An evidence based discussion about the players who've been overlooked for Cooperstown

[clydepepper]

Bill- I always enjoy the depth of your research.

However, I am not completely comfortable with defensive statistics in general and dWAR specifically...since I found Gary Carter so far ahead of Johnny Bench on the career list.

Maybe I grossly underrated Carter, but Bench was a pioneer and his career was a watershed moment for the science of catching and even with a shorter career, I cannot get my mind around anyone, other than Ivan (Bench.1) having better career defensive value.

[BearBailey]

Amazing Research!
I am with you I have always thought Belanger and Dave Concepcion get no credit, maybe because they played on great teams, maybe because they were defensive oriented. But when it comes to HoF voting apparently I'll never get it. You are either a HoFer or your not the first ballot vs. Non first ballot drives me crazy!

[Runscott]

Great job Bill, but no way is Belanger a HOF'er. Hitting is an integral part of the game, and he failed miserably in that area.

[Mountaineer1999]

Wow bill! You devoted some time to this, nice work. I can't agree with Belanger going into the Hall but I certainly know more about him and the Orioles now. Seems Concepcion would be the better candidate because he hit a little and I think he was as good defensively as Belanger regardless of the dWar numbers.

[Mountaineer1999]

My vote is for League MVP, gold glove & silver slugger winning 7 time All Star Dave Parker.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Great job Bill, but no way is Belanger a HOF'er. Hitting is an integral part of the game, and he failed miserably in that area.

I think both hitting and fielding are integral parts of the game, and if players can make the Hall of Fame for their hitting prowess alone, why can there not be players who make it for their fielding alone? The Hall exists to recognize, supposedly, the very greatest players in baseball history. There is compelling evidence to back up the assertion that Mark Belanger was the greatest defensive shortstop to ever play the game, or at the very least, on equal footing with the very best to ever play the position.

A hitter can be completely taken out of a game. A hitter gets 3 to 4, maybe 5 at bats in a game depending on how the game is progressing. If a pitcher doesn't want to face a hitter, they can simply intentionally walk them. They could conceivably do this each time the hitter came to the plate. It's far fetched, but not impossible. But a fielder, especially a great one, can negate much of the opposing team's offense, and they cannot be taken out of the game the way a hitter can.

If a right handed pitcher is facing a predominantly right handed lineup, the majority of batted balls should be to their pull side, the third base side. The shortstop and third baseman would work in symphony to silence much of that offense. Sharp grounders, well hit line drives become outs to a higher degree. Suddenly hitters are trying to put more loft into their swings, and in doing so, are having to slightly alter their approach at the plate. Belanger was a guy that with his range, and having Brooks Robinson to his right, could eliminate much of the opposing team's offense.

Ted Williams had a career WAR of 123.1 His oWAR was 126.3. His dWAR was -13.3. Clearly, he is a Hall of Famer because of his bat. It's been written that when Carl Yastrzemski came up for the Red Sox, the team immediately got better. He provided comparable offense, and vastly improved the defense.

Frank Thomas was just elected to Cooperstown as one of the great Chicago White Sox of all-time. His career WAR? 73.7. His oWAR was 79.8. His dWAR was -23.4. Thomas played 2,322 games in total, of which 1,310 were as a designated hitter. He played 971 games at first base, and had a dWAR of -23.4. His offense was the only thing that kept him in the Majors as over 56% of the games he played he was a hitter only. He never took to the field with a glove. His offense is clearly the only reason he's in the Hall of Fame. Defense, which is half the game, was a non factor with Frank Thomas.

Were Williams or Thomas as bad defensively as Mark Belanger was offensively? Probably not, because as I've shown, for the men in the modern era that managed to compile 5,000 or more at bats, Belanger had the lowest OPS of all. But it's clear that these two men were below average defensively. Only baseball, American League baseball, allows you to hide one poor defender with the designated hitter. Fielders did not get that luxury.

Ozzie Smith made it to the Hall of Fame, and he was pretty much a non factor offensively. Belanger had a .580 OPS. Smith's was .666. Yes, that's 86 points higher, which is statistically relevant. But Ozzie Smith didn't play through a dead ball era (in fact, the later part of his career took place in an era with increased offensive numbers). Belanger did. The first eight years of Belanger's career took place during what is called the second Dead Ball Era in baseball. This took place between 1964 and 1972. People familiar with baseball history will remember this period where pitchers clearly dominated the game, especially in the American League. This is the era during which Denny McClain won 30 games in a season. This is the era during which the aforementioned Carl Yastrzemski won the 1968 American League Batting Title with a .301 average. Yastrzemski was the only American Leaguer to hit .300 that year. In fact, only one other hitter in the AL managed to even hit .290, Oakland's Danny Carter, who hit .290 on the dot for second best behind Yaz. Belanger's play at shortstop was a contributing factor towards lower scoring in the American League.

Defense matters. And the great defenders in the game's history should receive the same level of recognition that the great hitters have gotten since Cooperstown opened her doors to Ruth, Wagner and Cobb.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by cubsfan-budman

Any thoughts on Lee Smith's chances? Seems like a solid HOF prospect, but I think at this point, unlikely to get in.

I think with the ever increasing reliance on not only just closers, but bullpen specialists, like the setup pitcher, the 8th inning pitcher, closers, and non-starters in general will start getting more consideration from the BBWAA, or in Lee Smith's case, the Veteran Committee.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Smith make it one day. In fact, I think he has a good shot. It remains to be seen how the Veterans Committee views him, but he got as high as 50.6% from the Baseball Writers in 2012. He finished just below 500 saves in his career with 478, which is pretty outstanding. Remember, too, that he was the all-time saves leader from 1993 to 2006. He had 3 top 5 Cy Young finishes in a 4 season span later in his career, including a Cy Young runner up in 1991. He led the league in saves three times, but he was an elite closer for more than a decade. His save chances were somewhat limited early on because he spent the first part of his career with a Cubs team that didn't win a lot of games, save for the '84 season. In '84, Smith was 9-7, pitched in 69 games, and saved 33. He's 12th all-time in games pitched with 1,012, and even with Mariano Rivera and Trevor Hoffman passing him, he's still third all-time in saves. The only guy I could see passing him anytime soon is Jonathan Papelbon. I don't see either Francisco Rodriguez or Joe Nathan having enough steam to reach 479.

Originally Posted by clydepepper

Bill- I always enjoy the depth of your research.

However, I am not completely comfortable with defensive statistics in general and dWAR specifically...since I found Gary Carter so far ahead of Johnny Bench on the career list.

Maybe I grossly underrated Carter, but Bench was a pioneer and his career was a watershed moment for the science of catching and even with a shorter career, I cannot get my mind around anyone, other than Ivan (Bench.1) having better career defensive value.

Bench was a pioneer, absolutely. One thing you need to remember though-Carter played over 300 games more as a catcher than Bench did. That's nearly two full seasons. Carter might not have been a better catcher, but he absolutely could have been a comparable defensive talent. Unfortunately, being the one that revolutionizes a position doesn't get them any extra points in their column. So, while Bench could have advanced things like defensive footwork, and pop rate, Carter could have equaled them.

I would love to be able to break down dWAR by position for those players who were used at more than one defensive position. Maybe there's a way to do that on Baseball Reference or Fangraphs that I'm missing. But here's one thing to keep in mind. If we compare Carter and Bench, and examine what their dWAR totals were at the end of their age 30 season, they're quite close:

Johnny Bench dWAR 18.6 (1967-1978)
Gary Carter dWAR 20.9 (1974-1984)

And the approximately 2 point difference can be traced to Gary Carter's 1983 season when he had a phenomenal 4.0 dWAR. Both Carter and Bench had six seasons with dWAR over 1.8 excluding Carter's 1983 season. Carter had one season with a below average dWAR, when he was -0.4 dWAR in 1988. Johnny Bench's defensive performance in 1982 hurt him, as he had a -1.5 rating. But by then, he wasn't catching. He was playing third base. 107 of the games he played that year were at third base. He played 8 more games at first base, and only one behind the plate. So while you might feel his 19.3 dWAR career total is low, keep in mind that he not only did not gain points for that season, but he lost a point and a half. So his career dWAR would have been more like a 20.8. And there's one other thing to keep in mind. Johnny Bench's dWAR is a combination of his time as catcher, as a third baseman, and a first baseman. 90.5% of Gary Carter's career games were behind the plate. 79.4% of Johnny Bench's games were behind the plate. I find nothing in these numbers that would make me think Gary Carter was a better catcher than Johnny Bench. The most accurate statement I could make would be that Johnny Bench and Gary Carter were in fact quite comparable talents defensively behind the plate. Carter won three Gold Gloves, and then Tony Pena, and then Benito Santiago took over as the best defensive catcher in the National League. While Johnny Bench was catcher, he was the best in the National League, hands down. He won ten Gold Gloves, and his place in the pantheon of great catchers is, in my mind, secure. He's the best combination of catcher offense and defense the game has ever seen.

Originally Posted by Runscott

Great job Bill, but no way is Belanger a HOF'er. Hitting is an integral part of the game, and he failed miserably in that area.

I respect your opinion, Scott. My last posts touches on my thinking as to why I feel he should be looked at again. Ultimately the Veterans Committee might maintain the status quo. But if the BBWAA can elect players based solely on their offensive prowess, then I feel the very greatest defensive players of all time at a given position should at least merit another review.

Originally Posted by Mountaineer1999

My vote is for League MVP, gold glove & silver slugger winning 7 time All Star Dave Parker.

Parker will definitely be looked at. Clemente's heir in right field was a damned fine baseball player, and he had some great years in the late 70s. That's when I became a fan of the Pirates. I was young, but there was something about Pops and the Family that just drew me in. We were lucky enough to have the Cobra in Milwaukee for one season, in 1990. He was an All Star, and he won a Silver Slugger by hitting .289 with 21 home runs and 92 RBI for the Brew Crew. That was his best season in the AL.

Thanks to all you guys, Howard and Bear Bailey, too. I'll start working on my next player selection. This one is coming from Ken. We're going to look at the Cuban Comet, Minnie Minoso.

[clydepepper]

Thanks to all you guys, Howard and Bear Bailey, too. I'll start working on my next player selection. This one is coming from Ken. We're going to look at the Cuban Comet, Minnie Minoso.
__________________


Bill-

I eagerly await your work on Minnie Minoso. Thanks for helping me understand the Bench / Carter comparison.

[bn2cardz]

The problem with only using dWAR and defensive merit is that you are leaving out JAWS, WAR, and even WAR7

If a team can find a player with slightly better batting even if it does make the position slightly weaker you can still have a better chance to win games.

You compared O.Smith to Bellanger because O.Smith was a great deffensive player but his overall contribution to the team was vastly different when you compare the full picture of JAWS WAR WAR7 and even oWAR.

Belanger oWAR = 14.6 over 18 seasons (avg 0.81/season)
O. Smith oWar = 47.8 over 19 seasons (avg 2.52/season)

Belanger RBAT (runs produced from batting) -219
O.Smith RBAT (runs produced from batting) -117

Belanger Rfield (runs from fielding) 241
O.Smith Rfield (runs from fielding) 239

Belanger RAA (runs above average) 160
O.Smith RAA (runs above average) 379

So even though O.Smith may be a slightly worse fielder, his batting was enough to make him a far more useful part of a winning team.

You state the amount of games Belanger played as a reason to average out his dWAR higher. Even in 162 game average Belanger only had 530 PA leading to only 465 AB, whereas O.Smith had a 162 average of 679 PA leading to 592 AB. Ozzie Smith was better known for his fielding and his Batting did lack, but not enough to make him ineffective so they had to hide him in the lineup.

Belanger's effectiveness was diminished by his inability to bat thus leading to him being hidden in the lineup and being removed from games early.

Belanger's
JAWS: 36.5 (39th)
WAR: 41 (38th)
WAR7: 32 (40th)

There is a HOFer that I feel Belanger does equate to and that is Rabbit Maranville. It is a hard argument for Maranville to be in without including Belanger.

Edited to add:

The number of PA that Belanger faced compared to O.Smith is a lot lower as well

Belanger faced 63131 PA, with only 7107 balls fielded. Compare this to O.Smith facing 91803 PA with 10581 balls fielded

Also to show how Belanger's batting did affect the amount of playing time:
He played in 1942 games, out of that he started 1687 (86.87%) he only played 1465 complete games (86.84% of games started were finished), that is only 75.44% of games he did a complete game.
O.Smiths numbers:
2511 Games, out of that he started 2477 (98.65%), he played 2265 complete games (91.44% of games started were finished), this means of the games he played 90.2% were complete games.

Belanger's batting affected the amount of playing time he got. Even in these stats Maranville out does Belanger. When a player can't be counted on to complete more than 3 out of 4 of the games he plays I have a hard time considering him a HOFer.

A HOFer is expected to play at least 10 seasons, Yet Belanger only played over 1000 innings in 9 years of play (for comparison O.Smith had 14 seasons of 1000+ innings seasons (his lowest between 79 and 93 was 81 with 986.1. ). Just because he was in MLB for over 10 seasons it is hard to consider him a HOFer if he didn't even have the innings played in the field for over 10 seasons especially if that is the part of his playing you want to put him in for. Frank Thomas doesn't have the fielding innings played, but the AL does have the DH he did his job and he did it well.

[bosoxfan]

[QUOTE=the 'stache;1318228 Ted Williams had a career WAR of 123.1 His oWAR was 126.3. His dWAR was -13.3. Clearly, he is a Hall of Famer because of his bat. It's been written that when Carl Yastrzemski came up for the Red Sox, the team immediately got better. He provided comparable offense, and vastly improved the defense.

Great subject and very thought provoking. Nice job!

Williams was not a great fielder that is true. He was NOT a terrible outfielder.
His dwar was -13.3. 46% of that negative came in his last 3 years when he was 39, 40, and 41 years old and playing hurt and still, had an overall war or 6.8.
To say that when Yaz came up the team immediately got better is not true. Yastrzemski's dwar in his first year was in negative territory and so was his offense.
There's a lot of great gloves that never make it to the show because they can't hit, but if you can hit, they will always find a spot for you.

[CMIZ5290]

Dale Murphy?

[39special]

Gil Hodges