hall of fame, next vote...

even w/ white guys like Seaver or Mantle, they were just being dicks.

That's almost the only explanation as to why, say, a Seaver or Ripken wasn't unanimous--stray voters who held to the silly if-not-Ruth-no-one principle.

The first question for the Hall of Famers is about Edgar's batting average against Mo. "Why do you have to say that," Mo said jumping up. "Why do you have to say the number???"

— Lindsey Adler (@lindseyadler) January 23, 2019

.579/.652/.1.053 in 23 plate appearances...

https://www.mlb.com/cut4/edgar-martinezs-amazing-stats-vs-pitchers-in-his-hall-of-fame-class/c-302992870

rivera becomes the third hall of famer with zero hits, following jack morris and walter alston (who isn't in for his playing)

rivera: 0-for-3, K, BB, RBI
morris and alston were both 0-for-1, but morris did score four runs

trevor hoffman also had more RBIs (5) than hits (4)

James seems to have taken on a new cause: Bobby Abreu.

So I’m actually (possibly irrationally) annoyed that Halladay isn’t going inas a Jay. Like wtf does his wife have against it?

It's weird--not quite as weird as when Maddux did the same, but still weird. I don't think it's irrational for a Jays fan not to be happy.

plaque cap is not "going in as," for the X000th time

most visitors to Cooperstown are too old to see the caps clearly anyway

Mussina had more value as an Oriole, but i'm not placing bets there

It's still a symbolic thing that registers with hometown fans. Surely you would have been baffled if Seaver had decided he'd be wearing a Reds cap on his plaque.

I won't steal James's poll, but he has a good one up: "If you could put one (but only one) second baseman from the '70s/'80s on the 2020s Eras Committee ballot, who would you choose: Grich, Whitaker, Randolph?" Jaffe has them 8/13/17, and they're separated by under 10 WAR for their careers.

Hall of Fame announces what caps will be worn on plaques of incoming class. No surprise on Edgar after 18 seasons in Seattle:

Harold Baines – White Sox.
Roy Halladay – no logo
Edgar Martinez – Mariners
Mike Mussina – no logo
Mariano Rivera – Yankees
Lee Smith – Cubs .

— Greg Johns (@GregJohnsMLB) January 25, 2019

http://www.naomiklein.org/files/images/NL-10thcover.jpg

makes sense for Smith, he was at his best with the Cubs, his bWAR over his eight seasons w/Chicago compares favorably w/Rivera's first eight seasons w/NY. However his subsequent career does not...

Congratulations to Jason Bay, Ryan Dempster, former #BlueJays GM Gord Ash and longtime MLB coach Rob Thomson for making up the 2019 Canadian Baseball Hall of Fame induction class. That's a strong group.

— Jerry Crasnick (@jcrasnick) February 5, 2019

Not sure if you can access this or not, but you may want to fill it in if you can.

http://joeposnanski.com/hall-of-fame-polls/

Has there been momentum to include baseball pioneers outside of the US in the past? I'm thinking the first great Cuban, Japanese, Dominican players for example.

I knew that Tony Perez was Cuban, so I went looking and also found this player named Martin Dihigo voted in 1977 by the Senior Negro League committee.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/register/player.fcgi?id=dihigo002mar

I would think that putting in at least Sadaharu Oh while he is alive as even a "pioneer" would be a big deal and probably should already be done anyway.

if, like me, you use fangraphs as your primary source of baseball data/stats, you'll be excited about their addition of pitch framing data and it's incorporation into WAR. in some cases it makes a BIG difference in catcher WAR, career and single-season.

https://i.imgur.com/sBOCtG8.png

much more here:

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/war-update-catcher-framing/

That's definitely huge--from ~25% of Posey's value up to almost ~40% for McCaan. It's the kind of thing I have to take on faith; I just don't see it when I watch a game. (Certain pitches, sure.) But Big Data Baseball, the book about the Pirates' resurgence, made a convincing case for the value of someone like Russ Martin, and those numbers certainly line up better with the idea that Molina should go into the Hall of Fame.

the HoF factor is one reason i posted that here - comparing catchers is going to be a mess because the pitch framing data only goes back to 2008.

this is terrible

i mean god bless hank conger, who should maybe not be out of baseball, but is

i am totally willing to admit that WAR has historically undervalued catchers, but this just suggests that WAR is an inadequate measurement that will be adjusted up or down willy nilly. hey, suddenly brian mccann is 150% what he used to be, just because!

oh hey, here's some recent data that completely wrecks the standard we've been using for years

Is WAR is zero-sum? If so, then the catcher's gains would be offset by the pitcher's reductions.

There are accompanying pitcher charts if you go to the site, and the pitcher adjustment is minimal.

I didn't say so, because I'm the dinosaur James guy--that's basically what I meant by "I just don't see it," though--but I agree with mookie: those adjustments are drastic.

brian mccann 8.9 war season haha ok

2007? doesn't seem far fetched to me. 135 RC+, .896 OPS – plus his contributions behind the plate (which he was much better at back then).
the swing we saw with their calculating pitch framing does seem extreme – but they could very well be otm. catchers are on the receiving end of every pitch thrown by their team in a game, sometime (not always) calling all those pitches – and I think we have way underestimated how much they can affect the game from back there.
a catcher who is talented behind the plate and also an asset as a hitter being worth 9 wins make sense to me.

I think the problem is that some people (on this thread?) are confusing "game-calling" with "pitch-framing"...

Pitch framing is literally stealing strikes: with borderline pitches that an umpire would tend to call balls, certain catchers tend to get called strikes via supple hands, soft wrists, steady posture... The catcher framed a borderline (or out of zone) pitch as a strike.

So with all the pitch fx data available (hence since '08), the analysts have come in and measured which catchers excelled at getting more strikes called on non-strike pitches. Extra strikes (& less balls) = extra outs (& less runs against) = extra wins.

My zero-sum concern upthread is that this shift of WAR towards catchers should come at the expense of offsetting the corresponding pitchers' WAR, but as each team carries 11-12 pitchers, there is from a ratio aspect more WAR to share.

ok so i don't know THAT brian mccann (it was 2008 btw) because i didn't start getting back into ball until... 2011? maybe he really was that good. currently listed as fangraphs #1 player that season, above near-peak pujols. maybe pitch framing really does count that much. but also, why does his framing fall off in later years? strikes me as a skill you wouldn't unlearn. did umps figure him out? or framing in general? does everyone's framing take a dip after 2008? i should probably be reading something, eh?

also all this hank conger shittalk upthread wtf you will NOT speak poorly of MY president

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTTLkDfg_HI

but also, why does his framing fall off in later years?

He got picked up by the Yankees who were real early on this statistic...

But the other problem was the Yankees were also running deep in high velocity pitchers as well.

Something about harder to frame flamethrowers.

I think the problem is that some people (on this thread?) are confusing "game-calling" with "pitch-framing"...

I totally understand the difference, which is my I'm a little skeptical of such a drastic upgrade. If game-calling were included--except how in the world could you measure that, without making all sorts of assumptions?--along with fooling umpires, I'd be less skeptical.

ya, these are good points.

and i had only mentioned game-calling as a general reason why a catcher could produce more value than any other position player, btw.

you'd also have to account for how often a manager is calling for pitches

i am totally willing to admit that WAR has historically undervalued catchers, but this just suggests that WAR is an inadequate measurement that will be adjusted up or down willy nilly.

i don't know if inadequate is the word, but imperfect would definitely be accurate. i would guess this kind of large noticeable sudden adjustment will happen again, as analysts keep honing in on the best way to measure defensive value at other positions. but i'd also guess that this pitch-framing adjustment will be the biggest of its kind.

oh hey, here's some recent data that completely wrecks the standard we've been using for years

it does wreck the standard, especially because it only covers the last 10 years. there's no way to see how much more godlike johnny bench would be, or someone like gabby hartnett. even for some contemporary players like yadi, the data is missing for the first few years of their careers. it's a fucking mess. people like jay jaffe are probably popping boners left and right because it means they get to spend the next year re-writing their hall of fame articles AGAIN.

but also, a lot of old schoolers were pissed when the dinosaur James people started gaining influence. the cardinals broadcasters still can't say "OPS" (AN INCREDIBLY BASIC STAT) without using the "i can't believe i'm saying this" tone of voice, and they i'm sure they'd think any sort of index-based stat like OPS+ is like totally incomprehensible rocket science nerd shit. i'm sure they got pissed when people started messing up the baseball card stat standards of .300, 500 home runs and Wins, or whatever.

ultimately i do think that new stats will kind of hone in on a new equilibrium, but it's going to be different in the statcast era, and there are likely going to be more of these standard-fucking adjustments before it's all said and done

catchers are on the receiving end of every pitch thrown by their team in a game, sometime (not always) calling all those pitches – and I think we have way underestimated how much they can affect the game from back there.
a catcher who is talented behind the plate and also an asset as a hitter being worth 9 wins make sense to me.

i think this is otm. Those of us familiar with WAR have gotten really comfortable with the idea of a very good player being worth 5-6 WAR. a very good non-catcher position player is worth about that much over the course of a season, playing nearly every game. a good starting pitcher is also worth about that much, which really is just a huge coincidence - starting pitchers participate in much fewer games, of course, but it's almost perfectly balanced out by them being so important when they do play, and it still comes out to 5-6 WAR for a very good SP.

we've also internalized the idea that a good relief pitcher, even an elite one, won't be worth 5-6 WAR, because they just aren't involved in enough plays over the course of a season.

and we've also gotten used to the idea of catchers of very good catchers being worth maybe 4 WAR or so, because they tend to play fewer overall games per season. that's part of the reason that this bump to give people like brian mccann a 8.9 WAR season is kind of an extra shock. even for the more renowned elite guys, it seems strange. mike trout no longer had the highest fWAR in 2012, with 10.1. now it's buster posey, with 10.4.

but when you think about it, catchers are kind of like Shohei Ohtanis - when they play, they're part of every single play on the defensive side, and they're also contributing offensively. it makes sense that their WAR would settle in a little higher than a normal position player, just like the WAR for a relief pitcher is lower than other positions. i think that's just something we'll have to have to get used to.

I've thought that WAR undervalues catchers for a while now, I hope these adjustments are just the beginning.

does it undervalue them systematically though? it seems that if some are better than average at pitch-framing, others must be a negative in terms of value

I guess that's still an open question. I'm sure there are other "hidden" values for catchers, I'm sure not all of them are systematic undervaluations. Once we can assign numbers to some of them then it might become clearer.

If you were to add on 2 WAR each for pitch framing, game calling, game management, effective blocking (plus whatever other skills might belong on the list) then you'd have 15 WAR seasons from catchers which I don't think anyone would believe. But I also can't believe that the best catchers, taking into account the physical and mental tolls of the position, don't sniff the top 20 or 30 overall leaders in WAR most years.

I guess that's still an open question.

ok I actually read the article and it's actually not an open question, some catchers were bumped up and some were bumped down. which makes sense -- you're comparing them against each other

There are definitely some in both directions, but I don’t think you can assume the overall effect comes out to 0. They’re being compared to a replacement level player, not an average major league player. So the overall effect could still be a positive one, right? tbh I’m not sure

I don't think so? for example baserunning is in runs above average, UZR is runs above average...the replacement adjustment comes after all that is sorted out. at least that would be my guess

Yeah, but what I’m saying is (and I’m on an iPhone sorry) a catcher could be below average pitch framing (negative compared to the index of 0) but still get a slight WAR boost if they’re still better than a hypothetical replacement catcher. In other words, some catchers may be below average in pitch framing, but when the effect of pitch framing is incorporated into WAR it’s still a positive one - they’re stealing strikes at a level below the MLB average but above a replacement player.

Note: this is a wild guess! And I understand that some catchers are so bad at it that the WAR effect is negative - they’re worse than replacement. But I’d think it would be possible for the overall systematic effect to be positive, because it’s accounting for an aspect of catcher value that wasn’t there before. And if the overall effect does lean positive, that would be compensated for by a small negative effect among pitchers

hmm. this would be a great question for the fangraphs chat!

I’m kinda surprised that they didn’t post some sort of supplementary article talking about the ramifications of all this

I wouldn't be surprised if we found a technology that allows to track pitch framing before 2008 (and after once all games were televised) which could also alter say Piazza, Carter or Posada's WAR totals.

WAR is going to be ever changing as long as is we assume there is fog wrt to the defensive aspect to the game so I'm cool with wily nily changes. Franchises seem to cook with their own data sauces anyway. I don't think the financial value of catchers is going to change a lot, if it does it is bound to be positive.

Since there are no other Hall of Fame arguments going on at the moment, I would just like to state what seems obvious. A place in the Hall of Fame is an honor to be given to those most worthy of admiration and respect. It is not a paycheck to be awarded based on a resume.

— Bill James Online (@billjamesonline) April 7, 2019

Not obvious enough, because I'm not quite sure what that means...Harold Baines, yes; Curt Schilling, no? I don't think James actually believes that, so further explanation required.

this season Mike Trout has passed these players in career bWAR:

Vic Willis
Dave Winfield (he was tied with these two at the start of the season)

Roy Halladay
Willie McCovey
Reggie Smith
Clayton Kershaw(!)
Andrew Dawson
Chase Utley
Craig Biggio
Ed Walsh
Amos Rusie
Willie Randolph
Luis Tiant
Goose Goslin
Pee Wee Reese
Buddy Bell
Duke Snider
Joe Cronin

assuming he winds up with a 10 bWAR season (seems like a reasonable assumption??) he'd pass almost 50 additional players.

you all remember good old Andrew Dawson of course

assuming he winds up with a 10 bWAR season (seems like a reasonable assumption??)

Things that only make sense on a Mike Trout thread

Andrew "The Hak" Dawson