Quote:
Originally Posted by G1911
Hernandez himself isn’t, but the logic to get him in does open the massive floodgate. “X is better than Y, Y is in, therefore we should elect X”. Considering some of the atrocious choices made, this is probably more like a thousand players who can be justified by it than a couple hundred. I think comparing to the general standards of the 1B in as a group is a good way to do it, or to focus on the very best at a position who are not in (the Hall inevitably waters down for it to continue functioning over time, but this directs that watering down to those closest to the extant threshold). I don’t see Hernandez meeting either standard. He fails at the traditional stats (he was very good, he only fails in the context of the Hall of Fame), and is left with a WAR argument, of which he is an oddity. WAR is written to punish first basemen, and the way that they do this is designed around a factor that he dodges because of his unusual style as a player, as a glove heavy 1B. I think WAR does a decent job of comparing offense among contemporaries (it is very much geared to the current game as it is played now, not how it was played in 1960 or 1930 or 1887), but the defensive adjustments is where it runs off the tracks, and some rather dubious values are given for some players.
|
If we were comparing Hernandez to George Highpockets Kelly and Jim Bottomley (the two worst 1B in the HOF), then I think your argument would make sense. But I wasn't comparing Hernandez to them.
Hernandez has a lot more than just WAR. He has an MVP and two other top 5 finishes. He was a central figure for two different team's championships. He has a batting title, 2 silver sluggers, and 5 All Star nods.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree.