Hall of Fame voting and WWII

[G1911]

Originally Posted by packs

What makes Dean a HOFer and not Johan Santana if not his 30 wins?

And is Jack Chesbro in the HOF for any other reason than his 41 win season?

Here's one more for you: Albert Belle and Hack Wilson have pretty similar numbers, don't they? Difference in WAR is negligible, OPS+ is exactly the same, whereas Hack put up 2 seasons with an OPS over 1000, Belle put up 4, including 3 in a row. Hack's single season high for OPS+ was 177. Belle's was 194.

However, only one of the two players set a single season rbi record and that player is in the HOF.

Is your argument that Dean accomplished nothing besides winning 30 games and this is the only reason he is in the hall? Or is it that if he is in, Johan should be in? These two things are not at all the same. I would not vote for either personally, but they are comparable. Johan has a hall of fame argument. He posted an ERA+ of 129 or greater every year from 2002-2010, won 2 Cy Youngs, 3 ERA crowns, led the league in WHIP 4 times and more. Their inning counts are awfully low, but I don't think Johan would be a terrible hall of fame selection, and is better than some pitchers already in in my book. Johan had 8 excellent level seasons (2002 was a partial season, though). Travis had 1 excellent season.


Albert Belle I would vote for. He is not in the hall of fame more because he was a piece of trash as a human being. He had this reputation before he was arrested for DUI's, exposing himself to children, chasing children down in his car, and stalking an ex. I don't think outside of baseball problems should relate to a baseball hall of fame selection, but there is a lot more going on with the vote for Belle than a straight statistical analysis. It is extremely misleading to equate him not being in with Hack.