Veterans Committee Ballot

[ironman]

Of the 27 players on the Veterans Ballot, who do you think are most likely to get in?

[ironman]

Here is a list of players: • Dick Allen
• Bobby Bonds
• Ken Boyer
• Rocky Colavito
• Wes Ferrell
• Curt Flood
• Joe Gordon
• Gil Hodges
• Jim Kaat
• Mickey Lolich
• Sparky Lyle
• Marty Marion
• Roger Maris
• Carl Mays
• Minnie Minoso
• Thurman Munson
• Don Newcome
• Lefty O'Doul
• Tony Oliva
• Al Oliver
• Vada Pinson
• Ron Santo
• Luis Tiant
• Joe Torre
• Cecil Travis
• Mickey Vernon
• Maury Wills

[nyykan_t]

Most likely to get in - Ron Santo.

Should be in - Ron Santo, Dick Allen, Joe Gordon, Carl Mays.

[Buzzaldrin]

I don't think Joe Gordon deserves it at all, really. Especially with such a short career. I do think that Hodges does if Santo and Allen do (which they do), numerically, Hodges and Santo are remarkably similar.

I've always liked Wes Ferrell for the hall and still do. Carl Mays had more talent than contemporaries Hoyt and Pennock, but he also was injured a lot and killed a man, so I doubt he'll ever get it, Lolich and Kaat were great workhorses but never really overwhelming enough to really deserve consideration. Being merely very good shouldn't get you in, so those two and Oliver just miss it IMO

Why won't they ever consider Indian Bob Johnson?

[Captain Cold Nose]

Santo, Hodges and Oliva usually are at the top of the list in terms of actual voting support. Santo probably has the best shot of the three.

In terms of executives, umpires and managers, Dick Williams and Doug Harvey probably stand the best chance. I'd love to see Whitey Herzog and Billy Martin get some positive support, but would not be surprised if no one on the compostie list ever gets in.

[dgarza]

In terms of executives, umpires and managers, Dick Williams and Doug Harvey probably stand the best chance.
On a personal level, I'd rather see Dick Williams make it than almost anyone else, maybe not Santo or Allen, but pretty much anyone else.

[nyykan_t]

I don't think Joe Gordon deserves it at all, really. Especially with such a short career.
Using second baseman standard and giving him war time credit, he should be in. He is the best second baseman in 40's.

[John Shoemaker]

Shoud get in: Rocky Colavito, Gil Hodges, Ron Santo and Bobby Bonds.

[KCGHOST]

No one will make it. If anyone would I would vote for Santo and Minoso.

[rkoch]

I don`t think Mays will ever get in because of his performance in the 1923 world series. See Fred Lieb; "My life in Baseball

[AlecBoy006]

Dick Allen, Ron Santo, Joe Gordon, Jim Kaat and Tony Oliva should be in amongst the players.

Dick Williams

70 Pirates
72-73 A's
80 Expos
84 Padres

Definitely a HOF'er.

[AstrosFan]

I don`t think Mays will ever get in because of his performance in the 1923 world series. See Fred Lieb; "My life in Baseball

I think it's the 1922 World Series. The Yankees won in 1923.

[Appling]

No one will make it.
I agree: no player will make it in the next VC ballot.

Tony Oliva, Joe Gordon, Ron Santo and probably Dick Allen SHOULD make it.

[hartman74]

I agree with everyone that no player will be elected on Feb. 27th. This committee has not elected anyone in 4 years. The player's statistics have remained the same.

I think the player who should be blamed for this is Bill Mazeroski. While he was a good second baseman. He hit a home run to win the 1960 World Series. His numbers are poor. Because he managed to get elected. The whole system had to be changed.

Here's hoping that someone gets elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame. Hey if the Boston Red Sox and Chicago White Sox can win World Series. Maybe a Veteran Player can be elected to the hall of fame.

[MyDogSparty]

Only Santo has a chance. I hope he makes it.

[Buzzaldrin]

Using second baseman standard and giving him war time credit, he should be in. He is the best second baseman in 40's.

Wartime credit for what? Ok, he missed two seasons (and he hit below .250 in both '43 and '46, so giving him two more of those doesn't help him much at all), but that gives him a whopping 13 total, and as both a batsman and a fielder I think he's quite overrated.

In his 11 seasons he did lead the league in assists four times, but he also led the league in errors four times. He obviously had excellent range but his hands weren't that sure, and the ONLY offensive categories he ever led the league in were strikeouts and GDP- once each, during his MVP season. That'll top a triple crown. The Yanks traded him away after a .210 season in 1946 and retained wartime hero Snuffy Strinweiss instead- who at least managed to lead the league in fielding a couple of times, which Gordon never did.

And Bobby Doerr was the best second baseman of the 40s, hands down, in the field and at bat. That's why Doerr has been in the Hall for 20 years and Gordon still isn't there.

[jalbright]

Wartime credit for what? Ok, he missed two seasons (and he hit below .250 in both '43 and '46, so giving him two more of those doesn't help him much at all), but that gives him a whopping 13 total, and as both a batsman and a fielder I think he's quite overrated.

....

And Bobby Doerr was the best second baseman of the 40s, hands down, in the field and at bat. That's why Doerr has been in the Hall for 20 years and Gordon still isn't there.

I'm not going to knock Doerr's selection to the Hall, but he's nowhere near "hands down" better than Joe Gordon. Why do I say that? Both were all-stars nine times, but Doerr had one in 1944, when Gordon was in the service. Gordon did better in MVP voting than Doerr, 1.57 MVP shares to Doerr's 0.93 (and Doerr had 0.22 in 1944, when a lot of the best ballplayers were in the military). Gordon was the Sporting News All-Star second baseman (their pick as the best in the majors) six times, Doerr twice (one of them being 1944). But the real evidence that knocks the Doerr was better than Gordon argument into a cocked hat IMO is the following from Chapter 12 in Bill James' Politics of Glory, (later renamed Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame?), in which James gives the career home/road splits of the two men:


HOME
G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB avg OBP slg
Doerr 954 3554 634 1119 246 46 145 743 465 0.315 0.395 0.532
Gordon 769 2718 422 696 112 25 119 437 358 0.256 0.346 0.447

ROAD
G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB avg OBP slg
Doerr 911 3539 460 923 135 43 78 504 344 0.261 0.327 0.389
Gordon 797 2989 492 854 152 27 134 538 401 0.279 0.367 0.482



If Doerr was truly better, how is it that on the road, in 114 less games and 493 less plate appearances, Gordon: scored more runs, had more doubles, more homers, more RBI, more walks, not to mention a higher average, higher OBP, and higher slugging percentage? Seems to me the "hands down" advantage Doerr enjoyed was his home park helped him a lot, while Gordon had to play in tough parks for his skills.

Jim Albright

[Buzzaldrin]

Perhaps hands down is a bit strong, and I retract that unfortunate choice of words. However, all-star voting and MVP selections tend not to mean a great deal to me, thanks usually to those doing the voting, and particularly from an era when the bias toward the award winner playing on a pennant winner was so strong that a guy can win two triple crowns and fail to win either award in those seasons because he didn't play in New York. I realize that Doerr had a classsic Boston home field advantage that biases his career stats, but if Gordon shouldn't be penalized for playing in NY and thus beating Williams out for the MVP and constantly receiving the benefit of the media focus, why should Doerr be penalized for being "fortunate" enough to play his home games in Boston? Do you know, by the way, how Gordon fared when he played in Fenway? That would be interesting to see.

Also, by all fielding analysis (certainly that I have access to), Doerr outfielded Gordon consistently. While Doerr was not the spiritual leader of his team, neither was Gordon for either of his teams. Doerr was also more consistent, only once after his rookie year dipping below .270, Gordon's batting was far more "hit and miss", and five of his eleven seasons produced averages of below .260

Gordon has always had more hype than Doerr, but I simply cannot see him as the better player, nor worthy of the Hall of Fame. You wrote that you don't knock Doerr's selection, but I'm curious if you think Gordon deserves to make it.

[jalbright]

You haven't met the meat of my argument, which is that Gordon was a far superior hitter. Sorry, but my source doesn't have Gordon's stats at Fenway or Doerr's at Yankee. Regardless, the difference in road records cannot be explained away by the approximately 1/7 of road games Doerr played in Yankee and the approximately 1/7 of road games Gordon played in Fenway. That is especially true in light of Gordon's superiority in counting stats on the road despite his shorter career (Doerr had about 1/7 more career road plate appearances). At the very least, I see them as equals, and that only because Doerr did have a longer career even if we give them both some break for military service. That said, I absolutely think Gordon is a Hall of Fame caliber player.

One problem is you seem too hung up on one stat, batting average--and, on the road, Gordon even bests Doerr there by a healthy margin.

Jim Albright

[CTaka]

Likely to get in given the track record of this committee: no one.

Should get in: I'd vote for Santo, Allen and Minoso.

[Buzzaldrin]

You haven't met the meat of my argument, which is that Gordon was a far superior hitter. Sorry, but my source doesn't have Gordon's stats at Fenway or Doerr's at Yankee. Regardless, the difference in road records cannot be explained away by the approximately 1/7 of road games Doerr played in Yankee and the approximately 1/7 of road games Gordon played in Fenway. That is especially true in light of Gordon's superiority in counting stats on the road despite his shorter career (Doerr had about 1/7 more career road plate appearances). At the very least, I see them as equals, and that only because Doerr did have a longer career even if we give them both some break for military service. That said, I absolutely think Gordon is a Hall of Fame caliber player.

One problem is you seem too hung up on one stat, batting average--and, on the road, Gordon even bests Doerr there by a healthy margin.

Jim Albright

I'm not so much hung up on it as looking at it first, since that's what the men in question would do, and even with modern stats like WARP and OPS+ to make us happy, it's still a base to start with, but I will address the issue.

Gordon had a good run, 39-43. In 41, his WARP was 8.8, but the other four years were all above 10, even including 43, when he hit only .249- that is a remarkable achievment. Once he came back from the war, however, he only topped seven once, in his first year with Cleveland- not particularly special. Doerr, as I said before, was a much more consistent hitter, any way you slice it, but in WARP terms alone, he too had four years above 10 (two above 11), and they came in a row. However, Doerr had seven straight seasons (42-50) above 8.0 and another above 9. Doerr wins out there. To my dismay, though, and to the joy of EQA fans everywhere, Gordon has an edge in the EQA department, but not much of one. A career edge of .288 to .280, not much of one, but still an edge to Flash, although if you simply look at BPs translated average stats, it's Doerr who has a slight edge, but only by three points, so not really worth mentioning. Their translated OBP and slugging give Gordon a slight edge, but something I did not realize- give them both career slugging marks above .500. Actually, from what I've seen, when you look in depth at their hitting stats, especially neutralized, they become remarkable similar, with Gordon having the edge in power, and Doerr having the edge in consistency.

However, I think these edges are neutralized by the fielding gap- Gordon's fielding rate is above 100 (average) for the first half of his career, but never after 1946, and surprise surprise- in his MVP season (the one where he led the league offensively in GDP and SO) it was only 96, slightly below average! He also led the league in errors that year (and DP admittedly). Doerr, on the other hand, is above 100 each and every year of his career until the final one. (this is the same Doerr who never once led the league in errors, but did five times in DP and four in fielding).

However, in fielding RAR it really becomes apparent- Gordon’s first three years and 1943 were above 40 (his 43 was a whopping 57, that’s what pushed up his WARP so high that year), but otherwise his numbers are mediocre (especially considering how good he was supposed to be), and his last four years produced a run of 14, 12, 13, and 6. Doerr had five years above 50 (versus two for Joe) with a high of 62 in 1946, and was never below 30 until his final year (after his 47 game rookie year, that is) when he still put up 18.

Basically, what I’m seeing overall is that, although Gordon, and certainly pre-war Gordon, had some more power and a bit more speed than Doerr, Bobby was the better contact hitter and by far the better fielder. Also, Gordon really didn’t have that many peak seasons, and his valleys seem to be below (and even well below) the league average, where Doerr had more peak seasons overall while his valleys were still at or above the league average for his position.

I’m still taking Doerr over Gordon by a fairly healthy margin, but I will concede that in purely hitting terms I was mistaken about Doerr’s advantage over Flash. How’s that?

[jalbright]

It's progress, but we'll have to agree to disagree over your conclusion. Fair enough?

Jim Albright

[Buzzaldrin]

It's progress, but we'll have to agree to disagree over your conclusion. Fair enough?

Jim Albright

I can live with that. Q for you- where do you think Gordon (and Doerr too, I guess) stacks up against other second sackers who played in the 40s, but didn't necessarily play the whole decade- take HOFers Herman, Schoendienst, and Robinson for starters, or even add Eddie Stanky or Danny Murtaugh to the mix.

[DoubleX]

As much as I'd like to see Santo finally make it, I almost don't want to see anyone make it in the hope that yet another futile election by the reconfigured VC will provide impetus for reconfiguring againt to facilitate election. IMO, the VC is meant as a check on the BBWAA, to put deserving players in that the BBWAA somehow missed. Of course it doesn't always work out that way, as the BBWAA has made some egregious selections, but it has also made some very good and appropriate elections, thus providing hope for players like Santo that were inexplicably not put in by the writers.

I don't see the point in having a VC that consistently won't elect anyone. Might as well not have it at all.

[jalbright]

I can live with that. Q for you- where do you think Gordon (and Doerr too, I guess) stacks up against other second sackers who played in the 40s, but didn't necessarily play the whole decade- take HOFers Herman, Schoendienst, and Robinson for starters, or even add Eddie Stanky or Danny Murtaugh to the mix.

I see only 4 2B men as deserving of the HOF who were major participants in the 40's. Subjectively, I rank them: Jackie Robinson, Billy Herman, Joe Gordon, Bobby Doerr. Schoendienst isn't far off the mark, but I see him as below it.

Jim Albright

[RBi]

Any update on this yet?

I am just wondering if anyone knows what time these votes will be announced?

[dgarza]

Any update on this yet?

I am just wondering if anyone knows what time these votes will be announced?
2PM EST .

[dgarza]

No one in from the VC this year :mad:

[RBi]

No one in from the VC this year :mad:
Santo missed by 5 votes...

What a shame that this marks 3 votes where no one got in...

[Appling]

Santo missed by 5 votes...

What a shame that this marks 3 votes where no one got in...
Maybe it is time to abandon the Veteran Committee totally.

If a player doesn't get approved after multiple ballots by the infallible BBWAA, they probably don't belong! (This seems to be the committee's opinion.)

Does anyone know the numbers -- for players only:
1. Voted in by BBWAA -- first ballot?
2. Voted in by BBWAA -- but not on first ballot?
3. Voted in later -- by VC or any other group (not by BBWAA)?

[hartman74]

I think that the Veterans Committee should be abolished and completely revamped.
The living members of the Hall of Fame were elected in part based on their statistics. They were also elected based on cronyism.

Cronyism works at least you get a player elected every year.
4 years and no one is elected that is foolish.

Ron Santo would have been elected through cronysim same with Gil Hodges.

[John Shoemaker]

I think that the Veterans Committee should be abolished and completely revamped.
The living members of the Hall of Fame were elected in part based on their statistics. They were also elected based on cronyism.

Cronyism works at least you get a player elected every year.
4 years and no one is elected that is foolish.

Ron Santo would have been elected through cronysim same with Gil Hodges.

I agree - both Ron Santo and Gil Hodges should have been elected based on their statistics - but if not let them be elected by cronysim - whatever works. They both deserve to be in the HOF.