Ryan Braun

[drstrangelove]

I said 170+ not 140-170

You said: "multiple 140-160 seasons is more than great." I replied with your quote with several modern players who had multiple 140-170 seasons who not only aren't in the hall, but didn't get make it past the first ballot.

Let's rephrase it according to the voters: "multiple 140-160 seasons is not great. We don't take that as hall worthy."

This was ALL in response to my contention that Braun will need 2 or 3 185+ seasons to get in and your response "If he stays at 150 for 4 more years and then slowly declines he will likely make it quite easily."

The answer from me (backed up by the voters is) a resounding no. They have seen that sort of really good, but not great performance many times in the modern era and they are loathe to add that to a hall that includes Williams, Musial, Cobb, Mays, et al.

It's not MY standard we are talking about, it's theirs. That is what the OP asked. What do we "think of his future hall of fame chances. "

[dominik]

You said: "multiple 140-160 seasons is more than great." I replied with your quote with several modern players who had multiple 140-170 seasons who not only aren't in the hall, but didn't get make it past the first ballot.

Let's rephrase it according to the voters: "multiple 140-160 seasons is not great. We don't take that as hall worthy."

This was ALL in response to my contention that Braun will need 2 or 3 185+ seasons to get in and your response "If he stays at 150 for 4 more years and then slowly declines he will likely make it quite easily."

The answer from me (backed up by the voters is) a resounding no. They have seen that sort of really good, but not great performance many times in the modern era and they are loathe to add that to a hall that includes Williams, Musial, Cobb, Mays, et al.

It's not MY standard we are talking about, it's theirs. That is what the OP asked. What do we "think of his future hall of fame chances. "

A 140 OPS+ IS HOF standard for LFers. There are some guys with that OPS+ that are out but there are also plenty of LFers with a lower OPS+ that are in.

Can you name a LFer with a 140 career OPS+ AND an MVP award who is not in the hall (non PEDs guy)?

Or if you still doubt that: what do you believe is the HOF cutoff in OPS+ for LFers?

I don't think you understand the value of black ink for HOFers. Ichiro has an OPS+ of below 120 and his HOF chances are 99.9%. multiple AS game appearances, MVP awards, ROY awards, leading the league in slugging and hits are all things that get noted by voters.

just look at ichiro and abreu. both are RFers but Abreu has a higher OPS+, OBP and power. but still Ichiro will go in on first ballot with 90+% while abreu likely will not get in.

and this is mostly because of his MVP and leading the league in hits multiple times as well as winning batting titles.

Just because there are (very few) guys with a 140 OPS+ who are not in it does not mean that braun has to do more than that to make it because of his black ink.

140 is usually already a ticket to the HOF but combined with that kind of black ink it's nearly a slam dunk.

[dominik]

BTW: I'm NOT saying that he will be in at age 32. he will need to play solidly till his mid to late 30s. but if he plays till 38 and maintains a 140 OPS+ his chances to make it are really good. he certainly doesn't need to better this season to have a good shot. if he stays at this level for a few years he will be a first ballot guy.

but if he loses it at 31 he will have no chance,

[drstrangelove]

A 140 OPS+ IS HOF standard for LFers. There are some guys with that OPS+ that are out but there are also plenty of LFers with a lower OPS+ that are in.

I don't think the voters have a sheet that says what the HOF standards are and I for sure know they don't have one by position.

Can you name a LFer with a 140 career OPS+ AND an MVP award who is not in the hall (non PEDs guy)?

Relevant? Braun's career isn't over, but there are guys with 2 MVPs that aren't in the hall (Maris and Murphy to name ones off the top of my head), so I know MVP awards don't carry much weight. Richie Allen has the MVP and is well over 140 OPS+ and he will only get in possibly with the veterans.

Or if you still doubt that: what do you believe is the HOF cutoff in OPS+ for LFers?

Again, there is no standard, so there is no cutoff.

I don't think you understand the value of black ink for HOFers. Ichiro has an OPS+ of below 120 and his HOF chances are 99.9%. multiple AS game appearances, MVP awards, ROY awards, leading the league in slugging and hits are all things that get noted by voters.

I understand the value of black ink. But it's ironic that you bring it up, since Braun has 9 and average HOF normally have 27. This is one of the reasons he may not get in. It's a weakness for him, not a strength.

just look at ichiro and abreu. both are RFers but Abreu has a higher OPS+, OBP and power. but still Ichiro will go in on first ballot with 90+% while abreu likely will not get in.

and this is mostly because of his MVP and leading the league in hits multiple times as well as winning batting titles.

Just because there are (very few) guys with a 140 OPS+ who are not in it does not mean that braun has to do more than that to make it because of his black ink.

140 is usually already a ticket to the HOF but combined with that kind of black ink it's nearly a slam dunk.

Again, his black ink is weak.

[drstrangelove]

Just for informational purposes since a couple posts mentioned the issue of people playing longer in this day and age.

Searches for players with 1,000 PA, 1981-2011

ages 23-27 758
ages 28-32 792
ages 33-37 314

Please note the 60% decline in qualifiying players from ages 28-32 to 33-37. Comparing a player at a young age to players who are similar at that age, but have completed a long career, is fraught with issues. The most conspicuous is that finishing a long career is hardly a given, much less finishing one well. The obvious reasons that players drop out (beyond injuries) is a decline in productivity (which is normal.)

This is not to imply that Braun would have a 60% chance of being out of baseball. It just means that performance decline occurs and is a real phenomena. Comparing someone to players who DIDN'T decline and who had long careers, is making a leap of faith that we know which players will or won't decline in advance of their life being lived. Examples like Maris and Murphy and to a lesser extant like Cepeda, who looked like sure fire first round HoF'ers at age 27 show us that real skills do decline.

Having said that, I think there's a good chance Braun will make it and a good chance he won't. His next 5 years are critical to that result.

[Sockeye]

1) I'm not sure how simply I can explain this: I did not say he needs a 185+ OPS+ to get into the hall of fame. I said he would likely need that in order to make sure his overall OPS+ does not drop too low during the course of his career. I was talking about how to keep his CAREER OPS+ higher. No one especially me has said that anyone has to achieve a particular thing in one particular season in order to make it into the HoF.

If that is what you are saying then how did all the other LFers, RFers, & 1Bmen who never acheived a 185 OPS+ manage to keep OPS+ high enough to make the HOF??

2) If you have facts to show that overall career OPS+ is flat in ages up through age 27 to the period after age 27, by all means post it. I think that it will be proven to be false, but again that is really not the question. I was not discussing all the players who play baseball, nor all the players who play today. I was talking about one player: Braun. It's not his fault or my fault he was not in the majors until age 23. He SHOULD have been playing by age 21, but that's as it is. Regardless, I portrayed several scenarios for him to explain my point. By all means, post yours or edit mine.

Obviously you have not studied the OPS of players as they age. Well I have and according to my research the OPS number drops only slightly from what it is through age 27 until they finish their career. What I believe you are failing to understand here is that a players career OPS goes in an arch, going up at every until it peaks at age 31 then plateau's through age 32, before it starts to decline every year from age 33 on. The longer the player's career the more of a drop in the OPS we'll see. Really if you think about it it's logic. For a player to increase their OPS all they have to do is to have a season that is better than their career average season to that point. A players prime is generally from ages 27-32 and their numbers are usually lower up to that point. Players OPS numbers rise faster than they fall due to the law of averages. The more career PA's a player has the less effect one season's worth of PA's has on their averages. I don't have the OPS+ numbers since it requires the other league data and would be quite difficult to calculate for multiple players over multiple seasons however I do have the raw OPS numbers for each age which should translate into OPS+. Here is the data from the sample group to back up this fact.

Career OPS through each age (OPS at that age) Ryan Braun's career OPS+ (Ryan Braun's OPS+ at that age)
Age 23: .889 (.915) 1.004 (1.004)
Age 24: .892 (.896) .937 (.888)
Age 25: .902 (.939) .937 (.937)
Age 26: .912 (.953) .918 (.866)
Age 27: .919 (.959) .933 (.994)
Age 28: .923 (.949)
Age 29: .929 (.973)
Age 30: .931 (.948)
Age 31: .934 (.955)
Age 32: .934 (.932)
Age 33: .932 (.919)
Age 34: .931 (.916)
Age 35: .929 (.897)
Age 36: .926 (.882)
Age 37: .924 (.866)
Age 38: .921 (.850)
Age 39: .919 (.863)
Age 40: .918 (.790)
Age 41: .915 (.801)
Age 42: .915 (.764)
Age 43: .914 (.722)

As you can see from the data above the average player in the sample group's career OPS increased every year from .919 at age 27 to .923 at 28, .929 at 29, .931 at 30, .934 at 31, & .934 at 32. That is an increase of 15 points in OPS before the decline starts. By that age the average player in the sample group had 5887 career at-bats so the law of averages keeps the decline slower even though the seasonal OPS totals drop at a faster rate. As a result it takes 7 seasons (or until age 39) for a players career OPS to drop 15 points back to the same career OPS that the player had through age 27.

3) I'm completely confused why the mention of ARod (an excellent sbhortstop with speed with 106 homers, 352 RBI and 21 WAR by age 22) and Griffey (an excellent center fielder with speed with 87 homers, 344 RBI and 20 WAR by age 22) to Braun (a below average left fielder with good speed and 0 plate appearances by age 22.) Braun is so far off the map compared to these 2 it's insane. Yes, if he wants to show up at the dance, 2 hours late missing some of the bells and whistles, he's going to have to make up some ground some where.

I think the point was that if those two players couldn't manage a 185 OPS+ as great as they were then now player should be expected to in order to be HOF worthy.

[Sockeye]

This is an important point with regards to Braun: thru his age-27 season he's lagging behind a typical HOF pace. Of the 20 LF in the Hall, 15 had more hits than Braun (16 when you schedule adjust O'Rourke); 14 had more WAR than Braun (15 when you schedule adjust O'Rourke).

HOF LF thru age-27 season

Rk             Player WAR/pos    H
1         Joe Medwick    38.8 1492
2          Joe Kelley    40.3 1304
3        Goose Goslin    35.9 1277
4         Stan Musial    50.6 1225
5    Carl Yastrzemski    33.4 1201
6    Rickey Henderson    51.1 1182
7        Ed Delahanty    26.7 1182
8          Al Simmons    28.2 1169
9       Jesse Burkett    26.9 1166
10        Fred Clarke    23.1 1150
11           Jim Rice    23.2 1124
12      Heinie Manush    22.9 1119
13         Zack Wheat    16.8  961
14     Billy Williams    19.7  928
15       Ted Williams    46.9  925
16          Lou Brock    13.0  821
17        Chick Hafey    16.4  806
18        Ralph Kiner    29.1  767
19    Willie Stargell     9.8  621
20        Jim ORourke    15.2  604

Then there is the strong likelihood that there is going to be a very significant shift in standards for the Hall of Fame, making it harder for Braun than many of those old-time LFers. A very good article outlining the reasons why, written by Bill James (who else) four years ago: Hall of Famers Among Us

This is purely a product of Braun starting at age 23. 18 of those 20 came up by age 21. Of those 20 only 3 had a higher OPS+ than Braun through age 27 (Williams, Kiner, & Robinson). I'll admit that an earlier start makes it easier to put up the kind of numbers needed for the HOF. Of those 20 players only Ralph Kiner started at age 23. That said Ryan Braun has been making up for lost time since day one. If you compare those 20 players from the ages of 23-27 to Braun you'll see that 10 have more WAR during that time, 10 have less WAR. Or if you compare those 20 players during their first 5 seasons you'll see that only 4 (Williams, Henderson, Kiner, & Robinson) have more WAR than Braun.

[Ubiquitous]

Or if you compare those 20 players during their first 5 seasons you'll see that only 4 (Williams, Henderson, Kiner, & Robinson) have more WAR than Braun.

The problem with that though is the same age problem you brought up earlier. 18 of the 20 players on the list started playing in the majors 2 years before Braun did.

[Sockeye]

The problem with that though is the same age problem you brought up earlier. 18 of the 20 players on the list started playing in the majors 2 years before Braun did.

By the same token it's also problematic to compare WAR of players with 7+ seasons to someone with 5 seasons

[drstrangelove]

If that is what you are saying then how did all the other LFers, RFers, & 1Bmen who never acheived a 185 OPS+ manage to keep OPS+ high enough to make the HOF??

You've asked this before and I've answered, but here it is again but in more detail.

Some of these players had great defensive skills (e.g., Clemente; Braun doesn't), some had great black ink (like Aaron who had one 185+ year or Gwynn who had none, while Braun doesn't), some had great records (Braun doesn't), some had great speed (Braun has good speed, but certainly not Brock or Henderson speed), and some just should not be in the Hall at all. In addition, the issue is simply math: you don't have to have a 185+ season to average 145 for a career if you are consistently over 150. Braun has had 2 out of his last 4 seasons at 130 and 131, so he he is not consistently having excellent seasons.

Obviously you have not studied the OPS of players as they age.

What is obvious is that you think you know more about this then other people. I've studied baseball stats for 45 years, if you need my credentials.

Well I have and according to my research the OPS number drops only slightly from what it is through age 27 until they finish their career. What I believe you are failing to understand here is that a players career OPS goes in an arch, going up at every until it peaks at age 31 then plateau's through age 32, before it starts to decline every year from age 33 on.

OPS+ goes in an arch if you collect data improperly. See my next few comments for this point.

The longer the player's career the more of a drop in the OPS we'll see. Really if you think about it it's logic. For a player to increase their OPS all they have to do is to have a season that is better than their career average season to that point. A players prime is generally from ages 27-32 and their numbers are usually lower up to that point.

Players prime years are between 23-32. I gave a link to one study on this, so you could reference that. Additional studies that James did shows that a disproportionate number of single season records are created from ages 22-27. Ages 27-32 are after players have already started physical declines.

Players OPS numbers rise faster than they fall due to the law of averages. The more career PA's a player has the less effect one season's worth of PA's has on their averages.

The law of averages does not explain the rise you have in your data for OPS+. The law of averages relates to how random numbers work and OPS+ is not a random number for players.

I don't have the OPS+ numbers since it requires the other league data and would be quite difficult to calculate for multiple players over multiple seasons however I do have the raw OPS numbers for each age which should translate into OPS+. Here is the data from the sample group to back up this fact.

Career OPS through each age (OPS at that age) Ryan Braun's career OPS+ (Ryan Braun's OPS+ at that age)
Age 23: .889 (.915) 1.004 (1.004)
Age 24: .892 (.896) .937 (.888)
Age 25: .902 (.939) .937 (.937)
Age 26: .912 (.953) .918 (.866)
Age 27: .919 (.959) .933 (.994)
Age 28: .923 (.949)
Age 29: .929 (.973)
Age 30: .931 (.948)
Age 31: .934 (.955)
Age 32: .934 (.932)
Age 33: .932 (.919)
Age 34: .931 (.916)
Age 35: .929 (.897)
Age 36: .926 (.882)
Age 37: .924 (.866)
Age 38: .921 (.850)
Age 39: .919 (.863)
Age 40: .918 (.790)
Age 41: .915 (.801)
Age 42: .915 (.764)
Age 43: .914 (.722)

As you can see from the data above the average player in the sample group's career OPS increased every year from .919 at age 27 to .923 at 28, .929 at 29, .931 at 30, .934 at 31, & .934 at 32. That is an increase of 15 points in OPS before the decline starts.

These increases are artificially created by a selection of players who have the target career types. Selecting samples (players) OUT of a population in a NON RANDOM fashion does not create a pool that enables you to explain the population. What one can say is that the data from the players selected for this pool had an OPS+ that followed this pattern. Since we don't know IN ADVANCE if a player will be in the pool, we can't predict how they will perform. What this says is: if a player plays the way a non random select group of other players played, then I can predict his performance. But even that is not correct unless we adjust the stats for the normal way that managers remove players from line ups as their OPS+ declines.

By that age the average player in the sample group had 5887 career at-bats so the law of averages keeps the decline slower even though the seasonal OPS totals drop at a faster rate. As a result it takes 7 seasons (or until age 39) for a players career OPS to drop 15 points back to the same career OPS that the player had through age 27.

You have limited your selections to players with thousands of career at bats. This predetermines the results you are getting on OPS+.

Why? Two reasons:

1) Because players who reach the majors and have early peaks and than sharp declines may never reach thousands of at bats. The selection method excludes finding sharp OPS+ declines and this keeps the overall OPS+ rate stable.
2) Players woh have longer careers but significant OPS+ drops are given less at bats as they age. This causes the overall group OPS+ to look like it's not experiencing sharp declines when in fact it's due to a mix effect in the samples. IF we could force all the players who play baseball to start at age 20 and play full seasons every year through age 39, the OPS+ would not show this trend.

I think the point was that if those two players couldn't manage a 185 OPS+ as great as they were then now player should be expected to in order to be HOF worthy.

Discussed and explainded in the first point, but with regards to ARod and Griffey, it's still baffling why you are comparing Braun to the two of them, when my point was specific to Braun.

The logic is like this:

1) Braun needs at least 400 home runs to get into the Hall (this is an arbitrary # of mr, I am using for an example, not as a real statement)
2) But DiMaggio, Henderson, Gwynn and Brock are in the Hall and none of them have 400 homers
3) But they played in different eras, or did other things better, or had records and black ink to back up the votes
4) So why are you saying that Braun needs 400 homers? Why is the standard being raised for other players?

Koufax 165 wins, Ripken .276 batting average, rinse and repeat.


Voters have their own individual reasons for voting in players. If I look at who is in and not in the Hall, especially from the last 30 years, Braun has some problems as he currently looks as a player:

1) limited black ink
2) no important records
3) no impressive peaks
4) small market city
5) limited post season play

So, to address this: if he ONLY repeats his first 5 year pattern, he may fall short unless he racks up a lot of years (10 more) at this level. Will & Jack Clark, plus Reggie Snith had careers with a lot of seasons which were really really good, but they had many if not all of the same issues that Braun has right now, and those 3 ALL were one and done on the HoF vote. Having a couple big spike years would make it much easier for voters. Playing in a big market or having a lot of successful post season play or setting some records or collecting a lot more black ink would be super valuable too. But if he continues like this, he will have to achieve some lofty career totals with some low quality drop offs.

[jalbright]

By the same token it's also problematic to compare WAR of players with 7+ seasons to someone with 5 seasons

Perhaps, but in terms of worthiness for Cooperstown, the battle is to amass an impressive enough career before Father Time and injuries take away major league level talent. A later start is never a positive in that regard.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I do wish to comment on two (2) of Freakshow's assertions on Braun. One of which is the idea that Braun's age 27 season is one "never to be seen again". The other is the assertion that MVP Awards should not be given much weight in voting and, indeed, will not be given as much weight in the future as they are now.

As to Braun's age 27 season: There's no doubt it's his best season, and by a significant margin, but it's not a fluke season. It's a season that fits in well in the context of his career; a career year coming at the age where most players have their best seasons.

What's more, guys like Braun also have similar years at age 29. It's well possible that Braun will approach, and even exceed, his 2011 level of performance at least one more time. And I think his current expected level of play suggests that Braun will continue to hit .300, hit around 30 HRs, and get selected for the All-Star Game. These are the sorts of things that HOF left fielders do to get into the HOF. Braun has been doing them, and there's no reason to think he'll drop to a 25/80/.275 guy all of a sudden. Braun AVERAGES a "HOF season" for his career (30/100/.300) and then some.

As to his MVP voting, Braun was not a clear choice for MVP, but Matt Kemp certainly wasn't a clear choice, either. I'm being redundant here, but I don't think this is an inaccurate statement. What is more important, however, is that the MVP award given to Braun is evidence of what Braun's contemporaries thought of his season as it was happening. And those same MVP voters are the folks that choose the HOFers. The BBWAA writers. For them to not give weight to their own choices for awards in evaluating a HOFer is not only foolish of them, but kind of a foolish thing to expect. The opinion of contemporary observers ought to be given great weight in choosing a HOFer. It's a fair criticism of a player's HOF candidacy to note that the folks who saw that player actually play weren't overwhelmed by his performance.

[Sockeye]

You've asked this before and I've answered, but here it is again but in more detail.

Some of these players had great defensive skills (e.g., Clemente; Braun doesn't), some had great black ink (like Aaron who had one 185+ year or Gwynn who had none, while Braun doesn't), some had great records (Braun doesn't), some had great speed (Braun has good speed, but certainly not Brock or Henderson speed), and some just should not be in the Hall at all. In addition, the issue is simply math: you don't have to have a 185+ season to average 145 for a career if you are consistently over 150. Braun has had 2 out of his last 4 seasons at 130 and 131, so he he is not consistently having excellent seasons.

And then there are those like Jim Rice, Billy Williams, Willie Stargell, Al Simmons, Carl Yastrzemski who had a very similar set of skills to that of Ryan Braun and made the HOF and deserve to be in the HOF.

What is obvious is that you think you know more about this then other people. I've studied baseball stats for 45 years, if you need my credentials.

Would love to see your list of credentials or reference list.

OPS+ goes in an arch if you collect data improperly. See my next few comments for this point.

The data was collected properly and it does go in an arch.

Players prime years are between 23-32. I gave a link to one study on this, so you could reference that. Additional studies that James did shows that a disproportionate number of single season records are created from ages 22-27.

Age 22-26: 19265 total seasons, 29 seasons with 10+ WAR
Age 27-32: 20551 total seasons, 40 seasons with 10+ WAR

This backs up my data pretty well.

Ages 27-32 are after players have already started physical declines.

It is an historical fact that there has been more age 26 seasons in major league baseball than any other age. The conclusion that James draws from this after that age "players have started physical declines" That theory however is quite incorrect. Of the 2636 position players who were out of baseball by age 26, only 34 had so much as 1.0 WAR in their final season. While 2144 players had < 0 WAR. 81.3%. The conclusion that I draw from this is this is that the players were out of baseball not because of any physical decline, but rather because the players weren't very good and the teams finally gave up on them. It had nothing to do with a decline due to their age.

The law of averages does not explain the rise you have in your data for OPS+. The law of averages relates to how random numbers work and OPS+ is not a random number for players.

Call it what you may the more career PA's a player has less effect one season has on their rates.

These increases are artificially created by a selection of players who have the target career types. Selecting samples (players) OUT of a population in a NON RANDOM fashion does not create a pool that enables you to explain the population. What one can say is that the data from the players selected for this pool had an OPS+ that followed this pattern. Since we don't know IN ADVANCE if a player will be in the pool, we can't predict how they will perform. What this says is: if a player plays the way a non random select group of other players played, then I can predict his performance. But even that is not correct unless we adjust the stats for the normal way that managers remove players from line ups as their OPS+ declines.

Ahh but as with what was brought up during the Jay Bruce debate the importance of comparing players that were similar in ability and how it was unfair to compare a player with a .805 OPS through age 24 to players with an average .892 OPS through the same age. It was said that Bruce should not be expected to age as well as the sample group because he wasn't on the same level as them. Well in this instance we are comparing Braun with a .933 OPS through age 27 to players with an average .919 OPS through age 27. But yet you seem to be suggesting now that the sample grouping should be extensively lowered. That would not create a more accurate model for which to compare Braun's future career path to.

You have limited your selections to players with thousands of career at bats. This predetermines the results you are getting on OPS+.

Why? Two reasons:

1) Because players who reach the majors and have early peaks and than sharp declines may never reach thousands of at bats. The selection method excludes finding sharp OPS+ declines and this keeps the overall OPS+ rate stable.
2) Players woh have longer careers but significant OPS+ drops are given less at bats as they age. This causes the overall group OPS+ to look like it's not experiencing sharp declines when in fact it's due to a mix effect in the samples. IF we could force all the players who play baseball to start at age 20 and play full seasons every year through age 39, the OPS+ would not show this trend.

1. The sharper the decrease in OPS the quicker the player ends up out of baseball so the less effect that player's decline has on the OPS number during future seasons. A player that was productive with a high OPS through age 28 but has a sharp decline and then is out of baseball by age 30 has no impact on the OPS number going forward from age 31 on.

2. You just made my point for me. As the player ages they receive less playing time. The less plate appearances the player gets the less effect on their career OPS number. Thus it declines more slowly. This was another reason that it took a player only 4 seasons to increase their career OPS 15 points, but 7 seasons for it to decrease 15 points.

Ryan Braun already has 3176 plate appearances and a 145 OPS+ through age 27. Only 35 other players have ever done that. 22 of them are in the HOF! 4 are still active (Pujols, Cabrera, Guerrero, Ramirez) 3 just recently retired (Griffey, Bonds, Thomas) That leaves just 6 players (Allen, Lyons, W.Clark, Strawberry, Mattingly, Browning) who were as consistantly great as Braun at as young an age and failed to make the HOF. So lets just focus on those six non HOFers.

Denny Lyons: .860 OPS through age 27, finished at .850 OPS
Dick Allen: .933 OPS through age 27, finished at .912 OPS
Will Clark: .885 OPS through age 27, finished at .880 OPS
Darryl Strawberry: .878 OPS through age 27, finished at .862 OPS
Don Mattingly: .900 OPS through age 27, finished at .830 OPS
Pete Browning: .889 OPS through age 27, finished at .869 OPS
AVG .891 OPS through age 27, finished at .867 OPS.
So even in the extreme cases which resulted in the player not being elected to the HOF on average the players OPS dropped 24 points from age 27 to the end of their career. If Braun suffers the same decline his OPS would go from .933 to .909. That would be the 56th highest OPS+ in baseball history.

Voters have their own individual reasons for voting in players. If I look at who is in and not in the Hall, especially from the last 30 years, Braun has some problems as he currently looks as a player:

1) limited black ink
2) no important records
3) no impressive peaks
4) small market city
5) limited post season play

1. 9 black ink through age 27 is actually a pretty good total. Keep in mind that the average HOFer has 27 black ink. That is not the HOF line. There are 149 position players in the HOF. There are 124 position players with 19+ black ink. Billy Williams had 18 black ink, Willie Stargell 17 black ink. So even if Ryan Braun only doubles his black ink total and finishes with 18 he'd be tied with Billy Williams and others for 125th all time.

2. The vast majority of HOFers hold no important records. Have no idea as to why that would be held against in. Rewards are actually much more look at. He has a ROY, 4 AS, 4 SS, and 1 MVP already.

3. His likely peak as for most players will be 27-32 and he's started off with a 166 OPS+ season so I'd say he's on his way.

4. Same small market city that Robin Yount spent his entire career with. Didn't seem to hurt him much.

5. He's led his team to the post season in 40% of his seasons. How many players have done that?

So, to address this: if he ONLY repeats his first 5 year pattern, he may fall short unless he racks up a lot of years (10 more) at this level. Will & Jack Clark, plus Reggie Snith had careers with a lot of seasons which were really really good, but they had many if not all of the same issues that Braun has right now, and those 3 ALL were one and done on the HoF vote. Having a couple big spike years would make it much easier for voters. Playing in a big market or having a lot of successful post season play or setting some records or collecting a lot more black ink would be super valuable too. But if he continues like this, he will have to achieve some lofty career totals with some low quality drop offs.

You are picking out three players who are the exceptions rather than the rule. I happen to feel that all three of those players are HOF worthy

Will Clark: 31.36
Reggie Smith: 30.33
Jack Clark: 29.80

It's also worth noting that Neither Reggie Smith or Jack Clark were of the same caliber as Ryan Braun through the same age. Both players in fact improved greatly from age 28 on

Jack Clark: .828 OPS through age 27, finished at .854 OPS
Reggie Smith: .814 OPS through age 27, finished at .855 OPS

[Sockeye]

Perhaps, but in terms of worthiness for Cooperstown, the battle is to amass an impressive enough career before Father Time and injuries take away major league level talent. A later start is never a positive in that regard.

That is very true. A later start leaves less room for error.

[Freakshow]

I do wish to comment on two (2) of Freakshow's assertions on Braun. One of which is the idea that Braun's age 27 season is one "never to be seen again". The other is the assertion that MVP Awards should not be given much weight in voting and, indeed, will not be given as much weight in the future as they are now.

On your first point we tend to agree that it's possible. You said: "It's well possible that Braun will approach, and even exceed, his 2011 level of performance...." I certainly didn't mean to imply that can't happen, it's just not likely to happen. Certainly if (a big IF) Braun posts a couple more 7.7+ WAR seasons it will give him a HOF peak. The more likely HOF path is for him to put together a strong run of prime seasons, another five seasons or so at his established level (average of 6.1 WAR over the past 3 seasons). The third path is to compile a long run of good years, say another 12 seasons averaging 4 WAR per year.

As to your second point, I did not assert "that MVP Awards should not be given much weight in voting". I said that, given the trend towards statistical analysis among HOF voters that the impact of winning the MVP would tend to be less in the future. As for the idea that "those same MVP voters are the folks that choose the HOFers", there were exactly 20 writers that voted Braun as the MVP (63% of the electorate). Getting 20 votes for the HOF doesn't get you very far; even 63% doesn't get you elected. It would carry a lot more weight to the future voters for Braun to collect a few rings.

[drstrangelove]

He's 26 and has played 4 seasons. I know it's very early on his career but I'd like to get some thoughts on his career so far and his future HOF chances.

Just reminding what the premise of the thread was.

It was not: "how will he compare in the future to current hall of famers."
It was not: "how does he compare at his current age to current hall of famers when they were the same age."

While it might SEEM to be a trivial wording, it isn't. The question that was asked aims at what are his chances to get in the HOF. The question that some want to argue is whether he DESERVES to be in the HOF.

Points:

1) he has an MVP award. So do many people not in the HOF. Some have 2 (Maris, Murphy off the top of my head) and are not in or even close to ever getting in. It's not a sole factor or possibly even a key factor in how voters decide.
2) he has a 166 OPS+ in his best season (so far.) In the last 50 years (since intergration before we debate it), there have been by my count 107 unique players who had at least 1 season with a 164 OPS+. Of those 35 are not yet eligible (still playing, not retired 5 years). Of the remaining 72, only 29 (40%) are in. Of the 43 NOT in, some had more than one 164+ seasons (Allen had 5, Howard had 3, K Mitchell 2, Belle 2, etc.) and they are not in or close to getting in.) It's not a key factor in how they decide.
3) he has some black ink. James thinks this is part of how voters decide. I tend to agree up to a point. But there are tons of people in the HOF with a lot less than average and they're in. Still there are again many people with lots of black ink that are not in. Oliva has 42 (and is not in) and it's not likely Braun will hit that number as he has 9 in 5 years. Gray ink? Braun has 87 and Cabrera, 1 year older, has 199.
4) Braun has had a solid 3 year run from ages 25-27. Braun had an excellent year at 27. True. But there is zero evidence that voters care about what a player does from ages 25-27 or at just age 27. There is zero evidence that voters actually look at a SINGLE year as a deciding factor at all.
5) Braun could repeat his 3 year run for the next xx number of years. True he could. There are probably 200-300 players who would be in the hall if we could choose their best 3 year run between ages 22 and 27 and let them repeat that for xx number of years.
6) Braun has been good for 5 years. True. Tons of players who are not in the Hall were good for 5 years. Many were good for 10 years.


If the question is whether Braun is likely to be better than 50% of the current HOF, well that is one thing. If the question is whether or not Braun is one of the top 15 players in baseball over the last 5 years that is another good question too.

But voters don't vote that way. If they did, we can easily list 10 people who WOULD be in the HOF right now who played in the last 40 years.

So, getting back to the question:

A) he has to have a lot more seasons like this if he is going to not overwhelm the votes with high peaks, black ink and records, and if he will continue to play an easy defenive position. His counting stats will have to be substantial if he continues in this pace.
B) he can afford to reduce some of the demands in A) if the can reach some extreme peaks, switch to a more challenging position or gather some substantial black ink.
C) if he wants to relax A) and B) he will need to make lots of friends with voters, move to a big market city, win 2 more MVP awards and/or show up routinely in the post season with a couple amazing performances. Better known as having good PR.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Just reminding what the premise of the thread was.

It was not: "how will he compare in the future to current hall of famers."
It was not: "how does he compare at his current age to current hall of famers when they were the same age."

While it might SEEM to be a trivial wording, it isn't. The question that was asked aims at what are his chances to get in the HOF. The question that some want to argue is whether he DESERVES to be in the HOF.

Points:

1) he has an MVP award. So do many people not in the HOF. Some have 2 (Maris, Murphy off the top of my head) and are not in or even close to ever getting in. It's not a sole factor or possibly even a key factor in how voters decide.
2) he has a 166 OPS+ in his best season (so far.) In the last 50 years (since intergration before we debate it), there have been by my count 107 unique players who had at least 1 season with a 164 OPS+. Of those 35 are not yet eligible (still playing, not retired 5 years). Of the remaining 72, only 29 (40%) are in. Of the 43 NOT in, some had more than one 164+ seasons (Allen had 5, Howard had 3, K Mitchell 2, Belle 2, etc.) and they are not in or close to getting in.) It's not a key factor in how they decide.
3) he has some black ink. James thinks this is part of how voters decide. I tend to agree up to a point. But there are tons of people in the HOF with a lot less than average and they're in. Still there are again many people with lots of black ink that are not in. Oliva has 42 (and is not in) and it's not likely Braun will hit that number as he has 9 in 5 years. Gray ink? Braun has 87 and Cabrera, 1 year older, has 199.
4) Braun has had a solid 3 year run from ages 25-27. Braun had an excellent year at 27. True. But there is zero evidence that voters care about what a player does from ages 25-27 or at just age 27. There is zero evidence that voters actually look at a SINGLE year as a deciding factor at all.
5) Braun could repeat his 3 year run for the next xx number of years. True he could. There are probably 200-300 players who would be in the hall if we could choose their best 3 year run between ages 22 and 27 and let them repeat that for xx number of years.
6) Braun has been good for 5 years. True. Tons of players who are not in the Hall were good for 5 years. Many were good for 10 years.


If the question is whether Braun is likely to be better than 50% of the current HOF, well that is one thing. If the question is whether or not Braun is one of the top 15 players in baseball over the last 5 years that is another good question too.

But voters don't vote that way. If they did, we can easily list 10 people who WOULD be in the HOF right now who played in the last 40 years.

So, getting back to the question:

A) he has to have a lot more seasons like this if he is going to not overwhelm the votes with high peaks, black ink and records, and if he will continue to play an easy defenive position. His counting stats will have to be substantial if he continues in this pace.
B) he can afford to reduce some of the demands in A) if the can reach some extreme peaks, switch to a more challenging position or gather some substantial black ink.
C) if he wants to relax A) and B) he will need to make lots of friends with voters, move to a big market city, win 2 more MVP awards and/or show up routinely in the post season with a couple amazing performances. Better known as having good PR.

As to "Will Ryan Braun make the HOF?": That's a moot point until he either (A) completes 10 years, or (B) gets an Addie Joss-ish waiver.

As to how Braun is progressing toward the HOF:

Black Ink Batting - 9 (252), Average HOFer ≈ 27
Gray Ink Batting - 82 (287), Average HOFer ≈ 144
Hall of Fame Monitor Batting - 80 (237), Likely HOFer ≈ 100
Hall of Fame Standards Batting - 29 (341), Average HOFer ≈ 50

I can't emphasize strongly enough that Braun has already done the sort of things that get one into the lower part of the gray area of the HOF in a mere 5 years in the big leagues. It's true that Dale Murphy was there, too, and he faltered, but (A) Murphy is still in the HOF hunt, (B) Murphy would have been in the HOF if his back had taken just two (2) more seasons to give way, and (C) he MIGHT have gone in if he had made it to 400 HRs. (I'm not a big "If A then why not B?" guy, but, really, if Jim Rice, why not Murphy?) Braun has the chrome and leather needed for a HOF career; if he stays healthy and maintains what his ESTABLISHED level of play is for a REASONABLY EXPECTED timeframe, he will be a presumptive favorite for the HOF. If Braun's career plays out as it projects, the question will be "Why not Braun?" and there will not be a very powerful answer to that question.

[Sockeye]

Just reminding what the premise of the thread was.

It was not: "how will he compare in the future to current hall of famers."
It was not: "how does he compare at his current age to current hall of famers when they were the same age."

While it might SEEM to be a trivial wording, it isn't. The question that was asked aims at what are his chances to get in the HOF. The question that some want to argue is whether he DESERVES to be in the HOF.

Points:

1) he has an MVP award. So do many people not in the HOF. Some have 2 (Maris, Murphy off the top of my head) and are not in or even close to ever getting in. It's not a sole factor or possibly even a key factor in how voters decide.
2) he has a 166 OPS+ in his best season (so far.) In the last 50 years (since intergration before we debate it), there have been by my count 107 unique players who had at least 1 season with a 164 OPS+. Of those 35 are not yet eligible (still playing, not retired 5 years). Of the remaining 72, only 29 (40%) are in. Of the 43 NOT in, some had more than one 164+ seasons (Allen had 5, Howard had 3, K Mitchell 2, Belle 2, etc.) and they are not in or close to getting in.) It's not a key factor in how they decide.
3) he has some black ink. James thinks this is part of how voters decide. I tend to agree up to a point. But there are tons of people in the HOF with a lot less than average and they're in. Still there are again many people with lots of black ink that are not in. Oliva has 42 (and is not in) and it's not likely Braun will hit that number as he has 9 in 5 years. Gray ink? Braun has 87 and Cabrera, 1 year older, has 199.
4) Braun has had a solid 3 year run from ages 25-27. Braun had an excellent year at 27. True. But there is zero evidence that voters care about what a player does from ages 25-27 or at just age 27. There is zero evidence that voters actually look at a SINGLE year as a deciding factor at all.
5) Braun could repeat his 3 year run for the next xx number of years. True he could. There are probably 200-300 players who would be in the hall if we could choose their best 3 year run between ages 22 and 27 and let them repeat that for xx number of years.
6) Braun has been good for 5 years. True. Tons of players who are not in the Hall were good for 5 years. Many were good for 10 years.


If the question is whether Braun is likely to be better than 50% of the current HOF, well that is one thing. If the question is whether or not Braun is one of the top 15 players in baseball over the last 5 years that is another good question too.

But voters don't vote that way. If they did, we can easily list 10 people who WOULD be in the HOF right now who played in the last 40 years.

So, getting back to the question:

A) he has to have a lot more seasons like this if he is going to not overwhelm the votes with high peaks, black ink and records, and if he will continue to play an easy defenive position. His counting stats will have to be substantial if he continues in this pace.
B) he can afford to reduce some of the demands in A) if the can reach some extreme peaks, switch to a more challenging position or gather some substantial black ink.
C) if he wants to relax A) and B) he will need to make lots of friends with voters, move to a big market city, win 2 more MVP awards and/or show up routinely in the post season with a couple amazing performances. Better known as having good PR.

A poll for a player this early in his career is more about the pace he is on and whether or not people here think he'll be likely enough to maintain his pace. This early it of course requires a lot of speculation. One thing to look at and compare is his career to date to what other HOFers at the same position have done through the same age. I've done that and Braun compares quite well. Both in his counting numbers and in his rate stats. Another thing to look at is how he's trending. Braun's coming off his best season and won the MVP award. Can't do much better than that. Everything in the case of Braun is pointing in the right direction for him having a long productive career. Fuzzy Bear is 100% correct when he says "Braun does the things that HOFers do"

It is in my opinion that there is above a 50% chance that Ryan Braun will finish with the kind of career numbers that will make him deserving of HOF honors. That isn't to say that I necessarily think there is above a 50% chance of him making to HOF. Being deserving and having the voters induct him are two very different things now-a-days. It could come out that Braun used PED's with the primarily evidence being an undisclosed source heard from the cashier at the corner deli that heard it from her hair dresser who use to date the neighbor of Braun's 3rd cousin-in-law twice removed that Braun once took a vitamin B-12 that may or may not have indeed been a Vitamin B-12. Going on such irrefutable evidence as that Ryan Braun may struggle to get enough votes to stay on the ballot.

[Cowtipper]

He was just busted for PEDS...that puts a damper on his Hall of Fame plans.

[drstrangelove]

He was just busted for PEDS...that puts a damper on his Hall of Fame plans.

It's early to say, but it's best if it's something OTC or a mistake by his doctor or something. He'd be best served by not doing a Manny and letting us guess: come out, tell us what it is and either apologize or explain it. Festering wounds and such...

[THE OX]

It remains to be seen what these alleged PED's were, obviously. I'm inclined to discount this allegation, as his statistics have tended to remain quite steady through his 5-year MLB career. There has been no sudden jump in home runs, RBI's, extra-base hits, etc. His batting average is 10-15 points higher than usual in 2011, but he's also age 28, which is on the front end of the normally most productive period of a player's career.

If he's guilty of using PED's, he sure got a bare minimum of bang for his buck. That's why I think this whole thing is a tempest in a teapot.......

[willshad]

BTW: I'm NOT saying that he will be in at age 32. he will need to play solidly till his mid to late 30s. but if he plays till 38 and maintains a 140 OPS+ his chances to make it are really good. he certainly doesn't need to better this season to have a good shot. if he stays at this level for a few years he will be a first ballot guy.

but if he loses it at 31 he will have no chance,

I don't think OPS+ has a whole lot to do with it. On this site we may see that stat as the best quick and dirty way of seeing a player's offensive value, but I really don't think the people who do the voting look at it. In any case, 140 seems to be around the cutoff for corner outfielders and first baseman, but I can name a lot of guys who had 140 , or close to it, who did not or will probably not get much support. Carlos Delgado, Todd Helton, Larry Walker, Brian Giles, Jason Giambi, Will Clark, even old timers like Bob Johnson. I know Edmonds was close, and he was a gold glove centerfielder.

You need to either reach lifetime counting stat milestones, or be perceived as a big star.

[dominik]

giambi would have gotten in had he not used steroids. he was basically the best AL hitter for a couple of years in the early 00s. he had two "monster seasons" (one 198 OPS+ over 154 games which is the best full season of the last 15 years by a non roider). he won an MVP and probably should have won it in 2001 too. he was a dominant monster hitter just as pujols or manny with less longevity.

Brauns chances basically just went to zero this month. if he doesn't get out of the steroid thing (and probably even then) voters will not even look at him.

the problem for any cheater is bonds. bonds was on roids we all know that. and he put up 250+ OPS+ seasons. that makes any steroid user who only put up 160 OPS+ seasons look like a bum. like: look at this loser. he used roids and still can't put up monster seasons. of course that might be unfair because it could be that bonds used for several years and braun only for some weeks in the playoffs to help his team but I'm sure voter don't care if he used 3 years or 3 days.

[willshad]

giambi would have gotten in had he not used steroids. he was basically the best AL hitter for a couple of years in the early 00s. he had two "monster seasons" (one 198 OPS+ over 154 games which is the best full season of the last 15 years by a non roider). he won an MVP and probably should have won it in 2001 too. he was a dominant monster hitter just as pujols or manny with less longevity.

Brauns chances basically just went to zero this month. if he doesn't get out of the steroid thing (and probably even then) voters will not even look at him.

the problem for any cheater is bonds. bonds was on roids we all know that. and he put up 250+ OPS+ seasons. that makes any steroid user who only put up 160 OPS+ seasons look like a bum. like: look at this loser. he used roids and still can't put up monster seasons. of course that might be unfair because it could be that bonds used for several years and braun only for some weeks in the playoffs to help his team but I'm sure voter don't care if he used 3 years or 3 days.

I do not see Giambi being elected, even without the steroids issue. Sure, he had a couple of monster seasons, but so did Carlos Delgado. Why Giambi and not Delgado? I know he is not eligible yet, but I don't see Carlos getting any support. What about Jeff Bagwell? He was a better hitter than Giambi, a much better all around player, and had similar lifetime counting stats. He can't get in either. I see Todd helton in the same boat...he is Giambi with great fielding skill added, and I don't see him getting elected.

Why did you call Giambi's 198 OPS+ season 'the best full season of the last 15 years by a non roider'? Do you not think he was juicing at that time?

[Go get em Tigers]

I think Braun is at least on the right track heading towards the HOF. He needs about 6-7 more solid years to be considered and then probably a few more years with diminishing capacity just to pad his career numbers.
He has five years in the big leagues, 3 seasons with 100+ runs scored, 4 seasons with over 100 Rbi's and over 30 HRs, a .312 career average and .563 career slugging. These are the numbers of a pre-season MVP candidate, so that puts him in good company. Rookie of the year, 4 all star appearances, and 4 silver slugger awards. MVP this year and 3rd in MVP voting a few years ago. 58 Post season at bats with a .379 BA and .638 slugging.
Like I said, he certainly needs several more solid years to be considered for the Hall, but he certainly hasn't done anything to derail his chances, unless of course that PED thing brings him down.