Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Baseball Fever Hall of Fame

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by jalbright View Post
    I'll also mention the guys who as I write are projecting within a vote of election, though changes in the electorate can certainly upset these projections:

    First, the two I don't support: Fred McGriff and Ross Barnes. I won't detail the reasons unless asked, because this post is more about who to support. I feel I should mention these two in the interest of fairness, and it doesn't seem too fair to add a delineation of why I don't support them.

    The others are:

    Charlie Bennett

    Frank Grant

    Heinie Groh

    Kazuhisa Inao

    Lou Whitaker

    Lou Whitaker needs the change of an existing vote, as all seven outstanding voters supported him last election. Whitaker has been over 50% the most times without being elected, and is tied for having the highest percentage without being elected (71%). It's really about time to push him over the top, folks.
    I'm not voting for Whitaker currently, as I watched him his entire career, being in Detroit and all, and he never struck me as a HOF'er. It's still kind of hard to shake that, but at a deeper glance there is no reason to exclude him based on who is in. Whitaker is very high in my queue, the chances of me voting for him next election if he does not get elected this go around are very good.
    Dave Bill Tom George Mark Bob Ernie Soupy Dick Alex Sparky
    Joe Gary MCA Emanuel Sonny Dave Earl Stan
    Jonathan Neil Roger Anthony Ray Thomas Art Don
    Gates Philip John Warrior Rik Casey Tony Horace
    Robin Bill Ernie JEDI

    Comment


    • Originally posted by AG2004
      I am aware of this. I was the first person to vote for Hines, Rogan, and Stearnes (all of whom were elected into the BBFHOF before I started these Keltner lists), and was the first person to cast votes for Perucho Cepeda, Dickey Pearce, and Joe Start.

      However, there are players whom we don't see as worthy of the BBFHOF, but can see as reasonable choices by other players. I don't agree with Fred McGriff or Larry Doyle, but I can understand the reasons why people would vote for them, and can imagine how, by stressing some criteria instead of others, they could be seen as worthy of the Hall.

      I can't see how Kingman is worthy (short of a fetish for career home run totals), nor can I see the argument for O'Doul (short of emphasizing career batting average at the expense of career length and just about everything else).

      Last month, when I asked the second question, Cowtipper responded by asking me to explain why I voted for Bennett, Gore, and Whitaker. I told him that I had already done that, and that the explanations were available in my Keltner List thread for him to view. I would like to know why he disagrees with my conclusions or what he feels the weak parts of my analyses were.

      Fred McGriff and Sam Rice came up one vote short in the last election. I don't have them on my ballot, but I have provided the reasons why I don't see them as worthy (they are in the Keltner List thread). I voted for Sal Bando and Tommy Leach; my reasons for choosing them are also available on the Keltner List thread.

      I have posted explanations for why I haven't voted for popular candidates, and why some unpopular candidates are on my ballot. I am merely asking Cowtipper to do the same thing - post his explanations for some of his choices.
      O'Doul finished a .349 average in his career, the fourth highest career batting average all time. He is the only player in the top ten highest career batting average list that's not in the Hall of Fame. Although he played only 11 years, he was a dominant player during a large chunk of his career. He was a two time batting champion, led in hits once, OBP once, plate appearances once, and although he never won an MVP, he finished second once and third once. His career OPS+ of 143 was better than, say, Hall of Famer Cal Ripken Jr.

      And...

      I admit, you're right about Kingman. Upon looking closer at his statistics, I feel inclined to make a change to my Hall of Fame ballot. The guy was a home run hitter, and that's all he could really do. His .236 average aside (that is obviously bad), he walked nearly three times less than he struck out. He struck out more than 100 times every year except for three years, and he never walked more than 62 times in a season. For being such a good power hitter, he never really drove in a plethora of runs (only 100 or more twice).

      I feel inclined to change my ballot, so I think I will. And guess who I'll change it to? Lou Whitaker!

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cowtipper View Post
        O'Doul finished a .349 average in his career, the fourth highest career batting average all time. He is the only player in the top ten highest career batting average list that's not in the Hall of Fame. Although he played only 11 years, he was a dominant player during a large chunk of his career. He was a two time batting champion, led in hits once, OBP once, plate appearances once, and although he never won an MVP, he finished second once and third once. His career OPS+ of 143 was better than, say, Hall of Famer Cal Ripken Jr.
        Compare him to OF, please. But the big problem with O'Doul is he had chances to establish himself in the majors, but never did until 1928, his age 31 season. He only had 3264 AB, and Cal Ripken had nearly that many hits and played shortstop. You can't possibly call him dominant for more than five seasons, and that's just about his entire career in the majors. You have to be all about peak performance and care almost nothing about career performance to go for him or give him huge credit for what he did in the PCL to go for him. Either is defensible, but still serious minority positions. Other than Frank Chance, who still has over 100 more career hits than O'Doul and a successful managing career to boot, the nearest OF/1B type in career hits I see is Hack Wilson, with more than 300 more hits--and there are plenty of people who think Wilson doesn't belong.

        Jim Albright
        Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
        Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
        A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Cowtipper View Post
          O'Doul finished a .349 average in his career, the fourth highest career batting average all time. He is the only player in the top ten highest career batting average list that's not in the Hall of Fame. Although he played only 11 years, he was a dominant player during a large chunk of his career. He was a two time batting champion, led in hits once, OBP once, plate appearances once, and although he never won an MVP, he finished second once and third once. His career OPS+ of 143 was better than, say, Hall of Famer Cal Ripken Jr.
          Take a good look at those first four years. O'Doul was essentially a part-time pitcher and pinch-hitter; he recorded 78 plate appearances and 77-2/3 innings pitched in 76 games. On July 7, 1923, O'Doul became the only pitcher since 1900 to give up 13 runs in a single inning. I think that's why he decided to give up on pitching (other sources say his arm went dead that year).

          O'Doul spent several years in the minors working on his hitting and learning how to play the outfield. Thus, O'Doul's case for the BBFHOF relies mainly on 7 seasons; he's going to need a huge peak. If he were the best player at his position over that stretch, or was the best position player in baseball several times during that period, he might have a chance.

          Unfortunately for O'Doul, according to win shares, he doesn't come close to having that massive peak. He recorded 33 and 30 win shares in his two best seasons. However, he recorded only 22 and 20 win shares in his next two best seasons; those are low-level All-Star-type seasons. He earned 122 win shares in his best five consecutive seasons. Just among left fielders, Roy White, Jose Cruz, and Topsy Harsel had higher win share totals in their best five consecutive seasons. The peak just isn't that impressive.

          As for O'Doul's OPS+? Mike Donlin edges him out with a career mark of 144. Charlie Keller finished with an OPS+ of 152. Why O'Doul instead of either of them?

          But the biggest argument against O'Doul belonging in the BBFHOF as a player is George Stone. Like O'Doul, Stone was a left fielder with a career OPS+ of 143. As he played in the majors during seven different seasons, Stone was also a player with a short career. He led in batting average once, OBP once, slugging average once, OPS+ once, total bases twice, and runs created twice. Both Stone and O'Doul were stars while they played. Both had four All-Star-type seasons (position players with 20+ win shares). Both led their league's players in win shares once: Stone in 1906, and O'Doul in 1932 (when he was tied with Ott). O'Doul had 144 career win shares, and 122 in his best five consecutive seasons. Stone had 146 career win shares, and 129 in his best five consecutive seasons. Incidentally, both O'Doul and Stone have Black Ink totals of 11.

          Let's face it - the most similar player to O'Doul was George Stone. It doesn't show up in the similarity scores, since O'Doul played in the middle of a hitter's era and Stone played in the middle of the deadball era. But when you take context into account - and the win shares method does just that - it's amazing just how similar O'Doul and Stone were. If one of them belongs in the BBFHOF as a player, so must the other. If Stone doesn't belong in the BBFHOF, then neither does O'Doul.

          Comment


          • I hope I'm wrong, but the fact we're down to just a little over a week to go and still have six votes unaccounted for from last month, combined with back to school issues makes me suspect we're going to lose at least a few of those voters for this election. Such an outcome would have a significant impact on the election, probably mostly negative.

            Jim Albright
            Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
            Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
            A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

            Comment


            • Have faith. I still think we'll find that a lot of voters are waiting til the last minute so as to see how the voting is breaking down.
              My dream ballpark dimensions
              LF: 388 Feet...Height 37 Feet...LCF: 455 Feet...CF: 542 Feet...Height 35 Feet
              RCF: 471 Feet...RF: 400 Feet...Height 60 Feet
              Location....San Diego

              Comment


              • I realized I erred in posting the 8th (Saturday) as the last day of the voting. As usual, it is Friday, the 7th.

                Jim Albright
                Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
                Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
                A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

                Comment


                • Here's the status of the vote: we've got six outstanding votes from last month as I write. I will post below my projection assuming all six vote, we get no new valid ballots, and that anyone with less than 25 names on their ballot doesn't add any. I'll bet all three conditions aren't met, but they're the safest assumptions I can make. Those who need six votes cannot get in with any less--they need six to get to 75%. Those who need five need at least two, and cannot miss any unless six votes are cast. Those who need four need at least one, can absorb one miss if between two and five votes are cast, and can absorb two if six votes are cast.

                  Code:
                  name..............	needed	prior	pct
                  Grant, Frank.....	4	4	96
                  Whitaker, Lou...	6	6	94
                  Barnes, Ross....	4	3	77
                  Inao, Kazuhisa..	5	4	68
                  McGriff, Fred....	5	4	68
                  Rice, Sam........	5	3	46
                  Bennett, Charlie	6	5	43
                  Groh, Heinie.....	6	5	43
                  Beckley, Jake...	5	2	35
                  Boyer, Ken......	5	2	35
                  Roush, Edd......	5	1	28
                  Aparicio, Luis...	6	3	15
                  Grimes, Burleigh	6	3	15
                  Wallace, Bobby..	6	3	15
                  Van Haltren, G...	6	2	11
                  Klein, Chuck....	6	1	9
                  Jim Albright
                  Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
                  Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
                  A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

                  Comment


                  • We've elected three this election: Ross Barnes, Frank Grant, and Lou Whitaker. We had sixteen valid ballots, and the complete results are as follows:

                    Code:
                    Name	votes		Name	votes
                    Grant, Frank	13		Aparicio, Luis	9
                    Barnes, Ross	12		Bando, Sal	1
                    Whitaker, Lou	12		Barnes, Ross	12
                    Bennett, C	11		Beckley, Jake	9
                    Groh, Heinie	11		Bender, Chief	3
                    Inao, Kazuhisa	11		Bennett, C	11
                    McGriff, Fred	11		Bessho, Akira	4
                    Van Haltren, G	11		Bonds, Bobby	2
                    Grimes, B...	10		Bottomley, Jim	2
                    Rice, Sam	10		Boyer, Ken	9
                    Aparicio, Luis	9		Bresnahan, R	2
                    Beckley, Jake	9		Browning, Pete	8
                    Boyer, Ken	9		Canseco, Jose	1
                    Moore, Dobie	9		Caruthers, Bob	5
                    Ruffing, Red	9		Cepeda, Perucho	7
                    Smith, Hilton	9		Cravath, Gavvy	2
                    Wallace, Bobby	9		Cuyler, Kiki	3
                    Browning, Pete	8		Doyle, Larry	5
                    Joss, Addie	8		Evans, Darrell	6
                    Palmeiro, R	8		Evans, Dwight	6
                    Quisenberry, D	8		Faber, Red	3
                    Roush, Edd	8		Franco, John	1
                    Cepeda, Perucho	7		Glasscock, Jack	6
                    Klein, Chuck	7		Gomez, Lefty	3
                    McPhee, Bid	7		Grant, Frank	13
                    Sutter, Bruce	7		Grimes, B..	10
                    Evans, Darrell	6		Groh, Heinie	11
                    Evans, Dwight	6		Hernandez, K	4
                    Glasscock, Jack	6		Inao, Kazuhisa	11
                    Caruthers, Bob	5		Johnson, Bob	2
                    Doyle, Larry	5		Johnson, HR	5
                    Johnson, HR	5		Jones, Charley	1
                    Rice, Jim...	5		Joss, Addie	8
                    Bessho, Akira	4		Kingman, Dave	1
                    Hernandez, K	4		Klein, Chuck	7
                    Manush, Heinie	4		Leach, Toimmy	1
                    Martinez, Edgar	4		Lombardi, Ernie	3
                    Ochiai, H...	4		Manush, Heinie	4
                    Pearce, Dickey	4		Maranville, R	1
                    Ryan, Jimmy	4		Martinez, Edgar	4
                    Sewell, Joe	4		Mathews, Bobby	1
                    Start, Joe	4		McCormick, Jim	1
                    Walker, Larry	4		McGriff, Fred	11
                    Welch, Mickey	4		McPhee, Bid	7
                    Bender, Chief	3		Moore, Dobie	9
                    Cuyler, Kiki	3		Mullane, Tony	1
                    Faber, Red	3		Nettles, Graig	1
                    Gomez, Lefty	3		Ochiai, H...	4
                    Lombardi, Ernie	3		O'Doul, Lefty	2
                    Perez, Tony	3		Oliva, Tony	2
                    Poles, Spot	3		Oliver, Al..	2
                    Smith, Lee	3		Palmeiro, R	8
                    Willis, Vic..	3		Pearce, Dickey	4
                    Wilson, Hack	3		Perez, Tony	3
                    Wynn, Jimmy	3		Pike,  Lip...	1
                    Bonds, Bobby	2		Pinson, Vada	1
                    Bottomley, Jim	2		Poles, Spot	3
                    Bresnahan, R	2		Quisenberry, D	8
                    Cravath, Gavvy	2		Rice, Jim....	5
                    Johnson, Bob	2		Rice, Sam	10
                    O'Doul, Lefty	2		Rixey, Eppa	2
                    Oliva, Tony	2		Roush, Edd	8
                    Oliver, Al .....2		Ruffing, Red	9
                    Rixey, Eppa	2		Ryan, Jimmy	4
                    Smith, Reggie	2		Sewell, Joe	4
                    Waner, Lloyd	2		Smith, Hilton	9
                    Bando, Sal	1		Smith, Reggie	2
                    Canseco, Jose	1		Smith, Lee	3
                    Franco, John	1		Start, Joe	4
                    Jones, Charley	1		Stephens, Vern	1
                    Kingman, Dave	1		Sutter, Bruce	7
                    Leach, Toimmy	1		Tiernan, Mike	1
                    Maranville, R	1		Van Haltren, G	11
                    Mathews, Bobby	1		Veach, Bobby	1
                    McCormick, Jim	1		Walker, Larry	4
                    Mullane, Tony	1		Wallace, Bobby	9
                    Nettles, Graig	1		Waner, Lloyd	2
                    Pike,  Lip...	1		Welch, Mickey	4
                    Pinson, Vada	1		Whitaker, Lou	12
                    Stephens, Vern	1		Willis, Vic	...3
                    Tiernan, Mike	1		Wilson, Hack	3
                    Veach, Bobby	1		Wynn, Jimmy	3
                    Youngs, Ross	1		Youngs, Ross	1
                    jalbright
                    Researcher/advocate/mod
                    Last edited by jalbright; 09-08-2007, 07:58 AM.
                    Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
                    Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
                    A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

                    Comment


                    • I must say that I've been most pleased with how putting the Limited Selection List into effect has played out. In the three elections it has played a part, we've elected 2, 4, and 3 candidates (in that order), and we're currently on a pace for at least two more this time. These results are all the more striking as in the previous eight elections of 2007, we'd never elected more than two, only gotten as many as two on two occasions, had one electee in five other elections, and one election without electing anyone. The last three elections have equalled the total of the prior eight elections, despite the fact that as we elect more, we get ever closer to (or deeper into) the dreaded gray area.

                      Jim Albright
                      Seen on a bumper sticker: If only closed minds came with closed mouths.
                      Some minds are like concrete--thoroughly mixed up and permanently set.
                      A Lincoln: I don't think much of a man who is not wiser today than he was yesterday.

                      Comment


                      • Jim Albright recently added some of my comments regarding Herman Long to the post on Long in his musings thread. I'm fine with the editing, since the portions he omitted refer in part to some shortstops we have differences over.

                        But since I reject many early shortstops whom others see as deserving of induction into the BBFHOF, I was wondering if my methods were too harsh on shortstops. Jim notes that the right field group is tough, so I decided to compare the numbers of SS I see as deserving of induction to the numbers of RF I see as worthy of the honor.

                        I found the shortstops currently have a slight edge in numbers. On the other hand, there are more tough cases at RF that I have yet to fully evaluate than there are similar cases at SS, so that gap may close.

                        Then I decided to limit the counts to players whose careers fell between the turn of the century and the Second World War.

                        There were eight RFs I saw as hall-worthy. Alphabetically, they were Willard Brown, Sam Crawford, Elmer Flick, Harry Heilmann, Mel Ott, Babe Ruth, Enos Slaughter, and Paul Waner. (Slaughter's a tough call, but, since his best season came in 1942, and more of his best years would come before the end of 1945 than after it if you gave him war credit, I decided he met the timeline restriction. Alejandro Oms misses out because he was actually a CF for most of the 1920s.)

                        There were also eight SSs that I also saw as deserving of induction. Alphabetically, they were Luke Appling, Perucho Cepeda, Joe Cronin, John Henry Lloyd, Dobie Moore, Arky Vaughan, Honus Wagner, and Willie Wells.

                        I can't see that I'm being unfair to early shortstops, since as many shortstops from the 1900-1945 period make my cut as do right fielders from the period. So what could account for this difference?

                        My right field list contains seven Major Leaguers and one Negro Leaguer, while my shortstop list contains four Major Leaguers and four Negro Leaguers. That causes Jim and I to disagree about whether Jack Glasscock is deserving of induction into the BBFHOF. If you're curious about what this distribution of talent has to do with our evaluations of Glasscock, I'll explain it below.

                        For a long time, Cooperstown had a rule that inductees had to have played ten years in the major leagues. This would produce an imbalance between prewar right fielders and prewar shortstops in the actual hall. Remember, I see just four such shortstops as worthy of the BBFHOF, while I see seven such right fielders. In order for there to be a balance between positions, you would have to induct more shortstops. Joe Sewell and Bobby Wallace would be among the top seven MLB shortstops from the 1900-1945 era, so you would have to induct them if you wanted to balance everything out. In general, the better shortstops would either have already been in Cooperstown or ineligible (since they played in the Negro Leagues), so those two would have been among the best available, and thus deserving of the real Hall of Fame.

                        Since Glasscock is fairly similar to Sewell or Wallace in the win share measures (taking season length into account), once you admit that those two are deserving of the BBFHOF, it follows that Glasscock is also deserving of induction.

                        On the other hand, the BBFHOF never had rules barring Negro Leaguers from membership. The positional imbalance between RF and SS that exists when you limit candidates to major leaguers disappears when you let all baseball players from 1900-1945 into the fold. You no longer have to lower the standard to the Sewell-Wallace-Glasscock-Stephens-Artie Wilson level in order for shortstops to have a fair shot at Hall of Fame membership. Those five were very good players, but in my opinion, they fall just short of the cutoff line for the BBFHOF. If I were to lower the bar at shortstop to honor them, I would have to lower it at the other positions as well, and that would result in far too many people qualifying for the BBFHOF.

                        Comment


                        • Current BBFHOFers by position

                          P- 57
                          C - 16
                          1B - 18
                          2B - 18
                          3B - 15
                          SS - 18
                          LF - 25
                          CF - 22
                          RF - 22
                          --There are some guys who could as easily be listed at another positon. There are lots of OF/1B or Cf/corner OF types and a few multi-position IFers. Generally though we are heavy on OFers, which makes me feel better about only having 2 on my ballot. We've skimmed the cream of that pool. I think 3B should be the lowest represented position, as it was the home of a team's second best SS for a good chunk of baseball history. Catcher we may be shorting a little. Its so hard for a player to keep his numbers up and have a long career with the beating at that position its hard to build a slam dunk HOF resume and for us to adjust for that in our evaluations. I think our ratio of pitchers to position players is about right. A teams top 2-3 starters are generally equal to their starting position players and more recently a top reliever may also have that kind of impact.

                          Comment


                          • My current ballot

                            P - 5
                            C - 1
                            1B - 2
                            2B - 3
                            3B - 3
                            SS - 6
                            LF - 1
                            CF - 1
                            RF - 0
                            --I may be favoring SS a little too much. AG has just about convinced me Glasscock doesn't belong. He and maybe another SS will probably be pared off from my next ballot. I think maybe I can still find room for the best available player at each position so a RFer wil probabl;y make my next ballot. Sorry Sam Rice fans, but it won't be him. He isn't even in my queue. Catcher is underepresented and I only have one (Charlie Bennett who will hopefully make it this time) on my ballot. I'll have to do some reviewing and see who should get the bump there. Cal McVey interests me, as he would also address a lack of 19th century guys.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by leecemark View Post

                              I think maybe I can still find room for the best available player at each position so a RFer wil probabl;y make my next ballot. Sorry Sam Rice fans, but it won't be him. He isn't even in my queue.
                              When I made a list of people I felt were deserving of honors, the numbers at 2B, SS, 3B, CF, and RF were about equal. There was a slight excess of deserving players at LF, and a slight deficit at 1B and C. This doesn't bother me too much, since, if you don't specify the positions in advance, you're more likely to have a slight excess at 1-2 positions and a slight deficit at 1-2 others than you are likely to have everything balance out. It seems we've done a better job at identifying worthy outfielders than worthy 2B/SS/3B.

                              As for finding worthy outfielders - I took a closer look, and I'm convinced that I ought to add Alejandro Oms to my ballot. If it had not been for that look, I would not have realized that Oms's career value is underestimated by Chris Cobb's MLEs at baseball think factory.

                              Oms was born in March 1895, but, with the exception of some token appearances for the Cuban Stars in 1917, his recorded profesional career does not start until summer 1921, when he was 26. However, according to Roberto Gonzalez Echevarria's The Pride of Havana , Oms was a star on a Santa Clara team that won a regional championship in winter 1920-21. That team drew its players from some sugar mill teams.

                              Due to the color line, Oms could not play in the American major leagues, and organized Negro Leagues in the United States weren't organized until the time Oms shows up. Playing for a sugar mill team would provide as good a living as playing in the Cuban League in winter and an independent team in the United States in the summer. Also, players for Cuba's top sugar mill teams were hired primarily to play baseball.

                              Cobb gives Oms 29 win shares for his play in 1921, and 31 for his play in 1922. Since Oms was playing at such a high level when his performance was finally being documented, he must have been a very good player in 1919 and 1920, and deserves some credit for those years. We have done something similar to this for Dobie Moore's years with a U.S. Army team, and Oms deserves the same treatment as Moore, since both were hired to play baseball, and the color line made Army and sugar mill teams legitimate career alternatives to the leading independent teams.

                              Cobb's MLEs give Oms 340 career win shares. With 40+ credit for his time with mill teams, Oms has 380+ career win shares. Oms also has a peak of 140 win shares over his best five consecutive seasons. (Oms has 89 win shares in his best three non-consecutive seasons, with totals of 31, 29, and 29, but Cobb admits that his system smooths out peaks and valleys over several years, so the values his MLEs produce for that category will underestimate a player's value. The values are more reliable when we consider spans of several consecutive seasons.)

                              So how does this compare to the leaders in career value among players outside the BBFHOF? I decided to list the top ten major league position players outside the BBFHOF in career win shares, along with their best five consecutive seasons. If adjusting for shortened seasons (1900-03, 1918-19, 1981, and 1994-95) gives a better peak, I list that peak in parentheses.

                              Rafael Palmeiro - 396 career; 126 (133) peak
                              Alejandro Oms - 380+ career; 140 peak
                              Darrell Evans - 364 career; 117 (119) peak
                              Rusty Staub - 358 career; 145 peak
                              Tony Perez - 347 career; 144 peak
                              Dwight Evans - 347 career; 122 (134) peak
                              Bobby Wallace - 345 career; 112 (116) peak
                              George Van Haltren - 344 career; 121 (135) peak
                              Fred McGriff - 341 career; 132 peak
                              Jimmy Sheckard - 339 career; 127 (137) peak
                              Tommy Leach - 329 career; 122 peak

                              You could make a case that Oms is the best position player outside the BBFHOF. Among major leaguers, only Palmeiro has more career value, and he got some of that through drug use. Also, Oms' peak is among the best in the group. Staub and Perez are marginally higher in the peak category, but Oms has a substantial lead over them in the career category, and there's a chance that Oms would catch up to them in peak if we had statistics for his play in 1920. Oms' nine projected seasons of 20+ win shares also beat Staub's and Perez' eight, and that's without considering the undocumented part of his career.

                              I'm going to have to add Oms to my ballot for this election.
                              AG2004
                              Registered User
                              Last edited by AG2004; 09-12-2007, 02:44 PM. Reason: Corrected copying error

                              Comment


                              • For those who are curious, here are the top five-year peaks, in terms of raw win shares, of major leaguers outside the BBFHOF. The numbers in parentheses refer to their career win share totals.

                                *Charlie Keller 157 (218 plus military service, or 258+ with war credit)
                                Al Rosen 154 (185)
                                Frank Howard 153 (297)
                                Ken Singleton 153 (302)
                                Wally Berger 152 (241)
                                Hack Wilson 152 (224)
                                Bobby Bonds 149 (302)
                                Heinie Groh 147 (271)
                                Bobby Murcer 146 (277)
                                Don Mattingly 146 (277)

                                The asterisk for Keller reflects the use of 1940-43 and 1946 for his five best consecutive seasons. When determining the peaks, Bill James said he would skip over 1945 if a player returning home from military service played a partial season that year; he did this for some players. However, he didn't skip over Keller's partial season in 1945 when computing the totals.

                                -----
                                On an additional note, if we adjusted the peaks to reflect games lost due to shortened seasons in the 20th century, Groh's five-year peak would jump up to 156. Groh has been one short vote of induction in each of the last three elections, and I'm hoping someone who left him off his/her last ballot will adjust his/her view on Groh.

                                Comment

                                Ad Widget

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X