No, next question.

Yes.

You do mean the Japanese Baseball Hall of Fame, right?

I'd like to see an exhibit of his legendary stash of porn, but as an inductee... no.

http://deadspin.com/5971584/hideki-matsui-to-announce-retirement-will-have-plenty-of-time-to-enjoy-his-massive-porn-collection

He's going to be remembered for owning a massive porn collection.

Word of Matsui's affinity for porn first surfaced in a 2003 Time magazine profile:

And, of course, he likes to watch his much vaunted porno collection, tapes that he often trades with Japanese reporters. As one Japanese journalist put it, describing Matsui's affinity for such unique Japanese cultural institutions like the no-panties shabu-shabu in Japan, "Matsui is a horny guy. All of us are horny, more or less. But Matsui doesn't attempt to hide the fact." Yet another win for the Japanese Everyman.

This information went largely unremarked upon for years, until "much vaunted" became more concrete in 2012 when GQ cited Matsui's porn collection as 55,000 videos strong:

The owner of 55,000 adult vids, Matsui ran out of gifts for writers at his first American press event. "Sorry," he said, "I'll get porn for the rest of you."

the left handed outfielder/DH ranks surprisingly high on the Yankees all-time list as a hitter (21st in OPS+

Nick Swisher is only at 2501 Yankee PA, but he's one OPS+ point ahead of Matsui.

If Ichiro, then Matsui.

Wonder if he's following this.

If Ichiro, then Matsui.

Do you seriously equate the two?

Do you seriously equate the two?

I agree with Ray.

Either NPB counts or it doesn't. This picky choosey horseshit is beyond irritating.

Either NPB counts or it doesn't. This picky choosey horseshit is beyond irritating.

Or, you know, it counts but Ichiro is quite a bit better.

Ichiro: 1014 RC NPB, 1387 MLB
Matsui: 1173 RC NPB, 801 MLB

(from Baseball Cube)

Japanese League baseball is not supposed to be considered in determining worth for the Hall of Fame. Only major league play and Negro Leagues/winter ball play for black players affected by the color line is to be considered.

Not sure what it matters that Matsui wasn't as good here as Ichiro was here, as long as we're just meshing all the stats together.

Very few people here have advocated just meshing the stats together. Claiming so is flippant and dishonest of Ray. What many do believe is that the Japanese stats may be reasonably considered as something like extra credit for a player that did enough in America alone to warrant HOF consideration.

Very few people here have advocated just meshing the stats together. Claiming so is flippant and dishonest of Ray. What many do believe is that the Japanese stats may be reasonably considered as something like extra credit for a player that did enough in America alone to warrant HOF consideration.

And that's exactly my point. People are choosing how to do this specifically to capture Ichiro and nobody else. So Ichiro's Japan performance is "extra credit," while Matsui's superior Japan performance - or Sadaharu Oh's - is not worthy enough.

Either there is a distinction between MLB and Japan or there is not. If there no distinction, Matsui's and Oh's performances should be given full credit. If there is a distinction, then Ichiro's Japan performance should be as meaningless as Matsui's and Oh's are.

Either NPB performance counts or it doesn't.

Not sure what it matters that Matsui wasn't as good here as Ichiro was here, as long as we're just meshing all the stats together.

I think the point was that if we're meshing all the stats together, what matters is 427 more RC.

Very few people here have advocated just meshing the stats together. Claiming so is flippant and dishonest of Ray. What many do believe is that the Japanese stats may be reasonably considered as something like extra credit for a player that did enough in America alone to warrant HOF consideration.

And I strongly disagree with that.

MORE IMPORTANTLY THOUGH.

Should Hideki Matsui's NA performance count towards his Japanese Hall of Fame case? :O)

OK. If you were a GM and they were both available as rookies, who do you take for their entire career?

I think it's pretty obvious.

There is a distinction between MLB and Japan, according to the Hall of Fame election rules. Sadaharu Oh has never been a candidate, never even been considered for Hall of Fame election.

What many do believe is that the Japanese stats may be reasonably considered as something like extra credit for a player that did enough in America alone to warrant HOF consideration.

Mmm, disagree. As Bruce, who should know, points out, there is nothing in the explicit rules supporting that interpretation. And my personal feeling is that baseball fame is baseball fame -- I do think the Sadaharu Ohs of the world should be in. I think that drawing a line between "MLB, plus its predecessors, plus I guess we have to include the Negro Leagues" and "other leagues" doesn't hold up. I think that becomes more and more apparent as time goes on.

I definitely feel that it's a very intellectually dissatisfying kludge to say that Matsui's Japanese career became relevant because he hit .147 in 34 games last year, but it'd be totally irrelevant if he hadn't done that. I don't really see how anyone would be happy with that.

If I were given a ballot, I'm honestly not sure whether I would "jury nullify" and vote for a Matsui (or El Duque or others in a similar situation) even though the current rules don't seem to justify it, or whether I would suck it up and play by the rules. Of course, if the ballot five years from now is comparable to the current ballot, it won't be an issue because Matsui won't be one of the 10 best guys on it either way.

The entire thrust of the HOF voting guidelines is that they are directed to MLB play only, and that is exactly how they were interpreted for decades until the object of everyone's obsession came along.

I suppose you could try to make a case for giving Ichiro extra credit for some sort of pioneer status, but I don't think it holds much water. First Japanese position player who was a star in MLB would be a bigger whoop IMO if he had actually heralded an influx of similar players who had similar success.

Either NPB performance counts or it doesn't.

It doesn't. When Matsui and Ichiro are considered for the HoF their MLB career should be on what that consideration is based. Ichiro did a lot more in his MLB career and has the highlights that will get voter attention. Obviously, the late starts affect the totals in the counting stats. Matsui was 29 and while he was very good at times his peak was far from enough to make it in on peak alone. Ichiro was "only" 27 as a rookie and as a lead off guy that played nearly every day he's accomplished enough that he has a reasonable case on MLB merits alone. He has twice as many hits as Matsui so their situations aren't even slightly comparable. Ichiro is an easy HoF'r and his NPB stats will just be a footnote. Matsui gets zero Hall of Fame consideration without using his overseas stats.

Heck is anyone arguing that Julio Franco should get extra consideration because of the years he played in Korea and Mexico (or wherever he was)?

And that's exactly my point. People are choosing how to do this specifically to capture Ichiro and nobody else.

If another player fell into the same category as Ichiro, I would deal with him the same way.

But I hereby acknowledge that my "extra credit" argument does go directly against the voting guidelines.

Very few people here have advocated just meshing the stats together. Claiming so is flippant and dishonest of Ray. What many do believe is that the Japanese stats may be reasonably considered as something like extra credit for a player that did enough in America alone to warrant HOF consideration.

I've read enough of these threads to know that you are underselling how often giving Ichiro a lot of credit for his Japanese stats has been suggested. It may seem to you like something "most people" wouldn't think, but that just means you agree with Ray, not that no one has argued the point. A few people have gone so far as to suggest that ALL Japanese stats should count and the the HOF should be a Worldwide institution.

Besides, Matsui clearly merits "consideration." Royce Clayton got "consideration." He'll be on the ballot. He was a 20 WAR player in the US during the post-prime downside of his career. He was an elite player in Japan for the 9 years before that, spanning much if not all of his prime. If he was a 25-40 WAR player during that time (not all that outlandish; he was a 4 win player with the Yankees while declining), he'd be a perfectly cromulent candidate. Especially if you give him pioneer credit or whatever.

I think Ray is right; a number of people like to talk as if the Japanese league has stats that matter only in terms of Ichiro. Whenever that gets taken to the logical next step, all people ever seem to say is "Come on, that's different."

I don't see Ichiro's Japan stats as extra credit. I see them as confirmation. Ichiro's MLB career is borderline HOF worthy. But wait, he got started very late. I wonder if he would likely have done just as well were it not for factors outside of his control? We can answer a confident "Probably" by looking at the fact that he was doing pretty much that well in another league.

I'm not counting his Japanese stats at all. I'm just confirming that despite the short career he had, he didn't just get lucky.

Fly, Ichiro doesn't need the extra credit, confirmation or whatever else you want to call it. He has 43 points of Black Ink average HoF is 27. He has 200 or more (way more usually) hits in 10 seasons. He hit .350 or better four times. He is in a respectable place on several all time leader lists among Hall of Famers which will only improve with another year or two left in him. The current ballot problem should be sorted out before he hits the ballot and he'll go in on first ballot based on what he did here.

If I had a vote, I'd take a pretty close look at Matsui, although I suspect he wouldn't make my cut. His game was much more power-dependent than Ichiro's, and his MLB performance (along with MLE evidence) suggests that his numbers would look significantly worse if he'd played in the US his whole career. That said, I still expect he was a hell of a player. Maybe a Will Clark type?

Which is to say that my view on Japanese credit isn't exclusive to Ichiro. Basically, I'd be happy to include anyone in the Hall of Fame, wherever he (or she?) played, if the best evidence shows that he was the equal of MLB's best. I don't care who it is, and I don't care how long he played in the US. Sadaharu Oh would probably get my vote, and so would two or three other NPB players. Isao Harimoto, Masaichi Kaneda, maybe Victor Starffin, and so on.

Same holds for some hypothetical Cuban star. If some guy defected at age 40 for one average season in MLB, and his Cuban stats suggested he was capable of putting up a .300/.400/.500 line in the US for the prior 18 or 20 years, I'd probably vote for him. Heck, he wouldn't need any MLB seasons if his MLEs were solid enough.

I've read enough of these threads to know that you are underselling how often giving Ichiro a lot of credit for his Japanese stats has been suggested.

Yeah, it's kind of frustrating. People argue X, Y, and Z all day long and then when I take issue with X, Y, and Z I get "very few people here have advocated that."

Whatever. If people aren't going to be honest about what the arguments often put forth are, there's really no point to having the discussion.

There is a distinction between MLB and Japan, according to the Hall of Fame election rules. Sadaharu Oh has never been a candidate, never even been considered for Hall of Fame election.

Let's change that!

Well, maybe I was wrong about what other people thought. Obviously there are some worldwide stats mashers.

Whatever, Diogenes.

EDIT: Referring to Ray, of course.

If Ichiro, then Matsui.

If Palmeiro, then Staub.

Ichiro is better than Matsui. They are the same age (seasonal age at least), making comparison easy.

Matsui from age 29-38 had 18.6 WAR. Ichiro in the same time had 43.4. This is despite Matsui being a better hitter, 118-113 OPS+. If I were to make any subjective adjustment to the defensive numbers on BBref, I would not change Ichiro, his +97 rating is not excessive for a guy who looked great in the field, has the highest speed score of any player to ever have a substantial career in right field, and won 10 gold gloves in his first 10 seasons. If anything, I'd adjust Matsui lower, his rating of -29 (-5 per full season) does not reflect a player who looked like one of the most brutal outfielders I've ever seen.

I don't see any reason to think the same pattern (Matsui better at hitting, Ichiro better overall) was any different in Japan. Ichiro was HOF quality, Matsui was HOVG quality. That's why I'd vote for Ichiro and not Matsui.

32. Eric J can SABER all he wants to Posted: December 28, 2012 at 12:56 AM (#4333446)
If Ichiro, then Matsui.

If Palmeiro, then Staub.

Um, I'll take two from column A and none from column B.

If he was a 25-40 WAR player during that time (not all that outlandish; he was a 4 win player with the Yankees while declining), he'd be a perfectly cromulent candidate.

That would make Matsui a 45-60 WAR player. There are 16 outfielders born after 1930 with 45-60 WAR who have been retired long enough for a HOF vote. Four of them are in, so while a longshot, Matsui would have a chance. The ones in are Billy Williams, Dave Winfield, Willie Stargell, and Kirby Puckett. Williams and Winfield are at the upper end of that range, 59 WAR. Willie Stargell might be the best comp for an optimistic upside. If Matsui's power during his peak years translated especially well, and his 50 homer years in Japan had turned into 40 homers seasons here, then maybe his career would look like Stargell's. I doubt it though, the record shows that players coming from Japan lose half their homers, so Matsui's peak years would look similar to the 25-30 homer years he had for the Yankees. And a full US Matsui career would probably look something like Chili Davis. Good, but not going to sniff the hall.

Ichiro, on the other hand, has 53 WAR in the US. Give him similar credit for Japan and he's at least 70 WAR, maybe past 80. The only comps that look reasonable are Kenny Lofton and Tony Gwynn. He's Lofton plus an earlier start, or Gwynn with more durability and less fat. Though if those guys are your comps, I have to consider that Ichiro born in the US might not even play baseball, he might have been a point guard instead.

I don't see any reason to think the same pattern (Matsui better at hitting, Ichiro better overall) was any different in Japan. Ichiro was HOF quality, Matsui was HOVG quality. That's why I'd vote for Ichiro and not Matsui.

The problem is that Ichiro's raw skill set in Japan transferred better to the majors than Matsui's did. So Matsui could well have been much better in Japan - certainly his raw stats show more power.

I had a college roommate who was 5'6", 110 lbs with rocks in his pockets. Not a bad playground point guard, but there comes a level where the size disadvantage is just too large a hill to climb...

Matsui's 29-38 are indistinguishable from Raul Ibanez's.

Matsui from age 29-38 had 18.6 WAR. Ichiro in the same time had 43.4. [...] I don't see any reason to think the same pattern (Matsui better at hitting, Ichiro better overall) was any different in Japan.

Comparing their decline phases and then saying "It was probably the same in their primes" seems wrong-headed to me. Ichiro has aged very gracefully, playing at least 146 (and usually 162) games every year. Matsui, in large part due to injuries, hasn't reached that games mark since 2005. I think it is pretty clear that Matsui has had a steeper decline phase. He was a gold glove OF in Japan and played a cromulent 40+ games in CF his first year in the States. Ichiro was basically the same guy in his 30s that he was in his 20s, just a little bit worse. Matsui was a more changed player.

so Matsui's peak years would look similar to the 25-30 homer years he had for the Yankees.

Except in his mid-20s he'd be playing 162 games with improved, possibly even good defense rather than being a not-quite full-time COF/DH liability. Also, I'd expect his power numbers to be higher, what with it being the late-90s.

I don't think he's as good as Ichiro, but that's not the point. If you play the "Japan years count" game, Ichiro rates as an extremely obvious hall of famer. The same game makes Matsui a reasonable candidate.

Matsui's 29-38 are indistinguishable from Raul Ibanez's.

Raul Ibanez was a pretty good player in his his 30s. If that was the decline phase of a durable star, it would look great; give Dale Murphy Raul Ibanez's 30s, and he's in the HOF right now. Ibanez's problem is that he had -0.1 WAR before turning 30s. In contrast, Matsui was a good full-time player at 20, and a one of the best players in NPB at 22.

I think Ray is right; a number of people like to talk as if the Japanese league has stats that matter only in terms of Ichiro. Whenever that gets taken to the logical next step, all people ever seem to say is "Come on, that's different."

This is dumb. We can reasonably come up with a framework where a person gets partial credit for his Japan playing days. If you give Matsui half credit for his Japan numbers then he makes it to 40 WAR and is still not a HOFer. Ichiro's at 55 WAR in the US already. If you give him half credit for his Japan numbers he moves to 70 WAR and is definitely a HOFer when you considered his peak.

So... again, you want to incorporate Japanese stats, but only in a way that makes them meaningful for Ichiro alone. Point proven? I'm not sure I see the rationale.

I'm not sure how to respond to that. I think giving partial credit to Japanese stats is fairer than the alternatives (no credit or full credit), does anyone really disagree with that? Pick a number between 0% and 100% and conduct your analysis. I have no pro-Ichiro agenda here.

Matsui is an interesting case. I don't think he's quite as good as Ichiro with the bat, and then you factor in defense and baserunning and it's Ichiro pretty easily. I'd love to see a HOM thread on Matsui and see the fine analysts that do they're thing over there go to work on him. My first impression is that he's like Dale Murphy for me--wouldn't mind if he gets in, don't mind if he doesn't. For me, baseball is baseball. I don't think the baseball hall of fame would be degraded by the inclusion of Sadahara Oh, etc. How many non American-based players would even be up for consideration, realistically? 3 or 4 from Japan, maybe a couple from Cuba? Whatever dilution you may fear that would cause would more than be offset by increasing our scope of the game.

Comparing their decline phases and then saying "It was probably the same in their primes" seems wrong-headed to me.

I agree. Fortunately we have NPB stats for both players. According to ESPN, Ichiro hit .353/.421/.522 in 951 games with 199 SB and 33 CS. Matsui hit .304/.413/.582 in 1268 games with 46 SB and 34 CS stealing. Using the cheapo wOBA*, I get .420 for Ichiro and .435 for Matsui. I suspect the SB difference makes that a wash.

So on a rate basis the two were about equal offensively (although I don't know the park factors, which may or may not make a big difference). We know Matsui played 300 more games and we can say with pretty high confidence that Ichiro was a far better defender, so without doing a calculation I'm guessing they had roughly the same total value in Japan.

Does anybody know the league averages for the NPB in the 90's? Shouldn't be too hard to do a crude WAR calculation.

*(1.75*OBP+SLG)/3

Thanks for the link, but I wanted to add two further points to the discussion.

1) The first is that, contrary to Bruce's claim above, there is no prohibition against considering a player's Japanese stats. Here is what Jeff Idelson said three years ago (source: http://seattletimes.com/html/larrystone/2009771249_stone30.html). Although the HoF does not encourage voters to consider performance in other leagues, it is left up to their discretion. Also, the Oh example is a red herring because he did not play 10 years in the majors.

"Our rules are pretty straightforward," Idelson said. "We ask voters to look at their major-league career, plus character, integrity, sportsmanship. Beyond that, it's up to each voter to decide."

Idelson noted that the stats package sent out to voters each year to help evaluate candidates includes only major-league stats. "But as a normal human, how can you overlook the dominance he had in the Pacific League for a decade?" he added.

2) Instead of meshing the stats together, or trying to come up with a conversion factor, I think it make more sense to ask if Matsui and Ichiro would have been successful in the majors as younger players based on what we know of them as veterans. Clearly, there's still a lot of conjecture there, but why wouldn't they have excelled during their primes when they had success later on in their careers, especially considering the transition involved?

As several have mentioned, Ichiro goes from a strong borderline candidate to a lock based on his past career, but Matsui is more of a test case. If NPL stats are considered, he has a good chance. Personally, I think his combined career warrants inclusion in the Hall of Fame.

If that was the decline phase of a durable star, it would look great; give Dale Murphy Raul Ibanez's 30s, and he's in the HOF right now.

Matsui had 159 HRs, 16.7 WAR, and an OPS+ of 119 in his 30s. Murphy was 161, 13.5, and 111. I'm not convinced that would do the trick.

Matsui's 30s (.281/.361/.466) look a whole lot like Jim Rice's (.289/.347/.467, OPS+ of 118). Rice is arguably one of the poorer HoF selections, and made it largely on his 20s peak.

Other decent 30s-comps for Matsui include Ben Oglive, George Foster, Dusty Baker, Brady Anderson, Reggie Sanders, guys like that.

I'm entirely open to Hideki Matsui's Hall of Fame case. If someone wants to actually make that case, rather than complaining about the obvious hypocrisy of unnamed persons who won't vote for Matsui, I'd be interested to hear it.** My first take on the numbers is that Matsui looks like a somewhat worse version of Lance Berkman. A hell of a hitter, not much of a fielder or runner, and a very solid HoVG player overall.

**To be clear, this passive-aggressive snark is aimed at Ray, not at William.

Also, isn't it generally accepted that NPB is somewhere around AAA in terms of talent level? Shouldn't all the stats from NPB be MLE'd?