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

Sunday, August 12, 2007

2003 Ballot

Prominent new candidates: Eddie Murray, Ryne Sandberg, Lee Smith, Ferrnando Valenzuela and Brett Butler.

Top-ten returnees: Pete Browning, Charley Jones, Roger Bresnahan, Bob Johnson, Andre Dawson, Cannonball Dick Redding and Tony Perez.

Please remember that all posts need to have comments or else they wont be counted.

John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 12, 2007 at 11:23 PM | 188 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: August 13, 2007 at 12:00 PM (#2483157)
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 he wont make my ballot).

1) Eddie Murray-1B/DH (n/e): A perennial MVP candidate, he's not a hard guy to place at the top of my ballot. Best ML first baseman for 1978, (close in 1981), 1982, 1983 and 1990. Best AL first baseman for 1979 and 1984.

2) Ryne Sandberg-2B (n/e): A truly great player and a fun guy to watch play. Best ML second baseman for 1984, (fairly close in 1985), 1990 and 1991. Best NL second baseman for 1989 and 1992.

3) Bus Clarkson-SS/3B (2): Looks like the best shortstop of the Forties, which is surprising to me. IMO, Eric would have to be totally off with his projections for Clarkson not to be near the top of everybody's ballot. Shave off 50 WS from his MLE and he still comfortably belongs.

4) Lee Smith-RP (n/e): Having his career occur during a major rethinking of his position really distorts his true value, IMO. All things equal, Gossage was better, but not that much better. Never the best for any one season, but consistently among the best for many a year.

5) Roger Bresnahan-C/CF (4): If you don't like Browning, why don't you try the Duke of Tralee? 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.

6) Charley Jones-LF/CF (5): If you don't like Browning, why don't you try "Baby?" 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).

7) Bucky Walters-P (6): The guy had a nice peak, fairly long career, and could hit. Best ML pitcher of 1939 (extremely close in 1940). Best NL pitcher of 1940 and 1944.

8) Mickey Welch-P (7): Yeah, pitching was different back then, but he still distinguished himself regardless. Best major league pitcher for 1885.

9) Pete Browning-CF/LF (8): If you don't like Browning...oh, never mind. :-D Gotta love the peak and prime! 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.

10) Vic Willis-P (9): Willis pitched a ton of innings at an above-average rate for a long enough time for his era. Best major league pitcher for 1899. Best NL pitcher for 1901.
   2. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 13, 2007 at 12:01 PM (#2483158)
11) Gavvy Cravath-RF (10): I'm finally buying the arguments for him. I'm giving him MLE credit for 1908-11. Possibly would have been the best ML right fielder for 1910. Best NL right fielder for 1913 and 1914. Best ML right fielder for 1915, 1916, and 1917.

12) Alejandro Oms-CF (11): Thanks to Chris' work, another gem has been uncovered. He should gather more and more support over the next few "years."

13) Bob Elliott-3B/RF (12): Best third baseman of the Forties. He could hit, field, and didn't have a short career. Best ML third baseman for 1943, 1944, 1947, 1948, and close in 1950. Best NL third baseman for 1949 and 1950.

14) Hugh Duffy-CF/LF/RF (13): "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.

15) Pie Traynor-3B (14): Back on my ballot after a 1-year absence. Best white third baseman of his time (though J. Wilson and Beckwith was better). Best major league third baseman for 1923 (Beckwith was better), 1925, 1927, 1929 (Beckwith was better) and 1932.

Redding, Johnson, Dawson and Perez all exist in my top-35, but they just fall short.
   3. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 13, 2007 at 12:02 PM (#2483159)
This is Rob Wood's ballot:

I am going on vacation. Can someone move this over to the 2003 ballot thread when it is available? Thanks much.

2003 ballot from this career voter (low replacement level):

1. Eddie Murray - consistently great; very high career value
2. Ryne Sandberg - one of my favorite players
3. George Van Haltren - deserving star of the underrepresented 1890s
4. Graig Nettles - super fielder; I am surprised by his lack of support
5. Bob Johnson - solid hitter, solid career (w/1 year minor lg credit)
6. Bobby Bonds - good combo of peak and career
7. Tony Perez - good career though he was barely an adequate 3B defensively
8. Bob Elliott - good 3B mired with woeful Pirates and Braves
9. Tommy Bridges - luv the strikeouts & win pct, with minor league and wwii credit
10. Andre Dawson - very difficult to place; depends on your view of his defense
11. Rusty Staub - good peak + good career (similar to Perez)
12. Charley Jones - great player, with 2 years of lockout credit
13. Reggie Smith - boost from center field play and japan
14. Chuck Klein - very good peak and career (even after adjusting for park)
15. Rabbit Maranville - better career than most realize (with credit for 1918)
16-20 Hack Wilson, Pie Traynor, Bus Clarkson, Jack Clark, Luis Aparicio

Not voting for Dick Redding (around 50th), Pete Browning (around 100th),
Roger Bresnahan (around 75th), and newcomer Lee Smith (around 50th).
   4. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 13, 2007 at 12:19 PM (#2483161)
This is Rusty Priske's ballot:

PHoM: Murray, Sandberg, Butler (Freehan gets edged out from the backlist again)

1. Eddie Murray - Murray is just a lock.

2. Tony Perez
3. Andre Dawson
4. Ryne Sandberg - I actually thought Sandberg would be higher, but once I looked at him closer, I saw that while he is very definitely deserving, he doesn't top a couple of other career guysI am pushing (Perez and Dawson).

5. Tommy Leach
6. George Van Haltren
7. Mickey Welch

As I said, I'm a career voter. These five (Perez, Dawson, Leach, Van Haltren and Welch) have impressive careers and have been maligned by the peak-lovers. :)

8. Lou Brock - The top base stealer pre-Rickey.
9. Rusty Staub - Worth the #1 spot on name alone.

10. Graig Nettles
11. Reggie Smith

Trammell could easily be above Smith and Nettles, but I would rather be conservative on this one... not that I think it will matter. Of course, Trammell is no longer on this ballot, so the heck with him! ;-)

12. Hugh Duffy - Another overlooked candidate, but a solid notch below the top guys.

13. Norm Cash
14. Orlando Cepeda
15. Bob Johnson

Good players, but slipping into the group of people I'm not personally lobbying for.

16-20. Browning, Redding, Singleton, Puckett, Willis
21-25. Bonds, Mullane, Butler, Murphy, Streeter
26-20. Grimes, Strong, McCormick, Greene, Gleason

Lee Smith is at about #55. I analyzed Lee Smith for the HoF season as well, and he does not rate anywhere close for me. I am not a fan of relievers in general for an august assemblage such as what we are building (though there are exceptions). Sure he got a bunch of saves, but I think the save is pretty much a meaningless stat.

As for Butler, no. There are too many more deserving players ahead of him to get near the ballot.
   5. sunnyday2 Posted: August 13, 2007 at 12:33 PM (#2483165)
Didn't vote 2001-2002, ballot has changed a lot since 2000, still finagling a bit. Feeling OK about the top 30-35, maybe 40, though I am thinking that Quisenberry probably won't be #15 by tomorrow. After #40 it's a bit random. But anyway, I wanted to be a real peak voter again and I've at least moved back in that direction.

Again since I haven't voted a couple of cycles, here is a recap of my recent PHoM selections.

2000--Gossage, Ryan, Joe Kelley
2001--Winfield, Puckett*, Mattingly*
2002--O. Smith, Munson*, Dean*
2003--Murray, Sandberg, Dawson*

* PHoM/not HoM 2000-2003--Puckett, Mattingly, Munson, Dean, Dawson
HoM/not PHoM 2000-2003--Whitaker, Trammell, Randolph, Stieb

All of the required disclosures are in my top 50, down to poor Indian Bob Johnson at #46.

1. Eddie Murray (new, PHoM 2003)
2. Ryne Sandberg (new, PHoM 2003)—the easiest picks of the new millennium so far; I cannot quite fathom all the Sandberg #1 votes, however; Eddie was clearly better IMO

3. Dizzy Dean (5-6-42, PHoM 2002)—for a peak voter, the one big oversight of the HoM project to date

4. Kirby Puckett (2-1-new, PHoM 2001)—right place, right time; I understand the knock on Kirby in the theoretical world, but in the real world there’s not an eligible player who made more of a difference in terms of team success, at least the way I saw it; that is meritorious

5. Elston Howard (9-12-15, PHoM 1994)—weird career, continual loss of opportunities that he was more than ready to take on, the potential comp was Mickey Cochrane

6. Ed Williamson (6-2-3, PHoM 1924)—more peak and more glove than than almost any other available IF; the knock seems to be those 27 HR but he didn’t make the rules and I don’t see how they hurt his team

7. Don Mattingly (3-3-new, PHoM 2001)—another real difference-maker though the team success somehow didn’t follow

8. Andre Dawson (8-new, PHoM 2003)—didn’t deserve the MVP in ’87 but I don’t deduct for that

9. Don Newcombe (7-8-10, PHoM 1997)—missed more opportunities than anybody; coulda been Robin Roberts

10. Thurman Munson (4-5-43, PHoM 2002)—the real straw that stirred the pot

11. Pete Browning (10-9-4, PHoM 1961)—even with AA discount, way too much offense to ignore; would aleady be HoM if my commentless ballot had been accepted in 2000 like so many other commentless ballots over the years

(11a. Alan Trammell [11-new]—his value proposition suffers by comparison to Ripken and Yount, but still….)

12. Tommy Bond (23-38-50, PHoM 1929)—he’s baaaack; pretty much the all-time WS peak monster

13. Larry Doyle (14-10-8, PHoM 1975)—an eminently deserving MVP at his best

14. Phil Rizzuto (12-13-13, PHoM 1995)—wow, lots of Yankees on this list; fact is, I hate the Yankees, but they had the horses or in this case the gloves

15. Dan Quisenberry (20-26-24)—7 years of Gossage is the comp; today he wouldn't come in with runners on base and wouldn't have problems with inherited runners and would be Mariano Rivera

The Drop-Outs 2000-2003

17. Charley Jones (15-11-6, PHoM 1921)
18. Dick Redding (28-12-12, PHoM 1971)
19. Vern Stephens (13-14-26)
20. Addie Joss (25-16-5, PHoM 1967)
21. Gavvy Cravath (37-36-11, PHoM 1995)
22. Chuck Klein (16-15-34)
43. Reggie Smith (35-24-14, PHoM 1988)
47. Frank Howard (36-21-9, PHoM 1987)

Close—i.e. right around in/out line, as I think we will elect another 7-8 or so backloggers before we’re done

16. Dale Murphy (17-17-40)
17. Charley Jones (15-11-6, PHoM 1921)
18. Dick Redding (28-12-12, PHoM 1971)
19. Vern Stephens (13-14-26)
20. Addie Joss (25-16-5, PHoM 1967)
21. Gavvy Cravath (37-36-11, PHoM 1995)
(21a. Ken Boyer [25a-42a-35b])
22. Chuck Klein (16-15-34)
23. Jim Rice (18-29-73)
24. Johnny Pesky (24-39-18)
25. Eddie Cicotte (27-40-32)

HoVG—and, for many, the HoO (Hall of Overrateds)

26. Hugh Duffy (29-32-30)
27. Dave Parker (32-33-56)
(27a. Wes Ferrell [40b-43a-69a])
28. Tony Perez (21-23-33)
29. Hack Wilson (26-31-44)
30. Sal Bando (22-28-28)

31. Roger Bresnahan (47-27-27)
(31a. Lou Whitaker [29a-19-new])
32. Pie Traynor (19-20-52)
33. Vic Willis (48-42-22)
34. Bill Monroe (NR-59-57)
35. Dick Lundy (50-41-49)
36. Bucky Walters (HM-44-45)
37. Ken Singleton (NR-57-19)
38. Al Rosen (34-22-23)
39. Orlando Cepeda (30-18-16, PHoM 1987)
40. Alejandro Oms (38-25-24)

41. Bruce Sutter (40-35-35)
(41a. Jim Bunning [31a-32b-30a])
42. Hilton Smith (NR-47-51)
(42a. Quincy Trouppe [37a-24a-21a])
43. Reggie Smith (35-24-14, PHoM 1988)
44. Tommy Leach (49-37-17, PHoM 1998)
45. Fred Dunlap (HM-30-25)
46. Bob Johnson (NR-66-37)
47. Frank Howard (36-21-9, PHoM 1987)
48. Luis Tiant (44-67-55)
49. Burleigh Grimes (HM-45-31)
50. John McGraw (NR-71-65)

Honorable Mention

Wally Berger (33-55-64)
(Dewey Evans [HM-38b-23a])
(Joe Sewell [38a-32a-25a])
(Jimmy Sheckard [49a-38a-20a])
Bobby Estalella (HM-63-66)
Tony Oliva (31-34-83)
Luke Easter (HM-48-58)
Lefty Gomez (HM-52-47)
Bobby Avila (NR-54-54)
Silvio Garcia (NR-120-126)
Lee Smith (new)
   6. ronw Posted: August 13, 2007 at 03:27 PM (#2483281)
2003 Ballot –I use a little of WS, WARP, RCAA, OPS+, and traditional stats, as well as reputation. I’m putting bWS/700PA and pWS/300IP, plus my broad All-Star candidates, and MVP/Cy Young candidates for fun.

1. Eddie Murray. 21.7 bWS/700PA, 7 MVP, 16 AS. Mr. Consistency has more All-Star selections than any primary 1B but Cap Anson.

2. Ryne Sandberg 18.8 bWS/700PA, 4 MVP, 10 AS. For career, he and Whitaker are nearly identical. Sandberg had a bit higher peak.

3. Dick Redding. If only we could have his teen’s peak clearly defined. I’m going to be disappointed if he never makes it to the HOM.

4. Pete Browning. 26.1 bWS/700 PA, 5 MVP, 8 AS. There were two better hitters through the 1880’s, Brouthers and Connor. Is this finally his year?

5. Roger Bresnahan. 22.7 bWS/700PA, 1 MVP, 10 AS. Yes, the MVP was as a CF, but still a very valuable player for his time.

6. Hugh Duffy. 20.9 bWS/700PA, 5 MVP, 10 AS. Dominant during the early 1890’s, but that might be Win Shares talking.

7. Kirby Puckett. 20.0 bWS/700PA, 5 MVP, 9 AS. I don’t think I would ever consider drafting Lou Whitaker ahead of Kirby Puckett.

8. George Van Haltren. 20.0 bWS/700PA, 1 MVP, 13 AS. Has gotten an elect-me vote on my ballot before.

9. Tommy Leach. 18.0 bWS/700 PA, 2 MVP, 11 AS. A good player from an underrepresented period.

10. Sal Bando. 19.4 bWS/700PA, 3 MVP, 10 AS. High late-60’s early 70’s peak.

11. Lou Brock. 18.7 bWS/700PA, 3 MVP, 11 AS. 30+ WS seasons in 1967, 1968, and 1971, plus a solid long career looks pretty good to me.

12. Ben Taylor. I think Ben was a smidgen better than Jake Beckley.

13. Bill Monroe. The ultimate overlooked candidate.

14. Luis Tiant. 21.5 pWS/300IP, 3 MVP, 9 AS. I think he may be better than electee Billy Pierce.

15. Larry Doyle 22.5 bWS/700PA, 1 MVP, 11 AS. I’ve voted him high before.

16. Dizzy Dean. 27.6 pWS/300IP, 3 CY, 6 AS. A bit of a shakeup in the pitcher rankings.

17. Bobby Bonds. 22.4 bWS/700PA, 4 MVP, 10 AS. Brought slightly more to the table than Singleton and Parker,

18. Jack Clark – 24.6 bWS/700PA, 3 MVP, 10 AS. The man could really hit, and for a decent period of time.

19. Bob Johnson. 21.8 bWS/700PA, 1 MVP, 12 AS. Just doesn’t have enough peak, but very solid for a long time, plus may deserve minor league credit.

20. Frank Viola – 19.7 pWS/300IP, 4 CY, 7 AS. I think he may get a vote before this project is done.


C. Wally Schang. 19.8 bWS/700 PA, 0 MVP, 11 AS.

C. Gene Tenace. 24.1 bWS/700PA, 1 MVP, 8 AS.

1B. Orlando Cepeda. 22.8 bWS/700PA, 3 MVP, 9 AS.

1B. Don Mattingly – 21.1 bWS/700PA, 3 MVP, 9 AS.

1B. Tony Perez. 19.3 bWS/700PA, 3 MVP, 8 AS.

2B. George Scales. I think we could have missed him.

3B. Pie Traynor. 16.2 bWS/700PA, 1 MVP, 11 AS.

SS. Herman Long. 13.3 bWS/700PA, 3 MVP, 9 AS.

SS. Dick Lundy. Reexamining his offense seems to classify him as a near miss.

LF. George J. Burns. 20.5 bWS/700PA, 3 MVP, 11 AS.

LF. Charley Jones. 24.9 bWS/700PA, 3 MVP, 9 AS. No holdout credit.

LF. Pedro Guerrero – 25.2 bWS/700PA, 5 MVP, 7 AS.

CF. Roy Thomas. 23.0 bWS/700PA, 3 MVP, 10 AS.

CF. Brett Butler. 17.6 bWS/700PA, 1 MVP, 10 AS. Besides those on my ballot (Browning, Duffy, Puckett, Van Haltren) I think I like Roy Thomas, Fielder Jones, Mike Griffin, and Vada Pinson better.

RF. Ken Singleton. 22.2 bWS/700PA, 5 MVP, 8 AS.

RF. Dave Parker – 19.4 bWS/700PA, 4 MVP, 9 AS.

RF. Dale Murphy – 18.8 bWS/700PA, 6 MVP, 7 AS.

RF. Andre Dawson – 18.1 bWS/700PA, 2 MVP, 9 AS. Not a high enough peak.

SP. Vic Willis. 22.0 pWS/300IP, 3 CY, 8 AS.

SP. Urban Shocker. 24.6 pWS/300IP, 3 CY, 7 AS.

SP. Rick Reuschel – 20.3 pWS/300IP, 1 CY, 9 AS.

SP. Wilbur Cooper. 22.2 pWS/300IP, 1 CY, 9 AS.

SP. Eddie Rommel. 24.2 pWS/300IP, 1 CY, 9 AS.

SP. Bucky Walters. 22.6 pWS/300IP, 4 CY, 5 AS. What a peak, but some of it is war years.

SP. Mel Harder. 20.5 pWS/300IP, 3 CY, 5 AS.

SP. Fernando Valenzuela. 17.0 pWS/300IP, 2 CY, 6 AS. At 11, I was the perfect age for Fernandomania and remember it fondly. That year, everyone loved him, even up here in Giants territory. Later, Giants fans hated him, but that first year was magical. I imagine it was very similar to Mark Fidrych. For later fans, compare it to Nomomania in 1995 or even Dontrelle Willis in 2003, but multiply that hype one hundredfold.

RP. John Hiller. 34.7 pWS/300IP, 1 CY, 5 AS.

RP. Sparky Lyle. 34.7 pWS/300IP, 0 CY, 4 AS.

RP. Dan Quisenberry. 45.0 pWS/300IP, 4 CY, 5 AS.

RP. Bruce Sutter. 48.2 pWS/300IP, 2 CY, 4 AS.

RP. Lee Smith. 46.1 pWS/300IP, 0 CY, 5 AS. Never had a super-dominant season, but just as valuable has the Quiz and Sutter seasons. Also did it for much longer than those two.
   7. DL from MN Posted: August 13, 2007 at 03:49 PM (#2483295)
2003 Ballot

1) Eddie Murray - A career voter's choice, consistently produced for a longer than average career.
2) Ryne Sandberg - Due to the short career I barely have him ahead of Whitaker and Trammell, still he is ahead of both despite the abrupt end.
3) Luis Tiant - Top 3 seasons WARP1 - Stieb 29.2, Tiant 30.3 - Tiant wins on peak. Top 8 seasons WARP1 - Stieb 67.8, Tiant 67.4 - tied on prime. Stieb only has 2 seasons over 4 WARP1 outside of his best 8 and Tiant has 5 - Tiant wins Career. The only advantage I see for Stieb is consecutiveness of prime and that doesn't matter to my ballot.
4) Bus Clarkson - His MLEs have him pretty much equivalent with Trammell. Two NgL all-star selections in the 40s with a war in between. Two MVP caliber seasons in the Texas League in the 50s.
5) Bob Johnson - Better than several contemporary elected outfielders (Medwick, Averill, Willard Brown). Did everything well for teams that didn't do anything well.
6) Norm Cash - One great season probably vaults him from off ballot to here. Cash = Cepeda + glove.
7) Tommy Bridges - Deserves war credit, strikeout pitcher with good postseason work. I like him lots more than Bucky Walters.
8) Graig Nettles - How is he much different than Randolph? Great glove, good bat, played for the Yankees.
9) Rick Reuschel - Same PRAA as Stieb but Reuschel has more value over a replacement.
10) Ron Cey - I'm favoring marginal 3B and marginal P over marginal OF mainly because the electors are preferring the marginal OF. Cey looks a lot like if Bob Elliott hadn't moved to RF.
11) Reggie Smith - A marginal OF I can get behind. Compare to Andre Dawson -they look close except for .366 OBP vs .323. Smith = Dawson + walks?
12) Buddy Bell - Brooks lite, outstanding fielder with just enough bat and a long career.
13) Rusty Staub - maybe I'm awarding him too much for the partial seasons but he has a great 5 year peak
14) Tony Perez - I like his time at 3B and the long career
15) Gavy Cravath - Acknowledging his status as my favorite pre-Ruth player I'll give him the last slot.

PHoM extends down to 29 with the exception of Bobby Bonds who will probably make it by the end of the project. Lee Smith makes PHoM but he's not likely to ever ballot. I like him better than Fingers.

16-20) Virgil Trucks, Bob Elliott, Ben Taylor, Jack Clark, Tommy John
21-25) Roger Bresnahan, Lee Smith, Dave Bancroft, Frank Tanana, Orlando Cepeda
26-29) Tommy Leach, Bobby Bonds, Thurman Munson, Dick Redding, [Charlie Keller]

30-34) [Richie Ashburn], Johnny Evers, Jack Quinn, Vic Willis, Darrell Porter, Alejandro Oms
35-38) [Rube Foster], Urban Shocker, Luke Easter, [Biz Mackey], Dizzy Trout, Lave Cross
39-41) Dutch Leonard, [Cool Papa Bell], Ken Singleton, [Ralph Kiner], Charley Jones
42-44) Hilton Smith, Frank Howard, Pete Browning, [Bill Freehan]

56) Andre Dawson
106) Brett Butler
n/a) Fernando Valenzuela
   8. karlmagnus Posted: August 13, 2007 at 04:16 PM (#2483315)
Winfield was very close to Jake, I think Murray’s a tiny fraction better. Sandberg loses for double retirement; it shortens his career – just below Schang, I think. Butler nowhere near good enough a hitter; off bottom of consideration set. Smith better than Fingers or Gossage; just off main ballot.

1. Eddie Murray. Tiny franction better than Jake Beckley and Dave Winfield, therefore well above borderline. . 3255 hits @129. TB+BB/PA .525 TB+BB/Outs .785

2. (N/A-7-7-6-8-6-6-7-7-6-7-7-7-9-8-7-7-4-5-3-3-3-5-4-4-4-6-4-4-4-5-2-2
-4-4-3-3-5-4-3-2-2-3-5-2-2-1) Addie Joss. I’m now even more convinced I missed him earlier, and that adjusting innings down for dead ball pitchers is illegitimate. 2327 IP at an ERA+ of 142. 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. 25% credit puts him at 2777 IP, 190-120, with ERA+ of 136. Substantially better than Koufax. OPS+20. Electorate needs to take him more seriously.

3. (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-
4-5-4-6-4-4-5-4-4-5-4-4-6-5-5-5-6-7-5-5-6-7-6-5-5-7-5-5-5-6-3-4-7-6-4-4-6-5-4-3-3-4-6-3-3-2) 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!

4. (N/A-10-9-8-10-11-10-13-12-14-N/A-15-14-13-12-11-10-10-11-9-9
-10-11-10-10-10-11-11-10-9-10-7-8-11-10-8-8-10-9-5-4-4-5-7-4-4-3) Ernie Lombardi. Up a bit more; we’re forgetting him. Berra closely comparable Berra. 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. TB+BB/PA .492, TB+BB/Outs .719., the ratio between the two very low because of strikeouts, I assume. Plus a great nickname!

5. (N/A-14-15-14-13-14-15-14-15-14-15-15-13-12-13-10-11-13-12-10-
11-12-11-6-5-5-6-8-5-5-4) 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. OPS+ 119 Best season 1944, however. Sliding up ballot.

6. (N/A-10-9-8-11-N/A-15-15-14-10-10-11-12-10-12-11-9-8-9-10-10-9-
8-9-10-9-8-7-9-9-8-10-9-8-10-9-8-9-8-8-10-9-8-8-8-9-7-7-8-9-8-7-7-9-9-8-7-8-5-6-9-8-6-6-8-7-9-8-8-10-11-7-8-6) Charley Jones. Short career – only 1,780 normalized hits, even when adjusted to nominal 130-game-played season. But OPS+ 149, TB+BB/PA .473, TB+BB/Outs .722, so above Pike and non-CF 90s OF. Down, but just above Browning

7. (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-
5-6-5-7-5-5-6-6-5-6-5-5-7-6-6-6-7-8-6-6-7-8-7-6-6-8-6-6-6-7-4-5-8-7-5-5-7-6-10-9-9-11-12-8-9-7) 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. Also discount for not playing full seasons; the normalized hits should thus be about 1900, so drop him to just above Hondo.

8. (N/A-9-8-8-9-10-8-10-9-8-7-8-11-11-10-10-10-11-11-10-9-11-12-
-11-11-13-13-11-10-11-8-9-12-11-9-10-11-12-8-7-7-9-10-6-7-5) 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.

9. (N/A) Ryne Sandberg. 2386 hits@114 and correction for 2B takes him to 134. TB+BB/PA .490, TB+BB/Outs .717. In, but only just.

10. (N/A-12-10-12-10-11-10-7-7-8-9-7-9-13-11-10-11-12-12-11-11-11-
10-8-8-9-10-9-8-8-10-10-9-8-9-6-7-10-9-7-7-9-8-7-6-6-8-9-9-10-8) 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.
   9. karlmagnus Posted: August 13, 2007 at 04:16 PM (#2483316)
11. (N/A-15-N/A-15-N/A-14-13-14-11-12-14-13-11-13-14-13-11-10-10-12-13-10-11-10) Frank Howard Very slightly better than Kiner – significantly longer career. Underrated by history. OPS+ 142 for 1774 hits. TB+BB/PA .546, TB+BB/Outs .805 in a pitchers’ park and era.

12. (N/A-12-11-11-13-14-11-12-11) Tommy John 288-231, 4710IP@111. Infinitesimally below Sutton, better than Kaat.

13. (N/A-13-12-13-13-12-14-15-12-13-11-11-N/A-11-9-12-12-N/A-15-15-N/A-14-N/A-15-13-12-14-15-12-13-12) George van Haltren. Had slipped too far at #44; we need more 90s stars.

14. (N/A-11-12-11-11-12-13-14-12-15-15-15-15-N/A-15-N/A-13-14-13) Carl Mays Had slipped down too far. 3021 innings at 119, 207-126 and 83 OPS+ Others should look at him more closely.

15. (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-14-15-14) Hugh Duffy. Back on ballot after more than 60 years; we don’t have enough Beaneaters!


16. (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-
3-2-2-3-2-2-4-2-3-2-2-4-2-2-2-4-3-3-3-4-2-2-2-2-N/A-15-N/A-15) Mickey Welch. UER were 43.37% of total runs allowed for Mickey, compared to about 40% with all his HOM contemporaries except Galvin (who started earlier, anyway.) Hence his ERA+, his weakness anyway, overstates his value; in spite of 307-210 he was primarily an innings-eater. 4802IP. Will now be on and off ballot.

17. (N/A-15-N/A-14-13-15-N/A) Rusty Staub. 2716 hits at OPS+124. TB+BB/PA .484, TB+BB/Outs .724. Not quite as good as Beckley, for not quite as long.

18. (N/A-12-N/A) Fred Lynn. Underrated, considerably better than Rice or Hernandez. 1960 hits at 130, but bonus for playing CF. TB+BB/PA .531, TB+BB/Outs .791. Lovely player to watch, and absolutely top-drawer at his best.

19. Andre Dawson. Longer career than Lynn but not as good. 2774 hits @119. TB+BB/PA .499 TB+BB/Outs .705

20. Reggie Smith
21. (N/A-14-N/A-15-13-15-N/A-15-N/A) Luis Tiant 229-172. 3486 IP at 114. ERA+ a little low, but W/L good. He’s not top tier, but just a little better than Pierce. Big psychic plus for Red Sox affiliation. Looking at Reuschel, a little overplaced so have slipped him down.

22. (N/A-13-15-N/A-15-15-N/A) Vic Willis Had slipped too far.

23. (N/A) Lee Smith 71-92 +478 saves. 1289IP @132. I find these relievers difficult to rank because their usage changes; with the exception of Wilhelm I don’t see any of them as clearly IN. (Rivera very short career in IP terms so far, and ERA+ declining as we speak.) Still, Lee Smith was better than Fingers and I think Gossage, though that one’s close.

24. Gavvy Cravath 1134 hits@150. Add 50% to career and deduct 5 points for more years in early career makes him 1699 hits @145, still a very short career, but comparable to Hack. TB+BB/PA .527, TB+BB/Outs .835.

25. (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-15-N/A-14-N/A-15-14-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.

26. Rick Reuschel. 214-191, 3548IP@114. Tough to put him far from Tiant, who had a better W/L, but I now realized I was overvaluing Tiant a bit because of Red Sox affiliation.

27. (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.

28. (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.

29. 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

30. Brian Downing. 2099 hits at 122 plus he caught about 1/3 of his games. TB+BB/PA.487 TB+BB/Outs.741

31. Roger Bresnahan. Moves up on re-examination, but not close enough to see the ballot because even with a catcher bonus his career is short 1252 hits @126, maybe 1500 with catcher bonus, since he played OF in a lot of his catcher seasons. About 2/3 catcher takes him to 140-142 but 1500 @140-142 is close but no cigar, given Klein and Johnson. TB+BB/PA .447, TB+BB/Outs .719. Lombardi and Schang very clearly better.

32. Tony Perez. Close to Staub but below him. 2732 hits at 122. TB+BB/PA .502, TB+BB/Outs .731.
33. Bill Madlock.
34. Toby Harrah
35. Ben Taylor.
36. Jim Kaat
37. Orlando Cepeda
38. Norm Cash
39. Jim Rice
40. (N/A-12-12-14-N/A) Tony Lazzeri
41. Cesar Cedeno
42. (N/A-14-N/A-15-N/A) Sam Rice
43. Lou Brock
44. Mickey Vernon
45. Thurmon Munson
46. Sal Maglie.
47. (N/A) Burleigh Grimes.
48. (N/A) Heinie Manush
49. (N/A-9-10-10-13-N/A) Mike Tiernan
50. Bob Elliott
51. (N/A) Dick Lundy
52. (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.
53. Jack Clark. As good as Reggie Smith but not for as long. 1826 hits@137OPS+, TB+BB .529, TB+BB/Outs .845
54. (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.
55. Dave Parker.
56. (N/A-10-9-8-7-6-7-8-5-12-10-10-N/A-10-8-11-11-N/A) Jimmy Ryan
57. Gene Tenace
58. Kiki Cuyler
59. Deacon McGuire
60. Jerry Koosman.
61. Boog Powell
62. Ken Singleton.
63. Bucky Walters 198-160, 3104IP at 115 certainly doesn’t make the ballot, but should be on the consideration set, so here he is. Less than Tiant or Reuschel..
64. Sal Bando.
65. Jim Fregosi.
66. Jack Quinn
67. Tony Mullane
68. Ron Cey
69. Pie Traynor
70. Jim McCormick
71. Dick Redding. My punt is 3200 innings at 114 ERA+ for a record of 207-159, i.e. same quality as Chris but a little shorter. About here looks right – a little below Grimes (longer career) and Maglie (better quality.)
72. Joe Judge
73. Spotswood Poles.
74. Buddy Bell.
75. Larry Doyle
76. Kirby Puckett 2304 hits @124. TB+BB/PA .498 TB+BB/Outs .738 Overrated badly by the HOF; 5 adjusted OPS+ points short of Cepeda, who’s below the ballot.
77. Curt Simmons
78. Waite Hoyt.
79. Harry Hooper.
80. Vada Pinson
81. Gil Hodges
82. Jules Thomas.
83. Rico Carty.
84. Wilbur Cooper
85. Bruce Petway.
86. Jack Clements
87. Frank Tanana
88. Graig Nettles.
89. Don Mattingley. 2153 hits@127. TB+BB/PA TB+BB/Outs. Just below Puckett because no positional adjustment. Overrated by Yankee fans; there’s a reason his career coincided with the drought.
90. Bill Monroe
91. Herb Pennock
92. Chief Bender
93. Ed Konetchy
94. Al Oliver
95. Jesse Tannehill
96. Bobby Veach
97. Chet Lemon.
98. Lave Cross
99. Tommy Leach.
100. Tom York
   10. Chris Cobb Posted: August 13, 2007 at 04:23 PM (#2483323)
ronw wrote: Pete Browning. 26.1 bWS/700 PA, 5 MVP, 8 AS. There were two better hitters through the 1880’s, Brouthers and Connor.

It's a small caveat, perhaps, but I note that WARP2 sees Anson as also a superior hitter to Browning through the 1880s, creating 68 BRAR2/out versus Browning's 64 (I ran the numbers for Anson from 1880 to 1890, season-adjusting each to 162 games, and dropping his 1883 off year, to match the study of Browning from 1882 to 1892, season-adjusting each, and dropping his 1889 off year). I haven't checked all of the other top hitters of the decade by this system, but I think that the next best after Browning was King Kelly, with 59 BRAR2/out. George Gore's rate was 56, and I don't see anyone else who was likely higher than the Brouthers/Connor/Anson/Browning/Kelly/Gore set. It's not surprising that Chicago's offense was awesome in the first half of the 1880s, since they had 3 of the top 6 hitters in baseball in the same lineup.
   11. rawagman Posted: August 13, 2007 at 04:31 PM (#2483332)
2003 Ballot
Use a sort of peak-over career number that measures ink by playing time. Combined with rate stats and a glove measurement, I feel this gives me both context for what the player actually achieved versus what the league around him was able to do. I think it also may be time to go a little more into my baseball philosophy, which may help in clarifying my rankings. I don't believe in the single stat theory of baseball, meaning I don't use WS or WARP in my rankings. Essentially, I follow this as I think a large percentage of what contributes to baseball is not counted. Well, no one has ever counted them as statistics as far as I've ever heard. This includes things like manager's prerogative, and actions that would require a historical pbp analysis currently unavailable. I search for what I consider "total ballplayers", guys who can do it all. I believe in positional representation and abhor the thought process that says that relievers were all failed starters and 2B are all failed SS, etc... A team cannot win without a 2B, nor without someone in LF. When I look at a player's career, I try to ask myself how I would feel about him as his manager - would his presence require special tactics to protect him, or is he completely reliable. I hope it can be seen by my rankings that the reliable players generally rise above the ones with clear holes in their games. There are always exceptions, but this is what I have. The stats I look at to get here tend to be traditional and rate, both offensive and defensive. Contemporary opinion also helps.

PHOM - Sandberg, Murray, Stieb. Sandberg tops my ballot. Murray comes in at 4. I'm not one to get concerned about leading the consensus scores. He is definitely very worthy, but I prefer Ben Taylor as a long career 1B. Stieb was on my ballot last year, but was heading the pack for my backlog PHOM. As he enters now, Andre Dawson moves to the head of the row and into the last spot on my ballot. All Oliver and Tony Oliva head my personal backlog. Lee Smith was strong for a releiver, but I think I would rather have Quisenberry. It's super tight between the trio of Quis, Smith and Sutter. But they are all off ballot. Brett Butler was a very good player. I have him as directly between Cy Williams and Amos Otis on the CF chart. In the consideration set, but well off ballot. No other newbies in my top 100, but Daulton, Pena and Valenzuela all make my expanded consideration set. Bravo! to them all.

1)Ryne Sandberg - The quintessential allround ballplayer. (PHOM)
2)Hugh Duffy - Super peak, wonderful prime. Amazing bat, super glove. (PHOM)
3)Ben Taylor - Can't find the peak, but a better prime (through the roof), career and glove than Beckley. I think he may be the player most underrated by the electorate. (PHOM)
4)Eddie Murray - Eerily similar to to the man above him. I could have flipped the two, but I choose to pay homage to sunnyday2 and imagination here. Much of Taylor's prime was scarcely documented. I believe that Murray-level play was the minimum that Taylor reached. There is a very good chance that he was markedly better as well. Some have commented on the "obvious" superiority of Murray's case to that of Sandberg. I guess I simply require mroe from my four corners guys than I do of guys whose play was up the middle.(PHOM)
5)Tommy Bridges - He was really very good. A summary of a reevaluation of some of our backlog pitchers in my high backlog (Bridges, Gomez, Redding, Walters) Of those four, the white guys were all regulars for 10-11 seasons. Bucky and Lefty both had immense peaks, but I think that Lefty's non-peak years hold up better than Bucky's. Also, Lefty does not need any war discount. Dick Redding seems more similar to Walters in that his non-peak was not so impressive. His peak was still enough to leave in him solid backlog country. (I even put him in my PHOM back when I joined the project.) Tommy Bridges wins out. He had much greater consistency. He is to pitchers what Bob Johnson was to hitters, but more of a winner. As we see the upcoming dearth of good pitching candidates, I urge everyone to give Tommy Bridges a closer look.(PHOM)
6)Kirby Puckett - I have it mentioned that some HOM voters consider Puckett to be a mistake of the BBWAA. I see where that sentiment may be emanating from, but I do beleive that his election was earned A wonderful ballplayer. (PHOM)
7)Lefty Gomez - looking at him in any single way hurts him. Looking at him kaleidoscopically has him as the best available pitcher in my eyes (PHOM)
8)Charley Jones - he got the shaft - but I am not convinced as to what extent. A little reconsideration bump here. I give partial blacklist credit. I tend to be liberal with credit, but I don't think he deserves full credit. That said, even with the partial credit I am giving him (2 full years), I now see that he was rather durable in season, and he seems to have been a solid defender. (PHOM)
9)Vern Stephens - Will we look at Nomar down the road like we look at Vern now? Great bat, good glove. (PHOM)
10)Dale Murphy - A player that my system loves. At his best he dominated. That refers to the years between 1979-1988. That's a 10 year prime with a very high peak. Also demonstrated very good fielding ability. Could easily move up my ballot. (PHOM)
11)Gavvy Cravath - No longer the worst fielder in my top 120 candidates (Frank Howard). Probably still the best hitter, though. (PHOM)
12)Bob Johnson - I don't know why it took me this long. Great all-round LF. Very durable. (PHOM)
13)Bobby Veach - He did it all well. As complete a LF as is available today. (PHOM)
14)Orlando Cepeda (PHOM)
((14a)Dave Stieb)) (PHOM)
15)Andre Dawson - Like Trammell, his lack of durability really hurts him for me. At this time, I prefer the resumes of Veach and Murphy among the OF backlog. Makes my ballot in his second year as a candidate.
   12. rawagman Posted: August 13, 2007 at 04:35 PM (#2483338)
16)Al Oliver - I was surprised by the similarities between Oliver and Reggie Smith. Smith had the higher OPS+, but I fear it may be a bit hollow. Oliver trumps Reggie (and Wally Berger) in light of his more convincing peak and a glove that scores better than the other two. Career length is nice as well.
17)Tony Oliva - another big jump. Career not as short as I thought. A world class hitter.
((17a)Dwight Evans))
18)Jack Clark - Marvelous hitter who had his uses in the field as well.
19)Jim Rice - This is, more or less, where the in-out line can be found.
20)Wally Berger - super-underrated
21)Dizzy Dean - Diet Sandy Koufax. 0 calories (career), no sugar (prime).
22)Don Mattingly - In the interest of my belief in a big hall for Cooperstown, I suppport Mattingly's induction. That said, for this project, he looks to be just the wrong side of the door.
23)Bus Clarkson - I failed to give him credit as a SS earlier. More shades of Quincy. The good doctor's new numbers have been added to my spread sheet, but I have not given him any of a readjustment yet as I wait to see how the electorate takes the info. Solid chance he will make my ballot next year though.
((23a)Darrell Evans))
24)Dan Quisenberry - I suppose I've decided that I value peak in a reliever over career totals. Mind you, if the guy has both...well, we'll see what happens with Goose in a few years.
25)Lee Smith - He didn't have the stellar peak of the two closers around him, but his prime outlasted them both. And his peak is really not that far below Sutter's, at least.
26)Bruce Sutter - Very curious to see if anyone else has him as their highest ranked reliever right now. Shorter career than the others, but when he was at his best, he was the best. That works for me.
27)Ernie Lombardi - defense was below average, but not quite horrible
((27a)Jimmy Wynn))
28)Alejandro Oms - This is a serious jump for him in my rankings (nearly 60 places). I was counting him as a RF only. The hybrid time gets him here, just above Reggie Smith. This could change. Right now I have provisionally given him a career as a 50% CF.
29)Reggie Smith - Another challenge. Uncertainties about his defense keep him from challenging my top half. Moves back up a bit as the clouds pass and I see much to compare between R. Smith and J. Wynn.
30)Dick Redding - One of the toughest for me to accurately place (PHOM)
31)Ron Guidry - I love a dominant pitcher. I don't think it's necessarily correct to view pitchers and hitters in the same light and I value a strong peak (I mean really strong) for pitchers more than for hitters (prefer a steady, all round type there). Similar to, but not quite the equal of, Lefty Gomez, one of my inner circle of best friends.
32)Al Rosen - One more season in prime, and he is top 10
33)Mickey Welch
((33a)Jim Bunning))
((33b)Billy Pierce))

34)Sparky Lyle - The biggest surprise of my remodeled reliever system. I don't look at postseason heroics so much, but for those who give plaudits for Fingers' work, check out Sparky. Great peak, very consistent.
35)Lance Parrish - SOlid all round catcher. Proud member of the HoVG. Not quite the HOM though.
36)Ron Cey - I remember his late Topps cards. Lots of very small print on the back. He compares favourably to the other eligible 3Bs. I'd still take Rosen's monster peak over his steady production, but it's close.
37)Norm Cash - Too much in one year - and that was not the best year for an everlasting peak, for a number of reasons.
((37a)Joe Gordon))
((37b)Dobie Moore))

38)Addie Joss - ERA/+ and WHIP are great, but why so little black ink?
((38a)Cupid Childs))
39)Fred Dunlap - Very short career. Very good, too.
((39a)Rollie Fingers))
40)Bucky Walters - Very similar to Pierce in overall picture - but built differently.
41)Don Newcombe - big beneficiary of pitcher's fielding analysis.
42)Tommy John - I think I like his overall picture just a smidgen more than Sutton's.
((42a)Don Sutton))
43)Luis Tiant - Undoubtedly a wonderful pitcher, but of the type who don't do that well in my system.I wasn't Billy Pierce's biggest fan, but I still liked Billy (and Marichal and Bunning) more than Tiant, so he starts off over here.
44)Tony Perez - I wasn't giving him the extra glove credit he earned through 5 seasons as the Reds' 3B. Still, no peak. As far as 1B go, I have Cepeda up higher because of his very nice peak and his not too short career as a regular. Ben Taylor suffers from a lack of documented stats. The stats there show that he could flat out mash the ball by dead-ball standards. Contemporaries say his glove was the best they had ever seen at 1B. Very apt, in this year of the Hernandez discussion. How much as a scoop worth? I think it's worth alot. I maintain that while a below average defensive 1B can cause little harm, an above average glove at 1B will provide a hefty bonus to the team lucky enough to employ one.
45)Fred Carroll - I give him around 1.5 seasons prime MiL credit. Better than Tenace.
46)Larry Doyle - If only the glove were just a little better.
47)Phil Rizzuto
48)Cecil Travis - A very worthy extra credit case.
((48a)Jake Beckley))
49)Jimmy Ryan
50)Fred Lynn - Very similar to Duffy and Roush. Loses a lot of ground due to in-season durability concerns for an otherwise very strong candidate. Should be appealing to Browning/Chance/McGraw supporters who overlook that sort of thing.
((50a)Charlie Keller)))
51)Cy Williams
52)Brett Butler - Some are calling him an equivalent to Kirby. I'm not seeing it. At Kirby's best, he was the best. At Butler's best, he was very good. My system will always take the guy who was the best for a stretch.
53)Amos Otis - The end of the centrefield run.
54)Dolf Camilli
55)Fielder Jones - I was missing on him a bit. A very apt first name. Solid bat as well.
56)Roger Bresnahan - Not like the two above or below, he is among those negatively affected by my new adjustments. Have been convinced to ease up slightly on his in season durability issue, but even so, here he is.
57)Pete Browning - A superior masher, but a horrible person to have on your team. No defensive value whatsoever and very very poor durability. Worse than most contemporary catchers.
58)Steve Garvey - Something between Perez and McCormick. Nice size career, defensive value, could hit a bit - nothing overwhelming though.
59)Jim Bottomley - More than just a Frankie Frisch mistake.
60)George Kell
61)Frank McCormick - One of the finest 1B gloves in MLB hitter, and a decent hitter as well.
62)Bob Elliott - A little 3B run here
63)Graig Nettles - Among 3B, I figure he sits nicely here between Elliott and Bando. The better question to ask is if I am underrating 3B in general. I'll have to look into it a bit more later. Nettles is the best defensive 3B on my ballot. I think he was better than Boyer as well.
64)Sal Bando
65)Buddy Bell - Fits in rather nicely in this run of HOVG 3B.
66)Pie Traynor
67)Ed Williamson - I was missing a little something here.
68)Johnny Evers
69)Elston Howard
70)Joe Wood - If he had one more really good year as a pitcher, he'd be balloted
71)Bill Mazeroski
72)Tony Lazerri - Similar value to Maz. Accrued very differently.
73)Tommy Leach - I had missed him until now - I don't see the great love for him, though.
74)Vic Willis - A reexamination of all pitchers to include fielding ability causes an adjustment for Willis and a jump up the consideration set.
75)Thurmon Munson - see below.
76)Walker Cooper - some days, he reminds me of Quincey Trouppe
77)Johnny Pesky
78)Hippo Vaughn
79)Tom Henke - Not a long career, but the Terminator was one of the best closers in the game at his peak.
80)George Kell - Had him a bit too high earlier.
81)Cesar Cedeno - Found him to be comparable to Amos Otis and Jimmy Wynn in total value. Slots lower than those two in light of the shape of that value.
82)Vada Pinson - The ink really threw me for a twist. He looks like a good all-round CF, not great. But he amassed hefty ink totals for his generation. This may be a safe ranking.
83)Luis Aparicio - The low OPS+ masks his real effectiveness.
84)Tip O'Neill - The next Canadian.
85)Rocky Colavito
86)Chuck Klein - Drops like a rock. Great hitter Not much else. What separates him from Cravath. Not sure at the moment, really. I guess Cravath has those extra credit intangibles.
87)Denny Lyons
88)John McGraw - Hurt alot by my readjustment - no durability. Tsk, tsk.
89)George Van Haltren - see the comment on Wynn. Van Haltren is the big loser on the CF sweepstakes due to his poor fielding by my own accounts.
90)Rabbit Maranville
   13. DL from MN Posted: August 13, 2007 at 04:35 PM (#2483339)
Oops, overlooked Fingers - he slots in between Shocker and Easter in my personal backlog.
   14. DL from MN Posted: August 13, 2007 at 04:50 PM (#2483359)
"The better question to ask is if I am underrating 3B in general. I'll have to look into it a bit more later."

With Darrell Evans way down at 23rd, I'm going to say YES. There's not much later left.
   15. Paul Wendt Posted: August 13, 2007 at 06:30 PM (#2483499)
JTMurphy on RSandberg
Best ML second baseman for 1990 and 1991. Best NL second baseman for 1989 and 1992.

1989-1992 does stand out in his record.
Notably, he made his reputation five years earlier. By 1989, i suppose, most sabermetricians expected that '84-85 would remain early promise unfulfilled (although he might merit Cooperstown anyway).

12) Alejandro Oms-CF (11): Thanks to Chris' work, another gem has been uncovered. He should gather more and more support over the next few "years."

i read this every few "years" :-(

Marc sunnyday2, Discussion #162
Didn't vote 2001-2002, ballot has changed a lot since 2000, still finagling a bit. Feeling OK about the top 30-35, maybe 40, though I am thinking that Quisenberry probably won't be #15 by tomorrow.

18 hours later, less 1 for supper, 8 for sleep, 1 for #### shower and shave

. . .
15. Dan Quisenberry (20-26-24)—7 years of Gossage is the comp; today he wouldn't come in with runners on base and wouldn't have problems with inherited runners and would be Mariano Rivera

The Drop-Outs 2000-2003

17. Charley Jones (15-11-6, PHoM 1921)
18. Dick Redding (28-12-12, PHoM 1971)

I'm sorry to see a Pete & Charley tandem near the top of the ballot break up with Charley dropping out.

I wanted to be a real peak voter again and I've at least moved back in that direction.

Yes indeed.
If 6-7 seasons is not too long to be a peak (Browning, Murphy, Quisenberry), all but a few of that top 18 can be viewed as peak candidates
1. Murray
6. Williamson
9. Newcombe*
10. Munson
17. Jones

and only a few others are hard to swallow but it can be done: Puckett, Dawson, Doyle, Rizzuto.

*Rizzuto or Newcombe? I thnk they only make the ballot with war credit that gives Rizzuto a meritorious peak in the mid-1940s, but also gives Newcombe a meritorious prime. Elsewhere, iirc, Marc has argued for crediting Newcombe with 10 or 11 prime seasons thru 1957.
   16. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 13, 2007 at 06:35 PM (#2483508)
i read this every few "years" :-(

Yeah, I hear you, Paul. :-( I probably need to update his comments, too.
   17. Evan Posted: August 13, 2007 at 06:36 PM (#2483509)
Ryne Sandberg-2B (n/e): A truly great player and a fun guy to watch play. Best ML second baseman for 1990 and 1991. Best NL second baseman for 1989 and 1992.

Was there better in '84-'85?
   18. Paul Wendt Posted: August 13, 2007 at 06:38 PM (#2483515)
Quick draw!
You hover watchfully, JTM.

(I composed that five hours ago but lost the 'net before posting.)
   19. rawagman Posted: August 13, 2007 at 06:41 PM (#2483518)
14. DL from MN Posted: August 13, 2007 at 12:50 PM (#2483359)
"The better question to ask is if I am underrating 3B in general. I'll have to look into it a bit more later."

With Darrell Evans way down at 23rd, I'm going to say YES. There's not much later left.

Thanks for calling me out, DL. I've had that quote for a while. Re-evaluating my 3B as compared to the rest of the positions will be my project for the 2004 election.
   20. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 13, 2007 at 06:50 PM (#2483528)
Was there better in '84-'85?

For some reason, my notation about '84 was omitted when I posted it. I'll correct it in a moment.

As for '85, I have Herr as the best, though that's arguable.
   21. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 13, 2007 at 06:55 PM (#2483536)
Quick draw!
You hover watchfully, JTM.

Nah, just caught me at the right time, Paul. :-)
   22. sunnyday2 Posted: August 13, 2007 at 07:01 PM (#2483541)
Paul, glad you liked it ;-)

>and only a few others are hard to swallow but it can be done: Puckett, Dawson, Doyle, Rizzuto

All MVPs except Puckett who happened to have his best year when Jose Canseco was doing his Reggie Jackson impression or maybe it was Duke Snider.

rawagman, don't overlook Ed Williamson. Of course, I now lump him with modern 2Bs. If you think of him in those terms he was an outstanding hitter even after you disregard his 27 HR yet he was a defense-first 3B and is a defense-first candidate. Ryne Sandberg is a heck of a comp, actually, or maybe Joe Gordon. As much as I love Pete Browning and Charley Jones, I woulda wanted Ed Williamson on my team first.
   23. Sean Gilman Posted: August 13, 2007 at 08:16 PM (#2483616)

1. Eddie Murray (-)--He’s good.

2. Ryne Sandberg (-)--Him too. Murray’s got a career edge, just enough to overcome Sandberg’s better peak and position.

3. Pete Browning (3)--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 the Negro Leaguers, the league translations inordinately underrate his peak. Besides, it isn’t like the AA wasn’t a major league. A better gladiator than Russell Crowe. (1927)

4. Charley Jones (4)--Jones, Shoeless Joe Jackson and Browning look pretty interchangeable to me. (1929)

5. Tommy Leach (5)--May be the most underrated candidate out there. Great career value, fine peak and played two premium defensive positions. (1942)

6. John McGraw (6)--He’s got the best non-Browning peak of the backlog, but still a shortage of career value. (1997)

7. Andre Dawson (7)--Peak’s not quite as good as the backloggers ahead of him, but it was very good and he’s got more career value as the outfielders below.

8. Larry Doyle (8)--Another underrated infielder. Sisler-esque peak , according to win shares.(1945)

9. Hugh Duffy (9)--High peak, medium length career, the best of a massive group of borderline OF candidates. (1964)

10. George Van Haltren (10)--Almost a HOMer not too long ago, will he make it eventually? (1966)

11. Alejandro Oms (12)--Another good, yet underrated, all-around outfielder. (1986)

12. Dale Murphy (13)--A great prime with a decent career value despite the decline phase. Fits in well with these broderline outfielders. (2000)

13. Ken Singleton (14)--Ridiculously comparable to Wynn. (1991)

14. Bobby Bonds (15)--Fine all-around outfielder, with a good mix of peak and career, like many other outfielders in this section of the ballot. (1995)

(Darrell Evans)
(Billy Pierce)
(Nellie Fox)
(Quincey Trouppe)

15. Luis Tiant (16)--Not quite Steib’s peak, but a bit more career sneaks him on to the ballot.

16. Graig Nettles (17)
(Willie Randolph)
(Rollie Fingers)
17. Dave Parker (18)
18. Sal Bando (19)
19. Wally Berger (20)
20. Carl Mays (21)
21. Mike Tiernan (22)
22. Cesar Cedeno (23)
23. George Foster (24)
24. Dick Redding (25)
25. Dave Concepcion (26)
26. Ed Williamson (27)
(Dobie Moore)
27. Tony Perez (28)
28. Rusty Staub (29)
29. Lee Smith (-)
30. Vada Pinson (30)
31. Dan Quisenberry (31)
32. Ron Cey (32)
33. Kirby Puckett (33)
34. Norm Cash (34)
35. Rick Reuschel (35)
36. Bruce Sutter (36)
37. Don Mattingly (37)
38. Frank Howard (38)
39. Brett Butler (-)
40. Bobby Murcer (39)
41. Orlando Cepeda (40)
(Red Faber)
42. Buddy Bell (41)
43. Bucky Walters (42)
44. Vern Stephens (43)
45. Roger Bresnahan (44)
46. Andy Van Slyke (45)
47. Lou Brock (46)
48. Dave Bancroft (47)
49. Jimmy Ryan (48)
50. Rabbit Maranville (49)
   24. sunnyday2 Posted: August 13, 2007 at 08:40 PM (#2483633)
Sean, as a FO19C, you might want to take another look at Big Ed! OPS+ 112 and an A glove. Compare:

Ryne Sandberg 113 B+
Lou Whitaker 117 B-
Willie Randolph 105 B+
Joe Gordon 121 A
Bobby Doerr 114 A
Roberto Alomar 117 B+

Bobby Grich 125 A--ok, Grich was better, the rest are all reasonable comps IMO, even Sandberg, in fact, since Ed hit with a little power (not just one year), Sandberg is probably the best comp of all.

And just in case anybody hasn't heard the story. Those 27 HR were dumped into a short LF porch in 1884. For the rest of Ed's career in Chicago those were ground rule doubles and indeed he led the league in 2B in 1882 with 49 and hit more than 20 2B another 4 years between 1879-1888 when he was the regular 3B in Chi-town. So if you want to downgrade those HR in 1884 to 2B, that would be fair. If you want to downgrade them to fly ball outs, then that would only be fair if you were willing to do the same for the following (all of whom were among the top 5 in 2B in the NL):

1879-Abner Dalyrympe--25 2B-2T
1880--Dalyrmple 25 2T, Anson 24 3rd, Gore 23 4th
1881--Kelly 27 1T
1882--Kelly 37 1st, Anson 29 2nd, Williamson 27 4T
1883--Williamson 49 1st and league record at the time (until 1894), Oyster Burns 37 3rd, Anson 36 4th
1884--Anson 30 3rd
1885--Anson 35 1st, Dalrymple 27 4th
1886--Anson 35 2nd, Kelly 32 3rd
1887--Anson 33 4th
1888--Ryan 33 1st

And 1884 Home Runs Williamson 27 1st and league record til 1923, Pfeffer 25 2nd, Dalrymple 22 3rd, Anson 21 4th

So that's a lot of discounting if you want to be fair and apply it to everybody, not just Big Ed.
   25. Sean Gilman Posted: August 13, 2007 at 08:48 PM (#2483643)
I like (N)ed. At 26 I've got him a lot higher than most voters, I suspect. He's been on the edge of making my PHOM for 100 years now.
   26. favre Posted: August 14, 2007 at 12:06 AM (#2483817)
1. Eddie Murray
2. Charley Jones
3. Vic Willis

Murray’s twelve seasons with an OPS+ above 130 gives him the top spot.

There is a group of sluggers in the backlog who have roughly the same resume: about 300 career WS (with credits and adjustments); a career OPS+ 150 or thereabouts, with a high somewhere in the 170s; eight or nine prime years (with various war/minor league credits); not a lot of defensive value. This group includes Gavvy Cravath, Frank Howard, Pete Browning (with AA adjustments), Mike Tiernan; Sam Thompson and Charlie Keller, already in the HoM, also fits in this group. All these guys have an argument for induction, but I think Jones is a cut above. He also had a high peak, but a longer prime (with blacklisted credit) and better defense than the other players in this group. Although I don’t give credit for any seasons before 1876, I do suspect that his late arrival in organized baseball was due to geographical factors.

Vic Willis pitched 4000 IP with an ERA+ of 118 (and seasons of 167, 155, and 154). That’s comparable to Faber (4086/119) and Lyons (4161/118), and a whole lot better than Ruffing (4344/109).

4. Kirby Puckett
5. Ryne Sandberg

I had Puckett over Trammell on the last ballot; I would have Trammell over Sandberg, so Puckett finishes above him as well. Same reasoning applies—similar hitters in their primes, Sandberg had more defensive value, but Puckett had more good seasons.

6. Roger Bresnahan
7. Roger Clarkson

We have a twenty year gap at catcher from 1891-1911. I understand the arguments against filling slots, but in this case I tend to think we have underestimated how difficult the position was at the turn of the 20th Century. Bresnahan was in the top six in OPB seven times from 1903-1914; he did equally well in another five seasons, but didn’t have the PA’s to qualify for the title. That’s a darned impressive run for a catcher.

I’m using Dr. C’s original MLE’s for Clarkson rather than the upgrades, but even those show that Clarkson was the best third basemen of the early 1940s, and arguably the best shortstop.

8. Tommy Leach
9. Gavvy Cravath

Cravath averaged a 161 OPS+ from ages 32-36, and the data from the minor leagues suggests that was not a fluke. Tommy Leach, an old favourite of mine, has 324 career WS, played great defence at two key positions, and could hit a little.

10. Dale Murphy
11. Ken Singleton
12. Larry Doyle

I’m a little surprised by the lack of love for Murphy, at least by peak voters. From ’82-85, he averaged a 148 OPS+ as a CF; I don’t have my book with me, but I think WS gives him a couple of Gold Gloves during that time frame. Had another big year as a RF in ’87. That’s not an astronomical peak by any means, but it’s still pretty good.

We don’t have a lot of 1970s OFr’s: only Stargell, Yaz, Reggie, Wynn, Winfield, and Dewey so far (and Dewey wasn’t all that good during the 70s). Singleton’s nine appearances in the OBP-top ten gets him a ballot spot. Larry Doyle has been in my top twenty-five or so for decades; there’s just not a lot of second basemen out there with a career 126 OPS+.

13. Bucky Walters
14. Tony Perez
15. Eddie Ciccotte

While I recognize that Walters’ 1939-’42 peak was helped by outstanding defenses behind him, he also pitched well during and immediately after the war, when his outstanding defences were either in the service or growing old. Drops a bit as I re-evaluate pitchers. Perez has the long prime that I tend to favour.

I’m not overjoyed about having Ciccotte on my ballot, but had three huge seasons which makes him stand out among other eligible pitchers. Perez has the long prime that I tend to favour.

16. Bob Elliott
17. Frank Howard
18. Wally Schang
19. Rusty Staub
20. Andre Dawson

Not in my top fifteen:

Pete Browning Brent/Daryn’s AA projections show he wasn’t a historic hitter, and he also had some playing time issues. Basically confirms what I’ve believed for a while: excellent hitter, mediocre defence, injury problems, same resume’ as a number of other OFers.

Dick Redding. Has been compared to Orel Hershiser. Seems apt: had a couple of big years which gives him an argument, but not quite enough for induction.

Bob Johnson Currently at # 21 If we’re talking about long prime candidates, I can’t see putting him ahead of Singleton (who was better at getting on base, and compares more favourably to his OF contemporaries) or Perez (with his time at 3B).

Andre Dawson IMO, Dale Murphy was better in his prime as a CF, 1980-85, than Dawson’s prime as a CF, 1977-83; Murphy’s best season as a RF (’87) also better than Dawson’s best as a RF(’88), although Dawson obviously had more good seasons in the corner. I can see why career voters like the Hawk, but I prefer Murphy.
   27. Mark Donelson Posted: August 14, 2007 at 12:16 AM (#2483826)
I’m a peak voter, though an amazing prime or really strong career will overwhelm my peak preferences in my (revamped) system. I rely heavily on WS for hitters, with OPS+ and a little WARP thrown in as well. For starting pitchers, I prefer PRAA, with some ERA+ adjustments and a little WS (which I don’t love for pitchers) for good measure. For relievers, I’ve adopted a mix of career total PRAA and year-by-year peak PRAA, with an emphasis on the latter, which seems to produce the most sensible results I can come up with.

I tweaked my relief-pitcher evaluation a bit with the arrival of Lee Smith, but mostly it just shook things up around the bottom of my top 50. Some other tweaks higher up as well, mostly aimed at continuing to adjust my underrating of defense.

pHOM: Sandberg, Murray, Darrell Evans.

2002 ballot:

1. Ryne Sandberg (pHOM 2003). A great hitter and a very good defender at a thin position. He ends up sixth all-time for me among the old-3B/new-2B folks, after Hornsby, Morgan, Robinson, Baker, and Gehringer. That’s not inner-circle, but it’s perhaps the next tier for me.

2. Eddie Murray (pHOM 2003). What’s amazing isn’t that I have Sandberg first—I am a peak voter, after all—it’s that Murray’s career is so overwhelmingly awesome that he ends up tantalizingly close to overtaking Sandberg in my system. Then again, Murray was a pretty rare career candidate: Yes, he may never have been the best hitter around in any given year (he also may have been once or twice, I concede), but he was among the best hitters every year for an absurdly long time. He’s just as easy a choice as Sandberg.

3. Dizzy Dean (pHOM 1967). Sure, it’s a really short peak, but he was inarguably dominant during it. It’s just long enough (and high enough for that brief period) for me.

4. Ed Williamson (pHOM 1931). A lost cause, but still the best of the backlog 3Bs, for my taste. As Sunny always points out, great peak on both offense and defense. He’s the one old-timer on my ballot who never seems to give ground, regardless of how I tweak my system.

5. Elston Howard (pHOM 1976). The various extenuating circumstances of his career can’t hide the great (if short) peak. I still prefer him slightly to Bresnahan, though I admit there’s a certain amount of “what if?” going on there. I don't think that's unwarranted in his case, though (I don't see it as much with Newcombe, since the latter doesn't have the demonstrated sick MLB peak Howard does).

6. Vic Willis (pHOM 1961). Not the most dominant pitcher of his era, perhaps, but then again, he was in the mix with some of the all-time greats. And his peak was very strong.

7. Pete Browning (pHOM 1979). An offensive force, if not as much of one as the insane AA numbers make it appear. Despite all the back-and-forth recently, I’m still convinced that he dominated his weak leagues by such a huge margin that he clearly belongs, and I don’t think his great non-AA season was a fluke.

8. Gavvy Cravath (pHOM 1985). Yes, I know he dominated partially because of his stadium, but I can’t see why I should penalize him for that. With minor-league credit—which I think he deserves—he’s a pretty easy choice for me.

9. Luis Tiant (pHOM 1991). No, he wasn't Carlton/Niekro/Perry/Jenkins—too inconsistent, not good enough long enough—but he packed enough brilliance into several years to get my vote.

10. Roger Bresnahan (pHOM 1973). The stats on how many games catchers of his time usually played convinced me to elevate him; since I always liked him, that gets him on ballot for the first time in a while. Clearly a force of a player, and if I don’t need to dock him for not playing enough at C, he’s even more clearly worthy.

11. Charley Jones (pHOM 1976). As with Browning, his numbers are covered in the AA mist, but I’m convinced he played at a high enough level long enough for induction—at his best, he was pretty clearly a force.

12. Al Rosen (pHOM 1968). Another very short peak, but five great years, especially at this position, are enough for me.

13. Ken Singleton (pHOM 1997). Another of the “I had no idea he was this good at the time” gang—I think he was the player most felt Rice was back then. In my system, on offense alone, he matches up well with Clemente and is better than Stargell.

14. Hugh Duffy (pHOM 1930). Finally makes his way back to the ballot after a demotion some years ago. I still like his peak a lot—just not as much as I used to. The defense doesn’t hurt, either.

15. John McGraw (pHOM 1996). Another tiny peak, but it seems good enough to outstrip the recent 3B glut to me (and at this position, it’s not like the years outside the peak are useless).
   28. Mark Donelson Posted: August 14, 2007 at 12:17 AM (#2483827)
16-20: Pesky (1997), Doyle (1995), Redding (1975), Trout (1997), Oms (1996)
21-25: [Da. Evans (2003)], Cicotte (1972), Rizzuto, [Stieb], F. Howard, Leach, [Ashburn], [Whitaker], Walters (1968)
26-30: Nettles, [Dw. Evans], G. Burns, Bando, McCormick, Clarkson
31-35: Puckett, Parker, [Boyer], H. Smith, Berger, Gomez (1987)
36-40: Dawson, Hiller, Dunlap, D. Murphy, Cepeda
41-45: Viola, Avila, L. Smith, [Doerr], Elliott, Mattingly
46-50: Shocker, Sutter, P. Guerrero, Munson, Stephens

Required Explanations and Newbies:

•Johnson. Right in the heart of the Hall of Very Good, and certainly underrated historically, but nowhere close to my ballot—nowhere near enough peak or prime.

•Dawson. An awful lot like a bunch of other borderline outfielders from this era, and I don’t seem much reason to elevate him above the likes of Parker and Murphy. He’s at #36.

•Redding. He remains right at the cusp of my ballot, where he’s been for a while. I like him, and he’s in my pHOM, but there are still a bunch of other lost-cause pitchers I like better.

•Perez. I’m not a fan—the years at 3B are nice, but it’s just not enough of a peak for a guy who mostly played 1B. He’s not in my top 50.

•Lee Smith. Count me among those who were surprised at how good he was—I, too, had forgotten (or never fully known about) those years with the Cubs. I like him better than Sutter, and better than almost all the relievers we’ve seen so far (only Hiller does better in my system, among the unelected eligible relievers). But there’s still a huge gap between him and Fingers/Gossage/Wilhelm, and I don’t see him as HOM-worthy, quite. He debuts at #43.

•Brett Butler was also better than I realized at the time, but that’s nowhere close to electability; he’s not in my top 50.

•Valenzuela’s peak is too short and not high enough to catch my eye. He is pretty close to Catfish Hunter overall in my system, but that’s not exactly an endorsement.
   29. Paul Wendt Posted: August 14, 2007 at 12:33 AM (#2483841)
Yes, Sandberg may be the best comp for Ed Williamson.

By baseball-reference implementation, Sandberg and Williamson have OPS+ 114 and 113.

Sandberg opens with almost ~1400 PA at OPS+ ~85 (before 1984) and closes with ~1350 PA at OPS+ ~89 (after the comeback). In the meantime he has ten seasons and ~6500 PA at . . . about OPS+ 127. Ten full seasons is a prime and that's a great one.

Ed Willliamson, too, has ten prime seasons at a high level with "ends" at a much lower level --one and two years on the calendar, where Sandberg has three and three years. Lop of the ends and he has ten seasons at about OPS+ 120. That should be adjusted upward because the schedule almost doubles in length as he declines, but his net decline is modest, I think.

Gordon also has ten years, including two missed seasons, at a high level. With 1-yr and 2-yr "ends" at a lower level, although above league-average (OPS+).

The other players listed all have at least a few more than ten full seasons. To focus on Alomar's 10-year/season prime is to drop four very full seasons, about 2800 PA at OPS+ 105, from front end and half that at a much lower level from the back end.
   30. Willie Mays Hayes Posted: August 14, 2007 at 12:34 AM (#2483842)
2003 Ballot

1. Pete Browning - Yes, I firmly believe he is the best player on this "year"'s ballot. His peak, to me, was more valuable than Murray's career. I see Murray as a rich man's Beckley, and I find that to be worth a bit less than the monstrous peak of Browning.
2. Eddie Murray - Still a fine player. Very consistent, missing that one or two huge seasons.
3. Hugh Duffy - Great bat, great glove, great intangibles.
4. Ryne Sandberg - Don't love him like some do. Sure, he's HOM-worthy, but #1 on the ballot? I'm not seeing it. Grich was better, and Whitaker was close.
5. Ken Singleton - Reading some of the discussion of Browning led me to take a closer look at Kenny. Wow, was he good at everything!
6. Thurman Munson - I'm sold that he was very similar to Freehan. Thurm is starting to get the support he deserves. Take another look, if you haven't lately.
7. Buddy Bell - He's very close to Darrell Evans in my system, just a bit better than Nettles.
8. Graig Nettles - WARP likes him, and so do I. A poor man's Brooks Robinson.
9. Alejandro Oms - I was missing a lot on him for a while. Nice player. A much better candidate than Dawson.
10. Charley Jones - Took another look at Charley this year. I don't give Blacklist credit, because I think it was partly his fault, but still a hell of a peak.
11. Rusty Staub - A mix of peak/prime career. I like him better than Beckley, but not near as much as Duffy/Browning.
12. Tommy Leach - Wow did I miss him for a while. Love the WARP, the career, just not the peak, though it was OK.
13. Don Mattingly - Clark, Murphy, and Donnie Baseball are essentially tied in my system. Excellent defender, great 3 year peak.
14. Gavvy Cravath - Looking at Jones again, led me to look at Gavvy again. He has the peak to make a case as aHOM'er to me, and so he's here.
15. Jack Clark - What a hitter! Not much defense to speak of, other than a strong arm - but tremendous with the bat.

Required Disclosures:
Roger Bresnahan - Not a fan. Don't like the durability issues, peak isn't huge, and spent a ton of time in the outfield.
Bob Johnson - Down near 50 - just not enough peak or prime - kind of Beckley-lite in that regard.
Andre Dawson - Made too many outs. I much prefer Dale Murphy.
Cannonball Dick Redding - Moves up on looking closer at him vs. Walters (who fell to 21 this "year"), but still not there. The 1920's really hurt his case.
Tony Perez - Definitely not a fan of Tony. Didn't hit when he played 1B, Didn't field at 3B. Off the top of my head I can think of 5 guys not in the HOM at each position I'd rather have.
Brett Butler - Good, but down near Bob Johnson.
Lee Smith - We really want to elect Lee Smith? I never though Lee Smith was a dominant reliever. A good one, sure, but dominant? This isn't Goose Gossage's innings, or Fingers' leverage. This is Lee Smith.
   31. Chris Cobb Posted: August 14, 2007 at 02:06 AM (#2483938)
Melky wrote:

Pete Browning - Yes, I firmly believe he is the best player on this "year"'s ballot. His peak, to me, was more valuable than Murray's career. I see Murray as a rich man's Beckley, and I find that to be worth a bit less than the monstrous peak of Browning.

This is an incredible claim. By WARP2, Browning created, over his 10 year peak, 1882-92, less his off year in 1888, 63.95 BRAR2/400 outs. Eddie Murray, during his 10-year peak from 1978-88, less his off year in 1987, created 63.50 BRAR2/400 outs. In context, Browning was a very slightly better hitter than Murray. Murray was quite a bit more durable during the peak 10 years, of course. And then there is the rest of his career. Only if one sees Beckley as karlmagnus sees him is there any reason to call Murray "A rich man's Beckley." Beckley finished in the top 10 in his league in OPS+ 4 times in his career. His placements were 3, 5, 6, and 10. Murray finished in the top 10 in his league in OPS+ 9 times. His placements were 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 5, 8, 7, 10. Just like Beckley . . . except for those four years when he was the #2 hitter in his league!

Browning's peak only looks monstrous because he was playing in the weakest major league of all time. It's still a strong batting peak, the best on the board (barely), but no more than that.

Murray's peak only looks Beckleyesque because he was playing in one of the strongest major leagues of all time, with the DH to boot. It's not one of the best peaks of all time, but it is nearly the best on the board, and Murray has considerable value outside his peak, though only one more great season.

I can't see how a ranking of Browning ahead of Murray could be justified with evidence.
   32. Spencer Benedict Posted: August 14, 2007 at 03:28 AM (#2484016)
Reach for the smelling salts, Johnny M., I am posting early.

1. Ryne Sandberg: Great all around player. Top five at his position. I can’t hold the paucity of declining years against hime.

2. Eddie Murray: As someone else wrote, A Lock. Produced first rate season like carter produced pills.

3. Tony Oliva: His face was on an awful lot of those league leader cards when i was a kid. Pretty much at or near the top of the league for eight years and at or near the top of my backlog for much longer.

4. Lou Brock: The SB’s had a lot of value during his era. To paraphrase BJ, a player of the type of which I am not enamored, but the very best player of that type. 3000 hits

5. Orlando Cepeda: Had one foot in the door before he was 26. He won an MVP after that.

6. Dizzy Dean: Had a few more top flight years than McLain but not as many as Koufax. 2.60 MVP shares.

7. Indian Bob Johnson: Pumped out those .295/.380/.500 seasons.

8. Hugh Duffy: Led the league in a number of offensive categories.

9. Luis Tiant: Two-time ERA+ leader and four-time twenty game winner. Irregular career pattern hurts him, but not with me.

10. Carl Mays: 81 games over .500 and a career 119 ERA+. B-R says he is the cousin of Joe Mays.

11. Chuck Klein: His “Most Similar by Age” comps are staggering. Even discounting for the ballpark, it’s a pretty good recommendation for inclusion here.

12. Andre Dawson: I was hasty ignoring him last time. Very fine early career and then some Wrigley inflation (for you younger viewers, Wrigley was once a preeminent hitters park). SB’s are a plus. OBP is a minus.

13. Left Gomez: 125 career ERA+, 87 games over .500, consistent all-star.

14. Burleigh Grimes: I know its situation dependent, but the five 20 win seasons have to count for something.

15. Pete Browning: The original masher – consistently near the lower end or just off my ballot.

The most comparable player to Tony Perez on B-R is Harold Baines. That just about sums it up. I would like more playing time than that offered by Bresnahan or Charley Jones. I may be slighting Redding, but from what I know he wasn’t very peaky and there are a number of hurlers like that who are not on my ballot.
   33. OCF Posted: August 14, 2007 at 05:43 AM (#2484066)
2003 Ballot.

1. Eddie Murray (new) I have a colleague who's an Oriole fan. I ask him why the press turned against Murray and he doesn't understand it either. Not a peak candidate, but a good prime, and a very strong career candidate. It's just that he never put together a couple of "Wow" years to top it all off. His perfect foil - much higher peak, much less career - would be Will Clark.
2. Ryne Sandberg (new) Bears several markers for being overrated: strong hitters park, low-OBP power hitter. I'm not really convinced he was better than Whitaker - but I did vote for Whitaker. Putting Sandberg here is being consistent with that earlier vote.
3. Larry Doyle (3, 5, 3, 3, 4) A better hitter than Sandberg.
4. George Van Haltren (4, 7, 5, 5, 5) He did accomplish quite a bit in his career. Has now been on my ballot for nearly 100 years. Sam Thompson has what could have been his spot in the HoM.
5. Tommy Bridges (7, 8, 6, 6, 6) RA+ PythPat 190-124. Walters had a higher peak, but Bridges was a terrific pitcher.
6. Bucky Walters (8, 9, 7, 7, 7) Offense-adjusted RA+ PythPat 197-148. More peak than Bridges, but the one thing RA+ doesn't account for directly is defensive support and he seems to have had plenty of that - so I knocked him down a couple of notches.
7. Orlando Cepeda (9, 10, 8, 8, 8) The Baby Bull. Cha-Cha. There are plenty of places to find fault: indifference to defense, selfishness about his role with the Giants, injury history, early decline. But the early decline sticks out because the start was so good. And his NL was a strong league.
8. Norm Cash (10, 11, 9, 9, 9) One year does not make a peak (or a prime). But oh, what a year. Actually, he's on my ballot as a career candidate, although missing games in each year whittles away at his career value.
9. Sal Bando (14, 14, 12, 12, 10) A hair ahead of Bob Elliott.
10. Bob Elliott (15, 15, 13, 13, 11) Now that Paul called attention to it, the Dixie Walker reference was getting a little dated. Roughly the value of Al Oliver or Brian Downing as a hitter, plus 1300+ games of pretty good 3B.
11. Lou Brock (13, 13, 11, 11, 12) Low-peak, career-value candidate, severely underrated by OPS+, but of little defensive value.
12. Tony Perez (16, 16, 15, 14, 13) A little less a hitter (mostly that's a about prime-shoulder seasons) than Staub, did play a fair amount of 3B.
13. Rusty Staub (17, 17, 16, 15, 14) Reggie Smith plus some hang-around time.
14. Luis Tiant (18, 18, 17, 16, 15) RA+ equivalent 224-164. A 60's pitcher who re-invented himself as a 70's pitcher. A major participant in the 1968 "year of the pitcher" festivities. But it's the 70's career that has more value.
15. Reggie Smith (19, 19, 18, 17, 16) A very, very good player who always seemed to wind up on winning teams.
16. Ken Singleton (24, 20, 19, 18, 17) A much better candidate than contemporary opinion would have made him. Earl Weaver's kind of hitter. But we can't let our enthusiasm for another unrecognized ballplayer overcome the fact that he's just another "bat," another corner outfielder of limited defensive value. Compared to Reggie Smith, he's got the better peak but less career - and I am more of a career voter.
17. Tommy John (21, 21, 20, 19, 18) RA+ Pythpat record of 281-244 with no big years. Compare to Tiant: the difference of 57-80 is pretty much a wash, and Tiant had some big years.
18. Darrell Porter (22, 22, 21, 20, 19) Better than Munson. Nearly as good a hitter, in context, as Lombardi.
19. Jack Clark (5, 23, 22, 21, 20) I overdid his case in his first year.
20. Graig Nettles (23, 24, 23, 22, 21) Interesting candidate, but not enough of a hitter for me to put him with Bando and Elliott.
21. Ron Cey (25, 25, 24, 23, 22) The best of that Dodger infield, although Lopes was also awfully good. Doesn't match Elliot and Bando as a hitter, so I'll slot him in behind them.
22. Frank Howard (11, 26, 25, 24, 23) Finally came to grips with his lack of defense and comparison to the likes of Singleton and Clark - and he drops in my ratings.
23. Gene Tenace (27, 28, 26, 25, 24) Only half a catcher, but a better hitter than our other half-catchers (Bresnahan, Schang)
24. Dick Redding (28, 29, 27, 26, 25)
25. Luis Aparicio (29, 30, 28, 27, 26) More games at SS than anyone else, 500 SB with a good percentage.
26. Bobby Bonds (30, -, 29, 28, 27)
27. Hugh Duffy (--, 30, 29, 28) OK, but I'd rather have Van Haltren.
28. Kirby Puckett (---, 30, 29) Racking my brain for good reasons to put him ahead of Lynn, Butler or Cedeno - I suppose he has a consistency and in-season durability advantage.
29. Frank Chance (returning)
30. Johnny Evers (----, 30) I abandoned his case long ago, but he keeps gnawing at me.

Pete Browning: I did vote for him from 1904 through 1916. We had a lot fewer viable candidates then.

C. Jones: I've never voted for him, and am not persuaded to start.

Bob Johnson: probably ranks about 35th. I'm more inclined to go for 1960's-1970's corner outfielders.

Roger Bresnahan: half a catcher, hit well as an outfielder. I could go either way between him and Chance.

Andre Dawson: Got Melky? said this: "He made too many outs. I can't get around this fact no matter how hard I try." Basically, that's where I stand, too.

Brett Butler: not that different from Puckett in value. Probably one of the top 20 or so pure leadoff hitters in baseball history - but ultimately, lack of power limits even a leadoff hitter.

Lee Smith: my first instinct is that it's just too difficult to accumulate enough value as a relief pitcher. But that's the one placement I'm not yet completely comfortable with. I'm going to go ahead and cast this ballot, but Smith's true placement for me is still a bit hazy.
   34. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: August 14, 2007 at 07:57 AM (#2484115)
Chris Cobb--well, that's using BP's league difficulty adjustments, which not all of us are convinced by. I think that after adjusting for league strength (relative to the standards of the time), Browning was a far superior hitter to Murray on a peak/prime basis. (Nonetheless, I think Murray is more Meritorious overall).
   35. TomH Posted: August 14, 2007 at 11:38 AM (#2484130)
Yes, Sandberg may be the best comp for Ed Williamson.

maybe superficially, but in reality, hogwash. Maybe Paul only meant superficially, so I'm not intending to bang his writing, but...

Sandberg came back from retirement and put up some lousy numbers, lowering his career OPS+. Take this away (and his career would still be as long as Ed's) and he's a cut above. Williamson had TWO seasons as a top 10 OPS+ hitter; one of them was 1879 (kind of a small league, wouldn't we agree), the other was the short-porch-induced 1884. Even if you're not a timeliner, being an all-star in a 26-team integrated MLB is a lot different than being an all-star in an 8-team MLB era.

A good comp for Ed is Davey Johnson, a slick-fielding 2Bman with a 111 OPS+ and one fine year of 43 dingers.
   36. Willie Mays Hayes Posted: August 14, 2007 at 01:07 PM (#2484159)
Chris Cobb:

Ten years is a peak?!?!?!?! What happened to 3 or 5 years? 10 years is long for a prime!

And what Dan R said - I'm not totally sold on the BP league adjustments, and there is no questioning that Pete was a far better hitter at his peak than Murray, relative to the composite numbers put up by the league. Since both played "bat" positions, the defensive difference is negligible IMO in terms of their overall merit. Murray gets dinged for not having the "Wow" years I expect out of a first baseman, plain and simple.
   37. DL from MN Posted: August 14, 2007 at 01:34 PM (#2484176)
"Beckley finished in the top 10 in his league in OPS+ 4 times in his career. His placements were 3, 5, 6, and 10. Murray finished in the top 10 in his league in OPS+ 9 times. His placements were 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 5, 8, 7, 10. Just like Beckley . . . except for those four years when he was the #2 hitter in his league!"

Add to that Beckley's league had 8-12 teams and Murray's had 14 teams. A top 10 in Murray's league is equivalent to a top 7 in Beckley's.
   38. Chris Cobb Posted: August 14, 2007 at 02:32 PM (#2484226)
Got Melky?, here's a quick response:

Here's the relevance of an examination of 10 years of performance relative to your claim about peak: You said Browning's peak is more valuable than Murray's career. I have pointed out in reponse that Murray's prime has more value than Browning's career, peak and all. You say you are not "totally sold" on BP's league quality adjustments. It seems from your conclusions that that means you ignore them all together. What some consideration of issues of league quality should suggest (and I think the position Dan R takes in post 34 abovve is a defensible one) is that the difference in league quality means that the difference between Murray's and Browning's peaks is _much_ less than the raw numbers suggest. Murray's prime and career advantages are so much greater that it is hard to see how any view of Browning that makes an attempt to adjust for context could find him to be superior in merit. "Wow" years seems to me a shaky criterion for merit.
   39. Mark Shirk (jsch) Posted: August 14, 2007 at 04:47 PM (#2484390)
It should also be noted that WARP2 does not do schedule adjustments, right? I thought hat WARP 2 is just the league strength adjustment while WARP 3 does league strength and schedule adjustments. So of course Murray would look better in WARP2 since he would both get the favorable league strength adjustment without Browning getting the schedule length adjustment.

All of this said, I agree that Murray was better than Browning and they will be about 6-7 slots apart on my ballot.
   40. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 14, 2007 at 06:00 PM (#2484493)
Reach for the smelling salts, Johnny M., I am posting early.


You're paying for the bump on my noggin when I passed out, Tom.

   41. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 14, 2007 at 06:02 PM (#2484494)
All of this said, I agree that Murray was better than Browning and they will be about 6-7 slots apart on my ballot.

I have them only slightly father apart on my ballot.

A good comp for Ed is Davey Johnson, a slick-fielding 2Bman with a 111 OPS+ and one fine year of 43 dingers.

Hmmm...I like Williamson much better than Johnson. Maybe he's somewhere between Ryno and Davey.
   42. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 14, 2007 at 06:05 PM (#2484500)
BTW, I noticed that karlmagnus hasn't come to defend Beckley yet. I guess it doesn't matter to him anymore since Eagle Eye's plaque is proudly displayed in the plaque room. Nobody can take that away from him. :-D
   43. Willie Mays Hayes Posted: August 14, 2007 at 06:17 PM (#2484508)
Murray's prime and career advantages are so much greater that it is hard to see how any view of Browning that makes an attempt to adjust for context could find him to be superior in merit. "Wow" years seems to me a shaky criterion for merit.

"Wow" years indicate domination of a player's particular league. Browning has this in his portfolio, Murray does not. For a peak-centric voter, that matters. Murray and Browning are nearly equal in prime, and the career advantage for Murray is due to his longevity. I'm not interested in giving a player longevity credit when comparing him to a player 90 years his senior. What about durability, you may ask? First basemen should be able to stay relatively healthy. It is not a difficult position to play when you're a bit dinged up. The outfield, on the other hand, typicall requires two working arms and legs.

I knew when I formulated my ballot that my position would be controversial. My personal intuition as to what "merit" is indicates Browning had more of it than Murray. Both are very much HOM-worthy, I just consider Browning to be slightly moreso, due to his dominant seasons. The gap between Browning and Singleton on my ballot is about 15 times narrower than from Singleton to Clark. There's a huge dropoff in merit after Singleton, in my opinion.
   44. Paul Wendt Posted: August 14, 2007 at 06:18 PM (#2484509)
2. Ryne Sandberg (new) Bears several markers for being overrated: strong hitters park, low-OBP power hitter. I'm not really convinced he was better than Whitaker - but I did vote for Whitaker. Putting Sandberg here is being consistent with that earlier vote.
. . .
Pete Browning: I did vote for him from 1904 through 1916. We had a lot fewer viable candidates then.

C. Jones: I've never voted for him, and am not persuaded to start.

I think OCF (and everyone) uses "vote for" to mean the entire ballot, 1st to 15th places. Am I right?

Indeed, a candidate who polls 6 points per ballot --equivalent to 15th place on every ballot-- will be elected in time if not promptly, so a 15th place vote for a newcomer may reasonably be interpreted as a vote to induct.

Furthermore, everyone who maintains a Personal HOM must have PHOMers below 15th place by now.

On the other hand, that comment by OCF on Sandberg would be just as true, and more meaningful, with a verb for listing a candidate in one of the three "elect me" places. What do you think of capitalization?

2. Ryne Sandberg [. . . revised by capitalization] I'm not really convinced he was better than Whitaker - but I did Vote for Whitaker. Putting Sandberg here is being consistent with that earlier Vote.
   45. sunnyday2 Posted: August 14, 2007 at 06:26 PM (#2484518)
>Eagle Eye's plaque is proudly displayed in the plaque room

Well, it's displayed in the plaque room....

(Maybe that will do it.)
   46. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 14, 2007 at 06:44 PM (#2484537)
Well, it's displayed in the plaque room....

(Maybe that will do it.)

   47. DanG Posted: August 14, 2007 at 06:55 PM (#2484549)
Murray's prime and career advantages are so much greater that it is hard to see how any view of Browning that makes an attempt to adjust for context could find him to be superior in merit. "Wow" years seems to me a shaky criterion for merit.

Chris, I recently explained it like this:

I checked and you're right: the Constitution allows for assignment of merit that is not value based. OK, I should've realized that when designing the system, because it was inevitable that we would reach a point where we would have wide disagreement over players' rankings.

In a way, that makes ranking guys a whole lot easier, because "merit" can mean just about anything, as long as it's within the bounds of the Constitution. Nobody can really dispute anybody else's system, it's all in how an individual decides to define "merit".

IOW, the fine distinctions we are called upon to make are based upon "My personal intuition as to what "merit" is", got it? Or as Bill James would term it, the "BS dump".
   48. Paul Wendt Posted: August 14, 2007 at 07:20 PM (#2484586)
TomH #35 quoting me #29 responding to Marc sunnyday2 #24
> Yes, Sandberg may be the best comp for Ed Williamson.

maybe superficially, but in reality, hogwash. Maybe Paul only meant superficially, so I'm not intending to bang his writing, but...

I did mean genuinely the best comp, but I did mean, too, best among the six modern 2Bmen Marc S listed as comparable, which I should have quoted.

Ryne Sandberg 113 B+
Lou Whitaker 117 B-
Willie Randolph 105 B+
Joe Gordon 121 A
Bobby Doerr 114 A
Roberto Alomar 117 B+

(There were some intervening articles not because I spent ~4:30-8:30 on the research but because I commonly download a Hall of Merit thread or three when I disconnect from the 'net.)

Sandberg came back from retirement and put up some lousy numbers, lowering his career OPS+.

And quantifying that effect for Sandberg and Williamson was the body of my article.

While writing, via "research" at baseball-reference, I learned that Joe Gordon also has a 10-year prime (including "war credit" for two seasons missing and one diminished) with career ends at a significantly lower level. But Sandberg and Williamson, not Gordon, are so much weaker at bat during their career ends that they seem to be different players. They don't have much merit outside their 10-year primes, I think. Still, I didn't go back and reconsider the first line after "discovering" Gordon's 13-year career and 10-year prime. See below.

For Alomar, too, it is easy to select a 10-year prime at bat, 1992-2001. Now I estimate . . .
6500 PA at OPS+ 126, essentially identical to Sandberg. But Alomar opens his career with four seasons, about 2800 PA, at OPS+ 106. That is another world from young Ryne Sandberg.

Sandberg and Williamson have in common precisely 10-year career as meritorious batters, with pop in the bat; very good to excellent fielders at the same position, by the oldtime-3B/modern-2B equivalence that is routine here (and Marc's premise); way overrated in Chicago.

On the other hand, the length of Joe Gordon's major league career outside the 10-year batting prime (shared by Sandberg, Gordon, and Williamson) is a perfect match for Williamson's career ends: one-year prelude, two-year denouement. And Gordon is a moderate rep of the low-batting high-onbase type, of which Williamson is an extreme example where Sandberg is an opposite. With a conservative interpretation of 1944-46, his two seasons missing and one diminished, Joe Gordon is the best handy comp for Ed Williamson.

(With a generous interpretation of 1944-46, Gordon is clearly greater as a batter than Sandberg or anyone else Marc listed, and worthy of "the rich man's Ed Williamson" as Murray is "the rich man's Jake Beckley"!
   49. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 14, 2007 at 07:25 PM (#2484593)
IOW, the fine distinctions we are called upon to make are based upon "My personal intuition as to what "merit" is", got it? Or as Bill James would term it, the "BS dump".

Dan, you have lost that battle four years ago. Time to move on.

Now, within the parameters of peak/prime/career, if you want to show inconsistencies regarding a voter's ballot (i.e. if Marc, as a peak voter, had a Beckley-type player at #1 on his ballot), then you will make an inroad.
   50. Paul Wendt Posted: August 14, 2007 at 07:29 PM (#2484606)
Willie Randolph, Lou Whitaker, and Bobby Doerr, for all their differences, are first and foremost career candidates, clearly meritorious for at least a few more than 10 years.
   51. Paul Wendt Posted: August 14, 2007 at 07:40 PM (#2484626)
Got Melky:
10. Charley Jones - Took another look at Charley this year. I don't give Blacklist credit, because I think it was partly his fault, but still a hell of a peak.

. . .
36. Got Melky? Posted: August 14, 2007 at 09:07 AM (#2484159)
Chris Cobb:

Ten years is a peak?!?!?!?! What happened to 3 or 5 years? 10 years is long for a prime!

Hear, hear!
Charley Jones is no peak candidate.
   52. OCF Posted: August 14, 2007 at 07:52 PM (#2484643)
I'm not sure about the capitalization, but Paul has correctly interpreted my comments. When I said "vote" about Browning, I was referring to positions 1-15 (I think that Browning topped out for me around #5 or #6), while my Sandberg/Whitaker comment was about "elect me" positioning on the ballot.
   53. DanG Posted: August 14, 2007 at 08:07 PM (#2484661)
Dan, you have lost that battle four years ago.

I have a bad memory. I honestly don't remember waging that battle four (or five) years ago.
if you want to show inconsistencies regarding a voter's ballot, then you will make an inroad.

Probably true, at times. It depends whether said voter is open to new information, or cherishes his entrenched system.
   54. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 14, 2007 at 08:31 PM (#2484690)
I have a bad memory. I honestly don't remember waging that battle four (or five) years ago.

My point was that we had peak, prime and career voters casting ballots in the 1898 election. What has changed in all of that time? Absolutely nothing.

If there was a time to change people's thinking, it was then. But not in 2003.

But I guess my bigger point is that you seem very bitter about this and I wish you wouldn't. But maybe I'm wrong about that perception. I certainly hope I am.

Probably true, at times. It depends whether said voter is open to new information, or cherishes his entrenched system.

Of course. But the consensus opinion is a powerful swaying tool. Yes, a small minority will hang on to their own misconceptions, but all you have to do is peruse the ballot threads to realize that the vast majority of us have listened to differing opinions and have changed our systems accordingly.
   55. Chris Cobb Posted: August 14, 2007 at 09:29 PM (#2484766)
jchmeagol wrote:

It should also be noted that WARP2 does not do schedule adjustments, right? I thought hat WARP 2 is just the league strength adjustment while WARP 3 does league strength and schedule adjustments. So of course Murray would look better in WARP2 since he would both get the favorable league strength adjustment without Browning getting the schedule length adjustment.

It should also be noted that the comparisons I was making were using Rate Stats based on seasons adjusted to 162 games to give them equal weight, and that when I did reference counting stats, they were also season-adjusted. I don't want to clog up the ballot thread (too much), so I'm going to take discussion of Murray's peak in context to his thread.
   56. Qufini Posted: August 14, 2007 at 09:52 PM (#2484791)
Personal Hall of Merit: Eddie Murray, Ryne Sandberg and Bob Johnson

1. Eddie Murray, 1B (n/e). OPS+ of 129 in 12817 PA! 9 straight seasons of OPS+ over 130 from 1979 to 1986, including 4 straight of 156 from ’81 to ’84. Plus Gold Glove defense. Yeah, he’s good.

2. Ryne Sandberg, 2B (n/e). Top 6 in Runs Created 6 times between 1984 and 1992 including 1st in 1990. Another player who combined outstanding offense and dazzling defense for a consistent period of time.

3. Cannonball Dick Redding, P (3). PHoM- 1975. Great peak years between 1914 and 1919 including an estimated 2.14 ERA in 321 innings for Chicago in 1917 (according to i9). Lost a half a year in each of ’18 and ’19 due to military service. Even so, his career MLEs of 234-174 put him in the neighborhood if not ahead of contemporaries like Coveleski, Faber and Rixey.

4. Alejandro Oms, CF (4). PHoM- 1984. Finally convinced that he’s the best eligible outfielder. Including play in his native Cuba, Oms has a long, outstanding career. He hit for both average and power, plus he was an above-average (and possibly exceptional) defensive center-fielder.

5. Tommy Bridges, P (5). PHoM- 2002. One of the beneficiaries of my big re-evaluation. I love that long prime. Top ten in ERA+ 10 times in 12 seasons (Addie Joss is only other eligible 20th century with more than 7 and he has 8). Top ten in IP 5 straight seasons from 1933 to 1937 for a suitable peak. Would be higher with a bit more career value.

6. Bob Johnson, LF (7). PHoM- 2003. Another beneficiary of my big re-evaluation. We’ve already got plenty of players from his era, but Bob Johnson’s prime is almost as good as Bridges’. Top ten in OPS+ 10 times in 12 seasons. Top ten in RC 9 times. 13 seasons with OPS+ over 125 (Jack Clark is only other eligible outfielder with more than 10 and he has 11). Similar to Bridges, would be higher with a bit more career value.

7. Andre Dawson, RF/CF (6). Has the peak: 1980-’83 OPS+ of 136-157-132-141 while playing Gold Glove-caliber defense. Has the career: #1 in unadjusted Runs Created among eligible players, #3 in Win Shares. Not enough time in CF keeps him behind Oms. Not enough OBP keeps him from being the sure-fire pick of a Kaline or Clemente. But while he’s not in their class, he’s still one of the best outfielders currently eligible.

8. Dave Concepcion, SS (9). My new favorite candidate. No other eligible shortstop can match Concepcion for length and quality of prime. Excellent all-around shortstop for 8 out of 9 years from 1974 to 1982 (1980 was a down-year exception), 8 ½ if counting his 89 game season in 1973.

9. Lou Brock, LF (10). PHoM- 1985. I had honestly expected that Brock would fall further in my re-evaluation but he ended up doing okay. 1622 career RC are best of any eligible player. Very consistent for 13 years from 1964 to 1976 with OPS+ always between 106 and 128 and RC/27 over 5.00 for all 13 seasons. Among the worst defensive outfielders but that doesn’t hurt him as much as it might as there are few eligible corner outfielder candidates with outstanding gloves.

10. Don Newcombe, P (11). PHoM- 1987. Great years in ’50-’51 and ’55-’56 interrupted by military service in the Korean War. Missing a rise to his career due to integration and a tail due to his own personal issues (and no, he doesn’t get credit for the latter). With proper credit, he’s well over 200 wins for his career and though he isn’t in the same class as contemporaries like Whitey Ford and Billy Pierce, he’s close enough to be worthy of induction.

11. Hugh Duffy, CF (12). PHoM- 1995. An excellent center-fielder who could have won Gold Gloves in ’93 and ’95, he was moved to left not because of poor play but because his team acquired Billy Hamilton. Also, an excellent offensive player for 8 seasons from 1890 to 1897. That’s not quite as valuable as what Concepcion did at SS, but its close.

12. Roger Bresnahan, C (13). The best catcher on the ballot. Offensively comparable to Lombardi (OPS+ 126 for Bresnahan to 125 for Lombardi) but more impressive for his dead-ball context. Also, better defensively at C with the versatility to play CF.

13. Orlando Cepeda, 1B (14). PHoM- 1996. The best available 1B. Has the peak that many of the career candidates are missing (including the recently elected Beckley) with OPS+ of 165, 164, 157 and 148. Has the career than many of the peak candidates are missing with 1375 Runs Created. I don’t think that the difference between Cash and Cepeda is all that great but I come down on the side of the Bull.

14. Dick Lundy, SS (15). Top 20 for a long time, finally cracks the top 15. Hall of Fame research shows that he walked more than initially credited. Initially compared to now-inducted Sewell and to players at other positions such as Biz Mackey and Cool Papa Bell. Similar defense to Bancroft. Similar length of prime to Concepcion from 1919-24 and ’26-28. Best player on pennant winning teams for two different franchises.

15. Vic Willis, P (n/a). Back on the ballot after getting knocked off about four elections ago. Had an incredible peak from 1899 to 1901-02. His league-leading ERA of 2.50 was 1.66 better than league average in ’99. He led his league in ERA+ in both ’99 and ’01, before posting a 2.20 ERA in 410 IP in ‘02. After that, he became more of a workhorse though his ’06 season stands out as a fourth excellent year

Top Ten Returnees: Pete Browning and Charley Jones: Voted for Browning a couple of times but after further research, I was convinced that there are many players more deserving than Pete, including Charley Jones who is in my top 30 even without blacklist credit.
Tony Perez: More impressed with '60s 1B hitters Cepeda and Cash, or contemporary 3B fielders like Nettles.
   57. DanG Posted: August 15, 2007 at 01:55 AM (#2485243)
If there was a time to change people's thinking, it was then. But not in 2003.

Strongly disagree on this, John. If peak voters are guided by a false belief in Wow seasons it's wrong to just say, "Oh, well".
But I guess my bigger point is that you seem very bitter about this

I wouldn't say "bitter". More disappointed to fully realize some voters' systems are strongly BS-based and only somewhat value-based.
   58. sunnyday2 Posted: August 15, 2007 at 02:06 AM (#2485291)
What if "Wow" seasons were defined as "MVP" or "MVP caliber" seasons?
   59. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 15, 2007 at 02:16 AM (#2485339)
Strongly disagree on this, John. If peak voters are guided by a false belief in Wow seasons it's wrong to just say, "Oh, well".

See, I don't understand this. I'm not peak-oriented myself, but I totally understand why someone would gravitate toward a Dean as opposed to a Beckley or Perez. At his peak, Dean was just flat-out more dominating. In terms of greatness, that's hard to just ignore.

I wouldn't say "bitter". More disappointed to fully realize some voters' systems are strongly BS-based and only somewhat value-based.

Again, your definition of "value-based" is 100% arbitrary and solely your own for HoM purposes.
   60. DanG Posted: August 15, 2007 at 02:05 PM (#2485710)
I totally understand why someone would gravitate toward a Dean as opposed to a Beckley or Perez. At his peak, Dean was just flat-out more dominating. In terms of greatness, that's hard to just ignore.

To me, it's nebulous terms like "dominating" that invalidate this approach. How high? For how long? (In the specific case of Dean, it wasn't high enough for long enough to bring him into contention, IMO.)

Also, likewise, I can "understand why someone would gravitate toward a Dean"; they simply have a system that emphasizes peak.
your definition of "value-based" is 100% arbitrary and solely your own

Well, true. What I'm saying is, it seems that some voters are not employing value-based systems; rather they are "Wow-Season" based or "dominating" based or "MVP caliber" based. IOW, based on intangible concepts moreso than concrete data.
   61. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: August 15, 2007 at 02:40 PM (#2485755)
DanG, since we appear to be revisiting old battles here, I can't let your assertion stand that peak voters based their systems on "intangible concepts moreso than concrete data." Nothing new under the sun here, but...

1. Your weighting of peak vs. career depends tremendously on what replacement level you use. The "concrete data" you claim to revere shows that in fact, the replacement levels used by the widely recognized uberstats are far too low. Every empirical study into replacement level shows that it has averaged roughly 80% of positional average over time. Both BP WARP and Win Shares use replacement levels far, far lower than that--BP's is the 1899 Cleveland Spiders, as Clay Davenport himself has said, and Win Shares uses the "background level" of 52% of league average offense. It is you who are ignoring the "concrete data" available regarding where to set the zero point above which a player begins to accumulate actual MLB value. If you use the true MLB replacement level rather than a double-A replacement level, about half of the supposed "real value" of your favorites like Pérez, Dawson, and Staub disappears.

2. The "concrete data" you claim to revere also show that the relationship between wins and pennants is not linear, meaning that one "Wow," "dominating," or "MVP caliber" season adds more pennants than two seasons with half as much win value. Again, if you were actually an empiricist interested in what actually wins pennants for MLB teams, you would check out Michael Wolverton's piece in the 2002 Baseball Prospectus annual on Pennants Added, which demonstrates mathematically the substantial additional value that peak seasons provide. But instead, you appear to be a dogmatist, interested in pushing your empirically inaccurate system (since it's based on a replacement level and a wins/pennants relationship which are factually wrong) on the rest of the electorate.
   62. DanG Posted: August 15, 2007 at 03:30 PM (#2485825)
Thanks for the help, Dan R. Clearly your system stands up to the "concrete data" test.

And it's not peak voters per se that I object to; it's anyone whose system is "based on intangible concepts moreso than concrete data".
   63. David Concepcion de la Desviacion Estandar (Dan R) Posted: August 15, 2007 at 03:47 PM (#2485841)
I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic.
   64. Kenn Posted: August 15, 2007 at 04:10 PM (#2485863)
Hello. It's a pleasure to join you folks. I outlined my selection process in the ballot discussion. I tweak endlessly, but this is what I'm happy with right now. Career oriented, fairly generous with fielders and missed time. I rely mostly on OPS+ and ERA+, weighted for playing time and adjusted by position and a sort-of "consensus-opinion" fielding rating.

1. Ryne Sandburg. An excellent string of solid seasons prior to his "retirement"

2. Eddie Murray. An even longer string of seasons, coming out slightly behind Sandburg due to my generosity towards fielders.

3. Reggie Smith. Looks extremely strong to me. A bit surprising, as poor in-season durability was not what I'd like, but it was still a fairly long career, with good defensive value as well.

4. Dave Concepcion. Average bat, excellent fielder for a very long time. Just the thing my system loves.

5. Tommy Bridges. Love the solid run of years from 1932-1942. Throw in a little war credit and comes out as my favorite pitcher.

6. Addie Joss. Similar or even stronger prime compared to Bridges, just with nothing else around the edges.

7. Charley Jones. With blacklist credit, a very solid candidate. Great durability, excellent hitting.

8. Bill Monroe. My favorite of the negro league candidates, based on the most recent MLE's posted here. Comparable bat to NL 3B I looked at, while at a more difficult position.

9. Phil Rizzuto. I give him three years of war credit, at his average level two years before and after. With an excellent fielding rating, he comes out here.

10. Andre Dawson. The long career includes several excellent, if spaced out, years, plus a lot of additional value. I place him as an okay CF/very good RF.

11. Bus Clarkson. I greatly appreciate the work done here on MLEs, though I find I have to discount them a bit or I get a stack of NLs at the top of the ballot. I'm convinced enough by the argument that Clarkson's era is underrepresented to discount him less than the rest, which places him here.

12. Jimmy Ryan. My favorite of the old CFs, due to the slightly longer career than the others. In my system, Duffy looks almost identical except for missing time after 1900.

13. Ed Cicotte. Cicotte does extremely well in my basic system. If I look at pitchers from any other angle, he doesn't fare so well, but, well, see the trio off ballot.

14. Roger Bresnahan. Still a very short career, but adjusting for typical catcher playing time of his era, just enough to make my ballot.

15. George Van Haltren. I see a tiny bit higher average level of performance than Duffy or Ryan, but without the couple huge years. Substantially longer career than Duffy, which is why Duffy lags well behind the other two on my ballot.

16. Bob Johnson. Very solid. No problem if he were elected.
17. Ben Taylor.
18. Virgil Trucks
19. Bucky Walters
20. Dick Redding. I feel that there should be more pitchers in the HOM, but none of these cases really compell me. Redding or Walters would be the horses to back, but I'd have to convince myself that he was really better than Trucks, which I don't see yet. Redding looks similar to walters, and worse on the stats we have, but potentially the best of them all, given uncertainty about them. I'm tempted to throw up my hands, jump Lee Smith past the whole lot of starters, and decide that was where the value is.
21. Pete Browning. When I first ran the numbers, I had penalized Browning's leagues at a greater rate than Jones', and the discrepency was rightly called out. Even though he's several spots off ballot, he might be the hardest for me to leave off, because a slight change in my assumption most easily puts him back on. Probably makes the ballot soon.
22. Luis Aparicio
23. Craig Nettles
24. Dave Bancroft
25. Fred Lynn
26. Alejandro Oms
27. Tommy John
28. Wally Schang
29. Vada Pinson
30. Johnny Pesky
31. Tony Perez. Very good, but doesn't stand out in my evaluation. Lowest of the 1B bats I looked at, and didn't play enough 3B to make it up.

Lee Smith. My favorite of the relievers, but not very close to the ballot using my current reliever treatment. #49
Kirby Puckett & Hugh Duffy: Suffer from shorter careers, though very good players. #45 & #47
Tommy Leach. Not sure of the appeal, unless I'm drastically undervaluing his positions for his time. ~#55.
   65. DL from MN Posted: August 15, 2007 at 04:17 PM (#2485872)
I'm still not sure how you get Aparicio ahead of Bancroft but they're both off-ballot.
   66. TomH Posted: August 15, 2007 at 04:18 PM (#2485873)
welcome, Kenn! Once my ballot gets posted, you can congratulate me on how positively brilliant I am to have copied so much of your insight :) Whoever used to post the 'closest ballot buddies' list or whatever it was called, Kenn may supplant KJOK as closest voter ot my tastes.
   67. Qufini Posted: August 15, 2007 at 05:27 PM (#2486004)
Welcome, Kenn!
   68. DanG Posted: August 15, 2007 at 05:28 PM (#2486007)
I honestly can't tell if you're being sarcastic.

Yeah, kinda aggravating, eh? ;-)

Seriously, I don't normally come in looking for a fight. Overall, I think you're a very valuable addition to the project. Lord knows we could use a few more hard-working analysts around here. However, a little less hyperbole ("Every empirical study") and snarkiness ("you claim to revere") in the presentation would be welcome.

Of course, there are times for hyperbole and snarkiness; parceled out judiciously they can have a good effect.
   69. Juan V Posted: August 15, 2007 at 05:38 PM (#2486021)
2003 Ballot

Review of my methodology: I use two systems, in one I use OPS+, with adjustments for stolen bases and shape of OPS, compared to a positional baseline, which varies over time to catch spectrum shifts and stuff. For pitchers, this is RA+, with adjustments for high IP seasons and relief pitching. In the other, I simply use the uberstats, mostly BPro's WARP but I'm integrating Win Shares and some components of Dan's WARP into the analysis. For both systems, I use a JAWS-like formula to weigh peak and career.

PHOM inductees are the top two newbies and Campaneris. Bert is part of a glut of candidates at the gates of the PHOM, which includes Harrah, Trucks and HOMers Ken Boyer and Darrell Evans. If my guesses are right, my PHOM borderline for 2008 will end up across or inmediately below this group. Date of PHOMation is provided between parentheses.

1-RYNE SANDBERG (2003): Seems to be 95% of Grich. An easy HOMer.

2-EDDIE MURRAY (2003): Tremendous prime-career candidate, even if he didn't have much peak. A super-sized Beckley?

3-LUIS TIANT (1988): The 114 ERA+ over a little less than 3500 innings is unimpressive, specially considering his contemporaries, but he really shined with unearned runs (roughly 8.5% of total runs allowed, compared to about 11.5% for his era).

4-GAVVY CRAVATH (1926): Clearly better than the borderline, Clarke and Flick seem to be good value comparables (maybe Winfield as well). With MLE credit, his peak is on the Kiner/Keller class, with the career that those two lack. So what if he took special advantage of his home park? He did it better than most, and his teams got value out of that.

5-BUS CLARKSON (1965): New MLEs incorporated. Glad to see the debate on him re-sparked, as we may be missing a gem here. In any case, he has well over 300 MLEed Win Shares, and an OPS+ around 120 from a SS/3B. The better part of his career, including his SS peak, took place before the Negro League scene got outta whack (although he was still well traveled). He was one of the reasons I decided to establish my new offense system, and under it he truly shines. I am discounting his 1940 a bit.

6-VIC WILLIS (1918): Almost 4000 innings at a 118 ERA+ put him pretty close to the average Hall of Fame starter (probably the average Hall of Meriter is a bit better). Seeing how this is squeezed into relatively few seasons, the result is a HOMable peak. Unearned runs are about average for his era, so they don't change his standing too much.

7-CHARLEY JONES (1926): Similar to Cravath, but he had a shorter career. A better defender, though.

8-ROGER BRESNAHAN (1929): His case has a good bit of context, as it depends on how you account for the brutal conditions for catchers of his time. I like the OBP-heavy production. Should be the favorite candidate of "gap-fillers", along with Clarkson.

9-ALEJANDRO OMS (1942): While the hitting value isn't as much as I once thought, there's too many Win Shares here to ignore. They give him a long career, with a considerable peak as well.

10-DAVID CONCEPCIÓN (1995): Averagish-bat, All-Time defense, and a really low baseline to compare him against. Clearly, my favorite among all the middle infielders with a similar profile. I believe there is a "real" reason why shortstops of his time were so bad with the bat, giving him real value.

11-TONY LAZZERI (1945): My old teddy bear (although, given my relatively short time voting, does it qualify him as "old"?). Where's the support for a 120 OPS+ second baseman? Was the defense really that bad (and why it doesn't show up on the uberstats, which put him clearly north of Larry Doyle territory)? Is my estimation of the baseline for 1930s second basemen that far off?

12-FRED DUNLAP (1930): Another "unearthed" candidate. Even with an UA discount, that 1884 season was monstrous.

13-BEN TAYLOR (1985): Comparable to Will Clark, but with a longer career and, because of the defensive demands of the position at his time, a lower baseline for comparision.

14-TONY PEREZ (1995): Most of his best offensive years were as a 3B, thus raising his peak to the level where it can be "carried" by his career.

15-JACK QUINN (1996): The Beckley of pitchers, with some Julio Franco sprinkled in. He showed up in the oldest player leaderboards in 1919, and played for 14 years after that. Peak is meh, but there's too much career value for me to ignore.
   70. Juan V Posted: August 15, 2007 at 05:51 PM (#2486038)
16-Dale Murphy (2001)
17-BOB JOHNSON (1996): He is, after all, in my PHOM. Still, I believe he doesn't have the prime/career to make up for the superior peaks Cravath and Jones have.
18-Lefty Gomez (1996)
19-Eddie Cicotte (1997)
20-Wally Schang (1997)
21-Dagoberto Campaneris (2003)
22-Toby Harrah
23-Virgil Trucks
24-Wally Berger
25-Mike Tiernan
26-Rick Reuschel
27-George Scales
28-John McGraw
29-Jimmy Ryan
30-Tony Mullane
31-Mickey Welch
32-Bobby Avila
33-Bob Elliott
34-Buzz Arlett
35-Vern Stephens
36-Marvin Williams
37-Urban Shocker
38-Frank Tanana
39-Cesar Cedeño
40-Ken Singleton
41-PETE BROWNING: When you think about it, he's equivalent to a poor-fielding, short career corner outfielder with a 140ish OPS+. His peak is still good, but he needs more.
42-Jim McCormick
43-LEE SMITH: I believe ERA+ slightly underrates relievers in the NL, so I adjusted Smith's numbers appropiately. I wouldn't be too upset if he ended up with strong support, but I don't see it in neither his peak nor his career.
44-Reggie Smith
45-Dave Bancroft
46-Lance Parrish
47-ANDRE DAWSON: All that out-making kills him IMO. If he had been at least league average in OBP, I guess he would have been in the PHoM queue, or higher.
48-Ron Cey
49-Carlos Moran
50-Mel Harder
51-BRETT BUTLER: A super-sized Dykstra and a remarkable member of the Hall of Very Good.
52-Tommy Bridges
53-Waite Hoyt

CANNONBALL DICK REDDING: I re-ran him once again and, while I would still like more info if possible, I'm relatively confident with where I'm ranking him. Which is mid-60s.
   71. Daryn Posted: August 15, 2007 at 06:32 PM (#2486088)
I thought I'd like Lee Smith a lot, but he is, to me, clearly inferior to John Franco and not much better than Kent Tekulve, really. It already, in 2003, looks like Rivera and Hoffman are better choices. Smith seems to be to career closers what Henke is to prime closers -- pretty darn good, but not quite ballot worthy. I'll start him in the 30s.

I value career over peak, but can be entranced by a great prime. I look at traditional statistics, ERA+, OPS+, Win Shares and Ink. Equally importantly, I read everything on this board and incorporate all that work into my analysis, whether it is RSI, MLEs, PenAdds, simple comparisons of candidates or anything else.

I am really lost after my top 13. I cannot make a distinction between the value of the players anymore at that level.

1. Murray – my kind of player; makes Brock’s 3000 hits look like they were with a Wiffleball. I can’t even begin to understand the Sandberg first place votes.

2. Lou Brock – I think the post season value and the tremendous speed puts him ahead of the similar long-career peakless Beckley. OCF sums up his case in post 126 of the Brock thread. Number of unelected Hall of Fame or Hall of Merit eligible players with more hits than Brock: Zero. Number of people with more MLB hits than Brock: 21.

3. Mickey Welch – 300 wins, lots of grey ink. RSI data shows those wins are real. Compares fairly well to Keefe. I like his dominating record against HoMers. With Beckley elected, he is my last real Teddy Bear.

4. Burleigh Grimes – as a career voter, I have difficulty seeing the vast difference others see between Rixey and Faber (both now elected) and Grimes.

5. Andre Dawson – very comparable to Perez. I’m inclined to put him ahead of Perez because, as I remember it, his centrefield defense was very good.

6. Tony Perez – this might be a bit high, but I am comfortable with it. 34th all-time in total bases, no black ink – the weight of his career totals push him above what otherwise looks like a definitional bubble candidate’s resume.

7. 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.

8. Sandberg – fits nicely into Trammell’s spot on the ballot. I know I am too harsh on middle-infielders if you want a rough quota, but I can’t come up with a system I can accept that would rate middle-infielders as highly as the consensus does.

9. Addie Joss – 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. He is barely better than (this is an unordered list) Kaat, Hunter, Harder, Warneke, Smith, Bridges, Gomez, Hoyt, 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.

10. Pete Browning – Joe Jackson’s most similar player, and they are pretty close – I have him as about 4/5ths of Jackson, who was 2nd on my ballot when elected. Pete Browning benefits from a decision I made in 1986. I’m a career voter, but I have decided that I’d rather honour a great peak than the 210th best career candidate.

11. Tommy John – not too far from Grimes, a step above Kaat. No credit for the surgery, but medical pioneers (even the guinea pigs) get my respect.

12. Jim Rice – I like the 77-79 peak. I like the runs created in his ten+ year prime and I like his overall totals. I do adjust raw totals significantly, but I think people are holding Fenway too much against him. From 1975 to 1986, Rice led the American League in total games played, at-bats, runs scored, hits, homers, RBIs, slugging percentage, total bases, extra-base hits, go-ahead RBIs, multi-hit games, and outfield assists.

13. Dave Parker – I think he is very similar to Rice, but I like Rice’s peak better. Their career counting stats impress me.

14. Sam Rice -- 2987 hits speaks to me.

15. Orlando Cepeda, 1b – He is a very difficult choice for me because he isn’t significantly better than Howard, Colavito and Cash, but the slight difference means about 25 spaces on this ballot.

Bresnahan is not too far off my ballot (20th this week).
Jones is not in my top 150. Too short a career and too unspectacular.
Johnson -- I once compared him to Bernie Williams, without the postseason accomplishments. Which means he is a very good player (38th on my ballot).
   72. Mike Webber Posted: August 15, 2007 at 08:52 PM (#2486269)
Had a great time in St. Louis at the SABR convention, but did a really crappy job of introducing Ken Fischer to Joe Dimino. Joe passed Ken and I at the ballpark and I teased Joe about Ken and I wanting to turn in a late ballot for the 1968 election. Had no idea ken didn’t know Joe or vice versa, until later. Hopefully that managed to meet pass each other again when someone with better manners than me was around to introduce them.

The convention was great, hope to see more of you guys in Cleveland or DC.

1) Eddie Murray 437 Win Shares, three MVP type seasons. 15 seasons 20+ win shares.
2) Ryne Sandberg 346 Win Shares, three MVP type seasons. 9 seasons 20+ Wins shares. Both Eddie and Sandberg are very qualified for the HOM, neither Rich Murray or Jared Sandberg are.
3) ROGER BRESNAHAN 231 Win Share, one MVP type season, 4 seasons 20+ Win Shares. Best catcher of his era. Like Leach a combo-position player that is hard to sum up what his contributions were, because he doesn’t nest into one position.
One of the most interesting discussions I had at the SABR convention was with Brock Hanke, a long time contributor to Primer, about the change of roles for catchers. He basically said that Bresnahan is the last of a type, though he said Dale Murphy and Craig Biggio are also in the family. Basically a catcher who can run like a deer, because the backstop by rule was 50 feet behind home plate.

4) TOMMY LEACH – 328 Win Shares, only one MVP type season, 8 seasons 20+ Win Shares. Good peak, excellent defensive player at third and in centerfield.
5) KIRBY PUCKETT281 Win Shares, two MVP type seasons, 10 seasons 20+ Win Shares. In the murky centerfield ranking area with Duffy, Van Haltren, Carey, Pinson and well, I’l throw Amos Otis in here too as a Royals fan.
6) PHIL RIZZUTO – 231 Win Shares, one MVP type seasons, 7 seasons 20+ Win Shares. With a conservative 60 or so win shares during the war, I move him ahead of Sewell. Same arguments as Nellie Fox, only with a 3-year hole in his career at ages 25 to 27, plus a bad return to MLB in 1946.
7) ALE OMS Based on the info we have I would consider him just above the in/out line for outfielders.
8) George Van Haltren Huge Career, plus short schedule. Even clipping his pitching credit.
9) SAL BANDO - 283 Win Shares, two MVP type seasons, 9 seasons 20+ Win Shares. I believe he was better than Ken Boyer, but his home parks helped disguise it. The big seasons are what puts him ahead of Boyer.
10) ELSTON HOWARD 203 Win Shares, 1 MVP type season, 4 20 + Win Share seasons, basically he has Thurman Munson’s career despite only having 23 win shares before age 29. Big jump on my ballot.
11) TONY PEREZ 349 Win Shares, three MVP type seasons, 8 seasons 20+ Win Shares. Hits all my targets for a ballot candidate, long career, big seasons, a top 25 player at his position.
12) NORM CASH 315 Win Shares, only one MVP type season, 8 seasons 20+ Win Shares.
13) KEN SINGLETON 302 win shares, 3 MVP type seasons, 7 20+ win share seasons. Big Seasons sneak him onto the bottom of my ballot.
14) LOU BROCK – 348 Win Shares, three MVP type seasons, 11 straight seasons 20+ Win Shares. As a career voter I’ll put him here. Batting leadoff he had great opportunity to rack up counting stats.
15) CARL MAYS 256 Win Shares, 2 MVP type seasons, 8 20 + Win share seasons


Bucky Walters/Dave Stieb – may be penalizing his WW2 pitching too much. It is a toss up between Stieb and Walters for me. Stieb is hard to evaluate compared to older pitchers who pitched so many more innings.

Cannon Ball Redding – Have waivered on him, I have voted for him in the past.

Pete Browning – Heck of a hitter, short seasons, suspect league, suspect fielding, suspect teammate.

Charley Jones – Short seasons, big bat. League strength? Understand the arguments, but I personally would go another way.

Bob Johnson – in the glut of very good outfielders, Cravath, Reggie Smith, Roy White, Murcer, and Dawson.

Dawson is in my top 25, his defense seems to have retroactively been downgraded. Or maybe his bad knees at the end have obscured the image of him in centerfield as a young man.

Newbies – Lee Smith – he was a Royal for a few minutes one spring, despite that, I can’t see him over Quisenberry.

Brett Butler – I’m sure some of you have seen the old Stat Scoreboard books that detail the best bunters of the season. Butler was tremendous at bunting, in fact I would say the only reason he is on the list at the top of the page as a notable is because of his bunting.
The point I really want to make here, is why in heck don’t more guys do this? Coco Crisp is a very good bunter, but I doubt he attempts to bunt for a base hit once a week. I’d think he could bunt for a .500 batting average, plus it has to draw the infielders in closer when you aren’t bunting, which also has to help.
For a guy like David DeJesus is could be the difference between the career he is having, and Brett Butler’s career. Which might be a $50MM proposition. Note that DeJesus has the crappy stolen base rate on the resume already.
It’s not a manly-man skill I think that is one of the things that retards it. I’d say that are some third basemen that beg to face more bunts.
   73. rico vanian Posted: August 15, 2007 at 09:00 PM (#2486283)
1) Ryne Sandberg – Great hitting at a fielding position trumps great hitting at a hitting position.

2) Eddie Murray – Really interchangeable with Sandberg. They are both massively deserving.
3) Chuck Klein – 4 hr titles including a triple crown. His age similarity scores from age 25-34 mirror Ruth, DiMaggio and Ted Williams. Even in a bandbox ballpark, that’s not too shabby.
4) Lou Brock - The H.O.M. doesn’t appear to value stolen bases (Aparicio, for example) as highly as I do. 3000 hits is a major qualifier for me as well.
5) Luis Aparicio – nine Gold Glove awards, led the American League in stolen bases nine seasons and was named to the All Star squad 10 times. When he retired in 1973, he held the career record for shortstops for games played, double plays and assists. I see alot of love for Ozzie, how about some for Looie?
6) Kirby Puckett - If players like Charlie Keller get in on short (but excellent) careers; than Puckett is a shoo-in. Great and clutch player who shouldn’t be penalized by a freak injury. He missed the years that would have pumped up his career totals, but his legacy was made in the years he played.
7) Burleigh Grimes – 5 20 wins seasons, 270 total wins, very strong on the black and gray ink tables.
8) Pie Trayner – .320 career average, hit .300 or better 10 times
9)Ernie Lombardi – 2 ba titles, 8 all star games, .300 career average as a catcher.
10) Dale Murphy – A heckuva peek, gets points off for a lousy batting average.
11) Thurman Munson – A good peak, obviously not a long career, although by the time of his death, he was already pretty much finished. If Freehan is in, than Thrum deserves consideration.

12) Phil Rizzuto – SS on the team with the greatest era ever. 3 prime years lost to WW2 would have put him over 2000 hits and ended the debate.
13) Andre Dawson – Power and speed (at least in his early years)
14) Jim Rice – Hit for power and average. Career flamed out, but I don’t see why Keller got more votes than him.
15)Don Mattingly – Short but awesome peak (see comments on Puckett).

no soup for...

16) Gavvy Cravath- The leading power hitter of the immediate pre-Ruth era.
17) Sam Rice – Talk about late bloomers…Virtually no stats before he was 29 and still finished just shy of 3000 hits.

18) Hugh Duffy – That .440 year is just plain sick.
19) Mickey Welch – 300 wins in a short career, but never the top pitcher in his era.
20) Dave Parker – Drugs are bad, mmkay?
21) George Foster- I think he is getting shortchanged. A terrific hitter for about 7 years.
22) Addie Joss- Awesome peak
23) Gil Hodges – Great fielder, very good hitter for arguably the NL team of the 50's.
24) Steve Garvey – Underrated due to fidelity / “feet of clay” overtones
25) Catfish Hunter- Peak and clutch
26) Pete Browning – League quality and shortness of career issues.
27) Tony Perez- I could have hit 20 homers and driven in 90 rbi’s a year with Rose, Morgan, Bench, etc surrounding me.
28) Tony Oliva- With good knees, he would’ve been a sure thing HOF’er
29) Jack Morris- Big game pitcher. Nuff said.
30) Tommy John &
31) Jim Kaat - Longevity certainly, Greatness no.
32) Dave Concepcion – I have him below Aparicio and Rizzuto on the SS list.
33) Bruce Sutter – Great peak, but not enough years
34) Ron Guidry – A late start and the Billy Martin/Art Fowler run em till they’re done school of arm management didn’t help. One of my all time favorites.
35) Vida Blue – What might have been…
36) Bill Madlock – Just hit, baby.
37) Don Baylor &
38) Reggie Smith The Hall of very good beckons
39) Bob Johnson (see Baylor & Smith)
40) Bucky Walters- Nice peak, but not enough.
41) Dick Redding - Another player with anecdotal, but not statistical evidence.
42) Graig Nettles – I grew up a Yankee fan and I remember the big hitting, but not until the Dodger/Yankee World Series was his fielding ever really lauded.
43) Lee Smith – Career aggregator. Scary looking mofo too.

Bresnahan and Jones didn’t play long enough or well enough to be close to my top 50.
   74. jimd Posted: August 16, 2007 at 12:19 AM (#2486524)
Ballot for 2003

Read previous ballots if you want more depth on my reasons for all but the latest eligibles.

I am a peak/prime/career voter. Prime tends to dominate the ballot as Career has had an easier time of it in HOM elections, and short Peaks don't get too far in my system. Important parts of my peak and prime assessment are both the quantity and quality of a player's "All-Star" selections. These are the seasons where the player is able to make a positive contribution to a typical "playoff contender" (top 25% of participating teams). I use both WARP and Win Shares, though I emphasize the former because of its demonstrated overall yearly positional balance throughout baseball history.

I am reexamining my ballot carefully annually as we go deep into the backlog.

1) R. SANDBERG -- Sandberg and Murray are extremely close in my rating system. Slight edge to Sandberg. If Sandberg, Santo, and Banks were on the ballot together, how would you rank them? Prime 1983-92. Best player by WS in 1984 and 1991. 1st-team MLB All-Star (2B) in 1984, 1990, 1991, WARP adds 1985, 1988, 1989, and 1992. Other star seasons include 1986, 1987. Honorable Mention in 1983 and 1996.

2) E. MURRAY -- Ranks similar to Yaz and Rose in my system. Prime 1978-92. Best player candidate by WS in 1983. 1st-team MLB All-Star (1B) in 1983 and 1984, WARP adds 1981 and 1982, WS adds 1990. Other star seasons include 1978, 1979, 1980, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1989, and 1992.

3) B. WALTERS -- Best of the backlog. Prime 1939-44. Best player in 1939; candidate in 1940 by WS. 1st-team MLB All-Star (SP) in 1939, 1941, 1944; WS adds 1940. Other star seasons include 1936 and 1942.

4) K. PUCKETT -- Makes my PHOM this year. Prime 1985-1995. Best player candidate in 1988 and 1992 by WARP. 1st-team MLB All-Star (CF) in 1986 and 1988 by WS; 1992 by WARP. Other star seasons include 1987, 1989, 1990, 1991, 1994. HM in 1985, 1993, and 1995.

5) F. TANANA -- More good seasons than Gossage. Poster-child for pitcher abuse. Still has the peak and also has the career. Prime 1974-77. Best player candidate in 1976 and 1977 by WARP. 1st-team MLB All-Star (SP) in 1976; WARP adds 1975, 1977. Other star seasons include 1974, 1984. Honorable mention in 1987.

6) K. SINGLETON -- Better peak than Bonds; not quite as much prime as Wynn. Prime 1973-81. Best player candidate 1977, WS adds 1979. 1st-team MLB All-Star (RF) in 1975 and 1977. Other star seasons include 1973, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981; also 1976 in LF.

7) D. CONCEPCION -- His best 7 seasons are very close to Ozzie's best 7, though Ozzie is clearly superior in peak, shoulder seasons, and career value. Prime 1974-82. 1st-team MLB All-Star (SS) in 1974; WARP adds 1976 and 1979; WS adds 1978 and 1981. Other star seasons include 1982. HM in 1975 and 1977.

8) L. TIANT -- Pitching candidate very close to the in/out line. Win Shares does not like him. Tended to alternate good years (even) and off years (odd). Prime 1966-1978. 1st-team MLB All-Star (SP) in 1968, 1974; WS adds 1976. Other star seasons include 1972 and 1973. Honorable Mention in 1966 and 1978.

9) J. KAAT -- Belongs. 14 HOM "bats" were born 1893-1903 (Sisler, Heilmann, Ruth, Torriente, Charleston, Terry, Goslin, Suttles, Stearnes, Averill, Simmons, Waner, Bell, Gehrig); don't tell me that 10 pitchers born 1938-48 are too many.Prime 1961-1975. 1st-team MLB All-Star (SP) in 1962; WS adds 1966. Other star seasons include 1974 and 1975. HM in 1961, 1964, 1967, 1971.

10) F. JONES -- Still an all-star player when he walked away. I still think he rates ahead of Ashburn, but it's close. Prime 1900-08. 1st-team MLB All-Star (CF) in 1908; WARP adds 1902 and 1907. Other star seasons include 1900, 1901, 1903, 1904, 1905, 1906.

11) F. DUNLAP -- Great two-way player; bypassed for some reason. Amibidextrous, too. Reportedly could catch and throw equally well with either hand. Useful in this era before modern fielding gloves forced a player to choose one hand for each. Prime 1880-86. Best Player candidate 1880-81 (WARP). 1st-team MLB All-Star (2B) in 1880, 1881; WARP adds 1882, 1883, and 1885. 1884 in the UA is hard to evaluate but may also be #1. Other star seasons include 1886.

12) D. DEAN -- High peak candidate. Prime 1932-36. Candidate for best player in MLB baseball, 1934. 1st-team MLB All-Star (SP) 1934, 1935, 1936; WARP adds 1932. Other star seasons include 1933.

13) B. BONDS -- Very nice prime; marginal on career. Those who go to extreme either way will miss him. Prime 1969-77. Best player candidate 1970 by WS. 1st-team MLB All-Star (RF) in 1970; WARP adds 1971 and 1973. Other star seasons include 1969, 1972, 1974, 1975, 1977, 1978. HM in 1979.

14) R. CEY -- Important component of the late 70's Dodgers. Prime 1973-1981. 1st-team MLB All-Star (3B) in 1978 by WARP. Other star seasons include 1974, 1975, 1976, 1979, 1980, and 1981. HM in 1973 and 1977.

15) B. MAZEROSKI -- Prime 1957-66. 1st-team MLB All-Star (2B) 1960 and 1964; WARP adds 1958. Other star seasons include 1962, 1963, 1966. HM in 1957, 1961, 1965.

16) T. PEREZ -- Better 3B than expected. Important component of the Reds prior to the arrival of Joe Morgan. Prime 1967-1975. Best player candidate 1970 by Win Shares. 1st-team MLB All-Star (3B) in 1970; WS adds 1973 at 1B. Other star seasons include 1967, 1968, 1969, 1971 (3B), and 1972 at 1B. HM in 1974, 1975, 1977 (1B).

17) D. REDDING -- Long career candidate. Fell off due to influx of new candidates.

18) D. BANCROFT -- Boost due to DanR's replacement level work. Prime 1916-22. 1st-team MLB All-Star (SS) 1920 and 1921; WS adds 1922. Other star seasons include 1916, 1917, 1918, 1925, 1926.

19) D. MATTINGLY -- Might make by ballot before we're through. Best player in baseball is hard to ignore. Prime 1984-94. Best player in 1986 by WARP, candidate by WS. 1st-team MLB All-Star (1B) 1985 and 1986; WARP adds 1987. Other star seasons include 1984, 1988, 1989, 1994. HM in 1992 and 1993.

20) F. VIOLA -- Better than I thought. Tiant-lite, more peak, less career. Prime 1984-93. Best player candidate by WARP in 1988. 1st-team MLB All-Star (SP) 1987 and 1988; WS adds 1984. Other star seasons include 1989, 1990, and 1992.

Just missing the cut are:
21-23) Pie Traynor, Jim McCormick, Norm Cash,
24-26) Rabbit Maranville, Ron Guidry, Lance Parrish,
27-29) Thurman Munson, Elston Howard, Jim Whitney,
30-32) Dizzy Trout, George Foster, Roger Bresnahan,
33-35) Vic Willis, Bobby Veach, Bob Johnson,
36-38) Urban Shocker, George Burns, Brett Butler,
39-41) Herman Long, Dale Murphy, Graig Nettles,
42-44) Ned Williamson, Andre Dawson, Bob Elliott,
45-47) Denny Lyons, Hugh Duffy, Vida Blue,
48-50) George VanHaltren, Silver King, Charley Jones,

I trust that those who say, in their defense of Pete Browning, that there is a point of diminishing returns when it comes to discounting players in weak leagues, are giving Fred Dunlap the benefit of the same doubt when it comes to 1884.

Got Melky, the 3rd best hitter in the 1882 AA was Hick Carpenter. He spent the three previous years in the NL, playing for last place teams, as an average 3b glove with the bat of Rey Ordonez (career 60 OPS+). Place Eddie Murray in a league where the 3rd best hitter was Rey Ordonez, and he too would have a "Wow!" season. (See the Browning thread, post 79, for more details about Hick Carpenter and the quality of the 1882 AA.)
   75. OCF Posted: August 16, 2007 at 12:50 AM (#2486583)
Kirby Puckett - If players like Charlie Keller get in on short (but excellent) careers; than Puckett is a shoo-in. Great and clutch player who shouldn’t be penalized by a freak injury

I think I understand what you're trying to say, but "shouldn't be penalized" can't be the correct terminology. We've been over this territory before, but there's a difference between this and war credit. Phil Rizzuto was physically capable of being a contributing major league baseball player in 1944, but was prevented from doing so in practice for a reason that affected not just him but a whole class of players. Kirby Puckett in 1996, Charlie Keller in 1952, and Addie Joss in 1911 were not physically capable of being contributing major league players. What you're saying is essentially a prime-only argument - that a hypothetical Puckett who had have 5 more years as a declining player would not have earned any more credit than the real player. That is an understandable point of view, but not counting any "hang-around" credit lies at one end of a spectrum of possibilities. For my sake, it doesn't really matter whether an injury is "freak" (the word you used for Puckett) or not or whether it was baseball-related (Koufax) or not (Joss). An injured (or ill, or dead) player doesn't contribute any value.
   76. Rick A. Posted: August 16, 2007 at 02:32 AM (#2486831)
Eddie Murray
Ryne Sandberg
Tommy Leach

2003 Ballot
1. Eddie Murray - Elected PHOM in 2003
2. Charley Jones – Truly great hitter who missed 2 years in his prime. Elected PHOM in 1921.
3. Pete Browning – Great hitter. Elected PHOM in 1925
4. Ryne Sandberg - Elected PHOM in 2003.
5. Vic Willis – Very good pitcher. I like him better than Waddell. Elected PHOM in 1945.
6. Dick Redding –Elected PHOM in 1968
7. Hugh Duffy – Better than Van Haltren and Ryan, Elected PHOM in 1970
8. Burleigh Grimes – Higher peak than Rixey. Elected PHOM in 1961
9. Bucky Walters Very high peak. Elected PHOM in 1972
10. Alejandro Oms – Jumps up some on this ballot. Elected PHOM in 1978.
11. Ed Williamson – I’ll take him over Boyer. Elected PHOM in 1958
12. Ken Singleton – Jumps onto ballot after I adjust for the DH. Elected PHOM in 1997.
13. Dizzy Dean – Short career, but high peak. Koufax lite. Elected PHOM in 1973.
14. Elston Howard – Underrated. Elected PHOM in 1985
15. Gavvy Cravath – Damn good hitter. Elected PHOM in 1988.

Required Disclosures
Roger Bresnahan - Just misses my bsllot.
Bob Johnson - Very good prime, but I'd like a bit more peak value from a corner outfielder.
Andre Dawson - Not far above Staub, who is nowhere near my ballot.
Tony Perez - Not a bad player. In the mid 40's
Phil Rizzuto - Not a required disclosure, but I felt I should say something. Great defense, May make my PHOM someday. My favorite announcer of all-time. RIP Scooter.

New candidates
Lee Smith Not as good as Sutter or Fingers. His career puts him just above Quisenberry.
Brett Butler Not as good as Puckett.

Off the ballot
16-20 Sutter,Munson,Bresnahan,Newcombe,Leach
21-25 (DwEvans),(Rixey),Easter,Bond,Rosen
26-30 (BRobinson),(Ashburn),Rizzuto,(Medwick),FJones
31-35 Murphy,Parrish,Monroe,Nettles,(DSutton)
36-40 (Gordon),Puckett,WCooper,Mattingly,Elliott
41-45 Johnson,Mays,Perez,(Terry),Traynor
46-50 Matlock,(Randolph),(Fox),(Boyer),(Faber)
51-55 Scales,LSmith,(Pierce),Shocker,Clarkson
56-60 (Doerr),HSmith,FHoward,Bando,Bell
61-65 Quisenberry,MWilliams,Doyle,Cey,HWilson
66-70 Van Haltren,Ryan,Schang,McGraw,Bancroft
71-75 (Sewell),AWilson,RSmith,Cepeda,Stephens
76-80 Poles,Winters,Mullane,ACooper,DiMaggio
81-85 Berger,Burns,Lynn,Taylor,Parker
86-90 Tiernan,Clark,(Thompson),JRice,Dawson
91-95 Pinson,Cedeno,Pesky,Chance,Brock
96-100 Staub,Cash,Fournier,Bonds,Lundy
   77. Adam Schafer Posted: August 16, 2007 at 06:37 AM (#2487182)
Still not voting for, or even cosidering voting for Cannonball. I have Indian Bob down in the 30's and Perez 50ish or so.

1. Eddie Murray - Lots of career value. Quite good for quite a long time.

2. Charley Jones - He was a monster before and after being blacklisted. I have no problem imagining him being a monster in the missed years

3. Gavy Cravath - he was given a good thing with his park, he took advantage of it. can't blame a man for that. no one else took advantage of it as well as he did then. i say good for him and reward him with my vote.

4. Lee Smith - i know, suprise! Lee smith high on someone's ballot. I am sure this won't be popular. Someone has to be a fan of the reliever. Might as well be me. I voted for Fingers, Gossage, Wilhelm, and continue to vote for Sutter and Jack Quinn. As far as I'm concerned, he is the Eddie Murray of relievers. Never really stood out, or pops into your mind as a stud, but quite consistent, and for quite a long time. I would have no problem with the HOM or HOF opening their doors to more relievers.

5. Pete Browning - I've realized he should be ranked closer to Jones and Cravath

6. Orlando Cepeda - never great, but consistently very good.

7. Bucky Walters - odd for my to like someone with out more career value as I'm not necassarily a peak voter per se, but in this case his good peak offsets the small amount of career value he would normally need to have for my taste

8. Don Newcombe - if you give him NeL and war credit, he has a very strong case

9. Bus Clarkson - I'm willing to believe he was a tiny bit better than Stephens

10. Vern Stephens - A power hitting SS and perennial MVP is someone i can vote for

11. Bruce Sutter - love me or hate me for it, I'm more friendly towards relievers than most

12. Elston Howard - I'm a little more sympathetic to catchers than most too.

13. Ryne Sandberg - this shocked me, I honestly thought I'd have him ranked 4th or 5th. I just couldn't find room to put him higher.

14. Chuck Klein - see Cravath

15. Bobby Veach - similar story to Cepeda...good career value

16. Jack Quinn
17. Ernie Lombardi
18. Lefty Gomez
19. Andre Dawson
20. Johnny Pesky
21. Roger Bresnahan
22. Don Mattingly
23. Rocky Colavito
24. Dolf Luque
25. Hack Wilson
   78. TomH Posted: August 16, 2007 at 03:59 PM (#2487422)
2003 Ballot
Review of Hanrahan’s value system: career value with a fairly high replacement level (slightly below average). Something like RCAP adjusted for defense and league strength, or WARP3 minus 2.5 wins per full year, or WS minus 11 per year adjusted for league quality. Small credit for pitcher “peak”, none for hitters. Some subjective estimating of ability across time and place. I rank the long primes higher than most of us.

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

1- Eddie Murphy {new}
Consistently great.
2- Ryne Sandberg {new}
Early demise keeps him from being #1 this ballot. I traded for him on my Scoresheet team in the winter of 93-94. Two months into the year, he was done. Errgh.
3- John McGraw (3) [20]
Dominant 9 year prime. Provided huge advantage over every other MLB team at third base. Add in our shortage of 1890s infielders & shortage of pre-WWII 3Bmen, and he’s clearly “in” for me.
4- Roger Bresnahan (4) [5]
Best MLB catcher of his era, the era before, & the era after; when catchers just did NOT HIT, nor did they play every day.
5- Bucky Walters (5) [14]
Faced strong opponents, pitched real well, hit real well too.
6- Bob Johnson (6) [7]
Very good long prime; clearly better over a dozen year stretch than our other backlog OFers. One very good MinorLg year of credit also.
7- Reggie Smith (7) [24]
Not quite the peak rate and durability for big-season voters, not long enough career for career voters. But overall a GREAT player. Helped every team he joined, and they hurt when he left.
8- George Van Haltren (8) [17]
Spent three years as primarily a pitcher. And is still 33rd all-time in runs scored.
9- Frank Chance (9) [53]
A great player on great teams. <u>As good a hitter as Pete Browning.</u>.
10- Bill Monroe (10) [51]
Dominant in his day.
11- Luis Tiant (13) [19]
Small bonuses for few unearned runs and post-season wins. Small discount for arriving in those luvly-to-pitch 60s.
12- Dick Redding (11) [9]
Great pitcher according to the anecdotes. Less great by MLEs. I split the difference.
13- Andre Dawson (14) [8]
Multiple gold gloves and other evidence make me think that BPro’s take on his D is understated. Bonus credit for strike-shortened ’81 gets him on.
14- Kirrrrbeeeeee PUCKETT! (15) [12]
In any other park besides the HHHdome, he was merely very good. However, post-season credit gets him on my ballot.
15- Rick Reuschel (off) [54]
As JoeD pointed out, a lot of small items (low unearned runs, effect of relievers following, stronger league, not-so-many great pitchers in his day) adds up. Just doesn’t add up as much as Joe thinks :-) Rick is the 3rd guy on my ballot who didn’t make our top 50 last time. I’m tempted to say “Take THAT, Consensus Score!!”, but it appears the typical voter among us has a couple of these on his ballot. <u>Anyone out there whose ballot is completely devoid of non-top-50ers, or even non-top-40ers?? </u> If so, you are very “now” I guess :)

Other Newbies:

Brett Butler – HOVG

Lee Smith – close but not enuf. EVen with Rollie F from Apr-Srpt. But he got torched in the post-season.

Returning top 10 disclosures:

Charley Jones [6] – barely behind Orlando Cepeda, who is not polling well with us.

Pete Browning [4] – cover up his seasons before age 25, when he was in a very weak AA, and he looks like Babe Herman. Do we want to elect a guy based on dominating a minor league? Van Haltren had as good an offensive career from age 25 on, and was better with the glove.

Tony Perez [10] – I do NOT understand how he can rate above Reggie Smith.
   79. DL from MN Posted: August 16, 2007 at 06:34 PM (#2487587)
"1- Eddie Murphy {new}
Consistently great."

He's been heading downhill since Beverly Hills Cop and is now replacement level.
   80. Howie Menckel Posted: August 16, 2007 at 08:20 PM (#2487815)
2003 ballot - our (and my) 106th

I had last year's electees Trammell-OSmith-Stieb at 1-2-3 on my ballot, even nailing Browning at 4th to win the "superfecta," with a decent payoff. An unusually high number of my old-time favorites have been elected, so modern candidates will do fairly well on my ballot in some years.

The annual fine print: Overall, I think 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. Increasingly, I've had to adjust for PAs/IP per season, not really an issue in earlier years when nearly all star players played almost every day or pitched a ton of innings.
I tend to be mostly prime-oriented with hitters, prime and career with pitchers. But a huge peak sometimes catches my eye, and a remarkably long hitting career also works for me.

1. RYNE SANDBERG - Best comp I see happens to be Lou Whitaker. Sandberg on peak with a little fielding and playing time edge; prime gets muddled; Whitaker on career with a longer and smoother tail. Gordon might have been this guy without the war. Incredible to think that Grich was better, but not sure what system can argue with that. Still, Sandberg is an easy HOMer. VERY close between he and Murray.
2. EDDIE MURRAY - A lot like Winfield as a hitter, but less defensive value imo. Both are well ahead of the Beckleys and other long-prime types who are debatable, but each has a hard time battling the peaks of the utter elites (see Williams, Billy). Geesh, Murray had 13 130+ OPS+s, including four consecutive 156s from 1981-84. He also hit .306 in both 1983 and 1984, making 427 outs in each season.
3. PETE BROWNING - Stubbornly holding on, as the recent swipes at him didn't reveal anything I wasn't already factoring. Look at the 1890 PL season. Browning, at age 29, leads the league in adj OPS+ by 13 pts over 32-yr-old HOMer Connor, followed by a 22-yr-old Beckley and HOMers Ewing, Brouthers, Gore, O'Rourke at 6-7-8-9. Ewing is 30, Brouthers is 32, Gore is 33, O'Rourke is 39. Browning by all accounts is 'an old 29' due to his health and alcohol problems. Yet in his chance to play in a HOMer-laden league, he dominates. Yet I am supposed to assume that as a younger player he wouldn't have been able to post big numbers in the NL rather than the AA? Seven OPS+s above 163. 10 seasons as a regular, a good number for the era. This lousy fielder played some 16 pct of his career in the infield. Given the era, how much did he really hurt his team in the field? Not as much as some think; it was a different game then.

4. CANNONBALL DICK REDDING - A longtime favorite who climbed his way back onto my ballot in recent years and now has nearly climbed back to "elect-me." I liked him as an all-around candidate, but the HOF research suggests he's more of a peak guy. Those types don't always fare well with me, but with the so-so ballot, to be fair I think he belongs here.
5. BOB JOHNSON - I really like this sort of consistency over an endless span, though I'd hardly say he's a 'must-elect.' Sort of the Joe Gordon of OFs in career shape, or a slightly longer and flatter version of Kiner. I am concerned by 1944 being his highest OPS+; seems like he took advantage of the weak competition, so I discount that a bit. But has more than a decade's worth of excellent hitting, for a prime that I like better than Van Haltren's or almost any other holdover's.
6. BOB ELLIOTT - Good to see him mentioned 'this year' in discussion! Six seasons of at least 134 OPS+, ALL of them as a 3B. Wish he'd played all 3B and not much OF, but c'est le vie - Sewell seemed to get treated as a full SS by some. Beats out HOMer Boyer (see Boyer thread for details) and compares remarkably well with HOMer Santo as a hitter (see Santo thread for more details). Better than HOMer Hack as well, and better than HOMer DaEvans (see DaEvans thread).
7. KIRBY PUCKETT - Good prime for a CF, but not amazing. I had said if I wasn't sold on him being an excellent defensive CF in his first 6-8 years, he'd drop a bit. And now I believe his defensive prime didn't last that long, so he drops 4 spots. It's that tight. I'll pass on the intangibles, but he holds his own against BobBonds offensively, for instance, and has just enough at the finish line to pass DaMurphy on long prime.
8. ROGER BRESNAHAN - Back on the ballot a few years ago after a long drought. Was discarded long ago by me when I liked many other careers better; a fresh look against this pack is enlightening. C and CF combo is fascinating; seems like he was an outstanding all-around player. Just wish he had one more big year, but I can say that about most of the ballot.
9. BEN TAYLOR - Have meant to reconsider him for years; finally did so last year. Long career, excellent fielder, consistent player. I'm not 100 pct sold on the hitting MLEs, but very good reputation and for sure a quality player. I'll try him out here this year.
10. GRAIG NETTLES - 3rd time on my ballot, moves up a few places this year. Very good fielder with nine seasons of 100 to 115 OPS+ as a regular, and outstanding from 1976-78
11. REGGIE SMITH - Climbs back on the ballot after winning a reeval 3 years ago vs. Jack Clark. Played a lot of CF, and quietly was one of the better OFs of his era. Closer to Puckett defensively than I had thought, so he moves up a few slots and nears Puckett range.
12. VIC WILLIS - Won a recent SP bakeoff with Grimes and Walters, with slightly more career than Walters and better peak than Grimes. It's close, but I'll stick with Willis for yet another year.
13. ORLANDO CEPEDA - Suddenly popped up on my ballot 6 years ago with the reevaluation. Had been losing out to Perez with positional consideration, but closer look shows a sterling top-4 and top-10 offensive line. DH opportunity added nothing to his case.
14. FRANK HOWARD - Usually someone pops back on my ballot each year, this time it's Hondo. I had forgotten how spectacular his peak was, and his career tally - 142 OPS+ in nearly 8000 PA. Yes, he suffers due to defense - he could make a case for ranking No. 1 if he could field! Best-3 seasons - 177-70-70 in 1968-70, with almost 2100 PA total - make these other guys look like banjo hitters.
15. DAVE CONCEPCION - 2nd time on my ballot. Peak is as good or better than Fox's; not quite as consistent, but a slick fielder and a very useful offensive weapon many times. Not fully buying the "other teams were stupid enough to play ciphers at the position" argument; that helped the Reds win pennants, but Concepcion can't get full credit for that stupidity. Similar case to Bancroft, whose prime I preferred last year to Concepcion's length. It's close.

LEE SMITH - Very tough one. 10 seasons I really like a lot, only 1 or 2 I love. Sutter has more to love, less to like. A lot of RPs do. Starts out off my ballot, but very much in consideration.

DAVE BANCROFT - Not sure if I ever voted for him before 3 years ago. But look at the prime: fantastic fielder at SS, with OPS+s of 120-19-19-09-09-09-04. Won a fresh 3-way evaluation vs Fox and Concepcion a year ago. Similar to Randolph, but an SS, so maybe Bancroft gets the nod next time.
BURLEIGH GRIMES - Compare to Ruffing, Rixey, Wynn and other such HOM pitchers - ok, Sutton, too. I dismissed him as short of Rixey and Ruffing, and he was. But he's just one 130 ERA+ year short of climbing a little higher on this ballot. Better peak than Tommy John, and a lot more durable relative to his era.
LUIS TIANT - Looks like he has the peak at first glance, but notice that the IP just aren't quite there. Plenty good when he did pitch, but with that lack of innings you have to be even more dominant. Maybe he winds up as the era's last P electee, but probably not.
RON CEY - In the past I have had him over Nettles and Bell and nearly on the ballot, but that's because I may like his fielding better than most. Closest of the trio to Bando in hitting. Talk me into voting for him.

HUGH DUFFY - Perhaps Win Shares' most embarrassing error. The Roger Maris of the turn of the century - wait, Roger had TWO great seasons and was a good fielder, too.
CHARLEY JONES - Some sympathy for the contract issues, but it's just not the same as going to war or being the 'wrong' skin color. Therefore, I see his career as too short.
TOMMY LEACH - Another guy where OPS+ is a reality check. Interesting player and I have a soft spot for hybrids, but barely an above-average hitter and this isn't a slick-fielding SS we're evaluating.
   81. Howie Menckel Posted: August 16, 2007 at 08:25 PM (#2487830)

not voting for...

ANDRE DAWSON - Loved to watch him as a player, bottom line is that he simply made too many outs to be elected (per PA of course). And my system basically throws his last 1100 PA out the window (and counting stats), for which he should be grateful. I guess I'll look again next year, though.
   82. Paul Wendt Posted: August 16, 2007 at 09:29 PM (#2487973)
Browning by all accounts is 'an old 29' due to his health and alcohol problems. Yet in his chance to play in a HOMer-laden league, he dominates. Yet I am supposed to assume that as a younger player he wouldn't have been able to post big numbers in the NL rather than the AA?

Maybe big numbers a la Charley Jones or Elmer Flick rather than enormous numbers a la Pete Browning.
Then how does he compare with Jones or Flick as a candidate?
OPS+ is not the only number.

games not played, Pete Browning 1882-1892 [1889 in brackets]
11, 14, 7, 0, 26, 5, 40, [57], 13, 32, 50

percent of games scheduled
14, 14, 6, 0, 19, 3, 29, [41], 9, 23, 33

That is average 15% down time in his 10 prime seasons "a la Cobb": overpassing his worst season in 11 years, identified by rate (OPS+ 98), which is also his worst by playing time (41% gnp). John McGraw or Frank Chance he is not, but compared to most candidates that is a lot of pine time.
   83. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: August 16, 2007 at 10:32 PM (#2488054)
2003 Ballot

Reporting on my personal info from the 2002 ballot. Good news: Since the last ballot we got our new (used) car. [2005 Scion XA with 13800 miles!] Bad news: can’t register it yet because the guy we bought it from used whiteout on the title….

1. Eddie Murray: This one’s easy for me. The guy was super consistent and went on forever, but he’s no Jake Beckley. He’s substantially better. My system likes his positional dominance, sees him as a many-time MVP-type player, a multi-multi-time All-Star, a guy who contributed a long time after passing his prime, and he had a ton of value. Playing in the very balanced 1980s he consistently rung up excellent years, and was consistently among the leagues leaders in important categories. He’s exactly what a prime/career candidate ought to look like.

2. Ryne Sandberg: Another fine prime guy and not without career or peak value. He’s comparable to Grich, Alomar, and Frisch, not quite in Gehringer’s league for me. Another multi-multi-time All Star. The Phils blew it on him, but that’s the Life of Phi for you.

3. Alejandro Oms: I know I’m going against the grain here. I think Oms probably did everything Winfield did over a long career, plus he played a good centerfield for much of it. Oms, in fact, has lots in common with Winfield, including the fact that neither seems to have had a superior peak, that both had a long, wonderful prime, and that both racked up tons of career value. Winfield is a safer, easier choice between them because his career is entirely documented and simple to interpret, but the NgL players have always required some guesswork, and my guess is that they are similar players with the slight advantage of position going to Oms.

4. Wilbur Cooper: Dominant NL portsider of the late 1910s-early 1920s. This guy was in the (retroactive) Cy Young chase every single year for a good long while in the late teens and early 1920s, battling Old Pete, Hippo, and Dolf for several years. I like pitchers who show dominance for a good stretch, and he’s one.

5. Ken Singleton: He’s the best player in the AL of the very late 1970s, and a good long while best RF in the AL. And while he might not have much defensive value, he’s doing a great job of walking and hitting with power, lots of SEC. Plenty of All-Star and MVP type seasons.

6. Larry Doyle: Dominant 2B of the NL of the 1910s, good peak/prime, and an argument for having been the best player in the NL for a brief time. Few on this ballot can make such a claim to league-wide dominance.

7. Tommy Leach: Pick your poison. As a CF, he’s not got enough peak to get on the ballot. But as a 3B, he’s a fabulous career candidate with enough at the top end to be among the top dozen 3Bs. Splitting it down the middle, he’s a 3B/CF hybrid with outstanding seasons at both positions, a nice, long career, and enough peak/prime to emerge as a downballot candidate.

8. Lance Parrish: Let me take a minute here to explain, since I think everyone’s going to jump my ship for this. As explained in his thread, Parrish’s two big knocks are his lack of walks and his fielding. But neither ubersystem sees Parrish as having problematic fielding—to the contrary, they LIKE his glove. We have evidence of his defensive goodness which has been largely ignored in the discussions so far: Parrish hung on for a good while as a regular and semi-regular despite a decline in his hitting—he could not have done so had his defense been as weak as has been said. Which leaves the walks. Well, catchers who play D and hit 300+ homers are still pretty rare, even in today’s HR-happy times. I won’t tell you the lack of walks is illusory, but I will say that Parrish built a lot of value despite the lack of walks, and that value is what I’m looking at. Parrish’s case begins and ends with positional dominance and career length. He was the best catcher of the AL for several years. Even after, he remained a productive regular for several seasons and a good backup even after that. He’s almost as high in my rankings at catcher as Whitaker is in my rankings of 2Bs. Not quite but almost. He’s right below Freehand and Torre. However, he’s more impressive than the guys below him at catcher, where Whitaker’s got plenty of guys breathing down his neck. I think both are HOMers, but their relative rankings are not cast in stone, and I’ll continue to monitor how I feel about it.

9. Dave Stieb: Admittedly I’ve been an advocate for Stieb. But I think it’s warranted. He outshone the league during a difficult time to dominate, and he’s the best pitcher in the AL over long, meaningful stretches of time. I wish 1986 were better, but that’s life. You don’t get to pick when your off years happen. Even so, he had plenty left in the tank, and among eligible peak/prime pitchers, he’s a great choice for induction. I have him above Walters based on many of the small things discussed in the Stieb thread, however, I could just as easily have gone the other way on it.

10. Bucky Walters: You know the story---I like pitcher peaks, and he's got one, even when dampened for the war.

11. Leroy Matlock: He’s back. Many years ago now I saw Matlock as the best available pitcher. My consensus scores plummeted…. But in reviewing NgL players, I looked back on his thread, and I don’t really understand why I lost my nerve on him. The MLEs look HOMable, even if you see that 1937 season as a little less than 43 WS. I think we’ve whiffed on him, and that someday when we’ve got more better information, he’ll be one of the “lost” guys that no one talked about who ends up as a HOMer.

12. Hugh Duffy: Lots of All-Star and MVP type seasons, a good run as his league's best position player, plenty of adjusted career value. He'd be a perfectly fine selection, but he’s certainly a borderliner.

13. Gavy Cravath: Nearly as good as Winfield, but that doesn’t necessarily translated into a high ballot placement….

14. Sal Bando: Same old, same old here. Good bat, good peak value despite so-so to not-so-good glove.

15. Pie Traynor: He’s extremely close to Bando in value but doin’ it different.

-Lee Smith: For many, he straddles the in/out line. I’m just of the belief that there aren’t many RPs who will merit the honor. I like Wilhelm, Gossage, and perhaps Rivera or Hoffman one day. I’ve opposed or not supported Fingers and Sutter, and I feel that’s consistent with my lack on interest in Smith.

-Brett Butler: Rich Asburn 2.0, but not as good as the first. I didn’t support Ashburn, and I don’t support Butler. A member of the All Famous Civil War Generals Team:

C Cliff Lee
1B Joe Gordon…
2B Joe Morgan
3B Terry Pendleton
SS Frank Grant
RF Reggie Jackson
CF Brett Butler
LF Don Buford
DH Dick Stuart

Pat Sheridan
Bill McClellan
Dave Pope
Darren Bragg

SP Gaylord Perry
SP Allie Reynolds
SP Sam McDowell
SP Lennie Hooker
SP Vean Gregg
RP Adrian Burnside
RP Dan Wheeler
P Icebox Chamberlain
P Milt Wilcox

-Fernando Valenzuela: If only he’d been from Venezuela. Durable in his prime, but very average in many years. Probably overworked, no matter how old he was.


-Pete Browning: Just off my ballot, and I was probably wrong about his HOMiness previously.

-Dick Redding: I’m not a believer. Those 1920s numbers aren’t pretty. I’d encourage everyone to look back at them again. It’s not pretty at all, and he needs all of them to make it. I’d rather induct Cannonball Adderley.

-Tony Perez: A prime and career that still awaits a great peak.

-Charley Jones: Baseball’s most weirdest career. An uptick seems in the offing to me if the 1874 stuff is true, and there’s more info from Paul Wendt. He’s very close already.

-Roger Bresnahan: Tralee’s at the bottom of my current catcher list, no problem to me if he goes in.

-Bob Johnson: I dunno, I’m not really taken with him, but WS may underrate him due to his awful teammates. If I used WARP I might be since he’s a prime candidate more than a peak or career guys. On the other hand, he’s got a case for MiL credit. He’s not helped by war discounts, though.

-Andre Dawson: He’s very, very close, in the same general range in both RF and CF that Randolph or Puckett or Fox were at their positions.
   84. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 16, 2007 at 10:47 PM (#2488068)
9. Dave Stieb: Admittedly I’ve been an advocate for Stieb.

So much so that you still have him on your ballot after his induction into the HoM, I see. :-D
   85. ronw Posted: August 16, 2007 at 11:30 PM (#2488127)
Tom H ballot said:

1- Eddie Murphy {new}
Consistently great.

Really? I think his 1916 was not very great, and happened in the middle of his career. :-)
   86. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 17, 2007 at 12:03 AM (#2488186)
Any Murphy has to have been great at some point. ;-)
   87. dan b Posted: August 17, 2007 at 01:48 AM (#2488384)
PHoM 2003 – Sandberg, Murray, Puckett

1. Sandberg NHBA #58 overall. More peak than Murray.
2. Murray NHBA #61 overall.
3. Dean PHoM 1976. 1975 reevaluation of great pitching peaks put him on my ballot for the first time. NHBA #25 pitcher.
4. Walters PHoM 1968. Nice peak – 3 WS Cy Youngs, 1 runner up.
5. Duffy PHoM 1912. Compared with the median level of already enshrined HoMers using WS, Duffy would be in the top half using 5 consecutive seasons, 10 consecutive seasons, 3 best and 8 best seasons.
6. Rizzuto PHoM 1995. 1993 reevaluation moved him up. Stark says he is overrated, but Stark didn’t give him any war credit. NHBA #16. Growing up in small town western NY, I would listen to Yankee games when reception for the Pirate games wasn’t good enough. I will never forget Rizzuto introducing as “an all-time Yankee great,” Ralph Terry. As a Pirate fan, I had my own reasons for liking Ralph Terry. RIP Scooter, one of the game’s great personalities.
7. Bresnahan PHoM 1928. SABR Dead ball era committee has him #1. No MLB catchers between Ewing and Hartnett is not being fair to all eras.
8. Cooper, W PHoM 1942. Returns to my ballot in 1995 after 44-year hiatus. His peak was during a thinly recognized period. 1 WS Cy Young, 3 times runner up. Willis may have been better, but his era is more strongly represented.
9. Singleton PHoM 1997. Not many players on ballot with 3-32+ and 6-27+ WS seasons.
10. Burns, G. PHoM 1996. Came close to making PHoM during the 1929-1932 trough. Probably should have, better late than never. His 10-consective year peak is above the HoM median as is his 3-year non-consecutive.
11. Leach PHoM 1926. Teddy bear.
12. Murphy PHoM 2002. 4 consecutive seasons with 30+ WS
13. Cravath PHoM 1967. mle credit where credit is due.
14. Mays, C PHoM 1997. His era could use another pitcher. A quality pitcher we are overlooking. NHBA #38.
15. Newcombe PHoM 1998. Giving more war and mle credit (1993). NHBA #46.
16. PuckettPHoM 2003. NHBA #98 overall.
17. Bando PHoM 1994. NHBA #11 (Boyer #12)
18. Mattingly NHBA #12.
19. Howard, E PHoM 1995. NHBA #15
20. Willis, V PHoM 1941.
21. Browning PHoM 1912.
22. Parker Do the first base line Dave. NHBA #14.
23. Howard, F
24. Berger
25. Rosen If a great 5 consecutive season peak were the only measure we considered, Rosen would have been elected in 1964.
26. Bonds, Bo Barry’s dad was pretty good.
27. Munson NHBA #14
28. Dawson
29. Staub Most career value on the ’02 ballot.
30. Veach
31. Evans, Dw I know he is a HoMer, just holding his place for the PHoM.
32. Perez Not enough good seasons to be higher. Jayson Stark says he is overrated.
33. Cepeda
34. Tiant
35. Cash, N
36. Doyle PHoM 1930.
37. Chance, F PHoM 1921.
38. Jones, C – I have voted for him (4) times – 1898 thru 1901. When I dropped him in ’02, he received only 2 votes. Ed Williamson was on 18 ballots; Arlie Latham drew more support with 3 votes. My 1898 ballot comment – “9. Jones. Two-year hold out probably costs him a couple places”. Nobody was giving credit for not playing back then, as we hadn’t tackled issues like war and mil credit yet. If as many voters had treated his hold out years like he was an all-star back then as are doing so now, he may have been elected by 1920. His 1988 top-10 finish pushed me to re-evaluate for 1989 and give him holdout credit. A reconstructed PHoM based on if I thought then like I think now, would have put him in my PHoM during the trough years of 1929-32 if not 1921.
39. Grimes
40. Ryan, J
41. Van Haltren Do 3 years of slightly below average pitching really merit Van Haltren this much more support than Jimmy Ryan? Walked 16 in stellar pitching performance 6/27/1887.
42. Redding Fared well in the Cool Papa’s survey, as did Spots Poles.
43. Elliott
44. Brock not enough peak to be higher
45. Pinson
46. Smith, Reg less peak and less career than Brock
47. Sutter I like him better than Fingers.
48. Arlett
49. Traynor
50. Nettles
51. Cicotte Better character and a couple more good years made possible by better character would have made him a HoFer if not a HoMer.
52. Gomez More peak than Tiant.
53. Bell
54. Murcer
55. Evers Comparable to Randolph.
56. Randolph A PHoM place holder. Overrated by HoM.
57. Cey
58. Mazeroski
59. McGraw Best 3B of the 90’s
60. Colavito
   88. DavidFoss Posted: August 17, 2007 at 02:38 AM (#2488448)
Getting my ballot in at a reasonable hour this week.

2003 Ballot

1. Eddie Murray -- Easy pick against this back log. Long career. Long prime.
2. Ryne Sandberg -- Peak candidate. Six great years make him an easy pick
3. Gavvy Cravath -- Top-notch corner OF-er of the 1910s. With MLE credit, he is at least on par with guys like Kiner.
4. John McGraw -- Great high-OBP 3B of the 1890s.
5. Larry Doyle -- MVP deadball second baseman. Position player cornerstone of the 1911-13 Giants pennant dynasty. Hit like an OF-er.
6. Dick Redding -- Great fireballer of the 1910s. His weak 1920s NeL numbers should not take away from his fine early play. I don't know why his support hasn't held up.
7. Norm Cash -- I have him higher than I had Keith Hernandez. My favorite uninducted bat from the expansion era
8. Roger Bresnahan -- High OBP C-OF of the 1900s. Playing time and positional classification issues have kept him out of the HOM so far.
9. Bob Elliott -- Excellent 3B of the 40s and early 1950s.
10. Mickey Welch -- Sure he was overrated, but we've been inducting guys like him from other eras.
11. Frank Chance -- Great hitter for great Cubs teams. Best non-Wagner hitter in the NL for several years.
12. Frank Howard -- This guy could really mash. 142 OPS+
13. Charley Jones -- I've been a long-time fan of his. Excellent -- and consistent -- rate stats, unfairly blacklisted.
14. Ernie Lombardi -- Catchers who hit this good are hard to find.
15. Al Rosen -- Hit like an inner circle guy for five seasons, but he came up late and then hurt his back.
16-20. Puckett, Browning, BJohnson, Nettles, Leach,
21-25. ADawson, Bando, Cepeda, TJohn, Cey,
26-30. Tiant, TPerez, Singleton, Brock, Staub,
31-35. Walters, DMurphy, Kaat, Parker
   89. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: August 17, 2007 at 03:28 AM (#2488479)

1. Murray
2. Sandberg
3. Oms
4. Cooper
5. Singleton
6. Doyle
7. Leach
8. parrish
9. Charley Jones: After my Steib debacle above, I realized now was a great time to refigure Jones with credit for the 1874 and partial 1875 seasons that Paul has documented. Doing so bumps him from off-ballot to level with Sheckard and safely above my in/out line.
10. Walters
11. Matlock
12. Duffy
13. Cravath
14. Bando
15. Traynor
   90. OCF Posted: August 17, 2007 at 05:29 AM (#2488527)

Nothing to beware - your previous post wasn't counted because it couldn't be counted. (Since you didn't specify a #16, it couldn't even be guessed at.) Thanks for fixing it, although that's an interesting leapfrog act with Jones, who is viable candidate for this year's one backlog spot. We shall see ...
   91. TomH Posted: August 17, 2007 at 11:30 AM (#2488576)
youse guys are so funny. A wee little slip on my part.

just to make sure I didn't cornfuse the ballot counters:

1 Eddie Murray
2- Ryne Sandberg
3- John McGraw
4- Roger Bresnahan
5- Bucky Walters
6- Bob Johnson
7- Reggie Smith
8- George Van Haltren
9- Frank Chance
10- Bill Monroe
11- Luis Tiant
12- Dick Redding
13- Andre Dawson
14- Kirrrrbeeeeee PUCKETT!
15- Rick Reuschel
   92. Mike Webber Posted: August 17, 2007 at 02:30 PM (#2488677)
dan b wrote:
41. Van Haltren Do 3 years of slightly below average pitching really merit Van Haltren this much more support than Jimmy Ryan? Walked 16 in stellar pitching performance 6/27/1887.

Joe Dimino and I were sitting together at Chris' (Dag Nabbitt's) presentation at the SABR convention about leveraging starters - Chris you really should put those slides up on the net, maybe Foreman would host them?

I commented to Joe then that I would bet $1 that Van Haltren was hugely leveraged in a negative way. I haven't done the research and there were lots of double headers then and maybe he was just the 2nd game starter (even at that wouldn't it mean he drew a weaker opposing pitcher regardless of the team's record?) but I'll bet you Anson was mostly starting him against the lesser teams in the league.

Dag Nabbit do you know if I owe Dimino a buck?
   93. OCF Posted: August 17, 2007 at 02:54 PM (#2488697)
TomH - you mean it wasn't intentional?
   94. TomH Posted: August 17, 2007 at 03:33 PM (#2488747)
no. I don't know HOW that happened.
   95. DanG Posted: August 17, 2007 at 04:36 PM (#2488803)
My “system”? Emphasizes prime and career; give me steady production over a fluke year or two or three. I look at win shares and WARP and rely on the interpretations of these by other analysts. IMO, our group overvalues peak; I like guys who play. There’s also a tendency here to cut and run from well-seasoned candidates. Finally, unlike Bill James and most voters I don’t give any “consecutive-seasons” bonus; value is value.

My ballot, Teddy Bears and all. My #1 and #2 were elected. In 2003, Murray and Sandberg are shoo-ins; Lee Smith and Brett Butler will get looked at. In 2004 it’s Molitor, Eckersley and a backlogger. Then Boggs and a backlog bonanza in 2005. In 2006, Will Clark is the top name while Belle goes through the wringer.

1) Eddie Murray – Easily a consensus top-100 player.

2) Ryne Sandberg – Not quite a consensus top-100 player.

3) Tony Perez (3,3,3) – Career lovers delight with enough peak to make him great. 349 win shares, with three best being 33-32-31. Even-steven with Staub in win shares, but drubs Rusty in WARP3; in 12-year weighted prime Perez beats him 8.41 to 7.43. <u>Firstbasmen with most Total Bases over a 15-year period, 1949-98</u>:

1977-91 4181 E. Murray
1967-81 3915 T.Perez
1959-73 3810 H. Killebrew
1972-86 3800 S. Garvey
1958-72 3684 O. Cepeda
1966-80 3430 L. May
1973-87 3400 C. Cooper
1963-77 3379 D. Allen
1973-87 3375 B. Buckner
1963-77 3360 W. McCovey

4) George Van Haltren (4,4,4) – Even taking away half his pitching win shares, when I schedule and league adjust I get a total of 381 win shares. Three-year peak, 1896-98, of 28-30-31. We’ve now elected 15 players who were behind him in 1972. Huh? Were we so wrong about him for 50+ elections? No, we’re wrong now. Now in his 95th year eligible. Pennants Added study shows him well. He excelled in the contraction years 1892-1900; he had high SB totals (usually 35-40 in his prime years), which I believe was more important pre-1920; he was a mainly a centerfielder (~71.7% of his non-pitching games vs. ~47.6% for Ryan and 61.5% for Wynn), Ryan (and Duffy) actually played more corner outfield. Players with <u>2900 times on base 1889-1901: </u>
1—3392 B. Hamilton
2—3134 G. Van Haltren
3—3046 J. Burkett
4—3043 E. Delahanty

Players with <u>most stolen bases 1891-1900: </u>
1—660 B. Hamilton
2—443 G. Van Haltren
3—416 H. Duffy

One non-HoMer here, Players with <u>3400 times on base 1871-1909</u>:
1—4433 C. Anson
2—3954 J. Burkett
3—3729 J. Beckley
4—3661 B. Dahlen
5—3605 G. Davis
6—3579 W. Keeler
7—3507 R. Connor
8—3438 G. Van Haltren
9—3434 B. Hamilton
10—3431 E. Delahanty

5) Andre Dawson (5,ne,ne) – My kind of candidate, multi-dimensional skills and longevity. Adjusting 1981 gives him peak WS from 1980-83 of 29-35-26-28. Also, 352 WS for career adjusting for 1981, 94-95 strikes. WARP3 from 1980-83: 9.0-10.5-9.0-7.9. Also, 108.8 for career.

6) Tommy Leach (6,5,5) – Enjoyed his highest finish in sixty years, when he was ahead of seven HoMers. I think it’s what Bill James once said, that all-around players get overlooked, while specialists get overrated; voters like that one area of dominance. Modern comp to, but just a bit behind, Craig Biggio, he could beat you in many ways. Longevity, defense and speed, more important in that era, rate him above Groh. Versatility is a plus; it should not be assumed that any typical thirdbaseman of the era could have successfully handled CF. Had a better peak than Bobby Wallace, but his career was a couple years shorter and he had just a little less defensive value. Among OFers with 750 games 1905-14, he is 2nd in PO/G (behind Speaker) and 2nd in FA (behind Clarke). Players with 1300 or more RBI plus Runs Scored, 1902-11:
1—1883 H. Wagner
2—1726 S. Crawford
3—1429 T. Leach
4—1408 N. Lajoie
5—1392 H. Davis
6—1343 F. Clarke
<u>Leaders in Total Bases, 1901-10</u>:
1—2606 H. Wagner
2—2527 S. Crawford
3—2410 N. Lajoie
4—2128 H. Davis
5—2052 C. Seymour
6—1973 T. Leach
7—1933 F. Clarke
8—1911 J. Sheckard
9—1823 G. Beaumont
10—1783 B. Wallace

Not bad for a “glove”.

7) Burleigh Grimes (7,6,6) – Comparable to E. Wynn. Has the heft I like in a career. Pitchers with <u>3800+ IP, 1916-75</u>. The top ten are all HoMers, nearly:

1—5244 W. Spahn
2—4689 R. Roberts
3—4564 E. Wynn
4—4344 R. Ruffing

5—4180 B. Grimes
6—4161 T. Lyons
7—3941 L. Grove
8—3897 E. Rixey
9—3884 B. Gibson
10—3827 B. Feller

8) Rusty Staub (8,7,7) – He’s the Grimes of position players. Ranks #36 all-time in Times On Base; #59 in Total Bases, just ahead of some guy named Jake. Edges Brock in win shares, blows him away in WARP3. Players with <u>OBP of .380+, 1967-76, 3500+ PA</u>:
1—.407 J. Morgan
2—.399 C. Yastrzemski
3—.397 W. McCovey
4—.394 P. Rose
5—.392 K. Singleton
6—.389 F. Robinson
7—.386 R. Carew
8—.386 R. Staub
9—.385 H. Killebrew
10—.381 D. Allen

9) Jimmy Ryan (9,8,9) – Browning had one skill; Ryan could do it all. As a SNT he finished ahead of seven HoMers; the order in the teens was Duffy-Ryan-GVH-Beckley. Usually trailing those guys were Caruthers-Pearce-Pike-Jennings-Griffith-Childs. <u>Most extra-base hits, ten-year period 1876-1903</u>:
632 1893-02 E. Delahanty
550 1887-96 S. Thompson
549 1886-95 R. Connor
542 1883-92 D. Brouthers
525 1883-92 H. Stovey
487 1890-99 J. Beckley
481 1893-02 J. Kelley
458 1888-97 J. Ryan
453 1888-97 M. Tiernan
<u>Most outfielder Assists, 1876-1918</u>
1—375 J. Ryan
2—348 G. VanHaltren
3—348 Tom Brown
4—307 J. Sheckard
5—289 O. Shaffer
6—285 K. Kelly
7—283 S. Thompson

10) Graig Nettles (10,9,10) – Another looonggg career 1970’s star; Darrell Evans lite. James slots him behind Boyer, ahead of Traynor, which seems about right. For the 1970’s he was #6 in HR and #10 in RBI, not bad for a “glove”. I think he still holds the AL record for HR at 3B; 2nd all-time in games at 3B.

11) Roger Bresnahan (11,10,8) – A couple more voters now (16) have high regard for The Duke of Tralee, as he climbed into the top five finishers. Versatility should be a bonus, not a demerit. How many other catchers could have been pulled out from behind the plate to be an all-star in centerfield? Could move higher, but I really like guys who play. Played half his teams’ games in only 11 seasons, averaging 71% of team games in those years. Still, his offensive production towers over other catchers of his era, so he deserves a vote. Defense only C+. <u>Catchers with 100 OPS+, 1876-1930 (minimum 3500 PA)</u>:
1—130 B. Ewing
2—126 R. Bresnahan
3—118 C. Bennett
4—117 J. Clements
4—117 W. Schang
6—101 D. McGuire
7—100 J. Kling
Players with <u>OBP over .390, 1903-14, 3100+ PA</u>:
1—.424 T. Cobb
2—.420 E. Collins
3—.413 T. Speaker
4—.401 R. Bresnahan
5—.400 H. Wagner
6—.399 F. Chance
7—.396 R. Thomas

12) Rabbit Maranville (12,11,12) – Every career voter should have him on their radar. WARP1 is 133.5, even better than Beckley’s 116.8 (high of 8.1). That includes four years better than 10.0. Plus he’s due nearly a year of war credit, which adds another 8.0 WARP1. Career WARP3 is 101.1, just in HoMer country. Career win shares, with war credit and adjusted to 162 games, is 339, including 124 in his top five seasons.

13) Wally Schang (13,12,13) – There’s not a dime’s worth of difference between him and Bresnahan, so he’s still on the radar. Players with <u>OBP of .390+, 1915-29, 5600+ PA</u>:
1—.475 B. Ruth
2—.439 T. Cobb
3—.436 R. Hornsby
4—.435 T. Speaker
5—.427 E. Collins
6—.412 H. Heilmann
7—.399 J. Sewell
8—.398 W. Schang
9—.393 K. Williams

14) Gavy Cravath (14,14,15) – Fourth time on ballot. Yeah, he has problems, but they all do. Had a long career, was a regular player into his late 30’s. And he had a high peak. What more do you need? Circumstances beyond his control kept him out of MLB for many years.

15) Alejandro Oms (15,15,--) – Third time on ballot. MLEs show OPS+ of 125 in +9000 PA. Win shares 340. Those are obvious HoMer numbers for a CF. Only my hatred of Negro leaguers has made him wait this long. Seriously, even my hyper-skeptical eye has to cave at some point.

Top tenners off ballot:

If we elect Browning it will be proof of mistakes in the design of our system; if a guy who’s liked by about a third of the electorate, and ranked +50 by another third, can make it in, something’s wrong. Nice peak in a very weak league. I don’t believe that fielding value is at all well measured pre-1893, so I’m very wary of electing any more bats from that era.

Charley Jones is Pete Browning lite.

Redding is a good candidate if you put total faith in the translations showing a stratospheric peak.

Bob Johnson looks just like a lot of other guys. Career not that long, peak not that high, just a bat.
   96. OCF Posted: August 17, 2007 at 06:06 PM (#2489076)
no. I don't know HOW that happened.

Blame not-Grandma.

TomH in #78 asks a question about voters with ballots contained in the top 40 or 50. I'm planning on eventually answering that question, but I think I'll wait until all the votes are in before I do.
   97. Esteban Rivera Posted: August 17, 2007 at 09:35 PM (#2489602)
Wonder of wonders, I am posting earlier than usual. Blame the rain Hurricane Dean will bring and my fear that the lights may go out because of it. Still, at least the eye is passing to the south of us, so there's good news. Such is life in the tropics (for those that have wondered or are wondering, I live in PR).

2003 Ballot:

1. Eddie Murray – Career production at that steady elevated level tops this year’s ballot.

2. Ryne Sandberg – One of my favorite players ever.

3. Pete Browning - Was a heck of a hitter and did it under tremendous duress. I buy the "greatness can't take full advantage off lower competition" idea. Proved he could hold his own in the Player's League.

4. Hugh Duffy - His credentials are that he was for a time one of the best players and he produced during the 90's. Was an outstanding defensive outfielder.

5. Charley Jones – Fantastic hitter from the 19th century. Gets some credit for blacklisting from me. Anticipating any new findings Mr. Wendt may find on Charley (looks promising).

6. Andre Dawson – Matches Perez in my offensive evaluations and has the defensive edge.

7. Roger Bresnahan - I believe his versatility is a major plus in his case. I can understand not giving him credit if you think his playing time at other positions was worthless but when he was an outfielder, in his case a centerfielder, he was one of the best ones in the league.

8. Bill Monroe - Seems to be one of the best second basemen of his time.

9. Tony Perez - See him similar to Beckley in terms of value. His prime/career value is pretty good. Third base years help.

10. Mickey Welch - The 300 game winner. The discussion of the past couple of years has made me realize that Welch should be a HOMer. Is not that far behind Keefe.

11. Kirby Puckett - Basically a peak/prime vote. Does not have any filler years at beginning or end of career and his defense /offense combination for his position and era give him the edge over the other candidates.

12. Bob Johnson – Have been overlooking Indian Bob. PCL credit counterbalances any war discounts.

13. Vic Willis –Blame the cohort analysis for making me take another look at Vic.

14. Bob Elliott – The post someone made about holding his outfield time against him was true in my case. Not as much an outfielder as I had previously thought.

15. Burleigh Grimes - Has enough big seasons and career bulk to edge him over other similar candidates.

Not on ballot but made Top 10:

Dick Redding – Too much uncertainty surrounding his career for me to put him on my ballot.

Newbie of note:

Lee Smith - Currently off ballot but his case may yet be found to be enshrinable. Needs more review.
   98. Paul Wendt Posted: August 18, 2007 at 12:12 AM (#2489821)
9- Frank Chance (9) [53]
A great player on great teams. As good a hitter as Pete Browning.

At his peak, yes. His peak as a batter, assessed by rate (OPS+), roughly matches the six seasons he was an "everyday" player, 1903-08. Even then he missed more games than premier players miss, many more even than Browning.

games not played, Frank Chance 1903-08 plus two seasons at each end
(71, 62), 14, 32, 37, 19, 44, 29, (62, 66)
percent of team games scheduled
(51, 44), 10, 21, 24, 12, 29, 19, (40, 43)

David Foss
11. Frank Chance -- Great hitter for great Cubs teams. Best non-Wagner hitter in the NL for several years.

Four years is reasonable, 1903-06. His four-year peak fits neatly between two by Sam Crawford (who signed with the AL for 1903) and eight by Sherry Magee.

The National League doesn't have many "best hitters" if one views three or more seasons at once. In retrospect it seems reasonable to recognize Brouthers, Wagner, Hornsby, and Musial for spans of 12-14 years. Delahanty, Cravath, and Klein-Ott-Mize cover the gaps. Give Barnes his due and that leaves the peak seasons of Charley Jones :-) when he was as good as anyone but it is reasonable to leave the crown vacant.
(Jones ranked 3-3-2-5 by OPS+. Compare Klein 3-3-2-1, the least dominant whom I have recognized here. Take this too seriously and the last few seasons where I have recognized Wagner and Musial should be deemed vacant.)

<u>best hitter in the National League</u> (year by year, last initial)

Second best isn't so commonly dominated by long tenure, of course. But Connor and McGraw-Crawford('Y' for Yahoo)-Chance-Magee reasonably cover most of the time when I have recognized Brouthers, Delahanty, and Wagner as best.

<u>second best</u>

';' represents the break between 3-digit decades, eg 1899;1900
Brouthers spent two seasons in PL/AA and Musial spent one in the military, marked in bold here, when they were not surpassed but absent from the National League.
   99. Paul Wendt Posted: August 18, 2007 at 12:13 AM (#2489822)
'z' for miZe
   100. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: August 18, 2007 at 01:49 AM (#2490108)
If we elect Browning it will be proof of mistakes in the design of our system; if a guy who’s liked by about a third of the electorate, and ranked +50 by another third, can make it in, something’s wrong.

Dan, I'm expecting that you will trumpet that if and when Dawson and/or Perez makes it in, correct?
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
Shooty would run in but these bone spurs hurt!
for his generous support.


You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.


Page rendered in 1.2036 seconds
41 querie(s) executed