Beltré and Brooksie
A lengthy musing about Adrian Beltre and a certain legendary third sacker….
Given Beltre’s strong hitting since 2010 (combined 137 OPS+) plus two more Gold Gloves, the Hall of Fame speculation is no longer idle stathead talk. He’s already #11 on B-R’s career WAR list among third basemen, and could move up to #7 as soon as this year. (WAR values herein are from Baseball-Reference unless noted.) Even by conventional measures, his counting stats — among 3Bs, he’s already 13th in hits, 9th in total bases, 7th in extra-base hits — plus his 4 Gold Gloves puts him within sight of HOF range, before his 34th birthday.
Which HOF-caliber third baseman’s career most resembles Beltre’s? It has to be Brooks Robinson.
And not just because a famous Oriole said so. Check out these leader boards:
WAR Defensive Runs (Rfield) by 3Bs through age 33:
| Rk | Player | Rfield | From | To | Age | G |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Brooks Robinson | 204 | 1955 | 1970 | 18-33 | 2040 |
| 2 | Adrian Beltre | 187 | 1998 | 2012 | 19-33 | 2115 |
| 3 | Buddy Bell | 184 | 1972 | 1985 | 20-33 | 1978 |
| 4 | Clete Boyer | 160 | 1955 | 1970 | 18-33 | 1695 |
| 5 | Graig Nettles | 159 | 1967 | 1978 | 22-33 | 1533 |
| 6 | Robin Ventura | 149 | 1989 | 2001 | 21-33 | 1698 |
| 7 | Scott Rolen | 138 | 1996 | 2008 | 21-33 | 1620 |
| 8 | Mike Schmidt | 116 | 1972 | 1983 | 22-33 | 1638 |
| 9 | Lee Tannehill | 113 | 1903 | 1912 | 22-31 | 1090 |
| 10 | Jimmy Collins | 113 | 1895 | 1903 | 25-33 | 1146 |
(Fangraphs has Robinson 204, Bell 187, Beltre 164, Nettles and C.Boyer 158, through age 33. Career leaders, Robinson 294, Bell 176, Beltre 163.)
Games Played at 3B through age 33:
| Rk | Player | From | To | Age | OPS+ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ron Santo | 2102 | 1960 | 1973 | 20-33 | 128 |
| 2 | Adrian Beltre | 2059 | 1998 | 2012 | 19-33 | 112 |
| 3 | Brooks Robinson | 2026 | 1955 | 1970 | 18-33 | 109 |
| 4 | Eddie Mathews | 2003 | 1952 | 1965 | 20-33 | 147 |
Now for a look at the hitting side:
OPS+ and its components
Through age 33, their OPS+ are similar — 112 Beltre, 109 Robinson — and they’re built in similar ways. Here are their slash rates compared to league rates (park-adjusted, pitchers excluded):
- Beltre …….. BA .280 vs. .264, 106% / OBP .331 vs. .333, 99% / SLG .476 vs. .422, 113%
- Robinson … BA .274 vs. .253, 108% / OBP .326 vs. .324, 101% / SLG .422 vs. .387, 109%
Both are virtually average in reaching base, and derive their positive OPS+ from slugging.
WAR Groupings
Various seasonal groupings of their WAR are very close:
- Age 24-33 combined: Beltre 52.0, Robinson 50.4
– per 162 games: Robinson 5.3, Beltre 5.2 - 3 best seasons: Beltre 23.4, Robinson 23.0
- 5 best seasons: Robinson 34.6, Beltre 34.3
- 7 best seasons: tied at 43.0
- Best 7-year run: Robinson 39.9, Beltre 36.5 (but that span does not include Beltre’s best year)
Their WAR through age 31 was very close — 48.8 to 48.1 for Beltre, but Brooks ahead per 162 games (4.9 to 4.7). Beltre had better years at 32-33, giving him an edge of 61.1-55.3 through age 33. But Robinson had a big year at 34 — 5.8 WAR (6th among AL hitters), 4th in MVP vote. If we gave Robinson that extra year in the comparison — which would give Brooks the same edge in G and PA that Beltre enjoys in the comparison through 33 — they’d come out exactly even at 61.1 WAR, and both would have 11 seasons of 3+ WAR.
(Through age 33, Fangraphs has Robinson well ahead, 73.0 to 62.8. Few players are seen more differently by the two WAR methods than Robinson: FG gives him 94.6 career WAR, while B-R gives him 72.7 WAR. It doesn’t much affect his rank on the career lists; FG has him 4th among all 3Bs, while B-R has him 6th (applying a “50% of games” standard to define who’s a 3B). Beltre looks much the same by either method: B-R says 61.1 WAR and 11th all-time, FG says 62.8 WAR and 16th (same standard).)
Aging
Will Beltre be able keep pace with Robinson? Brooks was unusually productive from 34-37, adding 16.7 WAR (4.2 per year). Just four other 3Bs ever amassed 15 WAR in that age range: Mike Schmidt (23.0), Chipper Jones (20.0), Pete Rose (17.3) and Jackie Robinson (16.9). (Rose and Jackie were not career 3Bs.)
Starting at age 33, the number of N-WAR seasons by all 3Bs:
- 5-WAR: 10, 5, 3, 2 at 36. (1 at 37, none older.)
- 3-WAR: 36, 21, 16, 8 at 36.
Aging notes for all the 50-WAR third basemen (ranked by total WAR after age 33):
- Chipper Jones (27.3 WAR after 33) stayed huge through 36 and lasted through 40 without ever falling under 2.1 WAR in a season.
- Mike Schmidt (24.2) stayed huge through age 37.
- Darrell Evans (20.3) averaged 3.1 WAR from 34-40, but moved to 1B at 36.
- Wade Boggs (19.8) from 24-33 averaged an MVP-caliber 6.8 WAR; he remained productive from 34- 38, but with a high of 4.3 WAR.
- Brooks Robinson (17.4) from 27-37 never fell below 3.1 WAR.
- George Brett (16.4) remained a fine hitter through 37, but he moved to 1B at 34.
- Graig Nettles (13.3) remained a regular 3B through age 41, but his last year over 3 WAR came at 33.
- Jimmy Collins (12.7) averaged 4.6 WAR for 34-35, then totaled 3.5 in his last three years.
- Stan Hack (11.8) was big at 35 against wartime competition, but in two more years against the big boys he totaled 4.0 WAR.
- Scott Rolen (10.6, still active) last reached 4 WAR at 31, averaged 2.6 from 32-37.
- Ron Cey (8.3) after 34 never reached 2 WAR, though he was OK through 38.
- Ken Boyer (5.8) was MVP at 33, never topped 2.4 WAR in six more years.
- Robin Ventura (5.1) had 3.4 WAR at 34, but added just 1.7 WAR in two more years.
- Sal Bando (5.0) notched 5.3 WAR at 34 but then gave some back in his last two years.
- Eddie Mathews (4.3) was still big at 33, had one more solid year but done at 36.
- Buddy Bell (4.0) at 32 had 5.8 WAR, completing a 6-year run at that level, but his last 5 years averaged less than 1 WAR.
- Home Run Baker (3.1) had 3.8 WAR at 33, not much in two more years.
- Ron Santo (-1.8) retired after 34.
And note these 3Bs who had 40+ WAR through 33 but didn’t get to 50:
- Toby Harrah (6.2) had big years at 33 (6.3 WAR) and 36 (4.0), but was done at 37.
- Matt Williams (5.0) at 33 had 3.8 WAR (and 142 RBI), totaled 1.2 in four more years.
- Bob Elliott (4.2) had 3.1 WAR at 34, totaled 1.1 in three more years.
- Heinie Groh (2.9) had 3.2 WAR at 34, barely played in three more years.
- John McGraw (0) last played regularly at 28 (a fantastic half season) and retired at 33.
Not a career 3B:
- Paul Molitor (24.3 WAR after 33, 72.5 career) moved from 3B at 33 and had several big years as a DH.
- Pete Rose (17.7 WAR after 33, 76.7 career) played 3B only from 34-37, averaging 4.3 WAR with the last of his 3-WAR seasons.
- Harmon Killebrew (16.4 after 33, 55.8 career) was a regular 3B only at age 23, 30, and 33-34, and played his last games there at 35; last reached 3 WAR at 34.
- Joe Torre (1.7 after 33, 54.2 career) was a regular 3B only at 30-31 and 34; MVP at 30 was his last big year.
Since Beltre’s glove is still earning raves, he’ll likely be able to stay at 3B for some time to come, which would help his WAR production. An example of how moving off 3B hurts WAR: Brett’s 148 OPS+ in ’79 was worth 6.9 oWAR as a 3B, but a virtual match in ’88 (149 OPS+ playing just as much) earned 5.0 oWAR as a 1B.
Let’s close out this long post with a couple more tables of third basemen since 1893:
WAR by 3Bs through age 33:
| Rk | Player | WAR/pos | From | To | Age | G | PA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Eddie Mathews | 87.6 | 1952 | 1965 | 20-33 | 2089 | 9015 |
| 2 | Mike Schmidt | 78.8 | 1972 | 1983 | 22-33 | 1638 | 6892 |
| 3 | George Brett | 71.4 | 1973 | 1986 | 20-33 | 1741 | 7479 |
| 4 | Wade Boggs | 68.5 | 1982 | 1991 | 24-33 | 1482 | 6725 |
| 5 | Ron Santo | 68.4 | 1960 | 1973 | 20-33 | 2126 | 8979 |
| 6 | Adrian Beltre | 61.1 | 1998 | 2012 | 19-33 | 2115 | 8697 |
| 7 | Buddy Bell | 57.6 | 1972 | 1985 | 20-33 | 1978 | 8315 |
| 8 | Home Run Baker | 56.4 | 1908 | 1919 | 22-33 | 1412 | 6036 |
| 9 | Scott Rolen | 56.0 | 1996 | 2008 | 21-33 | 1620 | 6847 |
| 10 | Brooks Robinson | 55.3 | 1955 | 1970 | 18-33 | 2040 | 8443 |
| 11 | Chipper Jones | 54.2 | 1993 | 2005 | 21-33 | 1651 | 7066 |
| 12 | Ken Boyer | 52.9 | 1955 | 1964 | 24-33 | 1523 | 6445 |
| 13 | Sal Bando | 52.1 | 1966 | 1977 | 22-33 | 1627 | 6751 |
| 14 | Graig Nettles | 49.5 | 1967 | 1978 | 22-33 | 1533 | 6204 |
WAR Batting Runs (Rbat) by 3Bs through age 33:
(Note that this table has been shortened by deleting ranks 15-27 and 31-47.)
| Rk | Player | Rbat | From | To | Age | G | PA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Eddie Mathews | 495 | 1952 | 1965 | 20-33 | 2089 | 9015 |
| 2 | Wade Boggs | 392 | 1982 | 1991 | 24-33 | 1482 | 6725 |
| 3 | Mike Schmidt | 385 | 1972 | 1983 | 22-33 | 1638 | 6892 |
| 4 | Chipper Jones | 369 | 1993 | 2005 | 21-33 | 1651 | 7066 |
| 5 | George Brett | 348 | 1973 | 1986 | 20-33 | 1741 | 7479 |
| 6 | Ron Santo | 301 | 1960 | 1973 | 20-33 | 2126 | 8979 |
| 7 | John McGraw | 301 | 1893 | 1906 | 20-33 | 987 | 4485 |
| 8 | Home Run Baker | 257 | 1908 | 1919 | 22-33 | 1412 | 6036 |
| 9 | David Wright | 242 | 2004 | 2012 | 21-29 | 1262 | 5453 |
| 10 | Edgar Martinez | 241 | 1987 | 1996 | 24-33 | 936 | 3911 |
| 11 | Bob Elliott | 230 | 1939 | 1950 | 22-33 | 1629 | 6912 |
| 12 | Scott Rolen | 215 | 1996 | 2008 | 21-33 | 1620 | 6847 |
| 13 | Sal Bando | 207 | 1966 | 1977 | 22-33 | 1627 | 6751 |
| 14 | Al Rosen | 201 | 1947 | 1956 | 23-32 | 1044 | 4374 |
| 28 | Adrian Beltre | 142 | 1998 | 2012 | 19-33 | 2115 | 8697 |
| 29 | Richie Hebner | 142 | 1968 | 1981 | 20-33 | 1610 | 6341 |
| 30 | Carney Lansford | 141 | 1978 | 1990 | 21-33 | 1722 | 7328 |
| 48 | Graig Nettles | 87 | 1967 | 1978 | 22-33 | 1533 | 6204 |
| 49 | Hank Thompson | 87 | 1947 | 1956 | 21-30 | 932 | 3569 |
| 50 | Brooks Robinson | 85 | 1955 | 1970 | 18-33 | 2040 | 8443 |
Ratio of Offensive to Defensive WAR (Career)
For all HOF 3Bs plus all others with 50+ WAR (ordered from lowest to highest ratio):
- Robinson, 1.1
- Beltre, 1.9
- Bell, 1.9
- Ventura, 2.2
- Collins, 2.3
- Nettles, 2.3
- Rolen, 2.4
- Schmidt, 4.9
- K.Boyer, 5.0
- Baker, 5.8
- Boggs, 6.1
- Bando, 6.7
- Santo, 7.3
- Cey, 7.8
- A-Rod, 9.2 (still needs 111 G at 3B to become a career 3B)
- Lindstrom, 9.6
- Mathews, 16.5
- Traynor, 18.9
- Kell, 20.1
- D.White, 28.0
- Hack, 36.3
- Brett, 67.0
- Chipper, negative dWAR
- Evans, negative dWAR
Only time will tell whether Beltre continues tracking the Hall’s greatest defensive third baseman. His reputation will never catch up to the legend’s, but he’s making inroads.
Subscribe to: RSS feed
Great stuff as always, John.
The big difference offensively is in counting stats, with Beltre having almost 200 more XBH through age 33 – 839 to 643. Beltre’s XBH total is already more than Robinson’s career total. As you noted, that translates into a 54 point edge in raw slugging percentage, and 35 points adjusted.
I am surprised the adjusted totals are as much as they are inasmuch as Beltre played his first twelve seasons in parks mostly known for being pitcher-friendly. However, he has certainly taken advantage of his friendly environs the past 3 seasons, almost matching or exceeding in his 30s his peak 3-year totals in doubles (115 vs. 116 in 2005-07) and HR (96 vs. 92 in 2002-04 and 2004-06).
Robby played in Memorial Stadium which was pitcher-friendly early and late in his career, and mostly neutral in mid-career. So, his most-productive years coincided with his home park becoming more hitting-friendly. I suppose the other factor is just the eras each played in, which probably accounts for most or all of the adjustment rather than home park factors.
Anyway, my question has to do with your explanation of the SLG difference between the two which is still a sizable 35 points even after adjustment. You said: “Beltre has the higher OPS+ mainly because his league numbers include a lot of DHs in place of the pitchers who hit for themselves through Robinson’s age-33 season.”. It seems like quite a leap of faith to accept this at face value. Beltre has played almost half his career in the NL, and Brooksie had the lion’s share of his PA batting 4th through 6th, which seems far enough from the pitcher’s spot not to have influenced his SLG to any appreciable degree. So, was wondering if you could please elaborate further on your statement.
Doug – I think what John is assuming with that sentence is that the calculation of OPS+ includes the pitchers’ hitting stats in the league totals. However, I’m pretty sure that’s not correct. From what I find on Baseball Reference’s website, the first step in calculating OPS+ is to remove pitcher’s hitting stats:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/about/bat_glossary.shtml
About halfway down the page is where the OPS+ explanation begins.
Doug and Ed — Thanks for catching my error in the OPS+ vs. league averages. Actually, I knew that OPS+ excluded pitchers, but I wrongly thought they were included in the league averages I posted.
I’ll just delete that sentence.
Correct, OPS+ does not include pitcher hitting. Go to any non-DH league and you will find the league average OPS+ to be << 100 because the pitchers hitting drags it down. (2012 NL average OPS+ = 94.) (Can we look up OPS+ by year, league, and position? The question is; does the average DH hit better than the average of the position players? Maybe a little, but certainly not much. So, Beltre may or may not be in a higher hitting environment because he is being compared to DH's.)
Doug re: their difference in extra-base hits: At least some of that difference just reflects changing times.
Comparing a peak year for each, first in XBH/H, then XBH/batted balls:
- In 1964, 28.2% of all hits were XBH. In 2004, 34.3% — a relative increase of 22%.
- In 1964, 8.5% of batted balls became XBH. In 2004, 11.3% — a relative increase of 33%.
Now for Robinson and Beltre through age 33:
- Robinson’s hits were 30.6% XBH, with Beltre at 37.8%, or +24%.
- Robinson’s batted balls were 9.3% XBH, with Beltre at 12.2%, or +31%.
Their head-to-head ratios are similar to the league ratios.
Good point John,
I guess because I saw Robinson play only in his later years (starting about 1969), I never perceived him as having much pop. Certainly not to the degree of Beltre. But, looking at Robinson’s prime and considering when it was, starting to look a bit closer to Adrian.
While Beltre has certainly benefited from his recent home parks, I also wonder if he hasn’t changed his approach to hitting. His walk and strikeout percentages are all under his career totals the past three years.
His career SO% is 15.0% but the past three years it’s been 12.8%, 10.1%, and 12.5%. His career BB% is 6.7% but the past three years it’s been 6.2%, 4.8%, and 5.5%. (actually it was 4.0% the year before that; so his BB% has been down for the past 4 years but his K% only the past 3). It’s actually pretty amazing that he’s decreased his K% in an era of soaring strikouts.
As for his HOF chances, who knows? The HOF has historically cruel to third basemen so I wouldn’t even want to venture a guess. As John said, Beltre will never match Robinson’s reputation. Robinson has clear leads over Beltre in MVP voting (3.69 career shares vs. 1.46), All-Star games (15 vs. 3), gold gloves (16 vs. 4), and World Series (4 vs. 1). Factors that at least some HOF voters will look at. And there’s always 2004 for voters to speculate about…
Ed, that’s an interesting point. But his SO rates might also reflect some park effects. (I’m just speculating.)
Fair point John. There probably are some differences in visibility in different parks. Though Beltre’s BB% actually dropped his last year in Seattle which might indicate that at least the drop in his BB% isn’t park related.
Beltre was noticeably pressing in Seattle as their offense got progressively weaker. In his last year he was quite out of sorts and was swinging at a lot of bad pitches for quite an extended period.
As you say Ed, one hesitates to speculate on HOF chances for 3rd basemen. That being said, Beltre could well surpass quite an array of counting stat milestones. The sabermetric-minded voter will know those counting stats should be adjusted for era, but I suspect many voters still perceive counting stats (especially milestones) without doing those adjustments.
Beltre has already passed Santo on doubles and HR, and will move past him in hits and runs in 2013, and in RBI in 2014. After the 2014 season, he has a good chance to be above 2500 hits, 500 doubles and 400 HR. And, he’ll be just 35 with probably a few more seasons to go to add to those numbers. If he’s still in positive WAR territory at 38, I think his HOF chances will be pretty good.
I think Beltre’s 2004 season still leaves questions on a lot of people’s minds. Here’s a guy who started very young, but had five full seasons under his belt coming in to 2004. He had 3400 PA, 99 HR’s and for three consecutive years had an OPS+ of under 100. Suddenly he goes nuts. 48 HR, 121 RBI, .334/.388/.629, OPS+ of 163, 9.3 WAR. He signs the monster contract with Seattle, and for his entire five years at Seattle he regresses to a solid, unspectacular bat (OPS+101) and good glove, culminating is a poor final year. Then he goes to Boston on a one year deal and turns it on again, although never approaching that absurd 2004 season. How often does a guy play twelve consecutive years of solid but unspectacular offense, (aggregate OPS+ of 104, stick in one “genius level” year smack in the middle, and then perform at a much higher level (except for 2004) after 7000 PA? I’m not saying it’s impossible, nor am I saying he juiced, but it is really odd. With the exception of Barry Bonds, who raises their game that much?
Mike L, two points:
1) It’s not clear exactly how 2004 impacts your view of Beltre’s unusual pattern. In trying to think of a player with a similar career pattern — one early spike in the middle of several OK seasons, than a late flourish — one springs to mind:
- John Olerud from 21-23 had three solid but ordinary seasons. At 24 he exploded with a 186 OPS+, but then had three more ordinary years, and the Jays gave him away to the Mets. To that point, he had six years between 111-127 OPS+, plus the one outlier. There followed three straight years all better than his 2nd-best year to date, including a 163 OPS+. His first six years after leaving Toronto averaged 136 OPS+.
Granted, Olerud’s late flourish wasn’t so long in coming as Beltre’s, but it’s still an unusual pattern.
2) Some other late bloomers:
- Cecil Cooper, 120 OPS+ through age 29, then 146 from 30-33.
- Dolph Camilli, 98 OPS+ through 28 in about 1300 PAs. (And he wasn’t great in the minors, which is why it took so long to get a shot.) From 29-35 he had a 152 OPS+.
- Paul O’Neill, 111 OPS+ through 29, then 138 from 30-35.
- Dixie Walker, 111 OPS+ through 29, then 137 for 30-35. (Wartime competition may have helped that second phase, but he continued having good years after the war.)
- Jeff Kent, 106 OPS+ through 29, then 142 for 30-34. His BA went from .269 to .307 for those periods.
These are imperfect comps, but I haven’t done a scientific search.
Seeing Camilli’s name brought to mind a story that I think I read in the BJHBA about Charlie Grimm not being very happy with whoever the Cubbies GM was at the time trading him away. But in looking at the numbers that he put up in his first 3 seasons it’s hard to say that it was a bad trade. Camilli and Hurst were both about the same age and while they had both put up pretty comparable numbers the season before the trade Hurst was coming off a string of 5 good to excellent major league seasons. And strangely enough while Camilli then went on to reel off 8 pretty outstanding seasons at the major league level Hurst went on to produce at pretty much the same level in the high minors that Camilli had been while Hurst was putting up his big numbers in the majors.
Does anyone know why Hurst fell off so badly in what you would normally expect to be his peak seasons? I can’t find any mention of an injury anywhere.
Hartvig, your memory of the Grimm/Camilli story is spot-on. It is in the BJHBA, in Camilli’s player rating passage. While the trade was of course a disaster on the field, it does seem that Grimm’s irritation with GM Bill Walker was at least as much about not being consulted on the trade.
I can’t find anything on Don Hurst’s collapse, though.
The first player I thought of was Luis Gonzalez, who had a 109 OPS+ through 4372 PAs (age 30), with a career high (prior to his age 31 season) of 123 at age 25. He then posted a 140 OPS+ in his next 5 years (1999-2003) in Arizona, one of which is, of course, his off the charts year (posted a 174 OPS+ in 2001), but his lowest seasonal OPS+ from 1999-2003 was his 125 in 2002.
I think part of what we might be missing (as a group) is that while we have a good idea about park effects and how they affect the general population of players, it is possible that specific players, when they change parks, have both a park specific change (moving from Dodger Stadium to Coors improves numbers) and a player specific change (perhaps someone moving to Fenway learns how to adapt to the Pesky pole or the Monster better than another player). While the general park effects are fairly well understood, it’s more difficult to get a read on any player specific changes because we’re looking at a single observation (the player in question). Though OPS+ should help in that regard.
So if Safeco is a bad hitter’s park in general, but effects Beltre more than others for whatever Beltre-specific reason, he could get a double bump up from moving out of Safeco – the upward spike in numbers from leaving a bad hitter’s park AND an upward spike leaving a park that was particularly bad for him. Could have been a similar situation with Gonzalez when he left Houston.
In the case of someone like Larry Walker, moving from Montreal to Colorado definitely had an effect on his raw numbers, but he had posted OPS+ numbers of 141 and 151 in Montreal (and at the end of his career he would post a 134 OPS+ in St. Louis) , and his Colorado OPS+ numbers are not that unreasonable given what he had done when he was in Montreal, so it doesn’t look like the move to Colorado had much of a “Larry Walker-specific” effect.
Further to Artie’s point, maybe Texas is just the perfect ballpark for Beltre. In his first 12 full years (before Texas), he always hit better away.
His OPS home and away (with home as a pct. of road in parentheses):
6 full years with LA:
1999 – .719/.839 (86%)
2000 – .788/.873 (90%)
2001 – .614/.814 (75%)
2002 – .654/.795 (82%)
2003 – .671/.750 (89%)
2004 – .982/1.049 (94%)
With Seattle:
2005 – .694/.736 (94%)
2006 – .778/.805 (97%)
2007 – .745/.858 (87%)
2008 – .703/.862 (82%)
2009 – .646/.717 (90%)
Boston:
2010 – .881/.953 (92%)
Texas:
2011 – 1.078/.737 (146%)
2012 – .988/.849 (116%)
John A, I’m not really sure. It was just unusual and it was a contract year and it’s stuck in the middle of an B (except for fielding) 12 year career. As to some of the others, O’Neill switched teams and switched stadiums (Bill James called the O’Neill for Roberto Kelly a “classic Yankee blunder.”) Cooper did as well, and he was going into his year 27 season when he want to the Brewers, who played him full time, whereas Boston platooned him. Cooper was very good in 1975 (OPS+ 143) for the Red Sox in 333 PA. Kent took off the second season he was with the Giants, but even his first season he finished 8th in the MVP. Camilli just looks like a slow starter-once he got going he was a superior player. None of your examples have that unexplained “hummock” in them.
I don’t know what it means. I’m not saying he shouldn’t be considered for the Hall, there are things that simply can’t be explained in any rational context, and don’t “tell” you anything.
These are all good responses, so let me refine my question a little more and tilt it away from my first question. Forget age, and forget the incredible 2004 season. Take a look at his aggregate totals through 12 years, which include the 2004 numbers: 6877 PA and an OPS+ of 105. Any historical precedent for a player with that level of performance, over such a long period, and no other years beside 2004 over 114, have the following three years at an OPS+ of 141,131, and 137?
There have been 36 players with an OPS+ of 131 or more for their 13th to 15th seasons. Of those players the second lowest OPS+ for their first 12 year seasons is Roberto Clemente with an OPS+ of 118, with 5 seasons of less than 114 and 4 seasons of less than 100. Third lowest is Cy Williams with an OPS+ of 119 with 7 seasons of less than 114 and 4 seasons of less than 100. Fourth lowest is Ellis Burks with an OPS+ of 121 with 5 seasons of less than 114 and 2 seasons of less than 100. Fifth lowest is Sammy Sosa with an OPS+ of 123 with 7 seasons of less than 114 and 5 seasons of less than 100.
Richard, thanks for that leg work.
Thanks, Richard. I think it makes the Beltre case even more strange. Even with 2004, he’s the clear leader in slightly above average.
JA and others:
The player I thought of immediately on my rather belated reading of this post is Mickey Vernon, and when I looked at his OPS+ figures, they do parallel Beltre’s but at a later age. He had a great season at age 28 after missing two years to WWII, then dropped to mediocrity only to rise to a much higher level from age 35 through 38. In the revised original BJHBA, there’s a long essay on the possible cause of Vernon’s erratic production from year to year until he settled in during the mid-1950′s to some steady and very big numbers for one of his age in that era. It seems Vernon was sort of paranoid about falling out of the lineup, so he played every day, regardless of suffering secretly from chronic back trouble for many years, until an appendix operation cured the problem. I doubt that Beltre suffered a similar fear, but you never know.
nsb, Vernon is an excellent example of a late-peaking hitter.
Which reminds me of Pete Runnels, Vernon’s teammate from 1951-55. Through age 29, Runnels had a 95 OPS+ in almost 4,000 PAs. Dealt to Boston, he logged a 125 OPS+ from 30-34.
And a Vernon contemporary: Eddie Joost through age 31 had a 77 OPS+ in over 3,000 PAs. From 32-36, he leaped up to a 119 OPS+.
Beltre may still be the most extreme example. But there are a number of guys who improved a lot in their 30s.
Joost’s career turned around when he started wearing eye-glasses.
Not easy trying to find good comps for Beltre.
FWIW, Beltre is the ONLY player since 1901 to play at least 12 seasons and have, in those first 12 seasons, exactly one qualifying 160 OPS+ season and no other qualifying seasons of 115 OPS+ or better. Beltre is also one of only 3 players with a qualifying 130 OPS+ season in each of his 13th thru 15th seasons, and one of only 12 players with even two of those three seasons meeting that criterion.
Looking at it a bit differently, there are 57 players with 5000 PAs through age 30 and an OPS+ in the 100-110 range (Beltre was 105). Of those 57, only 31 had 1500 PAs after age 30, and Beltre’s 137 OPS+ in the period easily ranks first (not surprising since he hasn’t yet entered his decline phase). Next best was Lou Whitaker at 129. In third spot was Buddy Myer at 119.
Buddy Myer bears more than a passing similarity to Beltre, except that Myer did NOT have the one, big season early in his career. Instead, Myer was a middling to mediocre hitter (98 OPS+) through age 28, then had his best OPS+ season (116) at age 29, and again (120) at age 30, and again (138) at age 31, with a reprise of that age 31 season at age 34. For his career of 1923 games and 8190 PA, Myer quietly batted .303 and tallied 2131 hits, with two black ink mentions, one for batting average and one for stolen bases. Beltre also has recorded black ink twice, in HR and doubles. Beltre isn’t a .300 hitter, but he did pass Myer’s 2131 hits in 2012, the same season he passed Myer’s 8190 PAs.
One more Buddy Myer note: in his season as NL batting champ in 1935, Myer recorded the second lowest total base total, and fourth lowest extra-base hit total of all 175 seasons since 1901 with 100+ Runs, 100+ RBI and 200+ hits. That’s another similarity with Beltre – each has only one such season.
Further to Beltre’s late-blooming bat:
I rounded up the 200 players with the most PAs through age 30 and an OPS+ from 95 to 115 (10 points on either side of Beltre).
Then I looked at them from 31-33, min. 1000 PAs.
- Luis Gonzalez went from 109 to 137, +28. (I’m sure people have their doubts about him, too.)
- Barry Larkin went from 115 to 143, +28.
- Robin Yount went from 114 to 136, +22. (Yes, Yount had more good hitting years through 30 than Beltre did. But his 31-33 was also a good bit better than his previous 3 years.)
- Stan Hack went from 114 to 135, +21. (Not a wartime effect, as his best years came right *before* the 1943 talent drain.)
- Ryne Sandberg went from 112 to 133, +21. If we move the split back a couple years, the effect is even more stark, and a little more like Beltre. Through age 28, Sandberg had a 108 OPS+, with two big years and five years between 92-111, including a combined 105 for age 26-28. From 29-32 he had a 140 OPS+, while averaging 30 HRs (after one prior year of 20+).
- Dusty Baker went from 112 to 132, +20. His first full year was very good, 142 OPS+ at 23, but then he muddled along for 4 years (105 OPS+) before another spike at 28, and two more so-so years. From 31-33 he was over 130 every year, but at no other time did he have even 2 straight years at 120 or better.
- Graig Nettles went from 108 to 129, +21. Age 31-33 turned out to be his 3 best years with the bat.
OK, I’ll stop going on and on. But Nettles illustrates another point: We may be thinking that 2010-12 is how Beltre will hit in the near future — but statistically, he’s more likely to revert towards his career average, plus a discount for aging, right?
When all is said and done for Beltre, we may look back on 2010-12 as anomalies akin to 2004. It’s still too soon to gauge how unusual his pattern is.
Mike, your note does touch on something that will be key to any chance of Beltre being elected: the narrative. HHS is not so much a place for narratives as it is a place for analysis built around stats, yet when it comes to seriously considering if a player has a chance at the HOF, then the narrative does come into play. It has to.
Beltre’s narrative has some things working against him:
1) He was viewed as a consistent underachiever early in his career;
2) He had a UFO season in his walk year when PED usage was in the news;
3) He was suspected of PED usage because of item #2;
4) He was one again viewed as an underachiever in Seattle, and:
5) He put up his best seasons in walk years, namely 2004 and 2010.
Collectively, all these items have created a negative feel around Beltre for much of his career, with items 2, 4 and 5 conveniently used by many to support item #3, creating the image in the minds of some of a player who has spiked his performance at times by using PEDs for his financial gain.
Beltre, however, is addressing each of these items brick by brick, and in the process is slowly rewriting his narrative. The evidence is three years back he’d never be mentioned as a HOF candidate. That’s not the case anymore.
Item 1, the perceived underperformance in the early part of his career is part of the record, but he was very young and there have been players who started out on one level and elevated to a new level, especially when they might have been rushed to the major leagues. Robin Yount spent six years as a below-average hitter before emerging as an MVP-level performer at the age of 24. There are similarities between Yount and Beltre. Both debuted at very young ages, teenagers, Yount at 18 and Beltre at 19. Yount had his best season at the age of 26, Beltre it now appears at the age of 25.
Item 2 is slowly being put to rest. His last year in LA is no longer a UFO season, thanks to his last three seasons. It was his peak year, but we now have evidence of three additional and consecutive strong seasons at the plate. The 2004 season was his clear best, but no longer sticks out as out of place.
Item 3, passing for the second.
Item 4,
Item 5 has always been nonsense and Beltre addressed that too by having the worst year of his career in his walk year in Seattle in 2009. People were predicting a huge year based on, well I’m not really sure, but he disappointed. He sucked that walk year. He did have a great year in 2010, his next walk year, but then he followed that up by having fine seasons in 2011 and 2012, not walk years.
Back to item 3 which I skipped, or saved to last, because it’s collectively and at least partially addressed by the other points, plus it’s impossible to prove. He’s never failed a drug test, and I should point out that 2004 was the first year of what the media likes to refer to as the “post steroids era,” and in fact all of his best seasons have occured after drug testing was in place. The five years prior to his breakout 2004 produced the lowest OPS+ of his career, yet they occured during the height of the steroid era. Finally, by the time Beltre comes up for HOF voting, the mania we see around steroids and HOF voting will have subsided. It’ll still be there on some level, but once players like Bagwell and Piazza are elected, meaning players who were suspected by never proven, then it will make it easier for someone like Beltre.
He still doesn’t have the narrative, even as he addresses the points above. 3B’men still are not elected in high numbers, and they seem to need some story short of being historic like a Matthews and a Schmidt, or a Brett o4 a Boggs. Brooks Robinson was helped by being regarded as the greatest fielding 3B’man ever. Ozzie Smith was elected because he is viewed as the greatest fielding SS ever. Hell, Bill Mazeroski was elected for perhaps doing something better as a 2B’man than any other player. And there was that HR.
Beltre is not ever going to replace Brooks in the eyes of voters as the greatest fielding 3B’man ever, which means he needs to keep on hitting for a few more years. He still doesn’t have a clean narrative, a simple story. In the end, that’s what may be what keeps him out.
Ha, I never finished item 4. Tough hitter’s park. As we saw, perhaps, with a David Wright, hitters may change their swings, for the worse, in tough parks. The fact that he elevated his hitting after Seattle says something.
MikeD- I think you’ve summed it up pretty well and as JA points out in 15 there is a good chance that he will begin to decline in the near future. But I do think that there are forces working in his favor as well.
First, I think that the notion that third basemen are represented in the Hall is becoming a little more widely accepted even among traditional baseball writers. I think that by the time Santo was selected many if not most of the non-advanced-metrics crowd had come on board with the idea that that was correcting a previous injustice.
And secondly, as Doug mentioned above Beltre is nearing several milestones and even if his actual performance should diminish some he plays in a park where his numbers might at least superficially look stronger than they actually are.
I actually think his chances are pretty good assuming he doesn’t completely go off a cliff.
Scott Rolen on the other hand seems to me to be a real long shot even though I would guess that most readers of this site would rank him among the 10 or 12 best third baseman of all time and at least the equal of Beltre as of this moment in their careers.
He totally has things going for him. I’m not saying he shouldn’t be considered, just mentioning what he has going against him, yet that he’s doing things to address every one of those issues that previously would have been used against him.
His best bet it to remain productive for a few more years. I remember Don Mattingly had some advice for Bernie Williams. Mattingly, of course, would know something about having a HOF-caliber career, but not quite enough peak or longevity to make the HOF. After Bernie Williams 2002 season, when Williams was 33 and coming off another fine season when he triple slashed .333/.415/.493, there were talks about Williams perhaps putting up a HOF career. Mattingly to that basically said you haven’t rounded third; remember the home stretch. Williams, of course, pulled up short. Not on purpose, but because of age. The same can be said of Beltre. He needs to keep his eye on the home stretch. Unfortuntely, father time may have different plans.
MikeD, that’s a really nice job on Beltre’s narrative.
I think what will potentially separate Beltre from Brooks is that Beltre can reach some pretty impressive counting stat milestones.
400 HR, 1500 RBI, 550-600 2B, and even possibly 3000 hits are within his grasp. If he finishes strongly, he could challenge Chipper Jones’ record for most RBI by a third baseman, which is somewhere around 1600.
If he even approaches these milestones, I think he’ll get in pretty easily. He’s really close to the WAR totals of recent inductees Larkin and Alomar.
bstar, good point about AB’s chance to accrue big counting stats.
But lest anyone think that Brooks Robinson was elected mainly for his glove, here are his ranks in major counting stats among career 3Bs when he first appeared on the HOF ballot (post-1982 season), and now:
Hits — #1, 2848 — now #3
2B — #1, 482 — now #5
TB — #2, 4270 — now #5
RBI — #3, 1357 — now #6
Runs — #5, 1232 — now #10
HR — #6, 268 — now #19 (and A-Rod not yet a “3B”)
Using baseball-reference’s value numbers, Beltre currently has more career “Rfield” than “Rbat“, 187 Rfield to 142 Rbat. Only four men have been elected to the Hall by the BBWAA who had more career Rfield than Rbat: Brooks Robinson, Ozzie Smith, Luis Aparicio and Walter “Rabbit” Maranville. Those four guys had huge gaps between their fielding and batting numbers — Beltre’s are much more balanced. As Bill James as often pointed out, guys with balanced skills sometimes get less attention than guys with equal total value but more of an extreme emphasis on one skill, as it’s the extremes that capture the popular imagination.
Great point, birtelcom.
The other HOF committees have been much kinder to glove men, letting in these 15 with more Rfield than Rbat:
Bid McPhee (154, 106)
Joe Gordon (150, 149)
Bill Mazeroski (146, -162)
Travis Jackson (139, 8)
Bobby Wallace (133, 66)
Johnny Evers (127, 82)
Jimmy Collins (121, 118)
Nellie Fox (119, -53)
Pee Wee Reese (117, 32)
Phil Rizzuto (116, -29)
Dave Bancroft (93, 15)
Red Schoendienst (78, -65)
Monte Ward (75, -38)
Ray Schalk (46, -94)
Lloyd Waner (17, 13)
The only players with -100 or less Rbat in the HOF are Ozzie, Rabbit, Mazeroski and Aparicio. If Vizquel were to somehow make it in, his -244 Rbat would break Rabbit’s current low of -228.
A perfect, fantastic story by Tom Verducci about why he will never vote for an admitted steroid user for the HoF. He nails the “everybody was doing it” crowd and the “so what” argument as well. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/mlb/news/20130108/hall-of-fame-ballot-steroids-mark-mcgwire-barry-bonds-roger-clemens/?sct=hp_t13_a3&eref=sihp
Very interesting read Timmy. I was looking at the ballots of the writers from mlb.com and the whole thing is just a mess. It’s a pretty even spread between those that are going to vote for whoever, PEDs be damned, and those whose ballots look something like Morris, Biggio and McGriff.
This is an interesting analysis by Nate Silver looking at HOF ballots of voters who did and did not vote for Bonds.
http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/suspicion-of-steroid-use-could-keep-bagwell-and-piazza-out-of-hall/
Seems like both Piazza and Bagwell are assumed to be PEDs users by the non-Bonds voters. I was also surprised that non-Bonds voters were less likely to vote for Trammell and Murphy. But then I saw that several voters only put one name of their ballot. That one name being Jack Morris. Seriously, some of these guys need to lose their voting privileges, their BBWAA membership and possibly their jobs.
That’s an interesting tactic, putting down only Morris. There was a local school board election here last year in which a longtime gadfly was elected to the board by convincing his supporters to only vote for him. They were allowed 3 choices and the top 3 vote getters were elected to the board. Interesting strategy, and it might be a bit of a backlash to the unfair campaign against Morris, IMO.
Thanks for sharing that link, Tim.
One aspect of his position is unclear to me: Exactly what, in his view, constitutes a “known steroid user”? A positive test or an admission is the easy case. What about players named in the Mitchell Report, or accused in some other semi-credible, not-quite-substantiated way?
Verducci says that he voted (again) for Bagwell, despite reciting a litany of suspicious actions and statements.
Then he talks about Lance Armstrong “as an example when it comes to PED evidence. … Now think about how Armstrong was busted: with no admission, no positive test, no court ruling. … Put him on a Hall of Fame ballot and half the writers would vote for him under the “there’s no evidence” umbrella. How was Armstrong, long associated with PED rumors, finally exposed? Teammates. … The same lesson applies to baseball. The Steroid Era, too, is an ongoing archeology: buried secrets known to many — teammates, trainers, suppliers, coaches, etc. — that sometimes get revealed with a little brushing away of the topsoil, not always as public as the work of Canseco or Mitchell.”
Verducci implies that he would not vote for someone with as much evidence against him as Armstrong. But few baseball players are ever going to be subjected to the level of investigation that was needed to expose Armstrong. The “buried secrets known to many” likely won’t be developed into a body of evidence any more conclusive than what he cites against Bagwell, for whom he votes.
I respect his position, but — just based on probability — he’ll probably wind up voting for a LOT of guys who were just as guilty as the ones he rejects.
John – Your final sentence was my reaction as well.
BTW, Baseball Think Factory (BBT) is tracking the voting. About 26% of votes have been revealed and so far Biggio is the top candidate though with only 68.2%. Morris is second with 62.9%…last year his final % was about 8% higher then BBT tracking. So he’ll likely end up just short this year.
Yeah, I heard that too. I was surprised at the low total for Morris. I thought this was his year in, but I guess the bigger names are stealing some votes, plus some of the writers who are protesting by sending in empty ballots or only one name are not helping Morris either. That’s fine with me.
As far as zero players getting in this year, I think it’s a little sad with so many qualified players on the ballot. I wish they’d go back to the runoff election if no one gets 75%. Luke Appling in ’64 and Red Ruffing in ’67 got in on runoff voting those years, but it was abandoned after that. I see only 1971 and 1996 as the years since where no one has been elected.
And what happens next year when Maddux, Glavine, Mussina and Thomas all debut? And the year after that with Pedro, Randy Johnson and Smoltz?
Wallace Matthews has a story in ESPN http://espn.go.com/new-york/story/_/id/8814011/barry-bonds-roger-clemens-do-not-belong-baseball-hall-fame
Matthews, and Verducci, and most of us here on HHS talking about it, are all really trying to do the same thing; finding some type of an intellectual construct to deal with an entire era of users. I am old enough to remember when 500 HR’s was a mountaintop, and there were only a handful of 50 HR seasons. Steroids blew that all up. But there is no one answer that is going to fit all types of situations, and undiscovered cheaters are going to slip by while high quality and possibly Hall-worth others fall by the wayside because their numbers just don’t look as special.
If I had the vote, I’d have to accept that any rule I made for myself meant I was probably being unfair to some player or group of players. I’ll draw the line when MLB drew the line; in 2003. If you failed a test from that point on, in my mind, you are out. But that’s just an arbitrary line in the sand.
Think about it this way Mike, suppose we swap the word gambling for steroids? The first argument would be that gambling goes to the integrity of the game much more than steroids, after all steroids were taken to help win games, not intentionally lose games. But Verducci points out in his article all the kids that missed out getting to the majors because some other guy was using steroids. I’m sure a scoundrel gambler has probably slipped into the HoF, but never an admitted gambler, or game thrower.
The Georgia Peach and the Grey Eagle almost assuredly bet on games that they knew were fixed. The evidence was as strong as the case against Roger Clemens taking PEDs.
Using the suddenly popular “character clause,” ignored by BBWAA only until now, I have no doubt who I would keep out if I had to pick from those groups. Cobb and Speaker would be out, just based on character. I consider what they did to be far worse. Add in that Speaker was a member of the Ku Klan Klan (also known at the time), and it gets worse.
Yet I actually believe Cobb and Speaker, as well as Clemens and Bonds, all belong in the HOF.
Well Mike let’s not sully the reputation of group that’s done so much for this country, that being the KKK. The Klan was not the only group in this country that lynched blacks, and besides since they wore masks you couldn’t be certain exactly who was doing the lynching. Kind of like steroid usage actually, since we’re not sure… obviously I’m joking. Listen, I hear you on the character clause creating confusion. How would you handle a player that was a racist during his 20s, but then repented in say his 40′s? Could the guy actually get extra credit for overcoming his upbringing and the social norms of early 20th century Georgia? It’s a mess for sure, but steroids is different. Our criminal justice system is the best in the world, but you don’t have to look very hard to find guilty men walking free and vice verse. The same is true for the HoF, we will have cheaters get in and honest guys not get in but to me you don’t cheapen the threshold.
Well I think Verducci says he revisited Bagwell after first voting for him, I’ll have to reread the article. There were some things he mentioned about Bagwell that I was not aware of and it’s damning. Let’s face it, some cheaters will get in, some are already there, but allowing someone that’s admitted to, or been caught into the HoF is like a cop that looks the other way when the mayor’s car is speeding.