Charlie Keller

[Cowtipper]

Charlie Keller played from 1939 to 1952, hitting .286 with 189 home runs, an OPS+ of 152 and a good BB/K ratio. An All-Star five times, he has the 34th best OBP all time, as well as the 65th best slugging percentage, 41st best OPS, 28th best OPS+ and 41st best OWP.

In 1943, he led the league in OPS. He led the league in BB in 1940 and 1943. Similarly, he also led the league in OPS+ in 1943 (seeing a trend here?). Shock, awe - he led the league in batting wins, adjusted batting runs, OWP, power speed number and AB/HR in 1943. So I guess you could say that was his best year.

None of the players most similar to him statistically are in the Hall of Fame. The players he is similar to are JD Drew, Kevin Mitchell, Al Rosen, Tommy Henrich, Gavvy Cravath, Wally Post, Bob Horner, Aubrey Huff, Jeff Heath and Gus Zernial.

The Baseball Page ranks him as the 24th best left fielder of all time. He was voted for in 10 different Hall of Fame elections, receiving as much as 6.1% of the vote.

So, what do you think? Should Charlie Keller be in the Hall of Fame?

[Domenic]

Maybe.

Charlie Keller had six excellent seasons, in which he posted OPS+'s of 143, 141, 162, 163, 168, and 159 - certainly a Hall of Fame peak. In the remainder of his career, shortened due to World War II and injuries, Keller only played in 338 games over seven seasons.

When it comes to World War II, I do not have a consistent viewpoint on how to evaluate players that participated, whether through enlistment or conscription. I honor their sacrifice, and view them as heroes, and tend to assume their production from the season or two prior to the war, and the season or two after. With Keller, this would add two seasons of tremendous production - eight years of Hall of Fame production couple with six-years of injury induced decline (although he was never really a poor player) is a Hall of Famer in my book... but I am not sure that I am willing to commit that much to Keller, given his propensity for injury, and likelihood that that may have happened earlier.

So, maybe, leaning heavily in the 'yes' direction.

[Paul Wendt]

maybe, leaning heavily in the 'yes' direction.
I agree with Domenic and my vote should stand as
"yes, leaning heavily in the 'maybe' direction".

If I believed in the Hall of Career Value as a guide for participation in Hall of Fame conversations, and thus for most participation in this forum, then the interpretation of Keller's military service would be more important. It wouldn't be possible to vote yes or even to lean yes without coming to the conclusion that Keller made some exceptional sacrifice or faced some exceptional mandate.

Without any such belief in the Hall of Career Value or any keen interest in Bronx Bombers, I am content to let others interpret his military service carefully.

[KCGHOST]

I love Charlie Keller's quality numbers but his counting numbers are so low (1085 hits, etc) that I can't possibly give him enough credit for his war years to get him into a serious discussion of being an HoFer. If he hadn't of played for Stengel's Yankees we would never propose him for the HoF.

[jjpm74]

No. Even with wartime credit, his career is too short. Had he gone on to be a successful manager or executive, I'd feel differently about him as his peak was indeed brilliant.

[DoubleX]

If he hadn't of played for Stengel's Yankees we would never propose him for the HoF.

He barely played for Stengel's Yankees. Stengel arrived in 1949 when Keller was three years removed from his last healthy and productive season. He had just 116 ABs in 1949 and returned to have 1 AB with the Yankees, his very last in baseball, in 1952.

Keller flashed a Hall of Fame bat, but between missing almost two seasons to the war and having his career curtailed due to injury, there's just not enough there. I said this in another thread, he's someone who may have benefited greatly from being able to DH.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I voted "maybe".

Keller's case is, in many ways, the exact same as Al Rosen's. Al Rosen hit a much higher peak than did Keller, so it's possible that, in the end, I'd support Rosen and not Keller when push came to shove. But the arguments for both are nearly identical. Rosen's first in line, though.

[willshad]

There's only one way to really justify putting a guy in with a career as short as Keller: if he had one of the very best peaks of all time. Keller was good, but certainly not as good a hitter as Albert belle in his prime, and Belle had a much longer career. Belle is a borderline candidate. As a hitter kellers' numbers remind me of Bobby Abreau , minus the steals. Again, Abreau has already had a longer career than Keller, and he doesnt get much support for the hall.
If Keller had been a catcher with the same numbers (almost impossible) that would be another possible reason to induct him.

[SABR Matt]

Keller's numerical record:
Yr Lg Off Def O-M D-M Wins
1942 AL 12.02 2.15 19.8 2.4 14.17
1941 AL 10.56 2.47 17.2 3.3 13.03
1946 AL 11.01 1.77 17.9 1.7 12.78
1943 AL 8.58 2.08 13.2 2.5 10.66
1940 AL 8.34 2.01 12.8 2.1 10.35
1939 AL 7.56 1.65 12.0 2.1 9.21
1947 AL 3.99 0.68 6.8 0.9 4.67
1945 AL 3.68 0.73 6.1 0.9 4.41
1948 AL 2.32 0.48 2.8 0.2 2.80
1950 AL 1.60 0.03 2.8 0.0 1.63
1949 AL 1.34 0.17 1.8 0.1 1.51
Very nice peak run there...but absolutely no tail...career marker totals place Keller 39th all time among left fielders - 114.6 offensive marker points, 25.0 defensive marker points...that's just not quite enough IMHO to get him into serious consideration.

[Fuzzy Bear]

If he hadn't of played for Stengel's Yankees we would never propose him for the HoF.


He did play for Joe McCarthy's Yankees, and they were storied enough, dontcha think?

[Paul Wendt]

Charlie Keller 1946-52
G, Gfield, PA
150, 149, 655 ; one "normal" season for reference
45, 43, 193
83, 66, 289
60, 31, 144
50 , 6 , 64
54 , 8 , 74

G - games, all roles
Gfield - fielding games, sum of all positions
(G - Gfield is the number of games played in pinch roles, an exact measure for Keller because he played only 'OF' fielding games, no mid-game switches a la Deron Johnson)

[SABR Matt]

What was the point of that post, Paul?

We all know he had essentially no playing time after 1946