This post is for voting and discussion in the 116th round of balloting for the Circle of Greats (COG). This round adds to the list of candidates eligible to receive your votes those players born in 1870. Rules and lists are after the jump.
The new group of 1870-born players, in order to join the eligible list, must, as usual, 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). Additionally, to be eligible, players must also have played at least half their career games since 1901 or compiled 20 WAR since 1901. This new group of 1870-born candidates joins the eligible holdovers from previous rounds to comprise the full list of players eligible to appear on your ballots.
Each submitted ballot, if it is to be counted, must include three and only three eligible players. As always, 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 Sunday, January 3rd, while changes to previously cast ballots are allowed until 11:59 PM EST Friday, January 1st.
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 1870 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-1870 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 thirteen 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 1870 birth-year players 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:
Kevin Brown (eligibility guaranteed for 4 rounds)
Goose Goslin (eligibility guaranteed for 3 rounds)
Hoyt Wilhelm (eligibility guaranteed for 3 rounds)
Graig Nettles (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Rube Waddell (eligibility guaranteed for 2 rounds)
Dick Allen (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Richie Ashburn (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Fred Clarke (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Andre Dawson (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Wes Ferrell (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Rick Reuschel (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Luis Tiant (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Bobby Wallace (eligibility guaranteed for this round only)
Everyday Players (born in 1870, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
Bill Dahlen
George Davis
Jimmy Collins
Doc Powers
Doc Casey
Socks Seybold
Pitchers (born in 1870, ten or more seasons played in the major leagues or at least 20 WAR):
No eligible pitchers this round
Kevin Brown
Wes Ferrell
Rube Waddell
Merry Christmas, everyone!
I think we’re eventually going to need to have a discussion about how much confidence we have in the early defensive measures, especially since someone like Bill Dahlen gets a lot of his value from his dWAR. But no matter how I slice it, Davis seems to be the best eligible position player this round. Davis has over double the Rbat of Dahlen. Post-1900, Dahlen has negative Rbat.
Best position player: George Davis
Best pitcher: Kevin Brown
Wildcard (in every sense of the word): Rube Waddell
Dahlen’s WAR is almost equally split between Rbat (137), Rfield (139) and Rpos (145). Cal Ripken (180 Rfield, 196 Rbat) and Lou Boudreau (118, 193) are the only modern shortstops above 100 in both metrics.
I presume I’m not the only one keeping an eye on the returns for the HoF voting – here’s the link for those who haven’t seen it:
bit.ly/hof16
At the moment, with not quite 1/4 of the ballots counted, Griffey (to no one’s surprise) is a mortal lock to get in, and Piazza (at 90%) is also in very good shape. Bagwell (84%) and Raines (81%) are strong contenders, while Hoffman (62%) is going to fall a little short. So it looks like we’re going to have at least 6 more rounds of CoG voting, and maybe as many as 8.
Trammell has picked up a lot of support, but isn’t going to make it, alas, and although Edgar Martinez is getting a big bump, too, but he’ll only have 3 more chances to get in via the BBWAA, and I fear he’s going to fall short, too.
It’ll be interesting to see what effect the purging of the ranks of HoF voters will have on this election, whether there will be the same differences between the public and non-public ballots as last year.
I would assume, and this is wholly untested, that voters who share their ballots online are more likely to support Raines and less likely to support Hoffman. And I would guess the reverse also applies. So Raines may end up falling just short (though I certainly hope he makes it), whereas Hoffman might end up just clearing the 3/4 mark.
Last year Bagwell, Piazza, Raines, Mussina, and Schilling all did better on public ballots than on non-public ballots, while Lee Smith (most notably) did better on non-public ballots, as I would guess would have been with the case with Hoffman, had he been on the ballot last year.
But with the purging of the voter roll I suspect this effect may be dampened. We shall see…
Note that there are also 12 partial ballots at the bottom of the spreadsheet. These aren’t included in the totals since for some reason these voters decided to only reveal some of the players they voted for. Raines has been named on 10 of these 12 ballots and Bagwell on 8 of them.
As for voters who share their ballots being more likely to vote for Raines, that’s probably true but less so then in past years now that they kicked a bunch of voters off the rolls (my guess is that the ones who were kicked off were the least likely to reveal their ballots).
So, our ballot choices were endorsed by a bit of an unlikely source. Larry King tweeted today:
“Ken Griffey, Mike Piazza, Tim Raines, Jeff Bagwell all should go into the Hall of Fame on the next vote. This is a no brainer.”
I knew King was a big baseball fan; didn’t expect him to be a Raines backer. Serves me right for assuming.
Both Bonds & Clemens are hovering around the 50% mark and from a quick scroll it appears that everyone who voted for them voted for both with the sole exception of a guy named Barry Rozner, who voted only for Bonds. Doesn’t anyone know what his rationale was?
I’m really hoping that Trammell at least clears the 50% mark
Hartvig –
Here’s an article which from last year on why Rozner voted for Bonds but not Clemens. Basically, he claims he doesn’t know when Clemens started taking PEDs.
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2015/01/voters-on-why-clemens-and-bonds-are-different.html#
Davis, Nettles, Tiant
So – Jimmy Collins. In the middle of the 20th century, he was probably considered the best 3B of all-time. Some people may have preferred the more recently retired Pie Traynor, who had superficially higher stats due to playing in the midst of a high-scoring era. And according to the modern superstats, they were right to be impressed by Collins.
Career bWAR, 50% games played at 3B, 1871-1960 (pre-expansion):
1. Home Run Baker – 62.8
2. Eddie Mathews – 60.9 (retired with 96.4)
3. Jimmy Collins – 53.2
4. Stan Hack – 52.5
5. Bob Elliott – 50.4
But since expansion, we’ve had a bit of an explosion in 3B talent. Collins and his 53.2 bWAR would rank 15th, behind Ron Cey (53.5) and in front of Toby Harrah (51.2). David Wright (50.1) will probably pass Collins in the next few years.
I think we’ve discussed it before, but 3B is just an odd position. In the early days of the game it was a more important defensive position than 2B due to the profusion of bunts, and it’s still a position where teams expect good offensive production and a solid glove. A huge number of players end up at 3B for at least a couple seasons – Steve Treder did a whole monograph about this, entitled Third Base: The Crossroads. Teams will try sluggers at 3B, but usually give up if the glove is just too poor to handle – look at Jim Thome, Jason Giambi and Gary Sheffield recently. Or Carlos Santana’s misadventures at 3B in 2014.
Collins & Clarke might be the two guys being shorted the most by the era in which they played. Not only were significant portions of their careers played in a pitchers paradise they also played 4 of their prime years (age 30 to 33 for Collins & 27 to 30 for Clarke) at a time of only a 140 game schedule.
I don’t think I’ll be voting for either of them but I can see a very reasonable rationale for doing so.
They also have a couple other similarities. They were both player-managers of very successful teams at the beginning of the 20th century – in fact, they opposed each other in the inaugural 1903 World Series. Of course, Clarke managed a lot longer than Collins – his managerial career alone is “Hall of Very Good” material, though like just about every great manager he had a huge advantage over other teams in possessing the best player in baseball for most of his career.
They were inducted to the HoF in the same class, the 1945 Old-Timers Committee vote. The various committees get dinged a lot for subpar choices, but that 1945 class was pretty darn good – not really a lemon to be found: http://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_1945.shtml. Well, Wilbert Robinson’s managerial career strikes me as being very average, but they did name the team after him for a while.
They were actually teammates at one point, on the 1895 Louisville Colonels. The Boston Beaneaters loaned the young Collins to the Colonels for the princely sum of $500, then returned him after the season. Clarke was only in his second year, and not yet the player-manager. The 1895 Colonels had some talent – the young Collins and Clarke, the aged Dan Brouthers and Jack Glasscock – but they were a miserable team, finishing 12th (last) in the NL with a 35-96 record.
That Socks Seybold had a solid career for someone who didn’t really start in The Show until age 30 (cuppa coffee at 28).
WAR, age 30+, in the first 8 seasons of a career:
45.8 … Jackie
29.5 … Ichiro
26.4 … Gavvy
25.4 … SOCKS
25.4 … Averill
25.3 … Stanky
24.6 … Ken Williams
24.1 … Bob Johnson
22.9 … Davey Lopes
22.0 … Dolph Camilli
21.4 … Melvin Mora
21.3 … Monte Irvin
19.8 … Hideki Matsui
19.4 … Ben Zobrist
18.8 … Chief Myers
18.0 … Hank Sauer
I’ve been familiar with Seybold’s name and role for more years than I care to acknowledge, but never actually noticed this before, Voomo. Good catch!
brown
nettles
tiant
This round’s tidbits. Answers in red.
1. Bill Dahlen was the first of only three shortstops to twice bat .350 with 30 doubles. Dahlen led his league in RBI in 1904, despite fewer than 200 total bases. Since 1901, which player has the most RBI in a season with fewer than 200 total bases? Jim Gentile (1960)
2. Jimmy Collins is the only player to compile 20 batting WAR for the Braves and Red Sox. Which two players played for both franchises and recorded 20 batting WAR for one of them? Babe Ruth, Javy Lopez
3. Doc Powers batted under .200 for five consecutive seasons (1904-08) of 50 games and 150 PA, the longest ever streak of such seasons. Powers compiled -4.1 WAR in less than 1200 PA over his final 7 seasons. Who is the only catcher with less WAR in fewer PA over that portion of his career? Danny Sheaffer
4. Doc Casey is the only player with 250 games at third base for the Dodgers, Cubs and Tigers. Casey was the first of only four players to record 400 games at third base over the final 3 seasons of his career. Who is the only expansion era player to do this? David Bell
5. Socks Seybold’s 144 OPS+ in 1901 is the top qualified result since 1893 by an age 30+ rookie. Seybold’s 6 consecutive seasons (1901-06) with 130 OPS+ and 3 oWAR, but including none with 5 oWAR, is the longest streak of such seasons. In five of those campaigns, Seybold posted a .350 OBP despite fewer than 50 walks. Which player aged 30 or older has the longest streak of 3 oWAR seasons with .350 OBP and fewer than 50 walks? Zack Wheat (1920-25)
6. George Davis’s 1897 season featured 31 doubles, 65 stolen bases and a league-leading 135 RBI. Which player has the only live ball era season like Davis’s with twice as many stolen bases as doubles and twice as many RBI as stolen bases, while leading his league in at least one of those three categories? Ben Chapman (1931)
2. I’m pretty sure one of them is Babe Ruth.
Answer to #5: Zack Wheat
2. The other one is Javy Lopez – the catcher, not the LOOGY. I completely forgot he ever played for the Red Sox. Actually, given how he performed, I expect most Red Sox fans have also forgotten that stint.
Some similarities between Ruth’s stint as a Brave and Lopez’s with the Red Sox.
– last team that each played for
– Ruth: 72 AB, 13 H, 6 XBH
– Lopez: 63 AB, 12 H, 5 XBH
But, all of Ruth’s XBH’s were homers and all of Lopez’s were doubles. Also, Ruth out-walked Lopez 12 to 2. Thus, Ruth finished with .789 OPS and 119 OPS+ compared to .485 and 22 for Lopez.
#1 is Jim Gentile in 1960 with 192 total bases and 98 RBIs.
6. It’s Ben Chapman in 1931 – 28 doubles, a league-leading 61 steals and 122 RBI.
Eric Davis’s 1987 fits the criteria of RBI >= 2*SB and SB >= 2*2B (100 RBI, 50 SB, 23 2B), but he didn’t lead the league in any of those stats.
Others who have this double-double in a qualified season since 1920 are Frankie Frisch (1920), Bobby Bonds (1978), Kirk Gibson (1986), Lance Johnson (1994), Sammy Sosa (1995) and Carlos Beltran (2003).
Answer to #3: Danny Schaffer
4. Looks like it’s David Bell. My first guess was Casey Blake, but he would have only qualified if he retired after 2010.
Here are some WAR and ERA+/OPS+ figures for current candidates.
Pitchers
..Name….P(Tot)-WAR….Peak5…Top5…WAR/9IP…WAR/Yr….ERA+…Career length
Brown……68.5 (68.3)…37.0…37.0….0.189….4.0 (17)…127…1.24
Ferrell….48.8 (61.8)…29.9…36.0….0.168….4.9 (10)…116…1.00
Reuschel…68.2 (70.1)…31.0…32.8….0.173….4.0 (17)…114…1.35
Tiant……66.1 (66.7)…28.7…34.7….0.171….3.9 (17)…114…1.33
Waddell….61.0 (58.5)…43.9…43.9….0.185….5.9 (10)…135…1.13
Wilhelm….50.1 (47.3)…16.1…21.6….0.184….2.6 (19)…147…N/A
Position Players
..Name….WAR………Peak5…Top5…WAR/G…WAR/Yr…OPS+…Career length
Allen…..58.7……..31.5…36.7…0.034…4.2 (14)…156…1.0
Ashburn…63.6……..31.6…32.7…0.029…4.2 (15)…111…1.3
Clarke….67.4……..22.2…26.6…0.030…3.7 (18)…133…1.3
Collins…53.2……..25.9…29.5…0.031…4.1 (13)…113…1.0
Dahlin….75.2……..22.6…29.8…0.031…4.0 (19)…110…1.4
Davis…..84.3……..27.4…33.1…0.036…4.7 (18)…121…1.4
Dawson….64.4……..32.4…33.7…0.025…3.4 (19)…119…1.5
Goslin….66.1……..32.5…32.8…0.029…4.1 (16)…128…1.3
Nettles…68.0……..28.7…32.2…0.025…3.4 (20)…110…1.4
Wallace..70.2 (76.3)..28.6…31.3…0.029…4.1 (17)…105…1.3
Sorry the columns came out worse than ever . . .
Try doing the numbers first, then the names.
And keep the same number of characters for each entry in a column. Although that will be difficult for the title row.
You can also put the pre and /pre tags (bracketed with less-than and greater-than signs) around your formatted text to preserve the original formatting.
Thanks for these formatting suggestions. I’ll try some, if I keep on posting these numbers in future rounds. I’ve posted them simply because I’ve calculated them – not sure whether they’re actually helpful.
I want to pick up on where there was some discussion between types of cheating at the end of the Walsh Wilhelm runoff. On actual throwing of games, I have absolutely no sympathy–even for Joe Jackson. On gambling/Rose, that’s a tougher one. Rose bet on baseball–he obviously has a compulsive side. I can’t imagine he bet against his own team–he’s too competitive. Would he shade his managing decisions based on the size of his bets…I just don’t know. Tip off bookies? Same. It’s these doubts that are at the bedrock of MLB’s iron-clad rule against betting. We picking COG are basically looking at how her performed on the field–and his performance on the field was presumably all him, so he deserves in. HOF? I think I wouldn’t vote for him.
As to juicers, I’m not an absolutist–I do have two lines in my head. The all-time greats who started their careers in the late 1980s, and continued them into the new century, I have some sympathy for. MLB clearly tolerated and even encouraged this. You do need to do some adjustment in their stats, but, if adjusted, they are still there, they should be strongly considered. There’s no question that sometime after 2001, MLB began to take this seriously, although the penalties were still mild (even in 2005 it was 10 days for a first offense, 30 for a second) and I think players were effectively on notice. If you have been caught in the last ten years, that’s pretty much a disqualifer for me, unless there’s some very unusual extenuating circumstances. So, as great as I think A-Rod is as a player—and would have been even without it, I wouldn’t vote for him.
Kevin Brown is one of those folks (I’m going to get into trouble here) who I think fails both of my tests for COG. His numbers are comparable to other people we are considering, so, adjusted down for chemicals, I think he’s below them, and his usage clearly continued during a period when he should have known better.
Why are there nine 1970 players on B-R with 10+ seasons, and one more with 20+ WAR, but only six new nominees? Frank Killen pitched ten seasons and had 29.5 pitching WAR (plus 4 hitting WAR), yet is not listed.
We’re only working with players who earned the plurality of their value in the 20th (or 21st) century.
Dahlen and Davis are right on the border.
Killen had the misfortune (for our exercise) of being an effective player at age 20.
Next week, Kid Nichols and his 115.5 WAR will also be on the bench.
Pitching WAR, first nine seasons of a career:
90.6 … Kid
82.6 … Big Train
81.6 … Cyclone
75.5 … Clarkson
73.8 … Keefe
72.9 … McKormick
69.2 … Rusie
69.0 … Alexander
65.7 … Tom Seaver
Actually, if I have this right, the formula is either most seasons post-1900 or 20+ WAR post-1900.
The first of two required qualifiers is the standard 10 career seasons OR 20 career WAR.
The second required qualifier is playing a majority of career games since 1901 OR compiling 20 WAR since 1901.
You know, I totally forgot about that caveat. Thanks.
Davis, Dahlen, Waddell
Goslin, Waddell and George Davis
Goslin, Davis, Ashburn
George Davis, Bill Dahlen, Bobby Wallace
Pretty amazing level of talent among the newcomers percentage-wise- half are legitimate Hall of Famers and with a little luck it’s not out of the question that could have been two-thirds.
I know 2 of the guys I am voting for but I have yet to make up my mind on the Wallace/Dahlen conundrum.
That’s due to selective sorting, though. We only have players who were good enough to put up good numbers in their 30s here. Usually that is going to be a higher level talent.
I think Davis is the class of this round and a true CoGworthy candidate. For those who are concerned that he’s an “Old Timer,” although he’s a full-time player as early as 1890, Davis was still able to accumulate 37.8 WAR from 1901 (his age-30 season) on, averaging 4.2 WAR/season, and that’s despite the fact that he lost the 1903 season to the inter-league wars that blocked him from playing, although he was ready and able to do so – a standard we usually grant credit for. (Davis averaged 6.4 WAR in the surrounding seasons – he should obviously be seen as a 40+ player at age 30+.) Overall, compare Davis’s Rbat and Rfield to, say, Ripkin’s (277:197 and 146:181) and his level of quality seems clearly CoG.
I’m sticking to Waddell, who I favored last round, but my third choice is not at all clear: Dahlen, Goslin, and Wallace seem very strong. I expect that my vote may change as it becomes clearer which players are in danger of dropping off the list, but my preference is:
Davis, Waddell, Dahlen
This vote was changed at January 2, 2016 at 12:44 am Atlantic Time, just before the vote-change deadline.
Davis, Allen, Ashburn
D. Allen, Reuschel, Wilhelm
Davis, Dahlen, Nettles
Allen, Dawson, Wilhelm
Allen, Dahlen, davis
Allen, Dahlen, davis
Early vote update, through 14 ballots (Paul E’s 2:46 PM 12/27 vote) –
========75% (11)
10 – Davis
========50% (7)
5 – Waddell*, Dahlen
4 – Allen
========25% (4)
3 – Brown*, Nettles*
2 – Ashburn, Tiant, Goslin*, Wilhelm*
========10% (2)
1 – Wallace, Dawson, Reuschel, Ferrell
0 – Clarke, [Collins]
As always, players marked with a [*] are off the bubble. Relatively commanding lead for Davis, while Dahlen is already safe as a holdover with 5 votes (pending changed ballots). 4 votes is pretty much the standard for being safe, since we tend to get 36-40 ballots nowadays.
Brown, Goslin, Clarke
David D and P, Cursed, and Hartvig:
The Boston Globe has a piece by Nick Cafardo, in which he talks about his HOF ballot. Cafardo is now taking the position that, based on his conversations with admitted users, half MLB players took PEDS. Because of that, he no longer will take it into account in his balloting. The Globe has a paywall, but you can read up to five articles a month:
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/12/27/rich-hill-ready-pitch-for/0rYM41N7NDEUkBy8Wd7K8N/story.html?
Cafardo’s choices are Griffey, Bonds, Clemens, Piazza, Bagwell, Kent, Schilling, Mussina, Hoffman and Sheffield. He notes leaving off Trammel, Raines, Edgar, McGriff, and Walker.
I’m not a Cafardo fan (I’m a Yankee fan, it would be a disruption in The Force to do so) but his thinking is usually interesting because it’s so tactical–he knows where is bread is buttered. I believe he’s moved in this direction because he plans to vote for favorite players in the future that were connected to PEDS, and he needs to lay the groundwork for doing so by advocating for equal treatment across the board now, whether you were a user or not.
I also think he’s going to be one of many. Baseball writers are going to be faced with really difficult choices in the years to come. Even if the dam breaks for the absolute top tier–Bonds, Clemens, etc. that’s still going to leave a lot of players who either failed a test, or were suspected of using. How many of these hometown writers are going to be able to stand up to local pressure?
To me his ballot almost looks as if he is saying: “You didn’t cheat? Then I am going to penalize you for it.”
Hartvig, I think your are correct, but there’s also a tremendous demolition derby coming up, which may further serve to lessen the chances of the non-cheaters. Here’s a list of new entrants for the next five years, 60bWAR or better:
2017, I Rod, Manny, and at 59.3, Vlad Guerrero
2018, Chipper, Thome, Rolen, and Andruw Jones.
2019, Mariano, Halladay, Helton, Pettitte
2020, Jeter, and at 59.9 Abreu
this list does not include people who will get consideration, like Vizquel, or some who will get some votes, like Posada, maybe Cliff Lee, Damon, Moyer,
Hoyt Wilhelm, Rick Reuschel and George Davis
Waddell, Allen, Dawson
Betances, Champan, Miller combined last year:
212 IP
347 SO
40 ER
Voom,
For 2014-2015, the top three in %-age of batters faced struck out….or, in English, strike-out percentage
Offensive WAR 1964 – 1969
1 Dick Allen 41.5
2 Ron Santo 41.1
3 Hank Aaron 39.9
4 Frank Robinson 39.6
5 Willie Mays 38.1
6 Roberto Clemente 36.5
7 Harmon Killebrew 34.4
8 Willie McCovey 33.7
9 Carl Yastrzemski 33.5
That’s 8 Hall of Famers following an oft-injured, frequently-suspended, habitually-fined, abused by fans, multiple-position train wreck of a young man. Based on Cafardo’s logic, Allen should be a unanimous choice for the Circle of Greats 🙁
George Davis – Richie Ashburn – Dick Allen
I am so glad that you guys have kept with the project I proposed and started long ago. Doug has obviously done an an absolutely fantastic job picking up the work that I used to do. There cannot be enough thanks.
In case you are curious, the reason I dropped out with little warning last March was a sudden, mysterious and rather devastating attack by a syndrome called interstitial pneumonitis, an inflammation of the lungs. To save my life, doctors had to put me in a coma, from which I did not awaken for about two months. I’ve been hospitalized in recovery ever since, but hope to be able to go home soon. Only now have I gotten strong enough to post a message like this.
But I don’t want to focus on me. I’m posting here now to recognize Doug’s great work, and the loyalty of all the voters and posters who have kept this project going over the years. Kudos!
birtelcom: Here’s wishing you the best. I hope you make a full recovery.
Wow, really glad to hear that you’re all right Birtelcom!!! Best wishes for a continued recovery and a wonderful 2016!!!
birtelcom, it’s great to hear from you. We’ve missed you here, but fortunately we’ve had some excellent work out of the bullpen from Doug.
I add my voice to the chorus wishing you a full and speedy recovery.
Wow. Happy New Year, sir, and best wishes for health to you and your loved ones.
birtelcom, you’re back!!!!!
We’ve been SO worried about you!
Perhaps you don’t want the focus on you, but you deserve it. We’re so glad you’re back around. Keep recovering, and we so look forward to seeing your insights around here again.
birtelcom, you made my day–even my month.
Just wanted to say how great it is to hear from you again and add my best wishes for a full recovery.
Also to second your thanks do Doug for picking up the mantel and keeping the project moving forward.
Terrific to hear from you, birtelcom!! Doug has been a wonderful stalwart, but we’ve all missed the Father of the COG, and Doom is right: we’ve been worried. Like everyone else here, I was really excited to see this message from you and I hope your recovery is soon complete.
Birtlecom,
Great to hear from you! Here’s to echoing everyone’s sentiments and best wishes for a continued recovery. Doug has done a great job and we’re all looking forward to your contributions soon.
Best regards,
Thank you for the update, for letting Doug keep this going, and for getting better.
Best wishes for a speedy recovery and a healthy 2016 and beyond.
Holy cow, that’s so great that they did save your life. I know you are saying you don’t want the focus to be on you, but the occasion calls for comment. Becoming familiar with people through writing on the internet is always strange – if they suddenly leave and you don’t know why, you’re reminded that you don’t actually really know that person, and their departure might be forever a mystery. In your case, it was certainly sad, because I enjoyed seeing your frequent writing and commentary, and it’s hard not to think the worst when a regular contributor just stops suddenly. And certainly, it was close to ‘the worst’ for you, it seems.
Anyway, I know everyone here is just pixels and characters to each other, but it actually brightened up my day quite a bit to see this message (and I’ve not been having the best day). I’m really sincerely happy that you’re alright, and I hope your recovery continues to the point where you can indulge in your hobbies and interests, like participating here.
And certainly it has been said before, but cheers to Doug for keeping this project (and, for several months, this entire site) going.
Birtelcom, let me join everyone in wishing you a full and speedy recovery. Thank you for dropping in to the COG; it has been great fun throughout and it is hard to believe that it is almost full – kudos to you and to Doug for the whole ballgame.
BIRTELCOM,
Let me join the chorus – it’s GREAT to hear from you after so long!! Very very sorry to hear about your extremely serious medical condition, but VERY VERY GLAD that you’ve recovered sufficiently to post to HHS. Doug and company have done a great job keeping your COG baby growing, so to speak.
You’ve got a lot of HHS reading to catch up on, ha ha. I look forward to hearing from you on HHS in the future for our informed and spirited debates.
Birtelcom,
Glad to hear you are on the mend – Doug has kept the fires going on this awesome project of yours and we’ve had tremendous discussions that you will undoubtedly be catching up on. Look forward to your future contributions in 2016, and best wishes from all of us for a speedy recovery.
birtelcom: here’s to hoping you make a full recovery. Best wishes.
YES!! Birtelcom’s back!
I can’t think of any better news than hearing from you again. My prayers are with you for your continued recovery. We all look forward to your contributions when you are feeling up to it again. All the best to you.
birtelcom: A heartfelt (or should I say lung-felt?) welcome back! Looking forward to many, many clever and insightful comments from you.
Here’s a vote update for anyone interested (though shard’s vote above). About half the votes are in (18 ballots cast), and it’s becoming a runaway:
12 – George Davis
===============50% (9)
6 – Dick Allen, Rube Waddell
5 – Bill Dahlen
===============25% (5)
4 – Kevin Brown
3 – Richie Ashburn, Goose Goslin, Graig Nettles, Hoyt Wilhelm
2 – Andre Dawson, Rick Reuschel, Luis Tiant
===============10% (2)
1 – Fred Clarke, Wes Ferrell, Bobby Wallace
Dick Allen is really picking things up, and Hoyt Wilhelm seems unable to recover from that walloping he took in the runoff.
Vote:
Wes Ferrell
Rube Waddell
Hoyt Wilhelm
George Davis
Rube Waddell
Fred Clarke
Goslin, Wilhelm, Ferrell
Ferrell, Dawson, Nettles
Waddell, Nettles, Wilhelm.
An all ‘Let’s Keep ‘Em On The COG Ballot”
– Luis Tiant – Red Sox bias showing…
– Fred Clarke – I am surprised at his lack of support; in 1915, when his playing career ended, he probably would be one of the top-3 retired outfielders.
Ed Delahanty would clearly be ahead of him, but who(m) else? Billy Hamilton, probably Sam Crawford? Maybe Jesse Burkett?? Even if you included active players, only Cobb and maybe Speaker would be better, but only on peak.
– Bobby Wallace – not convinced he’s a legit COG, but he deserves further discussion
You make a good case for Clarke, Lawrence, but I’m not too sure what you mean by the comparison with Cobb and Speaker – both are far beyond Clarke in both peak and career measures. I think the reason Clarke is in the shade is because he’s up against Davis, Wallace, and Dahlen from the same era (plus Waddell among pitchers), and his outfield position doesn’t argue for special consideration.
If Clarke survives, he’ll be competing with Burkett in future rounds, which is a very interesting match-up. (Because Big Ed D’s career came to its abrupt end he won’t be eligible for the CoG, despite having compiled 14.6 WAR in only 2.3 seasons post-1900. If he’d played out 1903 at the level of either of his preceding two seasons, he’d be a candidate.)
I’m expecting to change my vote on this round at some point next year (somewhere within its first 23 hours and 59 minutes), so long as Davis seems assured of winning and Waddell and Dahlen are well above the bubble. I’ll certainly consider saving Clarke and Wallace among those in danger. Not sure about Tiant. I’ve backed him in the past, but only as, in my view, the best of the Reuschel/Brown/Tiant family. Ultimately, I don’t really believe any of those three belongs in the CoG, while Clarke and Wallace may.
epm, I think Lawrence is saying that when Clarke retired, he would have ranked above Cobb and Speaker, who were both still active and had much of their careers ahead of them. Clarke was basically done by 1911; I believe his appearances from 1913-1915 were just fill-in/cameo spots as the manager. If you rank OF’s by WAR through the 1912 season, Clarke is #2, a hair behind Delahanty. Contemporary scholars may have also considered Keeler to be Clarke’s superior.
I think Clarke is a very strong candidate. I’m not convinced quite yet, but his WAR matches up well with the other OF’s on the ballot, and he has the bonus of being the player-manager of an incredibly strong team, the early 20th century Pirates.
C.C., Yes, I can see that if you move the cutoff from 1915 to 1911, though with Cobb already having won five straight batting titles, I think no one would actually have rated Clarke ahead of him even by that time (and by 1915, Cobb had blown past Clarke on all measures). Judging by the HoF outcomes 25 years later, Keeler may well have been more highly regarded than Clarke as an outfielder in their day.
I agree that Clarke’s credentials are bolstered by his managerial stint – quite successful, but with a great team and owner. I’m not sure how we’re supposed to factor that in for the CoG, but it certainly can’t hurt.
Voting right about the vote-change deadline for:
George Davis, the first AL player with 6 RBI in a single World Series
Hoyt Wilhelm, the first player with 228 career saves
RichieDick Allen, the first Oakland A to wear number 60(or about 24 hours before the vote-change deadline)
Totals, through 25 ballots (oneblankspace):
14 – Davis
=============50% (13)
9 – Waddell*
7 – Allen, Wilhelm*
=============25% (7)
5 – Dahlen, Nettles*
4 – Brown*, Ferrell, Goslin*
3 – Ashburn, Clarke, Dawson, Tiant
=============10% (3)
2 – Reuschel, Wallace
Dick Allen, Luis Tiant, Bobby Wallace
Brown
Davis
Dawson
Since Davis and Waddell are doing fine, and Clarke and Wallace may wind up in trouble even though they are viable CoG candidates, I’m going to switch my vote to make sure the latter two stick around. Someone else will need to take care of Ashburn and Reuschel.
Dahlen, Clarke, Wallace
I am torn about Ashburn. He’s in my maybe pile and with the possibility of 4 new openings happening this year instead of the anticipated 2 keeping him in the mix becomes a consideration.
I’m still back & forth on Dahlen & Wallace but I think Davis is a definite yes, if for no other reason than it would be difficult to explain why in the end we kept out the poster boy for everything that the advanced metrics crowd thought was wrong with the BBWAA since that was the seed from which this exercise grew.
I am now firmly in the Nettles camp as well as Ferrell’s as definite yeses.
And that’s how I’m going to vote and let Ashburn take his chances.
Davis, Ferrell, Nettles
Wallace, Brown, Clarke
If the BBWAA provides 3-4 new slots I’m feeling Wallace should get one of them. I like Dahlen and Nettles too, but helping Brown and Clarke stay in the mix. Don’t feel Ashburn or Reuschel offer quite enough to save them, as others would still beat them out among the holdovers we have.
For the 1870 election, I’m voting for:
-Andre Dawson
-Rick Reuschel
-Luis Tiant
Other top candidates I considered highly (and/or will consider in future rounds):
-Brown
-Goslin
-Ashburn
-Nettles
-Allen
-Waddell
-Wallace
-Clarke
-Davis
-Dahlen
Dawson, Wilhelm, Ashburn
It’s not too late for Dawson! I still believe
it’s kind of too bad that Jimmy Collins is getting no support, but he seems to be suffering from early third-baseman disease. I’m going very old here; Davis, Clarke, Wallace
I think Collins belongs in the HOF & if I were to expand the COG to the # I think belong it would include another 40 odd players, including the pre-1900 guys.
Forgive me COG, for I have sinned. It’s been around 75 years since my last election.
My three this time are:
Bill Dahlen
George Davis
Bobby Wallace
Update, through Howard Miller (welcome back!), the 34th vote:
18 – George Davis
9 – Rube Waddell*
=============25% (9)
8 – Dick Allen, Hoyt Wilhelm*
7 – Bill Dahlen, Bobby Wallace
6 – Kevin Brown*, Fred Clarke, Andre Dawson, Graig Nettles*
5 – Wes Ferrell, Luis Tiant
4 – Richie Ashburn, Goose Goslin*
=============10% (4)
3 – Rick Reuschel
Good luck on the final day of voting!
Doom, I count 33 ballots at this juncture (before Brendan Bingham’s ballot below), with one fewer vote for each of Dahlen, Davis, and Waddell.
I’m wondering whether you may have double-counted e pluribus munu’s ballots – he initially voted Dahlen/Davis/Waddell (fairly early on in the voting), then changed his ballot to Clarke/Dahlen/Wallace.
You nailed it. Thanks!
Reuschel, Ashburn, Allen
Davis, Waddell, Clarke.
OK, I had this wonderful wrap-up comment written here… and then I accidentally closed the window and lost EVERYTHING (I tend to browse in a private window, so it doesn’t ask me if I’m sure I want to close it). 🙁
Here’s a more vanilla version:
George Davis got elected (18/35); Dick Allen and Rube Waddell picked up extra rounds of eligibility; everyone receiving votes moved on, thanks to Brendan Bingham’s 11th hour save of Rick Reuschel; and Hoyt Wilhelm had what I think is unquestionably the worst round for a runoff loser in COG history.
Now, on to the career vote totals:
Craig Biggio – 763
Eddie Murray – 731
Roberto Alomar – 725
John Smoltz – 658
Kenny Lofton – 608
Ryne Sandberg – 607
Harmon Killebrew – 585
*Kevin Brown – 573
Edgar Martinez – 507
Lou Whitaker – 493
#Dave Winfield – 408
#Dennis Eckersley – 407
Roy Campanella – 396
Whitey Ford – 382
Bobby Grich – 376
Sandy Koufax – 375
*Luis Tiant – 361
Tony Gwynn – 346
Willie McCovey – 336
*Rick Reuschel – 320
#Minnie Minoso – 309
*Graig Nettles – 272
Juan Marichal – 268
Tom Glavine – 262
*Richie Ashburn – 248
Alan Trammell – 239
Mike Mussina – 233
Curt Schilling – 224
Nolan Ryan – 220
Ron Santo – 217
Lou Boudreau – 216
Tim Raines – 213
*Hoyt Wilhelm – 209
*Goose Goslin – 198
Larry Walker – 197
*Dick Allen – 192
Barry Larkin – 188
Frank Thomas – 181
Gabby Hartnett – 165
Paul Molitor – 152
*Wes Ferrell – 147
Bob Gibson – 147
Gaylord Perry – 142
Paul Waner – 140
Jim Palmer – 133
Al Kaline – 132
Duke Snider – 130
Carl Hubbell – 126
Joe Gordon – 126
Ernie Banks – 119
Eddie Mathews – 115
Pete Alexander – 111
#Dwight Evans – 100
1. The other holdovers: Andre Dawson (95), Rube Waddell (47), Bobby Wallace (18), Fred Clarke (11), Bill Dahlen (6).
2. Falling off the ballot was electee George Davis (18).
3. Wes Ferrell, Richie Ashburn, Goose Goslin, and Andre Dawson will likely be seeing MAJOR milestones this round; keep watching this space!
4. Finally, I know some of you saw my plug for Graham Womack’s “25 best players not in the Hall of Fame” voting. The results are up here, so check it out, whether you voted or not, because it’s a really interesting article!
If we do get the 4 additional rounds courtesy of the BBWAA it’s becoming more and more likely that Brown will eventually crack the top 5 in votes.
And with the BBWAA seeing fit to only add 2 rounds to our little exercise Brown now has only 5 rounds (including the current one) to either pick up the 36 votes needed to move in to 5th place and/or get himself elected. I wonder if the 4 accumulated rounds of eligibility will hurt him here? With 3 fairly clear cut choices on the horizon (Young, Martinez & Rodriguez) and then 2 wide open ballots it’s possible that some people might use their votes to keeping other players around for the final rounds. My money is that he’ll get the votes to move into the #5 spot but be close but no cigar as far as getting in. I guess we’ll see soon enough.
It ALSO depends on whether or not Doug will give us another Redemption Round. If we DO get one, I imagine Winfield, Eck, and Minoso will be the top candidates to hop back on the ballot, and they will certainly spread us thinner. That being said, it would just be right (in my mind, anyway) to remove their little # signs and have them back on the ballot until the bitter end!
As for getting to #5, Brown needs 25 votes to do so. He has four this round already. Barring vote changes, if he gets one more and continues that EXACT level of support for the final rounds… he’ll still be 10 votes shy of Kenny Lofton for #5. That being said, he’s also had a couple of pushes when election looked POSSIBLE, and those final two rounds may represent that possibility (even if not reality), so that extra push might get him to #5 all by his lonesome. So it should be interesting, but I would agree with you that the top 4 is utterly out of reach, but I don’t really think the top 5 is going to happen, either. In fact, I think Brown’s best hope now is just to crack the 600-vote mark.