With Derek Jeter’s retirement, the 2015 season will begin without an active 3000 Hit man. But, that should change soon, likely with an unusual confluence of such hitters.
More after the jump.
Cap Anson was the first player to reach 3000 hits, a club now numbering 28 members. Here are when each of them joined:
- 1894 – Cap Anson
- 1914 – Honus Wagner, Nap Lajoie
- 1921 – Ty Cobb
- 1925 – Tris Speaker, Eddie Collins
- 1942 – Paul Waner
- 1958 – Stan Musial
- 1970 – Willie Mays, Hank Aaron
- 1972 – Roberto Clemente
- 1974 – Al Kaline
- 1978 – Pete Rose
- 1979 – Carl Yastrzemski, Lou Brock
- 1985 – Rod Carew
- 1992 – Robin Yount, George Brett
- 1993 – Dave Winfield
- 1995 – Eddie Murray
- 1996 – Paul Molitor
- 1999 – Tony Gwynn, Wade Boggs
- 2000 – Cal Ripken
- 2001 – Rickey Henderson
- 2005 – Rafael Palmeiro
- 2007 – Craig Biggio
- 2011 – Derek Jeter
With more players, longer seasons, bigger contracts and better training regimens, 3000 hit men have become more common, with half of the current 28 joining the club in the last 35 seasons.
As can be seen from the list above, players reaching 3000 hits have been concentrated in two periods, with seven in the 1970s and nine in the 1992-2001 decade. Some superlatives concerning 3000 hit players:
- Most reaching 3000 in same season: 2 (1914, 1925, 1970, 1979, 1992, 1999)
- Most active at same time: 3 (Speaker/Cobb/Collins 1925-28, Mays/Aaron/Clemente 1972, Rose/Yastrzemski/Brock 1979, Yount/Brett/Winfield 1993, Gwynn/Ripken/Henderson 2001)
- Most seasons active after reaching 3000 hits: 8 (Pete Rose, 1979-86), 7 (Ty Cobb 1922-28)
- Most hits in season after reaching 3000 hits*: 216 (Derek Jeter, 2012), 211 (Ty Cobb, 1922, 1924)
- Most consecutive seasons with new 3000 hit man: 3 (1999-2001)
- Most consecutive seasons with one active 3000 hit man: 12 (1992-2003)
- Most consecutive seasons with none active: 16 (1898-1913), 12 (1946-57), 11 (1931-41)
*Paul Molitor had 225 hits in the 1996 season that he reached 3000 hits
Looking ahead, a new confluence of 3000 hitters appears to be approaching. Here are projected 3000 hit dates, together with current probability (based on Bill James’ Favorite Toy) of reaching that target (not necessarily in the projected year):
- 2015 – Alex Rodriguez (60%)
- 2016 – Ichiro Suzuki (71%)
- 2017 – Adrian Beltre (97%)
- 2018 – Albert Pujols (73%)
- 2019 – Miguel Cabrera (81%)
If the future unfolds that way, it will be the first time with a new 3000 hit man in 5 consecutive seasons. However, if we assume those probabilities are independent of each other, the chance that all five will reach 3000 is only 24%, but improves to 41% if we assume Rodriguez makes it (the zero for A-Rod’s hit total last season has lowered his probability estimate substantially, probably to a much greater degree than warranted).
Some other probabilities for reaching 3000 hits.
- Robinson Cano – 40%
- Mike Trout – 24%
- Jimmy Rollins – 22%
- Elvis Andrus – 20%
- Jose Reyes – 20%
- Nick Markakis – 19%
- Andrew McCutchen – 17%
- Billy Butler – 16%
- David Wright – 12%
- none of the above – 11%
The problem with James’ Favorite Toy is that it underestimates the career length of great players. For example, it has Pujols retiring at age 38. But we already know that he’s signed through age 41. I suppose it’s possible that he doesn’t play the final three years of his contract but it seems unlikely.
Anyway, Rodriguez only needs to average 20.3 hits for the final 3 years of his contract. Pujols, 68.7. Cabrera, 90.4 (less if 2024 and/or 2025 vests). Beltre’s only under contract for two more years but he shows no sign of slowing down.
Based on that, I’d say that everyone but Ichiro is a virtual lock for 3,000 hits. Ichiro is obviously the wild card since it’s unclear if he’ll even play next year. And if he does, he won’t be a starter.
I think it’s pretty unlikely Ichiro won’t play somewhere next year. Wouldn’t be shocked to see him back in Seattle. But, will he get another 600+ PA over the next two years – probably what he needs to make it.
Ichiro’s 156 “need” hits seem so paltry, and yet … my own guess is 50% on his shot at 3,000.
Ichiro was the 61st player with either 100 games or 100 hits *at* age 40. Of the prior set, 41 of them played at age 41. Averages for those who played both years:
Stat … 40 … 41
PAs … 488 … 378
Gms … 127 … 105
Hits … 118 … 86
OPS+ … 109 … 85
BA … .276 … .259
The control group was a little different than Ichiro at 40 — more offensive value, less defensive. But their hitting fell off a lot.
I think that Ichiro’s tolerance for a possible decline is as much a factor as getting a chance to play semi-regularly. Could he live with himself as a .250 hitter? He did return after batting .262 in 2013, but he was on a 2-year deal then. And even though he hit .284 last year, his K rate was way above his career norm, which could signal that he’s on the edge of a big drop.
And suppose he’s hitting .200 as he approaches 3,000 — will the inevitable criticism of pursuing “selfish” goals bother him enough to quit? I’d guess not, but you never know.
Sam Rice might be the best comp for Ichiro. Both outfielders with speed who got late starts to their MLB careers.
Rice’s age 41 season looks a lot like Ichiro last year – first season not playing almost every day. The next season (age 42), Rice saw his PA drop by a third from the year before, and almost to nothing the year after that (age 43) before being released by the Senators. Came back for one more year with the Indians that was a lot like his age 42 season.
Projecting Rice’s experience onto Ichiro, he might get 300 PA this season, but will probably struggle to get close to that in 2016. If it turns out that way, Ichiro will probably still be short of 3000 by end of 2016. Does anyone then sign a 43 year-old for one more season (or until he gets his couple dozen hits)?
It’s not that unlikely that Pujols won’t be playing to at the end of his contract – a few more injuries, a few half years…his three years in LA so far, averaged out, put him 4 more years from 3000 hits. I think 73% is pretty fair – health generally doesn’t improve, and neither does performance, in the mid-late 30s. A-Rod was far, far more of a cinch to make it after his age 34 season. Now, he will crawl over the finish line, probably.
Miguel Cabrera is very similar – playing a lot but not exactly healthy the last two years, he could easily flame out. He could also make a huge run up the all-time leaderboard like Jeter managed, of course.
Ken Griffey Jr. didn’t make it and didn’t come that close in the end, and he was on fantastic pace, until he wasn’t.
Not sure who gives Ichiro the playing time, and he’s not exactly a spring chicken. He could luck into a place where he gets 400-500 ABs this year, but I don’t think anyone will be planning on that in April.
Except Griffey makes the exact opposite point. Even beat-up, injured, limping to the end Ken Griffey managed 625 hits post age 34 (Pujols only needs 481).
Todd Helton, another guy who was injured a lot at the end of his career, managed 562 hits after age 34.
Heck, even with missing an entire season, Dave Winfield had 1,027 hits after age 34.
I could go one but you get my point. For someone of Pujols’ talent level and contract length, 481 more hits isn’t that many. And once he gets close, which he will, he’ll do whatever it takes to make it.
(About the only thing that I could see stopping him would be a Campanella type injury situation).
It’s not that I don’t think Pujols will make it, it’s just that I don’t think 73% is an unreasonable number. There is a small but real chance that Pujols declines or gets hurt and isn’t useful to anyone anymore. There have been very, very few players as good as Pujols, so it’s unlikely he becomes useless next year, but in the next 4 years, sure, there is a chance.
Also, if he gets close, but is no longer a useful player (and being a useful DH/1B requires at least decent hitting), it doesn’t matter if he’s willing to make it, only if someone is willing to give him playing time. Most recently, Johnny Damon was willing to play anywhere to make a run at 3000, he just wasn’t good enough.
We are in a unique contract era right now as well, with so many players signed to such old ages with long deals. Some of these deals are going to end 3-4 years early, we just don’t know who yet.
How would any of these deals end 3-4 years early???
Teams can’t just unilaterally cancel contracts. And the player has 0 incentive to accept a buyout for a lesser amount. If a players get released, the team is still on hook for the contract and someone else can pick him up for the league minimum.
Just look at Arod and the Yankees. Why do you think he’ll be on the team next year? Cause they have to pay him regardless so they might as well bring him back and see what he can contribute.
Also formerly great players are on a much longer leash. Teams keep giving them chances even when they’re not performing.
Just look at Eddie Murray. He had a poor season at age 38 (87 OPS+) but Cleveland still used him regularly. They brought him back the next year and he had a bounce back season (129 OPS+). He hit poorly for them the following year but Baltimore was still willing to trade for him and use him as well (637 PAs at age 40 with an 87 OPS+). The next year the Angels signed him and he was dreadful (53 OPS+). They released him the Dodgers signed him to finish out the year.
I realize the deals won’t actually end early, but some of the players won’t be playing at the end. Injuries and unexpected declines happen, sheesh, I didn’t think that was controversial.
And again, I think Pujols will make it, with plenty of room to spare, I just think 1:3 odds are about right if I was going to bet against him.
I agree with David P. Failing some kind of career ending injury (and not just your standard degrading injuries) I don’t see how Pujols doesn’t make it. He’s signed for 7 more years on a club with a DH spot to fill and he’s one of the greatest first basemen of all time. It doesn’t take much of a fraction of his talent to hold on for 481 more hits in his situation.
and his 2014 wasn’t really that bad folks. 125 OPS+ and 695 PA’s is a hell of a year for a 34 year old slugger. Yankees would have killed for that and would happily trade Tex for Pujols straight up. Your other $20m/year first basemen weren’t much better either. Fielder was injured after mission 1 game in 5 years and Howard made tex look like an all-star. Joe Mauer? No. Despite lots of well paid first basemen, the only one that managed better than Pujols was Adrian Gonzalez and Miguel Cabrera, who are 2 and 3 years younger respectively.
Pujols isn’t an MVP anymore but he’ll be a roughly league average first basemen for a long time to come. The hits are inevitable.
James’ Favorite Toy might now be highlighting something new, something that has changed in the game. Are players being allowed to stay around longer past their expiration dates because of their contracts? In the past, Pujols might have been gone at or around age 38. Question is, will the Angels just keep him around for another two or three years until he’s in his 40s if he can no longer hit?
A-Rod might be the first test of this. I can understand why the Yankees haven’t cut him. He’s actually never not hit, so they might as well see what’s left in that bat. But if there is nothing left, will the Yankees keep him around, especially after 2015? I say they don’t. They’ll eat the last two years and move on. If he’s cooked, will he even play enough this year to get his 60 or so hits? Back to Pujols, I don’t believe the Angels will just continue to play him at the outer edges of the contract if he skills are shot.
How many players have been given ten years deals that take them into their 40s? This seems like something newish. A-Rod, Pujols, now Cano. It’s one thing to give a player who is 36 or 37 a three year deal that takes him to 39 or 40. A team will have his recent track record to assess. They’ll already know if he is productive past age 35, minimizing the risk to some degree. The risk of signing a 30-31 year old to a ten year deal is extremely high. No one knows how he’ll perform in the last five years of the deal. That’s the Cano and Pujols question, and from that question comes another question: Will their teams allow them to continue to play? I think that is the unknown.
I think Arod will be given 100-200 PA’s this year if he hits like drew did in 2014 and then released. If he hits say a .650 OPS, they will probably cut him at the end of the season. If he hits .700 OPS I bet he’s back for 2016 and if he hits .750+ OPS and stay healthy I bet he qualifies for the batting title.
He doesn’t have a super long leash. I think the Yankees would cut him right now if they knew for a fact no team would ever sign him again and that he’d never put up an .800+ OPS for them. They have to rule out both of those possibilities before release enters the equation. If he’s productive then other teams would at least pay him league minimum so they won’t release him. Basically, he has to prove he’s unproductive to get cut.
I also think there’s a chance the yankees try to get out of 2016 and 2017 payments to A-Rod by using him purely as a pinch hitter in 2015, not even letting him start at DH. After 50-100 AB’s off the bench he may just walk away with too big a wound to his pride. There’s also the possibility they try the Manny path and at the first sign of injury send him to the 60 day DL (cause, yknow, gotta add to the 40 man to replace your backup DH even for a week or two wink wink) and make him actually HIT in AAA rehab before declaring him healthy enough to get back in the MLB. That might also force retirement.
It seems to me replacement level theory and basic business economics suggest that: 1. If you have a player with a guaranteed contract, so long as his expected performance level remains above replacement level he is worth keeping on the roster, or (if you already have a player at his position who is further above replacement level) at least trading to another team for some fair return while agreeing to pay all or most of his guaranteed salary. 2. Once the player’s expected performance level falls below replacement level, into negative WAR territory, it makes sense to just cut him and swallow the remainder of his guarantee.
Of course “expected performance level” is easy to say but not so easy to actually identify in a particular circumstance. Who knows what A-Rod’s “expected performance level” is right now.
And of course in the A-Rod case there is such a swirl of factors unrelated to on-field performance — his effect on the Yankees’ reputational value, his relationship with his teammates, etc.
I’m not sure I agree Birtelcom, at least in terms of the better players. There are two issues that I see:
1) With a formerly great players on a guaranteed contract, the team will have them on a long leash, waiting to see if they can return to their former greatness. Or some semblance of it. Even if a player is playing at or below replacement level, there’s still the hope that they’ll bounce back. I think it would take several years of below level replacement play for a team to release a player.
2) If you release the player, you still have to replace them. If you go the bargain basement route, you may not actually improve the team performance. Except now you’re paying two salaries, one large and one small and are no better off.
If you replace them with an average or better player, you may improve your team. But that player probably has a relatively high salary as well. So now you’re paying “double salary” which not all teams can afford. And you may have to trade for that player, costing yourself valuable assets.
#1 and #2 work together to keep veteran players on guaranteed contracts employed.
Mosc, I don’t think there’s any way they can get out of the contract, meaning A-Rod is not going to walk away, not from $61 MM. He’ll sit on the bench if that’s where they send them, but that will hurt them more than him. He can create an uncomfortable situation for the overall team and he’s a blocked roster spot without production. They can embarrass him, but he still owns the winning hand.
I think they’ll give him a chance to show what he has left, but if he fails, it may be in both their interests to cut a deal. If he limps through 2015, offer to pay him the $40 MM remaining if he retires. He gets his money, they remove the $27.5 MM AAV against the luxury tax and also will save them real money since they’re being taxed 50% on every dollar over the threshold. MLB probably won’t be happy if they try that, but not sure what they could do if he retires and they cut a separate deal with him structured as a personal services contract.
MikeD, 10-year deals ending past age 40 are surely new. But “hang-around” years have always been with us, for other reasons.
Before integration, when leagues tended to be much more stratified than now, there were always some hopeless teams who would take on a faded star as a drawing card, or just because they had no one better. The Braves were leading practitioners of this craft.
The Braves stunk most years from 1917-45, never rising above 4th and with just 4 winning years. (Only the Phils had a worse combined W%.) In that span, they gave swan-songs to Babe Ruth, Al Simmons, George Sisler, Earl Averill, Joe Medwick, Paul and Lloyd Waner, Rube Marquard and Ed Walsh — not to mention the return of the prodigal son, Rabbit Maranville, their regular shortstop from age 37-41.
As you say, it will be most interesting to see, as the A-Rod / Pujols / Cabrera / Cano contracts peter out, whether teams will acknowledge the sunk cost once the player slips below replacement level. And whether teams will have learned anything from contracts like these, Ryan Howard, etc.
JohnA,
I believe it’s possible that when teams sign these contracts they may believe they will eat the last year or two of the deals. Yet it’s easy to believe that when the decision is seven or eight years off. Actually cutting a player owed tens of millions is easier said than done. In A-Rod’s case, the Yankees at least front loaded more of the money. In Pujols’ case, the money increases the older he gets. I have no idea what the Angels plan to do there, but the latter years of that deal figure to be quite ugly.
A Rod is anything but a lock. Granted, he needs only 61 hits, but he sat out completely last year, and he turns 40 in July, not a good age to sit for a year. It’s already clear he isn’t the Yankees 1st choice at 3rd this year, although he could try 1st or dh, or even back at ss. Hopefully, Cashman and the Steinbrothers will see his real worth, and buy out his contract. Here’s hoping he doesn’t make the 3000 hit club.
The following players missed their age 38 season and then returned to the ML. Some of them had brief tours when they returned. I hope it prints OK.
Andres Galarraga
Billy Sullivan
Chris Chambliss
Clark Griffith
Diego Segui
Ed Heusser
Fred Tenney
Joe Berry
Ken Forsch
Leo Durocher
Luke Hamlin
Michael Jackson
Miguel Tejada
Orlando Pena
Rich Gossage
Rollie Hemsley
Tony Fernandez
Chambliss had zero hits after he returned. Galarraga had over 400.
So who knows what Arod will do? I would bet he gets over 3100 at the end of day.
Chambliss isn’t a good comp for Rodriguez. He was working as the Yankees hitting coach and was briefly activated to fill in for an injury.
It was the end of the day and I had spent a lot of time on the computer so I did not feel like checking out how much each guy played. Among the position players the only ones with hits were Galarraga with 412, Tenney with 97, Tejada with 45, Heuser and Fernandez with 32 and Leo the Lip with with 1.
I think the James predictor is flawed when it comes to these types of milestones. There are 8 retired players with between 3,000 and 3099 hits.
There are only 5 retired players with between 2900 and 2999. And only one within the last 40 years–Barry Bonds–and it seems he was forced into retirement.
Frank Robinson is the other one outside of Bonds within the last 70 years who retired just on the verge of 3,000 hits. I saw him quoted once as saying that he didn’t hang on for 3,000 hits (and 600 HRs) because in his day it wasn’t such a big deal.
I recall Wade Boggs saying that he was going to hang on until he got his 3,000 hits–and he retired right after the season he did, with 3010 hits.
My point is this: As long as a team will have them and pay them, it seems like almost all players on the threshold of 3,000 hits will keep playing until they get the magic number. And teams will generally pay a great player who is about to reach a milestone to make a farewell tour, because the theory is that it generates attendance and good PR. So, the James predictor does not seem to account for that.
I would bet that at least 4 of the 5 active players now approaching 3,000 hits will make it. And all 5 wouldn’t surprise me.
Billy Butler? Go figure.
At the rate he’s going, he’ll be the only 3,000 hit club member with WAR less than 40.
Don’t worry, he’s got enough time at DH where the writers will ignore whatever production he accomplishes anyway.
Running the play index at baseball reference I was surprised to discover that it was Sam Rice who had the most hits from 35 through 40, not Rose or Cobb. Also surprised that he was not a full time MLB player until he was 27. And he was out for all but 7 games when he was 28. And he still managed 2987 hits.
Joseph:
Sam Rice.
Almost 3,000 hits, but arguably remembered for this…
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/sports_blog/2011/09/did-sam-rice-reveal-a-world-series-secret-in-a-letter-opened-after-his-death.html
And a bit from the article lends support to my post in #15, that players on the verge of 3,000 hits will stick around to make the number:
>>The 44-year-old Rice finished just 13 hits shy of 3,000, a fact that he later revealed was unknown to him at the time or else he would have stuck around to get those hits.<<
@25,
When the fact that Sam Rice was only 13 hits short of 3,000 became well-known, the Senators offered Rice the chance to come back to get those 13 hits, but he declined.
BTW, there’s a restaurant in Rockville, MD that I go to that he several photos of Rice, amongst other MLB players; he lived in the area for many years.
Sam Rice’s lowest seasonal BA was .293. That is the highest minimum BA for all players with 10+ seasons. That counts all seasons regardless of the number of PA.
I’m curious about Frank Robinson’s case. Surely it was no secret that he was on the verge of 3,000 hits and he could still mash in 1975 (151 OPS+) his next to last season. As manager he could have penciled himself in more in order to chase the milestone but deferred to Rico Carty (they also had a DH at 1B in Boog Powell who had his last big year). The next year when he was no longer managing the Indians he went to the Dodgers where he would only pinch hit instead of staying in the AL as a full-time or at least platoon DH. Was he one of the rare players that just didn’t care about such milestones? Had he played another year at DH he may also have reached 600 HRs.
Sorry Joseph, I didn’t notice that you had mentioned Robinson in post #15. I’m surprised at what his reasoning was though since I remember Al Kaline’s 3,000th hit in 1974 being a pretty big deal.
I’m with you Howard. I was only in grade school in 1970 and had just started following MLB (watching the Sat “Game of the Week” and local coverage of the Expos), but I certainly remember Aaron and Mays reaching 3000 and that iw was a big deal.
I suspect Robinson saying it wasn’t a big deal is just cover for the real reason – namely, that his performance had declined to the point that he couldn’t justify inserting himself into the Indians lineup often enough to get there. That, I suspect, is the real reason and, if true, then kudos to Frank for not putting himself above the team, more especially since the team wasn’t in any danger of challenging for the division (so, it wouldn’t really have mattered had Frank just penciled himself in until he hit that milestone).
When Yaz got his 3000th hit the game was stopped and there was a short on-field ceremony to commemorate the event.
@32/RC;
I remember the ‘Yaz 3000-hit watch’ very well – it was painful by the end (June 1979?), as he was something like 0-for-21 before he hit a little dribbler up the middle that snuck into the outfield.
I think he was more relieved than excited at that point.
That makes sense, Doug though I’m still surprised he went to LA instead of an AL team. Maybe he saw the writing on the wall but he did hit well in 1975 w/good #s against both lefties and righties.
I think there’s a misunderstanding about the chronology. Robinson did play a season with the Dodgers, but it was not just pinch-hitting. He was used as a fourth outfielder in 1972 and got in 400 PA (looks like he also had a couple of short stints on the DL). After the Dodgers, he went to the Angels and from there to the Indians.
Duh….not sure how I mixed that up. Thanks for the info.
This is purely speculative on my part: Robinson may have been suffering from “low batting average syndrome.”
During Mickey Mantle’s last 4 years he hit .254 but had a 149 OPS+ because he was drawing walks and hitting HRs (his 22 HRs in 1967 were 8th in the AL). That 149 OPS+ over those 4 years was 10th in MLB for all players with 1000+ PAs. But I think people saw him as seriously diminished because his average fell to .254.
Frank Robinson from 1972-1976 had pretty similar numbers to Mantle 1965-1968 – .252 AVG, 141 OPS+, 10th in OPS+ in MLB for all players with 1000+ PAs (though he had a little less PAs than others because it’s a 5 year span and he was part-time). Everyone else with an OPS+ above 140 during 1972-1976 was hitting at least .275, and the .275 guy was Reggie Jackson. Perhaps Robinson felt like his skills were more diminished than they were because his batting average was in the .250 range. And having Rico Carty around to fill the DH spot probably didn’t help his playing time.
I went back and re-read the story–from the book “The Real 100 Best Baseball Players” by Ken Shoulder.
According to Shoulder, Robinson stated two reasons: 1. Nobody wanted to pay him enough to keep playing (which sounds more like him); and 2. The numbers were not as bid a deal.
I would guess that the money was the largest factor.
I’m also going to guess that because it was right at the dawn of the free agent era, and because he seemed to be a justifiably proud man, he wasn’t going to play for peanuts. Also, because he could have a nice pay day as a manager–really, I can’t imagine it would be fun to be a player/manager.
Beltre vs. Biggio:
Biggio spent his prime criminally underrated by all those who weren’t reading Bill James. He got on base a ton, including a lot of HBPs, stole bases at an efficient rate, and played passable defense at key positions. Those skills forced the Astros into keeping him around way past his prime to chase 3,000 hits, and now he’s a Hall of Famer.
Beltre spent his prime criminally underrated by all those who sort leaderboards by batting average and RBI rather than Rbat and WAR. He hit for power in pitchers’ parks and played elite defense, among the best ever at his position. Those skills keep teams signing him and should allow him to sail past 3,000 hits, with 500 homers not out of the question. Barring injury or scandal, he’ll sail into the Hall of Fame despite his reputation during his prime.
That may be where the similarities end. Biggio finished with 65 WAR, 29 WAA. Beltre has 78 WAR, 44 WAA at age 35. With a standard career arc taking him to retirement at 39, he should finish around 90 WAR, 50 WAA. That WAR is ahead of Chipper, even with Boggs and Brett, and not far off of Mathews in the 2nd-greatest 3B ever discussion. Even if he falls off hard this year, he’s neck-and-neck with Brooks Robinson for sixth. Of course, if he does fall off this year, the BBRAA might not love his counting stats and he’ll live in Veterans Committee purgatory with Buddy Bell and Graig Nettles and, most likely, Scott Rolen.
Beltre got enough attention when the Rangers were in the world series for a couple years. He’ll make it very quickly into the hall at this point. If he performs for another couple seasons he’ll be a first ballot sure thing.
There’s a big jump for me between Beltre and Nettles/Rolen/Bell. Big.
I could see some voters making the following anti-Beltre HOF argument:
“He was a good, not great player until he went to great hitting parks where his career took off. If he was really a HOFer, he would have hit better with the Dodgers and Mariners. And then there’s 2004. What was up with that? PEDs???”
It’s basically the anti-Larry Walker HOF argument with a bit of PEDs suspicion thrown in. (not saying I agree with the argument, but I wouldn’t be surprised if it gets made)
Now in Beltre’s case, he’s actually hit better on the road than at home over the course of his career. But I guarantee you that there are a number of voters who will just assume the Beltre was a “park invention” and not a real HOFer.
I think the issue with Beltre is partly that such a large part of his WAR is in his Rfield. His career Rbat is lower than Ron Cey’s or Stan Hack’s or David Wright’s, and that huge fielding number (second all-time at third base to Brooks Robinson) just may not feel as completely convincing to those who are not WAR aficionados. It’s widely acknowledged that Beltre is a fine defensive third baseman, but I’m not sure everyone would agree he’s been the second-greatest of all time. And almost everyone here recognizes that Rfield has its limitations.
Hits by Third Basemen:
3154 … Brett
3010 … Boggs
2848 … Brooks
2726 … Chipper
2604 … Beltre
2514 … Bell
2416 … Pie
____
Through Age 35;
2604 … Beltre
2421 … Bell
2399 … Brett
2398 … Brooks
2357 … Pie
2304 … Mathews
2267 … Boggs
I think that’s a great point Birtelcom! I’ve seen lots of people use WAR as a way to end a conversation (i.e, he has 77.8 WAR, he must be a HOFer). But as Dave Cameron from Fangraphs has stated, WAR is meant to open the conversation, not close it.
We know that Rfield isn’t as accurate as some of the other components of WAR. And that the newer defensive measures have larger ranges than some of the older ones which gives Beltre an advantage in comparison with 3rd baseman of other eras.
Also, Fangraphs has him considerably lower, with 70.8 WAR.
So Beltre’s definitely in the HOF conversation. But I personally think it’s a mistake to make it sound like he’s definitely a HOFer. I prefer to wait to see what the rest of his career looks like.
I’d like to see 4,000 Career Hits used as a standard of greatness, as opposed to 3,000 Career Hits. Granted, the club is a little less exclusive (45 vs. 28 members), but I think the overall quality of the members is higher, including some all-time great hitters not in the 3,000 Hit Club:
– Barry Bonds
– Babe Ruth
– Mel Ott
– Frank Robinson
– Lou Gehrig
– Frank Thomas
– Mickey Mantle
– Jimmie Foxx
– Rogers Hornsby
BTW, the 3,000 Hit Guys not on the 4,000 TOB List are:
– Tony Gwynn
– Nap Lajoie
– Lou Brock
– Roberto Clemente
The only “what is HE doing in this group?” guy is Rusty Staub, but he’s at the least no worse than Lou Brock (leads in Rbat, 280 to 121).
I know this will never happen because so many baseball fans are still wedded to the big round ‘magic’ numbers of 3,000 hits, 300 wins, etc…
@33,
OOOOOOPS – I meant to say: “Iād like to see 4,000 TIMES ON BASE used as a standard of greatness” – how did that get by me?? š
Agreed.
Throw in 5,000 total bases as well since we”re talking “compiling” stats.
Top 10 Career “TBIP” (“Total Bases Including Passes”, which means TB+BB+HBP):
1.Bonds 8,640
2. Aaron 8,290
3. Ruth 7,898
4. Musial 7,786
5. Mays 7,574
6. Rose 7,425
7. Yaz 7,424
8. Cobb 7,197
9. F. Robinson 6,991
10. T. Williams 6,944
32 hitters have reached 6,000 career TBIP, compared to 28 who have reached 3,000 hits. Biggio is the #32 guy on the TBIP list, getting over 6,000 because of his huge number of HBPs.
Predictor would have given V. Guerrero a 66% chance to make 3,000 after his age 36 season (2590 hits). He retired. I don’t recall if he was injured or not, but still a potential to be a decent hitter.