First off, congratulations to Goose Gossage, a deserving Hall of Fame candidate. Congratulations to Jim Rice for getting so close — I feel certain that he will get in next year — and it now looks like Andre Dawson made enough of a move that he too will get in. I will be happy for him. Class act. Bert Blyleven, I think, is on the cusp but I think he will get in also. Mark McGwire went backward, I think. And nobody voted for Jose Rijo. Outrageous.
One thing people sometimes fail to realize is that there are a lot of great players lined up at the Cooperstown gate. A LOT. Here is an alphabet’s worth. Play along and vote for your favorite letters in the comments section. I’m not trying to trick you — I would imagine that some of these players (maybe all of them) you will know instinctively by their numbers. But I hope by leaving off the names, you will take a look at the numbers, the special considerations, and vote without as much bias. We’ll see.
* * *
Player A: .266/.353/.515, 1877 hits, 340 2B, 14 3B, 462 homers, 1186 runs, 1407 RBIs, 132 OPS+.
Special considerations: Won MVP, stole 200 bases.
Player B: .298/.352/.502, 2452 hits, 373 2B, 79 3B, 382 homers, 1249 runs, 1451 RBIs, 128 OPS+.
Special considerations: Won MVP, led league in total bases four times.
Player C: .292/.378/.534, 1848 hits, 320 3B, 79 3B, 351 homers, 1019 runs, 1119 RBIs, 156 OPS+.
Special considerations: Won MVP and Rookie of the year, led league in OPS four times.
Player D: .265/.356/.469, 2111 hits, 350 2B, 39 3B, 398 homers, 1197 runs, 1266 RBIs, 121 OPS+
Special considerations: Won two MVPs, five Gold Gloves and stole 161 bases.
Player E: .277/.362/.464, 2254 hits, 365 2B, 67 3B, 342 homers, 1128 runs, 1331 RBIs, 125 OPS+
Special considerations: Won five gold gloves, led league in walks four times.
Player F: .279/.323/.482, 2774 hits, 503 2B, 98 3B, 438 homers, 1373 runs, 1591 RBIs, 119 OPS+
Special considerations: Won MVP and rookie of the year and eight Gold Gloves. Stole 314 bases.
Player G: .290/.339/.471, 2712 hits, 526 2B, 75 3B, 314 homers, 1272 runs, 1493 RBIs, 121 OPS+
Special considerations: Won MVP and three Gold Gloves. Two-time batting champion.
Player H: .280/.356/.465, 2866 hits, 488 2B, 49 3B, 384 homers, 1299 runs, 1628 RBIs, 120 OPS+
Special considerations: Led league in slugging and is 18th all-time in intentional walks.
Player I: .273/.359/.487, 1921 hits, 295 2B, 48 3B, 370 homers, 1105 runs, 1274 RBIs, 120 OPS+
Special considerations: Won three Gold Gloves and was beloved.
Player J: .307/.358/.471, 2153 hits, 442 2B, 20 3B, 222 homers, 1007 runs, 1099 RBIs, 127 OPS+
Special considerations: Won MVP and nine Gold Gloves and was beloved.
Player K: .296/.384/.436, 2182 hits, 426 2B, 60 3B, 162 homers, 1124 runs, 1071 RBIs, 128 OPS+
Special considerations: Won MVP and 11 Gold Gloves.
Player L: .272/.370/.470, 2446 hits, 483 2B, 73 3B, 385 homers, 1470 runs, 1384 RBIs, 127 OPS+
Special considerations: Won eight Gold Gloves and twice led league in OPS.
Player M: .295/.369/.564, 1726 hits, 389 2B, 21 3B, 381 homers, 974 runs, 1239 RBIs, 143 OPS+
Special considerations: Led league in hits, homers, 2B, RBIs, total bases, runs produced over 8-year span.
Player N: .288/.371/.532, 3020 hits, 585 2B, 38 3B, 569 homers, 1663 runs, 1835 RBIs, 132 OPS+
Special considerations: Won three Gold Gloves.
Player O: .303/.384/.497, 2176 hits, 440 2B, 47 3B, 284 homers, 1186 runs, 1205 RBIs. 137 OPS+
Special considerations: Won one Gold Glove and had cool nickname.
Player P: .266/.371/.424, 1833 hits, 320 2B, 47 3B, 224 homers, 1033 runs, 864 RBis, 125 OPS+
Special considerations: Won four Gold Gloves at premium defensive position.
Player Q: .263/.394/.588, 1626 hits, 252 2B, 6 3B, 583 homers, 1167 runs, 1414 RBIs, 162 OPS+
Special considerations: 12-time All-Star and rookie of the year. One of the game’s all-time great shows.
Player R: .273/.352/.499, 1774 hits, 245 2B, 35 3B, 382 homers, 864 runs, 1119 RBIs, 142 OPS+
Special considerations: Won rookie of the year and finished Top 10 in homers nine times.
Player S: .271/.374/.488, 1820 hits, 241 2B, 41 3B, 377 homers, 1046 runs, 1103 RBIs, 139 OPS+
Special considerations: Had one season with OPS+ greater than 200.
Player T: .287/.366/.489, 2020 hits, 363 2B, 57 3B, 314 homers, 1123 runs, 1092 RBIs, 137 OPS+
Special considerations: Won one Gold Glove, played in four World Series.
Player U: .285/.352/.415, 2365 hits, 412 2B, 55 3B, 236 homers, 1231 runs, 1003 RBIs, 110 OPS+
Special considerations: Won four Gold Gloves at premium defensive position and was World Series MVP.
Player V: .303/.353/.476, 1917 hits, 329 2B, 48 3B, 220 homers, 870 runs, 947 RBIs, 131 OPS+
Special considerations: Won Rookie of the Year, one Gold Glove and three batting titles.
Player W: .294/.385/.425, 2605 hits, 430 2B, 113 3B, 170 homers, 1571 runs, 980 RBIs, 123 OPS+
Special considerations: Led league in steals four times, stole 808 bases.
Player X: .303/.375/.409, 4256 hits, 746 2B, 135 3B, 160 homers, 2165 runs, 1314 RBis, 118 OPS+
Special considerations: Won rookie of the year, MVP, World Series MVP, and two Gold Gloves.
Player Y: .303/.344/.451, 2743 hits, 529 2B, 77 3B, 219 homers, 1189 runs, 1326 RBIs, 121 OPS+
Special considerations: Won batting title and finished Top 10 in average nine times.
Player Z: .291/.364/.427, 2169 hits, 425 2B, 166 3B, 83 homers, 1112 runs, 1176 RBIs, 136 OPS+
Special considerations: Led league in homers, doubles and extra base hits over 10-year span, second in virtually every other category to one of the all-time great players.
Loading ...
44 Comments, Comment or Ping
Steve Buffum
Without knowing the defensive position, this is a much harder exercise.
Jan 9th, 2008
BrianD
In no particular order (other than alphabetical) A,F,N,Q,W have compelling stories/careers/resumes.
Jan 9th, 2008
robustyoungsoul
Agreed, I think length of career would be a necessary factor for me also. A guy who had a huge OPS+ for several years than held onto the game for 2-3 years too long may see his career numbers affected.
Jan 9th, 2008
Paul White
No way near enough information to make a fair evaluation. If Player H, for instance compiled his numbers over 22 seasons as a DH, he doesn’t get my vote. If he compiles them over 16 seasons as a shortstop, he’s a first-ballot guy.
Jan 9th, 2008
Duke
I have N, Q, W, X, Z
Jan 9th, 2008
AK
Isn’t this something that could be voted on by Pozcars voters? Or was that a one-time thing?
Jan 9th, 2008
Mike
It wouldn’t kill me if the following got in:
ABCEFJKLMNOPQRSTWZ
I could not make a case for:
DGHIUVXY
Interestingly, I think I only recognized two stat lines. One was my all time favorite player - Mattingly. Before now, I would NOT have voted him as a HOFer. However, those Gold Gloves really stick out. If you look at him as a great fielder with a good bat, he looks good. If you look at him as a good bat who could field great, he somehow doesn’t look as good (which is what I’d been doing all along).
I also recognized Raines (I think). My position on him is unchanged; he makes the cut.
Jan 9th, 2008
Dan
Joe,
Before I study your alphabet soup, I’d like to suggest a final Hall of Fame topic for a blog entry:
The voting habits displayed by the electorate.
Specifically, what do you think of:
Writers who vote for Shawon Dunston or Todd Stottlemeyer (or any number of other first time candidates without the slightest rational basis for induction)?
Writers who withdraw a vote based on who is at the top of the ballot, then restore that vote in subsequent years?
The special case of Woody Paige and his ludicrous reasons for voting for some players.
In my opinion, all of these writers, and other unindicted co-conspirators, should lose their voting privileges immediately and permanently.
Perhaps you don’t want to go after your fellow writers, but there is a reason why a lot of people regard the balloting as little more than a joke, and I’d love to hear your take on the issue.
Jan 9th, 2008
Dan
Its B in a landslide.
You aren’t slipping my boy past ME!
Jan 9th, 2008
Mauichuck
M gotta go with M - You can’t slip my boy past ME!
Jan 9th, 2008
Mauichuck
Oh yeah, and don’t forget that A had an lifetime ERA of 0.00 and a perfect winning percent.
Jan 9th, 2008
Sam
You left this one:
.284/.377/.509, 134 OPS+, 441 2b, 24 3b, 493 HR, 1550 RBI, 1439 Runs, 2490 Hits
Special considerations: 5 time all star, led league in HRs twice.
Jan 9th, 2008
John
Player U has a mistake…his SB total is listed as his HR total. Should be 185 HR.
Jan 9th, 2008
Kyle
f k n q w x y
Yes and please do a note on why someone is a voted for one year and then not the next. Do they just forget? Becasue they don’t take it seriously, or are they just that dumb?
Jan 9th, 2008
rpa
without the positions and eras, i think it’s hard to make a fair comparison… if mr. Y was a shortstop instead of an outfielder, it would make a big difference. but i was always a fan of his. still don’t think he belongs in the hall.
i guess i recognize a lot of these guys by the numbers, so it’s not as hard.
some categories:
ought to be in: F ,U, W
would be in if not for “special considerations”: Q, X
could have been in if he wouldn’t have gotten hurt and alienated so many people: M
probably should be in, but might not make it due to “special considerations”: N (excellent for a long time.)
were good, but didn’t play long enough to have a hall of fame “career” and/or just didn’t dominate enough for a 7-10 year period: A, C, J, V, W
“this isn’t the hall of very good”: D, H, I, K, L, O, T, Y
would be in if they had played for the yankees: P, R
I submit two more guys for consideration in this game:
player AA: .267/.322/.357, 2326 hits, 389 2B, 48 3B, 101 HR, 993 R, 950 RBI.
Special considerations: won 5 gold gloves at a premium defensive position, would have won 3 or 4 more if he turned more backflips. played in four world series. 321 stolen bases. was beloved.
player AB: .286/.327/.442, 2757 hits, 485 2B, 127 3B, 256 HR, 1366 R, 1170 RBI.
Special considerations: one gold glove, during the first 10 years of his career was in top ten in total bases, doubles, triples, stolen bases and hits seven times. led league in hits twice. 305 stolen bases.
hmm… the hall of fame is subjective. that’s part of what makes it fun.
Jan 9th, 2008
rpa
one thing i forgot about player AB i listed above… at age 20 (his first full season) he was .316/.371/.509 with 47 2B, 9 3B, 20 HR, 21 SB, 131 R and was an all star. he lost the rookie of the year to a future hall of fame first baseman who hit .354/.429/.656 in 192 AB.
Jan 9th, 2008
Chris
This was tough, and I have to admit that the majority of those that I picked were those whom I recognized immediately by their stats. One of the hardent things to do was to objectively look at the counting stats. Over and over again, I kept finding myself qualifying players by using benchmarks of 500 HRs, 2Bs or seeing where their RBIs stack up. Eventually I simply used the counting stats to approximate the lengh of time that the player put up his numbers, which was hard in its own right.
For example, player M put up some MONSTER numbers when he played, but only playerd for a short period of time, as evidenced by him scoring less than 1,000 runs. The same goes for player C.
The point of all of this is that it is very difficult to objectively pick who is or is not worthy of induction, and this exercise leaves some definite gray, as reader Paul White points out. Still, it was fun to narrow down and make my selections, and as selective as they might have been, it was even more fun to research later, and see to whom I nearly gave a nod:
Congratualtions:
H, Q, W and X
Jan 9th, 2008
Pig
Q,N,F,O - no particular order. Focus was on OPS+, HR’s & the intangibles.
Jan 9th, 2008
SBG
And A is a best-selling author. Or at least an author.
Jan 9th, 2008
Rep. Kucinich
Happy trails to you….until we meet again….happy trails…
Adios amigos. I’m heading back to Cleveland to recharge and ponder whether to keep up this valiant fight. Time to move on to another chat board. Must always be one step ahead of the feds. So long from Zelnorm.
Jan 9th, 2008
Matt
C, E, O, P, Q, U, W, X
I admit, I looked up a couple of them. I don’t think I would have voted for U or P without knowing their position, and in real life there’s no way that X belongs - but we all know who X is, anyway.
Just on the career numbers, it looks like N goes in, but I know who that is. Even without his PR problems, I don’t think he had the great seasons necessary.
Jan 9th, 2008
Dave W
I think I would vote for B F J W X
Jan 9th, 2008
Andy
Based on my completely unscientific analysis of the numbers:
C, N, Q, W, X, Z. Z’s “special considerations” sold me and somewhat depressed me when I couldn’t figure out who he is. I guess I’ll have to go look him up.
Jan 9th, 2008
Andy
I’m calling B.S. on Dave W. I’m going to guess he’s about 34 years old. That’s old enough to remember Jim Rice’s prime and young enough to grow up idolizing Hawk, Rock, Donnie Baseball and Charlie Hustle. There’s no way you look at these numbers without names attached and just “happen” to come up with those five guys. B.S.
Jan 9th, 2008
Dave W
umm andy actually i don’t remember any of those guys in their prime seeing as i am only 23 and not 34
Jan 9th, 2008
Mike Bagnall
I didn’t study the numbers, since I believe that HOF admission SHOULD be based on other things in addition to numbers. If Candy Cummings really invented the curve ball, then he belongs in the Hall. It doesn’t matter that much how many guys he struck out with it. I think admission to the Hall should be based primarily on an individual’s (note I said individual, not player) impact on the game. Positive impact should probably be given more weight than negative impact. Some people impact the game solely with the numbers they put in the records, but others affect the game in other ways. Bruce Sutter was elected to the HOF because he was the guy who started the “closer” craze (which I hope will soon die its natural death) not because he was the BEST closer, or even the first one, but just the guy who popularized the thing. Like Ruth with the HR. If Harry Heilmann had been a pitcher, Cobb probably wouldn’t have bothered teaching him the right way to hit, and Yankee Stadium might have been built with the short porch in left instead of right.
Jan 9th, 2008
Chris
I agree with Andy.
There was no way that I could ignore N’s numbers, but I knew immediately who he was when I looked, so I disregarded him. For the purity of this exercise, I probably shouldn’t have. So congratulations, N, you are in on my list. I’d call you by name, but I don’t think I could pronounce your it with out it coming out sounding like “Rat.”
Jan 9th, 2008
joemn
My answer may be None of the above, though obviously I’m denying McGwire, Palmeiro and Rose only for their extracurricular misdeeds.
Jan 9th, 2008
Chris
McGwire, Palmeiro and Rose!!! You’re kidding me!! They were on the list??
The only person I recognized was Sherry Magee!!
Jan 9th, 2008
urayoan
Sam - your boy w/493 HR is not yet elegible for the hall, but a damn fine ballplayer. Often overlooked because the glut of good to great players at his position during his time meant he did not make a ton of All Star games, and he played in small to medium markets.
Jan 9th, 2008
rpa
agreed - sam’s candidate is worthy of serious consideration. some argue his totals are more a result of longevity than excellence, but I group him with player “N” in the respect that they were really great, and they were part of a large crop of excellent players at their position during their era.
i tend to ask, if a player’s candidacy seems to be more a result of longevity than excellence, was he considered the best at his position for a decade or so?
here are the OPS+ for sam’s candidate from 1988-1994:
157, 166, 153, 147, 166, 143, 157
that period of butt-kicking (top five in his league in each of those years) is a bit short for my taste, but at least deserves a look. he’s definitely an underrated player, in any case.
besides, i think longevity counts for something. there’s something impressive about being able to play at a major league level until you’re 40. i think it’s not enough to get you in on its own, but it should be a plus.
Jan 9th, 2008
Ed
Just writing them down on first impression while reading, I came up with:
D / G / M / N / Q / X / Y
I like Sam’s addition as well.
Jan 9th, 2008
Sam
True, #493 is not yet eligible, but neither is Player N.
Anyway, just looking at the stats, I would put #493 in, but knowing his true identity, he is just not someone who I would associate with the hall of fame…
One more thing, I forgot that his special considerations should also include the cool nickname.
Jan 9th, 2008
Ryan
CDEFNQW
Now when do we get the names?
Jan 9th, 2008
rpa
sam: i was a teenager during the glory years of Mr. #493’s career. my friends and i had a habit of saying “CHOWWWMP” after “#493″’s his name, due to a strange ad from McDonald’s for a formed meat sandwich that ran in those days. how we associated this player’s name with the sandwich is lost in the foggy part of my brain that i have drank away since then (i mean, they do sound somewhat similar…), but every time i think of him… i have to say “CHOMP”.
Jan 9th, 2008
Terry
Interesting how many replies point a finger at N. As a Pozcar voter, and I am wagging my finger at the screen while I write this, I will never vote for letters who need special considerations. Maybe the list should be redone with special consideration players in upper case and those who didn’t need special consideration in lower case.
Jan 9th, 2008
rpa
terry - the tough question for me, in regards to mr. “N” is actually two questions:
1) was he really ever the best in the league at what he did? third best? he has the numbers, he was really really excellent for a very long time. never the first guy that came up when you said “best slugger in the league”, but always a guy who came up when you said “best 10 sluggers in the league”. and he was that guy for 15 years or so.
2) how many of those 15 years was he clean?
i mean, i almost sympathize with the guys who shot up to try to prolong their careers. god knows, at 30 and working a desk job, that i have my share of aches and pains already. i can’t imagine being 35 and trying to play baseball. was the stuff they took meant to speed healing, or was it meant to turn them in to musclebound freaks?
really, as much as i hate to say it, “intent” actually might matter to me when it comes to steroids. i look at player a “i’ll take some hgh to get over this injury” differently than player b “i’ll shoot up some winstrol because i’m tired of not being able to hit homers.”
and i’m not sure how we’ll EVER be able to draw that line. and the pitchers were on it, too. i just think we’ll have to take the players from the “steroid era” and evaluate them much the same way that we did players from the “deadball era”… look at them compared to their contemporaries, and decide what we think of them. i think the widespread use of steroids was really really awful, but it was just that… widespread. maybe still is, for all i know. the chemists are always a step ahead of the testing programmes.
Jan 9th, 2008
Daniel
What’s interesting about this is that I had to go look up the names. I’m too young to have grown up with a lot of them, but the name means something. It’s that “feel” piece of the Hall of Fame that stat guys hate, but I think is somewhat necessary.
For example, I think Sam’s guy has good enough numbers to get in, but he never felt like a sure-thing Hall of Famer while he was playing (or when he retired, for that matter). This guy:
Player &
.297/.408/.540, 2314 hits, 488 2B, 32 3B, 449 HR, 1517 R, 1529 RBI, 149 OPS+
always felt like a Hall of Famer, even though he’s not a ton better.
How about these two (both still active, but nearing the end of their careers, assume they retire with these stats):
Player $$
.287/.379/.531, 1801 hits, 395 2B, 362 HR, 1154 R, 1121 RBI, 133 OPS+
Special: 4 All-Star games, 6 GG’s at a premier defensive position
Player %%
.289/.411/.536, 1801 hits, 343 2B, 364 HR, 1048 R, 1183 RBI, 147 OPS+
Special: 5 All-Star games, 1 MVP
Do those guys get in as of right now?
Jan 10th, 2008
Tokyo Sox Fan
Very interesting.
I think that Player G has the wrong HR total, it should be 339.
How about Player ZZ
.356/.423/.517, 1772 hits, 307 2B, 168 3B, 54 HR, 873 R, 785 RBI, 170 OPS+
Special Consideration: 2 World Series, career cut short, gave birth to a famous quote, was the inspiration for a movie
Jan 10th, 2008
joeficarra
maybe this is the point of this post (or not??)…
Give me their positions, years, home parks, and any obvious “special details” - (won his MVP in a strike year, or in the mid-60’s as a pitcher, or as a hitter in the mid-90’s).
Otherwise, anyone I vote for is meaningless…Context, people, Context…
This IS the job of the HOF voters. And this is where they seem to invariably fail (particularly the left-over voters who never get cycled off…get the right to vote, and never lose it! Sweet, its like 99-year-olds driving in Florida…)
Jan 10th, 2008
DosCarlos
C, M, N, and Q are the only ones who I think have strong HOF cases, based solely on the information given. Given more info (position, length of career, etc.) I might expand that list a bit. Of course, I’m pretty certain of the identities of those four players, and I would not vote for N or Q based on unlisted information.
Jan 10th, 2008
Aaron
Before posting my list I want to remind people that when they say things like “this isn’t the hall of very good”, that doesn’t really make sense. It’s the Hall of FAME. FAME does not mean only the best of the best. It means they were famous. It’s the reason that Eddie Gaedel’s jersey is in the Hall. Now, I’m not saying let everyone in, but most of your standards are too high. I mean, only 27 players have 3000 hits, only 23 have more than 500 HR, only 46 with more than 500 2B, only 17 with more than 600 SB, only 210 that batted .300 or better for a career, and only 60 with a career OBP of over .400. So if you really want to be silly about it, how about you are only allowed to pick from these? If that fit the criteria it would be fine with me, but I don’t believe it does. Without knowing names and going solely by what is listed above, this is who I would pick, and yes MVP’s, and Gold Gloves, and All-Star appearances do count.
C F G H J K L N Q W X
And after looking up who I just voted for I’m almost ashamed at one of the picks. But only one. See if you can guess which one it is.
Jan 10th, 2008
Snowman
Yeah, I can’t do this. I don’t form my opinions off of career numbers. I prefer to see how good a guy was during his peak, how dominating he was. A guy can put up a 120 OPS+ for 15 straight seasons and have career numbers that will probably get him in, but unless he had a period of 140+ years in there I wouldn’t support him (assuming he’s at an offensive position, of course. If he’s a second baseman or shortstop the bar is lower).
Jan 10th, 2008
Eric J
Player $$ has 8 Gold Gloves, not 6.
I know this wasn’t the points of the exercise, but I had fun going through and seeing how many players I could recognize just from the descriptions. Anyone else do that?
Jan 10th, 2008
Reply to “Hall of Fame Game”