Surprising baseball facts

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by jayshum

I'm not familiar with the careers of either Cecil Travis or Mel Harder. Looking at their stats, it looks like Travis may have had a chance to be in the Hall of Fame until he missed 3 years for military service. When he came back after WWII, he was clearly no longer the same player and was out of the majors at age 33. I can see an argument being made for him being inducted, but he probably needed a few more good years that he likely would have had if not for being in the military.

As for Harder, his stats show 4 or 5 very good seasons but overall it looks to me that he had a solid career but not one that makes me think he definitely belongs in the Hall of Fame. Regarding him getting 75% of the vote from the Veterans Committee but not getting in because 2 others were higher, does anyone have a link to the actual voting results showing that? I found a few places that mention it happened but couldn't find the actual results anywhere. If it was in 1999, then it looks like the Veterans Committee elected 4 people that year not 2.

https://baseballhall.org/discover/in...ss%20of%201999.

What you say about Travis has always been the biggest strike against him.

With Mel, it's the old, "Well, if he played in New York, he'd have been a shoe-in!" argument. Alas, Mel was with the lowly Indians for his entire career, retiring the season before he'd perhaps have had a chance to win a WS ring as a player. I supposed the same could be said for Travis, as he played in Washington, but I think the argument is stronger in this regard for a 20-year career, single team man.

I agree with your assessments as to why they're not in, and most certainly why they weren't good candidates immediately following their careers, but the "why not's" are also there and they always looked like solid picks as VC selections. Lots of worse and more embarrassing selections, to be certain. I would not be embarrassed to see these two guys voted in.