andruw jones is the greatest CF since willie mays discuss

I'm not sure how "loss shares" works... does that mean if he'd retired at 33, he'd be HOF worthy?

I don't know the math that goes into them either--there was a big book where James spelled all that out, but I don't have it. Looking at his table of Andruw's career, here's what I can tell you:

If he'd retired at 33, and you eliminate his last two seasons, deduct 11-11; he ends up 236-167, still short of the 100+ standard.

If he retires after 2006, at the age of 29, his differential is at its peak: 203-122, +81. Still short.

Much of the piece is about the still-developing evaluation of defense. One more quote before I end up quoting the whole thing:

Since 1980 we have worked very hard to improve our understanding of fielding stats and to create better stats, but we’re still trying to catch up. It is a simple reality that we do not understand the role of a fielder in run prevention with anything like the same level of sophistication that we understand the role of a hitter in run creation. No one does, even the experts in the field...But based on my understanding of the record, Jones’ fielding

a) Was only truly outstanding through 2002; after that his Gold Gloves were mostly just reputation, and

b) Was not of substantial enough value that we should consider him an all-time great player.

I don't think James understanding is correct (although he was generally stronger for the first 6 years of his career than he was from 2003-2007).

I am unpersuaded as well

I disagree, but I'm not saying you're wrong--and neither really is James: I have done the best I could to place Jones in the "right" position as a defensive player, and, as I said, I have confidence that my system is generally right on a certain level. But I can’t prove that those who would give more weight to his defense are absolutely wrong, just as I don’t believe that they can prove that they’re right. (Have you read the piece, or just what I've excerpted above?)

I'm fine with anyone who wants to argue that Jones should be in the HOF, especially if they take the time to explain their reasoning. I do have a problem with the "Of course Jones should be in the Hall of Fame, wtf?" line of argument, the implication being that you're stupid if you believe otherwise. For what it's worth, James never actually answered what to me was the main question I was asking: is it irrational of me to care that Jones did very little once he hit 30? Essentially, does the arc of a career matter, or is that totally irrelevant? It very clearly seems to matter to the voters. Whether it should, I don't know.

I do have a problem with the "Of course Jones should be in the Hall of Fame, wtf?" line of argument

a line of argument i've never in my life seen anyone forward (sadly)

Check yesterday's general chatter thread (I had the acronym wrong).

oh that was zach he doesnt count

I do not spend that much time on HOF arguments cuz, um, it's not important.

On career arc: the second half of his, Cal Ripken was basically average.

(but he was the white guy with perfect attendance)

I think the HOF argument for Jones is not actually a great one, but the two "understandings" that James has are off to my understanding. Statistically anyway his defensive contributions for those ten years (along with his pretty nice offense as well) would be enough to consider him an all-time great CFer (his WAR peak is quite good in a very crowded field and his JAWs is fairly close). So IF he'd had a normal sort of decline his HOF case would be very strong. Which of course he didn't (Cal Ripken he was not). He fell completely off a cliff and was basically a replacement level ballplayer for his last five years. And on the defensive stats side I do understand being a little more skeptical than maybe on the offense, but it's not like eyeballs disagreed with metrics.

A normal sort of decline, absolutely--that's what James says ("...for a reasonably full career"), also the sticking point for me. And as I said in the other thread, if you combine 2008/09 into one bad season (but hiding the hideousness of his 2008) and 2010/11 into one okay season, he looks better, if you're bothered by the arc stuff. Which I am, and others aren't.

Didn't even realize he was still playing in Japan.

Right as I said I'm not disagreeing with that. My only point was Jones was very special for a CFer (defensively and offensively) for nearly decade and that during that peak you could make a good argument that he was as all-time great valuable.

One thing they have to do is get rid of this 5% rule--it's terrible that Lofton's off before he ever had a chance to build a Blyleven kind of case. (Lots of other examples, I'm sure; I could see where Jones exits early, and I don't want that--argue it out, and give it a little time.)

I've seen various suggestions on how to change that. I'd set some very low benchmarks--200 HR, or 1,500 hits, or 150 wins, or 250 saves--and as long as you've reached one of those, that buys you five years regardless of how much support you get. (This would eliminate any obvious non-starters so the ballot doesn't get too cluttered.) If you want the 5% rule to kick in in the sixth year, fine.

Interesting to wade through your Andruw-related posts on this thread, Alex.

Rank 20 active players on potential HOF induction

Yeah I definitely had my eyes opened to the value of defense and stats in the immediate years following 11/2004. Amusingly I still think of things HOF related in terms of top five ballplayers at X position. :P

"These men...were all tremendous players when they were young--such tremendous players that they didn’t need to develop in order to become Hall of Famers; they merely needed to sustain their level of performance for a reasonably full career. But, for whatever reason, they weren’t able to do that, and fell short of a Hall of Fame standard."

You could probably put together a team of players with this story at nearly every position in every decade that probably give the corresponding team of hall of famers a run for their money.

Morbs I know you've always looked down on St. Cal, but he had several seasons of average offense + good defense at a key defensive position after turning 30, and according to B-R he had a bunch of 3-4 WAR seasons after turning 30 (I think they're overrating his defense during that period but still). You can't compare that to Jones falling off a cliff and having some of the worst offensive seasons ever.

I've got my starting rotation for earlnash's team: Gooden, Messersmith, Don Gullet, and Sam McDowell. Nomar at short, Knoblauch at second, Thurman catching. (I realize Munson's a special case, but he gets in under the "for whatever reason" clause.) Andruw in center, of course, since it's the Andruw Jones Team. Need first, third, and the corner fielders.

I'd either forgotten or never knew that Chuck Knoblauch's nicknames were "Skippy" and "Knobby." I don't know which of those I'd be more traumatized by.

Sal Bando maybe for third base. Giambi maybe for 1st although young very relative here. Darryl Strawberry RF (Tony Oliva also good possibility). LF no one jumps out.

yeah Ripken didn't start to get actively submediocre til 36, but I was addressing clemenza's introduction of "career arc" as a component of worthiness.

Mattingly slipped my mind--he seems like the obvious Andruw choice at first. (I know what you mean about Giambi, but with a good season at 35, an okay one at 37, and the fact that he's still hanging on at 42, he doesn't quite fit the Andruw profile.)

Some of those other guys that James mentions are like Mattingly that they played for a while, but they topped out with being great around 30 or so. Cesar Cedeno (played to 35) and Fred Lynn (played to 38) were still playing in their later mid-late 30s, they just were not as good or were constantly being injured and missing 50 games a year.

Outfielders-
Juan Gonzales
Jose Canseco
Rocky Colavito

3B- Scott Rolen

Starting pitchers - Bret Saberhagen, Vida Blue

That's a few more off the top of the head.

Keith Hernandez & Dave Stieb

Steib's a better choice than Gullett: great/dominant for six seasons, strong for another four (with one awful season between), finished at 32.

RF for the Andruw team: Tony Oliva. 42.6 WAR by the age of 32, .313/.361/.507 (mostly through the pitcher-dominated '60s), three batting titles, coming off eight straight seasons where he got MVP votes. He gets hurt and barely plays in '72, then he becomes one of the pilot DHs, where he has three decent but not especially distinguished seasons. Retires at 38, but he was essentially finished at 32.

Oops--Alex already mentioned him.

Giambi's career arc is a lot more like Thome's than Andruw Jones'.

Nobody mentioned Dick Allen yet. He had his last great season at 30, his last good one at 32, and was finished at 35.

Dick Allen is a poster-child def. but I think a large reason he did not get consideration was also because he was not well liked (although shortened career def. did not helped). His offensive #s are amazing for that period.

Albert Belle
Jim Wynn (also lost a ton of HRs to Astrodome most likely...)

Then you got the really big dudes that were good until they hit their 30s. They are pretty similar to guys like Killebrew or Thome, except they flat lines where those two were still productive into their mid-late 30s.
Richie Sexton
Frank Howard
Mo Vaughn
Ted Kluszewski
Ralph Kiner (still got in the HOF though...)

I like Belle for LF. My team:

C: Munson
1B: Dick Allen (there's a paradox in picking someone like Allen over Mattingly--Allen probably should be in the HOF, and therefore, at least for me, he becomes less Andruw-like than Mattingly, who clearly falls short--but Allen nonetheless fits the profile well)
2B: Knoblauch
SS: Nomar
3B: Troy Glaus (very solid till he's 31, 300 HR and 38.0 WAR, then he's finished; Rolen and Bando and others were clearly better, but I think their declines were more normal than sudden)
LF: Belle
CF: Andruw
RF: Oliva

Starters: Gooden, Sam McDowell, Messersmith, Stieb
Closer: Robb Nen

Manager: Joe Schultz

I just want Joe Schultz as my manager no matter what. He has nothing whatsoever to do with Andruw Jones.

Jody Davis is a pretty good catcher for a list. The Cubs just wore that dude down to a nub and his back went bad.

I'd frame the argument differently, but I don't think Andruw Jones belongs in the HOF either.

http://www.billjamesonline.com/andruw_of_center_field/