Hall of Fame Ballot Announced

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by packs

I was pointing out that Hernandez is the weakest on the list and may explain why he is the one not in the HOF.

Weakest in what way, other than that you think GMs would not want him as much as the others?

[packs]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Weakest in what way, other than that you think GMs would not want him as much as the others?

Weakest in that he wasn't as good as the other players on your list. Defense is a valuable skill but it's not something someone is going to get into the HOF for at first base. Shortstop, sure. Centerfield, maybe. Not first base. Hernandez's WAR is only where it is because of the points he picks up for dWAR. His offensive WAR is lower than every player on your list.

Bill Terry is closest to him but Keith Hernandez didn't hit 400 or retire with a 341 average.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by packs

Weakest in that he wasn't as good as the other players on your list. Defense is a valuable skill but it's not something someone is going to get into the HOF for at first base. Shortstop, sure. Centerfield, maybe. Not first base. Hernandez's WAR is only where it is because of the points he picks up for dWAR. His offensive WAR is lower than every player on your list.

Bill Terry is closest to him but Keith Hernandez didn't hit 400 or retire with a 341 average.

Yes, 1st base is the least important infield position, but it still matters.
Hernandez is underrated for his offensive production. For instance, he had an offensive WAR over five 3x, was a 2x Silver Slugger, and his OPS+ is 6 points higher than Perez'.

[packs]

You have to mash to get into the HOF at first base. Keith Hernandez did not mash. Tony Perez his over 200 more home runs than Hernandez and drove in over 600 more runs.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by packs

You have to mash to get into the HOF at first base. Keith Hernandez did not mash. Tony Perez his over 200 more home runs than Hernandez and drove in over 600 more runs.

Not all first baseman in the HOF "mashed".

Hernandez has more career Homers than Bill Terry.

I'm just saying Hernandez deserves another shot.

[G1911]

He hit .296, he walked well, he had little power. If .296/.384/.436 in the context that he did it is a HOF 1B, then we'd have to elect a ton of people. If it is his defense, well, I really don't see an argument for a defensive 1B to be elected while people revile every defense-first HOFer except for Ozzie Smith (Mazeroski, Maranville, Schalk, everyone but Ozzie dots the 'worst HOFer' opinion lists).

I get that Hernandez was very good at playing 1B, but I have a hard time ascribing the huge value to this that WAR does. Killebrew -18.7, Hernandez +1.3 (a positive at 1B is very, very tough); it's how they punish 1B not to dominate the rankings with their bats. 1B also has a positional adjustment factor on top of the dWAR component. Thus it has Killebrew and Hernandez equal overall in WAR because of the dWAR gap. I cannot fathom a single team picking Hernandez over Killebrew, not because they are stupid and don't understand analytics, but because Killebrew is clearly more valuable. WAR has a lot of problems with defense; one of many reasons it should not be treated as gospel.

Will Clark and Fred McGriff are better candidates for 1B who played when Hernandez did.

Olerud, Hernandez, they are better than the absolute worst 1B, but those mistakes should not be extended to justify hundreds of more mistakes.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by G1911

He hit .296, he walked well, he had little power. If .296/.384/.436 in the context that he did it is a HOF 1B, then we'd have to elect a ton of people. If it is his defense, well, I really don't see an argument for a defensive 1B to be elected while people revile every defense-first HOFer except for Ozzie Smith (Mazeroski, Maranville, Schalk, everyone but Ozzie dots the 'worst HOFer' opinion lists).

I get that Hernandez was very good at playing 1B, but I have a hard time ascribing the huge value to this that WAR does. Killebrew -18.7, Hernandez +1.3 (a positive at 1B is very, very tough); it's how they punish 1B not to dominate the rankings with their bats. 1B also has a positional adjustment factor on top of the dWAR component. Thus it has Killebrew and Hernandez equal overall in WAR because of the dWAR gap. I cannot fathom a single team picking Hernandez over Killebrew, not because they are stupid and don't understand analytics, but because Killebrew is clearly more valuable. WAR has a lot of problems with defense; one of many reasons it should not be treated as gospel.

Will Clark and Fred McGriff are better candidates for 1B who played when Hernandez did.

Olerud, Hernandez, they are better than the absolute worst 1B, but those mistakes should not be extended to justify hundreds of more mistakes.

I think you have some good points, until your last sentence "Olerud, Hernandez, they are better than the absolute worst 1B, but those mistakes should not be extended to justify hundreds of more mistakes"

We live in a big Hall world. If we lived in a small Hall world, I would agree that Hernandez should not be considered. But in our current reality, he should get another shot.

And letting Hernandez in wouldn't open the floodgates to "hundreds of more mistakes"

[packs]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Not all first baseman in the HOF "mashed".

Hernandez has more career Homers than Bill Terry.

I'm just saying Hernandez deserves another shot.

Bill Terry hit 400. If Keith Hernandez hit 400 I'd want him in too. But he didn't. He also didn't hit 341 over his career like Terry did, which is extraordinary.

[Gorditadogg]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Yes, 1st base is the least important infield position, but it still matters.
Hernandez is underrated for his offensive production. For instance, he had an offensive WAR over five 3x, was a 2x Silver Slugger, and his OPS+ is 6 points higher than Perez'.

"He's better than Tony Perez" is true but not a great argument, as Perez is one of the weakest 1st basemen to get in. I think with Hernandez we are talking about how he compares with other guys that don't belong in the Hall.

There was a post here a few months ago about which current 1st basemen will get elected once they are eligible. The consensus was Pujols and Cabrera will get in for sure (great insight I know), but that the next guys behind those two - Votto, Freeman and Goldschmidt - will have a hard time getting enough votes. And those guys are all a tier up from Hernandez.


Sent from my SM-S906U using Tapatalk

[Gorditadogg]

Duplicate

[darwinbulldog]

I'd say the ten best players not in the Hall, in order, are

Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Alex Rodriguez
Mike Trout
Clayton Kershaw
Justin Verlander
Max Scherzer
Jim McCormick
Albert Pujols
Curt Schilling

There are maybe as many as 20 other eligible players who haven't gotten in yet and probably should, but I don't feel too bad about omitting anyone who isn't on the above list. Even if you want to limit Hall membership to something like the 50 best players per century of MLB history, they're all above that cutoff.

[G1911]

I don’t think I would put McCormick over Pujols, but I’m a fan of his candidacy.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I'd say the ten best players not in the Hall, in order, are

Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Alex Rodriguez
Mike Trout
Clayton Kershaw
Justin Verlander
Max Scherzer
Jim McCormick
Albert Pujols
Curt Schilling

There are maybe as many as 20 other eligible players who haven't gotten in yet and probably should, but I don't feel too bad about omitting anyone who isn't on the above list. Even if you want to limit Hall membership to something like the 50 best players per century of MLB history, they're all above that cutoff.

Your first 3 I have no problem going in; could not care less about steroids. You still have to hit the ball no matter how powerful you have magically become. The next 6 maybe go in; we'll see. Finally, Schilling was a lock before he melted down in such a way that made the Black Sox/Joe Jackson, Hal Chase, Pete Rose, etc., look like kindergarten with their gambling. Though I hate what they did, and to this point they rightfully haven't gotten in, I hate Schilling even more. It sickens me to think he might go in. And then I would add Cecil Travis, Riggs Stephenson, Thurman Munson, and Don Mattingly to the list of whom ought to be in. They probably never will go in but ought to. Just my opinion; you all have yours, I have mine.

[Kzoo]

Originally Posted by darwinbulldog

I'd say the ten best players not in the Hall, in order, are

Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Alex Rodriguez
Mike Trout
Clayton Kershaw
Justin Verlander
Max Scherzer
Jim McCormick
Albert Pujols
Curt Schilling

There are maybe as many as 20 other eligible players who haven't gotten in yet and probably should, but I don't feel too bad about omitting anyone who isn't on the above list. Even if you want to limit Hall membership to something like the 50 best players per century of MLB history, they're all above that cutoff.

I like Ichiro, too.