Roy Thomas

[Cowtipper]

Roy Thomas played from 1899 to 1911, hitting .290 with 1537 hits, 1011 runs and 244 stolen bases. He had an OBP of .413, with is 28th best all-time. In fact, he led the league two years in a row in that category. Similarly, he also led the league in walks seven times, in plate appearances once, in runs once and in times on base six times.

Statistically, only one Hall of Famer is similar to Thomas - Miller Huggins. The other players statistically similar to Thomas are Burt Shotton, Jimmy Slagel, Topsy Hartsel, Otis Nixon, Max Flack, Juan Pierre, George Case, Patsy Dougherty and Duff Cooley.

He was fairly impressive defensively. He led the NL three times in putouts, twice in total chances per game, once in fielding and once in assists. When he retired, he held career fielding records for NL centerfielders in putouts and big league centerfielders in fielding average.

According to Bill James, he is the only regular to score three times as many as he drove in.

The Baseball Page ranks him as the 38th best centerfielder of all time.

What do you think about Roy Thomas? Should he be in the Hall of Fame?

[jjpm74]

Roy Thomas has always been a solid maybe for me.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Guys like Roy Thomas are super-subjective HOF cases. Thomas' case depends largely on how valuable his defense in CF is.

If Thomas were a middle infielder, or a third baseman, I'd be more likely to vote "yes" on him. His defense as a CF was Gold Glove caliber; his fielding percentage AND his range factors were well above league average. His career, however, was not particularly long, and his offensive peak was never all that high. His .631 career Offensive Winning Percentage (around .680 in his prime years) is not out of the question for a super defensive CF, but guys like Thomas tend to need longer careers to make the Hall at his level of offensive performance. He's a Definition D Hall of Famer; most guys at his level don't make the cut, but some do. There is some evidence that he was a unique and special enough player to make the cut, but that evidence is far from overwhelming. The best I can say is that I'm willing to be convinced.

[henrich]

4940 is his number for me, solidly in the no way category.

[Paul Wendt]

Guys like Roy Thomas are super-subjective HOF cases. Thomas' case depends largely on how valuable his defense in CF is.
Considering his whole career, not only the National League, may be another route to supporting him for the Hall of Fame. Certainly it is another route to considering him.

Roy Thomas played six seasons for the University of Pennsylvania and for the Orange Athletic Club and turned pro only after the stands at "Orange Oval"(?) burned down in 1898. He was recognized as one of baseball's best players, at least by Sporting Life, and he vindicated that judgment. He entered the major leagues as a finished player, same as Earl Averill and Wally Berger when they came over from the PCL thirty years later.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Considering his whole career, not only the National League, may be another route to supporting him for the Hall of Fame. Certainly it is another route to considering him.

Roy Thomas played six seasons for the University of Pennsylvania and for the Orange Athletic Club and turned pro only after the stands at "Orange Oval"(?) burned down in 1898. He was recognized as one of baseball's best players, at least by Sporting Life, and he vindicated that judgment. He entered the major leagues as a finished player, same as Earl Averill and Wally Berger when they came over from the PCL thirty years later.

Averill is, IMO a clear HOFer. Berger is borderline, but extremely underrated. None of this makes my decision easier, btw, but such is life.

[KCGHOST]

When you have to work as hard as some of you have to make a case for a player's candidacy it is a clear sign the guy isn't an HoFer.

[Fuzzy Bear]

When you have to work as hard as some of you have to make a case for a player's candidacy it is a clear sign the guy isn't an HoFer.

There are a number of HOFers that are legit HOFers (based on the median level of player that can normally expect induction to the HOF) that do not seem so at first glance, but are, in fact, found worthy upon further inspection.

The Tinker-Evers-Chance trio is an example of this. None of these guys, at first blush, appear to be legit HOFers; it is not unreasonable to believe that they are in the HOF solely on the basis of being immortalized by a poem. And, truly, Joe Tinker is a poor selection; he's borderline only if you (A) take into account that he's not the worst shortstop in the HOF, and (B) that he was an excellent defensive shortstop on an extremely successful team.

Frank Chance is a different case. He had an extremely short career, but he was a player-manager, and not just a player who later managed. He posted five (5) straight seasons of .700-plus OWP (.689 OWP for his career), and that's not bad for a first baseman playing in an era where defense at 1B was more critical. His legitimacy as a HOFer is something that SHOULD be examined, but not, to be sure, rejected out of hand.

Finally, there is Johnny Evers. Evers posted a .572 career OWP, with four seaons over .600 (two of them over .700!). He was the premier defensive second baseman of the day, a whiz on the DP (helping lead the NL in DPs in 1914), who won an MVP award (at a time when players could only win one award at a time). Evers was, indeed, the Bid McPhee of his day, and an offensive force in his best seasons. Of the Tinker-Evers-Chance trio, I find the case for Evers the most compelling. I believe he was one of the best defensive second basemen who ever lived, and I believe that his offensive contribution is on a par with an excellent defensive second baseman. I believe that this verdict is sustained by the opinions of Evers' contemporaries; while three (3) players were immortalized by Franklin P. Adams' poem, only Evers won an MVP, plus, Evers sustained his success outside Chicago (winning his MVP with the 1914 Boston Braves).

A Gold Glove defensive center fielder in a dead-ball era with an OWP of .631 and an OBP of over .400 for his career shouldn't be dismissed out of hand. It's not unreasonable to question the value of Thomas' skills for his time; it's also unfair to disregard a positive answer.