In the comparing Halls of Fame thread,Tenace is listed in 2 Halls, The Hall of Stats, and the The WAA Hall of Fame.
This is also posted in the single ballot HOF thread:
STLCards2, I'm not trying to be hyper-critical here (rather I just want to start a baseball debate), but I was wondering how you could possibly justify placing Gene Tenace in the Hall of Fame while removing such greats as Pie Traynor, Heinie Manush, and Mickey Welch? Does the 1972 World Series hold that much sway in your vote, or are there other reasons that I'm missing? This is coming from someone who was a big fan of Tenace's, by the way. The choice just seems perplexing to me.
Advanced metrics (esp. WAR) show Tennace as one of the 11-12 greatest catcher ever, and guys like Manush and Traynor being vastly overrated (I am researching to see if WAR is whiffing on Traynor - I wouldn't be surprised if I don't add him back in soon). Welch is not a guy who a large majority of guys feel is a HOFer anyway - without the 300 wins, he wouldn't be considered close. A 112 ERA+ with the number of innings he threw in that era is nothing remarkable. If Welch, why not King or McCormick? I didn't know Manush was supported by many at all. And Tennace is very borderline for me - I could take him out.