Tommy Bond

[Cowtipper]

I swore I saw a Tommy Bond thread before. But, I searched both "Tommy" and "Bond" and couldn't find one...

So, here we go.

Tommy Bond played 10 years in the big leagues, going 234-163 with a 2.31 ERA in 417 games, 386 of which he completed. He had Hall of Fame black ink with a mark of 45 - he led the league in games twice, ERA twice, wins twice, W% once, WHIP twice, H/9IP twice, BB/9IP three times, K/9IP once, IP once, strikeouts twice, GS once, CG once, shutouts three times, K/BB ratio three times and ERA+ twice. His 4.44/1 K/BB ratio is the best in big league baseball history.

He also has near-Hall of Fame grey ink, with a mark of 184 (the average Hall of Famer's is 185). Statistically, he is similar to five Hall of Famers: Clark Griffith, Joe McGinnity, Stan Coveleski, Mordecai Brown and Jack Chesbro. The other pitchers he is similar to are Will White, Charlie Buffinton, George Bradley, Babe Adams and Eddie Cicotte.

In 1877, he won the pitching Triple Crown.

He received a single vote for the Hall of Fame in 1936.

So, what do you think about Bond - Tommy Bond? Should he be in the Hall of Fame?

[Fuzzy Bear]

I swore I saw a Tommy Bond thread before. But, I searched both "Tommy" and "Bond" and couldn't find one...

So, here we go.

Tommy Bond played 10 years in the big leagues, going 234-163 with a 2.31 ERA in 417 games, 386 of which he completed. He had Hall of Fame black ink with a mark of 45 - he led the league in games twice, ERA twice, wins twice, W% once, WHIP twice, H/9IP twice, BB/9IP three times, K/9IP once, IP once, strikeouts twice, GS once, CG once, shutouts three times, K/BB ratio three times and ERA+ twice. His 4.44/1 K/BB ratio is the best in big league baseball history.

He also has near-Hall of Fame grey ink, with a mark of 184 (the average Hall of Famer's is 185). Statistically, he is similar to five Hall of Famers: Clark Griffith, Joe McGinnity, Stan Coveleski, Mordecai Brown and Jack Chesbro. The other pitchers he is similar to are Will White, Charlie Buffinton, George Bradley, Babe Adams and Eddie Cicotte.

In 1877, he won the pitching Triple Crown.

He received a single vote for the Hall of Fame in 1936.

So, what do you think about Bond - Tommy Bond? Should he be in the Hall of Fame?

The highlighted portion says it all for me. If folks who were more likely to be alive to have seen Bond play weren't impressed, they I question why a reassessment of Bond's career, over 124 years since he last played, is going to produce a significantly more positive assessment.

[SABR Matt]

No.

Not even close.

Yr Lg Off Def Pit O-M D-M P-M Wins
1877 NL 0.05 1.03 14.48 -1.5 1.6 21.8 15.56
1878 NL -0.13 0.94 13.28 -1.8 1.4 19.1 14.09
1876 NL 1.22 0.77 12.02 1.3 1.1 18.7 14.01
1879 NL 0.68 1.04 10.89 -0.3 1.5 14.2 12.61
1880 NL 0.63 0.92 4.93 -0.6 1.0 2.9 6.48
1884 UA 1.88 0.35 2.12 2.7 0.3 1.6 4.35

Yes he was very good in the early days of organized ball, but at the age of 24 (!) he became completely ineffective when the rules changed and the league began to get tougher. He's a prime example of the kind of player I dismiss. If you can't survive in the prime years of your adulthood when the league starts to get harder...you're not a hall of famer.

[jjpm74]

Yes he was very good in the early days of organized ball, but at the age of 24 (!) he became completely ineffective when the rules changed and the league began to get tougher. He's a prime example of the kind of player I dismiss. If you can't survive in the prime years of your adulthood when the league starts to get harder...you're not a hall of famer.

Pretty much agreed. When it comes to these really early pitchers, I either expect an amazing amount of production in a short amount of time (Radbourne), some kind of misc. contribution(s) (Cummings, Spalding) to the game to warrant a closer look, or some durability (Galvin, Keefe). Tommy Bond possesses none of these traits and as such is an interesting early player to discuss, but not a HOFer.

[SABR Matt]

Next on Cowtipper's list...Jim Devlin:

Yr Lg Off Def Pit O-M D-M P-M Wins
1877 NL 0.35 0.85 13.77 -1.0 1.2 19.7 14.97
1876 NL 1.88 0.74 12.08 1.9 0.9 15.9 14.70

:)

[Paul Wendt]

"folks who were more likely to be alive to have seen Bond play weren't impressed"

To have been alive at a date in the past --is that a matter of probability?

[SABR Matt]

It is when you're talking about an aggregate group of voters in the 1930s, Paul. He pitched 60 years before the first HOF vote...some of those writers may have been alive when he pitched...the probability is certainly greater than zero that a randomly selected writer from the 1930s would have been alive when he pitched...the probability of today's BBF members having been alive in 1879 - his last good season...is a firm 0. :)

[Fuzzy Bear]

"folks who were more likely to be alive to have seen Bond play weren't impressed"

To have been alive at a date in the past --is that a matter of probability?

Observers of Bond playing would have been in their seventies or eighties, if alive when the HOF opened. I grant you that. But there were some. There were others who were alive who were younger and who, at the very least, were aware of Bond's status as a major leaguer.

Black Ink: Batting - 1 (722) (Average HOFer ≈ 27) Pitching - 45 (30) (Average HOFer ≈ 40)
Gray Ink: Batting - 1 (2299) (Average HOFer ≈ 144) Pitching - 184 (52) (Average HOFer ≈ 185)
HOF Standards: Pitching - 47.0 (42) (Average HOFer ≈ 50)
HOF Monitor: Pitching - 141.5 (46) (Likely HOFer > 100)
Overall Rank in parentheses.

I give Bond some credit for doing well in Black Ink and Gray Ink, but the HOF monitor gives him credit for wins totals based on current standards. 40 wins in a season wasn't outstanding in Bond's time in the way it would be today; it might be the equivilent of a 20-win season today, but baseball, and especially pitching and catching, were much, much different in Bond's time.

[PVNICK]

I can't see holding the first HOF votes against anyone. Didn't they have only 10 players to name for pre-1900? Getting only one vote in an time when the numbers were probably not available is no disgrace. Players who have been looked on favorably here like Dahlen and Deacon White also received one vote, as did pioneers like Cal McVey and Lip Pike.

[KCGHOST]

I don't care whether the voters in 1936 saw him or not. They got it right in terms of his candidacy for the HoF.

[jjpm74]

I can't see holding the first HOF votes against anyone. Didn't they have only 10 players to name for pre-1900? Getting only one vote in an time when the numbers were probably not available is no disgrace. Players who have been looked on favorably here like Dahlen and Deacon White also received one vote, as did pioneers like Cal McVey and Lip Pike.

As far as I know, Lip Pike never received a vote in a HOF election. If he did, the NBHoFM has no record of it in their online database of balloting.

[PVNICK]

As far as I know, Lip Pike never received a vote in a HOF election. If he did, the NBHoFM has no record of it in their online database of balloting.
If wikipedia can be trusted that's where I found it.

[jjpm74]

If wikipedia can be trusted that's where I found it.


That's incorrect information that has already been removed several times. The wikipedia admins were contacted about it as well.