Mailing List

Sign up for email updates from Hot Corner Harbor any time there's a new post!

    Wednesday, December 31, 2014

    My 2015 Hall of Fame Ballot

    Once again, it’s time for me to cast my vote in the Baseball Bloggers Alliance’s Hall of Fame election. This year, they switched to a binary “Yes/No” choice for each player, rather than keeping the BBWAA’s system of a ten-person limit. That saved me the trouble of trying to decide whether to leave off the top choices to make room for the down-ballot players. So, briefly, here are my thoughts on each player.



    Rich Aurilia: I’m going to try and not resort to just Wins Above Replacement to justify my decisions, as that’s hardly the only thing I look at in my decision. But at the same time, Aurilia only managed 18.1 WAR (Baseball-Reference). That’s…pretty far off; only 20 of the Hall’s 211 players managed less than even 40 (and two of those were relievers, and another one was special case Roy Campanella, and so on).
    No

    Yes

    Craig Biggio: He should have made it in last year. 3000 hits, a 112 OPS+ that’s right around the median for Hall of Fame middle infielders (currently 113), which doesn’t even factor in that he started as a catcher, or that he hung on to get more plate appearances than all but ten men in history. 65.1 WAR, which is just above the median for middle infielders in Cooperstown (63.0).
    Yes

    Barry Bonds: Any argument against Bonds has to center around steroids, as the man was arguably the best player in baseball history. I voted for Bonds last year when he joined the ballot, and I don’t see any reason to change that this year.
    Yes

    Aaron Boone: Like with Aurilia, I feel bad just pointing to WAR. But at the same time…13.5 career WAR. At least he’ll always have the 2003 ALCS.
    No

    Tony Clark: According to Baseball-Reference, Clark has the lowest WAR on the ballot at 12.5. Yes, even lower than the relievers who didn’t reach 1000 career innings.
    No

    Roger Clemens: Again, any argument against Clemens is based on steroids, and I see no reason to take my vote for him away on an unlimited ballot.
    Yes

    Carlos Delgado: Delgado is actually tough. I wrote an article last year where I set McGriff loosely as my baseline for first basemen (more on that in a minute). How do they compare?
    McGriff: 10174 PA, 2490 H, 493 HR, 1305 BB, .284/.377/.509 line, 134 OPS+, 52.4 WAR
    Delgado: 8657 PA, 2038 H, 473 HR, 1109 BB, .280/.383/.546 line, 138 OPS+, 44.3 WAR
    That’s tough. They’re pretty close there. But McGriff’s slight edge in fielding and extra 1500 plate appearances are major edges in his favor (plus, he lost some good years to the strike, something Delgado can’t really say). I already feel like I’m stretching setting McGriff as the minimum for first basemen, and  Delgado is definitely a step down.
    No

    Jermaine Dye: A corner outfielder with a 111 OPS+ in less than 6500 at bats. 20.3 WAR. A solid career, but no.
    No

    Darin Erstad: Erstad was better than I remembered, thanks to strong defense. But even then, he still falls short. 32.3 WAR. His 93 OPS+ is only better than 6 Hall of Famers, and none of them played in as few games. Even Phil Rizzuto, who matched his 93 OPS+ and played in only seven more games, can at least fall back on missing three prime years to World War II.
    No

    Cliff Floyd: Again, better than I thought, with 25.9 career WAR. But that’s still far short of meriting Hall consideration for a corner outfielder. Also, it’s worth noting that his best 7 seasons totaled 25 WAR, meaning the other ten seasons of Floyd’s career were basically at replacement level.
    No

    Nomar Garciaparra: Man, was he good when he was healthy. His 124 OPS+ is fourth all-time for qualified shortstops, with one of the three ahead of him being Hanley Ramirez, who seems to be moving off the position for good starting in 2015. The catch is that he only had 6116 plate appearances. The only Hall shortstop with fewer was Hughie Jennings, who played from 1891 to 1918. He probably would have needed at least two more mostly-healthy seasons at that rate to get into the conversation. Still, 229 home runs and a .313/.361/.521 batting line are impressive for a shortstop. He also managed 44.2 WAR, and a Hall Rating of 90.
    No

    Brian Giles: Another player that I covered recently. Like I mentioned then, with an unlimited ballot, I’ll throw him a vote.
    Yes

    Tom Gordon: He’s an interesting hybrid starter-reliever, but I don’t know that he was good enough at either to merit induction. From 1988 to 1997, he pitched in 350 games and made all 203 of his career starts. In that time, he went 97-90 with a 4.21 ERA, 1329 strikeouts in 1548 innings, a 1.430 WHIP, a 106 ERA, and 21.7 WAR. That’s definitely below average. After then, he threw 560 more innings of 3.26 ERA (138 ERA+) with 144 saves and 599 strikeouts while totaling 13.2 WAR. I’m not sure that’s noticeably better than any of the three other relievers on the ballot, and the career as a starter isn’t enough to shift the needle very much.
    No

    Eddie Guardado: There are currently four full-time relievers in the Hall (five if we throw in Dennis Eckersley), and I find it difficult to argue that Guardado is better than any of them, or even ballot-mate Lee Smith. In only 944.2 innings, Guardado had a 109 ERA+, and only 13.3 WAR and 187 saves.
    No

    Randy Johnson: I could list facts about Randy, starting with his 4875 strikeouts, but it would be a pale imitation of the job Jonah Keri did over at Grantland last week, where he argued that The Big Unit was the greatest left-handed starter of all time.
    Yes

    Jeff Kent: I stand by what I wrote about Kent last year:
    “Kent is an interesting case. He’s the all-time leader in home runs by a second baseman with 377, and for the other common hitter milestone, he has 2461 hits. Not bad. His .290/.356/.500 line means a 123 OPS+, but unlike [Luis Gonzalez] or [Moises Alou], he actually does have some defensive value going for him.
    Well, kind of. Having that kind of production from a second baseman is always great…but Kent wasn’t exactly a great fielder. In fact, he negated almost all of his value from playing second base by being bad at it (Fangraphs has his fielding at +1.2 runs, combining the two aspects). His other benefit over the other two is that Kent had a much higher peak than either of them, with an MVP award and three other top-10 finishes. Overall, it comes out to a Hall rating of 103, 55.2 rWAR, and 56.6 fWAR. I think Kent is borderline, but his hitting makes me err on the side of putting him in. I’m not really sure why; fielding in such large sample sets is probably much more stable than I’m giving it credit for.
    Maybe part of it is assumed regression? Think of it this way: Gonzalez is a 50-win player who was mediocre at fielding, Kent is a 50-win player with atrocious fielding. I don’t know how bad Kent was at fielding, but it’s a lot easy to assume he wasn’t an extreme negative than it is to imagine that any given player wasn’t just average (given no prior knowledge). I hope that makes sense? Also, I didn’t really see Kent field, so maybe he was awful. Like I said, he’s borderline enough that I won’t be as upset if he falls off as I was about Kenny Lofton.”
    Maybe one day, I’ll change my mind. But with unlimited spots, I see no reason voting for him is wrong, even if he is borderline.
    Yes

    Edgar Martinez: My 50 Best Players Not in the Hall piece from 2012 summed it up quite nicely:
    “I think most of the problems people have with Edgar Martinez can be counted in two categories:

    1) He was “just” a designated hitter. However, since we’ve started electing AL pitchers from the DH era (and relief pitchers), I don’t think that you can argue that a DH is any more specialized than what’s already going into the Hall. Besides, Paul Molitor played DH more than anywhere else.

    2) Like Bagwell, he didn’t reach any milestones. This one is silly. Despite not hitting 500 home runs, he did manage 309 homers and 514 doubles, a .312/.418/.515 batting line that makes him one of twenty players to hit above .300/.400/.500 for his career, and a 147 OPS+ that ties him with Jim Thome, Willie McCovey, and Willie Stargell. That’s part of the reason he managed almost 70 WAR in his career. ”
    Yes

    Pedro Martinez: It’s hard to argue against Pedro in a serious way. His 154 ERA+ leads all starters with 1000 innings. 13th all-time with 3154 strikeouts.
    Yes

    Don Mattingly: Like Nomar, the peak was good, but there just isn’t enough there. The .307/.358/.471 line and 127 OPS+ are pretty good, but less good when you realize he was a first basemen. And he was a pretty good fielding first basemen, but not as good as others not in like Keith Hernandez or John Olerud. And he only managed 7722 plate appearances on top of that. Actually, let me just line these up for comparison, since I’ve advocated for both Hernandez and Olerud in the past:
    Mattingly: 7722 PA, 2153 H, 588 BB, 442 2B, 222 HR, .307/.358/.471, 127 OPS+, 33 TZR*, 42.2 WAR
    Hernandez: 8553 PA, 2182 H, 1070 BB, 426 2B, 162 HR, .296/.384/.436, 128 OPS+, 119 TZR, 60.0 WAR
    Olerud: 9063 PA, 2239 H, 1275 BB, 500 2B, 255 HR, .295/.398/.465, 129 OPS+. 97 TZR, 58.0 WAR
    I’d say both are much better, even with neither yet in.
    No

    *Total Zone Fielding Runs

    Fred McGriff: I’ve flip-flopped on McGriff in the past. The last thing I wrote about him was this piece from last January, where my conclusion was “I’d vote for him, but he’s probably my baseline for Hall of Fame first basemen, and I won’t lose sleep if he doesn’t make it”. I think that still stands today. One other interesting thing that someone brought up after I posted that article was that McGriff hit better in the postseason, with a .917 OPS. That would have only been his ninth best among his seasonal OPSes, but remember, October is a harsher hitting environment. Using my back-of-the-napkin attempt at postseason WAR, that’s about 2.1 batting runs. He loses some of that to positional adjustment and defense, but still, an extra win or more in only 50 games of postseason play is decent. It makes me feel a little better about putting him just over the borderline.
    Yes

    Mark McGwire: Obviously, he has the home runs: 583, tenth all-time. Those came at a record pace; he has a lower AB/HR rate than any player in history, at 10.61. They also give him a .588 slugging percentage, seventh in history. He also had a great eye, which gave him a .394 OBP in spite of his .263 batting average. His 163 OPS+ is tied for tenth all-time. 62.0 WAR.
    Yes

    Mike Mussina: Here’s a piece where I compare him and Curt Schilling favorably with 2014 inductee Tom Glavine. Also, as I wrote last year: “He didn’t reach either of the major pitching milestones, but he very well could have with two more seasons (270 wins, 2813 Ks). And he went out more or less on top, plus he missed time from the 1994-5 strike. His 123 ERA+ (3.68 ERA) over eighteen years is right in line with players like Juan Marichal and Bob Feller. He had six top-5 finishes in Cy Young voting as well. Also, he was a master of control: since the mound was moved back to 60 feet, 6 inches in 1893, only one player has a higher K/BB ratio (3.58) in over 3000 innings (Curt Schilling, 4.38). His Hall Rating is a solid 163. At 82.7 rWAR, he’s between Fergie Jenkins and Bob Gibson (24th). His 82.3 fWAR is between Schilling and Warren Spahn (19th)”.
    Yes

    Troy Percival: He did have 358 saves, but if we were just going on total, Lee Smith would go before him. He did have a 146 ERA+, but he only threw 708.2 innings. He was worth 17.2 WAR, 85th among relievers.
    No

    Mike Piazza: Again, the other day, I made a quick case that Piazza is the best hitting Hall of Fame catcher ever.  That’s more than enough for the Hall.
    Yes

    Tim Raines: Raines is 46th all-time in times on base, with 4076. Plus, his 808 steals rank fifth overall, and his 84.7% success rate is best of anyone with 300 attempts (even lowering the threshold to 200 only leaves him second). He has a .294/.385/.425 batting line, a 123 OPS+, and 69.1 WAR.
    Yes

    Curt Schilling: I first wrote about Schilling’s candidacy way back in January 2012, in addition to that earlier piece on him, Mussina, and Glavine.
    Yes

    Jason Schmidt: Only one starter has ever been elected to the Hall with under 2000 innings (Schmidt has 1996.1). Unfortunately, he wasn’t on Dizzy Dean’s level (131 ERA+ to 110, 42.7 WAR to 29.6), and even he was an anomaly as far as Hall choices go.
    No

    Gary Sheffield: Sheffield could hit, that’s for sure. 509 home runs, a .292/.393/.514 batting line that’s good for a 140 OPS+… Also, that OPS+ would tie for 14th among the Hall’s 44 corner outfielders. The big problem was his defense, which could, most generously, be described as “indifferent” (and would more accurately be described as “bad”). That only got him to 60.2 WAR for his career, but that would still tie him for 24th in that group. It still got him a 114 Hall Rating, though. I think he’d be a fine addition to the Hall, although there are higher priority cases out there right now.
    Yes

    Lee Smith: Smith’s biggest argument used to be that he was the all-time save leader, but Mariano Rivera (652) and Trevor Hoffman (601) have blown past his 478. But saves aren’t everything, even for relievers. Among relievers with 1000 innings, he’s ninth in ERA+ at 132. Not bad, but it could be better (plus, if you lower the inning cutoff to even 800 innings, he drops all the way down to sixteenth). His 8.73 K/9 rate is fifth among the 1000 inning bunch, and ninth in the 800-inning group. His K/BB ratio (2.57) is eleventh and sixteenth, respectively. His 1289.1 innings pitched are pretty good by the modern closer standards. I’m just not sure what to do with Smith, to be honest. He’s definitely one of the better closers not in the Hall, but I’m not really sure that we need many more. We have four modern closers already (Rollie Fingers, Goose Gossage, Bruce Sutter, and Dennis Eckersley), plus we’ll be probably be adding Rivera and Hoffman soon. Six closers for the Hall seems like a decent number, and I’m not completely sure I could argue for Smith ahead of players like Billy Wagner and Dan Quisenberry.
    No

    John Smoltz: One of the following pitching lines is Smoltz. The other two are Mike Mussina and Schilling, who I’ve already said I would vote for:
    Player 1: 270-153, 3.68 ERA, 123 ERA+, 1.192 WHIP, 3562.2 IP, 2813 K, 785 BB, 376 HR
    Player 2: 216-146, 3.46 ERA, 127 ERA+, 1.137 WHIP, 3261.0 IP, 3116 K, 711 BB, 347 HR
    Player 3: 213-155, 3.33 ERA, 125 ERA+, 1.176 WHIP, 3473.0 IP, 3084 K, 1010 BB, 288 HR
    If you can find a meaningful enough distinction in those stat lines to say that two should be in and the third shouldn’t, please feel free to share it with me, because I can’t (answer: Mussina, Schilling, Smoltz).
    Yes

    Sammy Sosa: Sosa is the one-dimensional player that everyone thinks McGwire is. Sure, he has 609 home runs and a .534 slugging percentage. But that came with a .273 average and a rather mediocre .344 on-base percentage. Even his speed, which netted him 234 stolen bases, was kind of canceled out by getting caught 107 times. In the end though, he was just so good at that one thing and not really bad at anything else. I’d vote for him, although I acknowledge he’s more borderline.
    Yes

    Alan Trammell: Trammell’s ship has probably sailed, seeing as this year is his second-to-last ballot. I feel like I compare him to Barry Larkin, who made it in his second ballot, every year, so I’ll just be lazy and link to this for this year. Larkin was a slightly better hitter and baserunner. Trammell was a better fielder played a little more. Overall, they were pretty indistinguishable.
    Yes

    Larry Walker: He wasn’t the Coors Field creation that some people like to paint him as; his OPS+, which is adjusted for home field, is 141, better than 31 out of 44 Hall of Fame corner outfielders. So it seems we can still be impressed by his .313/.400/.565 batting line and his 383 home runs. Add in that he had 230 stolen bases against only 76 times getting caught, a good glove, and a great arm, and it combines for 72.4 WAR.
    Yes


    Totaling it all up, that’s 21 yes votes and 14 no votes. There are probably a few yeses that I could be convinced to drop, but I have a hard time saying that there are any less than a dozen and a half good candidates here. Heck, I wouldn’t even begrudge someone too much for voting for a couple of the guys that I left off, especially with this unlimited ballot. Hopefully we see four or more players make it into the Hall for real this year.

    No comments:

    Post a Comment