So I did a bit of light Hall of Fame research that didn’t get into my last post, so I figure I’ll give that to you here — this is a handy-dandy “Who are the best players not in the Baseball Hall of Fame?” list, for clipping and sharing.* Happy holidays!
I'm assuming Miguel Cabrera was an oversight for the recently-retired section? Where does he slot in? I'd imagine somewhere between 2nd and 4th, what with his 429 Win Shares and all his hitting accomplishments.
Thinking about Darrell Evans makes me think about how much has changed in our "watching" baseball. I grew up in an AL city (KC) in the 70s. I can tell you a lot about Bobby Grich and Lou Whitaker and Dwight Evans and Graig Nettles, but unless an NL player played for the Reds/Dodgers/Pirates/Phillies, which meant they were in the playoffs and almost always on the NBC Saturday game of the week, I didn't know much about NL players except what was on their baseball cards. So Evans (Braves from 1969 to 1976 and Giants from 1976 to 1983) wasn't on my radar at all until he came to the Tigers in the mid 80s. By then he was old and no longer a 3rd baseman.
After the advent of SportsCenter with the highlights of every game every night and then baseball being on ESPN pretty much every night, suddenly fans were exposed to the other league in a way they never were before 1980. That makes a difference in perception.
Wait... Didn't you writing a compelling argument just a few months ago for Don Mattingly's Cooperstown inclusion, but he wasn't even mentioned in this post? Am I missing something?
Fair enough on most points. I think Rickey was feared but I think it was more about what he was capable of after he reach base rather than at the dish. Yount? Truly under appreciated…2x MVP at two premium positions. Incredible ballplayer. Agree 100% with your last two lines.
I hear you…those GIDPs were hard to take sometimes but if not Jim Ed, who was a better AL RH between ‘77 and ‘86? When I say he’s a deserving HoF, make no mistake, not in the same vein as some of his peers such as Brett, Schmidt and a few others, but I think he falls into the Andre Dawson crowd—Hall is not lessened by his induction but it wouldn’t have been a huge injustice if not elected. Better than “Hall of Very Good” but not an inner circle HoFer either.
Rickey Henderson and Robin Yount were significantly better RH hitters and Rickey didn’t even play in 77-78. (Check out Yount’s oWar, talk about an underrated Hall of Famer.) I think it’s the “most feared” label hung on Rice that bothers me, because it’s one of those non-quantifiable descriptions which can’t be disproven - given to a player when their quantifiable stats don’t reflect their actual reputation. Kind of like Don Drysdale “most intimidating/feared.” He doesn’t diminish the Hall of Fame (the Veterans Committee selections in the 40s and 70s guaranteed that). But Rice in the HOF and Dwight Evans out doesn’t make sense. I’d rather them both out or both in.
Rice wasn’t the same player after he broke his wrist the second time in 1980, but he still was the player they had to work harder to get out than. Evans. Evans was a mediocre hitter until he got older and by that time his fielding suffered due to not having any speed.
I think IBBs would be a great way to quantify how feared a hitter was. You just have to make sure to account for eighth hitters racking them up in the NL. Or if you really want to work at it, how often first base was empty when the IBB was issued.
Hey Joe! Where do you get the Win Share numbers? I know that Bill James has them available on his website, but any other options? Thanks for all the great writing!
Sorry to keep coming back to this but win shares not having a negative value is the entire reason why it views some players as so good, and others not. Omar doesn’t get penalized for his putrid offense and the same goes with Gary Sheffield. So of course if you don’t ever penalize players for their poor play, then players with extreme strengths are going to get overrated. That’s just how it goes
And the deeper I go into Win Shares the less I like it. It has Jeff Kent as the more valuable defense player than Kenny Lofton! That’s just absolutely nuts
I’m all for different methods of analysis, but I cannot take win shares at face value
You can't always go by statistics. The Royals were in the playoffs between 1976 a and 1985 almost every year. If you saw him play he was a Hall of famer. Unbelievable 2nd basemen and clutch hitter. Batted cleanup in 1985 World Series. I mean 8 time Gold Glove?
Your writeup of Darrell Evans makes him sound like the exact type of player we should *not* want in the Hall of Fame, and I say that understanding he was an excellent player with a fine career, and he was before my time. I never saw him play, so this is just me going off his numbers and your writeup. He sounds steady but completely unspectacular - not memorable, probably not the best player on his team (if he was, his teams were probably not championship-caliber), probably never considered a future hall-of-famer during his career. A large part of his value seems to have come through his walk totals.
I appreciate advanced stats, but I don't think they should determine HOF worthiness by themselves. We should not reach the point where we run the numbers to find the most valuable players ever, they spit out a surprising player like Darrell Evans, and we feel obligated to say "Really, Darrell Evans? Well, if the algorithm says so, then I guess we need to vote him in."
It's called the Hall of Fame, and as unfair as it may be in some ways, I do think actual fame should play *some* role in who gets in.
Lack of star appeal used to matter. It is why Phil Niekro and Don Sutton failed several elections despite surpassing 300 wins. Neither was seen as a star, game changing player.
The 1996 BBWAA vote had no winners. In '97 Niekro got in on his 5th trty. In '98 Sutton got in on his 5th try. Then in '99 three superstars appeared on the ballot and they each got elected on their first ballot: Ryan, Brett & Yount.
Star power still matters - it is why Rice was elected and not Dewey. But the HoF is conflicted on choosing superstars and players that fit the narrative. Dave Parker and Keith Hernandez were caught up in the 1980s Pittsburgh drug trials so they are dismissed despite being stars and impactful. And now we have the stain of PEDs and many more great, star, players will be excluded.
Parker & Hernandez show the risk of star power. Tim Raines was also implicated in the Pittsburgh drug trials but he was not a headline name like Dave or Keith. His connection with the scandal did not stick despite him saying he played with vials of cocaine in his baseball pants.
Interestingly, a comparison of Raines and Parker shows the bias of WAR for OBP. The two players have identical OPS. Parker has twice the home runs and 500 more RBI. But Raines has the higher OBP and WAR loves OBP. So Raines has a 69 WAR compared to 40 for Parker. Argue that Raines was the better player. But he was not that much better!
In a prior career, working for the Social Security Administration, I interviewed Eddie Yost when he filed for retirement. Super nice guy.
I also interviewed Curt Gowdy when he filed - and got his autograph. What a voice he had.
Hi Joe. Is there a current list of career Win Shares available? I'm willing to pay!
I'm assuming Miguel Cabrera was an oversight for the recently-retired section? Where does he slot in? I'd imagine somewhere between 2nd and 4th, what with his 429 Win Shares and all his hitting accomplishments.
Thinking about Darrell Evans makes me think about how much has changed in our "watching" baseball. I grew up in an AL city (KC) in the 70s. I can tell you a lot about Bobby Grich and Lou Whitaker and Dwight Evans and Graig Nettles, but unless an NL player played for the Reds/Dodgers/Pirates/Phillies, which meant they were in the playoffs and almost always on the NBC Saturday game of the week, I didn't know much about NL players except what was on their baseball cards. So Evans (Braves from 1969 to 1976 and Giants from 1976 to 1983) wasn't on my radar at all until he came to the Tigers in the mid 80s. By then he was old and no longer a 3rd baseman.
After the advent of SportsCenter with the highlights of every game every night and then baseball being on ESPN pretty much every night, suddenly fans were exposed to the other league in a way they never were before 1980. That makes a difference in perception.
Bobby Grich is overrated. There's a reason why he's never been seriously considered for Cooperstown: his career, while very good, was not great.
Wait... Didn't you writing a compelling argument just a few months ago for Don Mattingly's Cooperstown inclusion, but he wasn't even mentioned in this post? Am I missing something?
Fair enough on most points. I think Rickey was feared but I think it was more about what he was capable of after he reach base rather than at the dish. Yount? Truly under appreciated…2x MVP at two premium positions. Incredible ballplayer. Agree 100% with your last two lines.
To me Darrell Evans has a little bit of Harold Baines to him: good and very long career but was never a great player.
Darrell is certainly no Dwight
I hear you…those GIDPs were hard to take sometimes but if not Jim Ed, who was a better AL RH between ‘77 and ‘86? When I say he’s a deserving HoF, make no mistake, not in the same vein as some of his peers such as Brett, Schmidt and a few others, but I think he falls into the Andre Dawson crowd—Hall is not lessened by his induction but it wouldn’t have been a huge injustice if not elected. Better than “Hall of Very Good” but not an inner circle HoFer either.
Rickey Henderson and Robin Yount were significantly better RH hitters and Rickey didn’t even play in 77-78. (Check out Yount’s oWar, talk about an underrated Hall of Famer.) I think it’s the “most feared” label hung on Rice that bothers me, because it’s one of those non-quantifiable descriptions which can’t be disproven - given to a player when their quantifiable stats don’t reflect their actual reputation. Kind of like Don Drysdale “most intimidating/feared.” He doesn’t diminish the Hall of Fame (the Veterans Committee selections in the 40s and 70s guaranteed that). But Rice in the HOF and Dwight Evans out doesn’t make sense. I’d rather them both out or both in.
Rice wasn’t the same player after he broke his wrist the second time in 1980, but he still was the player they had to work harder to get out than. Evans. Evans was a mediocre hitter until he got older and by that time his fielding suffered due to not having any speed.
I think IBBs would be a great way to quantify how feared a hitter was. You just have to make sure to account for eighth hitters racking them up in the NL. Or if you really want to work at it, how often first base was empty when the IBB was issued.
Hey Joe! Where do you get the Win Share numbers? I know that Bill James has them available on his website, but any other options? Thanks for all the great writing!
Sorry to keep coming back to this but win shares not having a negative value is the entire reason why it views some players as so good, and others not. Omar doesn’t get penalized for his putrid offense and the same goes with Gary Sheffield. So of course if you don’t ever penalize players for their poor play, then players with extreme strengths are going to get overrated. That’s just how it goes
And the deeper I go into Win Shares the less I like it. It has Jeff Kent as the more valuable defense player than Kenny Lofton! That’s just absolutely nuts
I’m all for different methods of analysis, but I cannot take win shares at face value
I believe Bill James intended to address this with Loss Shares but never completed the Loss Shares project.
You can't always go by statistics. The Royals were in the playoffs between 1976 a and 1985 almost every year. If you saw him play he was a Hall of famer. Unbelievable 2nd basemen and clutch hitter. Batted cleanup in 1985 World Series. I mean 8 time Gold Glove?
Juan Gone should have a special committee election for largest free agent contracts signed and least games played.
Where can you find Win Shares? I tried Googling Keith Hernandez win shares and I'm coming up empty.
Please keep bangimg the drum for Lou Whittaker! It is an embarrassment for MLB, and should be corrected ASAP. What is the miniscule issue here?
Your writeup of Darrell Evans makes him sound like the exact type of player we should *not* want in the Hall of Fame, and I say that understanding he was an excellent player with a fine career, and he was before my time. I never saw him play, so this is just me going off his numbers and your writeup. He sounds steady but completely unspectacular - not memorable, probably not the best player on his team (if he was, his teams were probably not championship-caliber), probably never considered a future hall-of-famer during his career. A large part of his value seems to have come through his walk totals.
I appreciate advanced stats, but I don't think they should determine HOF worthiness by themselves. We should not reach the point where we run the numbers to find the most valuable players ever, they spit out a surprising player like Darrell Evans, and we feel obligated to say "Really, Darrell Evans? Well, if the algorithm says so, then I guess we need to vote him in."
It's called the Hall of Fame, and as unfair as it may be in some ways, I do think actual fame should play *some* role in who gets in.
Lack of star appeal used to matter. It is why Phil Niekro and Don Sutton failed several elections despite surpassing 300 wins. Neither was seen as a star, game changing player.
The 1996 BBWAA vote had no winners. In '97 Niekro got in on his 5th trty. In '98 Sutton got in on his 5th try. Then in '99 three superstars appeared on the ballot and they each got elected on their first ballot: Ryan, Brett & Yount.
Star power still matters - it is why Rice was elected and not Dewey. But the HoF is conflicted on choosing superstars and players that fit the narrative. Dave Parker and Keith Hernandez were caught up in the 1980s Pittsburgh drug trials so they are dismissed despite being stars and impactful. And now we have the stain of PEDs and many more great, star, players will be excluded.
Parker & Hernandez show the risk of star power. Tim Raines was also implicated in the Pittsburgh drug trials but he was not a headline name like Dave or Keith. His connection with the scandal did not stick despite him saying he played with vials of cocaine in his baseball pants.
Interestingly, a comparison of Raines and Parker shows the bias of WAR for OBP. The two players have identical OPS. Parker has twice the home runs and 500 more RBI. But Raines has the higher OBP and WAR loves OBP. So Raines has a 69 WAR compared to 40 for Parker. Argue that Raines was the better player. But he was not that much better!