could do a whole lot worse than induct him, as he wouldn’t lower their standards, but it would be ridiculous to induct him before Santo or Nettles, both of whom were superior players at the same underrepresented position.
12) Bill Freehan – 223. Adjusting for baserunning in Dan R’s WAR docks Freehan as it does Simmons and Torre, but as he was borderline to begin with, the baserunning deduction drops him well below the in-out line. As with Boyer, the advice to the Coop on Freehan should be: Simmons and Torre first!
   4. Paul Wendt Posted: January 28, 2008 at 03:41 AM (#2677314)
by fielding position

Minoso  Wynn --


Santo   --   Grich   Allen
Evans
Nettles
Boyer


Pierce


Simmons
Torre
Freehan 
   5. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 06:15 AM (#2677394)
Chris Cobb--to be clear, my system has problems with players who played multiple positions in the same season (particularly specific combinations of positions); guys who switch positions *between* seasons don't cause any trouble. I can manually produce corrected versions of any specific players who incur this problem--would you like a fixed version of Torre? Also, for everyone else--remember that players in my system are always compared to replacement level *at that position.* So if catchers are being docked for baserunning, it's because they're below-average baserunners *for a catcher*, not below-average baserunners overall. Finally, Chris, you do have to apply some subjective catcher bonus to my numbers or else you will only have 2-3 catchers in your PHoM. Judging by the placement of Simmons, it seems that you are doing this correctly.
   6. karlmagnus Posted: January 28, 2008 at 02:28 PM (#2677479)
I think there's more variabilty on this list than on the previous; 1-3 are comparable on each, but 10-12 on this are below everybody on the previous one. Not sure why this should be. Here's list, with at-the-time ballot placements -- only Evans looked a bit low where he was originally

1. Ted Simmons 1994 3rd

2. Dick Allen 1983 7th

3. Joe Torre 1984 7th

4. Bobby Grich 1992 9th

5. Ron Santo1980 12th

6. Billy Pierce 1987 16th

7. Darrell Evans 1995 67th

8. Minnie Minoso 1987 20th

9. Ken Boyer 1991 38th

10. Bill Freehan 1985 47th

11. Graig Nettles 2006 89th

12. Jimmy Wynn 1996 OFF
   7. Rusty Priske Posted: January 28, 2008 at 02:39 PM (#2677484)
Very prelim, just based on my old notes...

1. Minnie Minoso
2. Jimmy Wynn
3. Ken Boyer
4. Ron Santo
5. Darrell Evans
6. Graig Nettles
7. Ted Simmons
8. Dick Allen
9. Joe Torre
10. Bobby Grich
11. Bill Freehan
12. Billy Pierce

All are in my PHoM except Pierce.
   8. sunnyday2 Posted: January 28, 2008 at 02:49 PM (#2677488)
Prelim

I think it's going to change, that's why they call it a prelim. Though I am pretty comfortable with the groups. The changes will be within groups.

Easy HoM/HoFers

1. Santo--was #4 on my ballot the year he was elected behind Kaline, Dobie Moore and Kiner
2. Grich--was #2 behind Seaver and ahead of Fingers
3. Minoso--#11, one of history's most under-rated players, even by me

Solid Citizens

4. Simmons--#3 behind Niekro and Roush, ahead of Keller
5. Allen--#2 between Moore and Kiner, probably could rank higher
6. Freehan--#4 after Moore, Waddell and Roush and ahead of Browning
7. Torre--#10 after Moore, Kiner, Waddell, Brooksie, Freehan, Doyle, Roush, Browning and Fox
8. J. Wynn--#27 but was re-eval and made PHoM later on

The Borderline Runs Directly Through It

9. Da. Evans--#18, made PHoM later on

Not Good (Choices)

10. Boyer--#22, not PHoM
11. Pierce--#36, not PHoM, Don Newcombe is the obvious choice of that cohort
12. Nettles--honorable mention (not top 50), though I would now agree that is too low. I think he is at least the best of this grouping. Not quite as good as Da. Evans, who is the essence of borderline. There's a long line at the PHoM door ahead of him. But Boyer makes Nettles look like a wonderful choice.
   9. sunnyday2 Posted: January 28, 2008 at 03:00 PM (#2677490)
More divergence of opinion so far than I woulda thought though the composite is not too much of a surprise. I wouldn't do this if it were the real ballot. So far:

Santo

(gap)

Grich--thought he'd be closer to Santo
Simmons--thought he'd be closer to Torre
Allen

(small gap)

Minoso--my ballot probably skews him upward at this point

(gap)

Evans
Torre

(gap)

Wynn--thought he'd be higher though this is about where I have him
Boyer
Nettles
Pierce
Freehan
   10. andrew siegel Posted: January 28, 2008 at 03:28 PM (#2677516)
For now:

(1) Grich
(2) Santo

(3) Allen

(4) Simmons
(5) Torre

(6) Minoso
(7) Evans
(8) Pierce
(9) Wynn

(10) Boyer
(11) Freehan

(12) Nettles
   11. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 04:14 PM (#2677546)
My values, and ballot:

Inner circle (roughly top 20% of the HoM, $270M+): Nobody

Elite (roughly 50th-80th percentile, $200-$270M):

1. Bobby Grich, $215M. Just an extraordinary player--why is there so much more of a bandwagon around Santo than Grich? A 125 OPS+ second baseman who's one of the best fielders evar at his position (zeroing out below-average seasons, DRA has him as the 7th-best fielding MLB 2B since 1893)? Here is where I have him ranked among position players in the AL, by year: 1972 #4, 1973 #1 (trusting the numbers that his defense was historically great that year), 1974 #2, 1975 #3, 1976 #1 (tied with Brett and Nettles), 1977 hurt, 1978 #18, 1979 #6, 1980 #17, 1981 #3 (in an amazing keystone combo with Rick Burleson), 1982 #25, 1983 #15. I mean, that is just an *amazing* run. #6 2B all-time (behind Hornsby, Collins, Lajoie, Morgan, Gehringer). I just can't find enough good things to say about this guy. A no-doubt superstar and perennial MVP candidate for a decade. I very strongly hope Grich emerges as the class of this group, and that our final ranking demonstrates that he is one of the absolute most egregious omissions from the Hall of Fame. Would the Grich skeptics please stand up for debate? Rusty, #10??

Imperfect but clear inductees (roughly 30th-50th percentile, $175-$200M):

2. Ron Santo, $193M. God peak from 1963-68, but only one other All-Star caliber year (1972). So phenomenally dominant for six straight years (Rank among NL position players: 1963 #7, 1964 #2 to Mays by a nose, 1965 #3, 1966 #1, 1967 #1, 1968 #7) that he is a no-brainer HoM selection, but can't stand up to Grich on long prime. Worth noting that DRA is not as impressed with Santo's fielding as FRAA and Fielding WS are, seeing him as more of a +10 guy at his peak than +15-+20. Then again, DRA does not yet have a park adjustment, and Wrigley was a hitters' paradise in those days, so that might have something to do with it.

3. Dick Allen, $183M. Best hitter not in the Hall of Fame who didn't bet on baseball. The player everyone thinks Jim Rice was.

4. Ted Simmons, $182M. Astonishingly bad baserunner, zillions of DP's, even for a catcher. C replacement level was fairly high when he played (and it goes all the way up the distribution; think of all the great catchers of the era! Him, Bench, Fisk, Carter, Munson, Tenace...) His 1984 is one of the worst seasons by anyone in major league history. But, he's one of the best hitters evar at his position.

5. Darrell Evans, $183M. A 1B/3B like Allen, much worse hitter, much better fielder, much longer career. Tie broken by the doubt raised on these boards about the validity of his defensive stats (though DRA is very impressed with them as well).

Weak HoM'ers (roughly 15th-30th percentile, $160-$175M)

6. Saturnino Orestes Armas Arrieta Miñoso, $171M (including Negro League credit). Nice decade's long prime as a consistent high All-Star type player, with one season (1954) when he should have been the league MVP. Mix of skills, overall value, and career shape similar to Dwight Evans. Whoever let him attempt to steal bases should have been fired--cost his MLB teams 3.2 wins on the basepaths. League strength concerns bump him down a bit, but not $7M.

7. Graig Nettles, $164M. A defensive giant with a long career in a low-stdev era; low batting averages led him to be underrated.

Borderliners (bottom 15%, $150-$160M)

8. Jimmy Wynn, $158M. I'm not wild about him, but 5 years among the best players in his league and a handful of other All-Star seasons is a strong, if non-consecutive, prime.

9. Bill Freehan, $157M. Back-to-back terrific peak years, and 3-4 other All-Star seasons scattered in there. Seems pretty unimpressive, but the HoM standard for catchers has to be that low or there just won't be any catchers.

Not PHoM, below $150M

10. Ken Boyer, $148M
Ick. Superficially similar to Santo, whom he shared a league and position with for a bit, in that he only had 8 years as an above-average player (Santo had 9). To make the HoM with such a short career, you need a transcendent peak. While Santo had one, Boyer's was merely very good.

11. Billy Pierce, $141M. Again, would need a higher peak given the career length (his crazy ERA+ year was short on IP), or a longer career given the peak.

12. Joe Torre, $141M. Note to users of my system: Torre is one of those multi-position players that really crosses it up. He's definitely overrated in my public spreadsheet. Like Simmons, horrific baserunner and DP machine, even for a catcher. Unlike Simmons, was only half a catcher. 1971 doesn't look so hot after you plug in a Ryan Braun-esque -35 runs in the field per DRA. One of the worst players in the HoM--near Nellie Fox territory.
   12. DL from MN Posted: January 28, 2008 at 07:39 PM (#2677760)
I'm trying to assess which players are PHoM in this era that are unelected. Does the career have to start post-1943 or end post-1943 for consideration?
   13. baconears Posted: January 28, 2008 at 07:49 PM (#2677771)
Minnie Minoso and Santo definetely belong. Dwight Evans is borderline at best. Oh by the way I am pancakehead/wafflebrain and if you ban me agian it proves what cowards you are.
   14. Charter Member of the Jesus Melendez Fanclub Posted: January 28, 2008 at 08:00 PM (#2677782)
You will be banned again, but that's only because we have bets riding on whether your next persona will be fruitjuicenose or scrambledeyes.

Seriously...you were banned? For what? Making dumb jokes about the utility of ZIPS?
   15. DL from MN Posted: January 28, 2008 at 08:33 PM (#2677810)
Group 2 prelim

1) Bobby Grich (same neighborhood as Frisch, Yount, Cronin)
2) Ron Santo
3) Darrell Evans
4) Billy Pierce
5) Joe Torre
(Luis Tiant)
6) Ted Simmons
7) Graig Nettles
8) Bill Freehan
9) Dick Allen (value similar to Keith Hernandez)
(Norm Cash)
10) Minnie Minoso
11) Ken Boyer
12) Jim Wynn (not PHoM)

And yes, I'd like the "corrected" data for Torre before I post the final ballot.
   16. Mark Donelson Posted: January 28, 2008 at 10:12 PM (#2677885)
1. Dick Allen: I know, it's pretty much pure offense, but he's got one of the best peaks from a non-inner-circle player in my system. I'm still peaky enough that that matters.
2. Ron Santo: My system likes him a lot. Will look into the defense a bit more before the final ballot, though.
3. Bobby Grich: Neck and neck with Santo, perhaps will flip them in final ballot, given defensive differences. All three of these guys are close, in fact, and all are comfortably in.

4. Ted Simmons: In the lower echelon of HOM Cs, but not borderline, either.
5. Minnie Minoso: I had a hard time getting excited about him back at the time, but he's one of those remarkable-prime candidates I've come around on in more recent elections.

6. Joe Torre
7. Darrell Evans: I'm still weighing the defensive evaluations on both of these two. Having a hard time putting a lot of trust in any of them, so how I resolve that will make a lot of difference in where they end up. I'd have to buy that Evans was really THAT good and Torre was really THAT bad to move them too far from here, though.

8. Jimmy Wynn: Certainly borderline, but I think clearly on the right side of the line. Just enough peak.
9. Bill Freehan: I remember being more excited about him at the time, but that was probably just because it was a surprise to me that he was even this good. I don't doubt that he belongs, but he's also right near the line.

--my pHOM line right now--

10. Graig Nettles: He has to be all-forever defensively to make my pHOM cut, and I've been slowly coming to the conclusion that he was. Not quite in yet, but he's probably due to get in for me within another few elections.
11. Billy Pierce: Actually in my pHOM, but I think that may have been a mistake, in retrospect--I hadn't fully resolved my "WS isn't working for '50s pitchers" crisis back when he was elected, and overcompensated. I much prefer Saberhagen, and even Stieb.
12. Ken Boyer: I prefer the supershort-but-high-peak 3Bs to guys like Boyer, who never managed the peak I'm looking for.
   17. AJMcCringleberry Posted: January 28, 2008 at 10:53 PM (#2677906)
Seriously...you were banned? For what?

He was banned for trolling, I assume.
   18. AJMcCringleberry Posted: January 28, 2008 at 11:14 PM (#2677930)
Prelim

1. Santo
2. Simmons
3. Torre
4. Grich
5. Allen
6. Evans
7. Pierce
8. Freehan
9. Boyer
10. Wynn
11. Nettles
12. Minoso
   19. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 11:20 PM (#2677938)
Here is corrected Torre. I've included his percentage of games played at catcher so you can apply whatever catcher bonus to his numbers you see fit. He comes out to $141M using my consensus salary estimator, well below the HoM in/out line. The double plays take a real bite out of his offensive value, he only played 41% of his career as a catcher, and his 1971 MVP season is marred by atrocious fielding (which according to DRA is even worse than what I have down here).

TXBR is the total excluding his sub-replacement seasons.

Year SFrac  %C BWAA1 BRWA1 FWAA1  Rep1 WARP1 LgAdj BWAA2 BRWA2 FWAA2  Rep2 WARP2
1961  0.68 100
%  +0.7  -0.2  +0.0  -1.3  +1.8 0.962  +0.6  -0.2  +0.0  -1.2  +1.7
1962  0.36 100
%  +0.4  +0.0  +0.2  -0.8  +1.4 0.900  +0.4  +0.0  +0.2  -0.7  +1.3
1963  0.83  73
%  +2.4  -0.3  +0.1  -1.3  +3.6 0.942  +2.2  -0.3  +0.1  -1.3  +3.4
1964  0.96  58
%  +3.3  -0.2  -0.3  -1.3  +4.2 0.930  +3.1  -0.2  -0.3  -1.2  +3.9
1965  0.88  67
%  +3.2  -0.2  -0.2  -1.4  +4.2 0.937  +3.0  -0.2  -0.2  -1.3  +3.9
1966  0.91  74
%  +4.9  -0.2  +0.2  -1.4  +6.3 0.950  +4.7  -0.2  +0.2  -1.4  +6.0
1967  0.79  83
%  +1.8  -0.1  +0.0  -1.4  +3.2 0.947  +1.7  -0.1  +0.0  -1.3  +3.0
1968  0.70  75
%  +0.7  +0.0  +0.0  -1.1  +1.8 0.973  +0.7  +0.0  +0.0  -1.1  +1.8
1969  1.00  11
%  +2.9  +0.0  +0.9  -0.3  +4.1 0.914  +2.6  +0.0  +0.8  -0.3  +3.7
1970  1.02  55
%  +3.6  +0.0  -0.9  -1.8  +4.4 0.919  +3.3  +0.0  -0.9  -1.6  +4.0
1971  1.05  00
%  +6.9  +0.1  -1.8  -1.4  +6.5 0.940  +6.4  +0.1  -1.7  -1.3  +6.1
1972  0.95  00
%  +2.2  +0.1  -0.4  -1.1  +3.0 0.950  +2.1  +0.1  -0.4  -1.0  +2.8
1973  0.88  00
%  +1.7  +0.2  -0.3  -0.4  +2.0 0.948  +1.7  +0.2  -0.3  -0.4  +1.9
1974  0.89  00
%  +1.9  -0.2  -0.2  -0.2  +1.7 0.932  +1.7  -0.2  -0.1  -0.1  +1.6
1975  0.58  00
%  -1.0  -0.1  +0.4  -0.7  +0.0 0.936  -0.9  -0.1  +0.4  -0.6  +0.0
1976  0.50  00
%  +0.9  -0.2  +0.3  -0.1  +1.2 0.929  +0.9  -0.2  +0.3  -0.1  +1.1
1977  0.08  00
%  -0.6  +0.0  +0.0  -0.0  -0.6 0.972  -0.6  +0.0  +0.0  +0.0  -0.5
TOTL 13.06  41
% +35.9  -1.3  -1.9 -16.0 +48.7 0.938 +33.6  -1.3  -1.8 -15.0 +45.6
TXBR 12.40  43
% +37.5  -1.3  -2.2 -15.3 +49.3 0.938 +35.1  -1.2  -2.1 -14.4 +46.2
AVRG  1.00  41
%  +2.7  -0.1  -0.1  -1.2  +3.7 0.938  +2.6  -0.1  -0.1  -1.2  +3.5 
   20. Mike Green Posted: January 28, 2008 at 11:31 PM (#2677947)
Catcher defence is hard to evaluate. Rally has a chart on his stat website comparing SB/CS, WP, PB, Err, and pick-off rates to league averages for the retrosheet era. Curiously, Torre comes out at +1/150g and Simmons at -2/150g. Mind you, Torre had about 1/2 a career (900 games) there.

Grich and Santo seem to me to be the class of the field. Allen was the best hitter of the lot by a long shot, but he gave it away with the glove and on the basepaths, never mind in the clubhouse.
   21. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: January 28, 2008 at 11:41 PM (#2677960)
Allen wasn't a bad baserunner! He was a bad fielder, though.

Link to Rally's page?
   22. OCF Posted: January 29, 2008 at 12:16 AM (#2677985)
I prefer the supershort-but-high-peak 3Bs

For the record: Mark Donelson is a member of the Friends of Al Rosen. And he also votes for McGraw.
   23. DL from MN Posted: January 29, 2008 at 12:25 AM (#2677994)
Torre data doesn't change my placement, perhaps my catcher bonus is off also.
   24. Mark Donelson Posted: January 29, 2008 at 12:30 AM (#2677998)
For the record: Mark Donelson is a member of the Friends of Al Rosen. And he also votes for McGraw.

You say it like it's a bad thing. :)
   25. sunnyday2 Posted: January 29, 2008 at 12:33 AM (#2678001)
3. baconears Posted: January 28, 2008 at 01:49 PM (#2677771)
Minnie Minoso and Santo definetely belong. Dwight Evans is borderline at best. Oh by the way I am pancakehead/wafflebrain and if you ban me agian it proves what cowards you are.


I know that I always recommend that people who want to join a moderated forum should always broach the subject like this.
   26. Rafael Bellylard: Built like a Panda. Posted: January 29, 2008 at 12:33 AM (#2678002)
Prelim ballot...I'm pretty sure I'm going to twist a few of these names upon closer scrutiny:

1. Dick Allen: Just too much offense to ignore, even in a shortish career.
2. Ted Simmons: Too good a hitter at too tough a position to drop him much.
3. Minnie Minoso: With Negro League credit, he edges ahead of Grich.
4. Bobby Grich: I'd forgotten what a good player he was. Defense at 2B puts him ahead of Santo.
5. Ron Santo: I've not been on the Santo for HoF bandwagon, but he really was a wonderful player during his peak with enough career to be in the picture.
6. Billy Pierce: I rate him ahead of Stieb and Saberhagen, but just slightly.
7. Joe Torre: I have trouble rating him due to his multi-positional status. He's virtually tied with Freehan and Evans, so I'm going to give him the nod for his superior hitting.
8. Bill Freehan: I remember he hit a HR in the first AL game I ever saw. In spite of that, I'm not bumping him up.
9. Darrell Evans: As well as he did (when he did well), he had too many seasons that were subpar for a HoF'er. He was one of my favorite players when he was with the Giants. Of course, I seem to feel that way about a lot of past Giant 3B's (Hart, Gallagher, Mueller).
10. Jimmy Wynn: My system probably unfairly hurts him becuase he played at the same time as so many great OF's.
11. Clete Boyer: Neither he nor Nettles would make my ballot for the HoM. Boyer is way closer than Nettles, though.
12. Graig Nettles: His defense was superb, but it would have to be superhuman to get him within sniffing distance of the middle of this ballot.
   27. sunnyday2 Posted: January 29, 2008 at 12:38 AM (#2678007)
I personally think Graig Nettles was a lot better than Clete Boyer.
   28. OCF Posted: January 29, 2008 at 12:50 AM (#2678015)
You say it like it's a bad thing. :)

My thought processes: I saw that language you used, "supershort-but-high-peak" and thought this: either he's voting for Rosen or I don't know what he's talking about. So I had to look - and the simple explanation holds.
   29. Wes Parkers Mood (Mike Green) Posted: January 29, 2008 at 03:11 AM (#2678129)
DanR,

Rally's stat site is here:
http://home.comcast.net/~briankaat/statsite.html

Rally has also published valuable DP runs information here:
http://lanaheimangelfan.blogspot.com/
   30. jimd Posted: January 29, 2008 at 03:47 AM (#2678158)
I'm trying to assess which players are PHoM in this era that are unelected. Does the career have to start post-1943 or end post-1943 for consideration?

End in 1943 or later (if I'm reading the HOF writeup correctly).
   31. jimd Posted: January 29, 2008 at 04:02 AM (#2678170)
That should have said:

Began in 1943 or later (if I'm reading the HOF writeup correctly).
   32. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: January 29, 2008 at 01:21 PM (#2678294)
How do you figure Torre over Simmons, DL from MN?
   33. Mike Green Posted: January 29, 2008 at 04:58 PM (#2678408)
Rally's DP runs information suggests that Randolph's pivot on the DP (which everyone thought was good) was very, very good, and that he was 2nd behind Maz in DP runs during the retrosheet era, and far ahead of any other second baseman. The usual measures of defence often do not account for DP pivot. I don't know how that affects his rating vis a vis the others in Group 1, as he was by far the least of them with the bat.
   34. AROM Posted: January 29, 2008 at 05:36 PM (#2678459)
The fielding stats I did for THT were a range and error only measure, not including anything for DP's.

I think FRAA does include double plays, but only Davenport knows for sure.

I better start working on the article for part II. I've fixed some errors in the programming and refined the process, and Mazeroski now comes up at a little over 100 runs on range, and another 40 for DP's. As a HOM player though, he'd need to be about a +300 fielder to have the same overall value as the good hitting, good but not legendary fielding second basemen.
   35. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: January 29, 2008 at 05:46 PM (#2678483)
Willie Randolph isn't a 'good hitting' 2B himself? He had a career 104 OPS+. That's 'good' for a hitter, let alone a 2B in 1970s and 1980s.

Was over 100 every year from 1976-1987 except for 1981 and again in 1989 and 1991 (126 at age 36). He's the definition of a good-hitting 2B. He was also a career 74% base-stealer in a low offense environment (95 is his "AIR" factor on baseball-reference.com).
   36. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: January 29, 2008 at 05:47 PM (#2678487)
Also wanted to add that Randolph's career OBP was .373, compared to a league park adjusted average of .325.
   37. DL from MN Posted: January 29, 2008 at 05:58 PM (#2678506)
Torre ranks higher than Simmons using your WARP numbers (unless Simmons is wrong too).

Player BWAA BRWAA FWAA WAR
JoeTorre 34.2 -1.3 -2 46.2
Simmons 26.8 -2.9 -1 46
   38. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: January 29, 2008 at 06:06 PM (#2678517)
First, Simmons only does that poorly in my WARP if you hold his ghastly 1984 against him--it was one of the worst seasons in major league history, and he should have been benched. (His 1988 costs him a bit more too). That's why I post numbers excluding sub-replacement seasons, which would put Simmons at a healthier 49.2 WARP2.

But the big difference in my view is that Simmons played 70% of his games at C, and a much higher chunk still if you ignore his sub-replacement years, while Torre only played 41%. None of these guys would be near any of our PHoM's if it weren't for an appropriate catcher bonus, and I believe that catcher bonus should only be applied to games actually played at catcher. My equation is very simple: I take the raw salary (valuing sub-replacement years at 0), and multiply it by 1+.58C, where C is the percentage of games played that season at catcher. That elevates Simmons into no-brainer territory, and keeps Torre at the bottom of the pack. I suppose your mileage may vary.
   39. Mike Green Posted: January 29, 2008 at 06:16 PM (#2678529)
Joe #35/36,

I agree completely. Randolph was a good hitter, with the same balance of skills as Raines but pitched lower. I don't see the gaps at the bottom of group 1 really. If you tell me that Saberhagen or Stieb or Dawson or even Hernandez was more or less valuable than Randolph, I wouldn't argue.
   40. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: January 29, 2008 at 06:26 PM (#2678550)
I wasn't a big friend of Hernandez at the time, but I'll just say that if DRA is right that he was a +200 fielder, then he should be on the top half of everyone's ballot. That's a big if, I suppose.
   41. AROM Posted: January 29, 2008 at 07:10 PM (#2678611)
My stats had Hernandez as the top 1B, but at a little over +100 runs. The 200 seems unlikely to me. What does DRA say about Bill Buckner, especially later in his career?

FRAA also has Hernandez over 200 runs. It looks like FRAA gives too much credit for 1B assists, you can tell from the ratings Bill Buckner has. As a young player, his FRAA wasn't so good at first, but as he got older and hurt more often, he flips to the pitcher on every play, and racks up insane amounts of assists. FRAA has Buckner at +35 for the 85-86 seasons, which if seen by Red Sox fans probably causes their heads to explode.

I know these stats try to estimate unassisted putouts at the position but they seem to miss the mark in extreme cases.
   42. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: January 29, 2008 at 07:25 PM (#2678622)
I don't have complete 1B data; I just asked Michael for Hernandez. AROM, have you made any efforts to measure 1B scooping? That seems like a pretty big deal to me...
   43. mulder & scully Posted: January 29, 2008 at 07:30 PM (#2678629)
Prelim: This is based on both DanR WARP and WS (roughly 50/50). Consider prime and peak, then per "year" and career. All-Star and Gold Glove bonus. Catcher bonus scaled by how much time they spend at the position. Compare players within their position as well. This is all subject to change. Just look at my change from prelim to final for the previous ballot.

Tier 1:
Grich - I was surprised how good he was when I was ranking players. A great peak and prime. Great hitter and fielder.
Santo - Definitely helped by Wrigley, but still a great hitting and fielding peak/prime

Tier 2:
Allen - I think he was similar to Terrell Owens, personality-wise. But the performance was there when he was healthy and wanted to show up.
Simmons - A truly great hitter. By WS, he was the number 2 catcher in the NL for about 7 years in a row

Middle:
Freehan - very good catcher with two monster years
Evans - Great early peak and very good in his 30s.
Nettles - Great fielder, good power, poor hitter for average
Minoso - Not as high as I originally thought b/c he wasn't has old as most thought when he started in the AL.
Wynn - High enough peak and prime as a center fielder to make it

Not middle:
Torre - Not enough time as a catcher to rank higher

Bottom Tier:
Billy Pierce and Ken Boyer. NOT PHOM. There were not of long career 50s pitchers, but I think Pierce was just not as meritorious as the others. 7th best pitcher of his era (I think. The numbers are at home.) Boyer had a rather low peak and prime with a relatively short career.
   44. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: January 29, 2008 at 07:39 PM (#2678649)
Nice ballot, mulder & scully. You are wise.
   45. AROM Posted: January 29, 2008 at 08:54 PM (#2678768)
AROM, have you made any efforts to measure 1B scooping? That seems like a pretty big deal to me...


No, but that sounds like a good idea.
   46. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: January 29, 2008 at 08:58 PM (#2678777)
Any idea how you might approach it? It's a toughie....
   47. OCF Posted: January 30, 2008 at 08:37 PM (#2680058)
If I did no re-evaluation, how could I structure this based on my own past ballots? The best marker is my 1983 ballot:

(1. Billy Williams)
2. Allen
3. Torre
4. Pierce (I was always one of Pierce's biggest supporters)
7. Freehan
11. Wynn
19. Minoso
20. Boyer

Now to fit in the others:

Santo was ahead of Pierce on my 1980 ballot (Santo 2, Pierce 3, behind Kaline).

Grich, Simmons, and Evans entered the ballot after we had elected everyone on that 1983 list except Wynn.

In 1992 I had Grich #3 (behind Seaver and Rose), Wynn #6.

In 1994 I had Simmons #2 (behind Niekro but ahead of Sutton), Wynn #6.

In 1995 I had Evans #4 (behind Schmidt, Doyle, and Trouppe), Wynn #6.

In 1994 and 1995, I had Nettles #22, well behind the others.

I had Boyer ahead of Bando and Elliott, and Bando and Elliott ahead of Nettles.

I had Wynn ahead of Van Haltren and Van Haltren ahead of Minoso.

I had Freehan ahead of Trouppe and Trouppe ahead of Wynn.

That information does not uniquely determine an order - most notably, it doesn't determine the order of Grich, Santo, Allen, and Simmons - but the following would be consistent:

1. Grich
2. Santo
3. Allen
4. Simmons
5. Torre
6. Pierce
7. Evans
8. Freehan
9. Wynn
10. Minoso
11. Boyer
12. Nettles


This might or might not be my ballot. It's a start.
   48. jimd Posted: January 31, 2008 at 12:22 AM (#2680331)
HOF-not-HOM players from the Group I era:

1) Kirby Puckett

HOF-not-HOM players from the Group II era:

1) Bruce Sutter
2) Tony Perez
3) Catfish Hunter
4) Lou Brock
5) Luis Aparicio

6) Orlando Cepeda
7) Bill Mazeroski
8) Red Schoendienst
9) George Kell
   49. Jim Sp Posted: January 31, 2008 at 07:32 PM (#2680897)
Strong cases
1 Bobby Grich (1992). would love to see us unify around his candidacy, of the top four he seems to be left out of the conversation. Better player than oh say Ernie Banks, Rod Carew, Tony Gwynn, Frankie Frisch, Carl Yastremski, Al Kaline, Roberto Clemente, ... Great hitter, great fielder, great player.
2 Dick Allen (1983)
3 Ron Santo (1980)
4 Darrell Evans (1995)

Above the line, not by much
5 Graig Nettles (2006)
6 Jimmy Wynn (1996)
7 Minnie Minoso (1987)
8 Ted Simmons (1994) (bump up?)

HoVG
9 Ken Boyer (1991)
10 Billy Pierce (1987)
11 Bill Freehan (1985). Guess my catcher bonus ain't what it used to be.
12 Joe Torre (1984)
   50. sunnyday2 Posted: January 31, 2008 at 09:54 PM (#2681059)
Who do you like? Who has honored a better caliber of players.

HoF not HoM

1. Brock, lf
2. Schoendienst, c--OK, never caught a ML game but played everything other than C and RF, probably better equipped (skills) to do so than anybody else on this "team"
3. Puckett, cf
4. Cepeda, 1b
5. Perez, 3b--probably a better 3B than Kell
6. Kell, rf--1 game in RF, Cepeda played 18 but this looks like the least-worst defensive alignment among these guys
7. Aparicio, ss
8. Mazeroski, 2b
9. Hunter, sp

HoM not HoF

1. Raines, lf
2. Grich, 2b
3. Santo, 3b
4. McGwire, dh
5. W. Clark, 1b
6. Dw. Evans, rf
7. Wynn, cf
8. Simmons, c
9. Trammell, ss
Blyleven, sp
   51. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: January 31, 2008 at 11:01 PM (#2681159)
Jim Sp,

I think the appropriate test for your catcher bonus is, How much do you have to bump them up to get an acceptable number of C in the HoM?--with "acceptable" defined to taste. How many are in your PHoM? Among post-1893 MLB players, I have Simmons as the #11 catcher, vs. Nettles as the #15-16 3B and Miñoso and Wynn as the #45 and #55 OF (so equivalent to #15 and #18).
   52. OCF Posted: January 31, 2008 at 11:54 PM (#2681242)
sunnyday (Re #50):

I think if you wait a year, you'll probably be able to straighten out the positional alignment problems of the first team a little bit. Put Rice in RF (or flip him with Brock), move Kell to 3B, Perez to 1B, and you'll have Cepeda as a DH. But you still don't really have a catcher. Maybe borrow from another era and use Rick Ferrell?

One small sign of the difference between the teams. For the first team, you've got Aparicio and Mazeroski at the back of the lineup - which Mazeroski really was, and Aparicio should have been. On the second team, you've stuck Simmons and Trammell at the back end - real life cleanup hitters. Yeah, that's something of a difference. And no one on that second team is playing out of position.

The second team can also withstand a number of injury problems - if Santo goes down, you've got Da. Evens; if McGwire goes down, then Allen; if McGwire, Allen, and Simmons all get hurt, then Freehan and Torre.
   53. Wes Parkers Mood (Mike Green) Posted: February 01, 2008 at 03:13 AM (#2681355)
Blyleven wouldn't have to sweat with little run support for very often, with that matchup of clubs. Give him 36 starts with those teams, and he'd win 20 for the first time in his career. 20-8 with 8 no decisions. But then, he wouldn't be on the HoM not HoF team for very long!
   54. sunnyday2 Posted: February 01, 2008 at 05:24 PM (#2681613)
And with the second team, you actually have a pitching rotation. But since the first group only has the one pitcher, I figured I would just parallel that.
   55. DL from MN Posted: February 01, 2008 at 05:31 PM (#2681619)
> with the second team, you actually have a pitching rotation

I think that is noteworthy. The HoF has been more generous honoring pitchers than we have. I know this is our recommendations of priority based on the HoM but I think Billy Pierce is getting shortchanged. Compared to the standard of pitchers in the HoF he's clearly worth honoring.
   56. OCF Posted: February 01, 2008 at 05:42 PM (#2681627)
The HoF has been more generous honoring pitchers than we have.

This sentence is backwards. The HoM has been more generous.

The HoF/not HoM team above has only Hunter as a SP, although it also has Sutter and Fingers in the bullpen.

The HoM/not HoF team has Blyleven, Pierce, Stieb, and Saberhagen - a rotation, if we play by 70's rules. But no bullpen.
   57. Chris Cobb Posted: February 01, 2008 at 06:24 PM (#2681653)
This sentence is backwards. The HoM has been more generous.

Well, it depends on the period. Since 1950, we have been a bit more generous than the Hall. Prior to 1950, we have been less generous.

Pre-1950 HoFers-not-HoMers (15)
Chief Bender, Jack Chesbro, Andy Cooper, Leon Day, Dizzy Dean, Lefty Gomez, Burleigh Grimes, Jesse Haines, Waite Hoyt, Addie Joss, Rube Marquard, Herb Pennock, Hilton Smith, Mickey Welch, Vic Willis

Pre-1950 HoMers-not-HoFers (1)
Wes Ferrell

Post-1950 HoFers-not-HoMers (2)
Catfish Hunter, Bruce Sutter

Post-1950 HoMers-not-HoFers
Bert Blyleven, Billy Pierce, Bret Saberhagen, Dave Stieb
   58. OCF Posted: February 01, 2008 at 06:44 PM (#2681667)
I was taking the context to be that of sunnyday2's original post, which clearly implies post-WWII. I said that DL from MN's sentence was backwards because I though he was also operating within that context.

Post-1950 HoFers-not-HoMers (2)
Catfish Hunter, Bruce Sutter


What, are you saying we elected Fingers? (Checks notes.) Well, I'll be - we did. And I even had him 14th on my ballot that year. So much for my memory.
   59. DL from MN Posted: February 01, 2008 at 06:51 PM (#2681674)
I read the sentence backward but Chris Cobb explained it better than me (as usual).

Blyleven is likely to get elected by the HoF before all is said and done which would only leave 3 marginal pitchers (Pierce, Saberhagen, Stieb) for us. There's actually pretty good agreement on pitchers between our groups.
   60. Chris Cobb Posted: February 01, 2008 at 07:25 PM (#2681716)
So Karl doesn't have to say it: Bob Caruthers should be on the Pre-1950 HoMers-not-HoFers pitcher list. I missed him in my quick pass through my records.
   61. Rob_Wood Posted: February 02, 2008 at 04:11 AM (#2682105)
Prelim based on a career value perspective with a low replacement level:

Bobby Grich
Graig Nettles
Ron Santo
Darrell Evans
(gap)
Ted Simmons
Ken Boyer
Dick Allen
Jimmy Wynn
(gap)
Minnie Minoso
Joe Torre
Billy Pierce
Bill Freehan
   62. Paul Wendt Posted: February 03, 2008 at 04:37 AM (#2682566)
Wow! What do you think of this, Rob Wood?

"Twelve Good Men for the Hall of Fame"
Who can understand why the Hall of Fame has not recognized Ezra Sutton, Billy Nash, Lave Cross, Tommy Leach, Heinie Groh, Stan Hack, Bob Elliott, Ken Boyer, Ron Santo, Graig Nettles, Darrell Evans, and Buddy Bell? . . .
   63. Daryn Posted: February 03, 2008 at 07:52 PM (#2682771)
This is a crazy exercise for me, as I had 8 of these 12 guys in pretty much the exact same spot at the end of or just off my ballot.

The Top Two

Simmons
Santo

The Clumped Eight

Allen
Grich
Nettles
Evans
Torre
Freehan
Boyer
Minoso

The Bottom Two

Pierce
Wynn
   64. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: February 04, 2008 at 11:57 PM (#2683629)
I owe you guys a ballot thread, I apologize that my Super Bowl party got in the way last night. It will be up shortly.
   65. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: February 05, 2008 at 12:54 PM (#2683867)
I owe you guys a ballot thread, I apologize that my Super Bowl party got in the way last night. It will be up shortly.


In our previous elections, the ballot thread always went up a week after the prior election. I also had one made up, too, Joe.
   66. Joey Numbaz (Scruff) Posted: February 05, 2008 at 03:02 PM (#2683914)
That would normally be the case John, but we extended the last election since it was posted late . . .
   67. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: February 05, 2008 at 03:58 PM (#2683966)
That would normally be the case John, but we extended the last election since it was posted late . . .


That's fine, Joe. I had asked about this on the election thread, but I'm assuming you missed it.
   68. Howie Menckel Posted: February 06, 2008 at 12:10 AM (#2684431)
Years GROUP IIs were on HOM ballots (* if elected that year)
in order of finish by year

1970 - Minoso, Pierce
1971 - Minoso, Pierce
1972 - Minoso, Pierce
1973 - Minoso, Pierce
1974 - Minoso, Pierce
1975 - Minoso, Pierce, Boyer
1976 - Minoso, Boyer, Pierce
1977 - Minoso, Pierce, Boyer
1978 - Minoso, Pierce, Boyer
1979 - Minoso, Boyer, Pierce
1980 - Santo*, Minoso, Pierce, Boyer
1981 - Minoso, Pierce, Boyer
1982 - Freehan, Pierce, Minoso, Boyer
1983 - DAllen*, Torre, Freehan, Minoso, Pierce, JWynn, Boyer
1984 - Torre*, Freehan, Minoso, Pierce, Boyer, JWynn
1985 - Freehan*, Pierce, Minoso, Boyer, JWynn
1986 - Pierce, Minoso, Boyer, JWynn
1987 - Pierce*, Minoso*, Boyer, JWynn
1988 - Boyer, JWynn
1989 - Boyer, JWynn
1990 - Boyer, JWynn
1991 - Boyer*, JWynn
1992 - Grich*, JWynn
1993 - JWynn
1994 - TSimmons*, JWynn, Nettles
1995 - DaEvans*, JWynn, Nettles
1996 - JWynn*, Nettles
1997-06 - just Nettles

............

GROUP I was:
1996 - KHernandez*
1997 - DwEvans*
1998 - Blyleven*, Randolph, Stieb
1999 - Randolph, Stieb
2000 - Randolph, Stieb
2001 - Whitaker*, Randolph*, Stieb
2002 - Trammell*, Stieb*, Dawson
2003 - Dawson
2004 - Dawson
2005 - Dawson*, Saberhagen
2006 - WClark*, Saberhagen
2007 - McGwire*, Saberhagen
2008 - Raines*, Saberhagen*
   69. OCF Posted: February 06, 2008 at 12:22 AM (#2684438)
In putting together my ballot this week, I started with my own 1983 HoM ballot. Howie's chart makes it pretty obvious why I would have made that particular choice.
   70. Howie Menckel Posted: February 06, 2008 at 12:30 AM (#2684444)
looks like if I just go by my previous ranks, I come up with something like this:
1. Grich
2. Santo
3. Simmons
4. Pierce
5. Torre
6. Allen
7. Freehan
8. Minoso
9. Boyer
10. DaEvans
11. JWynn
12. Nettles

But Nettles made a deserved late surge on my 2006 ballot, and likely again here. Pierce over Allen is interesting; we've underrated pitchers and Allen is one of the few I'd think had some tangible negative impact on some of his teams. But what a hitter.
The catchers are interesting, too.
   71. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: February 06, 2008 at 02:40 PM (#2684645)
This ballot, IMO, was much more difficult than the previous one. Group 1 took less than 10 minutes to compile, while this one took me a few days to decide.
   72. Paul Wendt Posted: February 09, 2008 at 06:53 PM (#2687201)
Andrew Siegel wrote in the Ballot thread next door,
(5) Minoso--The remaining guys are very tightly bunched. As we discussed, those who project him as a top 100 player tend to rely on an erroneous birthdate. Using the right birthdate, he got most of the major league seasons he should have had. Still, the career he did have was HoM (though barely) on its own merits and he does deserve some extra credit both for marginal pre-integration seasons and b/c/ of the effect that exclusion/racism had on his career development.

Does anyone feel reasonably informed yet doubtful about the birthdate?

(10) Boyer--His record wouldn't put him in the HoM if he had debuted 20 years later. The key question is whether he played at a time where conditions had not yet developed to favor 3B or whether the relative lack of star 3B at his time was just the normal ebb and flow. I'm not sure whether we got it right.

Or the key question may be military time. How much (quantity and quality) of his baseball career did he lose? That may be what puts him ahead of Bob Elliott for someone like me --and several others mention Elliott in their ballot comments on Boyer.
In contrast no one cares how much of his baseball career Willie Mays lost in '52-53.
   73. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: February 10, 2008 at 09:09 PM (#2687693)
Does know who the next 12 are for Group 3? I'm working on the next discussion thread. Thanks in advance.
   74. Paul Wendt Posted: February 10, 2008 at 10:10 PM (#2687715)
According to my database Group 3 is 21 players. The category sizes are 12, 12, 21, 12 but Rose and Jackson may not be included in the Group 4 poll.

nameFirst nameLast
Jimmy Sheckard
Wes Ferrell
Charlie Keller
Sherry Magee
Joe Gordon
Heinie Groh
Stan Hack
Paul Hines
Bill Dahlen
George Gore
Ezra Sutton
Hardy Richardson
Jack Glasscock
Pete Browning
Cupid Childs
Harry Stovey
Bob Caruthers
Joe Start
Deacon White
Charley Jones
Charlie Bennett
   75. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: February 10, 2008 at 10:14 PM (#2687718)
Gracias, mi amigo.
   76. Paul Wendt Posted: February 11, 2008 at 01:49 AM (#2687837)
This is a sample ballot with more than the usual talk.
I want to be authorized to vote next time, at least.

The first line of each entry (partly bold) provides data on "full seasons equivalent" games played by fielding position. I have explained it elsewhere. Briefly, 81 catcher games in a 162-game team-season counts 0.50 full seasons at catcher. Here everyone's two leading positions are listed, even if he played 4 full seasons at his third position, but the "sum" covers all eight positions.
(The eight positions are the usual nine plus designated hitter (or none) minus two outfield distinctions. Pure pinch-hit and pinch-run games count zero. To be improved.)

1. Grich - 2b 11.23 seasons (#24), ss 1.01 ==> sum 12.73
I thought Dave Johnson was a pretty good player so I wasn't thrilled about utility infielder Bobby Grich taking over. And then Johnson hit 43 home runs for the Braves. That was 25 years ago and I changed my mind about 23 years ago. (At about that time I went to college and made a friend from the city of Baltimore itself. He had a been a big Jerry Adair fan and felt the same way about Johnson with respect to Adair.) When Grich signed with the Angels I knew enough to decry the pernicious effect of Gene Autry's pockets on the national game --that was my training for George Steinbrenner-- but I had no idea how good Grich was because walks were a big part of his game and who knew about walks?

Grich has been number two to eight on my personal list of worthy players who are not in the Hall of Fame (number two on a very bad day this Winter). He is usually about four and number one with 20th century debut.
October did not treat Grich kindly: tough defeats in '73, 74, 82, 86, and a not so tough defeat in '79. And he never had a really good series individually.
Like Dawson, Evans, and Fernando V, Bobby Grich put up his best year in the strike season. The home run championship was a 3-way tie, so his Black Ink Score (8) overstates his dominance as a batter. ;-)

2. Santo - 3b 13.22 seasons (#8), dh 0.29 ==> sum 13.88 (#129)
Eighth in full seasons equivalent games played at third base; number 129 in full seasons played at all "positions".That is the meaning of the line of data beside his name and everyone's except pitcher Pierce.
Ron Santo's peak seasons match the high mound, tall strike zone era. Probably the writers saw him as a merely good batter. Then the Cubs didn't win, when he might have been MVP.
Santo has been number four to eight on my personal list of eligible players not in the Hall of Fame.

3. Simmons - c 11.18 seasons (#14), dh 1.79 ==> sum 14.55 (#92)
Fourteenth in full seasons played at catcher, all in 14 heavy-duty years.
At the end(?) of the 1970s Earl Weaver said Ted Simmons was the best player of the decade, his first choice for a team. I recall admiring his incredible (to me) consistent batting records. The gleam in Earl's eye wasn't for walks or three-run homers. It must have been that consistency, and from a catcher Earl would take two-run doubles.

4. Allen - 1b 5.02 seasons, 3b 4.02 ==> sum 10.68
Richie was a great batter. When my dad was transferred to a major league media market (Philadelphia's), Richie was on his way to St Louis. We still got a lot of that devil in the newspaper next summer. Like writing messages to the fans in the dirt at first base.

5. Evans - 3b 9.19 seasons (#45), 1b 5.32 ==> sum 16.45 (#34)
6. Nettles - 3b 15.27 seasons (#2), of 0.45 ==> sum 15.89 (#49)
Second in full seasons played at third base behind Brooks Robinson (far behind). One of two dozen players with 15 full seasons at any position, 1871-1996. Nettles, Hines, and Pinson are not in the Hall of Fame; Aparicio, Brock, Hooper and Pinson not in the Hall of Merit. All of those but Nettles and Aparicio are outfielders. Once I thought Nettles should be docked some because he enjoyed the platoon advantage by team policy at the end of his career. But I noticed that he was barely platooned if at all in New York so I lost interest (NL ca1984-88, debut 39yrs 7mos).
Nettles and Evans were similar lifetime batters --merely similar, which equals uncanny similar plus 500 bases on balls to Evans. Nettles was historically great in the field while I was paying attention. I remember reading that he was great already during his Cleveland years. Of course, I never saw him on TV (no one did). It was the Yankees who put him in October's spotlight and in the Hall of Fame. . . (er, I once expected)
   77. Paul Wendt Posted: February 11, 2008 at 01:50 AM (#2687839)
Looking at Minnie Minoso and Jimmy Wynn in particular makes me wonder where I would rank Tony Oliva and Reggie Smith if they were in the Hall of Merit. I have thought of Reggie Smith as just below the line --which matches the group opinion, for he is number one in the backlog. Smith was not so durable as Minoso and Wynn but my current thought is that I would Now put him right in the middle of this list of 12 --above those two, the only outfielders.

Minoso - of 10.68 seasons (#99) and lf 9.70 seasons (#23), 3b 0.75 ==> sum 11.29
Is there still any reasonable doubt about his age? The revision, making him three years younger, dropped from near the top of many "not in Cooperstown" lists because it now seems implausible that he lost much of a major-league worthy pro baseball career to the segregation era. Without any extra credit, Minoso is a borderline Hall of Famer, similar to Kiki Cuyler in value and type.
I am still uncertain and I feel that we may have more to learn. This placement does put Minoso above the borderline but not far above.
Ten years ago Minnie Minoso was more famous than Larry Doby --may be he still is-- and I wondered whether the Veterans Committee inducted the right man. They did! Congratulations, Vetscomm.

Wynn - of 11.22 seasons (#80) and cf 7.29 seasons (#70), dh 0.18 ==> sum 11.51
Was it a paternalistic nickname, the Toy Cannon? It doesn't hint at the speed so it doesn't do him justice. I recall a friend's remark about fifteen years ago: "only if it's a Toy Hall of Fame".
"A HoMer shouldn't have a year like Wynn's 1971 right in the heart of his career."--OCF. Reading at baseballfever last month, I learned from a Keltner List by "AG2004" that Wynn was stabbed in a domestic quarrel that winter. See our "Jimmy Wynn" #147. FWIW the impact of 1971 on career OPS+ is four points. Calculators of consecutive prime may give him 7 or 10 seasons passing over that one. For the seven seasons but not for the ten he was a superior base thief too.
A.G. Keltner also provides circumstantial evidence that Wynn adapted to the Astrodome, improving his home batting at the cost of some road batting. It doesn't matter to me here, or to most participants here, but it's interesting and it would matter in a real latterday campaign for the HOF if that were to do well enough that anything would matter.

Torre - c 5.59 seasons (#150), 1b 4.87 ==> sum 13.23
Here we don't consider his greatest accomplishment, earning 12 years salary paid by George Steinbrenner & Sons. On the broad definition he would rank no lower than number four; I see the case for number one and would today make him three. As a player, however, he isn't close.
The Braves were eclipsed in his time. Hank Aaron wasn't enough to get a mediocre team on TV, so I don't recall Torre as a catcher. I know that he was not highly regarded there and that sabermetric measures in unison support the low grade. In contrast there are revisionists to say Ted Simmons was mediocre, a relative point in Simmons' favor..
Torre was a good enough batter for HOM consideration as a career DH. In my mind's eye he is slow. (During the batting race with Ralph Garr, Sports Illustrated did a story, a cover story iirc, on "The Tortoise and the Hare".) But Torre hit triples, 29 in four seasons including 5th and 5th in the league 1970-71. Busch Stadium didn't do that without some help from the batter. Right?
As a catcher he worked less than half as much as Simmons, which is a huge difference, more than enough to outweigh Torre's moderately superior batting. Torre and Simmons split the position in 1970. Torre played first base in 1969 with McCarver catching. Does anyone know the expectation when McCarver was part of the Curt Flood /Dick Allen trade? Was Torre expected to resume catching?

Pierce, pitcher (no full seasons statistic)
Pierce comes up short in the workload department but in the end it adds up to a respectable 3300 innings. Others in his time were also short in the workload department. Probably the 1960s/70s may be viewed as an aberration, a departure from long-term trend. Expansion to 162 games is only a minority part of it but +15 innings per annum would be noticed. Pierce would have twelve seasons at 200 innings (consecutive) and six at 250, rather than nine and three.
The new pitching sabrmetricians say that Pierce worked with greater than average "leverage" and I take that for granted.

Freehan - c 9.78 seasons (#27), 1b 0.97 ==> sum 10.75
A very good player, perennial all-star (10 straight) for a decade while the NL was stronger at his position, twice a borderline MVP of the American League. 1968 was quite a year for Denny McLain and Bill Freehan.
As a batter Freehan was up and down, just as everyone expected of every catcher before the 1970s. Catchers can't hit every year, they have too many nagging injuries.
The lasting image of Bill Freehan is the lasting image of Lou Brock, "Out!" at the plate in Game 5. Freehan is standing upright but so is Brock. Easy to forgive only because Brock did so much right in his preceding 11 World Series games.

Boyer - 3b 11.29 seasons (#24), of 0.72 ==> sum 12.47
A superior thirdbasemen with the bat and the glove, he fell off a cliff after October 1964. There go the hits, walks, and home runs like a bunch of lemmings. So he lasted one month longer than the Phillies.
Boyer was six years older than Brooks Robinson, another 1955 debutante and 1964 MVP. Back in '55 Boyer was overready and Robby underready (a bonus baby?). DanG is probably right that military service in '52-53 delayed Boyer's development as a player.
   78. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: February 11, 2008 at 01:52 AM (#2687842)
This is a sample ballot with more than the usual talk.
I want to be authorized to vote next time, at least.


AFAIAC, I'll accept it now, Paul. It's not as if you're new to the HoM community. ;-)
   79. Howie Menckel Posted: February 11, 2008 at 01:56 AM (#2687844)
Yeah, Wendt has an HOM card already.
:)

The way I recall it, the "toy" part for Wynn was because he was short (5-foot-9, not amazingly small for the era but not quite as tall as the other big sluggers, iirc).
But then, I was just a kid...
   80. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: February 11, 2008 at 02:01 AM (#2687852)
The way I recall it, the "toy" part for Wynn was because he was short (5-foot-9, not amazingly small for the era but not quite as tall as the other big sluggers, iirc).
But then, I was just a kid...


You remember it correctly, Howie.
   81. Paul Wendt Posted: February 11, 2008 at 02:27 AM (#2687862)
(back from a quick walk in light snow to the coffee shop and back)

For those who are entirely new here, I was an active contributor but I did not vote in any of the annual elections so I needed to post a sample ballot in the discussion thread.

--
By the way, today I tweaked Full Seasons Equivalent to cover LF, CF, and RF and I compiled two tables that may be interesting


Top 15 "full seasons equivalent" games played at position
<u>decade of first game at fielding position</u>

C_ : 1870s 010 01400; 02421 1990s
1B : 1870s 320 12110; 00131 1990s
2B : 1870s 121 10111; 11320 1990s
SS : 1870s 112 02010; 10430 1990s
3B : 1870s 010 00101; 23340 1990s
LF : 1870s 103 11111; 02121 1990s
CF : 1870s 110 20011; 23042 1990s (including five 1989-91)
RF : 1870s 002 10200; 31330 1990s

The trend is that very-long careers at RF, CF, and especially 3B have been recent.


12 or more "full seasons equivalent" games played at position
<u>number of players by fielding position</u>

33 1B
29 SS
-------- gap
15 2B, 3B
13 CF
11 LF, RF
8 C
   82. Paul Wendt Posted: February 11, 2008 at 02:36 AM (#2687864)
Is DH a position?
Sure but leader Harold Baines has only 10.51 full seasons and the top 15 thru 2006 go all the way down to Reggie Jackson 3.99 full seasons. The 162-game schedule predates the DH so the adjustment in calculation of FSeasEq is barely more than prorating the short seasons 1981 and 1994-95.

top 15, full seasons equivalent games played at Designated Hitter
10.5 : Harold Baines
9.14 : Hal McRae
8.89 : Edgar Martinez
8.23 : Don Baylor
7.67 : Paul Molitor
7.58 : Chili Davis
6.82 : Frank Thomas
5.53 : Jose Canseco
5.10 : Brian Downing
4.81 : Cliff Johnson
4.73 : Andre Thornton
4.67 : Willie Horton
4.64 : David Ortiz
4.04 : Rico Carty
3.99 : Reggie Jackson

Six of them (bold) served as DH in 1973 and the count of debuts by decade is 9-4-2 in the 1970s-80s-90s.
   83. Howie Menckel Posted: February 11, 2008 at 03:49 AM (#2687889)
So who's left for Group 4, anyway?
   84. Paul Wendt Posted: February 11, 2008 at 04:52 AM (#2687923)
nameFirst nameLast
Dickey Pearce
Cal McVey
Lip Pike
Ross Barnes
Quincy Trouppe
Dick Lundy
Grant Johnson
Alejandro Oms
John Beckwith
Dobie Moore
Joe Jackson
Pete Rose
   85. OCF Posted: February 11, 2008 at 05:51 AM (#2687945)
OK, so McVey, Pike, Pearce, and Barnes are here rather than in Group 3 because they don't meet the 10-year HoF rule? And for that 10-year rule, does the HoF recognize the 1871-75 NA or not? I just looked up McVey on bb-ref; he has 9 full years in the NA and NL but nothing outside those 9 years. He was 21 years only in 1871, so there's probably not much pre-NA, and he last played in the majors at the age of 29.

Not everyone lasted as long as Joe Start.
   86. Paul Wendt Posted: February 11, 2008 at 06:18 AM (#2687964)
OK, so McVey, Pike, Pearce, and Barnes are here rather than in Group 3 because they don't meet the 10-year HoF rule? And for that 10-year rule, does the HoF recognize the 1871-75 NA or not?

It does not, and the distinction makes a difference for Lip Pike thanks to his comebacks of a sort.

Pearce, Pike, Barnes, and McVey were regular players on professional clubs in 1869-70, the two seasons when the NABBP permitted professionalism. Pearce and Pike were practically pro ballplayers before then, no doubt, perhaps as early as antebellum and 1866.

Good night.
   87. TomH Posted: February 11, 2008 at 02:32 PM (#2688016)
pulled out of my previous ballots rankings

1 Santo - did it all, including most HR by a white guy in the 1960s.
2 Grich - almost the same. Poor Oct record.
3 Simmons - 315 WS for a catcher!? Nice.
4 Torre - same WS, little less catching.
5 Evans - over 360 WS? Sweet.
6 Boyer - WARP shows a great peak and fine 12 yr run.
7 Freehan - nice hitter, depressed stats in his time, superb glove
8 Minoso - agegate clouded the issue a bit.
9 Pierce - 92 WARP in 14 years.
10 Nettles - great glove, nice bat.
11 Wynn - turn his rotten 1971 into agreat 1969 and he jumps a whole lotta places higher.
12 Allen - Winning more impt than stats. Still a deserving HoMer.
   88. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: February 11, 2008 at 02:38 PM (#2688019)
TomH--Do you have any hard evidence at all that Allen didn't contribute as many wins to his teams as his stats would indicate?
   89. Paul Wendt Posted: February 11, 2008 at 05:37 PM (#2688110)
11 Wynn - turn his rotten 1971 into agreat 1969 and he jumps a whole lotta places higher.

In your (previous ballot rankings) approach, TomH, does Wynn rise if you simply delete his rotten 1971? If so then refer to #77.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Tuque
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 0.6299 seconds
49 querie(s) executed