Most Overrated Pre-War Player is...
 

From a purely statistical standpoint I'm wondering what pre-war player(s) you think are overrated...Not trying to "stir the pot" per se but more interested in which players' legends don't square up with the reality of their accomplishments. Cheers, Pat

Enough has been said about T-E-C, but I would have to go with Tinker as one of them.

All of the Black Sox guys!

Evers
 

Take a look at Johnny Evers stats. He certainly didn't make it in the hall with his bat.

Evers
 

From what I've seen on stats and my grandfathers stories, I think Evers is overrated. He (grandpa) use to say Tinkers-Evers-Chance was his claim to the hall of fame...

Evers and Chance are completely deserving Hall-of-Famers. As long as there are people out there trotting out the old nugget that a poem got them enshrined, they are actually under-rated.

Cheers,
Blair

Tinker
 

Tinker is Rizzuto...either you are a stat guy, then they aren't in, or you're a "value to team" guy and they are. I'll take Tinker and trade Bobby Wallace for Ron Santo...

Take Care,
Geno

Scoundrel
 

This might not be too popular among some here, but Hal Chase is imo way over rated and by all accounts one of the worst humans to play baseball. I avoid his cards the way he avoided sportsmanship. I cant see the fascination with him nor the Black Sox players, but to each his own.
Statistically speaking, i find it hard to see how many HOFers were included, most drastically Highpockets Kelly, first base, comes to mind.

George Sisler.

Lefty Gomez... but he's a HoF'er and deservedly so
 

Vernon "Lefty" Gomez gets my vote for most over-rated. Several pitchers with superior records (produced for inferior teams) are outside the hallowed walls of Cooperstown and will probably never gain entry. But Lefty's a Hall of Famer and deservedly so. (I just wish several others were also enshrined at Cooperstown.)

Sisler? .340 lifetime average and two .400 + years? Please, share your rationale.

Disproportionately low on base percentage and slugging average. Bill James agrees, by the way, calling him among the most overrated players of all time.

From Bill James' tome at 449
"Perhaps the most over-rated player in baseball history..... Sisler had a lower on-base percentage, in his career, than Fred McGriff, Alvin Davis, Earl Torgeson, Jack Clark, Mike Schmidt, Mark McGwire, or Gene Tenace. Or Ralph Kiner, or Elmer Valo, or a hundred other guys who didn't hit anywhere near .300."

I agree with a lot of what Bill James says but every once in a while he writes some of the most assinine things (usually when he is focusing on one statistical category--in this case OBP). To say that Sisler is among the MOST OVERRATED ever is silly. The guy was a great ballplayer and was viewed as such during his playing career. He was essentially the Tony Gwynn or Ichiro of his era--hardly a bad thing! Most overrated is a ridiculous statement when it comes to Sisler.
-Rhett

Agreed Rhett. And that awful obp is higher than Ichiro's career obp.

+1

Sisler's reputation is hurt if you disregard fielding, stolen bases, and all the things that speed and brains contribute to playing baseball.

I also agree with all the Sisler defenders--clear-cut hall-of-famer.

I don't think Bill James was suggesting Sisler is not a Hall of Famer, and neither am I, of course. I do think he may be overrated though in the sense of being considered one of the elite greats. Interestingly, on baseball reference.com, the three players most statistically similar are Heinie Manush, Zach Wheat and Kiki Cuyler. Not the creme de la creme.

Brian, he was universally described by the players of his era to be the best first baseman of the era -- and some said of all time. Yes, his numbers were not huge but many HOFers back then, in the dead ball era, did not have huge numbers. And of course he was a disgusting human being but that's what fascinates me: the duality of man, etc., evident in the Hal Chase story. Keep in mind, also, that Chase received more votes for the HOF in the first voting in 1936 than 18 future HOFers as well as Joe Jackson. He was that good.

I like Bill James, but I really hope for his sake that he said this early in his sabremetrics career. Making an argument based against one statistic is something that is frowned upon by all sabremetricians so it is rather hypocritical of him to do so unless he had some other supporting evidence.

Furthermore, if he's using one statistic, OBP is inferior to wOBA. Hopefully he said this in the 80's or 90's.

Of the names you listed, here is how they rank according to career wOBA.

Kiner .428
McGwire .415
Sisler .396
Schmidt .395
McGriff .389
Clark .375
Torgeson .374
Tenace .371
Valo .371
Davis .365

wOBA is a much more all encompassing statistic in terms of offense. Defense, baserunning, and "intangibles" makes things a bit murkier. But when it comes to the stick, Sisler is not overrated. Unless you're saying he is a better first basemen then Pujols, Gehrig, Thomas, or a few other 1b's

FWIW James said it in the 2003 edition of his historical baseball abstract -- fairly deep into his career -- his explanations aren't always complete so I doubt it is based on that one metric alone that just happens to be the one he mentioned.

Well wOBA was being researched in 2006 and came to a head in the popular book by Tom Tango "The Book", so that is a positive sign. WAR would follow shortly after. I just wonder who he thinks is overrating him. I wouldn't put him in the top 10 1B of all time, but I don't think many would. He would probably sit just outside my top 15. I think that is where is universally placed though amongst most fans.

EDIT: Off the top of my head he sits somewhere in the 12-14 range, but there might be a few names I'm forgetting.

George Sisler was a very great player before he suffered from a terrible illness that diminished his ability to play. Breaking in during the last 5 years of the "deadball" era, he was always one of the best hitters in the league. When the ball went Live, he got even better. My gosh, he hit .400 twice. But he missed all of 1923 due to a sinus illness and never fully recovered. To be fair to him and his admirers, we need to look not at the career totals but at his work prior to 1923. But even if we look only at the career totals, we will see that he was surpasses Manush, Wheat, and Cuyler because he was a great infielder. He was reputed to be among the best ever, right up there in the Chase / McInnis class.

Buck Weaver
 

I think Buck Weaver is overrated and his cards are overvalued. People put him in a class with Joe Jackson, as if his career was HOF caliber but he was ruled ineligible.

In reality, Buck only played 9 years and batted .272 with little power. His stats for runs and stolen bases are only average.

His cards sell for more than 20 times the price of a common.

King Kelly. Pretty luke-warm career for such a high-tier HOFer when it comes to the price of his cards.

About half the players in the Hall of Fame who played primarily in the 1920's and 1930's.....

Earl Averill, Rick Ferrell, Chick Hafey, Pie Traynor, KiKi Cuyler, Jim Bottomley, Travis Jackson, Dave Bancroft, George Kelly to name a few off the top of my head.

Hard to believe Sisler is in this conversation. Based on others general knowledge of his career and what seems like a lack of interest in his cards compared to many others, I'd put him right smack into the under-rated category.

The guy had some amazing years, with some awful line-ups around him.

OBP is flawed in that it gives walks the exact same relevance as hits. Hits most often move up runners extra bases, not just one base at a time. Sisler was also a Triples machine and stole plenty of bases.

Put the guy in the middle of a Yankees line-up and we'd be paying Gehrig like money for his cards.

I absolutely agree 100%. Bringing up Sisler's name in this conversation is possibly the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen presented in any thread!

Tommy McCarthy for one. I also agree that King Kelly, while extremely popular, is overrated. He was comparable to Buck Ewing offensively, but not the defensive catcher that Buck was. In the 1920's, Connie Mack called Buck Ewing the greatest catcher he had ever seen.

David, I understand why many of the players that are on your list are on there but the one name that really jumped out at me as being the notable exception on your list is Pie Traynor.

At the time Traynor retired he was literally regarded as the greatest 3rd Baseman that had ever lived. While his statistics aren't as sexy as some anybody regarded as the "greatest" at any position during their career (or in his case history up to that point) doesn't really have any place on an overrrated list.

-Rhett

more ridiculousness for tony
 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3...hall-of-famers

Looks who's number 1!! :)

traynor
 

The fact that he was rated number one just begs the question whether or not he deserved the ranking, if not then he was overrated. It's like trying to prove God exists because the Bible says so. As to the merits, I don't really have an opinion, I think third basemen do tend not to have great stats.

According to the writer Sisler "stumbled" into the Hall of Fame and Lou Brock is "the worst pick ever".

This is possibly the "worst article ever".

:(

Rube Marquard with a 201-177 record and a 3.08 ERA doesn't look overly impressive IMO.

Doug- you beat me to it. Rube Marquard went on a world wide tour publicizing himself as a HOFer after his good but hardly great career. We are not alone, a lot of fans feel he is the most overrated HOFer.

I thought he just said Brock was the worst FIRST BALLOT pick ever.

Buck Weaver the most overrated?????

"I have played against them all and in my mind there is no doubt that the best third baseman in baseball is Buck Weaver." Ty Cobb.

Buck was quickly becoming a star after adjusting to the hot corner spot. You have to remember he played in the dead ball era so his stats won't be as glamorous as later 3rd sackers. He also batted after some of the best hitters in baseball so his RBI totals won't be reflective as later players but he was a clutch hitter.
I would agree his cards are overpriced but that's due to his noteriety as being the only one of the banned 8 who didn't try to throw the Series and was on "the square."
Does he deserve to be in the HOF based on his career? Probably not since his career was cut short by the travesty of Landis, but most overrated? No way.

OK, I'll concede Traynor and replace him with Earl Combs and Joe Sewell....
:)

Peter, that may actually be the worst "article" I've ever read. There are no real criteria he is following--and I have little doubt he read what Bill James wrote and (as with many Bill James subscribers) if James wrote it it couldn't possibly be wrong.

I am all for statistical studies and analysis BUT there IS a human element to baseball--if there wasn't it would be played by mindless robots. I have a really hard time looking back in history and saying the guys that played along side the players themselves were idiots and couldn't recognize talent. Pie Traynor was deemed as the best all-around third baseman in history at the time he retired--Bill James has him ranked outside the top 10-15 third sackers. George Sisler was considered one of the greatest pure contact hitters and an intelligent player--but acording to this joker (the writer of the article NOT Bill James) he "stumbled into the Hall". Also how can any list purporting to include the most overrated players in history not include the likes of Bill Maz, Jesse Haines, Ted Lyons, Eppa Rixey and the bunch. Really, Sisler, Traynor and Brock are the most overrated ever...joke!

[QUOTE=rhettyeakley;863785]Also how can any list purporting to include the most overrated players in history not include the likes of Bill Maz, Jesse Haines, Ted Lyons, Eppa Rixey and the bunch./QUOTE]

I agree completely those players are not HOF worthy, along with many others. I don't think though that either the writer or James is suggesting Sisler, Traynor, Brock etc. don't belong in the HOF -- rather, they think they should not be regarded as highly as they are. As to your point about contemporaries, that sort of view can be biased, as we saw from the big push Frankie Frisch made to get lots of unworthies into the Hall in the 50s.

I agree that Frisch went too far with Lindstrom and Hafey, but most of the guys that he promoted were the mainstays of the Giants and Cardinals dynasties of the 20's and 30's. I am sympathetic to the argument that the top players on the top teams deserve an extra look when it comes to election to the Hall of Fame.

[QUOTE=Peter_Spaeth;863789]

A player who is underrated in my opinion when it comes to being overrated is Rabbit Maranville. He compiled a gawdy .258 career average and averaged a homer a year despite playing much of his career in a notoriously high average era. Why he is seldom mentioned as overrated when most baseball fans would take someone like Don Kessinger or Larry Bowa over him is pretty amazing. He did have a long career, but so did Jack Quinn. He was a pretty good player on a pretty bad World Champion...but is largely forgotten even when it comes to being among the worst of the best.

The hall of fame is what it is. You can't fix it, but it's cool. I would love to see an "inner circle" with an original 10 and electing one additional player every other year. It may take ten years for Mantle to get it...it would lead to an incredibly spirited debate.

The case for Rick Ferrell is hardly overwhelming. But hey he did have 143 hits in a season -- once.

So let's dial it up a notch...what is your worst possible hall of fame team? I'm sure I've missed a couple

1b: Kelly
2b: McPhee
ss: Maranville
3b: Linstrom
c: Ferrell
of: Hafey
of: L. Waner
of: Hooper
p: Lyons

I would add Waite Hoyt and Red Faber and Eppa Rixey to the pitching staff. Dave Bancroft might be worse at SS.

I would put Mazeroski at 2B over McPhee. I would argue Haines or Rixey at SP. Waite Hoyt didn't have an overwhelming career either, but did have great postseason success.

Not sure about the defense factor, but Ray Schalk can be argued at C.

I personally feel Hack Wilson is overrated. He had 5 "HOF" type years, possibly only 3 can be argued. His career numbers are nowhere near HOF worthy.

EDITED TO ADD: Agree with Peter's additions to the SP staff

After further reflection, Red Schoendienst would be a pretty good (bad) candidate at second base...

overrated
 

pre: maranville (had worse lifetime batting average than i did in my worthless little league era)
post: mazeroski( an amazing,even breathtaking homerun doth not a hall of famer make)

best,

barry

Don't agree at all that Hooper is one of the worst HOFers. Hooper was a star and mainstay of one of the first great dynasties of baseball.

I wrote the following a year ago in response to another post suggesting Hooper did not belong in the HOF:

-------------------------------------------

A few points about Hooper:

- He was a lead-off man with more pop than most,
- His job was to score runs - he scored 1429 of them (#79 all time), averaging 100 per season over his entire career,
- Top 100 all time in career base hits,
- #39 all time in triples, which means, in that era, both speed and power,
- Drew over 1000 walks, averaging 80 per season,
- Glove? Not even a question. One of the greatest. Key component of what many regard as the best outfield of all time,
- World Series? Unreal with both glove and bat. Won 4 World Series titles with Red Sox. The key player who was a constant in all 4 Red Sox championship years. First player ever to hit 2 home runs in a single WS game in 1915,
- Also stole 375 bases,
- The first and longest part of his career was played in the dead ball era with Boston. He hit .272 over this period. He went to Chicago roughly when the lively ball came into play and after that - in the twilight of his career - he hit .302...pretty good evidence of the effect of the lively ball on the stats of some players.

So I strongly disagree with the widely-held idea that Hooper does not belong.

---------------------------------------

Cheers,
Blair