Circle of Greats 1958 Ballot, Part 2
This post is for voting and discussion in the twelfth round of balloting for the Circle of Greats. This round adds those players born in 1958 who were not included in the first 1958 round. Rules and lists are after the jump.
41 players were born in 1958 and played in at least ten seasons of major league baseball. 20 of those (players with last names beginning A through H) were added as eligible in the previous round. The other 21 players in the born-in-1958 group are being added this round.
As always, each ballot cast must include three and only three eligible players. The one player who appears on the most ballots cast in the round is inducted into the Circle of Greats. Players who fail to win induction but appear on half or more of the ballots that are cast win four future rounds of ballot eligibility. Players who appear on 25% or more of the ballots, but less than 50%, earn two years of extended eligibility. Any other player in the top 9 (including ties) in ballot appearances (or who appear on at least 10% of the ballots) wins one additional round of ballot eligibility.
All voting for this round closes at 11:00 PM EST on Tuesday, March 19 11:00 PM EDT on Wednesday, March 20, while changes to previously cast ballots are allowed until 11:00 PM EST Sunday, March 17.
If you’d like to follow the vote tally, and/or check to make sure I’ve recorded your vote correctly, you can see my ballot-counting spreadsheet for this round here: 1958-Pt 2 COG Vote Tally . I’ll be updating the spreadsheet periodically with the latest votes. Initially, there is a row for every voter who has cast a ballot in any of the past rounds, but new voters are entirely welcome — new voters will be added to the spreadsheet as their ballots are submitted. Also initially, there is a column for each of the holdover players; additional player columns from the new born-in-1958 group will be added as votes are cast for them.
Choose your three players from the lists below of eligible players. The holdovers (who now total 13 guys) are listed in order of the number of future rounds (including this one) through which they are assured eligibility, and alphabetically when the future eligibility number is the same. The new group of 1958 birth-year guys are listed below in order of the number of seasons they played in the majors, and alphabetically among players with the same number of seasons played.
Holdovers:
Tom Glavine (eligibility guaranteed for 6 rounds)
John Smoltz (eligibility guaranteed for 6 rounds)
Tony Gwynn (eligibility guaranteed for 5 rounds)
Barry Larkin (eligibility guaranteed for 5 rounds)
Craig Biggio (eligibility guaranteed for 4 rounds)
Wade Boggs (eligibility guaranteed for 4 rounds)
Larry Walker (eligibility guaranteed for 4 rounds)
Roberto Alomar (eligibility guaranteed for 3 rounds)
Tim Raines (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Ryne Sandberg (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Kevin Brown (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Kenny Lofton(eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Edgar Martinez (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Everyday Players (born in 1958, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues, last name starts with letters I through Z):
Alan Trammell
Willie McGee
Don Slaught
Dickie Thon
Rafael Ramirez
Mike Scioscia
Pete O’Brien
Pat Tabler
Gary Pettis
Domingo Ramos
John Shelby
Tim Teufel
Chico Walker
Ron Kittle
Glenn Wilson
Pitchers (born in 1958, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues, last name starts with letters I through Z):
Dave Righetti
Bill Krueger
Tim Leary
Dan Petry
Walt Terrell
Matt Young
Subscribe to: RSS feed
Smoltz
Gwynn
Boggs
Well, we’re still lacking one Lou Whitaker but we’re almost to the peak of our middle infield depth chart. I will abstain in Lou’s honor from picking between them until next year. Also the other 2/3rds of the Atlanta trio can wait some more years to get sorted out against better competition.
And I think Boggs is the best player so I’ll vote for him too.
Boggs, Gwynn, Raines
Tony Gwynn, Roberto Alomar, Edgar Martinez.
Player ranking as per Actual Value calculation (defined in my post in the 1959 round):
Boggs 120.9
Glavine 107.1
Walker 104.3
Larkin 98.7
Trammell 97.2
Smoltz 97.0
Brown 95.4
Sandberg 94.5
Lofton 94.5
Martinez 94.4
Gwynn 93.4
Raines 92.9
Alomar 88.8
Biggio 85.5
This truly gets more difficult every round.
I won’t hold out on Boggs. He is head-and-shoulders above the rest, and I will always vote for a clearly superior candidate even if he doesn’t need my help. After this, it turns into a logjam. My next four players, in order, would be Glavine, Larkin, Walker, and Smoltz, none of whom need my help right now. I don’t expect any of them to win this round, so I’ll leave them alone. I know Trammell won’t get passed over, but nobody has voted for him yet and I would like to see him get multiple rounds of eligibility, so I think he’s my next choice. Brown gets deductions (anti-Brownie points?) for being a PEDer and jerk, so next on the list are Lofton and Sandberg. I like Lofton enough to keep him going; Sandberg will be fine without my help this time around.
Final ballot: Boggs, Trammell, Lofton.
Boggs, Biggio, Raines
And a shout out to Gary Pettis for autographing my Holyoke Millers program back in 1980.
He was also crazy fun to watch when he turned on the afterburners in the outfield or on the basepaths as well
Boggs
Walker
Glavine
Total Sophie’s choice.
There’s maybe a 10% difference between the 2nd and 14th best player on this ballot and a very reasonable case could be made for 7 or 8 of these guys as the second best. I am absolutely convinced that 11 of these guys belong in the Circle and leaning towards 2 others.
At pitcher I am absolutely sold on Glavine & Smoltz. I’ll have to leave it to others to make a case for Brown.
At second I sold on Sandberg & pretty sure about Biggio & Alomar.
At short I’m certain that Trammell and Larkin are comfortably inside the top 10 of what I think is the second deepest position.
At third Boggs is clearly in and I’m now sold on Edgar Martinez as well (and this is where I’ll put him)
In the outfield I have Raines, Gwynn, Lofton and Walker all belonging but exactly what order I would put them in changes constantly.
My vote: Trammell, Lofton, Martinez
An early vote and one showing the main threat to Boggs this year being people excluding him in favor of more marginal candidates. Coupled with Trammel love on that first year boost all candidates need in this process, Boggs may lose this year. It’s ballots that have Trammel and no Boggs vs those with Boggs and no Trammel that will decide it. I don’t like how people voting for both don’t have much say in who wins this year and also have fewer spots to support other candidates. That’s the Sophie’s choice for me. Different issue I guess, same problem.
So far only three people have voted for Trammel and not Boggs. So this is a complete non-issue. Boggs has a 41-16 vote edge over Trammel. Boggs will win. Easily.
Boggs, Larkin, Trammell.
Of the rest of the holdovers, I would also vote “yes” on Alomar, Biggio, Glavine, Gwynn, Raines, Sandberg, and Smoltz; “no” on Brown; and “maybe” on Lofton, Martinez, and Walker.
I expect Boggs will win this round. The next round should be very interesting…
I’m picking 1,2,3 in my batting order.
1. Get on, steal a base, and play elite defense.
2. Take pitches, let the leadoff guy steal, then get a hit. (and play elite defense)
3. Thump it. (and field it)
Lofton
Boggs
Walker
- Boggs
- Trammell
- Raines
This time I’m going for guys who, in 1987, would’ve been better choices for the MVP award than the _actual_ winners (Gwynn would’ve been another good choice).
Boggs, Trammell, Glavine.
Biggio, Boggs, Gwynn.
Boggs, Larkin, Glavine
Wade Boggs
Larry Walker
Kevin Brown
The next three guys on my list are Alan Trammell, Barry Larkin, and Ryne Sandberg – all middle infielders, and all within a hairsbreadth of one another, in my opinion. But I’m anticipating a big win for Boggs here…
Boggs, Larkin, Raines
Boggs, Gwynn, Smoltz
Trammell, Boggs, Raines.
Welcome to the voting, KCR.
Thankyou Birtelcom.
Glavine, Biggio, Boggs
Larry Walker, Wade Boggs, Tony Gwynn
Boggs, Larkin, Raines
Raines, Alomar, Gwynn
Lobbying for favorites to stay around and not necessarily for the Best of the Best since others will take care of that this round.
Lofton
Raines
Sandberg
Boggs, Walker, Gwynn.
Boggs walker and smoltz
Smoltz, Walker, Martinez
Boggs, Glavine, Gwynn
Smoltz, Boggs, Sandberg
Boggs, Gwynn, Raines…
Gwynn, Raines, Biggio
Gwynn, Alomar, Glavine.
Boggs, Glavine, Sandberg
Boggs, Martinez, Walker
Tom Glavine, Wade Boggs, Larry Walker
Wade Boggs
Larry Walker
Tom Glavine
Boggs, Raines, Larkin
Boggs, Gwynn and Raines
I want to begin by congratulating Mr. Henderson on being “The Greatest Ever” at least in his mind. Secondly I would like to review last rounds ballot, if only for my own sanity, and quote the 1981 movie “Stripes” “There’s something wrong with us, something very, very wrong with us. Something seriously wrong with us . . .” when Julio Franco receives the same vote total (3) as Craig Biggio and John Smoltz. This round is a bit of a challenge to my voting prowess; but thy will be done, I will only choose those veterans born in 58′. The first two are pretty easy once again, and I am pretty sure The Chicken Man AKA Wade Boggs will join the ranks that is the COG, secondly I vote for the purest form of under ratedness, Alan Trammell. The last veteran born in 58′ that will appear on my ballot is Spaghetti Righetti. Rags won ROY award in 81′ and was an All Star in 86′ and 87′. This San Jose, CA native son was one of the original hybrids pitcher that had some success as a starting pitcher but his true fame came as a relief pitcher, ala Dennis Eckersly, and even now he came home to coach his home town San Fran Giants pitchers to two WS championships as an above average Pitching coach. My ballot this round;
Boggs, Trammall, Righetti……
In the same post you’re complaining about votes for Julio Franco and casting a vote for Dave Righetti?
Not a complaint just an observation, and as mentioned in my post I only choose those veterans from that specific years ballot. I suppose i could have gone with Orel Hershiser (58′ part 1) again, but his name does not appear any where on this ballot, and Rags story is a good story. I can imagine a young 3 year old Rags sitting under his Dad (Leo), also a minor league veteran, arm watching those SanFran Giants and Stretch, The Say Hey Kid, Baby Bull and some rookie by the name of Gaylord Perry lose that 62′ series to the evil empire, and further more those same Giants had only moved to SanFran the year Dave was born (1958). Now Dave is the pitching coach of arguably one of the best pitching staffs in MLB who just so happened to win (2) WS in the last 3 seasons. Pretty good story, wouldn’t you say??
John Z, you’re a MADman. When you stole that cow, and your friend tried to make it with the cow, I wanna party with you, cowboy. You and me together? Forget it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTwIwfvNJLk
I don’t know whether to be very concerned that you associate with this line from Stripes, or to laugh out loud because after all, it is Stripes (an American Classic) IMO. I’d prefer to chose the latter, Bravo Zulu bstar.
Yeah, was just supplying some lines from my favorite Murray speech of that movie, most of which he improvised on the spot.
No, I was not implying that bestiality is one of my passions.
I concur Bstar, Bill Murray is genius. Here is a quote from Murray after filming Stripes. “I’m still a little queasy that I actually made a movie where I carry a machine gun. But I felt if you were rescuing your friends it was okay. It captured what it was like on an Army base: It was cold, you had to wear the same green clothes, you had to do a lot of physical stuff, you got treated pretty badly, and had bad coffee.”
Career Wins Above Average, excluding negative seasons:
Boggs 59.2
Walker 48.6
Larkin 45.5
Trammell 45.1
Brown 43.2
Glavine 42.2
Martinez 41.6
Smoltz 40.2
Lofton 39.5
Sandberg 39.1
Alomar 37.3
Raines 37.2
Gwynn 36.8
Biggio 36.7
I’m going to give Walker the round off after his WBC performance and vote for two deserving pitchers, one who’s picking up steam and another who seems to be fading.
Boggs
Brown
Smoltz
This election got me thinking about two players I held in similar esteem when I was a kid, and the way my understanding of baseball has evolved since then. Wade Boggs and Tony Gwynn each won four batting titles between 1984 and 1989. Neither had Darryl Strawberry’s power or Rickey Henderson’s speed, and I’m not sure I ever thought of them as the two best hitters in the game, but batting average meant a lot to me, and I expected them both to win the batting title every year.
’84 to ’89 represents something the prime of each guy’s career, though Gwynn would win four more batting titles in his mid 30s. During that spell, Gwynn hit .336, while Boggs hit .351. The two best pure hitters around, as they say.
That’s where the similarities stop. Boggs drew almost 300 more walks over those six years, out-OBPing Gwynn, .444 to .392. Boggs hit more doubles and more homers (though Gwynn had the edge in triples), outslugging Gwynn, .482 to .445. Boggs played in more of a hitter’s park, but still won the OPS+ battle soundly, 152 to 136. Gwynn closed this gap a bit with superior baserunning, his 21-Rbaser advantage offsetting a third of Boggs’ 65 Rbat edge.
On the defensive side, Gwynn was above average early in his career, but mostly a liability by the end of his 20s. B-R gives him 18 Rfield over the six years in question. Boggs was a solid defender, with 55 runs saved from ’84 to ’89. Throw in the relative difficulty of playing third base vs. right field and Boggs gets 7.1 dWAR, to Gwynn’s -1.7. These numbers shouldn’t be taken at face value, of course, but it’s clear that Boggs was a more valuable defender.
Add it all up, and Boggs was worth 47.7 wins above replacement from ’84 to ’89, to Gwynn’s 31.2. Boggs extends this advantage to 23 wins if we add the rest of their careers.
This is not meant as a judgment on anyone voting for Gwynn for the CoG- he was a pretty great player. Rather, it’s a recalibration of my understanding of the game back when I always knew my Little League batting average and compared it to the two guys who were threats to hit .400 at the big league level.
Here’s to Wade Boggs, the best pure hitter of the ’80s and the most valuable player on this ballot.
For the 80s as a whole, I might pick George Brett ahead of Boggs.
#47 –
I’d pick Rickey Henderson and Mike Schmidt ahead of both of them.
I’m sure someone can run a B-R search to see who has the most WAR for the decade. However, I would also consider peak.
Well, Bryan used the phrase “best ‘pure hitter’ of the 80s”. “Pure hitter” is ambiguous terminology, but I think it’s not generally intended to include the runner types or the Three True Outcomes slugger types. At least that’s the way I interpreted it. George Brett fits the defintion more closely I think, though in a different way than Boggs (line drive power rather than contact/singles hitter). I’d take Boggs if I had a team with other big offensive forces, who could make prime use of Wade’s presence on base; I’d take Brett if I had a weaker group of teammate hitters, where George’s extra-base power would be more needed.
The term “pure hitter” to me connotes hitting for average. Power is an afterthought. It’s normally given to players who can win batting titles, whether they have power or not. So Albert Pujols and Miggy are pure hitters as well as the Gwynns & Carews of the world. In that vein, I think I’d call Gwynn the best “pure hitter” of the ’80s.
Put Gwynn in Fenway and put Boggs in Jack Murphy Stadium all those years. Does Gwynn win 12 batting titles? How many would Boggs have? Maybe two at most? Boggs is a better overall player, but from a pure hitting perspective I don’t think there’s a question who was better.
Look at Gwynn and Boggs’ OPS totals @43 per birtelcom. Boggs’ Fenway OPS was .991!
I was actually trying to poke a little fun at the phrase “pure hitter”, which I consider a relic from the time when batting average was so tied to hitting talent that the winner of the league batting title won a car. Boggs was both the best at one small element of hitting in the decade and the most valuable player on this ballot.
If I have to defend Boggs against Brett and Gwynn, I’ll point out that Boggs’ .352 average in the ’80s was .20 points higher than Gwynn’s and .41 higher than Brett’s. Of course, that’s not park-adjusted and is based on two arbitrary endpoints, but I’m not sure the phrase “pure hitter” is worth much more sophisticated analysis. For what it’s worth, Boggs also topped the ’80s in wOBA (.409) and wRC+ (151, tied w/Schmidt).
OPS+ and wRC+ include value from walks, and I don’t think the term “pure hitter” has anything at all to do with patience/lack thereof at the plate.
Also, what would Gwynn’s BA in the ’80s have been if he played in Fenway? How about Boggs in San Diego?
Also, Boggs finished with the highest OPS+/wRC+ during the ’80s because of Fenway.
In road OPS during the eighties, Boggs’ .828 ranks 14th, between Tim Raines and Kirk Gibson. Home OPS? Boggs is first by a mile (1.017). Mike Schmidt was the only other guy to top .950 in the eighties at home (.954).
Does anyone really think Boggs was a better overall hitter than Mike Schmidt?
bstar, of course Boggs wasn’t a better hitter than Schmidt. Is anyone suggesting that? Schmidt matched Boggs’ prime wRC+ in his age 30 to 39 seasons.
I have a bit of a problem using road stats as a substitute for park-adjusted overall stats. Just as raw stats oversell players who play half their games in hitters’ parks, road stats sell short those same guys because they don’t get any benefit from their parks. A current Rockie gets about 35% of his road at bats in LA, SF, and SD, three extreme pitchers’ parks, and none of them in Denver. Do we learn any more from his road numbers than we do from his park-adjusted total numbers?
Park adjustments may not be perfect, but they give us an idea of the composite of (1) the extent to which a hitter took advantage of/survived his home park, and (2) how well he hit in all road parks, compared to others’ results there. I don’t know how well Boggs would have hit at Jack Murphy Stadium, but I know he hit better at Fenway than just about anyone who’s ever the privilege of playing half his games there.
It’s strange to me that when I think of “better hitter”, I don’t think of a better offensive player I think of a guy who makes good contact, plate coverage, and eye. Boggs was an near flawless hitter on those categories, he just had fairly average power. Brett was a better bat (different term to me for some reason?) and certainly a more threatening figure in run scoring situations and in close games. I’d vote for Brett over Boggs, with some hesitation due to era played and positional adjustment, but does anybody else differentiate hitting as a separate science?
Maybe it stems to a conversation I had with my father about Ted Williams. He finally came up with relating Ted Williams to me as Wade Boggs… with power. And the thought of that gave Williams the truly terrifying image he was deserving in my mind. It may have also separated power from “hitting” for me.
Bryan-
Here’s the all-time list for highest home tOPS+ (home OPS relative to overall OPS, w/ minimum 3000 PA):
1. Bobby Doerr – 125
2. Cy Williams – 124
3. Dante Bichette – 124
4. Chuck Klein – 122
5. Larry Walker – 120
6. Todd Helton – 119
7. Ron Santo – 118
8. Wade Boggs – 118
The fact that Walker and Boggs are in the top eight all-time (at least as far back as the Split Finder goes) and have both come up recently in these discussions is more of a coincidence than anything.
The coincidence has made it appear that I’m harping on anyone who hit well at home, but the actual fact is that only four players in MLB history had a bigger home/away OPS split than Walker and only seven for Boggs, so I think it’s quite relevant to any discussion involving them.
If a discussion comes up involving Todd Helton or Ron Santo, absolutely it should be discussed also.
Walker and Boggs were too good to be called “one-park wonders” because their numbers elsewhere were good (but not great), but they were other-worldly in the home park in which they played in their prime. That needs to be discussed, and I don’t think the discussion should be avoided by simply pointing out the existence of park factors.
Hmmm…once agian proving my Coors field point against Larry Walker. 3 of the top 8 all time came from Coors…
Reply to #98:
Walker’s OPS+ at Coors Field only is 141 and Boggs’ at Fenway only is 131.
From #127: Make that tOPS+.
Just out of curiosity I checked the tOPS+ splits for a few more players.
Hank Greenberg came in at 119
Yaz was 115
Ernie Banks was 113
Mel Ott was at 106 (Bill James said in one of his books that the Polo Grounds were a great home run park but not necessarily a great park for hitters)
Mays, Aaron, Kaline, Mantle & Teddy Ballgame all came in between 102 & 106
Joe DiMaggio was at 92- maybe he does belong in the conversation along with Cobb & Mantle & Mays after all.
Richard @128
I used 3000 PA as a qualifier for my search @98, but after Hartvig pointed out that Hank Greenberg slipped through the cracks I realized I was doing min. 3000 PA AT HOME.
I really had to finagle with the Split Finder to get the results and am having trouble regenerating the same list I got @98 but with 1500 PA at home as the qualifier. I don’t know how I did it, because I’m getting no results now.
Can you offer any assistance? I’m lost on this thing. I’m just looking for highest career home tOPS+ with 1500 PA at home as the minimum.
Reply to #131:
bstar:I fooled around with the PI bating split finder and here’s what I got. I selected Career, Home or Away, Home, checked the “Compare this split..” box, sorted by OPS and selected difference between total and split. At the top of the list are several of the players you mentioned. Copy and paste that list (first page only) into a spreadsheet.
Then do the same thing for the Away games in ascending order and the same players will appear at the top of that list. Copy and paste that list (first page only) onto the same spreadsheet, sort by name and calculate tops+ using the formula in BR.
I was unable to generate your list solely with PI. Every time I clicked on tOPS in PI no results came up.
Ok, thanks, Richard. Somehow I DID get a tOPS+ list yesterday for all-time highest at home. I just can’t remember what I did.
Thanks for the effort.
bstar:
By George I did it!
Click on Career, Home or Away, Home, Sort by OPS and set PA greater than 1500. Then click Get Report and scroll to the extreme right-hand column and sort.
Seriously not two minutes ago I realized the same thing! It was already in the table!
Thanks again.
So, long story short, if you cut it down to 1500 PA at home, there are a lot more players with a tOPS+ between 125 and 118. My list @98 was for longer careers, and since this thread is about players of Hall worthiness, I think I’m going to stick with those numbers, but use 3000 PA at home as the qualifier instead of 3000 AB:
highest tOPS+ at home, min. 3000 PA at home:
1. Bobby Doerr – 125
2. Cy Williams – 124
3. Dante Bichette – 124
4. Rico Petrocelli – 123
5. Chuck Klein – 122
6. Larry Walker – 120
7. Hank Greenberg – 119
8. Todd Helton – 119
9. Rudy York – 119
10 Tim McCarver – 119
11 Ron Santo – 118
12 Dom DiMaggio – 118
13 Wade Boggs -118
Richard, if you’re still around: If Boggs’ tOPS+ at Fenway is 131 and Walker’s is 141 at Coors, in your opinion is it correct to say this?
Boggs tOPS+ at Fenway/everywhere else = 131/69
Walker tOPS+ at Coors/everywhere else = 141/59
I think that is correct. I just need to bounce it off someone to make sure. If it’s true, wow. Those numbers are staggering.
Reply to #137:
I would say it is not correct to say that because only 35.4% of Boggs’ PA were at Fenway and only 31.1% of Walker’s were at Coors.
Reply to #129:
DiMaggio’s home/road stats are skewed due to the left-center and center field Death Valleys at the old Stadium. In looking at Joe’s home/road splits it is seen that he did better on the road in every category except triples, which is to be expected. It was noted on this web-site recently that his 65 HR road/home differential is the largest. Also I noted that he is the only player with more than 40 PA to have more HR than SO on the road. At home only Berra, O’Doul and Ken Williams have done that for players with more than 200 PA.
Tom Glavine, John Smoltz, Craig Biggio
Tony Gwynn career home/away OPS split: .859 OPS home/.835 OPS away.
Wade Boggs career home/away OPS split: .934 OPS home/.781 OPS away.
One vote for the deserving winner, Boggs. Then strategy votes:
Trammell
E. Martinez
We really need to clear this SS/2B logjam soon!
Boggs, Gwynn, Martinez
Boggs, walker , trammelll. I don’t think any of the three get enough credit for their defense , Boggs is the best player on the ballot, the other two are there to let me give a shout out tot the glove men. We seem to be able to see the one- dimensional players more clearly, Trammell had an 8 WAR season in 87 without leading the league in anything. How often has that been done? The man was a Ballplayer and s/b in the HOF by now
I question walker’s image as a defensive force. He was a decent outfielder defensively… which is a nice way of saying a skill position washout. I refuse to give him defensive credit compared to somebody like Biggio (who he has 5DWAR on) or view him as a tremendous defensive asset in comparison to Gwynn (who he has 10 DWAR on). Young Tony Gwynn was an extremely underrated outfielder. His year 29 season GG with -2.9 DWAR (1989) makes me queasy to look at.
I mentioned before that the Walker to Sheffield comparison is an interesting one. There is a staggering 30 DWAR between them. I did not see that on the field.
Walker deserves about -5 DWAR to me, which helps put him lower in the list compared to these middle infielders (all of which I’d probably ADD about 5DWAR to for increased positional adjustment factors).
Mosc , of course defensive stats are somewhat weaker than hitting stats, so we are always free to say that a player was not as good as his stats show. I saw Walker play in Montreal, and I would have called him an excellent right fielder, not a decent one , what I was trying to say is that credit should be given to players who play their position well, I know that RF is not as hard a defensive position as some, but it still helps to have someone out there who knows what they are doing, In Trammell’ s case I think he was better than his stats show, I could be wrong , of course.
Glavine
Smoltz
Gwynn
I’m surprised it took Eddie Mathews 5 years to get into the HoF.
Mathews had 78.4 WAR through his age 31 season — the 16th highest career WAR total ever for everyday players through age 31, comparable to guys like Gehrig and Musial. But after age 31 he racked up only 13.5 more WAR, just 213th highest for everyday players after age 31. And his relatively quick tail-off in production came at a time, the mid-1960s, when hitting production was falling off a cliff generally, making his decline seem even more dramatic than it was. Everyone recognized he was an all-time great, and his HOF voting share moved up pretty quickly, but I think through his early years of eligibility some people had his relatively fast fade in their heads, enough to slow down his induction a bit. Being overshadowed by Aaron probably didn’t help either.
Third basemen have always had a tough time with the HOF; it was the last position to have a player inducted – Jimmy Collins, 1945 (unless you count McGraw in 1937, but he was in as a manager).
Third base was also the last position elected by the BBWAA – Pie Traynor in 1948. After Traynor, another third baseman was not inducted into the HOF till 1955 – Home Run Baker. I count 62 players in the HOF by 1955, and only _three_ of them are third basemen.
There are only 12 MLB third basemen now in the HOF (13 if you count Molitor), fewest at any position. WHY? Bill James, as usual, gets to the essence:
“Third baseman are expected by the voters to be very good fielders, but also hit as well as outfielders.”
The scarcity of third basemen is even more dramatic when you consider that George Kell is a questionable choice, and Freddie Lindstrom is an _extremely_ questionable choice, one of a raft of “friends of Frankie Frisch” Veterans selection in the mid-70s to early 80s.
The list of retired third baseman better than Lindstrom is probably longer than the current list of HOF third baseman:
- Sal Bando
- Buddy Bell
- Bill Bradley
- Ken Boyer
- Ron Cey
- Harlond Clift
- Lave Cross
- Bob Elliott
- Darrell Evans
- Larry Gardner
- Stan Hack
- Tommy Leach
- Craig Nettles
- Al Rosen
- Robin Ventura
- Tim Wallach
- Matt Williams
You could make the argument that virtually every one of the third basemen that you listed are better than Kell, as well.
I can accept the fact that maybe there are only 6 or maybe 7 Circle of Greats caliber third baseman (if you’re not counting Molitor & Martinez) because the bar is so much higher than for the Hall of Fame. But only 12 in the Hall of Fame- especially when you figure that 2 of them don’t belong- is just silly.
Boggs, Trammell, and Smoltz.
I don’t think I realized how good Boggs really was. He was always behind Mike Schmidt and George Brett in my mind. Still is, but there is a lot of room to be a great player.
Trammell and Larkin are just about even. I think Trammell’s 1987 season was the best between the two of them so I’ll give him a hesitant nod.
Smoltz. I give him bonus points for his performance as a closer. I know those years are seen as less valuable, but I think given the context of his career it was an amazing acheivement.
per B-R
Boggs: 88.3 WAR, 57.5 WAA, peak seasons worth 9, 8.3, 8.2
Brett: 84.0 WAR, 50.7 WAA, peak seasons worth 9.3, 8.4, 8.1
Fangraphs gives the overall WAR edge to Brett, 91.5 to 90.7. Certainly not black-and-white, but I’d take Boggs by a beard hair.
Never do I recall a time when Boggs was thought of as a better player than Brett. I lived in Boston in the 80s and Boggs, obviously a great hitter and deserving HOFer, never struck the fear in an opponent or had the explosive impact in a game or a series as Brett did. This is one of the cases where I part with WAR. I just don’t (didn’t) see how Boggs was a better player than Brett.
If you listened to Boston-area sports radio in the 80s, this opinion would’ve been even more pronounced.
To even equate Boggs with Brett was considered a bizarre opinion; to say Boggs was actually _better_ than Brett would’ve gotten you immediately laughed off the air (especially if the talk-show host was Eddie Andelman, who seemed to have some sort of vendetta against Boggs).
The local consensus was that Boggs was a supremely gifted and brilliant craftsman as a singles hitter, but overall (defense, baserunning were suspect) he was not a truly great player.
I consider Brett to be better than Boggs (mostly on peak), but the margin is a lot smaller than what many of the aforementioned local fans believed. One thing many people don’t consider is that while Boggs was a lifetime third baseman (2215 of 2285 games on the field, 2440 games total), but Brett was not (1692 of 2200 games on the field/461 at 1B, plus 505 as a DH).
From ages 34-40 Brett was no longer a third baseman; that’s nearly 1000 games at DH or 1B, and the defensive adjustment drags down Brett’s career value some.
Has anyone here noticed that Jay Jaffe’s JAWS Hall of Fame worthiness system is now available on B-R? It rates Boggs 3rd, Brett 4th. It’s hard to believe that 30-40 years ago, Brooks Robinson or Pie Traynor were considered the greatest third basemen ever. Robinson is 7th in JAWS, Traynor is 52nd (!).
“Has anyone here noticed that Jay Jaffe’s JAWS Hall of Fame worthiness system is now available on B-R?”
You bet I have!
And if you look, Boggs’ JAWS score is much closer to #2 Eddie Mathews (only 0.3 “points” behind) than Brett is to Boggs (4.0 “points” behind).
I’m not sure that I’m willing to go that far but I don’t think the idea that they’re close in value is at all far-fetched especially when you think about all of the games that Brett missed when he was still relatively young to nagging injuries. Brett only had 4 seasons that he played more than 135 games at third. Boggs had 9 of 140 or more. That’s got to count for something.
Lawrence, your point about positional adjustments is a good one. Positional adjustments seem to help us assess value, but they don’t tell us a lot about talent. Could Brett have stuck at third later in his career and earned more WAR as a bad third baseman than he did as an average first baseman? Does the position he played in his late 30s have any bearing on his overall greatness?
B-r docks Brett 57 runs over the course of his career in positional adjustments. Boggs gets +2. That 59-run difference is close to six wins, or more than Boggs’ career WAR advantage. Certainly Boggs deserves some of that for sticking at third and playing it well until he was 40, but six wins?
I may redact my “Boggs by a beard hair” and go with Brett by a speck of pine tar.
Bryan – But if Brett had stayed at third, perhaps he would have continued to miss a lot of games, thus lowering his Rbat? A quick glance indicates that he generally missed fewer games after making the switch than before the switch. Not to mentioned that maybe (hard to say with any certainty) he would have has lower Rfields if he had stayed at 3rd.
We have learned that Traynor was not nearly as valuable as those who saw him play thought he was ; why couldn’t the same be true of Brett? I am ready to accept that Boggs was better ( not decided n my mind, just ready to accept it ) one thing Boggs suffered from in Boston was the perception that he was ” selfish” , taking walks instead expanding his strike zone to try to drive in runs.
Of course, he knew more about baseball than his critics, but he suffered from the stereotype that people who draw walks like Frank Thomas and run like Frank Thomas ought to rake like Frank Thomas. Of course, his OBP was all the more valuable because of where he batted in the order, but some folks couldn’t see that. None of this ,of course, should detract from Brett’s value ,but it is a possible reason why Boggs was underrated at the time
#84/BryanM -
Why was Pie Traynor considered the greatest third baseman of all time, even after Edddie Mathews’ career?:
- .320 career BA
- 100 or more RBI seven times
- reputation as an outstanding fielder
- fairly long career on a very good team (the Pirates were in two WS, usually competitive, and finished {barely} under .500 only twice during his career)
Maybe the most important reason was that there was no long-career third baseman before Mathews who was a great hitter, and Traynor seemed to fit the bill the best, as “the best third baseman” candidate.
Even at the time, I suspect some historians disagreed with that. Frank Baker was a more dominant hiter, though he had a shorter career.
I think people were just blinded by the high BA and all the 100+ RBI seasons.
Of course, now we know that Traynor was quite overrated, as his high BA and 100+ RBI seasons were mostly neagated by his lack of walks (39/full season), and moderate power (.122 ISO vs. NL average of .135). Overall, he just wasn’t one of the dominant offensive offensive forces – he was never in the Top-10 in Adjusted Batting Runs.
“We have learned that Traynor was not nearly as valuable as those who saw him play thought he was ; why couldn’t the same be true of Brett? ”
Or of Boggs?
I recall Boggs being viewed (mostly by writers) as a very marginal third baseman for his first 5 or 6 years in the league- an assertion that was hard to dispute if you lived 1200 miles from Boston and 3 & 1/2 hours from the closest American League ballpark. The only two sources you had on television were the game of the week & the White Sox on WGN in Chicago and even then my opportunities to watch were limited by a job where I worked a minimum of 50 hours a week and over half of those hours were afternoons, evenings & weekends. It’s hard to make an informed decision about the caliber of someones defense if you only see him play a couple of times a year.
I suspect that at least part of the reason that he was viewed as an inferior defensive third baseman may have had something to do with the fact that when he came up most of the baseball writers were still holdovers from when Brooks Robinson was the gold standard and guys like Schmidt, Buddy Bell, Aurelio Rodriguez and Graig Nettles were still around.
Although b-ref’s WAR ranks Boggs as one of the most valuable fielding third basemen ever, if you look at the range factors (RF) on b-ref, Boggs really converted no more plays into actual outs than an average AL third baseman of his time (2.76 RF/9 innings played, compared to a league average of 2.75). Since 1946, Boggs has the 10th highest career Rfield total among major league third basemen. I looked at the top 30 on that list, and unless I missed somebody, every other member of that top 30 has a higher positive gap between RF/9 and league average RF/9 than Boggs, in most cases, very, very much higher. I’m hoping to post a table with these numbers tonight.
I recognize that range factor has glaring flaws and limits as a stat for evaluating fielding, and indeed stats like fielding WAR are essentially attempts to adjust for the various flaws and limits in raw range factor. But I do like to use RF as an occasional reality check on more elaborate fielding valuations because it seems to me that if a guy is not actually making more plays than an average fielder at his positiion, there may be some legitimate outer bound to how extraordinarily valuable a defensive player he could really have been. In the case of Boggs, his RF does seem to be quite far out of whack with the huge value WAR is giving him as a fielder. There may be perfectly good explanations for that. But I do think it’s a fact that should at least raise our antenna about, or suggest further inquiry into, the accuracy of the high WAR valuation of Wade’s defense.
All comments noted. More later. No time now as I’m still looking for Eddie Andelman’s career WAR…
Does post season count in this discussion as it does for Smoltz, Rivera, Schilling, etc.? If so, Brett was 337/297/627 in 184 at bats, 30 runs scored, 10 HRs, 23 RBIs in 43 games. Boggs 237/337/383 in 174 at bats, 15 Rs, 2 HRs, 16 RBIs in 39 games. Those Royals-Yankee series, the 80 and 85 WS. That homer off Gossage…
(Eddie Andelman, never thought I’d hear that name again. Was he the first sports talk show guy?)
Andelman may have been the first regular sports-talk host in the Boston area with “The Sports Huddle”; well him and Guy Manella, way back in the early 70s.
I doubt he was the first sports-talk host _ever_ in the entire country, seeing that commercial radio has been around since 1920. Posters here from other parts of the country, can you weigh in?
As an interesting tangent, when I was involved with my local(Framingham) college radio station in the late 80s, we acquired several boxes of old production carts from “The Sports Huddle” and WHDH-AM, through our advisor.
Bill Mazer was doing a sports talk radio show on WNBC in New York City as early as 1964, according to Wikipedia, and I remember him myself almost but probably not quite that far back.
Maybe some of you older guys can confirm this but there was a New York sportscaster named Stan Lomax who I think had a sports talk show way back when.
Art Rust Jr. did sports radio talk for a Queens station back in the fifties, and worked steadily for the next thirty plus years, for a time on TV, then back to talk radio.
I guess it kind of depends on what one means by sports-talk. Rust’s obits suggest that although he had a sports news and interview show as early as the 1950s, those early shows weren’t the call-in kind of thing we now think of as sports-talk. Ditto with Stan Lomax, who I remember quite well doing the sports report on WOR’s Rambling with Gambling, which my mother listened to during breakfast before packing me off to elementary school. Mazer I think is pretty well recognized as the first to do the call-in type sports show at least in NYC.
Alan Trammell, Kenny Lofton, Roberto Alomar
Boggs, Glavine, Trammell
Boggs, Trammell, Sandberg
Boggs, Brown, Lofton
Larkin, Trammell, Sandberg
Boggs, Trammell, and Raines
Bah, I’ve been so absurdly busy this week that I failed to notice this until today. I do not have the time nor the energy to explain my methodology so I hope you all remember it.
Initial vote:
1. Wade Boggs (6.6 WAR/162 during 12-yr peak of 1983-94)
2. Larry Walker (6.6 WAR/162 during 12-yr peak of 1992-2003)
3. Barry Larkin (6.6 WAR/162 during 12-yr peak of 1988-99)
I could put those three in any order, essentially, but I think that’s the order of my preference.
Ranking of other HOF-caliber candidates:
4. Ryne Sandberg (6.6 WAR/162 during 5-yr peak of 1988-92)
5. Kenny Lofton (6.5 WAR/162 during 8-yr peak of 1992-99)
6. Tim Raines (6.5 WAR/162 during 5-yr peak of 1983-87)
7. Alan Trammell (6.2 WAR/162 during 11-yr peak of 1980-90)
8. Craig Biggio (5.6 WAR/162 during 9-yr peak of 1991-99)
9. Edgar Martínez (6.1 WAR/162 during 7-yr peak of 1995-2001)
10. Roberto Alomar (5.7 WAR/162 during 6-yr peak of 1996-2001)
11. John Smoltz (5.6 WAR/162 during 5-yr peak of 1995-99)
12. Tom Glavine (5.3 WAR/162 during 6-yr peak of 1995-2000)
I’ll just straight out go with my top 3 at this point:
Boggs, Glavine, Trammell
Wade Boggs had 200 hits and 100 runs seven years in a row.
In each of those years he had at least 89 walks.
In all but one of those years he had at least twice as many walks as strikeouts
(and that was his 9.0 WAR year)
He led the league in times-on-base every one of those years (plus an eighth)
_____________
I’m seeing the arguments being made that Boggs benefitted from the Fenway effect.
And of course, this is true.
But he batted .369 for his career at Fenway.
Ted Williams ‘only’ managed a .361 there.
Baseball is about making adjustments.
Boggs applied himself, had a methodology, had discipline, and made the most of his talent.
No, he probably doesn’t bat 370 in San Diego, but he doesn’t bat 270, either.
Part of the home/road effect, besides fence distance and altitude and sightlines, is the psychology/makeup of the ballplayer. Some players probably enjoy being on the road, enjoy the freedom to party and blow off steam.
Others benefit more from the routine of home. Boggs was famous for eating the exact same meal before every game.
__________
Milwaukee manager Harvey Kuenn observed that “He has such good bat control that he knows he can always get a good piece of a pitch. It’s amazing, really. In 10 times at bat, he’ll get good wood on the ball eight or nine times. Some guys are lucky to get good wood three out of 10.”
Walt Hriniak described what made Boggs so good. “Three things. He’s got a balanced, workable stance. He’s got great discipline for the strike zone. And he lowers his head on the baseball better than anyone else in baseball. He’s not a good hitter, he’s a great hitter. Exceptional. When it’s all done and over with, you’ll see some of the greatest stats of any hitter in the last 30 years.”
Two outs, bottom of the 9th, bases loaded, tie game, who do you want up? Any player in the history of baseball from any vintage. I think the answer is Wade Boggs age 27-30. That’s a very cherry picked example where you can walk-off-with-a-walk but I think it highlights the point. He was the hardest out in baseball to a level rarely seen. Hitters were more feared and pitched around to be sure but in that situation, ball 4 is the same as a grand slam. The pitcher’s going to throw strikes and you don’t need power to move everyone 90 feet. Though I suppose an argument could be made for a Ty Cobb bunt/slap torturing of a third basemen as the right answer as well. Babe Ruth and Ted Williams worked a better OBP for long periods of time but they were both feared hitters that pitchers did not want to challenge. They also played against much weaker pitchers and defenses IMHO (pre-integration league).
Down by 1 run, you probably want a better bat. Tied, you just want that pure hitting impossible out Wade Boggs up there.
Ok, now somebody tell me he was 0 for 5 in those situations or something and that Mike Cameron or somesuch was 3 for 3 with 2 walks.
Boggs with bases loaded and 2 outs had a .385 OBP in 104 PA. I have no idea how many of those were in the bottom of the 9th or later in tie ballgames.
Boggs had 4 career regular season PAs with two outs and bases loaded in the ninth inning. He had two singles, a walk and a groundout.
clearly a beast
Don’t sleep on Ichiro. Career .426 BA in 65 PAs with the bases loaded and two outs. No idea how he did in the 9th inning of such situations.
BTW, Boggs is 95th all time in OBP with two outs, bases loaded (minimum 50 PAs). The top 10 list is Mark McGwire, Bobby Abreu, Miguel Cabrera, Kevin McReynolds, Mike Hargrove, Alvin Davis, Bob Watson, Mark Grace, Ichiro, and Joe Orsulak (!).
5 for 11 in the ninth, with 3 singles, a double and a homer. In extra innings he’s had two two-out, bases loaded PAs, a walk and a fly out. Overall, 1.212 OPS in those 13 PAs.
Wade Boggs age 27-30: .460 OBP
Ted Williams age 27-30: .499 OBP
You can’t pitch around someone with the bases loaded in the bottom of the ninth and a tie game, so I think I’ll stick with The Splendid Splinter as my pick in that situation.
Boggs may be the least likely HOFer ever, given the early pattern of his career.
1) He spent two full seasons at AA and two full seasons at AAA. I doubt there’s another HOFer who spent so much time in the high minors.
2) He was 24 when he finally made the Red Sox in ’82. Again, that’s quite old for a HOFer.
3) When he did finally make the Red Sox, he spent the first half of the season sitting on the bench. The Red Sox already had an established 3rd baseman in Carney Lansford. Lansford was only one year older than Boggs and had won the batting title and finished 6th in MVP balloting the year before.
4) Boggs only got a chance to play when Lansford went down with an injury in late June. At the time, Boggs was only hitting .242. Fortunately he went on a hot streak, raising his average to .357. When Lansford came back, they kept Boggs in the lineup, moving his to 1st. If he hadn’t gone on a hot steak, who knows when he would have gotten another chance? Or what if Lansford hadn’t got hurt?
5) At the end of the season, the Red Sox traded Lansford to the As, giving Boggs 3rd base. I have no idea why the Red Sox chose Boggs over Lansford, given that Lansford was only one year older and was much more established. They could have just as easily held onto Lansford and traded Boggs. Or held onto both but kept Boggs as a part-time player, deciding that his rookie season was a bit of a fluke since it was so much better than what he had done in the minors. It obviously worked out but it’s the sort of decision that seems smarter in retrospect than it probably did at the time.
I’l see your Boggs and raise you Dazzy Vance as least likely HOFer ever, given the early pattern of his career:
Vance in the majors before age 31:
- 20 games
- 64.2 innings pitched
- ZERO wins
- 11 years in the minors (ages 21-30)
Hoyt Wilhelm, Joe McGinnity also fit this pattern of late-blooming HOFers.
Well I should have specified position players. Pitchers obviously can have very strange career patterns.
Looks like the only HOF position players whose first MLB game was in their age 24 season or older are Boggs, Puckett, Bill Terry, Dave Bancroft, Earl Averill, Earle Combs, Jackie Robinson and Roy Campenella.
Robinson and Campenella of course had extenuating circumstances that delayed the start of their careers. Of the others, Boggs is by far the best player and the only one that is clearly deserving of being in the Hall. The others fall in the range of poor selections to borderline deserving.
Puckett – over the borderline, solid peak
Bill Terry – just over the borderline due to peak
Dave Bancroft – just under the borderline,we can’t take all of Frankie’s Friends
Earl Averill – right on the borderline, I’d let him in due to peak (I’m biased to players whose last names begin with “A”)
Earle Comb – several great years, but not enough of them
I reached 1000 posts! Is anything magical supposed to happen?
@109 Lawrence: Andy sends you a congratulatory telegram. Oh no, wait, that’s the Queen.
It’s maybe cleaner to point at Lansford, but I think the more direct culprit is Glenn Hoffman. Lansford was already an established MLB third basemen before being traded to Boston for the 1981 season. Glenn Hoffman was drafted 5 rounds higher (2nd round) than Boggs in 1976 and was almost exactly the same age as Boggs (though on different sides of the line so Boggs is a year older instead of less than a month). By the time Boggs was finishing up hitting .317 as a 20 year old in AA ball back in 1978, Hoffman had turned his 1977 A-ball line of .289/.361/.360/.721 at short into a AAA call-up and followed it hitting .282 as a 19 year old stud SS prospect in ’78. Unfortunately for Hoffman, and because of him Boggs, Boston had an established AS shortop in 1977 and 1978 in the part of slick fielding Richard “Rooster” Burleson.
At the start of ’79, Hoffman was the Pawtucket AAA 3B in an attempt to move him to be useful alongside Rooster and Boggs was sent back to AA (Hoffman would not see AA until much later). In ’79, Boggs would again demolish AA this time OB-ing to the tune of .420 but newly converted third basemen Hoffman would put up .285/.332/.385/.717 and out HR Boggs to the tune of 11 to 0. That’s right 0. Hoffman costs Boggs a year right here, not Lansford.
1980 comes around and the Sox decide their 21 year old top prospect is ready for the show !at third! so Glenn Hoffman starts 93 games at 3B, hitting a respectable .285/.326/.397/.724 line. DWAR rankes him decently and the Sox can even use him at Short when needed. Boggs hits .306 but has 1 homer and 3 steals in his first year in AAA, hardly forcing his way to the show. Still, there must have been some sense that Hoffman would make a better shortstop than a third basemen. Rooster misses out on the 1980 AS game at short for the first time in 4 years but still puts up a respectable season. Chalk this year up to development at the next level for Boggs.
Rather than call up the powerless Boggs for ’81 to man third and free Hoffman for short, The Sox trade Rooster to the angel in return for a young and well established third basemen in the already mentioned person of one Carney Lansford. Hoffman gets to start at Short and Boggs gets to start… at third in AAA again. Boggs finds some power and DESTROYS AAA with a very nice 41 doubles and .437 OBP but it’s Hoffman’s poor .231/.271/.285/.556 at short that’s really costing Boggs another year. Lansford wins the ’81 batting title but he probably wouldn’t even be on the team if it weren’t for Hoffman.
1982 comes around, Sox go with Lansford at 3B with Hoffman at SS and Boggs at… 1B platooned with Dave Stapleton where Boggs would start 44 games. He would start there only 11 other times over his career. I’m not sure I would count Bogg’s time out of the lineup in 1982 against Lansford. It’s more a combination of factors like 42 year old Yaz hanging around, Stapleton’s non-left-handedness, and Hoffman displacing Rooster who was traded for Lansford. Still, Boggs got 381 plate attempts in ’82. Enough to get serious consideration as a starter for ’83. Boggs even manages 5 home runs in his rookie year, matching his last three minor league seasons combined (exceeding his 2 year AAA career total of 3).
For ’83, the Sox were probably wondering why they had freed up short for Hoffman who had hit just .209/.262/.311/.573. They also have two good third basemen to deal with now and no longer have Rooster. Still, they stick with Hoffman for ’83 which means Lansford or Boggs must got. I think if you look at those player’s careers going into the ’83 season, it’s clear that they can get more for Lansford and that they also know pretty clearly they have an exceptional hitter in Boggs. Everyone in the organization had enough time to look at Boggs! Lansford gets a good piece in Tony Armas for CF. In looking back, they might have wanted to go after a shortstop since Hoffman would have an abysmal year in 1983 and find himself on the way out after that.
So in conclusion, blame the fact that Boggs was born a few days late costing him a year, and he lost about 2 years to the second rounder boston took ahead of him in 1976: Glenn Hoffman. That, and the guy who decided to move Glenn Hoffman to third in 1979 AAA rather than call up Boggs probably made a big mistake.
Mosc – Several comments:
1) You seem to be implying that I stated that Lansford was somehow holding Boggs back. I never said any such thing. I only talked about Lansford relative to Boggs’ playing time in 1982.
2) “Lansford wins the ’81 batting title but he probably wouldn’t even be on the team if it weren’t for Hoffman.”
I don’t think that’s true. The Red Sox had a huge hole at third prior to acquiring Lansford. Their prior 3rd baseman was Butch Hobson. Hobson was a butcher in the field but the Red Sox were willing to tolerate that as long as he hit. But he was dreadful in 1980 (68 OPS+). Sure they had shifted Hoffman to 3rd but his bat played a lot better at short. So they trade was made to acquire Lansford as much as it was to open space for Hoffman. Boggs was basically a non-entity at this point, hitting for good but not great average and showing zero power (not even doubles power).
3) Your account of Boggs’ playing time/usage during his rookie season in 1982 in simply incorrect All you have to do is look at the starting lineup page:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/BOS/1982-lineups.shtml
For one thing, Boggs NEVER platooned with Stapleton at first. And how can you not count Boggs’ time out of the lineup against Lansford? Boggs was a 3rd baseman of unknown productivity. Being blocked by an established, quality 3rd baseman.
A quick rundown of Boggs’ starts in 1982:
*He started game 2 at first (Yaz started games 1 and 3). That could have been because of an injury, no way of knowing.
*His next start was game 16 at first. That’s the only game in a long stretch that he started at first. Otherwise, it was all Stapleton.
*He started games 18-20 at 3rd, presumably due to a minor injury to Lansford.
*He didn’t start another game till game 68!!! Yes, he went 48 games without a start. His game logs indicate that he was being used as a pinch hitter during this time so he clearly wasn’t hurt. The Red Sox just had zero interest in using him.
*He started pretty much every game from 68-92 at 3rd. This was the period when Lansford was hurt.
*When Lansford returned, Boggs started at first for 5 of the next 6 games.
*He then moved back to 3rd base for the following 14 games with Lansford moving to DH (perhaps still bothered by whatever injury had sidelined him earlier).
*Boggs then failed to start the next 15 games. He was occasionally used as a pinch hitter during this stretch so I presume he was dealing with a nagging injury that prevented him from starting.
*Boggs then started the final 35 games at first with Stapleton mostly being moved to short (how often does a team move a first baseman to short???)
4) I do agree that Lansford obviously had more trade value than Boggs, given his longer track record.
5) I completely disagree that Hoffman cost Boggs any major league playing time. Again, Boggs minor league numbers simply weren’t that great until his final minor league season.
Off-topic, but this won’t fit any particular post:
When typing up any post, consider its “readability” in the most general sense. That is:
DON’T MAKE YOUR PARAGRAPHS TOO LONG.
LIST STATISTICS VERTICALLY if POSSIBLE, NOT HORIZONTALLY in TEXT
A really long paragraph is somewhat of a turnoff for me, and I’d imagine for a lot of other people here. It also makes it harder to follow the premise of any discussion if the paragraph goes on forever. I admit it, I’ve been guilty myself of run-on paragraphs here.
This problem is exacerbated as comments are “nested”, and each successive “nesting” is narrower.
I don’t wanna be the “grammar police” here, just making a useful suggestion to possibly increase reading comprehension.
#86 Lawrence . Agreed , BA and RBI used to define a hitter, and there were few third basemen who were good at those two skills , which may Indirectly say something about how difficult the position is to play. Also, defense was a reputational rather than a statistical issue, back in the day, with a few spectacular plays going a long way to making a rep. I would generalize my other point, though, and say that walks by guys who bat 1-3 are worth more than walks by guys who bat 4-6 , and that this fact is little appreciated. I don’t know how to adjust for this , but you must be at least a competent base runner, not necessarily a threat to steal before a big league manager will pencil you in up there.
I think you could add 10 runs a year completely scratching the concept of a lineup and just hitting your hitter’s in order of their total skillset. Barry Bonds? Leading off.
Mosc, I think I agree , depending on what you mean by ” total skill set” . There have certainly been some bizarre batting order strategies down through the years , with patient, but powerless hitters batting seventh, and jackrabbits with big strike zones leading off. I do think it makes sense to bat your best ops guy third, and your two best remaining OBP guys first and second. I think we overrate the value of the walks generated by aging DH types who bat down in the order. The sight of Paul Konerko standing on first with the bottom of the white sox order coming up probably does not strike terror in the heart of the defense. To revert to Boggs, they really didn’t know what to do with him, he batted first, second and third a lot in his career .
I think he was great anywhere near the top of the order, but I can see his managers wishing he had more power when they wrote him in third, and more speed when they wrote him in first, when all the time he was better than the guy they were wishing for
Braves manager Bobby Bragan tried something like this in 1966 – he batted Felipe Alou leadoff in 127 of the 154 games he started. This led to one of the strangest stat lines ever:
.327 BA, 218 hits, 31 HR
BUT ONLY…
74 RBI
He did lead the NL with 122 runs. Having Hank Aaron and Joe Torre hitting behind him helped a lot too, I’d imagine.
I just checked the JAWS list for third baseman -there are twelve players ahead of Traynor whose careers started before his (though none in the Top-10).
So, even before he retired, there were a number of third basemen who were (at the very least) close to or at his level. Bill James, in his TNBJHBA wrote a long piece explaining when (mid-50s) and how (see my #86 above) Traynor was regarded as the GOAT, comparing him to Stan Hack, who got very little HOF support (7 years, peaking at 2.6%).
Actually, the #52 rating seems very low to me. B-R has his Rfield at -32; from all contemporary accounts he was one of the great defensive third basemen of his time. I’d say he was above-average at the very least, since he was basically a SS playing 3B.
It’s a case of “he’s so underrated he’s underrated now” – I wouldn’t put him in the Top-10, but he’s probably 15-20th all-time.
As far as walks and BOP, related to the topic of discussion Wade Boggs: in the mid-80s, the Red Sox frequently had either Boggs or Dwight Evans batting leadoff, and often those two batting 1-2. I don’t think it crippled their offense, even though neither of them were not condidered great baserunners.
Yes, Boggs cost his teams a few runs on the basepaths, but nowhere as much as some people claim.
Baserunning is hard to excel at. You have to steal consistently at a very high rate to add any value. You have very few opportunities to stretch a play with your legs to add value. You have so many plays where you can power walk or sprint and it will make no difference. Often times, I think good baserunning is less about speed and more about initial reactions to the ball off the bat (do you lunge back to base or take off or tag up?)
Mosc, I think the key is not to subtract value on the base paths . I concur that, those who add significant value by base stealing are few and far between, but those who keep their head in the game, have at least Ok speed , and anticipate the play , score more runs, which of course is the point.
BRef has a Stat called RS% which estimates the percentage of times a player who reaches base without hitting a home run subsequently scores, over a small sample this doesn’t mean much , but over a long career I think it is the gold standard of base running. I’ve posted on this elsewhere, but for this thread , wade Boggs was .322 career and Brett .320 , both very good numbers , but well short of players like Rickey, Raines, Paul Molitor, all superb base runners
OTOH , consider Harmon Killebrew at .228, the Mendoza line for base running. Of course, to make this into a meaningful stat, one would adjust for era , park factors , etc, but I think it is a reliable indication that Killers WAR overestimates the value of his walks.
24 stolen bases in 18 years.
Traynor had 2,363 hits in games in which he played third base. That’s the third highest number in that category all-time, behind only Brooks Robinson (who broke Traynor’s record in the category in 1972) and Boggs.
I say uncle on the Boggs-Brett comparisons, but I will say Brett had more impact over pennant races and was a dynamic post season player. Is Boggs great? Of course. Is Brett great? Of course. After looking at the numbers and reading above it’s probably closer than I thought, but I’d still take Brett.
As would I.
If Brett had been able to stay on the field as much when he played third base as he was in his later years as a first baseman, we’re not even having this conversation. But he wasn’t able to whereas Boggs managed to do that almost his entire career and thus the gap is narrower than one might have expected. But yes, it’s still Brett for me as well.
Trammell, Sandberg, Lofton
A few more details about Boggs:
7.1 XBH %
7.1 League XBH%
So, not a homer guy, but he put himself in scoring position or better at exactly the league rate.
__________________________
8% IF/FB% (percentage of fly balls on the infield)
18% League Avg
Is there anything more frustrating as a batter than a weak pop up?
__________________________
0.53 SO/BB
1.75 League SO/BB
Of all of Boggs’ eye popping numbers, it is his lack of strikeouts that stand out for me.
Consider the psychological effect on a pitcher, the pitcher knowing that the sonofabitch is not going to swing at strike 3 out of the zone, and that you’re simply not going to get a good one by him.
_________________________
And here’s the proof of that last piece:
3% S/Str (strikes swinging (without contact) / Strikes)
15% League S/Str
For some perspective on how amazing this is, here are some other guys:
5% Gwynn
7% Mattingly
8% Olerud
9% Roberto Alomar
12% Julio Franco
16% Puckett
21% McGwire
____________
( The balancing flip side to that:
47% L/SO (strikeouts looking / all strikeouts)
27% League average )
Note: The 3% S/Str is from data starting in 1988.
Cool, so now I know where to find all that strikes looking/swinging data.
*Checks Marco Scutaro*
5% S/Str. Bet the league average is higher these days as well.
For the 1958-Part 2 election, I’m voting for:
-Tony Gwynn
-Tom Glavine
-Wade Boggs
Other top candidates I considered highly (and/or will consider in future rounds):
-Biggio (Hopefully only temporarily off ballot)
-Alomar (Hopefully only temporariliy off ballot)
-Martinez (Hopefully only temporarily off ballot)
-Smoltz
-Walker
-Trammell
-Larkin
-Raines
-Sandberg
-Lofton
-Brown
Trammel
Smoltz
Larkin
Boggs, Trammell, Sandberg
Martinez, Lofton, Trammel
Glavine, Biggio, Boggs
Brown, Biggio, Martinez
Lofton, Martinez, Sandberg
Gwynn, Biggio, Kittle
Biggio Walker Martinez
Raines, Ryno, Trammell
I wouldn’t quite consider any of the new candidates to be COG-worthy, so it’s back to the leftovers for me:
1) Gwynn
2) Boggs
3) Alomar (because he needs some love)
Alomar, Larkin, Brown
Just a reminder that voting in the current round of the Circle of Greats balloting closes tonight. The post says “11PM EST”, but of course we are no longer on Standard Time — you have until 11PM Eastern Daylight Time tonight to cast your vote.
I don’t know if anyone else had the same problem but when I tried to access the site last night at about 9 PM CST I couldn’t. I tried again about an hour later & had the same problem. I’m not sure that this had any impact on the final vote totals but if someone says that they tried to vote and were unable to do so I just wanted to let you know that they weren’t alone in being able to access the site.
Yes, I could not access the site yesterday evening, either. Must have been some sort of issue at WordPress. The voting deadline for this round is extended through tonight, Wednesday, at 11PM Eastern Daylight Time.
I kind of took a change of position last ballot – I’m comfortable with the broad safety net afforded by the redemption balloting process, plus I want to actually see interesting names on the next redemption ballot. So instead of worrying that a player I think deserves to get into the CoG eventually is going to fall off the ballot, I’m just going to vote for the three best players on the ballot as I see them. It’s taken 11 rounds to come around to the simplest and most intuitive strategy, and I’m happy with that.
Wade Boggs – clearly a head above the rest.
Larry Walker – the constant illuminating debate here about Walker is great. What it’s done for me is to crystallize my view of him as a great player befitting of being in the CoG. Adam’s post on him today explains quite well what I’ve recently thought about him – because a) his Coors numbers sometimes look Ruthian and he clearly ain’t Ruth and b) Coors also made Dante Bichette’s numbers look great, there’s a tendency at first glance (and sometimes 2nd-Nth glances) to think WAR overrates him. It’s almost like it’s so offensive that he dared to put up numbers like the all-time greats in Coors, and it’s so offensive that mediocre players looked so good there, that it obfuscates number-centered debate. Larry Walker was great – you don’t have to be Ruth to make the CoG. Was he as good as Mussina? Thomas? I think so. Although I’m REALLY voting for Walker because he’s Canadian and so am I
Tom Glavine – perhaps I value longevity at a high level over an even higher peak, but I just think he’s right up there on the ballot.
Well, right about now the only ones that really NEED votes are Alomar and Brown. I think they’re both worthy of staying on the ballot, so they get my vote. My other vote goes to Willie McGee, as I’m surprised he hasn’t gotten a single vote despite an MVP and a couple of batting titles, not to mention being a big part of a Cardinals team that played in 3 seven-game WS in the ’80′s. He at least deserves a vote…if the BBWA (ahem) can give him 5% then I can give him a place on the spreadsheet.
Alomar, Brown, McGee
From 1989-2000 Kevin Brown was 4th among all pitchers in fWAR, trailing only Greg Maddux, Roger Clemens, and Randy Johnson. He was also 6th in FIP, 4th in ERA, games started, and innings pitched, and 5th in wins. He was runner-up to Smoltz in the ’96 NL CYA even though he had 7.7 bWAR compared to Smoltz’s 7.0, and his ERA was more than a full run lower (1.89 to 2.94), which translated to a 215 ERA+ compared to a 149 for Smoltz.
Robbie Alomar was incredibly consistent. He was a very good defender, hitter, and baserunner. He had some pop in his bat for a 2nd baseman, and he stole almost 500 bases.
Lastly, I have to give a tip of the cap to Dickie Thon for what might have been. In 1983 he finished 7th in the MVP voting despite leading all NL position players in WAR. He gets a special vote not only in the “what might have been” category, but also for the courage he displayed after being hit by Mike Torres.
1) Kevin Brown 2)Robbie Alomar 3) Dickie Thon
Thon-A-Thon: (def.) a long group run to raise charitable donations in support of beanball victims.
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
In honor of Dickie Thong…OUCH!
Trammell, Glavine, Biggio
14 players received 10%.
Whitaker, Stieb, and Brett Butler next year.
Will be see 15 players within 10% of one another?
And the top guys in ’56 are Molitor and Murray.
We have a full-scale battle royal on our hands.