I don't either. I was just using that as an example to show you can't use an arbitrary number like 20 or 25 to determine who is or isn't a Hall-of-Famer.
Originally Posted by davewashere
Yes. We are moving on, as of today.
Of course Rabbit Maranville was a mistake, and so were a dozen or so other guys. That doesn't mean there isn't room for Larkin. On the flip side, I don't believe those mistakes should be used to lower the bar for the HOF. Can't we just ignore those obvious mistakes like Maranville and move on?
When I evaluate players, I don't use WAR, because I don't believe in comparing players to imaginary replacement players. Besides, trying to figure out how it's calculated makes my head hurt.
The voters have not always been particularly savvy when judging talent from the past, and at times the voters (and I'm speaking specifically about the VC here) were downright corrupt.
I have my own system. I compare them to a real flesh-and-blood player. I use Frenchy Bordagaray of the old Brooklyn Dodgers, because his stats are fairly typical, and I like his nickname. Frenchy was a free spirit. He was the only player in the 1930's with a mustache. You could say he was 40 years ahead of his time. He once spat on an umpire, a la Roberto Alomar, but instead of issuing some wishy-washy apology, Frenchy took his punishment like a man, although he did say "The fine was more than I expectorated."
I call my system Wins Topping Frenchy (WTF). If your stats aren't better than Frenchy's I disregard you, unless of course you've got a really interesting story to tell.
"Look at it, man", he said as if he had read my thoughts. "they call it America, and they call it civilization, and they call it television, and they believe in it and salute it and sing songs to it and eat and sleep and die still believing in it, and---and---I don't know", he said, taking another drag, "then some time the Mets come along and win the World Series___" Gram Parsons, quoted by Stanley Booth in Dance With The Devil