|
||||
|
|
Talk Sports Discuss everything that is sports-related, like MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA, MLS, NASCAR, NCAA sports and teams, trades, coaches, bad calls etc. |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools |
![]() |
#1 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Not St. Louis
Posts: 2,872
|
HOF Monitor - Players Not Yet Eligible
There are some very, very interesting numbers on this list.
In case you aren't familiar with these scores, 100+ is considered a good possibility for the Hall, and 130+ is considered a virtual cinch. The first thing that surprised me is that there were 32 players with scores of 100 or more. But here are some players in particular: 151 Larry Walker 134 Albert Belle 121 Derek Jeter 117 Todd Helton Walker is certainly a great player, but his injury issues preclude him from being considered a no-brainer for the Hall; yet the Monitor says that he is on par with Eddie Matthews and Billy Hamilton, and is an automatic inductee already. Belle only has 1700 hits and 10 full seasons, and had an OPS over .900 in 6 of those. Plus his horrid attitude will surely cost him votes, although clearly the Monitor does not reflect that. Jeter. Enough has been said about that already. Although I will say that the reason he's so high is that the Monitor gives 6 points to the regular SS on a championship team. Helton I have nothing against; I'm just surprised to see him this high so early in his career. But when he retires, he will most likely lose votes due to being the first candidate to play the majority (possibly all) of his career in Coors Field. The numbers lead to me to believe that either: A) I'm very wrong in my perceptions of a lot of these players, or B) The Monitor has some serious flaws. I'm more inclined to go with B, as evidenced by Jeter in particular as a perfect example of how World Series titles are heavily weighted. Although there's something to be said about the allure of that many titles to the voters, and perhaps James was thinking of just that when he gave them so many points. And it certainly seems to have serious problems with longevity, as evidenced by Belle and Walker. However, if you look at the list of all players, the Monitor has historically done a great job of HOF prediction. Are its flaws only now coming out? Or will it end up being correct about these players? Last edited by Dwolfson20; 05-16-2003 at 12:39 AM. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,429
|
well i think Jeters post season record will help him.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: formerly of the OTBL
Posts: 4,113
|
I don't believe any of them are Hall of Famers.
Jeter may be someday, but he's no lock. Helton I just don't see. Belle has 1,400 less at bats than Kirby Puckett (who doesn't belong). Walker too.
__________________
Draft Dodger (Anarchy: Anything goes. The Draft Dodger viewpoint.) Sophmoric[sic] Member of the OOTP Boards (It's not OOTP; it's your computer) 15 GB Webhosting for $6.95 a month IMO we are best off abandoning that sinking ship that is Off Topic to the rats infesting it and just starting a whole new Baseball Forum from scratch. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,735
|
Quote:
Now, if he plays 20 full injury free years, he's automatic, but the chances of that are against him. Just FYI, if he does play a full 20, he winds up w/ 3475 hits and about 300 hrs. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,735
|
I don't see Walker. He's getting up there, and only has 335 homers, and not even 2000 hits.
Helton, if he plays for 15 years, another 9, he is on pace to hit 1500 hits, and 300 homers max, assuming he stays in Colorado. I don't see him in there. And as for Albert Belle, I would be shocked to see him elected. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Herscher, IL
Posts: 2,457
|
Belle will be a veterans committee candidate, because the BBWAA will never elect him.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Member #3409
Posts: 8,350
|
There might be some challenges ahead for the HOF monitor. With the last 10 years and the increase in offense, that's going to make a larger number of hitters seemingly strong candidates.
Will the election committees be aware enough to make distinctions? Or will they do as they have often done, favor hitters from hitting eras and pitchers from pitching eras? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Maryland
Posts: 1,999
|
You have to remember, the Hall of Fame Monitor "attempts to assess how likely (not how deserving) an active player is to make the Hall of Fame." Bill James devised this to figure out the characteristics of current HOFers, and devise a point scale to rate players based on this. Players with some number of 100-RBI seasons have historicall made the Hall X number of times, players with some number of 20-win seasons have made the Hall Y times, etc.
Helton, Walker, Belle and others might not make the Hall in the future, but based on the standards set by the players already there, these guys are shoo-ins. Remember, the definition of a Hall of Famer is simply "one who was elected to the Hall of Fame."
__________________
For the best in O's news: Orioles' Hangout.com |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#9 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Member #3409
Posts: 8,350
|
^^^Yah, what he said too. The Monitor is based on how voters have traditionally voted players in.
But I hold out hope that the voters will get better at it, thanks to the efforts of sabremetrics. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Montréal
Posts: 7,065
|
I'm curious... any place to find the players that have the highest Monitor score that aren't in the HOF? I'm suspecting people like Rose.... but I'm just curious.
__________________
Beta Baseball. Join it! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#11 | |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 1,687
|
Quote:
The last two columns list those not yet eligible. Rose does have the highest, by a bit, but he's not in the "batting leaders not yet eligible," since, as far as anyone can tell (and hope), he'll never be eligible. The top five, both pitching and batting: 313 - Pete Rose * 279 - Randy Johnson 278 - Barry Bonds/Tony Gwynn 268 - Wade Boggs 260 - Roger Clemens Shoeless Joe is at 122, 99th all time for batters. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Montréal
Posts: 7,065
|
Thanks TotalEnd!
Watch out for Kirk Rueter.... he has an 8!
__________________
Beta Baseball. Join it! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
Minors (Triple A)
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 275
|
The HOF monitor is certainly an interesting formula and tool. But, I would hope the baseball writers don't use any sort of "formula" to determine a Hall of famer. Obviously, you have to compare stats and cruch some numbers, but I doubt there would ever be a clear cut formula to determine of HOFer, just like there is no easy formula to compare similar players and positively pick the best one. As much as baseball is a game of stats and numbers, it is also a game open to opinion.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#14 | |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Not St. Louis
Posts: 2,872
|
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,429
|
so would it be better if the hof monitor was broken into different eras like in ootp league settings.
For example deadball era, 1921-1946, 1947-1960 And then taking the top players from each era and seeing how far better than their peers they are. But as time rolls on wouldnt each era finally reach a point where no player left deserves to go. I just dont want to see a dave kingman type player from say 1920 go in cause nobodys left. But at the same time i dont wanna see the hall keep players like Gil Hodges from going in. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Sioux Falls, SD
Posts: 5,021
|
I hate they Yankees, I hate Derek Jeter, but I wouldn't be mad or suprised if he was voted in. In my opinion he plays as hard as anyone else and helped the Yankees win their Rings. If stats determined a great player then Jeter probably won't get in. If I had a vote Jeter would get mine.
Of couse what do I know? |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: formerly of the OTBL
Posts: 4,113
|
Jeter may get in because of all his intangibles.
__________________
Draft Dodger (Anarchy: Anything goes. The Draft Dodger viewpoint.) Sophmoric[sic] Member of the OOTP Boards (It's not OOTP; it's your computer) 15 GB Webhosting for $6.95 a month IMO we are best off abandoning that sinking ship that is Off Topic to the rats infesting it and just starting a whole new Baseball Forum from scratch. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Herscher, IL
Posts: 2,457
|
Glancing down that list...
Highest pitcher long forgotten is Jim McCormick, at 182. He's followed by Tony Mullane (168). Other than Rose, highest hitters that are eligible are Ryne Sandberg, at 157, and Jim Rice, at 147. Don Mattingly (134) and Steve Garvey (131) passed that 130 level but are not likely to ever make it in. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
Hall Of Famer
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: The OC
Posts: 6,357
|
One impact that I think sabermetrics has had is the understanding that each era should only have a certain number of players at each position. I still think certain players will get in as a result of being overhyped, but I think the tendency to induct lots of hitters from hitting eras and lots of pitchers from pitching eras will be reduced in the future, particularly if the negative impact of the Veterans' Committee can be reduced.
__________________
Looking for an insomnia cure? Check out my dynasty thread, The Dawn of American Professional Base Ball, 1871. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
All Star Starter
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 1,668
|
I'm really not a big fan of the idea of limiting players by era at a position.
By era in general, certainly; it's hard to make a good argument that one era of baseball history should spawn a much higher percentage of HOFers than another. But by position... sometimes there are a whole bunch of fantastic second basemen playing at around the same time. Today, it's shortstops. I'd hate to see someone's argument for Jeter in another 15 years be based on the idea that he wasn't as good as Gonzalez, Garciaparra or Tejada, so he shouldn't be allowed in. In a case like that, there needs to be some recognition that there was a cluster of great players at the same position at the same time. That tendency to put in hitters from hitters eras and pitchers from pitchers eras is going to be hard to overcome, but I hope some of the sabermatric principles have an impact on that one. Kinda funny bit there... James has talked about Darrell Evans being perhaps the single most underrated player in baseball history, and a player who should be in the Hall of Fame. Evans doesn't even come close to registering on this list, which really proves James's point.
__________________
Spielman was at one time the smartest person on these boards. http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...martest+Person I don't believe in AnotherAlias. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|