hall of fame, next vote...

exactly

the reason WAR exists is to stop us from coming up with these arbitrary combinations of flawed counting stats

fwiw I'm not trying to make a case for Baines as HOFer so much as arguing that the idea doesn't seem insane. As just an offensive player, I don't think being impressive for a long career across all three slash line numbers represents an arbitrary combination of facts.

i.e., what can you fault him for as on offensive player other than speed?

as AN offensive player

looks like people generally tend to look at him as 4th best DH of all time (which I know is just a little over 40 years)

I'm not trying to make a case for Baines as HOFer so much as arguing that the idea doesn't seem insane.

it's not insane, it's bad

here's the leaderboard for most WAR accumulated between a player's age 22 season and his age 33 season

baines comes in at 516th, just between jake daubert and riggs stephenson

Daubert is in the HOF too; I had to check on Riggs (no).

btw the hell with Lee Smith getting off easy... the Spink Award went to Jayson Stark.

yeah, no kidding.

i don't have a vendetta against stark or anything, but several years ago he wrote for...yahoo? i forget? and it really seemed like he was being paid by the word. just so repetitive and loooong

ring lardner and jayson stark, side by side

at least he's NOT BEING INDUCTED, despite what the media say every year

If anyone's inclined to care about leverage over an eleven thousand PA career, Baines has his highest numbers in high leverage - .314/.381/.481 (for 2,289 plate appearances).

i guess it's something

he’s 97th in career WPA

Harold Baines was pretty good

I was looking at WPA earlier! I actually wondered if he was higher than that.

KM, Mark Grace is ahead of him...

lol

mark grace - pretty, pretty good

he was!

but not hall of fame good

not at all. we'll put him in the Hall of Professional Hitters, where .300-hitting first basemen with no power rest in glory

*late-career rod carew staggers through the doorway*

*late-career rod carew staggers back through the same doorway to the hall of fame, then closes the door and locks it behind him, leaving only a frightened billy butler in the hallway*

HOF tracker is at 45 ballots now, or 11.2% of the electorate.

Mariano still at 100%

Edgar at 91.3%

Halladay at 89.1%

Mussina at 82.6%

Schilling at 73.9%

Walker at 67.4%

Walker has gained 9 votes, the most of anyone overall. He's lost zero.

Somewhat curiously, Edgar and Mussina have each lost a voter from last season.

Forgot that this was Helton's first year on the ballot...46 ballots, 30% (tied with McGriff in his last year). Not an auspicious start, but if he stays somewhere around there, I think most first-year guys with 30% are eventually voted in by the writers.

“I would love to get into a legitimate confrontation [and] debate where you pull all the stuff that we looked at and you tell me," LaRussa said before adding some unsuitable for publication words, "that you look at, I guarantee you Harold [should be in]. Harold Baines is a Hall of Famer, and it’s a shame that now he’s being looked at as not right.”

that's from this piece, which discusses why the writer only voted for 3 players on his ballot (bonds, clemens, rivera):

https://www.newsday.com/sports/columnists/david-lennon/harold-baines-hall-of-fame-david-lennon-ballot-1.24610024

Somewhat curiously, Edgar and Mussina have each lost a voter from last season.

see the link above - this is the guy who dropped them (and schilling), and he explains why

My Hall of Very good lineup

1b- Darrell Evans
2b- Tommy Herr
ss- Tony Fernandez
3b- Buddy Bell
lf- Roy White
cf- Chet Lemon
rf- Pedro Guerrero
C- Lance Parrish
dh- Greg Luzinski

Two of those guys, Evans and Bell, are on James's list of the 25 Best (non-PED) Players Not in the HOF (link above). Tommy Herr was great in '85, but I think I'd rank him a little lower.

I just put up some good players I dug for one reason or another.

Herr was a good hitter and seemed to really benefit from the switch hitting. Two things, he batted clean up a bunch for the Cardinals. I also remember him having that pad that he would put over his thumb when he batted. He seemed to have a pretty open Charlie Lau style which was big in that day.

IIRC, didn't James write (in the New Historical Abstract) that Darrell Evans was the most underrated player of all time?

He might have. The first players I remember him really advocating for would include Evans (Darrell first, Dwight later on), Grich, Tenace, Jose Cruz, Jack Clark, and Amos Otis. With Evans and Tenace it was the value of a walk, with Cruz it was his punishing home park, and with Otis it was his tendency to fall just shy of the benchmarks that made you famous--he'd knock in 97 runs, hit .295, etc.

Is Herr the only player to ever knock in 100+ with under 10 HR?

Paul Molitor went for 9/113 in 1996, his first season w/Minnesota. 39 years old!

Quite a few times mid-century, it turns out, but they're the only two since 1950.

http://www.statmuse.com/questions/5d8b3c9e-d855-413a-a9c7-ea939a809927

I don't know if it's worth trying to figure out who might do it today; nobody who plays full-time hits under 10 HR anymore.

(They must have arbitrarily started that list in 1930 or so--Cobb did it as late as 1917, and I'm guessing it was a regular thing pre-Ruth.)

if anyone did it today it would have to be a good hitter who’s in a place in the lineup (a very good lineup) where he gets lot of opportunities and stays in the lineup despite a power outage.

I could see some like Altuve or Bogaerts being that guy, but who knows.

*someone like

They're at 79 ballots/~20%, and Schilling, Bonds, and Clemens are all hovering around 75%.

please god

I’m not holding my breath on those guys, Bonds and Clemens have picked up exactly one vote apiece. I suspect lots of voters have drawn the line there or are waiting for them to reach their 10th and final year before casting the vote. Schilling has picked up 4, which is well off the enshrinement pace.

The guy who has picked up the most votes this year overall is McGriff with 16 (too little, too late!) and is tied w/Walker in terms of net gain at 14 votes (McGriff lost two, Walker hasn’t lost any.) I’m willing to bet the vets put McGriff in at some point.

Halladay appears to be a lock right now. Edgar too, obv. Mussina looks good for a close finish in his favor. Walker is a no, but I’m a bit more optimistic about him next season than I would have been before seeing his gains.

Only one? Surprised--I don't remember them ever approaching 75%, even early on; they always seemed to be stuck in the 50-60% range.

It won't happen (and would be quite meaningless if it did, at least in terms of the player's value; the why of it would be interesting to ponder, though...), but Rivera's still at 100%.

it might just be a matter of the historically more Barry and Rog-friendly voters getting their ballots out there earlier.

here's a spicy take (there's a twist ending though!)

https://www.telegram.com/news/20181222/bill-ballou-mariano-rivera-not-getting-this-writers-hall-of-fame-vote

I'm surprised he didn't mention Torre's use of Rivera in the playoffs and all his 1+ inning saves -- in many ways the forerunner of today's bullpen usage (at least in the playoffs).

For the most part he's right, and I respect what he's doing, but Rivera was a great pitcher, period. His career WAR is close to Halladay's.

For the most part he's right

By this I mean that he's right about saves most likely being on their way out as a statistic.

Sending in a blank ballot, though? You can read that two ways: as honorable (he doesn't want to be the guy who costs Rivera unanimity--and I don't know why he's concerned about that, it won't happen with or without him) or as cowardly (he doesn't want to be identified as the guy who costs Rivera unanimity--and ditto).

if you send in a blank ballot, doesn't that mean your vote counts and rivera won't be unanimous?

to clarify he decided not to submit a ballot at all, and k3v is right about a blank ballot submission.

i think his overall point with closers is pretty sound, except he can't differentiate between Rivera and everyone else. Rivera did what he did for so long, with that ridiculous postseason resume stretching out to 141 IP.

last season Kimbrel showed signs during the regular season of being on the decline and his postseason was so, so bad.

To me, you submit your ballot, and if anyone gives you grief over Rivera, you simply explain your reasoning. Whether you agree or disagree, it's not like he hasn't given the issue a lot of careful thought, or that his arguments are unreasonable. Why not reward the players you do support?

he should have just submitted the ballot without explanation (voting for those he felt deserved it) and if called out, offer up his opinion. this is just empty posturing.

i would vote for Mariano but the anti-closer argument is super viable (and imo is viable in virtually every other case).