Hall of Fame Early Baseball Committee

[ValKehl]

Thanks, Scott, for your post re Dummy Hoy. I am in awe of anyone who overcomes a significant handicap to accomplish great things in life. Even though Hoy's career stats are not quite up the the usual HOF standards, I feel the HOF should enshrine Hoy to recognize how much a handicapped baseball player can accomplish.

[GaryPassamonte]

My top choice.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by CardCollector

I mean, all stats are made up in some sense. So are the stats that were readily available in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. That has no bearing whatsoever on whether newer stats more accurately capture a player's value in a way that wasn't apparent to Hall voters a long time ago. Using the best stats from yesteryear and today, we can get a pretty good idea of who should be in the Hall who wasn't enshrined originally. I like Carothers and Dahlen, and from this thread I now appreciate Harry Stovey, but I don't think we should reject more nuanced stats as "theoretical."

WAR isn't based on actual wins, it is based on theoretical wins. Here is an article by Bill James expaining it.

https://www.billjamesonline.com/judge_and_altuve/

[packs]

Here's my Hoy:

[triwak]

I'm pulling for Dahlen, Alejandro Oms, and Buck O'Neil.

[Angyale]

Hoping they get in!

[Leon]

Originally Posted by ValKehl

Thanks, Scott, for your post re Dummy Hoy. I am in awe of anyone who overcomes a significant handicap to accomplish great things in life. Even though Hoy's career stats are not quite up the the usual HOF standards, I feel the HOF should enshrine Hoy to recognize how much a handicapped baseball player can accomplish.

Not a bad perspective.

[bigfanNY]

Tip O'neil another best player on one of the best teams ever 1886 St. Louis. American Assn I think is reason he is not already in..

[Jim65]

I think these Early Baseball/Veterans Committees should be done away with, they accomplished what their intention was, to see if any HOF players were missed to the years. These players have been looked at and evaluated many times. How many more Harold Baines need to be elected?

[Huysmans]

Originally Posted by bigfanNY

Tip O'neil another best player on one of the best teams ever 1886 St. Louis. American Assn I think is reason he is not already in..

O'Neill being Canadian I'm sure doesn't help as well...

[bigfanNY]

Player with .326 lifetime average 10 years pro ball. Triple crown winner. Not Harold Baines. And to counter the AA vs NL Argument, Tip and the 1886 Browns beat the White Sox who were the National leauge champs 4 games to 2 in postseason.

[packs]

The AA was no different than the American League was when it started up. It was an equal competitor that didn't last, not a minor league that wasn't up to snuff. The stats should be respected.

And I really don't know what a player like Stovey or Hoy or Dahlen has in common with Harold Baines. No one would bring up Baines in a discussion about the most overlooked 20th century players 100 years from now.

[bbcard1]

Guys....I think I'm good.

I could see Dahlen, Bill Dinneen (as an ump), Buck O'Neil, and maybe Bobby Matthews, but I'm fine if we just stand pat. My personal favorite who is borderline but I would argue for using the lame Harold Baines defense would be Larry Doyle.

[AGuinness]

Originally Posted by commishbob

Can we get Buck O'Neil in the Hall? Please?

Let's keep this drumbeat going. It's a shame it didn't happen earlier, when Buck was alive and could have given a speech at his induction. At the very least, the world could certainly use some Buck O'Neil stories to bring some joy to everyone.

[HexsHeroes]

.
Isn't there a category for individual contributions to the game of baseball, outside of individual performance ?

If so, I would love to see more HOF consideration for Lefty O'Doul, and the contributions he made towards growth and importance of baseball in Japan.

[commishbob]

Originally Posted by aguinness

let's keep this drumbeat going. It's a shame it didn't happen earlier, when buck was alive and could have given a speech at his induction. At the very least, the world could certainly use some buck o'neil stories to bring some joy to everyone.

I just finished this book for the second time. I doubt anyone could read it and not become an advocate for him getting in.

Best book I’ve read in years.

AF26DB61-909A-4E2C-8D1F-5D373E742BFC.jpg

[Jason19th]

I will preface this comment by noting that I am a long term Negro League collector who will always be in Buck O’neil’s debt for the work he did bring the history of the Negro League to life and creating the Negro League Museum.

Buck O’Neil is not a hall of famer by any definition that the hall has ever used. As a player he was an no power first basemen who hit .260 and had a short careers. Using available stats Seamheads shows an OPS of .681 and a OPS+ of 101. He wasn’t someone who was kept out of the league because of his color. Had integration come 10 years earlier I doubt he would have made the majors much less been a regular. Think about the 1sr basemen of the 1930’s and 1940’s. A lot of them were better than Buck and by a wide margin.

As a manager he had a very short career- which I acknowledge was in part so to the end of the negro leagues.

As a scout he had a long and respected career but name me someone who got in the Hall based on scouting

He as never an owner or team executive.

He did help to preserve a history of the Negro Leagues but so did a lot of guys. Guys like Max Manning, Charles Biot, and Lester Lockett were tremendous ambassadors of the game. Quincy Troupe wrote a great book in the 1970 which was one of the early first person narratives about the league. I think it is also worth noting that but for the fact that Buck Leonard having a stroke, O’Neil was only going to have a small role in Ken Burns baseball and likely never would have gotten the national fame he received

O’neil has done some much for baseball but so have Sam Lacy, Shirley Povich, Pete Palmer, Bill James and so many more.

Buck O’Neil is a great man. He is not a hall of famer

[esd10]

Jake daubert, bill dahlen and Tony mullane all deserve to be in the hof

[nat]

"I would love to see more HOF consideration for Lefty O'Doul, and the contributions he made towards growth and importance of baseball in Japan."

FWIW, he is in the Japanese hall of fame.

The guys who get into the American hall for this sort of thing are 19th c. guys. The Harry Wrights of the world. But between being a pitcher, a star batter, being heavily involved in Japanese baseball, and being a force in the PCL for ages, O'Doul definitely had an extraordinary life in baseball.

[packs]

In 2024 Ichiro will be inducted into the HOF. Some would argue that moment is only made possible by Lefty O'Doul.

[FrankWakefield]

1- Ed Reulbach
2- Jack Glasscock
3- Lefty O'Doul
4- Carl Mays
5- George Mullin

It isn't just a matter of looking at statistics...

[Kenny Cole]

Originally Posted by Jason19th

I will preface this comment by noting that I am a long term Negro League collector who will always be in Buck O’neil’s debt for the work he did bring the history of the Negro League to life and creating the Negro League Museum.

Buck O’Neil is not a hall of famer by any definition that the hall has ever used. As a player he was an no power first basemen who hit .260 and had a short careers. Using available stats Seamheads shows an OPS of .681 and a OPS+ of 101. He wasn’t someone who was kept out of the league because of his color. Had integration come 10 years earlier I doubt he would have made the majors much less been a regular. Think about the 1sr basemen of the 1930’s and 1940’s. A lot of them were better than Buck and by a wide margin.

As a manager he had a very short career- which I acknowledge was in part so to the end of the negro leagues.

As a scout he had a long and respected career but name me someone who got in the Hall based on scouting

He as never an owner or team executive.

He did help to preserve a history of the Negro Leagues but so did a lot of guys. Guys like Max Manning, Charles Biot, and Lester Lockett were tremendous ambassadors of the game. Quincy Troupe wrote a great book in the 1970 which was one of the early first person narratives about the league. I think it is also worth noting that but for the fact that Buck Leonard having a stroke, O’Neil was only going to have a small role in Ken Burns baseball and likely never would have gotten the national fame he received

O’neil has done some much for baseball but so have Sam Lacy, Shirley Povich, Pete Palmer, Bill James and so many more.

Buck O’Neil is a great man. He is not a hall of famer

While I agree that Buck O'Neil does not meet HOF standards either as a player or as a manager when his achievements are viewed in isolation, I would argue and have argued that he more than meets the the somewhat fuzzy HOF requirements as a contributor when his achievements are viewed in total. That is particularly true in his case given the fact that his opportunities to excel were, to say the least, negatively impacted by the racial prejudices that existed during his time. Doc Adams is literally the only person I can think of off the top of my head who contributed as much to baseball as Buck O'Neil did as a non-player or manager, and who is not already in. In that regard, there are many who are already in who contributed far less, such as Morgan Bulkeley, who was nothing more than a figurehead. And there are many who clamor for Adams' induction. I personally think it would be fitting if both were be inducted.

[BillyCoxDodgers3B]

Originally Posted by Jason19th

I will preface this comment by noting that I am a long term Negro League collector who will always be in Buck O’neil’s debt for the work he did bring the history of the Negro League to life and creating the Negro League Museum.

Buck O’Neil is not a hall of famer by any definition that the hall has ever used. As a player he was an no power first basemen who hit .260 and had a short careers. Using available stats Seamheads shows an OPS of .681 and a OPS+ of 101. He wasn’t someone who was kept out of the league because of his color. Had integration come 10 years earlier I doubt he would have made the majors much less been a regular. Think about the 1sr basemen of the 1930’s and 1940’s. A lot of them were better than Buck and by a wide margin.

As a manager he had a very short career- which I acknowledge was in part so to the end of the negro leagues.

As a scout he had a long and respected career but name me someone who got in the Hall based on scouting

He as never an owner or team executive.

He did help to preserve a history of the Negro Leagues but so did a lot of guys. Guys like Max Manning, Charles Biot, and Lester Lockett were tremendous ambassadors of the game. Quincy Troupe wrote a great book in the 1970 which was one of the early first person narratives about the league. I think it is also worth noting that but for the fact that Buck Leonard having a stroke, O’Neil was only going to have a small role in Ken Burns baseball and likely never would have gotten the national fame he received

O’neil has done some much for baseball but so have Sam Lacy, Shirley Povich, Pete Palmer, Bill James and so many more.

Buck O’Neil is a great man. He is not a hall of famer

You couldn't have worded my own sentiments any better! Great job.

The overwhelming emotional attachment people have for Buck's character tends to affect their logic when it comes to their stance on him being inducted. He possessed a very rare brand of kindness that made everyone feel welcome and could do so whether you met him in person or even just watched some Ken Burns. That was his greatest gift.

Yes, he was a great ambassador, but so was Lefty O'Doul. On top of that, O'Doul was quite the player. Let's hope they would first look at O'Doul's possibility as a candidate for induction before thinking about Buck. There are other candidates more deserving than either of these fellows, however.

[CardCollector]

Originally Posted by Jim65

I think these Early Baseball/Veterans Committees should be done away with, they accomplished what their intention was, to see if any HOF players were missed to the years. These players have been looked at and evaluated many times. How many more Harold Baines need to be elected?

Thanks all, for the many illuminating posts on who might deserve to get in. I think the point Jim65 raises is a worthy one ripe for further discussion. Set aside Baines because the Early Committee probably wouldn't include someone who doesn't rate high statistically. I wonder if there is something to be said for not opening up the Hall to 19th century players UNLESS there is a modern stat that wasn't available initially that provides further justification for entry. Hall of Stats seems to do a pretty good job of this, and there's some overlap with a few of the players we've been discussing (including Caruthers and Dahlen): http://www.hallofstats.com/. But unless there's a strong statistical case based on something not available generations ago, I think I agree with Jim65.

[packs]

I disagree. A player like Stovey, for example, was voted on one time: in 1936 when five of the greatest players of all time were the only ones inducted. He was never voted on again.

[triwak]

Originally Posted by packs

I disagree. A player like Stovey, for example, was voted on one time: in 1936 when five of the greatest players of all time were the only ones inducted. He was never voted on again.

+1000! We should never cut off our ability to view history through the lens of hindsight. I think the Eras Committees are the most fun votes of the Hall - especially if you're a HOF card collector!

[CardCollector]

Originally Posted by packs

I disagree. A player like Stovey, for example, was voted on one time: in 1936 when five of the greatest players of all time were the only ones inducted. He was never voted on again.

Great response, thanks, I didn't know that and I agree with your point. +1!

[GaryPassamonte]

Stovey was one of the ten finalists on the 2016 pre-integration ballot. I believe he received 50% of the vote. 75% was required for induction.

[rhodeskenm]

I like the idea of a major push for big group of 19th century guys, negro leaguers and of course Dahlen.

Two names I’d add are Pete Browning to 19th Century and one from post war who got passed over - Gil Hodges

[packs]

Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte

Stovey was one of the ten finalists on the 2016 pre-integration ballot. I believe he received 50% of the vote. 75% was required for induction.

Does anyone know who casts these votes? I thought I remembered seeing a random list of current HOFers as the panel, but why them? What do they know about someone like Harry Stovey?

[Kenny Cole]

According to Wikipedia, the 2016 pre-integration committee had the following members:

Hall of Famers: Bert Blyleven, Bobby Cox, Pat Gillick and Phil Niekro
Executives: Chuck Armstrong, Bill DeWitt, Gary Hughes and Tal Smith
Media/Historians: Steve Hirdt, Peter Morris, Jack O'Connell, Claire Smith, Tim Sullivan, T.R. Sullivan, Gary Thorne and Tim Wendel

[GaryPassamonte]

Originally Posted by packs

Does anyone know who casts these votes? I thought I remembered seeing a random list of current HOFers as the panel, but why them? What do they know about someone like Harry Stovey?

A historical overview committee picks the 10 nominees to be considered. I'm not sure how many people are on the oversight committee. The 10 nominees are then voted on by 16 era committee members with 12 votes or 75% required for induction. That is the process. The problem is, as you stated, who does the voting on both the oversight committee and the era committees. These committees should be stacked with baseball historians expert in the era they are voting on, not HOFers, executives, or, for that matter, media personnel, a vast majority of which know nothing about the era they are voting on. Peter Morris is the only true baseball historian on the list in the previous post. What you need is 16 Peter Morrises on the committee.

[triwak]

Originally Posted by GaryPassamonte

A historical overview committee picks the 10 nominees to be considered. I'm not sure how many people are on the oversight committee. The 10 nominees are then voted on by 16 era committee members with 12 votes or 75% required for induction. That is the process. The problem is, as you stated, who does the voting on both the oversight committee and the era committees. These committees should be stacked with baseball historians expert in the era they are voting on, not HOFers, executives, or, for that matter, media personnel, a vast majority of which know nothing about the era they are voting on. Peter Morris is the only true baseball historian on the list in the previous post. What you need is 16 Peter Morrises on the committee.

Agree! The Hall really needs to get smarter with this.

[PowderedH2O]

I'll add two to the list that would be overlooked because they didn't stick around long enough to get those magic milestones.

Bob Johnson and Wes Ferrell

Yes, there are a lot of guys in from this time period, but a lot of those guys weren't as good as these two guys. Not overwhelming candidates, but if they went in they certainly wouldn't lower the HOF's standards by any stretch.

[GeoPoto]

I find it hard to argue for his inclusion in the HoF, although Ted Williams called him the "best hitter not in the Hall" and he had his almost certain HoF career truncated by the call to duty. But, this thread gives me another chance to bring him up.

Everybody on this forum knows 1941 saw Joe DiMaggio hit safely in 56 consecutive games (get stopped and then hit in 16 more!) and Ted Williams go 6 for 8 on the last day to hit .406 for the season (only .002 below DiMaggio’s average during his 56-game streak!). But how many know who led the AL in hits that year?

It was Washington SS Cecil Travis, who was halfway to the HoF at the end of the 1941 season -- he had 1,370 career hits and a .327 average before what would have been his age-28 season. But duty beckoned and like many ball players he joined the armed forces that winter. Although he spent most of the war playing BB for military teams, he shipped out to the ETO in time for the Battle of the Bulge, during which he earned a Bronze Star and suffered frost bite so bad an operation was required to save his feet.

He eventually returned to the Senators while still only 31 years old (military service consumed his age-28, -29, -30, and -31 seasons), but the physical trauma suffered in Europe had robbed him of his ability to excel and his career quickly petered out. Despite hitting less than .250 in parts of three seasons before his retirement (following ‘Cecil Travis Night” in 1947 at Griffith Stadium with General Dwight Eisenhower in attendance), his career .314 batting average is still the best by a SS in AL history and third in MLB history (behind Honus Wagner (who else?) and Arky Vaughan).

So, while considering the possible candidates surfaced in this thread, most of whom have stronger career counting stats, remember to at least raise a glass to what might have been for Cecil Travis, who protected democracy instead of the 4-5 hole and discarded the second half of a HoF career in the process.

https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1602936717
https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1602936782
https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1602936791

[nat]

"Wes Ferrell"

The hall of fame got the wrong brother. Wes would have been a decent choice. Rick is wildly underqualified. The representative Rick Ferrell card in my hall of fame collection is the Goudey premium that shows both brothers. The hall can't get it right, but at least my collection can.

[GeoPoto]

https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1602944605

[shagrotn77]

Originally Posted by nat

"Wes Ferrell"

The hall of fame got the wrong brother. Wes would have been a decent choice. Rick is wildly underqualified. The representative Rick Ferrell card in my hall of fame collection is the Goudey premium that shows both brothers. The hall can't get it right, but at least my collection can.

Wes Ferrell of the career 4.04 ERA? Come on now. Rick was a terrible choice. Wes would have been, too.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Wes should've been an outfielder. Though I would like to point out that his career ERA was 16% better than his contemporaries in this era of explosive offenses. Jack Morris's career ERA was only 5% better than his contemporaries...

[Orioles1954]

Originally Posted by GeoPoto

I find it hard to argue for his inclusion in the HoF, although Ted Williams called him the "best hitter not in the Hall" and he had his almost certain HoF career truncated by the call to duty. But, this thread gives me another chance to bring him up.

Everybody on this forum knows 1941 saw Joe DiMaggio hit safely in 56 consecutive games (get stopped and then hit in 16 more!) and Ted Williams go 6 for 8 on the last day to hit .406 for the season (only .002 below DiMaggio’s average during his 56-game streak!). But how many know who led the AL in hits that year?

It was Washington SS Cecil Travis, who was halfway to the HoF at the end of the 1941 season -- he had 1,370 career hits and a .327 average before what would have been his age-28 season. But duty beckoned and like many ball players he joined the armed forces that winter. Although he spent most of the war playing BB for military teams, he shipped out to the ETO in time for the Battle of the Bulge, during which he earned a Bronze Star and suffered frost bite so bad an operation was required to save his feet.

He eventually returned to the Senators while still only 31 years old (military service consumed his age-28, -29, -30, and -31 seasons), but the physical trauma suffered in Europe had robbed him of his ability to excel and his career quickly petered out. Despite hitting less than .250 in parts of three seasons before his retirement (following ‘Cecil Travis Night” in 1947 at Griffith Stadium with General Dwight Eisenhower in attendance), his career .314 batting average is still the best by a SS in AL history and third in MLB history (behind Honus Wagner (who else?) and Arky Vaughan).

So, while considering the possible candidates surfaced in this thread, most of whom have stronger career counting stats, remember to at least raise a glass to what might have been for Cecil Travis, who protected democracy instead of the 4-5 hole and discarded the second half of a HoF career in the process.

https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1602936717
https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1602936782
https://www.net54baseball.com/attach...1&d=1602936791

Bravo! Couldn’t agree more.

[packs]

Originally Posted by shagrotn77

Wes Ferrell of the career 4.04 ERA? Come on now. Rick was a terrible choice. Wes would have been, too.

As mentioned, I'd put Wes in way before I ever put in Jack Morris or Jesse Haines or Burleigh Grimes. Wes was an absolute freak. Check out his batting statistics while being one of the better pitchers of his era.

In 1935 Wes won 25 games and hit 347.

[nat]

Not all 4.04 ERAs are created the same. Ferrell pitched in a very high-offense era. As noted upthread, his ERA was 16% better than league average (once you adjust for the parks he played in). The fancy way of saying this is that he had a 116 ERA+. Here are the hall of famers with a worse ERA relative to their leagues:

Jim Bunning
Steve Carlton
Fergie Jenkins
Phil Niekro
Eppa Rixey
Robin Roberts
Mickey Welch
Chief Bender
Waite Hoyt
Nolan Ryan
Jack Chesbro
Jessie Haines
Red Ruffing
Burleigh Grimes
Don Sutton
Pud Galvin
Early Wynn
Herb Pennock
Jack Morris
Catfish Hunter
Rube Marquard

He wouldn't be inner-circle or anything. And many of the hall of famers who were worse pitchers than he was pitched far more innings, which has value.
But he would be a decent pick; not out of place given the other guys in the hall. He was also a really good hitter. For his career he had a 280 batting average, 351 on base percentage, and 446 slugging percentage. His OPS was exactly league average (once you adjust for the parks he played in). A guy who pitches as well as Jim Bunning but is also a league average batter is really valuable.