Home | Webstore
Latest News: OOTP 26 Available - FHM 11 Available - OOTP Go! Available

Out of the Park Baseball 26 Buy Now!

  

Go Back   OOTP Developments Forums > Out of the Park Developments > Talk Sports

Talk Sports Discuss everything that is sports-related, like MLB, NFL, NHL, NBA, MLS, NASCAR, NCAA sports and teams, trades, coaches, bad calls etc.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-16-2003, 12:36 AM   #1
Dwolfson20
Hall Of Famer
 
Dwolfson20's Avatar
 
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.
Dwolfson20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 12:55 AM   #2
BaseballMan
Hall Of Famer
 
BaseballMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 6,429
well i think Jeters post season record will help him.
BaseballMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 01:00 AM   #3
Draft Dodger
Hall Of Famer
 
Draft Dodger's Avatar
 
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.
Draft Dodger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 01:04 AM   #4
dbacks
Hall Of Famer
 
dbacks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 2,735
Quote:
Originally posted by BaseballMan
well i think Jeters post season record will help him.
And just reputation. I mean if he plays 15 full injury free years career, he's on pace to get only 2800 hits if that, and maybe 230 homers tops, and as he gets older, his hitting ability will drop, too. That 2800 hits and 220 homers is assuming he stays 28-29 for the next 7 years.

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.
dbacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 01:08 AM   #5
dbacks
Hall Of Famer
 
dbacks's Avatar
 
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.
dbacks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 12:29 PM   #6
blubbla
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.
blubbla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 01:05 PM   #7
Gastric ReFlux
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?
Gastric ReFlux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 01:26 PM   #8
CBL-Commish
All Star Starter
 
CBL-Commish's Avatar
 
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
CBL-Commish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 01:31 PM   #9
Gastric ReFlux
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.
Gastric ReFlux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 10:33 PM   #10
Long_Long_Name
Hall Of Famer
 
Long_Long_Name's Avatar
 
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!
Long_Long_Name is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 10:54 PM   #11
TotalEnd98
All Star Starter
 
TotalEnd98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 1,687
Quote:
Originally posted by Long_Long_Name
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.
http://www.baseball-reference.com/le..._monitor.shtml

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.
TotalEnd98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 11:04 PM   #12
Long_Long_Name
Hall Of Famer
 
Long_Long_Name's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Montréal
Posts: 7,065
Thanks TotalEnd!

Watch out for Kirk Rueter.... he has an 8!
__________________
Beta Baseball. Join it!
Long_Long_Name is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 11:32 PM   #13
slackmeisterPA
Minors (Triple A)
 
slackmeisterPA's Avatar
 
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.
slackmeisterPA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 11:35 PM   #14
Dwolfson20
Hall Of Famer
 
Dwolfson20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Not St. Louis
Posts: 2,872
Quote:
Originally posted by CBL-Commish
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."
I did indeed keep that in mind, but I feel that in the near future the Hall of Fame voters will realize the offensive age that is occurring and be less likely to vote in people like Walker and Belle. This will lead to the Monitor becoming less and less relevant, unless James somehow tweaks it to reflect present trends. And anyway, I don't think you can say that Belle is already in by the previous standards set, let alone a shoo-in. Since when does 1700 hits guarantee a player entry into the Hall?
__________________
Dwolfson20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-2003, 11:43 PM   #15
BaseballMan
Hall Of Famer
 
BaseballMan's Avatar
 
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.
BaseballMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2003, 02:32 AM   #16
JWay
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?
JWay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2003, 10:15 AM   #17
Draft Dodger
Hall Of Famer
 
Draft Dodger's Avatar
 
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.
Draft Dodger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2003, 12:31 PM   #18
blubbla
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.
blubbla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-17-2003, 02:43 PM   #19
Eckstein 4 Prez
Hall Of Famer
 
Eckstein 4 Prez's Avatar
 
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.
Eckstein 4 Prez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-18-2003, 06:23 PM   #20
Spielman
All Star Starter
 
Spielman's Avatar
 
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.
Spielman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:34 PM.

 

Major League and Minor League Baseball trademarks and copyrights are used with permission of Major League Baseball. Visit MLB.com and MiLB.com.

Officially Licensed Product – MLB Players, Inc.

Out of the Park Baseball is a registered trademark of Out of the Park Developments GmbH & Co. KG

Google Play is a trademark of Google Inc.

Apple, iPhone, iPod touch and iPad are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries.

COPYRIGHT © 2023 OUT OF THE PARK DEVELOPMENTS. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

 

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright © 2024 Out of the Park Developments