496. epoc Posted: January 08, 2020 at 04:32 PM (#5913971)
Bleed the Freak,

No problem. Offense is measured in fangraphs' offense+baserunning runs. Defense is in fangraphs' fielding + positional runs. Pitching is (for post-1900 pitchers) 50/50 RA9-based and FIP-based runs. I make some adjustments for cases where other baserunning and defensive ratings disagree drastically (both such adjustments were necessary in Jeter's case, e.g.).

Javy Vazquez surprised me too, but he's not as FIP-heavy as I initially thought. For '00-09, he's 1.82 SD above average by RA9 and 2.20 by FIP. That's not an unusual split, similar to Cliff Lee (1.82 to 2.19) and Andy Pettitte (1.61 to 2.08) for their primes, for instance. You are right in pointing out that he is probably more responsible than most for the discrepancy between FIP and RA9, seeing as how it looks like it's mostly a result of pitching (relatively) poorly with men on base, but even by RA9 he was an excellent pitcher, and I don't like the idea of underweighting FIP in just one selective case. Vazquez was also a decent hitter, which bumps him up a notch.

I'm not sure how detailed a description of my process you want, but I basically just find the SDs for RA9 runs, FIP runs, hitting+baserunning runs, and fielding+positional runs for each season and then record how many SDs a given player was for each season of their career. Oswalt, for instance, was 3.53 SD above average for RA9 runs for 2002 and 3.64 SD by FIP runs for the same season. Weighting them 50/50, he was 3.59 SD for that season.

Thanks epoc, do you have an adjustment for durability?
If Oswalt or Santana had some seasonal IP differences, did you make an adjustment, or how did you incorporate the playing time factor?
And it looks like you go to 2 decimal places for a rank, not just merely 1 SD, 2 SD, 3 SD, 4 SD, 5 SD above average.

Just wanted to chime in that I'm finalizing my ballot (was hoping to get this done a few days ago but some unforeseen real-life issues pushed that back) and I'll be posting it before the deadline. Huge thanks to everyone who has contributed to the discussion since I last posted in the thread, lots of things to mull over. Overall, I'm mostly set outside of a couple of ballot placements. Since I'm posting might as well walk through my thinking before finalizing my ballot.

Last year I did a quick and dirty check using WAA for the candidate pool, but having more lead time for this ballot I’ve decided to go this time with a mix of rWAR and gWAR (a varying mix for offense and defense with an even 50% split for pitching and positional adjustment and also looking at both the full fielding value and with it 1% regressed) in order to get a peak, prime and career value for the different candidates. Then I've also checked how they look in the value systems that I can reference such as Kiko's pWins and eWins, fWAR, whatever the heck Prospectus is doing and even WSAB roughly converted to a WAR value in order to get an idea of how the players compare in the different systems. I’m going with WAR instead of WAA as a base since it’s easier to use in order compare across the different metrics and also because of the issue with WAA not taking league quality into account and thus can overstate or understate certain players’ value if you want to take league quality into account.

So, here’s where I’m at by position:

Catcher – There’s five candidates ahead of the pool for me, which are Munson, Posada, Schang, Tenace and Lombardi. Last year it was Munson and Schang who were my top two candidates at catcher but adding a peak and prime component works a bit against Schang and drops him closer to Posada, Tenace and Lombardi. For now, it looks like only Munson will make my ballot.

First Base – It’s a bit of a messy cluster here for me. Last year my top three first basemen were Taylor, Helton and Chance, with Taylor making my ballot. This year, Taylor sees a revision in his MLEs but still is a candidate for me, albeit maybe not my top first basemen, Helton would be the clear front runner if I only pay attention to rWAR. What gives me pause is that the only other system that’s gung-ho on Helton is Prospectus (who only have values from 1921 onwards). Everything else (Kiko’s pWins and eWins, fWAR, gWAR and WSAB) all place him smack dab in the cluster of candidates and as part of several candidates in the cluster, not towards the top of it. Chance of course has the playing time issues but has the peak and is someone who I’m sure would gain value from the offensive PBP components not yet available/incorporated into his offensive WAR. Giambi does much better than I thought because of his peak. And then there’s the performance of Tony Perez, someone I had voted before as my top first basemen before I dropped out of voting, and who may climb back to the top of my first basemen consideration after this exercise. Perez is interesting because he is a career first baseman, but a peak and prime third baseman.

Second Base – I’m clear here, with Kent, Evers, Lazzeri and Dunlap being my consideration set and at the moment it looks like Kent is the only one that will make my ballot. I’d say that these four would be above my PHOM second basemen line, but that doesn’t mean they all get a ballot spot this year.

Shortstop – Jeter is making my ballot and is my likely number one. Rizzuto made my ballot last year, if he makes it again will depend on how much stock I put in Tinker and Fletcher’s defensive value. Of these two, I’d wager that Tinker has more likely hidden offensive value from PBP data than Fletcher, but that’s just a guess from eyeballing their stats and the reputation for the type of ball played by those 1900’s Cubs teams.

Third Base - Plenty of candidates here in my consideration set, but ever shifting. Going with the method of value I settled on for this year, Bando is my top third basemen. Bell, Harrah (who could be in my shortstop consideration set as well) and Cey also are part of my consideration set, along with Elliott, Traynor and Williamson. Williamson is edging ahead of the others for second after Bando. Oh yeah, and Tommy Leach is also the mix here and centerfield.

Left Field – Last time Bob Johnson got the final spot on my ballot, this time not sure he makes it. Johnson and Bobby Veach are the top left fielders in my consideration set, followed by a tight cluster of Berkman, Roy White and Albert Belle.

Center Field - How this candidate pool shakes out depends entirely on how I end up valuing defense. At full face value it’s Andruw Jones who is my top centerfielder, but if I just slightly regress it by 1% it’s actually Bernie Williams followed by Lofton. Using Kiko’s key stat with the weights I settled on, its Andruw and Dale Mutphy who are the top two centerfielders. So that’s another point for Andruw. Of the 19th century centerfielders I still feel Duffy is the best one not elected and is still in the mix for me. The consideration pool also includes Cedeño, Brett Butler, Leach, Willie Davis, Murphy, Puckett and Berger. But at this point, my top three are coming from the group of Andruw Jones, Bernie Williams and Kenny Lofton. Just have to decide in what order and if any make my ballot.

Right Field – No matter which way I cut it, Sosa’s my top right fielder. He made my ballot last time and will be on it this year. Next after him is one of either Bobby Bonds, Sam Rice or Harry Hooper, with Cuyler (who may actually deserve to be higher once the missing value is accounted for), Abreu, Giles and Klein following them in the next tier down. Gavvy Cravath made my ballot last time but he likely won’t be on it this year with my shifts in assessment.

Pitchers – I had 8 pitchers last time on my ballot, three of them were elected. The five returnees (Bond, Tiant, Santana, Willis and Newcombe) probably all make my ballot pending on how the assessment shifts going by WAR instead of WAA. But I also have Shocker, Tommy John, Pettitte, Cicotte, Appier, Hershiser, Grimes and a quartet of 19th century pitchers as possibilities. I may end up with at least half of my ballot with pitchers again.

Also, flip.

13) ANDRUW JONES 62.8 BBref-WAR, 276 Win Shares – 1 MVP type season, 7 additional 20-win share seasons. I think his defensive WAR is overstated, a little. That is why I’m lower on him than many.
14) KENNY LOFTON 68.2 BBref - 281 Win Shares – The reason I have him lower than others is I believe his Defensive WAR is overstated. Couple that with his lack of MVP type season’s and I have him lower than many others voters. 7 20-win share seasons.

What methodology do you use to determine that the def WAR is overstated ?

Bleed the Freak,

In-season durability is built into the SD. Since I'm using runs above average, both rate and bulk are accounted for.

And yes, sorry, I can see how the numbers I posted were unclear. By 1SD, I really meant 1+. So any season where the player was one or more SD above average goes in that bucket. Oswalt's 2002, which I have as 3.59 SD, counted as a 1SD season, a 2SD season, and a 3SD season in the list I posted.

Thanks epoc, do you have an adjustment for durability?
If Oswalt or Santana had some seasonal IP differences, did you make an adjustment, or how did you incorporate the playing time factor?
And it looks like you go to 2 decimal places for a rank, not just merely 1 SD, 2 SD, 3 SD, 4 SD, 5 SD above average.

This isn't exactly the same, but reading through epoc's stuff, it sounds like he's essentially doing something like what I was trying to with what I call Wins over Star (or WO*), which is one standard deviation above average. If I take my "choose your weights" Hall of Merit link, use only eWins (which are going to more closely approximate your other uber-stats - BB-Ref, Fangraphs, et al.), use 9-year positional averages (ditto) and base the starting/relief pitcher positional averages on pitchers who did both (which, again, I think gets you the closest to how at least BB-Ref treats SP vs. RP), and only use WO* (so, zero weights for wins, WOPA, and WORL), you get this.

Granting that this makes no non-MLB adjustments and is missing anything prior to 1918, here's the top 10 from that link:

1. Roy Oswalt
2. Johan Santana
3. Jason Giambi
4. Schoolboy Rowe - okay, I'm honestly not what my system is seeing in the Schoolboy!
5. Kevin Appier
6. Cliff Lee - oh, yeah, I set all of my positional weights to one; not really sure why the ballot ends up so pitcher-heavy! (Gene Tenace sneaks into the top 10 if you give enough of a catcher bonus.)
7. Jack Clark
8. Dale Murphy
9. Toby Harrah - okay, we've moved past the pitcher-heavy portion
10. Lance Berkman

Personally, I wouldn't go all-in on WO* like this, but, y'know, "different strokes for different folks". Bottom line: I gotta say: Roy Oswalt #1 on the ballot doesn't seem THAT crazy to me.

The one thing that struck me about your ballot, epoc, is Bobby Abreu. To me, he's kind of an obvious "non-peak" guy - a lot of value in the range between average and "star", at least in my system. He doesn't even make the link above - which is the top 100 guys eligible in this election, ranked purely by eWO* (zeroing out negative values, by the way). Just to be clear: I absolutely think it's reasonable to make a HOM/HOF case for Bobby Abreu, even using my Player won-lost records; it's just not at all a peak case.

4. Schoolboy Rowe - okay, I'm honestly not what my system is seeing in the Schoolboy!

Rowe had an interesting career. I've been intermittently posting in the Dugout about my efforts to recreate Bill James's starting pitcher rankings in older seasons (and with a few tweaks to his fairly shaky methodology), and Rowe snuck up to the #1 spot very briefly in early 1936. His career after that was heavily interrupted by injuries and the war; in fact, he never had another 200-inning season after '36. But in a standard deviation-based system, a year like his 1946 (4 WAR; just 136 innings, but a 162 ERA+) probably does better than a 4-WAR season with 250 innings would. (1940 was in the same vein, if a bit less extreme - 137 ERA+ in 169 innings, plus only 3 unearned runs allowed all year).

Also, I assume this measure isn't bothered about whether the good years are consecutive? Rowe would be hit pretty hard if that's a requirement.

Inspired by Esteban Rivera in #502, a positional ranking of my top 50 eligible candidates (2020 balloted players in bold):

C: Schang, Posada, Munson, E. Howard, Lombardi
1B: Helton, Taylor, Easter, McGriff, Chance, Giambi
2B: Kent, Evers, Lazzeri
SS: Jeter, Campaneris, Garciaparra, Rizzuto, Bancroft
3B: Bell, Leach, Clarkson, Bando, Elliott
Corner OF: Sosa, Abreu, Cravath, Bonds pere, Berkman, Brock
CF: Lofton, A. Jones, Duffy, W. Davis, Van Haltren, B. Williams
P: Luque, H. Smith, Tiant, Santana, Willis, John, Pettite, Walters, Shocker, A. Cooper, Appier
Relief P: L. Smith, Hoffman, Wagner

Not listed: I don't see enough to separate them from the deep backlog. Though I'm open to persuasion!

@ 504

What methodology do you use to determine that the def WAR is overstated ?

I think it overstates modern players - or understates older player. Whatever the case the playing field isn't level.

25 centerfielders have had 8 career D WAR - 26 including Wee Tommy Leach, but that's got a lot of 3b - so 25.

How many of those played before 1950?

None.

9 of them are active - ok a couple will get old and drop below probably, drop below 8.0 D WAR, but still.


Maybe 8 career D war is setting the bar too high.

What about 6 career D WAR and at least 500 games in center?
Well that adds, uh no one.

How about 4 career D War - Hey that does add someone that played before 1950, Richie Ashburn in 1948.

If you drop it all the way down to 2 career WAR finally we have some guys. 6 of them anyway. Speaker, Johnny Mostil, Mike Kreevech,a couple of DiMaggios and Pop Corkhill!


I'm just saying that CF today are getting credit for something previous guys didn't get credit for. It's fine if you are comparing them to each other (Andruw vs Lofton), but doesn't mean anything when comparing them to the whole of baseball history. If Andruw Jones D War was the same as Curt Flood's - 10.6 - then his career WAR would drop below 50.

I think treating him like a guy with a 50 career WAR makes more sense.

Kiko & Bleed,

Since my baseline is league average, my system will certainly have more in common with WO* than with most systems that use a lower baseline, especially those that use the replacement level set by most WAR systems.

Interestingly, Kiko, my ballot shares six names with your top-15 WO*, and five of those are pitchers. Any idea why that is?

About Abreu, yes, he doesn't have a super-high peak. Off the top of my head, I think the differences between WO* and my system that allow Abreu to rise for me are 1) baseline of average in my system rather than 1SD and 2) averaging all seasons in my system rather than zeroing out below-baseline seasons and adding. Re: 1) six of Abreu's prime seasons are between +1 and +2.2 SD, so my system is giving almost twice as much credit as WO* for much of his prime, and re: point 2), Abreu is helped in my system by being consistently above average (never below +1 SD) for his prime. Compare that to, for instance, Giles, who was better at his peak but also posted a below-average season within his 10-year prime (plus another season at about +.05 SD). Where WO* zeroes those out, my system counts them.

Lending some support to Mike Webber's argument in #509:

The SD for fielding+position jumped about 25% from 1949 to 1955. Likewise, the average SD is 25% higher for 1951-2000 than for 1901-1950. This is based on TZ, so it applies to both fangraphs' and BB-ref's defensive numbers. (My guess would be that there is an underlying cause that makes this discrepancy true [to some degree] for all historical defensive ratings, but I don't have evidence for that.) Also, my SDs are calculated after a 30% regression to the mean on fielding runs for all player-seasons, so I'm almost certainly *understating* the increase after 1950.

What this amounts to is exactly what Mike is suggesting: for whatever reason, it has been significantly easier for post-1950 players to accumulate defensive value.

Mike in #509

I suspect strongly that the reason WAR is imbalanced in that way is that it's operating without PBP pre 1948 and outfielder throwing doesn't get fully credited as a result. Tris Speaker, for example, will, someday, get a lot more credit for his throwing arm than he does now once we know not only how many baserunners he snuffed out but what the run value of each of them. No system can deliver that information unless it uses PBP. But that's just a guess on my part.

for whatever reason, it has been significantly easier for post-1950 players to accumulate defensive value.

Which is ironic since there were so many more balls put in play before 1950 compared to after 1950.

Interestingly, Kiko, my ballot shares six names with your top-15 WO*, and five of those are pitchers. Any idea why that is?

You said you do half RA/9 and half FIP, right? That ends up very close to my eWins - pitchers get full credit for the "three true outcomes" and share credit with fielders for everything else. I think, given that, we're going to end up with more agreement on pitchers than non-pitchers, mostly because of differences in fielding evaluation - not just how important it is relatively (where your number is pretty close to mine), but in being able to judge bad vs. good vs. great. I also think that when you reduce the impact of fielding (as you and I do), you get pitching being more important which I think leads to a view that pitchers are under-represented in the Hall of Merit. Which I think tends to produce pitcher-heavy ballots as a way to correct this.

My reaction to Mike's #509 re: fielders having bigger numbers today was the same as DL in #513. The reality is almost certainly the opposite: fielders used to have a lot more chances than they do today (look at pitcher K leaderboards from, say, the 1920s; outside of Dazzy Vance, the numbers there are just insanely low), which you would think would lead to equally good fielders (on a rate basis) being more valuable back in the day.

lead to equally good fielders (on a rate basis) being more valuable back in the day.

This is why my ranking Dom DiMaggio ahead of Andruw makes sense to me. Add 3 years of war credit to Dom DiMaggio and adjust his seasons up 5% for season length and you get roughly 147 Rbat compared to 119 for Andruw. Am I really supposed to believe that Andruw was nearly 18 wins better on defense (Rfield 235 versus ~58 for DiMaggio)? Dom DiMaggio was a very good centerfielder. If I adjust for the war and season length, Dom DiMaggio has about 5500 chances and Andruw had 5128. How does Andruw Jones save 180 runs more than a very good centerfielder when he has 350 fewer chances? Then there's the (legitimate) argument that Dom DiMaggio deserves a year of minor league credit for his 3rd season in the PCL.

In my system using the standard deviation adjusted numbers from Dan R, I have Dom DiMaggio as 12 FWAA and Andruw as 16 FWAA. I'll buy a 4 win difference but 18 is just too much to swallow.

Other historical players FWAA in my system

Mays 13.5
Speaker 19.2
Joe DiMaggio 4.9
Max Carey 12.9
Lemon 8.1
Hugh Duffy 9.9

If one gives Dom DiMaggio 3 years war credit in DRA at 20 runs/year, DRA puts Dom DiMaggio at 192 runs above average for his career.

it puts Andruw Jones at 215 runs above average for his career.

Chris, make sure you're just looking at range for DRA. It's throwing values aren't worth considering.

Mike @ 509

I think the point Dr. Chaleeko makes in 512 is one of the possibilities for this, another is that I think TZ is regressed pre-1953 (someone please correct me if I'm mistaken) so that would also limit the fielding value of players from before 1953.

One other possibility is the shifts in the positional adjustment given to centerfielders throughout the years. I mentioned this in post #118, but here are the center field positional adjustment values listed at Baseball Reference:

Center Field
1871-1896 = -8
1897 = -7.5
1898 = -7
1899 = -6.5
1900 = -6
1901 = -5
1902 = -4.5
1903-1926 = -4
1927-1928 = -3.5
1929-1930 = -3
1931-1932 = -2.5
1933-1937 = -2
1938-1941 = -1.5
1942-1980 = -1
1981-1982 = -0.5
1983-1986 = 0
1987-1988 = 0.5
1989 = 1
1990-1991 = 1.5
1992 = 2
1993-2017 = 2.5

Do those values make sense? You get a bonus for playing centerfield in today's three true outcomes, lots of night games, great glove tech and sunlight blocking tech, manicured and mostly cookie cutter fields era. You get a demerit for playing when there are more balls in play, mostly at day with the sun in your face and not as advanced glove tech with fields that are not uniform and well kept, with wall distance irregularities and eccentricities.

I listed the values for all the positions in that post, but another one that I find interesting is the third base positional adjustment values:

Third Base
1871-1926 = 5
1927-1928 = 4.5
1929-1930 = 4
1931 = 3.5
1932-1936 = 3
1937 = 2.5
1938 = 2
1939-1940 = 1.5
1941 = 1
1942 = 0.5
1943-1952 = 0
1953-1955 = 0.5
1956 = 1
1957 = 1.5
1958 = 2
1959 = 2.5
1960-1978 = 3
1979 = 2.5
1980-1981 = 2
1982 = 1.5
1983-1994 = 1
1995-1999 = 1.5
2000-2017 = 2

What happened in the 60s and 70s to warrant that boost relative to the 40s and early 50s?

Esteban, in the ballot threads you mention even a 1% regression on Jones/Lofton defensive numbers pushes them off ballot for you. Unless I misunderstand what you mean by 1% regression, that costs Jones a grand total of 3 runs and Lofton a grand total of less than 2 runs, which of course makes it rather ludicrous to suggest it affects ballot placement. So can you explain what you mean by 1% regression? I took it to mean regress their defensive runs saved 1% of the way towards league average.

Re: positional adjustments, those numbers are derived from the actual fielding performance of multi-positional defenders. So it's not that CF is absolutely harder to play now; it's that CF is harder than it used to be relative to how hard it is to play LF, RF, 2B, etc. And even that's misleading, because the issue isn't how "hard" it is, per se, but how well players perform. So one strong hypothesis would be that as fielding opportunities have declined, teams have become more comfortable putting weaker defenders in the outfield corners, which has increased the difference in performance between CF and LF/RF.

What methodology do you use to determine that the def WAR is overstated ?


I think it overstates modern players - or understates older player. Whatever the case the playing field isn't level.

That for your explanation. I had no idea that defensive WAR was skewed so much over different time periods. Seems to me that the older players are probably understated, so maybe their defensive WAR should be adjusted upwards by some appropriate factor depending on the era they played in.

What happened in the 60s and 70s to warrant that boost relative to the 40s and early 50s?

Nothing notable. In fact, the emergence of a ton of quality third basemen in the sixties and seventies compared to the previous thirty years points toward third base getting easier. It's definitely something to think about if you have Buddy Bell, Sal Bando, or Ron Cey on your ballot.

Or it simply points to a clustering of good third basemen in a certain timeframe by random chance. Or in the 90s did 3B get harder again?

So is the election over? Or are we waiting for Joe D?

The site is not letting me post on the results page, so I'll just say that Phil Rizzuto is mad Helton gets to go in to the HOM than Rizzuto got in 2012 when it was changed from elect 4 to elect 3 with elect 4 happening the next year.

Oops, meant to include that Rizzuto had more points than Helton.

I'm not suggesting changing anything, just showing that timing is sometimes everything.

I still like Rizzuto but I think it is harder for new voters to go backwards since they weren't in the thick of it year after year. George Van Haltren was our other near miss who has faded.

Top scores never elected. Score represents points as a percentage of a perfect ballot. For this year, a perfect ballot would have been 720 points.

Rank Year Player Score
1 1913 H.Duffy 51.1%
2 1908 H.Duffy 48.7%
3 1931 G.VanHaltren 48.3%
4 1898 E.Williamson 47.1%
5 2020 K.Lofton 44.9%
6 1914 H.Duffy 44.7%
7 1907 H.Duffy 44.4%
8 1930 G.VanHaltren 43.6%
9 1932 G.VanHaltren 43.5%
10 1912 H.Duffy 43.1%
11 2014 S.Sosa 42.6%
12 1910 H.Duffy 42.3%
13 1910 J.Ryan 41.3%
14 2017 S.Sosa 40.9%
15 2015 S.Sosa 40.6%
16 1909 J.Ryan 40.4%

Looking ahead.... Here's a little exercise in prediction, which is foolish because so many of us change our rankings year to year, but why not?

For future years, I'm taking 2020 voters' ballots and removing elected players (and later hypothetically elected players) to see how the backlog sifts out. I'm assuming a few future guys get elected...and I'm including Joe D because usually he votes...and I'm simply sliding the backloggers up each voter's ballot and counting points. I'm not including borderline newbies since we don't really know yet how the electorate will respond to them.

2021: Lofton, Santaña, Sosa
2022: A-Rod, Kent, Abreu, Berkman
2023: Beltran, Bell, Schang
2024: Ichiro, Beltre, Mauer, Utley
2025: Sabathia, Bonds, Willis

So if you don't like the looks of that, better sharpen up your arguments... ;)

  519. kcgard2 Posted: January 09, 2020 at 05:38 PM (#5914308)
Esteban, in the ballot threads you mention even a 1% regression on Jones/Lofton defensive numbers pushes them off ballot for you. Unless I misunderstand what you mean by 1% regression, that costs Jones a grand total of 3 runs and Lofton a grand total of less than 2 runs, which of course makes it rather ludicrous to suggest it affects ballot placement. So can you explain what you mean by 1% regression? I took it to mean regress their defensive runs saved 1% of the way towards league average.

Thanks for asking, forgot to clarify what I meant by this earlier. I was using the customized metric option at Baseball Gauge and decided to see how the numbers would look if I applied just a 1% regression to the WAR fielding value that the customization page allows one to do. That's what my 1% comment refers to.

2021: Lofton, Santaña, Sosa
2022: A-Rod, Kent, Abreu, Berkman
2023: Beltran, Bell, Schang
2024: Ichiro, Beltre, Mauer, Utley
2025: Sabathia, Bonds, Willis

I do notice that there is only one pitcher - Johan Santana - in the top 10 returning players.

Re 531:

With only Buehrle, Hudson, and Sabathia coming up. CC will probably be a slam dunk, but I suspect the electorate will be divided on Buehrle and Hudson.

If pitching were 30% of the HOM, then we'd expect 5 pitchers in the next five elections. What do 2020 ballots tell us will be coming up?
C: Schang, Mauer
1B: Berkman
2B: Kent, Utley
3B: Bell, Beltre (1/2 of A-Rod)
SS: (1/2 of A-Rod)
LF:
CF: Lofton, Beltran
RF: Ichiro, Bonds, Abreu, Sosa
P: Santaña, Willis, Sabathia

Now, what about further out? Here's who's going to be 40 within the next five years, casting a reasonably sized net:
C (3): Brian McCann, Yadier Molina, Russell Martin
1B (4): Miguel Cabrera, Albert Pujols, Edwin Encarnacion, Joey Votto
2B (4): Dustin Pedroia, Ben Zobrist, Robinson Cano, Ian Kinsler
3B (0):
SS (1): Hanley Ramirez
LF (3): Alex Gordon, Shin-Soo Choo, Ryan Braun
CF (2): Brett Gardner, Curtis Granderson
RF (2): Nelson Cruz, Nick Markakis
P (6): J.A. Happ, Justin Verlander, Zack Greinke, Adam Wainwright, Jon Lester, Cole Hamels

Of these, six of them feel like slam dunks, and another six feel like borderliners right now. No third basemen, no credible shortstop candidates (Tulo will be in here too in all likelyhood, though he's younger than 35), and no credible candidates (IMO) among any of the outfield positions. Pitching actually feels like a strong point in this group to. That and first base. It's going to be an interesting decade!

Also, Tulo we're about to start seeing eligibles who are younger than the HOM, and, for me, younger than my first election as a voter. It's like when managers start becoming guys you watched as players.

Now, what about further out? Here's who's going to be 40 within the next five years, casting a reasonably sized net:
C (3): Brian McCann, Yadier Molina, Russell Martin
1B (4): Miguel Cabrera, Albert Pujols, Edwin Encarnacion, Joey Votto
2B (4): Dustin Pedroia, Ben Zobrist, Robinson Cano, Ian Kinsler
3B (0):
SS (1): Hanley Ramirez
LF (3): Alex Gordon, Shin-Soo Choo, Ryan Braun
CF (2): Brett Gardner, Curtis Granderson
RF (2): Nelson Cruz, Nick Markakis
P (6): J.A. Happ, Justin Verlander, Zack Greinke, Adam Wainwright, Jon Lester, Cole Hamels

Of these, six of them feel like slam dunks, and another six feel like borderliners right now. No third basemen, no credible shortstop candidates (Tulo will be in here too in all likelyhood, though he's younger than 35), and no credible candidates (IMO) among any of the outfield positions. Pitching actually feels like a strong point in this group to. That and first base. It's going to be an interesting decade!

Also, Tulo we're about to start seeing eligibles who are younger than the HOM, and, for me, younger than my first election as a voter. It's like when managers start becoming guys you watched as players.

This will shake out depending on our confidence in assessing defense, but 3 pitchers out of 10 candidates.
McCann, Molina, Martin, Cabrera, Pujols, Votto, Cano, Verlander, Greinke, Hamels.

Evan Longoria and Josh Donaldson are only 33 but both look like 3B candidates.

Oh, definitely, DL, I'm just looking at the immediate window.

David Wright would be in the mix as a 3B candidate.

I do notice that there is only one pitcher - Johan Santana - in the top 10 returning players.

Of my PHOM eligibles, I see ~32% pitchers, but it's a matter of who we rally around, and the electorate has long struggled to propel the bubble pitchers before hitters

My guys, with Matthew Cornwell's PARC-d value (higher better) and comments:
Urban Shocker (104) - war credit, from a well populated era, early death caused him to fall from an obvious electee
Andy Pettitte (107) - base WAR often used (Baseball-Reference) isn't really a fan, but Fangraphs, Kikos, and post-season indicate he's undervalued, has entanglement with Jeter/NYY defense issues.
Johan Santana (94) - peak ala Koufax without post-season heroics, Fangraphs isn't a big fan.

My next guys, alphabetical, Cornwell not currently showing MLE credit:
Babe Adams (95, no MLE credit)- weird career shape, deserving of a little or a lot of minor league credit, brief but shined in world series.
Kevin Appier (97) - excellent RA9, VERY strong cohort, unimpressive by Kiko's (help please)
Tommy Bond (97) - early great, my confidence is low in separating pre 1893 pitchers, impressive RA9 and not FIP, how much credit goes to his top notch defenders.
Dizzy Dean (88) - Johan Santana or just lite from an overpopulated era, maybe a smidge of credit for minors or world series.
Orel Hershiser (88) - very bubbly across the board, some low standard deviation 80s, post-season glory.
Tim Hudson (88) - low border RA9, negative FIP, excellent Kiko level (please help here :).
Doc Gooden (89) - low standard deviation 1980s, ok in RA9, excellent in FIP, and good in Kikos, likely ready before majors but probably no extra credit.
Tommy John (92) - poor RA9, excels in FIP, Kikos, Joe D's, clutch, and post-season, overlaps a strong pitching cohort era.
Don Newcombe (xx) - raw WAR brought down by: low standard deviation 1950s, Korean war, integration.
Vic Willis (104) - RA9 looks impressive, Joe D's PA and FIP metrics don't like him.

Could be my guys/have support:
Tommy Bridges (87) - RA9 and FIP look short, deserving of significant WAR/MLE credit.
Charlie Buffinton (100) - poor by FIP, but strong by others, 1880s cohort
Eddie Cicotte (104) - black sox demerit issues, strong cohort.
Burleigh Grimes (<85) - 20s pitcher glut, rates well in non-consecutive measures besides a little low by Baseball Gauge, not well in consecutive.
Dolf Luque (xx) - MLE credit level? 1 huge peak season, just solid otherwise.
Jim McCormick (100) - shines bright in Baseball Reference, a weak candidate in FIP, and a poor one in Baseball Gauge, UA season challenges.
Tony Mullane (93) - league quality and backlisting issues.
Roy Oswalt (86) - just shy by most measures besides epoc's STD dev review, favorable in Kiko.
George Uhle (98) - 20s pitcher glut, rates well in RA9, not by Kiko (missing games?)

Others getting votes:
Chuck Finley (87) - borderline RA+, a little worse FIP, poor in Kikos.
Addie Joss (xx) - impressive ERA+, merely very good RA+, durability concerns
Cliff Lee (xx) - Santana/Oswalt lite.
Mickey Lolich/Javier Vazquez (xx) - clear FIP HOFers, short in RA9 and Kikos.
Lee Smith/Billy Wagner (xx) - relief pitching is incredibly valuable, any individual worth considering?
Hilton Smith/Negro Leaguers - none of the MLEs are overwhelming, Webster McDonald's latest indicates he belongs in the above group.
Frank Tanana (xx) - strong in WARP/BP, a little shy besides.
Bucky Walters (86) - good in B-R but short elsewhere, great defenders behind him.
Mickey Welch (xx) - Do we have enough 1880s pitchers, and I don't see him above Bond/Buffinton/McCormick/Mullane/Whitney.
Jim Whitney (xx) - combo hit/pitch FIP stud, a little short on RA9.

Right now I have the Hall of Merit as 28% pitchers, 38% 1B/OF, 34% 2B/SS/3B/C. Projecting out those next 5 elections would make us +7 bats, +7 gloves, +3 P assuming we don't elect Buehrle or Hudson. If we do elect Buehrle and Hudson that likely replaces Bonds and Willis which gives us +6 bat, +7 glove, +4 P.

My PHoM is 31% P, 34% 1B/OF and 35% 2B/SS/3B/C. My next few PHoM elections are likely to be

2021: Buehrle, Hudson, Pettitte
2022: A-Rod, Posada, Sosa, TBD
2023: Beltran, TBD, TBD
2024: Ichiro, Beltre, Mauer, Utley
2025: Sabathia, TBD, TBD

TBD candidates - Kenny Lofton, Will Clark, Vlad Guerrero, David Ortiz, Dave Concepcion, David Wright, Gene Tenace, Wilbur Cooper, Babe Adams, Burleigh Grimes, Dolf Luque, Dizzy Trout, Dwight Gooden, Bartolo Colon

DL, could I interest you in Tommy John or Kevin Appier? I also have Babe Adams reasonably close to ballot territory among pitchers.

Right now, my top 15 for next year looks something like this

1 Andy Pettitte
2 Kenny Lofton
3 Buddy Bell
4 Thurman Munson
5 Joe Tinker
6 Bobby Bonds
7 Tim Hudson
8 Bob Johnson
9 Sammy Sosa
10 Chuck Finley
11 Vic Willis
12 Urban Shocker
13 Mark Buehrle
14 Wally Schang
15 Bobby Abreu

To take a page from DL, my PHoM is currently 30.5% P, 34.6% 1B/OF and 33.9% 2B/SS/3B/C - although this is projected out through 2026. My next few PHoM elections are likely to be

2021: Buehrle, Hudson, Kent
2022: A-Rod, Posada, Helton, Guerrero
2023: Beltran, Johan, David Wells
2024: Beltre, Utley, Ichiro, Bobby Veach
2025: Sabathia, Oswalt, Mauer

DL, could I interest you in Tommy John or Kevin Appier?

Already both PHoM

I just lost a really long post about positional and chronological balance. I don't have the heart tonight to write it again, but here's the upshot.
POSITIONS
A) We're low on catchers, third basemen, and second basemen as we have been for a while.

B) We have plenty of first basemen.

ERAS
C) My analysis indicates that we are significantly over prior to 1900, between 1922 and the war, and from integration to about 1956. To the tune of 25% over or 21 players more than we would reasonably predict. That's 8% of the HOM right there. IMO, we should stay out of the business of electing from these player pools for a good long while, probably until the size of the HOM expands to the point where they are more in proportion with other eras. We've been abundantly fair to these players, and we may, unwittingly, be acting unfairly toward others.

D) The eras 1901-1908 and 1957-1968 are right on target. We could elect one player each from these eras and not feel bloated at all.

E) We need more representation in the 1910s, specifically 1909-1922. Wally Schang is the nearest we have to consensus on next steps for this time, and we'll likely need one more than that.

F) 1969-2008 is a gaping wound. We're now at 88% of balance over the ~100 slots in this time. Which means we are -12 here. The front loggers who are lined up for 2021 will help, of course. But keep in mind that as part of my calculations, I'm already redistributing slots away from this era and into others due to the presence of not-yet-eligible players. Particularly in the first 30 years of this timespan, we may want to make a more concerted effort to find some consensus on these players.

G) I'm not worried at all about the war years even though they are very low. That's just what happened in the war.

H) I'm not worried about 2009-2014 yet because there's so many more active players in the league.

I) If you haven't done this kind of analysis yourself, or if you don't like the way I do it, please do it yourself. It's a real thing that we need to be thinking more about as we construct ballots even if our individual systems tell us that earlier players suit our tastes/beliefs more.

If you really want charts and specifics, I'll post them in the 2021 discussion thread when it comes along.

Oh, actually, I have the charts handy. I didn't lose them like I thought. But the rest of the post got et.

            C    1B    2B    3B    SS    LF    CF    RF    DH   SP    RP
=========================================================================
% of app  18.0  30.3  22.5  22.5  24.4  26.5  26.6  24.4  5.3  60.7  13.0
Primary   20.0  31.0  22.0  20.0  26.0  24.0  26.0  25.0  3.0  72.0   5.0
33%       17.0  23.9  19.8  16.7  21.8  19.7  22.1  18.2  2.1  59.7   4.3
25%       17.6  25.4  20.1  17.6  22.4  21.7  22.7  18.5  2.1  59.7   6.3 

YEARS      %T.S.  SLOTS  ADJ  HOMERS  NET  PCT
===============================================
1871–1875   1.7%   4.8   5.2   4.4   -0.8   85%
1876–1881   1.5%   4.2   4.6   5.8   +1.2  127% 
1882–1884   1.7%   4.8   5.2   4.7   -0.5   90%
1885–1900   7.8%  21.4  23.2  29.7   +6.5  128%
1901–1908   4.7%  12.8  14.0  14.4   +0.4  103%
1909–1922   9.3%  25.4  27.6  25.5   -2.1   92%
1923–1942  13.7%  37.5  40.8  50.8   +9.9  124%
1943–1945   1.9%   5.2   5.6   3.5   -2.1   63%
1946–1956   6.3%  17.3  18.8  22.5   +3.7  120%
1957–1968   7.7%  21.1  23.0  23.3   +0.3  101%
1969–2008  37.4% 102.6  98.4  86.7  -11.7   88%
2009–2014   6.2%  17.1   7.7   2.4   -5.3   31%

Thanks for the info Eric. I've got some thoughts about chronological and positional balance, but I'll save them for when the 2021 discussion thread starts. Just to confirm, these numbers include the four new inductees? They all would fit (well Tiant has a few years before this period but is mainly within the range) in the 1969-2008 group you indicate is lower than expected.

Eric, would it be possible, using your methods, to break up the 1969-2008 period into smaller segments? It's by far the longest period in your table. It seems to me that if we have lots of players from, say, 1995-2008, that doesn't mean we have done a good job of representing 1969-84. It would help my assessment to see what your findings are about representation within different parts of that period.

Overall, my assessment of period distribution is pretty similar to yours, but I haven't run the numbers in about seven years, so I am basing my current assessment on a back-of-the-napkin addition of the last 20+ electees into the calculations. Once the 2021 discussion thread is up, I'll work more seriously on updating my numbers and adding them to the discussion of fairness to periods.

My back-of-the-napkin numbers suggest that for period representation we should look to elect around 5 players from the 1970-1990 period. We've got three more or less in the pipeline in Bell, Bonds, and Bando, so identifying a couple more appropriate and viable candidates from this period might be helpful and ultimately around 20-22 from 1990-2010. Most of the first-ballot players we'll be electing in the next 4-8 years will help with the latter part of this cohort: ARod, Pujols, Beltre, Ichiro, Utley, Beltran, Mauer, and Sabathia (that's eight), as will most of the top of the backlog: Lofton, Santana, Kent, Sosa, Berkman, Abreu. That's 14 of the 22, so the dire underrepresentation of this era is on track to be ameliorated.

It's the next eight HoMers below the 17 I've listed above where we could drop the ball if we don't come to a shared understanding of how to weigh post-1990 players with pre-integration players. Equitable period representation is going to mean electing (working down our current ballot while adding some new arrivals) 8-10 from a group like Pettitte, Posada, Giambi, Appier, Hudson, Campaneris, Buerhle, Oswalt, McGriff, Giles, Hershiser, Gooden. This is a group that doesn't look to me to be on track for election, though we have seen historically that more recent players ultimately tend to garner broader support as we work deeper into the backlog, and they often rise through older players who support is durable but lacks growth potential. It appears to me, however, that unless there is a change in how the electorate is assessing these players, that we are unlikely to elect players from this group unless we also elect a similar or greater number of pre-WWII players.

I don't think that would be fair to the post-1968 era, but there'll need to be a lot of discussion about all of that to move the consensus.

Yes Chris, and 1/2 Willie Davis, Tommy John, Thurman Munson, and Dale Murphy are guys from the first half of that era to consider also.

Tommy John, Thurman Munson, and Sal Bando look to be going on my ballot next year. Doing my part, at least a bit.

Well, that is until Mickey Welch and Urban Shocker follow them. But they’re pitchers, which we’re short on, right?

OK, now that I've had a night's sleep, let me put some context around those charts for you all.

POSITIONS
% of app = Percent each Homer played at each position
Primary = Primary position by majority or plurality
33% = Sum of percentages of all positions played by HOMers in at least 33% of apperances
25% = The same only with a 25% threshold
 
            C    1B    2B    3B    SS    LF    CF    RF    DH   SP    RP
=========================================================================
% of app  18.0  30.3  22.5  22.5  24.4  26.5  26.6  24.4  5.3  60.7  13.0
Primary   20.0  31.0  22.0  20.0  26.0  24.0  26.0  25.0  3.0  72.0   5.0
33%       17.0  23.9  19.8  16.7  21.8  19.7  22.1  18.2  2.1  59.7   4.3
25%       17.6  25.4  20.1  17.6  22.4  21.7  22.7  18.5  2.1  59.7   6.3 

Of course, I hope that you might sub in your definition if one of these doesn't suffice. But generally, catchers, second basemen, and third basemen are problematic for us at this second. Future elections could change that as noted up thread by others.

Now here's the other chart again, this time with the longest span split into two sub-spans. It's a little different than last nights also because I optimized something on it (I had forgotten to remove Abreu and Santana from not-yet-eligible status), so just slight differences. Same story though.

CHRONO
%T.S = Percentage of all team seasons in history
SLOTS = Predicted slots based on an even distribution across all of baseball history
ADJ = Predicted slots adjusted for the presence of not-yet-eligible players---adjusted up for eras with none, adjusted down for eras with some*
HOMers= Percentage of HOM careers in this span as determined by the sum of pieces of HOM careers in each year of the span (based on G for hitters and IP for pitchers)
NET = Raw +/- of HOMers compared to adjusted slots
PCT = Percentage above or below predicted balance with 100% being exactly balanced.

YEARS      %T.S.  SLOTS  ADJ  HOMERS  NET  PCT
===============================================
1871–1875   1.7%   4.8   5.1   4.4   -0.7   86%
1876–1881   1.5%   4.2   4.5   5.8   +1.3  128% 
1882–1884   1.7%   4.8   5.1   4.7   -0.5   91%
1885–1900   7.8%  21.4  23.0  29.7   +6.7  129%
1901–1908   4.7%  12.8  13.9  14.4   +0.6  104%
1909–1922   9.3%  25.4  27.4  25.5   -1.9   93%
1923–1942  13.7%  37.5  40.5  50.8  +10.3  125%
1943–1945   1.9%   5.2   5.6   3.5   -2.0   63%
1946–1956   6.3%  17.3  18.6  22.5   +3.9  121%
1957–1968   7.7%  21.1  22.8  23.3   +0.5  102%
1969–1990   19.3%  52.9  57.0  50.4   -6.6  88%
1991–2008  18.1% 49.7  42.4  36.3   -6.2   86%
2009–2014   6.2%  17.1   8.1   2.4   -5.7   29%

I picked these spans by looking for changes in representation across time. When I see an obvious change, it's the end of one era and the beginning of another. There are other ways to break this into blocks of time, though I don't think any of them are as helpful because they don't show the granularity. For example by decades or by deciles of %T.S. would both create distortions due to overlapping areas of high and low representation. This zeroes in more directly on the exact places where things look askew. Keep in mind that with each election, I'll be moving some of those adjusted slots back to where they originate as players become eligible whose careers took place in that span (as I did with Jeter and Abreu this time).

*Currently the list of players I'm using to generate the adjustment includes:
Alex Rodriguez
Carlos Beltran
Adrian Beltre
David Wright
Chase Utley
Ichiro Suzuki
Joe Mauer
Miguel Cabrera
Albert Pujols
Robinson Cano
Buster Posey
Mike Trout
Evan Longoria
Joey Votto
Paul Goldschmidt
Russel Martin
Nolan Arenado
Manny Machado
Francisco Lindor
Mookie Betts
Tim Hudson
Mark Buehrle
CC Sabathia
Justin Verlander
Chris Sale
Jacob Degrom
Max Scherzer
Felix Hernandez
Zack Grienke
Cole Hamels
Clayton Kershaw.

One could add to this list if one wanted to. For active players, I'm estimating their career length based on comps to generate the percentage of games played in a given season.

Questions? Let me know!

1/2 Willie Davis, Tommy John, Thurman Munson, and Dale Murphy are guys from the first half of that era to consider also.

Yes, they should be in the mix also. I was doing a quick scan of the voting results when I put together the sample list above, so I wouldn't want to imply that I am endorsing any particular player on that list or arguing against a player that I didn't include.

Willie Davis is an interesting addition in that he's the only one of the players mentioned who didn't get any votes. My system sees him as lower borderline -- he's the last player on my "off-ballot" list. With credit for his play in Japan, he would be a little higher than that. He's the only player we've mentioned that didn't get a single vote in 2020, so we might look at why he's slipped through everyone's assessments. Chet Lemon has also been mentioned a few times recently in comparison to Lofton and Jones but hasn't picked up any votes.

Isn’t W Davis already a HOMer?

Isn’t W Davis already a HOMer?

Nope

Willie Davis is an interesting addition in that he's the only one of the players mentioned who didn't get any votes. My system sees him as lower borderline -- he's the last player on my "off-ballot" list. With credit for his play in Japan, he would be a little higher than that. He's the only player we've mentioned that didn't get a single vote in 2020, so we might look at why he's slipped through everyone's assessments. Chet Lemon has also been mentioned a few times recently in comparison to Lofton and Jones but hasn't picked up any votes.

He's the 4th highest ranking position player eligible in Matthew Cornwell's PARC-d, behind Munson 111, Schang 111, and Bell 108.
https://www.baseball-fever.com/forum/general-baseball/history-of-the-game/3554719-updated-parc-d-and-methodology.
https://www.baseball-fever.com/forum/general-baseball/history-of-the-game/3554719-updated-parc-d-and-methodology?p=3559211#post3559211

Davis was hurt tremendously by his ballpark, he has one of the best road vs home hitting performances, and his defensive chances seem to be compromised as well.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.fcgi?id=Uw9j3
https://www.baseball-fever.com/forum/general-baseball/history-of-the-game/3542242-fielding-splits-home-and-road-for-historical-mlb-outfielders

He'd be a slam dunk for me if I didn't factor in Kiko's W-L records, but maybe Dodger Stadium is reeking havoc on his totals here?

I should have also added Jim Sundberg to the list above if we think he was a demigod with the glove.

For full disclosure, there is a glut of other 70s guys I didn't mention that might bubble below our threshold that could be candidates too: Norm Cash, Cesar Cedeno, Ron Cey (he comes out the best of this bunch for me :)), Jack Clark, Dave Concepcion (he's the best by Dan R/how do we evaluate replacement level), George Foster (underrated candidate), Toby Harrah, Tony Perez, Darrell Porter, Jim Rice, Gene Tenace, Roy White.

I presently have Willie Davis 40th, and currently the #2 CF behind James Lofton. I may revisit that position, as well as Tony Lazzeri next time, though they’re still off ballot for me.

Willie Davis looks to be 17th in my rankings for next year's HoM vote. After next year, it's quite possible he will be on my 2022 ballot, in the 10-15 range. He was elected to my PHoM in 1985.

2021: Lofton, Santaña, Sosa

I've mentioned my caution on the Sosa campaign due to his all-time awful clutch value.

Baseball-Reference scores for notable candidates:
Bert Campaneris - +6.1 (maybe this can help get some converts :))
Roy White - +5.6
Tony Perez - +4.7
Bobby Abreu - +4.4
Willie Davis - +4.3
Darrell Porter - +4.2
Kirby Puckett - +3.6
Toby Harrah - +3.5
Tommy Henrich - +3.4
Jason Giambi - +3.1
Jose Cruz - +3.0
Thurman Munson - +2.9
Bob Elliott - +2.9
Kiki Cuyler - +2.9
Tony Lazzeri - +2.9
Johnny Pesky - +2.7
Dolph Camili - +2.3
Tony Phillips - +2.2
Kenny Lofton - +1.7
Lance Berkman - +1.6
Jim Sundberg - +1.6
Cesar Cedeno - +1.4
Buddy Bell - +1.3
Carlos Delgado - +0.8
John Olerud - +0.4
Elston Howard - 0
Luis Aparicio - +0.9
Vern Stephens - (0.6)
Lou Brock - (0.9)
Bobby Bonds - (1.2)
Phil Rizzuto - (2.8)
Bernie Williams - (2.9)
Al Rosen - (3.0)
Sal Bando - (3.0)
Nomar Garciaparra - (3.1)
Dale Murphy - (3.2)
Luis Gonzalez - (3.2)
Darryl Strawberry - (3.2)
Brian Giles - (3.5)
Jorge Posada - (3.6)
Gil Hodges - (3.7)
Rocky Colavito - (3.7)
Robin Ventura - (4.0)
Bob Johnson - (4.6)
Jack Clark - (4.8)
Fred McGriff - (4.9)
Albert Belle - (4.9)
Ron Cey - (5.7)
Gene Tenace - (5.8)
Norm Cash - (6.7)
Ernie Lombardi - (6.7)
Jeff Kent - (8.9!)
Chet Lemon - (9.7!)
Lance Parrish - (12.7!!)
Sammy Sosa - (17.0!!!)

@Bleed the Freak - wouldn't the value created by players in clutch situations already be baked into their WAR? Are you suggesting these values should be worth more in a WAR model than they currently are? If so, are these numbers run values?

B-R and Fangraphs use a linear weights model for batters which does not incorporate situational/clutch value. BPro uses DRAA which is even further removed from situational value. Kiko's W-L Records do incorporate situational value. WPA and RE24 are designed around situational value, although there's not a public WAR model that I know of based on either of those two.

Most eligible position player WAR not in the Hall of Merit, backlog rank and by how many points they missed being elected in the last election:

68.3 - Kenny Lofton, 1st, 7
66.3 - Buddy Bell, 7th, 141
61.5 - Sal Bando, 10th, 184
60.7 - Willie Davis, no votes, 330
60.0 - Bobby Abreu, 6th, 130

58.6 - Sammy Sosa, 3rd, 99
58.2 - John Olerud, T86th, 324
57.9 - Bobby Bonds, 9th, 175
57.3 - Bob Johnson, 12th, 209
56.4 - Johnny Damon, no votes, 330

122 players with more position player WAR than Damon are in the Hall of Merit. Most inductees below the Damon Line are born over 100 years ago, position player WAR only:

1836 - Dickey Pearce 8.6 at Age 35-41, the only player with 1+ WAR born in 1840 or earlier

All seven players with 20+ WAR born 1841-1850 and 12th Lip Pike are in the Hall of Merit:

1842 - Joe Start 32.4 at Age 28-43
1845 - Lip Pike 14.3 at Age 26-42
1847 - Deacon White 45.7 at Age 23-42
1847 - George Wright 23.2 at Age 24-35

1849 - Ezra Sutton 32.9 at Age 21-38
1849 - Cal McVey 20.1 at Age 21-29
1850 - Jim O'Rourke 52.1 at Age 21-53
1850 - Ross Barnes 28 at Age 21-31

The Top 13 in WAR born 1851-1860, 16th John Ward who also pitches and 23rd Charley Jones are in the Hall of Merit:

1852 - Cap Anson 94.4
1852 - Charley Jones 26.3
1854 - George Gore 39.9
1854 - Charlie Bennett 38.8
1855 - Paul Hines 44.9

1855 - Hardy Richardson 40.9
1856 - Harry Stovey 45.2
1857 - Roger Connor 84.3
1857 - Jack Glasscock 62
1857 - King Kelly 47

1858 - Dan Brouthers 79.8
1859 - Bid McPhee 52.5
1859 - Buck Ewing 48
1860 - Sam Thompson 44.4
1860 - John Ward 34.3 + 28.1 pitching WAR

Born 1861-1870 and 40ish WAR apparently remains the in/out line for the Hall of Merit:

1861 - Pete Browning 40.6, In
1863 - Jimmy Ryan 43.3, Out
1865 - Mike Griffin 40.8, Out
1865 - Frank Grant, Negro League, In
1866 - Billy Hamilton 63.3, In

1866 - Lave Cross 46.7, Out
1866 - Hugh Duffy 43.1, Out
1867 - Ed Delahanty 69.7, In
1867 - Jake Beckley 61.6, In
1867 - Cupid Childs 44.3, In
1867 - Mike Tiernan 42.3, Out

1868 - Jesse Burkett 62.6, In
1869 - Hughie Jennings 42.3, In
1870 - George Davis 84.7, In
1870 - Bill Dahlen 75.4, In
1870 - Jimmy Collins 53.3, In

Born 1871-1880 and 50ish WAR apparently becomes the in/out line with 13th John McGraw managing and 16th Roger Bresnahan being one of the two best MLB Catchers born between 1859 and 1900:

1871 - Joe Kelley 50.6, In
1872 - Fred Clarke 67.9, In
1872 - Willie Keeler 54.2, In
1872 - Home Run Johnson, Negro League, In

1873 - Bobby Wallace 70.3, In
1873 - John McGraw 45.7, In, 2763-1948, 3 Rings and 10 Pennants as Manager
1874 - Honus Wagner 130.8, In
1874 - Nap Lajoie 107.4, In

1876 - Elmer Flick 53.2, In
1878 - Jimmy Sheckard 49.5, In
1879 - Roger Bresnahan 42.5, In
1880 - Sam Crawford 75.3, In
1880 - Joe Tinker 53.1, Out

Born 1881-1890 and 50ish WAR apparently remains the standard but the other best MLB Catcher born between 1859 and 1900 is not inducted:

1882 - Pete Hill, Negro League, In
1884 - Sherry Magee 59.3, In
1884 - John Henry Lloyd, Negro League, In
1886 - Ty Cobb 151, In
1886 - Frank Baker 62.8, In

1886 - Larry Gardner 48.3, Out
1887 - Eddie Collins 124, In
1887 - Joe Jackson 62.2, In
1887 - Harry Hooper 53.3, Out
1888 - Zack Wheat 60.2, In

1889 - Heinie Groh 48.2, In
1889 - Wally Schang 48, Out
1889 - Louis Santop, Negro League, In
1890 - Max Carey 54, In
1890 - Sam Rice 52.6, Out

Born 1891-1900 and 50ish WAR apparently remains the standard with 13th Edd Roush also inducted:

1893 - George Sisler 53.9, In
1893 - Edd Roush 45.3, In
1893 - Cristobal Torriente, Negro League, In
1894 - Harry Heilmann 72.2, In
1895 - Babe Ruth 162.1, In

1896 - Rogers Hornsby 127, In
1896 - Oscar Charleston, Negro League, In
1896 - Dobie Moore, Negro League, In
1896 - Alejandro Oms, Negro League, In
1896 - Jud Wilson, Negro League, In

1897 - Frankie Frisch 70.4, In
1897 - Biz Mackey, Negro League, In
1898 - Bill Terry 54.2, In
1898 - Joe Sewell 53.7, In

1898 - Dick Lundy, Negro League, In
1900 - Goose Goslin 66.1, In
1900 - Gabby Hartnett 60.1, In
1900 - John Beckwith, Negro League, In

Born 1901-1910 and 50ish WAR apparently remains the standard:

1901 - Turkey Stearnes, Negro League, In
1901 - Mule Suttles, Negro League, In
1902 - Al Simmons 68.8, In
1902 - Earl Averill 48, In
1903 - Lou Gehrig 112.4, In

1903 - Charlie Gehringer 80.7, In
1903 - Paul Waner 72.8, In
1903 - Tony Lazzeri 50, Out
1903 - Mickey Cochrane 48.5, In
1903 - Cool Papa Bell, Negro League, In

1904 - Buddy Myer 46.9, Out
1905 - Bob Johnson 57.3, Out
1905 - Willie Wells, Negro League, In
1906 - Joe Cronin 66.4, In
1907 - Jimmie Foxx 95.8, In
1907 - Luke Appling 74.5, In

1907 - Bill Dickey 58.4, In
1907 - Buck Leonard, Negro League, In
1908 - Ernie Lombardi 46.8, Out
1909 - Mel Ott 107.8, In
1909 - Billy Herman 54.8, In
1909 - Stan Hack 52.6, In

Born 1911-1920 and 50ish WAR apparently remains the standard with 16th Charlie Keller also inducted:

1911 - Hank Greenberg 57.6, In
1911 - Joe Medwick 55.6, In
1911 - Josh Gibson, Negro League, In
1912 - Arky Vaughan 72.9, In
1912 - Quincy Trouppe, Negro League, In

1913 - Johnny Mize 70.9, In
1914 - Joe DiMaggio 78.1, In
1915 - Joe Gordon 57.2, In
1915 - Willard Brown, Negro League, In

1916 - Enos Slaughter 55.3, In
1916 - Bob Elliott 50.4, Out
1916 - Charlie Keller 43.1, In
1917 - Lou Boudreau 63, In
1918 - Ted Williams 123.1, In

1918 - Pee Wee Reese 66.3, In
1918 - Bobby Doerr 51.2, In
1919 - Jackie Robinson 61.4, In
1919 - Monte Irvin 21.3, Negro League, In
1920 - Stan Musial 128.2, In

Born 1921-1930 and 50ish WAR apparently remains the standard with 14th Roy Campanella possibly needing Negro League play for induction:

1921 - Roy Campanella 37, Negro League, In
1922 - Ralph Kiner 49.4, In
1923 - Larry Doby 49.6, In
1925 - Yogi Berra 59.8, In

1925 - Minnie Minoso 50.5, In
1926 - Duke Snider 66.4, In
1927 - Richie Ashburn 63.9, In
1927 - Nellie Fox 49, In

Then it's mainly a 60ish WAR in/out line. 1000+ Games at C (500-999 Games at C) and born since 1931:

1947 Johnny Bench 75.2, In
1954 Gary Carter 70.1, In
1971 Ivan Rodriguez 68.7, In
1947 Carlton Fisk 68.5, In
1968 Mike Piazza 59.6, In
(1940 Joe Torre 57.6, In)

(1950 Brian Downing 51.5, Out)
1949 Ted Simmons 50.3, In
(1946 Gene Tenace 46.8, Out)
1947 Thurman Munson 46.1, Out
1941 Bill Freehan 44.8, In

The rest inducted below 60 WAR: 58.8 Darrell Evans, 56.5 Will Clark and 55.9 Jimmy Wynn, who are one and done with the Hall of Fame. 58.7 Dick Allen who was one and done but given a 2nd chance gets as high as 18.9% support. 59.4 Vladimir Guerrero a 2nd ballot inductee and 57.5 Willie Stargell a 1st ballot inductee.

bbmck - managerial contributions are not allowed to be considered for HOM.

That clutch score for Sosa is crazy low, but I think he still is one of the top backloggers for me. He will probably make the end of my ballot next year.

I have Willie Davis #48, so quite similar to bachslunch. But 3 spots behind Cesar Cedeño at #45, so the #3 CF available for me.

pHOM has 28.6% pitchers, but that's slated to go up slightly over the next few elections as Pettitte, Buehrle, Oswalt, and Sabathia will definitely be elected. Tim Hudson, Vic Willis, Larry Jackson, Babe Adams, Mark Langston, and Jerry Koosman will also be in consideration (though Langston and Koosman feel a tad like a longshots at the moment). Others in consideration for those (?) slots are Brian Giles, Fred Lynn, Munson, Posada, and Lazzeri.

2021: Pettitte, Helton Buehrle
2022: A-Rod, Oswalt, Sosa, Tinker(?)
2023: Beltran, Willis(?), Kent(?),
2024: Beltre, Ichiro, Utley, Nomar(?)
2025: Mauer, Sabathia, Sheckard(?)

Just spinning through my rankings. If the HOM were 70/30 hitters and pitchers and each hitting position were equally represented then we'd have about 24 guys per position and 90 pitchers. Here are the players in my rankings who rank 24th or higher at their respective positions among players eligible through 2021 but who are not in the HOM. This includes 2021 eligibles, therefore.
CATCHER
15. Wally Schang
19. Thurman Munson
20. Gene Tenace
21. Javy Lopez
22. Jorge Posada
23. Tony Pena
24. Jason Kendall
A note here that I think is important. I use Max Marchi's handling/game-calling values and I now include framing in numbers. Joe Mauer's 2024 eligibility makes Kendall an untenable vote for me.

FIRST BASE
20. John Olerud
24. Frank Chance
Lance Berkman is 25th at first base for me.

SECOND BASE
19. Jeff Kent
20. Tony Phillips
24. Fred Dunlap
By 2024, Chase Utley's eligibility will knock out Dunlap, making a current-time vote for Sure Shot untenable. Especially because Ian Kinsler (eligible 2025) is also between ahead of Dunlap.

THIRD BASE
15. Buddy Bell
18. Tommy Leach
20. Sal Bando
21. Ron Cey
23. Bob Elliott
24. Matt Williams
By 2024, Adrian Beltre and David Wright will supplant Elliott and Williams, so I would not consider the latter duo votable.

SHORTSTOP
14. Joe Tinker
17. Art Fletcher
23. Dave Bancroft
A-Rod's 2022 eligibility MIGHT make Banquo a mistake vote for me. The unsupported Miguel Tejada ranks 25th for me.

LEFT FIELD
13. Bobby Veach
18. Roy White
20. Jose Cruz
22. Bob Johnson
Brian Giles is my 25th man in LF.

CENTERFIELD
14. Kenny Lofton
15. Willie Davis
16. Mike Griffin
19. Bernie Williams
21. Cesar Cedeno
24. Brett Butler
Wally Berger Is my 25th and Chet Lemon is right behind him at 26. Willie Davis merits a closer look from me. I'm not sure about Mike Griffin. It's big defensive number that pushes him up here. Butler, Berger, and Lemon wouldn't be strong votes for me due to Carlos Beltran's 2023 eligibility.

RIGHT FIELD
15. Sammy Sosa
22. Bobby Bonds
This assumes that Cravath is just beneath Tony Gwynn who is 13th. Harry Hooper with adjustments slides in right beneath Dave Winfield at 20th. Sam Rice probably slides in ahead of Reggie Smith but I haven't included that for now. Abreu is just off the end at 26/27.

PITCHER
I've cut the unelected pre1893 pitchers out because we've been more than fair with them. Here's those missing from my top 82 sans them guys.
34. Vic Willis
56. Johan Santana
57. Eddie Cicotte
58. Kevin Appier
60. Urban Shocker
62. Chuck Finley
64. Andy Pettitte
65. Nap Rucker
67. Orel Hershiser
68. Tim Hudson
70. Babe Adams
71. Mark Buehrle
73. Roy Oswalt
75. Eddie Rommell
76. Mark Langston
77. Dwight Gooden
79. Frank Tanana
80. Wilbur Cooper
81. Dizzy Dean
82. Tommy John
With Sabathia coming in 2025, John is not a productive vote for me.

So that's my outlook right now. This is not encumbered with any conclusions about positional or chronological balance. Once those get factored in, my ballot starts to take shape. Which means that I'm unlikely to vote for newbies Hudson and Buehrle in 2021.

Dr. Chaleeko, one thing I do that maybe doesn't match up to the rest of HOM voters is combine LF/RF into one position to be represented. In that light, it's interesting to me you have Berkman as a 1B since he spent more of his career in the OF than at 1B (and some of that at CF, which makes him an interesting multi-position question in a way), so for me he's an OF and ahead of all the other guys you have listed at LF/RF. Also slightly interesting to me you don't have Abreu show up.

In general, my next guys up at each position are VERY similar to yours. One of my only real differences is Jim Sundberg at catcher, who may deserving of more defensive credit than what WAR is assigning. Anyway, I have Munson-Posada-Tenace-Schang-Sundberg-Lopez-Kendall, and I could see moving Sundberg two spots higher or maybe even three.

Can we start a 2021 Ballot Discussion thread, along with player threads for Mark Buehrle, Tim Hudson, and Torii Hunter?

*Not that Hunter is a serious candidate, but there are a lot of good Torii Hunter stories and memories :)

I will put up threads this week

Not allowing me to post to the 2021 ballot discussion thread despite being signed in. Nothing can be done about glitches like this, I guess?

That "glitch" has been going on for years. I don't think anyone really understands what causes (or fixes) it. I have only seen it manifest in Hall of Merit threads but it could be site-wide I guess.

The best advice I can give is to post in other threads as that *sometimes* seems to allow you to post in threads you previously were not able to post in.

Yeah, that glitch is super annoying. I'm trying to post in the discussion thread, but waiting for the Matrix to fix itself I guess

Let’s see...
-no persistence of login after short but unpredictable idle time
-terrible search engine
-crazy posting-login glitch
-the nanny
-getting the comment-making box when u aren’t logged in (and shouldn’t get it) them having a post eaten when you hit submit
-formatting tags that persist from comment to comment all the way down a thread
-occasional double or triple posts for no reason
-strange, unpredictable ability to edit others’ posts
-non-operating “remember me” button on login screen
-non-responsive design.

BTF is cra-cra, but I kind of love it for that. Still has that old school flavor. Builds cohesion as a bonding experience. At least there aren’t any emojis.

This infrastructure is garbage but the people are great. It feels like the old internet before the web.