Top 25 Worst MLB HOFER’S

[Baseballcrazy62]

Thought this was an interesting read.

https://www.stadiumtalk.com/s/worst-...d82210714841b8

[oldjudge]

Tommy McCarthy was rooked--he should have been number one.

[Rad_Hazard]

Interesting stuff! McCarthy must have made a lot of friends in his playing days.

I feel like the 19th century is riddled with players that should be in the HOF over a lot of the players in that article:

Jim McCormick
Tony Mullane
Bob Caruthers
Harry Stovey
Paul Hines
Lave Cross
Jack Glasscock

Etc, etc.

[sycks22]

Harold Baines, that was easy.

[michael3322]

Originally Posted by sycks22

Harold Baines, that was easy.

Could not agree more. Baines lowered the bar more than any other player

https://www.si.com/mlb/2018/12/10/ha...-fame-election

[bbcard1]

Originally Posted by michael3322

Could not agree more. Baines lowered the bar more than any other player

https://www.si.com/mlb/2018/12/10/ha...-fame-election

There are a lot worse choices than Baines, which is not to say he is a good pick.

[campyfan39]

i had forgotten he was in. Shocking

Originally Posted by michael3322

Could not agree more. Baines lowered the bar more than any other player

https://www.si.com/mlb/2018/12/10/ha...-fame-election

[z28jd]

I'm not going to comment on the list itself, but I will use McCarthy as an example. He was one of the first players voted in. Who are we to say that was a mistake instead of the benchmark? It reminds me of current voters changing the MVP award from almost always going to the best player on the best team to just the best player regardless of the team, then saying old voters got it wrong.

I don't agree with either. If the old voters set the standard, then that's what the standard should be. Who takes it upon themselves to make it harder to get into the Hall of Fame just because they think it should be harder. No one who was among the original committee, that's for sure. And nothing annoys me more than people saying the dumbest line ever "It's not the Hall of very good". Yeah, it's also not the Hall of great, very great, outstanding or any other words you want to use. It's the Hall of Fame.

The initial announcement for the Hall of Fame in August of 1935 said they hoped to have 50 players inducted by the 1939 centennial, so they didn't exactly want it to be that strict from the start. They also said that group of 50 would be "all-stars". I don't think anyone says McCarthy wasn't all-star quality. Another said that those 50 all-stars would be from the National League and American League, so they were purposely leaving out some players who made their name in the American Association (which you could argue still exists with some of their choices)

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by z28jd

I'm not going to comment on the list itself, but I will use McCarthy as an example. He was one of the first players voted in. Who are we to say that was a mistake instead of the benchmark? It reminds me of current voters changing the MVP award from almost always going to the best player on the best team to just the best player regardless of the team, then saying old voters got it wrong.

But if McCarthy is the standard, there have been literally THOUSANDS of players better than him in the history of the game.

I don't agree with "revisionist history" either, but I also don't believe in exacerbating mistakes for the sake of historical consistency.

[D. Bergin]

Originally Posted by z28jd

And nothing annoys me more than people saying the dumbest line ever "It's not the Hall of very good". Yeah, it's also not the Hall of great, very great, outstanding or any other words you want to use. It's the Hall of Fame.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I thought I was the only one who lost a little bit of his soul every time I heard this phrase or saw it in print.

[BobbyStrawberry]

Originally Posted by sycks22

Harold Baines, that was easy.

100% agree.

[luciobar1980]

Just food for thought. I was curious why Baines is always the poster child for this kind of discussion..

Cal Ripken, who came to mind for some reason, vs Baines...

https://stathead.com/baseball/player...ineha01&type=b

[mrreality68]

Originally Posted by BobbyStrawberry

100% agree.

Harold really did lower the bar and sadly others better are out when he is in.

[5-Tool Player]

Originally Posted by sycks22

Harold Baines, that was easy.

+1

[ThomasL]

Candy Cummings has to be the undisputed #1

Baines is obvious and Rabbit Maranville would round out my top 3 cuts

[LACardsGuy]

Interesting that the card market for all these players agrees with the article EXCEPT with Brock.

[theshowandme]

I’d rather have John Olerud in the HoF than George Kelly

[FrankWakefield]

George Kelley... I think Kelley should be in. I initially didn't, I barely knew of him. He's mentioned in Thomas' excellent book about Walter Johnson. The newspaper writers of the day recognized his ability to hit. If I'd not read that stuff, I'd be less supportive of him, or indifferent. You guys should read that book.

Frisch. I'm a Cardinals fan. Lifelong. I'm a fan of Bill James, the book writer / baseball numbers cruncher. I liked his initial book about the Hall of fame, I think it was called The Politics of Glory. James was not a fan of what Frisch did. Partly, I think Frisch played then and he knew who should be in. I'm good with Haines in. And partly, the larger part, I think Frish and some others got the Hall nudged in an unfortunate direction. I used to think Gary Carter should not have gone in. He hustled, could hit, was a fierce competitor, but I did not hold his skills in awe. Now that T Simmons is in, I feel like Carter was about that good, so they both can stay in. (Like otherwise they'd pay attention to me and kick someone out???)

Perez. Again, I'm a life long Cardinals fan. I saw a bunch of Reds games in Cincy, and in St. Louis. When the Reds had runners on late in the game, it sure seemed like Tony Perez could drive them in. That man could put the bat on the ball when the game was on the line. If the HOF were up to me, I'd have him in. This little story may not be true... but one night, late in the game, Tony Perez hits a home run that puts the Reds ahead, and then one of those hard throwing relievers finishes things and the Reds win. The old lefthander, Joe Nuxhall, is doing the color part of the radio broadcast, and he goes down to the field to interview the star of the game. That night, it was Tony Perez. Tony was still on cloud 9, having homered to get the win. A very few questions in, Nuxhall asks, Tony, what was that pitch you hit? Joe, you know it was a peter high fast ball. Soon after, Nuxhall was ending his interview, as he most always did, repeating the winning team and the score, then saying that's all for tonight, the old lefthander is rounding third and heading for home.

[FrankWakefield]

Exhibits,

https://www.net54baseball.com/images/attach/jpeg.gif

https://www.net54baseball.com/images/attach/jpeg.gif

https://www.net54baseball.com/images/attach/jpeg.gif

[cammb]

Jack Morris belongs on that 10 inning World Series game alone. As stated in the article, everyone wanted Morris on their team and especially in clutch situations. That means something.

[bbcard1]

Buck O'Neil despite being a great human being and ambassador for the game has no business being in the hall. No real qualifications as a player (1.5 career WAR), manager (two Negro League titles after most of the talented players had been in the hall of fame...there were around six teams at the time) or executive (he was a coach and scout, not an executive). There is not ambassador category for the hall of fame. People always stand on their soapbox and tell me what a nice man he was...and I met him and he was, a real treasure. My Uncle Frank was nice, too, but he's not in the baseball hall of fame.

Just doesn't meet any criteria except that he got elected.

[G1911]

If Kelly and Haines are good selections despite the statistical evidence, how did Frisch edge the Hall in an unfortunate direction?

[Misunderestimated]

My preferred statistical guideline is the JAWS metric which blends career value with peak value... It show George Kelly as the 95th best 1st Basemen. Even if we give him some extra-credit for being an beloved part of some winning teams (4 pennants and 3 WS Champions 1921-24)*

.... even his nickname ("High Pockets) does not get him within shouting distance of being a HOF caliber player... There are 23 1Bs in the HOF (including some who probably get credit for managing etc like Chance and Torre and Negro League legends who we don't have many stats for)... Frank Chance, considered a low-end HOF when he's viewed purely as a player, rates as #37 Jim Bottomley scores as #56. .. Kelly is 95th !

--
* - Frankie Frisch was the 2B on all of these teams.