Best For Their Time, But They Hardly Measure Up Historically

[BlueBlood]

Let's say that the best shortstop of the last thirty years is up for enshrinement. Sounds like a lock, right? Well, let's say the shortstop is 50th all time in Win Shares, 62nd in OPS+, 57th in RBI's, etc...

So, I'm begging the question. Does a player that happens to be the best of a generation or two deserve such an accolade even if they were the greatest at a time where their position was uncharacteristically weaker than it has been throughout baseball history? Do we give a plaque to some guy from the 1870's that was the best at his position for nearly a decade, was ignored by Cooperstown all this time, and stacks up as 55th best ever at their position?*

*And yes, this is all speculative and I'm not talking about a specific player.

[jjpm74]

Yes, if a player is the best of their respective generation, they deserve a place in Cooperstown.

I didn't vote in the poll because I'm not sure what you mean by historically. As a historian and history teacher, all it means to me is throughout history or with respect to history.

[dgarza]

Like Bobby Doerr? Joe Gordon? Gary Carter? Sure.

Like Jack Clements? Jim Fregosi? No.

[jalbright]

I can't possibly answer it without knowing how weak the player himself was, as pointed out by dgarza's post above. A guy can be a great in a weak pool, or merely the best of a bad lot. The former belongs, the latter does not.

[Gee Walker]

The trouble is that talent is never evenly distributed through time.

The three best first basemen in the American League in the 1930's (Gehrig, Foxx and Greenberg) rate in many folks' top ten all-time at that position. Should we punish Greenberg because he didn't have the good fortune to show up in the AL in the 1960's, where his chief competition would have been Norm Cash and Boog Powell?

Should we reward Dave Concepcion for being the best shortstop of the seventies or Dave Stieb for being the best AL pitcher of the eighties? I say no... Concepcion was a good glove with a below-average bat, who made many All-Star teams because he was the best of a bad lot. Stieb was an excellent pitcher in a short career - keeping in mind that his "excellent" is well below Dean's or Koufax's level of excellence in a career of similar length.

It's just that those positions had no suitable HOF candidates during that time span, and most of the time the "all-decade" teams coincide nicely with the Hall of Fame selections.

[KCGHOST]

I think we would have to know more about the player and his peers to really answer that.

[parlo]

The trouble is that talent is never evenly distributed through time.

The three best first basemen in the American League in the 1930's (Gehrig, Foxx and Greenberg) rate in many folks' top ten all-time at that position. Should we punish Greenberg because he didn't have the good fortune to show up in the AL in the 1960's, where his chief competition would have been Norm Cash and Boog Powell?

Should we reward Dave Concepcion for being the best shortstop of the seventies or Dave Stieb for being the best AL pitcher of the eighties? I say no... Concepcion was a good glove with a below-average bat, who made many All-Star teams because he was the best of a bad lot. Stieb was an excellent pitcher in a short career - keeping in mind that his "excellent" is well below Dean's or Koufax's level of excellence in a career of similar length.

It's just that those positions had no suitable HOF candidates during that time span, and most of the time the "all-decade" teams coincide nicely with the Hall of Fame selections.

Good post. Ten years is probably too short a time frame. Concepcion came up right after Banks, Apparicio etc and left right before Ripkin, Ozzie Smith. His career doesnt stand out over a 15 or twenty year time frame. To be the best in a decade is not enough. The best over a 15 or 20 year period is probably a better gauge.
Besides, the original post is questioning the best of a "generation"

[Paul Wendt]

a different place to start

For sake of argument, accept Banks, Aparicio, Trammell and Smith as points of reference. If there is no shortstop between them who seems comparable in the "historically great" sense, then we do have a 20-year gap rather than 10, a decade. Concepcion arrived 14 years after Aparicio, 7 before Trammell. So he may be the best in 20 years, 1957-1976 measured by debut dates. For sake of argument, let's say he is the best of those 20 years.

A way to approach the 20-year question, entirely different from above, is to begin with a look at the other gaps between debuts of Hall of Fame players --at least those at C, 1B, 2B, SS, 3B, the five positions where we might expect similar numbers. (Pitcher is certainly different and I don't know how to handle the outfield.) How common is a 20-year gap and what do we think in general about those gaps? We shouldn't talk about Dave Concepcion and his 20-year gap in general ignorance.

--
Here is an illustration. For simple illustration I am ignoring the blackball players and everyone who played before the debut of the first Hall of Fame "player" known as a shortstop, John Ward.

This table represents the major league debut dates of the HOF players who were plurality major league shortstops, counting John Ward.

J.Ward 1878 = 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 __ 1870s-1910s above, 1920s-1980s below
1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
0 1 = 1981 Cal Ripken

If we use Hall of Fame membership and plurality fielding position strictly, then Concepcion's gap is 17 years between Aparicio and Yount. There is also 14-year gap before Aparicio and 11 years between Ward and Davis. If we look at other fielding positions we may find that 17 years is not unusual. These gaps {17, 14, 11} show that 17 is no extreme outlier.

It is reasonable to count Ernie Banks as a shortstop. It may be reasonable to exclude Ward. "Pioneer" George Wright was greater as a player than as a manager or developer of playing style or pioneer sporting entrepreneur. Maybe he should count. Lloyd and Wells are two Hall of Fame shortstops from blackball. Here is the same chart if I retain Ward and add the other four (bold).

This table represents the major league debut dates of the HOF members who should be known primarily as professional shortstops, I believe.

G.Wright 1869 = 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 __ 1870s-1910s above, 1920s-1980s below
1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
0 1 = 1981 Cal Ripken

Concepcion's gap is still 17 years but the next longest gaps is only 11 years, down from 14 counting Ernie Banks. There is still one gap of 11 years after John Ward. By another handling of Ward --counting him as a pitcher or dating him by his shortstop debut-- or by dating Wright earlier than the first year of open professional play, there might be a gap longer than 11 years in the early days.

That's all I can do now. I hope you all get the idea.