Darrell Evans vs Gene Tenace

[JR Hart]

This is somewhat of a response to the Rice/Brock thread. They are 2 of players who are considerably downgraded here. Let’s now look at two SABR darlings (although I am surprised that they didn’t do as well on my 5-1 HOF project).

Darrell Evans
2687 games
1334 runs
2223 hits
329 doubles
36 triples
414 HRs
1354 RBI
1605 BBs
1410 SOs
248/.361/.431
OPS .792
OPS+ 119
1373 games at 3B
749 games at 1B
Career WAR 55.1

Gene Tenace
1555 games
643 runs
179 doubles
20 triples
201 HRs
674 RBI
948 BBs
998 SOs
241/.366/.429
OPS 817
OPS+ 136
892 games at catcher
517 games at 1B
Career WAR 44.3

Tenace has the edge in rate stats and was a catcher.

[JR Hart]

Evans had longevity, but it's close

[brett]

This is a good comp. I think they are both underrated by traditional stats, but I still would not put either one in my version of the hall of fame. I wouldn't put Rice in either though and would rate him lower than either of them. I think a team would be better off having Evans or Tenace over their careers. A big chunk of the problem with Rice is that he had a big edge at home. He only went .277/.330/.459 on the road with 649 RBIs. As for Evans and Tenace, they are virtually equal at least 2 steps down from my borderline.

[Captain Cold Nose]

The fact they did not do well on those projects, which have been fun, should tell you something.

I like Evans. Tenace was very good for as long as he was playing, but his lack of regular playing time hurts his cause to me. The lack of a tenured career like other catchers benefits him. For all the patience at the plate Evans had, he has to rank behind Graig Nettles and maybe even with Buddy Bell. Short of the HOF mark, but deserving of discussion.

[TomBodet]

Couple statborg faves....Evans is a legit Hof candidate, if overated by Bill James and co. Tenace was Tettleton w/out the cool 70's 'stache.

[PVNICK]

I'd have to give it to Evans, who was at least for a time with Atlanta a legitimately good defensive 3B. Tenace was a power hitter with a good eye who could play catcher. Even setting aside career length off the top of my head Evans' 73, 74 and 83 top the best seasons Tenace had, even if you factor in that Tenace was a catcher.

[Stolensingle]

I’m going to bump this up, as Tenace came up as I was researching Piazza and Gibson. Purely by rate stats, I think Tenace would belong in the HOF:

1) 4.7 WAR per 162 games (FG). That is just about all-star level, averaged over an entire career. And once he played regularly, his production was quite even; he was still very good, when he played, almost to the end. Though he accumulated only a little more than 400 PA in his final three seasons, his OBP was a whopping .410 over that period.

2) Seventh in OBP among catchers. Walked more than 100 times six times in his career, including one year when he hit only .211. His 17.8% BB% not only leads all catchers, but is 7th all-time among all players. Among players who appeared in more than 1500 games, only Williams, Bonds, and Ruth walked more per PA. That’s pretty awesome company to be keeping.

3) This leads to his most remarkable rate stat. His career wRC+ was 140. Among catchers, that puts him in a virtual dead heat with Piazza, who doping questions aside is clearly a HOFer, and Posey, whose career wRC+ will probably eventually drop as he gets older. Think about that. Though he was a career .240 hitter with good but not outstanding power, thanks to all those walks, one of the best measures of hitting says there was no catcher who was better at it than he was.

His biggest problem is that he didn’t get a chance to start until his age 26 season. Had he started earlier in his career, he might have ended up with as much as 70 WAR, which would be 2d or 3d all-time among catchers, trailing only Bench and maybe Pudge. Even by actual WAR, he’s a borderline case. His 45 WAR (FG) is 16th all-time among catchers. The only eligible ones ahead of him not in the HOF are Ted Simmons and Brian Downing, though Joe Torre belongs on that list, too, as he got in as a manager.

So to conclude, two factors worked against Tenace:

1) Didn’t get a chance to play regularly until he was near his peak;
2) A great deal of his offensive value came from walking, which was not appreciated as much during his time as it is now (and I would say, it’s still not appreciated enough by many HOF voters). Had it been more appreciated, he in fact might have been able to extend his career a little longer.

[Sultan_1895-1948]

I was going to mention something about Tenace earlier. I never realized how good a hitter he was. An argument could be made he's the second greatest hitting catcher (those who played MLB at least).

[PVNICK]

The thing about those walks is, he batted mostly 6th (654) or 5th and 7th (235, 254) of his 1302 games started. That is not a get on base part of the batting order, especially 7th in the National League. While it does turn the lineup around it may not lead to as many runs as it would had he batted second. It just means someone else makes the third out. [crouching to duck]

[Bothrops Atrox]

The thing about those walks is, he batted mostly 6th (654) or 5th and 7th (235, 254) of his 1302 games started. That is not a get on base part of the batting order, especially 7th in the National League. While it does turn the lineup around it may not lead to as many runs as it would had he batted second. It just means someone else makes the third out. [crouching to duck]

1. I am not in favor of Tenace in my HOF. Let it be on the record.
2. Walking from the #6 and #7 slot will still create a HECK of a lot more runs that making an out from the #6 and #7 slot. Not just to turn the roster over - but every-time the 7th or 8th guy does get a hit...
3. Since he is in the #6 and #7 "Non RBI" spots, that takes away the "well, he should have been swinging instead of walking since he was an RBI-guy" argument popular with Mickey Mante and Joey Votto.
4. If we replace his batting runs (which don't care where he batted in the order) with WPA (which does factor it in) he goes from about 260 runs created to 220 runs created. So about a 4 WAR difference, if anybody is insists. Even though, since he has no control of where he bats...I am not sure I feel comfortable docking him for that anyway. Putting a run producer 7th seems like something to take WAR away from a manager (if possible).
5. Tenace's "Clutch" score (high lev. vs. low lev.) is -5.8. That is very, VERY bad for a player with so few PAs. Knowing how much of that is randomness vs. approach/skill is up to viewer discretion.

[Herr28]

The greatest Tenace at-bat (actually ended up as a plate appearance) came in the bottom of the 6th inning of Game 7, 1982 Suds Series. Two rabbits named Smith were in scoring position, Brew Crew on top 3-1, and Tenace the Menace comes on with one out to pinch-hit. He works a 5-pitch walk to load the bases for birthday boy Keith Hernandez who has to face his high school teammate, lefty Bob McClure. That was the moment when I learned that storybook stuff does happen in real life.

[Bothrops Atrox]

The greatest Tenace at-bat (actually ended up as a plate appearance) came in the bottom of the 6th inning of Game 7, 1982 Suds Series. Two rabbits named Smith were in scoring position, Brew Crew on top 3-1, and Tenace the Menace comes on with one out to pinch-hit. He works a 5-pitch walk to load the bases for birthday boy Keith Hernandez who has to face his high school teammate, lefty Bob McClure. That was the moment when I learned that storybook stuff does happen in real life.

Tenace is a weird postseason player. He had 2-3 really big, "clutch", memorable moments/series...but his overall postseason stats are pretty abysmal.

[Herr28]

Tenace is a weird postseason player. He had 2-3 really big, "clutch", memorable moments/series...but his overall postseason stats are pretty abysmal.

Yeah, he hadn't done anything up to that PH walk in Game 7. Of course by then he was just a RH bat off the bench and used to spell lefty Darrell Porter behind the plate when needed. Not going to get much action on a team with Porter and Hernandez sitting in your only two possible positions. He did a great job for the Birds in '81 and '82 in that role. Still displayed tremendous power in a big park, and had a .400+ OBP both seasons. We could have used a bat like that off the bench in '85 and '87, but you are right about his postseason stats. That one game he hit the 3 homers gets mentioned a lot, and that was when he only had something like 5 on the year I think.

[BigRon]

Tenace had decent power and a great eye. But, that was coupled with a low balls in play average and high strikeout rates. I don't think he was quite as effective as his OPS numbers indicate, but overall he was a pretty productive offensive player. As a catcher, he was average at best. His late start didn't help him, but I don't see him as a HOF- level player under any circumstances. Good, yes- but quite a ways from great.

Evans had a lot of similar characteristics, but was a much better defensive player, at least for much of his career, and maintained comparable levels of performance for far longer. I personally wouldn't vote for Evans for the HOF, but I can understand a case for him.

[PVNICK]

1. I am not in favor of Tenace in my HOF. Let it be on the record.
2. Walking from the #6 and #7 slot will still create a HECK of a lot more runs that making an out from the #6 and #7 slot. Not just to turn the roster over - but every-time the 7th or 8th guy does get a hit...
3. Since he is in the #6 and #7 "Non RBI" spots, that takes away the "well, he should have been swinging instead of walking since he was an RBI-guy" argument popular with Mickey Mante and Joey Votto.
4. If we replace his batting runs (which don't care where he batted in the order) with WPA (which does factor it in) he goes from about 260 runs created to 220 runs created. So about a 4 WAR difference, if anybody is insists. Even though, since he has no control of where he bats...I am not sure I feel comfortable docking him for that anyway. Putting a run producer 7th seems like something to take WAR away from a manager (if possible).
5. Tenace's "Clutch" score (high lev. vs. low lev.) is -5.8. That is very, VERY bad for a player with so few PAs. Knowing how much of that is randomness vs. approach/skill is up to viewer discretion.

You have never seen Luis Castillo batting 8th to know the true un value of a walk when there are men on base and two out.
Will you concede a leadoff walk from Rickey Henderson was worth more than a leadoff walk to Rusty Staub in the mid 1980s (assuming the identical lineups behind them)?
It was really all I was pointing out. Maybe someone should have had the cojones to lead him off aka Mike Hargrove or Brian Downing or bat him second like Dwight Evans where his OBP might not have come to naught as much as it did.