T206 Who should be a HOFer that isn't ???

[Joshchisox08]

While I sit here going on hour number 1 and after re-scanning about 50 cards so far. (My new scanner came yesterday).

I'm begining to think of the players that I'm scanning. While there is a published book I'm sure you're all familiar with T206 Collection the players and their stories. They have some suggested "Overlooked by Cooperstown" players which I use for tracking purposes in my checklist.

Some of the players I agree with "Donnie Bush" besides his playing career he managed taking a team to the WS, was a partial owner and a scout as well. Can't get more of a HOFer in my book than that.

Some players I can't figure out why ??? George Stone ????????????

So setting aside those "Overlooked" players from the book.

Who do you think in the T206 collection should be a HOFer and didn't even get recognition in that book ???

I'll name a couple to start:

Ed Konetchy
Big Bill Dineen

HOW COULD I FORGET ////////////// Fielder Jones \\\\\\\\\\\\\\

****************************************EDIT FOR NET54 MOCK PLAYER INTRODUCTION PICKS********************************************* **************

1. Ed Reulbach 1 vote

[Mountaineer1999]

Put Bill Dahlen in and take Rube Marquard out.

[Joshchisox08]

Put Bill Dahlen in and take Rube Marquard out.

Lol Bill Dahlen is on the "Overlooked" list in the book. So he at least gets recognized.

[packs]

I never understood why Larry Doyle isn't in. He was the premiere NL second baseman of his time and retired the best ever at the position in his league. To me, the best player at their position in their era is a HOFer.

[trdcrdkid]

Sherry Magee (who I know is in the "Overlooked" section in the T206 book)
Jack Quinn
Jack Powell

[z28jd]

When you mention all that Donie Bush did in baseball, it points out that the HOF needs a category for career HOF'ers. Case in point, Charlie Grimm

.290 career hitter in 2166 games, drove in over 1000 runs. Very good career and I agree, not a HOF player.

19 years as a manager, 1287-1067 record, three NL pennants and I agree, not a HOF manager either, but you can't tell me that isn't a HOF career!

Dahlen will get in the HOF, now that WAR is a highly accepted stat to explain a player's value, you can't keep him out. Paul Molitor played 21 years, had a 75.4 WAR, Dahlen 21 years 75.2, one had no trouble getting in on the first ballot, the other has been retired for over 100 years, back when that WAR would have made him the sixth best position player ever up to that point.

When they put in Derek Jeter with 90+% of the votes and say, hey here is a shortstop with more value not in the HOF. Of course, you could say that with Barry Larkin, who basically had the same exact value as Jeter(aka not as good as Dahlen either) and he went in while waiting three long years, the poor guy :(

[Joshchisox08]

Sherry Magee (who I know is in the "Overlooked" section in the T206 book)
Jack Quinn
Jack Powell

Interesting I like them as HOFers too thought that I was the only one who would consider them because of their high losses in addition to wins.

[Joshchisox08]

When you mention all that Donie Bush did in baseball, it points out that the HOF needs a category for career HOF'ers. Case in point, Charlie Grimm

.290 career hitter in 2166 games, drove in over 1000 runs. Very good career and I agree, not a HOF player.

19 years as a manager, 1287-1067 record, three NL pennants and I agree, not a HOF manager either, but you can't tell me that isn't a HOF career!

Dahlen will get in the HOF, now that WAR is a highly accepted stat to explain a player's value, you can't keep him out. Paul Molitor played 21 years, had a 75.4 WAR, Dahlen 21 years 75.2, one had no trouble getting in on the first ballot, the other has been retired for over 100 years, back when that WAR would have made him the sixth best position player ever up to that point.

When they put in Derek Jeter with 90+% of the votes and say, hey here is a shortstop with more value not in the HOF. Of course, you could say that with Barry Larkin, who basically had the same exact value as Jeter(aka not as good as Dahlen either) and he went in while waiting three long years, the poor guy :(

Donnie Bush also had 1,800 hits and was considered one of the best fielding SS's in baseball.

"As a batter, Bush did not hit for high batting average but was regularly among the Major League leaders in drawing bases on balls, sacrifice hits, stolen bases, and runs scored. At the time of his retirement in 1923, Bush's 1,158 bases on balls ranked second in Major League history. His 337 sacrifice hits still ranks fifth in Major League history, and his 1909 total of 52 sacrifice hits is the fourth highest in Major League history. He ranked among the American League leaders in stolen bases ten times, and, during the decade from 1910 to 1919, the only players to score more runs than Bush were Ty Cobb, Eddie Collins, and Tris Speaker."

"He was recognized as one of the best defensive shortstops of the dead-ball era. He had more putouts, assists, and total chances than any other shortstop of the era, and his 1914 totals of 425 putouts and 969 chances are still American League records for shortstops (and the Major League record for putouts). He also led the American League in assists by a shortstop on five occasions and holds the Major League record with nine triple plays."

[RaidonCollects]

I highly agree with Bill Dinneen. Extremely overlooked.

-Pitched a no-hitter in '05
-Led the AL in saves in '03 and '07
-Stole the pennant of the Highlanders in the last game of the season (beating Jack Chesbro and his 41-win season in a pitching duel in '04)
-Pitched very well in the '03 series with a 3-1 record and pitching 11 strikeouts in Game 2
-Jimmy Collins listed him in the best 6 pitchers he had ever seen (with WaJo, Joss, Chesbro, Young and Ed Walsh
-4 20-win seasons (plus one in '87 in the minors)
-40 consecutive seasons in the majors (as player and umpire).
-Umpired the first half of the first AS game, plus 8 different WS and 5 no-no's.
-Ban Johnson (in a letter to Babe Ruth) said "Dinneen was one of the greatest pitchers the game ever produced" and "He is one of the cleanest and most honorable men baseball ever fostered"

Rant over ;)

Hurry up Cooperstown :rolleyes:

[Bpm0014]

Bill Dahlen
George Mullin

[insccollectibles]

Dahlen will most likely be a Hall of Famer when he is eligible again.

From Wikipedia:
Dahlen was included on the Veterans Committee ballot for 2013 induction to the Hall of Fame. The results were announced on December 3, 2012. Dahlen received 10 out of 16 votes, falling 2 votes short of election, the highest total of any person on the ballot who was not elected and will have to wait until the end of 2015 for election.

[Joshchisox08]

Dahlen will most likely be a Hall of Famer when he is eligible again.

From Wikipedia:
Dahlen was included on the Veterans Committee ballot for 2013 induction to the Hall of Fame. The results were announced on December 3, 2012. Dahlen received 10 out of 16 votes, falling 2 votes short of election, the highest total of any person on the ballot who was not elected and will have to wait until the end of 2015 for election.

I've always wondered how it would effect the card in the set of a player if they actually get inducted.

[Econteachert205]

Deacon phillippe

[insccollectibles]

I've always wondered how it would effect the card in the set of a player if they actually get inducted.

His Boston card already sells for a premium but it will most likely go up some after the election. The Brooklyn card is of course considered rarer and sells for a good price already but will most likely go up as well.

[Joshchisox08]

His Boston card already sells for a premium but it will most likely go up some after the election. The Brooklyn card is of course considered rarer and sells for a good price already but will most likely go up as well.

Thought it was his Brooklyn card ??? I have a Boston one and that would make me happy if it's Boston.

[insccollectibles]

Thought it was his Brooklyn card ??? I have a Boston one and that would make me happy if it's Boston.

Sorry I meant the Boston card is selling at a much higher premium than most other non hall of famers.

[The Nasty Nati]

I don't see there being any change in price if Dahlen gets in. His card is already priced as if he was a lower tier HOFer anyway...it's been priced that way for a while so I don't see much of a change if and when he gets into Cooperstown.

[z28jd]

I think there will be an initial rise in prices as people try to get one for their HOF collection, or just because he is in the news. Eventually it will level off.

[The Nasty Nati]

I actually had the same question a year ago about HOF candidates...

http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=184701

[CMIZ5290]

Dahlen and Ed Reulbach...

[Laxcat]

No love for Chief Wilson?

[Joshchisox08]

Reulbach is a good one. Nobody mentioning Fielder Jones either yet :(

[btcarfagno]

Sherry Magee. One of the top five tool players of the deadball era. Career OPS+ of 137. 441 Career stolen bases. Only non-Hall of Fame player to lead the league in RBI four times. 176 career assists from the outfield. Over 1100 career runs scored, over 1100 career RBI (during the deadball era!!), over 2,100 career hits....and he was just 34 years old when he played his last major league game. What could he have done had he stayed in the majors the next four years? He hit .331 at the highest levels of the minors over the next four years.

To me he is a no brainer for the Hall.

Tom C

[Jlighter]

Dahlen and Ed Reulbach...

If Reulbach had over 200 wins I'd bet he'd be in by now. I also have an item that'd probably go up in value if he were ever elected, but that definitely has nothing to do with me supporting his candidacy.:rolleyes:

[Joshchisox08]

I always liked Doc White as a sleeper HOF. He's not even considered by anyone maybe it's a White Sox fans biased opinion though.

[Frank A]

None: If they haven't made it by now, forget it.

[Joshchisox08]

None: If they haven't made it by now, forget it.

Interesting approach on the question ......... Wasn't expecting that one.

[z28jd]

Interesting approach on the question ......... Wasn't expecting that one.

And it assumes that they have known what they are doing all this time too. That's a very interesting take since there are clearly plenty of strong candidates from the 1800's as well

[Econteachert205]

And it assumes that they have known what they are doing all this time too. That's a very interesting take since there are clearly plenty of strong candidates from the 1800's as well


Agreed. Tony mullane for one.

[Joshchisox08]

How about Tommy Leach? Haven't heard anyone mention him.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Titus.

[Joshchisox08]

Pete I think Titus is an even further stretch than Leach.

If you'll go Titus I'll go Doc White !!!!

[Topps206]

There are four players not from this set who I think should be in.

Bill Dahlen
Sherry Magee
Larry Doyle
Gavvy Cravath

Deacon Philippe definitely has a case, in my opinion.

I wouldn't give it to Dineen as a pitcher alone, but he has a nice combo case.

[jrlebert]

Love that this thread got a restart. Definitely agree on Dahlen. Why wasn't he elected the last time he was eligible?

[Yoda]

And it assumes that they have known what they are doing all this time too. That's a very interesting take since there are clearly plenty of strong candidates from the 1800's as well

Like Jimmy Ryan and Tip O'Neil, who has been enshrined in the Canadian Sports Hall of Fame for many years.

[Topps206]

Like Jimmy Ryan and Tip O'Neil, who has been enshrined in the Canadian Sports Hall of Fame for many years.

Some compare Ryan to Magee. In my opinion, the latter was vastly superior.

What I do have a hard time is Babe Adams, Deacon Philippe and Sam Lever. What should be the pecking order in terms of HOF worthiness?

[JohnP0621]

Chief Meyers

[CMIZ5290]

Put Bill Dahlen in and take Rube Marquard out.

In all honesty, what got Marquard in the Hall was his stretch from 1911-1913. He went 73-28, end of story. I agree about Dahlen, but I fear that ship has long sailed......

[Topps206]

In all honesty, what got Marquard in the Hall was his stretch from 1911-1913. He went 73-28, end of story. I agree about Dahlen, but I fear that ship has long sailed......

Not to worry. He'll have fewer chances now, but if we, as a movement cam get strong backing, he can get it. He's better many players already in and is better than tons of shortstops in.

[CMIZ5290]

I think Ed Reulbach is a valid candidate.....

[Topps206]

He's not bad, I guess. Though I'm not crazy about him.

[RaidonCollects]

I agree that Ed Reulbach was a great player, but I don't think he's HOF worthy. He only posted one 20 win season plus here is his HOF stats:

Black Ink Pitching - 13 (175), Average HOFer ≈ 40
Gray Ink Pitching - 123 (152), Average HOFer ≈ 185
Hall of Fame Monitor Pitching - 101 (97), Likely HOFer ≈ 100
Hall of Fame Standards Pitching - 44 (54), Average HOFer ≈ 50
JAWS Starting Pitcher (202nd), 36.6 career WAR/32.3 7yr-peak WAR/34.5 JAWS
Average HOF P (out of 62) = 73.9 career WAR/50.3 7yr-peak WAR/62.1 JAWS

-Owen

[Topps206]

Another interesting device is the Keltner List, too.

[bravos4evr]

I agree that Ed Reulbach was a great player, but I don't think he's HOF worthy. He only posted one 20 win season plus here is his HOF stats:

Black Ink Pitching - 13 (175), Average HOFer ≈ 40
Gray Ink Pitching - 123 (152), Average HOFer ≈ 185
Hall of Fame Monitor Pitching - 101 (97), Likely HOFer ≈ 100
Hall of Fame Standards Pitching - 44 (54), Average HOFer ≈ 50
JAWS Starting Pitcher (202nd), 36.6 career WAR/32.3 7yr-peak WAR/34.5 JAWS
Average HOF P (out of 62) = 73.9 career WAR/50.3 7yr-peak WAR/62.1 JAWS

-Owen

I agree,career 27.1 fWAR, walked nearly as many as he struck out. Not a HOF'er

Sherry Magee falls a little short too IMO, 63.7 WAR is good, but among OF'ers it's only 40th all time, his wRC+ is also only tied for 64th among OF'ers all time.

During his career (1904-1919) he was only the 13th best OF hitter, and was 3rd in fWAR.

[CMIZ5290]

Ed Reulbach was 182-106 with a lifetime E.R.A. of 2.24, and these are not HOF numbers? Wow, tough crowd.... He won almost twice as many games as he lost...

[DerekMichael]

I like George Mullin

[CMIZ5290]

I like George Mullin

Great pitcher Derek, but look at this comparison...

Mullin 228-196, ERA 2.83
Reulbach 182-106, ERA 2.24

[bravos4evr]

Ed Reulbach was 182-106 with a lifetime E.R.A. of 2.24, and these are not HOF numbers? Wow, tough crowd.... He won almost twice as many games as he lost...

wins are a pretty worthless stat for judging individual production and yes his ERA is low, but his FIP is near 3 and for his era, it's good but not HOF worthy.

This is one of the examples of how old time "baseball card" stats really don't tell us how good a player is . His number look average once you get below the surface. 27.3 WAR over 15 years isn't much more than that, even if you say it was 50% low against him that would only make him a 40 WAR player, and over that career, once again, pretty avg.


ETA: during his career (1905-1917) Reulbach was 16th among starters in WAR, 27th in ERA and way down in the 150's in FIP. (we are talking an era, where the highest ERA among qualified starters (from 05-17) was 4.02!!!)

[rats60]

wins are a pretty worthless stat for judging individual production and yes his ERA is low, but his FIP is near 3 and for his era, it's good but not HOF worthy.

This is one of the examples of how old time "baseball card" stats really don't tell us how good a player is . His number look average once you get below the surface. 27.3 WAR over 15 years isn't much more than that, even if you say it was 50% low against him that would only make him a 40 WAR player, and over that career, once again, pretty avg.


ETA: during his career (1905-1917) Reulbach was 16th among starters in WAR, 27th in ERA and way down in the 150's in FIP. (we are talking an era, where the highest ERA among qualified starters (from 05-17) was 4.02!!!)

FIP is pretty worthless for deadball pitchers. You might as well say he didn't strike out a lot of batters and there are better stats for that. The pitcher that wins the game is the one who allows the fewest runs. Reulbach had an ERA+ of 123. That is better than many pitchers in the HOF including 300 game winner Eddie Plank. That is 9th among deadball pitchers post 1901. Wins and winning percentage mean a lot for this time period when pichers often pitched the whole game. There are certainly worse pitchers in the HOF. That doesn't mean he deserves it, but for this topic, he is one of the best not in.

[bbcard1]

There are a lot of colorful players in the t206 set that are good to remember, but in no way hall of fame candidates. That era has have many players honored by HOF inclusion...probably way too many. I could live with Doyle or Dahen fine, but I think guys like Oliva, Murphy and Maris would be more credible fits and I doubt any of the three of them are going to make it. Some of the guys mentioned are real stretches. Their statistics just aren't there. Some of them have the most ______ of any player not in the hall of fame. There will always be a player with the most ________ not in the hall of fame. That is not a criteria for inclusion.

[packs]

The home run has always been king but Gavvy Cravath doesn't get any love. Six time home run champ. Three years in a row twice. The Babe Ruth prototype.

[Joshchisox08]

Ed Reulbach was 182-106 with a lifetime E.R.A. of 2.24, and these are not HOF numbers? Wow, tough crowd.... He won almost twice as many games as he lost...

Not a big Cubs supporter as I'm a Sox fan but Reulbach would get my vote.

[Topps206]

I agree,career 27.1 fWAR, walked nearly as many as he struck out. Not a HOF'er

Sherry Magee falls a little short too IMO, 63.7 WAR is good, but among OF'ers it's only 40th all time, his wRC+ is also only tied for 64th among OF'ers all time.

During his career (1904-1919) he was only the 13th best OF hitter, and was 3rd in fWAR.

Not the best argument against Magee in my opinion. He's 40th all time in WAR four outfielders, yet there are more than 40 enshrined in the Hall.

Black ink - 35
Average Hall of Famer - 27

Gray ink - 210
Average Hall of Famer - 144

Only player to lead his league in RBIs four times and isn't in the Hall. This was in the Deadball Era.

He often gets compared to Wheat. While I think Wheat was the better player, that's no excuse to snub Magee.

[milkit1]

Johnny Kling, His contribution to the first post world series dynasty cant be overstated. He was considered the best catcher of his era and when he skipped 1909 to play billiards that was the only year between 1906-1910 that the Cubs didnt go to the world series

[Topps206]

Johnny Kling, His contribution to the first post world series dynasty cant be overstated. He was considered the best catcher of his era and when he skipped 1909 to play billiards that was the only year between 1906-1910 that the Cubs didnt go to the world series

I'd pass on Kling. In my opinion Bresnahan was better and really Kling is Ray Schalk with a slightly better bat but still unremarkable.

[CMIZ5290]

wins are a pretty worthless stat for judging individual production and yes his ERA is low, but his FIP is near 3 and for his era, it's good but not HOF worthy.

This is one of the examples of how old time "baseball card" stats really don't tell us how good a player is . His number look average once you get below the surface. 27.3 WAR over 15 years isn't much more than that, even if you say it was 50% low against him that would only make him a 40 WAR player, and over that career, once again, pretty avg.


ETA: during his career (1905-1917) Reulbach was 16th among starters in WAR, 27th in ERA and way down in the 150's in FIP. (we are talking an era, where the highest ERA among qualified starters (from 05-17) was 4.02!!!)

??? If you say so....

[bravos4evr]

Not the best argument against Magee in my opinion. He's 40th all time in WAR four outfielders, yet there are more than 40 enshrined in the Hall.

Black ink - 35
Average Hall of Famer - 27

Gray ink - 210
Average Hall of Famer - 144

Only player to lead his league in RBIs four times and isn't in the Hall. This was in the Deadball Era.

He often gets compared to Wheat. While I think Wheat was the better player, that's no excuse to snub Magee.

RBI's is a terrible way to judge individual production as it is contingent on the actions of his teammates to get on base.

IMO, there are people with less production in, but they shouldn't have been inducted either (Jim Rice, Goose Goslin, Monte irvin)

But, I am a small hall person, others want more in, I can see the argument (and Magee is as worthy as Jim Rice IMO)

[CMIZ5290]

wins are a pretty worthless stat for judging individual production and yes his ERA is low, but his FIP is near 3 and for his era, it's good but not HOF worthy.

This is one of the examples of how old time "baseball card" stats really don't tell us how good a player is . His number look average once you get below the surface. 27.3 WAR over 15 years isn't much more than that, even if you say it was 50% low against him that would only make him a 40 WAR player, and over that career, once again, pretty avg.


ETA: during his career (1905-1917) Reulbach was 16th among starters in WAR, 27th in ERA and way down in the 150's in FIP. (we are talking an era, where the highest ERA among qualified starters (from 05-17) was 4.02!!!)

Addie Joss 160-97, ERA 1.90....HOF
Jack Chesbro 198-132, ERA 2.69...HOF
Rube Waddell 193-143, ERA 2.16....HOF
Ed Reulbach 182-106, ERA 2.24...??

What am I missing?? Oh, I forgot, WAR....

[bravos4evr]

FIP is pretty worthless for deadball pitchers. You might as well say he didn't strike out a lot of batters and there are better stats for that. The pitcher that wins the game is the one who allows the fewest runs. Reulbach had an ERA+ of 123. That is better than many pitchers in the HOF including 300 game winner Eddie Plank. That is 9th among deadball pitchers post 1901. Wins and winning percentage mean a lot for this time period when pichers often pitched the whole game. There are certainly worse pitchers in the HOF. That doesn't mean he deserves it, but for this topic, he is one of the best not in.

not really, if FIP were truly worthless those at the top wouldn't be the best of the era (Walter Johnson, Waddell, Ed Walsh, Joe Wood, Addie Joss, Bender, Mathewson...etc)

Wins still don't mean much even back then because a win is so contingent on offense. Which is not in the pitcher's control.

Plank may have a lower ERA+ (a stat I find seriously lacking) but he's 13th in FIP during the dead ball era.

Reulbach would have one of the worst K/BB ratios of anyone from that era in the hall. Sure there are probably worse pitchers in, but if the only standard we use is the worst guy in we can rationalize nearly anyone.

[bravos4evr]

Addie Joss 160-97, ERA 1.90....HOF
Jack Chesbro 198-132, ERA 2.69...HOF
Rube Waddell 193-143, ERA 2.16....HOF
Ed Reulbach 182-106, ERA 2.24...??

What am I missing?? Oh, I forgot, WAR....

among other things....


look, it's a FACT that pitcher wins are a bad way to judge production


it's also a FACT that ERA (and it's derivatives) give too much credit to the pitcher for results that are often not of their own doing (defensive plays, unearned runs which are arbitrarily distributed)

it's a fact that K/BB ratio is a good way to judge pitcher production as he has direct control over them. Reulbach's is not very good.

FIP is better, WAR is a good thumbnail to use to compare players by era. It isn't perfect, by WAR Reulbach is right on the cusp of HOF status, but his peripherals don't paint such a rosy picture. I can see why "big hall" people would want him in, but I am a small hall person and think too many borderline and undeserving guys are in already, no need to muddy the waters with more of em.

[Herpolsheimer]

Hal Chase... It would make T206 collectors the happiest and for his era he was considered to be among the best....

[bravos4evr]

Chase? .291/.319/.391 slash line for his career, .710 OPS, .341 wOBA, 109 wRC+ , career WAR of 26 at first base Hal Chase?

He's not even a top 200 hitter all time at his position!!!


from 1871-1920 he's tied for 45th in hitting at 1b!!!


I know he's a popular player, but by no means is he a HOF'er except in a "pioneers of the game" manner

[Topps206]

RBI's is a terrible way to judge individual production as it is contingent on the actions of his teammates to get on base.

IMO, there are people with less production in, but they shouldn't have been inducted either (Jim Rice, Goose Goslin, Monte irvin)

But, I am a small hall person, others want more in, I can see the argument (and Magee is as worthy as Jim Rice IMO)

Magee did it four times though and I'll take him over Rice. Irvin is also in because of the Negro Leagues and I find Goslin a solid choice.

Going back to those RBI seasons, he batted .328 in 1907, .331 in 1910 (If the Chalmers Award existed, he probably would've won this year), hit .314 in 1914 and .298 in 1918. He's in the Hall of Stats and was consistently excellent in his time.

Also, in those seasons

1907 - OPS+ 169
1910 - 174
1914 - 158
1918 - 140

His career OPS+ is 137. This is no accident or mistake. The man belongs.

[CMIZ5290]

among other things....


look, it's a FACT that pitcher wins are a bad way to judge production


it's also a FACT that ERA (and it's derivatives) give too much credit to the pitcher for results that are often not of their own doing (defensive plays, unearned runs which are arbitrarily distributed)

it's a fact that K/BB ratio is a good way to judge pitcher production as he has direct control over them. Reulbach's is not very good.

FIP is better, WAR is a good thumbnail to use to compare players by era. It isn't perfect, by WAR Reulbach is right on the cusp of HOF status, but his peripherals don't paint such a rosy picture. I can see why "big hall" people would want him in, but I am a small hall person and think too many borderline and undeserving guys are in already, no need to muddy the waters with more of em.

Since you have got all the WAR nonsense. Please find me one pitcher that had a higher won-lost percentage than Reulbach (min. 175 wins) that is not in the Hall....Good luck....You need to get off this WAR garbage....Look at the player

[CMIZ5290]

Chase? .291/.319/.391 slash line for his career, .710 OPS, .341 wOBA, 109 wRC+ , career WAR of 26 at first base Hal Chase?

He's not even a top 200 hitter all time at his position!!!


from 1871-1920 he's tied for 45th in hitting at 1b!!!


I know he's a popular player, but by no means is he a HOF'er except in a "pioneers of the game" manner

Most people that know the game acknowledge the talents of Hal Chase. Yes, like a lot of other players,he was crooked. But he was one the best first baseman of all time, especially defensively.....Not really sure you know Baseball versus stupid ratios....

[Joshchisox08]

Chase? .291/.319/.391 slash line for his career, .710 OPS, .341 wOBA, 109 wRC+ , career WAR of 26 at first base Hal Chase?

He's not even a top 200 hitter all time at his position!!!


from 1871-1920 he's tied for 45th in hitting at 1b!!!


I know he's a popular player, but by no means is he a HOF'er except in a "pioneers of the game" manner


As another person mentioned in the Kling argument. It's kind of the same case for Chase.

Chase was considered to be the best defense first baseman by many people. Throw that in with pretty solid numbers (for the era) 2,100+ hits. A 17!!!HR season. Close to 1,000 RBI and not too far off .300 average.

I think it's more of his gambling issues that has kept him away from the Hall.

[MartyFromCANADA]

George Gibson and Jimmy Archer.

The hall overlooks catchers. Only Schalk and Bresnahan from the deadball era.
Only 17 catchers all time?

[Topps206]

George Gibson and Jimmy Archer.

The hall overlooks catchers. Only Schalk and Bresnahan from the deadball era.
Only 17 catchers all time?

I just looked both of them up and Kling looks like a better candidate by comparison.

If we're talking more recent times, I think Freehan and Simmons have better arguments.

[rats60]

among other things....


look, it's a FACT that pitcher wins are a bad way to judge production


it's also a FACT that ERA (and it's derivatives) give too much credit to the pitcher for results that are often not of their own doing (defensive plays, unearned runs which are arbitrarily distributed)

it's a fact that K/BB ratio is a good way to judge pitcher production as he has direct control over them. Reulbach's is not very good.

FIP is better, WAR is a good thumbnail to use to compare players by era. It isn't perfect, by WAR Reulbach is right on the cusp of HOF status, but his peripherals don't paint such a rosy picture. I can see why "big hall" people would want him in, but I am a small hall person and think too many borderline and undeserving guys are in already, no need to muddy the waters with more of em.

Those are not facts, those are your opinions. I strongly disagree with them. YOU brought up ERA. I brought up ERA+ which is a much better stat as it adjusts for the park the pitcher was pitching in. Even your crappy WAR uses ERA +.

K/BB ratio is not a good way to judge a pitcher. Weakly hit balls, pop outs, easy flies, double plays are also good ways to judge a pitcher, but are ignored by FIP. FIP treats every hit ball as equal. Anyone who has ever watched a baseball game knows that is not true. Baseball is a game of skill, not luck. Luck factors will average out over a career. Also, one of the main components of FIP are HRs, which aren't even a major issue in the period Reulbach pitched.

The bottom line is the team that allows the fewest runs wins the game. ERA+ is the best measure of that. All of your stats are fine in theory, but in the real world, Reulbach produced a great win loss record by preventing runs. He was a top 10 pitcher in his era and I will take him over all those guys with better FIP, but poor ERA+.

[CMIZ5290]

Those are not facts, those are your opinions. I strongly disagree with them. YOU brought up ERA. I brought up ERA+ which is a much better stat as it adjusts for the park the pitcher was pitching in. Even your crappy WAR uses ERA +.

K/BB ratio is not a good way to judge a pitcher. Weakly hit balls, pop outs, easy flies, double plays are also good ways to judge a pitcher, but are ignored by FIP. FIP treats every hit ball as equal. Anyone who has ever watched a baseball game knows that is not true. Baseball is a game of skill, not luck. Luck factors will average out over a career. Also, one of the main components of FIP are HRs, which aren't even a major issue in the period Reulbach pitched.

The bottom line is the team that allows the fewest runs wins the game. ERA+ is the best measure of that. All of your stats are fine in theory, but in the real world, Reulbach produced a great win loss record by preventing runs. He was a top 10 pitcher in his era and I will take him over all those guys with better FIP, but poor ERA+.
Great points, thanks..Also, Kling was a fantastic catcher, closely worth to HOF status IMO...

[Topps206]

I don't get the Kling arguments. If you want to argue a former Cub, Dahlen is first and foremost, though Stan Hack also has a case.

[Herpolsheimer]

I believe that all of the great players have made it to Cooperstown from the early years of the game and now we are only discussing very good players that might get voted in by committees that have only seen today's games. However, there are some omissions like Joe Jackdon that clearly deserve the honor but have been deemed to be ineligible for one reason or another. it seems that Hal Chase may have fallen into this dungeon of despair with Joe Jackson and more recently Pete Rose. While not banned he clearly was highly respected by his peers and perhaps remains one of the few 'special' players from his era not to be in Cooperstown. He may have been loved.... 5 T206 Cards....

[Topps206]

Changing the Hall committees isn't enough. We need actual historians voting for this era, not Hall of Famers from the modern era.

Blyleven said he researched Dahlen and Stovey on Wikipedia.

Boy would I have loved to have been in that meeting last year when they were turned away.

[bravos4evr]

Since you have got all the WAR nonsense. Please find me one pitcher that had a higher won-lost percentage than Reulbach (min. 175 wins) that is not in the Hall....Good luck....You need to get off this WAR garbage....Look at the player

I am looking at the player, and regardless of WAR he would be a borderline player who would make the hall worse not better.

pitcher wins are pretty worthless as a gauge of individual performance

yelling about modern statistics doesn't make them less valid

K/Bb ratio of nearly 1/1 is not good, having an FIP of near avg for his career doesn't help either.

If you want to put Reulbach in, you are going to have to put in about 50 other pitchers who are equally is deserving

[bravos4evr]

As another person mentioned in the Kling argument. It's kind of the same case for Chase.

Chase was considered to be the best defense first baseman by many people. Throw that in with pretty solid numbers (for the era) 2,100+ hits. A 17!!!HR season. Close to 1,000 RBI and not too far off .300 average.

I think it's more of his gambling issues that has kept him away from the Hall.

But if you look past the baseball card stats to his slash line ,defense...etc he is not a HOF'er. .710 OPS might get you in if you are Ozzie Smith or Bill Mazeroski, but a first baseman??? Who isn't even in the top 200 hitting all time at his position? gambling or not his admittance on stats alone would be an abomination.


ETA: let's look at Joe Jackson for what a HOF'er looks like. 11 full seasons, 60.5 WAR, slash line of .356/.423/.517 .940 OPS, wRC+ of 165 (100 is avg) now THAT'S a HOf stat line!

[Topps206]

For anybody who thinks Johnny Kling is a HOF'er, how do you justify someone who isn't top 1000 in career WAR or top 1000 in career OPS+ as an enshrinee?

Also, Kling has a lower JAWS than Ray Schalk. If Kling was one of the best catchers of his era, that's a weak era for catchers, then.

[FourStrikes]

Changing the Hall committees isn't enough. We need actual historians voting for this era, not Hall of Famers from the modern era.

Blyleven said he researched Dahlen and Stovey on Wikipedia.

Boy would I have loved to have been in that meeting last year when they were turned away.

Topps206 = mic drop.

DS

[bravos4evr]

For anybody who thinks Johnny Kling is a HOF'er, how do you justify someone who isn't top 1000 in career WAR or top 1000 in career OPS+ as an enshrinee?

Also, Kling has a lower JAWS than Ray Schalk. If Kling was one of the best catchers of his era, that's a weak era for catchers, then.

I'm with you here!

career wRC+ of 100 is dead avg, career WAR of 21.3 over 1260 games is also dead avg. Sure his defense (as all catcher defense is) is probably undervalued a decent bit, it's not so undervalued as to make him even near the HOF.

[Topps206]

Topps206 = mic drop.

DS

It just makes my blood boil. Justice for Dahlen and Magee. Justice for Gavvy and Doyle. Bill Dineen contributed so much as both an umpire and a pitcher and he hasn't been inducted yet.

I'm just so mad they'll only be considered once a decade. I'm also convinced Babe Adams is worthy of enshrinement. I would beg to be on the Early Baseball committee in 2020, but who ever said Hall of Fame voters were logical folk?

[Topps206]

How does this forum feel about Jimmy Sheckard and Cooperstown?

[Jantz]

My vote

[Topps206]

He wasn't actually in the T206 set.

[clydepepper]

The home run has always been king but Gavvy Cravath doesn't get any love. Six time home run champ. Three years in a row twice. The Babe Ruth prototype.



at the Baker Bowl? 260 feet?

on my best day, even I might have done that.

Oh, and the home run wasn't king until the Babe made it so.

[Topps206]

at the Baker Bowl? 260 feet?

on my best day, even I might have done that.

Oh, and the home run wasn't king until the Babe made it so.

That's still a lot of black ink in a monstrous peak in his later years and when he debuted it took him a while.

Babe Ruth became synonymous with the home run. It doesn't mean there were no kings before him.

[btcarfagno]

at the Baker Bowl? 260 feet?

on my best day, even I might have done that.

Oh, and the home run wasn't king until the Babe made it so.

His career OPS+ is 151. That is park adjusted. Short career, but that is 32nd in the history of the sport.

Tom C

[rats60]

His career OPS+ is 151. That is park adjusted. Short career, but that is 32nd in the history of the sport.

Tom C

It is not park adjusted. They adjust for runs scored, but that doesn't account for 265 foot fly balls that he got credited for home runs which would be outs in any other park. He only hit 20 home runs on the road, less than two per season. His OPS at home was .986, on the road .772.

He only played 100 games in 7 seasons. He couldn't stick in the majors with the Red Sox, White Sox or Senators. Only when he made it to the Phillies was he good enough to stick in the majors, taking advantage of the home field. If he was a HOFer, he would have played longer and made it as a full time player before age 31. His career was too short and too home field aided to be a Hall of Famer, in my opinion.

[Topps206]

Baker Bowl or not, Cravath had a peak bested by very few in history. He was probably the best player on that 1915 Phillies team which won the pennant. He absolutely should be in.

[packs]

How come no one talks about Fenway's short porch to right field but the Baker Bowl is always a point of contention?

[btcarfagno]

It is not park adjusted. They adjust for runs scored, but that doesn't account for 265 foot fly balls that he got credited for home runs which would be outs in any other park. He only hit 20 home runs on the road, less than two per season. His OPS at home was .986, on the road .772.

Polo Grounds left field foul pole was 279 and right field 258. That was for two teams at this time period.

Tom C

[rats60]

Baker Bowl or not, Cravath had a peak bested by very few in history. He was probably the best player on that 1915 Phillies team which won the pennant. He absolutely should be in.

I think very few would agree that he was better than Pete Alexander. I guess if you think Craveth should be in, we should ignore the Coors Field factor and put in those Rockies with home park inflated stats.

[Topps206]

I think very few would agree that he was better than Pete Alexander. I guess if you think Craveth should be in, we should ignore the Coors Field factor and put in those Rockies with home park inflated stats.

I was referencing position players, and really, I wouldn't have much of a problem with Larry Walker or Todd Helton.

Cravath was doing stuff in his day that players simply did not do.

[packs]

He was the prototype for the modern player. But it makes sense Cravath isn't in because neither is Stovey. Stovey was Mike Trout and Mickey Mantle before anyone even knew it was possible to play baseball that way.

[Topps206]

He was the prototype for the modern player. But it makes sense Cravath isn't in because neither is Stovey. Stovey was Mike Trout and Mickey Mantle before anyone even knew it was possible to play baseball that way.

Both Cravath and Stovey would make my Hall.

[bravos4evr]

Baker Bowl or not, Cravath had a peak bested by very few in history. He was probably the best player on that 1915 Phillies team which won the pennant. He absolutely should be in.

I don't see how a guy with 5 great years in an 11 year career should be a HOF'er. (and those great years aren't at Koufax type levels either) Yes his wRC+ of 150 is very good, but it is inflated by 3 very high years. If you are gonna let people in with those sorts of careers, you might as well open the floodgates.

and yes Larry Walker and Todd Helton are more deserving as they were as good or better for longer.

[Topps206]

I don't see how a guy with 5 great years in an 11 year career should be a HOF'er. (and those great years aren't at Koufax type levels either) Yes his wRC+ of 150 is very good, but it is inflated by 3 very high years. If you are gonna let people in with those sorts of careers, you might as well open the floodgates.

and yes Larry Walker and Todd Helton are more deserving as they were as good or better for longer.

Keep in mind that this is also because his career was shortened and didn't get his chance early on, but more than made up for it in his thirties.

Walker gets a raw deal. All it takes is a few minutes of research to see he was not a product of Coors.

[bravos4evr]

Keep in mind that this is also because his career was shortened and didn't get his chance early on, but more than made up for it in his thirties.

Walker gets a raw deal. All it takes is a few minutes of research to see he was not a product of Coors.

I get that, he didn't even make it to MLB until he was 27. BUT, we have to judge players by what they did and not by what they might have done.

IF, Josh Donaldson has one more great year then declines into a 1.4 WAR player over his last 4 years would he be a HOF'er? That's kinda the argument you are making. I would say no, not good enough for long enough.

but, as I have stated before, I am a "small hall" guy and think too many borderline players are in already.

yet I think Jim Kaat deserves it, so there goes that right! :D

[Topps206]

I also am a Kaat supporter.

Cravath not only debuted at 27, he spent 29 and 30 in the minors.

His offense was fantastic, even at the end.

[rats60]

I also am a Kaat supporter.

Cravath not only debuted at 27, he spent 29 and 30 in the minors.

His offense was fantastic, even at the end.

That is the problem. He wasn't good enough to play in the majors at a time when he should have been in his prime. He failed for 3 different teams before landing in a stadium where he could thrive. .273/.363/.410 are is career numbers in road games. It is no wonder he failed in Boston, Chicago and Washington. .410 slugging percentage for a guy whose strength was as a power hitter.

[Topps206]

That is the problem. He wasn't good enough to play in the majors at a time when he should have been in his prime. He failed for 3 different teams before landing in a stadium where he could thrive. .273/.363/.410 are is career numbers in road games. It is no wonder he failed in Boston, Chicago and Washington. .410 slugging percentage for a guy whose strength was as a power hitter.

The other two numbers aren't bad, but that seems like spin to me. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't seem he was given a fair shake until later.

[packs]

I don't think you can really say he failed. He was playing in the PCL until he was 27 years old. You might see PCL today and think minor leagues, but at the time it was the major leagues of the West. Players made almost the same amount of money and could play close to home, so many of them did just that.

[Topps206]

I don't think you can really say he failed. He was playing in the PCL until he was 27 years old. You might see PCL today and think minor leagues, but at the time it was the major leagues of the West. Players made almost the same amount of money and could play close to home, so many of them did just that.

Keep in mind it's the National Baseball Hall of Fame. Not the MLB Hall of Fame. I have no doubt he'd be a lot better known if there was the technology and social media we have now back in his day.

[rats60]

The other two numbers aren't bad, but that seems like spin to me. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't seem he was given a fair shake until later.

He played 117 games before he got to the Phillies. That is more than a fair shake. He didn't play well enough to stick in the majors and was sent down. A HOFer in his prime years should have been able to stick.

The PCL may have been better than a minor league. That doesn't change the fact that he wasn't able to make the jump to the majors until being sent down for 2 years and then landing in a favorable stadium that allowed him inflate his stats. This sounds to me like a good but not great player who has no business in the HOF.

7 full years just isn't enough for a guy who struggled to make the big leagues and was average away from the Baker Bowl.

[packs]

Just curious if you were aware that Cravath was a right handed batter hitting his homeruns to right field? It takes tremendous ability to do that. Also, the original Yankee Stadium dimensions were 295 feet to right field and only 281 feet to left field. Do you discount Ruth and Gehrig's totals knowing that?

[Topps206]

I don't think you can really say he failed. He was playing in the PCL until he was 27 years old. You might see PCL today and think minor leagues, but at the time it was the major leagues of the West. Players made almost the same amount of money and could play close to home, so many of them did just that.

Keep in mind it's the National Baseball Hall of Fame. Not the MLB Hall of Fame. I have no doubt he'd be a lot better known if there was the technology and social media we have now back in his day.

[Topps206]

He played 117 games before he got to the Phillies. That is more than a fair shake. He didn't play well enough to stick in the majors and was sent down. A HOFer in his prime years should have been able to stick.

The PCL may have been better than a minor league. That doesn't change the fact that he wasn't able to make the jump to the majors until being sent down for 2 years and then landing in a favorable stadium that allowed him inflate his stats. This sounds to me like a good but not great player who has no business in the HOF.

7 full years just isn't enough for a guy who struggled to make the big leagues and was average away from the Baker Bowl.

He also had a 137 OPS+ with Boston in 94 games in 1908. He did struggle in 23 games in 1909 between two clubs, but does anyone make a Hall of Famer in their first 117 games? Of course not. So why is someone not a Hall of Famer in their first 117 games?

Very rarely do I support short career players. Cravath is a rare exception.

[Joshchisox08]

How does this forum feel about Jimmy Sheckard and Cooperstown?

I believe Sheckard is worth talking about.

Cravath should be in
Dinneen probably should be as well for his all round


How about Fielder Jones????

[darwinbulldog]

Sorry if I missed them above, but I don't think anyone's mentioned Overall, Schulte, or Latham. Not that I really think they belong in the Hall (Overall isn't even eligible), but I think they were as good as most of the folks that have been mentioned in this thread.

Dahlen is the only one in T206 who deserves it as a player and hasn't been enshrined yet. Dinneen is a good pick for total contributions to the game.

The best pre-steroid era guys who haven't gotten in yet are Jim McCormick, Bob Caruthers, and Shoeless Joe.

[Topps206]

I believe Sheckard is worth talking about.

Cravath should be in
Dinneen probably should be as well for his all round


How about Fielder Jones????

I wouldn't be bothered by Sheckard getting inducted, but I'm not a cheeeleader for him, either. Sherry Magee absolutely must get in before we can start even thinking about Sheckard.

[Topps206]

Sorry if I missed them above, but I don't think anyone's mentioned Overall, Schulte, or Latham. Not that I really think they belong in the Hall (Overall isn't even eligible), but I think they were as good as most of the folks that have been mentioned in this thread.

Dahlen is the only one in T206 who deserves it as a player and hasn't been enshrined yet. Dinneen is a good pick for total contributions to the game.

The best pre-steroid era guys who haven't gotten in yet are Jim McCormick, Bob Caruthers, and Shoeless Joe.

Overall didn't pitch long enough. Schulte had an amazing 1911, but it takes more than one Hall of Fame season to be a Hall of Fame player.

[darwinbulldog]

Overall didn't pitch long enough. Schulte had an amazing 1911, but it takes more than one Hall of Fame season to be a Hall of Fame player.

I agree with everything you wrote, and I retract nothing of what I wrote.

[Topps206]

I believe Sheckard is worth talking about.

Cravath should be in
Dinneen probably should be as well for his all round


How about Fielder Jones????

I see nothing spectacular about Fielder Jones. Nice player. Nothing special.

[Topps206]

I agree with everything you wrote, and I retract nothing of what I wrote.

Who was Schulte as good as? He was no Sherry Magee. That's for sure.

[Joshchisox08]

I see nothing spectacular about Fielder Jones. Nice player. Nothing special.

Player Manager of the "Hitless Wonders" I know it's a bit of a stretch but I'm surprised that his name is never mentioned. Posted a 426-293 managerial record. Pretty good win%

Like Dinneen I'm for his interactions in baseball besides a player. Donie Bush?????

No love for him? Considered one of the top fielding SS's in baseball in his day over 1,800 hits.

A Manager
A Owner
A Scout
An Executive

You can't get more versatile than that can you?

[CMIZ5290]

Jimmy Sheckard? .270 career batting average with just over 2,000 hits in 17 years? Really? You were the guys busting my balls about Ed Reulbach, better re-group.....I dont get this choice at all.....

[Topps206]

Player Manager of the "Hitless Wonders" I know it's a bit of a stretch but I'm surprised that his name is never mentioned. Posted a 426-293 managerial record. Pretty good win%

Like Dinneen I'm for his interactions in baseball besides a player. Donie Bush?????

No love for him? Considered one of the top fielding SS's in baseball in his day over 1,800 hits.

A Manager
A Owner
A Scout
An Executive

You can't get more versatile than that can you?

Lots of managers with more wins and more championships aren't in.

[Topps206]

So, going back to the first page of the thread, many have been listed from the T206 set potentially being HOF worthy. I'm going to split this up in different categories. These are only my opinions.

Hall of Fame worthy

Bill Dahlen - One of the best players not in the Hall of Fame from any era at any position. The VC really messed up in December. Was terrific offensively and defensively and helped his teams win four pennants in his career. His 44 game hitting streak is second only to Joe DiMaggio among right handed batters. Nobody in history played more games at the time he retired and his longevity still holds today.

Sherry Magee - 4x RBI champ, hit very well in all of those seasons. Metrics rank him well and it can be argued he's better than many leftfielders already in. He could do it all and has been erroneously overlooked.

Larry Doyle - The best second baseman in the National League during his time. He was also the best position player on the Giants during their winning of multiple pennants. One came during an MVP season in 1912 and would probably be a World Champion had it not been for Snodgrass' Muff. Just as how Sherry Magee is arguably a top 15 leftfielder ever, I think Doyle could be top 15 all time at second.

Gavvy Cravath - I get the argument against him, but he absolutely dominated during his short peak.

Bill Dinneen - As a pitcher alone he is not a Hall of Famer, but when you combine his pitching career with his umpiring career, it's hard to justify his exclusion.

Could go either way

Jimmy Sheckard - He wasn't that bad of a player and worth doing more research on. No way should he get in before Sherry Magee, but a future induction would hardly taint Cooperstown.

Not Hall of Fame worthy

Deacon Philippe - I changed my mind here
I think Reulbach was better and I wouldn't put Reulbach in. Out of those Pirate teams, only Babe Adams deserves it and he's not in the set.

Ed Reulbach - Just falls short for me.

George Mullin - Would challenge Rube Marquard for the title of the worst pitcher inducted.

Fielder Jones - Nothing stands out.

Wildfire Schulte - If one season made you a Hall of Famer, he'd have been one of the earliest inductees of an overcrowded Hall.

Chief Meyers - Good, just below ten seasons, however.

Tommy Leach - You could pretty much categorize him in the Hall of Mistakes that the Frisch Committee monopolized. Though Cuyler could stay in my personal Hall.

Johnny Kling - He could be the worst catcher in the HOF and would be one of the worst players at any position.

Hal Chase and Ed Konetchy - I would just focus on modern era first basemen, with Konetchy probably being closer to deserving.

George Gibson and Jimmy Archer - You know have no business being worthy of Hall discussion when Johnny Kling looks good by comparison.


Again, these are only my opinions. I thought I'd respond to a majority of the names listed here.

[CMIZ5290]

So, going back to the first page of the thread, many have been listed from the T206 set potentially being HOF worthy. I'm going to split this up in different categories. These are only my opinions.

Hall of Fame worthy

Bill Dahlen - One of the best players not in the Hall of Fame from any era at any position. The VC really messed up in December. Was terrific offensively and defensively and helped his teams win four pennants in his career. His 44 game hitting streak is second only to Joe DiMaggio among right handed batters. Nobody in history played more games at the time he retired and his longevity still holds today.

Sherry Magee - 4x RBI champ, hit very well in all of those seasons. Metrics rank him well and it can be argued he's better than many leftfielders already in. He could do it all and has been erroneously overlooked.

Larry Doyle - The best second baseman in the National League during his time. He was also the best position player on the Giants during their winning of multiple pennants. One came during an MVP season in 1912 and would probably be a World Champion had it not been for Snodgrass' Muff. Just as how Sherry Magee is arguably a top 15 leftfielder ever, I think Doyle could be top 15 all time at second.

Gavvy Cravath - I get the argument against him, but he absolutely dominated during his short peak.

Bill Dineen - As a pitcher alone he is not a Hall of Famer, but when you combine his pitching career with his umpiring career, it's hard to justify his exclusion.

Could go either way

Jimmy Sheckard - He wasn't that bad of a player and worth doing more research on. No way should he get in before Sherry Magee, but a future induction would hardly taint Cooperstown.

Not Hall of Fame worthy

Deacon Philippe - I changed my mind here
I think Reulbach was better and I wouldn't put Reulbach in. Out of those Pirate teams, only Babe Adams deserves it and he's not in the set.

Ed Reulbach - Just falls short for me.

George Mullin - Would challenge Rube Marquard for the title of the worst pitcher inducted.

Fielder Jones - Nothing stands out.

Wildfire Schulte - If one season made you a Hall of Famer, he'd have been one of the earliest inductees of an overcrowded Hall.

Chief Meyers - Good, just below ten seasons, however.

Tommy Leach - You could pretty much categorize him in the Hall of Mistakes that the Frisch Committee monopolized. Though Cuyler could stay in my personal Hall.

Johnny Kling - He could be the worst catcher in the HOF and would be one of the worst players at any position.

Hal Chase and Ed Konetchy - I would just focus on modern era first basemen, with Konetchy probably being closer to deserving.

George Gibson and Jimmy Archer - You know have no business being worthy of Hall discussion when Johnny Kling looks good by comparison.


Again, these are only my opinions. I thought I'd respond to a majority of the names listed here.

I dont know you're name, but what is the argument for Sheckard? Please, because I'm clueless.....Also, Chase????

[Topps206]

I dont know you're name, but what is the argument for Sheckard? Please, because I'm clueless.....Also, Chase????

Nice WAR

121 OPS+

Not the worst batting average or OBP in the world.

One of the better leftfielders not in

Fast indivual and a key part of the Cubs title wins

Hall of Merit


Someone many pages back name dropped Chase.

[CMIZ5290]

So, going back to the first page of the thread, many have been listed from the T206 set potentially being HOF worthy. I'm going to split this up in different categories. These are only my opinions.

Hall of Fame worthy

Bill Dahlen - One of the best players not in the Hall of Fame from any era at any position. The VC really messed up in December. Was terrific offensively and defensively and helped his teams win four pennants in his career. His 44 game hitting streak is second only to Joe DiMaggio among right handed batters. Nobody in history played more games at the time he retired and his longevity still holds today.

Sherry Magee - 4x RBI champ, hit very well in all of those seasons. Metrics rank him well and it can be argued he's better than many leftfielders already in. He could do it all and has been erroneously overlooked.

Larry Doyle - The best second baseman in the National League during his time. He was also the best position player on the Giants during their winning of multiple pennants. One came during an MVP season in 1912 and would probably be a World Champion had it not been for Snodgrass' Muff. Just as how Sherry Magee is arguably a top 15 leftfielder ever, I think Doyle could be top 15 all time at second.

Gavvy Cravath - I get the argument against him, but he absolutely dominated during his short peak.

Bill Dineen - As a pitcher alone he is not a Hall of Famer, but when you combine his pitching career with his umpiring career, it's hard to justify his exclusion.

Could go either way

Jimmy Sheckard - He wasn't that bad of a player and worth doing more research on. No way should he get in before Sherry Magee, but a future induction would hardly taint Cooperstown.

Not Hall of Fame worthy

Deacon Philippe - I changed my mind here
I think Reulbach was better and I wouldn't put Reulbach in. Out of those Pirate teams, only Babe Adams deserves it and he's not in the set.

Ed Reulbach - Just falls short for me.

George Mullin - Would challenge Rube Marquard for the title of the worst pitcher inducted.

Fielder Jones - Nothing stands out.

Wildfire Schulte - If one season made you a Hall of Famer, he'd have been one of the earliest inductees of an overcrowded Hall.

Chief Meyers - Good, just below ten seasons, however.

Tommy Leach - You could pretty much categorize him in the Hall of Mistakes that the Frisch Committee monopolized. Though Cuyler could stay in my personal Hall.

Johnny Kling - He could be the worst catcher in the HOF and would be one of the worst players at any position.

Hal Chase and Ed Konetchy - I would just focus on modern era first basemen, with Konetchy probably being closer to deserving.

George Gibson and Jimmy Archer - You know have no business being worthy of Hall discussion when Johnny Kling looks good by comparison.


Again, these are only my opinions. I thought I'd respond to a majority of the names listed here.
Bill Dinneen.....170-177....What the Hell have you been smoking?????? Also, a 3.10 ERA in that ERA is very high....

[Topps206]

Bill Dinneen.....170-177....What the Hell have you been smoking?????? Also, a 3.10 ERA in that ERA is very high....

Like I said, he is not worthy as a pitcher. He is worthy as an umpire/contributor.

[bbcard1]

Bill Dinneen.....170-177....What the Hell have you been smoking??????

He was also a highly respected ump...but I think Jim Kaat and Tommy John are both considerably more deserving.

[Topps206]

He was also a highly respected ump...but I think Jim Kaat and Tommy John are both considerably more deserving.

I am fine with all three.

[CMIZ5290]

Like I said, he is not worthy as a pitcher. He is worthy as an umpire/contributor.

No offense pal, but you are clueless.....

[Topps206]

No offense pal, but you are clueless.....

Why is that? Are you not aware of his umpiring accomplishments?

[CMIZ5290]

Why is that? Are you not aware of his umpiring accomplishments?

Just curious, how do you rate Roberto Clemente??

[Topps206]

Just curious, how do you rate Roberto Clemente??

A worthy Hall of Famer and legend. Why? I think we can all agree Clemente deserves his place.

[packs]

Bill Dineen umpired 8 World Series and was behind the plate for the original All Star game. His 8 World Series is a mark held by him and Tommy Connolly, a HOFer. So what makes him not a HOF umpire?

[Joshchisox08]

So, going back to the first page of the thread, many have been listed from the T206 set potentially being HOF worthy. I'm going to split this up in different categories. These are only my opinions.

Hall of Fame worthy

Bill Dahlen - One of the best players not in the Hall of Fame from any era at any position. The VC really messed up in December. Was terrific offensively and defensively and helped his teams win four pennants in his career. His 44 game hitting streak is second only to Joe DiMaggio among right handed batters. Nobody in history played more games at the time he retired and his longevity still holds today.

Sherry Magee - 4x RBI champ, hit very well in all of those seasons. Metrics rank him well and it can be argued he's better than many leftfielders already in. He could do it all and has been erroneously overlooked.

Larry Doyle - The best second baseman in the National League during his time. He was also the best position player on the Giants during their winning of multiple pennants. One came during an MVP season in 1912 and would probably be a World Champion had it not been for Snodgrass' Muff. Just as how Sherry Magee is arguably a top 15 leftfielder ever, I think Doyle could be top 15 all time at second.

Gavvy Cravath - I get the argument against him, but he absolutely dominated during his short peak.

Bill Dinneen - As a pitcher alone he is not a Hall of Famer, but when you combine his pitching career with his umpiring career, it's hard to justify his exclusion.

Could go either way

Jimmy Sheckard - He wasn't that bad of a player and worth doing more research on. No way should he get in before Sherry Magee, but a future induction would hardly taint Cooperstown.

Not Hall of Fame worthy

Deacon Philippe - I changed my mind here
I think Reulbach was better and I wouldn't put Reulbach in. Out of those Pirate teams, only Babe Adams deserves it and he's not in the set.

Ed Reulbach - Just falls short for me.

George Mullin - Would challenge Rube Marquard for the title of the worst pitcher inducted.

Fielder Jones - Nothing stands out.

Wildfire Schulte - If one season made you a Hall of Famer, he'd have been one of the earliest inductees of an overcrowded Hall.

Chief Meyers - Good, just below ten seasons, however.

Tommy Leach - You could pretty much categorize him in the Hall of Mistakes that the Frisch Committee monopolized. Though Cuyler could stay in my personal Hall.

Johnny Kling - He could be the worst catcher in the HOF and would be one of the worst players at any position.

Hal Chase and Ed Konetchy - I would just focus on modern era first basemen, with Konetchy probably being closer to deserving.

George Gibson and Jimmy Archer - You know have no business being worthy of Hall discussion when Johnny Kling looks good by comparison.


Again, these are only my opinions. I thought I'd respond to a majority of the names listed here.\

I like your format and I'll use the same but switch it up to my picks. I'm a little more lenient.

Hall of Fame worthy

Bill Dahlen
Sherry Magee
Larry Doyle
Gavvy Cravath
Bill Dinneen
Ed Reulbach
Chase
Konetchy --- C'mon guys
Deacon Philippe - 1903 WS??? And look at the huge W-L gap decent ERA for his era as well
Donie Bush - too much good for this guy, not talked about enough IMO

Could go either way

Jimmy Sheckard
Tommy Leach - I like Leach a lot but his .269 average is what holds him back big time.
Chief Meyers
Kling

Not Hall of Fame worthy

George Mullin
Fielder Jones
Wildfire Schulte
George Gibson
Jimmy Archer -

[bbcard1]

Larry Doyle - The best second baseman in the National League during his time. He was also the best position player on the Giants during their winning of multiple pennants. One came during an MVP season in 1912 and would probably be a World Champion had it not been for Snodgrass' Muff. Just as how Sherry Magee is arguably a top 15 leftfielder ever, I think Doyle could be top 15 all time at second.


Worth mentioning that at that time, a player could only win the MVP once.

[RaidonCollects]

Dinneen is 100% a HOFer:

-40 Years of contributions to baseball
-A no-hitter
-4 20-win seasons
-Led the league in saves twice.
-For many seasons he was at the top of his league for WAR and ERA.
-He basically won the World Series for the Americans (1903)
-In the 03 Series he won three games and pitched 11 strikeouts in game 2.
-28 strikeouts overall in the series, :eek::eek::eek: and two shutouts:eek:
-pitched 37 consecutive complete games earning the record for the most consecutive innings without being relieved (337 consecutive)
-As said above 8 WS Umpired, and 5 No-no's
-Umpired a ton of games (more than O'Day, Conlan and Chylak)
-6th for career games a HP Ump
-I could have made this list twice as long

Also +1 on Donie Bush for the HOF. Fun Fact: He discovered Pee Wee Reese as a scout (one of his lesser known accomplishments)

-Owen:)

[Joshchisox08]

Dinneen is 100% a HOFer:

-40 Years of contributions to baseball
-A no-hitter
-4 20-win seasons
-Led the league in saves twice.
-For many seasons he was at the top of his league for WAR and ERA.
-He basically won the World Series for the Americans (1903)
-In the 03 Series he won three games and pitched 11 strikeouts in game 2.
-28 strikeouts overall in the series, :eek::eek::eek: and two shutouts:eek:
-pitched 37 consecutive complete games earning the record for the most consecutive innings without being relieved (337 consecutive)
-As said above 8 WS Umpired, and 5 No-no's
-Umpired a ton of games (more than O'Day, Conlan and Chylak)
-6th for career games a HP Ump
-I could have made this list twice as long

Also +1 on Donie Bush for the HOF. Fun Fact: He discovered Pee Wee Reese as a scout (one of his lesser known accomplishments)

-Owen:)

I've been waiting for you to contribute on Dinneen Owen :)

[btcarfagno]

Sorry if I missed them above, but I don't think anyone's mentioned Overall, Schulte, or Latham. Not that I really think they belong in the Hall (Overall isn't even eligible), but I think they were as good as most of the folks that have been mentioned in this thread.

Dahlen is the only one in T206 who deserves it as a player and hasn't been enshrined yet. Dinneen is a good pick for total contributions to the game.

The best pre-steroid era guys who haven't gotten in yet are Jim McCormick, Bob Caruthers, and Shoeless Joe.

And Bob Johnson...

Tom C

[Joshchisox08]

Sorry if I missed them above, but I don't think anyone's mentioned Overall, Schulte, or Latham. Not that I really think they belong in the Hall (Overall isn't even eligible), but I think they were as good as most of the folks that have been mentioned in this thread.

Dahlen is the only one in T206 who deserves it as a player and hasn't been enshrined yet. Dinneen is a good pick for total contributions to the game.

The best pre-steroid era guys who haven't gotten in yet are Jim McCormick, Bob Caruthers, and Shoeless Joe.

I like Latham. He's an interesting and good choice and is certainly in the category worth mentioning as the others.

Not so sure about Orval.

[bbcard1]

And Bob Johnson...

Tom C

If Indian Bob Johnson were playing today would he be called Native American Bob Johnson?

[Topps206]

I feel like I'm in the middle here on this topic. There are some players not in the Hall from the set I think should be in. Some standards are too stingy. Others advocate for terrible choices, in my opinion.

[Topps206]

I like Latham. He's an interesting and good choice and is certainly in the category worth mentioning as the others.

Not so sure about Orval.

Imagine putting Vince Coleman in the Hall of Fame. That basically sums up Latham.

[bravos4evr]

So, going back to the first page of the thread, many have been listed from the T206 set potentially being HOF worthy. I'm going to split this up in different categories. These are only my opinions.

Hall of Fame worthy

Bill Dahlen - One of the best players not in the Hall of Fame from any era at any position. The VC really messed up in December. Was terrific offensively and defensively and helped his teams win four pennants in his career. His 44 game hitting streak is second only to Joe DiMaggio among right handed batters. Nobody in history played more games at the time he retired and his longevity still holds today.

Sherry Magee - 4x RBI champ, hit very well in all of those seasons. Metrics rank him well and it can be argued he's better than many leftfielders already in. He could do it all and has been erroneously overlooked.

Larry Doyle - The best second baseman in the National League during his time. He was also the best position player on the Giants during their winning of multiple pennants. One came during an MVP season in 1912 and would probably be a World Champion had it not been for Snodgrass' Muff. Just as how Sherry Magee is arguably a top 15 leftfielder ever, I think Doyle could be top 15 all time at second.

Gavvy Cravath - I get the argument against him, but he absolutely dominated during his short peak.

Bill Dinneen - As a pitcher alone he is not a Hall of Famer, but when you combine his pitching career with his umpiring career, it's hard to justify his exclusion.

Could go either way

Jimmy Sheckard - He wasn't that bad of a player and worth doing more research on. No way should he get in before Sherry Magee, but a future induction would hardly taint Cooperstown.

Not Hall of Fame worthy

Deacon Philippe - I changed my mind here
I think Reulbach was better and I wouldn't put Reulbach in. Out of those Pirate teams, only Babe Adams deserves it and he's not in the set.

Ed Reulbach - Just falls short for me.

George Mullin - Would challenge Rube Marquard for the title of the worst pitcher inducted.

Fielder Jones - Nothing stands out.

Wildfire Schulte - If one season made you a Hall of Famer, he'd have been one of the earliest inductees of an overcrowded Hall.

Chief Meyers - Good, just below ten seasons, however.

Tommy Leach - You could pretty much categorize him in the Hall of Mistakes that the Frisch Committee monopolized. Though Cuyler could stay in my personal Hall.

Johnny Kling - He could be the worst catcher in the HOF and would be one of the worst players at any position.

Hal Chase and Ed Konetchy - I would just focus on modern era first basemen, with Konetchy probably being closer to deserving.

George Gibson and Jimmy Archer - You know have no business being worthy of Hall discussion when Johnny Kling looks good by comparison.


Again, these are only my opinions. I thought I'd respond to a majority of the names listed here.

I gotta say, the only one on your list I think deserves it as a player is Dahlen. (I get the Dinneen argument for total contribution to the game tho)

[bravos4evr]

I feel like I'm in the middle here on this topic. There are some players not in the Hall from the set I think should be in. Some standards are too stingy. Others advocate for terrible choices, in my opinion.

you rang??? :D:D:D


as far as the Clemente question you were posed earlier, that dude has a hard time understanding that when you say a player is better at defense than another player (like say Andruw Jones over Clemente) you aren't saying that the former was a better all around player than the latter, just that they were better at defense. He got all bent out of shape over this, for some reason.

[Topps206]

I ssw Doc White here earlier. I see nothing too special. He had a couple nice seasons but a typical deadball player, really.

[FourStrikes]

How does this forum feel about Jimmy Sheckard and Cooperstown?

NO Gil Hodges??? NO Dale Murphy? NO Keith Hernandez? NO (insert many far-more-deserving names here, but...)

p.s. I know none of the above are T206, but, just for the sake of argument...sorry, just not feelin' it for Sheckard - UNLESS I was sittin' on a binder full of T206 Sheckard (there's exceptions to every "accepted" rule, ya know???)

JMO

DS

[Topps206]

NO Gil Hodges??? NO Dale Murphy? NO Keith Hernandez? NO (insert many far-more-deserving names here, but...)

p.s. I know none of the above are T206, but, just for the sake of argument...sorry, just not feelin' it for Sheckard - UNLESS I was sittin' on a binder full of T206 Sheckard (there's exceptions to every "accepted" rule, ya know???)

JMO

DS

The only one you just mentioned who would get my support for Cooperstown is Hernandez.

Honestly before I started collecting the Monster many of these players I never heard of. I knew the big names like Wagner, Cobb, Plank, Mathewson, Johnson, basically all the Hall of Famers. I also knew of the likes of Dahlen, Magee, Cravath. I couldn't tell you anything about them, but I knew the name. I had no clue who Larry Doyle or Jimmy Sheckard were. This set taught me them and also I learned they were fantastic players.

[bbcard1]

there are lots of problems with the hall of fame, but that's what makes in interesting. If you use the worst player in the hall of fame as the litmus test for who belongs, pretty much everyone north of David Eckstien has an argument. making it more complex, winning 220 games in the 1980s is very different than willing 220 games in 1910 and will be exceedingly different than winning 220 games in 2020, just as hitting 500 homers in the 1930s or 40s is different than doing it in the 1990s. Plus the argument are you ranking players for their longevity or their pinnacle? That's what makes it a good argument.

[Topps206]

How good were they during their pimnacle? How long enough did they play? What position were they?

These are all questions to ask, too.

[packs]

I think the true test should be: was this person one of the three best players at their position during their career? If the answer is yes, then I don't see how that person isn't a HOFer. In the case of Larry Doyle, he was unquestionably the best second baseman of his time. So how is he not a HOFer?

Pitchers would be a different story because at any given time there could be an infinite amount of top pitchers. I wouldn't use the top three as an indicator for them.

[Topps206]

I think the true test should be: was this person one of the three best players at their position during their career? If the answer is yes, then I don't see how that person isn't a HOFer. In the case of Larry Doyle, he was unquestionably the best second baseman of his time. So how is he not a HOFer?

Pitchers would be a different story because at any given time there could be an infinite amount of top pitchers. I wouldn't use the top three as an indicator for them.

I'd say Doyle was third behind only Collins and Lajoie. In that case, it'd be tough to outdo either of them, but still the best N.L. second baseman in his career.

Also, of the T206 shortstops, I rate Dahlen third behind only Wagner and Davis.

[CMIZ5290]

NO Gil Hodges??? NO Dale Murphy? NO Keith Hernandez? NO (insert many far-more-deserving names here, but...)

p.s. I know none of the above are T206, but, just for the sake of argument...sorry, just not feelin' it for Sheckard - UNLESS I was sittin' on a binder full of T206 Sheckard (there's exceptions to every "accepted" rule, ya know???)

JMO

DS
+1 on Sheckard big time....

[bravos4evr]

NO Gil Hodges??? NO Dale Murphy? NO Keith Hernandez? NO (insert many far-more-deserving names here, but...)

p.s. I know none of the above are T206, but, just for the sake of argument...sorry, just not feelin' it for Sheckard - UNLESS I was sittin' on a binder full of T206 Sheckard (there's exceptions to every "accepted" rule, ya know???)

JMO

DS

Dale Murphy was my favorite player growing up, but sadly his career took too much of a nose dive due to injuries to be a HOF'er. Hall of very good yes, but doesn't measure up to the HOF standard.

[bravos4evr]

I think the true test should be: was this person one of the three best players at their position during their career? If the answer is yes, then I don't see how that person isn't a HOFer. In the case of Larry Doyle, he was unquestionably the best second baseman of his time. So how is he not a HOFer?

Pitchers would be a different story because at any given time there could be an infinite amount of top pitchers. I wouldn't use the top three as an indicator for them.

I don't like this argument. What constitutes an era? If we just look at who the top 3 at any given position are without comparing them to the rest of history at said position we are just going to weaken the HOF more than it is already.

Was the player in the top 10-15 all time at their position?

If not were they in the top 10 in the game at any position during their career?

Does that players stats paint a picture of an all time great? Or just a good player who played a position that had poor depth league wide at the time?

[CMIZ5290]

Please end this thread....3 months is long enough....

[Topps206]

I don't like this argument. What constitutes an era? If we just look at who the top 3 at any given position are without comparing them to the rest of history at said position we are just going to weaken the HOF more than it is already.

Was the player in the top 10-15 all time at their position?

If not were they in the top 10 in the game at any position during their career?

Does that players stats paint a picture of an all time great? Or just a good player who played a position that had poor depth league wide at the time?

Some of the players you say no to I think pass your litmus test.

[packs]

Well I'm talking about the T206 era and T206 players.

[Topps206]

I'm really puzzled that people are against Sheckard. He was better at his position than Kling was at his. I honestly think Sheckard would be a far better choice than most players listed in here.

[btcarfagno]

I'm really puzzled that people are against Sheckard. He was better at his position than Kling was at his. I honestly think Sheckard would be a far better choice than most players listed in here.

Sheckard is very underrated. For me he would go into the Hall Of Very Good, but he should at least be in the conversation regarding the Hall Of Fame. Sherry Magee, however, should be close to a no brainer for the HOF.

Tom C

[Topps206]

Sheckard is very underrated. For me he would go into the Hall Of Very Good, but he should at least be in the conversation regarding the Hall Of Fame. Sherry Magee, however, should be close to a no brainer for the HOF.

Tom C

I agree with all you say. Sheckard isn't an injustice if an omission, but I could live with his induction.

Magee? He stands the test of time. How is he not in yet? Why do we have to wait until 2020, at least?

How Magee and Bad Bill are not in when both are easily qualified is puzzling to me.

Edit: Look how long it took to induct George Davis, arguably a top five shortstop of all time! The voters don't always get it right.

[Joshchisox08]

Some others not mentioned that I completley forgot about:

Cy Seymour ??? .303 average, over 1,700 hits, and 61-56 pitching recrod
Ginger Beaumont ??? .311 average, over 1,700 hits, led the league in 1902 with .357 average
Jesse Tannehill ??? 197-111
Fred Tenney ??? 2231 hits, .294 lifetime average.

[rats60]

I agree with all you say. Sheckard isn't an injustice if an omission, but I could live with his induction.

Magee? He stands the test of time. How is he not in yet? Why do we have to wait until 2020, at least?

How Magee and Bad Bill are not in when both are easily qualified is puzzling to me.

Edit: Look how long it took to induct George Davis, arguably a top five shortstop of all time! The voters don't always get it right.

Magee I don't understand. He is the same as Wheat and Kelley. He should be in already.

Dahlen wasn't the defensive player that Wallace or Tinker were. Not being outstanding, just very good, both offensively and defensively doesn't necessarily mean you are a hofer. Davis was outstanding defensively. Why he didn't make it earlier makes no sense to me.

[Topps206]

Magee I don't understand. He is the same as Wheat and Kelley. He should be in already.

Dahlen wasn't the defensive player that Wallace or Tinker were. Not being outstanding, just very good, both offensively and defensively doesn't necessarily mean you are a hofer. Davis was outstanding defensively. Why he didn't make it earlier makes no sense to me.

I'm busy at work, so I'll respond in depth later, but don't let the fielding percentage fool you. Dahlen was a great defender.

[rats60]

I'm busy at work, so I'll respond in depth later, but don't let the fielding percentage fool you. Dahlen was a great defender.

Sorry, I disagree. Wagner & Davis .940. Tinker and Wallace .938. Dahlen .927. I don't put too much weight on fielding percentage, but that is too big a gap. He was marginally better getting to balls based on assists, but why? Did his pitchers throw more ground balls? We just don't know. Over a 162 game average he fielded about 3 more balls than Davis, 11 more than Wallace and 30 more than Tinker. Those really aren't enough to make up for extra errors he made.

[btcarfagno]

Sorry, I disagree. Wagner & Davis .940. Tinker and Wallace .938. Dahlen .927. I don't put too much weight on fielding percentage, but that is too big a gap. He was marginally better getting to balls based on assists, but why? Did his pitchers throw more ground balls? We just don't know. Over a 162 game average he fielded about 3 more balls than Davis, 11 more than Wallace and 30 more than Tinker. Those really aren't enough to make up for extra errors he made.

Jaws ranks Dahlen as the 10th best shortstop in history, behind only Wagner, A-Rod, Ripken, G. Davis, Yount, Vaughan, Banks, O. Smith and Appling.

He is ahead of:

Alan Trammell
Derek Jeter
Barry Larkin
Bobby Wallace
Lou Boudreau
Joe Cronin
Pee Wee Reese
Joe Sewell
Luis Aparicio
Joe Tinker
Dave Bancroft
Travis Jackson
Phil Rizzuto
Rabbit Maranville

Tom C

[Topps206]

Jaws ranks Dahlen as the 10th best shortstop in history, behind only Wagner, A-Rod, Ripken, G. Davis, Yount, Vaughan, Banks, O. Smith and Appling.

He is ahead of:

Alan Trammell
Derek Jeter
Barry Larkin
Bobby Wallace
Lou Boudreau
Joe Cronin
Pee Wee Reese
Joe Sewell
Luis Aparicio
Joe Tinker
Dave Bancroft
Travis Jackson
Phil Rizzuto
Rabbit Maranville

Tom C

He hates WAR and Jaws. Even without them, you could still argue in favor of Dahlen's defense.

[Topps206]

Sorry, I disagree. Wagner & Davis .940. Tinker and Wallace .938. Dahlen .927. I don't put too much weight on fielding percentage, but that is too big a gap. He was marginally better getting to balls based on assists, but why? Did his pitchers throw more ground balls? We just don't know. Over a 162 game average he fielded about 3 more balls than Davis, 11 more than Wallace and 30 more than Tinker. Those really aren't enough to make up for extra errors he made.

Here's the logical fallacy I find in your argument, and I'll spell it out for you.

Assists

Led his league in 1895, 1900, 1903

Second in 1904, 1908

Third in 1898, 1901, 1902

Fifth in 1896, 1905, 1906

8,138 fourth all time.

Defensive games at SS

Led in 1900, 1902, 1903

Third in 1895, 1906, 1907

Fourth in 1901, 1904, 1905, 1908

Fifth in 1898

2,133 total is good enough still for 12th all time.

Putouts at SS

Second in 1898

Third in 1900, 1903, 1908

Fourth in 1895, 1896, 1901, 1902

Fifth in 1904, 1905

Factor- 4,856 for second all time.

Assists as SS

Led in 1895, 1900, 1903, 1904

Second in 1902, 1908

Third in 1898

Fourth in 1895, 1905, 1906

Fifth in 1907

Total - 7,505 for fourth all time

Double plays turned as SS

Led in 1898, 1904, 1908

Second in 1895, 1903

Third in 1896, 1900, 1901

Fifth in 1905

Total - 881 for 55th All time. Higher than Tinker.

Range Factor/9 inning as shortstop

Led in 1893, 1894, 1898, 1908

Second in 1895, 1897, 1900, 1904

Third in 1901, 1903

Fifth in 1896, 1905

Range Factor/Game as SS

Led in 1893, 1894, 1897, 1908

Second in 1895, 1896, 1898, 1900, 1904

Third in 1901

Fourth in 1903

Fifth in 1905

Total - 5.80, sixth all time, Tinker is 19th.

Tinker did lead his league in fielding percentage as a shortstop four times, Dahlen only once, but also finished second six more times.

To be fair, Dahlen did commit more errors, but he played more than a decade before Tinker debuted and is still top 100 in games played, plus much of those errors were before the turn of the century and he made fewer later on in his career.

John McGraw called trading for Dahlen the best he ever made.

Dahlen not only should be in the HOF, he was a much better defender than you give him credit for.

[Topps206]

Some others not mentioned that I completley forgot about:

Cy Seymour ??? .303 average, over 1,700 hits, and 61-56 pitching recrod
Ginger Beaumont ??? .311 average, over 1,700 hits, led the league in 1902 with .357 average
Jesse Tannehill ??? 197-111
Fred Tenney ??? 2231 hits, .294 lifetime average.

Seymour was a better version of Schulte.

Beaumont had a good career, but unlike Cravath, not enough for a short one.

Tannehill is lower on the pole for pitchers.

Tenney is someone I'm surprised Frankie Frisch didn't pick.

[CMIZ5290]

We can beat this thread in the dirt (And I think we have). How about a poll with everyone getting only one player to vote on? I'll start the ball rolling with Ed Reulbach....

[Joshchisox08]

We can beat this thread in the dirt (And I think we have). How about a poll with everyone getting only one player to vote on? I'll start the ball rolling with Ed Reulbach....


I've been thinking about a poll and was going to bring up the idea earlier but you beat me to it!

I'll edit post #1 and start the list. Right now I'm undecided if we're going to vote just 1 player in.

Anyone think we would get at least 2 votes ??

[Topps206]

I would not vote for Ed Reulbach.

[CMIZ5290]

I would not vote for Ed Reulbach.

Leon, please end this thread....

[CMIZ5290]

I would not vote for Ed Reulbach.

So who would you vote for dumb ass???

[rats60]

Here's the logical fallacy I find in your argument, and I'll spell it out for you.

Assists

Led his league in 1895, 1900, 1903

Second in 1904, 1908

Third in 1898, 1901, 1902

Fifth in 1896, 1905, 1906

8,138 fourth all time.

Defensive games at SS

Led in 1900, 1902, 1903

Third in 1895, 1906, 1907

Fourth in 1901, 1904, 1905, 1908

Fifth in 1898

2,133 total is good enough still for 12th all time.

Putouts at SS

Second in 1898

Third in 1900, 1903, 1908

Fourth in 1895, 1896, 1901, 1902

Fifth in 1904, 1905

Factor- 4,856 for second all time.

Assists as SS

Led in 1895, 1900, 1903, 1904

Second in 1902, 1908

Third in 1898

Fourth in 1895, 1905, 1906

Fifth in 1907

Total - 7,505 for fourth all time

Double plays turned as SS

Led in 1898, 1904, 1908

Second in 1895, 1903

Third in 1896, 1900, 1901

Fifth in 1905

Total - 881 for 55th All time. Higher than Tinker.

Range Factor/9 inning as shortstop

Led in 1893, 1894, 1898, 1908

Second in 1895, 1897, 1900, 1904

Third in 1901, 1903

Fifth in 1896, 1905

Range Factor/Game as SS

Led in 1893, 1894, 1897, 1908

Second in 1895, 1896, 1898, 1900, 1904

Third in 1901

Fourth in 1903

Fifth in 1905

Total - 5.80, sixth all time, Tinker is 19th.

Tinker did lead his league in fielding percentage as a shortstop four times, Dahlen only once, but also finished second six more times.

To be fair, Dahlen did commit more errors, but he played more than a decade before Tinker debuted and is still top 100 in games played, plus much of those errors were before the turn of the century and he made fewer later on in his career.

John McGraw called trading for Dahlen the best he ever made.

Dahlen not only should be in the HOF, he was a much better defender than you give him credit for.

I thought I was going to get an actual argument instead of just listing that in 21 seasons, he led the league in a few categories. I hope you realize that many of those years he was in an 8 team league, so 4th or 5th is average and all the others seasons you didn't list, he was also below average.

Range factor? Lol. That is real accurate. I would be curious how they come up that with basically no data. I will add this stat. Where as Dahlen averaged about 30 more assists per season than Tinker, his pitchers averaged over 100 less strike outs per season. Do you think all those balls that never made it in play are the reason why Dahlen had more chances? I doubt that Dahlen had better range than Davis, Tinker or Wallace, he just made a lot more errors.

[Topps206]

I thought I was going to get an actual argument instead of just listing that in 21 seasons, he led the league in a few categories. I hope you realize that many of those years he was in an 8 team league, so 4th or 5th is average and all the others seasons you didn't list, he was also below average.

Range factor? Lol. That is real accurate. I would be curious how they come up that with basically no data. I will add this stat. Where as Dahlen averaged about 30 more assists per season than Tinker, his pitchers averaged over 100 less strike outs per season. Do you think all those balls that never made it in play are the reason why Dahlen had more chances? I doubt that Dahlen had better range than Davis, Tinker or Wallace, he just made a lot more errors.

Many of those years he was also at the top playing one of the hardest positions on the field.

Also, I don't think they just made up range factor out of nowhere either.

Almost everything I see suggests how great of a defender Dahlen was, and I would take his bat over two of those three shortstops, with Davis the exception.

[bravos4evr]

Sorry, I disagree. Wagner & Davis .940. Tinker and Wallace .938. Dahlen .927. I don't put too much weight on fielding percentage, but that is too big a gap. He was marginally better getting to balls based on assists, but why? Did his pitchers throw more ground balls? We just don't know. Over a 162 game average he fielded about 3 more balls than Davis, 11 more than Wallace and 30 more than Tinker. Those really aren't enough to make up for extra errors he made.

fielding % is a worthless and terrible stat because it tells us nothing about range. a statue who could not move but made perfect plays on balls hit right to it would have a 1.000 fielding % but would be far worse at preventing hits than a player with great range who made 20 errors a year.

if the statue field 100 balls perfectly he makes 100 outs with 0 errors

player B with the great range might make 200 outs and 20 errors, obviously you prefer the latter


for example: since 2012 JJ Hardy leads among SS on fielding % with .987 and Andrelton Simmons is 4th with a .982 , HOWEVER, in defensive runs saved Hardy is 3rd with 58 a massive 68 behind Simmons. In UZR/150 games Simmons leads with 21.7 to Hardy's 11.9 so, if you just used fielding % you would be wayyyyy off on who the best SS glove in baseball is. Simmons is over twice as good at creating outs than Hardy, yet .005 worse in fielding % (because fielding % tells us nothing about the range if a player ,their arm, nor their ability to generate outs, it just tells us how good they did when they got to the ball)

[bravos4evr]

He hates WAR and Jaws. Even without them, you could still argue in favor of Dahlen's defense.

Dahlen's 73+ WAR is good enough on it's own. When you dig deeper you see he's easily one of the best at his position all time. I still have no idea why he isn't in.

Magee's 63.4 WAR is right on the cusp of what I think should be required by an OF'er for the HOF. and is 40th all time for OF'ers. BUT, I have a hard time voting for a guy with a sub .800 OPS and a wRC+ of 134 (which ties him for 64th all time among OF'ers) But I can see the argument for his induction.

[bravos4evr]

So who would you vote for dumb ass???

once again captain crass has nothing of merit to add and stomps his feet, turns red and throws a tantrum. yer like 80 right? maybe you should act like it.

[bravos4evr]

I thought I was going to get an actual argument instead of just listing that in 21 seasons, he led the league in a few categories. I hope you realize that many of those years he was in an 8 team league, so 4th or 5th is average and all the others seasons you didn't list, he was also below average.

Range factor? Lol. That is real accurate. I would be curious how they come up that with basically no data. I will add this stat. Where as Dahlen averaged about 30 more assists per season than Tinker, his pitchers averaged over 100 less strike outs per season. Do you think all those balls that never made it in play are the reason why Dahlen had more chances? I doubt that Dahlen had better range than Davis, Tinker or Wallace, he just made a lot more errors.

I think it's funny when folks use old antiquated stats that are worthless, then when corrected with modern, more accurate stats they resort to name calling and hand wave away the data. It's like arguing evolution with a religious fanatic....

New stats are better, more accurate and based on things that are important instead of the poorly thought out stats of yesteryear. You either adapt, evolve or stay in the past. This is the way of things.

your argument about K's is poorly thought out as the player still has to field those balls and if Dahlen made outs on 30 of 100 more balls in play then he was an amazing fielder indeed!

[rats60]

I think it's funny when folks use old antiquated stats that are worthless, then when corrected with modern, more accurate stats they resort to name calling and hand wave away the data. It's like arguing evolution with a religious fanatic....

New stats are better, more accurate and based on things that are important instead of the poorly thought out stats of yesteryear. You either adapt, evolve or stay in the past. This is the way of things.

your argument about K's is poorly thought out as the player still has to field those balls and if Dahlen made outs on 30 of 100 more balls in play then he was an amazing fielder indeed!

What new stats do we have from 1891-1911? We don't have enough data to accurately calculate advanced stats from those years. He just pointed out the years that he led or was near the top of the league in traditional stats and I pointed out that he wasn't among league leaders even more times.

I don't think that you even understand my argument. You are ignoring that he also made 16 more errors to get those 30 outs. That is not very good.

[Topps206]

Dahlen's 73+ WAR is good enough on it's own. When you dig deeper you see he's easily one of the best at his position all time. I still have no idea why he isn't in.

Magee's 63.4 WAR is right on the cusp of what I think should be required by an OF'er for the HOF. and is 40th all time for OF'ers. BUT, I have a hard time voting for a guy with a sub .800 OPS and a wRC+ of 134 (which ties him for 64th all time among OF'ers) But I can see the argument for his induction.

How about his OPS+ of 137?

[bravos4evr]

What new stats do we have from 1891-1911? We don't have enough data to accurately calculate advanced stats from those years. He just pointed out the years that he led or was near the top of the league in traditional stats and I pointed out that he wasn't among league leaders even more times.

I don't think that you even understand my argument. You are ignoring that he also made 16 more errors to get those 30 outs. That is not very good.

we have more data than you might think. Dahlen is 5th all time in SS fWAR, he is 7th all time in fangraph's DEF stat at SS (which is cumulative and is Def = Fielding Runs Above Average + positional adjustment) he is pretty obviously one of the greatest SS's of all time.

[rats60]

we have more data than you might think. Dahlen is 5th all time in SS fWAR, he is 7th all time in fangraph's DEF stat at SS (which is cumulative and is Def = Fielding Runs Above Average + positional adjustment) he is pretty obviously one of the greatest SS's of all time.

Pie Traynor played 13 full seasons. During those seasons he led the league in put outs 7 times, 2nd 3, 3rd 1. In assists 3 times, 2nd 4 times, 3rd 2 times. In DP 4 times, 2nd 2 times and 3rd 1 time. He was considered the greatest defensive 3rd baseman of the preWW2 era by those who saw him play. He had tremendous range often cutting in front of his shortstop to make plays. His defense was so highly regarded that he was voted the greatest 3rd baseman of all time in 1969 for the 100th anniversary of pro baseball. All of his great defense is only worth 2 WAR. Obviously the data we have is seriously lacking and can't be relied upon to properly judge a player's defensive ability.

[Topps206]

Pie Traynor played 13 full seasons. During those seasons he led the league in put outs 7 times, 2nd 3, 3rd 1. In assists 3 times, 2nd 4 times, 3rd 2 times. In DP 4 times, 2nd 2 times and 3rd 1 time. He was considered the greatest defensive 3rd baseman of the preWW2 era by those who saw him play. He had tremendous range often cutting in front of his shortstop to make plays. His defense was so highly regarded that he was voted the greatest 3rd baseman of all time in 1969 for the 100th anniversary of pro baseball. All of his great defense is only worth 2 WAR. Obviously the data we have is seriously lacking and can't be relied upon to properly judge a player's defensive ability.

Yet I pointed out to you how many times Dahlen led things in different defensive categories or the many times he was near the top and you want to invalidate his defensive WAR.

[bravos4evr]

Pie Traynor played 13 full seasons. During those seasons he led the league in put outs 7 times, 2nd 3, 3rd 1. In assists 3 times, 2nd 4 times, 3rd 2 times. In DP 4 times, 2nd 2 times and 3rd 1 time. He was considered the greatest defensive 3rd baseman of the preWW2 era by those who saw him play. He had tremendous range often cutting in front of his shortstop to make plays. His defense was so highly regarded that he was voted the greatest 3rd baseman of all time in 1969 for the 100th anniversary of pro baseball. All of his great defense is only worth 2 WAR. Obviously the data we have is seriously lacking and can't be relied upon to properly judge a player's defensive ability.

or perhaps the data confirms what we already know: the eye test is seriously damaged by confirmation bias.

If the same standard is applied equally to all players, even if the methodology is not perfect (and with defense it probably never will be perfect) at least the ratio of performance relative to each other is accurate enough for comparison. And will always be a better gauge than the confirmation bias ridden eye test.

Pie Traynor grades out as the 209th best fielding 3b of all time. Now, that may not be perfectly accurate, but the data isn't so awful that it is somehow screwing Traynor out of 200 spots. You can either hand wave away the data, or you have to come to the more logical conclusion; the people using inferior statistics and the eye test were wrong.


P.S. you must remember too that defense is weighted by difficulty of position SS, CF, 2b, C get the most extra weighting, DH the biggest subtraction. a really excellent 3b will generally be an avg SS whereas an avg SS would generally be an elite 3b (but it would be a waste to put them there)

[bravos4evr]

To expand on my above post.


New metrics are not biased against old players. FWAR tells us Babe was the best player of all time in terms of overall production. It says he and Ted are back to back as hitters. It tells us Ozzie Smith gathered the most value at SS on defense. It shows us that the 4 pitchers to provide the most production over the course of their careers are Clemens, Cy Young, Walter Johnson and Greg Maddux.

Here is the Fangraphs DEF leaders ALL TIME at each position (excluding P ) :

C- Pudge Rodriguez

1b- Hughie Jennings

2b-Frankie Frisch

SS- Ozzie Smith

3b- Brooks Robbinson

LF-Willie Wilson

CF- Andruw Jones

RF-Jesse Barfield


now you might quibble with this list a little bit, but there's no player listed that wasn't considered the best of their era with the glove at their position. (and the spread of eras seems to show that the bias isn't as bad as one might think)

[packs]

That list is way off base if you ask me. Hughie Jennings only played 331 games at first base. How can he be the best fielding first baseman of all time?

[Topps206]

Bill Dahlen Top 10 Similarlity Scores

#1 George Davis - HOF
#2 Bid McPhee - HOF
#3 Herman Long
#4 Bobby Wallace - HOF
#5 Omar Vizquel
#6 Luke Appling - HOF
#7 Luis Aparicio - HOF
#8 Dave Concepcion
#9 Ozzie Smith - HOF
#10 Frankie Frisch - HOF

Translation - Someone is greatly missing from his rightful spot in Cooperstown.

[bravos4evr]

That list is way off base if you ask me. Hughie Jennings only played 331 games at first base. How can he be the best fielding first baseman of all time?

you logical fallacy is : CHERRY PICKING


probably because he was good enough to play SS and 2b too (which very few 1b in the history of baseball could do)

but if you want me to limit it to guys with 1000 games or more at 1b, you get Cap Anson #1 for first baseman on defense.

[bravos4evr]

Bill Dahlen Top 10 Similarlity Scores

#1 George Davis - HOF
#2 Bid McPhee - HOF
#3 Herman Long
#4 Bobby Wallace - HOF
#5 Omar Vizquel
#6 Luke Appling - HOF
#7 Luis Aparicio - HOF
#8 Dave Concepcion
#9 Ozzie Smith - HOF
#10 Frankie Frisch - HOF

Translation - Someone is greatly missing from his rightful spot in Cooperstown.

the only other player in the top 5 at their position all time (with no PED attachment) who isn't in the HOF is probably Joe Torre (and admittedly, he played a lot of his career outside of C so that might not even apply)

Let's see, using fWAR:
C- Bench , Carter, Rodriguez, Fisk,Berra (I was wrong, Torre is 7th)

1b-Musial, Gehrig, Foxx, Anson, Pujols (Pujols still active, but will be in)

SS- Wagner, A-Rod, Ripken,Davis , Dahlen (arod and dahlen not in)

2b- Hornsby, Collins, Lajoie,Morgan, Gehringer (all in)

3b- Schmidt, Matthews, Boggs, Brett, Chipper (Chipper eligible in 2018)

RF- Ruth, Aaron, Ott, F. Robinson, Kaline (all in)

CF- Mays, Cobb, Speaker, Mantle, Dimaggio (nuff said)

LF- Bonds, Williams, Henderson,Yaz,Ed Delehanty (all in but Bonds cuz roids)


so yeah, the only non PED impacted player in the top 5 at their position who hasn't gone in is Dahlen.

[Topps206]

Unlike basketball, you can't be inducted twice. Torre has a worthy case as a player alone, but he's in. That's all that matters.

[rats60]

or perhaps the data confirms what we already know: the eye test is seriously damaged by confirmation bias.

If the same standard is applied equally to all players, even if the methodology is not perfect (and with defense it probably never will be perfect) at least the ratio of performance relative to each other is accurate enough for comparison. And will always be a better gauge than the confirmation bias ridden eye test.

Pie Traynor grades out as the 209th best fielding 3b of all time. Now, that may not be perfectly accurate, but the data isn't so awful that it is somehow screwing Traynor out of 200 spots. You can either hand wave away the data, or you have to come to the more logical conclusion; the people using inferior statistics and the eye test were wrong.


P.S. you must remember too that defense is weighted by difficulty of position SS, CF, 2b, C get the most extra weighting, DH the biggest subtraction. a really excellent 3b will generally be an avg SS whereas an avg SS would generally be an elite 3b (but it would be a waste to put them there)

Or the model, which is biased, is completely wrong. You have done nothing but hand wave. There is nothing logical about any of your posts. You just want to hand wave away what people have seen. However, current defensive metrics are partially based on...the eye test. We now observe where balls are hit or for older players try to recreate that data, which is not available for Dahlen.

If you have a player who has poor range but gets a lot of balls hit right to him, he is not as good of a player who has to use his range to get to the same number of balls. Or another way to put it, Derek Jeter has led the league in assists and put outs, but we have enough observable data to know that he is not a good defensive player. I will trust those that saw Dahlen play that say he wasn't a HOFer and not a top defensive SS. I trust the people who saw Pie Traynor play and consider him the greatest 3B up to 1969. If you want argue otherwise, present new facts or data. If you are going to be lazy and just cite WAR, there is no further need for discussion.

[packs]

I wasn't cherry picking your list. Was no one else surprised to see Hughie Jennings' name at first base? A guy not known for playing first base? Numbers aren't always the whole story. He played the equivalent of just over 2 seasons at the position but he is rated as the best ever. I don't think so.

[Topps206]

Or the model, which is biased, is completely wrong. You have done nothing but hand wave. There is nothing logical about any of your posts. You just want to hand wave away what people have seen. However, current defensive metrics are partially based on...the eye test. We now observe where balls are hit or for older players try to recreate that data, which is not available for Dahlen.

If you have a player who has poor range but gets a lot of balls hit right to him, he is not as good of a player who has to use his range to get to the same number of balls. Or another way to put it, Derek Jeter has led the league in assists and put outs, but we have enough observable data to know that he is not a good defensive player. I will trust those that saw Dahlen play that say he wasn't a HOFer and not a top defensive SS. I trust the people who saw Pie Traynor play and consider him the greatest 3B up to 1969. If you want argue otherwise, present new facts or data. If you are going to be lazy and just cite WAR, there is no further need for discussion.

You trust those who saw Dahlen play that didnt think of him as a Hall of Famer. Yet they didn't see Sherry Magee as one either. You support Magee, I support both, but how is your logic applicable to Dahlen but apparently not applicable to Magee?

[rats60]

You trust those who saw Dahlen play that didnt think of him as a Hall of Famer. Yet they didn't see Sherry Magee as one either. You support Magee, I support both, but how is your logic applicable to Dahlen but apparently not applicable to Magee?

I already posted my reasoning. I am fine with neither being in and saying Kelley and Wheat or Tinker and Wallace don't belong. I think we can agree that there are players in the HOF that don't belong. So, player A being in doesn't necessarily mean player B should.

[Scocs]

I personally despise arguments like this because everyone ALWAYS overlooks the great Negro Leaguers of the past . It's like they get shafted twice: once when they were alive and again when they're dead.... :(

[Topps206]

I already posted my reasoning. I am fine with neither being in and saying Kelley and Wheat or Tinker and Wallace don't belong. I think we can agree that there are players in the HOF that don't belong. So, player A being in doesn't necessarily mean player B should.

That's true, but I've argued ad nauseam for these players and everything I've seen suggests they're amongst the best ever at their respected position.

[bravos4evr]

Or the model, which is biased, is completely wrong. You have done nothing but hand wave. There is nothing logical about any of your posts. You just want to hand wave away what people have seen. However, current defensive metrics are partially based on...the eye test. We now observe where balls are hit or for older players try to recreate that data, which is not available for Dahlen.

If you have a player who has poor range but gets a lot of balls hit right to him, he is not as good of a player who has to use his range to get to the same number of balls. Or another way to put it, Derek Jeter has led the league in assists and put outs, but we have enough observable data to know that he is not a good defensive player. I will trust those that saw Dahlen play that say he wasn't a HOFer and not a top defensive SS. I trust the people who saw Pie Traynor play and consider him the greatest 3B up to 1969. If you want argue otherwise, present new facts or data. If you are going to be lazy and just cite WAR, there is no further need for discussion.

ummm...no

this kind of argument against science is why we have anti-vaxxers, acupuncture and all sorts of other nonsense out there parading around like it has evidence behind it. an opinion has zero weight next to factual data. zero... nothing confirmation bias removes the eye test from any sort of meritorious consideration.

[rats60]

ummm...no

this kind of argument against science is why we have anti-vaxxers, acupuncture and all sorts of other nonsense out there parading around like it has evidence behind it. an opinion has zero weight next to factual data. zero... nothing confirmation bias removes the eye test from any sort of meritorious consideration.

So you are claiming that science doesn't use observation? Lol.

[Paul S]

:p.

[bravos4evr]

So you are claiming that science doesn't use observation? Lol.

science uses observation, but not opinion. there is no artistic merit in analyzing data.

science- player A has accumulated 128 defensive runs over his career


eye test- player A was below/above avg in the 15 games I saw him in

[CMIZ5290]

Nick- Please go away, this is ridiculous......

[bravos4evr]

Nick- Please go away, this is ridiculous......

no, you go away. you haven't given any meaningful data to back up anything you have said. I have. you don't like losing. sorry, work harder.

[Topps206]

If you don't like this thread, why go in it?

[bravos4evr]

If you don't like this thread, why go in it?

apparently he just wants to yell at clouds...

anyway, I'm with ya on Dahlen and I'm opting out of the thread as I don't see much more to be gained in it.

[CMIZ5290]

apparently he just wants to yell at clouds...

anyway, I'm with ya on Dahlen and I'm opting out of the thread as I don't see much more to be gained in it.

There is a God!!!!!!!

[FourStrikes]

Kevin / Nick:

just get a fuck!n' room already!

JMO.

xo me (and probably - maybe??? - others that are sick and tired of in-thread back and forth personal bullsh!t on Net54).

while both of you certainly DO contribute worthwhile insight/opinions on a variety of subjects, this sh!t is getting old.

again, JMO, but...