Next Hall of Famer

[Matt]

2 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

For the real Hall of Fame?  There are five HOF pitchers with higher OPSes than Mark Belanger.  Belanger was a truly great fielder, but I think you're mostly disqualified when you slug .280 for your career.

I don't mean that he'd be a particularly deserving candidate. I mean it cynically mostly.

[DrungoHazewood]

6 minutes ago, atomic said:

I don't think there is a standard but I think Lee May was a much better player than Tony Bautista.  But I don't see why it hurts anyone that Lee May is in the Orioles Hall of Fame.  A lot of people enjoyed him as a player for the Orioles.  I think if you want to argue about the Orioles hall of fame you should only be arguing about people who aren't in and you think deserve getting in. 

I think in 10 years or so we will have a lot of the 2012 - 2016 team in the Orioles HOF:

Tillman

Wieters

Markakis

Hardy

Jones

Machado

Britton

Jim Johnson

O'Day

 

It doesn't hurt anyone, no one really cares about the Orioles Hall of Fame except to remember some players and teams.  

But it's natural to discuss the standards, or lacking that the de facto standards.  Lee May was well-regarded when he was playing, but that was an era where nobody really thought about the impact of a DH who OBP'd .299.  He was the 1970s version of Mark Trumbo.

[esmd]

On 1/21/2019 at 3:48 PM, TonySoprano said:

The next player to be elected to the Hall of Fame as an Oriole has not yet put on the uniform.  My guess is that's at least 20 years away between their career and the mandatory waiting period.

This. Machado is a good bet to go in, but it'll likely be wearing another team's cap.

[Frobby]

9 hours ago, atomic said:

I don't think there is a standard but I think Lee May was a much better player than Tony Bautista.  But I don't see why it hurts anyone that Lee May is in the Orioles Hall of Fame.  A lot of people enjoyed him as a player for the Orioles.  I think if you want to argue about the Orioles hall of fame you should only be arguing about people who aren't in and you think deserve getting in. 

The interesting thing about Lee May is that he actually hit much better for each of the other three teams he played for than he did for the Orioles.    He was only a .722 OPS (105 OPS+) for us.     What I mostly remember is that he was an incredibly streaky player.    He could be ice cold for a month and then carry the team for a month.   

[DrungoHazewood]

9 hours ago, Frobby said:

The interesting thing about Lee May is that he actually hit much better for each of the other three teams he played for than he did for the Orioles.    He was only a .722 OPS (105 OPS+) for us.   

He played for the O's from ages 32-37.  A 105 OPS+ is about all you can expect at those ages for someone with Adam Jones' strikeout and walk numbers in 1970.

[Frobby]

56 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

He played for the O's from ages 32-37.  A 105 OPS+ is about all you can expect at those ages for someone with Adam Jones' strikeout and walk numbers in 1970.

I was going to counter by pointing out May’s .815 OPS in KC at ages 38-39, but on a closer look he didn’t play enough there to make that point.   

[DrungoHazewood]

2 hours ago, Frobby said:

I was going to counter by pointing out May’s .815 OPS in KC at ages 38-39, but on a closer look he didn’t play enough there to make that point.   

Yea, I saw that, but he had less than 200 PAs across two seasons.

[DrungoHazewood]

23 hours ago, atomic said:

Why? I mean there are guys who were primarily DH's in the Hall of Fame.  They didn't field at all.  Yet you want to hold out the second highest Defensive WAR player of all time?  

Why?  Because it's about contribution to wins.  When you OPS .580 and don't steal bases you have to be otherworldly with the glove to keep your job.  Belanger is 1286th out of 1303 players since 1900 in OPS+ (min 4000 PAs).  He had 5-6 seasons where he played semi-regularly but didn't qualify for the batting title because Earl either pinch hit for him early or used him as a defensive replacement.  Example, in 1970 he was either pinch hit for or came in as a defensive sub in approximately 50 games.  Earl constantly had to work around his inability to hit.

Belanger does have a good HOF case when compared to the lowest 10% or so of the Hall, mostly players inducted by various committees after having been rejected by the writers. His career value is very comparable to Harold Baines'.  But I think many of us are hopeful that those examples are cautionary, not precedent-setting.  I wouldn't be against a Hall that includes Belanger; they'd just have to induct about 500 others of similar or better qualifications.

The only primary DHs in the Hall are... Frank Thomas and Edgar... am I missing anyone?  Offense is roughly 50% of the game, pitching and defense are 50%.  Pitching probably 35% by itself.  You can be a one-dimensional offensive player and have a 60-win career.  It's basically impossible to be a one-dimensional defensive player and contribute that much.

[Can_of_corn]

Just now, DrungoHazewood said:

Why?  Because it's about contribution to wins.  When you OPS .580 and don't steal bases you have to be otherworldly with the glove to keep your job.  Belanger is 1286th out of 1303 players since 1900 in OPS+ (min 4000 PAs).  He had 5-6 seasons where he played semi-regularly but didn't qualify for the batting title because Earl either pinch hit for him early or used him as a defensive replacement.  Example, in 1970 he was either pinch hit for or came in as a defensive sub in approximately 50 games.  Earl constantly had to work around his inability to hit.

Belanger does have a good HOF case when compared to the lowest 10% or so of the Hall, mostly players inducted by various committees after having been rejected by the writers. His career value is very comparable to Harold Baines'.  But I think many of us are hopeful that those examples are cautionary, not precedent-setting.  I wouldn't be against a Hall that includes Belanger; they'd just have to induct about 500 others of similar or better qualifications.

The only primary DHs in the Hall are... Frank Thomas and Edgar... am I missing anyone?  Offense is roughly 50% of the game, pitching and defense are 50%.  Pitching probably 35% by itself.  You can be a one-dimensional offensive player and have a 60-win career.  It's basically impossible to be a one-dimensional defensive player and contribute that much.

Baines?

[atomic]

7 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Why?  Because it's about contribution to wins.  When you OPS .580 and don't steal bases you have to be otherworldly with the glove to keep your job.  Belanger is 1286th out of 1303 players since 1900 in OPS+ (min 4000 PAs).  He had 5-6 seasons where he played semi-regularly but didn't qualify for the batting title because Earl either pinch hit for him early or used him as a defensive replacement.  Example, in 1970 he was either pinch hit for or came in as a defensive sub in approximately 50 games.  Earl constantly had to work around his inability to hit.

Belanger does have a good HOF case when compared to the lowest 10% or so of the Hall, mostly players inducted by various committees after having been rejected by the writers. His career value is very comparable to Harold Baines'.  But I think many of us are hopeful that those examples are cautionary, not precedent-setting.  I wouldn't be against a Hall that includes Belanger; they'd just have to induct about 500 others of similar or better qualifications.

 The only primary DHs in the Hall are... Frank Thomas and Edgar... am I missing anyone?  Offense is roughly 50% of the game, pitching and defense are 50%.  Pitching probably 35% by itself.  You can be a one-dimensional offensive player and have a 60-win career.  It's basically impossible to be a one-dimensional defensive player and contribute that much.

If Belanger had an OPS of .650 he would have been voted in by the writers.  I think my point is guys like Baines and Belanger are missed by the writers.  That is why you have the veterans committee to get the guys who the guys who know nothing about baseball miss.  Pitchers dont' hit at all yet they get in the hall of fame.  I think Belanger deserves a look.  

[DrungoHazewood]

9 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

Baines?

I guess I'm still fully digesting that one.

[DrungoHazewood]

8 minutes ago, atomic said:

If Belanger had an OPS of .650 he would have been voted in by the writers.  I think my point is guys like Baines and Belanger are missed by the writers.  That is why you have the veterans committee to get the guys who the guys who know nothing about baseball miss.  Pitchers dont' hit at all yet they get in the hall of fame.  I think Belanger deserves a look.  

If Belanger had OPS'd .650 he would have been an occasional MVP candidate instead of being pulled from games in the 6th inning so Jim Dwyer could hit.

I know you casually dismiss WAR, and you'll dismiss this, but that's exactly why you do the detailed analysis.  So you can construct a framework that tells us the relationship between defense and offense and pitching, and that as much as you might want it to be a guy who is a defense-only shortstop is rarely or never as valuable as a great hitter.

Belanger and Baines were missed by not only the writers, but by pretty much everyone because you generally don't put guys who OPS .580 in the Hall, and you don't put in DHs who never led the league in anything.

[DrungoHazewood]

Luis Aparicio and Rabbit Maranville are tied for the lowest OPS+ among Hall of Fame position players at 82.  Belanger's is 68. 

[TonySoprano]

26 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

Luis Aparicio and Rabbit Maranville are tied for the lowest OPS+ among Hall of Fame position players at 82.  Belanger's is 68. 

Ozzie Smith was not far ahead of them at 87, but everyone thought the Wizard was a slam-dunk first ballot choice.

Belanger "only" had 8 gold gloves to Ozzie's 13.  The Blade had 3.7%  of the vote in his first and lone year on the ballot.  Only Vizquel has more gold gloves (9) than Belanger as an A.L. SS.  Vizquel OPS+ 82, and received 40.9% in his 2nd year on the ballot.

[atomic]

28 minutes ago, DrungoHazewood said:

If Belanger had OPS'd .650 he would have been an occasional MVP candidate instead of being pulled from games in the 6th inning so Jim Dwyer could hit.

I know you casually dismiss WAR, and you'll dismiss this, but that's exactly why you do the detailed analysis.  So you can construct a framework that tells us the relationship between defense and offense and pitching, and that as much as you might want it to be a guy who is a defense-only shortstop is rarely or never as valuable as a great hitter.

 Belanger and Baines were missed by not only the writers, but by pretty much everyone because you generally don't put guys who OPS .580 in the Hall, and you don't put in DHs who never led the league in anything.

Well Baines is in the  Hall of Fame and elected by players. It really doesn't matter that you don't think he belongs in there or not as he is in there.  The year before Belangers first full season the team gave up 592 runs. In his first season the team gave up 497 runs.  Anyway you just see things as black and white so there is no reason to argue with you.