Circle of Greats 1927 Balloting

150 Replies

This post is for voting and discussion in the 54th round of balloting for the Circle of Greats (COG). This round adds to the ballot those players born in 1927. Rules and lists are after the jump.

This week’s new group joins the holdovers from previous rounds to comprise the full set of players eligible to receive your votes this round. As usual, the new group of 1927-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 (but less than 75%) of the ballots that are cast win four added future rounds of ballot eligibility. Should a candidate ever appear on over 75% of the ballots but not win induction, he would gain six future rounds of ballot eligibility. 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 EDT Thursday, April 17, while changes to previously cast ballots are allowed until 11:00 PM EDT Tuesday, April 15. A little extra time is being allotted for voting this round with both the tax filing deadlines and Passover Seders falling at what might otherwise be right at the end of the voting.

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 1927 Round 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 candidates; additional player columns from the new born-in-1927 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 12 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 1927 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.

Holdovers:
Sandy Koufax (eligibility guaranteed for 9 rounds)
Juan Marichal (eligibility guaranteed for 6 rounds)
Ernie Banks (eligibility guaranteed for 5 rounds)
John Smoltz (eligibility guaranteed for 3 rounds)
Whitey Ford (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Edgar Martinez (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Willie McCovey (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Craig Biggio (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Harmon Killebrew (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Kenny Lofton (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Eddie Murray (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Ryne Sandberg (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)

Everyday Players (born in 1927, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Nellie Fox
Smoky Burgess
Joe Adcock
Granny Hamner
Richie Ashburn
Charlie Maxwell
Jim Busby
Johnny Temple
Don Mueller
Bob Nieman
Vic Power
Rocky Bridges
Clint Courtney
Jackie Jensen
Carl Sawatski
Sammy White
Billy Gardner

Pitchers (born in 1927, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Johnny Klippstein
Billy Pierce
Bill Henry
Stu Miller
Dick Donovan
Herm Wehmeier
Art Houtteman
Carl Scheib
Ruben Gomez
Jack Harshman

0 0 votes

Article Rating

150 Comments

Oldest

Newest Most Voted

Inline Feedbacks

View all comments

David P

10 years ago

Was looking at Richie Ashburn’s player page and realized his last season was with the expansion Mets. Wonder if there are any other Hall of Famers who spent their final season with a first year expansion team. Anyone know? Boggs was close but doesn’t quite meet what I’m looking for (his final season was the Rays second season).

David Horwich

10 years ago

Reply to David P

I took a look at all 14 first-year expansion teams, and didn’t see any others.

The best player after Ashburn to finish their career with a first-year team was Dale Murphy, who had 49 PA for the ’93 Rockies, followed by Ted Kluszewski, 290 PA for the ’61 Angels. Lesser lights include Billy Goodman (’62 Colt .45s), Johnny Podres (’69 Padres), and Roy Face, (’69 Expos).

David P

10 years ago

Reply to David Horwich

Thanks David! I appreciate your looking into that for me.

Author

birtelcom

10 years ago

Reply to David P

Also odd about Richie’s last season: after going his whole career never hitting more than four homers in a season, in that last year, Ashburn had seven homers for the Mets (six in the ancient Polo Grounds, one on the road). I imagine it’s rare that a player hits the most home runs of his career in his final season.

Richard Chester

10 years ago

Reply to birtelcom

Among others Jack Graham (24), Roy Cullenbine (24) and Dave Nilsson (21) have done it.

David Horwich

10 years ago

Reply to birtelcom

As it turns out, Ashburn hit 5 of those 7 home runs in a two-week span from June 10-23, including 3 in 2 days June 22-23; an unprecedented power outburst for him.

Ashburn had 3 2-HR games:

@ StL 6/21/55
@ NY 4/28/56
@ Hou 6/23/62

In the 1955 game, Ashburn’s 2nd HR was a 9th-inning 2-run shot with the Phillies down 1:

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/SLN/SLN195506210.shtml

Also to note, 7 of Ashburn’s 29 career home runs were inside-the-park HRs, but only 1 of his 7 in 1962.

no statistician but

10 years ago

Reply to birtelcom

Fifteen of Ashburn’s 29 career HRs came in the polo grounds. He was left handed. Couldn’t resist that 258′ right field fence, I guess. Also: needs to be put in here somewhere— he led the league in OBP four times and with 28 more PAs he would have done it a fifth time, in 1962. Led in hits 3 times, 3Bs twice, SBs once, BBs 4 times, BA twice. Competing in the public perception against the power and NYC prestige of Mays and Snider he didn’t make the all-star team that often, but to say he wasn’t appreciated in his… Read more »

Richard Chester

10 years ago

Looks like Jack Harshman should be on the list as a pitcher.

Author

birtelcom

10 years ago

Reply to Richard Chester

Good point. He was a slugging first baseman in the minors and came up to the bigs as a first baseman, but ultimately spent most of his career in the majors as a pitcher.

Chris C

10 years ago

Biggio, Sandberg, Marichal

10 years ago

Sandy Koufax, Juan Marichal, Richie Ashburn

ATarwerdi96

10 years ago

Ernie Banks, Edgar Martinez, Willie McCovey

KalineCountry Ron

10 years ago

Sandy
Whitey

and to celebrate his 87th birthday today April 8,
Charley ‘Paw Paw’ ‘Homerun Every Sunday’ Maxwell.

Author

birtelcom

10 years ago

Reply to KalineCountry Ron

Maxwell probably #3 left fielder in Tigers history, after Bobby Veach and Willie Horton. That’s a position that hasn’t really been a bright spot for the franchise in recent years.

no statistician but

10 years ago

Reply to birtelcom

Charley Maxwell was a lot like Bob Nieman—only not nearly as good a hitter. OPS+ of 116 to Nieman’s 132. They both appeared in just over 1100 games, were 151 PAs apart. Maxwell was a better fielder with a little more power.

Dr. Doom

10 years ago

Reply to birtelcom

Don’t forget about Bobby Higginson. LF is as good a place to put him as any.

Author

birtelcom

10 years ago

Reply to Dr. Doom

Yes, calling Maxwell or Higginson the Tigers’ #3 all-time left fielder kind of depends on how you define your terms. Higginson played many more games for Detroit but split his time down the middle between left field and right field. If you include the value Bobby generated in right, you might put him ahead of Maxwell. But Maxwell played almost all his games with the Tigers in left field, and if you just compare left field games to left field games, Maxwell probably comes out ahead. Their respective raw hitting stats while playing left for Detroit are actually extremely close,… Read more »

Lawrence Azrin

10 years ago

Reply to Dr. Doom

@10, 14, 2;

So who are the Tigers #1, #2 ALL-TIME LFers – Bobby Veach and Willie Horton?

Colavito and Goslin both excellent, but very short time with the Tigers.

Richard Chester

10 years ago

Reply to Lawrence Azrin

If you choose to rate them using WAR while playing as a Tiger:

Bobby Veach…45.8
Willie Horton…25.9
Charlie Maxwell…19.2
Rocky Colavito…17.3
Matty McIntyre…16.7
Steve Kemp…15.9
Dick Wakefield…13.2
Bob Fothergill…12.9

Goslin came in at 9.1, he played with the Tigers at the tail end of his career.

Mike

10 years ago

Sandy Koufax
Juan Marichal
Whitey Ford

Francisco

10 years ago

Juan Marichal, Sandy Koufax, Harmon Killebrew

Voomo Zanzibar

10 years ago

Nice biography on Stu Miller:

http://www.baseballtoddsdugout.com/stumiller.html

Voomo Zanzibar

10 years ago

Best seasons by WAR:
Richie Ashburn and Kenny Lofton

7.1 … 7.6
7.0 … 7.2 (’94)
6.6 … 6.6
6.3 … 5.9
6.1 … 5.6
5.6 … 5.5
5.5 … 4.9
4.5 … 4.1
4.4 … 3.7
3.8 … 3.5
3.4 … 3.4
2.2 … 3.4

Hartvig

10 years ago

Reply to Voomo Zanzibar

I think Lofton/Ashburn may be one of the best comps we’ve had in a long time. Center fielders, leadoff men, base stealers… They both even left the game after having a fairly decent season although at 40 I’m not sure that Lofton had much left in the tank. I know the Hall of Stats and JAWS see Lofton as being a bit better, mostly because of fielding. I’m not sure I have enough confidence in advanced fielding measurements to be certain that they’ve got it right in this case. I think I’ll hold off on voting for a while and… Read more »

no statistician but

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

Here’s a salvo: The perception is that Ashburn’s Phillies had a fly-ball oriented pitching staff. As far as I can determine, using some spot checking, that is an overstatement based on the fact that the ace of the staff, Robin Roberts, fits the narrative. Curt Simmons was only moderately a fly-ball pitcher, and the others passing in and out, Russ Meyer, Jim Konstanty, etc. were a mixed bag but mostly neutral in terms of flys to grounders. So how did Richie flag all those flies, leading the NL in outfield POs 9 years out of ten from 1949 on, topping… Read more »

Hartvig

10 years ago

Reply to no statistician but

“So how did Richie flag all those flies, leading the NL in outfield POs 9 years out of ten from 1949 on, topping 500 four times, topping 490 six times? ” Not to mention that the guy who was usually a fairly distant second-place runner-up to him in many of those years had a pretty fair defensive reputation of his own… Ashburn appears 5 times in the top 9, 6 times in the top 12 and 7 times in the top 18 all-time single season leaders for outfield putouts. The only other player to crack the top 24 more than… Read more »

Chris C

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

If you check the Bill James’ Win Shares book – he goes into great detail about it. Those Phillies rotations were some of the historically highest fly ball teams of all time. Also despite those high putout years – Ashburn never won a gold glove and was never regarded among best OF in his time.

Michael Sullivan

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

Ashburn actually has a pretty strong rField, even if it’s less than lofton’s. Where he’s really getting hammered is that CF in his time is a neg rPos while lofton gets a positive. -34 vs. +38, about 6 wins, which is just about the difference in WAR between them. I wonder how much of that CF value difference between the 50s and the 90s/00s is due to Mantle and Mays, two of the greatest players of all time, playing CF at the same time. Also contemporary of Duke Snider. Looking just at bWAR Ashburn is the #10 CF since 1901,… Read more »

Hartvig

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

Chris C- I wrote a LONG response about my Bill James library collection, Total Zone, how many categories that Ashburn was among the leaders of during his career, who his contemporary outfielders were, a great deal about the make up of the Phillies pitching staffs of the 50’s, the history of the Gold Glove awards and more… And then- because I had the Baseball-Reference page open on about a dozen different tabs- … my computer froze up. The short version is that I’m not buying Lofton being #14 in Total Zone Runs as an outfielder and Ashburn being #70 with… Read more »

Michael Sullivan

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

Hartvig: What you are saying about Ashburn’s TZ numbers doesn’t match the rField number at baseball-reference. I see Ashburn with 76.4 fielding runs and at #38 among all outfielders. He’s #41 among outfielders in dWAR. So more CFs jump ahead from better rPos in different eras than other OFs drop back from not playing center. Either way, I don’t see how to get him down to #70, or to 1/3 of lofton’s value. I do see two big negative rField years in Ashburn’s results toward the end of his career for -31 runs. If those two years had been average,… Read more »

Hartvig

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/tz_runs_total_of_career.shtml

Hartvig

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

And I was wrong about the 1/3rd of Lofton’s total because I was going from memory and I thought it was 39, which was his TZ runs as a center fielder only and not as an outfielder in total.

David P

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

Michael Sullivan @83 – As I understand it, the CF difference between the 50s and the 90s/00s, has nothing to do with Mantle/Mays. It’s a measure of how difficult the position was to play. In that sense, the position adjustment is saying that CF was more difficult to play in Lofton’s era than in Ashburn’s. They calculate the adjustments by looking at guys who played multiple positions. So looking at how a Cfer fared when moved to LF or vice versa. The adjustments don’t change that often so I assume they’re using multiple year data rather than single year data.… Read more »

bstar

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

Hartvig, from 2003-on, for Lofton and Kearns it is DRS, not TZ, runs being used in Rfield.

Your list @91 is for TZ numbers. It’s still compiled for 2003-on but is not used in WAR calculations.

DRS doesn’t like Kearns nearly as much as TZ does.

So Lofton’s Rfield is:

TZ runs from 1991-2002
DRS from 2003-2007

Richard Chester

10 years ago

Reply to no statistician but

Ashburn was the answer to a recent quiz on HHS. He is one of 5 players to have 15+ ML seasons with 100+ games played in each season.

David P

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

Ashburn vs Lofton: Rbat: +57 for Ashburn Rbaser: +70 for Lofton Rdp: +6 for Ashburn Rfield: +32 for Lofton Rpos: +55 for Lofton (this is an interesting one; even though they were both CFers, the position had more value when Lofton played) Rrep: +30 for Ashburn (I assume this reflects the NL integrating quicker than the AL during Ashburn’s time) WAR has Lofton 65 runs ahead though it only translates into 4.8 more WAR (which is less than the normal 10 runs = 1 WAR rule of thumb). I’m guessing this is because Ashburn played in a lower scoring run… Read more »

Hartvig

10 years ago

Reply to David P

“(this is an interesting one; even though they were both CFers, the position had more value when Lofton played)”

Would that be because of Ashburn’s contemporaries (i.e. Mays, Mantle, Snider)?

David P

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

Hartvig – I’m certainly no expert on positional adjustments but I think it means that centerfield defense was more important in Lofton’s era than in Ashburn’s.

David Horwich

10 years ago

Reply to David P

Ashburn vs Lofton…Ashburn played in an era not so well-suited to his talents (e.g. his stolen base numbers don’t impress), and that was already top-heavy at his position with Mayses and Mantles and the like. Hard for him to stand out in that environment. I’m surprised he scored over 100 runs only twice, given his durability and outstanding on-base skills, although did score 90+ runs a year like clockwork. I’ve been on the fence about whether Lofton is CoG-worthy, and I’m coming around to thinking that he is (take heart, Voomo!). Partly for reasons of positional scarcity: for CF we… Read more »

Hartvig

10 years ago

Reply to David Horwich

Position scarcity was an issue for me as well but mosc pointed out that guys like Kaline, Al Simmons, Dawson and others all played a considerable amount of time in center. The same thing applies to first, third and to a lesser extent catcher as well. I’d say that there are only 3 slam-dunk first baseman plus 2 others that depend on getting credit for time lost to military service plus our 3 current candidates, 2 of whom had to be voted back in on a redemption round. But you also have Frank Thomas, Ernie Banks, Rod Carew and Stan… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar

10 years ago

Reply to David Horwich

________________________________ Do the advanced stats undervalue elite speed? This has been the question that I’m trying to answer by backing Lofton. Can someone with a better understanding of the architecture of sabermetrics tell me if I’m wrong… Lofton on the bases raises the expectation of scoring a run. Yet RE24 doesn’t adjust for who that runner on first is. Whether or not the hitters bring that run in, Lofton’s mere presence on the bases 300 times a year was worth more than everyone else’s. And WAR falls short of telling us that. I’m trying to say that the creation of… Read more »

David Horwich

10 years ago

Reply to David Horwich

Hartvig @ 67 –

OK, I see where you’re coming from. When it comes to players who spent a substantial amount of time at more than one position, I prefer to categorize them according to their primary position (usually, but not always, the position at which they spent the most time), rather than saying, “well, we could play Musial at first and Ott at third if we need to”. But this is just my own preference.

David P

10 years ago

Reply to David Horwich

Voomo @72: I don’t understand your comment about RE24 not adjusting for the runner on first. You seem to be connecting it to WAR, but WAR doesn’t use RE24. It looks at how players actually performed on the bases and in that regard it gives Lofton +78 runs. It also seems you’re only thinking about 1/2 of the equation. Bill James made this point years ago regarding Ricky Henderson (if I remember correctly). James pointed out that Henderson has more value on base than a slow moving catcher. At the same time, James said that Henderson’s base hits have less… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar

10 years ago

Reply to David Horwich

@96 DavidP, I see how that was confusing, but no – I wasn’t connecting RE24 and WAR. Just theorizing each of their shortcomings w/r/t baserunning. Regarding Bill James’ assertion of the value of hits: how often are those trickling-infield-speedhits really happening versus the ‘true’ gapper doubles by a Molina? I wouldn’t disagree with Bill James just on instinct, but… … But whatever undue bump in hitting WAR those speedy guys might be getting, I still assert that their baserunning is undervalued. Lofton is at +78 baserunning runs? Over two decades? See, here’s where my point of view goes into the… Read more »

Author

birtelcom

10 years ago

Reply to David Horwich

Voomo @101: I like your point about RE24 undervaluing baserunning — it is true that RE24 will give the benefit of a guy who scores from second on a single, where others would only make it to third, to the hitter and not the runner. So, yes, RE24 undervalues baserunners in that sense. But that has nothing to do with WAR’s valuation of baserunning. WAR does try to take into account as many of those baserunning contributions as possible, looking to see how often a guy advances extra bases on various plays more often than the average player would and… Read more »

aweb

10 years ago

Reply to David Horwich

Lofton should have converted potential runs (and bases) into actual runs and bases at a higher rate than a poor baserunner, but I’m pretty sure this is captured in the baserunning metric (where you get credit for advancing more often 1-3 or 2-home on singles, for instance). His potential value is being realized, and more often than a poor baserunner. As for speedy player hits having less value, I’ve always seen Ichiro as the most extreme example in recent times, due to the number of IF hits. Career-wise, he hits .339 with a man on just second base, but has… Read more »

oneblankspace

10 years ago

Reply to Voomo Zanzibar

One day in the Phillies radio booth, Ashburn was talking about a certain leadoff man (I forget exactly who).

“He’s the best leadoff hitter the Phillies have had since… well, since me.”

Andy

10 years ago

Banks, Marichal, Edgar Martinez

Gary Bateman

10 years ago

Marichal, Ford, Ashburn (with apologies to Chi-town mainstays, Fox & Banks)

J.R.

10 years ago

Koufax, Biggio, Killebrew

Darien

10 years ago

I’m stickin’ with it: Banks, Lofton, Sandberg

aweb

10 years ago

With my long-time favourites gone, I’m sort of throwing darts at the field here. I think I was talked out of Killebrew last time, but I might end up vote-switching for the first time ever at some point. For now:

Lofton, Banks, Marichal

Jeff Harris

10 years ago

Martinez, McCovey, Lofton

JEV

10 years ago

Koufax, McCovey, Banks

Voomo Zanzibar

10 years ago

Vote:

Kenny Lofton
Eddie Murray
John Smoltz

Kirk

10 years ago

FOX! My childhood hero, Ford Killebrew

Bix

10 years ago

Koufax, Marichal, McCovey

Dr. Remulak

10 years ago

Biggio, Koufax, Banks.

Low T

10 years ago

Smoltz, Lofton, Martinez.

Editor

Bryan O'Connor

10 years ago

Most Wins Above Average, excluding negative seasonal totals:

Martinez 41.3
Smoltz 40.1
Lofton 39.3
McCovey 38.9
Sandberg 38.8
Banks 36.8
Biggio 36.3
Ashburn 33.9
Murray 33.7
Killebrew 33.0
Marichal 32.7
Koufax 32.3
Ford 29.3
Pierce 28.8
Fox 25.0

I’ve repeatedly made exceptions to my framework for Smoltz and Edgar because I believe they’re both sold short by WAR and WAA. It’s interesting to see them topping the list for the first time.

Smoltz, Martinez, Koufax

Dr. Doom

10 years ago

A couple things, before I get to my vote. First, a shout-out to Joe Adcock. I have a Joe Adcock mini-bat that belonged to my dad. I have no idea how old it is, or even when the idea of a mini-bat came about. But I do know that, when my dad was a kid rooting for the Milwaukee Braves, his favorite player was Joe Adcock. So a shout-out to him. Second, I’m hopeful there’s some support for newcomers Billy Pierce and Nellie Fox. Pierce was quietly one of the best pitchers of his generation, and Fox one of the… Read more »

Hartvig

10 years ago

Reply to Dr. Doom

And speaking of Joe Adcock and Bill James, in the BJNHBA James says that Adcock lost more home runs due to the parks that he played in than everyone except DiMaggio (J) and Goose Goslin. If you couple that with the fact that he only played more than 122 games 5 times and more than 138 twice it would seem to me that under different circumstances- like playing in Wrigley or the Polo Grounds and for a manager who’s not going to give away a couple hundred of his at-bats a year to the wrong Torre- he would have had… Read more »

Nadig

10 years ago

Martinez, Lofton, Koufax.

Abbott

10 years ago

Murray, Biggio, McCovey

oneblankspace

10 years ago

voting for three players who played in the World Series at 35th and Shields, Chicago:

NFox (324 W 35th)
BPierce (324 W 35th)
Biggio (wearing a Houston uniform at 333 W 35th)

Fox showed us that 74.68% is not 75% in his last year on the writers’ ballot for the HOF.

Artie Z.

10 years ago

Banks, Marichal, Murray Apologies to newcomers Ashburn, Fox, and Pierce. While looking at Pierce’s page I noticed that he hung around on the HOF ballot for 5 years, never topping 2%. While that interested me for a bit, I figured that the HOF had different standards for remaining on the ballot back then. So I was flipping through the HOF results and I have a new question: What happened in 1979? Looking at the number of players who first appeared on the ballot, from 1973-1978 it goes 8, 7, 4, 2, 5, 8. While all of those players were not… Read more »

bells

10 years ago

Here’s the vote according to my methodology. I take four measures of player value as a gauge of how players compare across advanced metrics that value things slightly differently. Then I give them a cumulative rank with all players on the ballot over 50 WAR, adding their ranking of each measure. Here are the measures: WAR – is it too new to call it ‘classic’? Well, it’s the ‘classic’ way of measuring a player’s value over a player the team could have gotten to replace the player, over that player’s career, to show how ‘good’ that player was. WAA+ –… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar

10 years ago

Reply to bells

Crumpets!

Both you and BO’C have Lofton #3 in your methodology and go in another direction.

Crumpets, I say!

Dr. Doom

10 years ago

Reply to Voomo Zanzibar

I say this, not because Lofton is undeserving, but to advocate for Banks and that he retains your vote. They have virtually the same amount of career WAR (Lofton leads by 0.7). However, the distribution is drastically different. Once both were sub-5-WAR players, Lofton accrued more value. But in their best six seasons, here they are. Lofton: 7.6 7.2 6.6 5.9 5.6 5.5 (38.4 Total) Very impressive. Reliably a 6-and-a-half-WAR player for a half-dozen years. But here’s Banks: 10.2 9.4 8.2 7.8 6.4 5.3 (47.3 Total) An EIGHT-WAR player for six years! Banks had a legit argument as the best… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar

10 years ago

Reply to Dr. Doom

Lofton’s 7.2 was in 112 games.
On pace for 10+.

Editor

Bryan O'Connor

10 years ago

Reply to Voomo Zanzibar

Interesting how close the bells method is to “straight” +WAA. Voomo, I haven’t been convinced yet that Lofton belongs in the CoG (it took me long enough to come around to him as hallworthy). To me, anyone over 50 +WAA is a shoo-in for the CoG. Under 50, I look for reasons players might have been better than +WAA gives them credit for. I see that argument for Smoltz (pitched in relief when he could have accrued more value as a starter and looks better via FIP-based WAR than RA9), Martinez (could have accrued more value at first base, even… Read more »

bells

10 years ago

Reply to Voomo Zanzibar

Take heart, it was a close ‘un, and I could be swayed in a different direction… there’s always next week. Or even later this week (although I don’t want every Tom, Dick and Harry to think they can get me to do their bidding by yelling ‘crumpets’ at me, so I might hold off)…

David Horwich

10 years ago

Marichal, Martinez, Sandberg

Editor

Doug

10 years ago

Some tidbits on this year’s ballot players. First, the batters. – Smoky Burgess is one of only 8 catchers with career marks (min. 5000 PA) of 115 OPS+ and a .295 BA. Among 21 searchable players with 500 PH appearances, Burgess ranks second only to Matt Stairs in OPS in that role. – Joe Adcock is the career leader in games for Brave first basemen. His five seasons with 3+ oWAR also top the list for Braves’ first sackers. – Granny Hamner, who had debuted the previous September, started on opening day in 1945, nine days shy of his 18th… Read more »

Richard Chester

10 years ago

Reply to Doug

On 4-29-53 Joe Adcock became the first player to hit a HR into the CF bleachers at the Polo Grounds during a ML game. He was later followed by Hank Aaron and Lou Brock. Luke Easter did it during a Negro League game in 1953.

Richard Chester

10 years ago

Reply to Richard Chester

Make that 1948 for Easter.

Dr. Doom

10 years ago

Reply to Doug

I didn’t mention it before because I assumed someone else would, but the infamous 18-TB game for Adcock is one of the most impressive feats in Major league history. The story goes that the double he hit juuuuuuuuuuust missed being a fifth homer. An impressive day by a player from Milwaukee, against the Dodgers. Of course, that record would be broken by a player from the Dodgers, against Milwaukee. I always thought that had a nice symmetry to it. I assume everyone here knows that little piece of Adcock trivia – it just felt wrong for no one to have… Read more »

10 years ago

Reply to Dr. Doom

@49: Doc, as long I’m still around don’t assume everyone here knows anything. 🙂

mosc

10 years ago

Can someone directly address my steroid issues with Martinez? If I was 100% sure he was clean I would think him on the plus side of the borderline. Deducting even a little bit for his late-career surge puts him out of the running.

Failing that:

Smoltz (who I think is the best candidate on this ballot by some margin), Koufax, Ford

Voomo Zanzibar

10 years ago

Reply to mosc

What issue?
The guy didn’t field or run.
He had a lot of free time on his hands.
Maybe he took steroids out of boredom.

Dr. Doom

10 years ago

Reply to mosc

Deducting for a late-career surge, but not augmenting for an early-career path to the majors that was blocked through no fault of his own seems unfair. I think he likely stayed healthier because he didn’t have the wear-and-tear of fielding on his body. Jim Thome was producing well into his 30s, as well. So is David Ortiz. I think it’s a big help to not have to play the field. Anyway, with Seattle not calling him up in spite of being ML-ready, I think that even if you WANT to deduct something for the end of his career, it’s made… Read more »

Hartvig

10 years ago

Reply to mosc

“Can someone directly address my steroid issues with Martinez?” I dunno. He’s not on the Mitchell report and it would seem that at the very least that Monahan could be making that claim to excuse his own failings. Plus, while I know that it’s still possible to mask use even with more diligent testing, the fact that Jamie Moyer and Raul Ibanez kept producing well beyond that was being done seems to cast doubt on their involvement. I guess my question would be since Monahan made his claim right after the Mitchell Report came out is why didn’t he contact… Read more »

mosc

10 years ago

Reply to Hartvig

Mitchell report didn’t name AROD lets remember…

Author

birtelcom

10 years ago

Reply to mosc

The stats argument for a PEDs suspicion vis a vis Edgar is that he bounces up to a whole new level of hitting performance at age 32, in 1995 right about when the trend to PEDs-aided hitting seems to have been taking off. He then sustained an extremely high level of performance for seven seasons, through his mid and late 30’s, dropped a level at age 39 and 40 but was still hitting at a very high level, especially for somebody at that age, and then finally dropped off a cliff at 41 — in 2004 when serious PEDs testing… Read more »

10 years ago

John Smoltz, Edgar Martinez, Kenny Lofton

Editor

Doug

10 years ago

Some tidbits on this year’s pitchers. – Johnny Klippstein is the last of only three pitchers (the others are Eddie Rommel and Hugh Bedient) to start a career with 4 seasons starting 10 games and finishing 10 others. All three also had 100 IP,a CG and a save in each of those seasons. Klippstein was selected by Washington in the 1960 expansion draft, the only hometown player to appear for the new Senators in their eleven seasons. – Billy Pierce is in select company with HOFers Greg Maddux and Gaylord Perry as the only pitchers with 162 IP and 100… Read more »

Richard Chester

10 years ago

Reply to Doug

I believe Carl Scheib is the youngest player to have played in the AL. He debuted at age 16 years, 8 months and 5 days on 9-6-43.

Editor

Doug

10 years ago

Reply to Doug

I believe you are correct, Richard. Jim Derrington is the only other AL pitcher to debut before his 17th birthday, at 16 years, 10 months, 1 day on 09-30-56.

Derrington is the youngest pitcher in either league to start a game. The Phillies’ Rogers Hornsby McKee is the youngest with a CG (and a win) at 17 years, 17 days on 10-03-43.

BillH

10 years ago

Tough decision now. There are at least 12 remaining names deserving of induction. This round I will go with:

Murray
Marichal
Ford

with Banks and McCovey close behind, and would hate to see Sandberg drop off the ballot.

Editor

Doug

10 years ago

Ashburn, Pierce, Ford

T-Bone

10 years ago

Sandberg
Banks
Lofton

jajacob

10 years ago

Martinez, smoltz, lofton

Arsen

10 years ago

Ashburn, Koufax, Banks.

koma

10 years ago

Sandy Koufax, John Smoltz, Craig Biggio

10 years ago

Marichal, Banks, Smoltz

Love that 1958 MVP voting. How is it Mantle not only places 5th but doesn’t get a first place vote? RBIs, I guess, thus Jensen.

10 years ago

Martinez, Lofton, Koufax.

Nick Pain

10 years ago

Murray, Banks, Smoltz

Mike HBC

10 years ago

Koufax, Smoltz, Ford. All pitching, all the time.

brp

10 years ago

I feel I need to consider Lofton and Ashburn for a while longer so am going to punt a decision for now:
Lofton
Ashburn
Marichal, by a leg kick over Smoltzie

Luis Gomez

10 years ago

Marichal, Martinez, Killebrew.

donburgh

10 years ago

Biggio, Lofton, Ashburn

Author

birtelcom

10 years ago

Reply to donburgh

4,225 games played in center field on that ballot.

David P

10 years ago

Banks, Marichal, Murray

jeff hill

10 years ago

Banks, Lofton, Smoltz

Hartvig

10 years ago

I still haven’t made up my mind about Ashburn. I simply cannot wrap my mind around how it could be possible to go from matching Willie Mays at his very best to worse than Dante Bichette in the span of a single season. But since it appears he’ll pick up enough support to get thru this round I’ll let others do the heavy lifting this time around and see what develops down the road.

Banks, McCovey, Sandberg