Great thread, what about most under rated pre-war player?

[Peter_Spaeth]

In my opinion we can't put someone into the HOF based on speculation about what he might have done, even if there was a noble reason for missing those years. It starts down a slippery slope that will end up with Brien Taylor being enshrined.

[Kenny Cole]

So why is Addie Joss a HOFer?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Probably the 1.89 lifetime ERA, plus the run of 6-7-8 dominant seasons. If Travis was hitting .350 lifetime (whatever the analagous BA is) when he went to war it might have been a different story. Instead, he had a stat line that while IF it continued eventually might have landed him in HOF territory, but he was not in that territory yet.

[Kenny Cole]

Um, no. He doesn't qualify. 9 years, not 10. Elected because of what might have been had he not died early. Try again.

BTW, it wasn't really a what might have been situation with Travis. That was sort of my point. It was. Then it wasn't, due to something that wasn't in any way attributable to something he did or the profession he played.

[Peter_Spaeth]

160-97, 1.89, comparable to Koufax and Dean neither of whom died. Although I am sure that played a role in his case.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Kenny yeah of course it was beyond his control, but I just don't think you can assume performance over a four year period based on his past results. I mean sure it's likely, but he could have been injured, etc.

[Kenny Cole]

9 years. Not eligible except for what might have been.

[HoofHearted]

I'm in the process of learning more about the Washington Senators players by putting together a type collection of Senators/Twins from 1901 to 1991. So far I've been most impressed with Cecil Travis (see his career stats at http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...ravice01.shtml). He was just hitting his stride when he answered the call to duty in '42...

[Oops! I didn't read the whole thread. I see Kenny C. had already mentioned Cecil T. Good choice!!]

[Kenny Cole]

Peter,

Cecil Travis is hitting the **** out of the ball for 8 years. He's going into his prime years as a baseball player. But he is suddenly going to go south, a la, Brian Taylor (who didn't have even 1 good year or go into the service) because maybe that might of, could of, happened, and we don't know if it would have because he was serving our country in the army? That's why he shouldn't be elected to the HOF?

Your other answer, as I understand it, is that we don't know what would have happened had WWII not derailed his career because the possibility exists that he might have been injured. Am I correct? Are those your arguments? I would like to define the parameters of the discussion before we go on.

[bbcarddan]

How about Gil Hodges can`t get much closer to the hall and still be on the outside lookin in than him.

My opinion ALL those ballplayers who lost playing time to serve our country during wartime are HOFers!

[Peter_Spaeth]

The other interesting part of the Travis story is that he not only missed several years because of WW II but he really was never the same afterwards because he suffered frostbite and had part of his foot amputated. So he was out of baseball by age 33. Still, in my book, Addie Joss to the contrary nothwithstanding, you don't make the Hall of Fame based on what might have been. And the voters agree -- I don't think he has ever garnered any significant votes. But maybe the Hall should open a what might have been wing.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/pl...ravice01.shtml

To answer your question Kenny, he might have been injured, his stats might have taken a nosedive for whatever reason (I bet we could come up with a number of examples of guys whose careers nosedived, off the top of my head Doc Gooden comes to mind who surely projected to a first round HOFer after 7 years; Jose Canseco might fit that bill; etc.). We just don't know. I wouldn't want to base HOF membership on projected performance.

[Kenny Cole]

Peter,

Unlike Travis, Doc Gooden's problems were largely self-inflicted so he doesn't really fit the bill. Conseco, were it not for the steroid issue (again self-inflicted) has a halfway decent case for the hall.

Surely you can come up with better examples than that when explaining why someone who showed absolutely no signs of slowing down -- someone who led the league in hits and hit .359 (second in the league) the year before he entered the service -- someone who had finished in the top ten in average 4 out of the 5 years immediately preceding his induction into the service -- would nonetheless, for some inexplicable reason that you cannot articulate,
have fallen flat on his face during the prime years of his career had he not gone off to fight for his country.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, but I suggest that my hypothesis -- which is that he would have continued to play at a consistently high level during the four years that he missed -- is more supportable than your theory that something "might" have happened to cause that not to occurr.

[Peter_Spaeth]

You are misstating the issue. Of course it's more likely that he would have continued. But as long as there is a doubt, I can't give him the benefit of that doubt. And there is a doubt, because it does happen that players go south. I will try to think of more examples. Perhaps you can explain why he never received a vote?

[Peter_Spaeth]

Eric Davis. Darryl Strawberry.

[D. Bergin]

Gary Templeton, Ralph Garr, Carlos Baerga


I'm sure the list could go on and on.

[Kenny Cole]

Unlike Travis, Eric Davis' career was derailed by consistent injuries -- a function of the game he was playing. I've already said that I don't give credit for that. Darryl Strawberry's career was derailed by Darryl Strawberry. He doesn't get credit for screwing himself.

However, the Cecil Travis situation is pretty much unique. The only other ballplayer I can think of whose situation is even arguably similar is Dom DiMaggio, and he too has supporters who think he should be elected to the HOF.

If you use some of Bill James' statistical projection techniques, Travis projects out to about 2800 hits and a .320+ average if he doesn't go off to war and get frostbite during the Battle of the Bulge. Those are pretty special numbers for anyone, let alone a guy who spent a lot of time at SS. He didn't post those numbers, but to me, the biggest question is why?

Cecil Travis' situation is a function of things beyond his control. If Cecil Travis dies in a car wreck in 1942, we can talk about what might have been but the context is different. He didn't die, he didn't get hurt playing baseball, he didn't hurt himself with unhealthy personal habits, and his skills as a baseball player didn't suddenly decline. His best years were effectively stolen from him by a war and the effects of a war.

To me, that is an entirely different scenario than loss of a skill set due to injury, apathy or self-abuse. However, you, and evidently the BBWAA, take the position that it doesn't matter why his numbers aren't what they should have been. I simply disagree with that analysis.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It doesn't matter to me why he didn't post the numbers, correct. The fact is, he didn't post them, and it is unreasonable to give him credit for numbers he didn't post. Baseball is too uncertain a game; too many variables.

[Kenny Cole]

That's the same type of analysis that was used as an argument against inducting the Negro Leaguers. We don't really know what their numbers were, they didn't post them in the majors, and it doesn't matter why. IMO, it does matter why. That's where you and I absolutely disagree.

[D. Bergin]

Did Cecil Travis have injury problems before the war, or was he a defensive liability...........because he only topped 140 games played twice in his career?

His career seems to track very similar to Bill Madlock, with less pop.

[Kenny Cole]

I don't get the sense that he suffered significant injury problems. He had well over 500 plate appearances every year after his first full season, when he had 400+.

I don't know how he was regarded as a fielder. His range factor and assists were pretty decent most years, but he made a fair amount of errors too. My impression, and it is simply that, is that he was average to above-average as a fielder. Never the best, but far from the worst.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

That's the same type of analysis that was used as an argument against inducting the Negro Leaguers. We don't really know what their numbers were, they didn't post them in the majors, and it doesn't matter why. IMO, it does matter why. That's where you and I absolutely disagree.

Oh come on Kenny, that is not analagous and you know it. There is a world of difference between guys that actually played and having imperfect statistics which can be supplemented with eyewitness testimony of fans and fellow players and contemporaneous press coverage, and speculating about how someone MIGHT have done IF he had played.

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by FrankWakefield

I've wondered if the delay on Mize had to do with him playing with the Yankees and Cardinals. Lots of Yankees got into the Hall.
Lots of Cardinals and Giants, too; many on merit, maybe a few from politics by Frisch and others. And politics may well have
helped a Yankee or two. If that was the perception then a backlash to that might have happened. Slaughter would have been
in the same boat. I recall the story about him sitting on the bench in the clubhouse, crying at the news that he'd been traded
to NY. Was Mize abrasive with the media? Was that a two way street??

In the Fall of 1981, I was fortunate to be set-up at a New Jersey BB card show next to the table that Johnny Mize was signing. The two
of us had a great time "Talking Baseball" for several hours. A really great guy, Mize invited me to visit with him, if I'm ever near Demorest,
Georgia.
In 1987, while visiting with friends in western North Carolina, I called Johnny, and drove down to Demorest. He was a most gracious host,
and we talked for about 2 hours. I recall this part of our conversation quite clearly....I asked Big John why he was traded by the Cardinals
at the end of 1941; and, then the Giants (1949), when he was at the top of his game. He told me that after 6 years of 100+ RBI's, a BA
that ranged from .314 to .364, he told Cardinals GM (Branch Rickey).."pay me or trade me". So, he was traded to the Giants. In 1947-48,
Mize's combined HR's = 91 and his RBI's = 263. In 1949, Mize felt he deserved an increase in salary. Leo Durocher and Horace Stoneham
disagreed, so Mize demanded to be traded.
Casey Stengel had followed Mize's career in the Nat'l Lge. since 1938, and the Yankees payed the Giants $40,000 to acquire the "Big Cat".
Mize was very instrumental in the Yankees success during 1949-1953. Especially in the 1952 World Series, which he hit 3 HR's, had 6 RBI's
and batted .400 (in 5 games). Mize was awarded the MVP of the Series. Mize was a tremendous clutch hitter. He still holds the record for
the most Pinch Hits in World Series play. And, hit 3 HR's in a game on 6 different occasions.

Regarding your question (Mize / HOF voting).....from 1960-1967, Mize received considerably less than 100 votes. Between 1968 to 1973,
the votes in favor of Mize started increasing to 157 (43%). Then, his status was in limbo till the Veteran's Committee elected him in 1981.







TED Z

[Kenny Cole]

"It doesn't matter to me why he didn't post the numbers, correct. The fact is, he didn't post them, and it is unreasonable to give him credit for numbers he didn't post." That was your statement.

That is precisely the analysis that was used to support the exclusion of the Negro Leaguers from the hall. The numbers, to the extent they existed at all, were suspect because they weren't compiled against major leaguers.

Ironically, that analysis is true to some extent. None of the numbers we see from offically sanctioned negro league games are such that, in and of themselves, they provide a compelling case for induction of any given player. Due to the way the Negro Leagues were structured, not even the greatest of the Negro Leaguers has lifetime statistics that are even remotely comparable to those of contemporary major leaguers. Thus, following your line of reasoning to its logical conclusion, no one gets in. They "don't get credit for numbers they didn't post" and it doesn't matter why, right? If they weren't compiled, they weren't compiled. End of story.

However, of course, that analysis is also greatly flawed because it does not take into account any of the reasons why. It doesn't take into account the thousands of barnstorming games, the exhausting conditions under which they generally had to play, the travel, or the financial instability of the teams they played for. Obviously, it also doesn't take into account the fact that blacks couldn't post major league numbers due to the existence of factors beyond their control.

That is my point. Why matters. Ultimately, though the HOF didn't want to, it was forced to to accept that why mattered insofar as at least some of the deserving Negro Leaguers were concerned. When it comes to Negro Leaguers, it appears that the why matters to you too. I think it is important with respect to the case of Cecil Travis as well.

[FrankWakefield]

Thanks for that, Ted.

Sounds like Mr. Mize offended front offices of the Cardinals, the New York Giants, and the Yankees. All players want 'more' money, but Mize may well have been more aggressive than others. Those strong franchises could spread the word about a player in those days. That may well have been a part of ownership and the newspapers downplaying Mize. Politics was, is, and probably always will be a vicious thing.

[Peter_Spaeth]

BIG difference you are obscuring, Kenny. The Negro League players DID post the numbers, they just didn't get recorded. In my opinion you are looking to make an analogy that just does not work.

[tedzan]

For sure, there's no doubt about it, politics do play a role in these HOF selections....and, most likely played a part in Mize's long delayed
entry into the HOF.

In the Fall of 1981 when I was with Johnny Mize, he was delightful, friendly, and was very responsive to the many questions I asked him.
That Summer, Mize was finally recognized for the tremendous ballplayer that he was. Our conversation started off on the right track, by
my telling Johnny that one of my fondest memories when I was a 10-year old kid was when I read in The Sporting News (Aug. 23, 1949)
that he was sold to the Yankees.

In the Summer of 1982, I had a lot business trips to Denver; and, I timed one in order to attend the St Louis National. Enos Slaughter was
one of many guests. A bunch of us gathered around Enos as he was holding court. A very interesting story-teller. His parting words to us
were...."I have told my daughters not to accept the HOF award if those idiots elect me into the HOF after I'm dead". And, he was "deadly"
serious about this. As you know, Enos was inducted into the HOF three years later.

Even though I was an avid Yankees fan as a kid, one of my best neighborhood friends, Gary Morit, was an avid Cardinals fan. So, between
Gary, my Bowman BB cards, and The Sporting News, I was well versed on your Cardinals as a kid.

Best regards ole buddy,

TED Z

[tiger8mush]

Cecil Travis should be rewarded for serving his country. Medals, money, honour, etc. But (IMO) entering the BASEBALL Hall of Fame should be based ONLY on your Baseball merits. If Cecil's baseball merits were good enough, he should be in.

By the same account, I don't think the HOF should be ONLY based on stats. Its called the Hall of FAME, not the Baseball Hall of Stats. Stats don't always tell the whole story.

To try to get back on topic, how about Colby Jack Coombs? He's not HOF material, but he pitched along side HOFers Chief Bender & Eddie Plank and had an amazing few seasons with the A's and even more amazing back-2-back post seasons (in 1910 and 1911, I believe).

Rob

[David W]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

Um, no. He doesn't qualify. 9 years, not 10. Elected because of what might have been had he not died early. Try again.

BTW, it wasn't really a what might have been situation with Travis. That was sort of my point. It was. Then it wasn't, due to something that wasn't in any way attributable to something he did or the profession he played.

They waived the 10 year rule on Joss, assuming had he not died from meningitis he would have put up better career stats.

[Kenny Cole]

Peter,

You are wrong. Look at the numbers for the Negro League HOFers in the back of Shades of Glory. Particularly with respect to the ones who played in thirties and forties, it is my understanding that the researchers think they have found box scores for nearly 100% of the league games and that their numbers are very solid.

All of the numbers are small. If someone simply looked at Josh Gibson's league numbers, without any context, I don't think they would be likely to conclude that he is even a HOFer, let alone arguably the greatest catcher ever. The numbers do not support his greatness.

Contrary to what you seem to think, it isn't that his stats weren't recorded or that some portion of them has been lost. They have them. Lost or unrecorded stats isn't the reason the numbers are small. Rather, the reason
they are small is that, due to the circumstances which existed at the time, he only played in 510 league games over the course of his entire career. Not even Josh Gibson can post huge numbers in only 510 games.

[Fred]

I love it when this thread shows up. The 19th Century players are represented, here are a few that didn't get a mention:

Count Mullane - would have probably won 300 games if he wasn't kicked out for a year.

Bobby Mathews - 297 career wins. Probably would have stuck around if he knew three Ws would have meant something.

Bob Caruthers - Third highest winning percentage for a pitcher with over 200Wins.

George Van Haltren - Lifetime .316 BA, 11 x 100 runs scored in a season, 583 lieftime SBs. Over 1000 RBIs over 1600 Runs.

Tip O'Neill - aruguably one of the most dominating statistical seasons in 1887 when he led the league in R, RBI, H, 2B, 3B, HR, BA, Slg%, TBs. Also has a career .326 liefetime BA. I guess hitting .435 one year helps that out.

[SteveMitchell]

Thank you, Kenny Cole, for a vigorous and fact-based defense of the late, great Cecil Travis. I think I was the one who first brought up Cecil Travis in this thread and must say that Kenny's arguments have been flawless. Thanks again, Kenny.

[Peter_Spaeth]

It's still not the same thing. The Negro Leaguers are not being credited for years they didn't play, based on assumptions about what they would have done in those years. They are being credited for their actual careers -- which of course included numerous unofficial games.