hall of fame, next vote...

I'd love to see the progression of the K/9 record for relievers. The starter record is still held by Randy Johnson in 2001, so that's been locked in for almost 20 years. The relief record is probably a relatively steep line up for a decade or two. But I can't find anything online.

Chris Sale seems to have the starter k/9 record at present? 11.1 vs Unit's 10.6 (Scherzer coming up a little shy at 10.5). And actually Darvish is #2, Strasburg #4, Scherzer at #5 (Cole is #11 despite having only had two seasons w/more K than IP, which shows how eye-popping his K rate's been over the past couple seasons).

Career, it's Sale; Johnson's single-season mark has been surprisingly resilient through the strikeout boom, though. Johnson (6), Scherzer (3), and Sale (2) hold more than half of the 20 best seasonal marks.

Somehow missed the “2001” — RJ was insane during that era.

Can Edwin Encarnacion and Nelson Cruz pad their juiced ball counting stats enough to get some HOF support? Both are late blooming DH-types who won't stop hitting. Edwin has a reasonable shot at 500 HR/1500 RBIs (assuming his current wrist injury doesn't ruin his power stroke).

If David Ortiz is the standard bearer for the DH with a 15-year peak, and he's not considered by many as a shoo-in, then Cruz and Encarnacion don't have a chance. But who knows how this era will be viewed in 10-15 years time.

My own sense is that Ortiz is a shoo-in, and that Encarnacion and Cruz have virtually no chance, with or without 500 HR. I think Ortiz's spectacular finish and--overrated in the aggregate though they may be (his ALDS and ALCS stats aren't anything special)--post-season numbers will count for a lot when he goes on the ballot, plus his seasonal numbers are clearly better than both.

Very similar, though, in how all three basically don't get started until they're 27-28.

(I don't just mean Ortiz's last season, although that was highlight--more like his sustained bounce-back after 2009, when he looked close to finished.)

I think Ortiz has is beloved enough that the bit of smoke around his alleged positive PED result will be overlooked. Which is unlike virtually every other PED guy. Plus the whole speech after the Boston Marathon bombing, and some more recent events too.

Before the so-called steroid era, 500 HR was automatic, and the HOF is full of guys in that 400 HR, 1400 RBI range whose peaks were about as good as Edwin and Cruz's are. If Jim Rice is in (and yes, he's a weak inductee) then aren't these guys worthy of serious consideration.

I personally think they don't "feel like HOFers" but their stat lines are getting interesting.

i think the real question is: can any of these touch harold baines??

neither of these guys are anywhere near ortiz, tho, and cruz needs another three seasons like this one just to get to 500 -- 2.5 of which would come after turning 40

ortiz was a top-5 mvp finisher in five straight seasons; neither cruz nor edwing have done it once. if we're gonna ride for mediocre fielders who didn't quite get to 500 let's go back and get crime dog before either of these two

I said this earlier (probably on this thread), but I think Martinez's induction helps Ortiz too. Edgar was the better hitter--a little better in OPS+, 13 games better in career WAR. (Helped by some positive defensive numbers very early in his career; there's some evidence there he would have been at least an adequate third baseman if they'd just left him there.) For as long as Edgar wasn't in, I think there would have been enough writers conflicted about voting for the second-best DH ever to keep Ortiz under 75%.

These guys hit with more power and probably had a better peak season, but Baines was a more complete hitter and did it for a longer period of time.

I'd put them probably with guys like Richie Sexton, Greg Luzinski or Don Baylor. Baylor won an MVP. Don't think either one is better than the Crime Dog.

Ortiz is "Big Papi", the guy is a huge star. Good lord the guy is like King Arthur as he pretty much killed the Yanks and the curse dead himself.

The wild thing about Encarnacion is that ANYONE could have had him for pretty much nothing at at one point, as he was put on waivers I think twice. He then turned around and hit like 250 home runs. Nelson Cruz pretty much came out of nowhere to win a couple AL HR crowns too, which is also notable.

Kinda too bad that Eddie could never figure out the throw from third base, as Encarnascion seemed to be pretty decent about picking it at the hot corner in Cincy. I remember more than a couple times him doing this amazing stop and then throwing the ball into the 3rd row. Reds could have used that big bat he had later on with Jay Bruce and Votto. Reds at one point wanted to extend him and then he went into a funk and got traded for Rolen. Don't even think the Blue Jays saw him busting out like the did, them bringing him back after releasing him looks pretty smart in hindsight.

That was the Jays MO somehow. Bautista was similar, in that most of baseball saw little to no value in he guy before his breakout.

whatever bautista did during the winter of 09-10 should be studied by scientists and historians

Andrés Galarraga is another player somewhat similar career arc/stats to Encarnacion and Cruz, he had the Mile High boost too but did continue to hit after he left Denver. He had a couple decent years in Montreal and then seemed like he was kinda done before breaking out with the early Rockies clubs.

Cruz and Encarnacion are incredible power guys and a lot better in many respects than your Kingman/Deer/Incaviglia/Dunn/Reynolds types, the guys many may view them as similar to. Better in terms of being well rounded at the plate, not too shabby in the BA dept, they walk a bunch, they’re totally dangerous, smart hitters. A cut below non-HOFers like Crime Dog but that’s nothing to be ashamed of really.

Galarraga is a good comp, he was a superior batter and while he didn’t walk that much his hitting was good enough to give him a good career WAR. He was no Bichette that’s for sure.

the HOF is full of guys in that 400 HR, 1400 RBI range whose peaks were about as good as Edwin and Cruz's are

Players I can find in that range (eliminating cases like Bench and Berra and DiMaggio, where it's a moot point): Willie Stargell, Vladimir Guerrero, Billy Williams, Orlando Cepeda, Johnny Mize, Andre Dawson, Duke Snider, Jim Rice, Tony Perez. Rice and Perez are in the same range as Cruz and Encarnacion; less so the others, I'd say.

Just to be clear, when I wrote the "HOF is full of guys" in that range, I didn't mean a majority of the HOF, I was thinking about exactly the kinds of players you named. It's not a small number, and even though Dawson and Rice might be considered borderline HOFers, they were great players and huge stars.

Cruz and Edwing were never really huge stars, didn't get the MVP support and so on, but their rate and counting stats are those to some HOFers. I'm not really sure what to make of it myself.

but their rate and counting stats are *close* to some HOFers

jaffe goes through some of the bigger names making moves:
https://blogs.fangraphs.com/weve-reached-peak-mike-trout-again/

I think the biggest HOF season this year has easily been Greinke's. He started the year at 187-118, 3.39, 61.1 WAR. You never know at that age--if quick decline had set in he might have ended up on the bubble, shy of 200 wins and somewhere around 65 WAR. But he's been great this year and has two more seasons at least in Houston; he looks solid for 225+ wins and 70-75 WAR, plus he'll have a chance to have a big postseason or two. I'd say he's getting closer and closer to a sure thing.

I know you guys live/breathe these sites' analyses as gospel, but I simply cannot (esp. after that radical recalculation for catchers a scant 5 months ago) trust any Defensive WAR #s and when FG/BA come out with these clicky-pieces comparing today's players vs. pre-statcast legends. (Offensive #s, sure, I'm right there, far less foggy/subjective).

I try to not to talk him up on here but I have a buddy who works for a (very good) club and he rolls his eyes whenever anyone in our group of friends brings up this "hobbyist" stuff to him. He feels like the open source sites are (my paraphrase) "on the right track but ultimately no more than entertainment for the more than casual fans & writers". His club has developed their own proprietary systems and metrics and says that even the top open source analysts are ~10 years behind their club's tech. No names but they are +250 to win the WS as of this morning.

the Lindbergh-Sawchik book has disposed me to root against that team (as soon as they dispose of the Yankees)

all models are wrong, some are useful

WAR is a constant work in progress, and I have no doubt that MLB teams aren't spending huge money on analytics to learn about what they could read on Fangraphs for free.

These are totally different things though -- in discussing the HOF, we're looking at past performance by the top 1% of players. Teams are interested more in future projections for everyone in baseball, including minor league prospects. Of course they're going to use different analytics tools!

*Marlins management takes a second look at $1 million line item to revisit Harold Baines’ hall of fame case*

Ha!

all models are wrong, some are useful

Doesn't address Jersey Al's points.

WAR is certainly a better framework for understanding player value than anything else publicly available

Maybe the Hall of Fame vote should only be decided by quants on the astros lol

xp - I have thought that might be the case at times. Other times, I look at the numbers and think something is wrong and I wonder about why and the extent to which other things that might be less noticeable are also skewered.

I don't know if you guys are interested in one I was looking at the other day. Minnie Rojas is said to have been worth 1.8 WAR in 1966, but only 0.8 WAR in 1967 when he pitched 37.1 more innings, had a lower ERA, finished 31 more games (leading the league), had about the same WHIP, lower FIP, lower SO/W.

The only thing I could think of is that maybe total offense was down in the AL in '67? But I checked, it was down, but only about 4-6% overall.

Fangraphs has him at numbers that are completely different: 0.1 WAR for '66, 0.7 WAR for '67. Bill James has him at 9 Win Shares for '66, 16 WS for '67.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/r/rojasmi01.shtml

that seems inexplicable

why were you looking at him, though?

team defense might be a reason, since bWAR includes that. the Angels in '66 had a worse defense by dWAR numbers, winding up with a negative team number, which could mean Rojas had to bail himself out more vs being bailed out by their better defense in '67.

I collect cards, have his '67 and '68 Topps. Interesting guy, came over from Cuba, short career.

Defensive difference between '66 and '67 teams is calculated as a total of 4.8 dWAR. Rojas pitched about 8.5% of the team's innings that year which would mean about a 0.4 difference in team defense when he was on the mound, right?

looks like he did give up 45 runs in 1967 (36 earned) vs 28 R/27 ER in 1966. So while his performance ERA-wise was better he could be getting dinged by the unearned runs maybe?

i have no idea if caught stealing rates are incorporated in pitcher WAR, but i can't imagine it mattering this much

this seems like the sort of thing you should ask a chat session and report back! except the fangraphs ratings seem reasonable, and they're the ones with all the chatz

dinged by the unearned runs

I don't know, I look at those games and yeah, he gave up some hits and walked some guys in those situations but we were already noting his WHIP being almost the same in more innings pitched, etc.

except the fangraphs ratings seem reasonable

Would have to look at whether or not he was really replacement level in '66.

Cruz went off yesterday, a HR and three doubles.

There was a recent article on a local news site talking about a) how Kenley Jansen may have to be replaced as the Dodgers closer and b) how he will go into the HOF wearing Dodger blue nonetheless!

A recent Cubs site article rhapsodized about Kimbrel’s HOF career.

I think they were once both very fine relievers who are nonetheless joke candidates.

Also I was thinking about Strasburg a bit after yesterday’s dominant start — I wonder if he has any shot at all. His peak has been sub-HOF level but he’s accrued a reasonably decent career WAR and is still fairly young. He’d have to go on a Scherzer-like run at some point probably, which seems unlikely but not out of the realm of possibility.

Strasburg is already Scherzer but without the # of innings.

Good piece on recalibrating the JAWS standard for starters:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/everyone-thinks-justin-verlander-belongs-in-the-hall-of-fame-so-why-dont-the-stats-agree/

i'm not sure if it's surprising to anyone as a diehard cardinals homer, but i've not been confident at all about yadi's hof case, and it annoys the hell out of me when certain broadcasters refer to him as "future hall of famer" as if it didn't warrant discussion. even now, i think he needs a strong finish (in 2020?) to have a good chance. there was some uproar about fangraph's addition of pitchframing to WAR a few months ago. yadi does very well, overall, on framing, even as he's become mediocre in recent years. but this is a good argument for other components of his value that haven't been incorporated:

https://blogs.fangraphs.com/instagraphs/yadier-molinas-career-in-four-graphs/

Here, the Cardinals are more than 300 steals below the second-best team and are nearly 600 steals below average. I’m not sure quite what to make of that ridiculously low total compared to the rest of baseball. They are more than three standard deviations away from the average. Most teams are going to have good and bad catchers over the course of 15 seasons; the Cardinals have had just one great one.

How many extra runs are we talking about? 25? 50? 100? Has Molina been worth another 10 wins over the course of his career that he’s not getting credit for? Due to the chances of getting caught and the potential runs taken off the board, a stolen base attempt is barely a positive offensively. Even preventing 700 attempts might only be worth 25 runs or so compared to average. But it’s hard to square that with the 600 fewer steals, which might be worth four times the amount of the prevented attempts.

A lot is made of Molina’s intangibles when it comes to assessing his career. Here, we have something very tangible, yet not fully accounted for by his WAR. Catching is hard. Putting everything a catcher does into WAR is incredibly hard. What Yadier Molina has done to the run game over these two decades has been of great value to the Cardinals. The graphs above should help put his career in perspective.

https://i.imgur.com/UNmsc7N.png

Yeah, this was a great article. I really believe that WAR, in its current form(s), is inaccurate for catchers.

very interesting, thanks

that's pretty convincing

...hall of famer yadier molina.