Slightly OT - 2020 Modern Baseball Era HOF Ballot

[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.

[packs]

Originally Posted by rats60

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.

I'm sorry but strictly looking at OPS+ does not tell you who is a better player. Hernandez's OPS+ is 1 point higher than Mattingly's too. I would say that differential is negligible and not a standard for who was better.

It should also go without saying that Mattingly appeared on this ballot at all while Hernandez did not.

[ejharrington]

Originally Posted by rats60

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.

Agreed, plus Hernandez was a key member of two separate World Championship teams.

[mr2686]

I've come to the conclusion that we're all champions for one player or another, and probably not going to change anyone's minds. Can't help but think about how the kids in 50's New York went back and forth as to who was better Willie, Mickey or the Duke.