Hall of Fame voting and WWII

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by G1911

I would argue that the Hall has actually done a pretty good job handling WWII (though they have not handled plenty of other things well).

Travis is the most glaring example of a career ruined by WWII, but unlike most of the others, this is more because it ruined his career entirely, instead of just missing X number of years. I'm not sure I would vote for someone, based on a projection of what they might have done if something that did happen did not actually happen, but I sure wouldn't be opposed to giving him a plaque. It becomes a slippery slope to me. What if Herb Score wasn't injured? He projected to have some great seasons.


I don't think anyone else who missed time really looks like a hall of famer, even giving them credit for those years and assuming they would have played at a very high level. Dom Dimmaggio's career is still short, and his extremely low OPS+ (by a hall of fame standard) doesn't indicate he was really all that great of a batter, which is his key. I don't think Dom would be in the conversation if his last name was different.


I think Rizzuto is a lower-quality Hall of Famer, but he was elected more for defense, not offense. His detractors make too much of his batting average and not enough of his glove. His supporters make too much of the fact that he wore Yankee pinstripes and was popular. Bill James, a detractor of Rizzuto's for a long time, ran a statistical study in the Historical Baseball Abstract from 2001, that concluded that Rizzuto was the greatest SS at turning the double play in baseball history. Obviously this is one statistical study, projecting what the expected double plays for a team would be and comparing to what they actually did, I don't recall all the details. Defensive statistics remain weak, and it does seem to have been the opinion at the time that he was a truly elite level defensive player at the second-most important defensive position. I can see the argument here, though I still think he rates pretty low on the Hall of Fame scale, but I don't think he was a truly terrible selection. If Al Dark was a Yankee and Rizzuto played for the A's, it's pretty clear who would be in the hall of fame.

I would argue (and have done so) that being hurt playing baseball is completely different than being hurt serving your country. On the one hand, playing baseball is entirely voluntary. Being drafted into the service for WWII was not. Being hurt playing in the profession you chose is substantially different, IMO, than being hurt doing something that you had no choice other than to do. As I understand it, Travis never resented having his career ruined by being drafted, which is true of most of the greatest generation. But the fact remains that he did, as a result of events over which he had no choice.

Herb Score had great projections until he got hurt doing what he had chosen to do. Cecil Travis had great projections until he was hurt doing what he was required to do by his country. To my way of thinking, there is a significant difference between the two, and it really bothers me that he gets next to no recognition for the sacrifice that he made. There really isn't any slippery slope in my estimation, because he is the only potentially HOF worthy candidate I can think of who had to make that sacrifice.