Hall of Fame Ballot Announced

ejharrington · #1 11-17-2022, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

A good way to tell a poor hall of fame candidate is to look at the arguments made for them and see if they seem reasonable on their own without ever looking at a counterargument.

2 Silver Sluggers.

5 All star games.

A single batting title.

First Base defense.

A stat that existed and was tracked for 9 years labelled "All time".

Arguments like this these are the mark of a very bad hall of fame candidate. They are usually never made for good candidates because better arguments are available and made. Hernandez is probably actually better than these suggest, he was a very good player.

Bury your head in the sand if you want. Here is the data comparing Keith to the other all-time great first basemen.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/l.../jaws_1B.shtml

Add in the fact he was the key player on two different World Championship teams (watch the Mets documentary if you don't believe me - he was the leader), 11 Gold Gloves (uh, first base defense does matter - anyone who understands baseball knows this), batting title, clutch hitting, MVP, etc.

He's a clear HOFer.

packs · #2 11-17-2022, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ejharrington

Bury your head in the sand if you want. Here is the data comparing Keith to the other all-time great first basemen.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/l.../jaws_1B.shtml

Add in the fact he was the key player on two different World Championship teams (watch the Mets documentary if you don't believe me - he was the leader), 11 Gold Gloves (uh, first base defense does matter - anyone who understands baseball knows this), batting title, clutch hitting, MVP, etc.

He's a clear HOFer.

Can you explain what makes Hernandez a HOFer but not Don Mattingly? They have almost the same credentials, but I would say Mattingly was by far the better player at his peak. He could do everything Hernandez could with his glove, but was far superior to Hernandez with a bat in his hand.

Hernandez has 11 gold gloves, Mattingly has 9. Hernandez has a batting title, so does Mattingly. They both won MVPs. Mattingly has one more all star appearance and silver slugger trophy.

I would find it surprising for anyone to say Keith Hernandez was better than Mattingly. He had a longer career, sure, and wasn't injured like Mattingly was. But I don't see how you can possibly argue Mattingly wasn't the superior hitter at his peak.

ejharrington · #3 11-17-2022, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

Can you explain what makes Hernandez a HOFer but not Don Mattingly? They have almost the same credentials, but I would say Mattingly was by far the better player at his peak. He could do everything Hernandez could with his glove, but was far superior to Hernandez with a bat in his hand.

Hernandez has 11 gold gloves, Mattingly has 9. Hernandez has a batting title, so does Mattingly. They both won MVPs. Mattingly has one more all star appearance and silver slugger trophy.

I would find it surprising for anyone to say Keith Hernandez was better than Mattingly. He had a longer career, sure, and wasn't injured like Mattingly was. But I don't see how you can possibly argue Mattingly wasn't the superior hitter at his peak.

Mattingly was elite for four years. If we were just to compare top 4 years, I can see the case for Mattingly.

However, over longer periods, Hernandez was the better player.

cgjackson222 · #4 11-17-2022, 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ejharrington

Mattingly was elite for four years. If we were just to compare top 4 years, I can see the case for Mattingly.

However, over longer periods, Hernandez was the better player.

Packs, check out their WAR7:
Hernandez 41.2
Mattingly 35.8

Most people would agree that 4 good years is not enough to make it to the Hall of Fame.

Mattingly was a better hitter in in '85 and '86 than Keith ever was. But Keith had a longer career and was more consistent.

Their career WARs aren't even close.

There are very few people that consider Mattingly to be the best fielding first basement ever, but there are many that believe Hernandez was. And the stats support this. Check out some tape of Hernandez. He was absurd.

packs · #5 11-17-2022, 10:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

Packs, check out their WAR7:
Hernandez 41.2
Mattingly 35.8

Most people would agree that 4 good years is not enough to make it to the Hall of Fame.

Mattingly was a better hitter in in '85 and '86 than Keith ever was. But Keith had a longer career and was more consistent.

Their career WARs aren't even close.

There are very few people that consider Mattingly to be the best fielding first basement ever, but there are many that believe Hernandez was. And the stats support this. Check out some tape of Hernandez. He was absurd.

It has been explained that Hernandez has a WAR out of whack with his performance. Whereas he has been rewarded for his defense, Mattingly has for some reason been punished, even though they have the same exact profile at first base. Nobody who played with Mattingly had anything different to say about his glove. He was all world as well but for whatever reason WAR doesn't reward him.

Even with his healthy career and longevity, Hernandez's counting stats are either below or only barely above Mattingly. Mattingly has more home runs, more RBIs, a higher career average, and a higher career OPS.

Hernandez has 29 more hits in 3 additional seasons and scored 117 more runs.

You said Mattingly had a four year peak. How did he eclipse Hernandez so much if Hernandez had this great HOF career?

cgjackson222 · #6 11-17-2022, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

It has been explained that Hernandez has a WAR out of whack with his performance. Whereas he has been rewarded for his defense, Mattingly has for some reason been punished, even though they have the same exact profile at first base. Nobody who played with Mattingly had anything different to say about his glove. He was all world as well but for whatever reason WAR doesn't reward him.

Even with his healthy career and longevity, Hernandez's counting stats are either below or only barely above Mattingly. Mattingly has more home runs, more RBIs, a higher career average, and a higher career OPS.

Hernandez has 29 more hits in 3 additional seasons and scored 117 more runs.

You said Mattingly had a four year peak. How did he eclipse Hernandez so much if Hernandez had this great HOF career?

It’s odd that the burden is on Hernandez supporters to explain why dWAR likes him. Perhaps you should explain why dWAR didn’t like Mattingly?

packs · #7 11-17-2022, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

It�s odd that the burden is on Hernandez supporters to explain why dWAR likes him. Perhaps you should explain why dWAR didn�t like Mattingly?

I can't. And that's the point. Mattingly had 9 gold gloves. If 11 gold gloves is a testament to Hernandez, how can 9 not be for Mattingly?

G1911 · #8 11-17-2022, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

It�s odd that the burden is on Hernandez supporters to explain why dWAR likes him. Perhaps you should explain why dWAR didn�t like Mattingly?

The burden is on Hernandez supporters to explain why he belongs. They and you have in this thread chosen 1B defense and WAR, which likes Hernandez for defensive reasons.

The burden is on Mattingly supporters to explain why he belongs. They do not tend to rely on 1B defense (the least important position where poor fielders are relegated because it has the smallest impact), but his peak offense production.

G1911 · #9 11-17-2022, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ejharrington

Bury your head in the sand if you want. Here is the data comparing Keith to the other all-time great first basemen.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/l.../jaws_1B.shtml

Add in the fact he was the key player on two different World Championship teams (watch the Mets documentary if you don't believe me - he was the leader), 11 Gold Gloves (uh, first base defense does matter - anyone who understands baseball knows this), batting title, clutch hitting, MVP, etc.

He's a clear HOFer.

For, I think the 5th time now, Hernandez has the WAR (WAR, WAR7 and JAWS are different time weighted cut ups of the exact same statistic, for the third time). This is all that can be pointed too that is actually near HOF standard. I am happy to stand corrected, for like the tenth time, but there's an obvious reason no other career stat, for this career honor, is brought up.

Surely one can see why this is not a compelling case to anyone who doesn't have a Keith Hernandez bias. He's got 1 stat, 1B defense is a joke when C, 2B and SS defense first players, with the sole exception of Ozzie Smith, are considered the worst HOF selections, and his WS performance is poor. If Madlock's 4 are dismissed and considered an insulting comparison, 1 batting title is not a credit.

cgjackson222 · #10 11-17-2022, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

For, I think the 5th time now, Hernandez has the WAR (WAR, WAR7 and JAWS are different time weighted cut ups of the exact same statistic, for the third time). This is all that can be pointed too that is actually near HOF standard. I am happy to stand corrected, for like the tenth time, but there's an obvious reason no other career stat, for this career honor, is brought up.

Surely one can see why this is not a compelling case to anyone who doesn't have a Keith Hernandez bias. He's got 1 stat, 1B defense is a joke when C, 2B and SS defense first players, with the sole exception of Ozzie Smith, are considered the worst HOF selections, and his WS performance is poor. If Madlock's 4 are dismissed and considered an insulting comparison, 1 batting title is not a credit.

You keep citing that defense first players are considered the worst HOFers. Who exactly are you referring to, Bill Mazeroski?

I hope not, because if you are comparing Bill Mazeroski to Keith Hernandez, then you have stooped even lower than comparing Bill Madlock to Keith Hernandez.

One more note--a lot of folks on here think Bill James knows what he is talking about. Last July he wrote an article in which he stated: I only advocate for a very limited number of players at any time, the very BEST of those not included; at the moment this would be Dwight Evans, Bobby Abreu and Minnie Minoso, perhaps one or two more. But I acknowledge the validity of other candidates. Keith Hernandez was a Hall of Fame caliber player. I’m not advocating for him, but I acknowledge that he belongs.

I personally would just like to see him get another shot at a vote.

G1911 · #11 11-17-2022, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

You keep citing that defense first players are considered the worst HOFers. Who exactly are you referring to, Bill Mazeroski?

I hope not, because if you are comparing Bill Mazeroski to Keith Hernandez, then you have stooped even lower than comparing Bill Madlock to Keith Hernandez.

One more note--a lot of folks on here think Bill James knows what he is talking about. Last July he wrote an article in which he stated: I only advocate for a very limited number of players at any time, the very BEST of those not included; at the moment this would be Dwight Evans, Bobby Abreu and Minnie Minoso, perhaps one or two more. But I acknowledge the validity of other candidates. Keith Hernandez was a Hall of Fame caliber player. I�m not advocating for him, but I acknowledge that he belongs.

I personally would just like to see him get another shot at a vote.

I have named specifics several times. Apparently everything must be stated more than 3 times, only for it to be asked again. Mazeroski, Maranville, Schalk, I named specifically. I also stated that this category constitutes every player elected primarily for their defense except for Ozzie Smith, the only glove-primary HOFer that seems to generally held as a 'real one'. Those clear, precise statements made multiple times already should give you plenty to work with.

You are free to be insulted by Madlock's very similar bat to Hernandez and higher oWAR (since WAR is the only stat we can cite for Keith). I don't understand it, but that's your choice.

I tend to like James. More interested in the case for him, as for every single other player, rather than appeals to authority though. Argument by authority is fallacious.

cgjackson222 · #12 11-17-2022, 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

I have named specifics several times. Apparently everything must be stated more than 3 times, only for it to be asked again. Mazeroski, Maranville, Schalk, I named specifically. I also stated that this category constitutes every player elected primarily for their defense except for Ozzie Smith, the only glove-primary HOFer that seems to generally held as a 'real one'. Those clear, precise statements made multiple times already should give you plenty to work with.

You are free to be insulted by Madlock's very similar bat to Hernandez and higher oWAR (since WAR is the only stat we can cite for Keith). I don't understand it, but that's your choice.

I tend to like James. More interested in the case for him, as for every single other player, rather than appeals to authority though. Argument by authority is fallacious.

So you are or are not comparing Keith Hernandez to Mazeroski, Maranville, or Schalk? It sure sound like you are.

As for your dismissal of citing Bill James as an "appeal to authority", that is just weak. I am sure you know better than Bill though.

G1911 · #13 11-17-2022, 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cgjackson222

So you are or are not comparing Keith Hernandez to Mazeroski, Maranville, or Schalk? It sure sound like you are.

As for your dismissal of citing Bill James as an "appeal to authority", that is just weak. I am sure you know better than Bill though.

I cannot fathom how my multiple statements, citing three specifics and then a blanket clause counting every single defense primary electee except for Smith, could possibly be simplified any further. There is no difficult word, no hemming and hawing, and it has been stated several times. It is already at its simplest. I do not understand why you need me to write everything 5+ times for you, and then keep asking me to state things I have already said in very simple and plain words again and again. It's right there for you already.

Yes. Because it is true. You didn't link an argument for Hernandez, you quoted in bold a statement of his belief without the argument. An appeal to authority, the authority of James. An appeal to authority is not reasonable. A thing is reasonable based on the supporting facts and merits of the argument itself, not what authority supports it. If we are arguing by appeal of authority, here's the trump card: "The Hall of Fame is the final authority and clearly things Hernandez does not belong. Therefore he does not". Which, of course, isn't logical, as it's just an appeal to authority.

cgjackson222 · #14 11-17-2022, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

I cannot fathom how my multiple statements, citing three specifics and then a blanket clause counting every single defense primary electee except for Smith, could possibly be simplified any further. There is no difficult word, no hemming and hawing, and it has been stated several times. It is already at its simplest. I do not understand why you need me to write everything 5+ times for you, and then keep asking me to state things I have already said in very simple and plain words again and again. It's right there for you already.

Yes. Because it is true. You didn't link an argument for Hernandez, you quoted in bold a statement of his belief without the argument. An appeal to authority, the authority of James. An appeal to authority is not reasonable. A thing is reasonable based on the supporting facts and merits of the argument itself, not what authority supports it. If we are arguing by appeal of authority, here's the trump card: "The Hall of Fame is the final authority and clearly things Hernandez does not belong. Therefore he does not". Which, of course, isn't logical, as it's just an appeal to authority.

Oh boy, your flustered again. Time to shut the thread down....

ejharrington · #15 11-17-2022, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by G1911

For, I think the 5th time now, Hernandez has the WAR (WAR, WAR7 and JAWS are different time weighted cut ups of the exact same statistic, for the third time). This is all that can be pointed too that is actually near HOF standard. I am happy to stand corrected, for like the tenth time, but there's an obvious reason no other career stat, for this career honor, is brought up.

Surely one can see why this is not a compelling case to anyone who doesn't have a Keith Hernandez bias. He's got 1 stat, 1B defense is a joke when C, 2B and SS defense first players, with the sole exception of Ozzie Smith, are considered the worst HOF selections, and his WS performance is poor. If Madlock's 4 are dismissed and considered an insulting comparison, 1 batting title is not a credit.

JAWS / WAR / etc. is a very big metric. It says he belongs. The writers disagreed. I believe his peers who actually watched him play will correct that mistake.

packs · #16 11-17-2022, 12:55 PM

He wasn't selected for the committee vote. How do they intend to do that?

G1911 · #17 11-17-2022, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

He wasn't selected for the committee vote. How do they intend to do that?

Yes, it would seem that they do NOT agree.

Garvey was considered in 2020 and 2018, Mattingly, McGriff and Palmeiro this year, Will Clark in 2019. It seems that they think there are several modern 1B more deserving. Which does not make them right, but I don't see how this committee that it is not putting him on the ballot is going to "fix" this mistake the writers made of not sorting BBREF by WAR.

ejharrington · #18 11-17-2022, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs

He wasn't selected for the committee vote. How do they intend to do that?

I didn't say this time.

paul · #19 11-29-2022, 10:48 PM

In case any of you missed it, the Hall of Fame website now lists the members of the committee who will be casting their ballots. Results will be announced this coming Sunday at 8 pm eastern time.

cgjackson222 · #20 11-30-2022, 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paul

In case any of you missed it, the Hall of Fame website now lists the members of the committee who will be casting their ballots. Results will be announced this coming Sunday at 8 pm eastern time.

https://baseballhall.org/news/2023-e...ced-december-4

"The 16-member Hall of Fame Board-appointed electorate charged with the review of the Contemporary Baseball Era player ballot features Hall of Fame members Chipper Jones, Greg Maddux, Jack Morris, Ryne Sandberg, Lee Smith, Frank Thomas and Alan Trammell; major league executives Paul Beeston, Theo Epstein, Arte Moreno, Kim Ng, Dave St. Peter and Ken Williams; and veteran media members/historians Steve Hirdt, LaVelle Neal and Susan Slusser."

"Results of the voting will be announced live on MLB Network on Sunday, Dec. 4 during MLB Tonight at 8 p.m. ET. Any electees are expected to be available to media shortly after the announcement via individual Zoom calls.

Albert Belle, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Don Mattingly, Fred McGriff, Dale Murphy, Rafael Palmeiro and Curt Schilling were named on Nov. 7 as the candidates for Contemporary Baseball Era Players Committee consideration. All candidates are living."

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Article: 2022 Hall of Fame Ballot (and cards)	Mike D.	Modern Baseball Cards Forum (1980-Present)	0	12-04-2021 07:55 PM
2016 Hall of Fame Ballot, Who would you vote for?	cardsfan73	Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk	140	01-16-2016 11:04 AM
Golden Era Hall of Fame Ballot announced	bigtrain	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	160	12-09-2014 09:40 AM
Hall of Fame Ballot Announced	bigtrain	Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk	34	01-08-2014 03:45 PM
Hall of Fame Veterans Committee Ballot	paul	Net54baseball Vintage (WWII & Older) Baseball Cards & New Member Introductions	21	11-15-2009 08:43 PM