HOF Results

[cammb]

Originally Posted by G1911

The Golden Era is not bad. Minoso is, I think, long overdue and a clear hall of famer. Kaat, Oliva and Hodges are not bad choices, not great ones. They can reasonably be hall of famers without lowering the standard, and could reasonably not make it. The kind of guys this vote, after missing admittance for like 50 years, is made for. I'd probably pick Boyer over Kaat, but none of these are a bad choice. No Harold Baines garbage, no Lee Smith, no Jack Morris type pick. All reasonable.

However, it looks like collusion. 11/16 ballots were exactly the same, with a choice among 10 players who are all in the same 'close but not quite' boat (except, I think, Minoso who is extremely deserving). Really looks like there was some vote trading or something to align everything so we have several players elected.


The Pre-War ballot, frankly, I think has much to do with narratives. It's purpose was obviously to elect Negro Leaguers, with the recent declaration that they are all major leagues. This isn't a problem necessarily, most of the best players from that time period not in are from the Negro Leagues. But O'Neil and Fowler? O'Neil is getting in for being a great interview subject, I like him and his stories like everyone else but I don't think that's an appropriate reason. Character by itself is not enough. Fowler, I don't claim to be an expert on, but he's seems chosen as a first-of-something, not a great. They had better choices on this ballot to honor black players from this period, like Donaldson.

If I'm reading it right, Bill Dahlen got 0 votes though. Reynolds and O'Doul, the other traditional major league options, both did get multiple votes. Each of whom is obviously inferior as a player, and Reynolds even being there is downright ridiculous (25 WAR, less than 200 wins, why not Lopat if you want a good-for-awhile Yankee from the 50's?). O'Doul has claims to significance in Japan, which does not seem relevant to an American Hall of Fame that does not and never has honored success in Japan. I know he has fans here, but 3,600 at bats for a player elected for his batting is a little absurd. Dahlen was close to getting in in a previous vote. He got completely screwed if the results I have are correct.

Why is Minoso a clear HOFer and not Oliva?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cammb

Why is Minoso a clear HOFer and not Oliva?

Plate Appearances:
Minoso 8223
Oliva 6880.

Minoso simply played significantly more, which helps.

WAR
Minoso 53.8
Oliva 43.0

WAR values Minoso's overall production higher than Oliva's prodigious bat.

Speaking of which, they offensively come out about the same rate wise.

OPS+:
Minoso: 130
Oliva: 131

Both really came into the league at 25 (Oliva had played 16 games before his rookie year, Minoso 9) and came in hot. Oliva won ROY, Minoso deserved too but a Yankee got it. Performance above the average is done at 35 for both of them. Except Minoso played more during that time and didn't miss as many games.

Oliva dominated the minors, but he wasn't there for long. 64 Games in D, 127 games in A ball and 1963 in AAA. He was probably major league ready a year or two before he got into the lineup. Minoso had 2 excellent AAA years, and 2 excellent years in the Negro National League (one of which he played a few games of A ball too). Minoso was major league ready well before he got a real chance.

Minoso was excellent at most things, Oliva was an excellent hitter who missed more time. Oliva has 3 batting titles

Black Ink:
Minoso 19
Oliva 41

But, Grey ink gives the reverse
Minoso 229
Oliva 146

Oliva's batting titles are significant, more than most modern-metric fans think so. But Minoso was close to the top in lots of things lots of years, moreso than Oliva.

Jaws has Minoso as the 18th LF, Oliva the 34th RF. The similarity scores for both are not good. Minoso though, is a difficult to compare player. There is only 1 900 score for his.

Oliva was a fine player, and I am not against his election. He and Minoso both have very, very similar total value from their bats (OPS+, which has faults but it's faults favor Oliva because it effectively weights slugging higher), but Minoso was good at the small things and played significantly more while putting out the same value. I think it pushes him over the line, while Oliva is right at the line and could go either way. Minoso's career in the majors is a bit short for HOF, Oliva's even moreso.

Finally, I think Minoso is the best player of his time who is not in the HOF (before this week). Oliva is not. The best player of his time not in the HOF makes them a reasonable selection for the HOF, when that era is revisited.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by G1911

Plate Appearances:
Minoso 8223
Oliva 6880.

Minoso simply played significantly more, which helps.

WAR
Minoso 53.8
Oliva 43.0

WAR values Minoso's overall production higher than Oliva's prodigious bat.

Speaking of which, they offensively come out about the same rate wise.

OPS+:
Minoso: 130
Oliva: 131

Both really came into the league at 25 (Oliva had played 16 games before his rookie year, Minoso 9) and came in hot. Oliva won ROY, Minoso deserved too but a Yankee got it. Performance above the average is done at 35 for both of them. Except Minoso played more during that time and didn't miss as many games.

Oliva dominated the minors, but he wasn't there for long. 64 Games in D, 127 games in A ball and 1963 in AAA. He was probably major league ready a year or two before he got into the lineup. Minoso had 2 excellent AAA years, and 2 excellent years in the Negro National League (one of which he played a few games of A ball too). Minoso was major league ready well before he got a real chance.

Minoso was excellent at most things, Oliva was an excellent hitter who missed more time. Oliva has 3 batting titles

Black Ink:
Minoso 19
Oliva 41

But, Grey ink gives the reverse
Minoso 229
Oliva 146

Oliva's batting titles are significant, more than most modern-metric fans think so. But Minoso was close to the top in lots of things lots of years, moreso than Oliva.

Jaws has Minoso as the 18th LF, Oliva the 34th RF. The similarity scores for both are not good. Minoso though, is a difficult to compare player. There is only 1 900 score for his.

Oliva was a fine player, and I am not against his election. He and Minoso both have very, very similar total value from their bats (OPS+, which has faults but it's faults favor Oliva because it effectively weights slugging higher), but Minoso was good at the small things and played significantly more while putting out the same value. I think it pushes him over the line, while Oliva is right at the line and could go either way. Minoso's career in the majors is a bit short for HOF, Oliva's even moreso.

Finally, I think Minoso is the best player of his time who is not in the HOF (before this week). Oliva is not. The best player of his time not in the HOF makes them a reasonable selection for the HOF, when that era is revisited.

Minos o the best player of his time not in the hall? How about Richie Allen or Vada pins on who I believe should be in the hall instead of Minoso

[G1911]

Originally Posted by cammb

Minos o the best player of his time not in the hall? How about Richie Allen or Vada pins on who I believe should be in the hall instead of Minoso

Minoso 1951-1964

Allen 1963-1977

Pinson 1958-1975

Allen is not really the same time as Minoso. Pinson overlaps some, his 111 OPS+ is far below their offensive level.

[cardsagain74]

Dick Allen's exclusion is worse than any of the new inductees was.

A 156+ OPS over 7300 plate appearances during the lowest scoring time period in the live ball era. Including leading the league three times (and in OPS four times). At this stage of HOF induction, that should be practically a layup.

And yep, his reputation. But obviously there are plenty of people in the Hall who are considered selfish jerks.

Unless he gave noogies for a dozen years to all little kids near him, he should still have been in long ago