HOF is a Joke

[baztacula]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

How does Brooks do on fielding stats? I always suspect them because guys with great range are going to reach more balls but probably as a result commit more errors. And I don't know how you could account for this unless you had tape of every fielding chance. Maybe "range factor" somehow figures this in through some algorithm?

Range factor per nine innings is this: 9 x (putouts+assists)/inning played.

That's it. So if your pitching staff strikes out lots of batters, your fielders will have lower range factors... except for the catcher.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by SAllen2556

I would love to see a survey of mlb players who played during Trammell and Whitaker's era to see what they think. I have always gone back and forth, and I watched them both for 20 years. Same with Jack Morris. I thought I read once that Reggie Jackson thought Morris was the best pitcher of that era.

The Tigers had the 2nd most wins in all of baseball during the 80's and won it all in '84. Seems like someone on those teams would be hall-of-fame worthy. And I can't think of anyone who played for the Tigers in the 80's who's in the hall-of-fame.

The guy with the best case at one time would have been Lance Parrish. He was a HOF level player until he got hurt in 86.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by baztacula

I'm going to take it easy on you since you support Whitaker, which I respect. All I'll say is that if I was a Pirates fan during the Maz years, I'd groan every time he stepped up to the plate, just like Tigers fans did during the Brandon Inge era. Both were great defensively for sure. But that's not enough. In fact, Inge was arguably a better hitter than Maz (.685 OPS to .667 for Maz) and there is absolutely, positively no way in anyone's lifetime that Inge should get within 1000 miles of the Hall of Fame.

Inge wasn't an elite defensive player. If it wasn't for his defense, Mazeroski wouldn't be close to the hof. Neither should Ozzie Smith, Brooks Robinson, Luis Aparicio or Rabbit Maranville. I get that you don't value defense, but many do, including the hof voters. If you are going to enshrine any player for their defense, then Mazeroski must be included.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by baztacula

Maz 2094 games at 2B
204 errors
.983 Fld%
5.72 Range Factor per 9 innings

Whitaker 2308 games at 2B
189 errors
.984 Fld%
5.39 Range Factor per 9 innings

I don't see where Mazeroski is the best fielding second baseman ever with those stats. There is a good chance that Maz's better range factor is directly related to more balls in play due to less k's by Pirate pitchers in the 50s, 60s & 70s compared to Tigers pitchers in the 70s, 80s and 90s.

Total Zone Runs
Mazeroski 148 (22 more than 2nd best player)
Whitaker 77

Mlb Records for Double Plays 2B
Career: 1706 Mazeroski (Whitaker 1527)
Season 161 Mazeroski (Whitaker's best 120)
Seasons led league 8 Mazeroski (Whitaker never led AL)

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by rats60

Inge wasn't an elite defensive player. If it wasn't for his defense, Mazeroski wouldn't be close to the hof. Neither should Ozzie Smith, Brooks Robinson, Luis Aparicio or Rabbit Maranville. I get that you don't value defense, but many do, including the hof voters. If you are going to enshrine any player for their defense, then Mazeroski must be included.

Brooks had 2800 hits and some seasons with good power. I would not mention him in this list.

[doug.goodman]

A whole bunch of you guys think too much...


The game has been played for 150 years (give or take)

There have been 20,000 people involved (give or take)

There are 300 members of the Hall (give or take)

That seems like a pretty select group.


People in general can't agree on anything. Every day I see three cars at a four way stop have a hard time figuring out who should go next, so of course there are going to be some hits & misses with the exact selections to the best HOF of them all.

I'll let somebody else figure out the percentage of players in the football, basketball & hockey halls. I would would guess that each of them has more than baseball, proportionately.

Doug "I'm also thinking too much" Goodman

[ooo-ribay]

Originally Posted by baztacula

Rank------Player--------(yrs)----Career WAR
78.---Lou Whitaker------(19)---------74.9
93.---Alan Trammell----(20)---------70.4
604.--Bill Mazeroski-----(17)---------36.2 <---HOF

Ridiculous.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/le...R_career.shtml

4---Barry Bonds---(22)----162.4

[ALR-bishop]

I think Doug might be wrong

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

A whole bunch of you guys think too much...


The game has been played for 150 years (give or take)

There have been 20,000 people involved (give or take)

There are 300 members of the Hall (give or take)

That seems like a pretty select group.


People in general can't agree on anything. Every day I see three cars at a four way stop have a hard time figuring out who should go next, so of course there are going to be some hits & misses with the exact selections to the best HOF of them all.

I'll let somebody else figure out the percentage of players in the football, basketball & hockey halls. I would would guess that each of them has more than baseball, proportionately.

Doug "I'm also thinking too much" Goodman

To me the more relevant number would be how many make it of those who play 10 years or more.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Brooks had 2800 hits and some seasons with good power. I would not mention him in this list.

Why not? You think a guy who hit .267 while averaging 15 homers but with no gold gloves would get even a sniff at the HOF? Of course not. So, yeah, he belongs on that list.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Brooks had 2800 hits and some seasons with good power. I would not mention him in this list.

OPS+ 104. That is not a hofer without his elite defensive.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Why not? You think a guy who hit .267 while averaging 15 homers but with no gold gloves would get even a sniff at the HOF? Of course not. So, yeah, he belongs on that list.

he did have 6 seasons with 20 plus HR nd 7 seasons with 80 plus RBI including two over 100 that's not bad for a third baseman just seemed to me in a different category than aparicio etc.

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by glchen

I think you're forgetting Tommy McCarthy of the 16.1 career WAR, so low he doesn't even make the top 1000 cutoff.

Frankly, I grew up during the age of those great Tiger teams of Trammell and Whitaker. I always thought of those two as solid All Stars, but not HOFer material. I thought those Tiger teams were led by Gibson and Morris, and Gibson will never sniff the Hall of Fame, and Morris might only get in through generosity of the Veteran's Committee. (Frankly, I think Morris deserves to get in.)

If you think Morris belongs and not Trammell/Whitaker, I simply cannot agree with that.

[the 'stache]

Originally Posted by Joshchisox08

Of course this would be biased then.......

What about Konerko? Border line numbers, won ALCS MVP, as well as a ring..... Can't say the same for Trammel or Whitaker

McGriff?
Baines?
Raines?
Larry Walker? (Please spare the whole Colorado crap)

A lone World Series ring and an ALCS MVP really carry no weight in Hall voting.

And, while I'm not the biggest fan of WAR, it's a good quick-reference starting place, and there's no way Paul Konerko and his 27.6 career WAR even sniff the Hall.

A 5.0 WAR or higher is considered an All Star season. Konerko's best seasons were a 4.7 (2010), a 4.0 (2005), and then a 2.9 (2006). Yes, his defense was terrible (career -18.9 dWAR), but his offense wasn't all that hot, either (career 32.6 oWAR). His numbers are clearly inflated by the era he played in.

Beyond WAR, he never led the league in any major statistic. He never won a Silver Slugger. He placed in the top 10 of MVP voting twice in a 17 year career.

JAWS has him as the 86th ranked first baseman of all-time. Pass.

And what's the "spare the Colorado crap" mean, that we should ignore the incredible boost hitters get at Coors?

In his MVP season of 1997, Larry Walker's splits were pretty even. But they started to veer off into the abyss after that.

In 1998, he won the NL batting title hitting .363. He hit .418 at home, and .300 on the road.
In 1998, he again won the NL batting title, hitting .379.
At Coors Field, he hit .461 with 26 HR and 71 RBI. His slash line was .531/.879/1.410.
Everywhere else, he hit .286 with 11 HR and 45 RBI. His slash was .375/.519/.894.

Yes, let's overlook that 516 point OPS disparity.

In 2001, Walker again won the NL batting title, hitting .350.
At Coors Field, he hit .406.
Everywhere else, he hit .293.

It's like whenever anybody says "oh, Carlos Gonzalez is one of the best hitters in the game!"

Hmm. In 2015, his splits:
At Coors, .293 AVG, 24 HR, 61 RBI, .355/.617/.972.
Everywhere else, .243 AVG, 16 HR, 36 RBI, ..294/.464/.758

Please.

[Topps206]

Coors is an aid, but the road splits determine if someone is merely a product of Coors or not.