Hall of Fame voting and WWII

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

OK, but why are they in? Is Dean in for those reasons or is Dean in because he won 30 games? Is Wilson in because of his record setting rbi season or not?

Wilson was not elected until 1979, so I highly doubt those numbers you just brought up jumped out to anyone, especially since they wouldn't have heard of OPS.

The answer is "No". Those milestones obviously helped, but if Wilson and Dean had had only 1 excellent season, they almost certainly would not have been elected. Wilson winning 4 home run crowns as well as setting that major record, is what did it. Dean's other achievements are highlighted above by Rats. Neither are strong hall of famers, but they had many more accomplishments and hall of fame level seasons than Travis' 1.

I cannot think of a player who is in the hall of fame purely on the strength of a single season, even among the worst they have chosen.

[packs]

Originally Posted by G1911

The answer is "No". Those milestones obviously helped, but if Wilson and Dean had had only 1 excellent season, they almost certainly would not have been elected. Wilson winning 4 home run crowns as well as setting that major record, is what did it. Dean's other achievements are highlighted above by Rats. Neither are strong hall of famers, but they had many more accomplishments and hall of fame level seasons than Travis' 1.

I cannot think of a player who is in the hall of fame purely on the strength of a single season, even among the worst they have chosen.

What makes Dean a HOFer and not Johan Santana if not his 30 wins?

And is Jack Chesbro in the HOF for any other reason than his 41 win season?

Here's one more for you: Albert Belle and Hack Wilson have pretty similar numbers, don't they? Difference in WAR is negligible, OPS+ is exactly the same, whereas Hack put up 2 seasons with an OPS over 1000, Belle put up 4, including 3 in a row. Hack's single season high for OPS+ was 177. Belle's was 194.

However, only one of the two players set a single season rbi record and that player is in the HOF.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

What makes Dean a HOFer and not Johan Santana if not his 30 wins?

And is Jack Chesbro in the HOF for any other reason than his 41 win season?

Here's one more for you: Albert Belle and Hack Wilson have pretty similar numbers, don't they? Difference in WAR is negligible, OPS+ is exactly the same, whereas Hack put up 2 seasons with an OPS over 1000, Belle put up 4, including 3 in a row. Hack's single season high for OPS+ was 177. Belle's was 194.

However, only one of the two players set a single season rbi record and that player is in the HOF.

Is your argument that Dean accomplished nothing besides winning 30 games and this is the only reason he is in the hall? Or is it that if he is in, Johan should be in? These two things are not at all the same. I would not vote for either personally, but they are comparable. Johan has a hall of fame argument. He posted an ERA+ of 129 or greater every year from 2002-2010, won 2 Cy Youngs, 3 ERA crowns, led the league in WHIP 4 times and more. Their inning counts are awfully low, but I don't think Johan would be a terrible hall of fame selection, and is better than some pitchers already in in my book. Johan had 8 excellent level seasons (2002 was a partial season, though). Travis had 1 excellent season.


Albert Belle I would vote for. He is not in the hall of fame more because he was a piece of trash as a human being. He had this reputation before he was arrested for DUI's, exposing himself to children, chasing children down in his car, and stalking an ex. I don't think outside of baseball problems should relate to a baseball hall of fame selection, but there is a lot more going on with the vote for Belle than a straight statistical analysis. It is extremely misleading to equate him not being in with Hack.

[packs]

My only point is that the HOF has rewarded players with induction for one incredible season. Dean's accomplishments are so in line with Santana's that they could be almost the same player, but one of them won 30 games and the other didn't. It's the 30 games that sets them apart and makes one a HOFer over the other. That's all I'm trying to say. I'm not saying what Travis did is equal to Dean winning 30 games or Wilson's rbi record. I'm simply trying to point out that the HOF has inducted players based on one out of this world season and the promise of what could have been if not for XYZ.

You don't have an argument for Chesbro, right? We are in agreement that he's only in the HOF because he won 41 games in a season once?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

My only point is that the HOF has rewarded players with induction for one incredible season. Dean's accomplishments are so in line with Santana's that they could be almost the same player, but one of them won 30 games and the other didn't. It's the 30 games that sets them apart and makes one a HOFer over the other. That's all I'm trying to say. I'm not saying what Travis did is equal to Dean winning 30 games or Wilson's rbi record. I'm simply trying to point out that the HOF has inducted players based on one out of this world season and the promise of what could have been if not for XYZ.

You don't have an argument for Chesbro, right? We are in agreement that he's only in the HOF because he won 41 games in a season once?

These two had short careers, but if all they accomplished was Dean's 1934 season and Hack's RBI record, they would absolutely not be in the hall of fame. Again, I probably would not vote for either myself, but to ignore both of these mens other fantastic seasons is not just misleading, it's factually wrong.

We do not agree on Chesbro either. Chesbro was a star pitcher in 1901, 1902 and 1905 as well. He led the league in wins in 1901. He had 4 hall of fame level seasons, posting ERA's far, far better than the league. Obviously the 41 win season was his best, and a key component of his value, but if he had not had the other seasons, he would also not be in the hall of fame. He proved more durable than Dean or Santana, pitching 1,000 innings more than either of them. Even among the players I think are among the worst selections to the Hall, they are not in for 1 single season. This claim is just not true, and is easily proven incorrect by looking at their season by season statistics. There is not a single player in the Hall of Fame who only had 1 excellent/hall of fame season.

[packs]

If you say so. I can think of a million pitchers with 4 good seasons. Even Chesbro's Wikipedia includes notes about how dubious his selection was and Bill James himself says he's only in for his 1904 season.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

If you say so. I can think of a million pitchers with 4 good seasons. Even Chesbro's Wikipedia includes notes about how dubious his selection was and Bill James himself says he's only in for his 1904 season.

As I just said above, he only had 4 excellent seasons and I think he is among the worst in the Hall of Fame. I agree with this. I would not vote for Chesbro either.

The claim that he only had 1 hall of fame level season and is in only for this season is pretty easily disproven by looking at his annual statistics.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by g1911

is your argument that dean accomplished nothing besides winning 30 games and this is the only reason he is in the hall? Or is it that if he is in, johan should be in? These two things are not at all the same. I would not vote for either personally, but they are comparable. Johan has a hall of fame argument. He posted an era+ of 129 or greater every year from 2002-2010, won 2 cy youngs, 3 era crowns, led the league in whip 4 times and more. Their inning counts are awfully low, but i don't think johan would be a terrible hall of fame selection, and is better than some pitchers already in in my book. Johan had 8 excellent level seasons (2002 was a partial season, though). Travis had 1 excellent season.


Albert belle i would vote for. He is not in the hall of fame more because he was a piece of trash as a human being, and a cheater in basbeall. he had this reputation before he was arrested for dui's, exposing himself to children, chasing children down in his car, and stalking an ex. I don't think outside of baseball problems should relate to a baseball hall of fame selection, but there is a lot more going on with the vote for belle than a straight statistical analysis. It is extremely misleading to equate him not being in with hack.

fyp