currently active players with a shot at the hall of fame

when beltre's going up for his acceptance speech everyone's gotta pat him on the head.

Utley will benefit as the SABR-friendly voters increase; def in top ten 2Bs in my opinion

Utley is still a v. good player, which is helpful because he'll need another 4-5 good seasons to impress the traditional voters. I think he's still a longshot though -- by the time he was HOF-eligible, most voters forgot how good Biggio was at his peak. If he'd retired two years earlier with ~2700 hits then he'd be a longshot too.

I think Mauer is a near lock. If he's John Olerud at first base for the next 7-8 years then he'll end up with decent career numbers, put that together with being the best catcher in baseball for nearly a decade plus an MVP award, and he should get in without a problem.

Cano's got a good chance if Seattle home park doesn't complete suppress his offense.

Pitchers will be hard to figure out. I mean how good does Verlander have to be from here out to make up for fact he won't have 300 (or maybe even 250) wins.

Cano's WAR pace is similar to Utley (and Wright) and he has even more years ahead of him. I think he'll get in.

I think it's generally accepted that pitchers get less wins than they used to, and that W-L records are increasingly meaningless.

Utley strikes as this era's Ron Santo.

Actually, I don't see Roy Halladay not getting in despite only winning 203.

I think it's generally accepted that pitchers get less wins than they used to, and that W-L records are increasingly meaningless.
--Van Horn Street

Sure but I think that just means that pitching benchmarks are just less clear.

Halladay sure but what about Santana. I mean my question is sorta what does Verlander have to do from here to be a HOF lock.

Get to around 60-70 WAR?

Because I don't buy that he already is.

That's like 30-40 WAR. So basically from 31-40 he has to put up the same #s as 22-30... Yikesz

Sorry 20-30 WAR. I guess that's not as bad.

I think Verlander and Hernandez will get around there. But 65 WAR becoming a benchmark for the Hall of Fame is harder to guess.

Hernandez farther than Verlander although I guess he's also younger. I think Felix needs at least one more Cy Young quality season for them to be be on par.

Felix is only 26!

He's 28 right now.

Or rather in 10 days he will be.

A little under three years younger than Verlander.

If the electorate is roughly split old and new, then Verlander and Hernandez are probably sitting in a similar place. Hernandez has a clear WAR advantage: 38.7 through age 27, as opposed to Verlander's 40.7 through age 30. The more traditional predictors favour Verlander, sometimes by a lot: Black Ink (46-20), Grey Ink (130-101), HOF Monitor (108-42), Cy Young Share (1.89-1.66). So above and beyond how well they pitch from here on in (which is obviously the biggest factor), where the electorate is down the road will also figure in. If it continues to inch towards new, as you would expect, Hernandez will benefit.

fWAR favors Verlander a little WAR. Also while Felix is younger they've pitched virtually the same amount of time (Verlander maybe 1/2 season more) so question is really same for each (ie when do wheels come off).

A little more than bWAR.

Just waiting for the vote:

Derek Jeter
Ichiro Suzuki
Albert Pujols

Lets see how they finish:

Carlos Beltran
CC Sabathia
Miguel Cabrera - probably not far now
David Ortiz
David Wright
Justin Verlander
Felix Hernandez
Adrian Beltre - probably not far now

Really good, but too early to really say:

Joey Votto
Joe Mauer
Dustin Pedroia
Andrew McCutchen
Mike Trout
Clayton Kershaw
Buster Posey
Prince Fielder

This is the list I worked up in a few minutes.

Fielder is probably a long shot, as you have to think the frame and injuries are just around the corner, but I'd say he's still got a shot a 500 HRs too.

Missed Robinson Cano under Let's see how they finish too. That was a pretty obvious one too.

I'd also say that Adam Dunn might end up the first player to hit 500 HRs and not get into the hall of fame for issues other than PED use. The guy is only 60 away at this point.

Subtracted WAY too early dudes (four years or less):

Carlos Beltran (I'd say he should make it, but it's really hard to say what voters will do... only real flaw is lack of monster season(s)/hardware. Does have great post-season stats though)
CC Sabathia (really all about the counting stats at this point)
Miguel Cabrera (I'd say last two years have pretty much cemented it)
David Ortiz (no way)
David Wright (can't see it either--just too much distant between him and the average HOF 3B for him to make up)
Adrian Beltre (kinda amazing how much value he's accrued--even if 1/4 of his value is defense he's still putting up very solid offense at 3B)
Joe Mauer (peak is really stellar for a catcher--I'd say he's got a decent chance)
Joey Votto (love him but late start plus 1B makes a tough sell)
Dustin Pedroia (the 2B version of Wright--except younger)
Prince Fielder (no chance)

biggest hurdle for felix will be health

xp lol no way on ortiz? is that "should" or "would"? he'll be jim rice 2.0 except with 500 homers possibly

remember reading something about how the majority of pitchers who make it to 300 get the majority of their wins after 30. it's really more about durability than talent. randy johnson only had 68 before he turned 30!

Either way you go, this potential Hall of Fame list is looking way, way smaller than when we did this kind of talk before.

Health and production is the biggest thing for all of the people on the list really.

Joey Votto - has an MVP, by the percentage new stats looks insane on some categories, won't get there on counting #s.
Joe Mauer - I think if he plays out decent in his 30s at first and stays healthy and most likely staying with one club, it could add up. He's closer than most on the list.
Dustin Pedroia - It all depends on his 30s. Keeps doing what he does, especially playing on a marquee club, it could add up.
Andrew McCutchen - has an MVP and good numbers, check back in 10 years.
Mike Trout - has put up freakish numbers, check back in 10 years.

I think the thing Big Papi has going for him though is that he is one of the bigger stars of his era and those guys seem to eventually get in somehow. Boston wins another championship and Papi has another good season along the ride, those four championships are going to have some sway. He won't have the MVP, but he could end up with #s and a resume not unlike Reggie Jackson. I'd say that guy and Stargell would be the similar players for Ortiz. If he does at 38-40 what he did at 35-37, I think it possible.
Clayton Kershaw - see above, if he stays dominant like he has through age 30 even if his arm falls off the guy will get in like Kofax or eventually Pedro.
Buster Posey - MVP+2 rings is a pretty good way to start, but long way to go.
Prince Fielder - 285 HRs at age and turns 30 in May. If he wasn't built like a squat fireplug perception might be different. The guy hasn't really missed that many games considering his size so far though, but it seems that the big guys run into a total wall between age 30-32 usually. I agree it's a total longshot.

more about durability than talent

Would be interested in putting that to the test by looking at all the 300-game winners who got more than half their wins after age 30. Randy Johnson was one of the most dominant pitchers ever from 35-38--there was a lot more than just durability with him. Even someone like Early Wynn, who was my first guess as to someone who probably just hung around until he got to 300, actually was a better pitcher after his age 30 season (3.36 ERA, 3.7 WAR/162) than before (3.86, 2.2 WAR /162). I'm sure it's true of some pitchers...Glavine?

But if you look at Johnson's last five seasons only, without which he doesn't cross 300, yes, that's true. It depends how you interpret the statement.

it's not hard to go to B-R's list of winningest pitchers and isolate their xx-29 seasons, which i just did and indeed pretty much every pitcher in the past 60 years got the majority after turning 30

It's not that I doubt that--mathematically, it's seems highly probable that a guy with a lot of career wins gets most of them after 30, unless it's someone who's winning regularly out of the gate, like Seaver--it's just that "more about durability than talent" strikes me as tautological at first glance. Putting aside the Fidryches and Priors of the world, guys with a limited amount of talent never get the chance to be durable; they're out of the league before they're 30.

seaver's wins pivoted around his age 30 season

saying "more about durability than talent" doesn't mean "durability matters and talent doesn't"

"xp lol no way on ortiz? is that "should" or "would"? he'll be jim rice 2.0 except with 500 homers possibly"

I mean he's not even 2/3s as good as Edgar. I don't see how he gets more consideration in any kind of rational world.

have you watched espn at any point over the last 10 years

"rational"

i mean a couple years ago he seemed like a no-chancer but he's got a third ring now and a couple more ortiz-like years under his belt, and he could definitely get the "most feared hitter of his era" comment over and over again if it came down to it

meanwhile edgar has "fourth most famous mariner in the 90s", bbwaa doesn't give a shit

I think you're both right, you're just looking at it two different ways. Edgar was the better hitter and more deserving. But, for the reasons zach mentions, Ortiz seems far more likely to be inducted. Although, as I said on another thread, I think Edgar's non-induction will be a lingering obstacle for Ortiz; there will always be a block of voters who won't vote for Ortiz knowing that Edgar hasn't gone in first.

1) he's a dh so there'll always be voters who won't give him the time of day.
2) he's not even the best eligible dh so there'll always be a sabermetric voting block that's down on him.
3) his stats are really not that great.

i dunno about #3. HOF or no, he has some solid career stats. i certainly would not describe it as "not that great".

I think his stats are great, just not all-time great and the HOF is no lock nor necessary deserved at this stage. still he's a really impressive hitter and I think he will get bonus points for the postseason.

Ortiz's election is all but a certainty after last year.

#3 I meant to say he's not a historically great hitter. He's probably one of the best 100 hitters ever, but considering thats the only value he brings to the table I don't think that qualifies as "that great". Certainly there are plenty of even contemporary dudes with similar offensive #s who actually played a position who won't get much consideration.

With less groomed facial hair though...

The other thing you can't discount is the PED association. (I just read up on it again--Ortiz's association is cloudy, but it's there.) If Bagwell and Piazza are having a hard time merely because of suspected use--two guys who would otherwise be first-ballot automatic--will the voters choose a DH to break precedent?

You guys are somehow overlooking that he has three rings and a million big postseason hits.

A lot of voters think that Andy Pettitte is a HOF'er because of the rings and his postseason record. They're more than happy to overlook the PED's if the right narrative is there. And Pettitte wasn't even that good in the regular or postseason.

they're willing to overlook it if the player doesn't strike anyone as a typical bagwellesque roider, eg non-firethrowing SPs

and pettitte was worth 68 fWAR!

Did any of you guys happen to look at what the "average shortstop" was doing in 1989? Trammel's 85 OPS+ was like 9th in the entire league. It's easy to be like oh well that WAR #s inflated until you look and realize that those numbers were still probably miles and miles better than what a replacement would put up. Trammel also had six years where he was OPS+ 130+. Rollins has exactly zero.

Rollins is POS not HOF

Trammell's peak years were better than Rollins', no question. It's his value in his subpar seasons (which was half of his career) that I'm not sure about.

He might have been better than a replacement level shortstop in 1989, which is important if I'm building a team in 1989. But how does it support his HOF case? He had a bad season, but the quality of shortstop talent in the AL just happened to bottom out, so suddenly it's a season worthy of an all-time great player?

"But how does it support his HOF case?"

Because he played and accumulated value (would point out that in most of these down years Trammel's def was still pretty strong according to the stats.) Anyway even setting aside career WAR, Trammel's 7YR peak and JAWS case are very good.

i like rollins, but no way is he going into the HOF. his peak wasn't nearly peaky enough, and it was too short.

i'm having fun looking for players who might have a shot at 3000 in the future (besides the obv ALTUVE!!!!) and BR makes it easy by listing current age, tho they only go to 100

2. Alex Rodriguez (20, 38) 2939
3. Ichiro Suzuki (14, 40) 2844
4. Adrian Beltre (17, 35) 2604
5. Manny Ramirez (19, 42) 2574
6. Albert Pujols (14, 34) 2519

manny probably won't make it! a-rod and pujols are virtual locks and i'm guessing ichiro really wants it and some team is going to keep humoring him until he crawls in there. i'd love to see beltre make it which seems totally possible right now.

12. Jimmy Rollins (15, 35) 2306
13. Miguel Cabrera (12, 31) 2186

barring disaster cabrera should make it. he looks v young next to everyone around him. rollins is also younger than everyone else down to #18 but i still don't think he gets in.

19. Carl Crawford (13, 32) 1868
22. Robinson Cano (10, 31) 1836
24. Jose Reyes (12, 31) 1772
25. David Wright (11, 31) 1702

crawford is the second youngest in the top 20 but will not make it. cano has to be the most likely under 2000 to make it, and his hit totals haven't declined at all. totally possible reyes can get there if he somehow becomes very healthy. that won't happen to wright! ha! mets!

29. Adrian Gonzalez (11, 32) 1635
32. Nick Markakis (9, 30) 1547

markakis is a very dark horse but he's the youngest out of anyone with over 1500 hits, and many of his BR comps have aged well. he's extremely healthy with the exception of one freak injury and his hit totals have been consistent. there was also a point where it looked like johnny damon would sneak in.

43. Hanley Ramirez (10, 30) 1403
44. Prince Fielder (10, 30) 1389
46. Dustin Pedroia (9, 30) 1371
54. Ryan Zimmerman (10, 29) 1326
59. Ryan Braun (8, 30) 1297
63. Billy Butler (8, 28) 1273
64. Melky Cabrera (10, 29) 1262

it is possible that one person here ends up with 3,000 hits and it won't be billy butler

79. Delmon Young (9, 28) 1115

i had no idea about this

90. Justin Upton (8, 26) 1039

who knew jupton was only 26? he's averaged 150 hits his last 3 years so i don't think it'll happen

looking beyond that on FG so i'm probably missing someone:
McCutchen 28/986
Andrus 26/959
Starlin 25/846
Freeman 25/656
Heyward 25/644
ALTUVE! 25/630
Stanton 25/619
Trout 23/572

some contenders for sure, but the only one we can really feel certain about is altuve

ofc in 20 years the BBWAA will be filled with sabermetric robots who won't care about a figure as glorious as 3000 hits but let's keep dreaming while we're still young and beautiful

i don't think ichiro's gonna make it (which of course shouldn't matter in the long run)

kinda love nick markakis, but yeah i don't see it

You know I love to talk about this stuff...A-Rod's a lock if he has a job, but that's a big if. Pujols should cruise along at this new, mortal-like level for a few more years, so yes. Beltre, Cabrera, and Cano, yes. Crawford had a good jump up till the age of 25, but he just doesn't play enough anymore--no chance. The Favorite Toy doesn't count David Wright out--12% chance. Obviously he'd have to bounce back to his 2009-10 levels, with a few All-Star years mixed in. McCutchen calculates to 17%. It's almost like his talents are too broad-based to make a run at 3,000--he's too good a player, in an odd sort of way. I think the Trout fellow will make it, even though he's only 24% by the Favorite Toy (Crawford was 28% after his age-25 season). Which, by the way, estimates career length very conservatively. It gives Trout 10 more years. Does anyone expect Mike Trout to retire at the age of 34?

2) Projected seasons remaining for the player. This is calculated by the formula (24 - .6(age)). Any player still playing regularly has a minimum of 1.5 seasons remaining, regardless of age.

seems like this part could use a bit of work

lincecum still has a 22% chance of 3000 strikeouts!!

(xpost) I'd be interested in reading James's thoughts on that now (the formula was developed in the late '70s). I think he'd probably say "No, you still have to use a conservative calculation," and would then proceed to explain why in a way that made sense. (E.g., that anything less conservative would produce an expected number of 3,000 hit guys way out of line with reality.) Intuitively, though, with all the money that's thrown at players these days, I would think some adjustment for extending expected career length would be in order.

Checking the odds for 3000 strike outs, CC Sabathia still has 32% chance per James' projection tool. Which is better than Peavy's 20%.

Hernandez would have an insane 15% chance of 4000. Kershaw, 24%.

had no idea peaves had so many strikeouts

I checked in other pitchers for 3000 K.

Strasburg: 27%
Bumgarner: 37%
Sale: 29%
Lester: 26%
Darvish: 16%
Scherzer: 37%

Price: 33%
Cueto: 13%
Greinke: 35%
Hamels: 44% =o
Wainwright: 4% :(
Burnett: 27%
Gio: 15%
Verlander: 40%

i feel like Hamels is a far better pitcher than people give him credit for.

really surprised FG never gave him a 5.0 + WAR season. His best season came in 2011 with 4.6.

BR is much nicer to him, two 6.6 seasons (2014, 2011) an one 5.4 (2010).

and then two 4.6 seasons – which is the max FG gives him.

A real longshot: Adrian Gonzalez. Only one mention on this thread (in a list). He's 32, coming off a good year where he'll get some MVP support.

--will probably end up with 350-400 HR
--currently at .292/.364/.499
--a couple of league titles: hits in 2011, RBI last year
--6 MVP finishes so far (highest: 4th in 2010)
--38.2 WAR right now; may end up around 60, but would have to keep playing well
--considered one of the best defensive first baseman, no?

The thing that hurts him is that 7 of his 9 full-time years have been in San Diego and L.A. His one year in Boston was excellent. For his career, he's .283/.360/.462 at home, .301/.368/.535 on the road. Even the second set of numbers would leave him on the fence for a first baseman, but there'd be a reasonable case. If you were to add those to some hitter-friendly home numbers, I think you'd be hearing a lot about his HOF chances.

If nothing else, he should linger on the ballot for a few years.

From his comp list, Hrbek and Will Clark work well; Palmeiro's on there too, and though I don't doubt that makes sense in terms of adjusted rate stats, Palmeiro piled up numbers in a way the other three didn't.

A better comp would be Fred McGriff. They have nearly the same slash stats and OPS+, a few top ten MVP finishes, similar reputations as v. good but not spectacular HR/RBI men for winning clubs. McGriff is a fringe candidate though. AGon would have to average about 25 HR/90 RBI until age 40 just to pull even with McGriff on counting stats.

In terms of raw numbers, he's good too. They're not on each other's BR comp list because of era-adjustment, presumably--McGriff's comps are better. But yeah, if McGriff's at 12% and dropping, Gonzalez doesn't have a chance.

If Adrian Gonzalez gets to around 63 WAR (which is possible) then yeah I'd back him to go in.

idk adrian's a good player (and was great for a brief spell) but i don't think he gets in and if he did he probably wouldn't deserve it based on how he'll likely perform moving forward.

For some reason I thought he was at 43 WAR, but nope, he is at 34 WAR and has less than 10 years to go (most probably). I doubt he reaches the necessary production indeed, unless he finds a surge.

If Adrian Gonzalez gets to around 63 WAR (which is possible) then yeah I'd back him to go in.

― Van Horn Street, Sunday, November 2, 2014 4:20 PM (14 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

for any reason other than "63 WAR"?

63 is a beautiful number.

Actually it's that 63 WAR would put in the top 20 all time for 1st baseman. It's not the end all of his value, but it's a strong enough indication for me that he would deserve a hall of fame, no matter how he gets there (defense, power, average, a combination of all). GG and MVP are not something a trust enough at the moment.

it just seems like a p low dividing line to me, and i'm just growing more and more suspicious of using WAR as a dividing line anyway

MVP voting trends are meaningful. In a single year there might be Shannon Stewart-style anomalies in the MVP voting, but if someone consistently finished in the top 10 during their prime, it's almost certain they were a great player. (yeah, there are rare exceptions like Ryan Howard)

Kershaw is now ninth on the career list of Cy Young shares at 3.34; another full share (which could theoretically happen next year) would move him into fourth place, behind Clemens, Johnson, and Maddux (and just ahead of Pedro). He should end up there within two or three seasons, but catching Clemens (7.66) and Johnson (6.50) will be tough. He's also up to 92 on James's HOF monitor, just shy of the 100 that would make him a "likely HOFer." (I'm not sure if that was ever adjusted during the PED era--if not, it's predictive value is less than it would have been when it was devised in the mid-'80s; pitchers, I think, are short-changed.)

Trout, meanwhile, at the age of 22, is 67th on the MVP-share list at 2.39; he's already passed Ripken, Koufax, Yaz, Winfield, and many other HOFers. And he's up to 65 on the HOF monitor.

i wanna say kershaw is already a probable but i would've said that about johan (12th in CY shares) before 2009 too

he was older when he started to be good but pitchers can drop off or get injured for life at any moment

Sure--or Gooden after the '88 season, maybe even '90; the red flags were there, but I think the general feeling was that he'd continue to pitch well enough to eventually end up in the HOF. Verlander, Sabathia, you never know.

One other thing about Trout. The HOF Monitor originally had a 70-100 score as the gray area; most people in that range didn't make it, but some did. (As standards go up and inclusion gets tougher, I'm not sure you'll see any players in that range get inducted anytime soon, if ever again.) So, as originally devised, Trout is 5 points shy of the gray area. At age 22.

Chase Utley is above a good bunch of 2B HOF in JAWS: Alomar, Biggio, Doerr, Gordon, Lazzeri. Still slighty under the HOF average.

I think he was on track for a protracted Blyleven/Raines debate before this year, but unless he comes back, I'd say no chance now (i.e., in terms of how the vote will actually go).

he's actively diminishing his case with every game played

he still has those two deserved MVPs he didn't win.

He had the peak part of his resume taken care of by 2009; except for Hornsby, Morgan, and Robinson, I doubt there's a second baseman who can match his 2005-09 run. (I guess the two ancient guys too, Lajoie and Collins.) The problem is, there's not much else. If he were to not play past this year, he'd finish with 1,600 hits, and that's a non-starter.

he still has those two deserved MVPs he didn't win.

let no one say a morbs is not magnanimous

not when ppl suggest Jimmy fucking Rollins is worthier

aw