Hall of Fame voting and WWII

[conor912]

I love how we’re now debating which war injuries are Hall worthy

[tedzan]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

Sorry Ted, but the other Ted was notorious for wanting EVERYONE in the hall of fame with him. I'd value the opinion of a LOT of people more than Williams. Frankly I'd take your word over Ted's lol. For my money Alvin Dark belongs in the Hall before Phil. Phil was a plus defender (but no Ozzie Smith, or even Pee Wee Reese) and only had one exceptional offensive season and several above average. Even if you give him his war years back he barely would've cleared 2000 hits.

I'm definitely one of those guys who wishes the Hall was more exclusive. Rizzuto was a very good player with flashes of greatness, but if he had played in Cleveland he wouldn't be in the Hall.

Unlike some other people here though I can agree to cordially disagree!

Happy Holidays!

Scott

"Agree, to disagree".....the most phony phrase in this "new-speak" world. I hate that phrase. What the hell does it actually mean ? Whatever, I totally disagree with you, ole buddy.

I normally do not discuss BB topics with any one who did not experience the subject matter in real-time. Because there really are no Stats, hearsay, etc., etc. that can substitute for
having seen the players perform. I was an avid BB fan growing up in the late 1940's - 1950's. As a young guy, I went to all three New York Stadiums and watched a lot of BB on TV.
The Yankees "dynasty" (1949 - 1953) was an amazing thing to see. It is an achievement in BB which I doubt will ever be repeated. It began with Casey Stengel in 1949 (which the
phony NY media declared him a "clown"). Sure, Casey was an underrated Manager in the Majors and the Minors in the past. However, given the right ballplayers he became a Base-
ball genius.
This I can attest to from having lengthy conversations with Tommy Henrich, Johnny Mize, and Phil Rizzuto. I was on a flight to Chicago in April of 1984 with Phil Rizzuto (he invited
me to sit in 1st Class with him). The common theme from these three ballplayers was that Stengel inspired them to play at their best. Indeed Rizzuto in 1949 scored 110 Runs and
drove in 65 Runs (pretty good for a Lead-Off batter). Well, the MVP Committee thought enough of Phil that he came in 2nd that year (Ted Williams was awarded MVP).
In 1950, Rizzuto was awarded the MVP. His numbers in 1950 = 200 Hits, BA = .324, 125 Runs, 66 RBI's, 92 BB, 7 HR's (and only 39 KO's). Phil's defensive play was outstanding.

Scott, all those years of BB are very clear in my mind. You will find out as you get to be my age that your mind starts reverting back to your youth. And you recall a lot of this stuff
as it may have occurred recently. I'll end with this...….

Here's a Wirephoto of the Oct 1st 1949 Play-Off game against Boston. Allie Reynolds just didn't have it that day, so Casey Stengel brings in the Yankees ace reliever Joe Page in the
3rd inning. Page completely shuts-down the Red Sox batters, allowing only one Hit in 6 2/3rds innings. And, Johnny Lindell drives a long HR into the Left Field seats of Yankee Sta-
dium to win game. I bring this particular event to you to as an example of Baseball games which I still clearly remember from 70 years ago.



Johnny Lindell …….……………………….…………….. Joe Page …………………………. Joe DiMaggio



TED Z

T206 Reference
.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Ted,

I just meant that in a day and age when people seem to think anyone who disagrees with them is at best a substandard intellect, and at worst sub-human, I just think of the person in question as a friend who sees things differently from me. It's not some reason to hold a grudge or think less of someone. Probably bordering on the political now so I'll stop.

[G1911]

I would argue that the Hall has actually done a pretty good job handling WWII (though they have not handled plenty of other things well).

Travis is the most glaring example of a career ruined by WWII, but unlike most of the others, this is more because it ruined his career entirely, instead of just missing X number of years. I'm not sure I would vote for someone, based on a projection of what they might have done if something that did happen did not actually happen, but I sure wouldn't be opposed to giving him a plaque. It becomes a slippery slope to me. What if Herb Score wasn't injured? He projected to have some great seasons.


I don't think anyone else who missed time really looks like a hall of famer, even giving them credit for those years and assuming they would have played at a very high level. Dom Dimmaggio's career is still short, and his extremely low OPS+ (by a hall of fame standard) doesn't indicate he was really all that great of a batter, which is his key. I don't think Dom would be in the conversation if his last name was different.


I think Rizzuto is a lower-quality Hall of Famer, but he was elected more for defense, not offense. His detractors make too much of his batting average and not enough of his glove. His supporters make too much of the fact that he wore Yankee pinstripes and was popular. Bill James, a detractor of Rizzuto's for a long time, ran a statistical study in the Historical Baseball Abstract from 2001, that concluded that Rizzuto was the greatest SS at turning the double play in baseball history. Obviously this is one statistical study, projecting what the expected double plays for a team would be and comparing to what they actually did, I don't recall all the details. Defensive statistics remain weak, and it does seem to have been the opinion at the time that he was a truly elite level defensive player at the second-most important defensive position. I can see the argument here, though I still think he rates pretty low on the Hall of Fame scale, but I don't think he was a truly terrible selection. If Al Dark was a Yankee and Rizzuto played for the A's, it's pretty clear who would be in the hall of fame.

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by G1911

I would argue that the Hall has actually done a pretty good job handling WWII (though they have not handled plenty of other things well).

Travis is the most glaring example of a career ruined by WWII, but unlike most of the others, this is more because it ruined his career entirely, instead of just missing X number of years. I'm not sure I would vote for someone, based on a projection of what they might have done if something that did happen did not actually happen, but I sure wouldn't be opposed to giving him a plaque. It becomes a slippery slope to me. What if Herb Score wasn't injured? He projected to have some great seasons.


I don't think anyone else who missed time really looks like a hall of famer, even giving them credit for those years and assuming they would have played at a very high level. Dom Dimmaggio's career is still short, and his extremely low OPS+ (by a hall of fame standard) doesn't indicate he was really all that great of a batter, which is his key. I don't think Dom would be in the conversation if his last name was different.


I think Rizzuto is a lower-quality Hall of Famer, but he was elected more for defense, not offense. His detractors make too much of his batting average and not enough of his glove. His supporters make too much of the fact that he wore Yankee pinstripes and was popular. Bill James, a detractor of Rizzuto's for a long time, ran a statistical study in the Historical Baseball Abstract from 2001, that concluded that Rizzuto was the greatest SS at turning the double play in baseball history. Obviously this is one statistical study, projecting what the expected double plays for a team would be and comparing to what they actually did, I don't recall all the details. Defensive statistics remain weak, and it does seem to have been the opinion at the time that he was a truly elite level defensive player at the second-most important defensive position. I can see the argument here, though I still think he rates pretty low on the Hall of Fame scale, but I don't think he was a truly terrible selection. If Al Dark was a Yankee and Rizzuto played for the A's, it's pretty clear who would be in the hall of fame.

I would argue (and have done so) that being hurt playing baseball is completely different than being hurt serving your country. On the one hand, playing baseball is entirely voluntary. Being drafted into the service for WWII was not. Being hurt playing in the profession you chose is substantially different, IMO, than being hurt doing something that you had no choice other than to do. As I understand it, Travis never resented having his career ruined by being drafted, which is true of most of the greatest generation. But the fact remains that he did, as a result of events over which he had no choice.

Herb Score had great projections until he got hurt doing what he had chosen to do. Cecil Travis had great projections until he was hurt doing what he was required to do by his country. To my way of thinking, there is a significant difference between the two, and it really bothers me that he gets next to no recognition for the sacrifice that he made. There really isn't any slippery slope in my estimation, because he is the only potentially HOF worthy candidate I can think of who had to make that sacrifice.

[bigfanNY]

Great subject I would be very happy if the Hall of Fame recognized every Major Leauge player who served in any branch of the service during War time.

[riggs336]

Since we're talking HOF and WWII, I thought I'd mention Hal Newhouser. No question he was a fine pitcher but he did compile 80 of his 207 wins in 1944, 45 and 46.
I won't weigh in on Scooter, but if we're looking for a HOF SS we could start with Bill Dahlen. His 75.4 WAR ranks seventh among all shortstops and he's tenth all-time in JAWS.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by Kenny Cole

I would argue (and have done so) that being hurt playing baseball is completely different than being hurt serving your country. On the one hand, playing baseball is entirely voluntary. Being drafted into the service for WWII was not. Being hurt playing in the profession you chose is substantially different, IMO, than being hurt doing something that you had no choice other than to do. As I understand it, Travis never resented having his career ruined by being drafted, which is true of most of the greatest generation. But the fact remains that he did, as a result of events over which he had no choice.

Herb Score had great projections until he got hurt doing what he had chosen to do. Cecil Travis had great projections until he was hurt doing what he was required to do by his country. To my way of thinking, there is a significant difference between the two, and it really bothers me that he gets next to no recognition for the sacrifice that he made. There really isn't any slippery slope in my estimation, because he is the only potentially HOF worthy candidate I can think of who had to make that sacrifice.

I think this my biggest objection is that it's not a numbers argument or an argument based on things that actually happened for his hall of fame case. Serving in WWII is admirable, more admirable than having a hall of fame baseball career. I'm not sure that means we should ignore what actually did happen and credit him with a purely theoretical career.

Travis had a WAR of 29.8 and an OPS+ of 108, 8% percent better than the league. He had 2 seasons with a 120 OPS+, 1940 (120 exact), and 1941 (a fantastic season, 154). Travis was, by OPS, a league average bat from 1934-1936. He was pretty good in 1937-1938, was slightly below league average in 1939, very good in 1940 and had a fantastic year in 1941. He never came back the same from the war and was done after, for the reasons mentioned by others earlier.

His best stat is his high battering average in an era where batting averages were very very high. Nothing else stands out, and he only had one excellent season looking at his numbers in context with the league he played in.

To get Travis to a hall of fame career, we have to assume that it was that season that was how he was going to produce, not any that came before, and then grant him not just 3 more excellent years during the war but a couple more after that as well. It seems as likely to me that he would not have continued this high level of play for several more years, as it is that he would. I think it is pretty safe to assume that Ted Williams, Johnny Mize and Stan Musial would have continued to crush the league during the war years, because they had a long track record of doing exactly that over the years he did play in Major League Baseball. Travis, looking at the numbers, did not.


The more I look at it, the more it seems clear this is a pretty shaky series of assumptions to make, if one even accepts the prerequisite argument that we can elect someone for a theoretical accomplishment that did not happen in actual fact. Travis would, I think, be the first player elected for things that did not actually happen in the real world. I don't think this is a good idea, because it opens the Hall to any number of "What if?" scenario's as well as awarding a player for theoretical achievements. In fact, he had 1 Hall of Fame level season.

[packs]

I could not disagree more. You're talking about years when Travis was 19 to 22 years old. Those are years a lot of people are still in the minor leagues.

From age 23 to 27, his career peak, he hit 332 and his OPS+ rose every year with the exception of his age 25 season. He also began to receive MVP votes in 4 of those 5 seasons, finishing 6th the year before he entered the service.

You have to make a decision when it comes to Travis and what his war injury meant to his career. It either derailed a HOF career or it didn't. It doesn't make much sense to debate what he did while he was 19 to 22 years old.