Harold Baines.....Lee Smith in Hall of Fame

[Moose Milligan]

21 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Yes, I draw the line there.  Gibson, Bell, Paige are all in the Hall, they have their plaques.  We can't go back and time and let them play in the majors.

All of that gambling is illegal in baseball.  I think it has to be.  Obviously nobody is going to make a huge case about an offhand comment about a $5 bet.  But gambling should be taken seriously because it really does have the ability to transform a sport into a kind of joke.  If many or most people think the players are on the take it can destroy it all.  For much of the 19th and 20th centuries baseball's biggest competition was boxing.  Boxing is now kind of a sideshow.  Some of that is the whole scrambled brains thing but a lot of it is that by the 1990s people assumed a lot of matches were fixed.  I'd much rather not be having that discussion about baseball.  

Just because bad things have happened and continue to happen doesn't mean we should allow or encourage bad things.  And we certainly don't need to bestow high honors on people who knowingly broke the most important rules.  There was never a sign in the clubhouse that said "take 'roids and you're banned for life."  But there was a commish and a bunch of owners who said "keep on hitting them homers, boys, we know you're clean! (wink wink)"

Ok, understood.  You draw the line there but I think it's silly to have Pete Roses gear displayed in the Hall of Fame but he can't have a plaque.  Agree to disagree.

I think boxing is more of a sideshow now because of a lack of fighters like Muhammad Ali, Frazier, Foreman, etc.  Even Mike Tyson (who never fought anyone of significance).  Just the other night I watched an excellent 30 for 30 about him losing to Buster Douglas, I highly recommend it.  But that happened in 1990.  Did we really lose interest in boxing because of fight fixing since then?  Maybe at the lower levels.  I also think boxing kinda went downhill because this isn't a rough and tumble country like it was in the early 1900s.  But I digress.

On a similar note, players salaries have exploded across all sports, I don't see how anyone could buy players like they did in the Black Sox, times have changed.  The Black Sox took money cause they felt Comisky was cheapskate.  Maybe players do gamble on their sports these days but I think Pete Rose was what he was; just a degenerate with an addiction.  Couldn't control himself.  I'm not advocating gambling on sports but I don't see players currently gambling on their sports.  I don't think "players being on the take" is a real thing these days, at least in paid professional sports.  So what are we so worried about?  If anything, we learned from the NBA scandal that refs can be on the take.  

I agree that we shouldn't encourage bad things.  But I don't see this being one of the most important rules simply because the threat isn't real these days.  It was very real back in the early 1900s.  But because Kenesaw Mountain Landis said so, I'm not buying it in 2018.   As I said before, if the overriding argument here is about playing a clean, honest game...the game has almost never been clean and honest. 

If the sign in the clubhouse trumps everything and is sacrosanct, I guess that's what matters the most.  But, IMO, as said before, I think what Pete did wasn't nearly as bad as what others have done to the game.  Again, agree to disagree.

As an aside, I'd like to see what the other rules are posted in the clubhouse.  I remember seeing them, I can't find them.  I am assuming tampering with bats and balls is on that list, and if so why is Gaylord Perry in?  Or is there a hierarchy with cheating?  

 

[Moose Milligan]

15 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Has anyone ever been kicked out of a major sports HOF?

That's a good question, I don't think so.  Google search doesn't come up with anyone.

https://www.cinemablend.com/television/2414031/bill-cosby-has-been-kicked-out-of-the-tv-academys-hall-of-fame

[JR Oriole]

1 hour ago, Number5 said:

But they didn't ban Garcia for life.  In fact, they later promoted him to umpiring supervisor.  Had they fired him, as they clearly should, the Orioles win  that game and perhaps the series.

Do you mean Rich Garcia?  If so, in 1996 we went 0-9 against New York in our own ballpark (including Games 3 - 5 of the ALCS).  As lame as that call was, we did win Game 2 in New York.  But losing every single home game you play to the same team is not a recipe for advancing in a playoff series.  Actually, the Yankees won every single road playoff game they played in 1996.....8-0!!! 

[TonySoprano]

Quote

Reinsdorf spoke with similar emotion about Baines’ election to the Hall of Fame at the Winter Meetings on Monday, noting that, after pumping his fist when the vote was announced, he looked over at La Russa, who managed Baines with the White Sox from 1980-86 and the A’s from 1990-92. “I thought he was going to cry,” said Reinsdorf.

Quote

The most popular, and effective, summation of the Hall of Fame’s standards is Jay Jaffe’s JAWS, which uses Baseball-Reference’s wins above replacement (bWAR) to compare the average of a player’s career and peak values (the latter defined as his best seven seasons, per bWAR) to that of the average Hall of Famer at that player’s primary position. Using that standard, I have compiled the following list of the 10 least-qualified Hall of Famers inducted as players, ranking them according to their individual JAWS scores as a percentage of the standard at their position.

Player	Pos	Inducted	Career	Peak	JAWS	Standard	Pct.
Tommy McCarthy	RF	1946	16.2	18.9	17.6	57.8	30.4%
Lloyd Waner	CF	1967	24.1	20.3	22.2	57.9	38.3%
Jesse Haines	SP	1970	32.5	22.0	27.2	61.8	44.0%
George “High Pockets” Kelly	1B	1973	25.3	24.0	24.6	54.7	45.0%
Freddie Lindstrom	3B	1976	28.4	26.3	27.3	55.7	49.0%
Rube Marquard	SP	1971	32.1	29.6	30.9	61.8	50.0%
Harold Baines	RF	2019	38.7	21.4	30.1	57.8	52.1%
Chick Hafey	LF	1971	30.1	27.1	28.6	53.5	53.5%
Ross Youngs	RF	1972	32.2	30.3	31.3	57.8	54.2%
Bill Mazeroski	2B	2001	36.5	26.0	31.2	57.0	54.7%

Quote

Every player on that list was a committee selection, seven of them selected under Frisch or Terry, and five of them — Haines, Kelly, Lindstrom, Hafey, and Youngs — former teammates of either Frisch or Terry. Baines fits snuggly in the middle of that regrettable group, with the second-lowest peak score, having compiled barely more than half of the JAWS score of the average Hall of Fame right fielder (there is no established standard for designated hitters, but Baines did play 1,042 games in right).

Quote

The concern now is whether Baines’ induction will open the floodgates for the large swath of players whose qualifications for the Hall fall between his and the established standard. Among right-fielders, alone, there are 40 players who compiled a higher JAWS score than Baines who have been retired long enough to be Hall-eligible but have not been inducted. If Baines is in, why not Rusty Staub, or Roger Maris, or Kirk Gibson, or Paul O’Neill, or Bob Allison, or Tommy Henrich, or Gavvy Cravath, or Carl Furillo, or David Justice, or Tim Salmon, or Jesse Barfield, or Ken Singleton, or Felipe Alou, or Darryl Strawberry, or Rocky Colavito, or Jack Clark, or Brian Giles, or Bobby Bonds, or Johnny Callison, or J.D. Drew? All have higher JAWS scores than Baines, as do several active players still in their twenties, including Giancarlo Stanton, Jason Heyward and Mookie Betts.

Quote

Nor do I expect Baines’ selection to be an inflection point for the candidacies of players who spent the bulk of their careers as designated hitters. Baines might be the first Hall of Famer primarily associated with the position, but he was a designated hitter in 58 percent of his career games. Frank Thomas, who sailed in on the first ballot in 2014, was a DH in 56 percent of his career games. Ten years before the Big Hurt, Paul Molitor got in on the first ballot despite having been a DH in 44 percent of his games. What’s more, Edgar Martínez, who was a DH in 68 percent of his games, was on his way to a final-year induction well before the news of Baines’ induction and was doing very well among the many writers who already cast their ballots before Monday’s announcement.

https://theathletic.com/710208/2018/12/12/how-harold-baines-induction-could-impact-current-and-future-hall-candidates/

[DrungoHazewood]

2 hours ago, Number5 said:

But they didn't ban Garcia for life.  In fact, they later promoted him to umpiring supervisor.  Had they fired him, as they clearly should, the Orioles win  that game and perhaps the series.

Is there any evidence that Garcia' s gambling was tied to baseball?  That he was betting on MLB games while an ump?  I thought he just had personal gambiling problems, but I don't really know.

Nobody is saying you can't go to Vegas and play the slots.  You just can't put $5000 on the Reds tonight when you're in the employ of MLB.

[DrungoHazewood]

47 minutes ago, TonySoprano said:

https://theathletic.com/710208/2018/12/12/how-harold-baines-induction-could-impact-current-and-future-hall-candidates/

The concern now is whether Baines’ induction will open the floodgates for the large swath of players whose qualifications for the Hall fall between his and the established standard. Among right-fielders, alone, there are 40 players who compiled a higher JAWS score than Baines who have been retired long enough to be Hall-eligible but have not been inducted. If Baines is in, why not Rusty Staub, or Roger Maris, or Kirk Gibson, or Paul O’Neill, or Bob Allison, or Tommy Henrich, or Gavvy Cravath, or Carl Furillo, or David Justice, or Tim Salmon, or Jesse Barfield, or Ken Singleton, or Felipe Alou, or Darryl Strawberry, or Rocky Colavito, or Jack Clark, or Brian Giles, or Bobby Bonds, or Johnny Callison, or J.D. Drew? All have higher JAWS scores than Baines, as do several active players still in their twenties, including Giancarlo Stanton, Jason Heyward and Mookie Betts

Easy answer.  None of those guys played half their career for Tony LaRussa.  Tony's a baseball man, not some nerd formula.

[DrungoHazewood]

2 hours ago, Moose Milligan said:

As an aside, I'd like to see what the other rules are posted in the clubhouse.  I remember seeing them, I can't find them.  I am assuming tampering with bats and balls is on that list, and if so why is Gaylord Perry in?  Or is there a hierarchy with cheating?  

 

I don't know, I've never been in a MLB clubhouse.  I know I rail against unwritten rules, but the unwritten, de facto death penalty has always been reserved for gambling.  The '77 Louisville crowd was banned for throwing games, Dick Higham was in the same era, 22 or more players were banned in the 1910s for gambling and fixing games, most notably Hal Chase.  Mays and Mickey and some others were temporarily punished for doing some kind of work for casinos (I'm not quite sure what was going on there), Leo Durocher was banned for a year or two for associating with mobsters and related gamblers.  Is anyone else banned from MLB for anything else?  I guess there might be a small handful of PED repeat offenders?  

For whatever reasons gambling has always been in a category by itself.

[TonySoprano]

21 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Easy answer.  None of those guys played half their career for Tony LaRussa.  Tony's a baseball man, not some nerd formula.

Reinsdorf was the ring leader, me thinks.  LaRussa, Gillick, Alomar, and Andy Sweater Vest added 4 more votes.

From the same article
 

Quote

Along the way, Reinsdorf grew extremely fond of Baines. So much so that, when the team traded Baines to Texas at the 1989 non-waiver deadline in a blockbuster deal that netted prospects Sammy Sosa and Wilson Álvarez along with veteran infielder Scott Fletcher, Reinsdorf hastily arranged the retiring of the 30-year-old Baines’ No. 3. 

 

[Moose Milligan]

14 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

I don't know, I've never been in a MLB clubhouse.  I know I rail against unwritten rules, but the unwritten, de facto death penalty has always been reserved for gambling.  The '77 Louisville crowd was banned for throwing games, Dick Higham was in the same era, 22 or more players were banned in the 1910s for gambling and fixing games, most notably Hal Chase.  Mays and Mickey and some others were temporarily punished for doing some kind of work for casinos (I'm not quite sure what was going on there), Leo Durocher was banned for a year or two for associating with mobsters and related gamblers.  Is anyone else banned from MLB for anything else?  I guess there might be a small handful of PED repeat offenders?  

For whatever reasons gambling has always been in a category by itself.

I read an article on those rules awhile ago, I just can't find it.  

But agree with me that the gambling rule is archaic.  It doesn't pertain to baseball today.   From Hal Chase's wiki page: 

Quote

Midway through the 1918 season, Chase allegedly paid pitcher Jimmy Ring $50 ($815 in current dollar terms) to throw a game against the Giants.

No chance $815 bucks today gets anyone to throw a game.  

You've got Pete Rose in the 80s and then you have to go back like 60 years to find any other gambling scandals.   PEDs pertain to baseball today because...well, when was the last time a player got busted for PEDs vs gambling?  And PEDs were way more widespread than any gambling scandal in the 1910s.   That just means that their rules need to be updated.  Which they did after whistles got blown in the early 2000s.  Look at all the players you laid out that had been associated with gambling, not a current living one in the bunch.  

I understand why gambling is in a category by itself, I just think the punishments are a little extreme.  

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, TonySoprano said:

https://theathletic.com/710208/2018/12/12/how-harold-baines-induction-could-impact-current-and-future-hall-candidates/  

If Baines is in, why not ... Gavvy Cravath?

By the way, I'm going to use this to advocate for the induction of Gavvy Cravath.  Even though I'm well aware that he's not qualified in any meaningful way.  If Baines and Rice and McCarthy, then Gavvy.

Cravath was stuck in the minors for most of his 20s.  He played in the PCL from 1903-07 when they had impossibly long schedules, well over 200 games.  He wasn't all that impressive but you have to remember this was the heart of the deadball era.  After brief trials in Boston, Chicago, and with the Senators he went to the Minneapolis Millers in the old American Association.  There he went a little nuts and in 1911 (remember, still very much deadball era) he hit .363 with 53 doubles, 13 triples and 29 homers.

At his point Philadelphia bought his contract and he played his age 31-39 seasons with the Phillies.  They played in Baker Bowl.  He led the league in homers in '13, '14, '15, '17, '18, and '19 with totals as high as 24.  I believe the 24 was the 3rd highest total of all time behind Ned Williamson's 1884 (27) and Buck Freeman's 1899 (25).  I mentioned Baker Bowl.  It was like 260 to RF.  Cravath hit 119 career homers, 93 at home. In 1914 all 19 of his homers were at home.  Included in the 119 were also 10 bounce homers, because things that today would be a ground rule double were homers up through 1919, IIRC.  

So Cravath's WAR total is an unimpressive 33, and that might overstate the case because of his extreme park effects.  But WAR is for wackos, real baseball men see Gavvy Cravath's real value: a moderately cool story for a Friday afternoon.  And that's what Cooperstown is all about.

 

[DrungoHazewood]

18 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

I read an article on those rules awhile ago, I just can't find it.  

But agree with me that the gambling rule is archaic.  It doesn't pertain to baseball today.   From Hal Chase's wiki page: 

No chance $815 bucks today gets anyone to throw a game.  

You've got Pete Rose in the 80s and then you have to go back like 60 years to find any other gambling scandals.   PEDs pertain to baseball today because...well, when was the last time a player got busted for PEDs vs gambling?  And PEDs were way more widespread than any gambling scandal in the 1910s.   That just means that their rules need to be updated.  Which they did after whistles got blown in the early 2000s.  Look at all the players you laid out that had been associated with gambling, not a current living one in the bunch.  

I understand why gambling is in a category by itself, I just think the punishments are a little extreme.  

Or maybe the reason there aren't any gambling scandals between the Black Sox and Rose is that nobody wants to get banned for life.

I just thought of a benefit of nobody caring about minor league pennant races: you can't put $5000 on the Baysox to lose when nobody cares if they lose anway.  You'd think that would be a big potential market.   A reliever making $1700 a month sleeping on the floor with five other guys might take five grand to give up six runs in the eighth.

[Moose Milligan]

33 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Or maybe the reason there aren't any gambling scandals between the Black Sox and Rose is that nobody wants to get banned for life.

I just thought of a benefit of nobody caring about minor league pennant races: you can't put $5000 on the Baysox to lose when nobody cares if they lose anway.  You'd think that would be a big potential market.   A reliever making $1700 a month sleeping on the floor with five other guys might take five grand to give up six runs in the eighth.

Wanna try to buy some players?  DM me.

[DrungoHazewood]

1 hour ago, Moose Milligan said:

You've got Pete Rose in the 80s and then you have to go back like 60 years to find any other gambling scandals.  

Ohhh... I just remembered, the Evangeline League scandal of the 40s!  What's that guy's name, Thomas something.  Bill Thomas!  The Evangeline League was a lower level league in the swamps of the Louisiana Mississippi delta.  Bad stuff going on down there in '46.  Bad stuff.

Thomas won at least 305 games all in the minors, mostly the low minors.  And that was after missing the 1947 and 1948 seasons probably unfairly accused of being wrapped up in the Evangeline League scandal.  I remember some piece where Bill James was wondering about how exactly you put $1000 on Houma to lose to Thibadeaux without getting capped by the New Orleans underground.

[Moose Milligan]

1 minute ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Ohhh... I just remembered, the Evangeline League scandal of the 40s!  What's that guy's name, Thomas something.  Bill Thomas!  The Evangeline League was a lower level league in the swamps of the Louisiana Mississippi delta.  Bad stuff going on down there in '46.  Bad stuff.

Thomas won 305 games all in the minors, mostly the low minors.  And that was after missing the 1947 and 1948 seasons probably unfairly accused of being wrapped up in the Evangeline League scandal.  I remember some piece where Bill James was wondering about how exactly you put $1000 on Houma to lose to Thibadeaux without getting capped by the New Orleans underground.

Man you're really grasping at straws aren't you?  

[DrungoHazewood]

2 minutes ago, Moose Milligan said:

Man you're really grasping at straws aren't you?  

Nah, I just like any excuse to drege up obscure stuff like the tale of Bill Thomas and the Evangeline League scandal of '46.