HOF Results

[insidethewrapper]

Does this mean guys like Bill Madlock with 4 batting titles etc will someday be in the HOF ?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by insidethewrapper

Does this mean guys like Bill Madlock with 4 batting titles etc will someday be in the HOF ?

Madlock is very similar to Oliva. I'm not saying I would vote for him, but he has a legitimate argument and should merit genuine consideration.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Not the strike season one, but weren't Madlock's other titles considered somewhat cheap given how many games he missed?

Anyhow Oliva was very popular. Madlock, not.

He won't get in ever IMO.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Not the strike season one, but weren't Madlock's other titles considered somewhat cheap given how many games he missed?

Anyhow Oliva was very popular. Madlock, not.

He won't get in ever IMO.

130, 142 and 130. Sure that's missing some time but not crazy. 565, 588 and 530 PA's. 530 is pretty low to the 502 required, but nobody seems to devalue Brett's run at .400 and the batting title he won with only 515 PA's.

Who's to say he wouldn't have hit even higher if he'd been healthier?

[cardsagain74]

Can't agree with all of the approval of Jim Kaat making it.

A 3.45 ERA during a low-scoring era of major league history. Pitched a ton for a Twins team that won a lot of games during the '60s, or else his win total wouldn't have even sniffed HOF consideration.

It's trademark hall of very good stuff, and represents how the hall's standards continue to slowly lower (and how important it is to have the right buddies influencing the voting)

[G1911]

I think Kaat’s 287 wins have more to do with his 4,500 innings than being a Twin. His 108 ERA+ is his real problem. His WAR is fairly low. He also was consistently good for two decades and won a ton of gold gloves that certainly can give him a little bit of a boost. 7 of his top 10 similarity scores are hall of famers. Excellent but not great 20 year pitchers doesn’t seem a bad place to draw the line as the bottom tier of the hall of fame. I’d rank him over some hall of fame starters, he’s hardly lowering the general bottom standard, he’s right on the border. He’s really almost the same player as John, wonder if he gets in soon. They’re both a lot better than Jack Morris.

[cardsagain74]

Originally Posted by G1911

I think Kaat’s 287 wins have more to do with his 4,500 innings than being a Twin. His 108 ERA+ is his real problem. His WAR is fairly low. He also was consistently good for two decades and won a ton of gold gloves that certainly can give him a little bit of a boost. 7 of his top 10 similarity scores are hall of famers. Excellent but not great 20 year pitchers doesn’t seem a bad place to draw the line as the bottom tier of the hall of fame. I’d rank him over some hall of fame starters, he’s hardly lowering the general bottom standard, he’s right on the border. He’s really almost the same player as John, wonder if he gets in soon. They’re both a lot better than Jack Morris.

I agree that my "lowering the standard" statement might be too strong. But I still maintain that it's a poor choice (to go along with whatever starters you felt were even worse choices).

The Twins were around 140 games over .500 during Kaat's 12 full seasons there, so I imagine it was both that and the 4500 innings that account for his win total.

And even with his fielding, as you mentioned, his WAR (especially over all those innings) still isn't worth of the hall to me. Especially when you factor in that low ERA+ compared to the usual HOF standards

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by G1911

I think Kaat’s 287 wins have more to do with his 4,500 innings than being a Twin. His 108 ERA+ is his real problem. His WAR is fairly low. He also was consistently good for two decades and won a ton of gold gloves that certainly can give him a little bit of a boost. 7 of his top 10 similarity scores are hall of famers. Excellent but not great 20 year pitchers doesn’t seem a bad place to draw the line as the bottom tier of the hall of fame. I’d rank him over some hall of fame starters, he’s hardly lowering the general bottom standard, he’s right on the border. He’s really almost the same player as John, wonder if he gets in soon. They’re both a lot better than Jack Morris.

Was just going to say if you like Jack Morris in the hall, you can't bitch about Kaat.

[tod41]

Originally Posted by G1911

Madlock is very similar to Oliva. I'm not saying I would vote for him, but he has a legitimate argument and should merit genuine consideration.

Oliva was a more impactful player.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by tod41

Oliva was a more impactful player.

I’d nudge Oliva over him due to context and his excellence in a pitcher leaning era. But Madlock is very similar statistically. “Impactful” is a thing difficult to quantify if we’re referring to something out of statistics.