hall of fame, next vote...

As for '67-68 Cardinals' "mystique"... the reason they dominated MVP voting is that the BBWAA seemed even lazier when there was a 10-team single pennant race. ie 1) pennant winner 2) basic counting stats 3) "intangibles" that could be made up on the spot. Ballot done.

While they were one of the more integrated teams to win at that point, I find the '50s Dodgers and '70s Pirates more compelling on that score.

Salaries are also determined by star power (sells merch/seats) which is why teams tend to overpay for over-the-hill talent.

I'll keep saying it until you guys ban me: defensive WAR is fool's gold. It pains me how much the BBWAA have relied/will rely on such a flawed metric for end of year (and HOF!) votes.

speaking of banning, who are the ILB mod(s)? just the dearly departed steve shasta?

I'll keep saying it until you guys ban me: defensive WAR is fool's gold. It pains me how much the BBWAA have relied/will rely on such a flawed metric for end of year (and HOF!) votes.

― Jersey Al (Albert R. Broccoli), Wednesday, October 16, 2019 11:49 AM (nine minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

Do you mean that we will never figure out good metrics for defensive evaluation or that right now those evaluations are inadequate?

i don't think defensive WAR is a bedrock stat for the writers; it is a factor among many in which they judge a player's defense

That McCann/Pujols '08 fWAR thing above is...

I don’t really trust any of the defensive catching metrics

shouting at guys who jog to first on pop-ups counts as an extra out, which fWAR accounts for.

The '64-'68 Cardinals had mystique--deserved or otherwise, that's just a fact. I was aware of that as a young fan in the early '70s, having read Roger Angell's accounts of the three World Series they were in. The Dodgers of the '50s had more, sure--tied in with a certain book--but the Cardinals had their own.

http://media1.fdncms.com/riverfronttimes/imager/u/blog/2573864/si_comparison_covers.jpg?cb=1454773020

so, cc sabathia

Epic career, but no. He had a Cy Young and made it to 3,000 Ks - best thing he had going for him was spending 10 years on the Yankees. Got him a lot of wins and post season games. But he never dominated or lead in much else aside from just pitching a lot. If he’d spent the last 10 years on the Twins, I don’t think he would be getting the same hof attention.

One man's "mystique" is another's "lotta press."

CC fairly close to Don Sutton's BWAR, while pitching a third less innings.

close comp to Drysdale too

Are you saying the Cardinals didn't have it or that it doesn't exist at all? A lot of press could just as easily explain Babe Ruth or Michael Jordan.

Obviously, Sutton's in for the 300 wins--if he'd fallen short, he'd probably be out there with Tommy John and Jim Kaat. (Sabermetrics rescued Bert Blyleven; I doubt that would have happened with Sutton, who's ahead of John in WAR but still short of 70.0.) Maybe, if WAR sticks around, a widely recognized benchmark will be established--70 seems to be the number right now for Jaffe-types. Sabathia's at 62.5, right where Kaat is. I'm on the fence with CC, and I think he'll be one of those guys who starts in the 40-50% range, and then, who knows.

Drysdale's in for...mystique!

Don’t forget to the fun name factor (1.01x)

Don’t forget to add all the words to your sentences, either

I don't know what Mystique (TM) *is*, other than it didn't get its Yankees tickets this week.

i keep going back and forth on CC, bc he did have a decent string of peak seasons but at the same time he does really seem sometimes like he's closer to a David Wells type than a Mike Mussina type, when looking at his entire career.

def not quite in Mussina's tier, careerwise

i don't want to mutter "compiler" but if we discuss peak there are a lot of pitchers out there who were much better and didn't last long enough at a diminished level to build up the career totals. Johan and Felix, to name a couple.

agnostic on his induction, but i kinda believe all hall of famers should have had a transcendent period during which they were, however fleetingly, the best in the game. and for cc, that second half with the brewers in 2008 counts.

CC was arguably not even the best lefty Cy Young winner Cleveland had during the '00s.

i thought for awhile he was going to wind up similar to Verlander, in that both had these good early indoctrination periods where they mastered their inherent talents before they peaked and won the Cy, followed by a depressing early decline, but Verlander's was just a blip on the radar and a bit of a mirage. CC wound up just having this very good middle period and a decline marked by occasional fine performances and outright terrible ones.

for me i guess the closest comparison is maybe Pettitte? a really fine and occasionally great pitcher who seems just outside HOF-worthy (though CC was better than Pettitte in terms of a consistent peak).

agnostic on his induction, but i kinda believe all hall of famers should have had a transcendent period during which they were, however fleetingly, the best in the game

Mostly agree with this, except 1) I think you can play/pitch at a slightly lower level if you do it long enough (something like Palmeiro, I guess), and 2) for me, Sabathia's transcendent period is too fleeting--I'd want two or three seasons where you're viewed as one of the best (half-dozen?) in the game.

i, too, prefer hall of famers to achieve transcendence (i'd say "among" the best in the game, not necessarily the very best) - the lower the height of peak transcendence, the longer it has to last. and then take that and divide by 5

and then there's the VC and Harold Baines

wow i don't think there's any need to bring venture capital or the viet cong into this

The Victory Condition for HOF has been lowered to “be at least as hall of famey as Harold Baines, at the very minimum”

Harold is a HOF with so many career highlights, baseball card companies had trouble narrowing it down to just one to cite

https://www.tradingcarddb.com/Images/Cards/Baseball/594/594-232Bk.jpg

hall of fame, next vote i care about... Bonds and Clemens

appreciate that they included a photo of harold getting fooled by a changeup

That card's perfect for Brendan C. Boyd's The Great American Baseball Card Flipping, Trading and Bubble Gum Book. "Harold & his wife have 4 children." Not to diminish the importance of repopulating the world, but I somehow can't see that turning up on Willie Mays' or Greg Maddux's card.

If CC doesn’t get in, the bar for the new generation is going to be really high. Pitchers with 70+ WAR won’t come up like it used too.

Great pitchers are the exception to whatever prevailing trends are around, so I don't know if usage patterns will much affect the existence or 70+ guys or not. Verlander's there, Greinke and Kershaw are about to be, Scherzer's close to a sure bet, Sale has a good shot, and Hamels, deGrom, Strasburg, Cole, Nola, and who knows who else are making realistic progress.

Not sure how that would compare to a snapshot of 1998 or 1984...There'll be more than that lost '80s generation of starters, for sure.

I don’t see how pitchers pitching fewer innings *couldn’t* lead to fewer guys passing a certain threshold...WAR is a counting stat after all

I'd want two or three seasons where you're viewed as one of the best (half-dozen?) in the game.

From 2007-9 he was certainly one of the best two or three pitchers in the game.

(xpost) I should have been clearer--when a Verlander or Scherzer comes along, they don't follow the prevailing trends.

He averaged > 6 WAR from 2007-2011, he was as dominant and consistent (230+ IP) as anyone in the game at his peak.

xpost

(xpost) True:

Sabathia -- 18.2
Greinke -- 18.0
Lincecum -- 17.5
Halladay -- 16.7
Santana -- 15.4
Beckett -- 14.8

I used the bWAR total for those three years (checked about a dozen pitchers...may have missed someone).

I have one foot dangling off the fence, pointing in the direction of Cooperstown.

he was as dominant and consistent (230+ IP) as anyone in the game

Consistent definitely. Dominant relative to the league--he totals 30.4 bWAR for those five years, 6.1 a year, which is a moderate HOF peak.

You're making a good case...maybe the thing that gets in the way for me is that he's only somewhat effective after the age of 31. Whether it should or shouldn't be, that's always a stumbling block for me.

Verlander's there, Greinke and Kershaw are about to be, Scherzer's close to a sure bet, Sale has a good shot, and Hamels, deGrom, Strasburg, Cole, Nola, and who knows who else are making realistic progress.

Hamels seems like at best an extreme long shot and at worst a no-brainer to be outside the HOF. His WAR is good but I don’t think any voters are gonna be inspired to look closely at him, barring a late career renaissance. He’s kinda the Ian Kinsler of hurlers.

Despite my comments CC is one of those guys who could get in and I’d be totally okay with it, he was obviously great for a period of time and while not up there with some of these guys it’s not like he’s Jack Morris. A compiler in a lot of ways but ultimately, whatever. Definitely Pettitte-like for his career but yeah, better.

What I mean by on the fence--if he gets, I'm fine with that. Honestly, I can't even get worked up about Harold Baines' induction. As I've said before, I simultaneously a) find HOF arguments extremely interesting and b) just don't care.

In relation to CC, though, I wouldn't be so quick to discount Hamels. Except for wins (huge advantage CC) and IP (ditto), Hamels has him beat in some key categories: WHIP, K/BB, ERA, ERA+, and FIP. He's just barely behind in bWAR (62.5-58.7), and--the key difference--Hamels is still pitching pretty well. Hamels is a free agent, so I don't know where (or if) he'll land, but he pitched 140 effective innings last year at age 35. His peak (2010-2014) is, as Karl Malone might say, a little less peaky than CC (27.2 bWAR, 5.4 per season), but for his career, he's been more consistent than CC.

Jaffe's assessment of CC sounds right: "...while he’s a bit short in the JAWS department, his milestones and the esteem with which he’s held will probably win the day."

http://blogs.fangraphs.com/cc-sabathias-storied-career-reaches-a-rough-ending/

Per Fangraphs, he’s as good as Glavine.

fp for bumping during a championship game

.... and not mentioning Altuve.

The Hall of Fame’s 2020 Modern Baseball Era ballot features Dwight Evans, Steve Garvey, Tommy John, Don Mattingly, Marvin Miller, Thurman Munson, Dale Murphy, Dave Parker, Ted Simmons and Lou Whitaker. Results to be announced Dec. 8 on @MLBNetwork #HOF2020 https://t.co/xlF1wuPg15 pic.twitter.com/jCrDFWqyMP

— National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum ⚾ (@baseballhall) November 4, 2019

some of the nominees deserve it by any standard (miller, whitaker, a couple borderline cases), and almost all deserve it by the harold baines standard