Top 25 Worst MLB HOFER’S

[lampertb]

Originally Posted by Mike D.

Other than the fact that it rhymes with Baines, what's your thinking on Raines?

He was a great base stealer in the '80s... but so were Eric Davis and Vince Coleman. He's the '80s equivalent of Jose Reys. He won 1 batting title, and his lifetime avg. is below .300. No WAY he deserves to be in! If he hadn't signed with NY, then he'd have no WS titles (maybe no playoff appearances) at all.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by lampertb

He was a great base stealer in the '80s... but so were Eric Davis and Vince Coleman. He's the '80s equivalent of Jose Reys. He won 1 batting title, and his lifetime avg. is below .300. No WAY he deserves to be in! If he hadn't signed with NY, then he'd have no WS titles (maybe no playoff appearances) at all.

So you are comparing Tim Raines to Eric Davis, Vince Coleman and Jose Reyes.

Tim Raines has almost twice as many career hits as Eric Davis and Vince Coleman, and a lifetime batting average at least 25 points higher. Raines has more career hits and a higher average than Reyes by 12 points. In addition to having a much higher average, Raines also had a much higher OBP: Raines .385, Davis .359, Reyes .334, Coleman .324.

When Raines got on base he made it count. Not only does Tim Raines have more career stolen bases than any of the other players, he has a lower caught stealing rate.
Raines' career stolen bases only trails Rickey Henderson, Lou Brock, Billy Hamilton, and Ty Cobb. While it is unknown how many times Billy Hamilton was caught stealing, Raines has a lower caught stealing % than Henderson, Brock or Cobb. In fact Raines has the highest stolen base percentage of anyone with over 400 attempts. Raines stole 808 bases in 954 attempts for an 84.7% rate.

Because of his high OBP and steal rate, he cranked out a lot of runs. Raines ranks 55th ever in Runs at 1,571 (right behind Rogers Hornsby) compared to Reyes 1,180, Davis 938, Coleman 849.

Raines was a 7x All-Star--Coleman and Davis were 2x All Stars, and Reyes was a 4x All-Star

Career WAR: Raines 69.4, Reyes 37.4, Davis 36.1, Coleman only 12.5

7 Year Peak WAR: Raines 42.4, Davis 30, Reyes 29.3, Coleman only 13.2

JAWS: Raines 55.9 (8th best LF) , Reyes 33.4 (57th best SS), Davis 33.1 (64th best CF), Coleman 12.8 (186th best LF).

Raines had a better peak, and a much better career than the other players. He is about the 8th best left fielder ever, compared to Coleman who is the 186th best. Its just not a great comparison.

[G1911]

Fred McGriff is a similar type player as Albert Pujols. That doesn’t mean they have similar value or hall cases.

I think Raines should have got in earlier. He does pretty well in the modern analytics and he has a great traditional stat line.

[lampertb]

[/QUOTE}I think Raines should have got in earlier. He does pretty well in the modern analytics and he has a great traditional stat line.[/QUOTE]

But at least to my eyes (the old "eyeball test" - nothing scientific) he just wasn't that amazing in the '80s/'90s. On those old Expos teams, Andres Galarraga was the difference maker, not this guy. Again, just my two cents.

[lampertb]

Originally Posted by lampertb

He won 1 batting title, and his lifetime avg. is below .300. If he hadn't signed with NY, then he'd have no WS titles (maybe no playoff appearances) at all.

I repeat...

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by lampertb

I repeat...

Well its nice that you agree with yourself. That must have taken a lot of guts.

Now you are comparing Galarraga to Raines.

Galarraga was on the Montreal Expos from 1985 through 1991. During those years, his batting average was .267. Raines batted just over .300 during that time period.
Galarraga led the league in strikeouts 3x during the time period. Raines led the league in stolen bases 4x during the time period.

Galaragga's highest season WAR from 1985 through 1991 was 5.7 and his total WAR was 10.9
Tim Raines' highest season WAR from 1985 through 1991 was 7.6 and his total WAR was 33.2

[bbcard1]

I think Raines is a very good quality pick. He was also the player most hurt by collusion.

[Mike D.]

Originally Posted by bbcard1

I think Raines is a very good quality pick. He was also the player most hurt by collusion.

I always wonder how people would look at Raines career if he didn't have a significant career overlap with Rickey Henderson.

[G1911]

I like math more than someone’s eyeball test that relies on comparisons to players of a similar type but wildly different stat lines and careers.

Mickey Mantle finished under .300 and only has WS rings because he was a Yankee too.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by G1911

I like math more than someone’s eyeball test that relies on comparisons to players of a similar type but wildly different stat lines and careers.

Mickey Mantle finished under .300 and only has WS rings because he was a Yankee too.

But Math relies on the eye test.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by rats60

But Math relies on the eye test.

Mhm.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by G1911

I like math more than someone’s eyeball test that relies on comparisons to players of a similar type but wildly different stat lines and careers.

Mickey Mantle finished under .300 and only has WS rings because he was a Yankee too.

The Mantle statement is absurd.

[sycks22]

Originally Posted by G1911

I like math more than someone’s eyeball test that relies on comparisons to players of a similar type but wildly different stat lines and careers.

Mickey Mantle finished under .300 and only has WS rings because he was a Yankee too.

That's like saying Jordan only won rings because he was on the Bulls. Mantle was the best player on all 7 of his World Series wins.

[G1911]

Originally Posted by sycks22

That's like saying Jordan only won rings because he was on the Bulls. Mantle was the best player on all 7 of his World Series wins.

It's a team accomplishment; no player has solo'd a team to the World Series. Hence why Ted Williams has none. Mantle needed one of the greatest teams of all time around him, because a single player cannot carry an entire team.

The argument that Raines is not a legitimate hall of famer because he only has a ring because he played for a good team that year is obviously illogical.

[cammb]

Originally Posted by sycks22

That's like saying Jordan only won rings because he was on the Bulls. Mantle was the best player on all 7 of his World Series wins.

Agree 1000%

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Tim Raines' highest season WAR from 1985 through 1991 was 7.6 and his total WAR was 33.2

Raines is one of those guys that WAR loves far more than the numbers would seem to justify. In 1992, for example, his 7 homers and 22 doubles and .784 OPS were somehow worth a 6.3 WAR - basically the same as Mark McGwire and his 42 homers and league-leading 176 OPS+.

(Yes, I'm aware of the defensive component and positional adjustments, etc).

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Tabe

Raines is one of those guys that WAR loves far more than the numbers would seem to justify. In 1992, for example, his 7 homers and 22 doubles and .784 OPS were somehow worth a 6.3 WAR - basically the same as Mark McGwire and his 42 homers and league-leading 176 OPS+.

(Yes, I'm aware of the defensive component and positional adjustments, etc).

You really cherry-picked the data. Yes Raines had low doubles and HRs in 1992. After all, Raines was no longer an All-Star and was past his prime, having been traded to the White Sox. But he still hit .294 with an OBP of .380 (both 13th in the AL), had 9 triples (4th in the AL), and stole 45 bases (7th in the AL). With the high OBP, stolen bases and triples, he was still a run scoring machine with 102 (6th in AL).

And Raines had arguably his best fielding year with 312 putouts, 12 assists and only 2 errors in 129 games in the outfield.

I am not an expert in WAR, but it seems like if you get on base a lot, run the bases well, and field well, you can accumulate a lot of it.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

You really cherry-picked the data. Yes Raines had low doubles and HRs in 1992. After all, Raines was no longer an All-Star and was past his prime, having been traded to the White Sox. But he still hit .294 with an OBP of .380 (both 13th in the AL), had 9 triples (4th in the AL), and stole 45 bases (7th in the AL). With the high OBP, stolen bases and triples, he was still a run scoring machine with 102 (6th in AL).

And Raines had arguably his best fielding year with 312 putouts, 12 assists and only 2 errors in 129 games in the outfield.

I am not an expert in WAR, but it seems like if you get on base a lot, run the bases well, and field well, you can accumulate a lot of it.

He got on base less than McGwire, had an OPS nearly 200 points lower, and scored just 15 more runs in 73 more PAs.

All I'm saying is a WAR of 6.3 implies a REALLY good year and 13th in OBP with no power doesn't match that.

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by Tabe

He got on base less than McGwire, had an OPS nearly 200 points lower, and scored just 15 more runs in 73 more PAs.

All I'm saying is a WAR of 6.3 implies a REALLY good year and 13th in OBP with no power doesn't match that.

Again, defense and base running do matter. Winning baseball games involves more than hitting.

And to try to steer this back to the original topic--Tim Raines belongs in the HOF and is nowhere near one of the 25 worst in the HOF as someone wrote earlier.