hall of fame, next vote...

Nobody who had their prime years with the Rockies has been elected though! We really don't know what it's going to take. That said, Arenado plays in a weaker offensive era, with the humidor, and is a plus plus defender at a premium position. There's really no good comparison with any past Rockies superstar.

the Rockies thing is tough because there were certainly a lot of not-great dudes who put up huge numbers, but i think each case is different. Helton was basically a mile-high Mattingly, to an extent. Probably a HOFer if he had a longer peak but i don't know that his admittedly ridiculous numbers during that peak make him a HOFer any more than Don. But he was genuinely great.

Bichette was a horrible defender and didn't walk much and was basically just a guy who could hit the ball hard, which allowed him to put up huge numbers in Denver. I'm still amazed his career WAR was only what Mike Trout put up well before the all star break this season.

I recalled that Galarraga was a good defender but a quick look tells me he was also lousy, didn't walk much, but he was an outstanding hitter. His success in Atlanta and Texas after leaving Colorado indicates he had the skills to hit anywhere. His best WAR seasons were in Montreal and Atlanta, despite those eye-popping seasons with the Rockies in the '90s.

Castilla was actually a pretty decent defender and had some real power, but when he left Denver he did just turn from a 40 HR guy to a 20 HR guy. When he returned to the Rockies after stints in Houston and Atlanta and TB he immediately had a season w/35 HR and led the league w/131 RBI.

Ellis Burks was really good before he went to Colorado and really good after. And that one epic season he had in '96 was across-the-board excellent. He was regular Ellis on the road, which means very good and not below average. At home he just happened to turn into Ted Williams.

then there were all those other guys like Garrett Atkins (whom i completely forgot existed until just now), Preston Wilson, Jeffrey Hammonds, etc guys who had these seasons that anywhere else would be actually impressive but just didn't make anyone notice them (rightly or wrongly.)

Tulo and Holliday were excellent in their prime, I think the latter in particular probably gained a lot of career rep for his fine run in St. Louis.

Walker was definitely the best Rockies player in franchise history and a clear HOFer imo, with Helton a solid second place. There's a reason the top ten adjusted OPS in franchise history has only three players on it: Walker (5 times), Helton (4), and Tulo (1).

But all of those guys above, I think they were all good *hitters* (even Bichette had some solid stats just in terms of swinging the bat as a part-timer in Cincy and Boston at the end of his career.)

Anyway, this has been rambling and long-winded but I suspect Arenado is an interesting case going forward because he's clearly good, and he's only 27. But I do think people might look at the road stats he's put up and wonder: (.263/.318/.469/.787) I don't think that's right in his case, but it'll happen.

Excellent post, thanks--thoughtful explanations are always more interesting to me than corny internet one-line dismissals.

Arenado seems to be on his way to being a generational fielder, in which case his home/road splits probably won't matter as much: Brooks Robinson glove plus a solid, park-assisted offensive line will be enough. Again, I think Helton's support will be relevant. Jim Edmonds didn't get past the first ballot with his highlight-reel defense and solid, era-assisted offensive line (bad timing, mind you, with an overly crowded ballot).

Hadn't thought about Schilling as a possible blueprint for where Kluber could go--Schilling had really had only the one excellent season (1992) before he was 29. Good comp.

Dave Stewart is a starter that did not get good until his 30s. Was mostly a reliever earlier in his career. Pretty nuts that the pitched over a 1000 innings from 1987 to 90.

With regards to the late start, definitely--his breakthrough season didn't happen till he was 30. I'm sure you'd agree that he doesn't fit with Kluber/Schilling in terms of how dominant he was, though--I think of him more as a good-not-great pitcher who was in the right place at the right time (albeit a better pitcher than Bob Welch in 1990; both were far behind Clemens). Probably one of the last guys with that kind of inning count, no?

Stewart had those four consecutive 20-win seasons and the last of them was the best: lowest ERA, 11 CG, 4 shutouts, and then he fell apart (he did start for a Blue Jays world series champ but he doesn't appear to have been the reason they went all the way, to be kind about it.)

Those innings caught up with him, or maybe it was age. Either way, you wonder what he could have done if he'd been given a more extended shot as a starter a lot earlier, as opposed to the single season in which he was primarily in the rotation. He was a bit of a minor legend though, clearly the best of the A's starters during the Bash Brothers era (though Moore and Welch had their moments.)

Randy Johnson is a possibly decent comp for Kluber, though Johnson got an even later start as a HOF-level talent. Though he did have several seasons of weird dominance prior to that, in which he'd strike out a lot of dudes, have an ERA somewhere in the high 3s, and walk 150 guys in 200 innings. One reason I think Kluber has a somewhat decent shot is he's on an outstanding team, which means his win totals have been very good (18 wins three times, 20 wins once in the last five years), and if he pitches close to this level for 3-4 more seasons and then peters out in the natural decline way, he might clear 200 wins. That plus the two Cy Young awards could do it.

BUT we're talking about pitchers, and these guys can turn into a pumpkin overnight.

Dodgers had so many good arms in that era, it was probably pretty tough to get through. They cut bait on a bunch of good pitchers early that got better or healthy and productive.

Lasorda wrecked more than a couple HOF-level ace arms back then. it was good Pedro got out early.

there were a few current WAR leader dudes who will probably get a handful of votes tossed their way before they drop off the ballot: Kinsler, Granderson, Wright, Zobrist, McCutchen, Adrian Gonzalez, Tulo, Holliday. Beyond McCutchen, who actually won one, all of those guys had seasons where they could have justifiably finished in the top 5 in MVP balloting.

Kinsler has been overshadowed by other players his whole career, and his low profile probably also comes from playing in Texas, Detroit, and Anaheim, but he's been one of the better second basemen in baseball history. Outstanding defender, very good hitter.

Granderson started out kind of as a poor man's Sizemore and wound up being a lot better than that (and a lot better than Sizemore, in the long run.)

Wright was a HOFer at his peak, it's a shame those injuries derailed him.

Zobrist was shockingly great with Tampa Bay, and two of his three Cubs seasons have been very good, but he'll never make it in.

McCutchen seems to be beyond done as a star player, after his age 28 season he's been pretty average. Also, maybe it seems like he wasn't as good a defender as I thought he was?

Gonzalez was supposed to become a perennial 40+ homer guy once he escaped San Diego, but he just continued to be a very good hitter. I still can't believe he caught so much shit from Boston media during a season in which he hammered the hell out of the ball, but...it's Boston.

Tulo is the present-day version of Garciaparra, with the added unfair mile high caveats added in.

Holliday was never a particularly exciting hitter, just a really good one. Like I said upthread, he's one of a tiny fraction of guys who put up huge numbers in Colorado who went on to prove himself elsewhere over an extended period of time.

If I had to vote for a single one of those guys, it would be Kinsler, since he may still have something left in the tank and he's a Bobby Grich equivalent in a lot of ways.

Yeah I wonder how many good not great seasons McCutchen as in him, I can see him compiling enough 2/3 war seasons to be a Hall of Fame player over the next 5-6 years but maybe I'm just being optimistic (as always).

One guy whose HOF chances I like is Simmons. Narratives count for a lot in how journalists see a hall of famer and as we all know Simmons is putting ridiculous defensive numbers through his first 1000 games. Those numbers have already been confirmed by junk awards so it's not like he is some sort of secretly great defensive player, even the dinosaurs are aware of him. I know the current shortstop crop is ripe with potential hall of famers but if Simmons end up being the one with the best defensive stats and has hit enough to have an average bat I think he is in.

Three years ago, I might've put McCutchen in the good-bet category--at the very least, building-a-case. He seems to have fallen so far since then, although his last few seasons haven't been disastrous or anything--he's remained steady in the .800 OPS range. Yet I never thought to include him this time. He seems like a blueprint of the old-fashioned, peak-at-27 kind of player, followed by a slow slide where he moves around a bit. I'd call him a probably-not at the moment.

I think Garciaparra was a much better player than Tulowitzki. I'm heavily biased by his stellar career as a Blue Jay (where, last I heard, he was still engaged in "baseball-related activities"--tabletop baseball, card collecting, etc.).

I can't see any kind of HOF path for the Zobrist/Kinsler type of player. Their value, which is obvious, is just too tied in with their versatility, and statistically with all the sabermetric stuff that doesn't translate to black ink. Every team wants them, and they won't be forgotten (like we haven't forgotten Gene Tenace or Amos Otis...what do you mean, "Who's Gene Tenace"?).

Simmons has hit well the past two or three years, so maybe, but the only defense-first people I can think of post-war are Ozzie, Brooks Robinson, Aparacio, and, the most obvious, Mazeroski. The first three at least had "counting-stats" (god, I hate that term) in their offensive lines, and they were better than that. Andruw Jones may not last past a second ballot.

simmons is probably the best defensive SS since...vizquel at least? if he’s an average-to-20%-above average hitter for the next 5 years I think he makes a really strong case

Simmons' defensive WAR rating on baseball reference is already 25.3 after 7 seasons, Vizquel reached 29.5 in 24(!) seasons, holy crap i didn't realize he played for that long.

Simmons total bWAR: 34.9
Vizquel total bWAR: 45.6

Simmons is still only 29, won't turn 30 til September. he's making a really good case so far, yeah, and i hope his defense keeps up as he ages.

one thing I notice is that Simmons has never played in an allstar game. Smith played in 15, Robinson 18, Maz 8... even Omar made it three times. I know it really has little to do with how good he is – but if a guy can't stand out enough from his peers to earn a single all star appearance (so far), i'm not sure i like his odds (as it stands now) at getting the votes he'd need (and again before someone tears into me - this isn't meant to denigrate his talent).
another outside factor is that Simmons hasn't had the chance to really show off his stuff in a world series. Smith won a WS five years into his career and got the NLCS MVP a few years after that. all of which, again, is little to do with talent, but a lot to do with fame/name recognition etc.

the all-star thing is a good point, seems weird that he hasn’t made one yet given how good he’s been, but for some reason it doesn’t seem like he’s known by non-saber types as an all-time defender like smith or jones...I guess he doesn’t have the flashiness that would make that necessary. he also plays in the AL now and there is a surfeit of great young SSs, but I bet he’ll make a couple at least

By the time Simmons gets on the ballot--15 years from now, let's say--defense will be much better understood, and that'll be a big thing in his favour. But Thermo has a basic point right--to make the Hall of Fame, with few exceptions I can think of, you have to make some kind of a dent on the public consciousness (the All-Star Game is one example of that). Brooks Robinson did that, especially after the 1970 World Series. Ozzie Smith did that: there was back-flip video and "Go crazy, folks" (not defense-related, but part of his legend). Mazeroski had the walk-off HR (ditto). Aparicio I don't know that well...I'm not saying that's right, or that Simmons won't be deserving. It's just the way it is. He still has lots of time to become better known, but one way or another, that'll have to happen.

I think you're at a point where WAR can rule someone out of the HOF, but it's not an automatic pass in. I very much doubt, after Morris, whether any non-reliever with a career WAR under 60 will make the HOF. Anyone under, it's a red flag for voters to take a closer look and flaws will be exposed. Morris was the last guy where a certain mindset had taken hold of enough older voters--"Jack Morris, future HOF'er"--that he eked in, barely. That won't happen again.

But if you're a 60+ player, maybe even a 70+ player who, for whatever reason, has played in the shadows, I don't think you're automatic, not yet.

going by bWAR here -- Ichiro is a tiny bit below 60 but he's a first ballot guy. Ortiz is in the mid-50s and seems like a reasonably safe bet to eventually make it, i do think the caveats about his PED issue are actually caveats *against* the alleged result that lean more in his favor towards "innocent until proven guilty," vs someone like Sosa, who is not going to be getting in anytime soon.

Simmons might be a guy like Beltre, who built his case slowly over time until the tail end of his career when people talked about him as a future HOFer. I'm talking about him like he's retired, i hope not...

I should have checked that--Ichiro and Ortiz are going in. (As a 27-year-old rookie and a career DH, they're both kind of special cases.) So let me say that that 60-WAR threshold will go into effect sometime soon...in the next 5-10 years. It'll just happen; there won't be an announcement.

I don't think it'll be that simple because you'll always have Big Hall voters who will stump for candidates below whatever the threshold is.

Just making an estimate of what the unspoken threshold will be...Even that's not the right wording. Individual voters won't even be thinking about a threshold; I just don't think that, voting as a group, any player under 60 is going to inducted at a rapidly approaching point. (If WAR hangs around, that is--that could also be discarded at some point for something else.)

Gonzalez was supposed to become a perennial 40+ homer guy once he escaped San Diego, but he just continued to be a very good hitter.

Meant to respond to Gonzalez. I've posted about this before: among active players (not sure if he'll be back next year), I can't think of anyone who's been hurt more by his home parks, his one year in Fenway aside. (Reminiscent of Piazza's L.A./N.Y. career. They both have an identical 91/108 tOPS+ split on Baseball Reference, which proportionally quantifies their overall home/road split.) For his career, almost all of which has been spent in San Diego and L.A.:

Home: 972 games, .277/.351/.451, 129 HR
Away: 957 games, .296/.364/.517, 188 HR

His full season in Fenway was huge, and he finished 7th in MVP voting. He's basically the opposite of a Coors field hitter. If you simply doubled his away totals, he'd still be short of the HOF. But if you took his away totals and added them to career totals for a favorable home park (or parks), who knows--you might be looking at 400 HR and a career slash line of .300/.370/.530. For a post-PED first baseman, he'd at least have a shot.

Wanted to give that a try...I thought Carlos Gonzalez might be a decent match for Adrian--take Carlos's home stats, pro-rate them to match Adrian's games-played, add them to Adrian's actual road stats, and you might get a rough idea of what Adrian's career would look like if he'd been a career Rockie. As it turns out, Adrian is the much better hitter in neutral parks:

Adrian - .296/.364/.517 (957 games)
Carlos - .251/.307/.420 (664 games)

So if anything, this probably shortchanges Adrian.

Carlos at home, pro-rated to 972 games (matching Adrian's career total at home):

AB-3562/H-1150/2B-256/3B-42/HR-207/BB-338/R-706/RBI-723

If you take all that (plus peripheral categories I haven't listed) and add them to Adrian's road totals, here's where he'd be at for his career:

AB - 7205
H - 2230
2B - 487
3B - 47
HR - 395
BB - 726
R - 1259
RBI - 1392
BA - .310
OBP - .373
SLG - .555
OPS - .928

Would that be enough for the HOF? Probably not. His career OPS, unadjusted, would be just outside the top 40, but he'd still be light on HR and RBI for a first baseman. If you factor in that he's a better hitter than Carlos, and his home totals would likely be even better, possibly.

How does this half-hypothetical career compare to Helton's actual career?

Helton: .316/.414/.539, 369 HR, 1406 RBI (2247 games)
Adrian: .310/.373/.555, 395 HR, 1392 RBI (1929 games)

Pretty close. Helton was better at getting on base, a little more power from Adrian. Helton's prime, though, was during the height of the PED-boom; Adrian doesn't start playing full-time until 2006, by which time things were starting to settle down.

So if you think Helton belongs in the HOF, I'd say that Gonzalez, playing in more favorable parks, would have been right there with him. And if you don't think Gonzalez belongs in the HOF, I think you'd have conclude that Helton doesn't belong there either, after adjusting for park and era.

Rizzo seems to be a similar hitter as Gonzales for someone playing now.

Helton's numbers in his 20s are lunacy by any measure.

I still think the best comparable to Helton is Donnie Baseball, both had these eye-popping and very brief peaks after which their power evaporated and they became Mark Grace types. I don’t think their peaks quite get them in the HOF, unless you’re making the peak era argument, in which case they both have the numbers to bolster your defense.

WAR and OPS+ for Mattingly-prime and Helton-prime are pretty close (slight edge to Helton).

Paul Goldschmidt is another player that is similar to Adrian Gonzalez to age 29-30.

sure, let's put a guy who received a lifetime ban from baseball into the hall before marvin miller

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DrQt9yHX4AECuCP.jpg:small

none of those dudes should go in, except maybe will clark for being a hall of fame asshole

davey johnson was a good manager, but i suppose you have to win more than one pennant

Will Clark was pretty great in the late '80s in a low-offense environment; like McGriff, he kind of got overtaken by circumstances through the '90s. Belle's probably the best player on that list, but he comes with a caveat or twelve.

clark was one of my favorite players when i started collecting baseball cards ('88, '89). he almost led the league in average in 1989, behind only tony gwynn, and he had much more power.

since i'm talking 1989 - howard johnson threatened 40/40!!

Joe Carter makes Jim Rice look like Joe DiMaggio and he was pretty terrible for about half his career, i mean he is absurdly underqualified for the HOF.

Harold Baines was a really good hitter but i mean not that good. he just stuck around for a million years and almost got to 3000 hits.

If Albert Belle didn't have a shortened career he'd have an extremely good case. As it is, I figure a lot of sportswriters will be happy they don't have to dig too deep for a reason to not vote for the guy. As it stands, he had a terrifyingly fearsome peak. But it was only 5 or 6 seasons.

Will Clark was an amazing douchebag, but for several years he looked like a definite HOFer. He seemed to arrive as this fully formed power hitter with the best swing in MLB, but by the time he was 25 he'd already peaked. He didn't really become a poor hitter, he just put up Mark Grace numbers instead of what he'd done before. Some of that was due to injury, though. He had a couple of seasons at the end of his career that were in line with what he accomplished in SF, but by that time he was ready to retire. I think the '90s offensive explosion really diminished his legacy but he was great.

Hershiser is another lost pitcher of the '80s, arguably another arm lost to Lasorda, and obviously a guy talented enough during his best seasons to make a strong case that he's better than a lot of pitchers already in the HOF but I don't think he deserves it. I figure Morris may be lowering that bar enough for someone like him to slip in, I guess. Hershiser was better than him, at least. An actual example of a pitcher everyone thought was a HOFer when they witnessed him, as opposed to the possibly apocryphal stories about Jack.

Without checking (I might be forgetting somebody obvious), my recollection is that Clark was the consensus choice as the game's best first baseman between peak-Mattingly and the emergence of Thomas/Bagwell. McGriff was there with him as a hitter, but Clark was viewed as the more complete player.

another lost pitcher of the '80s

There are so many of them, starting with Stieb. The Stieb/Fernando/Gooden/Viola/Hershiser/Soto/Saberhagen generation. Plus a few more.

orel looks pretty good next to morris and catfish hunter, but yeah

will clark's numbers are not a great deal better than jack clark's, and no one ever accused the latter of being a hall of famer (except for when he played against the pirates)

Not a Hall of Famer, but he was pretty damn good. He was one of a group of players I associate with the early Abstracts, players of whom James was always saying that fans have no idea how good this guy is--Bobby Grich, Gene Tenace, Darrell Evans, Brian Downing, Jack Clark. His 1987 season was huge (helped along by a league-wide offensive blip).

Am I an idiot? I don’t remember a Soto.

mario soto, cincinnati reds

did he succumb to injuries? he had 4 straight years of ~250 innings, then poof, out of the majors at age 32

Mario Soto was incredible, he had a couple of massive years.

I also remember Steve Rogers and John Candelaria.

Along with Stieb, probably the best pitcher in baseball from '80 to '84. He went 5/-/9/2/6 in Cy Young voting, and the year he didn't place, the strike year, he was 12-9 (which I mention out of habit), 3.29, with very good peripheral stats. He must have blown his arm out, but I don't remember.

let us also reflect on dewey evans

*leans back in a creaky chair*

aw yes, dwight "the dewster" evans. i think he should be in the hall! he was good at pretty much everything (except running), played almost his whole career with the red sox (more games than any other player except for yaz), played in a big market, hit a bunch of home runs, won a bunch of gold gloves (a wonderful, fair award that means a lot)

would he qualify for this modern era ballot, though?

or sorry, the "today's game" ballot

Dwight Evans--who peaked at 10% and didn't make it to a fourth ballot--would be one of the first guys I'd put in among players who didn't get a fair hearing. The biggest obstacle he faced, I think, is that he peaked so late; a certain idea took hold early in his career, that he was the other guy behind Yastrzemski, Lynn, and Rice, great glove and not much offense, and then from '81-89 (with one off year), he just got better and better. He was one of the best players in his 30s from the past few decades.

And still the greatest play I've ever seen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeLpoYvA-MU

would he qualify for this modern era ballot, though?

How do you qualify? Is it just playing within a certain time frame, or do you have to fill out a form or something?