SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Hall of Fame 2022 - David Ortiz Elected
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 5, 2021 18:50:25 GMT -5
Six new HOFers with one glaring omission.
Two living HOFers, both members of the 1965 AL Champion Twins, with the election of Jim Kaat and Tony Oliva.
Gil Hodges and Minnie Minoso were also elected, with Minoso having had time in the Negro Leagues.
From the Negro Leagues, Bud Fowler and Buck O'Neil were elected.
I'm happy Buck got in. I just wished it had happened while he was still living. He shouldn't have had his nose pressed up against the glass 15 years ago or so.
Dick Allen was a glaring omission, a victim of an unfair bad reputation and playing in a pitcher's era. He was pretty dominant during his time.
I was impressed with John Donaldson although I dont know as much about the Negro Leagues as I'd like to.
I also would have voted for Lefty O'Doul as well. He had a huge impact on Japanese baseball and happened to be a .349 lifetime hitter albeit in lesser ABs, a home ballpark that was an extreme hitters park in a hitters era.
I also think if Kaat is in, Tommy John should be in as well.
Even though they weren't in this ballot I'll always hope Tiant and Dwight Evan's get in. And I think Bobby Grich and Lou Whitaker need a longer look. Kenny Lofton as well.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 5, 2021 19:45:08 GMT -5
Well if Jim Kaat gets in Pettitte should get in. Very similar "just hung around being solidly above average for a really long time" profiles.
And if Tony Oliva gets in... well, a whole lot of people should get in.
The future of the Hall of Fame is that no one ever achieves a consensus among the sportswriters that they should be inducted and then these good-old-boy committees just choose whoever they personally like.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Dec 5, 2021 19:51:25 GMT -5
Add Kaat to the not-so-short list of HOF P's who were clearly inferior to Luis Tiant, whose omission I consider an outrage.
Of Minoso, Oliva and Hodges, Minnie had the highest B-Ref WAR at 58, well short of Dewey's 67.1
Rather than get frustrated, I'll take hope from this election. If they're electing guys of this caliber, the doors should eventually open for Luis and Dewey. I just hope Luis gets to see it. He's 81.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 5, 2021 20:28:28 GMT -5
I pay no real attention to these waves of veteran admissions. I mean, most of these guys are dead! I will need to be reminded Tony Oliva is a HOFer every time his name comes up, which will be about never.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 5, 2021 20:28:45 GMT -5
Add Kaat to the not-so-short list of HOF P's who were clearly inferior to Luis Tiant, whose omission I consider an outrage. Of Minoso, Oliva and Hodges, Minnie had the highest B-Ref WAR at 58, well short of Dewey's 67.1 Rather than get frustrated, I'll take hope from this election. If they're electing guys of this caliber, the doors should eventually open for Luis and Dewey. I just hope Luis gets to see it. He's 81. Heck, I think Dustin Pedroia has a clearly better case than Tony Oliva.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 5, 2021 20:47:33 GMT -5
My guess is Kaat got in because he's close to 300 wins and given the state of starting pitching these days there might never be a guy who wins anywhere near as much as Kaat did, so I'd guess that was a factor.
I'd guess with Oliva it's the memory of him being a .300 hitter when hitters were struggling to hit .240.
I'm not sure how Minoso stood out as much.
I remember him from his try to PH every decade attempt.
He played from 1949 - 1964, and then went 1 - 8 in 1976 when he was a coach on the White Sox. Then he went 0 - 2 as a PH on 1980. His 1976 hit came around his 53rd birthday. He was all ready to PH again in 1993 but I think Bud Selig wouldn't let a 70 year old guy play.
Hodges was a big part of those great Brooklyn teams of the 1950s and also was the manager of the 1969 Miracle Mets so that was also another factor in his favor.
As far as Pedroia goes, I can see both him and Kinsler not being voted in, but I can see him getting in thru the Veterans Committee down the road and Kinsler still not go in.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Dec 5, 2021 21:53:05 GMT -5
Add Kaat to the not-so-short list of HOF P's who were clearly inferior to Luis Tiant, whose omission I consider an outrage. Of Minoso, Oliva and Hodges, Minnie had the highest B-Ref WAR at 58, well short of Dewey's 67.1 Rather than get frustrated, I'll take hope from this election. If they're electing guys of this caliber, the doors should eventually open for Luis and Dewey. I just hope Luis gets to see it. He's 81. Heck, I think Dustin Pedroia has a clearly better case than Tony Oliva. I think Pedroia has a shot without the veterans committee. Definitely not 1st ballot but 7th or 8th chance maybe.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 6, 2021 4:39:23 GMT -5
Well if Jim Kaat gets in Pettitte should get in. Very similar "just hung around being solidly above average for a really long time" profiles. And if Tony Oliva gets in... well, a whole lot of people should get in. The future of the Hall of Fame is that no one ever achieves a consensus among the sportswriters that they should be inducted and then these good-old-boy committees just choose whoever they personally like. That's the problem with the HOF. If this guy is in, then everyone should be in.
|
|
|
Post by trajanacc on Dec 6, 2021 11:28:53 GMT -5
This further dilutes the baseball HOF in my opinion.
All four MLB selections were sub-60 WAR career, and only Minoso had one season of 8 WAR or better.
These guys were all pretty good, but not the best players of their era.
Makes you wonder if the veteran's committee has even heard of WAR. Not that it's the only thing to consider, but by now should be a key component.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 6, 2021 11:38:43 GMT -5
This further dilutes the baseball HOF in my opinion. All four MLB selections were sub-60 WAR career, and only Minoso had one season of 8 WAR or better. These guys were all pretty good, but not the best players of their era. Makes you wonder if the veteran's committee has even heard of WAR. Not that it's the only thing to consider, but by now should be a key component. Eh, it's a hall of fame not a hall of WAR. Like Buck O'Neil should've been in long ago for his contributions to the game that barely have to do with what he did on the field. ----- Against my better instincts, I'll just say that on Schilling, when a guy approvingly retweets a "Rope, tree, journalist - some assembly required" shirt or meme or whatever it was, it shouldn't be surprising when he doesn't receive an honor voted on by ... journalists. It's one thing to have a Williams-esque (Rice-esque?) antagonistic relationship, it's another to joke about hanging them. Not commenting with this on whether I'd personally vote for him, but I completely get someone who actually has a vote not voting for the guy who appears to approve of violence against those in my profession. I know that's a sticking point for a lot of them.
|
|
|
Post by trajanacc on Dec 6, 2021 12:05:38 GMT -5
As I said, there are other factors to consider besides WAR.
However, in 2021, WAR is probably the best commonly used tool to evaluate a player's on-field contributions. Strongly considering WAR is progress, imo. Letting guys in who are ~20 career WAR worse than other guys not yet in the hall is a step backward.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 6, 2021 12:14:29 GMT -5
This further dilutes the baseball HOF in my opinion. All four MLB selections were sub-60 WAR career, and only Minoso had one season of 8 WAR or better. These guys were all pretty good, but not the best players of their era. Makes you wonder if the veteran's committee has even heard of WAR. Not that it's the only thing to consider, but by now should be a key component. Eh, it's a hall of fame not a hall of WAR. Like Buck O'Neil should've been in long ago for his contributions to the game that barely have to do with what he did on the field. ----- Against my better instincts, I'll just say that on Schilling, when a guy approvingly retweets a "Rope, tree, journalist - some assembly required" shirt or meme or whatever it was, it shouldn't be surprising when he doesn't receive an honor voted on by ... journalists. It's one thing to have a Williams-esque (Rice-esque?) antagonistic relationship, it's another to joke about hanging them. Not commenting with this on whether I'd personally vote for him, but I completely get someone who actually has a vote not voting for the guy who appears to approve of violence against those in my profession. I know that's a sticking point for a lot of them. Exactly. These voters are mostly former players and executives, not fangraph writers/statisticians. To think they're going to consider WAR as the make it or break it to get in is ludicrous. They're going to go by what they saw on the field and what their own personal interpretations and evaluations were, and there's going to be lobbying going on all the while. Frankie Frisch got a bunch of his Giants and Cardinals teammates elected when he was on the committee. Ted Williams badly wanted Phil Rizzuto in the HOF and lobbied on his behalf. We all know all Tony LaRussa and his lobbying for Harold Baines. This is where feelings and relationships get involved over the cold hard numbers, and face it, are these former players and executives really going to forget what they saw or felt about these players and use some statistical system that they don't even know how it works (most people really have no idea what the computations are - they just parrot what they read, so there's not usually a ton of questioning about the actual accuracy of the stat, which is really just an estimate). So on the one hand, I don't worship at the altar of WAR. I'll pay attention to it as I know it's the evolution of the Bill James stats I used to devour in the 1980s, but I don't consider it an absolute ranking. On the other hand, we know there are going to be people elected where we smack our heads and say, "my God, if this guy is a HOFer, then x, y, and z, are HOFers". Part of me hates it and part of me likes it. It really doesn't bother me to see Gil Hodges get in. It does bother me that Dick Allen didn't. And I am glad there's a backdoor way for players to get in. In my opinion, the writers/voters have it wrong - Fred McGriff should be a HOFer. I'm glad the writers aren't the final word. I hope Dwight Evans and Luis Tiant get in. I think the writers have that wrong as well. It's not like the writers are fangraphs statisticians either. I mean, a guy withheld his David Ortiz vote, because it was fishy that he "suddenly" got good at 27, as if his minor league numbers were no indicator or that the personality and style clash with Tom Kelly didn't happen, or that his injuries didn't occur. So why should all power be in the hands of the writers for electing HOFers? So even though I don't think that Harold Baines or Tony Oliva or Jim Kaat should definitely be in the HOF, it doesn't bother me. Baines was an excellent hitter. HOF caliber? In my opinion, no. Oliva? He was HOF caliber in my opinion, but his career was too damn short because of injuries. Jim Kaat? He was a compiler, but if you suddenly suck, you can't compile numbers - as Jim Rice could attest to, so no he didn't have that huge peak, but he was excellent and pitched well enough that he was able to still be useful to teams for a long time. Does that mean a HOFer? YMMV. Some people feel Yaz or Biggio were compilers. I am glad Buck O'Neil got in but unfortunately it's 15 years too late. He should have had that honor while he was alive, but I'm sure somebody fixated on the fact that that he was a .288 hitter or something like that and didn't really appreciate the all around accomplishments he had. I'll tell you right now, if I could watch a game with one person, and just listen to him talk and give me his impressions, it would be Buck O'Neil. I never knew a damn thing about the Negro Leagues. Buck O'Neil made me interested and hooked me in. Now I care very much about those leagues and appreciated something I never really knew. That's a HOF thing right there, an impact to the game that's real and large even if you can't quantify it. The man was a good player, an excellent manager, an astute scout, and one of the best goodwill ambassadors the game of baseball has ever known. No WAR stat needed there.
|
|
|
Post by bluechip on Dec 6, 2021 12:40:20 GMT -5
Really if you’re going to complain about players not being properly recognized based on WAR, then the bigger complaint should be that Bill Dahlen was left out. Probably the most glaring admission from that era stilling not in. Guy had a 75 bWAR and a 77 fWAR. Nevertheless, I’m not really disappointed by his missing or by Gil Hodges, Kaat, and Oliva making it. Minoso probably deserved it sooner. Buck O’Neill certainly should have been in decades ago. Fowler is a good pick as well.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 6, 2021 13:40:22 GMT -5
Really if you’re going to complain about players not being properly recognized based on WAR, then the bigger complaint should be that Bill Dahlen was left out. Probably the most glaring admission from that era stilling not in. Guy had a 75 bWAR and a 77 fWAR. Nevertheless, I’m not really disappointed by his missing or by Gil Hodges, Kaat, and Oliva making it. Minoso probably deserved it sooner. Buck O’Neill certainly should have been in decades ago. Fowler is a good pick as well. You make a good point about Dahlen, now that I research him more closely. He was kind of an iron man of that era. A good all around player, playing a key defensive position, who really mirrored the eras he played in. The offense was whacky in the 1890s and stagnant in the dead ball era starting a decade later, and his offensive numbers reflected that.
|
|
|
Post by alexcorahomevideo on Dec 6, 2021 14:46:17 GMT -5
This further dilutes the baseball HOF in my opinion. All four MLB selections were sub-60 WAR career, and only Minoso had one season of 8 WAR or better. These guys were all pretty good, but not the best players of their era. Makes you wonder if the veteran's committee has even heard of WAR. Not that it's the only thing to consider, but by now should be a key component. Buck O'Neil is a hall of famer. Period. Minoso is a different case. He was the first black Cuban in MLB history. What he did for Cuban representation in the game carries weight. His numbers were also solid. Katt probably got in by his number of wins alone. I don't have an issue with really any of these players getting in.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 6, 2021 14:51:31 GMT -5
Reducing Hall of Fame candidacies to WAR isn't my favorite, but it's a often useful shorthand. Like, Tony Oliva was a hell of a player, but his statline doesn't look like a HOF case to me and WAR really confirms that. On the other end, reducing the case of Minnie Minoso to WAR is not a good idea. Minoso's statistical profile is that of basically an average Hall of Famer, and that's before you get into his greater impact. The idea that he dilutes the Hall of Fame? Oh, no. No, no, no, no, no.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 6, 2021 16:20:28 GMT -5
This further dilutes the baseball HOF in my opinion. All four MLB selections were sub-60 WAR career, and only Minoso had one season of 8 WAR or better. These guys were all pretty good, but not the best players of their era. Makes you wonder if the veteran's committee has even heard of WAR. Not that it's the only thing to consider, but by now should be a key component. Buck O'Neil is a hall of famer. Period. Minoso is a different case. He was the first black Cuban in MLB history. What he did for Cuban representation in the game carries weight. His numbers were also solid. Katt probably got in by his number of wins alone. I don't have an issue with really any of these players getting in. I was looking at the stats of the HOFers again, and yeah, Dick Allen and Bill Dahlen are guys that probably should have made the HOF. But I'm not upset by who got in. I don't think Kaat is an overwhelming HOFer, but he had a lot of really good seasons. Because he won close to 300 he got in, so I suspect Tommy John should get in at some point as well. But as has been pointed out, Luis Tiant was better and deserves enshrinement. Oliva's numbers for 8 seasons, from 1964 - 1972 are very impressive. That was the height of the pitchers' era and he won 3 batting titles during that time and was hitting over .300 when batters struggled to hit .240. He also average 23 HRs during that stretch, too and his Twins finished first 3 times during that era. Carew, Killebrew, and Oliva were the big bats of that Twins team. His inclusion is based on peak value, and is not that dissimilar to Nomar's case. I think it's possible down the road that Nomar might get a look from the Veteran's committee because from 1997 - 2003 and even through 2006, he put up 10 years that a HOFer would put up as far as peak value goes, but he lacked the longevity. But then again so did Rice and so did Puckett and so did Oliva. With Minoso, I didn't realize how good he was. He truly was an on-base machine. He was a .300 hitter, like Pedroia, until his last handfuls of ABs. And his OBP was not far under .400. He had some base stealing speed, but was a bad base stealer. Had some pop. So he was better than I thought he'd be. I think I read somewhere that Hodges wasn't the HOFer that Snider, Campanella, and Robinson were in that Dodgers lineup. Ok. True, but the guy was a serious force in that lineup. His OPS+ was around 125 during a long stretch. That and he was the manager of one of the most iconic teams of all time, the 69 Mets. That's another point in his favor. So all in all, I'm kind of happy with the way it went although I do hope that Allen and Dahlen get another look. I am glad for Fowler and Buck O'Neil. I should check if Bob Kendrick was on the committee to elaborate on other player such as John Donaldson.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 6, 2021 16:45:23 GMT -5
Reducing Hall of Fame candidacies to WAR isn't my favorite, but it's a often useful shorthand. Like, Tony Oliva was a hell of a player, but his statline doesn't look like a HOF case to me and WAR really confirms that. On the other end, reducing the case of Minnie Minoso to WAR is not a good idea. Minoso's statistical profile is that of basically an average Hall of Famer, and that's before you get into his greater impact. The idea that he dilutes the Hall of Fame? Oh, no. No, no, no, no, no. Jim Rice had 47.7 bWAR and Dwight Evans had 67.1. Then there's HOF Freddie Lindstrom who had 28.3. Pedroia at 51.9 should be a shoe-in compared to Lindstrom. This is why comparing players who are in the HOF with players who are on the ballot gets so ridiculous. They should seriously have a 50 WAR cutoff for who is even allowed on the ballot. And don't even get me started on failed starting pitchers who wind up in the HOF. It's a crime that Bill Dahlen, Lou Whitaker, Dwight Evans, and Bobby Grich are not in. Rolen should be as well, over everyone else on this year's ballot.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 6, 2021 17:01:30 GMT -5
Reducing Hall of Fame candidacies to WAR isn't my favorite, but it's a often useful shorthand. Like, Tony Oliva was a hell of a player, but his statline doesn't look like a HOF case to me and WAR really confirms that. On the other end, reducing the case of Minnie Minoso to WAR is not a good idea. Minoso's statistical profile is that of basically an average Hall of Famer, and that's before you get into his greater impact. The idea that he dilutes the Hall of Fame? Oh, no. No, no, no, no, no. Jim Rice had 47.7 bWAR and Dwight Evans had 67.1. Then there's HOF Freddie Lindstrom who had 28.3. Pedroia at 51.9 should be a shoe-in compared to Lindstrom. This is why comparing players who are in the HOF with players who are on the ballot gets so ridiculous. They should seriously have a 50 WAR cutoff for who is even allowed on the ballot. And don't even get me started on failed starting pitchers who wind up in the HOF. It's a crime that Bill Dahlen, Lou Whitaker, Dwight Evans, and Bobby Grich are not in. Rolen should be as well, over everyone else on this year's ballot. This overemphasizes WAR. Grich is a classic example of a guy whose WAR and counting stats are wildly out of synch. So if you do a strict WAR test, guy seems great. Strict counting stats test, guy is a pretty easy no vote (1833 hits in 17 seasons doesn’t make a dramatic impression). You look at him on the big stage, he is a career .182 hitter in the postseason. The thing to me about Grich is… I barely remember the guy. I mean, when I think back on those Angel teams, I never think “The Grich Angels.” (I DO think the Trammell/Whitaker Tigers). But he is an example of a guy I’d vote no on despite WAR — and why I think WAR is just one piece of a big puzzle. The thing is, there ought not be a line, exactly. It is qualitative as much as quantitative. But I take the “fame” part seriously… I like a bit of narrative, charisma etc.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 6, 2021 17:09:16 GMT -5
Jim Rice had 47.7 bWAR and Dwight Evans had 67.1. Then there's HOF Freddie Lindstrom who had 28.3. Pedroia at 51.9 should be a shoe-in compared to Lindstrom. This is why comparing players who are in the HOF with players who are on the ballot gets so ridiculous. They should seriously have a 50 WAR cutoff for who is even allowed on the ballot. And don't even get me started on failed starting pitchers who wind up in the HOF. It's a crime that Bill Dahlen, Lou Whitaker, Dwight Evans, and Bobby Grich are not in. Rolen should be as well, over everyone else on this year's ballot. This overemphasizes WAR. Grich is a classic example of a guy whose WAR and counting stats are wildly out of synch. So if you do a strict WAR test, guy seems great. Strict counting stats test, guy is a pretty easy no vote (1833 hits in 17 seasons doesn’t make a dramatic impression). You look at him on the big stage, he is a career .182 hitter in the postseason. The thing to me about Grich is… I barely remember the guy. I mean, when I think back on those Angel teams, I never think “The Grich Angels.” (I DO think the Trammell/Whitaker Tigers). But he is an example of a guy I’d vote no on despite WAR — and why I think WAR is just one piece of a big puzzle. The thing is, there ought not be a line, exactly. It is qualitative as much as quantitative. But I take the “fame” part seriously… I like a bit of narrative, charisma etc. If you don't like Grich for the HOF, then you don't care about walks or defense. 13.2% BB rate for his career, or if you want to count, 1087 walks. He had a career .371 OBP. He also had 4 Gold Gloves. That is the thing with WAR, it takes everything into account, not just cherry picked stats that you prefer. It's not a piece of a big puzzle, it is almost the entire puzzle.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 6, 2021 17:15:27 GMT -5
Jim Rice had 47.7 bWAR and Dwight Evans had 67.1. Then there's HOF Freddie Lindstrom who had 28.3. Pedroia at 51.9 should be a shoe-in compared to Lindstrom. This is why comparing players who are in the HOF with players who are on the ballot gets so ridiculous. They should seriously have a 50 WAR cutoff for who is even allowed on the ballot. And don't even get me started on failed starting pitchers who wind up in the HOF. It's a crime that Bill Dahlen, Lou Whitaker, Dwight Evans, and Bobby Grich are not in. Rolen should be as well, over everyone else on this year's ballot. This overemphasizes WAR. Grich is a classic example of a guy whose WAR and counting stats are wildly out of synch. So if you do a strict WAR test, guy seems great. Strict counting stats test, guy is a pretty easy no vote (1833 hits in 17 seasons doesn’t make a dramatic impression). You look at him on the big stage, he is a career .182 hitter in the postseason. The thing to me about Grich is… I barely remember the guy. I mean, when I think back on those Angel teams, I never think “The Grich Angels.” (I DO think the Trammell/Whitaker Tigers). But he is an example of a guy I’d vote no on despite WAR — and why I think WAR is just one piece of a big puzzle. The thing is, there ought not be a line, exactly. It is qualitative as much as quantitative. But I take the “fame” part seriously… I like a bit of narrative, charisma etc. In a way I agree with you. I'm not big on WAR being some sort of dividing line or authoritative number. OTOH, I do think Bobby Grich should get a serious look as a HOFer. He was extremely good in an all around way while playing good defense at a position not known for offense, which he provided, but even that was hidden because his batting average wasn't sky high, but his OBP was really good because of the walks. In a way he was kind of an infield Dwight Evans and underrated like Evans who I certainly advocate for as a HOFer.
|
|
|
Post by incandenza on Dec 6, 2021 17:16:50 GMT -5
Buck O'Neil is a hall of famer. Period. Minoso is a different case. He was the first black Cuban in MLB history. What he did for Cuban representation in the game carries weight. His numbers were also solid. Katt probably got in by his number of wins alone. I don't have an issue with really any of these players getting in. ... Oliva's numbers for 8 seasons, from 1964 - 1972 are very impressive. That was the height of the pitchers' era and he won 3 batting titles during that time and was hitting over .300 when batters struggled to hit .240. He also average 23 HRs during that stretch, too and his Twins finished first 3 times during that era. Carew, Killebrew, and Oliva were the big bats of that Twins team. His inclusion is based on peak value, and is not that dissimilar to Nomar's case... Looks like Oliva had about a 140 wRC+ for 1964-1971 (and note that stat is pegged to average production during those seasons). Outside of that he added basically no value. His career wRC+ was 129.
For context, Jason Giambi had a 140 wRC+ over the course of his full career, which lasted about 600 games longer than Oliva's.
It's fine to argue Oliva deserves induction, but if so you have to consider Giambi a shoe-in. Or if his PED history is a deal-breaker, there are the Clarks, Jack (career 138 wRC+) and Will (136), both of whom had longer careers than Oliva and WAR totals about 25% higher. (Will peaked at 4.4% of the HOF vote; Jack peaked at 1.5%.)
Mo Vaughn is a pretty good comp for Oliva - identical career wRC+; only about 450 fewer PAs.
|
|
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 6, 2021 17:28:40 GMT -5
... Oliva's numbers for 8 seasons, from 1964 - 1972 are very impressive. That was the height of the pitchers' era and he won 3 batting titles during that time and was hitting over .300 when batters struggled to hit .240. He also average 23 HRs during that stretch, too and his Twins finished first 3 times during that era. Carew, Killebrew, and Oliva were the big bats of that Twins team. His inclusion is based on peak value, and is not that dissimilar to Nomar's case... Looks like Oliva had about a 140 wRC+ for 1964-1971 (and note that stat is pegged to average production during those seasons). Outside of that he added basically no value. His career wRC+ was 129.
For context, Jason Giambi had a 140 wRC+ over the course of his full career, which lasted about 600 games longer than Oliva's. It's fine to argue Oliva deserves induction, but if so you have to consider Giambi a shoe-in. Or if his PED history is a deal-breaker, there are the Clarks, Jack (career 138 wRC+) and Will (136), both of whom had longer careers than Oliva and WAR totals about 25% higher. (Will peaked at 4.4% of the HOF vote; Jack peaked at 1.5%.)
Mo Vaughn is a pretty good comp for Oliva - identical career wRC+; only about 450 fewer PAs. Juicin Giambi? He was on a path, but we know what fueled it. Aesthetically, Oliva was a hitter in the way Jack Clark wasn't. Clark was a three true outcome guy and guys like that can have very high marks on OPS, wRC, etc, so I see how it comes out the same. I remember him at the tail end of his career with the Red Sox and would always argue with my Dad why he was productive even though he struggled to hit .250, even though it never really seemed like he was. I know he was a bigger force with the Giants and certainly the Cards - I remember that towering shot off of Niedenfuer after LaSorda foolishly refused to walk him in the clinching game of the NLCS in 1985. Oliva was hitting .300 when guys with those high pitchers mounds and expanded strike zones struggled to sniff .240. I know it's antiquated batting average, but that was noticeable in an era where very few could do that, and it was combined with power. I mean if you look at OPS, would you put in Ichiro Suzuki? His OBP was never much higher than his batting average nor did he have much of a SA, although he did play excellent defense and could run. Pete Rose was similar minus the plus defense and baserunning. Honestly I haven't studied Will Clark that well. Mo Vaughn was certainly on a hall of fame trajectory - like Nomar, but like Nomar, injuries got the best of him. Was it long enough? I don't think so? I know I feel that way with Mattingly. I guess it's where do you draw the line? Do you need WAR to draw the line for you? I don't. It's more a feel thing for me and there can be external factors. Like David Ortiz leading the Sox to 3 Series is an indelible thing that's not quantified in all this.
|
|
|
Post by manfred on Dec 6, 2021 17:29:12 GMT -5
This overemphasizes WAR. Grich is a classic example of a guy whose WAR and counting stats are wildly out of synch. So if you do a strict WAR test, guy seems great. Strict counting stats test, guy is a pretty easy no vote (1833 hits in 17 seasons doesn’t make a dramatic impression). You look at him on the big stage, he is a career .182 hitter in the postseason. The thing to me about Grich is… I barely remember the guy. I mean, when I think back on those Angel teams, I never think “The Grich Angels.” (I DO think the Trammell/Whitaker Tigers). But he is an example of a guy I’d vote no on despite WAR — and why I think WAR is just one piece of a big puzzle. The thing is, there ought not be a line, exactly. It is qualitative as much as quantitative. But I take the “fame” part seriously… I like a bit of narrative, charisma etc. If you don't like Grich for the HOF, then you don't care about walks or defense. 13.2% BB rate for his career, or if you want to count, 1087 walks. He had a career .371 OBP. He also had 4 Gold Gloves. That is the thing with WAR, it takes everything into account, not just cherry picked stats that you prefer. It's not a piece of a big puzzle, it is almost the entire puzzle. You don’t walk into the Hall of Fame. “Who was Bobby Grich, daddy?” “Son, he sure could take a free pass and light up a stadium.” “Oooh, daddy, I wish I could have been there.” And I am guessing in another context you would not take the GG argument seriously. Jeter had 5, right?
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 6, 2021 17:38:44 GMT -5
If you don't like Grich for the HOF, then you don't care about walks or defense. 13.2% BB rate for his career, or if you want to count, 1087 walks. He had a career .371 OBP. He also had 4 Gold Gloves. That is the thing with WAR, it takes everything into account, not just cherry picked stats that you prefer. It's not a piece of a big puzzle, it is almost the entire puzzle. You don’t walk into the Hall of Fame. “Who was Bobby Grich, daddy?” “Son, he sure could take a free pass and light up a stadium.” “Oooh, daddy, I wish I could have been there.” And I am guessing in another context you would not take the GG argument seriously. Jeter had 5, right? Grich had 16.8 (b-ref) dWAR for his career. Jeter had -9.4. That's an absurd argument with the kid thing. Does the kid know HOF Ron Santo with the almost identical career? Or hundreds of others that only diehard stathead fans have ever heard of, (many of which had worse careers than Bobby Grich)?
|
|
|