This post is for voting and discussion in the 49th round of balloting for the Circle of Greats (COG). This round completes the addition of players born in 1931. Rules and lists are after the jump.
Players born in 1931 are being brought on to the COG eligible list over two rounds, split based on the half of the year in which they were born — those born between January 1, 1931 and June 30, 1931 are being added to the ballot this round, while those born later in 1931 were added in last week’s voting. This round’s new group joins the holdovers from previous rounds to comprise the full set of players eligible to receive your votes in this round of balloting.
As usual, the new group of 1931-born players, in order to join the eligible list, must have played at least 10 seasons in the major leagues or generated at least 20 Wins Above Replacement (“WAR”, as calculated by baseball-reference.com, and for this purpose meaning 20 total WAR for everyday players and 20 pitching WAR for pitchers).
Each submitted ballot, if it is to be counted, 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 added future rounds of ballot eligibility (unless they appear on 75% or more of the ballots, in which case they win six added eligibility rounds). Players who appear on 25% or more of the ballots cast, but less than 50%, earn two added future rounds of ballot eligibility. Any other player in the top 9 (including ties) in ballot appearances, or who appears 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 Saturday, March 8, while changes to previously cast ballots are allowed until 11:00 PM EST on Thursday, March 6.
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:COG 1931 Part 2 Vote Tally . I’ll be updating the spreadsheet periodically with the latest votes. Initially, there is a row in the spreadsheet 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-1931 group will be added to the spreadsheet as votes are cast for them.
Choose your three players from the lists below of eligible players. The 13 current holdovers 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 1931 birth-year guys are listed below in order of the number of seasons each played in the majors, and alphabetically among players with the same number of seasons played. In total there were seventeen players born in 1931 who met the “10 seasons played or 20 WAR” minimum requirement. Eight of those are being added to the eligible list this round, those born in the first six months of the year. The nine players born later in the year were added last week.
Holdovers:
Lou Whitaker (eligibility guaranteed for 7 rounds)
Sandy Koufax (eligibility guaranteed for 5 rounds)
Eddie Mathews (eligibility guaranteed for 4 rounds)
John Smoltz (eligibility guaranteed for 3 rounds)
Juan Marichal (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Ron Santo (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Craig Biggio (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Jim Bunning (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Bobby Grich (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Kenny Lofton (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Edgar Martinez (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Willie McCovey (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Ryne Sandberg (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Everyday Players (born in 1931, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Willie Mays
Ernie Banks
Ken Boyer
Ed Bailey
Bill Virdon
Don Zimmer
Pitchers (born in 1931, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Hank Aguirre
Larry Jackson
Mays
Banks
Sandberg
Only 8 newcomers but at least 3 and possibly a 4th belong in the HOF. That said, I think only 2 warrant serious consideration for the COG.
Mays, Grich, Sandberg
Mays
Banks
Mathews
So lately for voting I’ve been ranking guys on 3 characteristics: WAR, WAA+ and JAWS. Willie Mays’ scores for the three of those, respectively, are 156.1/110.8/114.8. Egad, that’s mind-boggling.
Anyway, here are the 16 candidates on the ballot worthy of consideration ranked by those 3 methods, with cumulative ranking next to the names and ranking on the respective categories in parentheses). Willie Mays gets a cumulative ranking of 3, as he’s #1 on all 3 measures, and Koufax gets a 48, as he’s #16 on all 3 measures.
Mays 3 (1 1 1)
Mathews 6 (2 2 2)
Grich 12 (4 3 5)
Santo 12 (5 4 3)
Whitaker 16 (3 5 8)
Martinez 22 (7 6 9)
Banks 24 (9 11 4)
Lofton 26 (8 8 10)
Sandberg 26 (9 10 7)
Smoltz 27 (6 7 14)
McCovey 32 (12 9 11)
Marichal 35 (14 15 6)
Boyer 38 (13 14 11)
Biggio 39 (11 13 15)
Bunning 40 (15 12 13)
Koufax 48 (16 16 16)
Initial vote is Mays, Mathews, Santo.
Welcome back, birtelcom.
What a ballot! I don’t think we’ve ever had THIS much talent before, where a guy as good as Ken Boyer not only probably won’t make the next round, but quite possibly won’t even get a vote!
Willie Mays
Eddie Mathews
Ron Santo
(I have Santo just a smidge over Banks). And look at all these long-time Cubbies: Santo, Sandberg, Banks, and Jackson. Huh. That’s interesting, no?
Mays
Marichal
McCovey
And I’m not even a Giants fan.
Willie Mays, Eddie Mathews, Lou Whitaker
Mays, Marichal, Martinez.
Mays, Biggio, Edgar
Willie Mays, Eddie Mathews, Ernie Banks
Willie Mays
Eddie Mathews
Bobby Grich
Will Mays be the first 100 percent inductee? I was surprised that Aaron and Mantle didn’t come in higher.
Mays, Mathews, oufax
Welcome back, birtelcom!
When I try to view the spreadsheet with the ballot count, I get an “access denied” message from google drive. Don’t know what’s up with that – haven’t had it happen before,
Sorry, fixed now.
Anyone know why the Cards moved Boyer to CF in 1957?
He had just come off of a splendid 2nd year season with bat and glove.
CF was a black hole for St Louis, but they didn’t have a suitable 3B replacement, and it doesnt look like Boyer had any minor league outfield experience.
The Cards wanted to make room for Eddie Kasko at third in 1957 so they moved Boyer to CF (per wikipedia).
Maybe if they hadn’t traded Virdon in 1956 it wouldn’t have been a black hole.
The May 25, 1951 edition of The New York Times included an article that was headlined “Mays, Negro Star, to Join Giants Today”. The first sentence of the article ran: “Willie Mays, 20-year-old Negro outfielder, will start in center field for the Giants in the game with the Phillies in Shibe Park tonight.” The article mentions that the infielder Artie Wilson was sent down to make room on the roster for Mays. The article doesn’t mention that Wilson, who never did return to the majors after that, was himself a former Negro League star who had recently joined the Giants. Wilson had been a teammate of Mays on the Birmingham Black Barons. The Times article does point out that Mays’ was considered an extremely talented prospect whose debut was anticipated with great eagerness.
Artie Wilson’s obituary in the New York Times mentions that he hit .402 in 1948 for the Birmingham Black Barons when he mentored a young Willie Mays.
The Times Obituary goes on to say that this is thought to be the last time anyone exceeded .400 at the highest level of professional baseball.
As for Willie, his page at B-ref is a wonder.
Here is a stat that jumps off the screen…
5ft. 10in. 170lbs.
Ive wondered what stage in the player’s career b/r is taking that weight measurement. Here are the weights of the top ten homer guys.
Some seem right, some do not:
185 Bonds
180 Aaron
215 Ruth
170 Mays
225 Alex
195 Griffey
250 Thome
165 Sosa (I typed that correctly)
183 Robinson
215 McGwire
Voomo, I have often wondered about these weights as well.
Most seem like rookie weights although I don’t recall A-Rod and Thome being that heavy when they first came up.
If I had to guess the weights for each player at their power peak I would say:
Bonds-235
Alex- 235
Griffey- 225
Thome- 255
Sosa- 225
McGwire- 260
So Sosa “grew” the most of modern players in my mind.
I doubt Aaron and Mays ever saw 200 lbs although Robinson may have at the end of his career.
Ruth I have no idea- 240 at his peak?
According to Bill Bryson’s book “One Summer” (about the summer of 1927) “Over the course of his career, it was calculated Ruth had gained and lost two and a half tons.”
This seems a little unlikely since that works out to gaining and losing well over 100 pounds a year, even as a 19 year old.
What jumps out at me is that he led the league in walks and OBP at 40, when he also had 31 more strikeouts than he had in any other year, the only black ink he has after ’65
I’m guessing that Mays realized that at 40 he was losing bat speed, and he was consciously working the count more, resulting in more BB’s and K’s.
Strange that 1971 was the only year he had 100+ of both.
Some random musings:
– Don Zimmer is the only player since 1901 with 1000+ games thru age 33 who afterwards caught 30+ games in a season for the first time. Zimmer is also one of only 9 players since 1901 with 275 games at each of 2B, 3B anmd SS, including two (Nick Punto, Michael Young) who were active in 2013.
– Ed Bailey shares with HOFer Ernie Lombardi the distinction of being the only players to catch 250 games for both the Reds and the Giants. Bailey is also the only catcher with a home run for his lone World Series hit.
– Ken Boyer was one of only 4 players with seven consecutive seasons of 20 HR and 90 RBI in 1958-64. The others were named Aaron, Mays and Cepeda but, unlike Boyer, none of them won MVP during those seasons.
– Bill Virdon and Hoot Evers are the only players to lead their league in triples and times caught stealing, while stealing at less than a 50% success rate. Virdon’s 28% rate in 1962 was the lowest in a season of 15+ attempts since Bill Knickerbocker in 1936.
– Hank Aguirre is one of only 6 pitchers to lead his league in ERA in a season (1962) with 20+ starts and 20+ relief appearances (and the only one of the six to also lead in WHIP). All 6 saw their ERA+ drop the next season by at least 20 points, including 4 by 50+ points led by Aguirre’s 83 point plunge.
– Larry Jackson won 13 or more games for 12 consecutive seasons (1957-68), the longest such streak (by 4 years) to close out a career. Included was a 20 loss season following a league-leading 20 win season, making Jackson the first of only three live ball era pitchers to manage that juxtaposition. Who are the other two?
Steve Carlton is one of the others to follow a 20 win season with a 20 loss season. I thought Phil Niekro might be the other, but he’s not.
Do the 20 win and 20 loss seasons need to be consecutive? If not, then Denny McLain, Wilbur Wood, and Phil Niekro all meet the criteria (20 loss season after a league-leading 20 win season).
Yes. It’s in consecutive seasons.
Carlton and Wood are the other two.
I’m confused (er, more so than usual, that is) – is the 20-win season supposed to be league-leading? If so, then Wood doesn’t fit the criteria.
Yes, the 20 win season must lead the league.
Wood led the AL with 24 wins in 1972, and then lost 20 in 1973.
He also won 20 in 1974 and lost 20 in 1975, but did not lead the AL in wins in 1974.
Fun 20/20, Doug.
Jerry Koosman came close — 21 wins in ’76, one behind Randy Jones, then lost 20 in ’77. (Jones himself had lost a league-high 22 in ’74, then won 20 in ’75.)
Some more who went from 20 wins to 20 losses:
Stan Bahnsen, Wood’s 21-win teammate on the ’72 ChiSox, lost a league-high 21 the next year.
Luis Tiant, 1968-69
Mel Stottlemyre, 1965-66
Murry Dickson went from 20 wins to 21 losses, then 19, then 20.
Doug @ 52-
Oh, right – duh. I had some sort of brain lock where I wasn’t processing 1973 as a 20-loss season; I suppose I got distracted by the black ink in the wins column.
Haven’t figured it out yet but I have found a few oddities:
Wilbur Wood came within 1 loss of doing both in the same season (1973)
Dolf Luque did it in reverse by leading the league in losses in 1922 with 23 and wins in 1923 with 27.
Your blurbs on the eligible newcomers, Doug, are brilliant. Each one is really worth an HHS post in itself. My favorite this time might be the Aguirre comment. The other 20+GS/20+GR ERA leaders are Phil Niekro, Mike Garcia, Stu Miller, Bob Friend and Frank Baumann. All these guys were from more or less the same period of time, when that type of swing-man pitching was popular. The dramatic drop-offs in ERA performance after the ERA championships for these guys is probably a symptom of (1) most of these guys, immediately after their ERA championship years, got more starts and fewer relief appearances — and starter ERAs tend to be higher; (2) regression to the mean, which tends to be a strong effect on outlier ERA numbers (that’s one reason that sabermetrics/baseball prediction folks tend to look to numbers like FIP (Fielding Independent Pitching) rather than ERA).
The pitcher second to Jackson in longest streak of 13 win seasons to end a career is Allie Reynolds. They had similar ERA+ (113 for Jackson, 109 for Reynolds) but very dissimilar winning percentages (.515 for Jackson, .630 for Reynolds, despite a BB/9 twice as high as Jackson). Reynolds had qualifying seasons with ERA+ scores of 85 and 161, but everything else was between 100 and 126. Jackson was even more consistent, with a high/low of 138/96 and everything else between 109 and 128.
I thought maybe Casey was keeping Reynolds away from the better clubs, but doesn’t seem to be the case. The White Sox and Athletics are the teams Reynolds pitched against the least, and he actually had about 20% more innings against .500+ teams than those below .500. Evidently a powerhouse offense can go a long way with only so-so pitching. Imagine what Jackson might have done in pinstripes!
I think maybe the damning with faint praise approach doesn’t do justice to Reynolds.
Against the best the NL had to offer he produced a 7-2 W-L, 4 saves, 2 shutouts, ERA of 2.79. His high walk totals are merely representative of the era, especially in the AL, not something pertaining to him alone. Jackson was a better pitcher, but Reynolds wasn’t just so-so by any means, or not for the times in which he played.
To carry this a little further, the big three of the Cleveland Indians of that era, Lemon, Wynn, and Garcia, had the following W-L records against the Yankees: 28-33, 26-36, and 13-18. Reynolds’s W-L against the Indians was 19-13. And yes, the Yankees were the better team, but not by that much, about five more wins per season; also, offensively the Tribe put up good numbers.
Going against the best opposition, Reynolds showed his mettle, that’s the point. The two HOFers for the Indians went kind of slack against the team they had to beat, as did Garcia, whose shorter career kept his numbers lower.
So maybe Reynolds was a better pitcher than he looks in retrospect.
Very puzzling is Allie Reynolds’s 4.8 WAR for 1952. He led the majors in ERA and ERA+ (2.06 and 161), also in RA/9 (2.58). He ranked 2nd in strikeouts, 6th in SO/9, 5th in HR/9, and 11th with 244 IP. But his 4.8 WAR tied for 10th.
Granted, the Yanks were a great defensive team. But in the entire live-ball era, out of 75 pitcher-seasons of 230+ IP, ERA+ of 150 or better, and RA/9 less than 2.70, Reynolds was the only one to earn less than 5.1 WAR.
Reynolds pitched more against winners than losers that year, and had a 2.41 ERA against them. And he dazzled down the stretch, allowing just 5 runs in 40.2 September innings, winning or saving all 6 of his games, as the Yanks held off Cleveland to win by 2 games.
I trust the WAR formula more than my own reading in 99 of 100 cases. But this one doesn’t sit right. With his SO and HR rates, I don’t think Reynolds was so dependent on his defense.
John: several things jump out about Reynolds’ 1952 season and his seemingly low WAR total.
-Reynolds allowed 14 unearned runs in 1952, 20% of his total of 70 runs allowed. This was easily his highest percentage of unearned runs allowed for his career.
-Reynolds’ park factor for 1952 (a weighted average of all the parks he pitched in that season) was a career-low 93.0 mark.
-You mentioned the good Yanks’ defense. B-Ref’s RA9defense metric suggests 1952’s squad was the best defensive unit Reynolds pitched in front of. An RA9def of +0.35 per 9 for ’52 suggests his defense saved Reynolds nine or ten runs over 244 IP. These get effectively added to his runs allowed.
You mentioned the fact that Reynolds was less dependent on his defense. RA9defense takes care of that. Johnny Sain, for example, allowed a higher percentage of BIP than Reynolds did in 1952, so his RA9def mark is +0.40 instead of the 0.35 for Reynolds (the numbers are based on pitcher BIP divided by team BIP).
-Reynolds was pitching in the AL, the weaker of the two leagues, so fewer replacement runs for him than NL pitchers with the same IP.
-B-Ref’s RA9opposition mark estimates the teams Reynolds faced in ’52 would have scored a park-neutral 4.13 runs per game. This is a much lower mark than the previous three years for Reynolds.
But this is not suggesting Reynolds suddenly faced weaker competition in ’52. It’s merely reflecting the fact that AL scoring dropped from 4.6 R/G in 1951 to 4.2 R/G in 1952.
And, FWIW, of the seven pitchers to make at least 12 starts for the Yanks in ’52, Reynolds’ RA9opposition of 4.13 ties Vic Raschi for the highest mark among those seven.
So Raschi and Reynolds (both at 4.13) are getting a slight boost for pitching against better teams than, say, swingmen Bob Kuvaza (4.02 RA9opp in 12 GS) or Bill Miller (3.89 RA9opp in 13 GS).
Fangraphs’ fWAR claims to be defense-independent (or at least defense-agnostic) and their FIP-based WAR says 4.6 wins for Reynolds in 1952.
I think your best case that Reynolds might be undervalued here is the defense.
What we don’t know for sure is if the Yankees defense played worse for Reynolds than they did for other Yanks pitchers that year. The 14 UER and Reynold’s 20% UER% seem really high for a pitcher with highly-skilled defenders behind him.
b, thanks for several sound points, such as RA/9def and RA/9opp. But, I would toss the UER and the park factor. As noted, he led the majors not only plain ERA, but also in ERA+ (which takes in the park factor) and in RA/9 (which moots the UER).
I realize that for any group of seasons with similar IP and ERA+, *someone* has to have the lowest WAR, *someone* has to have the best defensive support. Still, there’s a stark difference between Reynolds’s WAR and that of all other live-ball pitchers in his range of IP and ERA+.
Since 1920, there are 34 seasons with 230-258 IP and 156-166 ERA+ (Reynolds was smack in the middle with 244 IP and 161 ERA+). Everyone else scored from 5.3 to 9.6 WAR. Reynolds had not only the lowest WAR — 4.8, one-third less than the median — but also more distance to the guy above than anyone else on that list.
I know that doesn’t prove anything. But given his performance in that World Series and others, I think Allie Reynolds may have been somewhat more valuable than WAR says.
John, thanks. We’re not arguing here, but I wouldn’t dismiss the UER.
I did something similar to you, but instead of looking at all seasons with similar IP and an ERA+ over 150, I put Reynolds’ 161 ERA+ right in the middle and looked at post-deadball seasons within 10 IP of 244 innings and within 5 points of his ERA+ on either side. So, IP between 234 and 254 and an ERA+ between 156 and 166.
That search yielded 22 pitcher seasons. Reynolds’ UER/R of 20% is the third-highest of those 22, with only two seasons from the 1930s being higher. Also, his defensive adjustment of +0.35 is the highest of those 22 seasons.
Yes, Reynolds’ 4.8 WAR ranks 22nd out of 22. But since he allowed the 20th-highest percentage of unearned runs and had the 22nd-highest downward defensive adjustment, it shouldn’t be that big of a surprise that his WAR ends up at the bottom of the heap.
Edit: John, sorry, in my haste I missed that you did a similar study to mine @78 where you put Reynolds in the middle. I was looking at the specs of your first study @74 while typing my response.
Alex Kellner is the other, in 1949 and 1950.
Doug: Is leading the league in wins a criterion, because Kellner did not?
I think leading the league in wins is a criterion, otherwise there are other players who fit the bill, e.g. Luis Tiant and Mel Stottlemyre Sr.
Also, Doug said Jackson was the first live-ball era pitcher to accomplish the feat, which puts 1964-65 as the early boundary – and since (with the exception of Mike Maroth) nobody has lost 20 games since 1980, these all must have occurred from 1965-80.
Wilbur Wood tied for the league lead in wins with Gaylord Perry in 1972 with 24. In 1973 Wood had 20 losses, along with 24 wins.
Since 1920 there have been 304 pitchers with at least 1 20+ win season and 82 pitchers with at least 1 20+ loss season. 34 of them have at least 1 of each.
It makes me very sad to see Boyer and Jackson on this list. Jackson probably doesn’t REALLY deserve COG consideration, but I would think that Boyer does. Since Doug’s lists are usually about those who won’t even get votes, it’s a shame to see Boyer included in that group.
I agree.
Strange how those birth years go. 1931 and 1934 were loaded. But, very little in between.
Boyer, Virdon, and Jackson were rookies together on the Cardinals in 1955. Jackson and Bunning pitched in 1966-67 for the Phillies.
The Cards came up with promising players year after year in the mid-Fifties—the three above, Harv Haddix, Ray Jablonski, Rip Repuski, Wally Moon, Lindy McDaniel, Joe Cunningham, and I guess you could throw in Don Blasingame and Luis Arroyo. All but Boyer went on to play more of their careers for other teams. Moon was vital to the Dodgers in two pennant runs, Jackson was a star in Chicago and Philadelphia, Virdon and Haddix both had their best years as Cards, but made their marks as Pirates, McDaniel had an erratic but sometimes brilliant career as a reliever, mostly with the Cubs and Yankees. Arroyo’s fame rests on his 1961 season with the Yankees.
Mays, Mathews, Koufax
Willie Mays, Eddie Mathews, Ernie Banks
Sandy Koufax, Craig Biggio, Willie Mays
Grich
McCovey
Sandberg
Craig Biggio
Willie Mays (Mr. Mays, why was it you never had a season with 50 HR and 50 SB? — I didn’t know I had to.)
Ernie Banks
Ernie Banks (lets play two today!)
Mays, Mathews, Koufax
Vote:
Boyer
Bunning
Lofton
Biggio, Mays, Koufax.
Mays, Mathews, Banks.
I still remember marveling at their stats (formerly elite 500 HR club) on the back of my baseball cards in the late 60’s and early 70’s.
Willie Mac was there too.
Also grew up in Florida as a Cards fan, hard not to throw a vote for Boyer.
Mays, Santo, Boyer
Not that I think either Santo or Boyer are better than Mathews, but Boyer really shouldn’t fall off the list this fast. He’s more of a “maybe” guy for me, but I’d like more time to consider him (and the redemption round is already going to be brutal). Mathews will get my vote in the 1930 ballot.
The 1929 ballot is the one I’m waiting for – assuming Mays wins this one and Mathews the next, the 1929 ballot should be wide open.
Agreed. That’s why I voted for Boyer.
Santo has such strong support. Will likely win a voting round in the next five elections. Yet I think Boyer vs Santo is a good discussion.
I think Boyer is borderline COG at best. I’d compare him more to Sal Bando than Santo:
Bando 119 OPS+, 61.6 WAR, 2019 GP
Boyer 116 OPS+, 62.9 WAR, 2034 GP
Santo 125 OPS+, 70.6 WAR, 2243 GP
If I recall correctly, Bando didn’t make it to a second round of voting. Boyer would make a reasonable HoF’er, but I think he falls just short of the CoG.
Boyer had a nine-year peak averaging 6.1 WAR.
That puts him in the company of a lot of the guys who have maintained support on this ballot.
OK, but then Bando had an 8-year peak averaging 5.9 WAR.
Maybe rather than arguing that that Boyer isn’t CoG-worthy, I should be arguing that Bando is…
Anyway, I just don’t see that much separation between the two of them – I’d rate Boyer a little higher, but only a little, not enough to think that one deserves to stay on the ballot when the other got bounced in short order (like Boyer, Bando came on the ballot in a tough year, same ballot as Seaver and Carlton).
I was looking at the Bando/Boyer comp earlier today and I can’t see a difference.
Boyer: 184 Rbat, 73 Rfield, 13 baserunning runs
Bando: 206 Rbat, 36 Rfield, 12 baserunning runs
Boyer has a few more replacement runs due to playing in the NL.
Neither of these two toiled in obscurity. Seven top-10 MVP finishes including a win for Boyer and three top-5s for Bando.
Perhaps the biggest difference between the two is Boyer was given a second shot at the Hall by being put back on the ballot a second time in 1985 (although it ultimately didn’t help him).
Looking at Bando, I see that the ’72 Athletics had 5 position players with at least 5.2 WAR.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/teams/OAK/1972.shtml#players_value_batting::13
__________________________
Wondering who had done that before.
And I found this post by Andy.
With the ’72 A’s omitted:
http://www.baseball-reference.com/blog/archives/9980
I wonder if the ’72 A’s are missing from that list because at the time the post was written bb-ref was setting replacement level higher than it does now – so the A’s might not have had 5 players with 5+ WAR per the old calculations.
Mays Grich Bunning
Mays, Banks, McCovey
The incomparable Willie Mays
Eddie Mathews
Ernie Banks
Willie Mays, Eddie Mathews, Ron Santo
Mays
Mathews
Banks
Willie Mays, Eddie Mathews, and once again Juan Marichal
I think Ernie Banks is better than Marichal, but I never really liked Banks for some reason so I won’t be voting for him until the rest of the spread starts to thin.
If you were going by the Circle of Great Baseball Minds, Don Zimmer by a landslide.
Mays, grich, lofton
Mays, Matthews, Banks
Marichal, Mays, Mathews
Bunning, McCovey, and Mays
For the 1931-Part Two election, I’m voting for:
-Ryne Sandberg
-Edgar Martinez
-Eddie Mathews
Other top candidates I considered highly (and/or will consider in future rounds):
-Smoltz
-Whitaker
-Grich
-Lofton
-Santo
-McCovey
-Biggio
-Mays
-Banks
One more picture from Bechloss. DiMaggio and Gehrig. Check out the athleticism.
https://twitter.com/BeschlossDC/status/440245860559880192/photo/1
Mike L, that’s not bad, for a guy they called Biscuit Pants. I’m also admiring the perfectly level check-swing by DiMag.
mays, banks, mccovey
Mays, Mathews, Bunning.
Biggio, Grich, Koufax
Mays, Mathews, Grich
Mays, Banks, McCovey
Mays, Boyer, Marichal
Mays, Marichal, McCovey
Mays, Mathews and Banks
Most Wins Above Average, excluding negative seasons:
Mays 110.8
Mathews 58.9
Grich 43.6
Santo 43.3
Whitaker 42.7
Martinez 41.3
Smoltz 40.1
Lofton 39.3
McCovey 38.9
Sandberg 38.8
Banks 36.8
Bunning 36.7
Biggio 36.3
Boyer 34.1
Marichal 32.7
Koufax 32.3
I’m not sure my excuse for voting for Edgar most rounds holds up here. He wasn’t a better hitter than Mays or a better player than Mathews. He’s got almost a 5-point edge in positive WAA on Banks, but WAA might be even more unfair to Banks than it is to Martinez, since it appears Banks was moved to first when he could still play short pretty well. He spent half a career as an all-time great shortstop and half as a slightly-above-average-hitting first baseman. Moving to first might have helped him reach 500 homers, but it must have cost him a handful of WAR.
Boyer is a borderline Hall of Famer, but not a Circle of Greatser.
A little strategery:
Mays
Banks
Martinez
I tried to research what exact injury Banks had to prompt the move from short to first. Wikipedia mentions a knee-injury flareup from his youth. It must have been pretty severe for it to be a permanent move to first.
If it wasn’t that serious, I agree, Bryan. It cost Banks some defensive value. He had just cranked out 50 fielding runs the four years prior to the move to first (most in the NL) and had snagged a Gold Glove in 1960. Most shortstops who are that skilled defensively tend to stay above-average fielders well past age 30.
I wonder if Banks moving to first had something to do with his off-year at the plate in 1961 (13 batting runs, a career low for Ernie up to that point). He had played every single game for six of the previous seven years. Maybe there was the thought that all those innings at short was affecting his value at the plate.
I looked up Ernie’s game logs for that year and discovered something I knew about and forgot. When his knee began bothering him, he was first shifted to left field, then first base. Eventually he was back at short, went out for ten games, came back at short, and missed the last six games of the season. He was, remember, Ernie Banks, the only marquee player the Cubs had, a guy whose motto was “let’s play two,” a guy who ran a streak of 717 consecutive games played—which I think ended mid-season 1961 because of the knee problem. The management wanted him on the field; he wanted to be there for two reasons, if not more; so he played when he shouldn’t have.
Here’s a trivia question: What event or set of circumstances kept Ernie Banks from leading the NL in home runs three years in a row?
At season’s end Banks and Mathews were tied for the NL lead with 45 HR in 1959. Mathews homered in the playoff between the Dodgers and the Braves to break the tie.
Yeah, nsb, I saw that about his game logs and how he got shifted around in 1961, thanks.
David’s article @98 is a great read and does describe the knee injury as “career-altering” and one that may have affected his hitting the rest of his career.
Either that, or Banks’ move to first was a result of the collective non-wisdom of Chicago’s rotating “College of Coaches” in 1961-62. Mr. Wrigley should have known that too many cooks spoil the vichyssoise.
bstar @ 95 –
Here’s a decent article on Banks:
http://www.bleedcubbieblue.com/2007/2/18/53329/7647
But it too only mentions a “knee injury”, in May 1961. As nsb notes, in late May Banks moved to LF for 3 weeks, then 1B for a week, then sat out a week, before returning to SS for the remainder of the season.
Since he only plsyed 1B for a week that season, I doubt it had much effect on his hitting; his rates stats for the 2nd half of 1961 are virtually identical to the 1st half of that season.
Martinez, Sandberg, Santo
Mays, Biggio, McCovey
Willie Mays, Ernie Banks, Eddie Mathews
Mays
Lofton
Grich
Through 46 votes (I think), we have:
(Lofton Grich)
Mays – 41
Mathews – 22
Banks – 15
McCovey – 8
Grich – 8
Koufax – 6
Marichal – 6
Biggio – 6
Martinez – 5
Sandberg – 5
Santo – 5
—10% AND top-8 line—
Bunning – 4
Lofton – 3
Boyer – 3
Whitaker – 1
Smoltz – Doughnut
As it stands right now, Boyer, Bunning, and Lofton would fall off the ballot, while Smoltz and Whitaker would lose yet another round of their once-commanding stacks of additional rounds. I’m pretty surprised to see Smoltz putting up nada so far. He’s been nabbing a few votes per round for what seems like forever (he even had 5 just a round ago). But I guess that’s what happens when you reach the biggest year for top-end talent in Major League history!
fair warning lofton lovers, I’m comin’ for ya!
If you really wanted to do that, a Martinez-Sandberg-Santo ballot would actually be a pretty good idea. On the one hand, it would all but ensure all of them being safe (which I’m sure would make you unhappy). On the other hand, at that point, the only wag for Loft on to be safe would be to get to 6 voters, which doesn’t seem particularly likely.
@93/mosc;
Not if I can help it!
– Willie Mays
– Kenny Lofton
– Ryan Sandberg
As with part 1, an all-time great + an effort to save a couple on-the-bubble guys.
Most Career WAR, 17th Round Draft Pick:
Kenny Lofton 68.1
Orel Hershiser 56.8
Brian Giles 50.8
Kent Hrbek 38.2
Ian Kinsler 34.8 (active)
Mark Grudzielanek 26.4
Russell Martin 24.4 (active)
Rick Honeycutt 22.3
Jermaine Dye 20.2
I see your 17th round pick and raise you a 42nd!
1971 60.1 Keith Hernandez
2005 23.0 Tim Lincecum
1995 13.6 Jerry Hairston
1999 12.8 Adam LaRoche
1995 8.2 Brad Lidge
1998 7.2 Nyjer Morgan
1967 7.2 John Wockenfuss
1993 3.3 Lance Carter
2004 3.1 Kyle Blanks
2005 2.7 John Axford
1989 2.0 Mike Mohler
2006 0.8 Kevin Chapman
2008 0.5 Stephen Pryor
1998 0.5 Kevin Cameron
1989 0.5 Mark Johnson
1994 0.3 Keith Glauber
1996 0.2 Erik Sabel
2008 0.1 Brad Bach
2003 0.1 Jim Adduci
There was also a Glenn Davis who showed up in the 1983 draft – the link went to the 1980s Astros 1B but the guy drafted in 1983 is not the Astros 1B (he was hitting 26 HRs in AA-AAA in 1983).
Lincecum (Indians), LaRoche (Marlins), Hairston (Orioles), Lidge (Giants), Morgan (Rockies), Carter (Twins), Axford (Reds) were drafted by the teams in parentheses in the 42nd round but didn’t sign with them. All of them would go higher in the draft (some of them MUCH higher – as in first round picks) in later years except for Axford who signed as an amateur free agent with the Yankees.
Only Hernandez, Wockenfuss, Blanks, and Mohler have had 2+ WAR after actually signing with a team when being drafted in the 42nd round, though Bach could add to that list.
And yes, someone can come along and do 62nd round picks – Mike Piazza will probably look even better than Hernandez relative to other 62nd round picks.
Buster Posey and Chris Davis were both 50th round picks, and both selected 1496th in their draft year.
I’m guessing Davis is the first 50th rounder to hit 50 homers in a season.
You’re correct, Doug. 50th rounders, ranked by WAR:
Rick Helling 20.6
Buster Posey 17.5
David Murphy 10.9
Marvin Benard 8.6
Chris Davis 7.8
Jarrod Dyson 4.7
Jim Parque 2.5
Unless I missed someone, these are the only 50th round picks to accumulate 1 WAR or more.
Only Benard and Dyson signed with the teams that drafted them. Benard had previously been a 39th round and 20th round pick. The others all improved their draft position:
–> Helling, Posey, and Murphy were 1st round draft picks later down the road;
–> Davis was later a 5th round pick.
–> Parque was later a 46th round pick…not much of an improvement, but hey: he made the majors, which is more than you can say of the vast majority of those drafted around him.
Through 54 votes, we have some interesting stuff going on:
Mays – 47
Mathews – 26
Banks – 16
McCovey – 9
Grich – 9
Koufax – 8
Martinez – 7
Santo – 7
Marichal – 7
–Top 9 Line–
Biggio – 6
Lofton – 6
Sandberg – 6
–10% Line–
Bunning – 4
Boyer – 3
Whitaker – 1
Smoltz – Still nothin’.
Before, Lofton was on the chopping block. He’s safe – for now. But depending on how many ballots are cast between now and the deadline, if seven more votes are cast and none go to Biggio, Lofton, or Sandberg, all THREE could fall off. So people saved Lofton temporarily at least, but he’s not out of the woods yet – and he’s managed to drag Sandberg and Biggio into danger with him!
Willie Mays, Ernie Banks, Ron Santo
Mays, Marichal, Koufax
Mays, Matthews, Grich
Martinez, Lofton, Santo
Mays, Koufax, Matthews
I’m voting for Lofton and Martinez to stay on the ballot, and Mathews in an attempt to get him to fifty percent. I’ll vote for Banks down the line, but he looks good for twenty-five percent right now.
Mr Cub’s 50 stolen bases are good for joint 17th most all-time for players who were caught stealing more often than they successfully stole. The leader in that category is a contemporaneous infielder from across the city, Nellie Fox, who had 76 swiped bags and 80 sheepish jogs back to the dugout.
Mays, Matthews & McCovey
Willie Mays, Kenny Lofton, Craig Biggio
Mays, Grich, Sandberg
Bring in the 8 way tie.
Unless we get a lot of votes, this means everybody but bunning and boyer are safe. not worried about bumping mathews to 50% because he’s going to win next ballot anyway.
Sandberg is the one guy I think might belong who’s in danger and can be helped. There’s no way for my vote to kick off the couple holdovers I’m not sure about. Grich is IMO the best of the long term holdovers, so he gets my last vote.
Mays, Matthews, Koufax
Mays, Mathews, McCovey
Mays, Mathews, Santo please
Mays, Lofton, Biggio
Mays, Mathews and Sandburg.
Interesting how memory can play you false. I had always put Mathews and Banks roughly at the same level but, they weren’t. Banks and his teammate Billy William were probably closer in value, and Williams got virtually no support on the 1938 ballot.
I think the difference is that Banks was, for a time, a dominant SS with a high peak, while Williams was “only” a very very good corner outfielder.
I tend to underrate Banks myself; for some reason the latter half of his career dominates the image I have of him. But that stretch from 1955-1960 is pretty darn impressive…
“Mays, Mathews and Sandburg.”
Here’s a Carl Sandburg baseball poem. Whether it’s good enough to get him into the COG is up to you:
Hits and Runs
I remember the Chillicothe ball players grappling the Rock Island
ball players in a sixteen-inning game ended by darkness.
And the shoulders of the Chillicothe players were a red smoke against
the sundown and the shoulders of the Rock Island players were a
yellow smoke against the sundown.
And the umpire’s voice was hoarse calling balls and strikes and outs
and the umpire’s throat fought in the dust for a song.
Mays, Banks, and Bunning.
Mays, Mathews, Koufax
Well, I think we’re over the hump, voting-wise. Barring a huge increase in votes without a couple of guys with 7 votes getting any more, all the holdovers save Bunning are making it. I know Smoltz and Whitaker don’t have enough rounds to be ignored forever, but with a 1930 class that is probably not good enough to get a single vote, it’s not hard to imagine enough of Mays’ 60-odd votes going to others that everyone will probably be safe after next ballot too. Without a concentration of talent as rich as we’ve just seen until the 1880s, and without a slam-dunk new candidate (at least in terms of being quite above others in WAR) until Robin Roberts in 1926, I’ll boldly predict that everyone who is on the ballot after this round will stay on until they’re elected or until the CoG exercise is over.
Mathews is clearly a cut above the rest and should take the 1930 election, but after that it gets incredibly interesting, and should stay so through the twenties and tens. How will we finally value Koufax’s truncated career vs. the multitude of qualified candidates who shone less brightly but lasted longer? How will we finally break up our middle-infield logjam that has been a thing since the start? How will the very worthy and deep redemption round class shake out, and how will the redemption winners fare once back on the ballot?
The thirties has been fun for its megawatt talent glut, but switching tack is bound to be fun too.
Born 1920-29 and 40+ career WAR.
Generated 3/7/2014.
The players of this generation had more important work to do than playing baseball.
Pitchers born 1920-29, 40+ WAR: (pitching WAR only)
Spahn 92.6
Roberts 83.1
Newhouser 60.4
Ford 53.9
Pierce 53.1
Wilhelm 50.1
Wynn 51.6
Simmons 42.7
Too bad Spahn, Roberts, Ford, and Pierce couldn’t have pitched in their primes in 1944-45 the way Newhouser did.
Well, Ford was 16-17 years old in 1944-45, so he didn’t lose an opportunity to pitch those years because of the war.
David:
Note qualifier—”in their primes.” The point is, Newhouser not only didn’t lose time to military service—Ford, for example, lost 1951-52 and Spahn 1943-45—he came into his own as a pitcher when the opposition was weakest, the last two years of the war. In those two years he put up 19.2 WAR out of his 60.4, and therefore his overall WAR is tainted to a degree by his war WAR. That’s humor for you.
To illustrate the problem: in 1945 Newhouse had to face the murderous Yankee outfield of Bud Methany, Tuck Stainback, and Hersh Martin. Their combined Major League games played after the ’45 season was 94, 91 of them by Stainback, producing an OPS+ of 57. The competition, in other words, was easy pickings for a top flight pitcher in his prime, and since we can’t follow my ironic supposition about the other four pitchers, we ought to make some mental adjustment in our evaluation of Newhouser’s big numbers for those years.
Newhouser’s career is a unique case, granted, but part of its uniqueness is that he was a giant among midgets for two years.
nsb @136 –
Sure, I understood the basic point that Newhouser’s numbers need to be discounted some amount because he faced weaker competition during the war. Missed the irony, but (tone + internet) often = misreading. Thanks for the clarification.
Do take Newhouser’s 1944-45 seasons with a grain of salt. But he was also the runaway WAR leader for the first 4 post-war years, leading #2 by 24%.
Hal’s 21.8 WAR for the first 3 post-war years ranks 6th in the live-ball era for age 25-27. And even with a one-third discount on 1944-45, his adjusted WAR would rank 4th for age 23-27, between Seaver and Pedro.
Also, while the competition in 1944-45 was much depleted, Newhouser went 32-10 against teams that finished .500 or better — 9-4 vs. Yanks, 11-3 vs. Browns. Sixty percent of his starts in those years were against winning teams, which helps account for his big WAR.
Lastly, if you credit Whitey Ford for his lost 1951-52 with the average of his next 3 years, that only gets him just over 60 career WAR.
I don’t know if Newhouser had a better career than Ford over all. But he had a much higher peak, even if you adjust for wartime.
Newhouser’s 1946 season against the “real” MLers was eerily similar to his 1945 season against the “ersatz” players.
1945: 25-9 W-L, 1.81 ERA, 29 CG, 212 SO, 195 ERA+, 1.114 WHIP
1946: 26-9 W-L, 1.94 ERA, 29 CG, 275 SO, 190 ERA+, 1.069 WHIP
In 1942, playing against more full squads, Newhouser led the league in H/9.
At age 21.
His 6.7 was the 15th lowest total for =>21.
That was a 4WAR season while also leading the league in SO/9.
What shifted from 1943 to 1944 was his control.
From 5 walks per 9 down to 3.
We will also have two redemption fellas after 1930.
(or more? I wouldn’t be opposed to three. It is going to be a massive ballot of 60+ WAR players.)
I’m inclined to stick with two winners this coming redemption round. Two will make for a more exciting competition than three, and we have a pretty substantial group of holdovers who have earned their spot on the current ballot. If the ballot talent does seem to be thinning, though, we can always hold the next redemption round after that a little earlier than scheduled.
I would have figured there to be a fair number of strong candidates in the 1890s and early 1900s as well, since those are your golden age players of the 20s and 30s. And there will be some biggies coming up with birthdates in the 10s and 20s.
That said, it does look like the giants are spread out enough that we won’t be looking at years with 2-3 slam dunkers again until the 1880s.
McCovey
Bunning
Boyer
Mays, Marichal, Martinez
Mays, Banks, Boyer