Top Tier HOF'ers - M. Brown / Waddell / Joss

[bcbgcbrcb]

In a similar fashion to the Bob Feller thread, please share your opinion on these three pitchers. I left out Eddie Plank as I think it is fairly obvious that he would be considered upper echelon.

[packs]

In skill I agree. But not in cards.

[tiger8mush]

I guess I'd have to look at the initial HOF selection in 1936 to help gauge the answer to this question.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_1936.shtml

M. Brown was 31st on the list, getting 2.7% vote.
Waddell was 18th, with 14.6%
Joss isn't even on the list, neither is Plank

Top twenty:
Cobb 98.2%
Wagner 95.1%
Ruth 95.1%
Matty 90.7%
WaJo 83.6%
Lajoie 64.6%
Speaker 58.8%
Young 49.1%
Hornsby 46.5% (Active)
Cochrane 35.4% (Active)
Sisler 34.1%
E. Collins 26.5%
J. Collins 25.7
G.C. Alexander 24.3%
Gehrig 22.6% (Active)
Bresnahan 20.5%
Keeler 17.7%
Waddell 14.6%
Foxx 9.3% (Active)
Walsh 8.8%

I'd vote "not top-tier"

[tiger8mush]

Maybe for "top-tier" you could put together a "team". If you had a 25 man roster, who would make it? Since it is pre-war, perhaps to with 15 positional players and 10 pitchers and maybe that can define your "top-tier team" for pre-war?

Rob

[Brian Van Horn]

As for Joss, if you have a lifetime of 1.89, you are a top tier Hall of Famer.

[Peter_Spaeth]

None of the above. Ed Walsh might rate higher than any of them, btw.

Hall Of Fame StatisticsPlayer rank in (·)


Black Ink Pitching - 67 (14), Average HOFer ≈ 40

Gray Ink Pitching - 178 (62), Average HOFer ≈ 185

Hall of Fame Monitor Pitching - 146 (45), Likely HOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards Pitching - 52 (31), Average HOFer ≈ 50

[Peter_Spaeth]

ERAs from that period of time are deceptive.

Consider Joss' Baseball Reference stats, and lest you say well his career was cut short, his WAR for 7 years ranks only 111th.

Black Ink Pitching - 19 (110), Average HOFer ≈ 40

Gray Ink Pitching - 139 (115), Average HOFer ≈ 185

Hall of Fame Monitor Pitching - 89 (129), Likely HOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards Pitching - 47 (44), Average HOFer ≈ 50


Joss also compares unfavorably in most categories to Koufax who had a similar shortened career.

Black Ink Pitching - 78 (12), Average HOFer ≈ 40

Gray Ink Pitching - 151 (94), Average HOFer ≈ 185

Hall of Fame Monitor Pitching - 227 (17), Likely HOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards Pitching - 46 (48), Average HOFer ≈ 50

[CMIZ5290]

This one surprises me a tad. I think all 3 of these guys are first tier HOFers.. Waddell and Joss had tragic, short lives, but there stats are incredible..

[AddieJoss]

Joss is one of only 2 pitchers ever with a WHIP under 1.00 or an ERA under 2.00 and he did both for his career. His career was cut short or his numbers would have been either better, but dominating pitcher with sick stats.

[Bored5000]

I am shocked that there has been as much support as there has been for any of three to be "top tier" Hall of Famers. IMO, it is a pretty easy vote that none of the three are "top tier." Brown, Waddell and Joss are all ranked middle of the pack to bottom half of nearly all HoF metrics. Waddell and Joss especially may have had tragic, shortened careers, but you can only grade them on what they actually did during their careers.

Waddell especially may have brilliant during his time, but it is telling IMO that none of the three received much support during that frst election period. "Top-tier" HoFers attract more than 15 pecent of the vote or three percent of the vote.

IMO, "top-tier" pre-war pitchers mean WaJo, Matty, Cy, GCA.

[CW]

I feel that these 3 would be middle tier, if that exists, but not top tier HOFers. Both Joss and Waddell had a few years of greatness, but their overall careers are too short. A top tier HOFer needs to have a fairly lengthy career to put up the numbers to be truly upper echelon, in my book.

Brown had a fairly long career, but he only had a 6 season stretch of 20+ wins, and this was during the deadball era when 20 was attainable for average pitchers.

All 3 were great players and I like many of their cards, but when you compare them to true top tier pitchers like Mathewson and Johnson, they just don't quite stack up. Joss and Waddell both had the potential, but "what if" doesn't get you top tier.

[Kenny Cole]

Phil,

What about Kid Nichols? IMO he has a much better claim to being a top tier pitcher than any of these three.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Phil,

What about Kid Nichols? IMO he has a much better claim to being a top tier pitcher than any of these three.

Indeed he does, by the numbers. And to reiterate, Joss' raw numbers must be considered in the context of the dead ball era. Adjusted for era, they aren't that great. This is not a difficult concept. Nichols:

Hall Of Fame StatisticsPlayer rank in (·)


Black Ink Pitching - 35 (46), Average HOFer ≈ 40

Gray Ink Pitching - 309 (9), Average HOFer ≈ 185

Hall of Fame Monitor Pitching - 228 (16), Likely HOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards Pitching - 69 (9), Average HOFer ≈ 50

JAWS Starting Pitcher (4th), 116.5 career WAR/75.1 7yr-peak WAR/95.8 JAWS

[Peter_Spaeth]

Tim Keefe also looks very good by the numbers.

Hall Of Fame StatisticsPlayer rank in (·)


Black Ink Pitching - 58 (19), Average HOFer ≈ 40

Gray Ink Pitching - 245 (23), Average HOFer ≈ 185

Hall of Fame Monitor Pitching - 271 (6), Likely HOFer ≈ 100

Hall of Fame Standards Pitching - 70 (7), Average HOFer ≈ 50

JAWS Starting Pitcher (12th), 86.7 career WAR/66.5 7yr-peak WAR/76.5 JAWS