HoustonGM's Personal Hall of Fame

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by actionjackson

First of all congratulations on this very well balanced HoF. I'm sure a lot of effort went into it. At least 20 players at each position, almost 65 SP, 2 RP, and 2 DH. That is spectacular balance. I assume Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson are not in because of the ineligibility thing. I know they're in the Hall of Merit, but I guess you decided to cut it down to players who could've been voted into the real life HoF.

---

Correct. These are the players I would have in the Hall if I controlled it IRL. Rose and Jackson are banned, so they're out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by actionjackson

I've gotta ask about/stump for Rick Reuschel, Kenny Lofton (asked about earlier in the thread I know, but I think he belongs), Luis Tiant, David Cone, Vic Willis, Buddy Bell, Willie Randolph, Andre Dawson, Bret Saberhagen, Red Faber, Sal Bando, Kevin Appier, Wes Ferrell, and Bobby Bonds. Your HoF, your blood, sweat, and toil, but these are guys that I think are worthy. How close were they, and will you re-visit them again? Thanks again for all you do around here, even if this place isn't quite as busy as it once was.

---

Reuschel, Cone, Appier, Ferrell, and Saberhagen are all at the literal definition of borderline for me, as guys with 5-7 All Star seasons and a Cy Young award. Some pitchers just on the other side of the borderline are Kevin Brown, Whitey Ford, Stan Covelski, Nolan Ryan, Juan Marichal, and Fergie Jenkins, all of whom have a bit more bulk/slightly higher overall level of performance. Simply speaking, I like to see at least 3,000 IP, and a 125 ERA+ or so for a career of that length.

Luis Tiant and Vic Willis are a step below the above borderline players. Willis had two Cy Young seasons, but little outside of that (4 total AS seasons). Tiant's big issue was that he had major in-season durability issues during an era known for incredible workhorses. He never finished in the top 5 in his league in innings pitched. This lack of in-season bulk hurts him significantly in comparison to his peers (3 All Star seasons, 0 Cy Youngs).

Red Faber is an interesting case. He's right at the borderline but in a different fashion than the first group of pitchers. His 1920-1922 peak was legitimately amazing, with 2 Cy Youngs, but the rest of his career was marked by a similar issue as Tiant - lack of in-season bulk compared to his peers. Faber, however, provided significantly more bulk value than Tiant, at a slightly higher level as well. Upon further review, I think Faber belongs on the right side of the line, for reasons similar to other compilers like Don Sutton. Faber was consistently an above average pitcher for two decades, with little in the way of below average performance, and he tops that off with a peak where he was certainly the best pitcher in the AL for a few years, something Don Sutton, for example, can't claim.

Buddy Bell and Sal Bando are two similar third basemen in my eyes. They were consistently All Stars for the better part of a decade, but rarely the top of the class at their position. I have Bell with 7 all star seasons, but 0 times as the best third basemen in the league. Bando edges him out with 8 all star seasons and 2 times at the top of third basemen. I also tend to think that WAR slightly overrates third basemen of their era. I could easily be convinced that players like Pie Traynor and Bob Elliott belong in ahead of Bell and Bando, as they were both the top third basemen in their leagues for a half decade with some All Star seasons outside of that period. Along with Ron Cey and Larry Gardner, these six form the borderline at third base, but I have them each just on the wrong side.

I think Willie Randolph is criminally underrated overall. For 15 years, he could be counted on for a league average bat and plus defense at a premium position. I have him with 8 All Star appearances and 3 times as the top second basemen. Along with Larry Doyle and Nellie Fox, I could see going either way on him. I feel that second base is sufficiently represented, though, so I have them just on the outside.

Kenny Lofton has a very similar profile to Willie Randolph, except that I don't have him as being the best center fielder at any time during his career. Andre Dawson is similar too, except with a higher peak (twice as the best at his position). I just like to see a little more from outfielders, either in terms of being the best or in length of their career. Taking a look at similar center fielders in terms of All Star seasons.... Of the eligible players with 7-9 AS seasons (14 such players), I have exactly half of them as Hall of Famers - Larry Doby, Richie Ashburn, George Gore, Reggie Smith, Earl Averill, Duke Snider and Jimmy Wynn. Doby and Ashburn lead the pack with 9, and Doby had five seasons as the top center fielder, and Ashburn had 2 such seasons despite sharing an era and league with Willie Mays and Duke Snider. Like Doby, Gore, Smith and Averill also had at least half a decade's worth of seasons at the top of their position. Wynn is just shy with 4. Snider only had 2, but that comes with an MVP award as well. The players from that group that I have outside the Hall are Bernie Williams, Wally Berger, Cesar Cedeno, Kirby Puckett, and Chet Lemon. I think Lofton and Dawson fit more squarely in with that group than those that are inducted.

Bobby Bonds falls into a similar pack of right fielders as Lofton and Dawson do amongst center fielders. Bobby Abreu, Kiki Cuyler, Ken Singleton, Tony Oliva, Mike Tiernan, Ross Youngs and Jack Clark are similar players I have on the outside, while Gary Sheffield, Enos Slaughter, Sam Thompson, Harry Heilmann, Willie Keeler, Sammy Sosa, Tony Gwynn, Elmer Flick and King Kelly are similar players I have on the right side of the line. Like with the center fielders, those over the line have something over Bonds, like more seasons as the best right fielder, or a higher peak, or what have you.

All that being said, I'm always up for reconsidering players and nobody's ever 100% locked out of induction. And with that...

Red Faber's inducted with a White Sox cap!

Realized that the Boston Red Stockings were the same franchise as the Atlanta Braves, so I've updated Al Spalding's cap.

Interesting note - no player has ever won 3 MVPs (in my eyes) and not been a deserving Hall of Famer. Of the players with that many MVP selections, the only ones not in my Hall are Alex Rodriguez, Albert Pujols, and Mike Trout. A-Rod and Pujols are obviously locks when they're eligible. Mike Trout, though, has only played 3 full seasons... a truly historic start to his career. Likely the best start a player has ever had.

I can see a case being made for Trout in 2012, but I just don't see how you make a legitimate case for him in 2013. Look at the stats side by side, and Cabrera seems the obvious choice. Much more production in 34 less AB. http://www.baseball-reference.com/aw...13.shtml#ALmvp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cadmus2166

I can see a case being made for Trout in 2012, but I just don't see how you make a legitimate case for him in 2013. Look at the stats side by side, and Cabrera seems the obvious choice. Much more production in 34 less AB. http://www.baseball-reference.com/aw...13.shtml#ALmvp

---

Defense and baserunning.

Cabrera was the better pure hitter both years, but he was a subpar defensive third basemen and provided no value on the basepaths. Trout, on the other hand, was an above average defensive center fielder with a lot of baserunning value.

Cabrera the better hitter, Trout the better overall player.

Thanks for the long response HGM. Glad I was able to slide one in there in your HoF. Definitely not who I was expecting, but hey beggars can't be choosers amirite? That response also demonstrates to me how much work you put into this. You certainly know your sh!t, and back it up with reasoned analysis. Great stuff.

The lower rung of my Hall:

Bobby Doerr, Ken Boyer, Hughie Jennings, Charlie Keller, Jim Wynn, Dave Winfield, Red Faber, Don Sutton, Ted Lyons

Hey HGM. Couple of questions: Which WAR do you use to select your MVPs, CYAs, ROYs, ASG berths, best player at each position etc: fWAR or rWAR (B-Ref WAR)? How do you go about determining how many players belong on each All-Star Team? I ask because the roster size for the original game in 1933 was 18 players for one of the teams (can't remember which one off the top of my head), and just last year there were 40 AL players and 41 NL players. Maybe you put the top two position players in each league on, plus a certain amount of pitchers, but things sure have changed throughout history. How many players would be on a 19th century team for example? How many would be on the most recent teams? Just curious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by actionjackson

Hey HGM. Couple of questions: Which WAR do you use to select your MVPs, CYAs, ROYs, ASG berths, best player at each position etc: fWAR or rWAR (B-Ref WAR)? How do you go about determining how many players belong on each All-Star Team? I ask because the roster size for the original game in 1933 was 18 players for one of the teams (can't remember which one off the top of my head), and just last year there were 40 AL players and 41 NL players. Maybe you put the top two position players in each league on, plus a certain amount of pitchers, but things sure have changed throughout history. How many players would be on a 19th century team for example? How many would be on the most recent teams? Just curious.

---

For WAR, I looked at both Baseball-Reference and Fangraphs. If there was a clear consensus, I went with it, otherwise, I looked deeper at the individual players and made a choice myself. I also greatly favored B-R WAR when it came to pitchers, especially back further in history where FIP was much less of an indicator of a pitcher's value, IMO.

As for number of players on each All-Star team, it's roughly 2-2.5 players per team in the MLB. I started 2014 with 34 all stars, as that's the number of active players on the real life All Star team (40 and 41 include the injured players, players named to the team that opted out, etc.). That made for 68 all stars, or 2.26 per team. I kept that number up to each expansion year, and then generally took off 2 players per expansion team. For 1997, for example, I had 32 All Stars per league (64 total). I kept the numbers in each league equivalent, even though there were often times 1-2 more teams in one of the leagues.

The number of players per team generally increased slightly the further back you go in history, as I tried to construct the teams so that at least an average of 2 players per position made it, while also having at least 4 pitchers. So, for 8 team leagues like 19th century NL (for the most part), there were 20 per year, so 2.5 players per team.

Recent years tended to have 3 players per position, with 6-8 pitchers. As I just said, throughout history I tried to keep it at at least 2 players per position and at least 4 pitchers. There were also years where I deviated from the numbers per position. Sometimes, leagues had 5-6 great shortstops while only having 1 or 2 great first basemen, so I adjusted numbers a bit to fit in as many All Star caliber players I could (~4+ WAR). I always made sure to have at least 1 player per position, though. What positions got extra players sometimes deviated.

I think there was one instance of a year where I failed to include a left fielder - 1887 NL. There could have been other years, but I doubt it. 1887 was such because Hardy Richardson was the top player that played 40% or more of his games in left field, but he played 5 more games at 2B, so he made it as a 2B. George Wood was the next best left fielder, at 1.6 WAR, but I had 4 other outfielders ranked ahead of him (Sam Thompson, Jim Fogarty, King Kelly and Paul Hines - 3 RF and 1 CF), as well as a glut of excellent SS (Monte Ward, Jack Glasscock, Sam Wise, and Jack Rowe, plus Ned Williamson who failed to make the cut), so I left off Wood.

I remember Keith Olberman did a piece on Herman Long arguing that he should be in the Hall.

Looking at his offensive numbers, I was sort of meh on it. He did appear to have more power during the dead ball era and as a SS that is pretty impressive. Defensively is where he starts to pop out. Ranks 9th all time in put outs, however ranks 1st all time in errors. That tells me his range has to be really absurd for that position. What do you think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragecage

I remember Keith Olberman did a piece on Herman Long arguing that he should be in the Hall.

Looking at his offensive numbers, I was sort of meh on it. He did appear to have more power during the dead ball era and as a SS that is pretty impressive. Defensively is where he starts to pop out. Ranks 9th all time in put outs, however ranks 1st all time in errors. That tells me his range has to be really absurd for that position. What do you think?

---

I remember more recently Olberman doing a piece on Derek Jeter basically saying he is nothing more than an average player. Not worthy of hall consideration. I remember thinking man, he's citing alot of stats maybe he's correct. I remember looking closer at it and seeing just how cherry picked those were and concluding this was nothing more than a hack job to gain ratings from a shock jock. My opinion of Olbermann fell significantly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRLzkufdxGA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

I remember more recently Olberman doing a piece on Derek Jeter basically saying he is nothing more than an average player. Not worthy of hall consideration. I remember thinking man, he's citing alot of stats maybe he's correct. I remember looking closer at it and seeing just how cherry picked those were and concluding this was nothing more than a hack job to gain ratings from a shock jock. My opinion of Olbermann fell significantly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRLzkufdxGA

---

I thought Olbermann's piece on Jeter was fine. I haven't watched it since it was originally recorded (and can't currently watch it to jog my memory) but I think you're greatly twisting his argument. If I recall correctly, it was that Jeter is immensely overrated (true), isn't one of the top 5 Yankees of all time (true), was an awful defensive shortstop (true), and should not have been batting at the top of the order this year (true). I don't recall him saying that he was merely average, nor do I recall him saying that he wasn't worthy of Hall consideration. Even though everything I just said is true, Jeter is still one of the best shortstops of all time and an easy Hall of Famer. He's just more Luke Appling/Ozzie Smith/Pee Wee Reese (in terms of overall value), and less Honus Wagner/Cal Ripken/Alex Rodriguez (as the average media buffoon and fan would think).

Rage:
Herman Long isn't close to a Hall of Famer IMO. Good player, nice career, but I have him with only 3 All Star seasons and just 1 year as the best shortstop in the league. Jack Glasscock, Bill Dahlen and Hughie Jennings were the best shortstops of that era. Long isn't close to them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

I remember more recently Olberman doing a piece on Derek Jeter basically saying he is nothing more than an average player. Not worthy of hall consideration. I remember thinking man, he's citing alot of stats maybe he's correct. I remember looking closer at it and seeing just how cherry picked those were and concluding this was nothing more than a hack job to gain ratings from a shock jock. My opinion of Olbermann fell significantly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRLzkufdxGA

---

I just watched it and I feel like we watched two different videos. I didn't hear him say anything like you just said. Although he did cherry pick some stats like WAR/years played and a lot of the fielding stats he showed were affected by the fact Jeter played so many years at SS. I don't believe he was 200 x worse at defense than fricking Yuniesky Betancourt for example. But his main point was that Jeter was not the GOAT and that all the hoopla over his last games was ridiculous. Both I agree with. It's okay to think Jeter was over rated and still think he is HOF worthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichelleWie

I just watched it and I feel like we watched two different videos. I didn't hear him say anything like you just said. Although he did cherry pick some stats like WAR/years played and a lot of the fielding stats he showed were affected by the fact Jeter played so many years at SS. I don't believe he was 200 x worse at defense than fricking Yuniesky Betancourt for example. But his main point was that Jeter was not the GOAT and that all the hoopla over his last games was ridiculous. Both I agree with. It's okay to think Jeter was over rated and still think he is HOF worthy.

---

Defensive runs saved is a counting stat, so yeah, the fact that he played so much is part of why he has so many negative fielding runs - but, also, if he wasn't so bad, he just simply wouldn't have that many negative runs. It's not saying that he's X times worse than Yuniesky Betancourt any more than saying that any random slugger having X times more home runs than some other better power hitter with less at bats is saying that that random slugger is X times better... But it does highlight some important details. Look at the players being compared - they all eventually were moved off the position. That shows that players of Jeter's defensive caliber at shortstop generally do not stick at the position and that Jeter was overrated and received different treatment than similar players - even others with excellent bats (Young and Hanley).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Defensive runs saved is a counting stat, so yeah, the fact that he played so much is part of why he has so many negative fielding runs - but, also, if he wasn't so bad, he just simply wouldn't have that many negative runs. It's not saying that he's X times worse than Yuniesky Betancourt any more than saying that any random slugger having X times more home runs than some other better power hitter with less at bats is saying that that random slugger is X times better... But it does highlight some important details. Look at the players being compared - they all eventually were moved off the position. That shows that players of Jeter's defensive caliber at shortstop generally do not stick at the position and that Jeter was overrated and received different treatment than similar players - even others with excellent bats (Young and Hanley).

---

This isn't really anything new, either. IIRC, you and I have both made the argument before on this forum--maybe as long as a decade ago--that Jeter is (well, was, now I guess) over-rated as a defensive player, that whereas a lot of people saw him as a good defensive SS, he was actually below average defensively.

Caveat: I haven't heard exactly what Olberman said about Jeter--there seems to be some dispute there--so I can't comment specifically on that. Frankly, I consider Olberman a pompous jackass, and I'm not interested in what he has to say on any subject.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichelleWie

I just watched it and I feel like we watched two different videos. I didn't hear him say anything like you just said. Although he did cherry pick some stats like WAR/years played and a lot of the fielding stats he showed were affected by the fact Jeter played so many years at SS. I don't believe he was 200 x worse at defense than fricking Yuniesky Betancourt for example. But his main point was that Jeter was not the GOAT and that all the hoopla over his last games was ridiculous. Both I agree with. It's okay to think Jeter was over rated and still think he is HOF worthy.

---

i think the point of his rant, at the time of it, was entirely misleading and solely done for ratings / shock jock. He could've given the flip side to the story if he wanted to be honest and upfront. Now I'm not a Yankee fan nor am I honestly much a fan of Jeter's. I fully agree he's overrated. But I don't see how anyone can watch that video and think it's not misleading and done purposefully .

My two cents on Derek Jeter: he was an overrated HoFer. Sounds like a contradiction, but with the way everyone carries on about him, you would think he was Honus freakin' Wagner re-incarnated, and he's not even close.

HGM, another question for ya: You say you sometimes had to take just one player at various positions throughout history for your All-Star teams, due to a lack of quality at that position that year. Did you do that with catcher as well? I ask because it's the most specialized position on the field, and I would think that in reality you'd want two players for it, but of course if the object is to get the best damn players on your All-Star team in a given year, I'd wager there were some years where you had to go with just one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by actionjackson

My two cents on Derek Jeter: he was an overrated HoFer. Sounds like a contradiction, but with the way everyone carries on about him, you would think he was Honus freakin' Wagner re-incarnated, and he's not even close.

HGM, another question for ya: You say you sometimes had to take just one player at various positions throughout history for your All-Star teams, due to a lack of quality at that position that year. Did you do that with catcher as well? I ask because it's the most specialized position on the field, and I would think that in reality you'd want two players for it, but of course if the object is to get the best damn players on your All-Star team in a given year, I'd wager there were some years where you had to go with just one.

---

Basically this. Most years have at least 2 catchers, but there are certainly some where I had just one. I also tried to make sure that the All Stars did something to separate themselves from the rest of their position. For example, if there was a catcher with 4 WAR, a catcher with 2.5 WAR, and then every other catcher was bunched up around 1 or less WAR, I'd be more likely to make those top 2 catchers All Stars compared to a situation where the top catcher had 4 WAR, the next best had 1.3 WAR, and then there was a cluster around 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Basically this. Most years have at least 2 catchers, but there are certainly some where I had just one. I also tried to make sure that the All Stars did something to separate themselves from the rest of their position. For example, if there was a catcher with 4 WAR, a catcher with 2.5 WAR, and then every other catcher was bunched up around 1 or less WAR, I'd be more likely to make those top 2 catchers All Stars compared to a situation where the top catcher had 4 WAR, the next best had 1.3 WAR, and then there was a cluster around 1.

---

The all star game, as far as I recall, has always been played midseason with the players being chosen based upon their early season performance. If one of your goals is trying to show how your HOF would differ from MLB's, and allstar selections is something that goes into consideration for HOF entry, wouldn't it make sense to use the same timeframe when selecting allstars? If thats not one of your goals and you're simply listing your personal HOF with no relationship to MLBs or structure for their award consideration than i guess it doesn't matter. I'm of course assuming your all stars were chosen based upon a complete seasons statistics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dickay

The all star game, as far as I recall, has always been played midseason with the players being chosen based upon their early season performance. If one of your goals is trying to show how your HOF would differ from MLB's, and allstar selections is something that goes into consideration for HOF entry, wouldn't it make sense to use the same timeframe when selecting allstars? If thats not one of your goals and you're simply listing your personal HOF with no relationship to MLBs or structure for their award consideration than i guess it doesn't matter. I'm of course assuming your all stars were chosen based upon a complete seasons statistics.

---

Yes, the point was to come up with who the "All Stars" were for each individual full season. You're right that my goal is to show how my HoF differs from MLB, and that's part of the reason why I'm designating All Stars differently. I think using real life All Star selections as part of a HoF analysis is misguided, as it is often times decided just based on first half performance, plus other things that don't have anything to do with how good a player actually is (such as 'lifetime achievement' All Star selections like Derek Jeter in 2014 or Cal Ripken in 2001), and my ideal Hall of Fame is based almost purely on how much on-field value players actually provided to their team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

Basically this. Most years have at least 2 catchers, but there are certainly some where I had just one. I also tried to make sure that the All Stars did something to separate themselves from the rest of their position. For example, if there was a catcher with 4 WAR, a catcher with 2.5 WAR, and then every other catcher was bunched up around 1 or less WAR, I'd be more likely to make those top 2 catchers All Stars compared to a situation where the top catcher had 4 WAR, the next best had 1.3 WAR, and then there was a cluster around 1.

---

Thanks for the explanation. :cool:

Can you give critique about what Hall of Famers are in, but don't deserve to be for what reasons, for players like Rabbit Maranville for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ragecage

Can you give critique about what Hall of Famers are in, but don't deserve to be for what reasons, for players like Rabbit Maranville for example.

---

Maranville had a solid peak, with 5 All Star seasons, but only his 1919 rates as the best year for a shortstop. He sprinkled 4 WAR seasons randomly throughout his career, but was mostly a no-hit, good-glove shortstop for a long time. Issue is that he wasn't particularly otherworldly in the field, and his glove, too, was inconsistent. Just wasn't good enough outside of his All Star seasons to warrant selection.

I haven't yet listed all the real Hall of Famers in my spreadsheet to compare and get a definite list of who is in the real HoF but not in mine. I'll do that at some point most likely (busy with rosters currently), but will expand upon individual players if anybody asks specifically.

How about Johnny Evers and Joe Tinker? No, I'm not a sucker for the "Tinker, to Evers, to Chance" jingle. I guess Tinker only had one season where he was the best in his league and it came in the Federal League, so that's a strike against him. He looks like he was good enough for double digit all-star seasons though. As for Evers, he looks like he was best at his position four times, and has eight all-star seasons by my count. Keep in mind, I've only used BB-Ref WAR, so if I'm way off on these numbers, be gentle. Thanks in advance for your response. :cool:

Tinker is close - i have 10 all star seasons, but only 1 at the top of the league, and the overall package is just a bit underwhelming too me. He's a touch below the borderline IMO. Evers I have with 7 all star seasons and 2 as the best at his position (1907, 1908 - Claude Ritchey, Miller Huggins and Larry Doyle were the best for various stretches around Evers' career). Definitely a good player, but more along the lines of a Davey Lopes type, not a HoFer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

The new players on the 2015 ballot that have made my personal Hall of Fame:

Randy Johnson
Pedro Martinez
John Smoltz
Gary Sheffield

Johnson becomes the first player to be "inducted" with an Arizona Diamondbacks cap, and Sheffield the first with a Miami Marlins cap.

---

The new players on the 2016 ballot that have made my personal Hall of Fame:

Ken Griffey, Jr. (Seattle Mariners)
Jim Edmonds (St. Louis Cardinals)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

The new players on the 2016 ballot that have made my personal Hall of Fame:

Ken Griffey, Jr. (Seattle Mariners)
Jim Edmonds (St. Louis Cardinals)

---

The new players on the 2017 ballot that have made my personal Hall of Fame:

Vladimir Guerrero (Washington Nationals)
Ivan Rodriguez (Texas Rangers)
Manny Ramirez (Boston Red Sox)

bump to put the post back up at the top

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoustonGM

The new players on the 2017 ballot that have made my personal Hall of Fame:

Vladimir Guerrero (Washington Nationals)
Ivan Rodriguez (Texas Rangers)
Manny Ramirez (Boston Red Sox)

---

The new players on the 2018 ballot that have made my personal Hall of Fame:

Jim Thome (Cleveland Indians)
Chipper Jones (Atlanta Braves)
Scott Rolen (Philadelphia Phillies)

Good to see that you still visit these lifeless forums, HGM. I thought you had likely moved on, as it seems that everyone else has. On the other hand, still no place for Tiant in your Hall? As I may have mentioned, he's one of my personal favorites.

Jack Morris baby!!! Mr. clutch!!