PDA

View Full Version : BBF Mock HoF Election: 1990



DoubleX
04-03-2007, 11:33 AM
Welcome to Baseball Fever's Mock HoF Election for 1990. The goal of this project is to conduct Hall of Fame elections from 1979-2007, as if we were the BBWAA, and then compare our results to the actual BBWAA results. For the most part, we will proceed just like BBWAA does. 1979 was selected as the start date as that is when the BBWAA elections first implemented the 5% rule (though it was not always adhered to).

This post will provide three things:

1) The Format and Rules

2) A Guide for the 1990 Election

3) Some Personal Thoughts and Observations


Format and Rules
- The BBF ballot will consist of the same players that were on the BBWAA ballot, except for in instances where we have elected, dropped, or sustained on the ballot different players than the BBWAA (which will likely be quite a few).

- Voters may vote for between 0-10 candidates. A "None of the Above" option is available if you believe no one is worthy and you wish to submit a blank ballot.

- Adjusting Ballots: Anyone who votes for more than 10 candidates will have all their votes discounted unless they inform me within 48 hours of submitting their vote (or the close of the election, whichever comes first) of the mistake and which players they wish to discount. In such a situation, if I am not informed of the players to be dropped, I will discount that voter's entire ballot. If a voter habitually submits a ballot with more than 10 players, they risk having their votes discounted in all present and future elections. Otherwise, there will be no adjusting ballots after submitted, even if you forgot to vote for someone you meant to vote for or clicked on the wrong player. So please think carefully about your ballot before voting and make sure you have selected everyone you intend to vote for (up to 10).

- 75% support or greater will elect a player. Players receiving less than 5% will be dropped from all future elections (even if in reality, that player was included in future BBWAA elections). Players receiving 5% or more but less than 75% will stay on the ballot for the next election, unless that player's 15-year eligibility is over.

- The election will close exactly a week after it started. The next election might not commence for another day or two.

- IMPORTANT: There is some concern about voters defrauding this process by voting with multiple screen names. First, please don't as there is really no point and it takes the fun out of this which is to see how we come out, more than it being a heated competition to get your player elected. Nevertheless, to take precaution against the possibility of a voter abusing the process, votes will be made public, so if we see unfamiliar screen names casting similar ballots, we'll see cause for concern, and if the concern proves to be founded, some form of punitive action could follow. So basically, ONE PERSON = ONE BALLOT. Anything else is really just moronic and defeats the purpose.

- Also, in the interest of making this process as genuine as possible, I strongly urge voters to not view the results before they vote, as viewing results before voting could influence a person's votes (perhaps subconsciously).

- This thread is also meant to be a discussion thread, so please feel free to stump for and/or against players, including players that will come up for election in the following year.


1990 Guide
There are 41 candidates on the 1990 BBF ballot. Here's some information regarding the candidates:

First Timers (22)
Jim Bibby
Mike Caldwell
Bucky Dent
Roy Howell
Greg Luzinski
Tug McGraw
Jose Morales
Rick Monday
Joe Morgan
Amos Otis
Jim Palmer
Lou Piniella
Jerry Remy
Mickey Rivers
Tony Scott
Ken Singleton
Paul Splittorff
John Stearns
Champ Summers
Dick Tidrow
Mike Torrez
Bob Watson

Holdovers (19)

Player Year of Eligibility High BBF Support Previous Year’s BBF Support
Luis Aparicio 12th 70.73% (1989) 70.73%
Sal Bando 4th 19.57% (1987) 9.76%
Bobby Bonds 4th 28.26% (1987) 12.20%
Jim Bunning 14th 69.57% (1987) 43.90%
Norm Cash 11th 19.57% (1987) 12.20%
Curt Flood 14th 13.04% (1987) 7.32%
Bill Freehan 9th 41.17% (1986) 31.71%
Frank Howard 12th 27.46% (1986) 17.07%
Catfish Hunter 6th 32.69% (1985) 17.07%
Jim Kaat 2nd 21.95% (1989) 21.95%
Bill Mazeroski 13th 37.10% (1980 & 1984) 21.95%
Minnie Minoso 5th 70.73% (1989) 70.73%
Tony Oliva 9th 36.96% (1987) 12.20%
Boog Powell 8th 17.74% (1984) 7.32%
Reggie Smith 3rd 23.81% (1988) 17.07%
Gene Tenace 2nd 7.32% (1989) 7.32%
Luis Tiant 3rd 40.48% (1988) 17.07%
Joe Torre 8th 61.54% (1985) 51.22%
Jimmy Wynn 8th 34.62% (1985) 14.63%

Last Year of Eligibility
None

Penultimate Year of Eligibility
Jim Bunning
Curt Flood

Players on BBF Ballot not on BBWAA Ballot (10)
Luis Aparicio - Elected by BBWAA (1984)
Sal Bando – Dropped by BBWAA (1987)
Norm Cash – Dropped by BBWAA (1980)
Bill Freehan – Dropped by BBWAA (1982)
Frank Howard - Dropped by BBWAA (1979)
Catfish Hunter – Elected by BBWAA (1987)
Boog Powell – Dropped by BBWAA (1983)
Reggie Smith – Dropped by BBWAA (1988)
Gene Tenace – Dropped by BBWAA (1989)
Jimmy Wynn – Dropped by BBWAA (1983)

Players on BBWAA Ballot not on BBF Ballot (14)
Dick Allen – Elected by BBF (1985)
Ken Boyer – BBF Eligibility Ended (1989) – The BBWAA extended his eligibility until 1994 for reasons explained in our 1989 guide.
Orlando Cepeda - Elected by BBF (1984)
Elston Howard – Dropped by BBF (1981)
Roy Face - Dropped by BBF (1979)
Harvey Kuenn - Dropped by BBF (1979)
Fergie Jenkins – Elected by BBF (1989)
Mickey Lolich – Dropped by BBF (1985)
Sparky Lyle – Dropped by BBF (1989)
Thurman Munson – Dropped by BBF (1989)
Gaylord Perry – Elected by BBF (1989)
Vada Pinson - Dropped by BBF (1983)
Ron Santo - Elected by BBF (1980)
Maury Wills – Dropped by BBF (1989)

Actual Hall of Famers on BBF Ballot (6)
Luis Aparicio (BBWAA - 1984)
Jim Bunning (VC - 1996)
Catfish Hunter (BBWAA – 1987)
Bill Mazeroski (VC - 2001)
Joe Morgan (BBWAA – 1990)
Jim Palmer (BBWAA – 1990)

Players Elected by BBF between 1979-1989 (23)

Player BBF Election Year BBF Election Percentage Year on Ballot
Hank Aaron 1982 100.00% 1st
Dick Allen 1985 75.00% 3rd
Richie Ashburn 1979 75.41% 12th (1st for BBF)
Johnny Bench 1989 95.12 1st
Lou Brock 1988 76.19% 4th
Orlando Cepeda 1984 79.03% 5th
Don Drysdale 1983 79.03% 9th (5th for BBF)
Bob Gibson 1981 89.83% 1st
Fergie Jenkins 1989 82.93% 1st
Al Kaline 1980 90.32% 1st
Harmon Killebrew 1981 93.22% 1st
Juan Marichal 1981 79.66% 1st
Willie Mays 1979 98.36% 1st
Willie McCovey 1986 100.00% 1st
Gaylord Perry 1989 80.49% 1st
Brooks Robinson 1983 88.71% 1st
Frank Robinson 1982 100.00% 1st
Ron Santo 1980 82.26% 1st
Duke Snider 1979 83.61% 10th (1st for BBF)
Willie Stargell 1988 88.10% 1st
Hoyt Wilhelm 1979 77.05% 2nd (1st for BBF)
Billy Williams 1982 80.00% 1st
Carl Yastrzemski 1989 92.68% 1st

Players Elected by BBF by Position
Catcher (1): Johnny Bench
First Base (4): Dick Allen, Orlando Cepeda, Harmon Killebrew, Willie McCovey
Second Base (0):
Shortstop (0):
Third Base (2): Brooks Robinson, Ron Santo
Left Field (4): Lou Brock, Willie Stargell, Billy Williams, Carl Yastrzemski
Center Field (3): Richie Ashburn, Willie Mays, Duke Snider
Right Field (3): Hank Aaron, Al Kaline, Frank Robinson

Starting Pitcher (5): Don Drysdale, Bob Gibson, Fergie Jenkins, Juan Marichal, Gaylord Perry
Relief Pitcher (1): Hoyt Wilhelm

Players Elected by BBWAA between 1979-1989 (19)
Hank Aaron (1982)
Luis Aparicio (1984)
Johnny Bench (1989)
Lou Brock (1985)
Don Drysdale (1984)
Bob Gibson (1981)
Catfish Hunter (1987)
Al Kaline (1980)
Harmon Killebrew (1984)
Juan Marichal (1983)
Willie Mays (1979)
Willie McCovey (1986)
Brooks Robinson (1983)
Frank Robinson (1982)
Duke Snider (1980)
Willie Stargell (1988)
Hoyt Wilhelm (1985)
Billy Williams (1987)
Carl Yastrzemski (1989)

BBF/BBWAA Election Ratio
23:19

Players Elected by BBF but not BBWAA between 1979-1989 (6)
Dick Allen (1985)
Richie Ashburn (1979)
Orlando Cepeda (1984)
Fergie Jenkins (1989)
Gaylord Perry (1989)
Ron Santo (1980)

Players Elected by BBWAA but not BBF between 1979-1988 (2)
Luis Aparicio (1984)
Catfish Hunter (1987)

Players Dropped by BBF After 15 Years on Ballot (7)

Player Year Dropped High BBF Support
Ken Boyer 1989 33.33% (1986)
Nellie Fox 1985 67.31% (1985)
Gil Hodges 1983 27.42% (1980 & 1983)
Ted Kluszewski 1981 9.68% (1980)
Don Newcombe 1980 12.90% (1980)
Red Schoendienst 1983 25.81% (1983)
Enos Slaughter 1979 45.90% (1979)

BBF Holdovers Dropped Before Eligibility Ended (8)

Player Years on Ballot Year Dropped High BBF Support
Willie Horton 3 1988 6.52% (1987)
Elston Howard 8 (3 for BBF) 1981 11.29% (1980)
Don Larsen 7 (2 for BBF) 1980 6.56% (1979)
Sparky Lyle 2 1989 7.14% (1988)
Roger Maris 9 (4 for BBF) 1982 16.13% (1979)
Thurman Munson 9 1989 17.39% (1987)
Vada Pinson 3 1983 13.56% (1981)
Maury Wills 12 (11 for BBF) 1989 16.13% (1984)

Years in which Zero Players Elected by BBF between 1979-1988
1987

Years in which Zero Players Elected by BBWAA between 1979-1988
None

Number of Ballots Submitted in Past BBF Elections
1979: 61
1980: 62
1981: 59
1982: 55
1983: 62
1984: 62
1985: 52
1986: 51
1987: 46
1988: 42
1989: 41

Links to Past BBF Elections
1979 (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=56114&highlight=Mock+Election)
1980 (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=56470&highlight=Mock+Election)
1981 (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=56809&highlight=Mock+Election)
1982 (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=57089&highlight=Mock+Election)
1983 (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=57376)
1984 (http://www.baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=57694)
1985 (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=58020)
1986 (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=58308)
1987 (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=58590)
1988 (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=58882)
1989 (http://baseball-fever.com/showthread.php?t=59147)


Thoughts and Observations
1) Newcomers: It’s not quite last year, but it’s certainly a step up from some of those years we had in the mid 80s. This year’s class is headlined by Joe Morgan and Jim Palmer. After that, there aren’t that many players that really stand out, though there are a number that could garner some votes as well as some fan favorites. Among these players we have Ken Singleton, Greg Luzinski, Amos Otis, Bucky Dent, Bob Watson, Lou Piniella, Mickey Rivers, Rick Monday, and Tug McGraw.

2) Holdovers: Not surprisingly, with a strong incoming class in 1989, we lost trimmed down our holdover list a bit as we lost three holdovers due to lack of support (Sparky Lyle, Thurman Munson, and Maury Wills), plus Ken Boyer due to his eligibility ending. Here are some of my thoughts on some of the holdovers:
- Minnie Minoso: Minoso tied Luis Aparicio as the top vote-getter amongst holdovers last year. He cracked 70% for the first time, and in our history, we have thus far elected every player that has received at least 70% of the vote in at least one election. I really urge people to take a long hard look at Minoso. He was a complete player that did everything well and that starred for a decade despite not getting a real shot at the Majors until age 28 due to segregation. In that time, he made 7 All Star teams, won 3 Gold Gloves and likely would have won more had they been introduced earlier, was constantly a factor in the batting race, he hit for average, he got on base at a good rate, he stole bases, had some power, and was good defensively. Had he broke in earlier, there is little doubt in my mind that he’d have a Hall of Fame Major League career. There’s also the element that he was a major inspiration for Hispanic ballplayers – before there was Clemente, there was Minoso. Keeping him out, IMO, is unfairly punishing him further for the ignorance of segregation.
- Luis Aparicio: He tied Minoso for highest support among holdovers. He seems to have made a steady climb over the years, and with just four years of eligibility remaining, he might be close to enough for a final push to get him in. He’s also just one of two players the BBWAA has elected thus far that we haven’t (the other being Catfish Hunter, and I don’t envision himgetting elected anytime soon). He was also a major inspiration for Hispanic players, and I'd imagine that most Hispanic middle infielders over the years would cite Aparicio as a major influence.
- Joe Torre: He finished third in support last year and he’s consistently been in the 50-60% range. I think if you look at his offensive production and consider that it came while playing mostly catcher and 3B, and also consider the era, he seems to have a strong case to me. He has an MVP, one of the finest offensive campaigns ever by a 3Bman, was perhaps the best catcher in baseball (or at least the NL, with Bill Freehan having the strongest rival claim - another player I urge voters to take a good look at) during most of the 60s, a Gold Glove at catcher, and nine All Star selections. Seems like a pretty strong case to me.
- Jim Bunning: He took a bit of a hit last year. For several years, he appeared to be the strongest pitcher on the ballot, but that status has become diluted in recent years with the entries of pitchers like Luis Tiant, Jim Kaat, electees Fergie Jenkins and Gaylord Perry, and now Jim Palmer is on the ballot. This is his next to last year on the ballot, and with the pitching competition stronger than it was, it’s not looking too good for Bunning.
- Luis Tiant: Man did this guy take a hit from his first year. He was up over 40% after his first year and dropped all the way down to 17% last year. Like Bunning, he was probably a victim of the pitching pool suddenly getting much more competitive.
- Gene Tenace: I think Tenace is a generally underrated player, but of all the players that we’ve held over for at least a year, this one has me scratching my head the most (well maybe not quite as much as Don Larsen, though Larsen did have that WS perfect game). No question that Tenace could hit as a catcher, his career 135 OPS+ attests to that. However, he strikes me as a far cry from a Hall of Famer. The argument in favor of Tenace is that he was a very good offensive catcher. However, he played about only 8 full seasons, had just 5525 plate appearances, only twice did he catch more than 100 games in a season (plus one more 99 game season), only once more than 104, and he played 1B almost as often as he caught. I just don’t see how he had a Hall of Fame career at any position, especially catcher. To me, Thurman Munson seems more deserving as a Hall of Fame catcher than Tenace, yet he was dropped last year (I didn’t vote for Munson either). I’m not trying to tell people how to vote, just saying why I don’t see Tenace as a Hall of Famer and would ask his supporters to state his case in response.
- Sparky Lyle and Relievers: Lyle gave a little hope to relievers when he was able to stick on the ballot for a year. But that hope was probably squelched when we dropped him last year. It will be interesting to see what kind of support Rollie Fingers will get next year.

3) Positional Adjustments: Well we finally elected a catcher – Johnny Bench, but we still have given no love for middle infielders. I don’t want to accuse anyone of anything, but I think some of us are holding the offensive standards of 1B and corner OF positions to everywhere on the diamond, and that is naturally prejudicing players at other positions that feature and excel in different skill sets. I believe many of us have in the past criticized the BBWAA for being unable to properly adjust for position and recognize that at certain positions, massive offensive production just isn't the norm. Looking at our track record, it would appear that we too would deserve that same criticism as we seem to have plenty of love for sluggers but not much for players at non-slugging positions. Even the BBWAA got in Luis Aparicio by this point. I’m curious to see now what kind of support Joe Morgan gets – will he get a strong endorsement, or will he get in begrudgingly, or will he even fail to get enough support?

4) Dropped Holdovers and Yankees: I find it interesting that we’ve dropped 8 players that have held over at least once, and that the majority of them (5) are most associated with the Yankees: Elston Howard, Don Larsen, Sparky Lyle, Roger Maris, and Thurman Munson. The other three were Willie Horton, Vada Pinson, and Maury Wills. Wills especially got a tough break after surviving for 12 years on the ballot.

5) Voter Turnout: I was hopeful that with a year featuring a number of strong candidates, we would rekindle support, but we actually lost a vote last year (though the rate of attrition did slow from the previous years). Personally, I’d prefer as large a turnout as possible, but as some members have indicated, perhaps a more diminished voter pool is not necessarily such a bad thing as perhaps we’re getting more informed and enthusiastic voting this way.

6) BBF vs. BBWAA: After we had some lean years in the mid 80s, the BBWAA was rapidly catching us in the number of players elected. After last year, when for the second time we elected four players in a year, we’ve again put some distance between us and the BBWAA.

DoubleX
04-03-2007, 11:50 AM
I voted for seven players:

Luis Aparicio
Bill Freehan
Frank Howard
Minnie Minoso
Joe Morgan
Jim Palmer
Joe Torre

This is the first time I voted for Howard. I decided his hitting, and especially his power, was good enough for me and suffered a lot due to era and ballpark. I considered pulling the trigger on Reggie Smith, Jim Bunning, Luis Tiant, Jim Kaat, Bobby Bonds, and even Ken Singleton, but couldn't quite do it.

I will most likely vote for Bunning next year. I've said in the past that if there is a player that I'm really borderline on, I will vote for them if they make it to their 15th election and even if I haven't been voting for them in the previous 14 years. I did this previously with Red Schoendienst. Others that I'm not currently voting for that I might do this for in future elections include Smith, Tiant, Kaat, Bonds, and perhaps Jimmy Wynn as well.

Westlake
04-03-2007, 11:58 AM
No vote for Joe Morgan from John Shoemaker....

John Shoemaker
04-03-2007, 12:07 PM
No vote for Joe Morgan from John Shoemaker....

He just missed my list. I voted for 10. If I could have voted for 11 I would have voted for him.

I voted for: Bonds, Cash, Freehan, Howard, Hunter, Luzinski, Mazeroski, Powell, Smith , and Tiant.

DoubleX
04-03-2007, 12:11 PM
He just missed my list. I voted for 10. If I could have voted for 11 I would have voted for him.

I voted for: Bonds, Cash, Freehan, Howard, Hunter, Luzinski, Mazeroski, Powell, Smith , and Tiant.

John, I commend you for coming around on some of these players. So I was just wondering what changed your mind on Hunter, Mazeroski, and Tiant? With more diversity, you've made it a little more difficult to question your ballot. :). However, I have to ask - how is Joe Morgan lacking to you?

Erik Bedard
04-03-2007, 12:28 PM
I voted for ten, though I saw 13 as worthy:

Aparicio
Bando
Bonds
Bunning
Flood
Freehan
Mazeroski
Minoso
Torre
Wynn

I left off Morgan and Palmer for strategic reasons, and Oliva due to not having enough room.

DoubleX
04-03-2007, 12:35 PM
I left off Morgan and Palmer for strategic reasons, and Oliva due to not having enough room.

I suspect that Morgan will make it, but given our history with middle infielders, I wouldn't be suprised if we didn't elect him.

dgarza
04-03-2007, 01:02 PM
1. Joe Morgan
2. Jim Palmer
3. Tony Oliva
4. Minnie Minoso
5. Joe Torre
6. Jim Bunning
7. Luis Aparicio
8. Frank Howard
9. Bobby Bonds
10. Reggie Smith

Erik Bedard
04-03-2007, 01:08 PM
I suspect that Morgan will make it, but given our history with middle infielders, I wouldn't be suprised if we didn't elect him.

If we don't elect him this year, he'll make my ballot next year without fail.

Brooklyn
04-03-2007, 02:06 PM
I voted for Morgan and Palmer.

It is early, but I'm struggling to see how Palmer can be below 75% and Morgan be barely above it. 5 people didn't vote for Palmer, and 4 for Morgan. Do we have that many "strategic voters" out there, or do people genuinely thing they are not deserving?

538280
04-03-2007, 02:34 PM
How on earth have four people already not voted for Joe Morgan???!!!???

538280
04-03-2007, 02:36 PM
He just missed my list. I voted for 10. If I could have voted for 11 I would have voted for him.

I voted for: Bonds, Cash, Freehan, Howard, Hunter, Luzinski, Mazeroski, Powell, Smith , and Tiant.

Seriously, man, please explain how ANY of those guys (but particularly Luzinski and Mazeroski) are better than Morgan. Also why Tiant but not Palmer?

KCGHOST
04-03-2007, 02:36 PM
Morgan
Palmer
Minoso

John Shoemaker
04-03-2007, 04:35 PM
John, I commend you for co ming around on some of these players. So I was just wondering what changed your mind on Hunter, Mazeroski, and Tiant? With more diversity, you've made it a little more difficult to question your ballot. :). However, I have to ask - how is Joe Morgan lacking to you?

Is I said I would reconsider those that I thought were close to the borderline. Joe Morgan was one of those but I had to pick 10 and he just missed. It looks like 3 other people also left Joe off their list so maybe you better ask them.

As for questioning ballots I would first question the 3 that left Carl Yastrzemski off last years ballot. They must never have never been to Fenway park and seen him play. IMO it is much worse not voting for Carl than not voting for Joe.

538280
04-03-2007, 06:05 PM
Is I said I would reconsider those that I thought were close to the borderline. Joe Morgan was one of those but I had to pick 10 and he just missed. It looks like 3 other people also left Joe off their list so maybe you better ask them.

I would like them to explain their reasoning as well, though we already have heard from Erik Bedard who really does think Morgan is a HOFer but just left him off to vote for other candidates in fear they wouldn't make the 5% cut (and figuring would Morgan would be an easy first ballot inductee). My question is in what universe is Morgan a borderline HOFer? Morgan is 4th in all time in OPS+ at his position (second base). He added over 650 steals in his career and his OPS+ is very OBP heavy which makes it more valuable than one coming more from SLG. Morgan's EqA is .313 which is the 2nd highest of any 2Bman of all time which I think is a more fair representation of his offensive abilities (not that he isn't a no questions asked HOFer going by just OPS+ anyway). I would say Morgan is either the 2nd or 3rd best offensive player from second base over his career, the lowest I could possibly see you having is 4th-and that's still a no question HOFer. Defensively, Morgan was a five time Gold Glove winner.

Morgan has 512 career Win Shares which is 18th all time, among ALL players. His career TPR (67.4) is 17th all time. SABR Matt's PCA has him 17th all time as well. Morgan's complete package of being an excellent hitter with good power and super on base ability as well as a great baserunner with good fielding makes him, according any statistical metric out there, at least a top 20 player all time. His top 5 consecutive seasons by Win Shares total 197 which is the 9th best of all time-Morgan's peak season rank in the top 10 all time IMO. He's top 20 by career and his peak is even better.

Gong by more subjective criteria I think Morgan should be an easy first ballot selection as well. Morgan won two MVP awards in 1975 and 1976. He is 31st all time in career shares of the MVP vote. As I mentioned earlier he won 5 Gold Gloves. He was a 10 time All Star and he was elected by the BBWAA on the first ballot to the HOF in 1990.

The question with Morgan is whether he is one of the top 20 players of all time or not-not whether he deserves election to the HOF. To leave him off your ballot as borderline when you are instead voting for players such as Greg Luzinski, Bill Mazeroski, and Boog Powell is...well, I don't even know how to describe it. Everyone else here should be an also ran compared to Little Joe. He's the best player we'll have on these ballots IMO other than Mays, Aaron, and Bonds (if we get to Barry).


As for questioning ballots I would first question the 3 that left Carl Yastrzemski off last years ballot. They must never have never been to Fenway park and seen him play. IMO it is much worse not voting for Carl than not voting for Joe.

I would have to to totally disagree. Yaz was about the same hitter as Morgan-Morgan has a 132 OPS+ compared to Yaz's 130. However, Morgan added over 650 steals on top of that hitting (that's another 650+ bases), and played a GG second base. Yaz is giving up a lot to Joe on the basepaths and while he was an excellent left fielder, Morgan was playing second base, a position which carries a lot more defensive importance than LF. Morgan doens't trade anything to Yaz-Yaz wasn't a better hitter, and he was a far worse baserunner and a significantly worse defender. Morgan is ostensibly superior to Yaz-and I am a big Yaz fan.

Westlake
04-03-2007, 06:11 PM
Is I said I would reconsider those that I thought were close to the borderline. Joe Morgan was one of those but I had to pick 10 and he just missed. It looks like 3 other people also left Joe off their list so maybe you better ask them.

As for questioning ballots I would first question the 3 that left Carl Yastrzemski off last years ballot. They must never have never been to Fenway park and seen him play. IMO it is much worse not voting for Carl than not voting for Joe.

You aren't answering the question though. You're just telling us to ask the others. Why dont you tell us why those other guys you voted for are more deserving than Morgan?

BoSox Rule
04-03-2007, 06:13 PM
I didn't vote for Morgan. Didn't see him. Add my vote?

dgarza
04-03-2007, 06:19 PM
Why dont you tell us why those other guys you voted for are more deserving than Morgan?

They hit more HRs. It's just that simple.

AstrosFan
04-03-2007, 06:32 PM
Glad to see Morgan is back over 75%. It wouldn't be nice to give Chris a fatal coronary at such a young age.

2Chance
04-03-2007, 07:14 PM
Clearly, the class of the newly eligibles are Morgan and Palmer.
They are also the only new guys on my ballot; the rest are returning after a brief respite.

Aparicio
Bando
Bunning
Freehan
Mazeroski
Minoso
Morgan
Palmer
Torre
Wynn

John Shoemaker
04-03-2007, 08:03 PM
They hit more HRs. It's just that simple.

I voted for Mazeroski - he hit 138 homeruns. Morgan hit 268. How is that more?

DoubleX
04-03-2007, 08:29 PM
I didn't vote for Morgan. Didn't see him. Add my vote?

Can't do it. It's an unfortunate part of the process, but no amending votes after the fact. Honest mistakes happen, but I don't want to start a policy of allowing people to retroactively change their vote.

DoubleX
04-03-2007, 08:32 PM
I would have to to totally disagree. Yaz was about the same hitter as Morgan-Morgan has a 132 OPS+ compared to Yaz's 130. However, Morgan added over 650 steals on top of that hitting (that's another 650+ bases), and played a GG second base. Yaz is giving up a lot to Joe on the basepaths and while he was an excellent left fielder, Morgan was playing second base, a position which carries a lot more defensive importance than LF. Morgan doens't trade anything to Yaz-Yaz wasn't a better hitter, and he was a far worse baserunner and a significantly worse defender. Morgan is ostensibly superior to Yaz-and I am a big Yaz fan.

Agreed. Yaz was a tremendous player. I have him around 30th all time, but Morgan was better and more valuable. One of the things that really bugs me about Yaz (but obviously not that much if I have him around 30th) is the home/away splits. The difference is pretty big - .905 home OPS and .779 away OPS.

DoubleX
04-04-2007, 01:35 PM
Sockeye voted for "None of the Above" which is fine, but why do you feel that Joe Morgan and Jim Palmer are not deserving? Morgan won two MVPs, which is no small feat, especially for a 2Bman, and Palmer won three Cy Youngs.

Erik Bedard
04-04-2007, 07:11 PM
All right, the fact that Morgan and Palmer don't at least have 90% is ridiculous. I don't think I'll vote strategically any more.

vtbub
04-06-2007, 08:17 AM
Minoso is sooooo close.

DoubleX
04-06-2007, 04:02 PM
Minoso is sooooo close.

The progress he's making is very encouraging, but I'm more amazed by the sudden support for Aparicio. It's nice to see that we can rally behind holdovers and that there is hope year in and year out (otherwise it would get kind of boring if we'd only stuck to electing first year players). I'm also hopeful that we can reverse the downward trend and pick up a few votes this year. We already have 40, so that's just one behind last year.

Looking ahead to next year...We have Rod Carew and Rollie Fingers headlining the ballot. I think Carew could get more support than Morgan because he'll attract people that put a lot of emphasis on counting numbers and will be impressed by his 3000+ hits and .328 career BA. He also has 7 batting titles, 12 top 10 finishes, an MVP, ROY, 18 All Star games (all consecutive), 353 stolen bases, and an OBP near .400.

Fingers should be interesting. If I had to guess, I don't think we'll elect for at least a few years. I think he'll need some good arguments to push him over the line.

After that we could see guys like Rusty Staub and Al Oliver hang on, the best of the rest appears to be Larry Bowa, Jerry Koosman, Mike Hargrove, Jeff Burroughs, and Oscar Gamble.

538280
04-07-2007, 07:33 AM
Looking ahead to next year...We have Rod Carew and Rollie Fingers headlining the ballot. I think Carew could get more support than Morgan because he'll attract people that put a lot of emphasis on counting numbers and will be impressed by his 3000+ hits and .328 career BA. He also has 7 batting titles, 12 top 10 finishes, an MVP, ROY, 18 All Star games (all consecutive), 353 stolen bases, and an OBP near .400.


I would wonder about the knowledge of many of the electorate if we are seriously more impressed with Carew than with Morgan. Not that I won't vote for Carew, I will, he's an easy HOFer, but he's not Morgan either. They were essentially the same in terms of hitting value, but Morgan again added over 300 more bases through steals, and he did in a much better percentage (Carew actually has more CS than Morgan despite having over 300 less SBs). Morgan also spent his whole career at second base while Carew moved to first midway through, and while he was at second Morgan also was a step up defenisvely from Carew who was somewhat erratic at 2B. Morgan also had a period in his career where he was one of the best players of all time, 1972-1976. In that time he posted a average OPS+ of around 160, stole 60 bases a year, and played a GG 2B. He had 197 Win Shares in that stretch which is the 8th or 9th I can't remember 5 year stretch of all time by WS. I'm still shocked at the lack of support Morgan is getting here. With players like Willie McCovey and Willie Stargell (Easy HOFers, don't get me wrong, just not even close to Morgan) getting over 90% support it is ridiculous IMO that Morgan can't even crack 90. That Luis Aparicio is getting only three less votes here than Morgan is even more ridiculous.

DoubleX
04-07-2007, 07:55 AM
I would wonder about the knowledge of many of the electorate if we are seriously more impressed with Carew than with Morgan. Not that I won't vote for Carew, I will, he's an easy HOFer, but he's not Morgan either. They were essentially the same in terms of hitting value, but Morgan again added over 300 more bases through steals, and he did in a much better percentage (Carew actually has more CS than Morgan despite having over 300 less SBs). Morgan also spent his whole career at second base while Carew moved to first midway through, and while he was at second Morgan also was a step up defenisvely from Carew who was somewhat erratic at 2B. Morgan also had a period in his career where he was one of the best players of all time, 1972-1976. In that time he posted a average OPS+ of around 160, stole 60 bases a year, and played a GG 2B. He had 197 Win Shares in that stretch which is the 8th or 9th I can't remember 5 year stretch of all time by WS. I'm still shocked at the lack of support Morgan is getting here. With players like Willie McCovey and Willie Stargell (Easy HOFers, don't get me wrong, just not even close to Morgan) getting over 90% support it is ridiculous IMO that Morgan can't even crack 90. That Luis Aparicio is getting only three less votes here than Morgan is even more ridiculous.

I agree all around (with one minor exception). I think we have a contingent here that places a lot of weight on counting numbers and therefore lose sight of how good Morgan really was.

I don't think that Aparicio being so close to Morgan is a big deal. Those three votes amount to 8 percentage points, that's quite a bit, and Aparicio has been on the ballot for years, so this is the product of a buildup. Aparicio struggled for several years on our ballot. He received just under 41% in his first year (1979) and was at 50% as recently as 1986. I think it would be different if this were both their first years and Morgan only had three more votes than Aparicio.

AstrosFan
04-07-2007, 11:22 AM
I went with:

Bando - Underrated because of his low BA
Bonds - Tough choice. He's pretty borderline to me.
Bunning - I don't see any reason why Drysdale should be in and he shouldn't be.
Freehan - Defines the cutoff of the Hall for catchers, in my view.
Minoso - Should have been in a long time ago. I'm pleased to see my vote put him at 75%.
Morgan - No brainer
Palmer - No brainer
Smith - See Bonds. Both will probably fall as the new group comes in.
Torre - Best eligible at his position not in.
Wynn - Best eligible at his position not in.

DoubleX
04-08-2007, 07:30 AM
I went with:

Bando - Underrated because of his low BA
Bonds - Tough choice. He's pretty borderline to me.
Bunning - I don't see any reason why Drysdale should be in and he shouldn't be.
Freehan - Defines the cutoff of the Hall for catchers, in my view.
Minoso - Should have been in a long time ago. I'm pleased to see my vote put him at 75%.
Morgan - No brainer
Palmer - No brainer
Smith - See Bonds. Both will probably fall as the new group comes in.
Torre - Best eligible at his position not in.
Wynn - Best eligible at his position not in.

I pretty much agree with your assessments of each player, but it's not enough for me to vote for them. Bando is underrated but he couldn't quite cross the border for me. Bonds is pretty borderline, but he's on the other side for me, same with Smith. I too think that Freehan is probably the line for catchers, but I might have to reconsider when we get to Lance Parrish. Minoso should have been in a long time ago. Morgan and Palmer are no brainers. Torre is the best eligibile at his position and should be in. Wynn might very well be the best at his position not in, but I'm not that eager to put him in.

But my question for you is on Bunning. You said that if Drysdale is in that Bunning should be. Fair enough - care to make your point for Bunning in comparison to Drysdale? Bunning only has a few years left so now would be the time to try to make a push (I will likely vote for Bunning next year).

jalbright
04-08-2007, 08:03 AM
I'll give you what I have in my musings thread for the case for Bunning:

Jim Bunning

He was a 7 time all star and had the fifth highest total of win shares of all pitchers in the 1960's. He's 54th in black ink, 29th in gray ink and 60th in HOF standards.

He was in the top 5 in ERA six times, the top 5 in wins six times (leading once), the top 5 in strikeouts 11 times, the top 4 in WHIP seven times and the top five in strikeout to walk ratio 11 times. He is 44th in career shutouts and 15th in career strikeouts.

I'll add this fine analysis by AG2004:


1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?

No.

2. Was he the best player on his team?

He was the best pitcher on the Tigers in the 1957 and 1960 seasons, and best in the 1960-62 stretch. He was the best pitcher on the Phillies every season from 1964 through 1967.

3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?

He led all major league pitchers in win shares in 1957 and 1967, and led the AL in win shares in 1960. Although he finished third among NL pitchers in win shares in both 1965 and 1966, he had more win shares than any AL pitcher in both of those years.

4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?

No. With the exception of 1964, his teams were far out of contention. That year, he was 19-4 with two weeks left in the season. But Gene Mauch only gave him two days’ rest between starts for those final two weeks, and he finished 19-8.

5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?

Yes. He lasted until the age of 39.

6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?

I don’t know if he is. It depends on how you compare pitchers with position players.

7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?

By similarity scores: Mickey Lolich, Luis Tiant, Rick Reuschel, Jerry Koosman, Catfish Hunter, Jim Perry, Don Drysdale, Hooks Dauss, Jerry Reuss, Billy Pierce. Two are in Cooperstown, but none in the BBFHOF.

By career win shares, contemporary pitchers: Jim Kaat 268, Juan Marichal 263, Whitey Ford 261, Don Drysdale 258, BUNNING 257. This is very good company.

By best three seasons: Juan Marichal 92, BUNNING 83, Don Drysdale 78. Again, this is generally good company.

By best five consecutive seasons: Whitey Ford 105, BUNNING 100, Larry Jackson 99. Bunning is around the cut-off line for the BBFHOF.

8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?

Bunning’s black ink score of 28 is a borderline 55th. His gray ink mark of 216 is 30th all-time, and 31 points over that of the average Hall of Famer. He’s 60th on the HOF Standards Score list, at 42.0. So he generally meets the standards.

Bunning is in both Cooperstown and the Hall of Merit.

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

Bunning suffered from very bad luck. He led all AL pitchers in Win Shares in 1960, but went 11-14. He led all Major League pitchers in Win Shares in 1967, but finished 17-15 as he lost five 1-0 games. Given his performance on the mound and the Phillies’ typical offensive performance, he should have gone 20-11, 21-11, 25-9, and 22-12 from 1964 until 1967, but his actual record was 19-8, 19-9, 19-14, and 17-15.

10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?

He is arguably the best eligible major league pitcher who is not in the BBFHOF. He’s the highest such pitcher in Bill James’ rankings.

11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?

He led the pitchers in his league in win shares in 1957, 1960, and 1967. He was also among the major league’s top three starting pitchers in win shares in 1965 and 1966. The only year somebody voted for him for the Cy Young, however, was in 1967, when he received one vote out of twenty.

12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?

He was an All-Star in seven different seasons, which is usually a good sign for a pitcher. In win shares, he was among his league’s top four pitchers in seven different seasons. He was seventh in 1964, but his 22 win shares were only four off the league leader, and overuse over the last two weeks of the season could have cost him a spot in the top four.

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?

If he were a team’s best pitcher, that team could win the pennant. But they would need more solid players than either Detroit or Philadelphia usually provided.

14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?

He did pitch a perfect game in 1964. Also, when he retired in 1971, he was second on the all-time career strikeouts list (he’s now sixteenth on the list).

15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?

As long as you don’t consider becoming a politician a serious character flaw, yes.

CONCLUSION: Bunning is a legitimate Hall of Famer.

AstrosFan
04-08-2007, 12:37 PM
Career WS:

Bunning: 257
Drysdale: 258

Peak WS (I'm going with four best here):

Bunning: 30, 27, 26, 25
Drysdale: 27, 26, 25, 24

Career WARP3:

Bunning: 94.3
Drysdale: 100.6

Peak WARP3:

Bunning:
Drysdale: 11.2, 10.3, 9.1, 9.1
Bunning: 10.8, 9.9, 9.5, 9.5

I don't have WARP3 Cy Young awards, but Bunning shows up as deserving three WS Cy Young awards (1957, 1960, 1967), while Drysdale gets one (1964).

Based on these metrics, I see no evidence that Drysdale was a better pitcher than Bunning.

AstrosFan
04-08-2007, 12:39 PM
As for the rest of the players, I won't bother going all out to make a case. Players like Bando, Smith, Bonds all could go either way in my mind. It's not a big deal if none of them get in to me.

DoubleX
04-08-2007, 08:17 PM
As for the rest of the players, I won't bother going all out to make a case. Players like Bando, Smith, Bonds all could go either way in my mind. It's not a big deal if none of them get in to me.

I'd probably vote for those three guys and perhaps even Wynn in the Veterans Election as I take a slightly different approach between the regular election and the Veterans Election. In this election, I only vote for players I feel should be in, and thus a non-vote for a player is really a vote against them. However, there are a number of players that while I don't necessarily support for the Hall, I also wouldn't really object to their inclusion. I suppose it's the difference between actual support and indifference. So in the VC Election I vote for the players I'm indifferent about, because like I said, a non-vote is really a vote against them, and I'm not against their induction, I'm just not necessarily for it....I wonder if this makes any sense? Oh well.

RuthMayBond
04-09-2007, 06:11 AM
Geez, Palmer is having to squeak by. I know he's arguably overrated, but

Colorado Express
04-09-2007, 06:37 AM
Aparicio
Howard
Minoso
Morgan
Oliva
Palmer

STLCards2
04-09-2007, 08:22 AM
I posted this last month. Here it is again, with the hope it will sway a few people's opinions...


Jim Bunning was burried under the names of Whitey Ford, Don Drysdale, Sandy Koufax, Juan Marichal and. Bob Gibson. Bunning also pitches at the same time as the primes of Wynn and Pierce, and ran into some really good early seasons from Perry, Jenkins, Niekro and Seaver.

I think Bunning is very underrated. I think a case can be made that he was the best pitcher in his league on three different occasions: '57, '60, and '67. I also think he was a top 4-5 pitcher in '61, '64, '65, and ,'66. As mentined before, this was during one of the richest periods for pitchers in baseball history. It is well past time for Bunning to be inducted.

In the categories of IP and ERA+, Bunning finished the following

1957: 1st and 3rd

1960: 5th and 2nd

1961: 3rd and 5th

1964: 4th and 7th

1965: 6th and 6th

1966: 4th and 2nd

1967: 1st and 2nd

He also finished 2nd in IP in '59, and '62.

There were 3-4 other seasons he was well above average too.

Oh yeah, he finished in the top 2 in strikeouts 8 times, leading the league 2 or 3 times.

Remember, this was playing in the same leagues as many other HOF pitchers while playing for less than fantastic teams. In fact not one of Bunning's teams ever made postseason. I wonder what he would have done with 118 run support? How is Bunning not a (BBF) Hall of Famer again?


P.S. With Drysdale's offense and playoff success, I would put them about even.

STLCards2
04-09-2007, 08:25 AM
Geez, Palmer is having to squeak by. I know he's arguably overrated, but

The trend of undervalung pitchers which I noticed in the 2nd "year" we did this is continuing. I shouldn't be suprisprised. There are 10 or so pitchers in real life that deserve election in Cooperstown who aren't there, and most people around here have pitchers comprising only around 25% of their personal "Hall of Fames." Matter of preference I guess.

Brooklyn
04-09-2007, 09:32 AM
The trend of undervalung pitchers which I noticed in the 2nd "year" we did this is continuing. I shouldn't be suprisprised. There are 10 or so pitchers in real life that deserve election in Cooperstown who aren't there, and most people around here have pitchers comprising only around 25% of their personal "Hall of Fames." Matter of preference I guess.

What do you think the percentage should be? I personally think 25% or so sounds about right

RuthMayBond
04-09-2007, 04:32 PM
The trend of undervalung pitchers which I noticed in the 2nd "year" we did this is continuing. I shouldn't be suprisprised. There are 10 or so pitchers in real life that deserve election in Cooperstown who aren't there, and most people around here have pitchers comprising only around 25% of their personal "Hall of Fames." Matter of preference I guess.Isn't that pretty good for one position? Do they comprise 25% of the actual HOF?

jalbright
04-09-2007, 05:09 PM
There are 227 players in the HOF, depending on exactly whom you count and whom you don't (Connie Mack? Hughie Jennings? etc.) Leaving out Ruth, there are 62 guys in the HOF with significant major league pitching careers (if you include Satch Paige). There are several other Negro League pitchers who have made the HOF but were not in BB reference's list of major league players in the HOF, which means that pitchers comprise about 30% of the HOF.

Before the advent of the relief ace, for many years teams had four steady starters and eight position players, so pitchers were about 1/3 of the regular starters. Today, there are five man staffs and a relief ace, which moves that percentage even higher. In light of this, I don't think that approximately 30% of the Hall being pitchers is out of line.

Jim Albright

DoubleX
04-10-2007, 12:09 PM
1990 is over, and I'm very excited about the results for a few reasons:

1) We elected four players which I believe is the 3rd time we've done so.

2) We elected two holdovers, including a player that has been on all 12 of our ballots (Aparicio). I believe its good to to elect holdovers and it means the process here is working, IMO.

3) After a number of down years, we made a huge jump in voter turnout, going up to 51.

So here are our four new Hall of Famers:

Luis Aparicio (76.47%)
Minnie Minoso (76.47%)
Joe Morgan (88.24%)
Jim Palmer (80.39%)

Jim Bunning, in his next to last year, received the highest support among holdovers, receiving 56.86%. Joe Torre followed at 54.90%. No one else topped 35% and no holdover received less than 5%.

Among the rest of the newcomers, only Amos Otis, in a bit of surprise, IMO, was able to muster enough support to hang on the ballot (though just barely).

I should have 1991 up later today. I'd advise that any Bunning for Curt Flood supporters should come out early and state their cases for both, as both will be in their last year. I don't think Flood has much of a chance, and I'm pretty amazed he's lasted given that he's seemingly hung on by a thread annually. Bunning, however, has some hope and could get a Cepeda-boost to get in.