Slightly OT - 2020 Modern Baseball Era HOF Ballot

[ejharrington]

Originally Posted by Tabe

He has no case. A 1B with no power who hit under .300? Would you vote for John Olerud, who was better offensively and 98% defensively? Of course not.

He has a GREAT case. A five time All Star, a batting champion, an MVP, eleven Gold Gloves, and ist baseman for two different World Championship teams. A little known fact, but he also is the single season and all-time leader in Game Winning RBIs, which is no longer tracked.

With respect to advanced sabermetrics (i.e., JAWS, WAR), the only retired first baseman that ranks higher than him not in the HOF (other than PED users Rafael Palmeiro and Mark McGuire) is Todd Helton and that is almost a dead heat. Of the 21 first basemen in the HOF, Hernandez ranks higher than Hank Greenberg, George Sisler, Harmon Killebrew, Jake Beckley, Tony Perez, Orlando Cepeda, Frank Chance. Jim Bottomley, and High Pockets Kelly.

Also, with respect to WAR, Defensive WAR is always being tweaked and as it stands right now, Hernandez gets virtually no credit for his defense. Anyone who watched him play knows his defense saved a lot of runs over the years. It’s possible his WAR will increase as improvements are made to the defensive calculations.

More anecdotally, I watched most of the Mets games from 1983-1987 and I always considered him the most valuable Met based on the eye test.

As for Olerud, he is borderline and I wouldn’t vote for him but there are many worse players in the HOF then him.

[packs]

Originally Posted by ejharrington

He has a GREAT case. A five time All Star, a batting champion, an MVP, eleven Gold Gloves, and ist baseman for two different World Championship teams. A little known fact, but he also is the single season and all-time leader in Game Winning RBIs, which is no longer tracked.

With respect to advanced sabermetrics (i.e., JAWS, WAR), the only retired first baseman that ranks higher than him not in the HOF (other than PED users Rafael Palmeiro and Mark McGuire) is Todd Helton and that is almost a dead heat. Of the 21 first basemen in the HOF, Hernandez ranks higher than Hank Greenberg, George Sisler, Harmon Killebrew, Jake Beckley, Tony Perez, Orlando Cepeda, Frank Chance. Jim Bottomley, and High Pockets Kelly.

Also, with respect to WAR, Defensive WAR is always being tweaked and as it stands right now, Hernandez gets virtually no credit for his defense. Anyone who watched him play knows his defense saved a lot of runs over the years. It’s possible his WAR will increase as improvements are made to the defensive calculations.

More anecdotally, I watched most of the Mets games from 1983-1987 and I always considered him the most valuable Met based on the eye test.

As for Olerud, he is borderline and I wouldn’t vote for him but there are many worse players in the HOF then him.

Do you think Hernandez was better than Don Mattingly? Mattingly has 9 gold gloves to his 11, 6 all star games to his 5, matches him with an MVP but retired in less seasons with almost the same amount of hits, more homers, more rbi's, a higher OPS, more total bases and a higher batting average while playing for worse teams. At his peak he crushed Hernandez in every way and Mattingly is not in the HOF.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by packs

Do you think Hernandez was better than Don Mattingly? Mattingly has 9 gold gloves to his 11, 6 all star games to his 5, matches him with an MVP but retired in less seasons with almost the same amount of hits, more homers, more rbi's, a higher OPS, more total bases and a higher batting average while playing for worse teams. At his peak he crushed Hernandez in every way and Mattingly is not in the HOF.

JAWS
Keith Hernandez First Base (19th):
60.4 career WAR / 41.3 7yr-peak WAR / 50.8 JAWS
Don Mattingly First Base (39th):
42.4 career WAR / 35.7 7yr-peak WAR / 39.1 JAWS
Average HOF 1B (out of 21):
66.8 career WAR / 42.7 7yr-peak WAR / 54.8 JAWS

Keith Hernandez was clearly better than Don Mattingly using advanced metrics. Actually, even at their peaks Hernandez was better. His WAR7 (taking only the players top 7 seasons) has Hernandez ahead 41.3 to 35.7. Even if you break it down further, Mattingly only had 4 seasons of 5 or more WAR which is All Star level, 7.2, 6.5, 6.3, 5.1. Hernandez had 5 seasons, 7.6, 6.7, 6.3, 5.5, 5.1. So, even Mattingly's best seasons are at best a push with Hernandez's best seasons. Mattingly is worthy of HOF in my opinion, but I would put Hernandez in first.

[packs]

Originally Posted by rats60

JAWS
Keith Hernandez First Base (19th):
60.4 career WAR / 41.3 7yr-peak WAR / 50.8 JAWS
Don Mattingly First Base (39th):
42.4 career WAR / 35.7 7yr-peak WAR / 39.1 JAWS
Average HOF 1B (out of 21):
66.8 career WAR / 42.7 7yr-peak WAR / 54.8 JAWS

Keith Hernandez was clearly better than Don Mattingly using advanced metrics. Actually, even at their peaks Hernandez was better. His WAR7 (taking only the players top 7 seasons) has Hernandez ahead 41.3 to 35.7. Even if you break it down further, Mattingly only had 4 seasons of 5 or more WAR which is All Star level, 7.2, 6.5, 6.3, 5.1. Hernandez had 5 seasons, 7.6, 6.7, 6.3, 5.5, 5.1. So, even Mattingly's best seasons are at best a push with Hernandez's best seasons. Mattingly is worthy of HOF in my opinion, but I would put Hernandez in first.

I don't really care about WAR. Hernandez had a longer career without injury. Mattingly put up higher numbers in a shorter career and there's no way you'll ever convince me the prototype for Albert Pujols wasn't better than Keith Hernandez.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't really care about WAR. Hernandez had a longer career without injury. Mattingly put up higher numbers in a shorter career and there's no way you'll ever convince me the prototype for Albert Pujols wasn't better than Keith Hernandez.

I'm not really sure how you come up with Albert Pujols for a comparison to Mattingly. Pujols had an OPS+ of 170 his 1st 11 years in St. Louis. Mattingly's best season was 161, 9% lower than Pujols average. Mattingly's career OPS+ is only 127 which is actually worse than Keith Hernandez's career OPS+ of 128. Hernandez was a slightly better hitter, a better fielder and was able to play MLB longer. Hernandez was clearly better than Mattingly.

[packs]

Originally Posted by rats60

I'm not really sure how you come up with Albert Pujols for a comparison to Mattingly. Pujols had an OPS+ of 170 his 1st 11 years in St. Louis. Mattingly's best season was 161, 9% lower than Pujols average. Mattingly's career OPS+ is only 127 which is actually worse than Keith Hernandez's career OPS+ of 128. Hernandez was a slightly better hitter, a better fielder and was able to play MLB longer. Hernandez was clearly better than Mattingly.

Without using WAR what tells you Hernandez was better than Mattingly? Mattingly's peak was 200 hits a year (three years in a row), 40 plus doubles a year, 30 plus homers, 100 rbi's and hitting 320 and above while doing it. That's where the Pujols comparison comes in. Mattingly put up an OPS over 900 four years in a row. Hernandez had an OPS over 900 twice in his entire career. There is no reason to believe Mattingly wouldn't have kept doing what he was doing if not for his injury. He was a beast.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by packs

Without using WAR what tells you Hernandez was better than Mattingly? Mattingly's peak was 200 hits a year (three years in a row), 40 plus doubles a year, 30 plus homers, 100 rbi's and hitting 320 and above while doing it. That's where the Pujols comparison comes in. Mattingly put up an OPS over 900 four years in a row. Hernandez had an OPS over 900 twice in his entire career. There is no reason to believe Mattingly wouldn't have kept doing what he was doing if not for his injury. He was a beast.

Hernandez was a better hitter. OPS+ tells us that. You use choose to use raw stats that ignore Mattingly's home park was very hitter friendly. The stats you use are worthless unless you put them in context of the field they were performed on. Baseball is the only sport where the field of play isn't constant, so you cannot use raw stats to compare players. Stats say Hernandez was a better hitter. Defensive stats say Hernandez was a better fielder. Better hitter plus better fielder means he was the better player. No need to use WAR when the other stats point to the same result.

[ejharrington]

Originally Posted by packs

Do you think Hernandez was better than Don Mattingly? Mattingly has 9 gold gloves to his 11, 6 all star games to his 5, matches him with an MVP but retired in less seasons with almost the same amount of hits, more homers, more rbi's, a higher OPS, more total bases and a higher batting average while playing for worse teams. At his peak he crushed Hernandez in every way and Mattingly is not in the HOF.

Yes, I think Hernandez was better. Hernandez's career WAR was 60.4 while Mattingly's was 42.4. Hernandez's WAR in his best seven consecutive years was 41.3 while Mattingly's was 35.7. Hernandez's WAR in his best season was 7.6 while Mattingly's was 7.2. As far as some of the raw numbers, those were due to a favorable ballpark and league for offense.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by ejharrington

He has a GREAT case. A five time All Star, a batting champion, an MVP, eleven Gold Gloves, and ist baseman for two different World Championship teams. A little known fact, but he also is the single season and all-time leader in Game Winning RBIs, which is no longer tracked.

Let's be brutally honest - Gold Glove defense at 1B doesn't mean a heckuva lot. It's BY FAR the easiest position on the diamond. Yes, Hernandez was probably the best ever but he doesn't lap the field in that regard.

So that leaves us 5-time All-Star, MVP, batting champion. That's a good career. It's not a HOF career. We're talking a guy who played a premium offensive position but delivered mediocre - at best - power. Of all players who've played at least 1000 games at 1B since the live ball era started, Hernandez ranks 79th in home runs. That puts him in the company of guys like Walt Dropo and Pete O'Brien. No, home runs aren't everything, but they are super-important. When you play a power position like 1B, and you're trying to make a case for the Hall, your career high in homers better be more than 18 during a juiced ball year.

With respect to advanced sabermetrics (i.e., JAWS, WAR), the only retired first baseman that ranks higher than him not in the HOF (other than PED users Rafael Palmeiro and Mark McGuire) is Todd Helton and that is almost a dead heat. Of the 21 first basemen in the HOF, Hernandez ranks higher than Hank Greenberg, George Sisler, Harmon Killebrew, Jake Beckley, Tony Perez, Orlando Cepeda, Frank Chance. Jim Bottomley, and High Pockets Kelly.

Hernandez gets a lot of credit in WAR and the like because, well, most of his cohorts at 1B weren't that good. That era is littered with guys hitting .260 with 7 homers. And, even then, his top WAR is 7.6, the year he won the MVP. And that's well below normal MVP standards. Dave Winfield was far more deserving that year, to boot.

At the end of the day, at 1B, you gotta do one of two things - hit for a high average or hit with power. Hernandez didn't do either one (for his career). .296/13/83 every 162. That's just not great.

He has no case for the Hall.

[JunkyJoe]

Originally Posted by Tabe

So that leaves us 5-time All-Star, MVP, batting champion. That's a good career. It's not a HOF career. We're talking a guy who played a premium offensive position but delivered mediocre - at best - power.

IMO Hernandez was much better than just mediocre offensively. To me, "mediocre" would be an average hitter who bats in the .250 - .280 range throughout his career.

Not only was Hernandez a .296 career hitter, he also had 6 seasons over .300, with his top 3 seasons at .344 ; .321 ; .311 -- those numbers are solidly above-average. I'd even say that's much better than the average player.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by JunkyJoe

IMO Hernandez was much better than just mediocre offensively. To me, "mediocre" would be an average hitter who bats in the .250 - .280 range throughout his career.

Not only was Hernandez a .296 career hitter, he also had 6 seasons over .300, with his top 3 seasons at .344 ; .321 ; .311 -- those numbers are solidly above-average. I'd even say that's much better than the average player.

Note that I said mediocre power, not mediocre offensively.