Who Would You Rather? Whitaker vs. Grich?

[Tyrus4189Cobb]

If had to choose between Lou Whitaker and Bobby Grich, who would you induct to the HoF?

[PVNICK]

Grich by a lot. Whitaker was very very good but Grich is somewhere between Gordon/Doerr and Sandberg/Kent etc.

[jjpm74]

Grich, but they both belong.

[rsuriyop]

I see Grich as being very close to Gehringer. So yeah, he most definitely belongs. And Whitaker, although not as good, also belongs.

[Jackaroo Dave]

Both belong, but I'd take Whitaker for my team just because of the additional 1750 PA.

[Second Base Coach]

Whitaker never really had a bad season. But that's not what puts you in the HOF, correct?

[Tyrus4189Cobb]

Grich seemed to be overshadowed by contemporary stars. More recognition might have gotten him in.

[Ben Grimm]

I don't think either one will get in anymore. I did back around 10 years ago, but that thinking has passed. After seeing the likes of Alomar and soon to be Kent & Biggio getting in - along with the production we've seen by Cano, Utley & Phillips, I just don't see this perceived as anything more than adding to the "above-average but not HoFers" we've seen from the vet committee over the past years.

Granted, it's a different era and the game has changed, but so do the perceptions (especially by the youth) as to what's good and what's great. I remember back in '03 or '04 defending why Ryne Sandberg should be in the HoF. The main antagonists used Joe Morgan as their argument. It took months, but I finally got them to see Ryne deserved to be in - even though they were two different types of players playing in different eras. I just can't seem to find an argument to say either one (Grich/Whitaker) definitely belongs.

In all honesty, and though he played SS as opposed to 2B, I'd almost rather see Alvin Dark make it in before either Bobby or Lou.

Maybe I'm totally off-base with this as TV coverage for the west coast was minimal at best and I'm willing to bet I've only seen Grich play maybe once in his career. And other than baseball cards, I can't say I saw Whitaker all that much more.

EDIT:

I wanted to edit what I mentioned above without totally deleting it and there's no strikeout option...

After really looking at Grich's body of work, maybe I jumped the gun. I'm not a big calculator guy so it sometimes takes me multiple looks at a player to get a more complete picture - especially one I never got to see play. I used to read Rich Lederer's blog when it was active. He made a huge push for Bert Blyleven to make the HoF and he was pretty convincing with his analysis. He even got into some good debates with an ex-writer here in town who was absolutely anti-analysis but had votes for awards being a member of the BBWAA.

He raises a good point with numbers even I can fairly understand in terms of Grich. He also got to see him play quite often since he lived in the area and has called Bobby the 4th greatest Angel of all time. Here's his argument for him gaining induction based on Joe Gordon's entry: If Gordon, then why not Grich?

Maybe I have to back to my thinking 10 or so years ago when I believed he should be enshrined.

[machinehead11]

I'm sorry, but I just don't get the love for Grich. Maybe because I never actually saw him play. Was he a defensive wizard? He ranks low on the HOF Monitor/Black/Gray Ink scores so he wasn't much of a hitter, aside from a 30-homer season.

[jalbright]

A 2B with a 125 OPS+, a .371 career OBP, a .158 isolated power and four Gold Gloves at the spot in over 8220 PA is one heck of a package. That's why I'm enamored of Grich.

Whitaker has a 117 OPS+, a .363 OBP, a .150 isolated power and three Gold Gloves at second, all of which are below Grich, but very, very good, especially in over 9900 PA, the one area he bests Grich in in this comparision. Whitaker deserves to be in, too, but since the question is about Grich, it just shows why there's strong sentiment that Grich is quite qualified.

Another way to look at it is how each would compare to the 2B enshrined in the Hall:
Grich would be 9th in OBP among 2B, Whitaker 12th if they made the Hall and the other didn't.
Grich would be 6th in OPS+ under the above conditions, Whitaker 9th
Grich would be 8th in isolated power, Whitaker 9th under those conditions
Whitaker would be 7th in PA under those conditions, Grich 13th.
Can't do the same for Gold Gloves since the award didn't exist for many 2B in the Hall.
Using career WAR, both would be in the top 7.

Remember, this is comparing them to HOF 2B, of which I'll count 17 (leaving out the managers: Huggins, Sparky Anderson, and Bucky Harris).

[drstrangelove]

By my estimate, 50-60% of voters do not understand, and do not care to understand any statistical evaluation of baseball and baseball players. It's therefore plausible to see Grich get 2.6% of the vote his first year, while being in the top 50 of players in history in WAR, while players like Wills and Mazeroski (with about half his WAR) getting 10x the number of votes.

I have no hope that this will change anytime soon. I still hear and read sportscasters with opinions like "ERA+ is rubbish" because "you don't need to adjust for era's or parks." I still see them determine who to vote for based upon number of Gold Gloves or all star game appearances or 'intangibles', without any real idea as to what that has to do with winning ball games. Players like Grich and Whitaker will quietly play through their careers and retire with most people not recognizing that they were watching one of the top 10 players at his position of all time. Grich was better than Alomar, I think clearly, while Whitaker was at least as good as Alomar.

[Tyrus4189Cobb]

By my estimate, 50-60% of voters do not understand, and do not care to understand any statistical evaluation of baseball and baseball players. It's therefore plausible to see Grich get 2.6% of the vote his first year, while being in the top 50 of players in history in WAR, while players like Wills and Mazeroski (with about half his WAR) getting 10x the number of votes.

I have no hope that this will change anytime soon. I still hear and read sportscasters with opinions like "ERA+ is rubbish" because "you don't need to adjust for era's or parks." I still see them determine who to vote for based upon number of Gold Gloves or all star game appearances or 'intangibles', without any real idea as to what that has to do with winning ball games. Players like Grich and Whitaker will quietly play through their careers and retire with most people not recognizing that they were watching one of the top 10 players at his position of all time. Grich was better than Alomar, I think clearly, while Whitaker was at least as good as Alomar.

This thinking is starting to die out, though. More and more people are becoming statheads for baseball and reconsidering things. Analysts in the next two decades may start to accept adjustments, etc. instead of puking asinine statistics that are a matter of circumstance and not worth.

At the same time, baseball is a sport. I occasionally disagree with posters on this site because they try too hard to quantify a player's efforts as if we were watching 162 math classes a year. I would never want to hear any fan at a ballpark refer to linear weights, OPS+, UZR, Runs created, or WAR before mentioning how this player is their favorite and that one has a good arm and this guy is "wicked" fast while that guy can't stay above the Mendoza Line.

[drstrangelove]

This thinking is starting to die out, though. More and more people are becoming statheads for baseball and reconsidering things. Analysts in the next two decades may start to accept adjustments, etc. instead of puking asinine statistics that are a matter of circumstance and not worth.

At the same time, baseball is a sport. I occasionally disagree with posters on this site because they try too hard to quantify a player's efforts as if we were watching 162 math classes a year. I would never want to hear any fan at a ballpark refer to linear weights, OPS+, UZR, Runs created, or WAR before mentioning how this player is their favorite and that one has a good arm and this guy is "wicked" fast while that guy can't stay above the Mendoza Line.

I hope you're right. I think you're right, but I don't want to be frustrated by not seeing it change. Let's hope so.