Bob Caruthers And The HOF

[G1911]

I think Caruthers is hurt by a couple of things.

1) He played in the AA, which the Hall doesn’t like very much. He was a mediocre pitcher in the NL (97 ERA+ = 3% below league average).

2) His career is very short. 19th century pitchers tended to hurl more innings and play fewer years than we are used to now. Caruthers only threw 2,800 innings though, which doesn’t compare well to his HOF contemporaries.

3) His stats start to recede when you look at his team. His primary HOF statistic is his win loss record, which has more to do with him playing on the Browns and Bridegrooms that were great teams than his hurling. When he went 40-11 to lead in wins and win percentage, his ERA+ was a good but not star 110 (his other 40 win year was an actually great season).

On the other hand, he was an excellent pitcher and he was as good of a batter or better than he was a pitcher. 134 OPS+ over 2,900 plate appearances is hardly insignificant. It probably is not fair to hold the AA against him too much, it’s a recognized major league in a period where the lines were rather fluid and thus should count.

I would vote for Caruthers as a lower end but deserving HOFer. I would probably vote for 6-10 other 19th century players before him though.

I think the year rule is a good rule for players who came up in the time of the major leagues. I think it should be waived for pioneers like Ross Barnes and James Creighton. It’s absurd that they aren’t in the Hall.