Worst Team of all HOFers

[clydepepper]

Originally Posted by G1911

Counting only players who were elected primarily for their contributions as players, elected for their talent as players (not players like Cummings who made it primarily because he was credited with inventing the curve), and elected for their performance in a league for which their is a reasonable statistical basis for objective analysis. I am also considering that many of the "worst" are labelled as such because their offensive stats are weak, but they were elected primarily for their defense.

SP: Jesse Haines
SP: Rube Marquard
SP: Catfish Hunter
SP: Jack Morris
RP: Bruce Sutter
C: Rick Ferrell
1B: George Kelly
2B: Joe Gordon
3B: Fred Lindstrom
SS: Travis Jackson
LF: Chick Hafey
CF: Lloyd Waner
RF: Ross Youngs
DH: Harold Baines


As a counter, the best player at each who is not in the Hall of Fame, not on the active ballot, and is not excluded for his cheating/gross misconduct (Jackson/Rose/Steroids):

SP: Jim McCormick
SP: Bob Caruthers
SP: Billy Pierce
SP: Kevin Brown
RP: John Franco, no real snubs, too many in.
RP: Dan Quisenberry
C: Jorge Posada, no real snubs
1B: Gil Hodges counting some points for the 68 Mets; Will Clark, Fred McGriff or Mattingly otherwise
2B: Grich or Whitaker, but suspect it will end up being Kent. No real snubs.
3B: Ken Boyer
SS: Bill Dahlen
LF: Minnie Minoso
CF: Kenny Lofton
RF: Bobby Abreu, no one has really been snubbed here.


On the whole, they have done well with starting pitchers. I think the best non-HOFers are easily better than the worst HOF team.

LUIS TIANT! Forgotten yet again.

At least you included Minoso, but no Oliva.

.

[MCoxon]

I would agree with adding Oliva, in addition to Minoso. First Cuban (Minoso), with good stats, longevity, and a great personality; and 3 time batting-champ (Oliva) whose bad knees doomed him from a longer-lived career

[G1911]

Originally Posted by clydepepper

LUIS TIANT! Forgotten yet again.

At least you included Minoso, but no Oliva.

.

Tiant has a good case, but there's quite a number of very similar pitchers at that 3-,3,500 inning 110-120 ERA+ range to pick from. The difference between Pierce and Tiant is very small; I like Pierce's 119 ERA+ better. I think a better case can be made that, value wise, the pitchers should all be 19th century guys then picking between the absent post-war starters. Oliva has surprisingly similar hitting value, adjusted for league and park, to Abreu but in a career much shorter. Both had good defense, Abreu had 400 steals. Abreu will be an unpopular pick because he's not a name nor a sentimental favorite to anyone, but the math suggests to me significantly more value, old stats and new stats alike. I think I stand by my list.