T206 Who should be a HOFer that isn't ???

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by rats60

Magee I don't understand. He is the same as Wheat and Kelley. He should be in already.

Dahlen wasn't the defensive player that Wallace or Tinker were. Not being outstanding, just very good, both offensively and defensively doesn't necessarily mean you are a hofer. Davis was outstanding defensively. Why he didn't make it earlier makes no sense to me.

I'm busy at work, so I'll respond in depth later, but don't let the fielding percentage fool you. Dahlen was a great defender.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Topps206

I'm busy at work, so I'll respond in depth later, but don't let the fielding percentage fool you. Dahlen was a great defender.

Sorry, I disagree. Wagner & Davis .940. Tinker and Wallace .938. Dahlen .927. I don't put too much weight on fielding percentage, but that is too big a gap. He was marginally better getting to balls based on assists, but why? Did his pitchers throw more ground balls? We just don't know. Over a 162 game average he fielded about 3 more balls than Davis, 11 more than Wallace and 30 more than Tinker. Those really aren't enough to make up for extra errors he made.

[btcarfagno]

Originally Posted by rats60

Sorry, I disagree. Wagner & Davis .940. Tinker and Wallace .938. Dahlen .927. I don't put too much weight on fielding percentage, but that is too big a gap. He was marginally better getting to balls based on assists, but why? Did his pitchers throw more ground balls? We just don't know. Over a 162 game average he fielded about 3 more balls than Davis, 11 more than Wallace and 30 more than Tinker. Those really aren't enough to make up for extra errors he made.

Jaws ranks Dahlen as the 10th best shortstop in history, behind only Wagner, A-Rod, Ripken, G. Davis, Yount, Vaughan, Banks, O. Smith and Appling.

He is ahead of:

Alan Trammell
Derek Jeter
Barry Larkin
Bobby Wallace
Lou Boudreau
Joe Cronin
Pee Wee Reese
Joe Sewell
Luis Aparicio
Joe Tinker
Dave Bancroft
Travis Jackson
Phil Rizzuto
Rabbit Maranville

Tom C

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

Jaws ranks Dahlen as the 10th best shortstop in history, behind only Wagner, A-Rod, Ripken, G. Davis, Yount, Vaughan, Banks, O. Smith and Appling.

He is ahead of:

Alan Trammell
Derek Jeter
Barry Larkin
Bobby Wallace
Lou Boudreau
Joe Cronin
Pee Wee Reese
Joe Sewell
Luis Aparicio
Joe Tinker
Dave Bancroft
Travis Jackson
Phil Rizzuto
Rabbit Maranville

Tom C

He hates WAR and Jaws. Even without them, you could still argue in favor of Dahlen's defense.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by Topps206

He hates WAR and Jaws. Even without them, you could still argue in favor of Dahlen's defense.

Dahlen's 73+ WAR is good enough on it's own. When you dig deeper you see he's easily one of the best at his position all time. I still have no idea why he isn't in.

Magee's 63.4 WAR is right on the cusp of what I think should be required by an OF'er for the HOF. and is 40th all time for OF'ers. BUT, I have a hard time voting for a guy with a sub .800 OPS and a wRC+ of 134 (which ties him for 64th all time among OF'ers) But I can see the argument for his induction.

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

Dahlen's 73+ WAR is good enough on it's own. When you dig deeper you see he's easily one of the best at his position all time. I still have no idea why he isn't in.

Magee's 63.4 WAR is right on the cusp of what I think should be required by an OF'er for the HOF. and is 40th all time for OF'ers. BUT, I have a hard time voting for a guy with a sub .800 OPS and a wRC+ of 134 (which ties him for 64th all time among OF'ers) But I can see the argument for his induction.

How about his OPS+ of 137?

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by rats60

Sorry, I disagree. Wagner & Davis .940. Tinker and Wallace .938. Dahlen .927. I don't put too much weight on fielding percentage, but that is too big a gap. He was marginally better getting to balls based on assists, but why? Did his pitchers throw more ground balls? We just don't know. Over a 162 game average he fielded about 3 more balls than Davis, 11 more than Wallace and 30 more than Tinker. Those really aren't enough to make up for extra errors he made.

Here's the logical fallacy I find in your argument, and I'll spell it out for you.

Assists

Led his league in 1895, 1900, 1903

Second in 1904, 1908

Third in 1898, 1901, 1902

Fifth in 1896, 1905, 1906

8,138 fourth all time.

Defensive games at SS

Led in 1900, 1902, 1903

Third in 1895, 1906, 1907

Fourth in 1901, 1904, 1905, 1908

Fifth in 1898

2,133 total is good enough still for 12th all time.

Putouts at SS

Second in 1898

Third in 1900, 1903, 1908

Fourth in 1895, 1896, 1901, 1902

Fifth in 1904, 1905

Factor- 4,856 for second all time.

Assists as SS

Led in 1895, 1900, 1903, 1904

Second in 1902, 1908

Third in 1898

Fourth in 1895, 1905, 1906

Fifth in 1907

Total - 7,505 for fourth all time

Double plays turned as SS

Led in 1898, 1904, 1908

Second in 1895, 1903

Third in 1896, 1900, 1901

Fifth in 1905

Total - 881 for 55th All time. Higher than Tinker.

Range Factor/9 inning as shortstop

Led in 1893, 1894, 1898, 1908

Second in 1895, 1897, 1900, 1904

Third in 1901, 1903

Fifth in 1896, 1905

Range Factor/Game as SS

Led in 1893, 1894, 1897, 1908

Second in 1895, 1896, 1898, 1900, 1904

Third in 1901

Fourth in 1903

Fifth in 1905

Total - 5.80, sixth all time, Tinker is 19th.

Tinker did lead his league in fielding percentage as a shortstop four times, Dahlen only once, but also finished second six more times.

To be fair, Dahlen did commit more errors, but he played more than a decade before Tinker debuted and is still top 100 in games played, plus much of those errors were before the turn of the century and he made fewer later on in his career.

John McGraw called trading for Dahlen the best he ever made.

Dahlen not only should be in the HOF, he was a much better defender than you give him credit for.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Topps206

Here's the logical fallacy I find in your argument, and I'll spell it out for you.

Assists

Led his league in 1895, 1900, 1903

Second in 1904, 1908

Third in 1898, 1901, 1902

Fifth in 1896, 1905, 1906

8,138 fourth all time.

Defensive games at SS

Led in 1900, 1902, 1903

Third in 1895, 1906, 1907

Fourth in 1901, 1904, 1905, 1908

Fifth in 1898

2,133 total is good enough still for 12th all time.

Putouts at SS

Second in 1898

Third in 1900, 1903, 1908

Fourth in 1895, 1896, 1901, 1902

Fifth in 1904, 1905

Factor- 4,856 for second all time.

Assists as SS

Led in 1895, 1900, 1903, 1904

Second in 1902, 1908

Third in 1898

Fourth in 1895, 1905, 1906

Fifth in 1907

Total - 7,505 for fourth all time

Double plays turned as SS

Led in 1898, 1904, 1908

Second in 1895, 1903

Third in 1896, 1900, 1901

Fifth in 1905

Total - 881 for 55th All time. Higher than Tinker.

Range Factor/9 inning as shortstop

Led in 1893, 1894, 1898, 1908

Second in 1895, 1897, 1900, 1904

Third in 1901, 1903

Fifth in 1896, 1905

Range Factor/Game as SS

Led in 1893, 1894, 1897, 1908

Second in 1895, 1896, 1898, 1900, 1904

Third in 1901

Fourth in 1903

Fifth in 1905

Total - 5.80, sixth all time, Tinker is 19th.

Tinker did lead his league in fielding percentage as a shortstop four times, Dahlen only once, but also finished second six more times.

To be fair, Dahlen did commit more errors, but he played more than a decade before Tinker debuted and is still top 100 in games played, plus much of those errors were before the turn of the century and he made fewer later on in his career.

John McGraw called trading for Dahlen the best he ever made.

Dahlen not only should be in the HOF, he was a much better defender than you give him credit for.

I thought I was going to get an actual argument instead of just listing that in 21 seasons, he led the league in a few categories. I hope you realize that many of those years he was in an 8 team league, so 4th or 5th is average and all the others seasons you didn't list, he was also below average.

Range factor? Lol. That is real accurate. I would be curious how they come up that with basically no data. I will add this stat. Where as Dahlen averaged about 30 more assists per season than Tinker, his pitchers averaged over 100 less strike outs per season. Do you think all those balls that never made it in play are the reason why Dahlen had more chances? I doubt that Dahlen had better range than Davis, Tinker or Wallace, he just made a lot more errors.

[Topps206]

Originally Posted by rats60

I thought I was going to get an actual argument instead of just listing that in 21 seasons, he led the league in a few categories. I hope you realize that many of those years he was in an 8 team league, so 4th or 5th is average and all the others seasons you didn't list, he was also below average.

Range factor? Lol. That is real accurate. I would be curious how they come up that with basically no data. I will add this stat. Where as Dahlen averaged about 30 more assists per season than Tinker, his pitchers averaged over 100 less strike outs per season. Do you think all those balls that never made it in play are the reason why Dahlen had more chances? I doubt that Dahlen had better range than Davis, Tinker or Wallace, he just made a lot more errors.

Many of those years he was also at the top playing one of the hardest positions on the field.

Also, I don't think they just made up range factor out of nowhere either.

Almost everything I see suggests how great of a defender Dahlen was, and I would take his bat over two of those three shortstops, with Davis the exception.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by rats60

I thought I was going to get an actual argument instead of just listing that in 21 seasons, he led the league in a few categories. I hope you realize that many of those years he was in an 8 team league, so 4th or 5th is average and all the others seasons you didn't list, he was also below average.

Range factor? Lol. That is real accurate. I would be curious how they come up that with basically no data. I will add this stat. Where as Dahlen averaged about 30 more assists per season than Tinker, his pitchers averaged over 100 less strike outs per season. Do you think all those balls that never made it in play are the reason why Dahlen had more chances? I doubt that Dahlen had better range than Davis, Tinker or Wallace, he just made a lot more errors.

I think it's funny when folks use old antiquated stats that are worthless, then when corrected with modern, more accurate stats they resort to name calling and hand wave away the data. It's like arguing evolution with a religious fanatic....

New stats are better, more accurate and based on things that are important instead of the poorly thought out stats of yesteryear. You either adapt, evolve or stay in the past. This is the way of things.

your argument about K's is poorly thought out as the player still has to field those balls and if Dahlen made outs on 30 of 100 more balls in play then he was an amazing fielder indeed!

[rats60]

Originally Posted by bravos4evr

I think it's funny when folks use old antiquated stats that are worthless, then when corrected with modern, more accurate stats they resort to name calling and hand wave away the data. It's like arguing evolution with a religious fanatic....

New stats are better, more accurate and based on things that are important instead of the poorly thought out stats of yesteryear. You either adapt, evolve or stay in the past. This is the way of things.

your argument about K's is poorly thought out as the player still has to field those balls and if Dahlen made outs on 30 of 100 more balls in play then he was an amazing fielder indeed!

What new stats do we have from 1891-1911? We don't have enough data to accurately calculate advanced stats from those years. He just pointed out the years that he led or was near the top of the league in traditional stats and I pointed out that he wasn't among league leaders even more times.

I don't think that you even understand my argument. You are ignoring that he also made 16 more errors to get those 30 outs. That is not very good.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by rats60

What new stats do we have from 1891-1911? We don't have enough data to accurately calculate advanced stats from those years. He just pointed out the years that he led or was near the top of the league in traditional stats and I pointed out that he wasn't among league leaders even more times.

I don't think that you even understand my argument. You are ignoring that he also made 16 more errors to get those 30 outs. That is not very good.

we have more data than you might think. Dahlen is 5th all time in SS fWAR, he is 7th all time in fangraph's DEF stat at SS (which is cumulative and is Def = Fielding Runs Above Average + positional adjustment) he is pretty obviously one of the greatest SS's of all time.

[bravos4evr]

Originally Posted by rats60

Sorry, I disagree. Wagner & Davis .940. Tinker and Wallace .938. Dahlen .927. I don't put too much weight on fielding percentage, but that is too big a gap. He was marginally better getting to balls based on assists, but why? Did his pitchers throw more ground balls? We just don't know. Over a 162 game average he fielded about 3 more balls than Davis, 11 more than Wallace and 30 more than Tinker. Those really aren't enough to make up for extra errors he made.

fielding % is a worthless and terrible stat because it tells us nothing about range. a statue who could not move but made perfect plays on balls hit right to it would have a 1.000 fielding % but would be far worse at preventing hits than a player with great range who made 20 errors a year.

if the statue field 100 balls perfectly he makes 100 outs with 0 errors

player B with the great range might make 200 outs and 20 errors, obviously you prefer the latter


for example: since 2012 JJ Hardy leads among SS on fielding % with .987 and Andrelton Simmons is 4th with a .982 , HOWEVER, in defensive runs saved Hardy is 3rd with 58 a massive 68 behind Simmons. In UZR/150 games Simmons leads with 21.7 to Hardy's 11.9 so, if you just used fielding % you would be wayyyyy off on who the best SS glove in baseball is. Simmons is over twice as good at creating outs than Hardy, yet .005 worse in fielding % (because fielding % tells us nothing about the range if a player ,their arm, nor their ability to generate outs, it just tells us how good they did when they got to the ball)