Most Overrated Pre-War Player is...

[rhettyeakley]

Peter, that may actually be the worst "article" I've ever read. There are no real criteria he is following--and I have little doubt he read what Bill James wrote and (as with many Bill James subscribers) if James wrote it it couldn't possibly be wrong.

I am all for statistical studies and analysis BUT there IS a human element to baseball--if there wasn't it would be played by mindless robots. I have a really hard time looking back in history and saying the guys that played along side the players themselves were idiots and couldn't recognize talent. Pie Traynor was deemed as the best all-around third baseman in history at the time he retired--Bill James has him ranked outside the top 10-15 third sackers. George Sisler was considered one of the greatest pure contact hitters and an intelligent player--but acording to this joker (the writer of the article NOT Bill James) he "stumbled into the Hall". Also how can any list purporting to include the most overrated players in history not include the likes of Bill Maz, Jesse Haines, Ted Lyons, Eppa Rixey and the bunch. Really, Sisler, Traynor and Brock are the most overrated ever...joke!

[Peter_Spaeth]

[QUOTE=rhettyeakley;863785]Also how can any list purporting to include the most overrated players in history not include the likes of Bill Maz, Jesse Haines, Ted Lyons, Eppa Rixey and the bunch./QUOTE]

I agree completely those players are not HOF worthy, along with many others. I don't think though that either the writer or James is suggesting Sisler, Traynor, Brock etc. don't belong in the HOF -- rather, they think they should not be regarded as highly as they are. As to your point about contemporaries, that sort of view can be biased, as we saw from the big push Frankie Frisch made to get lots of unworthies into the Hall in the 50s.

[Mark]

I agree that Frisch went too far with Lindstrom and Hafey, but most of the guys that he promoted were the mainstays of the Giants and Cardinals dynasties of the 20's and 30's. I am sympathetic to the argument that the top players on the top teams deserve an extra look when it comes to election to the Hall of Fame.

[QUOTE=Peter_Spaeth;863789]

Originally Posted by rhettyeakley

Also how can any list purporting to include the most overrated players in history not include the likes of Bill Maz, Jesse Haines, Ted Lyons, Eppa Rixey and the bunch./QUOTE]

I agree completely those players are not HOF worthy, along with many others. I don't think though that either the writer or James is suggesting Sisler, Traynor, Brock etc. don't belong in the HOF -- rather, they think they should not be regarded as highly as they are. As to your point about contemporaries, that sort of view can be biased, as we saw from the big push Frankie Frisch made to get lots of unworthies into the Hall in the 50s.

[bbcard1]

A player who is underrated in my opinion when it comes to being overrated is Rabbit Maranville. He compiled a gawdy .258 career average and averaged a homer a year despite playing much of his career in a notoriously high average era. Why he is seldom mentioned as overrated when most baseball fans would take someone like Don Kessinger or Larry Bowa over him is pretty amazing. He did have a long career, but so did Jack Quinn. He was a pretty good player on a pretty bad World Champion...but is largely forgotten even when it comes to being among the worst of the best.

The hall of fame is what it is. You can't fix it, but it's cool. I would love to see an "inner circle" with an original 10 and electing one additional player every other year. It may take ten years for Mantle to get it...it would lead to an incredibly spirited debate.

[Peter_Spaeth]

The case for Rick Ferrell is hardly overwhelming. But hey he did have 143 hits in a season -- once.

[bbcard1]

So let's dial it up a notch...what is your worst possible hall of fame team? I'm sure I've missed a couple

1b: Kelly
2b: McPhee
ss: Maranville
3b: Linstrom
c: Ferrell
of: Hafey
of: L. Waner
of: Hooper
p: Lyons

[Peter_Spaeth]

I would add Waite Hoyt and Red Faber and Eppa Rixey to the pitching staff. Dave Bancroft might be worse at SS.

[Robextend]

I would put Mazeroski at 2B over McPhee. I would argue Haines or Rixey at SP. Waite Hoyt didn't have an overwhelming career either, but did have great postseason success.

Not sure about the defense factor, but Ray Schalk can be argued at C.

I personally feel Hack Wilson is overrated. He had 5 "HOF" type years, possibly only 3 can be argued. His career numbers are nowhere near HOF worthy.

EDITED TO ADD: Agree with Peter's additions to the SP staff

[Bosox Blair]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

So let's dial it up a notch...what is your worst possible hall of fame team? I'm sure I've missed a couple

of: Hooper

Don't agree at all that Hooper is one of the worst HOFers. Hooper was a star and mainstay of one of the first great dynasties of baseball.

I wrote the following a year ago in response to another post suggesting Hooper did not belong in the HOF:

-------------------------------------------

A few points about Hooper:

- He was a lead-off man with more pop than most,
- His job was to score runs - he scored 1429 of them (#79 all time), averaging 100 per season over his entire career,
- Top 100 all time in career base hits,
- #39 all time in triples, which means, in that era, both speed and power,
- Drew over 1000 walks, averaging 80 per season,
- Glove? Not even a question. One of the greatest. Key component of what many regard as the best outfield of all time,
- World Series? Unreal with both glove and bat. Won 4 World Series titles with Red Sox. The key player who was a constant in all 4 Red Sox championship years. First player ever to hit 2 home runs in a single WS game in 1915,
- Also stole 375 bases,
- The first and longest part of his career was played in the dead ball era with Boston. He hit .272 over this period. He went to Chicago roughly when the lively ball came into play and after that - in the twilight of his career - he hit .302...pretty good evidence of the effect of the lively ball on the stats of some players.

So I strongly disagree with the widely-held idea that Hooper does not belong.

---------------------------------------

Cheers,
Blair