Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, November 22, 2017

Ryan Thibs has his HOF Ballot Tracker Up and Running!

Ryan has received his first official ballot, courtesy of Adam Rubib. Ten votes, including Vizquel.

So who gets a higher percentage of vote this year, Trammell with the VC or Vizquel with the BBWAA? (Only partly a tongue-in-cheek question…)

TJ Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:48 PM | 1774 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: hall of fame

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 14 of 18 pages ‹ First  < 12 13 14 15 16 >  Last ›
   1301. bachslunch Posted: January 08, 2018 at 09:54 AM (#5602590)
And flip once more.
   1302. Ziggy's screen name Posted: January 08, 2018 at 12:03 PM (#5602679)
Edgar is at 80.5%. He needs 71.4% of the remaining ballots. Last year his private % trailed his public % by 12. If there were no more public ballots and that rate held, he'd get 69% of the remaining ballots. But of course we have a couple more weeks for public ballots to be released. I'd say that Edgar's chances of getting in this year are something like 50/50, and maybe even a little better than that.
   1303. Adam Starblind Posted: January 08, 2018 at 12:08 PM (#5602682)
Last year his private % trailed his public % by 12.


Anyone know what kind of variability there is in this metric year to year? Too lazy/dumb here.
   1304. Baldrick Posted: January 08, 2018 at 12:22 PM (#5602688)
I was curious about the small-ballot voters, and looked at some of the numbers. Some interesting tidbits.

There are 31 voters with 7 or fewer names on their ballots. Most players (obviously) get lower percentages from that group, but a few a particularly hurt. Mike Mussina, for example, is polling at 26% with the small ballot group, compared to 73% with the electorate as a whole. Slightly behind him, Schilling has a 40 point gap between this group and his overall totals, while Bonds and Clemens have a 38 point gap. Edgar is at 35 points and Walker at 30 (40% with the overall electorate but only 10% with this group).

On the other side of the equation, two of the nine votes for Andruw Jones come from this group, which means they have him running slightly ahead of his overall averages. And Omar Vizquel is polling WELL ahead with this group (who have him at 39% compared to 29% for the whole).

So...small ballot guys like defense, I guess? Unless you're a third baseman?

FWIW, even with their small ballots, this group would still elect Chipper (94%), Thome (84%), and Vlad (84%).
   1305. Kiko Sakata Posted: January 08, 2018 at 12:32 PM (#5602697)
Anyone know what kind of variability there is in this metric year to year? Too lazy/dumb here.


Ryan's spreadsheet has sheets for previous years. For Edgar specifically, the -12.1% public vs. private gap was identical in 2016 and 2017.

A couple of things about Edgar.

(1) Edgar has always done better among public pre-results voters than either public post-results or private voters.
(2) The gap between these groups expanded significantly in 2016 when he gained much more significantly among public voters than among private.
   1306. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 08, 2018 at 12:33 PM (#5602700)
So...small ballot guys like defense, I guess? Unless you're a third baseman?

In the current climate, small-ballot voters start off as contrarians, so perhaps it's not a surprise that it carries over to the beneficiaries of their votes. I don't know that I'd set the bar at 7 - you could cast a pretty good ballot with just 7 names, although the opposite is true, too. I was going to say that slow voters are more of an annoyance, but see we're now up to 174. Let's get the remainder of the public ballots quickly.
   1307. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 08, 2018 at 12:51 PM (#5602719)
The latest update picks up the Boston Globe voters:

Nick Carfado: Bonds, Clemens, Vlad, Hoffman, Chipper, Mussina, Schilling, Sheffield, Thome & Vizquel
Bob Hohler: Damon, Vlad, Hoffman, Chipper, Edgar, Mussina, Schilling & Thome
Bob Ryan: Vlad, Chipper, Edgar, Mussina, Schilling, Thome & Vizquel
Dan Shaughnessey: Vlad, Chipper & Thome

As many votes for Vizquel as Hoffman & Edgar.
   1308. EO1828 Posted: January 08, 2018 at 01:15 PM (#5602746)
The latest update picks up the Boston Globe voters:

Nick Carfado: Bonds, Clemens, Vlad, Hoffman, Chipper, Mussina, Schilling, Sheffield, Thome & Vizquel
Bob Hohler: Damon, Vlad, Hoffman, Chipper, Edgar, Mussina, Schilling & Thome
Bob Ryan: Vlad, Chipper, Edgar, Mussina, Schilling, Thome & Vizquel
Dan Shaughnessey: Vlad, Chipper & Thome

As many votes for Vizquel as Hoffman & Edgar.


Also

Peter Abraham: Bonds, Clemens, Vlad, Chipper, Edgar, Mussina, Rolen, Schilling & Thome

Edgar chances dropping, but still will finish well over 60% this year. Will be interesting to see if Schilling can finish ahead of both Bonds and Clemens, as I assume Mussina will.
   1309. Kiko Sakata Posted: January 08, 2018 at 01:19 PM (#5602751)
As many votes for Vizquel as Hoffman & Edgar.


With Bob Hohler's vote for Johnny Damon, he now has as many votes among all 174 ballots in Ryan's spreadsheet as 2-time (should-be 3-time) Cy Young winner Johan Santana.
   1310. Ziggy's screen name Posted: January 08, 2018 at 01:27 PM (#5602757)
With Bob Hohler's vote for Johnny Damon, he now has as many votes among all 174 ballots in Ryan's spreadsheet as 2-time (should-be 3-time) Cy Young winner Johan Santana.


Eh, that's not really an injustice. Given the small number of votes involved, the voters decided that neither one is a realistic candidate. They're both getting courtesy votes, and it so happens that they've been extended similar amounts of courtesy.
   1311. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 08, 2018 at 01:33 PM (#5602761)
Also Peter Abraham: Bonds, Clemens, Vlad, Chipper, Edgar, Mussina, Rolen, Schilling & Thome

Oops, missed the bold. Not a bad ballot. If Mussina, now at 73.6%, finishes above 65%, I think he goes in next year, which may cause enough Schilling haters to give in so that he follows within a year or two.
   1312. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 08, 2018 at 01:53 PM (#5602772)
The 2019-2020 inductions will probably include Mariano Rivera, Edgar Martinez, Derek Jeter, Mike Mussina, and
Roy Halladay in some form or another. That means that my man Curt Schilling, the Alaskan Alienator, has a good
chance of going in all by himself in 2021. Or maybe with Bonds and Clemens. Hopefully, Dick Allen will be chosen
that year by the "Golden Days" Committee.
   1313. Ithaca2323 Posted: January 08, 2018 at 01:57 PM (#5602778)
Eh, that's not really an injustice. Given the small number of votes involved, the voters decided that neither one is a realistic candidate. They're both getting courtesy votes, and it so happens that they've been extended similar amounts of courtesy.


Yeah. And honestly, Damon and Santana, althought they aren't HOFers, speak to the kinds of players we elect. Santana was the peak candidate who didn't last and really lacked iconic moments. Damon played forever, was very good, but never truly great, (except for maybe one year in KC) but also had some pretty memorable moments—the Grand Slam as a part of the '04 Sox, the double steal in '09 for the Yankees. There are some voters who appreciate each of those kinds of guys
   1314. SoSH U at work Posted: January 08, 2018 at 02:00 PM (#5602779)
Or maybe with Bonds and Clemens. Hopefully, Dick Allen will be chosen
That means that my man Curt Schilling, the Alaskan Alienator, has a good
chance of going in all by himself in 2021. Or maybe with Bonds and Clemens. Hopefully, Dick Allen will be chosenthat year by the "Golden Days" Committee.


Those four going in the same year would be wonderful.
   1315. Booey Posted: January 08, 2018 at 02:02 PM (#5602781)
Curt Schilling, the Alaskan Alienator, has a good chance of going in all by himself in 2021. Or maybe with Bonds and Clemens. Hopefully, Dick Allen will be chosen that year by the "Golden Days" Committee.


Schilling...Bonds...Clemens...Allen...Man, that would have to be the most unlikeable (personality-wise) HOF class ever, no? Hopefully Sheffield and Kent start rapidly building enough support to make it in that year too...

Edit: partial coke to SoSh
   1316. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 08, 2018 at 02:28 PM (#5602800)
(1315) I read an article that Bill James more than anyone was responsible for accusing Dick Allen of being a disruptive force.
His teammates all seemed to like him. He might have been a little late for batting practice on occasion, but I don't think he
was a nasty Albert Belle kind of guy.
   1317. SoSH U at work Posted: January 08, 2018 at 02:35 PM (#5602805)
(1315) I read an article that Bill James more than anyone was responsible for accusing Dick Allen of being a disruptive force.


If Harvey were still around, he'd dispute that rather vigorously. I think Dick Allen was treated a bit unfairly by a society that wasn't quite ready to accept that kind of black athlete, but Dick Allen had a significant hand in his reputation.

Edit: ####, given your join date (welcome, by the way), you might not be familiar with Harvey.
   1318. dlf Posted: January 08, 2018 at 02:50 PM (#5602821)
If Harvey were still around, he'd dispute that rather vigorously.


I was just about to post much the same thing. I miss Harveys and his acerbic wit.

Allen had some real supporters on his teams; he also had folks who didn't care for him at all. And no, while Allen's race was a factor, it wasn't all about race. He was a charmer and an alcoholic and a supremely talented person and someone who thought rules didn't apply and an amazing hitter and someone who quit on his team. For younger folks, I don't really see him as an Albert Belle type, but more of a Gary Sheffield. Belle, I think, was just angry and played like a middle linebacker. Sheffield had a giant us (or me) against the world chip and for years chalked up everything negative to racism, the latter of which dilutes it when race really is a factor.
   1319. QLE Posted: January 08, 2018 at 03:15 PM (#5602854)
In the current climate, small-ballot voters start off as contrarians, so perhaps it's not a surprise that it carries over to the beneficiaries of their votes. I don't know that I'd set the bar at 7 - you could cast a pretty good ballot with just 7 names, although the opposite is true, too. I was going to say that slow voters are more of an annoyance, but see we're now up to 174. Let's get the remainder of the public ballots quickly.


Two points that I think need to be teased out:

1) There seems to be some evidence that the small-ballot voters tend to be older and more distant from day-to-day baseball reportage than the average voters- I suspect that some of this may reflect in terms of their values (more likely to despise the idea of the DH, more likely to use pitcher W-L records as their chief criteria for that position, more likely to fixate on steroids).

2) As for "slow voters"- aren't a lot of the late public voters ones who participate in group votes, and who therefore seem to be unable to release their ballot prior to the group reveal? In that case, the issue with speed isn't the writer, but whoever is publishing them.
   1320. Rally Posted: January 08, 2018 at 03:59 PM (#5602917)
I was also thinking about Harvey. Here is the Dick Allen hall of merit page. The name to look for is Harveys Wallbangers. He may be of the same opinions as expressed by Bill James, but he came by them from being around to watch Allen play ball, not from reading James.

The HOM discussion predates WAR being available on bbref or other sites, but the stat is consistent with the opinion that Allen was a great hitter but didn't do anything else. He was a terrible fielder and had a short career. In the end we have 58.7 WAR. That is about as borderline as it gets. About the same as soon-to-be second ballot HOFer Vlad Guerrero. But also in the same ballpark as Darrell Evans, John Olerud, and Sal Bando. Allen would not be a statistical mistake like a Jim Rice, but he's also not an obvious error of omission like Whitaker and Grich. That's purely the stat side.

As to the feeling that Allen's HOF case is less than the sum of his stats, that's what Bill James said, that's what Harvey said, and that's what the BBWAA said. Allen was not on track to get in before James published anything negative about his case, he was doing about as well as Gary Sheffield is right now. I don't have anything to add either way to those opinions. I wasn't there.
   1321. chisoxcollector Posted: January 08, 2018 at 04:55 PM (#5602963)
I have to say, it has been a much less stressful HOF voting period for me this year. Frank Thomas and Tim Raines are two of my three favorite players of all-time (along with Robin Ventura). The last few years were nerve racking every time a voter released his ballot.
   1322. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 08, 2018 at 05:22 PM (#5602993)
Damn, Ray Thomas of the Moody Blues died. Didn't make it to the Rock and Roll HOF induction in April.
Probably my second favorite band after the Beatles. "Timothy Leary's dead, no no no no, he's outside, looking in."
   1323. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 08, 2018 at 05:22 PM (#5602995)
As for "slow voters"- aren't a lot of the late public voters ones who participate in group votes, and who therefore seem to be unable to release their ballot prior to the group reveal? In that case, the issue with speed isn't the writer, but whoever is publishing them.

Yes, there are quite a few that don't release their votes until just before the official announcement, and others that do so just after. Both probably motivated to not pre-empt the official announcement. The "slow voter" comment was just a tongue-in-cheek lament about the lull in Thibs compilation. It's not like he'd slack off, he's probably calling the holdouts hourly.
   1324. Baldrick Posted: January 08, 2018 at 05:51 PM (#5603019)
I have to say, it has been a much less stressful HOF voting period for me this year. Frank Thomas and Tim Raines are two of my three favorite players of all-time (along with Robin Ventura). The last few years were nerve racking every time a voter released his ballot.

Edgar Martinez is my favorite player, by far. I look forward to the day when I can share your sanguinity.
   1325. chisoxcollector Posted: January 08, 2018 at 06:07 PM (#5603028)
Edgar Martinez is my favorite player, by far. I look forward to the day when I can share your sanguinity.


Ouch, the Tim Raines route is particularly painful. For your sake, I hope Edgar gets in this year to spare you the final year stress.

The Big Hurt is by far my favorite. Leading up to the voting I was worried that a lot of voters didn’t realize how historic his offensive peak was. Combined with a “one dimensional” penalty, I was terrified he’d only get 60% or something. Luckily, it didn’t take long to realize he was pretty safe.

I have to admit, I’m going to be a little bit annoyed if Jim Thome gets a higher percentage of the vote than Thomas did. I know it doesn’t matter... but it matters to me! I love Jim Thome, and will be thrilled when he’s inducted. I’ve met him a bunch of times and he’s an awesome guy. And he was a hell of a hitter. But he’s no Big Hurt!
   1326. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: January 08, 2018 at 08:04 PM (#5603072)
Does anyone have a link to Harvey’s obit or know what his actual name and locale were? I always wanted to know his story. He was such a character, and I miss his posts too. Thanks.
   1327. Adam Starblind Posted: January 08, 2018 at 08:17 PM (#5603078)
Thomas was the only player I ever heard assertively talking about walks as part of his offensive contributions.
   1328. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: January 08, 2018 at 09:27 PM (#5603096)
Thomas was the only player I ever heard assertively talking about walks as part of his offensive contributions.

Joey Votto too.
   1329. 6 - 4 - 3 Posted: January 08, 2018 at 09:28 PM (#5603097)
I have to admit, I’m going to be a little bit annoyed if Jim Thome gets a higher percentage of the vote than Thomas did. I know it doesn’t matter... but it matters to me! I love Jim Thome, and will be thrilled when he’s inducted. I’ve met him a bunch of times and he’s an awesome guy. And he was a hell of a hitter. But he’s no Big Hurt!

Very different electorate today than the one that elected Thomas in 2013.
   1330. Ziggy's screen name Posted: January 08, 2018 at 10:16 PM (#5603109)
I liked reading about how Thomas was tracking his progress on the gizmo. Here's the quote:

Thomas admitted the past few days had been stressful as an announcement drew close, but he also said he had been following the Baseball Think Factory's vote count, which tracked Thomas at 89.4 percent of the vote.
"I was watching that Gizmo thing because people said it had been accurate," Thomas said.


Interview.
   1331. Random Transaction Generator Posted: January 09, 2018 at 12:06 AM (#5603149)
Dan Shaughnessey: Vlad, Chipper & Thome


That's the first ballot with 3 or 2 names that DIDN'T have Vizquel.

   1332. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: January 09, 2018 at 12:35 AM (#5603162)
Dan Shaughnessey: Vlad, Chipper & Thome


Well I suppose if you are a tiny hall guy who likes batting average and narrative and penalizes anyone with a roid taint...then it's the perfect ballot!
   1333. QLE Posted: January 09, 2018 at 03:27 AM (#5603174)
Very different electorate today than the one that elected Thomas in 2013.


That, and I'd also argue that Thome is facing a somewhat less glutted ballot than Thomas did- how well Thome would have done on the 2014 ballot, or how Thomas would do if he was a first-timer this year, is something we'll never be able to test.
   1334. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 09, 2018 at 04:31 AM (#5603175)
(1329) If it was up to me, Frank Thomas and Tom Glavine would have swapped their voting percentages in the 2014 election.
Yes, Gentleman Jim's greater percentage of games in the field (65.75% - 42.53%) is resulting in a higher vote total
than Frank Thomas. No, this doesn't mean Franky T. was any less of a hitter than Jimmy T.
   1335. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: January 09, 2018 at 09:29 AM (#5603230)
#1322:
Damn, Ray Thomas of the Moody Blues died. Didn't make it to the Rock and Roll HOF induction in April.


But what do obstinate gatekeepers making a Hall of Fame about themselves have to do with the BBWAA voting?

The Moody Blues first became eligible for induction in 1989. That date is literally closer to the Moody Blues' first single than it is to today.
   1336. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 09, 2018 at 10:33 AM (#5603264)
(1335) The Moody Blues were inducted into the "Me" Hall of Fame in 1977 when I chose the 2-LP "This is the Moody Blues" compilation
as one of my introductory selections from Columbia House. I immediately waived the "25 years from first recording" waiting period.
   1337. DanG Posted: January 09, 2018 at 11:59 AM (#5603365)
When determining HOF standards, I like to reference players who have been candidates for a long while. I look at candidates who have at least a couple decades of vetting by the Hall electorates. In this way, the standards of the past can then be applied to current candidates to see who is being overlooked, as well as showing which weak candidates have "jumped the queue" and been inducted ahead of more qualified players.

Start by looking at position players retiring in 2000 or earlier. Who has the most WAA outside the Hall?

Rk         Player WAAWAR/    PA From   To
1     Bobby Grich 43.4 70.9  8220 1970 1986 H
2    Lou Whitaker 42.5 74.9  9967 1977 1995 H
3     Joe Jackson 40.3 62.3  5695 1908 1920 H
4     Bill Dahlen 39.6 75.2 10405 1891 1911 H
5    Reggie Smith 37.4 64.5  8051 1966 1982 H
6  Jack Glasscock 36.2 61.9  7552 1879 1895 H
7 Willie Randolph 35.7 65.5  9461 1975 1992 H
8      Dick Allen 32.9 58.7  7315 1963 1977 H
9    Dwight Evans 32.8 66.9 10569 1972 1991 H
10  Graig Nettles 32.8 68.0 10228 1967 1988 H
11      Sal Bando 32.5 61.4  8287 1966 1981
12     Buddy Bell 32.4 66.1 10009 1972 1989
13    Bobby Bonds 31.8 57.7  8090 1968 1981
14Keith Hernandez 31.6 60.0  8553 1974 1990 H
15      Ken Boyer 31.5 62.8  8272 1955 1969 H
16   Sherry Magee 31.0 59.0  8541 1904 1919 H
17    Bob Johnson 30.9 57.2  8050 1933 1945
18     Chet Lemon 29.6 55.5  7874 1975 1990
19 Charlie Keller 29.1 43.0  4604 1939 1952 H
20     Will Clark 28.8 56.2  8283 1986 2000 H
21      Pete Rose 28.6 79.1 15890 1963 1986 H
22       Jim Wynn 28.6 55.6  8011 1963 1977 H
23    Gene Tenace 27.9 46.8  5527 1969 1983
24   Art Fletcher 27.6 47.0  6036 1909 1922
25  Pete Browning 27.4 40.6  5315 1882 1894 H
26   Harry Stovey 27.3 45.1  6848 1880 1893 H
27  Minnie Minoso 26.8 50.2  7712 1949 1980 H 

Players in the Hall of Merit are marked "H".
   1338. DanG Posted: January 09, 2018 at 12:17 PM (#5603384)
Which position players retiring after 2000 have the most WAA outside the Hall?

Rk         Player  WAA/  WAR/    PA From   To
1     Barry Bonds 123.5 162.4 12606 1986 2007 H
2   Alex Rodriguez 76.0 117.7 12207 1994 2016
3    Chipper Jones 53.2  85.0 10614 1993 2012 H
4     Larry Walker 48.2  72.6  8030 1989 2005 H
5      Scott Rolen 43.9  70.0  8518 1996 2012 H
6   Edgar Martinez 38.5  68.3  8674 1987 2004 H
7     Kenny Lofton 38.2  68.2  9235 1991 2007
8        Jim Thome 37.5  72.9 10313 1991 2012 H
9     Mark McGwire 37.0  62.0  7660 1986 2001 H
10    Andruw Jones 36.0  62.8  8664 1996 2012
11   Manny Ramirez 35.6  69.2  9774 1993 2011 H
12     Jim Edmonds 34.9  60.3  7980 1993 2010 H
13  Carlos Beltran 34.1  69.8 11031 1998 2017
14     Todd Helton 32.8  61.2  9453 1997 2013
15     Derek Jeter 30.4  71.8 12602 1995 2014
16 Rafael Palmeiro 30.1  71.6 12046 1986 2005 H
17   Vlad Guerrero 29.4  59.3  9059 1996 2011 H 
   1339. gabrielthursday Posted: January 09, 2018 at 02:46 PM (#5603493)
#1338 It is interesting to note how low Jeter appears on that list - below debatable guys like Helton, Edmonds, Lofton and Andruw Jones. And that's on the basis of the most-favourable defensive metrics for Jeter. Michael Humphreys and Tom Tango estimate him approximately 200 runs worse, if I remember correctly.
   1340. Hysterical & Useless Posted: January 09, 2018 at 03:50 PM (#5603552)
When I was in college a lot of people were big fans of the Moody Blues. I thought "Nights in White Satin" was a lovely song. The rest of their stuff, not to my taste.
   1341. Rally Posted: January 09, 2018 at 04:15 PM (#5603590)
#1338 It is interesting to note how low Jeter appears on that list - below debatable guys like Helton, Edmonds, Lofton and Andruw Jones. And that's on the basis of the most-favourable defensive metrics for Jeter. Michael Humphreys and Tom Tango estimate him approximately 200 runs worse, if I remember correctly.


You are right that there are estimates much less favorable to Jeter's defense, but DRS is not the most favorable. It has him at -246 on bbref (combined with totalzone for the years before DRS was available). Fangraphs has him at -147, as UZR does not see him as being as terrible as DRS does.

Weird that despite 100 runs of defensive variation his WAR is exactly 71.8 on both sites.

bat 309, 353
bsr 24, 56
def -147, -246
pos 117, 135
rep+lg 434, 438

So BBref likes his offense and baserunning just enough better to offset the lower fielding numbers.
   1342. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 09, 2018 at 06:04 PM (#5603692)
(1340) The bad thing about the Moody Blues is that classic radio plays the same 10 or 12 songs and nothing else.
Another bad thing is that the Moody Blues (unlike Springsteen) play those same 10 or 12 songs (and a few more) every single concert. No deep cuts.
The great thing about the Moody Blues was that they had four legitimate singer/songwriters in the group, with Justin Hayward as the biggest hitmaker.
So, it was pretty easy to crank out a string of solid albums. I bet there are a few other Justin Hayward songs not played on the radio
that you would like.
   1343. gabrielthursday Posted: January 09, 2018 at 06:07 PM (#5603697)
#1341 You are right that there are estimates much less favorable to Jeter's defense, but DRS is not the most favorable. It has him at -246 on bbref (combined with totalzone for the years before DRS was available). Fangraphs has him at -147, as UZR does not see him as being as terrible as DRS does.


Good catch - should have double-checked. It's surprising to see B-R and FG vary so far on non-defensive metrics. Anyway, I know Bill James used to do some range-factor-based metrics, and I gather Jeter was pretty bad there, but I don't think they're publicly available. I'd like to see that - over a full career, something range-factor based ought to be pretty useful. Michael Humphrey's DRA puts Jeter at -350 for his career.
   1344. DanG Posted: January 09, 2018 at 06:21 PM (#5603704)
And here are position players in the Hall with the least WAA, retiring in the past 50 years:

Rk         Player WAAWAR/    PA From   To
1  Bill Mazeroski  4.7 36.2  8379 1956 1972
2       Lou Brock  8.2 45.2 11240 1961 1979
3      Tony Perez 17.9 53.9 10861 1964 1986
4  Orlando Cepeda 18.3 50.3  8698 1958 1974
5        Jim Rice 18.6 47.4  9058 1974 1989
6   Luis Aparicio 20.4 55.7 11230 1956 1973
7   Dave Winfield 23.7 63.8 12358 1973 1995
8   Kirby Puckett 25.5 50.9  7831 1984 1995
9 Willie Stargell 26.6 57.5  9027 1962 1982
10 Billy Williams 27.0 63.6 10519 1959 1976
11   Eddie Murray 27.0 68.3 12817 1977 1997 
   1345. EddieA Posted: January 09, 2018 at 09:48 PM (#5603800)
<1344> Narrative is important to many of these.

Wasn't Mazeroski "Best defensive 2b" + Game winning WS homer
Lou Brock steals leader
Tony Perez and Cepeda Latin
Rice the fear
Aparicio most games at ss, steals, and MVP votes
Winfield 3000 hits
Puckett premature career ending while still apparently near the top of his game, at least hitting
Stargell "We are family"
Williams not really all that borderline
Murray not really all that borderline

   1346. QLE Posted: January 10, 2018 at 01:39 AM (#5603847)
#1337, #1338, and #1344-

The career WAA approach is an interesting one, and has a couple of advantages over career WAR (namely, it understands that value X of WAR is more valuable if accumulated in a shorter period of time), but has a couple of limitations for understanding peak- namely, because it is still tied to career WAR, it can punish some players whose had truly awful seasons to start or end their careers, and (albeit to a lesser extent than career WAR) still has an accumulator effect.

I have an approach that looks at peak over the best ten years of a position player's career, and also notes seasons with 5+ WAR, seasons among the league leaders in WAR, and seasons among the league leaders in position player WAR.

Using your players- first, the #1337 list:

Shoeless Joe Jackson: 7/6/8/61.9
Pete Rose: 8/3/6/59.4
Bobby Grich: 7/4/7/58.4
Ken Boyer: 8/5/7/57.6
Sal Bando: 7/3/7/56.4
Dick Allen: 6/3/6/56.0
Graig Nettles: 6/2/6/55.0
Jim Wynn: 6/3/4/54.1
Bill Dahlen: 7/3/8/53.6
Bobby Bonds: 7/2/3/52.8
Keith Hernandez: 6/5/6/52.7
Buddy Bell: 5/3/5/52.1
Reggie Smith: 5/1/4/51.4
Lou Whitaker: 4/2/3/50.6
Minnie Minoso: 5/6/6/50.1
Jack Glasscock: 5/6/9/49.4
Sherry Magee: 4/2/7/49.2
Dwight Evans: 4/2/2/48.7
Willie Randolph: 4/1/2/48.3
Chet Lemon: 4/3/4/47.9
Indian Bob Johnson: 3/2/4/47.4
Art Fletcher: 3/4/7/46.8
Will Clark: 3/2/3/45.9
Gene Tenace: 4/1/3/43.1
Charlie Keller: 5/5/5/42.1
Harry Stovey: 2/3/8/39.7
Pete Browning: 3/5/5/38.5

As can be seen, the relative position of players on this list differs- someone like Rose (whose career WAA is low because he spent so long playing poorly in his chase for the hit record) improves substantially, while the likes of Whitaker (who had lots of prime, but not much peak) declines.

In my approach, those who end up with 50+ WAR in their peak are clear HOFers- the top fifteen on my list all should be in the HOF (or would be were it not for their off-the-field behaviors), and I would also argue that Glasscock, Magee, Fletcher, Stovey, and Browning (all of whom had their peaks affected by seasonal length in one way or another) are similarly deserving. Of the others, cases can be clearly made for Evans (depending on how much strike credit he deserves in 1981), Randolph (for the large amount of prime outside his peak), Lemon (same reasons as Evans), Johnson (depending on how we calculate minor-league credit), and Keller (depending on how we give WWII credit). Of these, the only two I draw a line with are Clark (for reasons that will be apparent shortly) and Tenace (if he just caught, I'd say he deserved induction- but he spent a lot of time at first base, including in his peak years, and this reduces the amount of catcher credit I feel comfortable giving).

Now, the #1338 list:

Barry Bonds: 17/16/17/97.9
Alex Rodriguez: 11/10/11/86.9
Chipper Jones: 8/7/5/60.7
Edgar Martinez: 8/2/7/58.8
Larry Walker: 6/3/5/58.1
Andruw Jones: 6/5/6/57.8
Scott Rolen: 6/3/4/57.2
Carlos Beltran: 6/3/5/57.1
Todd Helton: 5/4/5/55.8
Jim Edmonds: 7/3/5/55.2
Mark McGwire: 8/3/6/54.8
Kenny Lofton: 6/3/5/54.6
Jim Thome: 5/3/5/54.3
Derek Jeter: 5/4/4/54.1
Manny Ramirez: 6/1/2/53.4
Vladimir Guerrero: 5/4/4/52.4
Rafael Palmeiro: 5/1/5/51.5

This list doesn't have quite the same variations with the career WAA list as #1337 did (especially at the very top and very bottom), and all the players on this list merit induction (and, with this list, the good news is that three of those on it look like they will be inducted in a few weeks' time).

Finally, the #1344 list:

Billy Williams: 5/3/4/53.6
Eddie Murray: 5/2/4/51.1
Dave Winfield: 5/1/3/48.5
Willie Stargell: 4/2/3/46.9
Kirby Puckett: 3/2/3/46.8
Tony Perez: 4/1/4/45.5
Orlando Cepeda: 3/2/2/44.3
Jim Rice: 5/2/4/43.4
Luis Aparicio: 2/1/2/42.5
Lou Brock: 3/0/2/39.7
Bill Mazeroski: 0/0/1/33.4

Williams and Murray are unquestionably deserving HOFers (and, in Murray's case, his performance on this list is somewhat negatively impacted by the 1981 strike- he probably lost 1.5 WAR or so from his peak because of it).

As for the others (and this is a commentary that is in many regards a response to #1345 as well):

-Winfield's presence is kind of the flip side of Andruw Jones, as it depends on how much one believes the metrics for outfield fielding. Neither the HOF nor the HOM were ones that concerned themselves too much with this (they were both working pre-WAR), and neither had any difficulties inducting him.

-My method dislikes Stargell because he lacked seasonal durability, and I'm not sure if it's a flaw in the method or Stargell or both. Also a HOM inductee with some ease.

-Puckett came close, especially when strike credit is added- I have to wonder if Dale Murphy would have gotten the same treatment if he had had his career end abruptly as well (instead of six seasons of below-average and usually part-time play).

-Perez and Cepeda demonstrate why I'm not a big fan of Will Clark's HOF case- there is a cluster of first basemen with very similar peaks (Norm Cash and Gil Hodges are others, as is David Ortiz if you don't consider the DH a position), and I'm not convinced that either strike credit or a few seasons of somewhat above-average play (which is what Clark's career outside this time amounts to) is sufficient to make a difference.

-Rice, in terms of his actual merits, is one of a long list of folk who had a few great years but didn't accomplish much outside of them (his WAA outside his five best seasons is negative)- in certain regards, he's a less-extreme version of the Dave Parker story, only able to get traction that Parker never did.

-Every thirty years or so, the BBWAA overrates a shortstop due to his defensive performances. Maranville was the 1950s version, Aparicio was the 1980s version, and Vizquel is the one we're seeing now.

-In addition to the stolen bases and the singles, I wonder if Brock's overrating has to do with the timing of his best seasons- the three great years he had are the three the Cardinals made it to the World Series (including the one where he was traded to them a third of the way into the season), and I wonder how much this served to inflate his reputation.

-As for Mazeroski, I'd say that this slash line alone says plenty, and that anything else is somewhat superfluous.
   1347. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 10, 2018 at 10:38 AM (#5603921)
This post's mention of Jim Rice got me thinking of Sam Rice and the lowest HR% of HOFers who played in the live ball era.
Off the top of my head, I came up with Richie Ashburn and Nellie Fox. Is there someone I'm missing?
   1348. SoSH U at work Posted: January 10, 2018 at 10:48 AM (#5603928)

Is there someone I'm missing?


Ozzie
   1349. DanG Posted: January 10, 2018 at 12:26 PM (#5604037)
#1346 is great, as it takes the lists and uses them as a starting point for deeper research.

Continuing from #1344, here are position players in the Hall with the least WAA retiring 50-80 years ago (1938-67), after the time of the infamous "Frisch selections." This list is significant because it indicates the baseline for HOF standards for players who were fully vetted by the VC.:

Rk         Player WAAWAR/    PA From   To
1     Lloyd Waner 
-2.1 24.1  8334 1927 1945 V
2    Rick Ferrell  5.9 29.8  7076 1929 1947 V
3 Re Schoendienst  8.5 42.3  9224 1945 1963 V
4     George Kell 15.1 37.4  7529 1943 1957 V
5   Heinie Manush 15.5 45.8  8419 1923 1939 V
6  Roy Campanella 15.7 34.2  4815 1948 1957 B H
7      Nellie Fox 18.3 49.0 10351 1947 1965 V H
8     Chuck Klein 20.5 43.6  7171 1928 1944 V
9    Phil Rizzuto 21.0 40.8  6719 1941 1956 V
10    Kiki Cuyler 21.2 46.7  8100 1921 1938 V
11 Enos Slaughter 22.3 55.1  9086 1938 1959 V H
12   Earl Averill 22.8 48.0  7221 1929 1941 V H
13   Tony Lazzeri 23.6 49.9  7315 1926 1939 V
14 Ernie Lombardi 24.4 45.9  6352 1931 1947 V
15    Ralph Kiner 25.6 49.3  6256 1946 1955 B H
16   Billy Herman 26.6 54.7  8638 1931 1947 V H
17    Bobby Doerr 27.0 51.2  8028 1937 1951 V H
18    Joe Medwick 28.2 55.6  8143 1932 1948 B H 

"V" indicates Veterans committee selections. "B" indicates BBWAA selections. "H" indicates Hall of Merit selections.
   1350. The Duke Posted: January 10, 2018 at 01:12 PM (#5604089)
1346 . Where is Ted simmons on this list. And trammel and morris
   1351. Ziggy's screen name Posted: January 10, 2018 at 02:19 PM (#5604127)
I know that there are many things that are more-worth getting upset about but this:

Lloyd Waner -2.1

upsets me. We've got BELOW AVERAGE players in the HOF.
   1352. Greg Pope Posted: January 10, 2018 at 02:32 PM (#5604136)
I'm considering attending induction weekend since Alan Trammell was my favorite player as a kid. In the pictures that I've seen, it looks like large crowds mean that you don't really get to see much. The HOF offers travel packages that include VIP seating. Anyone done that? Is it worth it? I don't relish being at the back of a crowd and only hearing the players.

Also, should I book before the BBWAA announcements? I'm assuming that more people decide to go once they know who's in.
   1353. QLE Posted: January 10, 2018 at 02:42 PM (#5604143)
1346 . Where is Ted simmons on this list. And trammel and morris


Morris is a pitcher- and I am a bit reluctant to handle pitchers with my methodology because pitching WAR is heavily contested in ways that are not as severe with position player WAR.

I didn't include Simmons or Trammell because they didn't make the lists in question- Simmons has a relatively weak WAA because of the last five seasons of his career (and especially his 1984) and because, as a catcher, he had less of a chance to accumulate a really high WAA in the first place, and Trammell, as of the last VC meeting, is a HOFer and no longer eligible for the list at #1337.

That said, their statistics, by my calculations:

Alan Trammell: 6/5/6/56.8
Ted Simmons: 4/0/5/45.4

Trammell was the best shortstop whose career was entirely in the 20th century and who was eligible for HOF consideration to not be in, and was fifth on the #1337 list prior to his induction.

In Simmons' case, I use a base of 40 rather than 50 for catchers (reflecting that catchers tend to play around 80% of the games that all other positions do)- by this methodology, he's tenth all-time among catchers (behind seven HOFers, the still-active Joe Mauer, and Thurman Munson), and clearly meriting HOF induction.

As for this list in #1349, I'll get around to it later in the day- i have some work to do shortly, and I don't have pre-existing figures for Waner, Ferrell, Schoendienst, or Kell.
   1354. Adam Starblind Posted: January 10, 2018 at 02:51 PM (#5604156)
I'm considering attending induction weekend since Alan Trammell was my favorite player as a kid. In the pictures that I've seen, it looks like large crowds mean that you don't really get to see much. The HOF offers travel packages that include VIP seating. Anyone done that? Is it worth it? I don't relish being at the back of a crowd and only hearing the players.

Also, should I book before the BBWAA announcements? I'm assuming that more people decide to go once they know who's in.


Yeah dude, he's your favorite player. Go VIP. You're only going to spend the money on things, most of which you don't need. You'll remember Trammell's induction until you're dead.

   1355. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: January 10, 2018 at 03:03 PM (#5604164)

You'll remember Trammell's induction until you're dead.
or senile.
   1356. Lassus Posted: January 10, 2018 at 03:05 PM (#5604166)
I don't relish being at the back of a crowd and only hearing the players.

Well, it is a large lawn, but you can get there early (and may the gods of sunshine/humidity have mercy on you that weekend) they also have massive video screens and you would certainly see the players. I admit I have no idea what a VIP seat entails, but I have no argument with Starblind's thoughts.
   1357. Greg Pope Posted: January 10, 2018 at 03:12 PM (#5604175)
Right, this is obviously a once-in-a-lifetime thing for me. I honestly didn't think Trammell would ever get in. I was pretty jealous when my friend went to the induction of his favorite, George Brett.

I just was wondering if anyone here had ever attended in the VIP section.
   1358. Greg Pope Posted: January 10, 2018 at 03:14 PM (#5604176)
they also have massive video screens and you would certainly see the players. I admit I have no idea what a VIP seat entails

Maybe it's just me, but I've been to concerts in huge arenas with the large video screens, and I just always have the feeling that I might as well be watching from home.
   1359. Ithaca2323 Posted: January 10, 2018 at 03:14 PM (#5604177)
Can I aske a question about the ceremony? What's it like for people in wheelchairs? Do they have reserved seating? Is it hard to get to restrooms/portapotties? I'm planning on going if Mike Mussina is inducted, but really want to figure out a plan that doesn't involve me being penned in (especially if he gets inducted with Jeter, which will be a mess and a half)
   1360. dave h Posted: January 10, 2018 at 03:33 PM (#5604189)
I went for Pedro, I had no idea what I was doing, and it was a bit of a nightmare. It was screaming hot, and of course they kept him for the last speech. We had no idea where to park and so had a long walk (with 4 little kids - 2 mine and 2 my brother's) and ended up with a random spot pretty far back in the field. My brother's family didn't make it long before they couldn't take it and left. We could mostly just see on the video boards (although even for that induction, it didn't feel crowded anywhere but the little bits of shade). We didn't bring any food or drink, and there was much less available than I thought there would be.

And I would absolutely do it all over again. (Hopefully better though.)
   1361. SoSH U at work Posted: January 10, 2018 at 03:42 PM (#5604193)
I went for Pedro, I had no idea what I was doing, and it was a bit of a nightmare. It was screaming hot, and of course they kept him for the last speech. We had no idea where to park and so had a long walk (with 4 little kids - 2 mine and 2 my brother's) and ended up with a random spot pretty far back in the field. My brother's family didn't make it long before they couldn't take it and left. We could mostly just see on the video boards (although even for that induction, it didn't feel crowded anywhere but the little bits of shade). We didn't bring any food or drink, and there was much less available than I thought there would be.


I went to the ceremony about 25 years ago, the year Hank and Frank were inducted. We arrived a few minutes before the ceremony began and were about 25 feet from the stage. Later on, I snuck into the hotel where all the players stay and got to meet Cool Papa Bell and a few other HoFers.

It sounds like things have changed a little since then.

   1362. Srul Itza Posted: January 10, 2018 at 04:39 PM (#5604231)
I went to the ceremony about 25 years ago, the year Hank and Frank were inducted


Senility is creeping up on you.

Try around 35 years ago.

Feel old yet?

ETA: My only trip to the Hall (not an induction weekend) was more like 50 years ago.
   1363. QLE Posted: January 10, 2018 at 05:23 PM (#5604266)
Here's the list in #1349, ranked using the methodology mentioned in #1346:

Joe Medwick: 3/4/6/50.4
Ralph Kiner: 5/4/5/49.3
Earl Averill: 4/3/5/48.0
Bobby Doerr: 6/5/6/46.0
Billy Herman: 3/3/4/45.3
Nellie Fox: 4/5/6/45.1
Enos Slaughter: 3/2/5/44.5
Chuck Klein: 4/4/5/43.8
Tony Lazzeri: 3/2/4/43.8
Heinie Manush: 3/1/3/41.3
Kiki Cuyler: 2/4/6/40.3
Phil Rizzuto: 3/3/3/40.2
Red Schoendienst: 3/2/4/38
Ernie Lombardi: 1/1/1/36
George Kell: 0/1/3/34.7
Roy Campanella: 3/2/3/34.2
Lloyd Waner: 0/0/0/24.7
Rick Ferrell: 0/0/0/24.1

All of these players spent the peaks of their careers in the 154-game era, so their statistics (excepting the catchers) merit a 5% boost to have them equal those in the 162-game era. This equals a base of 48 WAR for the non-catchers- on the surface, this means clear induction only for Medwick, Kiner, and (by the skin of his teeth) Averill.

However, in order to properly analyze these players, it's best to look at them one-by-one, as a rather high percentage, for reasons to be dealt with, cannot have their statistics taken at face value:

-Medwick basically had three great years and some prime- but that was just enough for him to get over the 50 WAR mark.

-Kiner's start in the majors was almost certainly delayed by WWII, as he spent close to three years in the service. Without the war, he probably makes the majors at least a year early (given the level he had already reached before entering the service), and even one year of average play gets him over 50 WAR (by supplanting his poor 1955).

-Averill entered the majors late and spent three years crushing competition in the PCL. Given his level of play once he reached the majors, it seems clear that his peak would get a boost once credit for his 1928 season is given.

-Doerr left the 1944 season with a month to go and missed the entire 1945 season to enter the service. His level of performance surrounding those years is such that 5 WAR at a conservative estimate should be added- and this is enough for him to merit induction.

-Billy Herman is more complicated- like Doerr, he missed time due to WWII, but, in his case, the issue is one of calculating his potential performance in 1944 and 1945, given how quickly his career ended post-war. If we assume he would have remained at his 1943 level, he narrowly merits induction- the issue is that I'm not sure if that is the case....

-Nellie Fox doesn't have WWII or extended minor-league time as an issue. Rather, his is one involving defensive calculations- if you trust it as bWAR has it, he doesn't merit induction, but, if you think his performance was substantially better (as the HOM did), then he deserves to get in.

-Enos Slaughter missed three years from his prime due to WWII- if we assume he would have performed at his 1946 level (or higher) in the missing years, he merits induction.

-Chuck Klein can probably be best summed up as a demonstration as for why park factors matter- a few great years in the Baker Bowl, but not much else for his career.

-There isn't much to say about Lazzeri that hasn't been said many times before.

-Manush belongs to the parade of 1920s/1930s players who were overrated by the VC due to the high batting averages of the period- he's better than many of the friends of Frankie Frisch, but no more deserving of induction than Ken Williams, and clearly inferior to the likes of Bobby Veach.

-Cuyler had a great nickname and a great championship season for the Pirates- but when you are inferior to Chuck Klein in a head-to-head comparison....

-There are people who argue that Rizzuto deserves to get in, based on war credit. This I find highly questionable- by my methods, you'd have to assume he would have been a far better player during the war years than he consistently was at any point in his career.

-The belief is that Schoendienst was inducted due to his career with the Cardinals as a whole, rather than just as a player- he clearly falls far short if just his playing career is considered.

-Given that Lombardi was a catcher (albeit one on the Piazza level of fielding), he's closer to meriting induction than those directly above him on the list- but I still feel comfortable saying no, especially since there are four or five other catchers at the same level.

-Kell seems to have been overrated in his peak because of the performance of the Tigers between 1947 (after Greenberg at left) and 1950- in retrospective, it seems to have been more a combination of luck and underrated pitching.

-Campanella demonstrates the limitations of this methodology quite well- because of the color line, his major-league record misses much of his peak and includes all of his decline. I haven't calculated any equivalencies for his time in the Negro Leagues- but, just eyeballing the raw numbers, I suspect he's at the level of Cochrane and Berra at a minimum.

-It seems safe to say that Lloyd Waner would never have been inducted if he didn't have Paul as a brother, and it can be left at that.

-Apparently, Rick Ferrell was an outright mistake- a bunch of people casting token votes, and not realizing that they added up to enough to induct him until too late. Given that he was a catcher, he was better than Lloyd Waner, but that's not saying very much.

Looked at this way, then, six of these players (Medwick, Kiner, Averill, Doerr, Slaughter, and Campanella) clearly merit HOF induction, and two more (Fox and Herman) have potential cases- interestingly, this aligned almost exactly with how the HOM (working for the most part prior to the emergence of WAR) has calculated it.
   1364. SoSH U at work Posted: January 10, 2018 at 05:54 PM (#5604278)

Senility is creeping up on you.

Try around 35 years ago.

Feel old yet?



Damn, lost 10 years there.

   1365. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: January 10, 2018 at 06:14 PM (#5604284)
Been to several HOF Inductions over the past 20 years. Advice:

1) If you are getting there only for the Sunday, get there by 10 or so - the parking is much easier and cheaper.
2) Bring a cooler for the ceremony itself - lots of cool drinks, snacks, sandwiches, etc. Almost impossible to bring too much water.
3) If you can be there for the Saturday, do it at least once. The 6 pm parade of greats going through downtown is extremely cool.

The crowds for the ceremony are definitely getting bigger, on balance (though some years will bump trend line up or down). I think the biggest mistake people make is trying to get there at the last minute for the ceremony - I cannot overstate how much better Cooperstown is to visit when you are not in a rush. Pop in and out of stores, walk around, etc
   1366. dave h Posted: January 10, 2018 at 10:27 PM (#5604384)
They did a good job having basically firehoses of water, which was necessary given the heat and total exposure in the field. Wish we had brought food and more interesting drink though (and probably something to pass the time).

We actually camped nearby, which was really great. However, we skipped the Saturday - I think the next time I'll prioritize the Saturday parade and maybe not even go to the ceremony.
   1367. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 10, 2018 at 10:48 PM (#5604391)
-Every thirty years or so, the BBWAA overrates a shortstop due to his defensive performances. Maranville was the 1950s version, Aparicio was the 1980s version, and Vizquel is the one we're seeing now.

I think Aparicio got in for bringing back the stolen base rather than his defense.
   1368. QLE Posted: January 11, 2018 at 12:07 AM (#5604436)
I think Aparicio got in for bringing back the stolen base rather than his defense.


Yes and no, I'd argue- the stolen bases clearly helped him get a base of support, but, if it was just the stolen bases, Maury Wills would have also been inducted, and he peaked at 40.6%. Given that neither man was much with the bat, it would seem that Aparicio's defense was what made the difference.
   1369. reech Posted: January 11, 2018 at 12:25 AM (#5604440)
Me and my teenage son went for the Griffey/Piazza year. Did Saturday and Sunday- spent about 25 bucks a day to park in town, and had a blast. Hanging out before the speeches was like Baseball Woodstock. Everybody is your best friend. Bring a cooler, and you can leave your chairs on the lawn the day before.
   1370. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 11, 2018 at 02:45 PM (#5604826)
I was wondering if anyone could look up this answer for me.

Since 1901, how many pitchers have made at least one start in the major leagues?
   1371. Kiko Sakata Posted: January 11, 2018 at 02:58 PM (#5604843)
Since 1901, how many pitchers have made at least one start in the major leagues?


It looks like Baseball-Reference's play index finds 5,735 such players.
   1372. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 11, 2018 at 03:47 PM (#5604888)
(1371) Thank you, I was going to guess around 5,000. I put the Brewers 215 starting pitchers in chronological order
1970 (Lew Krausse) to 2017 (Aaron Wilkerson). 155 made at least 7 starts and 60 made 6 starts or less.

It would be interesting to see how many pitchers since 1901 made at least 2 starts, 3 starts, 4 starts, all the way up
to 148 (where the baseball reference career leaders list begins).
I think even making 50 career starts is a special accomplishment.
   1373. The Duke Posted: January 11, 2018 at 09:18 PM (#5605147)
This thread has disappeared off the home page - is there an easy way to find it now
   1374. SoSH U at work Posted: January 11, 2018 at 09:27 PM (#5605155)
This thread has disappeared off the home page - is there an easy way to find it now


The easiest thing to do is to bookmark it. That will leave it above your Hot Topics sidebar.

Rolen just reached the expected number to ensure he's around for next year. Moreover, if you add in the two other partial votes, plus the support he's got from people who couldn't fit him on the ballot, and he's up around 20 percent of the electorate so far. His initial support could be much higher than most of us anticipated, a level from which he could make a legitimate push toward election.
   1375. bachslunch Posted: January 12, 2018 at 07:52 AM (#5605279)
Glad to see Rolen appears to be safe. Unless any of Sheffield, Wagner, or Kent do worse than expected, the major concerns now are Santana and Andruw.

I'm actually not surprised Rolen is struggling. If memory serves, he's a close comp to Ron Santo, who had an awful time getting in. Hopefully, he'll manage better.
   1376. DanG Posted: January 12, 2018 at 08:07 AM (#5605289)
I think even making 50 career starts is a special accomplishment.
PI says that 1,952 guys have 50+ GS since 1901. BTW, you don't need to be a subscriber to get this information.
   1377. The Duke Posted: January 12, 2018 at 08:10 AM (#5605290)
I’m hoping Edgar gets in as this may finally eliminate the “more than 10 guys” problem. It would allow Mcgriff and Walker to fully realize their votes and guys like rolen and Andruw Jones would pop up to a more reasonable percentage. I think schilling and mussina are getting close to the place where their momentum generates more votes. They could go in as early as next year.

For all the complaining, the writers are doing a good job of pushing a lot of guys through the pipeline. Once the PED guys move to the Vets committee, all will be back to normal.

I think the dark horse for next year is Larry walker. He should do really well
   1378. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: January 12, 2018 at 08:12 AM (#5605291)
Since 1901, how many pitchers have made at least one start in the major leagues?
It looks like Baseball-Reference's play index finds 5,735 such players.

it also finds that 678 pitchers have made exactly 1 career start
   1379. Ithaca2323 Posted: January 12, 2018 at 10:44 AM (#5605363)
It would allow Mcgriff and Walker to fully realize their votes


McGriff's are pretty fully realized. He's at 19% with voters who pick less than 10 players. He does terribly with first-time voters (1 for 10 in 2016, 2 for 15 last year, 2 for 9 this year). There's some movement at the margins due to the 10 player limit—because there is for nearly every serious, non-PED player who ever sees a ballot. But the jury is pretty clearly in on McGriff. I think he'd struggle to break 35% even on an unlimited ballot. The traditional stats are pretty good—especially if you're an anti-PED guy. But the advanced stats have him pegged as borderline at best—basically Will Clark.

Walker's made a decent amount of progress, most likely because he has advanced stats on his side. But he's still at just 40% with all his gains, and as the ballots shrink, I think he'll drop considerably. He's at 18% with voters who have fewer than 10 names on them, and just 4 of his 27 adds have come from those ballots.

I know that every vote matters, and I'm a fan of unlimited ballots. But I don't think these guys have major pockets of unrealized votes out there
   1380. The Duke Posted: January 12, 2018 at 01:00 PM (#5605480)
I’m not quite sure Mcgriff doesn’t do better. If you believe all three records from his era are inflated due to PED and you don’t think he did PEDs, his numbers look pretty darn good. But maybe it’s just me. Still I think he will get a surge to set him up for re-evaluation by the Vets.
   1381. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 12, 2018 at 01:22 PM (#5605501)
The "What Might Have Been" Non-HOFer Rotation

(Age and year of first start)

18-10 mos.(estimated) 1908 SMOKY JOE WOOD (158 career starts).....21-10 mos. 1955 HERB SCORE (127 career starts)
21-9 mos. 1976 MARK FIDRYCH (56 career starts).....20-10 mos. 1998 KERRY WOOD (178 career starts).....
20-8 mos. 2013 JOSE FERNANDEZ (76 career starts)
   1382. Ithaca2323 Posted: January 12, 2018 at 01:39 PM (#5605519)
If you believe all three records from his era are inflated due to PED and you don’t think he did PEDs, his numbers look pretty darn good.


Well, the traditional ones do. The advanced ones (52 WAR) don't. But that's been the case for how long? He's been on for 8 years, and earned, at most 23.9%. He's got two years left. If these voters are out there, they haven't shown up. In Year 9, he's net +3 with returning voters, and 22% with first-timers.
   1383. gabrielthursday Posted: January 12, 2018 at 02:01 PM (#5605538)
Well, the traditional ones do. The advanced ones (52 WAR) don't.
But the advanced stats are relative to the higher, presumably PED-enhanced, average offensive output during McGriff's career. If voters are viewing McGriff as a non-PED user in an age of cheating, those same voters should, to be consistent, give him some credit for the fact that he was competing in a environment where his value was suppressed by the cheating around him. That's perhaps hard to quantify (how far was the offensive level raised? To what extent were non-PED using hitters adversely affected by PED use by pitchers?), but some degree of credit should be given if a voter is concerned with PED use.
   1384. Ithaca2323 Posted: January 12, 2018 at 02:14 PM (#5605553)
But the advanced stats are relative to the higher, presumably PED-enhanced, average offensive output during McGriff's career. If voters are viewing McGriff as a non-PED user in an age of cheating, those same voters should, to be consistent, give him some credit for the fact that he was competing in a environment where his value was suppressed by the cheating around him. That's perhaps hard to quantify (how far was the offensive level raised? To what extent were non-PED using hitters adversely affected by PED use by pitchers?), but some degree of credit should be given if a voter is concerned with PED use.


The bolded part is what they should do, and what they clearly are doing, are two different things.

I'm not saying you're wrong if you're pro-McGriff. But in his 9th year on the ballot, he's probably going to finish under 25% for the 9th year in a row. There's just no progress being made like we're seeing with Edgar, Mussina, even Walker. At some point, the simplest explanation is probably the right one. He's not getting closer because he just doesn't have a lot of support.
   1385. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 12, 2018 at 02:24 PM (#5605560)
I’m hoping Edgar gets in as this may finally eliminate the “more than 10 guys” problem.

Electing 5 would free up ~1900 votes for next year's ballot, giving the non-1st ballot types an environment closer to the the pre-ballot glut days. Alas, I think Edgar may fall a few votes short, so the effect is diminished by ~ 350 votes, and with the offset by next year's 1st-year eligibles, the result may not be that dramatic. Still, some progress seems likely.
   1386. Rally Posted: January 12, 2018 at 02:31 PM (#5605568)
18-10 mos.(estimated) 1908 SMOKY JOE WOOD (158 career starts).....21-10 mos. 1955 HERB SCORE (127 career starts)
21-9 mos. 1976 MARK FIDRYCH (56 career starts).....20-10 mos. 1998 KERRY WOOD (178 career starts).....
20-8 mos. 2013 JOSE FERNANDEZ (76 career starts)


Some others:

Dwight Gooden (with 48 WAR and a 194-112 record he would not be the worst HOF selection, but wow what a start)
Mark Prior
Karl Spooner
   1387. John Northey Posted: January 12, 2018 at 04:53 PM (#5605692)
The 'good' thing with the glut is that we are approaching some lean years for voting. Halladay, Helton, Pettitte, Rivera are the only ones who are serious HOF contenders next year. Then only Jeter the following year. 2021 doesn't appear to have any serious contenders based on BR list. The following year sees A-Rod and Ortiz. So the next 4 years sees one year with no newbies who are HOF'ers, 4 who should be locks (Halladay, Rivera, Jeter, Ortiz), one who should get in someday despite being hated (A-Rod) and 2 who will build cases over years (Helton, Pettitte). Much easier than today's ballots. If it was still 15 years many on the ballot today would be in fantastic shape.
   1388. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 12, 2018 at 05:16 PM (#5605709)
I just don't think the "glut" has been that big a deal as far as keeping guys out of the HOF. Maybe some of the lesser candidates have had
percentages that are a little lower than usual. In 2013, Kenny Lofton and Bernie Williams were hurt as far as getting 5%.
Other than that, eight players have gone in on the first ballot since 2014. So, that leaves Biggio (third ballot in 2015), Piazza (fourth ballot in 2016),
and Bagwell (seventh ballot )/ Raines (tenth ballot) in 2017. Maybe they had to wait a year or two longer, who knows.
Voters will have a couple of extra spots next year (Rivera and Halladay as high debuts minus the four 2018 electees).
Maybe Buster Olney can give up his righteous protest and return to voting next year.
   1389. soc40 Posted: January 12, 2018 at 05:44 PM (#5605721)
Would be interesting and historical if next year we only see Mariano and Edgar elected. The greatest DH and the greatest closer (arguably, but for narrative purposes they are looked upon this way). How far will the Hall of come, electing two position players that don't count as "real" positions? DH and RP are like the plague for puritans.
   1390. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 12, 2018 at 06:29 PM (#5605735)
The best scenario for next year would be to have Mussina & Pettitte go in with Rivera, with Mariano stepping in to finish their speeches.
   1391. EO1828 Posted: January 12, 2018 at 06:32 PM (#5605739)
How will Walker do next year with Helton coming on the ballot? Their numbers are comparable across the board, except that Helton was a lifetime Rockies' player, and played about 360 more games than Walker in the same amount of years (17) while compiling about 360 more hits, 200 less SBs, 400+ more BBs.

This year we have a number of 1st year ballot players taking a significant number of votes (Chipper, Thome, Vizquel), but there was still room on many voters' ballots to significantly move upward the candidacies fo Vlad, Mussina, Edgar, Walker and Schilling, with oly Kent and Wagner suffering "minor" losses (in the grand scheme of things, although their candidacies were slow to begin with).
   1392. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 12, 2018 at 06:48 PM (#5605744)
I predict Larry Walker gets 37% this year and 45% next year. I predict Helton gets off to a slow start of 15-20% in 2019.
   1393. QLE Posted: January 12, 2018 at 07:50 PM (#5605764)
#1388- Reviewing the possible effects of the glut:

2011: First year in which glutted conditions are fully visible. Brown and Olerud both failed to make it to a second ballot, but this seems to be due to other factors in both cases (especially Brown's). None of the first-timers come particularly close to induction, and the backlog has mixed effects: Alomar and Blyleven gain enough to obtain induction and Larkin has considerable gains, but Martinez and McGwire lose ground and Trammell barely gains.

2012: Glut conditions let up with induction of Alomar and Blyleven, Brown falling off ballot, and a weak crop of first-timers (none of who really merit HOF induction, and Bernie Williams being the only one to make it to a second ballot). Larkin gets in; Bagwell, Raines, and Trammell surge; Martinez gets back to 2010 level of support; Walker barely gains; McGwire actually loses support slightly.

2013: The glut begins in earnest, as seven candidates with strong HOF chances enter ballot. The BBWAA fails to induct anyone: of the first-timers, the only ones to get over 50% are Biggio and Piazza, while Lofton falls off the ballot. Bagwell and Raines manage to narrowly gain support; Martinez basically holds; everyone else who merits induction loses support.

2014: The glut only gets worse, as four candidates who merit induction make the ballot. The BBWAA manages to clear three of the newcomers (leaving Mussina waiting), but the backlog is strong effected by this glut. Biggio and Piazza have small gains (in Biggio's case leaving him just short of induction), but everyone else sees their votes plunge, with Palmeiro falling off the ballot.

2015: The glut holds in size, with three more strong candidates (and a borderliner in Sheffield) making the ballot. Some members of the backlog get positive movement: Biggio gets inducted, Piazza gains in support, Raines has substantial gains, Schilling returns to his 2013 level of support. Others have no such luck: Bagwell, Martinez, and Walker are all basically stagnant in their support, while McGwire loses ground.

2016: The glut starts to shrink a little, as only two new candidates who merit induction reach the ballot. However, here the effects of the glut have one of their most prominent victims: Edmonds fails to make it to a second ballot. In terms of analyzing the backlog, a major complication is present: this is the first ballot after the BBWAA purged its inactive members, and I have not yet done the substantial analysis to tell how many changes are purely products of the purge and how many are the products of writers changing their minds. That said, a lot of the backlog does improve: Piazza makes it; Bagwell and Raines surge to points close to induction; Trammell has a substantial surge in his last time on the ballot (which probably played a role in his getting inducted by the VC this time around); Martinez has a boom in his support; Bonds and Clemens have the first substantial improvement on their 2013 levels of support; Schilling and Mussina have notable gains. Interestingly, the three members of the backlog aided the least by this are McGwire (as he left the ballot), Sosa, and Sheffield.

2017: The glut continues to shrink a little, but four first-timers who have strong HOF cases make this ballot, with one of them (Posada) failing to make it to a second ballot. Of the backlog, Bagwell and Raines make it in; Martinez continues to gain in support; Bonds and Clemens have substantial gains in their support; Walker finally returns to his 2013 level of support; Schilling falls (for reasons that have nothing to do with a glut); Mussina gains.

Overall, then, in terms of analyzing how the glut affected inductions: it seems clear that several deserving players fell off the ballot due to the glut in part (Lofton, Palmeiro, and Edmonds)- but it is also fairly clear that none of them were likely to ever get inducted even if they had remained on the ballot. However, it is clear that there being a glut has played a major role in shaping the inductions in one sense. Biggio unequivocally was affected by the glut in terms of his failing to get in on his second ballot in 2014. Had he gotten in at that point, it is highly likely that this would have had a cascading effect on the rest of the ballot- his 2015 support probably would have gone to various other candidates, and, depending on who benefited, this could result in substantial changes in terms of the timing of Piazza's, Bagwell's, and Raines' inductions, possibly have placed Martinez in a position to be inducted this year, improved Walker's position, saved Edmonds, and otherwise had considerable changes to the last three ballots and to the current one. In these ways, it is clear both how the glut has had an obvious effect, and how small changes at certain points could have made for a substantially different situation now.
   1394. John DiFool2 Posted: January 12, 2018 at 08:05 PM (#5605771)
The best scenario for next year would be to have Mussina & Pettitte go in with Rivera, with Mariano stepping in to finish their speeches.


You really think Pettitte will leapfrog Schilling & outduel Halladay? Pettitte is clearly 4th best, even to the traditionalists.
   1395. Srul Itza Posted: January 12, 2018 at 08:09 PM (#5605772)
You really think Pettitte will leapfrog Schilling & outduel Halladay?


I think it was a joke. You know, Mariano closing out speeches like he closed out games for Mussina and Pettitte?

I didn't say it was a GOOD joke.
   1396. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 12, 2018 at 08:30 PM (#5605777)
I didn't say it was a GOOD joke.

Such high standards!
   1397. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: January 13, 2018 at 12:14 AM (#5605850)
Not that this matters, but Thurman Munson must have had the lowest 15-year total percentage. I added everything together
and he averaged 7.66% of the vote. A loyal bunch of Yankees writers undoubtedly kept him around. I'm glad.
As a Brewer fan, I listened to or watched Thurman in many of his 125 starts against my team. Just as with Lyman Bostock the
previous September, Munson's death was a sad and shocking reminder that baseball players were mortal just like the rest of us.

   1398. John DiFool2 Posted: January 13, 2018 at 12:59 PM (#5605924)
Duhhh...

Anyway, it is clear from 1393 that 2013 is the year that totally screwed the pooch. BBRef confirms that the voters were still "stuck" in ~5-6 players per ballot mode (it went close to 9 the following year), meaning it took them awhile to adjust to the reality of these superclogged ballots. I mean, it has 6 guys who have since been elected, along with ~7 more guys who absent steroids would already be in there too. The voting body as a whole simply was unable to respond to said new reality.
   1399. Howie Menckel Posted: January 13, 2018 at 03:35 PM (#5605978)
OPS+ in full seasons, best to worst

CrimeDog:: 165 165 157 157 153 147 144 144 125 120 119 111 110
Vladimir G: 162 160 157 154 150 147 146 139 138 130 119

Guerrero has more defensive value (and wins offensive Years 9-10), so he's better
but is he hundreds of votes better?
   1400. bachslunch Posted: January 13, 2018 at 04:33 PM (#5606000)
Flip.
Page 14 of 18 pages ‹ First  < 12 13 14 15 16 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
robneyer
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogCatch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (October 2018)
(195 - 3:03am, Oct 15)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogOTP 2018 October 8: Hugh Jackman's 'The Front Runner' Confronts The Political Conundrum Of Our Time
(1291 - 2:54am, Oct 15)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogUmpire Joe West Hit By Throw From Red Sox Catcher Christian Vazquez
(20 - 2:22am, Oct 15)
Last: Jacob

Sox TherapyALCS Thoughts
(20 - 12:01am, Oct 15)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogOT - 2018 NFL thread
(43 - 11:54pm, Oct 14)
Last: SteveF

NewsblogAll jokes aside, Bob Uecker seriously loves baseball
(14 - 11:50pm, Oct 14)
Last: Jacob

NewsblogLEAGUE CHAMPION SERIES OMNICHATTER! for the 2018 Playoffs!
(761 - 11:40pm, Oct 14)
Last: Baldrick

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 2018 Discussion
(4 - 10:41pm, Oct 14)
Last: Michael J. Binkley's anxiety closet

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(390 - 9:53pm, Oct 14)
Last: PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina

NewsblogYankees Will Shop Sonny Gray This Offseason
(62 - 9:46pm, Oct 14)
Last: BDC

Hall of MeritLatin American Players and Pitchers Home Page
(88 - 5:13pm, Oct 14)
Last: QLE

Hall of Merit2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(164 - 4:48pm, Oct 14)
Last: Dr. Chaleeko

NewsblogCora breaks character, gets tossed in Game 1
(2 - 4:35pm, Oct 14)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Force of Nature

NewsblogOT - October 2018 College Football thread
(146 - 4:31pm, Oct 14)
Last: McCoy

NewsblogThe Brewers Are The Rare Team To Win The Offseason And The Actual Season
(1 - 4:23pm, Oct 14)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.7820 seconds
46 querie(s) executed