The metrics are the product of extensive research and analysis and thought. The reason they use four is for the precise reason you mention -- any one alone has its biases and therefore its flaws. So your argument about Cecil Cooper is a straw man. Taken as a whole, the metrics are pretty meaningful. Just look at the rankings they generate -- there are perhaps some aberrations on any given metric, but not that many. And Chick Hafey is not even in the discussion on any one of the four metrics. He had a few good years. So did all sorts of people who are not Hall worthy.
it bears repeating.
Black Ink Batting - 7 (324), Average HOFer ≈ 27
Gray Ink Batting - 79 (311), Average HOFer ≈ 144
Hall of Fame Monitor Batting - 69 (284), Likely HOFer ≈ 100
Hall of Fame Standards Batting - 33 (254), Average HOFer ≈ 50
JAWS Left Field (57th), 30.1 career WAR/27.1 7yr-peak WAR/28.6 JAWS
Average HOF LF (out of 19) = 65.1 career WAR/41.5 7yr-peak WAR/53.3 JAWS
__________________
Net 54-- the discussion board where people resent discussions. 
My avatar is a sketch by my son who is an art school graduate. Some of his sketches and paintings are at
https://www.jamesspaethartwork.com/
Last edited by Peter_Spaeth; 05-02-2014 at 11:34 AM.
|