2009 Hall of Fame Veteran's Committee Ballot Options

[Razor Shines]

20 players are on the ballot for the 2009 Veteran's Committee.

The first 10 listed are on the post-1943 ballot (living HoF'ers vote for up to four, players with at least 75% of the living HoF vote get in), the last 10 names are on the pre-1943 ballot (committee of 12 vote for up to four, 9 votes needed).

Who do you think should make it in?

Personally, I'd vote for Allen, Santo, Kaat, Tiant, Dahlen, Gordon, and Mays. Allen seems like the most egregious omission, given his level of dominance during an era dominated by pitchers. From what I hear, he was kind of a dick, but given some of the other personalities in the Hall, keeping him out would be a hypocrisy.

Per baseballreference.com, here are the highlight stats for each player:

• Dick Allen: 1B-3B, RoY, 1972 MVP, 7 A-S, 351 HR, .292 BA, 156 OPS+
• Gil Hodges: 1B, 8 A-S, 3 GG, 370 HR, .273 BA, 120 OPS+
• Jim Kaat: P, 283-237, 3 A-S, 16 GG, 1966 TSN AL Pitcher of Year
• Tony Oliva, RF-DH, RoY,2x 2nd in MVP, 8 A-S, 1 GG, 3 BA Titles, .304 BA, 220 HR, 131 OPS+
• Al Oliver: CF-1B, 7 A-S, .303 BA, 219 HR, 121 OPS+
• Vada Pinson: CF, 2 A-S, 1 GG, .286 BA, 256 HR, 110 OPS+
• Ron Santo: 3B, 9 A-S, .277 BA, 342 HR, 125 OPS+
• Luis Tiant: P, 229-172, 3 A-S, 2 ERA Titles, 114 ERA+
• Joe Torre: C-1B-3B, 9 A-S, 1 GG, 1971 MVP & BA title, .297 BA, 252 HR, 128 OPS+
• Maury Wills: SS, 1962 MVP, 5 A-S, 2 GG, 20 HR, .281 BA, 586 SB, 88 OPS+
• Bill Dahlen: SS, 1891-1911, 2457 H, 547 SB, .272 BA, 109 OPS+
• Wes Ferrell: P, 1927-1941, 193-128, 2 A-S, 1935 2nd in MVP, 116 ERA+
• Joe Gordon: 2B, 1938-1943&1946-1950, 1942 MVP, 9 A-S, 1530 H, .268 BA, 120 OPS+
• Sherry Magee: LF, 1904-1919, 2169 H, 441 SB, .291 BA, 136 OPS+
• Carl Mays: P, 1915-1929, 207-126, 120 ERA+
• Allie Reynolds: P, 1942-1954, 182-107, 110 ERA+, 6 A-S
• Vern Stephens: SS, 1941-1955, 1859 H, .286 BA, 119 OPS+, 8 A-S
• Mickey Vernon: 1B, 1939-1943&1946-1960, 2495 H, 172 HR, .286 BA, 116 OPS+, 7 A-S, 2x BA Title
• Bucky Walters: P, 1931-1950, 6 A-S, 1939 MVP and TrplCrwn, 2x ERA title, 3.30 ERA, 115 ERA+
• Deacon White: 3B-C, 1871-1890, 2066 H, .312 BA, 127 OPS+, 2x BA Title

edit: I should have added an option for "none". If you don't think anyone should make it and would like to take part in the democratic process, just post in this thread.

This post has been edited by Razor Shines: Nov 25 2008, 05:08 PM

[Carmen Fanzone]

Santo
Tiant

Though Allen and Hodges are very close

[DeltaForce]

This makes me miss the old "SoSH Hall of Fame" project. I think most (and possibly all) of these players were discussed at some length over the years. And, if memory serves, we collectively decided that most of the players on this list were Hall-worthy.

The two that leap off the page to me are Santo and Dahlen, but I'd be inclined to vote for several others (with Allen and Gordon perhaps leading the way), and I could probably be persuaded to vote for nearly all of them.

One quick note about Ferrell that wasn't captured above: he was one of the best hitting pitchers of all time, and I think that's an enormous aspect of his candidacy. No production is expected out of the pitchers' spot, but Ferrell was an above-average hitter --- not "above average for a pitcher," but above average, period. His career line was .280/.351/.446. And, in his peak hitting year in 1931, his line was an insane .319/.373/.621.

None of this makes him a hall-of-fame lock, but he is undervalued if viewed only as a pitcher and not as a ballplayer.

This post has been edited by DeltaForce: Nov 25 2008, 05:32 PM

[Spacemans Bong]

Santo, Gordon, Allen, Dahlen, Tiant and maybe Deacon White.

Santo and Gordon are the two of the biggest non-selections in the Hall's history.

[JulE6]

Santo, Hodges, and Allen to me have the numbers (based on the time they played) to be in. I can't speak for watching them play, but taking a look at that list I'd have to say those are the three names that jumped out at me.

This post has been edited by JulE6: Nov 25 2008, 05:58 PM

[OttoC]

To add to Ferrell's story, he holds both the single-season (9) and career (38) home run records for pitchers. While the home runs may be an "enormous aspect of his candidacy," he did manage to post a 193-128 w/l record, which is a .601 winning percentage, which was the seventh highest of all-time when he retired from major-league ball in 1941. He went on the play more in the minor leagues mostly as an outfielder (but with occasional pitching appearances and one year as a second baseman). In 1948, as player-manager in the Western Carolina League, he batted .425 and slugged .766 in 381 at bats at the age of 40.

[bsj]

This makes me miss the old "SoSH Hall of Fame" project. I think most (and possibly all) of these players were discussed at some length over the years. And, if memory serves, we collectively decided that most of the players on this list were Hall-worthy.

I'm with you...I got into it a little late in the game...but distinctly remember championing the merits of Tony Oliva and, I think, getting him in in his 2nd to last year of eligibility.

If we could get a committed group of people together, I would definitely be a fan of doing that again. Start the whole schlemele over...

[Tyrone Biggums]

Santo will make it in this year...I'd also vote for El Tiante but Santo will definitely get in this time.

[zeraza]

I hope Santo makes it in finally, easily one of the biggest snubs out there

[Lidle Airways]

None.

Santo is a close call but he dosen't make my cut. I am a hard line HOF guy anyway.

I do agree that a few oh those guys (Santo, Kaat, Tiant, Hodges and more) deserve getting in more then Gossage and Sutter but that's not how I would vote.

[Spacemans Bong]

None.

Santo is a close call but he dosen't make my cut. I am a hard line HOF guy anyway.

I do agree that a few oh those guys (Santo, Kaat, Tiant, Hodges and more) deserve getting in more then Gossage and Sutter but that's not how I would vote.

Santo is one of the top five or six third basemen in history. By not including him you're basically arguing that Yaz is a borderline Hall of Famer.

[kenneycb]

So I'm assuming Buck O'Neil isn't a part of the vote because he never played in the MLs? Because he's the biggest snub to me if we're going by contribution to the game as a status. I guess this is the place where I can just vent...hell, Joe Pos agrees, so I can't be that far off.

[ifmanis5]

Santo is one of the top five or six third basemen in history. By not including him you're basically arguing that Yaz is a borderline Hall of Famer.

It really doesn't work like that, though. If it did, Ray Guy would have made the Football HOF years ago. (And should have, but that's another argument)

[JohntheBaptist]

It really doesn't work like that, though. If it did, Ray Guy would have made the Football HOF years ago. (And should have, but that's another argument)

How does it work? I don't watch football so the analogy means nothing to me, but- how can you justify keeping out one of the ten greatest players at a given position? That seems odd to me. The entire Santo thing is so strange to me. He's not even borderline qualifications-wise, he's generally considered to be a great, well liked guy. I don't get what the problem is. Unfortunately though, I also don't see it as a "guarantee" he'll get in.

I'd say Santo, Allen, Gordon and Tiant.

This post has been edited by JohntheBaptist: Nov 26 2008, 09:37 PM

[Lidle Airways]

Santo is one of the top five or six third basemen in history. By not including him you're basically arguing that Yaz is a borderline Hall of Famer.

What the Hell are you talking about? Santo has nothing to do with Yaz. That's a crazy leap to compare positions like that.

Top 5 or 6 all-time?

In No Order: Eddie Mathews, George Brett, Mike Schmidt, Wade Boggs, Paul Molitor and Chipper Jones are all guys I take in a walk over Santo.

Personally I take Brooks Robinson as well over Santo. That's 7. Someone more well read on early baseball could make a case for Home Run Baker as well.

That's quite a few guys for one of the historically worst (when it comes to great players) positions in history. Pie Traynor was considered by many to be the best third baseman for much of the 20th century.

Oh... please stop comparing Carl Yastremski to Ron Santo. You are insulting anyone who writes here or reads anything on this board. It's rude to the whole community.

[JohntheBaptist]

Well you judge these guys against their peers. Your list notwithstanding, it's tough to make an argument for Santo existing outside the top ten all time at 3B. Bonger's just pointing out that if you're a "hardline guy" enough to keep a top ten 3B out of the Hall, you'd probably be a hardline guy in LF... right?

3B is definitely a weaker position offensively, but I think drawing the line before Santo is excessive. I don't subscribe to the "well, these lesser guys are in so he should be" school of thought, because I don't think you set a baseline with potential mistakes. But an argument for Santo is based around his being among the best and not better than the worst.

[Spacemans Bong]

It really doesn't work like that, though. If it did, Ray Guy would have made the Football HOF years ago. (And should have, but that's another argument)

Except a third baseman isn't a punter. Ray Guy (who I agree should be in the HOF too) is more comparable to Manny Mota or Lenny Harris (or Jesse Orosco) than Santo. Santo batted one in nine times just like Billy Williams and Ernie Banks, and fielded a pretty important position.

What the Hell are you talking about? Santo has nothing to do with Yaz. That's a crazy leap to compare positions like that.

Top 5 or 6 all-time?

In No Order: Eddie Mathews, George Brett, Mike Schmidt, Wade Boggs, Paul Molitor and Chipper Jones are all guys I take in a walk over Santo.

Personally I take Brooks Robinson as well over Santo. That's 7. Someone more well read on early baseball could make a case for Home Run Baker as well.

That's quite a few guys for one of the historically worst (when it comes to great players) positions in history. Pie Traynor was considered by many to be the best third baseman for much of the 20th century.

Oh... please stop comparing Carl Yastremski to Ron Santo. You are insulting anyone who writes here or reads anything on this board. It's rude to the whole community.

You've got 81 posts, shouldn't you wait a little longer before basically assuming you can speak for the whole of Sons of Sam Horn?

Let's go through your argument.

Top Five or Six All Time:

Schmidt, Brett, Boggs, Mathews are all better. No argument here.

Molitor played less than 800 career games at 3B. He's not a 3B, he's a DH. Molitor is a better hitter, but more due to longevity (which was a function of his being primarily a DH with some moonlighting at 1B) than anything else. WARP3 favors Santo's peak as he had six straight 10-plus seasons while Molitor never had one. EQA's are pretty comparable, a slight edge to Molitor at .298 to .294. I value playing the field, and in the end Santo played 700 more games in the field, and was good to boot - winning five Gold Gloves.

Frank Baker and Santo have pretty much the same peak, but Baker basically had a 10 year career, playing 700 fewer games than Santo. Baker, along with Jimmy Collins, ranks at the top of third basemen before the war. It's not his fault people thought Pie Traynor was great.

Brooks Robinson was the greatest fielding third baseman ever, but he was a much inferior hitter - Santo has a 125 career OPS+, Robinson a 104 OPS+, and this is during a time when many people argued the AL was the weaker league. Obviously much more of his value was tied up in fielding, because of Brooks Robinson had even a decent year with the plate he received serious MVP consideration. Even then, check out who Santo was up against vs. Robinson. Robinson is fighting guys like Boog Powell, Tony Oliva and Tommie Agee for votes, while Santo finishes in the top 10 in votes surrounded by Hall of Famers, many of whom are inner-circle guys like Mays, Aaron, and Koufax and Pete Rose who we all know is a Hall of Famer if you disregard the gambling. Robinson's biggest argument is longevity, and if you're arguing that Robinson's age 35-40 years are what puts him over Santo while equally regarding Robinson as a no doubt about it Hall of Famer, which many do, doesn't that make Ron Santo qualified for the Hall of Fame?

Chipper and Santo are basically equal right now with an edge towards Chipper. Chipper's a better hitter, Santo's a better fielder. Chipper will surpass Santo in time, mostly because Santo retired at the age Chipper is now while Chipper just hit .364. But there's not really any doubt Chipper's going to the Hall of Fame, is there?

In other words those are four people that the vast majority of informed baseball fans would agree are Hall of Famers, and Santo comes off well against every one.

[Tudor Fever]

Oh... please stop comparing Carl Yastremski to Ron Santo. You are insulting anyone who writes here or reads anything on this board. It's rude to the whole community.

Bonger is 100% correct; Santo was roughly Yaz's equal. The big difference is that Santo hung it up at age 34, whereas Yaz lasted until he was 44. However, during most of his last 10 seasons, Yaz was just a replacement-level icon. The team would have been much better off jettisoning him and hanging on to Cooper and Oglivie.

[RedSox04]

Bonger is 100% correct; Santo was roughly Yaz's equal. The big difference is that Santo hung it up at age 34, whereas Yaz lasted until he was 44. However, during most of his last 10 seasons, Yaz was just a replacement-level icon. The team would have been much better off jettisoning him and hanging on to Cooper and Oglivie.

I'm not sure you can say Yaz was just a replacement level icon his last ten seasons. Yaz always had a very high OBA as he walked a ton, and in 1976 his power returned for a few years as he had a particularly good 1977 season. He had hurt his shoulder in '75 on a swipe play at 1B. He got healthy enough to hold his bat higher when he swung in 1976, and it resulted in him going over the 20 mark 3 years out of 4. He was still a decent player in 1982 when he batted .275 with 16 homers and a good walk ratio. (I should mention that when he held his arms higher when swinging he generated more power. Doerr taught him that in 1967, but injuries prevented Yaz from continuing that and his power waned. He went back to it in 1976 and it led to some more productive years/)

You mentioned Cooper and Oglivie. In Cooper's case, it was clearly a short-sighted thing. I have no idea why the Sox felt compelled to deal Cooper who could have played 1B (with Yaz at DH and Rice in LF or vice versa) to Milwaukee for George Scott and Bernie Carbo. Yes, Scott had a good 1977 season, but he was on his way down, while Cooper was ascending. I have no doubt Yaz and Cooper could have and should have continued to co-exist on the team. Yaz wasn't the problem.

I understand the point about Oglivie but he was moved very quickly after he came up. He didn't last with the Sox that long - I believe they dealt him in 1973 or thereabouts. Again I doubt Yaz was the reason, as Yaz was playing 1B by then, and Oglivie was an OF in a time where they had a veteran in Tommy Harper and two young future backup OF (good backup OF's, we could use guys like them this upcoming season) in Rick Miller and Juan Beniquez and a young Evans. The Sox could have kept Oglivie, but the decision regarding Oglivie eventually had he stayed would have been does merit a spot in the OF over Rice, Lynn, or Evans, and the answer is no, as good as he was, no.

Sorry for straying off the point, but as a Yaz fan (I only remember Yaz when he was in his 40s), I couldn't let the point drop.

This post has been edited by RedSox04: Nov 27 2008, 09:43 AM

[Vermonter At Lar...]

I'd say that the two who should be slam dunks are Santo (for all the reasons listed above, plus the fact that a good chunk of the voters will have been contemporaries) and Deacon White, who is probably the most aggregious omission from the 19th Century roll of players.

Of the pre-war players, Dahlen and Magee probably have the best credentials, but I can't see them gaining enough support from the VC.

Of the post-war players, I agree that Gordon should and will get a lot of recognition. Oddly, his MVP probably plays against him, since every knowledgeable historical fan knows his selection was tainted by the anti-Williams movement. Kaat may also get some sentimental support from his contemporaries (he was certainly a better pitcher than guys like Don Sutton). I don't think Allen will get much support from that group. If one were going to pick a short-career player from that group, I would expect Oliva to be the one, since it can be argued that injuries ruined his career, as opposed to the self-destructiveness of Dick Allen.