Hal Trosky

[Cowtipper]

Hal Trosky played only 11 seasons in the big leagues. However, in that time he hit .302 with 228 home runs, 1012 RBI, 1561 hits, and he had an OPS+ of 130. He walked 545 times and struck out only 440 times.

Never an All-Star, Trosky hit over 30 home runs three times and over 40 home runs once. From 1934 to 1939, he drove in at least 100 RBI a season, with high marks being 162, 142 and 128. He also scored over 100 runs four times and had over 200 hits twice. He hit over .333 three times as well, coming close a fourth time.

In 1934 and 1935, he led the league in games played, and in 1936 he led the league in RBI an EXBH. He appeared on many top-ten lists as well. For example, he appeared on the top-ten list for home runs six times, slugging six times, and EXBH seven times.

Statistically, Trosky is similar to only one Hall of Famer: Hack Wilson. The other players he is similar to are Wally Berger, Ted Kluszewski, Derrek Lee, Ken Williams, Dolph Camilli, Carlos Lee, Mo Vaughn, Jeff Heath and David Ortiz.

The Baseball Page ranks Trosky as the 46th best first baseman of all time.

What do you think? Should Hal Trosky be in the Hall of Fame?

[BSmile]

Another example of a great career hurt by WWII.
Of course, he also had the great misfortune of playing 1B in the AL at the same time as Gehrig, Foxx & Greenberg. Ouch! He had a great peak (in an offensively inflated era)...but not quite a HOF'er. He should always be on the short list of "greatest offensive rookie year" discussions too.

[PVNICK]

I think he had migraine issue or some other debilitating injury that foreshortened his career or at least diminished his effectiveness.

[Otis Nixon's Bodyguard]

He's a much better candidate than he's given credit for and is certainly worth debating, but he falls short in my opinion. He had a great peak, but not much else. I don't think WWII hurt him that much - he returned at age 31 and didn't really produce. Furthermore, his numbers were heavily aided by the environment he played in. Maybe he'd have a shot had he played another position, but he didn't hit enough for a 1930s first baseman with a short career.

[philipthegreat]

He had some really great seasons, especially his 1936 season but absolutely not.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The argument for Trosky is the argument for Albert Belle or Will Clark. Trosky put up a .663 OWP, and that includes two decline phase years after interuption from war service. OK, but not really better than Clarke or Belle.

One powerful argument AGAINST Trosky is that he was never selected for the All-Star team. He spent his best years behind Gehrig and Foxx, so this is a mitigating circumstance, but I can't think of a single HOFer who played his entire career from 1933 on that wasn't selected to at least ONE All-Star team.

[Calif_Eagle]

I think he had migraine issue or some other debilitating injury that foreshortened his career or at least diminished his effectiveness.

I would second this post. My understanding is Trosky retired due to debilitating migraine headaches that made facing AL pitching a daunting task. (especially in a pre-batting helmet era.) I wouldnt mind it if he was in the HOF, but I dont see him getting elected.

Theoretically, I would prefer a very elite small hall. But we dont actually have that, and havent almost since the HOF opened its doors. So, I find myself supporting "candidates" (or at least not opposing them) like Trosky, Sal Maglie, Gavvy Cravath, Cecil Travis, etc. who have extenuating circumstances that can be readily cited in their careers. Tony Oliva is another one I like for the Hall, that sort of fits in the same category. When you can name 30 or so players who are in the HOF who clearly dont belong in an "elite small Hall" then the genie is out of the bottle, the horse has left the barn and every other cliche' you want to name along those same lines applies.

[Cougar]

The queue of arguably qualified candidates is incredibly long at first base, and Trosky isn't very close to the head of the line.

[KCGHOST]

Just not enough there. Even with his fine peak he didn't garner a lot of MVP support either.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The argument for Trosky is the argument for Albert Belle or Will Clark. Trosky put up a .663 OWP, and that includes two decline phase years after interuption from war service. OK, but not really better than Clarke or Belle.

One powerful argument AGAINST Trosky is that he was never selected for the All-Star team. He spent his best years behind Gehrig and Foxx, so this is a mitigating circumstance, but I can't think of a single HOFer who played his entire career from 1933 on that wasn't selected to at least ONE All-Star team.

I should have, perhaps, mentioned a more obvious argument against Trosky: If Dick Allen is outside the HOF, why should Trosky be in?