2016 Pre-Integration Era HOF Candidates

[Peter_Spaeth]

You go right on advocating for a guy with a 4.04 ERA then. You're doing a great job of convincing us that the voters of the last 70 years just didn't know what to look for. Where does Bill James rank him by the way, that would be interesting, I thought I had his book handy but can't find it.

[btcarfagno]

What a strange case Wes Ferrell is. He was a better hitter than his Hall Of Famer brother. He won 20+ games 6 times. He was also incredibly easy to hit off of, rarely struck anyone out and walked a ton of hitters. A normal 9 inning game for him would include 13-14 base runners. Efficient he was not.

Tom C

[Peter_Spaeth]

All you guys who want to keep expanding the Hall should like this site. It ranks Wes in the 20s, fairly high up especially if you take out the PED guys.

http://www.notinhalloffame.com/baseb...0&limitstart=0

[darwinbulldog]

I figure the Hall should include about 2 players per year. Apparently that makes me a Big Hall guy. So be it. If we start with 1871 and don't yet count the 2015 voting, we should already have 288 players in. If you count Al Spalding then, we're about 37 eligible players shy of the Hall I'd want. Dahlen and Ferrell would both be in my top 37.

Along with:

Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Bob Caruthers
Charlie Buffinton
Urban Shocker
Jim McCormick
Jeff Bagwell
Mike Mussina
Curt Schilling
Mike Piazza
Kevin Brown
Rick Reuschel
Ivan Rodriguez
Larry Walker
Tommy Bond
Noodles Hahn
Bobby Grich
Tony Mullane
Luis Tiant
Dave Stieb
Bobby Mathews
Minnie Minoso
Tim Raines
Fred McGriff
Lou Whitaker
Alan Trammell
Reggie Smith
Dick Allen
Willie Randolph
Ken Boyer
Sal Bando
Ron Guidry
Mark McGwire
Keith Hernandez
Edgar Martinez

There. Something everyone can disagree with.

[btcarfagno]

Wes Ferrell's WHIP numbers being extraordinarily bad have little to do with the era in which he played. His WHIP numbers were in the bottom half of all major league pitchers on a routine basis, even in his best 8 years. He led the league in hits allowed three straight years. He led the league in walks once. During his best 8 years (after which he was an absolute flaming dumpster fire as a pitcher by the way) he allowed more hits (just hits) than innings pitched every year except one. That year he allowed 299 hits in 299 1/3 innings. Far from scintillating even given the era. Over those same 8 years, he struck out a total of 795 batters while walking...795.

Also, as "OK" as his ERA numbers were over that eight year stretch, hs FIP numbers were much much higher....which means he was basically a very lucky pitcher over that 8 year stretch. For five of those 8 years, his FIP was half a run HIGHER than his ERA. Only two years was his FIP lower than his ERA.

Great run support and defense I assume. He has a nice little 8 year run and won a lot of games over that time. He was far from a dominant pitcher though.

Tom C

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I figure the Hall should include about 2 players per year. Apparently that makes me a Big Hall guy. So be it. If we start with 1871 and don't yet count the 2015 voting, we should already have 288 players in. If you count Al Spalding then, we're about 37 eligible players shy of the Hall I'd want. Dahlen and Ferrell would both be in my top 37.

Along with:

Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Bob Caruthers
Charlie Buffinton
Urban Shocker
Jim McCormick
Jeff Bagwell
Mike Mussina
Curt Schilling
Mike Piazza
Kevin Brown
Rick Reuschel
Ivan Rodriguez
Larry Walker
Tommy Bond
Noodles Hahn
Bobby Grich
Tony Mullane
Luis Tiant
Dave Stieb
Bobby Mathews
Minnie Minoso
Tim Raines
Fred McGriff
Lou Whitaker
Alan Trammell
Reggie Smith
Dick Allen
Willie Randolph
Ken Boyer
Sal Bando
Ron Guidry
Mark McGwire
Keith Hernandez
Edgar Martinez

There. Something everyone can disagree with.

If you want to dilute that much, I would rank Hodges, Oliva and Garvey above some of those names. As well as John and Kaat.

[btcarfagno]

Jack Glasscock everyone.

Jack.

Glasscock.

He was regarded as the finest fielding shortstop of his time, and his offense was well above average for any position on the field, let alone a shortstop. Finished with more than 2000 hits. .290 lifetime batting average. OPS+ of 112. Stole 372 bases that we know about. He was 28 before it became a measurable statistic, and at that point he averaged 50 steals per year for the next 5 years. Just imagine how many he stole in the 7 years prior to that. He likely had 700+ steals in his career.

As an example of his overall game, in 1889 he led the National League in hits with a slash line of .352/.390/.467 for an OPS+ of 138 (the next year it was 147). He also led the league in total chances (by more than 100 over the next person), putouts, assists, double plays and fielding percentage.

He is a Hall Of Famer, and was looked upon as such in the era in which he played. Not his fault that the first election process for the Hall came 37 years after he retired.

Tom C

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

Jack Glasscock everyone.

Jack.

Glasscock.

He was regarded as the finest fielding shortstop of his time, and his offense was well above average for any position on the field, let alone a shortstop. Finished with more than 2000 hits. .290 lifetime batting average. OPS+ of 112. Stole 372 bases that we know about. He was 28 before it became a measurable statistic, and at that point he averaged 50 steals per year for the next 5 years. Just imagine how many he stole in the 7 years prior to that. He likely had 700+ steals in his career.

As an example of his overall game, in 1889 he led the National League in hits with a slash line of .352/.390/.467 for an OPS+ of 138 (the next year it was 147). He also led the league in total chances (by more than 100 over the next person), putouts, assists, double plays and fielding percentage.

He is a Hall Of Famer, and was looked upon as such in the era in which he played. Not his fault that the first election process for the Hall came 37 years after he retired.

Tom C

ANYONE who could play and play well with such a condition deserves at least another look.

[timn1]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

You go right on advocating for a guy with a 4.04 ERA then. You're doing a great job of convincing us that the voters of the last 70 years just didn't know what to look for. Where does Bill James rank him by the way, that would be interesting, I thought I had his book handy but can't find it.

Good question, Peter. Bill James ranks Ferrell #40 among pitchers, and EVERY pitcher ahead of him except Carl Mays at #38 is already in the HOF. (Mays might well be in there too if not for that little incident...) Ferrell is ranked just above a bunch more guys who are also in the HOF.

I don't argue that Ferrell was an efficient pitcher (neither was Nolan Ryan). He gave up lots of hits and walks in an era where almost everybody did, and still managed to post a .600 PCT and go 65 games over .500 while never pitching for a pennant winner. His strikeouts were probably league average or above for the era, and he gave up very few HRs. Oh, and the three years he led the league in hits allowed he also led in IP, so let's don't go crazy over that stat.

Do you realize how many HOF pitchers are NOT 65 games over par, even with many more decisions? And how few of them are at .600? (Look at Drysdale, for cryin out loud. That gaudy ERA and pitching for strong teams in Dodger Stadium didn't help him get more than 43 games over.)

Don't even get me started on some of these guys.... Marquard? - 24 games over .500 while playing for pretty good teams. Basically a .500 pitcher who had one good hot streak. His PW (Player Wins) rating is actually below 0!! Koufax's PW is at 22, as is Dizzy Dean's. Ferrell is at 31 (again, probably the highest of almost any 20th-century pitcher not in HOF).

To explain Ferrell as having 8 years of unbroken good luck makes little sense to me. The guy knew how to win.

[btcarfagno]

Ferrell's WHIP and FIP numbers were about 15% better than the AVERAGE pitcher during his best 8 seasons. After that he was absolute garbage. I'm not thrilled with putting someone in who was 15% better than an average pitcher during his best seasons.

I hope you aren't touting wins as a stat that shows he is Hall of Fame worthy. Wins show how many more run your team scored than how many they gave up while you were the pitcher of record. He only controls half of that.

Nolan Ryan was a very inefficient pitcher. He also struck out more than the population of some countries, and threw a ton of no-hitters which...while they involve some amount of luck...are a very popular happening.

Tom C

[timn1]

Bill James puts Ferrell's 4.04 ERA in context as 22% better than league average (park and era adjusted). The 22% better than league average compares favorably to a lot of the second-tier HOF pitchers. Put him in Dodger Stadium in the 1960s, and Koufax in League Park in the 1930s, and the ERA numbers would (mostly) reverse. More precisely, Ferrell in Dodger Stadium is Drysdale with a much better winning PCT.

Also, WHIP is a great stat, but like ERA it works best in conjunction with others rather than in isolation. Ultimately I dont think it measures overall effectiveness as a pitcher (as opposed to, say, raw talent) as well as a pitcher's winning PCT relative to the teams he played on.

Ferrell's good years were 1929-1936 when he went 161-94 (.631) (very high ERAs during the rest of his career, but still only .500 - not "absolute garbage"). Subtracting his decisions his teams 1929-1936 went 469-498 (.485). In other words he was pitching for subpar teams and carrying them on his back. Then he broke down, but unlike Koufax (who retired with a similar record), Ferrell tried to keep going and his ERA went up as he endured a long decline phase.

BTW, Drysdale was 199-157 (.560) during his effective years (1957-68). Without his decisions the Dodgers were 837-716 (.540). Not that much of an improvement to the team.

On the other hand, Ferrell's relative winning PCT (.631/.485) is almost exactly comparable to Koufax's six strong seasons (1961-66) when he went 129-47 (.733) relative to his team without him: 562-407 (.580)

I don't expect it will convince any of the naysayers, but I would be totally comfortable arguing that Ferrell was a better pitcher than Drysdale and quite close to Koufax in quality during their peak years (not close in pitcher type, obviously).

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

Ferrell's WHIP and FIP numbers were about 15% better than the AVERAGE pitcher during his best 8 seasons. After that he was absolute garbage. I'm not thrilled with putting someone in who was 15% better than an average pitcher during his best seasons.

I hope you aren't touting wins as a stat that shows he is Hall of Fame worthy. Wins show how many more run your team scored than how many they gave up while you were the pitcher of record. He only controls half of that.

Nolan Ryan was a very inefficient pitcher. He also struck out more than the population of some countries, and threw a ton of no-hitters which...while they involve some amount of luck...are a very popular happening.

Tom C