eras committee candidates baseball HOF

[Misunderestimated]

If I were voting I would select Donaldson based on the limited stats and remarkable legends. Apart from him i'm not so sure.
I'm old enough that I remember the careers of most of these players (not the Negro League legends or Ken Boyer)

A friend of mine once asked whether it was the "Hall of Fame" or the "Hall of Stats"... obviously these things overlap but just saying whomever (whoever?) has the highest WAR should get in seems wrong. WAR is a very impressive combination of stats but I don't feel it should be dispositive of a player's value for the HOF.
Among other things, WAR doesn't account for post-season performance at all. Even as a lifelong Cub fan I think that's really important, especially if we're thinking of fame and even greatness.

Specifics:
Bobby Grich is one of the strongest "WAR candidates" (he's not on the ballot) but I don't feel like he's a HOFer. On the other hand Tiant, Allen, Parker, and definitely Garvey (whom I loathe) did seem like HOF caliber players during some or all of their careers.

[BioCRN]

Originally Posted by Misunderestimated

Among other things, WAR doesn't account for post-season performance at all. Even as a lifelong Cub fan I think that's really important, especially if we're thinking of fame and even greatness.

I point to M.Rivera's 141 innings of post-season greatness any time anyone thinks that it's b/s that a reliever is the only unanimous vote HOF'r. Sure, it's not supposed to factor in a huge way, but you can't ignore 141 innings of 0.70 ERA and 0.76 WHIP vs the best of that season.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Before all this WAR got bandied about, who can honestly say they heard anybody mention Bobby Grich in any capacity for decades? Decades. Apart from infrequent paid autograph signings, his was a name that just never hit my radar, and I do this stuff full time. It's not exactly a benchmark of greatness when a guy is almost completely forgotten about when he played so recently. Then again, Harold Baines...same thing, minus the super high WAR. I can't wait for the next post-1980 ballot! Andy Van Slyke? Lloyd Moseby? George Bell? Nothing will elicit an element of surprise at this point.

[BioCRN]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

Before all this WAR got bandied about, who can honestly say they heard anybody mention Bobby Grich in any capacity for decades?

Rick Reuschel strongly agrees.

[FrankWakefield]

I agree with Alan about reading The Politics of Glory. First edition, please. For me it was a troubling read because I'm a Cardinals fan...

I also recommend The Historical Baseball Abstract, by Bill James, First edition!!!

And, on the heels of those two reads, look at The Fix is In, by Daniel Ginsburg. Rule 21. That's the rule about gambling on baseball.

I've praised these books before, several places. Maybe more than once, here. As for The Politics of Glory changing it's title, my thinking is that the newer title is more warm and fuzzy, less accusatory than the original title. I thought they should not have changed it. too.

[Peter_Spaeth]

https://www.baseballprojection.com/special/grich.htm

It's not just WAR.

Very in depth here:
https://www.cooperstowncred.com/bobb...ame-candidate/

[John1941]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

Before all this WAR got bandied about, who can honestly say they heard anybody mention Bobby Grich in any capacity for decades? Decades. Apart from infrequent paid autograph signings, his was a name that just never hit my radar, and I do this stuff full time. It's not exactly a benchmark of greatness when a guy is almost completely forgotten about when he played so recently. Then again, Harold Baines...same thing, minus the super high WAR. I can't wait for the next post-1980 ballot! Andy Van Slyke? Lloyd Moseby? George Bell? Nothing will elicit an element of surprise at this point.

Because we know how infallible crowds are at assessing the true value of things.

Also, WAR rates Baines as almost exactly average for his career - his WAR is not exactly "super high."

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by John1941

Also, WAR rates Baines as almost exactly average for his career - his WAR is not exactly "super high."

Yes. I was saying exactly that.

[tod41]

Thanks to LaRussa and his buddies, the floodgates are open. With Baines in, the case can be made for so many players now. Dave Parker? What about Fred Lynn?

[packs]

Bobby Grich can get into the WAR HOF anytime he likes but it’s odd to portray him as one of the best players of all time. He was largely pedestrian in his career, no counting stats to speak of, and even the article about him seems to be steeped in WAR and then finding reasons to support his status vis-a-vis his WAR. I didn’t find it very compelling.

I just feel like he’s always been the equivalent of an underground band where guys like to see if you know who they are. Talked about like they were great. Then you put the album on and you get a lot of “you had to be there” stories because no one with fresh ears is impressed and even the guys who thought they liked them are having second thoughts.

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by tod41

Thanks to LaRussa and his buddies, the floodgates are open. With Baines in, the case can be made for so many players now. Dave Parker? What about Fred Lynn?

I hear this claim, and LaRussa has helped some questionable players get in. But this is not the first time this has happened. Frank Frisch helped some players get in that were far, far less qualified.

The Hall with survive.

It is a flawed process, but it is still the best Hall in sports.

[John1941]

Originally Posted by BillyCoxDodgers3B

Yes. I was saying exactly that.

Oh gosh, I misread that. Mea culpa.