Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

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

Wednesday, January 23, 2019

2020 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion

2020 (December 2019)—elect 4

Top 10 Returning Players
Luis Tiant (263), Todd Helton (251), Kenny Lofton (217), Andruw Jones (201), Ben Taylor (196), Jeff Kent (188), Johan Santana (176), Wally Schang (153), Sammy Sosa (148), Lance Berkman (135)

Newly eligible players

Player Name	HOFm	HOFs	WAR	WAR7	JAWS	Jpos
Derek Jeter	337	67	72.4	42.4	57.4	55
Bobby Abreu	95	54	60	41.6	50.8	56.8
Jason Giambi	108	44	50.5	42.2	46.4	54.7
Cliff Lee	72	30	43.5	39.8	41.7	61.7
Rafael Furcal	54	32	39.4	30.7	35.1	55
Eric Chavez	29	25	37.5	31.1	34.3	55.7
Josh Beckett	43	23	35.7	31.2	33.4	61.7
Brian Roberts	34	24	30.4	28.1	29.2	56.9
Alfonso Soriano	105	31	28.2	27.3	27.8	53.6
Paul Konerko	80	36	27.7	21.5	24.6	54.7
Carlos Pena	25	18	25.1	24.1	24.6	54.7
Chone Figgins	18	19	22.2	22.5	22.3	55.7
Marco Scutaro	11	19	22.1	20.9	21.5	55
Raul Ibanez	38	27	20.4	20.1	20.2	53.6
Brad Penny	23	11	19.1	21.5	20.3	61.7
Jason Bartlett	15	5	18.3	19.6	18.9	55
Adam Dunn	75	32	17.4	17.7	17.6	53.6
Lyle Overbay	12	13	16.8	16.7	16.7	54.7
J.J. Putz	25	17	13.1	12.9	13	32.7
Jose Valverde	51	13	11.5	12	11.7	32.7
Ryan Ludwick	13	14	11.2	13.5	12.4	56.8
Alex Gonzalez	11	19	9.2	12.8	11	55
Jamey Wright	10	2	9.1	10.1	9.6	32.7
Joe Saunders	10	3	8.6	10.1	9.3	61.7
Heath Bell	31	13	7.1	8.9	8	32.7
Nate McLouth	10	12	6.4	10.2	8.3	57.8
Kyle Farnsworth	22	4	6.2	9.3	7.8	32.7

we’re alternating “elect 3” and “elect 4” years

2020, 2022, 2024, 2026, 2028, 2030, 2032, 2034, 2036-37, 2039, 2041 are elect 4

DL from MN Posted: January 23, 2019 at 01:21 PM | 569 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 4 of 6 pages ‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 6 > 
   301. Howie Menckel Posted: December 03, 2019 at 02:04 PM (#5905283)
this Merits a bump
   302. bachslunch Posted: December 03, 2019 at 02:07 PM (#5905284)
@294: I did drop UA stats when drawing up the list for McCormick, which seemed like the right thing to do if they're possibly suspect. And even when you drop all of McCormick's UA earned credit, he still beats Tiant (who ranks 2nd) for best BBRef WAR for pitchers. If we're going to start getting too complicated with this, I'm out -- frankly, there's a limit as to how far I'm willing to finagle. We're supposed to have a system and stick to it, and that's what I'm doing. Frankly, this all just seems like a somewhat more systematic approach to strategic voting, essentially Mariano Rivera in reverse (who I didn't vote for).

Also, my adjustment for pre-expansion players is not systematic, just a guess, and I've been told this is required -- and that's as far I'm willing to go there as well. And if it's not required, I won't do it. In fact, if we're adjusting in the other direction because of a non-integrated league (re Schang vs. Munson), one wonders if the two issues would cancel each other out. Does this only hold for 1947-1960 then? One wonders.

Look, my ballots have looked pretty middle of the road except for McCormick and Rivera. I'm thinking I'm doing something right, if so. Most everybody's got a wild card guy on their ballot or a player everyone else is voting for who is off ballot who fits their approach.
   303. Carl Goetz Posted: December 03, 2019 at 03:01 PM (#5905310)
I'm not saying you are required to make adjustments for 19th Century pitchers. Just saying that McCormick rates higher than Tiant because he was a 19th Century pitcher and not because he was a better pitcher. Making adjustments for era differences is not strategic voting; its analysis. This is why we post ballots; so others can read them and ask questions or critique; maybe even try to change your mind. We aren't the BBWAA; we are open minded and engaging with each other. No one is saying your ballot is "bad"; just pointing out why the notable difference (McCormick) is occurring. There's no requirement that you agree with my assessment, let alone act on it, but I have every right to provide it.
Also, I don't think there's a specific rule that says you have to have a system and stick with it; just that you have to explain why you did what you did. There's no such thing as a perfect system. If I have a player on my ballot that's out of the mainstream, I'll spend a longer time on my explanation. If I'm right in the mainstream, maybe its only a few words.

"In fact, if we're adjusting in the other direction because of a non-integrated league (re Schang vs. Munson), one wonders if the two issues would cancel each other out."
I would say that this depends on the situation. I don't think there's a set formula to create. In terms of Schang vs Munson (and I'm an 'in' on both), I'd say catching was probably harder on a player in the 10s/20s than in the 70s. My personal opinion is that greater toll on a catcher and adjusting for the shorter schedule would outweigh the nonintegration issue. That, and I have Schang as the best catcher (along with Santop) between Bresnahan and the mid 20s to early 40s glut. That's about a 20 year period. I have Munson as #4 in the 70s/early 80s behind Bench, Carter, and Fisk. I try not to overweight that since sometimes there's just gluts/droughts at various positions, but it is a point in Schang's favor.
As far as pitchers in the 1870s and 1880s are concerned, the job was very different from what it became even in the late 90s and early 20th Century. That difference in what an average pitcher could do needs a big adjustment in my opinion. My solution is to view this group of pitchers almost as a separate position and compare them against each other to decide which were the best. I look at WAR/WAA/WAG compared to each other but not compared to later pitchers who basically had a different job. Again; just telling you what I do. There's no requirement you handle the problem the same way.
   304. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 03, 2019 at 03:02 PM (#5905312)
LEACH looks like a no-go based on the lack of PBP data,

LAZZERI:. Poosh 'em Up Tony loses value when we include the PBP. I estimate he's a -18 runner whereas BBREF shows +5. I'm estimating -3 on GIDPs. So en toto, he loses 26 runs, or two-and-a-half wins.

RIZZUTO: PBP shows Scooter worth about 12 runs in the four years with missing PBP data versus 6 runs on BBREF. In addition, I estimate about 1.5 missing DP runs. so en toto, 7.5 runs, or less than a win's worth of difference.

Here's a couple more I've worked up today:

KLEIN: PBP estimate shows about 10.5 runs on the bases versus -3 for Rbaser on BBREF. Additionally, I estimate about +21 runs of DP avoidance. However, he loses about seven runs of arm value against DRA.

I looked at Al Simmons too because he's interesting. Simmons was a really great all around player. PBP gives him about +21 runs on the bases versus the 2 BBREF gives him. I'm calculating -8 runs on DP avoidance, though I did a special calculation for that because DP info only picks up in his age-32 season, and after that season he completely lost his wheels. So essentially all his bad DP years are in his mid-late thirties. Also, a good thrower with +19 in RF, +9 in CF (and -0 in RF in a handful of games). That's about 28 runs versus the -11 DRA shows.

Also Edd Roush: Gains about 9 runs on the bases (-0 by PBP versus -9 on BBREF), adds 6.5 runs of DP avoidance, loses about 1.5 runs for throwing vs. DRA. Net add of about 14 runs. Note: We're missing more than half his career, so this is quite provisional.

And finally, Rabbit Maranville: Picks up seven runs in PBP running vs BBREF (12 vs 5), about -10 runs in DP avoidance, no OF throwing to speak of. So the total is a loss of about 3 runs. Sorry Rabbiteers!

Obviously, I'm just picking away at guys I'm interested in now that some main candidates have been updated. Just let me know if there's anyone else you'd like to see.

   305. rwargo Posted: December 03, 2019 at 03:48 PM (#5905335)
As a sanity check, I like to split into 25 year eras. All of our pitchers except Rollie Fingers have at least 25WAA (adjusting for relievers) For pitchers, we have elected:

1871-1895 - 10
1896-1920 - 17 (12 MLB, 5 NLB)
1921-1945 - 14 (11 MLB, 3 NLB)
1946-1970 - 18
1971-1995 - 16


From 1871-1895 - we have elected all 14 pitchers over 32 WAA except 4 - Tommy Bond, Jim McCormick, Charlie Buffinton, and Tony Mullane. Bond is #5, McCormick #6, Buffinton #9, and Mullane #12 in this period. There are 6 more pitchers over 25 WAA.

From 1896-1920 - we have all 14 pitchers over 30 WAA except 3 - Vic Willis, Babe Adams, and Urban Shocker. Plus we elected Red Faber and Eppa Rixey below that number. Willis is #8, Adams #9, and Shocker #14 in this period. There are another 10 pitchers over 25 WAA.

From 1921-1945 - we have elected all 15 pitchers over 25 WAA except 4 - Dizzy Dean, Bucky Walters, Dizzy Trout, and Tommy Bridges. Dean is #9, Walters #11, Trout #12, and Bridges #14 in this period.

From 1946-1970 - we have elected all 17 pitchers over 31 WAA except 1 - Luis Tiant, who is #11 in this period, and ahead of Bunning, Palmer, Drysdale, Marichal, Ford, and Koufax. Also we elected Don Sutton, only at 25.5 WAA. There are another 8 pitchers over 25 WAA from this period, including Sutton. Wilbur Wood is the only player between 30 and 31 WAA from this period. We also elected Rollie Fingers.

From 1971-1995 - we have elected all 16 pitchers over 33 WAA and none below that number. There are another 14 pitchers above 25 WAA from this period. Appier, Gooden, and Hershiser are each over 30WAA.

From 1996-2020 - we have elected Roy Halladay. Among elgibles, Johan Santana has over 33 WAA, and Roy Oswalt (32.9) is close. Zambrano, Cliff Lee, and Javier Vazquez are eligibles below 33 and above 25 WAA.

Overall, only 12 pitchers remain over the threshholds for each era, about 1/2 of whom are 19th century guys or deadballers. After electing Tiant, we will generally be looking at the bottom of available pitchers in every era.
   306. rwargo Posted: December 03, 2019 at 03:59 PM (#5905337)
Sanity Check - C, 2B, 3B, SS, with bonus for catchers. Also, these are debut years. We have elected:

1871-1895 - 21 (19 MLB, 2 NLB)
1896-1920 - 15 (9 MLB, 6 NLB)
1921-1945 - 17 (13 MLB, 4 NLB)
1946-1970 - 20
1971-1995 - 19
1996-2020 - 1

From 1871-1895 - we have elected all 15 players over 22 WAA except 2 - Denny Lyons and Fred Dunlap. We also elected Monte Ward, Ross Barnes, George Wright, Ezra Sutton, Cal McVey, and Dickey Pearce.
From 1896-1920 - we have elected all 13 players over 25 WAA except 5 - Wally Schang, Joe Tinker, Art Fletcher, Dave Bancroft, and Larry Doyle. We also elected Joe Sewell (23.6) who really belongs in the next era.
From 1921-1945 - we have elected all 16 players over 25 WAA except 3 - Ernie Lombardi, Travis Jackson, and Vern Stephens. Remember catchers adjusted.
From 1946-1970 - we have elected all 25 players over 25 WAA except 6 - Sal Bando, Thurman Munson, Gene Tenace, Toby Harrah, Jim Fregosi, and Bert Campaneris. Electee Nellie Fox is just outside at 24.8 WAA.
From 1971-1995 - we have elected all 22 players over 33 WAA except 3 - Alex Rodriguez (not eligible), Derek Jeter (this year) and Buddy Bell (at the bottom). There are another 7 players below 33 and above 25 WAA.
From 1996-2020 - we have elected Scott Rolen. There are two eligibles above 25, but not 30 WAA, Nomar Garciaparra (29.2) and Jason Kendall (26.8).

We are generally voting for the remaining people on this list. or just below the thressholds.

   307. rwargo Posted: December 03, 2019 at 04:10 PM (#5905343)
Sanity Check - 1B, OF. Again, debut years. No adjustments here. We have elected:

1871-1895 - 20
1896-1920 - 17 (13 MLB, 4 NLB)
1921-1945 - 23 (16 MLB, 7 NLB)
1946-1970 - 20
1971-1995 - 20
1996-2020 - 1

Remarkably consistent.

From 1871-1895 - we have elected all 17 players over 22 WAA except Mike Smith. We also elected George Gore, Joe Start, Charley Jones, and Lip Pike.
From 1896-1920 - we have elected all 13 players over 25 WAA except Frank Chance. We also elected Jimmy Sheckard (22.2)
From 1921-1945 - we have elected all 19 players over 25 WAA except Bob Johnson, Chuck Klein, Hack Wilson, and Kiki Cuyler. Electee Enos Slaughter is just outside at 24.8 WAA. Only Johnson is above 30 WAA.
From 1946-1970 - we have elected all 22 players over 29 WAA except Bobby Bonds and Cesar Cedeno. Another 7 players are between 29 and 25 WAA, but no electees.
From 1971-1995 - we have elected all 21 players over 33.5 WAA except Kenny Lofton and Sammy Sosa. Another 16 players are between 33.5 WAA and 25 WAA, including electee Will Clark (29.3).
From 1996-2020 - we have elected Vladimir Guerrero. Andruw Jones and Todd Helton are above 33 WAA, while Lance Berkman and Bobby Abreu are below that but above 30 WAA.

Again, we have a few to catch up on, but no huge outliers. Sanity check done.
   308. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 03, 2019 at 05:09 PM (#5905366)
Kiko - could you compare Rizzuto and Henrich?

Also, could you comment on Toby Harrah's fielding? As a very young person, I always had the idea that he was not a very good fielder. I think this came from early Bill James articles on Range Factor, and the fact that he was moved off SS at age 27. Guys that could really field didn't play all over the diamond back then, they locked them into a slot.


Always glad to talk about my numbers. I'll start with Harrah. On the player pages on my website, if you click the headings of the third table, you get breakdowns of Batting, Baserunning, Pitching, and Fielding. Here's Toby Harrah's fielding page.

Top-line. I have Toby Harrah as, essentially, an average fielder throughout his career. My units are wins and losses, so these are win percentages, which, of course, center on 0.500. I have Harrah's overall career fielding win percentage at .503. At SS, I have him at .508; at 3B, .501; at 2B, .487. If the latter seems odd, remember, he only played meaningful games at 2B in his last two seasons, at ages 36 and 37.

If you click "Shortstop" in the above link, it takes you here, which breaks down Harrah's fielding at shortstop. Infielders get totals in five components: 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. Component 5 is hits vs. outs on balls-in-play; 6 is singles v. doubles v. triples on hits-in-play (which is much more significant for outfielders than infielders); 7 is double plays (on ground outs in DP situations); 8 is baserunner outs (throwing out a guy at home, the ability to double runners off on line drives, that sort of thing); 9 is baserunner advancements (8 and 9 are more important to outfielders than infielders - it's pretty rare to go 1st-to-3rd on a single to the SS - but not necessarily trivial).

For his career, Harrah was slightly below average at Component 5 (.495), very bad at component 6 (although, as I said, that doesn't matter a great deal to infielders), and very good at components 7, 8, and 9 (win percentages of .544, .595, .532, respectively). Looking at Harrah's raw numbers, the DP numbers don't jump out at me (per BB-Ref, he was 4th in the AL in DP's at SS in 1974, his only top-10 finish, but he led the AL in defensive games at SS that year, so that doesn't really scream "great on the double play"). Digging out my copy of Bill James' Win Shares, he reports actual vs. expected DP's by team by season and he shows the Senators/Rangers from 1971-74 (Harrah's good DP years at SS) at +6.6, -14.2, -16.9, and +8.0. So he's not really seeing what I'm seeing there. Couldn't really tell you why.

The Rangers moved Harrah from SS to 3B in 1977. In 1976, I do have Harrah dipping below .500 for the first time, and Harrah led all AL shortstops in errors (for the 2nd time). The '76 Rangers had Roy Howell at 3B. They acquired Bert Campaneris in the off-season to play SS and traded Howell to the expansion Toronto Blue Jays. I don't know the order in which those decisions were made - possibly "We gotta move Harrah off SS; hey, Campaneris is available; okay, but what do we do with Roy Howell?" Or maybe it was dissatisfaction with Howell (Howell wasn't great, but the '76 Rangers had quite a few bigger problems than their somewhat below-average third baseman) and an availability of Campaneris? Not sure.

Moving to 3B, then, Harrah continued to be an average fielder, by my numbers, broken down in much the same way: below-average at the core job of converting balls-in-play to outs (component 5 - .492), well above average at the rest (preventing extra-base hits and baserunner advancements and throwing guys out - .566, .521, .566 at those three components.

I started being a baseball fan around this time - in fact, Harrah played 3B and batted 5th in the first MLB game I saw live - but I don't really remember the perceptions of the time.

Trying to read my numbers into a scouting report 40 years after the fact, it looks like Harrah probably had limited range - not BAD range, per se, but probably below average - but a strong arm and probably good baseball instincts.

I'll try to answer your other question later tonight.
   309. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 03, 2019 at 06:59 PM (#5905399)
Last little-things update for the day.

Dave Bancroft: PBP estimate of 1.6 Rbaser vs -8 BBREF Rbaser plus estimated 2 runs of DP avoidance, though that's currently based completely on comps. Net gain of 9.5 or so runs.

Bill Terry: PBP baserunning of +20 vs -4 from BBREF; +13 estimated DP runs; -0 throwing runs for limited RF play. Net gain of +37 runs.

Charlie Gehringer: +44 PBP running runs vs 11 from BBREF; estimate of +8 for GIDP avoidance. Net gain of +41 runs en toto.

Joe Sewell: -0.4 PBP running runs vs -2 from BBREF; +6 runs for DP avoidance. Net gain of about 7.5 runs.

Max Carey This is a very provisional estimate, but thought I'd sneak it in here since there's some WOW factor here. PBP running estimated with comps +102 runs vs +89 from BBREF; estimated DP avoidance from comps of +18 runs; estimate of 2 runs of throwing vs 22 runs on DRA. That means that Carey nets out at +11. I would say that Carey's baserunning has room to grow believe it or not. Remember that the league is stealing at about 55%ish through most of his career. 1925 was Carey's last great running year, and he stole 81% of his attempts. (He would have two other years with great SB% in meaningful numbers of attempts, but 1925 appears to be his last great all-around baserunning season.) In the seasons 1919 to 1924, he stole at the following percentages: 62% (18 of 29), 84% (52 of 62), 76% (37 of 51), 96%! (51 of 53), 86% (51 of 59), and 79% (49 of 62). Those steals by themselves are worth 28.5 runs versus the 10 runs his steals after 1924 were worth (in less PT, of course). Anyway, alls I'm saying is that the book is far from closed on Carey and given how far ahead of the competition he was in SB%, his comps may undersell him. The same may be true for his arm value in that he had an outstanding throwing record, and we've only got information on his baseball senescence.

Gabby Hartnett: Bad news for the Gabmeister. PBP running estimates of -23 runs vs +7 on BBREF; -21 runs estimated for DP avoidance. Net loss of -37 runs. Don't worry, he's still very much a top-tier catcher. Haven't figured his clone, Bill Dickey, yet, but Dickey's only got a couple years of incomplete PBP whereas we still don't have the whole story on Hartnett.

If you want to know about someone, let me know. Otherwise, I'll just keep spouting these things out as I go along. Unless that's really annoying, in which case, you should also so!
   310. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 03, 2019 at 09:20 PM (#5905422)
If you want to know about someone, let me know. Otherwise, I'll just keep spouting these things out as I go along. Unless that's really annoying, in which case, you should also so!


Keep 'em coming Doc, between this and the Negro League analysis, late birthday/early Christmas presents for me :)

I'll try to think of some grey area guys to review in particular, I appreciate the comments on Bancroft, Cuyler, Sisler, Lazzeri, Rizzuto, and Terry.
Off hand, I'm curious on Johnny Pesky, would help his peak case if he gains, thank you sir.
   311. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 03, 2019 at 11:19 PM (#5905430)
Kiko - could you compare Rizzuto and Henrich?


Sure. Similarities are obvious - Yankees of the 1940s who missed significant time to World War II. Both were good baserunners and fielders - Rizzuto was probably better at both, plus he played the more difficult/valuable defensive position. Henrich was the much better hitter and Henrich's better bat overwhelms Rizzuto's other small advantages - in part because Henrich was himself a pretty good baserunner and a fine fielder.

Both Henrich and Rizzuto look quite a bit better in pWins (which tie to team wins) than eWins (which are context-neutral), by similar amounts, though, so that's not all that interesting a piece of the comparison. On my player pages, if you click the heading "Value Decomposition" on either of the first two tables, you get a page that basically decomposes a players pWORL (if you click on the pWins page) or eWORL (if you click on the eWins) page - these are modeled after BB-Ref's "Player Value" tables. At the bottom of this page, then, you can create a weighted "uber-stat" and it'll show you results by season - this is helpful, for example, for figuring out how much war credit to give these guys.

Anyway, Phil Rizzuto's eWORL decomposition page is here. For his career, I have him at 2.2 baserunning wins over (non-pitcher) average and 5.8 net fielding wins. Using my default positional weights, he gets 11.5 wins for playing shortstop. Add all of that up and that's 19.5 wins above average. Then we have to add in his batting. Retrosheet shows him with a career OPS+ of 93 and -29 Rbat (if you also include his +1 Rdp, which I put under batting). I have him at -8.2 wins relative to (non-pitcher) average. So I'm lower on Rizzuto's batting. Basically, my system values power more than most other offensive systems and Rizzuto wasn't much of a power hitter (career SLG of .355). If you click on "Batting" in the link there you can dig more deeply into Rizzuto's batting page.

Anyway, add it all up, he has a career eWOPA of 11.3 - basically, his batting almost perfectly offsets his baserunning plus fielding and his eWOPA almost perfectly matches his positional adjustment (11.5 wins). Shifting to (my) replacement level adds another 20 wins, giving him 31.3 career eWORL.

Tommy Henrich's page is here. Rizzuto beats him in baserunning 2.2 to 1.5 - but 1.5 baserunning wins is still pretty good. Rizzuto beats him in fielding 5.8 - 3.2, where Rizzuto's being compared to shortstops and Henrich is being compared to corner outfielders. That difference in position is 11.5 to -4.2 for Rizzuto. All of which adds up to 19.5 for Rizzuto vs. 0.5 for Henrich. And then Henrich makes up all of that and then some in batting, where I have Henrich ahead 25.3 to -8.2 (BB-Ref has the difference - in runs, including DP's - at 216 to -29).

Basically, my system likes everything about Henrich a bit more than Baseball-Reference. I don't know that I could really say why.

The other issue with Rizzuto and Henrich in terms of putting together my ballot - why Henrich hangs around the bottom of my ballot and Rizzuto's not really in my consideration set - is WWII credit. If you go down to the last tables in the two links above, you can see an "uber-stat" by season for these guys. For Henrich, he's ending up with an uber-stat just over 100 in about 7 full and 3 partial seasons with 3 full seasons missed due to WW2. The units don't really mean anything here, but ballpark, it probably takes 115 or so to make the bottom of my ballot, so Henrich is perhaps one or two prime seasons off-ballot. In his case, World War II very clearly cut into his prime. He had two very good full seasons right before the war, came back and put up four very good seasons immediately after the war. So, it seems fairly simple, to me, to justify just taking an average of those six seasons, give or take, and give him credit for three more just like them.

Rizzuto, on the other hand, had a very good 1942 season - basically comparable in value to Henrich's prime seasons. And then, after the war, he put up pretty good seasons in 1947 and 1949 and a great season in 1950. But he also put up a clunker in 1946 and another one in 1948. Now here, if we assume that Rizzuto's 1943-45 were comparable to his 1942 - and if we write off his 1946 as also a casualty of the war and maybe give him a fourth season at or near that level, now we have a Hall-of-Merit candidate - probably still just off ballot for me, but at least he's in the consideration set. I just think that's too generous.

Henrich was clearly a player who you could count on to hit .280/.380/.490 with solid baserunning and above-average defense in the corner outfield. Saying he deserves credit for three more seasons of exactly that seems very straightforward and uncontroversial to me. Rizzuto was a guy who could hit .300 for you or he could hit .250 for you - and even his fielding fluctuated more than you might like (his 1946 was bad because he put up a 74 OPS+; in my system, his 1948 was something of a clunker because his fielding dropped to average on top of the OPS+ of 79 per BB-Ref).
   312. Howie Menckel Posted: December 03, 2019 at 11:40 PM (#5905431)
Rizzuto came back home post-WW II poor - and flirting with an offer from the Mexican League in May 1946. lawyers followed, and he never jumped. but it was a weird year. I do think 1942 is a better measuring stick than 1946 for that reason.
   313. bachslunch Posted: December 04, 2019 at 07:20 AM (#5905444)
@303: Thanks, Carl. Appreciate the feedback.
   314. DL from MN Posted: December 04, 2019 at 09:36 AM (#5905465)
Rizzuto was still dealing with malaria in 1946. I don't give extra credit for it but I don't weight it heavily for his 3 seasons of war credit. I rate those as 1/3 of his surrounding 9 seasons.
   315. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 04, 2019 at 09:02 PM (#5905752)
Here's some more info on baserunning, DP avoidance, and throwing.

Johnny Pesky: 8 runs for 1942-1947, where BBREF gives him -1 over that span. DP avoidance for 1942-1947 appears to be roughly 4 runs, so an estimated net gain of +11.

Can't really do Sisler so much because what we have of his running is all post-injury and late-career. Given how much his game changed after the beanball, I'm going to hold off on estimating him.

Indian Bob Johnson: Estimated baserunning of +4 runs versus -3 for BBREF; estimated DP avoidance of -2 runs; estimated throwing +22 runs versus +40 for DRA. Net of about 5 runs sans DRA, -13 with DRA.

Pepper Martin: Just for giggles...+26 running estimated vs BBREF estimate of +5; +5 on DP avoidance; +5 on throwing vs +4 for DRA's throwing. Net of 26 runs w/out DRA, 27 with DRA.

More giggles. Red Rolfe, who was a great baserunner like Martin. Estimating +20 running vs +5 for BBREF. Now get ready for this one: +36 on GIDP avoidance. I'm pretty sure that I've got my numbers correct, and he did that in only 5,406 PA. The typical MLBer would have grounded into about 145 deuces in Rolfe's 1102 DPopps. He banged into just 48. Anyway, all told it's +51 for Red. Not that it matters.

Earl Averill: His entire career is now covered by PBP. Averill was an extreme player in the little stuff. He calculates out to +13 runs on the bases versus -3 for BBREF. Then he's an astounding +52 on DP avoidance. Again, we have a lefty hitter, and I'm guessing he's probably an extreme flyball hitter as well. That's +52 in a little over 7,200 PA, which is astounding. Right now we have him at 32 GIDP in 760 DPopps, or under 5%. The league is at 13%. His other extreme, however, is throwing. While DRA shows up at -11, PBP suggests he's a -35ish thrower. Ouch. So a lot of those gains on offense are given back and he nets out at +43...which ain't bad.

Stan Hack: PBP has him at -0.4 running runs and BBREF has him at -9 running runs. BTW: Hack was a weird baserunner. He just at it vs the league in SBruns. His 165/154 was just a 52% success rate where the league was at about 60% on average during his career. So he's losing 13 runs to the league there. But he picks up 1.5 runs on avoiding pickoffs, 3 runs on avoiding outs on base, adds a run on bases taken sans batted balls, and then gains another 8 runs on extra bases taken on batted balls. So either he's a preternaturally terrible SB guy, or he was involved in a lot of busted hit and runs, and whoever the #2 hitter was should have been fired. Anyway, it's still +9 against BBREF, and Hack looks like he's about +16 in DP avoidance for a grand total of +25.

Rick Ferrell: Bad news for Ferrell fans. I'm pegging him at -3 for running against BBREF's -2 for running. Not bad for a catcher! But he's -21 in DP avoidance. Oops. So that's -22 total.

More sometime this weekend.
   316. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 04, 2019 at 11:33 PM (#5905790)
1. Jeter - my system agrees he was a historically terrible defender, but my system, in general, has less extreme fielding numbers (a theme that will repeat itself regularly in the comments here)
2. Tommy John - if you didn't know that my system loves Tommy John, then you probably haven't been paying attention to my comments and ballots over the past few years
3. Andruw Jones - perhaps a bit of a surprise given my system's general fielding numbers. My system likes his offense more than some others (my system likes home runs) and I tend to prefer peaks and primes over careers (despite Tommy John's presence at #2 - I'm actually very open-minded about HOW a player puts together a Hall-of-Fame/Merit case). Anyway, running my latest numbers with the weights I like right now, Jones ends up extremely high.
4. Jeff Kent - I like power-hitting middle infielders. My system thinks Kent's defense, while not "good" wasn't particularly "bad" either - he was just a bit below average
5. Vern Stephens - power-hitting middle infielder - check! good defense - check (the Red Sox moved Pesky to 3B for him)! his placement does depend on how much you downgrade his 1943-45 for the level of competition
6. Luis Tiant - my system kind of puts him in a clump with several other pitchers; I'm pushing him up a bit in a nod to other voters/systems
7. Wally Schang - I'm missing the first 6 years of his career and about 300 games thereafter. What I have looks good; given Jorge Posada's documented defensive deficiencies, I think Schang is the best eligible catcher not in the Hall of Merit.
8. Andy Pettitte - kind of a poor man's Tommy John
9. Sammy Sosa - I'm pushing him up a bit judgmentally; again, my system finds a few outfielders who are fairly similar in value; Sosa gets a bit of a bump here in a nod to consensus.
10. Lance Berkman - good hitter, great postseason performer; benefits from my preference for peak/prime
11. Jorge Posada - I knocked him down a few notches because I'm warming to the idea that he was a truly wretched defensive catcher in ways that are not included in my system but which are, in fact, measurable (e.g., pitch framing).
12. Urban Shocker - I'm missing some of the beginning of his career, but my system really likes what it's seen so far
13. Tommy Henrich - I'm giving him fairly generous World War II credit to get him up here - this is actually a theme for my last four ballot slots; they're all guys about whom I have more uncertainty than the guys ahead of them.
14. Johnny Evers - He pre-dates my system. But I'm fairly sure that once I have Player won-lost records back to the first decade of the 20th century, at least one of Tinker, Evers, and/or Chance are going to leap out as clear HOMers. My best guess, as of right now, is that Evers has the best case of the three.
15. Ben Taylor - I have to defer to others and my interpretation of others' comments is that he's borderline at best.

Off-ballot (for now): I'm going to clump some of these, because in some cases, there are groups of players who my system sees as extremely similar, so much so that I tend to feel like I need to either vote for all of them or none of them (within a particular clump - not literally everybody below):

16-18. Orel Hershiser, Dwight Gooden, Johan Santana - all three have peaks/primes that easily meet HOF/HOM standards; all three are a bit weak on career numbers. Santana has the best peak and the shortest career.

19-21. Toby Harrah, Bert Campaneris, Dave Concepcion - the only three shortstops of the 1970s who could hit worth a damn. All three would be in my personal Hall of Fame. I think I could make a case to order the three of them in any of the six possible ways you can order three names.

22. Jason Giambi - has the sort of peak that I like
23. Darryl Strawberry - ditto; could probably clump these two. A third guy who recently started popping up in my rankings that's similar is Jack Clark. George Foster also makes an appearance in my ballot link earlier from this same general class (peak/prime-heavy hitters)

24-25. Todd Helton, Gil Hodges - we've discussed positional averages before, and I have modified my system so you can pick your own. That said, I still like one-year positional averages when I evaluate players. Doing so, Hodges benefits from the fact that he was arguably the best first baseman of the 1950s. Helton suffers from playing in an era when there were a ton of good-hitting first basemen - McGriff, Delgado, Olerud, Palmeiro, et al. I think my system is also dinging Helton more for Coors Field than some other systems, so I've actually slid him up here (he's more like in the 50-75 range in the link above) to account for that. I don't hate him as a candidate, but I don't think he's likely to make my ballot.

Required / notable disclosures:

Bobby Abreu - I have him around #35 or so; not enough peak for my tastes
Buddy Bell - probably in my top 200; my fielding numbers are less extreme in general and, while I think he was very good, I think my evaluation of his defense is a bit less than other systems. I'm also not a huge fan of his offense - not enough power; and I think BB-Ref's positional adjustment for 3B during his career might be a little wonky.
Kenny Lofton - around #75 or so. Basically, it's the same arguments as Buddy Bell, but perhaps less extreme: his defense was good, but probably not great; offense was fine, but not what I would see as HOF/HOM-worthy; he was an elite baserunner, which is a big advantage relative to Bell
Thurman Munson - I don't know exactly how to evaluate catchers. He's around #100 on my ballot, probably, if I went that deep, but if you wanted to convince me that his defense was elite, you could probably convince me and maybe I'd even be willing to push him as high as top-30 or so. I'm inclined to NOT give "death" credit; essentially, that's just an extreme career-ending injury. If he suddenly becomes our top back-logger, I'm not going to argue AGAINST his induction and if he gets elected to the real Hall of Fame next week, I'll be happy for his family and fans. But I'm pretty sure he's not going to be making my ballot.

I think that's everybody folks might care about.


Others who are high in W-L records/a peakier version I use, I would expect to see on your short list/how do these guys fare?
If you have general comments on the guys mentioned, would be greatly appreciated from my end:
Kiki Cuyler
Dale Murphy
Tony Perez
Fred McGriff
Ron Cey
Bob Johnson
Bobby Abreu
Amos Otis
Roy Oswalt

It could be that not all of the games are available by Retrosheet making the candidacies look a bit inflated, but the next grouping you have is a glut of 1920s/30s with limited support:
Schoolboy Rowe
Hack Wilson
Waite Hoyt
Burleigh Grimes
Do you support any of these guys for your personal hall of merit/should we be skeptical of missing data?
I'm a big fan of trying to reimagine my personal hall each year

Who do you have from those elected by the HOM that you feel are mistakes, looking at your uber-stat?
Richie Ashburn, Hoyt Wilhelm, Rollie Fingers, Edd Roush*, Eppa Rixey*, Tony Gwynn!, Red Faber*, Don Drysdale!, Dave Stieb, Keith Hernandez, Nellie Fox, Bill Freehan, Rick Reuschel, Stan Hack, Ralph Kiner?

Thanks for your insights :)
   317. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 05, 2019 at 01:01 AM (#5905804)
Others who are high in W-L records/a peakier version I use, I would expect to see on your short list/how do these guys fare?
If you have general comments on the guys mentioned, would be greatly appreciated from my end:
Kiki Cuyler
Dale Murphy
Tony Perez
Fred McGriff
Ron Cey
Bob Johnson
Bobby Abreu
Amos Otis
Roy Oswalt


Everybody named here shows up in the top 34 in the link on the previous page (repeated here for convenience). I would presume that all of these guys would be in my personal Hall of Fame/Merit, although since my system doesn't go back before 1919 and excludes Negro Leaguers, it's hard to know exactly how many pHOF slots I have to fill from guys for whom I have full career numbers.

Schoolboy Rowe
Hack Wilson
Waite Hoyt
Burleigh Grimes
Do you support any of these guys for your personal hall of merit/should we be skeptical of missing data?


For Schoolboy Rowe, Retrosheet's next update should cover his entire career - although I believe the Tigers have the most deduced games of any team in the 1930s. So, yeah, perhaps a grain of two of salt are warranted, but he's probably in my top 50 (he's #42 in the link above). Of relevance here, given their relative HOM voting histories, Rowe rates as notably better than long-time teammate Tommy Bridges in my system - Bridges is just outside my top 100 - although since Bridges' career started three years earlier than Rowe's, I'm missing more games of his career (53 games total), so that could change over time.

Hack Wilson is #63, but I'd be cautious at least until Retrosheet releases deduced games for all of 1930 - that season's very much the key to Hack Wilson's HOM case (I'm currently missing 22 games in that season; 164 games total for his career).
Waite Hoyt is #28. I'm missing 80 games (which I'm extrapolating into his rating here).
Burleigh Grimes is #40 with my missing 139 games including two full seasons (that I'm not extrapolating for the #40). I should probably take a look at how much manual credit to give him for his pre-1919 work. He could certainly slide up into my consideration set.

Who do you have from those elected by the HOM that you feel are mistakes, looking at your uber-stat?
Richie Ashburn, Hoyt Wilhelm, Rollie Fingers, Edd Roush*, Eppa Rixey*, Tony Gwynn!, Red Faber*, Don Drysdale!, Dave Stieb, Keith Hernandez, Nellie Fox, Bill Freehan, Rick Reuschel, Stan Hack, Ralph Kiner?


I'm going to pass on all of the guys with asterisks, all of whom played in MLB prior to 1919.

I go back and forth sometimes, but I think my current thinking would be to have Mariano Rivera as the only relief pitcher in my personal Hall. Goose Gossage tends to show up as the second-best relief pitcher in my system (not counting Dennis Eckersley, who's in my personal Hall) but I'd probably leave him out.

I think the three un-asterisked starting pitchers that you list would be in my personal Hall. If I take the weights from my previous link and extend it to include everybody, Rick Reuschel pops up at #200, Dave Stieb is #203, and Don Drysdale is #205. I think those are high enough rankings to be in my personal Hall. Incidentally, Sandy Koufax is #214 (the short career really hurts - take a look at his career WAR, for example).

Stan Hack shows up at #239 right next to Joe Mauer, Bill Terry, and Dizzy Dean. That might be too low to make my personal Hall (although keep in mind, this ranking includes guys not yet eligible (well, the presence of Joe Mauer makes that obvious) - A-Rod is #13, Pujols is #23, Mike Trout is already up to 102 - right behind two other guys not yet eligible: C.C. Sabathia at #99 and Adrian Beltre at #101). Anyway, all of that said, I think Hack is in my personal Hall and if he's out, he's not far enough out to really be a "mistake".

Bill Freehan is #282, which is probably out. I have him behind (at least) four eligible non-HOM catchers: Jorge Posada, Ernie Lombardi, Gene Tenace, and Darrell Porter. That said, Freehan had a much stronger defensive reputation than all three of those guys and I'm probably under-valuing catcher defense (and hence, implicitly over-valuing poor defensive catchers). I might be inclined to make an adjustment for that if I were filling my personal Hall. So, like Hack, even if Freehan's not in my personal Hall, I hesitate to label him a "mistake".

Nellie Fox is #284, which could indicate a mistake, because I have more confidence in my numbers for non-catchers. Although in the past I've given a bit of a boost to second basemen, who tend to have shorter-than-average careers. If I give a 5% boost to second basemen, Fox slides up to #260, which is probably right around the borderline where it depends on how I populate my personal Hall. Probably less likely to be in my personal Hall than Hack and Freehan, but I'd still be loathe to call him a "mistake".

Which I believe leaves four guys who I think I would be willing to call "mistakes" relative to my system: Ralph Kiner (#294) - his career's too short and he doesn't add enough value outside of the home runs (which are obviously very valuable, of course); Keith Hernandez (#305) - first base defense just isn't that important, and he doesn't stand out quite so much in my numbers as he does in some other metrics, even setting aside the difference in scale; Tony Gwynn (#356) - not enough power for a corner outfielder whose baserunning and fielding got notably worse as he aged. And Richie Ashburn doesn't even show up among my top 500. I think I've talked about him before. My system just doesn't like him - no power, my system really dislikes his fielding, especially the secondary aspects of it (his teams allowed large numbers of extra-base hits). Scrolling through the second link in this reply, unless there's another non-relief pitcher HOMer whose case is based entirely on MLB performance since 1919 outside my top 500 besides Ashburn, I think that's it as far as clear "mistakes" based on my system.
   318. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 05, 2019 at 10:48 AM (#5905865)
Thanks Kiko, if possible, please comment on Kiki Cuyler since he's not slotted in your rankings but does well in the raw W-L records, and forgot, also Dave Bancroft once you roll in his pre-1919 years.

Thank you!
   319. Esteban Rivera Posted: December 05, 2019 at 12:13 PM (#5905914)
There’s a lot of information to take in (thanks Doc and Kiko). Some information I wanted to ask about with regards to the NgL MLEs:

The WAR values on Baseball Reference are regressed for fielding and base running pre-1953. Are the MLEs similarly regressed in this regard?

The fielding part I believe uses DRA as part of its calculation (if I read the explanation correctly), since that is what is used at the Negro Leagues database. The data is then converted to an rfield value, but if I’m comparing the MLE WAR numbers to the major leaguers, would it make more sense to use the DRA fielding values for the major leaguers when doing the comparison or should it be the numbers as done by Baseball Reference with DRS?

I’ll chime back in once I’ve had a chance to read through the more recent posts.
   320. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 05, 2019 at 05:50 PM (#5906084)
Esteban,

The MLE values for Baserunning aren’t regressed because there aren’t any Baserunning values to regress. With no PBP and without accurate counts if SB and CS, there’s not a lot to regress with. So instead, I use SB/ estimated opportunity, height, and weight, and I find MLB comps from 1948 to now and look at the twelve players most similar to the guy in question. In reality, these are very much estimates.

For fielding it’s a bit different. In fielding there’s more information but it’s spread out across a career. So I take a player’s career average and turn that into the rfield value as you say. There’s no regression instead we’re relying on less complex types of central tendency to do the work for us.

I hope that helps. It may be helpful to know that fielding data is running behind batting data at this point. There’s many seasons where we have both and many seasons where we only have batting.
   321. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 05, 2019 at 11:05 PM (#5906138)
Thanks Kiko, if possible, please comment on Kiki Cuyler since he's not slotted in your rankings but does well in the raw W-L records, and forgot, also Dave Bancroft once you roll in his pre-1919 years.

Thank you!


Sure, in my latest weighting Cuyler comes in #30. He's between Dave Concepcion and Bobby Abreu, who I did mention. Cuyler is definitely a guy who benefits from play-by-play data as I use it or as Dr. C. has been doing. Great baserunner - across all aspects, including what I measure as sort of the baserunning-adjacent components of batting - avoiding double plays, beating out infield hits, legging out extra-base hits. He's also a very good fielder - again, across the board as I measure it - solidly above average at converting balls-in-play into outs, very good at preventing extra-base hits, very good in the "arm" components of fielding (baserunner outs, baserunner advancements).

His peak still pre-dates the seasons for which Retrosheet has full play-by-play, but Retrosheet has at least some data for every season of his career. Overall, it looks like I'm missing 153 games of his career, which works out to about 8% - although they're skewed toward his more valuable seasons, so 8% probably under-states the relative impact of his missing games. For seasons where I'm missing some games, I extrapolate based on the games I do have - so, for example, if a guy played 150 games and I have play-by-play for 75 of them, then I take his records in those 75 games and multiply them all by two. This is far from ideal, of course, but it's a problem that is more or less self-correcting as we get more data.

As of now, #30 is far enough off-ballot that it's hard for me to see how I could justify putting him on my ballot, although different folks value different things. I think looking at his numbers, his peak is a little low for my taste and he doesn't really have the career bulk to make up for it. But, again, that may change as we get more data - and others may be less interested in peak vis-a-vis career.

Cuyler has three seasons with significant missed time - 1927 (age 28, 85 games), 1932 (age 32, 110 games), and 1933 - (age 33, 70 games). It looks like 1932 and 1933 were injuries (broken bones in both cases) which I think is one of those things that you can't really go and adjust for every injury a guy suffered. The 1927 missed time, though, is kind of weird, and I think you might be able to defend giving him some sort of credit. According to Cuyler's SABR Biography, Cuyler basically missed the last two months of the season because his manager, Donie Bush, didn't like him. I don't know - maybe you could use that as an excuse to slide him up the ratings a bit.

Personally, I think I'm going to wait until we get more play-by-play data. It's possible that'll be enough to slide him up onto my ballot in a few years. Although I suspect he's going to just kind of hang around in that #20-#40 no-man's land of always being in consideration but never quite good enough to make my ballot. But we'll see - that's the great benefit of permanent eligibility.
   322. Esteban Rivera Posted: December 07, 2019 at 10:57 AM (#5906508)
Esteban,

The MLE values for Baserunning aren’t regressed because there aren’t any Baserunning values to regress. With no PBP and without accurate counts if SB and CS, there’s not a lot to regress with. So instead, I use SB/ estimated opportunity, height, and weight, and I find MLB comps from 1948 to now and look at the twelve players most similar to the guy in question. In reality, these are very much estimates.

For fielding it’s a bit different. In fielding there’s more information but it’s spread out across a career. So I take a player’s career average and turn that into the rfield value as you say. There’s no regression instead we’re relying on less complex types of central tendency to do the work for us.

I hope that helps. It may be helpful to know that fielding data is running behind batting data at this point. There’s many seasons where we have both and many seasons where we only have batting.


Thnaks for the answers Doc, I'm clear on this now. If you're still doing some of the little things spotchecks you've been posting and are taking suggestions, here's some potential players to look at:

Dolph Camilli
Lonny Frey
Max Bishop
Eddie Stanky
Buddy Myer
Bob Elliott
Harlond Clift
Dick Bartell
Marty Marion
Ken Williams
Augie Galan
Heinie Manush
Dom DiMaggio
Wally Berger
Babe Herman
Bill Nicholson
Ross Youngs

I didn't include Ray Schalk since many of his seasons are not yet in the PBP data, but he's someone who I think may actually be a a stealth candidate once all of this value is accounted for.
   323. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 07, 2019 at 04:26 PM (#5906618)
Ken Williams' only seasons of PBP are his age 36 and beyond, so I'm a little hesitant to go there yet. Youngs is also very incomplete, so I'm not going to touch it yet. And I'm too lazy to do Herman today. I'll get to him tomorrow. But I've got the rest of these guys. I'm going to make a chart this time.

          EST  BBREF EST  EST  EST  EST  DRA  NET    NET
NAME      BSR  BSR   DPR  LFR  CFR  RFR  OFR  NODRA  DRA
=========================================================
BARTELL     7   -5    -2                      +14   
BERGER      6   -1     9   -0    2    1   -9  +16    +28
BISHOP     -8   -4     3                      - 1
CAMILLI     5   -2    17                      +24 
CLIFT      17    0    -5   +0              0  +12    +12      
DIMAGGIO   21    0    -0   +0   27   +0   20  +21    +28  
ELLIOTT     2   -5   -10   -0   -3   -7   -0  - 3    -13
FREY       19   -2    18   +0   +0   -0   +0  +39    +39
GALAN      19   -1    32    5    6   +0   -4  +53    +64 
MANUSH     28    6    12  -12   -2   -2  -34  +46    +64 
MARION      4   -1     5                      +10    
MYER        7   -5     8                      +20
NICHOLSON   0   -1    18    1    0  -13  -10  +19    +17
STANKY      2   -1     4                      + 7
---------------------------------------------------------
KELLER     -7    2    26   -7         1  -17  +15    +26   
SLAUGHTER  16   -3    15   -2   -1   -6   -2  +34    +27

Note: Only includes value accrued through 1948 (running/dp) or 1952 (OF throwing).

I'll try to get to Herman tomorrow, but I must clean the litter boxes right now or no one in our house will be happy.
   324. DL from MN Posted: December 07, 2019 at 07:43 PM (#5906656)
Interesting how many are moving up. What are the chances that MLB average baserunning also moves up and this extra value gets swallowed up?
   325. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 07, 2019 at 09:23 PM (#5906691)
DL, I had the same question about my own work. I think there are eight possible things here. Some, all, or none may be operative.

Before I articulate those things, anyone interested in knowing more about the running, DP, and arm value of the players before 1948, PLEASE send BBREF a note asking them to update WAR as far back as they can. There’s a ton more info now than before, and speculation like mine is just until the acknowledged leader in the field gets this data into their calculations. Please, Sean Forman, if you are reading, the HOM needs you!!! :)

1) It’s possible that the worst players in the league may soak up disproportionate amounts of negative value in running—prior to integration this may have been more true because the talent pool was smaller and the difference in skill between the best and worst players may have been greeater.
2) We have been looking primarily at good to great players, and those guys tend to be good at many things
3) I have cherry picked a lot of guys due to my personal expectation that they would have additional value to contribute.
4) But I’ve included very few catchers so far, and they are usually pikers who lose value on running and on DPs
5) We are very used to seeing these players with less variable numbers for running due to BBREF’s regression, and that may shape part of our reactions
6) IMPORTANT: Virtually every LH batter will gain value for DP avoidance, and those with even a modicum of speed, fly ball swings, and high walks totals will look good by DP avoidance
7) I might be doing my estimates wrong—which is why I have asked Kiko to corroborate previous posts (and I would be glad for corroboration here as well)
8) actually I had two more, BTF ate my post and I had to start over. I’m sure they were utterly brilliant but in midlife I’ve developed a case of CRAFT*, and things disappear like sand through the hourglass.
*Can’t Remember a F*****g Thing: ask your doctor about this horrific malady if you develop symptoms such as being unable to remember what the initials GVH stand for, misplacing the last name of a ball player named Kiki, or being unable to name the thirty major league teams at will.
   326. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 08, 2019 at 11:02 AM (#5906786)
Prelim:
1. Andruw Jones
2. Derek Jeter
3. Wally Schang
4. Luis Tiant
5. Urban Shocker
6. Todd Helton
7. Johan Santana
8. Bobby Veach
9. Joe Tinker
10. Andy Pettitte
11. Lance Berkman
12. Bert Campaneris
13. Don Newcombe
14. Harry Hooper/open
15. **Marvin Williams/Webster McDonald** - awaiting latest from Doc.

20 Under consideration:
Bobby Abreu, Kevin Appier, Dave Bancroft, Tommy Bond, Bobby Bonds, Ron Cey, Kiki Cuyler, Dizzy Dean, Art Fletcher, Jason Giambi, Brian Giles, Tommy John, Bob Johnson, Jeff Kent, Tommy Leach, Kenny Lofton, Dolf Luque, Thurman Munson, Vern Stephens, Vic Willis.

Short:
Sammy Sosa - pathetic clutch scores remove him from ballot consideration, he was a GIDP and whiff machine in important situations
Jorge Posada - catcher framing, clutch, post-season are all bad or terrible, bringing down a rather impressive raw WAR total.
Ben Taylor - short by latest MLEs, Eric and Miller elected to take Marvin Williams, Webster McDonald, Roosevelt Davis, and Hurley McNair ahead of Taylor.
   327. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 08, 2019 at 01:49 PM (#5906831)
1) I found a little error in my throwing calculations that affected yesterday's reported PBP updates.
2) I've gathered all the stray players I mentioned earlier upthread.
3) I've estimated Williams after all. Too much time at the computer yesterday made me forget how to do that. I remembered.
4) Babe Herman is now done.

That's what's in this chart.



          EST  BBREF EST  EST  EST  EST  DRA  NET    NET
NAME      BSR  BSR   DPR  LFR  CFR  RFR  OFR  NODRA  DRA
=========================================================
BANCROFT    2   -8     2                      +12
BARTELL     7   -5    -2                      +14   
BERGER      6   -1     9   -0    2    1   -9  +16    +28
BISHOP     -8   -4     3                      - 1
CAMILLI     5   -2    17                      +24 
CLIFT      17    0    -5   +0              0  +12    +12      
COMBS      20   -1    11   -0  -10   -1  -35  +30    +56 
CUYLER     77   21     8   +0   -2   19    9  +64    +72
DIMAGGIO   21    0    -0   +0   27   +0   20  +21    +28  
ELLIOTT     2   -5   -10   -0   -3   -7   -0  - 3    -13
R FERRELL  -3   -2   -21                      -22
FREY       19   -2    18   +0   +0   -0   +0  +39    +39
GALAN      19   -1    32    5    6   +0   -4  +53    +64 
BA HERMAN -12   -3     1  - 2        -0  -21  - 8    +11  
B JOHSON    4   -3    -2   19    3   -0   40  + 5    -13
KLEIN      11   -3    21  - 2   +0   16   23  +35    +26 
LAZZERI   -18    5    -3                      -26  
LOMBARDI  -14    5   -44                      -63 
MANUSH     28    6    12  -11   -1   -3  -34  +46    +65 
MARANVILLE 12    5   -10                      - 3
MARION      4   -1     5                      +10    
MARTIN     26    5     5    1    3    2    4  +26    +28 
MYER        7   -5     8                      +20
NICHOLSON   0   -1    18    1    0  -13  -10  +19    +17
PESKY      18    9    15                      +24
S RICE     39   12    24   -1    9    7   12  +51    +54 
RIZZUTO    12    6     2                      + 7
ROLFE      20    5    36                      +61 
SCHANG    -18    4    -1                      -23 
STANKY      2   -1     4                      + 7
STEPHENS    5    1     1    1             +0  + 5    + 6
TRAYNOR    42   -2     1                      +45 
K WILLIAMS  6   -6     8  -24   -4   -0   16  +20    -24  
---------------------------------------------------------
AVERILL    13   -3    52    2  -37   -0  -11  +68    +44
CAREY     102   89    18    0   +0    2   22  +31    +11 
COCHRANE   17    2    15                      +34
FRISCH     47   31    11                      +27 
GEHRINGER  44   11     8                      +41
HARTNETT  -23    7   -21                      -51  
BI HERMAN   7   -4    -9                      + 2
KELLER     -7    2    26   -4         1  -17  +15    +31   
OTT        25   -4    50    1   +0   13   11  +79    +81 
ROUSH      -0   -9     7   -0   +0    0    2  +16    +14  
J SEWELL   -0   -2     6                      + 8
A SIMMONS  21    2    -8   19    9   -0  -11  +11    +50
SLAUGHTER  16   -3    15    2   -1    2   -2  +34    +35
TERRY      20   -4    13                      +29
VAUGHAN    15   -9    36   -0             +0  +57    +57
WANER      23   -8     9    1   -0   -6   -7  +40    +42

Note: Only includes value accrued through 1948 (running/dp) or 1952 (OF throwing).


I'll update the chart as I do more of these.

   328. bachslunch Posted: December 09, 2019 at 12:00 PM (#5907062)
When does voting start?
   329. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 09, 2019 at 06:47 PM (#5907289)
re: 328

1926 NNL just posted on the NLDB. I'm going to try to pump out the most important guys as quickly as I'm able, but it's not the flip of a switch, and it may take a couple-few days. Do with this information as the group wills.
   330. cookiedabookie Posted: December 09, 2019 at 07:31 PM (#5907298)
So with those edited numbers, Kiki Cuyler and Sam Rice look a lot more appealing for the HoM...that would move them closer to my top 25
   331. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 09, 2019 at 07:58 PM (#5907306)
OK, uh, actually, I've got the important remaining guys all figured out. Will post below. Don't worry about the election, set it up for whenever!
   332. JoeD has the Imperial March Stuck in His Head Posted: December 09, 2019 at 08:08 PM (#5907308)
Hey guys, sorry I am a little late this year. Catching up on things. Have you all decided when the election will be yet?
   333. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 09, 2019 at 08:13 PM (#5907310)
I actually ended up with another mysteryish player, William Bell. Though he's not the mystery player I've been referring to. I don't think Bell's ballot worthy, but he'll be useful as a reference point since he's in the HOVG zone.

WILLIAM BELL: SP
YEAR AGE  LG   G   IP    R   RA9  RAA  pWAA  pWAR    PA   Bat  bWAR    WAR
===========================================================================
1923  25  NL  33  150   87  5.25  - 7  -0.6   0.9    50  -1.4   0.2    1.1
1924  26  NL  33  170   85  4.53    0   0.0   1.8    57  -1.6   0.2    2.0
1925  27  NL  34  180   74  3.71   27   2.7   4.5    60  -1.7   0.3    4.8
1926  28  NL  34  200   69  3.11   32   3.5   5.4    67  -1.9   0.3    5.7
1927  29  NL  38  230   87  3.27   33   3.6   5.9    77  -2.2   0.4    6.2
1928  30  NL  38  240  103  3.86   22   2.3   4.8    80  -2.2   0.4    5.2
1929  31  NL  37  230  104  4.05   34   3.2   5.6    77  -2.2   0.4    6.0
1930  32  NL  36  200   83  3.72   44   4.0   6.1    67  -1.9   0.3    6.4
1931  33  NL  29  180   90  4.52  - 1  -0.1   1.8    60  -1.7   0.3    2.1
1932  34  NL  38  240  123  4.61  - 1  -0.1   2.4    80  -2.2   0.4    2.9
1933  35  NL  36  240  112  4.22  - 7  -0.7   1.7    80  -2.2   0.4    2.1
1934  36  NL  39  230  105  4.11   15   1.5   3.9    77  -2.2   0.4    4.3
1935  37  NL  34  150  103  6.21  -25  -2.4  -0.8    50  -1.4   0.2   -0.6
1936  38  NL  35  200   89  3.99   16   1.7   3.7    67  -1.9   0.4    4.1
1937  39  NL  36  170   75  3.97   10   1.1   2.8    57  -1.6   0.3    3.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
             530 3010 1386  4.10  194  19.6  50.4  1006 -28.2   4.9   55.3



   334. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 09, 2019 at 09:02 PM (#5907315)
Next is Dandy Andy Cooper. He made a ballot or two a few years back, so it seemed worth it to give him a rundown for everyone. However, as you'll see he's not a great candidate.

ANDY COOPER: SP
YEAR AGE  LG   G   IP    R   RA9  RAA  pWAA  pWAR    PA   Bat  bWAR    WAR
===========================================================================
1920  24  NL  32  140   60  3.84    2   0.2   1.6    47  -6.1  -0.4    1.1
1921  25  NL  36  220  114  4.68  - 2  -0.2   2.1    73  -9.5  -0.4    1.6
1922  26  NL  39  250   98  3.52   41   4.2   6.7    83 -10.8  -0.3    6.4
1923  27  NL  36  210  123  5.28  -10  -1.0   1.3    70  -9.1  -0.4    0.9
1924  28  NL  34  200   94  4.21    7   0.8   2.8    67  -8.8  -0.5    2.4
1925  29  NL  32  210   86  3.71   32   3.2   5.3    70  -9.1  -0.3    5.1
1926  30  NL  34  200   77  3.47   24   2.5   4.5    67  -8.8  -0.4    4.2
1927  31  NL  30  180  105  5.23  -13  -1.3   0.6    60  -7.8  -0.3    0.3
1928  32  NL  23  210  104  4.44    6   0.6   2.8    70  -9.1  -0.3    2.5
1929  33  NL  34  200  110  4.97    9   0.8   3.0    67  -8.8  -0.2    2.8
1930  34  NL  29  200   83  3.72   44   4.1   6.2    67  -8.8  -0.2    6.0
1931  35  NL  29  220   79  3.22   31   3.4   5.6    73  -9.5  -0.3    5.3
1932  36  NL  35  210  142  6.10  -35  -3.3  -1.1    70  -9.1  -0.3   -1.3
1933  37  NL  34  210  113  4.82  -20  -2.2   0.0    70  -9.1  -0.4   -0.4
1934  38  NL  20  170   81  4.27    8   0.8   2.6    57  -7.4  -0.2    2.4
1935  39  NL   5   30   15  4.47    1   0.1   0.4    10  -1.3  -0.0    0.3
1936  40  NL   2   10    5  4.66    0   0.0   0.1     3  -0.4  -0.0    0.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
             494 3070 1489  4.37  123  12.7  44.5  1024 -134.0 -4.9   39.7

   335. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 09, 2019 at 09:19 PM (#5907318)
Here's our next pitcher, Roosevelt Davis. It turns out that the last couple updates to the NLDB have been less favorable to Davis than everything that came before. He looked like a very solid candidate previously, now he's not that much different from William Bell above. I wouldn't advocate for him at this time. In addition, I suspect that Miller and I at the Hall of Miller and Eric might pull him back since we elected him when we had less but more favorable information. Although I'm not saying that for sure.

ROOSEVELT DAVIS: SP
YEAR AGE  LG   G   IP    R   RA9  RAA  pWAA  pWAR    PA   Bat  bWAR    WAR
===========================================================================
1924  19  NL  10   50   25  4.47    0   0.0   0.6    17  -2.0  -0.1    0.5
1925  20  NL  15  100   40  3.59   16   1.6   2.7    33  -3.9  -0.1    2.6
1926  21  NL  34  200  117  5.25  -16  -1.6   0.5    67  -7.9  -0.2    0.3
1927  22  NL  36  210  100  4.30    6   0.7   2.8    70  -8.3  -0.2    2.6
1928  23  NL  38  240  107  4.01   18   1.9   4.4    80  -9.5  -0.1    4.2
1929  24  NL  37  230  117  4.60   20   1.8   4.3    77  -9.1  -0.1    4.2
1930  25  NL  37  230  162  6.34  -17  -1.4   1.1    77  -9.1  -0.1    1.0
1931  26  NL  37  240  129  4.84  -10  -1.0   1.5    80  -9.5  -0.2    1.3
1932  27  NL  38  240  114  4.27    9   0.9   3.4    80  -9.5  -0.1    3.2
1933  28  NL  34  210   86  3.70    6   0.7   2.8    70  -8.3  -0.3    2.5
1934  29  NL  32  140   61  3.92   12   1.2   2.6    47  -5.6   0.0    2.6
1935  30  NL  35  220   86  3.54   29   3.0   5.2    73  -8.6  -0.2    5.0
1936  31  NL  38  230  101  3.95   19   2.0   4.4    77  -9.1   0.0    4.3
1937  32  NL  38  220  108  4.40    3   0.3   2.5    73  -8.6  -0.1    2.4
1938  33  NL  32  140   66  4.27    2   0.2   1.6    47  -5.6   0.0    1.6
1939  34  NL  36  190   89  4.23    5   0.5   2.4    63  -7.4  -0.1    2.3
1940  35  NL  34  190   84  3.99    8   0.9   2.8    63  -7.4  -0.1    2.7
1941  36  NL  35  190   65  3.06   25   2.8   4.6    63  -7.4  -0.1    4.5
1942  37  NL  28  180   52  2.59   26   3.2   4.9    60  -7.1  -0.2    4.7
1943  38  NL  31  160   51  2.88   19   2.2   3.7    53  -6.3  -0.3    3.4
1944  39  NL  22  130   58  4.03    3   0.3   1.7    43  -5.1  -0.2    1.5
1945  40  NL   2   10    5  4.27    0   0.0   0.1     3  -0.4   0.0    0.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
             679 3950 1823  4.15  185  20.4  60.7  1316 -156.0 -2.9   57.7

   336. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 09, 2019 at 09:34 PM (#5907320)
Now Webster McDonald whose 1926 numbers weren't great either. Overall, however, he appears to be the best Negro Leagues pitcher outside the HOM. However, that doesn't mean I'd cast a vote for him. He's not an overwhelming great looking pitcher after all, but someone who would exist near the borderline. I think. In addition, we've got too many pre-war guys anyway, so without a resume that absolutely screams elect-me, I'm not really shopping in that aisle.

WEBSTER McDONALD: SP
YEAR AGE  LG   G   IP    R   RA9  RAA  pWAA  pWAR    PA   Bat  bWAR    WAR
===========================================================================
1922  22  NL  34  180   74  3.72   26   2.5   4.4    60  -6.3   0.0    4.4
1923  23  NL  36  210   82  3.51   31   3.2   5.3    70  -7.4  -0.1    5.2
1924  24  NL  34  200   66  2.96   35   3.8   5.8    67  -7.0  -0.2    5.6
1925  25  NL  32  210   83  3.55   35   3.6   5.7    70  -7.4   0.0    5.7
1926  26  NL  34  200   95  4.29    5   0.6   2.6    67  -7.0  -0.1    2.5
1927  27  NL  36  210   83  3.56   24   2.5   4.6    70  -7.4  -0.1    4.6
1928  28  NL  27  180   56  2.80   38   4.1   5.9    60  -6.3   0.0    5.9
1929  29  NL  34  200   88  3.96   31   3.0   5.1    67  -7.0   0.0    5.1
1930  30  NL  36  200  129  5.79  - 2  -0.2   2.0    67  -7.0   0.0    2.0
1931  31  NL  35  180   84  4.20    6   0.6   2.4    60  -6.3   0.0    2.4
1932  32  NL  40  270  131  4.35    7   0.8   3.6    90  -9.5   0.0    3.6
1933  33  NL  44  280  129  4.14  - 5  -0.6   2.2    93  -9.8  -0.1    2.1
1934  34  NL  36  200   97  4.37    7   0.7   2.8    67  -7.0   0.0    2.8
1935  35  NL  41  270  127  4.24   14   1.4   4.2    90  -9.5   0.0    4.2
1936  36  NL  42  270  156  5.21  -15  -1.5   1.4    90  -9.5   0.1    1.5
1937  37  NL  37  260  133  4.60  - 3  -0.3   2.4    87  -9.1   0.0    2.5
1938  38  NL  40  260  124  4.31    3   0.3   3.0    87  -9.1   0.1    3.1
1939  39  NL  30  150   77  4.62  - 3  -0.3   1.2    50  -5.3   0.0    1.2
1940  40  NL   4   10    5  4.40    0   0.0   0.1     3  -0.3   0.0    0.1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
             652 3940 1819  4.16  235  24.3  64.7  1315 -138.0 -0.4   64.3

   337. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 09, 2019 at 09:44 PM (#5907326)
Now for our final three candidates at large, the hitters. This is Hurley McNair, outfielder. He's a long-and-low kinda guy. That's probably to some degree a reflection of the MLE process since it tends to flatten things out. But that just also seems to be the Hurley McNair way. He played much of his career during a time we could use more players from, and he competes during that time with guys like Harry Hooper and Bobby Veach in the OF and with Art Fletcher and Dave Bancroft in the infield. And, of course, The Schanger at catcher. As we all know, I'm disposed toward Schang, so I'll just run the numbers at this juncture.

Year Age  Lg  Pos  G     PA  Bat  Bsr  DP  Fld  Pos  RAA   WAA  Rep  RAR   WAR  WAR162
======================================================================================
1910  21  NL  RF  110    460   23   0   0    1  - 5   19   2.1   14   33   3.7   3.9
1911  22  NL  RF  127    534   25   0   0    1  - 6   20   2.1   17   37   3.9   4.1
1912  23  NL  RF  142    600   28   0   0    1  - 7   22   2.3   19   41   4.2   4.4
1913  24  NL  CF  142    590   31   0   0    0  - 3   28   3.0   18   46   5.1   5.3
1914  25  NL  CF  144    590   28   0   0    0  - 3   24   2.8   18   43   5.0   5.2
1915  26  NL  RF  144    590   28   0   0    1  - 7   22   2.7   18   41   5.0   5.2
1916  27  NL  CF  142    580   24   0   0    0  - 3   20   2.5   18   38   4.8   5.1
1917  28  NL  RF  132    540   20   0   0    1  - 6   15   1.9   17   32   4.0   4.2
1918  29  NL  LF  116    480   13   0   0    3  - 5   11   1.3   15   26   3.2   3.3
1919  30  NL  LF  129    530   17   0   0    3  - 6   14   1.7   17   30   3.7   3.9
1920  31  NL  LF  149    630   20   0   0    3  - 7   16   1.9   20   36   4.1   4.4
1921  32  NL  LF  150    640   30   0   0    3  - 6   27   2.8   20   47   4.8   5.1
1922  33  NL  LF  132    570   35   0   0    3  - 5   33   3.1   18   50   4.8   5.1
1923  34  NL  LF  129    560   11   0   0    3  - 5    8   0.8   17   26   2.6   2.7
1924  35  NL  RF  129    550   35   0   0    1  - 5   31   3.1   17   48   4.9   5.2
1925  36  NL  RF  113    490   11   0   0    1  - 5    7   0.7   15   23   2.2   2.3
1926  37  NL  RF   97    410    6   0   0    1  - 4    3   0.3   13   16   1.7   1.8
1927  38  NL  RF   86    370    3   0   0    1  - 4    0   0.0   12   12   1.2   1.3
1928  39  NL  LF   69    300    0   0   0    2  - 3  - 1  -0.1    9    8   0.8   0.9
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 2382  10014  385   2   0   31  -96  321  34.8  312  633  69.6  73.3


   338. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 09, 2019 at 10:14 PM (#5907332)
Finally, we have our mystery man. Ladies and gentlemen, Newt Allen!

NEWT ALLEN: 2B 
VERSION 1—NO ADDITIONAL ADJUSTMENTS
Year Age  Lg Pos    G   PA  Bat Bsr  DP  Fld  Pos RAA   WAA  Rep  RAR   WAR  WAR162
===================================================================================
1923  22  NL  2B   51  220    2   0   0    5   2   10   1.0    7   17   1.7   1.7
1924  23  NL  2B  143  610    7   1   0   15   4   29   3.0   19   48   5.0   5.3
1925  24  NL  2B  148  640    6   1   0   15   4   29   2.8   20   49   4.7   5.0 
1926  25  NL  2B  148  630    1   1   0   15  4   25   2.6   20   44   4.6   4.9
1927  26  NL  2B  147  630   20   1   0   15   4   43   4.4   20   63   6.5   6.8
1928  27  NL  2B  145  630  - 1   1   0   15   4   22   2.2   20   42   4.2   4.5
1929  28  NL  2B  146  640   34   1   0   15   4   57   5.2   20   77   7.1   7.4
1930  29  NL  2B  146  640   38   1   0   15   4   61   5.3   20   81   7.1   7.5
1931  30  NL  2B  148  630   14   1   0   15   4   37   3.9   20   57   6.0   6.3
1932  31  NL  2B  142  610    1   1   0   14   4   23   2.4   19   42   4.4   4.6 
1933  32  NL  2B  141  590  -15   1   0   14   4    7   0.9   18   26   3.0   3.1
1934  33  NL  2B  139  600  -11   1   0   14   4   11   1.2   19   30   3.1   3.3
1935  34  NL  2B  140  600  - 7   1   0   14   4   15   1.5   19   34   3.4   3.6
1936  35  NL  2B  122  530    0   1   0   12   4   19   2.0   17   36   3.6   3.8
1937  36  NL  2B  115  490    3   1   0   12   4   22   2.3   15   37   3.9   4.1
1938  37  NL  2B   82  350  - 5   0   0    8   3    8   0.9   11   19   2.1   2.2
1939  38  NL  2B   70  300  - 7   0   0    7   2    4   0.4    9   13   1.4   1.5
1940  39  NL  2B   61  260  - 4   0   0    6   2    6   0.6    8   14   1.5   1.6
1941  40  NL  2B   44  190    0   0   0    4   2    7   0.8    6   13   1.5   1.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 2278 9790   75  12   0  231  69  437  43.4  305  742  74.9  78.7


Now you'll notice two things right away.
1) I'm running two different MLEs for him
2) that in version 1, his fielding value is crazily high.

Let's talk about number two. The MLE is using the fielding data the same way that all other MLEs do. In Allen's case, it's a little under 200 games' worth of data. In all cases, he's an amazing fielding second baseman, but it's still only 200ish games. So I created a second MLE that takes his fielding numbers down to a more historically reasonable level. Prior to WW2, the highest Rfield for a second baseman was Biddie McPhee, just a little under +160. Joe Gordon, considered to be the most acrobatic and gifted second baseman of his time rang up about +140. So the MLE below goes with the +140 mark. I could have gone to 150, I suppose since Allen's career was longer than Gordon's but if McPhee provided an upper bound, we're in the neighborhood already.

VERSION 2—HISTORICALLY REASONABLE FIELDING VALUE
Year Age  Lg Pos    G   PA  Bat Bsr  DP  Fld  Pos RAA   WAA  Rep  RAR   WAR  WAR162
===================================================================================
1923  22  NL  2B   51  220    2   0   0    3   2    7   1.0    7   15   1.3   1.4
1924  23  NL  2B  143  610    7   1   0    9   4   20   3.0   19   45   4.1   4.3
1925  24  NL  2B  148  640    6   1   0    9   4   20   2.8   20   46   3.9   4.1 
1926  25  NL  2B  148  630    1   1   0    9   4   16   2.6   20   41   3.7   3.9
1927  26  NL  2B  147  630   20   1   0    9   4   34   4.4   20   60   5.5   5.8
1928  27  NL  2B  145  630  - 1   1   0    9   4   13   2.2   20   38   3.3   3.5
1929  28  NL  2B  146  640   34   1   0    9   4   48   5.2   20   74   6.2   6.6
1930  29  NL  2B  146  640   38   1   0    9   4   52   5.3   20   78   6.3   6.7
1931  30  NL  2B  148  630   14   1   0    9   4   28   3.9   20   53   5.0   5.2
1932  31  NL  2B  142  610    1   1   0    9   4   14   2.4   19   39   3.4   3.6 
1933  32  NL  2B  141  590  -15   1   0    9   4  - 1   0.9   18   23   2.0   2.1
1934  33  NL  2B  139  600  -11   1   0    9   4    3   1.2   19   27   2.2   2.3
1935  34  NL  2B  140  600  - 7   1   0    9   4    6   1.5   19   31   2.6   2.7
1936  35  NL  2B  122  530    0   1   0    8   4   12   2.0   17   33   2.9   3.0
1937  36  NL  2B  115  490    3   1   0    7   4   15   2.3   15   35   3.1   3.3
1938  37  NL  2B   82  350  - 5   0   0    5   3    3   0.9   11   17   1.5   1.6
1939  38  NL  2B   70  300  - 7   0   0    5   2    0   0.4    9   12   1.0   1.0
1940  39  NL  2B   61  260  - 4   0   0    4   2    2   0.6    8   13   1.1   1.1
1941  40  NL  2B   44  190    0   0   0    3   2    5   0.8    6   13   1.2   1.2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 2278 9790   75  12   0  140  69  296  26.3  305  692  60.2  63.4


In MLE 1, he's a no-brainer candidate. In MLE 2, he's more like a Jeff Kent kind of candidate, though with a lower peak. I think Allen needs to be discussed among the electorate. That's my opinion. Given his era, I wouldn't likely vote for him, but I do think he's an important enough candidate to merit high level discussion.

The other thing to know about him is that there will potentially be more opportunity for us to gain fielding information. If the NLDB goes back and collects fielding data from the seasons that currently lack it (for example 1927 and 1926), then we could see either downward movement (most likely since it's hard to be better than he looks now) or solidification of his fielding prowess, in which case, we really need to talk about what an off-the-charts Negro Leagues fielder means to us.
   339. DL from MN Posted: December 10, 2019 at 09:35 AM (#5907380)
JoeD - this is your rodeo. If you have ballot counters we can have an election.
   340. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 10, 2019 at 01:22 PM (#5907475)
I forgot that I'd mentioned that I'd share MLEs of three other players. Here's the first Sam Bankhead.

Year Age  Lg Pos    G    PA  Bat Bsr  DP  Fld  POS  RAA   WAA  Rep  RAR   WAR  WAR162
===================================================================================== 
1931  20  NL  SS   30    130   0   1   0    1    2    3   0.3    4    7   0.8   0.8
1932  21  NL  SS  139    600   1   2   0    4    8   16   1.7   19   35   3.6   3.8
1933  22  NL  SS  143    600   3   2   0    4    8   18   2.1   19   37   4.2   4.4
1934  23  NL  SS  142    610   7   2   0    4    8   22   2.2   19   41   4.1   4.3
1935  24  NL  SS  144    620  11   2   0    4    9   27   2.7   19   46   4.7   4.9
1936  25  NL  SS  145    630  -1   2   0    4    9   14   1.4   20   34   3.4   3.6
1937  26  NL  SS  118    500  -6   2   0    4    7    7   0.7   16   23   2.4   2.5
1938  27  NL  SS  138    590  -7   2   0    4    8    8   0.8   18   26   2.8   2.9
1939  28  NL  SS  143    610  5    2   0    4    8   20   2.1   19   39   4.1   4.3
1940  29  NL  SS  142    610  12   2   0    4    8   27   2.8   19   46   4.9   5.1
1941  30  NL  SS  152    650  13   3   0    5    9   29   3.1   20   50   5.4   5.7
1942  31  NL  SS  132    560   3   2   0    4    8   17   2.0   17   35   4.0   4.2
1943  32  NL  SS  146    620  -5   2   0    5    9   11   1.2   19   30   3.5   3.6
1944  33  NL  SS  145    620  -3   2   0    4    9   13   1.4   19   32   3.5   3.7
1945  34  NL  SS  130    560   2   2   0    4    8   16   1.7   17   34   3.5   3.7
1946  35  NL  SS  136    580   5   2   0    4    8   20   2.2   18   38   4.3   4.6
1947  36  NL  SS  124    530 -12   2   0    4    7    2   0.2   17   18   1.9   2.0
1948  37  NL  SS  115    490  -3   2  -1    4    7    8   0.9   15   24   2.5   2.6
1949  38  NL  SS   91    390  -1   2  -1    3    5    9   0.9   12   21   2.2   2.3
1950  39  NL  SS   65    280   2   1   0    2    4    9   0.9    9   18   1.8   1.9
1951  40  NL  SS   16     70   0   0   0    0    1    2   0.2    2    4   0.4   0.5
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 2536  10850  29  42  -2   78  150  298  31.4  338  636  68.0  71.5



With Bankhead we have a more reasonable-fielding version of Newt Allen. In some ways that makes Sam more believable as an MLE. His fielding is based on 203 games (just a little more than Allen) but is primarily influenced by his final two seasons. In Bankhead's case, however, we have a lot of running value. In fact, he's among the best base runners we have MLE'ed. It's probably a good time to quickly refresh you on how I estimate base running.

I create a two-part estimate that fuses together his actual base-stealing exploits and the performance of comparable players from the PBP era.
ACTUAL RUNNING RECORD
Here I compare his SB per opportunity (H+BB+HPB-2B-3B-HR) to his league's rate of the same. I adjust for "good" and "badly" reported teams. That is, not every city's papers reported steals, so any team that's stolen more than the league's average is considered well reported and the opposite for anyone below that average. I recognize the issues with this, but each season one or two teams are obviously way underreported, and the penalty for them of an unadjusted rate is worse than someone getting hit with the adjustment. Anyway, the adjustment looks at how many approximate opps the player had in good and bad reporting cities in home and away games and makes minor tweaks. I then take the ratio of a player's rate of SB/OPP vs the his leagues, and I regress it based on a study I did a couple years ago, placing it into a runs-based, per-PA context. I just plug in that ratio and it spits back the first half of the running estimate.

COMPS RECORD
Next, I take that ratio I found of player's SB/OPP vs lgSB/OPP, and I compare it to a set of comps via the Play Index. The comps are chosen on the basis of their height, weight, and a minimum PA threshold that depends on my what I'm estimating the Negro Leaguer at. Then I determine their SB/OPP vs the lgSB/OPP for all of them, and I find the 12 players whose median is closest to the MLE player's ratio. Then I look at the Rbaser/PA of those dozen players and take their median.

MASHED TOGETHER
I take each of those two components and weight them at 50%. I combined them into a single figure that is expressed on a per PA basis. Once I've determined a player's PAs for each season, I then simply multiply this combined figure by those PAs to generate the running runs estimate.

OK, so that's the basics of the sausage making for running.

I'm sure you would agree with me that
a) It's a pretty decent guesstimate routine on the basis of what information we actually have.
b) It's filled with opportunities noise, the possibility of noise, and potentially skew/bias.
c) If it were the electoral fulcrum for a player, we'd probably not want to elect the player.

What I will say is that this method delivers the results you'd expect in terms of who is a really good runner or a really bad runner, with one notable exception, John Henry Lloyd whom it sees as a fundamentally average baserunner despite the reputation he had for Cobb-like base running.

Anyway, as you can see I've issued enough caveats here to fill us all up for the year. Generally, I'd say that if we wanted to talk about a Negro Leagues infielder throw down, it would be among Williams, Clarkson, Bankhead, and Allen, each of whom has some troubles, and for whom the data and resultant estimates are least complicated for Williams and Clarkson.
   341. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 10, 2019 at 01:38 PM (#5907484)
Last batter I'll mention: Heavy Johnson.

Year Age  Lg Pos    G    PA  Bat Bsr  DP  Fld POS  RAA   WAA  Rep  RAR   WAR  WAR162
===================================================================================== 
1916  21  NL  C    39   160    9   0   0   0    2   11   1.3    5   16   2.0   2.1
1917  22  NL  C    49   200   11   0   0   0    3   13   1.6    7   20   2.5   2.6
1918  23  NL  C    73   300   16   0   0   0    4   19   2.3   10   30   3.6   4.6
1919  24  NL  C    66   270   14   0   0   0    3   17   2.0    9   26   3.1   3.6
1920  25  NL  C   116   490   42   0   0   0    5   47   5.1   17   63   7.1   7.4
1921  26  NL  RF  117   500   44   0   0  -1   -5   37   3.7   17   54   5.5   5.8
1922  27  NL  RF  123   530   47   0   0  -1   -5   41   3.9   18   59   5.6   5.9
1923  28  NL  RF  141   610   41   0   0  -1   -6   34   3.3   21   55   5.3   5.6
1924  29  NL  RF  132   560   44   0   0  -1   -5   37   3.8   19   57   5.8   6.1
1925  30  NL  RF  130   560   -1   0   0  -1   -5   -8  -0.8   19   11   1.1   1.1
1926  31  NL  RF  120   510   17   0   0  -1   -5   11   1.1   17   28   2.9   3.1
1927  32  NL  RF  124   530   26   0   0  -1   -5   20   2.0   18   38   3.9   4.1
1928  33  NL  RF  113   490   13   0   0  -1   -5    7   0.7   17   24   2.4   2.6
1929  34  NL  RF  101   440   10   0   0  -1   -4    5   0.5   15   20   1.9   1.9
1930  35  NL  RF   68   300   10   0   0  -1   -3    7   0.6   10   17   1.5   1.6
1931  36  NL  RF    6    25    1   0   0   0    0    1   0.1    1    2   0.2   0.2
1932  37  NL  RF   46   200    8   0   0   0   -2    6   0.6    7   13   1.3   1.4
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 1564  6675  351  -1   0 -11  -35  305  31.7  228  533  55.7  59.8



Dude could really rake. No doubt about it. Johnson's got some weird stuff going on, though. If you notice, he simply didn't play in a lot of his teams' games. This is not an artifact of his catching because his catching years are all whole-cloth estimates. He was in the Wreckers with Dobie and Bullet in those years before the NNL. Johnson disappears from the record for 1921, and IIRC, Gary Ashwill might have said that Heavy stayed an extra year with the Wreckers before making the permanent jump to the NNL in 1922 (where he was an immediate sensation).

He disappears again for 1929, so that's a whole-cloth season. Jim Riley has nothing to say about it. Then in 1930-1932, he's just kinda hanging around the fringes. Riley has him in the league in 1933, but I have yet to see any information to confirm it. I've held back on him because of the small possibility that he could be part of the 1932 Negro Southern League data that is next on the list for the NLDB. We won't get that update before we vote, so we'll just have to wait and see. I don't have information about any of his latter-career movements.

That said, he's one of the best hitters I've MLE'ed outside of the truly great players like Gibson and Charleston. Forty Rbat in an MLE is nothing to sneeze at, and he did that several years in a row.

I don't think he fills a need among OFs or prewar players, and I won't have him on my ballot.
   342. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 10, 2019 at 01:54 PM (#5907492)
Now our final Negro Leagues candidate for this election, Hilton Smith.

Year  Age  Lg  G    IP     R   RA9 lgRA9  RAA  pWAA  pWAR    PA    Bat bWAR  WAR
================================================================================
1932  25  NL  36   180    83  4.14  4.60    9   0.9   2.8    60   -0.5  0.4  3.1
1933  26  NL  34   210    82  3.53  3.97   10   1.2   3.2    70   -0.6  0.4  3.7
1934  27  NL  36   200    95  4.28  4.68    9   0.9   3.0    67   -0.6  0.4  3.4
1935  28  NL  35   220   117  4.78  4.71   -2  -0.2   2.1    73   -0.8  0.4  2.6
1936  29  NL  42   270   142  4.75  4.71   -1  -0.1   2.7    90   -0.8  0.6  3.3
1937  30  NL  37   260   132  4.57  4.51   -2  -0.2   2.5    87   -0.8  0.6  3.1
1938  31  NL  40   260   114  3.96  4.42   13   1.4   4.0    87   -0.8  0.6  4.7
1939  32  NL  38   260   121  4.20  4.44    7   0.7   3.4    87   -0.8  0.6  4.0
1940  33  NL  37   270    88  2.94  4.39   43   4.9   7.6    90   -0.8  0.6  8.2
1941  34  NL  34   210    81  3.45  4.23   18   2.0   4.1    70   -0.6  0.5  4.6
1942  35  NL  28   180    99  4.94  3.90  -21  -2.2  -0.4    60   -0.5  0.4  0.0
1943  36  NL  31   160    45  2.52  3.94   25   3.0   4.5    53   -0.5  0.3  4.8
1944  37  NL   4    20     7  3.18  4.25    2   0.3   0.5     7   -0.1  0.0  0.5 
1945  38  NL  29   180    79  3.93  4.46   11   1.1   2.9    60   -0.5  0.3  3.3
1946  39  NL  33   180    77  3.86  3.96    2   0.2   2.0    60   -0.5  0.4  2.4
1947  40  NL  33   180   107  5.34  4.57  -15  -1.5   0.4    60   -0.5  0.4  0.7
1948  41  NL  33   180    80  4.01  4.43    8   1.0   3.2    60   -0.5  0.4  3.5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             560  3420  1549  4.08        117  13.5  48.5  1141  -10.0  7.4 55.9


As you can see, Smith lags behind Rosie Davis, William Bell, and Webster McDonald despite his batting excellence. Smith could benefit from the 1932 update when it happens. He spent his rookie season in that circuit. Smith frequently benefitted from good defenses (Newt Allen was a longtime teammate). His career is kinda like Mickey Lolich or someone like that who was a better than average hurler with one really big lights-out kind of season thrown in there.

OK, I think that's everyone that has drawn support or been mentioned in the last several elections!
   343. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 10, 2019 at 06:10 PM (#5907607)
Doc, please post Clarkson, he looked pretty good and one of the best with prime/peak war credit.
   344. DL from MN Posted: December 10, 2019 at 06:29 PM (#5907610)
Clarkson is post #260
   345. kcgard2 Posted: December 10, 2019 at 09:07 PM (#5907630)
@233, jumping in late now, but I did some rough math on the representation of NgL players back in the 2018 discussion (when I first started trying to wrestle with Ben Taylor and germinated what has now been a long and interesting path down Chaleeko's MLEs and NgL analysis in general). To summarize, 10% of players in HOM (at that time) were NgL selections, though NgL players represented probably about 5 or 6% of the eligible player pool. In my personal opinion, NgL players are already over-represented in HOM, though I know others disagree.

I'm very glad to see the support Andruw Jones is getting in some early posted ballots here! I thought I was a big outlier last year when I had him #2 overall, though one other person also had him that high. I also felt like a high outlier on Tommy John, and it seems like he's getting some love in these early ballots as well. Glad that Appier has been mentioned several times. Maybe Johan Santana is getting a better look this year than last as well. I guess last I'll say that Ventura is a dark horse I've been considering strongly the last 3 years as well, and he made Jaack's prelim ballot here. I'm glad to see I am rubbing off on so many people ;)

Kiko, I have played with your spreadsheet 16 different ways and combos, and no matter what I do, Vern Stephens comes out one of the top 3 players. I think you rigged it somehow. And so I keep going back and looking at his career and wondering...why is this career the top of every re-run? Short-ish career, good but not outstanding peak (by HOM standards). Even if I downgrade the WWII years, your sheet doesn't seem to care. Is it because there's so little decline phase going on? I just want to know why Stephens is in by every possible finagling of your sheet! He is the sort of profile I like - well rounded player at strong defensive position - but despite that he won't make my ballot.
   346. DL from MN Posted: December 11, 2019 at 10:11 AM (#5907724)
If we wanted to talk about a Negro Leagues infielder throw down, it would be among Williams, Clarkson, Bankhead, and Allen


I need to put Negro Leaguers in context. If there are 4 infielders with similar credentials the odds are more in favor that none of them are HoM players rather than all of them. The re-evaluation of Dick Redding which moved him way up the list among NGL pitchers sort of forced his election. If these players are just more names at the bottom of the list they aren't as compelling.
   347. DL from MN Posted: December 13, 2019 at 10:00 AM (#5908410)
Who is volunteering to count ballots this year?
   348. cookiedabookie Posted: December 13, 2019 at 10:56 AM (#5908441)
Who is volunteering to count ballots this year?

I can, assuming someone can tell me the points per slot
   349. rwargo Posted: December 13, 2019 at 11:17 AM (#5908448)
Updated WAA table after the 1926 data. This is best of WAA, OffWAA, or PitWAA in career in the entire NLDB. These have not been adjusted for league quality. Still, the fact we have elected all of the top 20, plus 25 out of the top 32.

# Player            Years      Pos PA    IP     HoF  HoM  WAA   Off   Fld    Pit   Adj   Total   B/700   P/300
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1  O. Charleston    1915-1941  8   6706   170.1 ✔   ✔   55.6  56.6   6.0  -2.3  -4.6   56.6    5.9
2  Josh Gibson      1930-1946  2   3751     1.2 ✔   ✔   43.9  40.9   1.5  -0.3   1.8   43.9    8.2
3  C. Torriente     1912-1928  8   5062   402.0 ✔   ✔   38.6  43.3   1.2  -1.9  -4.1   43.3    6.0
4  Bullet Rogan     1916-1938  1   2607  1683.1 ✔   ✔   41.8  18.9   1.6  22.5  -1.2   41.8            7.5
5  Willie Wells     1924-1948  6   5571     0.2 ✔   ✔   41.3  29.6   4.5   0.0   7.3   41.3    5.2 
6  Turkey Stearnes  1923-1940  8   4329     7.0 ✔   ✔   36.6  36.5   2.7  -0.8  -1.9   36.6    5.9 
7  Satchel Paige    1927-1947  1    684  1538.2 ✔   ✔   35.9  -0.3  -0.1  36.3   0.0   36.3            7.1
8  Joe Williams     1907-1932  1   1115  2210.1 ✔   ✔   33.7  4.7    0.3  28.9  -0.1   33.7            4.6
9  J. Lloyd         1906-1932  6   5693         ✔   ✔   33.5  25.3   1.8   0.0   6.3   33.5    4.1 
10 Pete Hill        1904-1925  8   4185    13.0 ✔   ✔   32.2  31.3   5.0  -0.2  -3.7   32.2    5.4 
11 Jud Wilson       1922-1945  5   4524         ✔   ✔   31.2  30.8   1.9   0.0  -1.5   31.2    4.8 
12 Ray Brown        1931-1945  1   1470  1537.2 ✔   ✔   29.8   4.7  -0.2  25.9  -0.5   29.8            5.8
13 Mule Suttles     1923-1944  3   3945    16.0 ✔   ✔   26.0  29.6   0.6  -0.2  -3.8   29.6    5.3 
14 José Méndez      1907-1926  1   2406  1868.2 ✔   ✔   25.8  -3.5   0.5  28.4   0.4   28.4            4.6
15 Martín Dihigo    1922-1945  9   2981   781.0 ✔   ✔   27.7  13.5   4.0  10.3  -0.1   27.7    6.5 
16 Willie Foster    1923-1937  1    791  1863.1 ✔   ✔   26.2  -0.8   0.0  27.2   0.0   27.2            4.4
17 Dobie Moore      1916-1926  6   2458              ✔   26.1  13.4   9.1   0.0   3.5   26.1    7.4 
18 Cool Papa Bell   1922-1946  8   6587   310.1 ✔   ✔   23.4  25.7  -2.6   3.7  -3.3   25.7    2.7 
19 Dick Lundy       1916-1937  6   3876     0.2      ✔   24.7  11.8   7.5   0.0   5.4   24.7    4.5 
20 Buck Leonard     1933-1948  3   2794         ✔   ✔   22.0  23.4   1.4   0.0  -2.8   23.4    5.9 
21 Carlos Morán     1899-1915  5   2621                   23.2  14.3   7.3   0.0   1.6   23.2    6.2 
22 William Bell     1923-1937  1    868  1666.1           21.9   1.1   0.2  20.6  -0.1   21.9            3.9
23 Juan Padrón      1915-1926  1    617  1450.0           19.7  -1.1  -0.2  21.0   0.0   21.0            4.3
24 Bill Byrd        1933-1948  1    899  1396.2           20.9   3.5  -0.1  17.7  -0.1   20.9            4.5
25 John Beckwith    1919-1937  5   2537    22.1      ✔   20.0  18.5  -0.5   0.5   1.4   20.0    5.5 
26 Ben Taylor       1909-1929  3   4250   282.0 ✔        19.2  17.3   5.1   0.5  -3.6   19.2    3.2 
27 Nip Winters      1921-1932  1    877  1461.2           18.9   3.6  -0.4  15.8  -0.2   18.9            3.9
28 Grant Johnson    1895-1914  6   1790     6.2      ✔   18.7   9.7   7.5  -0.1   1.6   18.7    7.3 
29 Dick Redding     1911-1936  1   1059  2243.2      ✔   18.4   0.1  -0.4  18.7  -0.1   18.7            2.5
30 Willard Brown    1935-1948  8   1995         ✔   ✔   18.1  17.5   1.2   0.0  -0.6   18.1    6.4 
31 Hurley McNair    1910-1937  9   3769   122.1           17.4  17.7   3.8  -0.3  -3.9   17.7    3.3 
32 Biz Mackey       1920-1947  2   4334    20.1 ✔   ✔   17.1  14.0   1.2  -0.9   2.8   17.1    2.8 
33 Heavy Johnson    1916-1932  9   2128     3.0           12.1  16.7  -3.0   0.2  -1.8   16.7    5.5 
34 Hilton Smith     1935-1948  1    503  1027.2 ✔        16.3   1.8  -0.5  15.0  -0.1   16.3            4.8
35 Carlos Royer     1899-1910  1    728  1284.0           16.2   0.7  -0.3  15.9  -0.1   16.2            3.8
36 Leon Day         1934-1946  1    723   709.1 ✔        15.3   2.7  -0.1  12.6   0.0   15.3            6.5
37 George Scales    1921-1946  4   3431     8.0           15.1  13.9   0.1   0.0   1.1   15.1    3.1 
38 W. McDonald      1922-1940  1    576  1341.2           14.4  -0.5  -0.1  15.0   0.0   15.0            3.4
39 Andy Cooper      1920-1939  1    728  1806.1 ✔        12.7  -2.2   0.0  14.8   0.0   14.8            2.5
40 Leroy Matlock    1929-1941  1    448  1237.0           14.3  -0.1   0.4  14.2  -0.1   14.3            3.5
41 B. Wright        1933-1945  8   2364                   13.0  14.0   0.3   0.0  -1.3   14.0    4.1 
42 Rap Dixon        1922-1937  9   2492     5.0           13.9  13.0   2.7   0.2  -2.0   13.9    3.9 
43 Adolfo Luque     1911-1927  1    627   901.0           13.8   1.2  -0.5  13.1   0.0   13.8            4.6
44 José Muñoz       1900-1913  1   1119  1789.1           12.0  -0.8  -0.4  13.7  -0.4   13.7            2.3
45 José Junco       1909-1922  1    758  1113.0           10.7  -0.9  -1.5  13.4  -0.3   13.4            3.6
46 Julián Castillo  1901-1914  3   1958    13.0           10.7  13.2  -1.1   0.1  -1.6   13.2    4.7 
47 Ted Trent        1927-1939  1    517  1343.2           10.3  -2.9   0.0  13.2   0.0   13.2            2.9
48 Sam Streeter     1921-1936  1    651  1484.1           13.1   2.1   0.0  11.1   0.0   13.1            2.6
50 Bill Holland     1919-1941  1    836  1943.0            9.7  -3.0  -0.3  13.0   0.0   13.0            2.0
49 Rats Henderson   1922-1931  1    507  1149.2           10.7  -2.2  -0.1  13.0   0.0   13.0            3.4
51 Dave Brown       1919-1925  1    415  1008.0           11.5  -1.4   0.0  12.9   0.0   12.9            3.8
52 Barney Brown     1931-1948  1   1058  1290.2           11.2  -1.5   0.2  12.9  -0.5   12.9            3.0
53 Red Ryan         1919-1932  1    586  1377.1           12.4  -0.4   0.0  12.8   0.0   12.8            2.8
54 Sam Bankhead     1933-1948  6   3705     2.0           12.0   5.2   3.6   0.1   3.2   12.0    2.3 
55 C. Blackwell     1915-1929  9   2729                    8.8  11.9  -0.7   0.0  -2.5   11.9    3.1 
56 Charlie Smith    1925-1931  9   1126                   11.8  10.1   2.0   0.0  -0.3   11.8    7.3 
57 Johnny Wright    1937-1947  1    258   625.1           10.5  -1.3   0.0  11.8   0.0   11.8            5.7
58 Bill Pettus      1909-1923  3   1680     3.2           11.6   8.7   3.6   0.0  -0.7   11.6    4.8 
59 Bingo DeMoss     1910-1930  4   3925                    7.2  -5.4  11.1   0.0   1.5   11.1    1.3 
60 Newt Allen       1922-1947  4   4450     0.2           11.0   3.7   3.7   0.0   3.6   11.0    1.7 
61 Dave Barnhill    1941-1948  1    282   584.1           10.9   0.8   0.0  10.1   0.0   10.9            5.6
64 Edgar Wesley     1917-1927  3   2449                    9.6  10.6   1.3   0.0  -2.3   10.6    3.0 
63 Alejandro Oms    1917-1935  8   2059    32.0 ✔         9.8  10.6   0.2   0.3  -1.2   10.6    3.6 
62 E. Pedroso       1907-1926  1   2848  2209.0           10.6   6.8  -5.0  10.6  -1.8   10.6            1.4
65 Roy Partlow      1936-1948  1    412   636.0           10.3   0.4  -0.3  10.3  -0.1   10.3            4.9
66 Louis Santop     1910-1926  2   1969         ✔   ✔   10.1   9.3  -0.6   0.0   1.4   10.1    3.6 
-- Judy Johnson     1918-1936  5   4307     4.1 ✔         9.4  -0.9   7.5   0.0   2.8    9.4    1.5 
-- Monte Irvin      1938-1948  8   1200         ✔   ✔    7.9   7.7  -0.1   0.0   0.3    7.9    4.6 
-- Rube Foster      1902-1917  1    663   983.1 ✔   ✔    5.7   1.9   0.3   3.7  -0.2    5.7            1.7
-- Quincy Trouppe   1930-1948  2   1394     9.1      ✔    4.9   3.8   0.7  -0.1   0.4    4.9    2.5 
-- Ray Dandridge    1933-1944  5   1587         ✔         3.9   3.0   0.1   0.0   0.7    3.9    1.7 
-- Frank Grant      1891-1907  4    234         ✔   ✔    0.7   1.0  -0.4   0.0   0.1    1.0    3.0 
   350. rwargo Posted: December 13, 2019 at 11:28 AM (#5908456)
The above leads me to believe we should take a careful look at the 7 players in the top 32. namely:

# Player            Years      Pos PA    IP     HoF  HoM  WAA   Off   Fld    Pit   Adj   Total   B/700   P/300
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21 Carlos Morán     1899-1915  5   2621                   23.2  14.3   7.3   0.0   1.6   23.2    6.2 
22 William Bell     1923-1937  1    868  1666.1           21.9   1.1   0.2  20.6  -0.1   21.9            3.9
23 Juan Padrón      1915-1926  1    617  1450.0           19.7  -1.1  -0.2  21.0   0.0   21.0            4.3
24 Bill Byrd        1933-1948  1    899  1396.2           20.9   3.5  -0.1  17.7  -0.1   20.9            4.5
26 Ben Taylor       1909-1929  3   4250   282.0 ✔         19.2  17.3   5.1   0.5  -3.6   19.2    3.2 
27 Nip Winters      1921-1932  1    877  1461.2           18.9   3.6  -0.4  15.8  -0.2   18.9            3.9
31 Hurley McNair    1910-1937  9   3769   122.1           17.4  17.7   3.8  -0.3  -3.9   17.7    3.3 



Among hitters, Morán has the best case by B/700 and by raw numbers, but has league quality issues. Taylor and McNair are fine, but would be our lowest B/700 in the top 32 other than Biz Mackey and Cool Papa Bell.

Out of the pitchers above, Bell, Padrón, Byrd, and Winters have similar raw numbers and rates. Bell has about 200 more innings than the others, and Winters is slightly behind the pack.


I may end up with no NL players on my ballot this year for the first time in a while.

Speaking of which, let's get the ballot up.

   351. rwargo Posted: December 13, 2019 at 11:30 AM (#5908461)
Edit ti Post 349 - Still, the fact we have elected all of the top 20, plus 25 out of the top 32 is interesting.
   352. DL from MN Posted: December 13, 2019 at 11:38 AM (#5908469)
60 Newt Allen 1922-1947 4 4450 0.2 11.0 3.7 3.7 0.0 3.6 11.0 1.7


The MLE doesn't make sense if this is the data set it drew from.

BTW - Oms should be checkmarked for HoM also.
   353. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 13, 2019 at 11:43 AM (#5908473)
Let's talk about number two. The MLE is using the fielding data the same way that all other MLEs do. In Allen's case, it's a little under 200 games' worth of data.


Dr. C., I have a question about your fielding data. Let me preface with an apology: I'm sure you've answered this before. What exactly are the fielding data that you have? Just putouts, assists, DP's, errors at a seasonal level? Or are there some limited play-by-play (or even game-by-game?) data available? Thanks! And thanks for all of the great information here!
   354. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 13, 2019 at 12:47 PM (#5908505)
Among hitters, Morán has the best case by B/700 and by raw numbers, but has league quality issues.
And he has the left-handed third baseman problem.

The MLE doesn't make sense if this is the data set it drew from.
It's absolutely possible I've done something drastically wrong with Allen's MLE. I would never say otherwise. But remember, I don't just take the NLDB's WAR data, and I likely generate the value a little differently than the gents at NLDB do. So it's possible for me to get results that seem a little different from theirs.

What exactly are the fielding data that you have?
I'm using the DRA available on the NLDB rather than going back to raw fielding totals. I then transmute it to an Rfield total for the purposes of the MLEs I post. I do that because I'm otherwise using BBREF's WAR calculations for batting and pitching and matching their visual presentation.

I may end up with no NL players on my ballot this year for the first time in a while.

I would endorse this. I don't feel any urgency around a Negro Leagues candidate now that Redding's been elected. There's nothing screaming elect-me about our remaining guys. Especially not when we consider that virtually all of them come from an era that's already over-represented.
   355. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 13, 2019 at 02:34 PM (#5908539)
I'm using the DRA available on the NLDB rather than going back to raw fielding totals. I then transmute it to an Rfield total for the purposes of the MLEs I post. I do that because I'm otherwise using BBREF's WAR calculations for batting and pitching and matching their visual presentation.


Thanks, Dr. C.!
   356. kcgard2 Posted: December 13, 2019 at 05:51 PM (#5908596)
cookie: the official ballot rules are here https://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/hall_of_merit/discussion/our_constitution

Electees
1: 24-19-18-17-16-15-14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6
2: 24-23-18-17-16-15-14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6
3: 24-23-22-17-16-15-14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6
4: 24-23-22-21-16-15-14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6
5: 24-23-22-21-20-15-14-13-12-11-10-9-8-7-6

Since this is an elect 4 year, you should use the point totals on line 4, is my understanding of the point values for each voting slot.
   357. cookiedabookie Posted: December 14, 2019 at 06:18 PM (#5908741)
@356 thanks kcgard2!

On another note, I decided to revise my system. It felt a bit off to me. Here's what my new top 25 looks like:

1 Derek Jeter
2 Andruw Jones
3 Andy Pettitte
4 Kenny Lofton
5 Buddy Bell
6 Luis Tiant
7 Thurman Munson
8 Bobby Bonds
9 Joe Tinker
10 Bob Johnson
11 Sammy Sosa
12 Chuck Finley
13 Bobby Abreu
14 Vic Willis
15 Urban Shocker
16 Sal Bando
17 Kevin Appier
18 Wally Schang
19 Eddie Cicotte
20 Todd Helton
21 Lance Berkman
22 John Olerud
23 Johan Santana
24 Jeff Kent
25 Dwight Gooden

I reduced the peak value a bit. Really hit Johan hard. I'll continue to tinker after this ballot, but this is pretty close to (or exactly) what I will post when the official ballot goes up.
   358. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 14, 2019 at 08:54 PM (#5908749)
OK, this update of estimated running, DPing, and throwing value comprises all the players I did this for originally a couple years ago plus some additional that I'd seen mentioned in this thread. If there's anyone else who needs to be done, let me know.

Candidates above the line, and HOMers below it.
          EST  BBREF EST  EST  EST  EST  DRA  NET    NET
NAME      BSR  BSR   DPR  LFR  CFR  RFR  OFR  NODRA  DRA
=========================================================
BANCROFT    2   -8     2                      +12
BARTELL     7   -5    -2                      +14   
BERGER      6   -1     9   -0    2    1   -9  +16    +28
BISHOP     -8   -4     3                      - 1
BOTTOMLEY -10    1     7                      - 4
CAMILLI     5   -2    17                      +24 
CHAPMAN    15    5    -7    5    5   -3   18  + 3    - 8
CLIFT      17    0    -5   +0              0  +12    +12      
COMBS      20   -1    11   -0  -10   -1  -35  +30    +56 
W COOPER   -5    0    -8                      -13
CRAMER      5  -10    17    2   -2   -0   -5  +32    +37 
CUYLER     77   21     8   +0   -2   19    9  +64    +72
D DIMAGGIO 21    0    -0   +0   27   +0   20  +21    +28  
ELLIOTT     2   -5   -10   -0   -3   -7   -0  - 3    -13
R FERRELL  -3   -2   -21                      -22
FREY       19   -2    18   +0   +0   -0   +0  +39    +39
FURILLO    -3    0    -2   +0    9    7   14  - 5    - 3
GALAN      19   -1    32    5    6   +0   -4  +53    +64 
HAFEY      21   -3     7   14   -1    4   -0  +31    +48
HENRICH    16    6    28   -1    1   15    6  +50    +59  
BA HERMAN -12   -3     1   -2        -0  -21  - 8    +11  
HODGES     -0    0    -0                      - 0 
HOLMES      4   -1     6   -0    9   -7    3  +11    +13 
T JACKSON   2   -3   -16                      -11
B JOHNSON   4   -3    -2   19    3   -0   40  + 5    -13
KELL        5    1    -8                      - 4 
H KELLY   -13    2   -11    1    0   -0   -0  -25    -24
KLEIN      11   -3    21   -2   +0   16   23  +35    +26 
LAZZERI   -18    5    -3                      -26  
LINDSTROM  13   -7    -1   +0    4   -4    2  +19    +17
LOLLAR     -1    0    -1                      - 2
LOMBARDI  -14    5   -44                      -63 
MANUSH     28    6    12  -11   -1   -3  -34  +46    +65 
MARANVILLE 12    5   -10                      - 3
MARION      4   -1     5                      +10    
MARTIN     26    5     5    1    3    2    4  +26    +28 
MYER        7   -5     8                      +20
NICHOLSON   0   -1    18    1    0  -13  -10  +19    +17
PESKY      18    9    15                      +24
S RICE     39   12    24   -1    9    7   12  +51    +54 
RIZZUTO    12    6     2                      + 7
ROLFE      20    5    36                      +61 
SCHALK      2    6    -3                      - 7
SCHANG    -18    4    -1                      -23 
SCHNDIENST 13    3    -1    2   -0         1  + 9    +10
STANKY      2   -1     4                      + 7
STEPHENS    5    1     1    1             +0  + 5    + 6
TRAYNOR    42   -2     1                      +45 
D WALKER    8   -2    29    3    4   14   -1  +39    +59 
L WANER    10   -4    16   -0   -6   -1   -1  +30    +24 
K WILLIAMS  6   -6     8  -24   -4   -0   16  +20    -24  
H WILSON   -2    1    -4   -2  -20    2  -10  - 7    -17  
---------------------------------------------------------
APPLING    22    1     3                      +24
ASHBURN     0    0     0    1    4        +0    0    + 5
AVERILL    13   -3    52    2  -37   -0  -11  +68    +44
BERRA       0    0     0    0        -1   -0    0    - 1 
BOUDREAU   -2   -3    -6                      - 5 
CAREY     102   89    18    0   +0    2   22  +31    +11 
COCHRANE   17    2    15                      +34
CRONIN     -4   -4   -20                      -20
DICKEY    -18    1     5                      -14 
J DIMAGGIO 32    7    13    7   34    1    3  +52    +90 
DOBY        0    0              -3    2   -7    0    + 6
DOERR      -3  -12    -5                      + 4 
FOXX        7   -6    -7   -0    0   +0   -0  + 6    + 6
FRISCH     47   31    11                      +27 
GEHRIG      1  -13    52   +0        -0    0  +66    +66 
GEHRINGER  44   11     8                      +41
GREENBERG  -3    7    -9   +0              2  -19    -21 
GORDON     13    2     2                      +17
GOSLIN     11   11    10    2    1    1    6  +10    + 8
HACK       -0   -9    16                      +25
HARTNETT  -23    7   -21                      -51  
HEILMANN  -10   -1   -15    0    0  -19  -13  -24    -30 
BI HERMAN   7   -4    -9                      + 2
HORNSBY    22   -9    -2             -1   -0  +29    +28 
KELLER     -7    2    26   -4         1  -17  +15    +31   
KINER      -3    0    -0  -18   -3        -9  - 3    -15
MAYS        0    0     0         5         8    0    - 3
MEDWICK    -1    0   -11    4   -0   -1    6  -12    -15
MINOSO                     -0   -2   -2   -5         - 0
MIZE       11    2    12             -0    0  +25    +25
MUSIAL     14   -3    11    1   -0    5   -3  +28    +36
OTT        25   -4    50    1   +0   13   11  +79    +81 
REESE       5   -2    11                      +18
J ROBINSON  6    1     6                      +13
ROUSH      -0   -9     7   -0   +0    0    2  +16    +14  
RUTH       30  -12    26  -10        -6  -23  +68    +75 
J SEWELL   -0   -2     6                      + 8
A SIMMONS  21    2    -8   19    9   -0  -11  +11    +50
SISLER     30   13    17                      +60
SLAUGHTER  16   -3    15    2   -1    2   -2  +34    +35
SNIDER     -1    0     1   +0   -3   -1    2    0    - 4
TERRY      20   -4    13                      +29
VAUGHAN    15   -9    36   -0             +0  +57    +57
P WANER    23   -8     9    1   -0   -6   -7  +40    +42
T WILLIAMS  2    1     6    3        -2    1  + 7    + 8

Note: Only includes value accrued through 1948 (running/dp) or 1952 (OF throwing).


Phew! Got that in before the election starts.
   359. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 14, 2019 at 08:58 PM (#5908751)
OK, this update of estimated running, DPing, and throwing value comprises all the players I did this for originally a couple years ago plus some additional that I'd seen mentioned in this thread. If there's anyone else who needs to be done, let me know.

Candidates above the line, and HOMers below it.
          EST  BBREF EST  EST  EST  EST  DRA  NET    NET
NAME      BSR  BSR   DPR  LFR  CFR  RFR  OFR  NODRA  DRA
=========================================================
BANCROFT    2   -8     2                      +12
BARTELL     7   -5    -2                      +14   
BERGER      6   -1     9   -0    2    1   -9  +16    +28
BISHOP     -8   -4     3                      - 1
BOTTOMLEY -10    1     7                      - 4
CAMILLI     5   -2    17                      +24 
CHAPMAN    15    5    -7    5    5   -3   18  + 3    - 8
CLIFT      17    0    -5   +0              0  +12    +12      
COMBS      20   -1    11   -0  -10   -1  -35  +30    +56 
W COOPER   -5    0    -8                      -13
CRAMER      5  -10    17    2   -2   -0   -5  +32    +37 
CUYLER     77   21     8   +0   -2   19    9  +64    +72
D DIMAGGIO 21    0    -0   +0   27   +0   20  +21    +28  
ELLIOTT     2   -5   -10   -0   -3   -7   -0  - 3    -13
R FERRELL  -3   -2   -21                      -22
FREY       19   -2    18   +0   +0   -0   +0  +39    +39
FURILLO    -3    0    -2   +0    9    7   14  - 5    - 3
GALAN      19   -1    32    5    6   +0   -4  +53    +64 
HAFEY      21   -3     7   14   -1    4   -0  +31    +48
HENRICH    16    6    28   -1    1   15    6  +50    +59  
BA HERMAN -12   -3     1   -2        -0  -21  - 8    +11  
HODGES     -0    0    -0                      - 0 
HOLMES      4   -1     6   -0    9   -7    3  +11    +13 
T JACKSON   2   -3   -16                      -11
B JOHNSON   4   -3    -2   19    3   -0   40  + 5    -13
KELL        5    1    -8                      - 4 
H KELLY   -13    2   -11    1    0   -0   -0  -25    -24
KLEIN      11   -3    21   -2   +0   16   23  +35    +26 
LAZZERI   -18    5    -3                      -26  
LINDSTROM  13   -7    -1   +0    4   -4    2  +19    +17
LOLLAR     -1    0    -1                      - 2
LOMBARDI  -14    5   -44                      -63 
MANUSH     28    6    12  -11   -1   -3  -34  +46    +65 
MARANVILLE 12    5   -10                      - 3
MARION      4   -1     5                      +10    
MARTIN     26    5     5    1    3    2    4  +26    +28 
MYER        7   -5     8                      +20
NICHOLSON   0   -1    18    1    0  -13  -10  +19    +17
PESKY      18    9    15                      +24
S RICE     39   12    24   -1    9    7   12  +51    +54 
RIZZUTO    12    6     2                      + 7
ROLFE      20    5    36                      +61 
SCHALK      2    6    -3                      - 7
SCHANG    -18    4    -1                      -23 
SCHNDIENST 13    3    -1    2   -0         1  + 9    +10
STANKY      2   -1     4                      + 7
STEPHENS    5    1     1    1             +0  + 5    + 6
TRAYNOR    42   -2     1                      +45 
D WALKER    8   -2    29    3    4   14   -1  +39    +59 
L WANER    10   -4    16   -0   -6   -1   -1  +30    +24 
K WILLIAMS  6   -6     8  -24   -4   -0   16  +20    - 4  
H WILSON   -2    1    -4   -2  -20    2  -10  - 7    -17  
---------------------------------------------------------
APPLING    22    1     3                      +24
ASHBURN     0    0     0    1    4        +0    0    + 5
AVERILL    13   -3    52    2  -37   -0  -11  +68    +44
BERRA       0    0     0    0        -1   -0    0    - 1 
BOUDREAU   -2   -3    -6                      - 5 
CAREY     102   89    18    0   +0    2   22  +31    +11 
COCHRANE   17    2    15                      +34
CRONIN     -4   -4   -20                      -20
DICKEY    -18    1     5                      -14 
J DIMAGGIO 32    7    13    7   34    1    3  +52    +90 
DOBY        0    0              -3    2   -7    0    + 6
DOERR      -3  -12    -5                      + 4 
FOXX        7   -6    -7   -0    0   +0   -0  + 6    + 6
FRISCH     47   31    11                      +27 
GEHRIG      1  -13    52   +0        -0    0  +66    +66 
GEHRINGER  44   11     8                      +41
GREENBERG  -3    7    -9   +0              2  -19    -21 
GORDON     13    2     2                      +17
GOSLIN     11   11    10    2    1    1    6  +10    + 8
HACK       -0   -9    16                      +25
HARTNETT  -23    7   -21                      -51  
HEILMANN  -10   -1   -15    0    0  -19  -13  -24    -30 
BI HERMAN   7   -4    -9                      + 2
HORNSBY    22   -9    -2             -1   -0  +29    +28 
KELLER     -7    2    26   -4         1  -17  +15    +31   
KINER      -3    0    -0  -18   -3        -9  - 3    -15
MAYS        0    0     0         5         8    0    - 3
MEDWICK    -1    0   -11    4   -0   -1    6  -12    -15
MINOSO                     -0   -2   -2   -5         - 0
MIZE       11    2    12             -0    0  +25    +25
MUSIAL     14   -3    11    1   -0    5   -3  +28    +36
OTT        25   -4    50    1   +0   13   11  +79    +81 
REESE       5   -2    11                      +18
J ROBINSON  6    1     6                      +13
ROUSH      -0   -9     7   -0   +0    0    2  +16    +14  
RUTH       30  -12    26  -10        -6  -23  +68    +75 
J SEWELL   -0   -2     6                      + 8
A SIMMONS  21    2    -8   19    9   -0  -11  +11    +50
SISLER     30   13    17                      +60
SLAUGHTER  16   -3    15    2   -1    2   -2  +34    +35
SNIDER     -1    0     1   +0   -3   -1    2    0    - 4
TERRY      20   -4    13                      +29
VAUGHAN    15   -9    36   -0             +0  +57    +57
P WANER    23   -8     9    1   -0   -6   -7  +40    +42
T WILLIAMS  2    1     6    3        -2    1  + 7    + 8

Note: Only includes value accrued through 1948 (running/dp) or 1952 (OF throwing).


Phew! Got that in before the election starts.

[EDIT: Fixed Ken Williams' net DRA total]
   360. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 14, 2019 at 09:15 PM (#5908752)
Just a reminder that some of these guys are quite provisional because we only have data back through 1925. So someone like Ray Schalk only has four-five years of baserunning in the proverbial bank. His figures are quite provisional. Harry Heilmann, Babe Ruth, Highpockets, Carey, Sisler, Roush, Hornsby, Rice, Maranville, and Bancroft are in this category.

Sorry also for the double post. My internet's had the hiccups all week.

   361. Rob_Wood Posted: December 16, 2019 at 04:58 AM (#5908902)
Are we getting ready to vote? When does the official ballot thread open? Should prelim ballots be posted herein at this time?
   362. DL from MN Posted: December 16, 2019 at 10:29 AM (#5908937)
I have been deferring to Joe and John about when to start the vote. I will put up a thread by the end of the week if I don't hear anything sooner.
   363. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 16, 2019 at 08:41 PM (#5909150)
So, Joe, you out there? We got to get this election rolling!

Does anyone else have the keys who can set up a voting thread?

With holiday and whatnot, it’s kinda now or never.
   364. Rob_Wood Posted: December 17, 2019 at 04:26 PM (#5909375)
Retrosheet recently released the complete 1932 & 1933 seasons so I took another look at Tommy Bridges, the 1930's Detroit Tigers pitcher. Bridges pitched just a little as a rookie in 1930 and was a regular in 1931 but didn't pitch all that well. So we now have virtually all the "evidence" for the Hall of Merit case for Bridges.

My Win Values stat estimates how many wins a starting pitcher contributed to his team on a game-by-game basis taking into account both the number of runs he allowed and the number of runs his team scored. Bridges led the AL 1933 Win Values. His AL ranks from 1932-1943 are the following: 7, 1, 4, 7, 4, 15, 9, 4, 7, 5, 12, 3. Bridges went 2-0 in the 1935 World Series including winning the clinching game six.

Bridges's career was cut short due to World War II. His ERA+'s in his last five seasons were 139, 141, 133, 144, 146, and then he was inducted into the army at age 37. His major league career was essentially finished (though he did pitch several more years after the war in the minor leagues).

Bridges is somewhat comparable to Roy Oswalt and Kevin Appier. With reasonable credit for time missed due to WWII, Bridges will be high on my ballot (maybe around 5th) whereas Oswalt and Appier will be just off my ballot. I encourage everyone to take another look at Tommy Bridges.
   365. Qufini Posted: December 17, 2019 at 04:37 PM (#5909379)
test post
   366. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 17, 2019 at 05:25 PM (#5909395)
Following up on Rob's #364. Retrosheet released its latest update one week ago today. As Rob noted, it completes the 1932 and 1933 seasons. It also includes partial play-by-play for the 1918 season as well as a few new games between those two seasons (I'm not sure of the exact number of such games yet) and upgraded 79 games from "deduced" to "event" between 1941 and 1968. I'm cautiously optimistic that I will have my Player won-lost records updated to incorporate these new data by the end of this weekend. I'll make another post in this thread when that happens - and probably go ahead and post my preliminary ballot here / final ballot in the ballot thread within a day or two of that.
   367. bachslunch Posted: December 18, 2019 at 07:22 AM (#5909459)
Problem solved, post retracted.
   368. Howie Menckel Posted: December 20, 2019 at 08:24 PM (#5910227)
here's the "showdown" I wish we had instead of Jeter walking in on a weak ballot

Jeter OPS+, high to low, as every-day player:

153 132 128 127 125 125 125 125* 124 121 114 114 111 103 102 101 100 (090 076)

155 138 138 138** 130 136 120 113 (97 92 90 90** 89 85)

* - (Jeter also had a full season's worth of postseason PA, and hit even better. so let's give him another 125)
** - not a BA title qualifier

second line is Trammell, who routinely had 100+ fewer PA in seasons. Jeter holds up well, then, in batting peak, in long prime, and even in extra years as an above-average hitter for a SS.

throw in defense, though, and - well, Trammell had to wait too long to get into HOF and Jeter is flirting with unanimous.

wonder what this matchup vote would be
   369. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 21, 2019 at 01:32 PM (#5910306)
Thanks for the updates charts, Doc if you add the new totals in post 359 + war credit + MLE credit, limiting myself to 10 :), can you share an estimated CHEWS+ for the following, looking at how to fill out the 2nd half of my ballot and personal hall of fame at this juncture, your help is greatly appreciated!

Earl Averill - +68, PCL
Dave Bancroft - +12, MLE at 23, ~all-star at 24
Bus Clarkson - WWII credit, is he 1st for middle infield negro leaguers remaining for you?
Kiki Cuyler - +64, any credit managerial shenanigans in 1927, or MLE credit held down in the minors until 25?
Tommy Henrich - +50, WWII, probably no MLE credit/though blocked from a full-time role until 25.
Harry Hooper - +?,
Bob Johnson - +5, PCL
Don Newcombe - Korean + Integration
Johnny Pesky - +24, WWII, AA credit?
Phil Rizzuto - +7, WWII, malaria 1946?
   370. bjhanke Posted: December 22, 2019 at 03:06 PM (#5910466)
I've been working up a new method. Using the New Historical Abstract ranking system, because it remains the most robust and satisfactory of all ranking systems, I checked those rankings against who is in the HoM. This gives me a list of the highest ranking players in the New Historical who are NOT yet in the HoM, with only one surprise. In other words, Sal Bando is the highest-ranking third baseman who is not in the HoM. He's ranked 11th at 3B in the NHA. I realize that I will need to fold in players who played after 2000, and Negro Leaguers, but I think that this is turning out to be a great method. For one thing, no player in the top ten at his position according to the NHA is NOT in the HoM. That's credibility. We, in general, agree with the NHA. The only difficult position is pitcher, because we have many many more pitchers than we do at any other position. It turns out that we have 77 pitchers and 193 position players, including Edgar Martinez. So, what I did was divide the 193 by the 77, coming up with 2.506, just barely over 2.5. So, when I was doing the pitchers, I just took their raw rank and divided it by 2.506 , and rounded up to the next integer, to get the pitchers on the same scale as the other players. So, Walter Johnson, who is ranked #1 by the NHA, gets 1/2.506, which is a fraction, but I rounded it up to the next integer, which was 1. The #2 guy, Lefty Grove, got 2/2.506, which is still less than 1, so he ALSO gets a "1" when comparing him to position players. Cy Young, #3, gets 3/2.506, which is between 1 and 2, so he gets a 2, as do the fourth and fifth guys. So far, what it looks like is that there will be three pitchers at every rank except 1. In short, you can divide the pitcher's NHA ranking by 2.506 and get a ranking that works, placing the pitchers among the position players.

The surprise - the highest-ranking player not in the HoM - turns out to be pitcher Dizzy Dean. He is ranked 25th in the NHA, certainly a HoM rank, and I divided it by 2.506. This gives you a number just below ten, so I consider Dizzy to be equal with position players ranked 10th. That makes him #1 on my ballot. I will defend that in more detail when I get the whole essay done. What follows is a listing of the various positions (skipping pitcher for now), and, within the position, the highest-ranking non-HoM player, and the second-highest such, along with the highest-ranking player from the 19th century who is not in the HoM. This won't be my final ballot, of course, since I've not folded in the Negro Leaguers and the recent guys (not too hard, because we've already voted in Bonds, Clemens and McGwire). But it my preliminary list:

C - Thurman Munson (ranked 14th at C in the NHA), Elston Howard (15), Deacon McGwire (40)
1B - Don Mattingly (12), Tony Perez (13), Henry Larkin (69)
2B - Tony Lazzeri (19), Larry Doyle (20), Tom Daly (55)
3B - Sal Bando (11), Al Rosen (14), Lave Cross (33)
SS - Luis Aparicio (13), Jim Fregosi (15), Herman Long (34)
LF - Lou Brock (15), Frank Howard (19), Topsy Hartsel (47)
CF - Dale Murphy (12), Wally Berger (13), Hugh Duffy (20)
RF - Dave Parker (14), Bobby Bonds (15), Fielder Jones (41)

I skipped DH, because I have no idea who the highest-ranking DH might be. I, personally, think that putting Frank Thomas among the 1B, instead of the DH, is altogether wrong, but this is a ballot decision, not mine to make. I had to look over the outfielders three times to make sure we hadn't already elected Hugh Duffy. I will certainly have him on my ballot, along with a 19th-century pitcher or two, and at least one Negro Leaguer. Best I can say, right now. - Brock Hanke
   371. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 22, 2019 at 08:04 PM (#5910511)
I'm cautiously optimistic that I will have my Player won-lost records updated to incorporate these new data by the end of this weekend.


My cautious optimism was justified! My Player won-lost records have been updated to incorporate Retrosheet's most recent data updates. I'll probably post a preliminary ballot here tomorrow night and move it over to the ballot thread on Tuesday. Please let me know if anything looks wonky at my website. I think everything should have updated correctly, but it's hard to check everything.

And here's a link where you can construct a HOM ballot based on Player won-lost records with your own personal weights for various things.
   372. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 23, 2019 at 09:28 AM (#5910544)
Thanks Rally, an in depth review of Jeter defense:

http://www.baseballprojection.com/special/jeter.htm
   373. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 23, 2019 at 11:37 PM (#5910775)
Okay, based on my updated Player won-lost records, here's my preliminary ballot. If nobody objects to anything here, I'll probably go ahead and make this official tomorrow (Tuesday / Christmas Eve).

1. Derek Jeter - my system agrees with the consensus that he was a terrible fielder - worst fielding SS in history given his playing time - but my fielding numbers are generally more conservative than other systems (he's about -11 net wins for fielding over his career). Jeter also looks better in pWins (tied to team wins) than in eWins to a larger extent than virtually anybody of the past 60-70 years or so. I'm not sure what to make of it, but I wrote about it here.

2. Tommy John - my system LOVES Tommy John.

3. Andruw Jones - this surprises me, given that my fielding numbers tend to be more conservative - and, in fact, Jones isn't even clearly the best defensive CF in history per my measure (he's in a clear top 3 with Willie Davis and Amos Otis - I'm not entirely sure what to make of my system's love of Amos Otis's fielding). If anybody's interested, I wrote about him too.

4. Jeff Kent - the conservative fielding numbers probably work a bit in his favor too. And my system is a sucker for power-hitting up-the-middle defenders.

5. Vern Stephens - did somebody say "power-hitting up-the-middle defenders"?

6. Andy Pettitte - same basic case as Tommy John

7. Luis Tiant - I think he'd probably already be in my personal HOM; he's just outside of "elect me" here just because there are a few other pHOM guys that I like just a bit more. If the rules allowed it, I'd think about strategically bumping him up to an elect-me slot; but my understanding it that the HOM voting rules explicitly do NOT allow that.

8. Lance Berkman - I give postseason credit, which helps Berkman.

9. Jason Giambi - I tend to be a peak-heavy voter and Giambi had a great one.

10. Darryl Strawberry - ditto. I decided I was downgrading them for no good reason in the preliminary ballot on the previous page - consensus be damned: my system likes Giambi and Strawberry, so I'm going to vote for Giambi and Strawberry!

11. Wally Schang - his best seasons still pre-date my Player won-lost records. What I have looks very good.

12. Sammy Sosa - he looks a LOT better in my eWins (context-neutral) than in pWins (tied to team wins) and I think in Sosa's case some of that is "real" - he was pretty weak in the clutch for most of his career. But even with that, he sneaks onto my ballot.

13. Jorge Posada - my system loves him (remember "power-hitting up-the-middle defender"), but I've downgraded him because I've become convinced that he was bad at aspects of catching that my system is missing.

14. Tommy Henrich - he needs World War 2 credit to make my ballot, but given his performance in 1941-42 and again in 1946-49, giving him three years of strong WWII credit seems pretty defensible.

15. Urban Shocker - I'm still missing a couple of seasons at the beginning of his career and several games within his prime seasons that I do have. I worry that I may be over-rating his 1919 season in particular because of missing games (Retrosheet has play-by-play for only 6 of his 30 games that season), but he's the type of pitcher that my system really likes. I debated holding him back until I get more data, but I don't really have an obvious #16 candidate, so I stuck with Shocker here for now.

I dropped Johnny Evers and Ben Taylor from the preliminary ballot on the last page. For Evers, my ballot placement before was a bit of wish-casting, guessing how he'd look in my system. I decided to be a bit more cautious and just wait until Retrosheet gets back to the first decade of the 20th century. For Taylor, his latest MLE's seem to push him back below the borderline.

Setting aside Evers and Taylor, my next tier of candidates would probably be

16, 17, 18. Orel Hershiser, Dwight Gooden, Johan Santana - essentially, all great peaks, all not quite enough careers
19, 20, 21. Toby Harrah, Bert Campaneris, Dave Concepcion - one of these three is the best shortstop of the 1970s; my opinion as to which of the three that is changes regularly.

Required disclosures:
Buddy Bell - my system just doesn't like him. Not enough power for a third baseman; good, but not great fielding, and more conservative fielding numbers in general. Maybe in my top 200, can't see putting him much higher than that.
Kenny Lofton - similar issues to Bell - no power; good, not great fielding. Probably around #75 or so in my consideration set.
Todd Helton - just not enough separation with a bunch of contemporaries (McGriff, Delgado, Olerud, as well as several HOMers - Palmeiro, Bagwell, Thomas, Thome, etc.). Looks to be around #70 or so in my consideration set

Other players of note:
Bobby Abreu - ranks somewhere in the 30's for me. Not as much peak as I'd like, but certainly a worthy candidate.
Thurman Munson - right now, he shows up around #100 or so for me. Among non-HOM catchers, in addition to Schang and Posada, I also have Darrell Porter and Gene Tenace ahead of him. But I'm open to the idea that my system is missing a lot of the defensive value of catchers.
Kiki Cuyler - he's a guy that my system actually likes quite a bit. But not quite enough for me to put him on ballot. He's within spitting distance of Bobby Abreu in my system (Amos Otis, Jim Kaat, and Fred McGriff end up in the same general area of the ballot - those five are #32 through #36 in the link in comment #371).

I don't know if there's anybody else anyone would like me to comment on. I think that's everybody I'm required to.
   374. Chris Cobb Posted: December 25, 2019 at 05:38 PM (#5910947)
Thanks to guidance from jaack on finding a comment box, I am posting a preliminary ballot for 2020. Given that I've been absent from the HoM discussions for six years, I will post a detailed preliminary ballot in a few pieces, so that folks can get a good look at what i'm doing and comment. I'm using much the same system that I always have, but the feedstocks of data have changed a bit since 2014, when I last voted.

I begin by calculating a value for each player, which sums three factors:

(1) Career wins above replacement, with negative values at beginning or end of career dropped, adjusted for position players to 154 or 162 game seasons
(2) Career wins above average, calculated on a seasonal basis by subtracting 2ish WAR (it varies for pitchers) from the player's season-length adjusted WAR totals for each season, then summing the remaining wins
(3) 5-year peak WAR rate, calculated by summing the player's best 5 consecutive seasons by WAR, dividing by games played or IP, then multiplying by 154 g, 162 g, or an appropriate number of innings for a season, then multiplying by 5.

The underlying data comes mainly from Baseball Reference and Fangraphs.

For position players, I calculate each player’s score in bb-ref’s and fangraphs WAR and average the totals. I then make a career fielding adjustment based on DRA.

For pitchers, I calculate each player’s score using bb-ref’s WAR only.

For all players, I give credit for playing time missed due to wars or labor actions, and I give minor-league credit when appropriate.

For Negro-League players, I use Eric Chalek’s MLEs, with some minor adjustments and cross-checking vs. the raw data to see the impact of regression.

This system creates scores that are roughly twice the magnitude of players' career WAR. They top out in the low 300s for players like Ruth, Johnson, Young, and Barry Bonds. Any player with a score better than 130 is almost certainly a HoMer, players with scores between 120 and 130 are usually elected, players with scores between 110 and 120 are sometimes elected, and players with scores below 110 are rarely elected, and are usually electees that my system sees as mistakes.

To rank the players, I begin by grouping them in decade-based cohorts, with players being ranked in whatever decade they accumulated the most value. If a player was highly valuable in two different decades, I may count him as 1/2 a player in each of the two decades. This gives me a rank in decade for every player as well as a raw score to use in ranking. I match the decade rankings by establishing an expected "quota" of HoMers for each decade based on demographic factors (quite similar to the method used by Dr. Chaleeko) and scaling the numbers from decades with smaller cohorts to the size of the larger. (For example, for the 1880s, my quota system indicates that there should be about 14.5 HoMers for that decade, while there should be 30 for the 2000 decade, which is the largest cohort. If an 1880s player were ranked 10th in his decade, I would multiply 10 by 30/14.5 to get a scaled ranking of 20.7.

I integrate the decade-by-decade rankings into my ballot by considering both the players’ raw scores and their re-scaled rank within their cohort. Having two ways of looking at each player enables me to make judicious adjustments for differences between eras without applying a single "theory of everything" modifier to adjust for all the factors that make the nature and quality of play differ from one era and league to another. When comparing players who are close in time, I give more heed to the players' raw scores, and when comparing players who are distant in time, I give more heed to scaled in-decade ranking. I am influenced by positional differences and discrepancies in positional representation in the Hall of Merit, but aside from giving bonuses to catchers and handling position players and pitchers differently with respect to season and rate measures, I don't systematically favor any position to boost representation.

With that overview done, I'll go on to uploading the preliminary ballot.
   375. Chris Cobb Posted: December 25, 2019 at 05:41 PM (#5910948)
Chris Cobb 2020 Preliminary Ballot, Part 1

(#) = 2014 ballot ranking (n/e = not eligible) (n/r = not ranked)
Total = score in my system

Ballot Section 1: A Group = Clear HoMers (Generally raw scores of 130 and up)

1. Derek Jeter (n/e). Total = 135.95. 2000s. Rank in Decade: 16. The big question for evaluating Jeter is his defense: just how bad was it? Although all of the advanced metrics agree that it was very bad, there’s still a huge spread. Fangraphs has -137, Baseball Reference has -243, and DRA has a whopping -349.8. These numbers put Jeter somewhere between the top 5 position players during his career and outside the Hall of Merit, if one gives full credence to either the highest or lowest assessment of his fielding value. My approach of averaging the fielding results puts Jeter in pretty much a tie with Buddy Bell and Andruw Jones for the top spot on the 2020 ballot. Reputation and intangibles are sufficient for me to give Jeter the #1 spot.
2. Buddy Bell (7). Total = 136.98. 1980s. Re-Scaled Rank in Decade: 20.6. Very similar to the already elected Nettles, except that he peaked earlier and higher and had less value later in his career. An above average hitter and a great fielder at a plus defensive position, with a strong peak and a solid career. (DRA and Total Zone agree pretty closely on his defensive excellence.) I see him as considerably stronger than a couple of the recent electees, most notably Vlad Guerrero, so I hope his case will get traction this year.
3. Andruw Jones (n/e). Total = 135.50. 2000s. Rank in Decade: 17. A historically great defensive centerfielder. Quantifying the value of his defense is not easy, and assessments vary. My system sees him as nearly identical to Jeter and Bell. With the spectacular cratering of Jones’s later career not in dispute, I have no trouble preferring the longer career Jeter and Bell.
4. Kenny Lofton (10). Total = 136.07. 1990s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 22.9. Another player for whom fielding is a big stake in his evaluation. It’s a sign that the electorate continues to undervalue fielding systematically that in a backlog year all the top returning candidates are high on the fielding side, when lesser (in my view) players with big bats like Vlad Guerrero have already been elected. Lofton also loses ground because his peak fell within the 1994-95 strike, so voters who don’t strike adjust may have Lofton lower. Lofton was one of the best players in the game at his peak, and he was an above average player for a long time. His career profile is a lot like Buddy Bell’s.
5. Todd Helton (n/e). Total = 130.46. 2000s. Rank in Decade: 19.5. (Sheffield and Mauer rank between Jones and Helton in the 2000s cohort). Coors Field complicates the assessment of Helton’s career, but I am comfortable enough with the way the WAR systems handle park effects to use their numbers and place Helton here. By scaled in-decade rank, he would place ahead of Lofton, but where there is considerable career overlap, it makes sense to favor the raw number.
6. Sammy Sosa (7). Total = 133.07. 1990s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 24. Sosa has a big peak and a solid prime, which more than compensate for relatively low career value for a HoMer. I evaluate candidates by a context-neutral system, but I take note of the findings of situational systems that Sosa’s all-or-nothing approach on offense was situationally sub-optimal for his teams, so I put him at the bottom of the A group on this ballot.

Ballot Section 2. B Group = High Borderline. (This group typically includes scores 120-130).

7. Kevin Appier (15). Total = 125.6. 1990s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 25.6. I saw him pitch only after his injury, when he was a battler without great stuff, but he was brilliant in the first half of the 1990s with a peak that was the best in the American League 1992-96. (Maddux in the NL was better over that stretch). He has a very similar case to Johan Santana, just below, but I give him the edge over Santana because he has a bit more value outside of his peak seasons.
8. Bobby Abreu (n/e). Total = 121.41. 2000s. Rank in Decade: 22.5. Higher by in-decade ranking than by raw score, I nudge Abreu up for his well-rounded game and my sense that competition was tightening in the post-steroid era in which he played the second half of his career.
9. Johan Santana (n/e). Total = 120.6. 2000s. Rank in Decade: 23.5. Like Appier above, he is his peak, one of top pitchers in the majors. During his five-year peak from 2005-9, he has the highest value over that period according to Baseball Reference. Just enough career to go along with that peak to merit election.
10. Luis Tiant (12). Total = 125.5. 1970s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 26.9. An uneven career, but he’s got a couple of great seasons and a lot of very good ones. Pitching in extreme hitters’ parks probably took a bite out of his IP totals relative to his contemporaries as well.
11. Vic Willis (17). Total = 122.14. 1900s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 25.6. The highest-ranked unelected player in my system from the pre-integration era. I am cautious about adding anyone from this period, from which almost all of the HoM-worthy players have been selected already: to be fair to all eras, the HoM needs to get on with inducting the borderline candidates from 1970 forward. That said, Willis is a rare high-borderline player that has been left out so far. In my system, he ranks ahead of two elected pitchers from his decade—Joe McGinnity and Mordecai Brown—as well as Jimmy Collins, Jimmy Sheckard, and Roger Bresnahan among position players. Brown and Bresnahan were arguably mistakes, and other unelected players rank ahead of them, but Willis is the only unelected player ahaead of McGinnity, Collins, and Sheckard. He’s very similar in value, though not in career shape, to Tiant and Appier. He may be a bit underrated because his peak is split by the odd 1900 contraction year. BBref makes competition adjustments, but I don’t think its enough to counter the effects of this odd season. I haven’t made any compensatory adjustment, but I certainly noticed a consistently large drop in WAR numbers for the 1900 season as I was re-evaluating the top players from this period for this ballot.
12. Sal Bando (24). Total = 124.71. 1970s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 28.2. He was lower on my ballot five years ago because I was overrating a few of his pitching contemporaries. With them moved down a bit, my 1970s rankings fit my all-time scale better, and Bando rises onto the ballot. There are mixed views of his fielding (TZ thinks he was pretty good, DRA sees him as poor), which keeps him in the borderline area rather than the clear HoMer group.
13. Ned Williamson (31). Total = 128.3. 1880s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 26.9. My ballot’s other “blast from the past.” I re-evaluated the 1880s candidates for the purpose of deciding what to do with Jim McCormick and the result is that Williamson comes up onto my ballot. (McCormick is the top-ranking unelected pitcher from this period, but he’s still below the in-out line for that decade.) He was one of the top players in the game during the first half of his career. DRA backs up Total Zone’s strong assessment of his defense, and he places above multiple elected players from that decade. We’ve elected too many, which makes he hesitant to move too strongly on his candidacy, but he deserves to rank among the high borderline candidates.
14. Bobby Bonds (11). Total = 123.9. 1970s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 29.4. I like Bonds as a candidate for reasons similar to Abreu: I think his well-rounded skill set probably had enhanced situational value, although the high-strikeout rate might undercut that. In any case, he is the last unelected modern-game player with a raw score above 120, which defines the base of the high borderline, so I am moving him onto the ballot above a number of players ranked “by decade” higher than Bonds from the 1990-2010 period.
   376. Chris Cobb Posted: December 25, 2019 at 05:42 PM (#5910949)
Chris Cobb 2020 Preliminary Ballot, Part 2

Ballot Section 3: C Group=True Borderline. (This group typically includes scores 116-120).

15. Orel Hershiser. Total = 118.5. 1980s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 30. Hershiser has the next highest raw score of any unelected modern player, so he gets the last ballot spot, and the only one available this year to the true borderline tier of candidates. He has a dominant peak, which puts him ahead of the next available modern pitcher, Chuck Finley, and I’d overall take him over the next highest modern position player, Brian Giles.

____________ The Off-Ballot Top Candidates________

16. Brian Giles (n/e). Total = 117.72. 2000s. Rank in Decade: 25.5. He should be elected at some point, but his borderline score and his play in the over-represented outfield mean that there is no hurry. Frankly, he’s better than I expected: Petco killed his raw power numbers, but he had substantial value there even after his peak in Pittsburgh. I am not giving him credit for play in the minors in this ranking. The argument for giving him credit is pretty good, as such cases go. I don’t downgrade him for off-the-field behavior, but if I were putting a team together, I’d sure rather have Hershiser, which is a factor in a borderline call.
17. Ben Taylor. (23). Total = 118.73. 1910s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 25.3. Taylor’s case is a difficult one to figure out. His position is well represented, but not from his era. His era is well represented, perhaps over-represented, but there’s a small dip in representation during the period of his prime. His reputation is very strong, but is not fully matched by the data; the data are very sketchy for the first half of his career. I arrived at his raw score by putting the MLEs Eric Chalek developed through my system. His in-decade rank may overrate him a little, but I’ve positioned him to move up onto the ballot in the upper part of the C group, as we go deeper into the backlog.
18. Chuck Finley (33). Total = 117.0. 1990s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 26.7. Finley’s been back and forth across my in-out line as I’ve tweaked and re-tweaked my system. He had a very solid prime without ever having a major peak, which is unusual for a post-1980 pitching candidate, but I’ll take it.
19. Urban Shocker (15). Total = 120.94. 1920s. Scaled Rank in Decade: 30. If Shocker had lived longer, he probably would have had a solid HoMer career. As it stands, he is on the borderline. By his raw score, he might rank a little higher. He’s part of an unusually large group of borderline pitchers whose careers started in the teens and continued into the 1920s and even early 1930s. I think the shift to the lively ball and the corresponding change in pitcher usage may have extended some pitching careers, and the simultaneous spit-ball rule change may have artificially enhanced the careers of the designated spit-ballers, of which Shocker was one. He died too young to get the full advantage of being a grandfathered spit-ball pitcher in the lively ball era, but I handle his case with a bit of caution nevertheless.
20. Joe Tinker (n/r). Total = 119. 83. Scaled Rank in Decade: 32.6. Tinker and Art Fletcher below close out the C group. Tinker’s scaled rank puts him 1 place outside the scaled Top 30 that I consider the usual in-out line for each decade, but his raw score is ahead of near-contemporary and fellow high-defense shortstop Art Fletcher, so I bring Tinker ahead.
21. Art Fletcher, (/n/r). Total = 116.56.1910. Scaled Rank in Decade: 26.8. Fletcher is a player I had never looked at before, but when I re-evaluated the 1900-1930 player group in order to decide what to do with Wally Schang, he emerged from the pack. Both he and Tinker are helped by the fact that DRA shows their defense as extraordinary.

Ballot Section 4. D Group=Low Borderline. (This group typically includes raw scores from 110-115.) About 1/3 of these players, the 1990-2010 players, are above my all-time in-out line, and I would generally move them up ahead of the rest. Where they will stand historically will depends on how the 2010-2030 period plays out. I’m in no hurry to push any of these players in, but it’s likely that in five years time, we’ll be seeing some of them being on the cusp of election.

22. John Olerud (n/r). Total = 116.69. 1990. Scaled Rank in Decade: 27.8.
23. Jason Giambi (n/e). Total = 116.35. 2000. Rank in Decade: 26.5.
24. Robin Ventura (20). Total = 114.94. 1990. Scaled Rank in Decade: 29.1.
25. Thurman Munson (n/r). Total = 114.71. 1970. Scaled Rank in Decade: 30.6
26. Lance Berkman. (n/e). 114.65. 2000. Rank in Decade: 28.5. The main difference between Berkman and Brian Giles (#16) in my system is in peak rate. Their best years were very similar, but Giles was able to maintain his peak production in four consecutive seasons, whereas Berkman’s best seasons alternated with weaker ones. It’s a small difference, resulting in just three points of raw score between them—the equivalent in the system one season of play at 2.5 WAR. In the borderline area, however, there are (relatively) a lot of players with very similar totals. From the 2000s, Jason Giambi and the not-yet-eligible Tim Hudson fall between Giles and Berkman, and with another 130 years of baseball to drawn on, there are eight other players squeezed into that small gap.
27. Jeff Kent (13). Total = 112.87. 2000. Rank in Decade: 29.5.
28. Chet Lemon (28). Total = 116.77. 1980. Scaled Rank in Decade: 31.2
29. Frank Chance (n/r). Total = 116.75. 1900. Scaled Rank Decade: 34.4. Chance ranked a little bit higher than his numerical totals warrant because his rate of production is so high. By peak rate, he was an elite player, 1-2 WAR better per 154 games that some of his elected contemporaries. But he couldn’t stay in the lineup. I like players who had a high impact whenever they were on the field: it seems like that’s the foundation of who is a better player. What sets the no-doubt HoMers apart from the borderliners is usually per-game value. Most of the time, the players with more per-game value also have more games. In the rare cases in which it doesn’t work out that way, I tend to give a little extra boost to the players who were great when they played.
30. Bob Johnson (n/r). Total = 123.19. 1930. Scaled Rank in Decade: 35.2.
31. Phil Rizzuto (n/r). Total = 111.45. 1940. Scaled Rank in Decade: 30.
32. George Uhle (n/r). Total = 119.43. 1920. Scaled Rank in Decade: 31.5.
33. Wally Schang. (n/r). Total = 110.40. 1920. Scaled Rank in Decade: 34.4. As my system sees it, even with a catcher bonus Schang falls a little bit short. His main case is being arguably the best major league catcher between Charlie Bennett and Gabbie Hartnett, with the elected Roger Bresnahan being the alternate candidate for that title. The main reason Schang falls short in my system is that he lacks a significant peak. That isn’t a function of games played, but of per-game impact. Bresnahan has a good deal less career value than Schang, but at his best he was an impact player, with a peak rate in BWAR of 6.19 WAR/154 games over his best five-year stretch. Schang tops out at 4.56 WAR/154 games. That’s the lowest of any ranked position player, although it is the 3rd highest by a catcher during this period, following Bresnahan and the underappreciated Jack Clements, who averaged 5.21 WAR/154 games for Philadelphia from 1890-96. If there were no HoM catchers between Bennett and Harnett, Schang might have a stronger argument, but there is Bresnahan from the majors plus Santop and Mackey from the Negro Leagues.
34. Tony Perez (n/r). Total = 114.57. 1970. Scaled Rank in Decade: 31.8.
35. Bernie Williams (27). Total = 113.03. 1990. Scaled Rank in Decade: 31.1.
36. Dwight Gooden (n/r). Total = 112.90. 1980. Scaled Rank in Decade: 32.4.
37. Ron Cey (n/r). Total = 113.78. 1970. Scaled Rank in Decade: 33.1.
38. Jorge Posada (n/e). Total = 110.94. 2000. Rank in Decade: 32.5.
39. Dave Bancroft (n/r). Total = 114.6. 1920. Scaled Rank in Decade: 32.9.
40. Cesar Cedeno (n/r). Total = 112.38. 1970. Scaled Rank in Decade: 34.3.
41. Fred McGriff (n/r) Total = 110.90. 1990. Scaled Rank in Decade: 32.2.
42. Jim McCormick (10). Total = 123.33. 1880. Scaled Rank in Decade: 35.2.
43. Tommy John (n/r) Total = 110.6. 1970. Scaled Rank in Decade: 35.5.

   377. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 25, 2019 at 05:51 PM (#5910950)
Welcome back Chris!

Speaking for me, the Lofton voters question TZs defense is to some degree and incorporate DRA and or Kiko. Good note on Sosa, though he's SOOOO horrible I've dropped him off the radar in a glut of corner outfield candidates. As to Buddy Bell, replacement levels for 3b are a bit inflated at the expense of shortstops, he does poorly in Kikos stat too. The replacement runs also apply to the Campaneris vs Bando comparison.

   378. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 25, 2019 at 06:07 PM (#5910952)
The edit function failed me, Chris, yet again, a fine ballot and please stick around with us for future years sir :). Merry Christmas everybody!
   379. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: December 25, 2019 at 06:56 PM (#5910955)
Hey, Chris Cobb! So excited you are back! We have missed you. Welcome HOM.
   380. cookiedabookie Posted: December 25, 2019 at 07:28 PM (#5910957)
As to Buddy Bell, replacement levels for 3b are a bit inflated at the expense of shortstops, he does poorly in Kikos stat too. The replacement runs also apply to the Campaneris vs Bando comparison.


I'm curious on this. What years are people suggesting that there was defensive runs given to third basemen that belonged to shortstops? I though it was the early 1970s. Because Bando's last above average year defensively was 1978, yet Bell put up 120 fielding runs over the next six years? Is Bell being unfairly docked for the defensive runs issue, or did it go into the 1980s?
   381. Jaack Posted: December 25, 2019 at 08:35 PM (#5910958)
You can see the shift in positional adjustment here. Both fangraphs and bbref assign positional adjustment by the decade - for third base it's about 3.5 runs per year in the 70s and 1 run per year in the 80s.

I don't know how other voters deal with it, but my quick fix is debit third basemen 2.5 runs a year for 1969-1979 (prorated for partial seasons obviously) and credit an equivalent amount to shorts opts for that time frame. The combination of expansion, the proliferation of astro turf, and the general shift in 3B usage come to a head about 1969, but the positional adjustments on bbref/fang raps don't really deal with it until 1980. Rolling positional adjustments like in Kiko's numbers are better, but the quick fix I use works well enough to get in the ballpark.

In Bell's case, I don't dock him at all for the 80s because the positional adjustmentioned for that decade is fine. I don't have my numbers in front of me at the moment, but I think I dock him about 18 runs over the course of his career, while I dock Bando around 30 runs.
   382. kcgard2 Posted: December 26, 2019 at 08:29 AM (#5910984)
Welcome back Chris Cobb. I immediately noticed that your ranking system churns out results that look strikingly similar to mine. I like your inclusion of a decade ranking.

One humongous disparity is Ned Williamson. I do not have him in my top 125 players. Can you elaborate on him? His defense is pretty clearly outstanding, but his hitting is open for a very great deal of debate IMO. For example, his 6 WAR campaign in 1884 is almost entirely attributable to Cap Anson changing the ground rules for the White Stockings' laughable home park such that hits that went over the fences were HRs (revolutionary idea, I know). At that time such hits were traditionally doubles. But Lakeshore Park's dimensions were 185/300/190. 25 of his 27 HRs occurred there, naturally. And in the other years when the ground rules called those hits doubles, Williamson set the MLB record for doubles. It's the Chuck Klein issue on steroids.

Apart form his offensive performance, which overall is not very impressive, are you giving extra credit for injury or something? Even if I give full weight to everything he accomplished given his environment, he's nowhere close to my ballot. I think I'd have to give *massive* credit for the alternate universe version of Williamson that doesn't injure himself on Spalding's World Tour in 1888 just to get him inside my top 60 or so.

So what am I missing on him? The other somewhat big disparity is Tommy John. Since I have John at the top of my ballot, it's a bit sad you don't have him near the ballot, but I can fully explain that disparity as your preference to only use bWAR for pitchers.
   383. cookiedabookie Posted: December 26, 2019 at 10:37 AM (#5910998)
In Bell's case, I don't dock him at all for the 80s because the positional adjustmentioned for that decade is fine. I don't have my numbers in front of me at the moment, but I think I dock him about 18 runs over the course of his career


Could Bell be hurt by the 1970s positional adjustments, or at least docking him for it? He did significantly better in the 1980s defensively, which is weird given defense tends to peak earlier than offense.
   384. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 26, 2019 at 10:37 AM (#5910999)
Kcgard2, Williamson scores a 111 MAPES and an 87 CHEWS, he's a viable candidate, depends on how you adjust season length, and if you doc for the odd 1884 campaign. Docs 2018 figure was 104, 19th century guys took a hit in the latest update.
   385. Jaack Posted: December 26, 2019 at 12:04 PM (#5911018)
Could Bell be hurt by the 1970s positional adjustments, or at least docking him for it? He did significantly better in the 1980s defensively, which is weird given defense tends to peak earlier than offense.


I'm not sure exactly what your getting at. I dock Bell about 18 runs because the positional adjustment for 70s third basemen is too high, but none of that comes out of his personal defensive value, just that flat adjustment.

Bell's defensive arc is atypical, but the different metrics generally agree it happened, and it's not unbelievably absurd to think a player could improve. But I don't see what that has to do with the positional adjustment
   386. cookiedabookie Posted: December 26, 2019 at 12:53 PM (#5911030)
@Jaack fair enough, just trying to work through the idea for myself. Thanks for the clarification
   387. cookiedabookie Posted: December 26, 2019 at 12:55 PM (#5911031)
I wrote this on another site regarding Andruw Jones and his defensive WAR values. I figured I'd share here, just for discussion's sake.

So, I feel like Bill James is doing exactly what he is accusing Andruw supporters of doing. He's decided Willie Mays is the best, and that there's no way Andruw is better, much less twice as good as Mays. However, if you just look at traditional defensive stats, Mays doesn't do as well as one would suspect.

If you limit to center fielders with at least 10,000 innings in center (41 total players), and turn putouts, assists, errors, and total zone into rate stats, Mays doesn't look like the greatest of all time. Mays rankings:

Putouts/1000: 27
Assists/1000: 21
Errors/1000: 38
Total Zone/1000: 5

Compared to Andruw:

Putouts/1000: 16
Assists/1000: 20
Errors/1000: 6
Total Zone/1000: 2

If you sum up each players rankings in these four traditional stats, Jones is second behind Paul Blair, while Mays is 26th, between Rick Manning and Vernon Wells. If you sort by the median of these four rankings, Jones is fourth, behind Dwayne Murphy, Kirby Puckett, and Blair, while Mays is 25th, between Cesar Cedeno and Lloyd Moseby.

Now, one thing that goes against Mays is because of his reputation, he played in CF longer than he should have. He was pretty pedestrian out there over his last 7 years and 6086 innings. Because that could drag down his overall rankings (he did have 700 more innings in center than any other player), let's remove those seasons, and re-do the comparison.

Mays would end up with 14629 innings in center field over those years. To get a reasonable comparison, let's use Andruw through 2007, where he ends up with 14234 innings. Here's how they look:

Putouts/1000: Mays 291, Jones 302
Assists/1000: Mays 7.4, Jones 7.0
Errors/1000: Mays 5.3, Jones 2.6
Total Zone/1000: Mays 9.9, Jones 9.5

So Jones wins in putouts and errors, Mays in assists and total zone. Given putouts and errors are more important than assists in my opinion, I'd give the edge to Jones, even with the slight edge in total zone for Mays. But it's close enough I won't argue with a tie. Which isn't the same as Andruw being twice as good, but it's also not the same as Andruw not being as good as Mays. Given his offensive production, Andruw looks like a no-doubt Hall of Famer to me, even if he isn't an inner circle guy like Willie.
   388. Chris Cobb Posted: December 26, 2019 at 07:27 PM (#5911122)
@ Kcgard2 re Williamson's case as the Chuck Klein issue on steroids:

I generally don't reduce players' value for taking advantage of whatever park or rule features they found to take advantage of. There are so many cases that one might adjust for, and why should a player be penalized for figuring out how to use their park or the rules effectively? When it comes to the subjective task of putting players of very similar value in order on a ballot, I do consider such matters, and perhaps I should do so in Williamson's case: I have a bit of caution about Shocker, for example, because he was a grandfathered spitballer, but I didn't consider being cautious about Williamson.

As Bleed the Freak mentions, the way one adjusts for season length has a huge effect on Williamson's case. Without season adjustments, he looks much weaker than he does with such adjustments, because his peak was in short seasons and his decline was in longer ones. If one looks at WAR/154 by bWAR across his 1879-84 peak without docking his 1884 season, he's solidly in the middle of the 1880s HoMers:

Brouthers: 9.49 (1882-86)
Connor: 8.62 (1885-89)
Bennett: 7.82 (1881-85)
Anson: 7.60 (1880-84)
Ewing: 7.32 (1882-86)
Glasscock 7.24 (1886-90)
Dunlap 7.13 (1880-84)
Williamson 6.83 (1879-84)
Hines 6.61 (1878-82)
Gore 6.61 (1880-84)
Browning 6.35 (1882-87)
Richardson 6.28 (1883-87)
C. Jones 6.02 (1878-84)
Stovey 5.55 (1883-89)
O'Rourke 5.46 (1873-77)

Similarly, during his peak of 1879-84, he generated the third-most bWAR of any position players (21.8), trailing only Cap Anson (24.7) and Fred Dunlap (23.3), who has the advantage of his 1884 UA season.

Not that either of these measures is decisive, but it suggests that for a 5-6 year period, Williamson was legitimately one of the best players of his time, consistent with his contemporary reputation. Overall, his career is on the short side, so he's by no means in an obvious or clear-cut HoMer. If his peak seasons are not given equal weight with his decline seasons or if his peak is docked for park factors, he won't look even borderline. I do adjust season length and I don't dock for park factors, and so Williamson shows up as a high-borderline candidate.
   389. cookiedabookie Posted: December 28, 2019 at 06:52 PM (#5911471)
Still pretty light on ballots in the ballot thread. I believe we're only at 12 so far. We had 20 at this time last year.
   390. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 28, 2019 at 07:53 PM (#5911477)
Cookie in 389, I have a prelim posted, but trying to finalize my spreadsheets with latest update from Kikos win-loss records, Miller and Eric posting pitcher CHEWS at the HoME next Wed, Matthew Cornwells PARC-d and ranking updates, etc. I'll plan to have somethingin before the deadline.
   391. kcgard2 Posted: December 29, 2019 at 09:43 PM (#5911648)
The ballot thread doesn't show up anywhere on the front page (neither does this discussion thread). We'd probably get more ballots if the thread had visibility on the site.
   392. DL from MN Posted: December 30, 2019 at 09:15 AM (#5911686)
The thread is "sticky" on the HoM page, should be the first thing people see.
   393. epoc Posted: December 30, 2019 at 01:09 PM (#5911754)
Hey all, I realize I'm a little late to the party w/r/t this year's vote, but if you can tolerate another newcomer I'd be interested in participating. A sample ballot to be dissected and interrogated is below, but first a brief description of my methodology.

The basis of my system is standard deviations above average by season for offense (hitting+running), fielding, and pitching. My go-to stat is average SD over best 10 consecutive seasons, though I'm not a total slave to that number. For pitching, I weigh RA9 and FIP equally, and for position players I weight fielding at .3 of offense. Big differences between my system and others will likely be because of a) my focus on peak/prime over career, b) my baseline of average rather than "replacement level," c) my underweighting of fielding relative to WAR, and/or d) my use of FIP in evaluating pitching. Most questions about my ballot will probably be obviated by considering those four factors.

SAMPLE BALLOT

1. Derek Jeter - Giving appropriate credit for significant value outside his prime, I think he deserves the top spot in a weak year.

2. Dwight Gooden - Historically great pitcher for '84-85, with a solid prime outside that. He gets extra credit for his performance relative to his contemporaries. I have only Clemens and Saberhagen above him among his pitching peers; no other eligible player comes close to ranking that highly within his era.

3. Johan Santana - Same basic argument as for Gooden, though he stands out less among his contemporaries.

4. Roy Oswalt

5. Lance Berkman

6. Bobby Abreu

7. Brian Giles - Berkman, Abreu, Giles, and Vlad Guerrero all look very similar in my system, and I would rank them in that order.

8. Kevin Appier

9. Sammy Sosa

10. Dizzy Dean - Clearly behind his contemporary Carl Hubbell, but holds his own in the comparison. Their primes overlap from '31-38, and Dean was the better pitcher in '32,'34-35, and '37.

11. Ron Guidry - Similar to Appier, he's the low man on the HoM-worthy totem pole for his era.

12. Tommy Bridges

13. Eddie Cicotte - Bridges and Cicotte both get extra credit for their rank among their contemporaries.

14. Gavvy Cravath - Though I don't give minor league credit, my system also doesn't punish Cravath for a short MLB career. In addition, he gets extra credit for his rank among contemporaries.

15. Frank Chance

16-25: Urban Shocker, Andy Pettitte, Benny Kauff, Bobby Bonds, Fred McGriff, Albert Belle, Jason Giambi, Wally Schang, Bill Byrd, Carlos Moran

Mandatory Disclosures:

Santana, Sosa, and Berkman are on my ballot. All are worthy of induction.

Wally Schang is just off-ballot. Best available catcher. He'd have been inducted long ago into my personal HOM, but he's been surpassed by more recent players.

Luis Tiant is nowhere close to my ballot. He's well behind near-contemporary Sam McDowell and slightly behind Tommy John. The two biggest things holding him back for me are injury/inconsistency within his prime and relatively poor DIPS numbers.

Todd Helton and Andruw Jones would both be in the 30-40 range for me, I think. Helton is slightly but clearly behind his contemporary Jason Giambi. Andruw is in a bunch with Bernie Williams, Cesar Cedeno, and Dale Murphy, and I think I'd have him last among that group.

Kenny Lofton is not close to my ballot. He's similar to Chet Lemon for me.

Jeff Kent is also not close to my ballot. He is bunched with Larry Doyle and Fred Dunlap at the top of the eligible-2b pile, but I'd have both those guys ahead of him due to rank within era.

Ben Taylor is behind both Bill Byrd and Carlos Moran among eligible Negro Leaguers. My policy on NegL is that the best players are comparable to the best MLB players, but I need to be (relatively) certain that a NegL player is among the best before I'll vote for him. I don't have that kind of certainty with Taylor. Seamheads has him at 139 OPS+ in 4250 PA. Any reasonable level of regression puts his bat in a questionable range for a 1b. He'd probably come into play for me somewhere around #40.
   394. cookiedabookie Posted: December 30, 2019 at 01:24 PM (#5911757)
@393 8/15 on your ballot are pitchers - seems a bit heavy to me. Also, do you do any adjustments for catchers? Given the description of your system, it seems it would pretty consistently underrate catchers, given the differences in playing time.
   395. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 30, 2019 at 01:31 PM (#5911759)
 373. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 23, 2019 at 11:37 PM (#5910775)
Okay, based on my updated Player won-lost records, here's my preliminary ballot. If nobody objects to anything here, I'll probably go ahead and make this official tomorrow (Tuesday / Christmas Eve).

1. Derek Jeter - my system agrees with the consensus that he was a terrible fielder - worst fielding SS in history given his playing time - but my fielding numbers are generally more conservative than other systems (he's about -11 net wins for fielding over his career). Jeter also looks better in pWins (tied to team wins) than in eWins to a larger extent than virtually anybody of the past 60-70 years or so. I'm not sure what to make of it, but I wrote about it here.

2. Tommy John - my system LOVES Tommy John.

3. Andruw Jones - this surprises me, given that my fielding numbers tend to be more conservative - and, in fact, Jones isn't even clearly the best defensive CF in history per my measure (he's in a clear top 3 with Willie Davis and Amos Otis - I'm not entirely sure what to make of my system's love of Amos Otis's fielding). If anybody's interested, I wrote about him too.

4. Jeff Kent - the conservative fielding numbers probably work a bit in his favor too. And my system is a sucker for power-hitting up-the-middle defenders.

5. Vern Stephens - did somebody say "power-hitting up-the-middle defenders"?

6. Andy Pettitte - same basic case as Tommy John

7. Luis Tiant - I think he'd probably already be in my personal HOM; he's just outside of "elect me" here just because there are a few other pHOM guys that I like just a bit more. If the rules allowed it, I'd think about strategically bumping him up to an elect-me slot; but my understanding it that the HOM voting rules explicitly do NOT allow that.

8. Lance Berkman - I give postseason credit, which helps Berkman.

9. Jason Giambi - I tend to be a peak-heavy voter and Giambi had a great one.

10. Darryl Strawberry - ditto. I decided I was downgrading them for no good reason in the preliminary ballot on the previous page - consensus be damned: my system likes Giambi and Strawberry, so I'm going to vote for Giambi and Strawberry!

11. Wally Schang - his best seasons still pre-date my Player won-lost records. What I have looks very good.

12. Sammy Sosa - he looks a LOT better in my eWins (context-neutral) than in pWins (tied to team wins) and I think in Sosa's case some of that is "real" - he was pretty weak in the clutch for most of his career. But even with that, he sneaks onto my ballot.

13. Jorge Posada - my system loves him (remember "power-hitting up-the-middle defender"), but I've downgraded him because I've become convinced that he was bad at aspects of catching that my system is missing.

14. Tommy Henrich - he needs World War 2 credit to make my ballot, but given his performance in 1941-42 and again in 1946-49, giving him three years of strong WWII credit seems pretty defensible.

15. Urban Shocker - I'm still missing a couple of seasons at the beginning of his career and several games within his prime seasons that I do have. I worry that I may be over-rating his 1919 season in particular because of missing games (Retrosheet has play-by-play for only 6 of his 30 games that season), but he's the type of pitcher that my system really likes. I debated holding him back until I get more data, but I don't really have an obvious #16 candidate, so I stuck with Shocker here for now.

I dropped Johnny Evers and Ben Taylor from the preliminary ballot on the last page. For Evers, my ballot placement before was a bit of wish-casting, guessing how he'd look in my system. I decided to be a bit more cautious and just wait until Retrosheet gets back to the first decade of the 20th century. For Taylor, his latest MLE's seem to push him back below the borderline.

Setting aside Evers and Taylor, my next tier of candidates would probably be

16, 17, 18. Orel Hershiser, Dwight Gooden, Johan Santana - essentially, all great peaks, all not quite enough careers
19, 20, 21. Toby Harrah, Bert Campaneris, Dave Concepcion - one of these three is the best shortstop of the 1970s; my opinion as to which of the three that is changes regularly.

Required disclosures:
Buddy Bell - my system just doesn't like him. Not enough power for a third baseman; good, but not great fielding, and more conservative fielding numbers in general. Maybe in my top 200, can't see putting him much higher than that.
Kenny Lofton - similar issues to Bell - no power; good, not great fielding. Probably around #75 or so in my consideration set.
Todd Helton - just not enough separation with a bunch of contemporaries (McGriff, Delgado, Olerud, as well as several HOMers - Palmeiro, Bagwell, Thomas, Thome, etc.). Looks to be around #70 or so in my consideration set

Other players of note:
Bobby Abreu - ranks somewhere in the 30's for me. Not as much peak as I'd like, but certainly a worthy candidate.
Thurman Munson - right now, he shows up around #100 or so for me. Among non-HOM catchers, in addition to Schang and Posada, I also have Darrell Porter and Gene Tenace ahead of him. But I'm open to the idea that my system is missing a lot of the defensive value of catchers.
Kiki Cuyler - he's a guy that my system actually likes quite a bit. But not quite enough for me to put him on ballot. He's within spitting distance of Bobby Abreu in my system (Amos Otis, Jim Kaat, and Fred McGriff end up in the same general area of the ballot - those five are #32 through #36 in the link in comment #371).

I don't know if there's anybody else anyone would like me to comment on. I think that's everybody I'm required to.


Thanks for the updates Kiko, I've run my latest review through a peakier lens you recommended awhile back, adjusting for war and MLE credit, I have the following, with your ranking after the player. Please share at least broad comments on players I makes notes on, thank you in advance :)

1. Derek Jeter - 523.7 (1)
2. Urban Shocker - 417.0 (15) - missing seasons and WWI / 1918 season, you noted conservatism here, though B-R and B-G are also fans.
3. Vern Stephens - 413.3 (5)
4. Jason Giambi - 403.0 (9)
5. Tommy Henrich - 398.0 (14)
6. Tommy John - 395.9 (2)
5. Lance Berkman - 392.7 (8)
6. Jeff Kent - 386.9 (4)
7. Darryl Strawberry - 383.2 (10)
8. Andruw Jones - 376.9 (3)

Position player tier(s):
9. Kiki Cuyler - 374.5 (~34) - small bump for minors/manager insubordination
10. Bob Johnson - 374.2 (xx) - small PCL credit
11. Jack Clark - 371.2 (xx)
13. Sammy Sosa - 368.3 (12) - I believe your pWins better reflect the reality of Sosa's contributions, matching up well with B-R's -17 clutch wins.
14. Dave Bancroft - 366.8 (xx)
15. Dale Murphy - 366.7 (xx)
17. Wally Schang - 364.0 (11) - Eric's CHEWS at 112, Miller's MAPES at 110, Matthew Cornwell's PARC-d ranking 148th all-time, top ~190 HOF line.

19. George Foster - 361.2 (xx)
20. Tony Perez - 358.9 (xx)
21. Toby Harrah - 357.2 (19)
25. Jorge Posada - 353.3 (13) - advanced defense, clutch, and post-season lower him a ton. Eric's CHEWS has him at 94, Miller's MAPES at 90, Matthew Cornwell's PARC-d 233rd.
26. Ron Cey - 352.8 (xx)
27. Fred McGriff - 352.7 (~36)
30. Gil Hodges - 351.4 (xx)

31. Tony Lazzeri - 336.2 (xx) - a bump of PCL credit
32. Rocky Colavito - 335.4 (xx)
33. Amos Otis - 334.5 (~32)
34. Bobby Abreu - 333.7 (~33)
35. Brian Giles - 333.2 (xx) - ample blocked in the minor leagues and ready credit
37. Hack Wilson - 331.0 (xx)
38. Fred Lynn - 330.9 (xx)
39. Dave Concepcion - 330.0 (21)
40. Cesar Cedeno - 330.0 (xx)

42. Sal Bando - 329.0 (xx)
43. Jose Canseco - 326.5 (xx)
48. Matt Williams - 321.8 (xx)
50. Todd Helton - 316.6 (~70) - docking him because of depth at 1B? Normally looking at your ranks, league quality is a factor in some of the old timers coming down to earth and understandable, but curious on Helton.
51. Bobby Bonds - 316.2 (xx)
52. Johnny Pesky - 316.1 (xx) - prime/peak war/MLE credit
53. Dave Parker - 313.9 (xx)
54. Bob Elliott - 313.7 (xx)
55. Bert Campaneris - 310.8 (20)

Pitching tier(s):
12. Andy Pettitte - 369.5 (6)
16. Carl Mays - 366.5 (xx) - PLEASE take a close look at him for your ballot, from the raw Key Stat, extrapolating for missing seasons, I think the 355 is conservatively placing him, your thoughts here greatly appreciated.
18. Burleigh Grimes - 363.7 (xx)
22. Luis Tiant - 356.0 (7)
23. Dolf Luque - 355.5 (xx) - some Negro/integration credit.
24. Tommy Bridges - 354.0 (xx) - placing proper credit for WWII/PCL makes him quite interesting.
28. Waite Hoyt - 352.5 (xx)
29. Schoolboy Rowe - 352.0 (xx) - a dash of MLE credit

36. Dwight Gooden - 332.0 (17)
41. Herb Pennock - 329.8 (xx) - subject to how you adjust for missing years/war.
44. Orel Hershiser - 323.3 (16)
45. Johan Santana - 322.8 (18)
46. Dizzy Dean - 322.6 (xx) - smidge MLE credit
47. Don Newcombe - 322.2 (xx) - toughest case, Negro/Integration estimates
49. David Wells - 318.3 (xx)


Wondering what your thoughts are on DRA darlings from the primarily deadball era, your defensive assessments are for a narrower spectrum, does this change for you the earlier in time we travel, with more BABIP influences.

** Jimmy Sheckard**
** Max Carey** - W-L indicate lower tier but qualified HOMer
Joe Tinker
Bobby Veach - data a bit scant, but a multiplier of ~1.8x gets him to 208.4, making him a woeful candidate
Harry Hooper - like Veach but even less data, 1.95x gets 210.4.
Art Fletcher
Tommy Leach
Sam Rice - didn't get a break until late/suffered personal tragedies and I don't believe deserves pre-MLB credit, though does war, 10% bump for 1918 and brief 1916 pushes him to 219.0, in the Veach/Hooper tier of unqualified OFers.
*Willie Davis* - seems severely damaged by playing in Dodger Stadium, as he was a huge road over home hitting split, as well as outfield defense.

Lowest rated HOMers, please note if guys data isn't reliable as of yet to right them off:
Richie Ashburn 183.4
George Sisler 218.4 - most years available, so missing games?
Hoyt Wilhelm 231.0
Edd Roush 241.0
Rollie Fingers 246.4
Tony Gwynn 254.1
Bill Freehan 268.0
Nellie Fox 274.8
Stan Hack 282.2
Dave Stieb 287.4
Don Drysdale 289.1
Rich Gossage 297.3
Zach Wheat 297.9 - missing just shy of half value, so mix of years and missing games?
Red Faber 300.4 - estimated, behind a glut of other same timeframe hurlers
Rick Reuschel 301.6
Bill Terry 301.7
Harry Heilmann 301.8 - seems counter to your mashers preference, likely missing many games
Ralph Kiner 307.8
Sandy Koufax 311.5
*Ivan Rodriguez 321.3* - catcher
Joe Sewell 322.3
Graig Nettles 325.0
Willie Randolph 326.0
Bob Lemon 331.0
Rafael Palmeiro 334.9
*Ted Simmons 336.3* - catcher
Eppa Rixey 337.0
Heinie Groh 340.4
Joe Medwick 345.4

I'll try to gather additional thoughts, but wanted to get this posted.
   396. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 30, 2019 at 01:32 PM (#5911761)
epoc, good first effort! Most of your idiosyncratic votes are guys who look good in my system and I tend to think the HOM is a little shy of pitchers, so your pitcher-heavy ballot seems reasonable to me.

That said, I would echo cookiedabookie regarding catchers. I would also raise a similar issue with respect to second basemen - I would think a system that (properly) values fielding less than WAR would be more favorable to Jeff Kent. But even with those caveats, I think your ballot looks good to me. Welcome aboard!
   397. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 30, 2019 at 01:58 PM (#5911768)
It won't let me edit, apologies that some of the ordinal ranks are labeled improperly, the content remains valid.
   398. Kiko Sakata Posted: December 30, 2019 at 02:06 PM (#5911769)
Thanks for the updates Kiko, I've run my latest review through a peakier lens you recommended awhile back, adjusting for war and MLE credit, I have the following, with your ranking after the player. Please share at least broad comments on players I makes notes on, thank you in advance :)

...
2. Urban Shocker - 417.0 (15) - missing seasons and WWI / 1918 season, you noted conservatism here, though B-R and B-G are also fans.
...
9. Kiki Cuyler - 374.5 (~34) - small bump for minors/manager insubordination
10. Bob Johnson - 374.2 (xx) - small PCL credit
...
13. Sammy Sosa - 368.3 (12) - I believe your pWins better reflect the reality of Sosa's contributions, matching up well with B-R's -17 clutch wins.
...
17. Wally Schang - 364.0 (11) - Eric's CHEWS at 112, Miller's MAPES at 110, Matthew Cornwell's PARC-d ranking 148th all-time, top ~190 HOF line.

...
25. Jorge Posada - 353.3 (13) - advanced defense, clutch, and post-season lower him a ton. Eric's CHEWS has him at 94, Miller's MAPES at 90, Matthew Cornwell's PARC-d 233rd.
...
31. Tony Lazzeri - 336.2 (xx) - a bump of PCL credit
...
35. Brian Giles - 333.2 (xx) - ample blocked in the minor leagues and ready credit
...
50. Todd Helton - 316.6 (~70) - docking him because of depth at 1B? Normally looking at your ranks, league quality is a factor in some of the old timers coming down to earth and understandable, but curious on Helton.
...

16. Carl Mays - 366.5 (xx) - PLEASE take a close look at him for your ballot, from the raw Key Stat, extrapolating for missing seasons, I think the 355 is conservatively placing him, your thoughts here greatly appreciated.
...
23. Dolf Luque - 355.5 (xx) - some Negro/integration credit.
24. Tommy Bridges - 354.0 (xx) - placing proper credit for WWII/PCL makes him quite interesting.
...
29. Schoolboy Rowe - 352.0 (xx) - a dash of MLE credit

...
41. Herb Pennock - 329.8 (xx) - subject to how you adjust for missing years/war.
...
46. Dizzy Dean - 322.6 (xx) - smidge MLE credit
47. Don Newcombe - 322.2 (xx) - toughest case, Negro/Integration estimates
...


Wondering what your thoughts are on DRA darlings from the primarily deadball era, your defensive assessments are for a narrower spectrum, does this change for you the earlier in time we travel, with more BABIP influences.

** Jimmy Sheckard**
** Max Carey** - W-L indicate lower tier but qualified HOMer
Joe Tinker
Bobby Veach - data a bit scant, but a multiplier of ~1.8x gets him to 208.4, making him a woeful candidate
Harry Hooper - like Veach but even less data, 1.95x gets 210.4.
Art Fletcher
Tommy Leach
Sam Rice - didn't get a break until late/suffered personal tragedies and I don't believe deserves pre-MLB credit, though does war, 10% bump for 1918 and brief 1916 pushes him to 219.0, in the Veach/Hooper tier of unqualified OFers.
*Willie Davis* - seems severely damaged by playing in Dodger Stadium, as he was a huge road over home hitting split, as well as outfield defense.

Lowest rated HOMers, please note if guys data isn't reliable as of yet to right them off:
Richie Ashburn 183.4
George Sisler 218.4 - most years available, so missing games?
Hoyt Wilhelm 231.0
Edd Roush 241.0
Rollie Fingers 246.4
Tony Gwynn 254.1
Nellie Fox 274.8
Stan Hack 282.2
Dave Stieb 287.4
Don Drysdale 289.1
Rich Gossage 297.3
Zach Wheat 297.9 - missing just shy of half value, so mix of years and missing games?
Red Faber 300.4 - estimated, behind a glut of other same timeframe hurlers
Rick Reuschel 301.6
Bill Terry 301.7
Harry Heilmann 301.8 - seems counter to your mashers preference, likely missing many games
Ralph Kiner 307.8
Sandy Koufax 311.5
*Ivan Rodriguez 321.3* - catcher
Joe Sewell 322.3
Graig Nettles 325.0
Willie Randolph 326.0
Bob Lemon 331.0
Rafael Palmeiro 334.9
*Ted Simmons 336.3* - catcher
Eppa Rixey 337.0
Heinie Groh 340.4
Joe Medwick 345.4

I'll try to gather additional thoughts, but wanted to get this posted.


I think that quotes everything you may have wanted my comments on. As I said above, we only have play-by-play for 6 games from Shocker's 1919 season - out of 30. And he was REALLY good in those 6 games. But I suspect he was worse in the other 24, so I'm being a little conservative in my placement of his on my ballot.

I'm pretty sloppy / haphazard about giving bonus credit. Basically, my default is to let my database query do its work and leave it at that unless somebody points out an obvious case for adjustment. I also just have no clue who does or does not deserve minor-league credit. That said, my database query is extrapolating missing games within seasons where I have some data (so, for example, I'm taking the 6 games I have for Shocker in 1919 and multiplying by 5) and is adjusting season lengths to a constant 162 (so, the 1918 and 1919 seasons should be getting adjusted automatically for that - which makes those six Shocker games that much more important!).

Carl Mays slipped through the cracks for me. I'm missing his first three seasons entirely - the latter two of which look like they were among his best. It's not obvious that's enough to push him up to my ballot, but it certainly puts him into consideration. We'll see what new data the new year brings and how it makes him look.

The issue of fielding the deadball era is a very important one. Frankly, for now, I haven't really studied it because we don't have a lot of data - 1919 just came out in June, 1918 just came out this month, and both of those seasons were war-shortened. It is undoubtedly true, however, that the simple raw fielding numbers were much higher back then than today just because there were so many fewer strikeouts. For example, here's a comparison of Rabbit Maranville and Omar Vizquel. The numbers for Maranville don't start until 1918 (when he only played 11 games before he joined the Navy) and I've extrapolated missing games and adjusted season lengths to 162, but looking at the ages where they were both regulars, Maranville just had a ton more decisions. Which I would assume would be to the advantage of good fielders of the era (e.g., Maranville) and to the detriment of bad fielders of the era - which could help explain Harry Heilmann?

Re: Helton - and this also plays into Raffy Palmeiro - for my ballot, I decided to use one-year positional averages. I set up my pages, so you can reject that if you'd prefer and go with some combination of long-run and/or 9-year smoothed, but I tend to think that value is best measured relative to one's peers and if everybody has a first baseman who can hit .280/.360/.480 with 30 home runs, then being a first baseman who hits .285/.380/.500 with 32 home runs just isn't THAT valuable. I also think that this shows up in the defensive numbers. I suspect that one reason why Helton looks so good defensively is that he's being compared to a bunch of guys who were in the lineup solely for their bats - which has some value, certainly, but doesn't necessarily make him as good a fielder as, I don't know, say Don Mattingly.

As for the "worst" HOMers per my system, my default weights don't like relief pitchers (you can give relief pitchers extra weight on my HOM Ballot and Uber-Stats pages if you'd prefer to have relief pitchers in your pHOM - if you do that, my system mostly agrees with the ones in the HOM and would probably add Lee Smith and Trevor Hoffman to the mix), and my system values fielding less than WAR (e.g., Willie Randolph, Graig Nettles, Keith Hernandez - who I'm sure is one of my lowest-ranked HOMers but I think you left him out), and values power more heavily than most other offensive systems (e.g., Sewell, Ashburn, Gwynn) (Andruw Jones is hurt by the former but benefits from the latter, ending up in an elect-me position on my ballot). Anybody who played a meaningful amount of time before 1930, I'd also be hesitant about judging as I could simply be missing some games/seasons. Oh, and I think both Ivan Rodriguez and Ted Simmons would be in my personal HOM; my system tends to under-value catchers a bit and I haven't entirely decided how to adjust for that.
   399. Jaack Posted: December 30, 2019 at 02:13 PM (#5911770)
Welcome epoc!

Going to echo Kiko and cookie regarding catchers. Since the tend to play fewer games per season, peak oriented voters have to be aware the might be shortchanging them. Furthermore, I understand and respect your reasons for underweighting fielding, but that too could be underating catchers.

A couple of questions
1. What defensive metric(s) are you using?
2. When you weigh the defensive metrics, do you demphasize just the fielding numbers or the comobile defense+positional adjustment numbers?

Last note - I see that Benny Kauff is near ballot for you. I assume it's because of his seemingly impressive peak. Are you discounting that his two best seasons occurred in the Federal League, which was questionable in quality compared to the NL and AL?
   400. Bleed the Freak Posted: December 30, 2019 at 04:04 PM (#5911788)
Thanks Kiko, good catch on Keith Hernandez.

With the comment on Maranvilles Fielding vs Vizquel, are Veach, Hooper, Tinker, Fletcher, Leach, and or Rice viable candidates? And it's ok if all you can say is maybe at this point :)

You noted to take pre 1930s players with a grain of salt, your personal take on the 1920s characters would be greatly beneficial, Cuyler, Johnson, Bancroft, Mays, Grimes, Luque, Bridges (war era also missing games), Hoyt, and Rowe (see Bridges and how should war credit be handled, 4 war years in 43 and 46, but mediocre surrounding) all look like strong candidates. I think the evidence is pretty strong on the hitters to be on the good side of the grey area, are any of the pitchers in the Shocker camp where they are missing substantial data and we should be rather cautious?

Thanks for your help and insights!
Page 4 of 6 pages ‹ First  < 2 3 4 5 6 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Randy Jones
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Syndicate

Page rendered in 1.6327 seconds
41 querie(s) executed