Johnny Bench may well have been the greatest all-around catcher in baseball history. High Heat Stats voters showed no uncertainty in making him the 26th inductee into the Circle of Greats, by a wide margin. More on Johnny, and the voting, after the jump.
Most Career Wins Above Replacement (baseball-reference version) By A Catcher (defined as a player who played more games at catcher than any other one position):
1. Johnny Bench 75.1
2. Gary Carter 69.7
3. Carlton Fisk 68.4
4. Ivan Rodriguez 68.3
5. Yogi Berra 59.3
Most Career Regular Season Home Runs For the Reds Franchise:
1. Johnny Bench 389
2. Frank Robinson 324
3. Tony Perez 287
4. Adam Dunn 270
5. Ted Kluszewski 251
Most Career Post-Season Home Runs for the Reds Franchise:
1. Johnny Bench 10
2. Tony Perez 6
3. Pete Rose 5
T4. Morgan, Foster, Geronimo, Sabo and Ludwick 3 each
Most RBI in the Majors, 1970-1979:
1. Johnny Bench 1013
2. Tony Perez 954
3. Lee May 936
4. Reggie Jackson 922
5. Willie Stargell 906
****************************
Johnny was even stronger in the post-season than the regular season:
in J Bench’s regular season career: .342 OBP, .476 SLG, .817 OPS
in Bench’s N.L.C.S. career: 94 PAs, .330 OBP, .530 SLG, .860 OPS
in his World Series career: 94 PAs, .340 OBP, .523 SLG, .864 OPS
*****************************
Baseball-reference’s data includes a catcher’s fielding stat called Stolen Base Opportunities (SBO), which counts the number of plate appearances during which a catcher was behind the plate with a man on first or second and the next base open. For each season of Johnny Bench’s career, I looked at the average stolen bases allowed in the NL per SBO (subtracting out Bench’s own SBs allowed and his SBOs). I then compared that average rate to Bench’s own SB per SBO rate for that season. Using that approach I could calculate for each season how many more stolen bases the Reds would have allowed at the average (non-Johnny Bench) SB per SBO rate instead of Bench’s actual rate, given the number of SBOs that Bench actually faced. I also went through the same process for caught stealing numbers. The results:
Bench’s actual career numbers
Stolen Bases Allowed: 610
Runners Caught Stealing: 469
Numbers if Bench had allowed SBs and caught runners at the then- prevailing NL average (non-Johnny Bench) rate per SBO, assuming same number of SBOs:
Stolen Bases Allowed: 989
Runners Caught Stealing: 512
*****************************
–This 1947 round of Circle of Greats voting saw very heavy support for the newcomers from the 1947 birth year. Bench led the way, but Carlton Fisk and Nolan Ryan also received a lot of support. These three guys likely would have received an even higher percentage of the votes but for a late swing in the balloting toward strategic voting for some of the holdovers.
–Despite the late strategic voting, two holdovers drop off the ballot, BBWAA-elected Hall of Famer Dave Winfield, and Rick Reuschel. Fisk and Ryan replace them, so the holdover list stays at 11 names long.
–Ryne Sandberg avoided falling off the ballot by a tiny margin. One fewer ballot with his name on it, or three more ballots without his name, and Sandberg too would have been sent off to redemption-round purgatory. By the way, baseball-reference has not yet recognized that Sandberg has replaced Charlie Manuel as Phillies manager. Recent box scores and the Phillies page at b-ref are (as of the time of this post) still listing Manuel as the manager.
–With Winfield and Reuschel out, and Ryan and Fisk joining the holdovers with enough support to earn protection from the bubble, only Sandberg, Eddie Murray and Kenny Lofton will be on the bubble next round.
As usual, you can check out the complete voting record for this past round at Google Docs. The link is here: COG 1947 Vote Tally
If you would like to review the history of the COG voting, a spreadsheet summary of the voting is here: COG Vote Summary , with a summary of the raw vote totals on Sheet 1 and a summary of the percentage totals on Sheet 2.
*************************************************
The Circle of Greats membership thus far:
Bert Blyleven, P
Roger Clemens, P
Tom Glavine, P
Randy Johnson, P
Greg Maddux, P
Mike Mussina, P
Curt Schilling, P
Johnny Bench, C
Gary Carter, C
Mike Piazza, C
Jeff Bagwell, 1B
Wade Boggs, 3B
George Brett, 3B
Mike Schmidt, 3B
Barry Larkin, SS
Cal Ripken, Jr., SS
Ozzie Smith, SS
Alan Trammell, SS
Robin Yount, SS
Rickey Henderson, LF
Tim Raines, LF
Barry Bonds, LF
Tony Gwynn, RF
Larry Walker, RF
Paul Molitor, DH
Frank Thomas, DH
I missed the regular comment period for the last COG results, but I just wanted to say how good it looks to separate our inductees by position; I dunno, it makes me think of it as more of an all-time team than a collection of guys. And that glaring hole at second base becomes more apparent…
That hole at 2B will be filled before too long – Rod Carew comes up in 1945 (although he did play a few more games at first than at second, so I suppose he’ll be counted as a first baseman, presuming he makes it), and Joe Morgan in 1943.
It’s also curious that we still don’t have a CF – and unless Lofton should happen to sneak in one of these next several years (unlikely, I’d say), we probably won’t until the 1931 (!) ballot, which, as has been pointed out several times before, will feature both Mays and Mantle (and Eddie Mathews and Ernie Banks and Ken Boyer and Jim Bunning…yowza!). Coincidentally enough, that’ll be another 2-part election, if the current pattern holds.
Another interesting quirk is that as yet we have only one ‘pure’ first baseman. I tend to think of the 1990s as a golden age for first baseman – in addition to Bagwell (and Thomas) the ’90s featured players such as McGriff, McGwire, Will Clark, Palmeiro, and Olerud; a number of representatives of the Hall of Very Good, e.g. Grace, Mo Vaughn, Tino Martinez, et al; and some others who were born after our 1968 cutoff (Thome, Delgado, Giambi). That’s a lot of talent at the position. Of course there are, um, extracurricular reasons some of them received short shrift in the voting….
Molitor was a full time second basemen for 3 seasons. He also played 500 innings at age 33. DWAR says he was around league average which is pretty good considering he was always a shortstop prior to putting on a brewers uniform. He should be viewed at second similar to Rod Carew to me. You’d probably platoon them at second happily.
I’m trying to get Biggio in at 2b (or cf).
By my count, Winfield makes the 6th BBWAA HOF member to drop off of the COG ballot so far (apologies if my columns are wonky):
Puckett: 1960 – 1 round – 3 votes
Dawson: 1954 – 1 round – 5 votes
Eckersley: 1954 – 2 rounds – 9 votes
Rice: 1953 – 1 round – 1 vote
Gossage: 1951 – 2 rounds – 13 votes
Winfield: 1951 – 6 rounds – 53 votes
Winfield is the first that I would say is a “strong but not overwhelming” Hall of Famer, much like many of our long-time bubble candidates (Alomar, Biggio, Murray, Sandberg, etc.), and the results are quite a contrast to the 2 relievers and 3 weaker recent Hall of Famers.
Adam Darowski’s Hall of Stats calculates a rating for each player based on a formula that relies on b-ref’s Wins Above Average and Wins Above Replacement stats.
Adam has his numbers set up so that a Hall of Stats rating of 100 or more is “Hall of Fame” worthy in the sense that 208 players have a rating of 100 or more, matching the number of players in the actual Hall of Fame. For the smaller, more elite version of a Hall that we are selecting for the Circle of Greats (which on completion will only be about half the size of the Hall of Fame, though the eligibility standards are a bit different, too), a similar cutoff using Adam’s numbers would be a Hall of Stats rating in the low to mid 120s.
Hall of Stats ratings:
Puckett 93
Dawson 122
Eckersley 124
Rice 83
Gossage 90
Winfield 114
Now the Hall of Stats rating is no more the be-all-and-end-all of evaluation standards than any other standard, and is only useful to the extent you accept the usefulness of (1) b-ref’s WAR and WAA, and (2) Adam’s formula for combining those two stats. But it’s interesting to compare our voting results to Adam’s ratings.
Just to add to your comment about the Hall of Stats birtelcom:
I figure the cutoff point for the top 112 in the Hall of Stats to be about 126 but it’s really not as simple as that. There are 37 “points” difference between the #1 and #2 spot in the HOS. Between #2 and #3 there are 26. But there are 8 players with a score of 126, 3 with a score of 125 and 6 more with a score of 124. A small change in how WAR is calculated or how Adam calculates his scores could easily more someone up or down 5 or more “points”, JAWS is the same way plus- since the don’t use the same methodology to arrive at their rankings- will often arrive at different conclusions. And of course WAR doesn’t account for anything outside of the regular season.
Then you have stuff like this: Hank Greenberg only scores 119 in the HOS but he missed 4 & 1/2 seasons to WW2 while managing to lead the league in home runs and rbi’s in both the last full season BEFORE he went in and his first full season AFTER he came back again. He easily lost 25 or even 30 WAR while in the service. Same story for Bob Feller, Joe DiMaggio and many more. Different story but same issues for Jackie Robinson, Roy Campanella and others.
There are other issues these systems don’t account for as well, at least in my mind.
They (meaning the HOS & JAWS) are really useful tools and a great place to start when deciding how you’re going to vote. But you need to do some homework on your own in addition.
Keep in mind that the 112-member goal we have for the COG is intended to mimic the BBWAA’s election of 112 guys who played a majority of their seasons from 1900 on. Because the BBWAA never considered its mission to include electing those guys who played mainly 19th century ball, to the extent we ultimately choose to do so for the COG we should do so beyond the 112-player limit. Following that logic, when I look at the Hall of Stats for a 112-player cutoff point, I exclude those players in Adam’s pantheon who played primarily in the 19th century. That’s why, when I do the 112-player cutoff point I get a Hall of Stats rating a few points lower than 126.
I do use the Hall of Stats quite heavily. I try to go on pure stats (including the weighted ones), and my own impression (as subjective as it is). I do use Adam’s rankings based on his formula, and try to look for a player that is near the Top 112 according to the Hall of Stats, if I am in doubt.
I am embarassed that I let Dawson go by without considering him for the COG myself – I didn’t even go so far as checking his Hall of Stats page, and am amazed that he has a 124 Hall Rating – not “weaker” at all, really. I will try and remember to have to have another look at his career during the next Redemption Round.
I hadn’t thought to try and weigh what Hall Rating is near the top 112, but that is most helpful, Hartvig. Interestingly, Eck and Dawson are just below 126.
I also note that with this last round, Smoltz has done the inevitable and taken the all-time vote lead back from the elected Gwynn. Now it’s Smoltz, Gwynn, Alomar, Biggio and Glavine with the most votes ever in that order, with Whitaker the highest other ‘active’ ballot vote-getter.