Circle of Greats: 1910 Part 1 Balloting

There may be no major league games for a while, but at least there is the COG. This post is for voting and discussion in the 76th round of balloting for the Circle of Greats (COG).  This round begins to add to the ballot those players born in 1910. Rules and lists are after the jump.

Players born in 1910 are being brought on to the COG eligible list over two rounds, split in half based on last names — the top half by alphabetical order this round and the bottom half next round.  This round’s new group joins the holdovers from previous rounds to comprise the full set of players eligible to receive your votes this round.

The new group of 1910-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.  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 11:59 PM EST Saturday, November 8, while changes to previously cast ballots are allowed until 11:59 PM EST Thursday, November 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 1910 Part 1 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-1910 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 fourteen 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 1910 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 22 players born in 1910 who met the “10 seasons played or 20 WAR” minimum requirement. Eleven of those are being added to the eligible list this round (alphabetically from Elden Auker to Lonny Frey).  The eleven players further down in the alphabet will be added next round.

Holdovers:
Whitey Ford (eligibility guaranteed for 9 rounds)
Harmon Killebrew (eligibility guaranteed for 5 rounds)
Lou Boudreau (eligibility guaranteed for 4 rounds)
Joe Gordon  (eligibility guaranteed for 4 rounds)
Roberto Alomar (eligibility guaranteed for 3 rounds)
Kevin Brown (eligibility guaranteed for 3 rounds)
Roy Campanella  (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Eddie Murray (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Rick Reuschel (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Dennis Eckersley (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Joe Medwick  (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Minnie Minoso (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Luis Tiant (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Dave Winfield (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)

Everyday Players (born in 1910, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Frankie Crosetti
Lou Finney
Lonny Frey
Frank Demaree
Frenchy Bordagaray
Bill Brubaker

Pitchers (born in 1910, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Bill Dietrich
Dizzy Dean
Joe Bowman
Elden Auker
Max Butcher

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

242 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
koma
koma
9 years ago

Whitey Ford, Harmon Killebrew, Dennis Eckersley

latefortheparty
latefortheparty
9 years ago

Kevin Brown
Lou Boudreau
Joe Gordon

Steve
Steve
9 years ago

Whitey Ford; Harmon Killebrew; Joe Medwick

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago

Ah, COG, how I’ve missed you! You’re always there to comfort me in this horrendous time we call the “off season.”

Joe Gordon
Kevin Brown
Lou Boudreau

Bix
Bix
9 years ago

Killebrew, Medwick, Eckersley

MJ
MJ
9 years ago

Rick Reuschel, Kevin Brown, Joe Gordon

Artie Z.
Artie Z.
9 years ago

Alomar, Brown, Murray

Gary Bateman
Gary Bateman
9 years ago

Ford, Alomar, Minoso

JEV
JEV
9 years ago

Killebrew, Medwick, Campanella

Hub Kid
Hub Kid
9 years ago

Dizzy Dean, Lou Boudreau, Luis Tiant

Here’s a vote to get Dean ‘on the board’. If only a borderline COGer, at best, Dean had a great St. Louis Cardinals career (38 bWAR and 26.5 WAA as a regular from 1932-1937), and then very little career value afterwards.

David Horwich
David Horwich
9 years ago

Alomar, Campanella, Ford

My first vote for Ford. Seems as good a time as any for him to get in.

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  David Horwich

And here I was thinking we’ve done such a good job of keeping Ford out that we should keep going! 🙂

Chris C
Chris C
9 years ago

Agree with David at #11. Ford needs to get in. This is my first time voting for him too but he deserves to be here. I’m kind of torn on Dizzy Dean, he’s sort of a poor man’s Koufax with the short career but stunning 4-5 seasons. Maybe I’ll change a vote later if he needs it.

Ford
Eckersley
Tiant

Steven
Steven
9 years ago

Ford, Medwick, Dean.

Jeff H.
Jeff H.
9 years ago

Boudreau, Reuschel, Brown

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago

Gordon, Campanella, Minoso

Dan S.
Dan S.
9 years ago

Ford, Killebrew and Dean

mosc
mosc
9 years ago

Ford seems to be getting some carry, I’ll keep on board I think he belongs. The best player here to me is Joe Gordon. I also have to vote to keep Winfield around. I’m glad campy’s off the bubble.

Gordon, Ford, Winfield

Andy
Andy
9 years ago

Dizzy Dean
Whitey Ford
Killebrew

Abbott
Abbott
9 years ago

Killebrew, Winfield, Eckersley

J.R.
J.R.
9 years ago

Ford, Killebrew, Medwick

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago

To measure Greatness with a number… How about this? _____________ Wins Above Average, expressed as a rate stat, by dividing it into Plate Appearances (PaWaa): 166.4 … (7024) Lou Boudreau 176.2 … (6537) Joe Gordon 287.8 … (7712) Minnie Minoso 289.8 … (8143) Duck Medwick 306.7 … (4815) Roy Campanella 322.0 …(10400) Rob Alomar 350.0 … (9833) Harmon Killebrew 474.8 …(12817) Eddie Murray 521.4 …(12358) Dave! Winfield _________________________ This stat in its raw form favors the career that ended early and abruptly (Gordon, Boudreau) to the player who hung on at league average or below into his 40’s (Murray, Winfield).… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago

Innings Pitched per Win Above Average
IpWaa:

73.5 …(1969) Dean
80.3 …. (3256) Brown
93.1 …. (3548) Reuschel
101.0 … (3486) Tiant
107.4 … (3286) Eckersley
109.3 … (3170) Ford

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Dean’s first 6 season vs Koufax’s last 6 seasons:

Dizzy

1728 IP
133-75
3.00 ERA
132 ERA+

140 CG
23 SHO
31 SV

1.206 WHIP

38.0 WAR
24.2 WAA

71.5 IpWaa
__________

Sandy

1633 IP
129-47
2.19 ERA
156 ERA+

115 CG
35 SHO
5 SV

0.970 WHIP

46.6 WAR
30.9 WAA

52.8 IpWaa

Doug
Doug
9 years ago

This year’s tidbits. – Frankie Crosetti (1936-40) and teammate Red Rolfe (1937-41) each posted 5 consecutive qualifying seasons with Runs exceeding OPS+. Who are the only three players with a longer streak of such seasons? – Bill Dietrich is one of 7 pitchers since 1901 with 2000 IP and a career WHIP of 1.5 or more. Which one of those seven was active in 2014? – Lou Finney was a teammate of Doc Cramer and Jimmy Foxx, with both the Athletics and the Red Sox. Those three also played 500 games for both of those franchises. Who is the only… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Dizzy Dean: I’ve got Nolan Ryan, Gaylord Perry, and Randy Johnson.

Doug
Editor
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

Those are three of them.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Also David Cone and Jim Bunning

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Bill Dietrich: Jamey Wright is the active player.

Doug
Editor
9 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Doom

Wright is the right answer.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Lou Finney question: Tony Armas the Elder

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago

Whoops, did not know it was already answered.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Crosetti-Rolfe question: Johnny Damon, Doc Cramer and Tony Womack.

Doug
Editor
9 years ago

Absolutely correct.

Artie Z.
Artie Z.
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Doc Cramer is one of the answers to the Crosetti and Rolfe question.

From 1936-1941 the lowest amount of runs scored he had was 90; his maximum OPS+ was 85. He just misses in 1942 – 71 runs, 72 OPS+.

brp
brp
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Bordagray question is interesting.

My first attempts were Emilio Bonifacio and Joey Bats, but neither one quite makes it. It’s not even Chone Figgins, who did play in 2014 (somehow). Jerry Hairston almost did it but not quite, and didn’t play this year either.

Looks like it’s Willie Bloomquist. I had to dig around for that one.

Doug
Editor
9 years ago
Reply to  brp

Bloomquist is the one. He’s never had a season playing fewer than 3 positions, and has four seasons playing 8 positions (incl. DH) and five more (incl. 2014) playing at 7 spots (he’s never pitched or caught). This despite only two 100 game seasons, and none over 125 games.

Maybe it’s because of that versatility, but it feels to me as if Bloomquist has been around forever, but he’s actually still only 36.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Additional tidbits: Elden Auker is the only pitcher to lead the league in hits surrendered in his last season in the majors with 273 in 1942. Dizzy Dean’s last game came on Sept. 28, 1947. As a stunt the Browns coaxed him out of retirement to pitch that day with hopes of jacking up the attendance. It worked because the 15,910 fans who attended made it the third largest crowd of the year at St. Louis. Attendance for their 4 prior home games were 747, 1450, 315 and 1031. Dean did well, 4 IP, 0 R, 3 H and 1… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago

Dean got a hit in his only plate appearance, as well.
Eddie Lopat gave up 14 that day.
And two runs.

The record for hits allowed in a nine inning game with no more than 2 runs is 15, achieved by 7 pitchers, one of whom was named Sloppy Thurston.

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

I noticed, looking at that boxscore, that Lopat faced 41 batters, with a Game Score of 50.

Wondered if anyone with a GS that high ever faced more batters than their Game Score.

The answer is most definitely.
__________

Ted Lyons, 77 Game Score. 85 Batters Faced.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CHA/CHA192905240.shtml

__________

Burleigh Grimes, 77 Game Score, 83 BF

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/PHI/PHI191904300.shtml
(tie)
__________

Since 1988 (the Eckersley line), the record is a mere 38, by Charles Nagy and Bobby Witt

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

(why would this system tell me that trying to post 4 links to boxscores “looked a bit spammy” ?

I mean, links to discount boner pills, okay. But boxscores, c’mon!)

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/OAK/OAK199310030.shtml

http://www.baseball-reference.com/boxes/CLE/CLE199406270.shtml

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Voomo — just too many links.

Doug
Doug
9 years ago
Reply to  Doug

Here are the remaining quiz answers.

Frank Demaree question: other Cub outfielders with 4 WAR, 100 RBI and fewer than 20 HR – Andy Pafko, Kiki Cuyler, Riggs Stephenson

Joe Bowman question: other starters to see their ERA+ decline and W-L% improve age 30+ – Bruce Chen, Mike Krukow

Max Butcher question: pitcher with second highest ERA+ improvement age 30+ – Red Ruffing

Elden Auker question: pitcher with three seasons of 10 H/9 and 3.5 BB/9, all age 35+ – Earl Whitehill

Bill Brubaker question: other rookies with 100 RBI and league-leading strikeouts – Tony Lazzeri, Ron Kittle

Gary Bateman
Gary Bateman
9 years ago

Lou Finney question: Tony Armas?

Doug
Editor
9 years ago
Reply to  Gary Bateman

Correct.

mo
mo
9 years ago

Ford Killebrew Reuschel

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago

I’ll save someone a little searching on question 1 (more than 5 consecutive qualifying seasons with runs exceeding OPS+) and say that it’s NOT Luis Aparicio, Omar Moreno or Juan Pierre.

I would have bet some fairly serious money on that one.

bells
bells
9 years ago

Here’s the vote according to my statistical 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 – 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+ – adding the wins above average players (rather than replacement)… Read more »

jajacob
jajacob
9 years ago

killebrew, alomar, murray

Francisco
Francisco
9 years ago

Joe Medwick, Kevin Brown, Luis Tiant

bstar
9 years ago

Here’s a standings update through Francisco’s vote @37:

11…Ford
10…Killebrew
6….Brown
6….Medwick
5….Boudreau
5….Gordon
4….Eckersley
4….Reuschel
4….Alomar
4….Dean
4….Tiant
3….Campanella
2….Murray
2….Minoso
2….Winfield

Bill Johnson
Bill Johnson
9 years ago

Killebrew, Eckersley, and Medwick

Joseph
Joseph
9 years ago

Whitey Ford, Harmon Killebrew, Kevin Brown

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago

Vote:

Lou Boudreau
Kevin Brown
Joe Gordon

RonG
RonG
9 years ago

Ford, Minoso, Tiant

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
9 years ago

Dizzy Dean would probably have been featured on Awful Announcing if they had had it back in his day.

He sloood into second. (rhymes with good) — it was a long slide.

–Dizzy, don’t you know the King’s English?
–Yes, and so is the Queen.

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  oneblankspace

Dean was the first former MLer to do play-by-play broadcasting for the Yankees. He was a TV announcer in the early 1950s. And I frequently heard him use the word sloood.

no statistician but
no statistician but
9 years ago

Dizzy, I think, played off on the role of country boy deliberately. He was Andy Griffith before Andy Griffith made his name in “No Time for Sergeants.” The difference was that Griffith was a college educated actor. Dizzy was the real thing.

billh
billh
9 years ago

Ford, Murray, Winfield

T-Bone
T-Bone
9 years ago

Reuschel, Tiant, Whitey Ford

Jeff Hill
Jeff Hill
9 years ago

Ford, Boudreau, Brown

Mike G.
Mike G.
9 years ago

Brown, Reuschel, Tiant

Stubby
9 years ago

Campy, Minoso, Dizzy Dean

--bill
--bill
9 years ago

Gordon, Brown, Dean. A note on Ford. From 1953-1960, pitching away from Yankee Stadium against A’s, Browns/Orioles, Indians, and Senators, Ford had 484.2 IP with a 2.62 ERA. From 1953-1960, pitching in Fenway Park and Tigers Stadium, Ford had 108 IP with 3.83 ERA. If he had pitched equally against every team, home and away, he’d have pitched about 234.2 IP in Fenway and Tigers Stadium. Stengal hid him from those two stadiums, and that drastically effects his numbers, and how we should interpret them. As a comparison, look at Billy Pierce over the same time frame and in the… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago
Reply to  --bill

Right now it is Ford or Killebrew. I’m a lifetime Yankees fan and I’m furrowing my brow at Ford beating out everybody on this ballot right now, too. And Killebrew… will someone who has voted for him speak more to his strengths, please? Sure, I see the homers. And 573 was a huge number at the time. He retired 5th all-time. But what else did he bring? I never saw him play, so I’m really asking. The numbers say he had a good eye and they pitched around him. But those walks are offset by lack of value on the… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

I wouldn’t be concerned about Killer’s high vote total. The earliest voters (first day or two) are the biggest fans, if past elections are any guide. He has often been the #1 or #2 guy at this point. Then he collects only a vote or two over the next four days combined, and falls out of the running. So I’d say at this point that, in spite of a high vote count, he’s still probably a non-factor. His support doesn’t look unusually high to me.

David Horwich
David Horwich
9 years ago
Reply to  --bill

–bill @ 64 – In favor of Ford – By pitching Ford less often against Detroit and Boston in 1953-60, Stengel was “hiding” him from two of the mediocre teams of that era (neither of them a serious contender in any of those seasons), this pitching him more often against the contenders – he made more starts against the White Sox in his career than any other team, and pitched brilliantly (2.17 ERA vs the White Sox over his entire career). Anyway, I can’t really fault Ford because Stengel tried to maximize his assets by not pitching his ace lefthander… Read more »

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  David Horwich

David H – Except those White Sox teams that Ford was pitching against weren’t known for their offense. During Ford’s 13 year prime (53-65) the White Sox had a winning record every year. Yet they never led the AL in runs scored and only once finished as high as second. The ’59 WS team finished 6th in runs scored (as did the ’58 team) and the 98 win team in ’64 finished 7th. Meanwhile Ford pitched exactly 0 innings against the top offensive team of the era (obviously his own team) whereas 16% of Pierce’s innings were against the top… Read more »

Mike L
Mike L
9 years ago
Reply to  --bill

Bill @64 Regarding Ford, there’s a risk in cherry picking stats to diminish his accomplishments. There are a lot of highly regarded pitchers who found certain stadiums not to their liking. Spahn was mediocre in old Forbes Field. Randy Johnson had a 4.89 ERA at Fenway. Pedro had a 4.91 in ten starts at Turner Field. Kevin Brown, who gets a lot of love here, had several stadiums he was ineffective in, Grex Maddux was mediocre in Shea and awful in 12 starts in Arizona. Drysdale, who you cite, in a pitcher’s era, had a 4.89 ERA in 26 starts… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
9 years ago
Reply to  Mike L

The other problem with –bill’s remark, it seems to me, is that it holds the discussion to an eight year stretch, ending in 1960. Some of Ford’s best pitching was done as a rookie in 1950 and from 1961 through 1964, when Pierce, being older, wasn’t doing so well. Prior to 1953 Pierce was learning his craft (Ford, parenthetically speaking, was a complete pitcher from the start and lost two good years in the military) and then spent a couple of years on a dismal White Sox team where he was the second or third starter before getting it all… Read more »

bells
bells
9 years ago
Reply to  Mike L

I don’t think the case was ‘he was worse in some parks than others’, though, so yes lots of pitchers were worse in certain parks but that’s not really germane to the discussion. The case seems to me to be ‘he was worse in some parks than others and his manager avoided starting him in those parks and so his career numbers look significantly better than if he had been played in those parks’. Either way, we’ve talked enough about Ford that I feel people have definitely made cases on why he might have been more valuable than WAR says… Read more »

Mike L
Mike L
9 years ago
Reply to  bells

Bells, here’s a link to the 1928 discussion which has a lot about Ford, well expressed (by others) http://www.highheatstats.com/2014/03/circle-of-greats-1928-part-1-balloting/#more-20348

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago
Reply to  bells

Here’s a question about Whitey and WAR.

He is credited with 3.8 pitching WAR for 1961.

39 starts.
283 IP.
Whitey’s record was 24-5

The Yankees were 34-5 in games he started.

So, is that 3.8 (call it 4) WAR suggesting that if a replacement-level pitcher was on the hill for those 283 innings, that they Yankees would have gone 30-9 in those games?

Richard Chester
Richard Chester
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Voomo: I have asked a similar question some time ago. I don’t know precisely how WAR is calculated but I have found out that there is no correlation between WAR and a pitcher’s W-L record. WAR is simply a matter of runs yielded with adjustments. Example:In 1937 Lou Fette of the Braves had a 20-10 W-L record and a WAR of 3.9. Eddie Smith of the A’s had a W-L record of 4-17 and had the same WAR, 3.9.

paget
paget
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Voomo @77,
Extra weird? He led the league in FIP that year. Strangely for the Chariman, his FIP was stronger than his actual ERA (something he only accomplished twice in his career).

I’ve been vocal in my belief that WAR gives Ford the shaft; here, though, I really don’t get it since the major knock on him is that he had a terrific infield playing behind him. Why would his WAR be so low even in a year where he actually performed better than his ERA suggest he did?

no statistician but
no statistician but
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

None of the three pitchers who received votes in the 1961 Cy Young balloting—Ford, Spahn, Lary—finished in the top ten for WAR. The WAR co-leaders were Don Cardwell and Jack Kralick, a pair of journeyman hurlers having career years for teams buried in the second divisions of their respective leagues. Let’s ask this question: would the Yankees have been better served by having Don Cardwell or Jack Kralick in Ford’s spot in the rotation that year? Or would their statistical dominance in WAR have evaporated into sabermetrical hot air? Whitey’s record, by the way, was 25-4. Dyslectic Moment, I suspect,… Read more »

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Yes, dyslexic moment. I sometimes have a baseball thought need to come out while I am the valet to a 3.69 year-old.
______________

And yes, the W/L record is not a factor in WAR.
But there are instances where it stands out as cockeyed. Most of us have spent a lifetime looking with awe at Whitey’s 25-4 on possibly the most famous of all the Yankee teams.

And this panacea of a number comes along that tells us to shrug and move on.

This instance seems to be worth being aggravated about.

bstar
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

What is this sudden obsession with W-L records for pitchers? Whitey Ford had the league’s best defense AND the league’s best offense behind him that year. I could understand this a little more if he actually had a low ERA in ’61, but his 3.21 mark was the second-highest of his career and was only the 10th-best mark in the AL that year. And he pitched in the most extreme pitcher’s park in the league. His WAR is not controversial. B-Ref says an exactly league-average pitcher, pitching in the same parks with that defense against those exact teams, would have… Read more »

paget
paget
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

@86, Clearly his WAR is controversial. Going back a long ways, many readers of this blog think Ford is not accurately represented by WAR. Forget W-L record. (Which, parenthetically, I never brought up anyway.) You say Ford had the league’s best defense behind him–great, but what does that have to do with his FIP, the whole point of which is to neutralize defensive contributions to his ERA? As I said before, his FIP was not only better than he ERA (which is unusual for Ford), it was the best in the league. The other knock against Ford (which we’ve seen… Read more »

Chris C
Chris C
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

I’m curious but no idea how to do this. What numbers would Ford have to have put up to be credited with an 8 WAR season in 1961? 350 innings with an ERA under 1.00? Even better than that?

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Chris C. – WAR runs off of RA/9. My back of the envelope shows he would have needed a 2.10 RA/9 to achieve 8 WAR, keeping his innings pitched the same.

Honestly, I’m not sure what’s so controversial about Ford’s ’61 season. Looking at either ERA or RA shows it was a below-average seasons by his own standards. So why would we expect him to have such an outstanding WAR that year?

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

@92- But, paget, FIP is only ONE way to remove the defensive component of pitching. And, since most of us here us bb-ref WAR numbers, it’s not relevant to the conversation at all. Like W-L record, it’s not a factor in rWAR. So no matter how many times you bring it up, it’s not a part of the reckoning. For what it’s worth, Fangraphs credits him with 6.0 WAR that year. But his career total is only 55.4 at Fangraphs, while 53.9 at baseball-reference. So you’re basically getting the same career assessment of him, regardless of which WAR type you… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

@95 David P, SO much more concise than mine. I should learn brevity, and basically the same answer. Also, because I was looking at Fangraphs, I decided to make a “best-of” career for Ford, where I just take whichever was higher, his b-ref WAR or Fangraphs WAR in a given year. That STILL only totals to 59.4 WAR. Also, for the WAR skeptics out there, their WAR is within 1.0 of one another every year EXCEPT 1961 – and since the error bar for WAR is generally considered to be 1.0 WAR, I’d consider that a pretty darn good confirmation.… Read more »

paget
paget
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

@96, In your comment, Doom, you write: “FIP is only ONE way to remove the defensive component of pitching. And, since most of us here us bb-ref WAR numbers, it’s not relevant to the conversation at all. Like W-L record, it’s not a factor in rWAR. So no matter how many times you bring it up, it’s not a part of the reckoning.” That’s kind of my point exactly – I’m not suggesting that there’s been some kind of miscalculation utilizing the formulae that are part of rWAR; I’m suggesting the his rWAR is not reflective of his worth. Bringing… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

@99

“I’m saying that rWAR does not appropriately reflect Ford’s worth that year.”

Why would Ford’s value be accurately described by one formula one year, but a different one a different year? As I said, no matter HOW you divide Ford’s career – Fangraphs, B-Ref, half-way between, or even “best-of,” he’s under 60 WAR. It’s AWFULLY tough to get him to be an upper-level COG member (or perhaps in the COG at all) with that kind of a career.

paget
paget
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

@100,

Apologies if I’m not being clear. I’ll put it as plainly as I can: I don’t think either system of WAR rates Ford highly enough on a career basis. 1961 is merely the year we happen to be discussing. One of the last times we had an epic conversation about Ford I believe I brought up 1958 as another example.

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Doom – I think that’s a bit unfair to Ford (and I’m hardly a member of his cheering section!). 1) He also added 3.4 WAR via batting. 2) He missed two seasons due to the war. 3) He added value via the postseason. 4) His numbers take a big hit due to Yankee Stadium being a pitchers park. And yet he shows little difference between his home/road ERAs. So it’s possible that WAR’s a bit unfair to him. I don’t think he’s one of the best candidates on the ballot right now. But it’s certainly possible that he belongs in… Read more »

mosc
mosc
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

David P’s points are spot on. This is a case that needs consideration with wartime correction, post season correction, and more. I would re-iterate my position that extreme pitcher parks over-penalize their starters contributions. If you’re a stud pitcher in a pitcher’s park, your strikeouts are less valuable than in a hitter’s park. That’s the truth of WAR buried deep down in a place we don’t like to think about. You strike the guy out either place it has little to do with the stadium. Similarly, Yankee stadium was particularly hard for right handed batters in the 50s and 60s… Read more »

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

@102 Ah, I see. You think WAR is completely unfair to Ford in either implementation. That’s fine. I’m relatively agnostic on him. I don’t think he’s the best pitcher among the current crop, but I don’t have any problem with his election. @103 Yes, I was not accounting for batting, nor for the War. He missed out on maybe 5-5.5 pitching WAR because of Korea (being generous), and then let’s call it 4 WAR for hitting. Okay, now he’s a 65-ish WAR guy. That STILL leaves him short of every other pitcher on the ballot, with as much credit as… Read more »

mosc
mosc
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Well I hope the middle of a quote tree isn’t too disruptive a place to make a tangent on WAR calculations. The basic problem is the statistics used are linear compensators that are then aggregated. Pitching WAR is literally a sum of several intertwined numbers added together as if they are completely independent. This is different to a large extent to batters performances. A hitter’s positional adjustment doesn’t have much to do with his rbat, or his replacement value from AB’s an innings. You can say his on base percentage affects his ability to add or lose value on the… Read more »

bstar
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

paget @86 I would more willing to buy into the concept of “clear controversy” surrounding Whitey Ford’s 1961 WAR if some or even a little bit of the questioning was coming from someone other than Yankees fans. But I don’t see evidence of that. Not in this thread or the one Mike L linked to above. If it’s there and I have overlooked it, I am open to changing my mind about this. Also, we have to park-adjust FIP just like ERA, since it includes home runs (especially for a lefty in Yankee Stadium). Whitey was actually 8th in the… Read more »

paget
paget
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

@127, bstar, you (and David P. and whoever else) are missing the true point of this discussion, at least as far as I’m concerned. I can’t speak for anyone else, but for me this is not about Ford, at least not as such; this is about WAR. Ford happens to be the specific player we’re talking about, but the true stakes of the issue lie in WAR and how well it functions as an interpretation of player value. To turn it into a partisan issue in which Yankee fans cannot be trusted to offer meaningful opinions is wrong-headed in the… Read more »

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

Paget – This is a well thought out response and I agree with much of what you wrote. Look…we all have our biases and there’s plenty of research that shows that we seek out information that confirms what we’ve already decided. None of us are even close to being objective, as much as we might like to think otherwise. BTW, I did point out the fact that Ford never had to face the Yankees lineup (#71) though I was referencing his whole career not ’61 specifically. Bstar (in #86) also mentioned the Yankees having the best offense in the league… Read more »

Artie Z.
Artie Z.
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

I didn’t know Ford’s particular numbers in 1961 but I assumed he had an ERA of 2.40 or something like that the way people are going back and forth. I assumed he had a 1978 Guidry type season and was getting 3.8 WAR, which would seem a little ridiculous. His ERA was 3.21, his RA9 is 3.43 without adjusting for anything. Black out the W-L record and how are his numbers that much different from 1961 Jim Bunning, who had 3.7 WAR for a Tigers team that won 101 games? Someone (mosc?) mentioned Clete Boyer getting a lot of love… Read more »

paget
paget
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

@151, Artie Z. Your comment brought into somewhat sharper focus the basic problem underlying this debate, at least as I see it. You say that based on all this hullabaloo you were expecting that Ford would have had some kind of epic season in 1961, and you were surprised to find it was basically just another Whitey Ford sort of season. I’m with you on that to a large extent. What your comment suggests to me is that this argument has *seemed* like one where one side thinks he’s just a “very good” pitcher, and the other thinks he’s a… Read more »

David P
David P
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

@183 Paget – Your Ford vs. Palmer comparison works up to a point. In fact they have almost the same number of “runs above average”. Palmer has 275, Ford 257.

And yet Palmer obviously has a lot more WAR.

Why is that? Simply because the AL of Palmer’s time was considered a lot tougher than the AL of Ford’s time. Despite their similar runs above average, Palmer has a large lead in runs above replacement (621 vs 499).

Voomo Zanzibar
Voomo Zanzibar
9 years ago
Reply to  Voomo Zanzibar

paget@183,

Whitey vs Andy Pettitte illustrates how WAR/WAA valued pitchers differently in different eras.

IP
3170
3316

WAR
53.9
60.9

WAA
29.0
30.1

IpWAA
109.3
110.1

WAA says that they were of the same value above average, but Andy was 7 wins more above replacement.

no statistician but
no statistician but
9 years ago
Reply to  bells

mosc:

I hold a similar position about the WAR evaluations of pitchers who have a good year for a bad team.

I repeat my question: Would the Yankees have been better off in 1961 with Cardwell or Kralick—the year’s WAR champs—in Whitey’s spot in the Yankee rotation?

mosc
mosc
9 years ago

Describe the ideal pitcher for the 1961 Yankees. 1) He should league the league in innings. This is an easy one, any team would request this 2) The yankees have great infielders, he should keep the ball down and play to the strengths 3) He should be left handed. Yankee stadium in that era had one of if not the highest splits between left and right handed hitters. A left handed pitcher will punish lefty bats and has the stadium to assist him with right handed/switch bats. Whitey is the ideal pitcher for the ’61 yankees and it’s not even… Read more »

bstar
9 years ago

Maybe not, nsb, but they have may been just as well off with Camilo Pascual, had he been a lefty. 😉

Andy
Andy
9 years ago

Alomar, Boudreau, Kevin Brown

Dave Humbert
Dave Humbert
9 years ago

Brown, Reuschel, Tiant 3 high value postwar pitchers, 2 of whom got no BBWAA love at all and immediately fell off the ballot before proper consideration. By a number of statistical measures (laid out by bells@30) they seem pretty worthy to me. While everyone we’ve carried over is at least hall-of-fame caliber, some are “just” HOF, not COG. Some candidates were one-dimensional or good for a relatively short time, and have to wait – there are limited slots available, and some could miss out. Even with this thinner backlog, we can maintain a COG level of performance (unless we want… Read more »

Dan
Dan
9 years ago

No one loves stats as much as I do but seeing the player perform is still the best way and unless someone as seen a player they do not get a full measure of their worth. I realize that we must use stats for those we have not seen but if I have seen them play that is much more valuable than the stats.

JamesS
JamesS
9 years ago

Killebrew, Murray, Alomar

opal611
opal611
9 years ago

For the 1910 Part 1 election, I’m voting for:
-Roberto Alomar
-Eddie Murray
-Dave Winfield

Other top candidates I considered highly (and/or will consider in future rounds):
-Eckersley
-Killebrew
-Ford
-Brown
-Boudreau
-Gordon
-Reuschel
-Tiant
-Medwick

Stephen
Stephen
9 years ago

Ford, Killebrew, Gordon

David P
David P
9 years ago

While others are discussing Whitey Ford, I want to bring up Dizzy Dean. I’m puzzled by his early support. Sure he had a nice 6 year peak, but that’s basically his whole career. And it’s hardly an historic peak. Just looking at players of the same age (22-27), Dean’s 6 year peak only ranks 10th all-time. The player closest to him in WAR from ages 22-27 is Dave Stieb who’s long gone from the ballot. Don Drysdale and Kevin Appier had just a bit less WAR than Dean and are also long gone. Wes Ferrell will be on the ballot… Read more »

mosc
mosc
9 years ago
Reply to  David P

Weak ballot. He’ll fall when we get into some deeper talent.

John Autin
Editor
9 years ago

Boudreau, Gordon, Tiant. Just to chew the fat a bit … I’m surprised Ol’ Diz is faring pretty well. I can’t see him over guys like Saberhagen and Guidry. What has Dean got that Sabes hasn’t? Dean’s case rests on his first five full seasons, racking up 33.6 WAR (6.7 WAR/year). That does beat Saberhagen’s 5-year peak by 0.6 WAR per year, but only by 0.2 WAA per year. And that’s setting the terms of engagement to Dean’s advantage. For their careers, per 200 IP, Sabes leads in WAR by 4.6 to 4.3, and in WAA by 2.9 to 2.7.… Read more »

birtelcom
birtelcom
9 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Bill James, in his New Historical Abstract, placed Dizzy 25th on his ranking of all-time pitchers. Just behind Nolan Ryan at 24, just ahead of Phil Niekro at 26. Bill’s notes on Dizzy in the Abstract do not, however, discuss the baseball reasons for his placement of Dean at that high spot at all, but instead are an interesting biographical and sociological explanation for why Dizzy became so famous and so popular despite his short stint as a star.

Dr. Doom
Dr. Doom
9 years ago
Reply to  birtelcom

Well, my guess for the statistical reason would be that the rankings in the NBJHBA were made up of three components: Win Shares over the best three (consecutive) seasons, Win Shares over the best five (nonconsecutive) seasons, and total Win Shares.* Because two of the three criteria were peak-related, something like that would hurt a guy like Ryan, who was more-or-less the same pitcher for like 25 years, and really help a guy like Dean, who was a shooting star with a higher peak. “3” and “5” are just randomly chosen. If he had used 7 and 10 for a… Read more »

paget
paget
9 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

I’ll just be the guy who says it, even though everyone is thinking it: freak injury extra credit. Clearly, the people voting for Dean are giving him career extra-credit for his toe injury in the 1937 All-Star game (“Fractured, hell, the damn thing’s broken!”). If one is philosophically against the idea of extra-credit then the conversation’s a non-starter. But, clearly, a number of folks believe Dean achieved just enough in his brief career to suggest a complete COG career if but for an accident of fate. I’m not saying I agree or disagree, but that’s what’s producing his vote total.… Read more »

David Horwich
David Horwich
9 years ago
Reply to  paget

Saberhagen’s career pattern is I think largely attributable to injury and workload/fatigue issues. His wikipedia bio mentions 3 different injuries, and he was worked reasonably hard at a young age: 260 IP (regular & postseason combined) at age 21 in his first Cy Young season; then, after a down year in which he threw only 156 IP, he threw 257+ IP from ages 23-25. He never pitched 200+ innings again.

John Autin
Editor
9 years ago
Reply to  paget

On the “freak injury extra credit” angle: Isn’t the connection between Dean’s toe and his arm somewhat speculative? Of course, it could be the direct cause. But Dean averaged over 300 IP from age 20-26 (the first two years in the minors, both over 300 IP). And he was heading for another 300-IP season up to the fateful All-Star Game. Would it be a shock if such a pitcher *just* got a sore arm, with no precipitating injury? The only one even close to Dean’s workload for 1932-36 was Hubbell. He was seven years older, and also was much less… Read more »

bstar
9 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

“..and..[Dean’s]..combined 132 ERA+ for his 6-year peak (or 130 for his 5-year peak) isn’t impressive at this level — it’s in the range of Adam Wainwright or Cole Hamels over the last five years.” John, Dizzy Dean’s ERA+ doesn’t seem that historically impressive at first glance. But I do think we need to consider the fact that’s it much harder to have a high ERA+ pitching 350 innings than pitching 220 like Hamels or Waino do, especially considering a good deal of that difference is coming from fourth or fifth-time-thru-the-order PAs for the 300+ inning guys. The TTOP has gotten… Read more »

John Autin
Editor
9 years ago
Reply to  bstar

bstar, aren’t you partly making the same point I was about Dean? The sentence you quoted was in support of my preceding sentence: “Dean’s peak value was as much due to his huge workload as to the quality of his innings.” Yes, it’s harder to have a great ERA+ with 285-325 IP. It was the bulk innings that gave him great value. OK, I should have compared Diz to his contemporaries instead of Waino and Hamels. So here are Dean’s ERA+ ranks in the NL: — 1932, 10th — 1933, 10th — 1934, 3rd — 1935, 3rd — 1936, 6th… Read more »

bstar
9 years ago
Reply to  bstar

Yes, I suppose so. I almost put a P.S. in to say my comment was less about what you said specifically and more about my reservations about ERA+. The stuff about the different eras has been bubbling inside of me for quite some time, but it wasn’t until a P-I search earlier tonight that I realized how glaring the issue is, at least for me. So, I could have saved that for another day but I couldn’t resist. I totally agree with you on the injury credit front. Meh, I don’t think peak-value is so much about increased pennant impact.… Read more »

Hartvig
Hartvig
9 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

I know that Dean’s career was cut short so there’s the “what if” factor but if that’s the case why hasn’t that come up for other pitchers? I know when I think of Frank Tanana the picture that forms in my mind is the crafty veteran often pitching on the edge and getting outs by outsmarting the hitter. But for about the first 4 years of his career he matched Dean pretty much right down the line. Jim Maloney broke out a year later than old Diz but his first 5 years are a pretty close match as well. Sam… Read more »

no statistician but
no statistician but
9 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

Actually, we’re just getting into to era of injury and illness damaged careers. Coming up are Chuck Klein, George Sisler, Ross Youngs, Ray Chapman, and Addie Joss. I doubt if any but Sisler has a chance at the COG, and he has only a chance. At least he and Klein didn’t die like the other three.

paget
paget
9 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

@101, I’m not saying a disagree with you, in theory, about the issue of extra credit, but Dean’s case is a little different than most of the guys you list as players whom we could consider for “what if” points. Herb Score is of course one of baseball’s greatest “what ifs”; the sad fact is that he only had those two seasons and so many HHS readers might not feel like he achieved enough for us to reasonably speculate. Dean clearly surmounts some sort of unofficial career achievement level for some of our readers. This is an area where it’s… Read more »

bstar
9 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

I think in general we’ve done a good job of only doling out “what-if” credit for years lost to wartime service or time lost to exclusion from the league because of the color barrier.

Anything other form of credit would likely be haphazardly and unevenly applied. Was Dizzy Dean’s injury that different from the Scores of other pitchers who suffered health setbacks at some point in their careers, or was Dean’s simply more publicized?

paget
paget
9 years ago
Reply to  bstar

His *injury* might not have been that different, but his *career* sure was. I don’t plan on voting for him, but I get the logic of someone who wants to.

Lawrence Azrin
Lawrence Azrin
9 years ago
Reply to  bstar

@116;

“…Scores of other pitchers…” – I see what you did; very clever. Herb Score’s terrible injury was also well publicized.

no statistician but
no statistician but
9 years ago
Reply to  Lawrence Azrin

The May 20, 1957, issue of Life Magazine had a two-page spread on Score’s injury. In the 1950’s, as we old-timers know, that was the height—or in this case, depth—of public exposure. TV was pretty well established by then, too, and film of McDougald’s drive or stills of the aftermath, I can’t remember which, made it prominently on National news that evening. Score’s recovery was big news, too, and his disappointing return to pitching was followed widely in the media. I doubt that Dean’s injury received half as much public attention. Incidentally, the entire run of Life Magazine is now… Read more »

bstar
9 years ago
Reply to  Lawrence Azrin

+1 for catching that, LA!

Steven
Steven
9 years ago
Reply to  Hartvig

Another 30-game winner who was finished early: Two-time Cy Young Award winner, organ-playing, freelance felon, Denny McLain.

oneblankspace
oneblankspace
9 years ago
Reply to  Steven

One of my sports trivia partners back in the 1980s asked the question: Which convicted felons had won a Cy Young award.

McClain, Blue, Hoyt, Jenkins, I don’t know if Gooden had his at that point yet.

Doug
Doug
9 years ago
Reply to  John Autin

Another guy on this ballot that I’d barely heard of before has some surprising WAR numbers. Lonny Frey started out as a shortstop with the Dodgers where he had a few good years (8 WAR in about 3 seasons), but he really shone as a second baseman with the Reds. His four seasons with 2.5 oWAR and 2.0 dWAR trail only Utley (5) and Joe Gordon (7), with Pedroia and Kinsler sitting at 3 seasons. Frey lost two seasons to the war (but age 33 and 34) and a fair bit of time to short seasons (one season with 78… Read more »

aweb
aweb
9 years ago

Brown
Killebrew
Boudreau