Thurman Munson Hall of Fame? And other careers cut short.

[jingram058]

Originally Posted by G1911

I don’t see any reasonable case that Munson was either as good as Bench, or as bad as a replacement level player. At some point math and reality have to interfere with narrative. Must we always take the greatest of extremes?

Munson had a career .357 batting average in the postseason with three home runs, 22 RBIs and 19 runs scored. His batting average in the World Series was .373. Munson threw out 44.48% of base runners who tried stealing a base on him, ranking him 11th on the all-time list.[46]

1st all time – Singles in World Series, 9
10th all time – Batting average by catcher, .292
11th all time – Postseason batting average, .357
11th all time – Caught stealing percentage
16th all time – On base percentage by catcher
20th all time – OPS by catcher
24th all time – Slugging by catcher
26th all time – Hits by catcher
26th all time – Runs by catcher
AL Rookie of the Year (1970)
AL MVP (1976)
3× Gold Glove Award
3 AL Pennants
2 World Series titles
7× All Star

Yes his career was cut short. That's the only thing keeping him out of the HoF. All the other arguments or opinions are BS. No more discussion on this by me. There's nothing to discuss.

[howard38]

Originally Posted by jingram058

Munson had a career .357 batting average in the postseason with three home runs, 22 RBIs and 19 runs scored. His batting average in the World Series was .373. Munson threw out 44.48% of base runners who tried stealing a base on him, ranking him 11th on the all-time list.[46]

1st all time – Singles in World Series, 9
10th all time – Batting average by catcher, .292
11th all time – Postseason batting average, .357
11th all time – Caught stealing percentage
16th all time – On base percentage by catcher
20th all time – OPS by catcher
24th all time – Slugging by catcher
26th all time – Hits by catcher
26th all time – Runs by catcher
AL Rookie of the Year (1970)
AL MVP (1976)
3× Gold Glove Award
3 AL Pennants
2 World Series titles
7× All Star

Yes his career was cut short. That's the only thing keeping him out of the HoF. All the other arguments or opinions are BS. No more discussion on this by me. There's nothing to discuss.

Thurman had a great arm and an exceptionally quick release but he is not even close to 11th all time in caught stealing percentage. That stat is dominated by the old-timers like Ray Schalk and Roy Campanella.

[JollyElm]

Many/a lot(?) of us were around when Thurm was playing. He was a great catcher, a great leader, and a hard-nosed ballplayer who got things done. He was a huge part of whatever it was that got the Yanks back into prominence, and was beyond clutch in the post-season...yet, once again, when stats are shown, the first one is WAR. WAR is a goddamn theoretical stat. It seems the people who constantly trot it out are those who have never stepped onto a baseball diamond in their life, and base everything on what a computer tells them. I much rather listen to the guys who played with and against Munson to get the measure of him as a player (Here is where some snarky contrarian will jump in to quote a Yankee who had something less than stellar to say about him. Whatever.).

When he was playing (and admittedly statistically declining) he was thought of as a sure fire HOFer. That's important in his case, as he was looked at as one of the best around by both players and fans alike.

End of rant.

[nolemmings]

I can't give an objective opinion. Thurman Munson was my favorite player and meeting him was the highlight of my sportsfan life, short 60 seconds or so as it was.

[Mike D.]

I always find it amusing that people find WAR useful until they disagree with what it says about a borderline Hall of Famer, then it's garbage. Yet nobody looks at the list of top 10 career WAR and says "that list is absurd".

When talking about catchers who's career were "cut short", how about Mauer? He was a very good catcher who had a 135 OPS+. He played until he was 35, but at less valuable position (1B) and had a 105 OPS+.

Mauer was worth 44.6 WAR in his first 10 seasons, before he was forced off catching. He was worth 10.6 WAR in his final 5 seasons (post concussions). It stands to reason he'd have had some aging related loss of performance those last 5 years even if he didn't have the concussion.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Many/a lot(?) of us were around when Thurm was playing. He was a great catcher, a great leader, and a hard-nosed ballplayer who got things done. He was a huge part of whatever it was that got the Yanks back into prominence, and was beyond clutch in the post-season...yet, once again, when stats are shown, the first one is WAR. WAR is a goddamn theoretical stat. It seems the people who constantly trot it out are those who have never stepped onto a baseball diamond in their life, and base everything on what a computer tells them. I much rather listen to the guys who played with and against Munson to get the measure of him as a player (Here is where some snarky contrarian will jump in to quote a Yankee who had something less than stellar to say about him. Whatever.).

When he was playing (and admittedly statistically declining) he was thought of as a sure fire HOFer. That's important in his case, as he was looked at as one of the best around by both players and fans alike.

End of rant.

If we 1) toss out statistical evidence and 2) toss out any opinions other than that he is a Hall of Fame, then Munson is a Hall of Famer. You can arrange any outcome if you refuse to a admit any evidence that is not in accord with what you want to find

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by G1911

If we 1) toss out statistical evidence and 2) toss out any opinions other than that he is a Hall of Fame, then Munson is a Hall of Famer. You can arrange any outcome if you refuse to a admit any evidence that is not in accord with what you want to find

Gee, not exactly a surprise to see you try to take a shot at yet another person here. Yawn. Perhaps, if you actually read what I wrote, you may notice that I didn't give an opinion on whether or not he belongs, I simply stated, "When he was playing (and admittedly statistically declining) he was thought of as a sure fire HOFer. That's important in his case, as he was looked at as one of the best around by both players and fans alike."

[G1911]

Originally Posted by JollyElm

Gee, not exactly a surprise to see you try to take a shot at yet another person here. Yawn. Perhaps, if you actually read what I wrote, you may notice that I didn't give an opinion on whether or not he belongs, I simply stated, "When he was playing (and admittedly statistically declining) he was thought of as a sure fire HOFer. That's important in his case, as he was looked at as one of the best around by both players and fans alike."

The shot was at the illogical setup, not the person. I know this board abolsutely hates logic and reason and loves ad hominem and outrage. I do not know you whatsoever. Perhaps if you read what I wrote, you would see the glaring logic issue.

[JollyElm]

Originally Posted by G1911

The shot was at the illogical setup, not the person. I know this board abolsutely hates logic and reason and loves ad hominem and outrage. I do not know you whatsoever. Perhaps if you read what I wrote, you would see the glaring logic issue.

You are going to talk to me about logic???? Good one. If you want to take shots at "this board," then take shots at it and leave me the eff out of it. Are we done, because I have things to do?

[G1911]

Originally Posted by jingram058

Munson had a career .357 batting average in the postseason with three home runs, 22 RBIs and 19 runs scored. His batting average in the World Series was .373. Munson threw out 44.48% of base runners who tried stealing a base on him, ranking him 11th on the all-time list.[46]

1st all time – Singles in World Series, 9
10th all time – Batting average by catcher, .292
11th all time – Postseason batting average, .357
11th all time – Caught stealing percentage
16th all time – On base percentage by catcher
20th all time – OPS by catcher
24th all time – Slugging by catcher
26th all time – Hits by catcher
26th all time – Runs by catcher
AL Rookie of the Year (1970)
AL MVP (1976)
3× Gold Glove Award
3 AL Pennants
2 World Series titles
7× All Star

Yes his career was cut short. That's the only thing keeping him out of the HoF. All the other arguments or opinions are BS. No more discussion on this by me. There's nothing to discuss.

I can appreciate your passion, but we all know that Bench's accomplishments are significantly greater.

One can argue he is or is not a HOFer, but to argue he is above Bench is just not within the realm of reason.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I can appreciate your passion, but we all know that Bench's accomplishments are significantly greater.

One can argue he is or is not a HOFer, but to argue he is above Bench is just not within the realm of reason.

Let's not overlook the fact that he is NOT a HOFer. Historically, voting is not perfect, but it certainly suggests he's at best borderline. Can you imagine any doubt about Bench?

1981 BBWAA (15.5%)
1982 BBWAA ( 6.3%)
1983 BBWAA ( 4.8%)
1984 BBWAA ( 7.2%)
1985 BBWAA ( 8.1%)
1986 BBWAA ( 8.2%)
1987 BBWAA ( 6.8%)
1988 BBWAA ( 7.5%)
1989 BBWAA ( 6.9%)
1990 BBWAA ( 7.4%)
1991 BBWAA ( 6.3%)
1992 BBWAA ( 7.4%)
1993 BBWAA ( 9.5%)
1994 BBWAA ( 6.8%)
1995 BBWAA ( 6.5%)

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Let's not overlook the fact that he is NOT a HOFer. Historically, voting is not perfect, but it certainly suggests he's at best borderline. Can you imagine any doubt about Bench?

1981 BBWAA (15.5%)
1982 BBWAA ( 6.3%)
1983 BBWAA ( 4.8%)
1984 BBWAA ( 7.2%)
1985 BBWAA ( 8.1%)
1986 BBWAA ( 8.2%)
1987 BBWAA ( 6.8%)
1988 BBWAA ( 7.5%)
1989 BBWAA ( 6.9%)
1990 BBWAA ( 7.4%)
1991 BBWAA ( 6.3%)
1992 BBWAA ( 7.4%)
1993 BBWAA ( 9.5%)
1994 BBWAA ( 6.8%)
1995 BBWAA ( 6.5%)

I don't think Munson is a strong candidate, but he also wouldn't be a shocking choice. He's a bit below the line, but not that far below it and he has the intangibles of having a lot of fanboys who don't care about math, a tragic story, and being a Yankee captain.

I just wouldn't use the vote results to make the case - a player is meritorious or not because he is or is not actually meritorious, not because the voters did X or Y.

The arguments that he is with Bench or Fisk or was replacement level during his prime are just absurdist reactions at opposite ends of the absurdity spectrum. It usually takes less than 15 posts in a HOF thread before we've devolved into a world that is completely distinct and separate from any actual reality.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

I don't think Munson is a strong candidate, but he also wouldn't be a shocking choice. He's a bit below the line, but not that far below it and he has the intangibles of having a lot of fanboys who don't care about math, a tragic story, and being a Yankee captain.

I just wouldn't use the vote results to make the case - a player is meritorious or not because he is or is not actually meritorious, not because the voters did X or Y.

The arguments that he is with Bench or Fisk or was replacement level during his prime are just absurdist reactions at opposite ends of the absurdity spectrum. It usually takes less than 15 posts in a HOF thread before we've devolved into a world that is completely distinct and separate from any actual reality.

I get it, but at the same time to me the fact of voters over 15 years being that unimpressed, who were from that period, is at least relevant, although of course not definitive.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

I get it, but at the same time to me the fact of voters over 15 years being that unimpressed, who were from that period, is at least relevant, although of course not definitive.

My only issue is that if I made this argument, that Munson is not deserving because the voters overwhelmingly thought he was not deserving, then I would have to take that argument for everyone else. For example, I would have to conclude that Arky Vaughn was a poor Vets Committee choice, because the voters overwhelmingly rejected him during his many years on the ballot. It seems to me the safe and fair argument to make about Munson, and to hold everyone to the same standard, is the mathematical one.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by G1911

My only issue is that if I made this argument, that Munson is not deserving because the voters overwhelmingly thought he was not deserving, then I would have to take that argument for everyone else. For example, I would have to conclude that Arky Vaughn was a poor Vets Committee choice, because the voters overwhelmingly rejected him during his many years on the ballot. It seems to me the safe and fair argument to make about Munson, and to hold everyone to the same standard, is the mathematical one.

The committees haven't put Munson in either.