Extremely Weak Hall Of Fame Class (1 Viewer)

[Limp Ditka]

First timers on the ballot

Tim Raines, David Justice, Brady Anderson, Rod Beck, Shawon Dunston, Chuck Finley, Travis Fryman, Chuck Knoblauch, Robb Nen, Jose Rijo and Todd Stottlemyre.



Does this benefit some guys that have come up short in the past?

Jim Rice and Goose Gossage obviously top this list as they've come the closest in the recent past.

Full list below...

• Brady Anderson

• Harold Baines

• Rod Beck

• Bert Blyleven

• Dave Concepcion

• Andre Dawson

• Shawon Dunston

• Chuck Finley

• Travis Fryman

• Rich "Goose" Gossage

• Tommy John

• David Justice

• Chuck Knoblauch

• Don Mattingly

• Mark McGwire

• Jack Morris

• Dale Murphy

• Robb Nen

• Dave Parker

• Tim Raines

• Jim Rice

• Jose Rijo

• Lee Smith

• Todd Stottlemyre

• Alan Trammell

 

[Anthony Borbely]

I think it's a joke that Gossage isn't in.

 

[ooofffaaa]

I think it's a joke that Gossage isn't in.

He was fun to watch back in the day.

 

[Vladislav Tretiak]

A bigger joke is that Blyleven isn't in

 

[jeter23]

A bigger joke is that Blyleven isn't in

How many years was Blyleven a top 3 pitcher? Not many.

 

[wilked]

Rice and Goose

 

[the moops]

A bigger joke is that Blyleven isn't in

How many years was Blyleven a top 3 pitcher? Not many.

At a quick glance, Blyleven finished 3rd for Cy Young voting 2 times. 5th once, and 7th another time.Nearly 300 wins. Lifetime 3.31 ERA. 3 to 1 K/BB ratio.The dude threw 325 innings in 1973. Started 40 games, averaging 8+ innings per start. That is sick.

 

[David Yudkin]

A bigger joke is that Blyleven isn't in

How many years was Blyleven a top 3 pitcher? Not many.

At a quick glance, Blyleven finished 3rd for Cy Young voting 2 times. 5th once, and 7th another time.Nearly 300 wins. Lifetime 3.31 ERA. 3 to 1 K/BB ratio.The dude threw 325 innings in 1973. Started 40 games, averaging 8+ innings per start. That is sick.

Blyleven had a career ERA+ of 118. He was an All Star twice. Of the Big 3 pitching categories, he was Top 5 in wins 2 times, ERA 7 times, and strikouts 13 times. The year he pitched 325 innings, there were 3 other pitchers that threw more than he did.His HOF scoring looks like this . . .Black Ink: Pitching - 16 (131st best pitcher) (Average HOFer ≈ 40)Gray Ink: Pitching - 237 (24th best pitcher) (Average HOFer ≈ 185) HOF Standards: Pitching - 50.0 (38th best pitcher) (Average HOFer ≈ 50) HOF Monitor: Pitching - 120.5 (68th best pitcher) (Likely HOFer > 100) I don't think he's a terrible candidate, but I hardly think he should be considered a slam dunk.By comparison, David Cone had an ERA+ of 120 and was an All Star 5 times. He was Top 5 in wins 4 times, ERA 4 times, and strikeouts 10 times. He won a Cy Young and was Top 5 three other times. Lifetime 3.46 ERA (in a higher scoring era). His HOF scoring looks like this . . .Black Ink: Pitching - 19 (100) (Average HOFer ≈ 40) Gray Ink: Pitching - 165 (76) (Average HOFer ≈ 185) HOF Standards: Pitching - 39.0 (73) (Average HOFer ≈ 50) HOF Monitor: Pitching - 103.0 (90) (Likely HOFer > 100) Cone's seasonal numbers compare favorably to Blyleven's (although his career totals obviously don't as he pitched 2000 fewer innings). Is anyone clamoring to have Cone in the HOF? IMO, Blyleven simply pitched a lot longer than other pitchers, but was he really that much better?

 

[the moops]

I think they both should be in.

 

[ack34]

Goose Gossage should be in already. If Sutter is ranked #1, Gossage has to be 1A.

Tim Raines should get a longer look. He really is a "just miss" kind of player. He actually compares favorably to Lou Brock, but doesn't have the magic 3,000 hits milestone.

I grew up watching Bert Blyleven play and never thought 'This guy is a HOFer'. I did think that about Jim Rice, however.

I'd say Gossage and Rice get in this time...McGwire has to wait again, although he will get more votes than last year.

 

[Celph Titled]

Travis ####### Fryman?

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I think they both should be in.

You think David Cone should be in the National Baseball Hall of Fame?

 

[TheLimeChicken]

I think it's a joke that Gossage isn't in.

I think it WILL be a joke when the vote comes out and Raines doesn't get in.Greatest leadoff hitter in NL history, career .385 OBP (compared to a .388 for Gwynn, who was a slam dunk HOF case). Taking walks and steals into account (TB+BB+SB), he beats Gwynn by over 500 bases (in 127 more PA). Over 1500 runs scored, of those above him and eligible only Bill Dahlen and George Van Haltren (who should be there) aren't in the HOF.I hate trying to make a HOF case by cherry picking numbers like this because it really can be done for almost anyone, but for Raines it all boils down to this...Quite simply the second best leadoff hitter of the last 40 years and being second to Rickey isn't exactly a bad thing. Had Raines had the same career in Boston, NY, LA, or Chi rather than Montreal he'd be a doubt first ballot-er, as it is I fear he'll struggle to get to 50% which is a shame.

 

[guru_007]

If I had a vote:

Jim Rice

Goose Gossage

Lee Smith

Andre Dawson

Those new comers don't have a fighting chance.

It's a damn shame Rice hasn't been voted in yet, and the fact this is his second to last year on the ballot is laughable. I'm not saying he was a first ballot no doubt about it hof'er but he certainly should have been voted in by now. I grew up watching all of the above players and there were a number of years where they were the best in the game.

 

[Workhorse]

I think it's a joke that Gossage isn't in.

I think it WILL be a joke when the vote comes out and Raines doesn't get in.Greatest leadoff hitter in NL history, career .385 OBP (compared to a .388 for Gwynn, who was a slam dunk HOF case). Taking walks and steals into account (TB+BB+SB), he beats Gwynn by over 500 bases (in 127 more PA). Over 1500 runs scored, of those above him and eligible only Bill Dahlen and George Van Haltren (who should be there) aren't in the HOF.I hate trying to make a HOF case by cherry picking numbers like this because it really can be done for almost anyone, but for Raines it all boils down to this...Quite simply the second best leadoff hitter of the last 40 years and being second to Rickey isn't exactly a bad thing. Had Raines had the same career in Boston, NY, LA, or Chi rather than Montreal he'd be a doubt first ballot-er, as it is I fear he'll struggle to get to 50% which is a shame.

I'm sorry but NO. Tim Raines was a nice player but his career numbers aren't all that much better than Kenny Lofton's and Lofton was a FAR superior fielder.Fact is that Raines only place in the top 5 in MVP voting ONCE in his career (5th). Given that he played most of his career in a relatively weak era for Outfielders shows that his place is in the Hall of Very Good. And that's all.

 

[oso diablo]

this is going to be a maddening round of voting, with an unprecendented amount of politicking, with each guy's supporters trumpeting their candidate, cherry-picking stats to make their guy look the best.

i'm sure i'll do it too.

 

[oso diablo]

I'm sorry but NO. Tim Raines was a nice player but his career numbers aren't all that much better than Kenny Lofton's and Lofton was a FAR superior fielder.Fact is that Raines only place in the top 5 in MVP voting ONCE in his career (5th). Given that he played most of his career in a relatively weak era for Outfielders shows that his place is in the Hall of Very Good. And that's all.

Tim Raines career offensive stats are much better than Lofton's. Start with OPS+, which adjusts for park effects and for era. Raines is 123 to Lofton's 107. Raines had an OBP of 385, compared to league average of 331, a margin of 54 points. He had a SLG of 425 vs. a league average of 398, a margin of 27 points.Lofton has an OBP of 372, compared to a league average of 342, a margin of 30 points. He has a SLG of 423, UNDER the league average of 429.Using Pete Palmer's Adjusted Batting Runs stat (similar to his Linear Weights, and expressed relative to league average), Lofton has posted a career cumulative total of around 100. Raines has about 333.I could go on, but there's no comparison between the two offensively, from a HOF voting standpoint.

 

[Statorama]

SANTO

 

[oso diablo]

SANTO

is he eligible?

 

[Darth Cheney]

I'm voting Montgomery Brewster.

 

[Workhorse]

I'm sorry but NO. Tim Raines was a nice player but his career numbers aren't all that much better than Kenny Lofton's and Lofton was a FAR superior fielder.Fact is that Raines only place in the top 5 in MVP voting ONCE in his career (5th). Given that he played most of his career in a relatively weak era for Outfielders shows that his place is in the Hall of Very Good. And that's all.

Tim Raines career offensive stats are much better than Lofton's. Start with OPS+, which adjusts for park effects and for era. Raines is 123 to Lofton's 107. Raines had an OBP of 385, compared to league average of 331, a margin of 54 points. He had a SLG of 425 vs. a league average of 398, a margin of 27 points.Lofton has an OBP of 372, compared to a league average of 342, a margin of 30 points. He has a SLG of 423, UNDER the league average of 429.Using Pete Palmer's Adjusted Batting Runs stat (similar to his Linear Weights, and expressed relative to league average), Lofton has posted a career cumulative total of around 100. Raines has about 333.I could go on, but there's no comparison between the two offensively, from a HOF voting standpoint.

Raines drew far more Intentional Walks than Lofton did in their careers. When you knock out all the IBBs from Raines, his career OBP drops to .376, which is pretty comperable to Lofton and certainly brings their career OBP figures far more in line. Again, not saying that Lofton = Raines but they're not all that far off in terms of their career figures. And Raines was a very mediocre defensive player. Maybe I should use better examples that illustrate the point more clearly :Raines: .294/.385/.425 - OPS+: 123Compare that to guys who never even SNIFF the Hall of Fame like say: Cesar Cedeno: .285/.347/.443 - OPS+: 123Dwight Evans: .272/.370/.470 - OPS+: 127Darrell Evans: .248/.361/.431 - OPS+: 119Chili Davis: .274/.360/.451 - OPS+: 120Bernie Williams: .297/.381/.477 - OPS+: 125It's all about the company you keep and to me, Raines falls short of Hall of Fame standards. A very good player but can you honestly say he was that much better than those other guys I just listed? Because NONE of them are ever getting in.And before you count steals for Raines as putting him over the top, you could certainly just as easily make up the difference in defensive advantage for guys like Bernie, Cedeno and Dwight Evans who were superior fielders to Raines.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

I'm sorry but NO. Tim Raines was a nice player but his career numbers aren't all that much better than Kenny Lofton's and Lofton was a FAR superior fielder.Fact is that Raines only place in the top 5 in MVP voting ONCE in his career (5th). Given that he played most of his career in a relatively weak era for Outfielders shows that his place is in the Hall of Very Good. And that's all.

Tim Raines career offensive stats are much better than Lofton's. Start with OPS+, which adjusts for park effects and for era. Raines is 123 to Lofton's 107. Raines had an OBP of 385, compared to league average of 331, a margin of 54 points. He had a SLG of 425 vs. a league average of 398, a margin of 27 points.Lofton has an OBP of 372, compared to a league average of 342, a margin of 30 points. He has a SLG of 423, UNDER the league average of 429.Using Pete Palmer's Adjusted Batting Runs stat (similar to his Linear Weights, and expressed relative to league average), Lofton has posted a career cumulative total of around 100. Raines has about 333.I could go on, but there's no comparison between the two offensively, from a HOF voting standpoint.

Raines drew far more Intentional Walks than Lofton did in their careers. When you knock out all the IBBs from Raines, his career OBP drops to .376, which is pretty comperable to Lofton and certainly brings their career OBP figures far more in line. Again, not saying that Lofton = Raines but they're not all that far off in terms of their career figures. And Raines was a very mediocre defensive player. Maybe I should use better examples that illustrate the point more clearly :Raines: .294/.385/.425 - OPS+: 123Compare that to guys who never even SNIFF the Hall of Fame like say: Cesar Cedeno: .285/.347/.443 - OPS+: 123Dwight Evans: .272/.370/.470 - OPS+: 127Darrell Evans: .248/.361/.431 - OPS+: 119Chili Davis: .274/.360/.451 - OPS+: 120Bernie Williams: .297/.381/.477 - OPS+: 125It's all about the company you keep and to me, Raines falls short of Hall of Fame standards. A very good player but can you honestly say he was that much better than those other guys I just listed? Because NONE of them are ever getting in.And before you count steals for Raines as putting him over the top, you could certainly just as easily make up the difference in defensive advantage for guys like Bernie, Cedeno and Dwight Evans who were superior fielders to Raines.

Nice argument.

 

[johnny_q]

First, YES, I am a Detroit homer.

However, I have no clue how none of the 80's Tigers get an ounce of respect when it comes to HOF voting.

1) Jack Morris...As much as I don't really like him, he was arguably the most dominant pitcher of the 80's. In my opinion, he should have been a 1st ballot HOFer. He anchored 3 World Series champion staffs. He threw a no-hitter (not a great HOF argument, but it certainly adds to his resume). His disdain for the media probably plays into him not getting much voting love.

2) Alan Trammell...If he played in NY, Boston, or LA, he'd be in.

3) Lou Whitaker...Compare his numbers to Joe Morgan...eerily similar.

4) Kirk Gibson...I personally don't think his overall numbers are all that great, but he showed up when he was needed. I don't have that much of a problem with him not getting in.

5) Chet Lemon...I just really liked him...lol.

 

[Statorama]

SANTO

is he eligible?

I thought he had some 'veterans committee' time left.

 

[shadyridr]

Goose & Blyleven

Raines belongs in the Hall of Very Good

 

[shadyridr]

First, YES, I am a Detroit homer.However, I have no clue how none of the 80's Tigers get an ounce of respect when it comes to HOF voting. 1) Jack Morris...As much as I don't really like him, he was arguably the most dominant pitcher of the 80's. In my opinion, he should have been a 1st ballot HOFer. He anchored 3 World Series champion staffs. He threw a no-hitter (not a great HOF argument, but it certainly adds to his resume). His disdain for the media probably plays into him not getting much voting love.2) Alan Trammell...If he played in NY, Boston, or LA, he'd be in. 3) Lou Whitaker...Compare his numbers to Joe Morgan...eerily similar.4) Kirk Gibson...I personally don't think his overall numbers are all that great, but he showed up when he was needed. I don't have that much of a problem with him not getting in.5) Chet Lemon...I just really liked him...lol.

I actually think Trammell deserves to be in

 

[Workhorse]

First, YES, I am a Detroit homer.However, I have no clue how none of the 80's Tigers get an ounce of respect when it comes to HOF voting. 1) Jack Morris...As much as I don't really like him, he was arguably the most dominant pitcher of the 80's. In my opinion, he should have been a 1st ballot HOFer. He anchored 3 World Series champion staffs. He threw a no-hitter (not a great HOF argument, but it certainly adds to his resume). His disdain for the media probably plays into him not getting much voting love.2) Alan Trammell...If he played in NY, Boston, or LA, he'd be in. 3) Lou Whitaker...Compare his numbers to Joe Morgan...eerily similar.4) Kirk Gibson...I personally don't think his overall numbers are all that great, but he showed up when he was needed. I don't have that much of a problem with him not getting in.5) Chet Lemon...I just really liked him...lol.

I actually think Trammell deserves to be in

Torn on Trammell. If you put him in, you've GOT to put in Barry Larkin too. And I'm on the fence with Larkin as well.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

First, YES, I am a Detroit homer.However, I have no clue how none of the 80's Tigers get an ounce of respect when it comes to HOF voting. 1) Jack Morris...As much as I don't really like him, he was arguably the most dominant pitcher of the 80's. In my opinion, he should have been a 1st ballot HOFer. He anchored 3 World Series champion staffs. He threw a no-hitter (not a great HOF argument, but it certainly adds to his resume). His disdain for the media probably plays into him not getting much voting love.2) Alan Trammell...If he played in NY, Boston, or LA, he'd be in. 3) Lou Whitaker...Compare his numbers to Joe Morgan...eerily similar.4) Kirk Gibson...I personally don't think his overall numbers are all that great, but he showed up when he was needed. I don't have that much of a problem with him not getting in.5) Chet Lemon...I just really liked him...lol.

I actually think Trammell deserves to be in

Torn on Trammell. If you put him in, you've GOT to put in Barry Larkin too. And I'm on the fence with Larkin as well.

I've laid out my argument for Morris many times. I think Whitaker deserves entry more than Trammell but he's no longer on the ballot. His career stats mirror Ryan Sandberg except for the big year. Whitaker was just one of the best 2Bman every single year, he never had an off the charts season.

 

[Workhorse]

First, YES, I am a Detroit homer.However, I have no clue how none of the 80's Tigers get an ounce of respect when it comes to HOF voting. 1) Jack Morris...As much as I don't really like him, he was arguably the most dominant pitcher of the 80's. In my opinion, he should have been a 1st ballot HOFer. He anchored 3 World Series champion staffs. He threw a no-hitter (not a great HOF argument, but it certainly adds to his resume). His disdain for the media probably plays into him not getting much voting love.2) Alan Trammell...If he played in NY, Boston, or LA, he'd be in. 3) Lou Whitaker...Compare his numbers to Joe Morgan...eerily similar.4) Kirk Gibson...I personally don't think his overall numbers are all that great, but he showed up when he was needed. I don't have that much of a problem with him not getting in.5) Chet Lemon...I just really liked him...lol.

I actually think Trammell deserves to be in

Torn on Trammell. If you put him in, you've GOT to put in Barry Larkin too. And I'm on the fence with Larkin as well.

I've laid out my argument for Morris many times. I think Whitaker deserves entry more than Trammell but he's no longer on the ballot. His career stats mirror Ryan Sandberg except for the big year. Whitaker was just one of the best 2Bman every single year, he never had an off the charts season.

Whitaker is one of the top 20 second basemen ever. But as far as second basemen go, Whitaker has no shot until Bobby Grich gets in. He'll go down in history as the best second baseman not in the Hall of Fame.

 

[DCThunder]

Isn't it about time for YankeeFan23 to start beating the drums for Don Mattingly and the Atlanta homers (posty) to do the same for Dale Murphy?

 

[Statorama]

Isn't it about time for YankeeFan23 to start beating the drums for Don Mattingly and the Atlanta homers (posty) to do the same for Dale Murphy?

There really should be a wing for players that just absolutely dominated for a stretch, but were otherwise ordinary. There was a 5 year span where Mattingly was just lights out.

 

[Workhorse]

Isn't it about time for YankeeFan23 to start beating the drums for Don Mattingly and the Atlanta homers (posty) to do the same for Dale Murphy?

There really should be a wing for players that just absolutely dominated for a stretch, but were otherwise ordinary. There was a 5 year span where Mattingly was just lights out.

Add Jim Rice to that wing too. Doesn't deserve the big hall, but he was as feared a hitter as anybody from 1977-1983.

 

[Yankee23Fan]

• Rich "Goose" Gossage• Don Mattingly• Mark McGwire• Jim Rice

Works for me. Although considering who is already in the HOF, everyone on this list should go in.

 

[posty]

Isn't it about time for YankeeFan23 to start beating the drums for Don Mattingly and the Atlanta homers (posty) to do the same for Dale Murphy?

As much as I think Dale Murphy should be in the HOF, he will never get into the hall... Yes he was one of the best in the early-to-mid-80s, but a .265 career batting average won't cut it...

 

[TheLimeChicken]

I'm sorry but NO. Tim Raines was a nice player but his career numbers aren't all that much better than Kenny Lofton's and Lofton was a FAR superior fielder.Fact is that Raines only place in the top 5 in MVP voting ONCE in his career (5th). Given that he played most of his career in a relatively weak era for Outfielders shows that his place is in the Hall of Very Good. And that's all.

Tim Raines career offensive stats are much better than Lofton's. Start with OPS+, which adjusts for park effects and for era. Raines is 123 to Lofton's 107. Raines had an OBP of 385, compared to league average of 331, a margin of 54 points. He had a SLG of 425 vs. a league average of 398, a margin of 27 points.Lofton has an OBP of 372, compared to a league average of 342, a margin of 30 points. He has a SLG of 423, UNDER the league average of 429.Using Pete Palmer's Adjusted Batting Runs stat (similar to his Linear Weights, and expressed relative to league average), Lofton has posted a career cumulative total of around 100. Raines has about 333.I could go on, but there's no comparison between the two offensively, from a HOF voting standpoint.

Raines drew far more Intentional Walks than Lofton did in their careers. When you knock out all the IBBs from Raines, his career OBP drops to .376, which is pretty comperable to Lofton and certainly brings their career OBP figures far more in line. Again, not saying that Lofton = Raines but they're not all that far off in terms of their career figures. And Raines was a very mediocre defensive player. Maybe I should use better examples that illustrate the point more clearly :Raines: .294/.385/.425 - OPS+: 123Compare that to guys who never even SNIFF the Hall of Fame like say: Cesar Cedeno: .285/.347/.443 - OPS+: 123Dwight Evans: .272/.370/.470 - OPS+: 127Darrell Evans: .248/.361/.431 - OPS+: 119Chili Davis: .274/.360/.451 - OPS+: 120Bernie Williams: .297/.381/.477 - OPS+: 125It's all about the company you keep and to me, Raines falls short of Hall of Fame standards. A very good player but can you honestly say he was that much better than those other guys I just listed? Because NONE of them are ever getting in.And before you count steals for Raines as putting him over the top, you could certainly just as easily make up the difference in defensive advantage for guys like Bernie, Cedeno and Dwight Evans who were superior fielders to Raines.

Nice argument on the merits of Raines. I'll admit that when it comes to HOF voting he's one of those guys I probably feel a little irrationally strongly about (Rice being another one, but on the not quite side. Odd considering I was born in Boston, am a Sox fan, and grew up watching him in his prime).When it comes to Raines, I feel like he's the kind of guy who'll be pretty divisive. Probably very much underrated by the traditional type (i.e. most of those who actually vote) and probably overrated just as much by the stat-head types (I've seen posters I respect very much at BBTF say he's one of the top 50-75 players EVER, which I can't agree with). I would put the reality somewhere in between and admit that I overrate him, but even still I would consider him to be in.One thing I do admit to not knowing is his fielding. You've said it wasn't good and I can't argue it because I really don't know. I know he never won a GG, but a quick glance tells me that his career FP and RF were both above average in the outfield (BPro has him -34 fielding runs above average for his career, but I think BPros defensive numbers are much more carp than FP and RF which aren't great either) and with a 21 assist year in the OF he must have somewhat of an arm. I'd love to see some kind of historical UZR someday, but I guess we just don't have the data to come up with one.I see your point on only finishing top-5 in the MVP voting once, but (and I'm about to use an argument I'm pretty sure I can't even endorse myself) let's take a look at another metric during those peak years in Montreal...Win Shares. Raines received MVP votes in the following years, the first number is his rank in MVP voting, the second his rank in Win Shares:1981 - 19th - 6th1983 - 5th - 6th1984 - 11th - 5th1985 - 12th - 1st (tied with McGee)1986 - 6th - 1st1987 - 7th - 1st1989 - 17th - 12thBy at least one metric he actual outperformed his MVP finish in every one of those years and actually had three consecutive MVP type seasons. Note that I don't actually endorse Win Shares as a reliable metric, it certainly overrates some aspects of the game and underrates others, but it's interesting to me to see such a big discrepancy as 1985 (12 vs. 1).Oh, and while I've got the book out, I might as well see what it says about Raines' fielding....it gives him a B-. Ugh, I certainly didn't mean for that post to go so Win Shares-centric, but I was just trying to make a case.

 

[redman]

Blyleven was a good pitcher for a long time, but he's a HoF candidate the way that Bledsoe is in the NFL.

 

[Bob Henry]

I'd say yeh for Goose. I would probably vote for Rice. I'd love to have a vote for Mount Morris.

Tram and Whittaker won't get in the Hall, but they are the best double play combo ever, IMO.

Morris over Blyleven all day long - and that's not a knock on Bert. I liked that guy a lot and he had one of the best hooks evah, but Morris was $$$.

 

[PatriotJohn]

This begs for a FBG poll

 

[oneohh]

Santo all day long. And then Grace in 2 years. That's right, I said it.

 

[Tremendous Upside]

Raines gets bonus points for me for sliding headfirst in the 1980s so as not to break the cocaine vials he had in his back pocket...

 

[Workhorse]

You make a good case for Raines based on Win Shares but you've got to remember that the fundamental problem with Win Shares is what makes Raines look so damned good in that stat: He has sort of arbitraily assigned defensive values in his Win Share calculus. Whenever somebody brings up Win Shares, I point out that Bill James has estimated that Ozzie Smith was more valuable offensively than defensively in his career. That, in a nutshell, gives you the real problem with WS as a statistical tool: It doesn't penalize average-to-bad defensive players who play less premium defensive positions (like Left Field) and it doesn't reward highly enough EXCELLENT defensive players who play MORE premium defensive positions (like all the infield positions).

The problem with Raines is that he played the majority of his game in LF. Left Field is the least demanding everyday fielding position and the least important defensive position. For me, to be a HOF LFer, you need to put up offensive numbers that are significantly better than other players who regularly played more demanding defensive positions. Raines had a very good offensive career, but look at his stats compared to a guy like say, Keith Hernandez:

.296/.384/.436, OPS+: 128.

Similar or better than Raines in every way except steals. And Hernandez happens to be one of the greatest fielding first basemen of all time.

For me, Raines' PEAK just wasn't high enough as a left fielder to justify inclusion in the HoF.

 

[guru_007]

Isn't it about time for YankeeFan23 to start beating the drums for Don Mattingly and the Atlanta homers (posty) to do the same for Dale Murphy?

There really should be a wing for players that just absolutely dominated for a stretch, but were otherwise ordinary. There was a 5 year span where Mattingly was just lights out.

Add Jim Rice to that wing too. Doesn't deserve the big hall, but he was as feared a hitter as anybody from 1977-1983.

Crazy talk here....and I thought you were a Red Sox fan1975 Rice came in 3rd in MVP voting (as a rookie) - came in 6th in total bases and missed 20 games or so1984 Rice came in 13th in MVP voting - and won Silver Slugger award - 7th in total bases1986 Rice came in 3rd in MVP voting again - 7th in total basesRice was a top ML outfielder in the game from 75-86 - a pretty decent 11 year stretch. Sure he had some mediocre years in there, by his standards, but if you take those years in aggregate, he had to be about the best player in the game.

 

[Workhorse]

Isn't it about time for YankeeFan23 to start beating the drums for Don Mattingly and the Atlanta homers (posty) to do the same for Dale Murphy?

There really should be a wing for players that just absolutely dominated for a stretch, but were otherwise ordinary. There was a 5 year span where Mattingly was just lights out.

Add Jim Rice to that wing too. Doesn't deserve the big hall, but he was as feared a hitter as anybody from 1977-1983.

Crazy talk here....and I thought you were a Red Sox fan1975 Rice came in 3rd in MVP voting (as a rookie) - came in 6th in total bases and missed 20 games or so1984 Rice came in 13th in MVP voting - and won Silver Slugger award - 7th in total bases1986 Rice came in 3rd in MVP voting again - 7th in total basesRice was a top ML outfielder in the game from 75-86 - a pretty decent 11 year stretch. Sure he had some mediocre years in there, by his standards, but if you take those years in aggregate, he had to be about the best player in the game.

I'm a HUGE Sox fan, but there are certain things that work against Rice:(1) The same problem with LF that I have with Raines - Rice was a below average defensive player at the least premium defensive position on the field. (2) While Rice had buckets of production during his prime, he was also an out machine - When you look at Double Plays per PA over his career, Rice was a machine, and not in a good way. He's SIXTH overall in career GIDP. That's pretty staggering since he's not even in the top 100 in career plate appearances.(3) We can debate back and forth on whether or not Rice should be "penalized" for racking up big stats at Fenway but it's pretty hard not to notice that AWAY from Fenway, Jim Ed was a really average ballplayer (.277/.330/.459).I LOVED Rice as a kid. Probably one of my favorite players of all time. But viewing his career objectively, he shouldn't be in the Hall.

 

[redman]

One more note on Blyleven - didn't he give up a huge number of taters? I think one year they hit like 50 off of him IIRC.

 

[David Yudkin]

I have argued that Rice should be in many times. To summarize his Top 5 finishes . . .

MVP - 6

Average - 4

OPS - 4

Runs - 4

Hits - 5

Total Bases - 5

Home Runs - 5

RBI - 7

Prior to last year, for years Rice had the highest HOF Monitor score of any eligble position player (since past by McGwire) not inducted in the HOF.

 

[johnny_q]

I'd say yeh for Goose. I would probably vote for Rice. I'd love to have a vote for Mount Morris.

Tram and Whittaker won't get in the Hall, but they are the best double play combo ever, IMO.

Morris over Blyleven all day long - and that's not a knock on Bert. I liked that guy a lot and he had one of the best hooks evah, but Morris was $$$.

I understand this is just one man's opinion, but I think it's shared by many. If so, how can you not have either of the best DP combo in the hall. However, as someone else stated, Tram and Lou were overlooked because they didn't have the "huge year".

I guess we'll just have to do with going down to Cobo and seeing them in the Michigan Sports Hall of Fame.

 

[TheLimeChicken]

You make a good case for Raines based on Win Shares but you've got to remember that the fundamental problem with Win Shares is what makes Raines look so damned good in that stat: He has sort of arbitraily assigned defensive values in his Win Share calculus. Whenever somebody brings up Win Shares, I point out that Bill James has estimated that Ozzie Smith was more valuable offensively than defensively in his career. That, in a nutshell, gives you the real problem with WS as a statistical tool: It doesn't penalize average-to-bad defensive players who play less premium defensive positions (like Left Field) and it doesn't reward highly enough EXCELLENT defensive players who play MORE premium defensive positions (like all the infield positions).The problem with Raines is that he played the majority of his game in LF. Left Field is the least demanding everyday fielding position and the least important defensive position. For me, to be a HOF LFer, you need to put up offensive numbers that are significantly better than other players who regularly played more demanding defensive positions. Raines had a very good offensive career, but look at his stats compared to a guy like say, Keith Hernandez:.296/.384/.436, OPS+: 128.Similar or better than Raines in every way except steals. And Hernandez happens to be one of the greatest fielding first basemen of all time. For me, Raines' PEAK just wasn't high enough as a left fielder to justify inclusion in the HoF.

Decent points all.One point I'd like to make is that while I do agree that defense is typically underrated (not just in Win Shares, but overall), I might say the same thing about baserunning. To build on your Hernandez comparison, and despite not being similar players at all, those numbers really are VERY close Raines put up a .294/.385/.425, OPS+: 123. Certainly nothing to scoff at, especially the OBP. Now, would we feel any differently about a LF with the same BA and OBP, but who slugged .500? In addition to stealing a lot of bases, Raines also did so at an exceptionally high percentage, adding quite a view bases worth of value to his career, 662 to be exact (808 SB - 146 CS), add 662 to his career TB and you end up with Raines being a .500 slugger (ok, .4996 to be precise).Now I know that you can't just simply do that and consider it a good faith argument, but that's more than a full seasons worth of bases that aren't getting consideration when you just look at BA/OBP/SLG. There's been quite a bit written about Raines the past few days and I think this quote, stolen from another board so if you've seen it know that I'm not taking credit for it, might sum up his candidacy the best:"There are two ways to think of Raines' career. The first (which was written in a recent mainstream article) is as a guy who once won a batting title and stole lots of bases. Sort of like Willie McGee. The other way of describing him in one sentence is very possibly the greatest leadoff hitter in the history of the National League.Its really simple. Voters who think of him the first way won't vote for him. Those that think of him the second way will."I'll put myself squarely in the second camp. In all honesty, I don't see him getting in, but I have this deep fear that he'll drop off the ballot after one season, like Belle (as short as his career was and as big of a jerk, that stretch from 93-98 was insane) and Will Clark (who I thought had a case) which would be a shame, I just hope he can hang on for a few years and generate the same type of conversation that Rice and Blyleven bring about year after year and maybe someday he'll get his due, if not at least he'll be remembered for the next fifteen years when the ballot comes out.Just out of curiosity, if Raines had his same career at second base (where he first came up) would it make a huge difference?

 

[Workhorse]

Good post Lime Chicken.

Here's my take:

Stolen Bases: The biggest problem with trying to assess the value of a Stolen Base is that being caught stealing is such a negative effect on run scoring that it FAR outweighs a successful steal. Also, adding stolen "bases" to total bases/ slugging percentage is extremely flawed since it doesn't even come close to reflecting run expectancy. For example, a single+SB isn't anywhere CLOSE to the same value as a double as it relates to run expectancy because a single+SB doesn't drive in any more runs than just a single. Also, if you are going to potentially revise your totals for Raines's slugging based on successful steals, you'd certainly have to dock him OBP for being CAUGHT stealing, right?

The stolen base is VERY overrated as an offensive weapon in almost every metric you look at. Pretty much the entire SABR community acknowledges that anyone who can't steal bases successfully at least 75% of the time, shouldn't be running at all. Rained, admittedly, is above that threshhold but it says more to point that Steals shouldn't carry anything close to the weight of say, DEFENSE, when evaluating a player.

I'd argue, that Raines average defensive in Left Field PLUS his steals wasn't any more "productive" than Keith Hernandez's steller defense at first ball WITHOUT steals. Since we both acknowledge that both guys have almost identical plate production.

If Raines had played even AVERAGE second base his whole career, I think he's pretty much a shoe-in. But it's kind of irrelevant. If Raines could have played even decent 2B he would have over guys like Vance Law and Tom Foley. But Raines was horrendous at second so they moved him to the OF. It's kind of like asking if Dale Murphy had been able to stay behind the plate his whole career, would he make the HOF. The answer of course is yes, but it's a moot point. He couldn't so he didn't.

 

[[icon]]

Rice and Goose

 

[[icon]]

I have argued that Rice should be in many times. To summarize his Top 5 finishes . . .MVP - 6Average - 4OPS - 4Runs - 4Hits - 5Total Bases - 5Home Runs - 5RBI - 7Prior to last year, for years Rice had the highest HOF Monitor score of any eligble position player (since past by McGwire) not inducted in the HOF.

For christs' sake put the guy in the hall so boston can consider retiring his number.Black Ink: Batting - 33 (49) (Average HOFer ≈ 27)Gray Ink: Batting - 176 (57) (Average HOFer ≈ 144)HOF Standards: Batting - 43.0 (113) (Average HOFer ≈ 50)HOF Monitor: Batting - 146.5 (85) (Likely HOFer > 100)