John Smoltz: Never had two consecutive 5+ WAR seasons, one run of three consecutive 4+ WAR seaons, second best season WAR of 5.9
Kevin Brown: Five consecutive seasons of 6.2+ WAR

Not really sure this is the thread to rehash old debates....but Brown had a peak career, he had a five year peak(with another outlier year) where he was truly a great pitcher, and I think he was a deserving hofer, but again he was on a crowded ballot, wasn't well liked etc. And that the current crop of voters is much more willing to maximize their ballots. People in 2011 weren't listing 10 name ballots, people in 2015 were.

Kevin Brown is superior in my opinion to Smoltz, and the fact that Smoltz went in on his first ballot and Brown was one and done just 4 years earlier shows the improvement that I'm talking about that has come from the voters. Yes there are still some voting on narrative, obviously that is true, but more and more are being more inclusive of advanced thinking, which includes expanding their ballots. Smoltz is a unique character in line more with Eckersley career arc than Brown/Schilling/Mussina.

I think Brown got hosed.

It is interesting that the Monitor and Black Ink basically predicted it, that there were things about his statistical breakdown, separate from his narrative, that could have helped us predict he'd get hosed. On Black Ink, Smoltz is low at 34 but Brown is at 19. On the HOF Monitor Smoltz beats him 162-93. I agree that Brown was a better pitcher but there were a few different things going on that hurt him.

Ed to add "Monitor" after "HOF"

I think Brown got hosed.

It is interesting that the Monitor and Black Ink basically predicted it, that there were things about his statistical breakdown, separate from his narrative, that could have helped us predict he'd get hosed. On Black Ink, Smoltz is low at 34 but Brown is at 19. On the HOF Smoltz beats him 162-93. I agree that Brown was a better pitcher but there were a few different things going on that hurt him.

Agree 100% with this, and if Kevin Brown debuted on the ballot today, he gets enough votes to stay on the ballot. He doesn't go in but he gets enough vote for a campaign to be built to educate the voters.

Kevin Brown was an ass, had PED allegations surrounding him and appeared on a crowded ballot, Smoltz had the 150 saves.

Yes, this is the narrative that explains the difference in their voting totals. You have granted it axiomatic status in an attempt to argue against it.

I called the Smoltz thing in a thread like this a few years ago, which will forever make me feel like I'm super good at predicting what Hall voters will do, whether or not that's actually true. And I will just bet you a dollar that Beltran hangs around a long time but doesn't go in. His career is atomized in a number of different ways:

1. He played for a zillion teams, and split his peak between also-ran Kansas City teams and famously flopping Mets ones.

2. As other people around here have mentioned, he has always been one of those "good at everything, great at nothing guys", unless you count SB%, which nobody does.

3. Post-season heroics came for teams that didn't win anything; I, for one, didn't realize he was considered one of the great postseason players of all time. I'd bet you that's true of a lot of people.

4. Not a notable personality of any kind, at least publicly. I'm sure he's nice to his kids and stuff, but nobody cares about that.

5. A long decline as an injury-prone shell of his former self, while adding extra value to his stat sheet, leaves memories of his great seasons dim. Contrast to Adrian Beltre, whose late peak surprised everybody and will leave a vibrant impression in the minds of many, and will probably get him into the Hall.

6. Never had an overwhelmingly great season; his only hardware are three Gold Gloves from his Mets days and a ROY. Even the year he accumulated 8+ WAR he missed time and finished 4th in the MVP voting -- and probably should have finished 2nd, behind Pujols, anyway.

The lasting memory of Carlos Beltran in many people's minds will always be of him watching a called strike three in a critical playoff situation.

In short, I think Beltran might make it if he plays a while longer and the nature of the electorate has shifted by the time he's on the tail end of his eligibility, which is entirely possible as that's likely to be 15-20 years in the future. But based on the way the voting has gone in the past, his only hope is the VC, or a sustained campaign from someone like Rich Lederer, which will be harder with the shorter eligibility period.

I just don't buy the many teams issue being a negative. He has been well-liked by the press just about everywhere and writers like to like who they vote for. He's probably personally crossed paths with tens if not hundreds of the voting electorate and if his time in St. Louis is any indication, the press loved him.

I wonder what hat he will want to wear. I assume the hall would want him in a Royals hat.

I just don't buy the many teams issue being a negative. He has been well-liked by the press just about everywhere and writers like to like who they vote for. He's probably personally crossed paths with tens if not hundreds of the voting electorate and if his time in St. Louis is any indication, the press loved him.

I agree with you here, I think that there is the possibility of being on many teams being an issue, but that would be for guys like Blyleven, Dick Allen or players perceived as mercenary free agents who didn't quite live up to the hype (Kevin Brown is an example of that, even if that is the wrong interpretation of the events)

I get that Beltran gets a bit of a hit because of his first year for the Mets. But I think the fact that he moved around because of trades based upon the new economics of baseball and that he didn't suck for those teams for the most part, negates that bad first year for the Mets.

I wonder what hat he will want to wear. I assume the hall would want him in a Royals hat.

Probably but with his career I can see a non-logo cap.

I just don't buy the many teams issue being a negative.

It has long been an established problem for many guys before him. There is absolutely no reason why it wouldn't affect a nonentity like Beltran in the same way.

100% with this, and if Kevin Brown debuted on the ballot today, he gets enough votes to stay on the ballot. He doesn't go in but he gets enough vote for a campaign to be built to educate the voters.

I really can't see any evidence for this. Again, look at Walker who's going nowhere. Look at Edmonds who couldn't even pass the first hurdle. Do you think Rolen is going to do well on his first ballot? Do you think he's going to advance substantially after his debut? What about Utley?

Maybe Brown would pick up enough to make 5%. But your faith in the "increasing competence" of the voters has no evidence to support it. They struggled with Piazza and are still struggling with Bagwell and Raines while they are about to wave Hoffman in easily. Fred McGriff is out-polling Walker (and Sheffield) while Edmonds is dismissed in one ballot.

Then there's the structural change to the 10-year limit that will leave less time to make a case. Mussina only has 7 ballots left and has to add 32% ... he'll probably make it but it's likely to be close (this year's vote will tell us a lot).

As to the rest of your argument, you keep saying things are changing then keep pointing to the same trivial, narrative-based, "don't want to vote for a guy so let me find a reason" explanations for BBWAA non-support that have been true forever.

The wider use of WAR among BBWAA voters hasn't really changed anything, it's so far been used as really just another counting stat where some massive total is considered "obvious" and everything else is just debatable.

The BBWAA is not changing at any noticeable pace. Beltran won't be on the ballot for several more years so even slow change could make a big difference for him ... or he could still get Rolened. The more likely chance is that the BBWAA no longer exists or has had to change so dramatically to survive that there's been massive change ... or the HoF dumps them as the voters or reduces their role.

Beltran has a good chance because he will be on weaker ballots for an extended period, up to 3-4 ballots where he's the best position player available. The Dawson comp really is a good one:

1st ballot -- Ozzie and backloggers
2nd -- Murray, Sandberg (who he beat by 4 votes)
3rd -- stalled with Molitor, Eck and the big Sandberg jump
4th -- Boggs
5th -- nobody, big jump
6th -- fell back under the Ripken/Gwynn juggernaut
7th -- nobody, recovered and gained to 66%
8th -- Rickey, stalled but now the top backlogger
9th -- Alomar/Larkin non-1st ballot, inducted

So no 1st ballot guys entering in 3 of 5 ballots and he's able to add over 25% to his vote total. The backloggers ahead of him on his 4th ballot (Sutter, Rice, Gossage) were elected in years 5, 7 and 8.

Beltran's path will probably be quicker because it doesn't look like he'll have many 1st ballot types entering in his early ballots. He could end up going quite quickly -- they're looking like some really empty ballots to me.

On Beltran vs. Betts ... through age 23, Beltran had about 6 WAR, Mookie about 18. It's not close.

When it comes to WAR and Beltran I find it odd that we'd stress oWAR but through age 23 it's 13 to 3 oWAR in Betts' favor. Over his first 5 full seasons, Beltran made it to 20 oWAR so Mookie only needs 7 over 3 years to match that. Mookie is credited with 6.1 oWAR this year and Beltran has had only one season better than that at age 29 ... he had 2 essentially the same at ages 24 and 26. In OPS+ terms, Beltran's best through age 28 was 133; Betts is at 133 this year. From 25-27, Beltran had a 125 OPS+; Betts' 21-23 total is currently 126.

Take Beltran ages 24-26 and it's 16.5 WAR, still less than Betts ages 21-23.

Obviously whether Betts will last 15+ seasons, will accumulate 45 WAR through age 30 is unknown. But he's been much, much better at the same ages as Beltran and as good at 21-23 as Beltran was at any point in his career.

Yost, that's an interesting narrative you've developed for yourself, will be interesting to see how many voters share it. "A long decline as an injury-prone shell of his former self..." So at 34 he had a career best OPS+, and has now followed it up with another five seasons of solidly above average OPS+, 120 which is better than what he averaged early in his career (from 22-27 it was 114), and did so while averageing 137 games and 554 PA's per season.

Do you have more insight into the long established issue of guys with many teams having a problem getting elected? I think Dawson had that issue, and has been mentioned as a comp earlier.

Is Dawson's problem that he played for too many teams? Or that he played for one team in particular: the Expos? They have had three HOF players. One a slam dunk got in on his sixth try. Another, Dawson, got in on his ninth. And Raines is now up for his tenth try.

Other than the Tigers has any team been treated worse?

A long decline as an injury-prone shell of his former self..." So at 34 he had a career best OPS+, and has now followed it up with another five seasons of solidly above average OPS+, 120 which is better than what he averaged early in his career (from 22-27 it was 114), and did so while averageing 137 games and 554 PA's per season.

To be clear, this isn't 100% my evaluation of Carlos Beltran as a player. But that great season was years ago; since then he's been a good hitter who can't field as well as he once could and hasn't been able to stay on the field -- 137 games is certainly less than full time, and his last two years have been abbreviated. This is, by the way, the Tim Raines story almost exactly. I'm not trying to be interesting or cute. I'm interpreting Beltran's career as many all-arounders have been interpreted since practically the day the Hall of Fame opened.

As to why that happens, I think it's to do with human psychology as much as anything. Sports are basically about the wow factor. A player like Carlos, as good as he's been, doesn't have a lot of wow factor. He's just been pretty good to very good at lots and lots of things, including things that get missed -- taking third on a single; ignoring the steal sign when he can't get a good jump; laying off a bad pitch; hitting the cutoff man, etc. These are the kinds of things that get talked about a lot, but that players don't really get that much credit for.

I also think that's why having a career split up between teams the way Beltran's has is a problem sometimes. If Beltran had spent his whole career with just the Royals, or split fairly evenly b/w Mets and Royals, he'd get credit for being a good guy, solid fundamentals, clubhouse guy, old pro, does things the right way. Biggio got this kind of credit. Larkin. Others. It's a way of standing out when you "only" have 400 HR and 2800 hits and 3 GG. Instead he looks mercenary, and the fact that no team he's ever played for has won the WS means he's never had the opportunity to get a lot of that talk heaped on him through another avenue.

Anyway, I hope I'm wrong. But I'm very skeptical of Beltran's Hall chances.

Other than the Tigers has any team been treated worse?

Harvey Kuenn, 15 years on the ballot (39% peak)... Mickey Lolich, 15 years on the ballot (25% peak)... the Roundheads vs Royalists geopolitical crisis named Jack Morris... historically, have the Tigers really been notably penalized in HOF voting?

Harvey Kuenn, 15 years on the ballot (39% peak)... Mickey Lolich, 15 years on the ballot (25% peak)... the Roundheads vs Royalists geopolitical crisis named Jack Morris... historically, have the Tigers really been notably penalized in HOF voting?

Those are good points but they have three HOMers who didn't get into the HOF--more than any other team--in Trammell, Whitaker and Freehan--plus a chunk of Darrell Evans, whom they share with the Giants and Braves but is also an HOM/not HOF. Even if you dock them one player for Morris, they have been hosed more than anybody else, I think.

Only the big 6 have more career WAR.

By the time he hits the ballot, Trout will have passed him.

Contrast to Adrian Beltre, whose late peak surprised everybody and will leave a vibrant impression in the minds of many, and will probably get him into the Hall.

Probably? He is 65 hits shy of 3,000, with 444 HR, 1500 RBI and 4 GG at 3B, and having another excellent year for a division winning club

He is a colorful, well known character who already is regularly being referred to as Future Hall of Famer.

And for all the Sabermetric types, he has 89.7 WAR, 51 WAA and 10 seasons at 5 WAR or better (Beltran: 70.3 WAR, 36.4 WAA and 6 seasons at 5 WAR or better)

By the time he is done, he will be first ballot no-doubter.

"Probably" my ass

Yes, to 117; interesting story about Beltre & Beltran in last week's NY Times (although it did refer to both of them as probable HOF'ers).
Article described Beltre's leadership role on the Rangers; young players will go to extra BP sessions if they learn Beltre will be there.

As the leader & best position player (both hitting & fielding) on the team that could end up w/AL's best record, Beltre, as he did last year merits support for MVP (not named Trout). Beltre surged this year (like last year except he wasn't injured as much this year) led TX to playoffs.

Regarding Beltran, a deserving candidate for the hall, I think he has around 9 ASG appearances, indicative of fame or how he was regarded at the time he played (I think Beltre has around 4 appearances). Garvey, for one, must have > 9 appearances and he is not in (putting aside Clemens, Bonds & Rose); who else w/that # of appearances is not in the hall?

I would take the under on Beltran getting to 3K hits, but if he hits like did while on NY this year, he'll get there. I don't think he can maintain those numbers long enough to get the playing time. Of course, if he has a huge post season, such being MVP for a WS winning Rangers; that narrative would push him over the top.

Regarding Beltran, a deserving candidate for the hall, I think he has around 9 ASG appearances, indicative of fame or how he was regarded at the time he played (I think Beltre has around 4 appearances)

9 and 4 are the correct totals for both players, yeah. (WRT Beltre, third base has been an utterly loaded position for most of his career, and he has a pronounced split of hitting better in the second half - his OPS is 76 points higher post-ASB for his career.

Most times on All-Star roster for players not in the Hall of Fame but eligible:
Barry Bonds 14
Mark McGwire 12
Roger Clemens 11
Bill Freehan 11
Steve Garvey 10
Elston Howard 9
Dave Concepcion 9
Fred Lynn 9
Frank McCormick 9
Gary Sheffield 9

Outside of the obvious ones, it's largely a list of players who had relatively weak competition at their positions. Which seems relatively true of Beltran as well; outfield doesn't seem to have been as good a source of talent in the last couple decades as it used to be.

Thought I would see Ted Simmons on that list but he "only" got into 8

I hadn't realized that Beltre had been so hot -- OPS over 1000 in both Aug and Sept has really pulled up his season numbers. As noted, that's put him just 65 short of 3000. He's in for sure although 1st ballot might still depend on how crowded the ballot is -- it doesn't look like it will be crowded to me so 1st ballot is a good chance too.

I'm declaring ballotgeddon officially over with after this ballot. Bagwell and Hoffman will go in, Raines is off one way or the other. I don't know how Vlad and IRod will do but, if they do rather well, that probably means Schilling/Mussina don't move much; if they debut in the 40s, that probably means Schilling/Mussina had pretty good jumps. Either way, the backlog going into 2018 will probably look a lot like a standard HoF backlog -- 1-2 guys in the 60s, a couple more in the 50s, maybe more than usual in the 40s. There will still be a few voters who would prefer to list over 10 names but the guys getting jobbed by that will now be either quite borderline or hopeless cases. The victims of ballotgeddon are pretty obvious -- the roiders (real or perceived) of course, Walker, Kent, McGriff, Edgar, maybe Edmonds (in terms of hanging around for a while).

Of that bunch, probably only Edgar might have had a real shot if not for the ballot crowding. But he showed no progress in 2011-12 before the crowding, wasn't hurt by the crowding of 2013 and only really fell back under the 2014 onslaught.

We can quibble about the who but, in terms of the quantity, the BBWAA did their job after the non-election of 2013 with 9 inductees in 3 years. Strictly in crowding/ballotgeddon terms, it would have been worse if they hadn't been so adamantly anti-PED. All said and done, Bonds/Clemens et al didn't crowd the ballot excessively.

The big thing about 'ballotgeddon' was that the writers did up their number of names per ballot on average and that made a big difference. Not only did it put people in, but it increased the vote totals of likelies to the point that they have legitimate shots.

But that great season was years ago; since then he's been a good hitter who can't field as well as he once could and hasn't been able to stay on the field -- 137 games is certainly less than full time, and his last two years have been abbreviated.

These past five seasons he's played in 85% of his team's games, with OPS 120, and he'll approach 600 PA this year unless the Yanks sit him for these last games, which I doubt. "Less than full time"? True, but how many players have done that well in their age 35-39 seasons? Say, with at least 2,500 PA (Beltran is at 2,774 thru yesterday) and OPS 120 or better. I'd guess the list isn't all that long.

I think he goes the Kenny Lofton route. Similar career path, and (currently) similar WAR.

Most oWAR, age 35-39, minimum 2500 PA

Beltran has 39.2 peak WAA, well ahead of Jeter, Gwynn, Murray, Biggiio, etc. That's an impressive amount, I'd think 40 peak WAA should be a slam dunk hall of famer. Combine 39 with being the greatest modern day playoff hitter should be more than enough.

I don't think anybody's contending he doesn't belong. But he's not going to make it. Peak WAA will have zero bearing on this.

I hadn't realized that Beltre had been so hot -- OPS over 1000 in both Aug and Sept

He's the ultimate "second half" performer -- Second Half of the Season (for his career, 80 points of OPS) and Second Half of Career (1998-2007, OPS+ 107; 2008-2016, OPS+ 126)

I'd guess the list isn't all that long.

Well, about twice as long as I thought. Lots of HOF there but also lots of HOVG or maybe even HOG. Thanks, DanG.

Curious about the number of teams. One thing I could do is look at players in the 50-70 WAR borderline range. Pretty much everyone above 70 is in unless they are ineligible or roid suspects. Most below 50 are out, with a few exceptions. Don't look at players who retired after say, 2000. I'd group players into:

1. One team, with exceptions for players like Billy Williams who played 2 years in Oakland at the end. His entire prime was with the Cubs. Probably someone like Brock too - he played a bit for the Cubs, then the trade, then his entire HOF case is based on what he did for St. Louis.

2. Players whose prime years were for 2 teams, but not 3. These guys might have played for a 3rd or 4th team early or late in their careers.

3. Players with 3 or more teams splitting their prime years, or who played for 5 or more teams for any of their season.

See if the different groups end up with similar in/out HOF percentages.

This is, by the way, the Tim Raines story almost exactly.

If your belief is that Beltran's story is almost exactly like Raines', and Raines received 70% of the vote last year, why exactly are you worried about Beltran?

One thing I could do is look at players in the 50-70 WAR borderline range.

Messing around with this a little...

There are 126 position players currently listed between 50-70 WAR on B-R. Of those, I removed active players and players who have played since 2001 (and who could still therefore be on a Hall of Fame ballot, even if they aren't actually), players whose careers were primarily before 1900 (Hall of Fame selections of those players are unlikely to be representative of the current selection process), and Joe Torre (who didn't get voted in without his managerial career, but is still technically in), I'm left with 78 players. Of those 78, 45 are in the Hall of Fame; 28 were selected by the writers, and 17 through some other method (VC or Old Timer's Committee, mostly).

Rather than go through and try to classify everyone's prime seasons, I used the following criteria: If more than 75% of the player's games were played for one team, he's a one-team player. If he isn't a one-team player, look at the games played for all teams other than his most-played-for team; if over half of the remaining games were played for one team, he's a two-team player. Outside of that, he's a nomad. (I'm sure there are issues with this system, but it'll do for now.)

37 of the 78 players are one-team players. 27 are in the Hall of Fame (18 via the writers, 9 via other methods).
33 of the 78 players are two-team players. 15 are in the Hall of Fame (8 via the writers, 7 via other methods).
8 of the 78 players were nomads. 3 are in the Hall of Fame (2 via the writers).

Just looking at the list of nomads... it includes Al Simmons and Eddie Murray, both of whom spent their best years in one place and traveled around for a long time afterward. So it's not a perfect system.

With that caveat, the one-team players seem to have a distinct advantage - 27 of 37 in the Hall, as compared to 18 of 41 otherwise. That advantage looks to be in place at both levels of the selection process, as well. 18 of 37 one-team players went in via the writers, as compared to 10 of 41. If you remove the players selected by the writers, the VC/OTC selected 9 of 19 one-team players vs. 8 of 31 otherwise.

Good work. How about for the true one teamers, never wore a second MLB uniform. Do they do even better?

Quick check for quality bias on this: 32 of the 78 players had 60-70 WAR; 22 are in the Hall (16 via writers). Those 32 include 16 one-team players (12 HOF, 9 BBWAA), 13 two-team players (8 HOF, 5 BBWAA), and 3 nomads (2 HOF, 2 BBWAA). The other 46 are obviously between 50-60: 21 one-team players (15 HOF, 9 BBWAA), 20 two-team players (7 HOF, 3 BBWAA), 5 nomads (1 HOF, 0 BBWAA).

So there appears to be a bias toward one-team players at both levels of quality, but especially in the lower band; 50-60 WAR players have better odds of being voted in by the writers if they're one-team players than they do of being voted in by any method if they're not.

Good work. How about for the true one teamers, never wore a second MLB uniform. Do they do even better?

YES. 10 such players, 9 in the Hall, 7 via the BBWAA. (Poor Stan Hack.) Leaving them out, you get 18/27 quasi-one-team players in (11 via the writers), still better odds than the players who moved around more but lower than the true 1TPs.

The lists, in case anyone wants to go through my work. Asterisks are HOF; double-asterisks are BBWAA picks.

One-team players: Tony Gwynn**, Ryne Sandberg**, Ernie Banks**, Dwight Evans, Duke Snider**, Pee Wee Reese*, Willie Randolph, Willie McCovey**, Richie Ashburn*, Billy Williams**, Lou Boudreau**, Ken Boyer, Jackie Robinson**, Willie Davis, Harmon Killebrew**, Zack Wheat*, Yogi Berra**, Hank Greenberg**, Willie Stargell**, Bob Johnson, Bill Dickey**, Enos Slaughter*, George Sisler**, Max Carey*, Jose Cruz, Bill Terry**, Joe Sewell*, Gabby Hartnett**, Joe Tinker*, Bert Campaneris, Sam Rice*, Cesar Cedeno, Stan Hack, Mickey Cochrane**, Norm Cash, Bobby Doerr*, Kirby Puckett**

(True one-team players: Gwynn, Banks, Reese, Robinson, Stargell, Dickey, Terry, Hack, Doerr, Puckett)

Two-team players: Gary Carter**, Carlton Fisk**, Fred Clarke*, Joe Cronin**, Buddy Bell, Goose Goslin*, Reggie Smith, Andre Dawson**, Dave Winfield**, Home Run Baker*, Mark McGwire, Sal Bando, Keith Hernandez, Sherry Magee, Dick Allen, Darrell Evans, Joe Gordon*, Will Clark, Luis Aparicio**, Joe Medwick**, Jim Wynn, Chet Lemon, Billy Herman*, Tony Perez**, Ron Cey, Elmer Flick*, Harry Hooper*, Brian Downing, Toby Harrah, Tony Phillips, Bob Elliott, Minnie Minoso, Ted Simmons

Nomads: Al Simmons**, Eddie Murray**, Graig Nettles, Bobby Bonds, Vada Pinson, Jack Clark, Orlando Cepeda*, Fred Lynn

Among the current ballot players, Bagwell and Edgar are the true one team players. Bagwell should have been in already, but at 71% last year, he probably gets the call next year. Edgar will have to wait for the VC, barring a miracle.

Among active guys high in WAR, Mauer, Pedroia, and Felix are one team players. My guess is Mauer finishes his contract and retires a Twin. I have a hard time imagining a scenario where Pedroia leaves the Red Sox. I think Felix will stick around in Seattle, but not as sure about that one.

A few months ago I would have thought Dwyane Wade was a Heat for life, things can change.

Among active guys high in WAR, Mauer, Pedroia, and Felix are one team players.

WRT Felix, I didn't check on pitchers so I don't know if the voting behaves the same way with them.

Active position players between 50-70 WAR (or technically, 49.9-70):
Cabrera: 2 teams
Utley: Quasi-1 team
Cano: 2 teams (just on the edge of quasi-1 team, but getting farther away with every game in Seattle)
Ichiro: 2 teams (also just on the edge, but getting farther away with every game out of Seattle)
Ortiz: Quasi-1 team
Kinsler: 2 teams
Teixeira: 2 teams
Pedroia: True-1 team
Mauer: True-1 team
Wright: True-1 team

A few other guys on the true-1 team list are fairly close to reaching 50 - Trout, Votto, Longoria, and Braun. Of course, all of them are still active and could change teams in the future, especially because none of their teams are particularly good at the moment.

Re DanG's list in 125... Beltre hasn't yet qualified for that list with only 1855 PA, but would already be ranked #36 with 14.5 oWAR. A couple of just-average years (below his recent performance but probably a reasonable projection for ages 38 and 39) would put him around 17th-20th. And that doesn't even consider his defense, which is still stellar. Pretty remarkable what he's done.