Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

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

Monday, January 16, 2006

1968 Ballot

Notable new candidates: Richie Ashburn, Red Schoendienst, and Eddie Yost.

Returnees: Eppa Rixey, Biz Mackey, Clark Griffith, George Sisler, George Van Haltren, Cool Papa Bell, Jake Beckley, and Cannonball Dick Redding.

John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 16, 2006 at 01:25 PM | 140 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Related News:

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

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

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 16, 2006 at 01:31 PM (#1823635)
hot topics
   2. karlmagnus Posted: January 16, 2006 at 01:33 PM (#1823638)
Ashburn’s another case like Carey where WS has grossly overrated a centerfielder. 2574 hits at an OPS+ of 111 is very marginally inferior to Hooper’s 2466 at 114, and Hooper was also reckoned a top class centerfielder. They’re both better than Carey, who we elected, neither anything like as good as Beckley or indeed Van Haltren, who we haven’t. Schoendienst OPS+ only 93, so off the bottom. Yost is Traynor minus 20% of the career – off the bottom. Woodling mostly a part-timer; bad luck as if he’d played full time he’d be above Ashburn, at least. Not a very distinguished bunch.

1. (N/A-9-9-10-7-7-5-5-4-3-5-6-5-3-4-3-4-4-3-2-2-1-1-2-6-4-4-2-1-1-1-3-
1-2-2-1-1-2-2-1-1-2-2-3-1-1-1-1-2-1-3-1-1-2-1-1-2-1) Jake Beckley. Paul Waner is a very close comp (it was 37 years till we found one) and it thus makes no sense to have Waner far above Beckley. Adjust his 2930 hits to full seasons and he's up there with Nap, above Babe, over 3200 hits, and OPS+ of 125 better than Van Haltren and slightly short of Wheat’s 129. Isolated power .127 vs “slugger” Wheat .135, in a less power-centered era. Marginally ahead of Welch, as we have seen more 307-win pitchers (now 10 others among currently HOM-eligible) than 2930-hit hitters (now 8 others). TB+BB/PA .455, TB+BB/Outs .707. Played for un-famous teams. Better than Keeler, almost as good as Crawford. More than a borderline HOMer, somewhere in the reaches well above the border but below the immortals.

2. (15-14-11-12-10-9-6-8-7-7-6-7-6-3-3-3-2-3-2-2-3-2-4-5-4-2-3-2-3-3-
3-2-2-3-2) Mickey Welch. 307-210 comes to impress me more and more, particularly as we get more and more of the 1920s and 1930s pitcher glut – 7 more wins than Lefty Grove! 1885 looks like a pretty good peak too; 44-11 with a 1.67 ERA is pretty impressive, compared for example to Clarkson’s 49-19 at 2.73 in 1889. With 4802 IP, OK at an ERA+of 113 (but he never heard of ERA) he was far better than most of the 00s and 20s pitchers under consideration, none of whom (other than Young, Matty and Alex) got near 300 wins, and many of whom had ERA+s little better than Welch.

3. (N/A-6-4-3-3-3-5-3-4-4-3-3-5-5-3-4-4-5-6-4-4-3-3-4-3-5-3-3-4-3-
3-4-3) George Sisler. 2812 hits, OPS+ 124 puts him just below Beckley and Welch. TB+BB/PA .482, TB+BB/Outs .748. Better singles hitter than Ichiro!, his record having been set in a 154 game season. And he had power too. Undervalued by sabermetricians.

4. (N/A-10-8-7-6-4-3-3-5-9-7-8-6-4-4-4-6-4-5-6-5-4-6-7-6-5-5-6-7-5-5-4-
4-5-4-6-4-4-5-4-4-5-4) Eddie Cicotte. Only 208-149 and an ERA+ of 123, but 3223 IP, more than Waddell and should get about 25% of the bonus for the 300-win career he should have had (he was, after all, a knuckleballer, who tend to peak late.) Much better than the 20s glut – only loses to Welch on longevity – Newhouser a close comp, but Cicotte had a longer career. Successfully cursed Red Sox AND White Sox for over 8 decades!

5. (N/A-15-N/A-5-4-4-6-10-8-9-7-5-5-5-7-5-6-7-6-6-7-8-7-6-6-7-8-6-6-5-
5-6-5-7-5-5-6-6-5-6-5) Pete Browning. Recalculating, to adjust ’82 as well as ’83-’92, he had 2,177 “normalized” hits, with no AA discount. However, TB+BB/PA .511, TB+BB/Outs .855. the same as Tiernan, not quite as good as Thompson, but he got no significant boost from the 1893-94 run explosion. Career OPS+162 vs. 146 Thompson and 138 Tiernan, but you have to discount a bit for AA

6. (N/A-12-10-9-10-9-8-7-7-8-9-7-7-6-8-8-7-9-8-7-9-8-7-8-6) Eppa Rixey, 266-251 and ERA+ of 115. Huge 4,494 IP. Better than Lyons with WW1 credit. Wynn’s going in and Ruffing has, and Rixey’s better – the Bert Blyleven of his day.

7. (N/A-7-7-6-8-6-6-7-7-6-7-7) Addie Joss. I’m convinced I missed him earlier. 2327 IP at an ERA+ of 141. 160-97 by age 30. If you assume the rest of his career would have been 1800 IP, 120-90 with an ERA+ of 110 (somewhat conservative, assuming you boost his last sick season, though pitchers didn’t last as long as they did later) then 50% credit would put him at 3227IP, 220-142, with ERA+ of 130, at #3 on this list. 25% credit puts him at 2777 IP, 190-120, with ERA+ of 136, still good for just below Rixey.

8. (N/A-10-9-8-11-N/A-15-15-14-10-10-11-12-10-12-11-9-8-9-10-10-9-
8-9-10-9-8-7-9-9-8-10-9-8-10-9-8-9-8) Charley Jones. Short career – only 1,780 normalized hits, even when adjusted to nominal 130-game-played season (but that’s more than Pike, with much less of an adjustment, and Jones too missed two prime seasons.) But OPS+ 149, TB+BB/PA .473, TB+BB/Outs .722, so above Pike and non-CF 90s OF.

9. (N/A-14-13-15-N/A-15-N/A-14-N/A-10-8-7-6-5-5-7-11-9-10-8-6-6-6-8-
10-9) Clark Griffith. Credit for 1892-3 moves him up a notch. 3385 IP, 237 wins (say 270 with credit) and an ERA+ of 121 not outstanding, but his winning percentage is good and his 1898 peak is nice.

10. (N/A-12-10-12-10-11-10-7-7-8-9-7-9-13-11-10-11-12-12-11-11-11-
12-12-11-11-12-13-12-15-14-12-14-11-10-11-11) Sam Leever. Pity he wasn’t able to start at the normal time; 2 more years would have made him a NB. Only 2660 innings, but was blocked till 27 by the one-league 1890s and having a steady job as a schoolteacher. Believe he needs to be looked at seriously by others, and included in pitcher analysis. Mild plus for high level of moral probity.
   3. karlmagnus Posted: January 16, 2006 at 01:34 PM (#1823639)
11. (N/A-9-8-8-9-10-8-10-9-8-7-8-11-11-10-10-10-11-11-10-9-11-12-
11-14-13-11-13-13-13-13-12) Wally Schang. When you normalize his career to 130 game seasons for the first 18 years, as I do for catchers, he gets to 1941 hits, more than Groh at an OPS+ of 117, very similar. Furthermore, TB+BB/PA=.455, TB+BB/Outs=.728, also significantly better than Groh, over very close to the same period. And he was a catcher, more difficult than 3B.

12. (N/A-10-9-12-11-13-15-14-14-14-13) Bobby Doerr. 2042 hits but missed a year for the war. OPS+ only 115, but they’re using a funny corrector for Fenway, as his raw stats are much better than Boudreau, whose OPS+ is 120. 2042 hits (plus 1 wartime season) TB+BB/PA .508, TB+BB/Outs .754. Down a bit on reflection.

13. (N/A-8-7-8-14-13-14-13-9-9-10-11-9-11-10-13-13-15-N/A-15-N/A-
15-N/A-15-15-14) Cupid Childs. OPS+119, almost the same as the 90s trio, and TB+BB/PA .470, TB+BB/Outs .797 highly competitive with them. Main negative is only 1720 hits, or about 1780 even if you normalize him to a 130 games played season. Nevertheless, he was a 2B. Back on ballot after a few years just off.

14. (N/A-10-9-8-10-11-10-13-12-14-N/A-15) Ernie Lombardi 2137 hits, normalized to a 130 game season, and an OPS+ of 125 makes him a little better than Schang, but some of it was during the war years and he fielded badly, so now a little below. TB+BB/PA .492, TB+BB/Outs .719., the ratio between the two very low because of strikeouts, I assume. Plus a great nickname!

15. (N/A-10-12-N/A) Ralph Kiner Only 1451 hits, but an OPS+ of 149. Doesn’t really deserve war years bonus (too young.) TB+BB/PA .617, TB+BB/Outs .991. Closest comp is Hack Wilson, but Kiner was a little better. Down a bit because of short career.

16. (N/A-11-14-N/A) Rube Waddell Given Joss’s new elevation, he’d dropped a bit too far at 32.

17. (N/A) Vern Stephens. Short career – only 1859 hits, but comparing him to Reese he was much better, and not far short of Doerr. TB+BB/PA .508, TB+BB/Outs .756. Best season 1944, however.

18. Quincy Trouppe. Not quite as good as Lombardi or Schang, but will be on ballot in quiet years. OPS+118, about 1900 adjusted hits. Much better than Mackey.

19. (N/A-7-13-11-13-14-14-14-N/A-15-15-15-N/A-14-15-15-15-N/A-
14-N/A-15-15-N/A) Hack Wilson TB+BB/PA = .588, TB+BB/Outs = .954, OPS+ 144. (he does appear to have known about BB, unlike some others.) Very short career, but quality too good to ignore. OPS+ slightly below Jones, so here he goes.

20. (N/A-14-14-N/A) Chuck Klein. Shortish career but very good one. Similar player to Beckwith, beats Hack on career length, but Hack was better. TB+BB/PA .575, TB+BB/Outs .909, but only 2076 hits. OPS+137.

21. Indian Bob Johnson. Very similar career to Klein but infinitesimally less good. TB+BB/PA .569, TB+BB/Outs .890., only 2051 hits. OPS+138

22. (N/A-15-N/A) Alejandro Oms. New MLE OPS+ of 125 moves him down a bit. Shorter career than Beckley, and not quite as valuable, but he was a darn good player nonetheless.

23. (N/A-11-12-11-11-12-13-14-12-15-15-15-15-N/A) Carl Mays
24. Ben Taylor. Not all that far below Beckley and better than Van Haltren. Put him above Suttles – he’s better, so will be on ballot in weak years.
25. (N/A-6-5-9-8-9-8-7-10-11-8-9-7-7-6-6-9-9-8-6-6-6-5-4-8-7-9-12-
N/A-14-13-15-N/A) Hugh Duffy. Up a little after looking at Ashburn
26. (N/A-12-12-14-N/A) Tony Lazzeri
27. (N/A-11-12-15-14-N/A) Joe Sewell
28. Willard Brown. If he’d been a SS for the whole of his career he’d be close to Doerr or even a little above, but he was mostly a CF.
29. (N/A-14-N/A-15-N/A) Sam Rice
30. (N/A) Mickey Vernon 2495 hits plus say 300 for war credit. OPS+116, TB+BB/PA .477, TB+BB/Outs .711
31. (N/A-13-15-N/A-15-15-N/A) Vic Willis
32. Sal Maglie. At 175% of visible career he would have been 208-108, with a 126 ERA+ in 3015 innings. That puts him about here.
33. (N/A) Burleigh Grimes.
34. (N/A) Heinie Manush
35. (N/A-9-10-10-13-N/A) Mike Tiernan
36. Bob Elliott
37. (N/A) Dick Lundy
38. (N/A-9-12-11-14-13-14-12-11-12-13-11-11-9-9-13-14-12-14-14-N/A) Levi Meyerle.
39. Biz Mackey. Not quite as good as Schang, very similar to McGuire. Better than Bell, though.
40. (12-15-N/A-11-10-12-10-10-9-8-11-12-10-10-8-8-14-15-13-15-15-N/A) Harry Wright.
41. (N/A-10-9-8-7-6-7-8-5-12-10-10-N/A-10-8-11-11-N/A) Jimmy Ryan
42. (N/A-13-12-13-13-12-14-15-12-13-11-11-N/A-11-9-12-12-N/A) George van Haltren. TB+BB/PA .469, TB+BB/Outs .765, not overwhelming for the 90s.
43. Cool Papa Bell. Hugely overrated by history. Lou Brock minus, without 3000 hits and Brock would only just make this ballot.
44. Kiki Cuyler
45. Deacon McGuire
46. Jack Quinn
47. Tony Mullane
48. Pye Traynor
49. Jim McCormick
50. Dick Redding
51. Joe Judge
52. Edd Roush
53. Spotswood Poles.
54. Larry Doyle
55. Roger Bresnahan.
56. Wayte Hoyt.
57. Joe Gordon.
58. Harry Hooper.
59. Richie Ashburn. Just marginally inferior to Hooper. OPS+ only 111 on 2566 hits. TB+BB/PA .451 , TB+BB/Outs .721
60. Jules Thomas.
61. Wilbur Cooper
62. Bruce Petway.
63. Jack Clements
64. Bill Monroe
65. Jose Mendez
66. Herb Pennock
67. Chief Bender
68. Ed Konetchy
69. Jesse Tannehill
70. Bobby Veach
71. Lave Cross
72. Tommy Leach.
73. Tom York
   4. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: January 16, 2006 at 03:42 PM (#1823730)

While I don't disagree with your leaving Ashburn off the ballot, hits and OPS + are two measures that will underrate Whitey because they either don't take into account, or don't give proper weight to, Ashburn biggest offensive asset, his walks. Plus Hooper played RF (I don't know how well) while Ashburn played CF really well (though not as well as RF would have you believe). To me it is an easy decision between those two.

I just want to give you this info as I think you have Ashburn low for some pretty shaky reasons.
   5. Brent Posted: January 16, 2006 at 03:43 PM (#1823731)
1968 Ballot:

I'm off for the holiday today, so I thought I'd vote early.

Several reconsiderations this time. Two great center fielders/leadoff hitters—Richie Ashburn and Cool Papa Bell—enter my personal hall of merit.

1. Richie Ashburn – 7 seasons with 27+ WS (adjusting to 162 gm schedule); A+ defensive outfielder. Ashburn, like most of his comparables (Bell, Carey, D DiMaggio, Leach, van Haltren) was very consistent from season to season. I guess it’s easier to be consistent at doing something 280 times a season (reaching base) than at doing something 35 times a season (hitting home runs). The comparability of Ashburn’s statistics with those of several other leading candidates is, in my opinion, evidence that he was better than them, because Ashburn was putting up those stats in a league with Robinson, Campanella, Mays, Banks, and Aaron (as well as Musial, Spahn, Roberts, and Snider). (PHoM 1968)

2. Hugh Duffy – 8 seasons with 26+ WS, with a high of 41 (adjusting to 162 gm schedule); A+ defensive outfielder. (PHoM 1931)

3. Clark Griffith – Over 8 seasons (1894-1901) he averaged 22-13, 5.5 wins above team, 304 IP, 124 DERA+. (PHoM 1960)

4. Cool Papa Bell – Big gain from reconsideration; very comparable to Ashburn, but with a little more power and not quite as many walks. Still waiting Chris’s revised estimates, but this is about where I expect him to end up. (PHoM 1968)

5. Phil Rizzuto – Defensive excellence. MVP for 1950, runner up for 1949; age 25-27 seasons in military service. <a >Minor League Player of the Year</a> for 1940. (PHoM 1967)

6. José de la Caridad Méndez – Over his first 7 Cuban League seasons (1908-14) he went 62-17, 16.3 wins above team. Gary A’s latest numbers for games Méndez pitched against major league competition confirm his status as an outstanding pitcher. (PHoM 1938)

7. Mickey Welch – Over 7 seasons (1880, 84-85, 87-90) he averaged 30-17, 4.3 wins above team, 437 IP, 116 DERA (PHoM 1966)

8. Alejandro Oms – According to the MLEs, 8 seasons with 27+ WS (adjusting to 162 gm schedule). (PHoM 1967)

9. Bucky Walters – Over 7 seasons (1936, 39-42, 44-45) he averaged 18-13, 2.0 wins above team, 270 IP, 122 DERA+, 72 OPS+. MVP for 1939. (PHoM 1958)

10. Willard Brown – “A slugger who was exceptionally fast in the field, a good base runner, and an excellent gloveman with a great arm.” —James A. Riley.

11. Dizzy Dean – Over 6 seasons (1932-37) he averaged 22-13, 3.6 wins above team, 288 IP, 128 DERA+, 182 SO, 67 BB. MVP for 1934, runner up in 1935 and ‘36. (PHoM 1958)

12. Burleigh Grimes – Over 8 seasons (1918, 20-21, 23-24, 27-29) he averaged 21-12, 4.0 wins above team, 292 IP, 115 DERA+, and 67 OPS+. (PHoM 1940)

13. Biz Mackey – “His defensive skills were unsurpassed in the history of black baseball . . . In his prime, the switch-hitting Mackey was one of most dangerous hitters in baseball.”—James A. Riley.

14. Charlie Keller – Four seasons with 31+ WS. OPS+ above 140 every season from 1939-47. I've been arguing that it’s harder for a Yankee to put together HoM statistics than for players on other teams. Here’s another piece of evidence. Keller was <a >Minor League Player of the Year</a> for 1937, hitting .353 for Newark as a 20-year-old. With 15 out of 16 teams, that gets you into the major league lineup the next season; Keller, however, was under contract to the 1937 Yankees, so he got sent back to Newark for another year, where he hit .365, scoring 149 runs and driving in 129.

15. Roger Bresnahan – Great catcher of the deadball era.

Test ballot (are we still doing them?):

16. Tommie Leach (PHoM 1932)
17. Buzz Arlett
18. Dick Redding – Just misses.
19. Joe Gordon
20. Gavy Cravath

21-25: Kiner, Pesky, Easter, Rosen, Willis

Off ballot:

33. Eppa Rixey – Very good for a long time, but never quite reached the level of greatness; there are about ten more deserving pitchers.

37. George Van Haltren – A good player, but I don’t see that he was better than (for example) George Burns or Spottswood Poles.

49. George Sisler – Career value is hurt by a lot of throwaway seasons; peak and prime are not as impressive as those of other hitters such as Keller, Cravath, and Kiner.

Not in my top 100. Jake Beckley – As they say in the horror film ads, “He’s back!” Is there anything positive I can say about him? Well, he’s almost certainly not one of Cooperstown’s ten worst mistakes... better than Travis Jackson and Jesse Haines and Rick Ferrell and Chick Hafey and George Kelly...

Other new arrivals:

Red Schoendienst had a wonderful story of overcoming adversity, which I’m sure didn’t hurt his HoF case; I’ve ranked him # 82. Eddie Yost didn’t make my top 100.
   6. Brent Posted: January 16, 2006 at 03:47 PM (#1823736)
I'm having trouble posting links (they look ok on the preview screen. Let me try again; here's the link to the lists of Minor League Players of the Year.
   7. DavidFoss Posted: January 16, 2006 at 04:21 PM (#1823773)
adjusting to 162 gm schedule

Strange that you are doing this already when almost none of other candidates have any playing time at that season length and Ashburn only has one.

Its good practice for the future, but for now I give a heads up to everyone that the entire backlog needs their seasons adjusted to 162.
   8. sunnyday2 Posted: January 16, 2006 at 04:21 PM (#1823774)

Well you've got Ashburn at #1 and #59. Hopefully those will cancel each other out and the rest of the ballots will have a more objective view of the white haired wonder. I must say, however, that 59 is closer to reasonable than 1 is. I'm looking at him somewhere around #40, probably.
   9. yest Posted: January 16, 2006 at 04:39 PM (#1823792)
1968 ballot
Ashburn and Bottomley make my PHOM this year

1. George Sisler I believe everyone knows my view on him by now (made my personal HoM in 1936)
2. Cool Papa Bell the lack over support for Bell is mind boggling to me he was almost universally considered one of the top 5 Negroe Leaguers ever the stats that we have for him are amazing he played good for almost 25 years he was one of the smartest players in Negro Leagues (made my personal HoM in 1948)
3. Richie Ashburn owns 6 of the top 10 seasons with the most putouts (makes my personal HoM this year)
4. Pie Traynor most 3B putouts 7 times (made my personal HoM in 1942)
5. Mickey Welch please see his thread (made my personal HoM all the way back in 1898)
6. Joe Sewell love the strikeouts (made my personal HoM in 1939)
7. Biz Mackey another Cooperstown mistake (made my personal HoM in 1949)
8. Chuck Klein 4 hr titles (made my personal HoM in 1951)
9. Sam Rice if he got 13 more hits would he make the HoM? (made my personal HoM in 1940)
10. Pete Browning 13th in career batting avg. (made my personal HoM in 1906)
11. Jake Beckley 30th in hits (made my personal HoM in 1915)
12. Rube Waddell most Ks/9IP 7 times in a row tying with Vance for the record led in it 1 more time (made my personal HoM in 1917)
13. Hack Wilson 4 hr titles (made my personal HoM in 1940)
14. Ralph Kiner 7 HR titles (made my personal HoM in 1961)
15. Hugh Duffy had 100 runs or RBIs every full year he played (made my personal HoM in 1908)
16. Addie Joss 2nd in era (made my personal HoM in 1918)
17. George Kell very good hitter and fielder at important and under elected position (made my personal HoM in 1963)
18. Clark Griffith 54th in wins (made my personal HoM in 1912)
19. Heinie Manush 330 batting avg. (makes my personal HoM this year)
20. Edd Roush 323 batting avg (made my personal HoM in 1937)
21. Hilton Smith see his thread (made my personal HoM in 1964)
22. Ray Schalk the best catcher ever (made my personal HoM in 1938)
23. George Van Haltren 31st in runs (made my personal HoM in 1925)
24. Jimmy Ryan 30th in runs (made my personal HoM in 1926)
25. Rabbit Maranville best shortstop before Ozzie (made my personal HoM in 1939)
26. Bobby Veach most doubles twice (made my personal HoM in 1931)
27. Jake Daubert 29th in triples (made my personal HoM in 1930)
28. Ginger Beaumont 1902 batting title (made my personal HoM in 1932)
29. Gavvy Cravath most active HRs 1918, 1919 and 1920 (made my personal HoM in 1928)
30. Kiki Cuyler 2299 hits (made my personal HoM in 1968)
31. Lloyd Waner had the most OF putouts 4 times, finished 2nd once and finished 3rd twice (made my personal HoM in 1968)
32. John McGraw 3rd in on base percentage (made my personal HoM in 1930)
33. Jim Bottomley 2313 hits (makes my personal HoM this year)
34. George J. Burns most walks 5 times (made my personal HoM in 1932)

explanation for players not on my ballot
Eppa Rixey I don’t find anything special in most of the 20’s pitchers
Dick Redding based on the evidence we curruntly have I don't think he belongs
Eddie Yost 42nd on the ballot
Red Schoendienst 65th on the ballot
   10. Chris Cobb Posted: January 16, 2006 at 05:01 PM (#1823821)
Its good practice for the future, but for now I give a heads up to everyone that the entire backlog needs their seasons adjusted to 162.

Either that, or the new candidates will need to have post-1960/61 seasons adjusted downwards to 154 games. That might be simpler if you haven't been adjusting everybody to 162 games from the beginning, as many of us have been doing, I think.
   11. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 16, 2006 at 05:26 PM (#1823852)
Well you've got Ashburn at #1 and #59. Hopefully those will cancel each other out and the rest of the ballots will have a more objective view of the white haired wonder.

Probably not the word that you were looking for, Marc.
   12. rawagman Posted: January 16, 2006 at 06:28 PM (#1823932)
I'm new to this, but hope to contribute something, however meagre. Please correct me if I'm wrong - I rank my top 20 in order of all eligible candidates?
Where can I find a list of everyone who's eligible?
   13. TomH Posted: January 16, 2006 at 06:38 PM (#1823948)
if you look at the '1967 election results', you'll see everyone who got at least one vote last time. New eligibles are listed at the top of this thread: Richie Ashburn, Red Schoendienst, and Eddie Yost
   14. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 16, 2006 at 06:40 PM (#1823955)
Hey, rawagman! Glad to have you on board.

Set up a preliminary ballot on the 1968 Ballot Discussion thread first, so we can see if doing everything right under our Constitution (like comments for each player listed and for any top-ten player from the previous election that you left off your ballot). If it passes muster, then you can submit your official one on this thread.

BTW, the 20-man test ballot appears to be dead as a door nail, so just submit a 15-man one instead. Make sure that you have your ballot set up from best to worst, too.

Where can I find a list of everyone who's eligible?

The prominent newbies are on the Ballot Discussion thread. As for non-newbies, check out the previous election threads to get a good grasp of who is eligible. Basically, any player who retired in 1962 and before is eligible.

If you have any other questions, please let us know on the Ballot Discussion thread. Hope you have fun as a member of the HoM!
   15. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: January 16, 2006 at 07:08 PM (#1823992)
I have been adjusting to the 162 game schedule since about 1945 or so, whenever I expanded my 'system'. It really isn't a big deal.

I use 5% (the real number is 5.2% but I go a little down to help take out the effects of an injury or resting at theend of a seasons, really it shouldn't matter) and round up only at .7. This means that I add one WS from 14-33 none below 14 and two on any season over 33.

It can be done sans calculator.
   16. jimd Posted: January 16, 2006 at 07:56 PM (#1824037)
and round up only at .7

Unusual convention... 11-13 and 31-33 seasons appear to get shorted one Win Share.
   17. DavidFoss Posted: January 16, 2006 at 08:02 PM (#1824042)
Yeah, its not a *huge* deal, but its often little things that determine the difference between a non-consensus inductee and a backlogger.

Ideally, since the original value is rounded it would be best to do the adjustment on the pre-rounded value and then round, but you'd need the digital version of the book for that.

The biggest obstacle is to remember to do it at all. I mean, its just so quick and easy to look at the career total for career and line up seasonal WS totals to look at peak. Its those seasonal line-ups I'm most worried about. A single WS difference between each season on those lines often makes a player look quite a bit better.
   18. Rusty Priske Posted: January 16, 2006 at 09:05 PM (#1824108)
PHoM: Richie Ashburn & Cupid Childs

1. Willard Brown (6,8,4)

Jumps up a bit for me. Quite overlooked, in my opinion.

2. Richie Ashburn (new)

Oddly snubbed in prelim.

3. Eppa Rixey (2,5,6)

Likely to be inducted this year, I think.

4. Jake Beckley (4,7,9)

5. George Van Haltren (1,3,2)

Pet project for me. I still have to be honest with myself and sometimes (like this year), I can't bring myself to put him #1.

6. Biz Mackey (7,9,10)

The other one likely to be inducted this year.

7. Dobie Moore (9,11,11)

8. Mickey Welch (5,6,7)

Another pet project of mine.

9. Cool Papa Bell (8,10,8)

10. George Sisler (10,12,14)

11. Hugh Duffy (12,13,15)

12. Tommy Leach (11,14,12)

13. Edd Roush (13,15,15)

14. Cupid Childs (17,20,x)

I have warmed to him. He makes my PHoM this year.

15. Quincy Trouppe (15,18,18)

16. Sam Rice (14,19,19)

17. Clark Griffith (16,16,x)

18. Bobby Doerr (x,x,x)

19. Hilton Smith (x,x,x)

20. Sam Streeter (x,x,x)

21-25. White, Browning, Ryan, Doyle, Strong
26-30. Gleason, Grimes, Redding, Willis, Greene
31-35. Kiner, Sewell, McCormick, Robinson, Elliott
36-40. Souell, Mullane, Ware, Coimbre, Johnson
   19. karlmagnus Posted: January 16, 2006 at 11:47 PM (#1824272)
Hooper was a famously good RF in a huge early fenway right field; with three extra points of OPS+ he's very close to Ashburn, in my view. I can see no rationale whatever for ranking Ashburn above Beckley; longer career, more difficult position and 14 extra points of OPS+. Beckley doesn't benefit from an inflated SLG because there were no HR during his era; if you want to adjust a portion of his triples into HR, feel free.
   20. DavidFoss Posted: January 16, 2006 at 11:58 PM (#1824285)
Beckley doesn't benefit from an inflated SLG because there were no HR during his era; if you want to adjust a portion of his triples into HR, feel free.


I think lgSLG already takes that into account.
   21. sunnyday2 Posted: January 17, 2006 at 12:20 AM (#1824305)
>I can see no rationale whatever for ranking Ashburn above Beckley

karl, there is the best reason of all to rank Ashburn above Beckley.

Two words: time, line.

If Beckley stepped of the time machine in 1955, he would be an embarrassment. Or so I'm told.

Meanwhile,If Whitey stepped off the time machine in 1900, he would be a superstar--after all, he had superior nutrition, coaching, conditioning, 55 more years of strategic experience, more education. He would be as good or better than Ty Cobb.

I don't know why we elected anybody before Cobb and Wagner.
   22. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 17, 2006 at 12:30 AM (#1824309)
I can see no rationale whatever for ranking Ashburn above Beckley; longer career, more difficult position and 14 extra points of OPS+.

karlmagnus, I'll listen to you if if you're comparing Inside Baseball Era CF to 1B, but I think you'll have a hard time convincing anyone about 1950s' CF.
   23. ronw Posted: January 17, 2006 at 01:02 AM (#1824344)
1968 Ballot –I use a little of WS, WARP, RCAA, OPS+, and traditional stats, as well as reputation.

1. Pete Browning There were two better hitters through the 1880’s, Brouthers and Connor. Unfairly grouped with Kiner and Keller, since the Gladiator had more seasons.

2. Dick Redding We’re missing his best years.

3. Larry Doyle We generally elect hitters of this caliber, no matter what the fielding.

4. Dobie Moore Such a high peak that less PT not really an issue.

5. Bob Elliott I think that everyone has been penalizing him for mediocre wartime seasons, and are not carefully looking at 1947-1951.

6. Cupid Childs Fine 1890’s representative.

7. John McGraw Yes, he was injured, yes, he didn’t have a long career, but when he played, he played exceptionally well.

8.Biz Mackey A better pure catcher than Bresnahan, with a lower hitting peak.

9. Roger Bresnahan Best available major league catcher, by a good margin.

10. Tommy Bridges I am becoming less enamored of him.

11. Jose Mendez I think that I can’t ignore Mendez, who was probably the pitcher that Ferrell was, and may have been as good a hitter.

12. George Van Haltren Has gotten an elect-me vote on my ballot before.

13. Bill Monroe The ultimate overlooked candidate.

14. Clark Griffith The Old Fox is looking better.

15. George Sisler I can see him either way, in or out.


16. Cool Papa Bell

17. Richie Ashburn

18. Willard Brown

19. Ben Taylor

20. Eppa Rixey

Wow, I have all the top 10 somewhere on this ballot. That may be a first for me.

Red Schoendienst – I have a lot of trouble taking him over someone like Johnny Evers.

Eddie Yost – I like him, but not enough to vote for him.
   24. OCF Posted: January 17, 2006 at 02:14 AM (#1824439)
1968 ballot. The more the backlog bubbles to the top, the stranger my ballot - and everyone else's - get.

1. Larry Doyle (3, 3, 4, 3, 2) Big hitter in low scoring times - nearly as good a hitter as the backlog outfielders. Mediocre defense, but occupied the position for a long time. And no, I don't try to understand WARP.
2. George Van Haltren (5, 6, 5, 5, 3) He did accomplish quite a bit in his career.
3. Eppa Rixey (6, 6, 7, 6, 4) A successful long-career inning-eater. No peak.
4. Ralph Kiner (7, 7, 8, 7, 5) His career may not have lasted very long, but during it he played every day and he hit a LOT of home runs.
5. Joe Sewell (9, 9, 9, 8, 6) If only he'd had 2 or 3 more good years - then he'd be an easy choice.
6. Quincy Trouppe (16, 17, 9, 9, 7) As with all Negro Leaguers, a lot of this is guesswork.
7. Biz Mackey (11, 12, 11, 10, 8) Catcher is a tough position, and catchers do tend to grow old early. Even Cochrane and Hartnett didn't have the hitting careers needed for election as a corner player.
8. Jose Mendez (12, 13, 12, 11, 9) A peak-value pitching candidate.
9. Dick Redding (13, 14, 13, 12, 10) A career-value pitching candidate.
10. Jake Beckley (10, 10, 14, 13, 11) Not much peak, long career. Was he really better than Vernon? Maybe defense, maybe a position-scarcity argument. Offensively, I don't see it.
11. Bob Elliott (14, 16, 17, 15, 13) Roughly the equivalent of Dixie Walker as a hitter, plus 1300+ games of pretty good 3B.
12. Mickey Vernon (--, 16, 16, 14) Another loooong career 1st baseman, searching for a peak. My new oddity vote
13. Willard Brown (17, 17, 17, 15, 15) If he really could hit for that batting average, he's Kirby Puckett. If not, he's Juan Gonzalez. Worth a look in any case.
14. Richie Ashburn (new) My offensive system puts him with less offensive peak than Duffy, less career than Van Haltren. But this might be seriously underrating him - the 1950's NL might have been the toughest league there was. And I like leadoff hitters, and he did catch plenty of flies.
15. Hugh Duffy (18, 18, 19, 18, 16)

16. Bucky Walters (19, 19, 20, 19, 17) Offense-adjusted RA+ PythPat 197-148, with a peak that nearly rivals Ferrell's. We elected Lemon - why not Walters?
17. Phil Rizzuto (20, 20, 21, 20, 18) A glove-first SS candidate. Not a great offensive player, but at least useful on offense in an OBP-first shape, with good baserunning. But even with war credit, his career's not particularly long.
18. Cupid Childs (21, 21, 22, 21, 19) Like a lot of people, his career is too short. Not the offensive peak of Doyle, but it is a real peak.
19. Joe Gordon (22, 22, 23, 22, 20) Not much to choose from between him and Billy Herman.
20. Tommy Bridges (23, 23, 24, 23, 21) RA+ PythPat 190-124. Ferrell had a higher peak, but Bridges was a terrific pitcher.

21. Cool Papa Bell (24, 24, 25, 24, 22) A legend, of course, with a very long career. He's down here because I'm not sure his peak is any better than Willie Wilson's.
22. Edd Roush (25, 25, 26, 25, 23) Nearly the same offensive value as the leftover 1890's guys; better hitter than Carey.
23. George Sisler (26, 26, 27, 26, 24) My peak-heavy offensive evaluation system likes Chance ahead of Sisler, and Sisler ahead of Beckley. The order gets reversed because of playing time.
24. Vern Stephens (27, 27, 28, 27, 25)
25. Bobby Doerr (28, 28, 29, 28, 26)
26. Dobie Moore (29, 29, 30, 29, 27) Short career, high peak.
27. Bob Johnson (30, 30, -, 30, 28)
28. Frank Chance (----, 29) A great, great player - when he was in the lineup, which is the problem.
29. Rube Waddell (----, 30)
30. Jimmy Ryan (returning from off-ballot) As the backlog bubbles up, the next one to appear will be Bresnahan.

Red Scheondienst: a few more years like 1954 and 1958, and we'd be telling a different story. But as it stands, not near to being in the Lazzeri/Herman/Doerr/Gordon class. In fact, I'd take Avila over him.

Eddie Yost: I need to work on placing him - but I'm fairly confident he doesn't crack the top 15.
   25. dan b Posted: January 17, 2006 at 03:24 AM (#1824516)
1.Duffy PHoM in 1912. 1890’s underrepresented. I’ve been looking at how players on the ballot compare with the median level of already enshrined HoMers whose credentials are post 1893 MLB using WS. The following are at or above the median:
3 year peak (non-consecutive) – Kiner, Rosen, Keller
5 year peak (consecutive) – Kiner, Rosen, Duffy, Berger, Keller
8 year peak (non-consecutive) – Duffy, Keller
10 year peak (consecutive) – Duffy, Burns
WS/162 – Keller, Chance, Berger, Rosen, Duffy, McGraw
Career - None

2.Griffith PHoM 1913. 4th best pitcher of 90’s belongs in. 1890’s still underrepresented.
3.Kiner PHoM 1966. Ignore the überstats and pay homage to seven consecutive HR titles. Above the HoM median in 3 and 5 year peaks.
4.Waddell PHoM 1926 and returned to my ballot for the first time since 1939 in 1964. IMO, Koufax is a no-brainer. When comparing all the eligible high peak pitchers on this ballot to Sandy’s overpowering dominance from 1961-1966, Rube’s performance from 1902-1908 comes closest.
5.Cravath PHoM 1967. Would have been in my PHoM 35 years sooner had the mle’s been available.
6.Keller PHoM 1967. The more I look, the more I like. James puts just ahead of Kiner, and he may be right. I don’t see a better WS/162 among 20th century players on this ballot. See Duffy comment above.
7.Mackey PHoM 1958. The only unanimous pick of the Cool Papa’s survey of experts.
8.Leach PHoM 1926. Favorite teddy bear.
9.Rixey More career value than any other pitcher in his era not named Johnson or Alexander. PHoM 1939.
10.Browning PHoM 1906 and returned to my ballot in 1960 for the first time since 1933.
11.Walters PHoM 1968. Preferring his peak to Ruffing’s career.
12.Bell PHoM 1968.
13.Bresnahan PHoM 1928. SABR Dead ball era committee has him #1.
14.Roush PHoM 1942. Arnold Hano, in his 1955 “A Day In The Bleachers”, called Willie Mays “the finest player employed by the National League since Eddie Roush.” Using WS to compare to Ashburn:
·3 year peak - Roush 36, 33, 30; Ashburn 29, 28, 28
·5 year peak (consecutive)– Roush 144; Ashburn 138
·8 best years – Roush 218, Ashburn 216
·WS/162 – Roush 25.9; Ashburn 24.4
·OPS+ - Roush 126; Ashburn 111
·NHBA Rank – Roush 15, Ashburn 16
·HoM Support – Roush forgotten; Ashburn – elected as shiny new toy? Say it ain’t so.
15.Cooper Doesn’t look like the HoM will have any pitchers wearing a Pirates cap either. PHoM 1942.
   26. TomH Posted: January 17, 2006 at 04:07 AM (#1824583)
Meanwhile,If Whitey stepped off the time machine in 1900, he would be a superstar...... He would be as good or better than Ty Cobb.

I'd call that a strawman argument, except it needs an even whispier description. Perhaps paperman or fluffman.
   27. TomH Posted: January 17, 2006 at 11:24 AM (#1824843)
Belated happy MLK day to all. I hope we all did something to promote harmony and justice yesterday.

There would be something musical about honoring a Biz Mackey this week, so he could make a "thank God almighty, free at last" acceptance speech. But I ain't gonna place him any differently.

Tom the WASP, who has gone through life facing very little discrimiation
   28. sunnyday2 Posted: January 17, 2006 at 11:44 AM (#1824847)
TomH, was that a subtle plea not to elect a guy named "Whitey"? ;-)
   29. TomH Posted: January 17, 2006 at 12:13 PM (#1824850)
you so funny, sunny :)

To prove I'm not a card-carrying timeliner, my #1 spot this ballot will be filled with a turn-of-the-century player. These modern pitchers ain't got nuthin on the Old Fox, who went 237-146 for mediocre teams. Not sure why Eppa Rixey's 266-251 is seen as anywhere near as impressive. Elect Mr. Griffith!
   30. sunnyday2 Posted: January 17, 2006 at 01:49 PM (#1824874)

Bulking up on pitchers for PHoM--Dick Redding and Bob Lemon.

1. Dobie Moore (1 last year-2-1, PHoM 1942)--Still the best peak available.

2. George Sisler (3-4-4, PHoM 1938)
3. Pete Browning (4-5-5, PHoM 1961)
4. Ralph Kiner (5-6-6, PHoM 1964)--big peak hitters.

5. Rube Waddell (6-7-7, PHoM 1932)
6. Jose Mendez (7-8-8, PHoM 1957)--big peak pitchers.

7. Willard Brown (9-10-13, PHoM 1966)--ah, a guy with a career!

8. Addie Joss (10-11-11, PHoM 1967)--another big peak.

9. Ed Williamson (11-12-12, PHoM 1924)--comps Jimmy Collins and Stan Hack.

10. Charley Jones (12-13-14, PHoM 1921)--yet another big peak hitter.

11. Dick Redding (13-14-15, PHoM 1968)--nice career to go with nice peak.

(11a. Bob Lemon [17-19-20, PHoM 1968]--I was underestimating Bob.)

12. Tommy Bond (8-9-9, PHoM 1929)--biggest peak pitcher of them all.

(12a. Stan Hack--close but no cigar. Still, the IF backlog glut starts here.)

13. Larry Doyle (15-17-18)
14. Bobby Doerr (16-18-19)--the IF backlog glut continues.

(14a. Earl Averill--lurking.)

15. Joe Gordon (14-15-16)--still more IF backlog glut.

Drops out--none.

Deep backlog

16-20. Vern Stephens, (Harry Stovey), Charlie Keller, Hugh Duffy, Eppa Rixey, Dizzy Dean
21-25. Quincy Trouppe, Gavvy Cravath, Mike Tiernan, Eddie Cicotte, Cupid Childs (PHoM 1925)
26-30. Alejandro Oms, Bill Monroe, Bob Johnson, Clark Griffith, Edd Roush


Biz Mackey remains around #47, as I prefer Trouppe and Bresnahan. Rixey and Griffith are among my top 30. Van Haltren, Bell and Beckley--the peakless wonders--are in the 80s, 50s and 70s respectively.
   31. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: January 17, 2006 at 03:05 PM (#1824930)

1. Jose Mendez: Peaktasticness supported by Gary A’s wonderful research.
2. Leroy Matlock: Maybe I’m overrating him, or maybe I’m the only one who knows his inner light? I don’t know, and I’m not sure yet how to figure out how to know.
3. Bucky Walters: Yes, the march of the mid-length, high peak pitchers is one man shorter with Wes on the wall now, but this movement is very much alive.
4. Quincy Trouppe: I’m sorry to say this but unless the Hall of Fame committee knows something we don’t, they totally missed the boat on QT. Best available catcher.
5. Charley Jones: Best unenshrined outfielder.
6. Roger Bresnahan: Second best catcher out there. Good peak, wish he’d played more in the latter half of his career.
7. Hugh Duffy: Great flycatcher, splendid batter with power and average and speed and enough walks to make me happy. The Larry Doby of his era? In terms of value, yes.
8. Cupid Childs: High-OBP, high-octane second basemen, best at his position for almost a decade. He’s overdue.
9. Dobie Moore: Absolutely great SS, probably has ten, maybe more years of service including the Wreckers. This guy’s for real.
10. Willard Brown: If he woulda just walked a little bit more---ten more times a year even!---he’d be in like flint already.
11. Biz Mackey: Golden glove, pewter bat. It’s OK, the whole package is what we reward.
12. Wilbur Cooper: Makes it back on board my ballot for the first time since, like, the Hoover administration. Another mid-length, high output pitcher who made a pretty good transition to the lively ball all told.
13. Eppa Rixey: He’s back, he’s stacked, and this time he’s left handed---Red Ruffing 2: The Consistenator (in theatres now for the Hollidays).
14. Burleigh Grimes: I’ve reconned him to this spot. I’m very confused by Grimes. He had a lot of bad inning-eating kind of years, as well as a lot of good staff-ace kind of years. He could move up or down in coming elections.
15. George Sisler: Right near my personal in/out line.

16. Pete Browning
17. Ed Williamson
18. Larry Doyle: First time near my ballot in a while. Hard-hitting keystone cop with enough good glovin’ to stay in the league for a dozen or more years, but not enough to give him a big value boost or to keep him around when his hitting slud a little.
19. George J. Burns: He's back!
20. Gavy Cravath: He's also back!

Richie Ashburn: about as good as Carey and CP Bell, neither of whom I've endorsed at any time.

Ed Yost: Walk on by...

Red Schoendienst: No better than Lazzeri who has never been close to my ballot.
   32. Daryn Posted: January 17, 2006 at 03:47 PM (#1824970)
Belated happy MLK day to all. I hope we all did something to promote harmony and justice yesterday.

I have three girls under the age of 6 (we're white). I sat them down to listen to MLK's I Have a Dream Speech. It's sixteen minutes and ten seconds, so that's no small feat. Anyway, the most amazing and gratfiying thin was that I had to explain to them who MLK was and that thre was a time, long long ago I said, when white people treated black people differently based just on the colour of their skin. At their age, living in our multicultural community, that was actually incomprehensible for them. I hope it always is. it still brings tears to my eyes when I hear "judged not by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character". Nice speechifier that MLK.

Oh, and here's my ballot. And you can see from my past ballots that it is just happenstance that Bell is an elect me position for the first time this year.

1. Mickey Welch – 300 wins, lots of grey ink. RSI data shows those wins are real. Compares fairly well to Keefe. I like his oft repeated record against HoMers.

2. Cool Papa Bell – It seems likely he would have exceeded 3000 hits with tremendous speed and great defense in a key position.

3. Eppa Rixey – see Grimes comment.

4. Burleigh Grimes – as a career voter, I have difficulty seeing the vast difference others see between Rixey and Grimes. There is not much of a spread between Rixey at 3 and Joss at 13, which results in 7 pitchers on my ballot. Both Rixey and Grimes are among the top 50 all-time in Pitching Win Shares.

5. Jake Beckley -- ~3000 hits but no peak at all. Crawford (HOMer) and Wheat (HOMer) are two of his three most similars. 3200+ hits adjusted to 162 games. After voting for him at the very top of my ballot for 50 years, I have come to realize that his peakless career is rarer than I thought and also less deserving. Still, as we get into the backlog, he's top 5 material.

6. Dick Redding – probably the 6th best blackball pitcher of all-time (behind, at least, Williams and Paige and likely behind the Fosters and Brown), and that is good enough for me.

7. Biz Mackey – I vote career over peak, so I like Mackey the best of the eligible catchers. It is close though, and Mackey is not that much ahead of Bresnahan (15) or Schang (27).

8. George Sisler – I like the hits, the OPS+ and the batting average.

9. Ralph Kiner – He is my highest peak/prime only candidate. I cannot ignore seven consecutive home run titles and a 149 career OPS+.

10. Rube Waddell -- I like the three times ERA+ lead, the career 134 ERA+, the .574 winning percentage, the 46 black ink points, and, of course, all those strikeouts (plus the 1905 Triple Crown). I simply don’t understand how Vance and Newhouser get elected easily and Rube gets hardly any votes.

11. George Van Haltren – 40 wins, 2500 hits, never dominated. Pretty good adjusted win shares.

12. Clark Griffith – 921 similarity score with mcginnity, who was 1st on my ballot when elected. I’ve decided to slot him right behind the two short career pitching balloters, though he could just as easily be ahead of them. He is barely better than Harder, Warneke, Smith, Bridges, Gomez, Hoyt, Mendez, Joss, Dean, Luque, Pennock, Trucks, Matthews, Quinn, McCormick, Cicotte, Willis, Walters, Bender, Mays, Cooper, Shocker, Mullane (highest WS of any non-candidate by far), Byrd and Mullin. That’s 25 pitchers. It is tough to separate the wheat from the chaff among the pitchers.

13. Addie Joss – I used to have him on the ballot, but then dropped him, perhaps due to peer pressure. But in preparing for Koufax, I asked myself what kind of short pitching career would be ballot worthy (I’m not sure Koufax' is); my answer was Joss’. It goes without saying, but I give no credit for anything after April 14, 1911. I don’t like short careers much, but I cannot ignore the best WHIP of all-time, the second best all-time ERA, the 12th best ERA+ and the nice winning percentage.

14. Richie Ashburn – anywhere between here and Sisler seems right. Cool Papa with a shorter career maybe. He’s my type of player and would top the ballot with three extra 100 OPS+ seasons at the end of his career.

15. Roger Bresnahan – Great OBP, arguably the best catcher in baseball for a six year period. Counting stats, like all catchers of this time and earlier, are really poor. I like him better than Schang because he compared better to his contemporaries, if you count him as a catcher.

I'll be hard pressed not to top the consensus scores this week -- oh, the embarrassment.
   33. OCF Posted: January 17, 2006 at 05:57 PM (#1825179)
10 voters so far; 10 different candidates getting #1 votes, and 15 different candidates getting "elect me" votes. What can easily be predicted: it will be close, with rather small vote differences among the top handful of candidates.
   34. andrew siegel Posted: January 17, 2006 at 06:06 PM (#1825200)
I find this ballot very hard. I've been playing with all sorts of historical and statistical lists and am finding things to really like about forgotten candidates like Fielder Jones, Mike Tiernan, Larry Doyle, and Mike Griffin, as well as things to dislike about all of my on-ballot guys. We are entering the gray zone where there is little difference between say number 3 and number 30 on everyone's ballot. And Richie Ashburn doesn't help by showing up with a resume that could be number 3 or number 30.

Here's this week's dart throw:

(1) Moore (1st)--George Sisler's offensive value and defense somewhere between Ernie Banks and Cal Ripken. One of the top 50 7 or 8-year runs of All-Time. (PHOM)

(2) Rixey (3ed)--Handful of All-Star seasons and one of the 25 best careers for a 20th-century hurler. Very deserving. (PHOM)

(3) Van Haltren (5th)--Put up about 380 season-length adjusted WS in 25-30 WS chunks. Consistently excellent for 14 years in a difficult one-league environment. Good PCL work on both ends of his career. Of all long-career CF's his career OWP ranks somewhere between 10th and 15th depending on how you draw your career-length line (same is true for Duffy and Roush).(PHOM)

(4) Oms (4th)--Subjective and objective reviews converge; he was on the Sam Crawford/Paul Waner level, though with a slightly shorter career. (PHOM)

(5) Duffy (5th)--Slides up a few positions as I downgrade other guys slightly. His skills were incredibly valuable in his time and place. (PHOM)

(6) Roush (7th)-- I know he missed a lot of games and played in a relatively weak league, but he's a solid CF with a long career who consistently ranked among the top few guys in his league in OPS+. Very similar to Duffy and GVH.(PHOM)

(7)Trouppe (9th)--Still trying to get a handle on the playing time and positions questions, but the available evidence says that he's the best catcher on the board.

(8) Childs (10th)--2B who hit like this and are better than league-average fielders don't grown on trees. (PHOM)

(9) Gordon (12th)--A lot turns on his fielding. If he was the gold glover of his reputation, he probably should be on the top 3 of this ballot for prime voters who give war credit. If his defense was poor enough in the later years to drag his career defensive value down to average, he probably belongs right around Doerr. Splitting the difference, he lands here. (PHOM this year)

(10) Beckley (12th)--Uniqueness is usually an indicator of value. What holds Beckley back for me is the fact that his best seasons were in weak multi-league eras whereas he struggled when the game contracted in the 1890s. I also think GVH and Duffy had more defensive value, though I concede the gap is smaller than WS suggests.

(11) Mendez (14th)--I have him with about 3100 IP and an ERA+ of around 120. That and his bat make him similar to a number of our electees, though the IP were less valuable for him than they were for Ferrell and Lemon.

(12) Sisler (8th)--If you look at his career in total, he is fairly similar to Sewell or Ashburn--right around 300 WS with 6-8 seasons between 3rd and 10th in the league in WS. If you look at his peak run and treat the remaining years as essentially valueless, he look a lot like Keller or Chance. I'm leaning towards the former view.

(13) Ashburn (new)-- I initially had him seventh, but his OWP of .600 is a full level below the GVH/Duffy/Roush crowd (all of whom are between .620 and .625). Still, he played in the toughest league we've ever seen and had a seven year run where he was one of the best couple of players in the league once you take out the first-ballot HoMers.

(14) Bob Elliot (15th)-- Has the eighth highest OWP of any medium-long career 3B and was a decent fielder. Rate stats get a bump b/c/ he played through the war and career length is not particularly long, but it is hard to find too many 3B who hit like him and knew which side of the glove to use who won't be in the HoM.

(15) Sewell (off/17th)--Owes his status as the best SS of the 1920s to the color line. Still, has a lot to offer.

Next 15: Doerr, Schang, Bell (big mover), Bridges (big mover), Johnson, Chance, Grimes, Ryan, Bresnahan, W. Brown, Leach, Kiner, Keller, Doyle, Redding.

Bell moves up almost 20 spots to 18--if his OPS+ was closer to 106 than to 100, then his other skills start making him very valuable.

Redding and Griffith are 35 and 36--I like them both but like other candidates more, though I am amenable to being convinced on Redding (for whom I wish we had more evidence). Griffith didn't pitch enough innings per season.

Mackey might be better than where I have him (the 40's), but, using the current numbers, I think he is clearly behind Trouppe, Schang, and Bresnahan.
   35. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 17, 2006 at 06:23 PM (#1825233)
I use Win Shares as the base for my ranking system, though I am now using a modified version (any negative values are converted into zeroes) of BRAR, FRAR and PRAR for the NA.

I am integrating the conclusions made by DERA with Win Shares for all pitchers.

I do place (to a certain degree) domination at one's position during the player's era. That doesn't mean that domination-by-default will necessarily help you though (Gil Hodges may have been the best first baseman of his era, but I doubt he'll make my ballot when he becomes eligible).

1) Roger Bresnahan-C/CF (2): He's here just to make OCF happy :-) (see post #33). Greatest catcher of the Deadball Era not named Santop. The poor man's Buck Ewing (Johnny Kling was the poor man's Charlie Bennett) is still good enough to be here on my ballot. Slightly better than Noisy behind the plate, but the Duke played longer and at other positions. Best major league catcher for 1905, 1906 and 1908. Best major league centerfielder for 1903.

2) Alejandro Oms-CF (3): Thanks to Chris' work, another gem has been uncovered. He should gather more and more support over the next few "years."

3) Willard Brown-CF/LF/SS (4): May deserve to go ahead of Oms. At any rate, I'm sold that he was an outstanding player.

4) Cupid Childs-2B (5): <6>Best second baseman of the '90s.</b> Too short of a career to knock out McPhee for tops for the 19th century, but not that far behind. Considering the average second basemen of his era, he was fairly durable. Best major league second baseman for 1890, (almost in 1891), 1892, 1893, 1894, 1895, 1896 and 1897.          

Childs was the best major league second baseman more times in a season than Doyle was the best NL second baseman. IMO, there's no way that the Laughing One goes above the Little Fat Man.

5) Hugh Duffy-CF/LF/RF (6): "Only" the third best centerfielder of the '90s, but that position was very strong for that decade. Best major league right fielder for 1890 and 1891. Best major league centerfielder for 1892, 1893 and 1894.

6) George Van Haltren-CF/P (7): Long career of quality play. Best NL leftfielder for 1889 and best AA leftfielder for 1891.

7) Tommy Bridges-P (8): I'm giving him WWII credit, so that pushes him fairly high on my ballot. Still not sure about post-major league credit for him, though. Never the best in his league, but consistently of high quality throughout his career.

8) Jake Beckley-1B (9): Not much peak, but plenty of career. Better than his numbers suggest since first base was tougher during his time than during the ABC boys' era. Best major league first baseman for 1900.

9) Wally Schang-C (10): I've come to the conclusion that the two Erics have a point about Schang - his stats demand more respect from the electorate. Like Bresnahan, we're not doing a good job of placing catchers in their proper context, IMO. Best AL catcher for 1913, 1914. Best major league catcher for 1919, 1921.

10) Burleigh Grimes-P (11): Pitched for a long time behind crappy teams and defenses. Better peak, IMO, than Rixey or Welch places him slightly above those career guys. Best NL pitcher for 1921 and 1929.

11) Mickey Welch-P (12): I have to admit that the 1880's had some fine pitchers. Best major league pitcher for 1885.

12) Richie Ashburn-CF (n/e): Not really a dominating player at his position, but Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker would have had a hard time being top dog in CF during the fifties, too. At any rate, I think he's a non-inner circle HoMer. Best NL center fielder for 1948 and 1951.

13) Pete Browning-CF/LF (12): Gotta love the peak! Best major league second baseman for 1882. Best major league leftfielder for 1883 (close in 1890). Best AA centerfielder for 1885. Best major league centerfielder for 1887.

14) Frank Chance-1B/C (13): Best first baseman for the first decade of the 20th century. Even more so than Beckley, the Peerless Leader shouldn't be compared with the ABC boys or the post-1920 grouping of first baseman. The cream-of the-crop from Franklin Adam's famous trio. Best major league first baseman for 1903, 1904. 1905, 1906, and 1907 (close in 1908). Best NL first baseman for 1908.

15) Charley Jones-LF/CF (14): He was playing a more difficult position than the one that it evolved into. I gave him a little more credit for his (unfairly) blacklisted years. Best major league leftfielder for 1877, 1879 and 1884. Best AA centerfielder for 1883. Best AA leftfielder for 1885 (close to being the best in the majors).

Mackey, Rixey, Sisler, Griffith, Redding, and Bell all exist in my top-35, but they just fall short.
   36. jimd Posted: January 17, 2006 at 07:46 PM (#1825416)
I can see no rationale whatever for ranking Ashburn above Beckley; longer career, more difficult position and 14 extra points of OPS+.

karlmagnus, I'll listen to you if if you're comparing Inside Baseball Era CF to 1B, but I think you'll have a hard time convincing anyone about 1950s' CF.

The only way I know of to calibrate the value of average defense at a position is by measuring the lack of offense at a position.

By that standard, there is little difference in the defensive value of CF from the 1890's through the 1960's. Except possibly for the 1910's, though that is when Cobb and Speaker dominated the position. Are Mantle and Mays their equivalents?

Could be. If so, that brings up a related question: why was CF more difficult in the 1950's relative to the 1940's and 1960's? Or were Mantle and Mays dominating a relatively weak group of CF'ers? Their dominance is just not visible in the average OPS for the position during the 1950's, the way that Cobb and Speaker appear to be in the 1910's.

In either case though, CF in the 1950's hit about the same as 1B during the Inside Baseball Era (1890s', 1900's, 1910's).

Decade 1B LF RF CF 3B 2B Ca SS Pit
1870's +1 +4 -1 +4 +2 +2 +0 +1 -13
1880's 13 +6 +1 +5 +1 -1 -7 -2 -17
1890's +6 +9 +7 +7 +0 -2 -6 -2 -22
1900's +6 10 +9 +8 +0 +2 -9 -1 -29
1910's +6 +7 +9 10 +1 +1 -7 -4 -31
1920's +9 10 10 +8 -3 +1 -4 -7 -32
1930's 13 +8 10 +5 -1 -3 -3 -4 -36
1940's +8 11 +9 +7 +2 -3 -4 -4 -37
1950's +9 10 +7 +7 +4 -3 -1 -5 -40
1960's 11 +9 11 +7 +4 -5 -3 -6 -46
1970's 10 +8 +8 +5 +3 -5 -2 -11-45
1980's +8 +6 +6 +2 +3 -4 -4 -8 -48
1990's +9 +4 +6 +1 +1 -3 -4 -7 -50

Mean.. +9 +8 +7 +6 +1 -2 -4 -5 -36
   37. karlmagnus Posted: January 17, 2006 at 08:09 PM (#1825481)
jimd, thank you, that confirms what I had understood from previous discussions over the last 70 "years." CF becomes a more important defensive position from the 1970s, with the rebound from 1963-68, and is much more important in the high-HR era of 1980-99, but 1B is just as important in 1890-1920 as CF in 1940-1970. Most important, for WS users, WS DOES NOT REFLECT THIS, IT IS A MANIFEST ERROR IN THE WS SYSTEM.

I'm quite prepared to admit Ashburn was a considerably better CF than Beckley was a 1B, but Beckley had a significantly longer career (even before correcting for season length) and 14 OPS+ points is a LOT. As for league quality, Beckley played right through the 1-league 1890s; his numbers dropped, but you'd expect them to, and his 125 OPS+ includes the tough competition of those years.

I just don't see how Ashburn comes out ahead without a vicious timeline that we're not supposed to have.
   38. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 17, 2006 at 08:58 PM (#1825609)
Good stuff, Jim. I stand corrected. That needs to be posted every year, AFAIAC.



BTW, I'm not really yelling :-), but tar and feathering WS as if they are the only system afflicted with this is 100% wrong.

I just don't see how Ashburn comes out ahead without a vicious timeline that we're not supposed to have.

Yes and no. Yes, we're supposed to be fair to all eras, but how you accomplish this is up in the air.

As for "vicious" timelining, I have "Eagle Eye" above Whitey, so I don't want to be lumped into that group. :-)
   39. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: January 17, 2006 at 09:03 PM (#1825622)
Well, Ashburn comes out ahead if you prefer peak and prime to career. That much should be obvious.

While I understand the lack of any other way to do this, I don't think you can just say that CF became a top level defensive position because its offensive level fell off. Chances are that CF was more important before the 1970's, but that it took a while to figure this out. Well, that and Snider, Mantle, and Mays are three pretty awesome hitters at any position.
   40. TomH Posted: January 17, 2006 at 09:39 PM (#1825686)
The table (shown again below) also does not 'zero out' the 8 positions relative to each other, since P hitting continues to get poorer. A correction might be to subtract 2 from all of the players in 1870-89, but subtract 5 in the 1960s.

Decade 1B LF RF CF 3B 2B Ca SS Pit
1870's +1 +4 -1 +4 +2 +2 +0 +1 -13
1880's 13 +6 +1 +5 +1 -1 -7 -2 -17
1890's +6 +9 +7 +7 +0 -2 -6 -2 -22
1900's +6 10 +9 +8 +0 +2 -9 -1 -29
1910's +6 +7 +9 10 +1 +1 -7 -4 -31
1920's +9 10 10 +8 -3 +1 -4 -7 -32
1930's 13 +8 10 +5 -1 -3 -3 -4 -36
1940's +8 11 +9 +7 +2 -3 -4 -4 -37
1950's +9 10 +7 +7 +4 -3 -1 -5 -40
1960's 11 +9 11 +7 +4 -5 -3 -6 -46
1970's 10 +8 +8 +5 +3 -5 -2 -11-45
1980's +8 +6 +6 +2 +3 -4 -4 -8 -48
1990's +9 +4 +6 +1 +1 -3 -4 -7 -50

Mean.. +9 +8 +7 +6 +1 -2 -4 -5 -36
   41. jimd Posted: January 17, 2006 at 09:41 PM (#1825691)
I don't think you can just say that CF became a top level defensive position because its offensive level fell off. Chances are that CF was more important before the 1970's, but that it took a while to figure this out.

Following that logic, the offensive level fell off when the managers realized it was an important defensive position. Before that they were treating it like a non-important defensive position, and putting a bat out there. So you can't give the practitioners then the credit for playing an important defensive level position when they weren't good defenders (on an absolute level).
   42. jimd Posted: January 17, 2006 at 09:49 PM (#1825718)
A correction might be to subtract 2 from all of the players in 1870-89, but subtract 5 in the 1960s.

That assumes that pitchers get the same at-bats as the other positions. This is close to true before 1910 (just lineup order effects), but becomes less and less true as time goes on due to the increasing use of pinch-hitters (and DH's in the 1970's and later).
   43. jimd Posted: January 17, 2006 at 09:56 PM (#1825733)
A correction might be to subtract 2 from all of the players in 1870-89, but subtract 5 in the 1960s.

My "back of the envelope" estimate is that that effect is worth about one point extra in the 1950's vs the 1890's. (And makes an avg 1950's CF and avg 1890's 1b comparable as offensive forces.)
   44. Sean Gilman Posted: January 17, 2006 at 10:32 PM (#1825833)

1. Pete Browning (1)--If he played in the PCL in the 00s or the Negro Leagues in the 30s, would he be a HOMer by now? Same as with Suttles and Beckwith, the league translations inordinately underrate his peak. Besides, it isn’t like the AA wasn’t a major league. I’d love to see our fabulous translators take another look at the AA. Ralph Kiner has 242 career win shares. According to the last Pennants Added numbers, Browning has 310. (1927)

2. Charley Jones (2)--Jones, Shoeless Joe Jackson and Browning look pretty interchangeable to me. (1929)

3. Cupid Childs (3)--Where has the love for Cupid gone? (1938)

4. Tommy Leach (4)--May be the most underrated candidate out there. (1942)

5. Clark Griffith (5)--About as close to Coveleski as can be. The most balanced pitcher on the ballot in terms of peak and career, probably why no one talks about him anymore. (1942)

6. Larry Doyle (6)--Another underrated infielder. Sisler-esque peak , according to win shares.(1945)

7. George Sisler (7)--Good peak, good career value, underrepresented position.(1958)

8. Cool Papa Bell (8)--Lots of career value, and the translations likely underrate his peak.(1960)

9. Eppa Rixey (9)--Griffith’s got a big edge in peak, and his career value doesn’t make up the difference. It does give him the edge over the short/career/high peak pitchers though.(1960)

10. Hugh Duffy (10)--High peak, medium length career, the best of a large group of borderline OF candidates.(1964)

11. George Van Haltren (11)--Almost a HOMer not too long ago, will make it eventually. (1966)

12. Carl Mays (12)--Big peak, but a bit more career value than Ferrell. (1968)

13. Biz Mackey (13)--Catchers are a tough group with Mackey, Trouppe and Bresnahan. Mackey’s got the big career length advantage. (1968)

14. Willard Brown (14)--Big career advantage over Sewell.

15. Joe Sewell (15)--Overrated, underrated. Tomato, potato. The gap between him and #6 Doyle is tiny, despite the 9 ballot spots.

16. Edd Roush (16)
17. Alejandro Oms (17)
18. Quincy Trouppe (18)
19. Vern Stephens (19)
20. Roger Bresnahan (21)
21. Richie Ashburn (-)
22. Bob Elliott (23)
23. Ed Williamson (24)
24. Jose Mendez (25)
25. Bobby Doerr (26)
26. Dave Bancroft (27)
27. Ralph Kiner (28)
28. Wally Berger (29)
29. Bucky Walters (30)
30. Dick Redding (31)
   45. KJOK Posted: January 17, 2006 at 10:41 PM (#1825852)
Using OWP w/playing time, Player Overall Wins Score, and defense (Win Shares/BP/Fielding Runs) for position players, applied to .500 baseline. Using Runs Saved Above Average, Player Overall WInsScore and Support Neutral Fibonacci Wins for Pitchers. For Position Players AND Pitchers, heavily weight comparison vs. contemporaries, and lightly look at WARP1.

1. JAKE BECKLEY, 1B. 23 POW, 115 WARP1, 245 RCAP & .596 OWP in 10,492 PAs. Def: AVERAGE. A very good for a long time player. Best first baseman from 1880 – 1920.

2. ROGER BRESNAHAN, C. 23 POW, 75 WARP1, 282 RCAP & .651 OWP in 5,373 PA’s. Def: AVERAGE. Best Catcher from 1880s – 1915.

3. JOHN McGRAW, 3B. 20 POW, 78 WARP1, 459 RCAP & .727 OWP in 4,909 PAs. Def: AVERAGE. Was CAREER ALL-TIME OBP% leader until Ruth qualifies in 1923, EVEN adjusting for League, and is STILL #3 behind Williams and Ruth. AND he played 3B, where offensive output was generally very low. Plus led his team to 3 consecutive championships. Oh, AND at least 2nd best 3B between 1875-1900!

4. FRANK CHANCE, 1B. 23 POW, 72 WARP1, 308 RCAP & .720 OWP in 5,099 PAs. Def: VERY GOOD. Excellent hitter and good fielder back when 1st base was MUCH more important defensively. Top seasons better than Beckley’s best. Loses out to Beckley as best post-1880 thru 1920 1st baseman due to playing time.

5. CLARK GRIFFITH, P. 28 POW, 83 WARP1, 256 RSAA, 199 Neut. Fibonacci Wins & 121 ERA+ in 3,385 innings. Career-wise, close to McGinnity. One of the best pitchers of the 1890s, and in the top 10 of his 30 year era.

6. QUINCY TROUPPE, C. Estimated 115 OPS+ over 8,462 PA’s. Def: AVERAGE. Comp looks to be Gary Carter. He could hit for a catcher, and seems to have been AT LEAST average defensively. One of the best major league teams was willing to give him a chance at age 39, which I think says something about his talent.

7. EPPA RIXEY, P. 24 POW, 99 WARP1, 217 RSAA, 229 Neut. Fibonacci Wins & 115 ERA+ in 4,495 innings. Closest comp is probably Red Faber.

8. JOE SEWELL, SS. 35 POW, 103 WARP1, 346 RCAP & .549 OWP in 8,830 PAs. Def: VERY GOOD. Comps are Barry Larkin and Alan Trammell. Best major league SS of the 1920’s, AND 3rd best SS of 1910-1930 period.

9. BOB ELLIOTT, 3B. 21 POW, , 90 WARP1, 241 RCAP & .610 OWP in 8,190 PAs. Def: AVERAGE. 3rd best 3rd baseman in 1930-59 timeframe.

10. BEN TAYLOR, 1B. Estimated 138 OPS+ over 9,091 PA’s. Def: FAIR. Comps are Fred McGriff and Mule Suttles. Too bad his best years were pre-live ball, pre-Negro Leagues. He’s Bill Terry plus about 3 more Bill Terry type seasons.

11. DICK REDDING, P. 183 MLE Neut_Fibonacci_Wins, and 114 MLE ERA+ in 3,556 innings. Was the 2nd best Negro League Pitcher in his era, behind only Williams.

12. BOB JOHNSON, LF. 36 POW, .651 OWP, 319 RCAP, 102 WARP1, 8,047 PAs. Def: VERY GOOD. Best of the outfield glut.

13.BIZ MACKEY, C. . Estimated 98 OPS+ over 9,020 PA’s. Suffers in comparison with Josh Gibson, but a .300 hitting Gold Glove Catcher in his prime had to be a very valuable player. However, I think Trouppe was better for more seasons.

14.BOBBY DOERR, 2B. 40 POW, 107 WARP1, 234 RCAP & .539 OWP in 8,028 PAs. Def: EXCELLENT. Have him just ahead of Childs this time.

15.CHARLIE JONES, LF. 19 POW, .697 OWP, 245 RCAP, 71 WARP1, 3,958 PAs. Def: AVERAGE. Not a lot of PAs due to short schedules and suspension, but lots of offensive production.



RICHIE ASHBURN, CF. 23 POW, 103 WARP1, 146 RCAP & .600 OWP in 9,736 PAs. Def: VERY GOOD. Only about 5th best CF in his 30-year era. Like Duffy, just not in the elite class offensively.


GEORGE SISLER, 1B. 27 POW, 93 WARP1, 205 RCAP & .611 OWP in 9,013 PAs. Def: FAIR. Only ranks about 5th at his position over 30 year period. Some really great seasons, but not enough of them.

GEORGE VAN HALTREN, CF. 12 POW, 118 WARP1, 167 RCAP & .620 OWP in 8,992 PAs. Def: FAIR. He wasn’t that far above position offensively, and wasn’t that good defensively.

COOL PAPA BELL, CF. MLE of .365 OBP and .382 SLG over 13,637 PAs. Even after giving him “Rickey Henderson” credit for baserunning and “Willie Mays” credit for fielding, he still falls short of ballot worthy. Greatness perception perhaps a ballpark illusion. Best comp is Harry Hooper with speed.

DOBIE MOORE, SS. Wish we had good MLE’s for him. Hard to tell if he’s ballot-worthy or far from it. Could be close to Hugh Jennings comp. Based on reputation and known data, just not quite there.

WILLARD BROWN, RF. Estimated 131 OPS+ over 8,407 PA’s. Def: FAIR. Closest comps seem to be Jose Canseco and Rocky Colavito.

CUPID CHILDS, 2B. 30 POW, 104 WARP1, 354 RCAP & .609 OWP in 6,762 PAs. Def: AVERAGE. Best 2nd baseman of the 1890’s, but only around 4th best in 30 year period.

PETE BROWNING, CF/LF. 28 POW, 95 WARP1, 478 RCAP & .745 OWP in 5,315 PAs. Def: POOR. Baseball’s premier hitter in the 1880’s. Much better hitter than any eligible outfielder, but only around 6th best CF in 30 year period.

JOSE MENDEZ, P. 154 MLE Neut Fibonacci Win Points. 114 MLE ERA+ over 3,001 MLE Innings. Similar career to Orel Hershiser perhaps. Had some really great years early in his career, then changed positions due to arm problems at age 27 and was never really a star player after that.

HUGH DUFFY, CF/LF. 5 POW, 95 WARP1, 154 RCAP & .623 OWP in 7,838 PAs. Def: AVERAGE. Just not in the elite OF class offensively, and fielding runs doesn’t even like his defense (-31).

RALPH KINER, LF. .693 OWP, 346 RCAP, 75 WARP1, 6,256 PAs. Def: FAIR. Given the differences in career length and defense, can’t see putting him on ballot ahead of Bob Johnson, or Averill, who can’t make my ballot.
   46. EricC Posted: January 17, 2006 at 11:51 PM (#1825991)
1968 ballot.

1. Wally Schang
2. Joe Sewell

League strength and best-at-glove-position arguments.

3. Joe Gordon
4. Bobby Doerr

Gloves, WWII credit.

5. Richie Ashburn Haven't we elected all 100+ WARP3 candidates? WS and WARP1 underrate him because they don't take into account 1950s NL strength. OPS+ underrates him because his OPS is extremely OBP heavy. And OPS+ isn't a comprehensive metric anyway, as it leaves out the fact that Ashburn was an A+ center fielder.

6. Charlie Keller Win Shares peak overcomes short career; WWII credit.

7. Cool Papa Bell Long career, low peak, perhaps like Sam Rice with the bat, but with outstanding speed.

8. Jose Mendez Evidence of a HoM worthy peak. Perhaps somewhat comparable to Lefty Gomez.

9. Biz Mackey One of the greatest NeL catchers.

10. Tommy Bridges Top 2 Cooperstown-eligible pitchers in career runs saved above average: 1. Bert Blyleven; 2. Tommy Bridges (you can look it up). For this alone, ought to be generating a lot more enthusiasm in this group.

11. Red Schoendienst A little below PHoM cutoff, actually, but among the top 2B in the 40-year span between Gehringer and Morgan: 1. J. Robinson; 2. Bi. Herman, 3. Gordon, 4. Doerr, 5. Fox, 6. Schoendienst (sorry Maz!) Voters should take another look at 2B between now and Morgan's eligibility in 1990.

12. Ernie Lombardi Even with WWII deduction, one of the best hitting C ever, though not the fastest.

13. Ralph Kiner Historically underrated at first because BA was overrated; now overrated because of his HR titles, but a good "peak" candidate, with similarities to Keller and more recent players Mattingly and Belle.

14. Bob Elliott Glove position, NL strength, one of best 3B of his time, if not the best.

15. Lefty Gomez Peak-season bonus for his two Cy-Young type seasons boosts him onto the ballot.

16-20, in order: Dutch Leonard, Mickey Vernon, Tommy Henrich, Eppa Rixey, Roger Bresnahan.

Left behind:

Clark Griffith: made my ballot once, but has been passed by too many later players.

Beckley; GVH: Joined PHoM in the weak ballots of the early 1930s, but passed by later players.

I have Sisler lowest among the returning top-10. While I sympathize with his case, his injury meant that his prime wasn't quite dominant and long enough for me.

Redding: would vote Mendez and Bill Byrd in first.
   47. Rick A. Posted: January 18, 2006 at 02:58 AM (#1826221)
Went over my ballot during the past few weeks and found an error in my spreadsheet in regards to Mendez and Redding. Both move up as a result.

Dick Redding
Enos Slaughter

1968 Ballot
1.Charley Jones – Truly great hitter who missed 2 years in his prime. Elected PHOM in 1921.
2.Pete Browning – Great hitter. Elected PHOM in 1925
3.Dobie Moore – Impressive peak. Giving him more credit for army years. 10+ year prime at important position. Elected PHOM in 1939.
4.Jose Mendez – Looking at the Negro League pitchers thread shows I may be underrating him. Jumps over Averill. Elected PHOM in 1942.
5.Biz Mackey – Took another look at Mackey and realized that we’re underrating him. Yes, he wasn’t as great a hitter as we thought. Yes, he has a kind of Sisleresque career shape. However, he has a ton of career value, very good prime value and was an A+ defensive catcher. That adds up to a HOMer to me. Elected PHOM in 1956.
6.Vic Willis – Very good pitcher. I like him better than Waddell. Elected PHOM in 1945.
7.Dick Redding – Very good career with lots of innings. Moves up due to error in spreadsheet. Elected PHOM in 1968
8.Ed Williamson – He’s back. I was talked into the idea that I overestimated him in the past, but decided I was right the first time. Elected PHOM in 1958
9.Cupid Childs – Good hitter. Elected PHOM in 1960.
10.Burleigh Grimes – Higher peak than Rixey. Elected PHOM in 1961
11.Willard Brown – Big jump up for Brown. I tend to start conservatively w/ Negro league players and other players who need MLE credit. I guess I just need time to digest the information. Elected PHOM in 1966.
12.Hugh Duffy – 82% of career is above-average. Great defense
13.Ralph Kiner – These high peak, short career players are the hardest for me to evaluate. Incredible peak and enough prime value to make my ballot
14.Bucky Walters – Peak pitchers get a big boost in reevaluation.
15.Roger Bresnahan – Underrated by me previously. Very good catcher.

Required Disclosures
Griffith Doesn't rate well in my system.
Rixey, Beckley, Van Haltren As a peak, prime voter, I need to see a higher peak
Bell, Sisler Both barely miss my ballot

New Candidates
Richie Ashburn - Ranks below Max Carey(who isn't in my PHOM)
Red Schoendienst, Eddie Yost Both fall out of my consideration set.

Off the ballot
16-20 Monroe, Bell, Dean, Mays, Sisler
21-25 Oms, Leach, Roush, Matlock, W.Cooper
26-30 Johnson, Waddell, McGraw, Cravath, H.Smith
31-35 Ashburn, Winters, Gordon, Doyle, Rosen
36-40 Elliott, A.Cooper, Stephens, Bond, Schang
41-45 Rizzuto, Easter, Poles, Keller, Tiernan
46-50 F.Jones, Clarkson, Van Haltren, Pesky, Doerr
   48. DavidFoss Posted: January 18, 2006 at 04:57 AM (#1826288)
Baseball in 1967.

The Red Sox win a memorable pennant race on the last day of the season, much to the chagrin of Twins fans everywhere. (With Detroit & Chicago also within 3 games at the very end). They withstood the injury of a key regular (Conigliaro) and had a break out season from LF-er Yastrzemski who won the Triple Crown.

In contrast, the Cardinals ran away with the division. Winning by 10.5 games. They also withstood the injury of a key regular (Gibson).

The difference in the World Series was due to Gibson's return. He won 3 CG's with a 1.00 ERA and 26 K's.

Babe Ruth watch 1967:

1 Babe Ruth 714
2 Willie Mays 564
3 Jimmie Foxx 534
4 Ted Williams 521
5 Mickey Mantle 518
6 Mel Ott 511
7 Eddie Mathews 509
8 Lou Gehrig 493
9 Hank Aaron 481
10 Stan Musial 475
11 Ernie Banks 442
12 Duke Snider 407
13 Frank Robinson 403
14 Harmon Killebrew 380
15 Gil Hodges 370

I wasn't impressed with the new eligibles this year. Ashburn compares well with Carey who I was not particularly fond of back in the day. Schoendienst marks a shift to a new type of 2B. The defensive spectrum has indeed shifted, but I'm not sold on voting for the lesser hitting guys that played between Jackie Robinson and Joe Morgan. Sure there is a lot of room between those two and the in/out line, but #3 on the RCAA list between 1950-70 is Pete Runnells. Nellie Fox will be an interesting candidate.

1968 Ballot

1. Clark Griffith (1) -- The plethora of borderline live-ball pitchers is making me think we may have forgotten about Clark, who pitched well in an even livelier era. Solid numbers in an underrepresented era.
2. Larry Doyle (2) -- I think the electorate is underrating him, his support is waning. Fine second baseman for great Giants teams. Solid peak. Fielding was mediocre, but not as horrific as WARP suggests.
3. John McGraw (5) -- 135 OPS+ is aided by the fact that its OBP heavy. In fact, his OBP is 3rd all time. Playing time issues keeping him out of the HOM so far...
4. Cupid Childs (3) -- Very comparable to Doyle. OPS+ is OBP heavy. Fielding was good, but not A-level.
5. Dick Redding (6) -- "Cannonball" had the 2nd best fastball of the 10's according to Neyer/James.
6. Ralph Kiner (7) -- Top-notch peak, career sputtered out a bit too early. Still, 149 OPS+ in 6256 PA with a healthy peak on top of that is pretty darn good. Starting him just above Cravath.
7. Gavvy Cravath (8) -- Cravath has a monster peak that is holding up against new eligibles.
8. Biz Mackey (4) -- Lets not forget about Biz! Wasn't the hitter I had previously thought, but I have a soft spot for catchers. Giving him credit for his year in overseas and his rate numbers are not bad if you cut them off in the late-1930s or so. Its not fair that his older days are weighing his rates down.
9. Joe Gordon (9) -- Tossing some love out for the fine 2B for some great Yankees/Indians clubs. Short career has me worried, but a little war credit puts him on the ballot instead of Ruffing.
10. Charley Jones (10) -- Unfairly blacklisted. Appears to be a hybrid or Pike/Stovey/Thompson, guys I've ranked fairly highly. Returning to my ballot after a sizeable absence. He is not from an underrepresented era which is making me a bit apprehensive about his future on my ballots.
11. George Sisler (11) -- Peak candidate... before the injury (184 RC+) was a top-tier hitter.
12. Roger Bresnahan (12) -- Great five year peak at C. 126 OPS+ is OBP-heavy. Didn't appear to play full-time outside his peak though... getting a small subjective boost due to catcher shortage from his era.
13. Joe Sewell (13) -- Top SS of the 1920s. High OBP, excellent glove. Decent peak, but a peak that warrants a longer career for a slam dunk induction. Still better than most. New candidates have pushed him off of many ballots and it will be interesting to watch to what degree his support returns as we dip deeper into the backlog.
14. Bob Johnson (15) -- High OBP slugger stuck on the post-fire-sale Connie Mack clubs. WS numbers are depressed by his teams constant underperforming of Pythag.
15. Bob Elliott (nr) -- Great hitter for five years... not as great as Al Rosen, but much more meat to his career making him more ballot-worthy.

16-20. Doerr, Rixey, Rosen, Trouppe, Chance,
21-25. Lombardi, Beckley, WBrown, Browning, Welch,
26-30. DMoore, Leach, Waddell, Roush, Newcombe,
31-35. BWalters, CPBell, Ashburn, Rizzuto, VStephens
   49. Rusty Priske Posted: January 18, 2006 at 02:29 PM (#1826506)
What happened to the 20 man ballot? There are a few people not listing 16-20.
   50. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 18, 2006 at 02:48 PM (#1826524)
What happened to the 20 man ballot? There are a few people not listing 16-20.

AFAIAC, it's over, Rusty.
   51. TomH Posted: January 18, 2006 at 04:01 PM (#1826607)
AFAIAC - as far as I ... ??
   52. TomH Posted: January 18, 2006 at 04:07 PM (#1826619)
1968 Ballot
Review of Hanrahan’s value system: career value with a fairly high replacement level (slightly below average). Something like WARP3 minus 2.5 wins per full year, or WS minus 11 per year adjusted for league quality, or OPS+ over 95 adjusted for defense and timeline and speed. No real credit for “peak”. Some subjective estimating of ability across time and place.

Yes, I do feel the late 1950s NL is a much stronger league than its predecessors, and stats should be adjusted accordingly. If we honor fewer players from the 1960 era than we do from the 1930 era (including the deserving NegLgrs of that day), our perspective will be greatly askew.

(x) indicates where I voted for them last ballot
[y] indicates their consensus rank from last ballot

1-Clark Griffith (1) [5]
Brought many victories to otherwise mediocre teams. More than any other player in our backlog.
2-Richie Ashburn {new}
Got on base. Scored lots of runs. Really, lots. Played a fine CF. Take the great new black stars out of his league and he’d be further above his competition than the stars of the non-integrated years before. Does WS overrate CFers? Yes it can. But if you use WARP, Ashburn looks even better than he does by WS; and WARP shows him to be a worse fielder than any other defensive metric.
3-Joe Sewell (2) [18]
A many-tooled fine player lost in the shuffle of those who favor career-only or peak-only. Great RCAP, AND very good defense. Will we (like the HoF) ignore Alan Trammell?
4-George Van Haltren (3) [7]
Hit. Ran. Played D. Pitched. Long career. Played in under-represented 1890s.
5-Cool Papa Bell (5) [8]
The basestealing of Vince Coleman with the CF ability and career length of a Willie Mays. Even with an average bat, he’s probably a HoMer. Our MLEs may understate Bell’s real value.
6-Eppa Rixey (6) [3]
Good discussion in December on Eppa. Upon reflection, I was penalizing him more than I should have for his ‘weak’ league. However, it IS a factor that shouldn’t be totally ignored.
7-Bucky Walters (7) [22]
Faced strong opponents, pitched real well and hit well too, played in strong league. His perceived peak in ‘39-‘40 is aided by the Red’s gold glove defense.
8-Joe Gordon (8) [21]
Nudges out Doerr; I might feel differently if Doerr had helped his team over the top in at least one of the many close pennant races that they lost.
9-John McGraw (10) [37]
The prime of Hughie Jennings. Outstanding RCAP. HoM is short of 3Bmen and 1890s infielders. Brilliant tactician.
10-Biz Mackey (9) [4]
Schang looks just as good. But Mackey’s fine rep and career length puts him here.
11-Willard Brown (11) [12]
Close comp to Averill, who I assess as one of our weakest HoMers to date. Luke Easter MIGHT be Willard Brown, but I’m less uncertain of Brown’s career. Same for Mr. Oms.
12-Frank Chance (12) [40]
Y’all know how I feel.
13-Jake Beckley (13) [9]
Fine career.
14-Ralph Kiner (off) [19]
Great prime.
15-Bob Johnson (off) [35]
Very good long prime.

{Top 10 not on my ballot – Cannonball Redding is about #40}

16 G Sisler – great prime, shorter than Kiner’s
17 B Monroe
18 C Childs
19 P Rizzuto
20 B Doerr
21 R Bresnahan
22 P Traynor
23 D Moore

Others near the ballot:
Wally Schang …bonus credit for catching lots of thieves in W.S. play
Ernie Lombardi …a little speed would have made him a HoMer
Tommy Leach ...Pie Traynor clone almost
Rube Waddell ...Great ERAs & KOs, but many UER and not at the top of his era.
Dizzy Dean ...Great pitcher for a while. Not as good as Ferrell.
Jose Mendez …Dean clone.
Mickey Welch ...Rixey clone almost.
Gavy Cravath … might belong also, but it’s real hard to tell
Alejandro Oms … another fine NegL Ofer
Pete Browning … almost Ralph Kiner
   53. Daryn Posted: January 18, 2006 at 04:25 PM (#1826652)
AFAI am concerned.
   54. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 18, 2006 at 04:32 PM (#1826660)
AFAI am concerned.

Correct. :-)
   55. TomH Posted: January 18, 2006 at 04:37 PM (#1826674)
   56. favre Posted: January 18, 2006 at 05:45 PM (#1826800)
Now that Medwick and Ruffing have been elected, I'm ready for my sad journey back to the top of the consensus score pile :).

1.Alejandro Oms
2.Eppa Rixey

I think Larry Doby is a fair comp for Oms. They were the same type of players, hitting about 140 OPS+ with very good CF defense in their primes. Both had long strings of 25+WS (nine for Oms, eight for Doby), and they had somewhat similar career WS (312 for Doby w/ NeL credit; Oms projected at 340). Doby had a higher peak, Oms had a better career. If you had Doby high on your ballot, take another look at Alejandro.

Rixey’s 4494 IP is 27th all time; Ferguson Jenkins, Eddie Plank, and Jack Powell are all within ten innings. I think Jenkins and Plank are good comps. He made my pHoM back in 1940, so I’m obviously pleased that he’s coming close to induction.

3.Jake Beckley
4.Wally Schang

Beckley posted a 152 OPS+ in 1890, at the age of 22, in the Players League. He posted a 144 OPS+ fourteen years later, at the age of 36. If you drop two seasons where he hit for league average, then Beckley had thirteen seasons in between where his average OPS+ was 130 while playing good defense at first base. That is a long, productive prime.

This is a pretty high ranking for Schang, but he had nine seasons with an OPS+ of 121 or higher, which is impressive for a catcher. Career .393 OBP in a .349 era.

5.Rube Waddell
6.Jose Mendez
7.Dobie Moore

I know Waddell allowed an inordinate amount of unearned runs, that his RSI index isn’t impressive, and that he was very unreliable. But his top four ERA+ seasons are 179, 179, 165, and 153, and he was striking out between seven and eight guys per nine as he was posting those. Arguably better than Feller at his peak.

There’s a lot of circumstantial evidence in favor of Mendez: he was a terrific player in a very good Cuban league, also played on the dominant Negro League team of the early 1920s, had a long career, could hit, had some great playoff moments, played in an era which is underrepresented by pitchers, and was possibly the best pitcher to come out of Cuba. Taken as a whole, this evidence convinces me that he was a better pitcher than Dick Redding, whom I have at #20, although Redding may move up later.

It’s become pretty clear to me that Moore is the best shortstop available. Not quite the peak of Jennings, but a better career when you factor in his playing days in the army. I should have had him on the ballot three decades ago.

8.Richie Ashburn
9.Tommy Leach
10.Cool Papa Bell

The centerfielders. I’m a little surprised at the lukewarm support for Ashburn thus far; I thought high on-base percentages and excellent defense were highly valued in sabermetric circles. Then again, a) we have a lot of ballots still to come in b) he doesn’t have much of a peak argument and c) what the hell do I know about sabermetrics?

Leach actually has more career WS than any major-league position player on the ballot except for Van Haltren and Ashburn, who leads Leach by one (328 to 327). Played A+ defense at centerfield AND third base, and could hit a little (career 109 OPS+). It’s not like the HoM suffers from a third baseman glut.

I’d rather have Ashburn and Leach in their primes, but over his career Bell both saved and created a whole lotta runs. He deserves to be in.

11.Joe Gordon
12.Ned Williamson
13.Bobby Doerr

Gordon had a 120 career OPS+ while missing two prime years to the war; Doerr had a 115 OPS+ while playing during the war years; both were A defenders. This convinces me that a) Gordon should *absolutely* be ahead of Doerr and b) both players should be on the ballot. We don’t see this kind of combination of defense and hitting at 2B again until we reach Joe Morgan and Ryne Sandberg.

Williamson is still the best pure third baseman available almost eighty years after he retired. His main challenger for that spot is Bob Elliott, but Williamson has a better peak and considerably more defensive value.

14.Biz Mackey
15.Clark Griffith

Mackey fits well with the “outstanding-defense-and-pretty-good-with-bat” group that I have near the bottom of my ballot. Griffith made my pHoM in 1930, but fell off the ballot sometime in the 1950s, I think. It must have been a nightmare to pitch in the 1890s: the mound was moved back, offensive numbers were soaring, the best hitters contracted into one league. Griffith was consistently very good through that time period, although I wish his IP were a little higher relative to his contemporaries.

16.George Sisler
17.Roger Bresnahan
18.Ralph Kiner
19.Gavvy Cravath
20.Dick Redding

Sisler, Kiner, and Cravath have similar resumes: huge peak seasons with short careers that just keep them just off the ballot for now. I’m impressed by Kiner’s seasons of 184, 184, and 173 OPS+; and by Sisler’s 161 OPS+ and forty stolen bases per season between 1917-1922. But I’m more impressed by the guys who could field well, have long careers, and still hit some.

21.George Van Haltren

I think Van Haltren gets too much credit from the electorate for his pitching, but he did do a lot of things well for a long time.

22-25: Cupid Childs, Bob Elliott, Larry Doyle, Edd Roush
26-30: Pete Browning, Mike Tiernan, Bob Johnson, Vic Willis, Burleigh Grimes
   57. DL from MN Posted: January 18, 2006 at 07:40 PM (#1827040)
Since this is my first ballot I figured I'd play it a little safe, ranking the guy's I'm less certain lower.

1. Biz Mackey - I'm giving him Bob Boone credit for the glove and longevity and keeping the translated OPS+ at 98.
2. Clark Griffith - clearly above the rest of the pack in his era
3. Cool Papa Bell - arguments have me convinced he's better than Ashburn
4. Richie Ashburn - With a longer career he'd be ahead of Bell. WS and WARP can't both be drastically wrong.
5. Joe Sewell - top of the SS/2B heap
6. Eppa Rixey - huge career, decent prime
7. Quincy Trouppe - better hitter than Mackey but he wasn't a better catcher. Both C and 3B are underrepresented.
8. George Van Haltren - Did a lot of things well, interesting player
9. Rube Waddell - Great peak, may be too high on the ballot. Call him my shiny new toy and I'll probably adjust downward later.
10. Jake Beckley - Great 1B defense when it mattered most.
11. Tommy Leach - glad I took a look down the ballot, this guy has all the credentials
12. Bobby Doerr - Gordon may have been better but I'm more certain that Doerr was this good
13. Bob Johnson - Very good hitter for a long enough time, good glove too
14. Alejandro Oms - I have him right around where I'd put Averill
15. Gavy Cravath - Terrific post-peak career leads me to conclude he would have been a great one
16. Dobie Moore - I have him around where I would have Jennings
17. Bucky Walters - needs more career or more prime
18. Edd Roush - Needs more glove
19. Dick Redding - I will probably move him up in comparison to Walters and Waddell but wanted to rank conservatively
20. Joe Gordon - it takes a lot of credit to move him up further
21. Bob Elliott - Solid 3B
22. George Sisler - I'm not seeing greatness
23. Ralph Kiner - If he could catch the ball he'd move way up.
24. Cupid Childs - best of a poor era
25-30. Schang, Duffy, Bresnahan, Browning, Grimes, Mendez

I don't see Schoendienst making my top 50. Yost isn't really notable.
   58. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 18, 2006 at 07:48 PM (#1827062)
Your ballot looks good, DL. Welcome to the club!
   59. Mark Donelson Posted: January 18, 2006 at 09:30 PM (#1827297)
1968 ballot

I’m an extreme peak voter; career numbers matter very little to me, except as a tiebreaker.

Bucky Walters and Al Rosen join my pHOM this year. (It seems likely I'll be the only one here ever to type those words...)

1. Dobie Moore (pHOM 1932). Just enough to satisfy my (admittedly small) minimum requirements. Best unelected hitter, at least for the peak-centric.

2. José Méndez (pHOM 1960). We still need more pitchers, and to me, he looks like the best one still out there. Would have loved to see him pitch.

3. Rube Waddell (pHOM 1919). I’m still his best friend, it seems. Love his PRAA, love his strikeouts, and the unearned runs don’t bug me that much.

4. Hugh Duffy (pHOM 1930). It seems many of us agree this era is a bit underrepresented; it’s just that we can’t agree on whether Duffy, the peak candidate, or Van Haltren, the career candidate, deserves to go in. I find Duffy easily the best nonelected eligible CF, though.

5. Cupid Childs (pHOM 1938). Another high-peaking infielder.

6. Vic Willis (pHOM 1961). Underrated (or so says my ever-dropping consensus score). Impressive peak, lots of Ks.

7. Ralph Kiner (pHOM 1964). He still looks pretty good to a peak voter.

8. Willard Brown (pHOM 1964). A great hitter, even if he didn’t walk much. Another CF way better than Ashburn, IMO.

9. Ed Williamson (pHOM 1931). Still the best of the remaining 3Bs, for my taste. And, hey, from that underrepresented era again!

10. Quincy Trouppe (pHOM 1967). All the hard evidence makes him the best of the remaining eligible catchers.

11. Dizzy Dean (pHOM 1967). He’s back! I had him pegged right in my first few votes. It’s a really short peak (which is why he’s not higher), but it’s an impressive one.

12. Bucky Walters (pHOM 1968). Another underrated pitcher with an appealing peak.

13. Al Rosen (pHOM 1968). I remain pretty lonely on Rosen, but he makes my pHOM this year. Normally even I don’t go for guys with peaks this short, but his position gives him a decent boost in my system—I think we need more 3Bs.

14. Charlie Keller. Quite close to Kiner overall; a very underappreciated and underrated player (well, if you’re a peak voter, anyway).

15. George Sisler (pHOM 1939). He finally makes it back to my official ballot, after being demoted on reappraisal a few years back (my consistency score is grateful). He’s overrated by most, underrated here, blah blah blah.

16. Roger Bresnahan. We still need more catchers, and he played the position enough to qualify (if he’d played it more with the same offensive numbers, he’d be significantly higher).

17. Joe Gordon. A solid infielder I may still be underappreciating.

18. Charley Jones. Another player I may still have too low; I’ve never been fully happy with my analysis of him (or of Pete Browning, who’s a few places below). His peak is prodigious, but how real are those numbers?

19. Larry Doyle. Another of the good-hitting infielders I tend to favor.

[19a. Pee Wee Reese. I’m not as sold on him as most of the rest of the electorate was, but he’s undeniably one of the great middle infielders, even to a peakster like me.]

20. Pete Browning. If only I could get a better handle on his level of competition, he might be much higher. I’m going to have to do a serious reevaluation of him and Jones someday soon.
   60. Mark Donelson Posted: January 18, 2006 at 09:38 PM (#1827317)
21-25: Redding, [Slaughter], Mackey, Berger, H. Wilson, Oms
26-30: Cicotte, Poles, Griffith, Leach, McCormick
31-35: Cravath, Joss, Ashburn, Doerr, Roush
36-40: Chance, Ryan, Burns, Dunlap, Pesky
41-45: Welch, Van Haltren, Grimes, [Lemon], Veach, Rizzuto
46-50: McGraw, Newcombe, B. Johnson, Stephens, [W. Foster], [Faber], Matlock.

Required Explanations and Newbies:

•Rixey. Still no peak to speak of, and still just outside my top 50.

•Mackey. The numbers, at least in the MLEs and the actual data, just aren’t quite there—not enough peak. I can’t bring myself to elevate him on reputation alone, but at #22, he is getting closer to my ballot. (I already put him in my pHOM before a demotion some years back, for the record.)

•Griffith. Not great by WS, but a better PRAA peak than I’d realized. He’s at #28, and he may move up a bit more soon; my thoughts on him are still changing.

•Van Haltren. Not a peak voter’s kind of hitter. He’s at #42.

•Bell. Also not a peak voter’s type, unless you go entirely on reputation, which I’m not willing to do. Not terribly close to my top 50. (I’m going to reevaluate him before next election, however, due to the discussion on his thread. Even best-case, I don’t think it’ll get him to my ballot, though.)

•Beckley. The epitome of the “not a peak voter’s type” crowd. Not close to my top 50.

•Redding. I don’t think his peak was stellar, but he was very, very good. He’s edging toward my ballot, at #21 now.

•Ashburn. He’s solidly in the middle of the CF glut for me—even with a small boost for what may be a higher level of play in the ‘50s, the peak’s just not fantastic. I’ll take another look at him shortly, and he may move up slightly, but he’s not terribly close to my ballot. He debuts at #33.

•Yost. The Walking Man is vastly underrated historically, but not by enough to get him into my top 50. He takes a place in the rather large 3B gap between Elliott and Traynor.

•Schoendienst. Not a great peak by any means. I don’t think he’s a ton better than Gil McDougald, who’s not close to being close to my top 50.

No one else is in the ballpark, as it were…
   61. OCF Posted: January 18, 2006 at 09:45 PM (#1827335)
It looks like DL from MN has a pretty good chance of winding up among the top handful of consensus scores. That's not unusual for a new voter. It's the guys who've stuck around for a while who get really ideosyncratic.
   62. Howie Menckel Posted: January 19, 2006 at 01:22 AM (#1827763)
1968 ballot, our 71st

Ashburn was the only one who required significant study. Some players moved around, though, after a holiday break and a fresh 'feel' for which are most deserving. I know their pros and cons backwards and forwards by now.

I continue to be convinced that overall there is too much emphasis on WARP3 and WS, which are intriguing tools but which are not yet sufficiently mature.
So my preference for ERA+ and OPS+ helps, I think, as a reality check on the newfangled toys.

1. EPPA RIXEY - Remains at the top of the heap for a 2nd straight year. A very misunderstood career. People found him wanting, compared to other guys with that incredible number of IP. But pretend he's a shorter-career guy, and suddenly he looks better than the Ferrells or the Lemons. Plus he's got his own solid collection of top 10 IP finishes, so we don't have a Griffith situation here. Eppa missed his age 27 season to WW I (and much of the age 28 season), and I wonder how many have accounted for that, either. Better than Ruffing over full career context, too.
2. JAKE BECKLEY - It's STILL time, but I've seen that a lot of our voters will never ever vote for him.
His OPS+s as a regular: 152 44 38 33 31 28 27 27 26 26 26 24 22 12 12 05 02
Long, long career of "quite good" is almost unique. His fielding had value, he played every day, he hit well - there's nothing remotely like this career among the unelected hitters from 1875-1935. 13 OPS+s of 120 or better. Rivals came and went; it's only he who lasted. Some parallels to Rixey.

3. DICK REDDING - I need only add he and Bell to round out my own personal Negro League contingent, pending further analysis. A little bit caught between peak/career types, and of course parts of his career are shrouded by history. A rare Negro League pitcher who lasted, deserves much credit for that. I agree that this is the missing Negro League pitcher in our experiment.
4. CLARK GRIFFITH - Zooms back up after a brief detour toward the bottom of my ballot. Is everyone considering 1892-93 credit for him? If not, that may be all it takes for more votes. I don't believe the amazing W-L is a fluke; pitching conditions were a ton different then, and he was focused on Ws in a non-HR era. Lack of innings a problem, I admit, but he stands out over most contemporaries for the body of work.
5. COOL PAPA BELL - I enjoy the color-blindness of our evaluations, and this is the ultimate case. Continues a steady climb on my ballot, and this is while conceding that park and steals led him to be a bit overrated. But discounting the myth a bit doesn't mean ignoring a very long and productive career.
6. GEORGE SISLER - Hanging in there. The comparison with Medwick in an earlier ballot discussion thread was instructive: There is an argument whether his best season was any better than George's, but there are too many voters using other systems that work against Sisler. A slight pitching boost, too.
7. CUPID CHILDS - A full-length career for this brutal and underrepresented era is darn impressive. I discount the heck out of the silly 1890 AA season, but still find seven other 120 OPS+ seasons here. Matches up well against 2Bs in all eras.
8. RALPH KINER - Just a tad better than HOMer Medwick; I like mashers like this, and a little war credit. Is getting underrated by the electorate.
9. GAVVY CRAVATH - Continues to make a late charge on the Howie ballot, after 20+ years of resistance. The key is the half-season opportunity in 1908; even then he clearly was a quality major league hitter, so there's little reason not to significantly credit either 1907 or 1909-11. And his work in his 30s is just outstanding. I think Gadfly's estimates on the Cravath thread are way too kind to him, BUT I hope people don't reject his whole case on that grounds. Doesn't need a lot of minor-league credit to beat Medwick. Comparison to Kiner is even more fascinating.
10. PETE BROWNING - He's slipped just behind the Kiner/Cravath doppelgangers. Seven OPS+s above 163. 10 regular seasons, a good number for the era. Almost would be No. 2 on my ballot if he could field. He stunk at it, sometimes, but played some 16 pct of his career in the infield. Was OF fielding hugely important in this era? I doubt it.
11. BOB ELLIOTT - Probably better than HOMer Hack, has returned to my ballot. Wish he'd play all 3B and not so much OF, but c'est le vie. Amazing how much better a hitter he was than Pie Traynor.
12. BURLEIGH GRIMES - Landed on my radar two years ago and onto my ballot last time. Compare to Ruffing, Rixey, and other borderline HOM pitchers. I dismissed him as short of Rixey and Ruffing, and he was. One 130 ERA+ year short of climbing a lot higher on this ballot.
13. JOE GORDON - Leaps onto my ballot this time. Candidacies of Doby and Slaughter confirmed that Gordon has gotten screwed in terms of WW II war credit in comparison. A good Gordon argument might put him on next year's ballot.
14. ROGER BRESNAHAN - I could use a few more innings at C and not OF, but he was great in OF some years. Has not been on my ballot in many years. Better pick than Mackey.
15. GEORGE VAN HALTREN - I dismissed him long ago, but as the ballot thins it's inevitable that he would sneak back into my top 15. Don't think he's a HOMer, but tough to find 15 better.

MICKEY WELCH - Will return to the ballot someday. The Ws are great, but hovered in the 3 to 5 ranking in IP when only a dozen or so guys were hurling serious innings. One outstanding, one excellent, one very good year ERA+-wise. The category is not a perfect tool out of that era, but the dominance also wasn't quite there.
DOBIE MOORE - I had Jennings 15th when he was elected; I'm more convinced here on the short career part than on the 'best player in baseball' part, at this point.
JOE SEWELL - Another guy who I rightly dissed during ferocious ballot competition, but he claws his way back when the pool thins a bit.
(Bobby Doerr and Hugh Duffy follow.)

RICHIE ASHBURN - I like more offense from my OFs, frankly, even my CFs. I may take another look next time, though.

BIZ MACKEY - I like the Sisler and Deacon McGuire comparisons in his thread. Sisler - one good half-career, one 'not worth much' half-career. McGuire - long career as a C, but played not always that often or that well. Unfortunately for Biz, the latter seems more on the money. He's fallen off my radar, as fielding by a C is not as key in my eyes as 2B-SS, among others. How much was that really worth?
   63. Kelly in SD Posted: January 19, 2006 at 07:25 AM (#1828147)
1968 Ballot

<u>PHOM Inductees</u>: Backlog again: Hughie Jennings and Billy Herman.
I wanted Ashburn to make the ballot, but I couldn’t find a player to demote. He is on the edge. I want to have Burns and Ashburn tied for 15th, but I don’t think we are allowed to split ballot positions.
Burns and Ashburn have many similarities: leadoff hitters
Top 10s: hits: Burns 8, Ashburn 9 with 3 firsts;
walks: Burns 9 with 5 firsts, Ashburn 8 with 4 firsts;
stolen bases: Burns 9 with 2 firsts, Ashburn 12 with 1 first;
runs: Burns 11 with 5 firsts, Ashburn 7;
total bases: Burns 7, Ashburn 1;
AVG: Burns 4, Ashburn 9 with 2 firsts;
OBP: Burns 5 with 1 first, Ashburn 9 with 4 firsts;
SLG: Burns 3, Ashburn 0;
Runs Created: Burns 8 with 1 first, Ashburn 3;
Times on Base: Burns 11 with 3 firsts, Ashburn 11 with 5 firsts.
Ashburn played center, but Burns hit for more power.

1. Mickey Welch – PHOM 1901 - The weight of the evidence.

2. Charley Jones – PHOM 1906 - I give 2+ seasons credit for being blackballed. Among position players, by win shares, he ranks tied for 4th in 1878, 2nd in 1879, 6th in 1883, 1st in 1884, 3rd in 1885. Now add in 2 missing years in 1881 and 1882. Also, career OPS+ of 149.
His 1876 score is artificially low because of the quality of his team. In 1876, his team had a .138 winning percentage, winning 9 games out of 65. Jones had 33% of his team’s win shares. He was 20th in the league among position players in total WS, but 1st by percentage of team.

3. Pete Browning – PHOM 1921 - The second best peak and prime. Has the best OPS+ among eligibles by 10 points, 162 to Keller’s 152. An All-Star by STATS 8 times and win shares 5 times. Among position players, he is 1st in 1882 in AA, 4th in 1883, 5th in 1884, 1st in 1885, 2nd in 1887, 5th in 1890 Players League.

4. Charlie Keller – PHOM 1957 - WWII credit for one season and one partial at his established level. Great peak and prime.
Only Pete Browning has a higher career OPS+ than Keller’s 152.
Was an on-base machine, with the 4th highest OBP among eligibles behind McGraw, Childs, and Roy Thomas. His .518 SLG is 7th.
Among position players in WS: 1939 -22-14th (rookie year). 1940 – 24 ws – 9th. 1941 – 32 ws – 4th. 1942 – 34 ws – 2nd. 1943 – 36 ws – 2nd. 1946 – 31 ws – 4th. For six years, only Dimaggio and Williams were better (and Musial, but that’s NL).

5. Hugh Duffy – PHOM 1918 - Adjusted for season length, only Browning and Keller have a better peak, and only Browing and Charley Jones have a better prime.
An A+ outfielder for his career who played less than 50% of his games in center.
He was 2nd in 1890 PL. 1891 AA 3rd. 1892 NL 5th. 1893 NL 1st (tied). 1894 NL 1st. 1895 NL 11th. 1897 8th. 1898 13th.

6. Bucky Walters – PHOM 1958 - Best National League pitcher between Hubbell and Roberts/Spahn. This ranking is after I reduce his WWII efforts.
3 times best pitcher in NL. Best pitcher by 12 win shares, 38 to 26; by 4 win shares, 32 to 28; by 8 win shares, 32 to 24. He missed by 1 win share in 1941 of leading the league 4 times.
Only 3 eligibles have a better peak. Has 10th highest prime. Only Dean has more Black Ink.
Faced tougher average opponents then any real candidate. Only Nap Rucker, Thorton Lee, and Eddie Smith faced tougher.

7. Quincy Troupe – PHOM 1960 - Long career catcher at a very high level. An All-star 23 different times. The productive phase of his career lasted longer then Mackey’s. 7 times with over 20 win shares is nothing to sneeze at from a catcher. I do not give credit for the year spent boxing, but I do for the War. The huge number of walks is a big plus for me.

8. Alejandro Ohms – PHOM 1964 - Big plus for my system is the 8 years of at least 25 win shares. While he doesn’t have the big peak that I like, his prime his fantastic.
His thread says everything I would say, but better.

9. Cupid Childs - PHOM 1932 - Childs was the best second basemen of the 1890s by a wide margin. He was better than HoMer Bid McPhee most every year of the decade. A key member of the great 1890s Clevelend teams.

10. Vic Willis – PHOM 1942 - Only Rixey have a higher career win share total. Tied with Waddell for best non-consecutive peak. Highest prime of any eligible pitcher. He ranks lower than other pitchers because I have a higher standard for earlier pitchers than post deadballers.
First in NL twice (1899, 1901).
Top 10 pitcher in 1902 (2nd), 1903 (9th), 1906 (2nd), 1907 (9th), 1908 (8th), 1909 (5th)

11. Jose Mendez- PHOM 1967: Big beneficiary of rereading his thread. Fantastic peak/prime. And did really well against top-of-the-line white teams. REREAD HIS THREAD.

12. Tommy Leach - PHOM 1966 - I know Leach split time in centerfield along with third, but I see him as the most qualified 3rd baseman by far. 7 Gold Gloves by win shares. 5 times a win shares All-Star. Instrumental in the Pittsburgh defenses of the first 15 years of the 20th century.
Rank in LG:
1899: 13 WS, NR
1900: 3 WS, NR
1901: 17 WS,
1902: 27 WS, 4th in NL, best 3rd in NL and Majors
1903: 21 WS, 14th tied, best 3rd in NL (tied)
1904: 25 WS, 6th in NL, best 3rd in NL (tied)
1905: 17 WS, NR
1906: 19 WS, NR
1907: 29 WS, 4th in NL, 3rd best OF in NL – all-star.
1908: 31 WS, 4th in NL, 2nd best 3rd to Hans Lobart’s 32 in NL and majors.
1909: 26 WS, 7th in NL, 4th best OF in NL (Clarke 31, Mitchell 28, Hofman 27)
1910: 16 WS, NR
1911: 10 WS, NR
1912: 14 WS, NR
1913: 24 WS, 4th in NL, 2nd best OF in NL
1914: 27 WS, 4th in NL, 4th best OF in NL (Burns 31, Magee 29, Cravath 28)
1915: 7 WS, NR
   64. Kelly in SD Posted: January 19, 2006 at 07:33 AM (#1828149)
13. Dobie Moore – PHOM 1967: No infielder has such a great peak. I give 3 years credit for Army play. An all-star every year he was healthy.
Please review the information on his thread.

14. Frank Chance: Benefits from my reconsideration. 6 year run as best first baseman in baseball. His Cubs were the winning-est team of all time based on anything from 1 year to 8 years (or more). It wasn’t just Brown and Sheckard. Great at getting on base. I think people forget he had a OPS+ of 135 while still being in the top 70 in career stolen bases.
1903 – 31 WS – 3rd NL, 1904 – 29 WS – 2nd NL, 1905 – 25WS – 8th NL, 1906 – 35 WS – 3rd NL, 1907 – 23 WS – 6th NL, 1908 – 20 WS. Best first baseman in NL 1903-1908. Best in majors 1903-1907.

15. George Burns – PHOM 1938 - Like his balance. 4 top 5s in extra-base hits and 6 top 10s. Also, led league in walks 5 times, 2 other top 5s, 2 more top 10s. 8 top 10s in runs created. 3 times best outfielder in league, 1 time second, 2 times 3rd best OF in NL. 8 straight years among top 10 position players in NL including 1 first and 4 times in top 3. And he did this as a lead off hitter.

<u>16. Richie Ashburn</u>: Almost made the ballot, but I couldn’t see having 4 center fielders and 7 outfielders total on the ballot. Excellent defense. Singles hitter who took a lot of walks.
4 times a win shares NL all-star in OF. Plus 3 times 4th best OF. The 3 times he finished 4th, he finished behind Musial, Kiner, and Irvin / Mays, Snider, Aaron / and Aaron, Mays, F Robinson. 2 times by just one win share.
Rank in NL among position players:
1948: 12th / 6th
1949: 15th / 8th
1950: 10th / 6th
1951: 6th / 4th
1953: 6th / 3rd
1954: 7th / 4th
1955: 5th / 3rd
1956: 4th / 3rd
1957: 8th / 4th
1958: 4th / 3rd
1960: 13th / 5th

<u>17. Burleigh Grimes – PHOM 1961</u> - Not just a slop pitcher. 7 top 10s in K/9. 10 top 10s in IP with 3 firsts. 11 top 10s in wins with 2 firsts.
6 years as win shares All-Star, 7 years with 20 win shares, 4 over 25, 2 over 30. 5 times a STATS all-star.
3 year peak of 92 win shares is in the top 10 among eligibles, career total of 286 is 4th among eligibles, 7 year prime of 181 is 5th behind 4 pitchers whose primes were in better pitching times.

<u>18. Willard Brown</u> - Dropping from my previous estimation because I reconsidered his dominance of the NAL in light of his competition and the lack of walks. I had to balance the lack of walks with the small base upon which those are based. His power is certainly impressive.
Does he remind anyone else of Jeff Francoeur? Maybe Soriano is a valid comp? I am just trying better understand him.
Could return to the ballot if I reconsider having some positional balance.

<u>19. Luke Easter</u> – I give various bits of credit for WWII, NeL play, Industrial League play, and barnstorming. He was a fearsome power hitter who played forever and hit forever. Julio Franco’s role model.

<u>20. Wilbur Cooper</u> - Similar to Grimes, just 700 fewer innings and better defensive support. Had 9 years of 20 win shares. This is unique. The number of pitchers with 9 or more such seasons since he retired are Grove, Spahn, Clemens, Seaver, Maddux, Palmer, Niekro, and Blyleven. But he only had 1 year over 30. A 4 time STATS all-star, 6 times win shares all-star. 12th in non-consecutive 3 yr peak. 8th in consecutive 3-yr peak. 6th in 7yr prime. 7 top 10s in ERA+, 8 top 10s in wins, 8 top 10s in IP.

<u>Mackey: 24th</u> on list. Peak and prime was not as high as I thought it would be. Poor second half of his career.

<u>George Sisler: 28th</u>: Prime is not high enough to balance the not-great career. Does anyone have his home-road splits? Sportsman’s Park was such a great hitters park. I see him as a better Jimmy Ryan. A great first half of a career, but not enough in the second half.

<u>Rixey: Around 39-40th</u>. Cooper and Rixey and Vance and Coveleski and Johnson and Alexander were all better in the teens and twenties. Lack of big years hurts him. Luque and Donohue faced the tougher pitchers on the Reds. I have severe doubts about giving war credit if the following story is true. According to the NBJHBA, Rixey joined the war effort in a fit of pique after the Phillies traded Alexander to the Cubs after the 1917 season. If you leave for war because you are angry with management, rather than patriotism or draft, I am not sure about giving any credit. I still do, but it is under exam.

<u>Griffith: About 31st</u>. Did not have the big years that his contemporaries did. Maybe that is why he had a longer career, but he definitely lacks the big years of Young, Nichols, Rusie, or McGinnity.

<u>George Van Haltren: About 22nd</u>. PHOM 1939: Lots of year with 25 win shares once you adjust for schedule length. Unfortunately, the 1890s were the best decade for outfielders to put up big numbers and there were too many others who put up bigger numbers for him to make the ballot.

<u>Cool Papa Bell: About 33rd</u>. He suffers from the same difficulties as Beckley, except he was quite a bit better. Long career, but no peak and a low prime.

<u>Jake Beckley</u>: Will never make my ballot. No peak. Did not dominate the period between great first basemen. Best in majors only 2 times. Best in league only 1 more time. If he was the best position player on the team, the team would be lucky to be mediocre. That is not a HoMer.

<u>Dick Redding</u>: About 21st on the list. I see him as the 6th best available pitcher. He has a great peak and a very good prime, but the “seasonal” total is a little weak and the career is middle of the pack. Would be happy to see him in the HoM.
   65. Kelly in SD Posted: January 19, 2006 at 08:11 AM (#1828154)
To justify my Beckley comments:

With Beckley showing up in the top 10 again, I thought I would repost something from the 1949 election thread.

First, I looked at how Beckley ranked among the first basemen of his league (and among all first basemen if more than one league. I apologize if there I missed a player who spent time with more than one club in one season.) The rankings are based on win shares, unadjusted totals, though I will also list the STATS selection for best first baseman in each league.

1888: <u>Beckley 14</u>, NL, 4th, Connor 32, Brouthers 29, Anson 27. STATS: Anson
Including AA: 8th, Reilly 25, Tucker 20, Larkin 19, Comiskey 15.
1889: <u>Beckley 19</u>, NL, 4th, Brouthers 28, Connor 26, Anson 21. STATS: Brouthers
Including AA: Tied for 6th, Tucker 30, Foutz 24, Larkin 19
1890: <u>Beckley 21</u>, PL, 2nd, Connor 25. STATS: Connor
Including AA, NL: 4th, Foutz 27, Anson 21.
1891: <u>Beckley 16</u>, NL, Tied for 3rd, Connor 23, Anson 21, Tied w/ Foutz.. STATS: Anson
Including AA: Tied for 6th, Brouthers 29, Werden 19, Larkin 17.
1892: <u>Beckley 19</u>, NL only, Tied for 5th, Brouthers 34, Connor 24, Virtue 22, Ewing 20, Tied w/ Anson. STATS: Brouthers
1893: <u>Beckley 17</u>, NL only, 1st (Brouthers, Connor 16). STATS: Connor
1894: <u>Beckley 17</u>, NL only, Tied for 2nd, Brouthers 21, Tied with Doyle. STATS: Brouthers
1895: <u>Beckley 18</u>, NL only, 2nd, LaChance 18. STATS: Cartwright
1896: <u>Beckley 10</u>, NL only, Tied for 4th, Doyle 17, Connor 14, Anson 12, Tied with Cartwright, LaChance, Tucker. STATS: Doyle
1897: <u>Beckley 15</u>, NL only, Tied for 3rd, Lajoie 21, Doyle 18, Tied with Tenney, Werden. STATS: Lajoie
1898: <u>Beckley 14</u>, NL only, 6th, Joyce 25, Wagner 22, McGann 21, Everitt 18, Tenney 17. STATS: McGann
1899: <u>Beckley 20</u>, NL only, Tied for 2nd, Tenney 25, tied with McGann. STATS: Beckley
1900: <u>Beckley 21</u>, NL only, 1st (E Delahanty 19). STATS: Beckley
1901: <u>Beckley 18</u>, NL only, Tied for 1st, Kelley 18. STATS: Kelley
Including AL: Tied for 3rd, Freeman 24, Anderson 20.
1902: <u>Beckley 18</u>, NL only, 2nd, Tenney 25. STATS: Beckley
Including AL: 4th, Davis, Hickman 19.
1903: <u>Beckley 17</u>, NL only, 4th, Chance 31, Tenney 21, Doyle 19. STATS: Chance
Incluing AL: Tied for 8th, Hickman 21, Anderson 19, Ganzel 18, Tied with H Davis.
1904: <u>Beckley 23</u>, NL only, 2nd, Chance 29. STATS: Chance
Including AL: 2nd.
1905: <u>Beckley 16</u>, NL only, Tied for 4th, Chance 25, McGann 24, Tenney 17, Tied with Gessler. STATS: Chance
Including AL: Tied for 7th, Davis 26, Donahue 22, J Stahl 21.
1906: Beckley 5

So, best 1st baseman in:
Majors: 2 times1893, 1900
His league, one more time, 1901.
2nd in majors: 1894, 1895, 1899, 1904.
2nd in his league: 1902.

Between the end of the ABC boys and the rise of Chance, 1895 to 1902, Beckley finished:
2nd to LaChance,
Tied for 4th with 3 others,
Tied for 3rd with 2 others,
Tied for 2nd to Tenney,
Tied for 3rd,
and 4th.

It appears as though Fred Tenney is the only other long-term first baseman in this period. Here is a direct comparison to Tenney, who never appears in a discussion of the HoM.
1895: Beckley 18, Tenney 4 (as an OF)
1896: Tenney 12 (in OF), Beckley 10
1897: Beckley and Tenney tie
1898: Tenney 17, Beckley 14
1899: Tenney 25, Beckley 20
1900: Beckley 21, Tenney 7
1901: Beckley 18, Tenney 9
1902: Tenney 25, Beckley 18

Shouldn’t a HoMer dominate his position during a period with no other HoMer at the position?

Next, I checked to see how many times Beckley finished in the top 15 players in his league by win shares. I have a spreadsheet with the top 15 position players and top 10 pitchers from 1876 to 1963 so I just had to look for Beckley.

1888: no.
1889: <u>Tied for 15th</u> among position players in his league, not in top 30 for majors. Including pitchers, tied for 27th in NL.
1890: <u>7th or 8th</u> in Player’s League (depending on how you place Van Haltren) among position players, <u>23rd</u> among all three leagues (with no adjustment for quality). Including pitchers, 14th in Players League, 48th among all players all leagues.
1891: no
1892: no
1893: no
1894: no
1895: no
1896: no
1897: no
1898: no
1899: no
1900: <u>Tied for 11th</u> with George Van Haltren, John McGraw, and Bill Dahlen. Tied for 17th among all players.
1901: no
1902: no
1903: no
1904: <u>Tied for 10th</u> with Roger Bresnahan. Tied for 18th among all National League players. Tied for 23rd among all position players. Below 40th among all players in all leagues.
1905: no
1906: no
1907: no

Two times a top 10 performer among position players in his league. Best finishes: 7th or 8th, 10th tie, 11th tie, 15th tie. In multi-league years, he finished 23rd among position players two times.

Those totals place Beckley way below the typical HoMer. For comparison's sake here are the totals for other electees usually considered at the bottom of the HoM: Bobby Wallace has a 14th, 13th, 11th, 8th, 11th, 11th, 12th, and a 14th. At least he made the top 15 8 times vs. Beck's 4. Sam Thompson has a 10th, 1st, 7th, 9th, and a 7th. 5 top 10s and a 1st. Max Carey has a 9th, 11th, 9th, 9th, 5th, 5th, 2nd, 2nd, 8th, and a 6th. 10 top 15s.
   66. Kelly in SD Posted: January 19, 2006 at 08:13 AM (#1828155)
How did Beckley rank on his own teams? This question gets to the issue of whether a team could win it all with Beckley the best player on it or if he was the 2nd or 3rd, etc.
<u>Year, Beckley WS, rank among position players on his team, rank among all players on his team, team record, team finish</u>:

1888: 14, 3rd among position, Kuehne 18, D Miller 15, 5th including pitchers, Morris 34, Galvin 30, team 66-68, 6th out of 8.
1889: 19, 2nd Carroll 23, 3rd Staley 22, team 61-71, 5th out of 8.
1890: 21, 1st, 2nd Staley 27, team 60-68, 6th out of 8.
1891: 16, 2nd, D Miller 17, 4th Baldwin 25, King 20, team 55-80, 8th out of 8.
1892: 19, 4th, Smith 31, Miller 24, Shugart 22, 7th Baldwin, Ehret, Terry 20, team 80-73, 6th out of 12.
1893: 17, 4th, Smith 25, Lyons 21, GVH 20, 6th Killen 42, Ehret 24, team 81-48, 2nd out of 12.
1894: 17, 3rd Stenzel 24, Smith 19, 4th Ehret 21, team 65-65, 7th out of 12.
1895: 18, 2nd Stenzel 28, 3rd Hawley 44. team 71-61, 7th out of 12.
1896: 10, 2 teams
1897: 15, 2 teams, but 14 with 1 so we will use that. 4th Irwin 17, Hoy 16, Miller 15, 7th Breitenstein 34, Rhines 24, Dwyer 23. team 76-56, 4th out of 12.
1898: 14, 6th Smith 27, McBride 21, Miller 21, Corcoran 18, McPhee 15, 11th Hawley 28, Breitenstein 25, Dwyer 21, Dammann 17, Hill 16. Team 92-60, 3rd out of 12.
1899: 20, 2nd Selbach 23, 3rd Hahn 29. Team 83-67, 6th out of 12.
1900: 21, 2nd Barrett 23, 2nd. Team 62-77, 7th out of 8.
1901: 18, 2nd Crawford 24, 3rd Hahn 26. Team 52-87, 8th out of 8.
1902: 18, 2nd Crawford 23, 4th Hahn 29, Phillips 20. Team 70-70, 4th out of 8.
1903: 17, 4th Donlin 24, Seymour 24, Steinfeldt 21, 6th Hahn 24, Ewing 18. Team 74-65, 4th out of 8.
1904: 23, 1st, 3rd Nichols 27, Taylor 27. Team 75-79, 5th out of 8.
1905: 16, 2nd Smoot 23, 2nd. Team 58-96, 6th out of 8.

By rank among position players, team finishes:
1st: 6 / 8 in 1890, 5 / 8 in 1904.
2nd: 5 / 8 in 1889, 8 / 8 in 1891, 7 / 12 in 1895, 6 / 12 in 1899, 7 / 8 in 1900, 8 / 8 in 1901, 4 / 8 1902, 6 / 8 in 1905.
3rd: 6 / 8 in 1888, 7 / 12 in 1894.
4th: 6 / 12 in 1892, 2 / 12 in 1893, 4 / 12 in 1897, 4 / 8 in 1903.
5th or worse: 3 / 12 in 1898.

Over/under .500 by rank among position players:
1st: under, under (60 – 68, 75 – 79)
2nd: under, under, over, over, under, under, push, under (61 - 71, 55 – 80, 71 – 61, 83 – 67, 62 – 77, 52 – 87, 70 – 70, 58 – 96)
3rd: under, push (66 – 68, 65 – 65).
4th: over, over, over, over (80 – 73, 81 – 48, 76 – 56, 74 – 65)
5th or worse: over (92 – 60)

By rank among all players, team finishes:
2nd: 6 / 8 in 1890, 7 / 8 in 1900, 6 / 8 in 1905.
3rd: 5 / 8 in 1889, 7 / 12 in 1895, 6 / 12 in 1899, 8 / 8 in 1901, 5 / 8 in 1904.
4th: 8 / 8 in 1891, 7 / 12 in 1894, 4 / 8 in 1902.
5th: 6 / 8 in 1888.
6th or worse: 6 / 12 in 1892, 2 / 12 in 1893, 4 / 12 in 1897, 3 / 12 in 1898, 4 / 8 in 1903.

Over/ under .500 by rank among all players:
2nd: under, under, under (60 - 68, 62 - 77, 58 – 96)
3rd: under, over, over, under, under (61 – 71, 71 – 61, 83 – 67, 52 – 87, 75 – 79)
4th: under, push, push (55 – 80, 65 – 65, 70 – 70)
5th: under (66 – 68)
6th or worse: over, over, over, over, over, over (80 – 73, 81 – 48, 76 – 56, 92 – 60, 74 – 65)

<u>From the above, it is hard to argue that if Beckley was one of your best players, your team was any good</u>. If Beckley was just another guy, your team was above average. I don’t know how this compares to other HoMers, but intuitively it means that Beckley is not a HoMer. <u>Shouldn’t a HoMer should be a player who leads his team to victory, not just a contributor</u>?
   67. Adam Schafer Posted: January 19, 2006 at 09:26 AM (#1828169)
Two new additions to my ballot. I re-evaluated Cravath, and he makes a very strong debut on my ballot after many years of overlooking him. Ashburn comes in on the lower half of my ballot.

1. Mickey Welch - 300 wins should not be an automatic stat to get you in. Everyone says wins were easier to come by back then. Pitchers were used more, and thus able to win more. Wow, I guess the pitchers back then weren't aware of this since not many of them won 300 games. Welch may have pitched against worst teams...wasn't Welch and Keefe (who got elected) on the same team pitching against the same teams for quite awhile? Top 10 pitcher in almost all major pitching categories from 1880-1889. Was never "the" best, but was consistently one of the best over and over.

2. Clark Griffith - wonderful career value

3. George Sisler - Even his "bad" years were still pretty darn good

4. Biz Mackey - I've always felt he was a star. He wasn't Josh Gibson, but who was?

5. Bobby Doerr - Good hitting 2nd baseman. Enough career to make my ballot.

6. Gavvy Cravath - Gavvy bursts onto my ballot this year. I looked long and hard at him, and decided I really needed to put more stock into his minor league years. With proper minor league credit now given, Gavvy has enough career to merit a spot on my ballot.

7. Burleigh Grimes - Between 1918-1931 he was pretty durable. A couple bad seasons mixed in, but all in all a dependable pitcher and I'm a career type of guy for the most part.

8. Joe Sewell - You couldn't strike the guy out! I absolutely love that about his career.

9. Jake Beckley - not quite the peak, but plenty of career. Enough to scratch the bottom of my ballot.

10. Sam Rice - Top 10 in hits 12 of the years between 1917 and 1930, 8 times top 10 in Batting Average.

11. Rube Waddell - Not quite Newhouser's peak, but not too shabby himself

12. Richie Ashburn - I didn't think at first that he'd crack my top 15, but after working through my ballot, I realised that I needed to have him ahead of GVH.

13. George Van Haltren - I welcome George back to my ballot after a long time away. I did decide to move him up quite a bit, but I also felt the need to move Schang and Rixey down on my ballot after taking another look at them (yet again).

14. Eppa Rixey - Not as excited about him as I once was, but he's hanging around the bottom of my ballot.

15. Wally Schang - Lots of extra credit for being a durable catcher.

16. Joe Gordon - If his peak had been higher, or his career had been longer, I'd like him a lot more

17. Pie Traynor - I can understand why everyone didn't fall head over heals for him, but I didn't imagine that he would recieve so little support.

18. Cool Papa Bell - creeps up a little bit to take over this position from Bresnahan

19. Roger Bresnahan - if he had only caught more games, I'd have him a lot higher.

20. Edd Roush -
   68. karlmagnus Posted: January 19, 2006 at 01:19 PM (#1828207)
Kelly, your figures are correct but your deduction from them is nonsense. Beckley was the first or second best 1B in his league 8 times, including 5 times when his was the only league -- this compares well to the “peak only” Chance. He also had an exceptionally long career; when he retired he was second in hits only to Cap Anson in the whole history of baseball, and is still 4th in triples overall 100 years later. WS undervalues him, because WS gets fielding wrong for the deadball era, overvaluing outfielders (particularly CF) at the expense of infielders. For long term dominance at an important defensive position, a good comp is Willie Mays, who was also often not the best CF in baseball.
   69. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 19, 2006 at 01:41 PM (#1828215)
For long term dominance at an important defensive position, a good comp is Willie Mays, who was also often not the best CF in baseball.

You're comparing Beckley to a guy who is one of the top-ten best players of all-time?!

I have Beckley leading all first basemen once (and it's not by a lot). How is that remotely Willie?
   70. karlmagnus Posted: January 19, 2006 at 02:14 PM (#1828242)
Mays is somewhat overrated; not in my view one of the 10 best players of all time though certainly one of the top 30. However, comparing him with other CF, he wasn't even the best in his own city in his early career though he may have been best in the NL in 1958-62. He was 2nd in HR when he retired, Beckley was 2nd in hits. I'm not denying Mays was better, but the gap's far far less than their respective fame would suggest. The single league, short schedule and WS inadequacies are causing many voters to underrate Beckley severely; he's not a borderline HOMer, being MUCH better than the likes of Ashburn or Carey.
   71. sunnyday2 Posted: January 19, 2006 at 02:32 PM (#1828259)
Beckley was the best 1B in his league and era. Mays was the best CF in his league and era. Ergo, the two players are of equal quality?

This misses the simple fact that one was "the best" by a miniscule margin, the other by a very wide margin.
   72. DL from MN Posted: January 19, 2006 at 03:13 PM (#1828310)
I think there's fault to find with any of the 1968 candidates. There is a reason why these players have been in the backlog. It's a different reason for each of them or the consensus would be higher.
   73. Michael Bass Posted: January 19, 2006 at 03:37 PM (#1828350)
Mays got beat out sometimes by Mickey Mantle and Duke Snider.

Beckley got beat out sometimes by Fred Tenney guys whose first names I don't even know.

Yeah, those are comparable circumstances.

There are reasonable arguments to be made for Beckley (personally I don't find them persuasive, but career voters certainly like him for good reason). Comparison to Willie Mays is not one of those reasonable arguments, and in fact kind of hurts them by making the case for Beckley seem delusional.
   74. karlmagnus Posted: January 19, 2006 at 04:20 PM (#1828430)
Beckley in his early career had competition from Anson, Brouthers and Connor, who were of comparable stature in their time to Mantle/Snider. At the end of his career he had Frank Chance, who's up there on peak though not career. Tenney was his competition only during his odd mid-career dip.

The comparison may look absurd, but it isn't, though I grant you Mays wins it. If you think it is absurd, you're probably overvaluing Mays and you're certainly undervaluing Beckley.
   75. dan b Posted: January 19, 2006 at 04:32 PM (#1828447)
The credibility of our only Sam Leever fan hits a new low.
   76. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 19, 2006 at 04:48 PM (#1828470)
karlmagnus, which years do you think Beckley was MVP material? IOW, he's not Mays. Not by a long shot.

Believe me, I want to see Beckley get into the HoM. I think sabermetric and non-sabermetric analysis underrate him. But when Beckley is compared to inner-circle HoMers, there possibly could be a backlash for voters who have Eagle Eye on the fringes of their ballots and could easily replace him with another candidate of equal value (in their opinion, of course). Just bide your time and he should eventually get in.
   77. karlmagnus Posted: January 19, 2006 at 04:54 PM (#1828479)
No Dan, the low/high still remains 1922, when I definitively proved that Parisian Bob was a better pitcher than Mathewson and a better hitter than Lajoie. But I would remind you Caruthers was elected only a few years later.

Making apparently wild but actually justifiable statements is an effective forensic technique; it shifts the debate sharply in your direction. If you have to work hard to prove Caruthers wasn't a combination of Mathewson PLUS Lajoie, you end up admitting he's HOMable. Similarly, Beckley ain't Mays, but the fact the comparison can plausibly be made and can be supported by considerable evidence is an important point in his favor.

Moderation never won anything!
   78. Mark Donelson Posted: January 19, 2006 at 05:06 PM (#1828496)
Making apparently wild but actually justifiable statements is an effective forensic technique.

I'd modify that to "an effective political technique."
   79. Daryn Posted: January 19, 2006 at 05:12 PM (#1828505)
But when Beckley is compared to inner-circle HoMers, there possibly could be a backlash for voters who have Eagle Eye on the fringes of their ballots.

Let's hope we are all independent/mature enough that we won't devalue Beckley due to karl's perceived overexaggerations of his worth.
   80. karlmagnus Posted: January 19, 2006 at 05:13 PM (#1828506)
No, it tends to lose elections but win debates -- the process is different. Elections involve an attempt to occupy the center ground, debates are a tug of war.
   81. Mark Donelson Posted: January 19, 2006 at 05:16 PM (#1828513)
Actually, I meant policy debates, not elections. Of course, whether the statements are justifiable or not doesn't much matter in practice--at least, not till the next election, and probably not even then.
   82. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 19, 2006 at 05:20 PM (#1828521)
Let's hope we are all independent/mature enough that we won't devalue Beckley due to karl's perceived overexaggerations of his worth.

I don't think anybody would devalue him, but if your #16 is really no different in your eyes than your #15 (Beckley in this case), it's constitutional to switch them. Yes, it would still be spiteful, but the damage would still be done.
   83. karlmagnus Posted: January 19, 2006 at 05:49 PM (#1828594)
John, stop encouraging them. Obviously there will be a certain percentage of the midly pro-Beckley who will be alienated by my defense of him (but this is less important than in an election, because nobody's electing me to anything.) On the other hand, there may be voters, particularly newer ones, for whom Beckley is not on the radar screen, and who by seeing him lose narrowly against Mays come to realize how worthy a candidate he is. As evidence that the latter group may be larger, I point out that Beckley's doing well against Welch, a similar candidate (good counting stats, long time ago, some flaws) for whom I have been less obtrusive and annoying.
   84. frozenrope Posted: January 19, 2006 at 05:49 PM (#1828595)
From Michael #73

Mays got beat out sometimes by Mickey Mantle and Duke Snider.

Beckley got beat out sometimes by Fred Tenney guys whose first names I don't even know.

Yeah, those are comparable circumstances.

There are reasonable arguments to be made for Beckley (personally I don't find them persuasive, but career voters certainly like him for good reason). Comparison to Willie Mays is not one of those reasonable arguments, and in fact kind of hurts them by making the case for Beckley seem delusional.

Duke!!! We can see you!!! Please stop ignoring your FOBL brethren. We're all worried about you.
   85. Subby Posted: January 19, 2006 at 05:51 PM (#1828601)

I think your comments are completely spot on. You must be a lawyer or something.

BTW - there are 40 or so fake baseball owners that miss you and wish you would at least let us know what happened to you. in case you forgot. :\
   86. The Ghost of Michael Bass' Former Life Posted: January 19, 2006 at 05:54 PM (#1828609)
   87. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 19, 2006 at 06:15 PM (#1828645)
On the other hand, there may be voters, particularly newer ones, for whom Beckley is not on the radar screen, and who by seeing him lose narrowly against Mays come to realize how worthy a candidate he is.

Yeah, that's the ticket! :-)
   88. Thane of Bagarth Posted: January 19, 2006 at 10:44 PM (#1829199)
1968 Ballot
I’ve been tinkering with my rankings of pitchers relative to position players. I think I had been unduly favoring pitchers, hence this week some hitters are moving up.

1) Richie Ashburn
Over 100 WARP3 and 300 WS and a decent peak. Not an inner-circle guy, but he strikes me as the best of this year’s crop—only slightly better than GVH.

2) Ben Taylor
He's been in the top 5 on my ballot since 1958. I see him as equal to, or slightly better than, Suttles among NeL 1stbasemen.

3) George Van Haltren
Big career #s in Win Shares and WARP1. His 3 year and 5 year peaks in WS are almost identical to Ashburn’s, but WARP3 gives the 5 year edge to Ashburn (46.7 to 39.0) which is enough to put “Put Put” (anyone know the origin of that nickname?) at the top.

4) Bobby Doerr
Best of the middle infielder heap. Great defense and 115 OPS+.

5) Dick Redding
6) Jose Mendez
These two are nearly inseparable. The shape of their careers is different, but I see the cumulative value as equivalent.

7) Cool Papa Bell
May not have been as great as all the stories make him out to be, but he was still an amazing talent.

8) Willard Brown
As much as his lack of walks seem to confound analysis of his career, he put up some impressive numbers and is worthy of a ballot spot.

9) Bucky Walters
On a tightly bunched ballot, Walters comes out 4 spots ahead of Trout, basically thanks to 300 extra IP and a OPS+ advantage of 13 points.

10) Fielder Jones
Doesn't have the 130 OPS+ that jumps out at you, but WARP and WS seem to agree that he's a ballot contender: 44.3 in top 5 WARP3, 135
top 5 WS.

11) Pete Browning
A slight reduction in the WARP discounting of his league/era moves the slugger up to the bottom of the ballot.

12) Eppa Rixey
Great career value, but middling peak keeps him in the mix with pitchers like Walters and Trout.

13) Dizzy Trout
Similar WARP career (~87) and 5 yr. peak (~48) to that of Walters, but WS gives Bucky an edge: 248 to 230 career, 132 to 126 5 yr. consecutive peak.

14) Spotswood Poles
15) Alejandro Oms
Like Mendez and Ruffing, these two Negro League standouts are hard to separate.

Rest of the Top 50
16) Joe Gordon
17) Bill Monroe
18) Jimmy Ryan
19) Charlie Keller
20) Dick Lundy

21) Ralph Kiner
22) Dobie Moore--He could make it back into the top 15 sometime in the foreseeable future.
23) Dom DiMaggio
24) Tommy Leach
25) Burleigh Grimes
26) Ray Dandridge
27) Harry Hooper
28) Bob Johnson
29) Edd Roush
30) Bob Elliott
31) Bobby Veach
32) Joe Sewell
33) George Sisler--Was not quite great enough for not quite long enough.
34) Phil Rizzuto
35) Biz Mackey--Highest ranking catcher on my ballot.
36) Carl Mays
37) Cy Seymour
38) Wally Berger
39) Hugh Duffy
40) Jake Beckley--This is the highest I’ve ever had him ranked. I can understand why some voters rank him high, my relative preference for peak vs. career just doesn’t favor him.
41) Clark Griffith--A worthy candidate, but I see several other pitchers ahead of him.
42) Lon Warneke
43) George Burns
44) Roy Thomas
45) Kiki Cuyler
46) Lefty O’Doul
47) Leon Day
48) Dutch Leonard
49) Urban Shocker
50) Vern Stephens
   89. TomH Posted: January 19, 2006 at 11:46 PM (#1829309)
at the risk of 'overreaching' in my debate technique, resulting in the spawning of a backlash of anti-Mays votes later... :)

Willie Mays National League rank in RCAP (not a stat like WARP or Win Shares, but a reasonably comprehensive overall offensive measure, adjsuted for defensive position)

(52-53 in military)
1954 3rd
55 2nd
56 10th
57 3rd
58 1st
59 3rd
60 tie 2nd
61 2nd
62 3rd
63 2nd
64 1st
65 1st
66 6th
68 5th
71 4th

now Jake Beckley
1888-1903 (crickets chirping)
1904 9th

Oh, but maybe I forgot to correct for that bum Mays' sorry glove work....
   90. karlmagnus Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:01 AM (#1829444)
Yes, but HOW is it adjusted for defensive position? If it's the same way as WS, it will contain the same errors. Also, to compare like with like w.r.t. 1893-1901, you need to look at Mays' rank in baseball as a whole.
   91. ronw Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:11 AM (#1829458)
karl is right: his statement that Caruthers was a better pitcher than Mathewson and a better hitter than Lajoie was much, much siller than his claim that Beckley is almost as good as Willie Mays.

However, he is wrong that he definitively proved anything to that effect. Caruthers was not elected for anything remotely related to karl's assertions about him.

What does your all-time top-30 list look like? I can't justify putting Mays anywhere below #5, but I'm due for a laugh.
   92. sunnyday2 Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:21 AM (#1829473)
Mays at #5 (to me) would be a timeline enhanced rating.
   93. TomH Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:23 AM (#1829474)
It is adjusted for position by comparing to how well the average hitter who played that position hit, each year.
   94. Patrick W Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:39 AM (#1829500)
1. Bobby Doerr (2), Bost. (A), 2B (’37-’51) (1960) – Obviously a defense and war credit/debit choice, but his offense was both above league and positional averages and the advanced metrics have no question about how valuable a defender he was.
2. Richie Ashburn (n/a), Phila. (N), CF (’48-’62) (1968) – Similar strengths and weaknesses as Doerr as a candidate. Also has a rough similarity to Keeler, who he shows up next to on the ol’ sorting list.
3. Willard Brown (3), KC (--), 1B (‘34-‘48) (1966) – I have decided that the consensus is correct: Brown’s career trumps Oms’ peak advantage.
4. Alejandro Oms (4), Cuba (--), CF (‘21-‘37) (1965) – It sure looks like both Brown and Oms are gonna screw with my consensus scores from here on out on this project. Maybe I could drop Oms a little more because the resume is so heavily non-US, but I won’t do that yet.
5. Biz Mackey (5), Hilldale (--), C / 3B (’20-’41) (1967) – Someday is finally here!! He made it in on my ballot.
6. Bucky Walters (6), Cinc. – Phila. (N) SP (’33-’47) (1961) – I can’t think of the reason why I had developed space on the ballot between Dizzy and Bucky, they seem nearly equal in career value. This causes Bucky to drop on the ballot. It may have been because I just like saying Bucky. Anyone else here read ‘Get Fuzzy’?
7. Dizzy Trout (7), Detr. (A) SP (’39-’52) (1967) – Bob Lemon was better than Dizzy Trout, but Lemon on the cusp while Trout isn’t even the best Dizzy according to the voters is too steep a drop IMO. It would take a war discount of close to 50% to drop him from my ballot, which is about 35-40% below what the quality drop-off actually was. Don’t penalize the players for being in their prime in ’42-’45.
8. Joe Gordon (8), N.Y. (A), SS (’38-’50) (1968) – Compares favorably to Doerr. Better bat, shorter career, lesser defender (though not according to Win Shares), more war credit. Weighing it all together, I think Doerr was more valuable. .
9. Dutch Leonard (9), Wash. (A) SP (’34-’53) – Amazing how valuable he was before and after the war, the lost time to injury in ’42 and the apparent effects of recovery in ’43-’44 keep him from the 15-18 votes that all his equals seem to be getting. Penalize one guy for playing too good during the war, penalize another for not playing good enough...
10. Phil Rizzuto(10), N.Y. (A), SS (’41-’56) – If you don’t like Gordon or Doerr, I’m not gonna convince you to like Rizzuto.
--. Larry Doby, Clev. (A), CF (’46-’59)
11. George Van Haltren (11), NY(N), CF / LF (’87-’03) (1926) – Would already be in but for the fluke scheduling quirk in ’31. Here’s hoping it won’t take much longer.
--. Stan Hack, Chic. (N), 3B (’32-’47) –
--. Joe Medwick, St.L (N), LF (’32-’47) –
12. Dom DiMaggio (13), Bost. (A), CF (’40-’52) – 2nd best OF to date for FRAR (Speaker), and Dom’s rate is much better than Tris. That, along with the fact that he’s not Marion with the bat, gets him on the ballot. 4th highest war credit bonus to date (Pesky, Greenberg, Feller) I have measured this by pct. of career above actual career, so he beats out Ted. Adding up the total credit would be a different story of course.
13. Bob Johnson (14), Phila. (A), LF (’33-’45) – Late start to his career, but every season a quality one, and 0.304 EQA always looks good on the resume. Baseball Analysts has an article about him this week.
--. Heinie Groh, Cinc. (N), 3B (’12-’27) –
14. Joe Sewell (--), Clev. (A), SS / 3B (’20-’33) (1939) – Might deserve the spot over Rizzuto, but not this year.
--. Earl Averill, Clev. (A), CF (’29-’40) –
15. Jake Beckley (15), Pitt. – Cinc.(N), 1B (’88-’07) (1929) – I’m always gonna be a career-voter at heart.

Eppa Rixey – Bobo was better.
George Sisler – Makes Jennings seem ballot-worthy by comparison.
Clark Griffith – In that vast cloud of players just off the ballot.
Cool Papa Bell – Could be on the ballot, but isn’t.
Dick Redding – The bar for NeL pitchers has been set higher than this, IMO. The jump from Ray Brown to Bill Foster, Mendez and Redding will keep them all out of my Hall. Foster's in the big Hall, so obviously some here have and will continue to disagree.

A lot of players were in last year’s top ten, but not in my top 15 this year.
   95. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:49 AM (#1829513)
now Jake Beckley
1888-1903 (crickets chirping)

I'm confused here, Tom. Doesn't Beckley have to rank somewhere every year?
   96. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: January 20, 2006 at 05:52 AM (#1829779)

I think TomH was only posting top 10's.

Also not to feel left out...

Cupid Childs was better than Maz with the glove and Hornsby with the bat! Only the stats I use show this so I must be right! (I like putouts and doubles during the 1890's)
   97. TomH Posted: January 20, 2006 at 12:56 PM (#1829904)
sorry, yes, my reference source only had league top 10s
   98. Al Peterson Posted: January 20, 2006 at 02:57 PM (#1829974)
1968 ballot. This year I had the extended holiday break to tweak the system. Not an Ashburn fan, positions 1 and 8 elected so there is new blood getting ink.

1. Clark Griffith(2). Best left over from the 60’6” transitional period of pitching. Was a winner, good auxiliary stats to go with it.

2. Dick Redding (3). CANNONBALL!!! Pitched in multiple leagues, each time having success. He’s the NeL pitcher I think we’re missing.

3. Bobby Doerr (5). Middle IF who is slightly above many others in the running for HOM. Billy Herman minus a little.

4. Jimmy Ryan (4). Started playing during two league system (AA, NL), ended during two league system (AL, NL).

5. Edd Roush (12).
Star of the 1910s. Another CF which doesn’t seem to hurt in my rankings.

6. Bob Johnson (6). His peak might not be as high as others but at the same time for 13 years he has the highest floor of anyone. By floor I mean what can we reasonably expect from him in terms of performance. During those 13 years you knew exactly what you got with Bob Johnson – nothing less, rarely more. I guess my system rewards consistency as well as greatness. WARP numbers like him, WS not so much. Over his career his teams underperformed Pythag W-L by 15 games so he loses some there.

I’m afraid he’s between the two voting factions. He doesn’t have the peak but was effective longer that the high peak, short career players. He doesn’t have the career but was at a higher production level than the low peak, long career players. Either way, he stacks up nicely compared to the other LFs hanging around.

Indian Bob got a late start, played on bad teams in ballparks that favored pitchers, and got left out of post-war ML baseball while he was still doing well at age 39. 10 years of top 10 performances in OPS+, 102.2 WARP1 for 13 years with no padding on the front or back end.

I guess they were right. While others shot to stardom, collected an MVP, and faded from sight, along rolled Bob Johnson, punching the time clock with excellence far from the spotlight. Forgotten while playing, lost in history…

7. Rube Waddell (10). They don’t make ‘em like this anymore. Hard thrower, dominated strikeout categories wherever he went. Rube was the traveling circus coming to town – people came to see him pitch.

8. Biz Mackey (9). His defensive reputation probably takes him above some of the translated MLEs that were produced. Not the elite of a Gibson but was a NeL all-time type so I’m inclined to give him the boost. The #2 guy in the NeL catching ranks in what is described as probably that league’s strongest position.

9. Frank Chance (15). The rate stats are very impressive. His problem is on the amount of time played. Had some speed for his day as well.

10. Hugh Duffy (11). Constant little tweaks to my system lead to players bubbling up toward the end of the ballot. He’s got that nice little peak in the early 1890s.

11. Cool Papa Bell (13). Speed game particularly suited for the Negro Leagues. Maybe not the immortal we wanted him to be but still a darn fine centerfielder.

12. Tommy Leach (21). Represents a shorted position, quality player at two positions. Versatility is a bonus; clubs can build teams different ways when players can move around.

13. Dobie Moore (16). Probably the SS from the 20’s if I had to choose one. Jennings type of candidate if the stories are correct.

14. Eppa Rixey (17). Lost a little time to war but still a fine career candidate. Winningest LHP before some guy named Spahn replaced him.

15. Pete Browning (23). Hitter with few rivals. Top 3 in batting average 9 times in 10 years. He hit in whatever league he played in.

16-20: Poles, Mullane, Kiner, Sisler, Easter
21-25: Mendez, Childs, VanHaltren, Byrd, Berger
26-30: Ashburn, Sewell, Bridges, Keller, Gordon
31-35: Elliott, Cicotte, Stephens, Lundy, F Jones
36-40: Veach, Carl Mays, Willard Brown, McGraw, Roy Thomas
41-45: Willis, Trout, Hack Wilson, Cuyler, D. Leonard
46-50: Ben Taylor, Doyle, Shocker, Beckley, Trouppe

Top Returnees: Beckley (#49) and Sisler (#19) – one peak, one career but neither have the goods for the ballot. Now with the ballot tweaking I can say Sisler is not far off the ballot. Van Haltren (#23) drops off the ballot again. He is always top 25, sometimes moves to the ballot.

New guys: Ashburn – ya want to love him but I can’t bring myself to fixing the numbers to get him on ballot. Starts at #26. We’ve got a glut of backlog CFs who I like. Schoendienst and Yost would set a low bar for elections.
   99. SWW Posted: January 20, 2006 at 03:38 PM (#1830018)
Man, it’s been a while since I’ve done this. Anyway, I think Bell and Sisler might have gotten lonely, without Joe Medwick sitting between them on my ballot anymore. So I’ve provided them with a new friend.

<u>1968 Ballot</u>
1)Burleigh Arland Grimes – “Ol’ Stubblebeard”
Burleigh first became eligible for election in 1940. He appeared on 19 ballots. Last year, he appeared on 10 ballots. This is not a candidacy that is moving in the right direction. Rixey has crept ever closer to election, and while I’m voting for him too, Grimes strikes me as a clearly superior candidate. 54th on Maury Allen Top 100. Ritter & Honig Top 100.
2)James Thomas Bell – “Cool Papa”
For me, the assessment of Bell as an extremely long-serving player with Win Shares to reflect that is not necessarily a strike against him. My ballot history shows a great affinity for such players. But two factors lead me to place him all the way up here: one, the career total is too extraordinary to be ignored. Even if you discount his Win Shares by as much as 20%, he’s still got very impressive numbers. And two, assessments from his contemporaries, which are essential for a player for whom the statistics are necessarily conjectural, describe him particularly skilled on the field and especially prized as a teammate. Way back in the years Rube Foster was on the ballot, somebody commented that the Negro Leaguers would be astonished if Foster was not a member of our Hall. I tend to think the same thing about Bell. 66th on Sporting News Top 100. 74th on McGuire & Gormley Top 100. 76th on Bill James Top 100. New York Times Top 100. 3rd on SABR Negro League poll. 2nd Team, Pittsburgh Courier 1952 poll.
3)Don Richard Ashburn – “Whitey”
I see that a lot of people are reluctant to place Richie high (or at all) on their ballots, but I suspect he can still go higher on mine. I have to hand it to him, it’s hard being the fourth best center fielder in baseball when the Top 3 are among the best of all time. Seven appearances in the Top 10 in Win Shares. Better WARP than Snider. And higher prime than Bell. I’ll buy it. New York Times Top 100.
4)George Harold Sisler – “Gorgeous George”
A tremendous high with decent career filler. As a Hall member, he would follow in the footsteps of guys like Medwick and Averill. 33rd on Sporting News Top 100. 45th on McGuire & Gormley Top 100. 55th on SABR Top 100. 55th on Ken Shouler Top 100. 16th on Maury Allen’s Top 100. New York Times Top 100. Ritter & Honig Top 100.
5)Raleigh Mackey – “Biz”
His numbers are not as gaudy as those of Gibson or Santop, but they are significantly greater than his Major League counterparts. 17th on SABR Negro League poll. 1st Team, Pittsburgh Courier 1952 poll.
6)Eppa Rixey – “Jephtha”
It’s hard to hate a pitcher with 300 WS. His career arc is a little flat, but it’s a good package. He won’t be the worst pitcher we’ve inducted.
7)Edd J Roush
He figures to be pretty lonely without Averill to shadow. Long career, good peaks...all the things I admire in a candidate.
8)Willard Brown
Great numbers, and you have to admire a guy who decides that he’s better off barnstorming than playing for the St. Louis Browns. I share the general concerns about the level of his competition, but not so much so to deny him a spot on the ballot. The general lack of enthusiasm for his candidacy does trouble me somewhat.
9)Hugh Duffy
A very peaky centerfielder, which is a tough sell when we have so many who are consistently great. Easier to swallow than the mess of pitchers, though.
10)Robert Pershing Doerr
Definitely a player I underrated at first, and the more I look, the better he appears. I like him better than Gordon owing to the higher career numbers.
11)Carl William Mays
A gentler career arc than that of Ferrell or Lemon, higher highs than Willis. Frankly, I think the only reason more people vote for Lemon is the black ink. Mays is higher in career WS, peak, WS, prime WS, and they’re practically even in gray ink.
12)Lawrence Joseph Doyle - “Laughing Larry”
Flipped with Doerr this time around. Doyle has the edge on black and gray ink, Doerr on Standards, Monitor, & WARP. They’re very close.
13)Thomas William Leach – “The Wee”
A tribute to my belief in Win Shares. Used to vote for him quite regularly. Some would call that timelining, but I just think stronger candidates have joined the ballot since his heyday.
14)Edgar Charles Rice – “Sam”
Great career numbers, and consistently the best position player on a very bad team for a very long time. That’s what separates him from a candidate like Beckley.
15)Alejandro Oms
A big (and overdue) reconsideration. I feel like I’m still learning about Oms, but after considering all the eligible center fielders in light of Richie Ashburn, as well as my support for Willard Brown, I felt he had to be at least this high. This could fluctuate in coming years, but I’m satisfied with placing him here at this time.

<u>Other Top 10 Finishers</u>
Clark Calvin Griffith
I found that Griffith had striking similarities to Dick Redding, who I have voted for in the past. Redding has a higher peak, Griffith a higher prime. So for the time being, they’ll be my Van Haltren & Ryan of pitchers, hanging out together through thick and thin.
George Edward Martin Van Haltren
I respect the Win Shares, but there are too many guys more worthy of a vote. He’s nearly interchangeable with Jimmy Ryan, and I don’t support either one. Similar to Pete Browning, too. Only finished in the Top 10 in Win Shares in his league once.
Jacob Peter Beckley – “Eagle Eye”
I tend towards career numbers, but Beckley’s are so without peak that I’m hard pressed to call him a great. Kelly from SD articulated most of my concerns very eloquently. Of course, I’ll be putting Willie Mays in the top spot, so you could argue that this points up the flaws in my system.
Dick Redding – “Cannonball”
Well, that figures. I re-evaluate him out of contention, and he finally makes the Top 10. I should have additional consensus points taken away just for that. Redding keeps yo-yoing on and off my ballot. I’m relying very heavily on Chris Cobb’s projections, which demonstrate a substantial peak. He also does well in James Vail’s standard deviation scores. How he fares at the end of February will have some bearing on how he does here.
   100. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 20, 2006 at 06:17 PM (#1830368)

I think TomH was only posting top 10's.

Okay, I thought he was indicating where they stood among their peers just at their position. That makes much more sense now. Sorry about that.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.



<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF


Thanks to
James Kannengieser
for his generous support.


You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.


Page rendered in 0.9679 seconds
41 querie(s) executed