PDA

View Full Version : Veteran's Committe Hall of Fame



redsmetz
01-11-2007, 11:15 PM
I was looking at the list of players being considered by the Veterans Committee, including several with Reds connections (sorry, I couldn't get it to format right). Pinson had the most significant time, but Flood started with us, Mays had several good seasons in the 20's and Newcombe had a few years with us towards its end. Voting results will be announced February 27th.

Players Ballot


Dick Allen Mickey Lolich Tony Oliva
Bobby Bonds Sparky Lyle Al Oliver
Ken Boyer Marty Marion Vada Pinson
Rocky Colavito Roger Maris Ron Santo
Wes Ferrell Carl Mays Luis Tiant
Curt Flood Minnie Minoso Joe Torre
Joe Gordon Thurman Munson Cecil Travis
Gil Hodges Don Newcombe Mickey Vernon
Jim Kaat Lefty O'Doul Maury Wills

Cyclone792
01-11-2007, 11:44 PM
The Vets' Committee only votes every other year right now. Here's the 2005 results from their last election ...


2005 Election
80 Total votes cast
75% required for election

Gil Hodges 52 65.0%
Ron Santo 52 65.0%
Tony Oliva 45 56.3%
Jim Kaat 43 53.8%
Joe Torre 36 45.0%
Maury Wills 26 32.5%
Vada Pinson 23 28.8%
Luis Tiant 20 25.0%
Roger Maris 19 23.8%
Marty Marion 16 20.0%
Ken Boyer 15 18.8%
Joe Gordon 14 17.5%
Carl Mays 12 15.0%
Minnie Minoso 12 15.0%
Dick Allen 12 15.0%
Curt Flood 10 12.5%
Wes Ferrell 9 11.3%
Mickey Lolich 9 11.3%
Don Newcombe 8 10.0%
Sparky Lyle 7 8.8%
Elston Howard 6 7.5%
Bobby Bonds 4 5.0%
Rocky Colavito 4 5.0%
Thurman Munson 2 2.5%
Smoky Joe Wood 2 2.5%

A case could be made for Vada Pinson, but I'm not sure how persuasive it'd be. His credentials match that of some of the lower tier Hall of Fame center fielders, such as Richie Ashburn, Larry Doby, Earl Averill, Hack Wilson and Kirby Puckett, and Bernie Williams is also a current day player of a similar mold. Pinson's just received so little support that I don't really see him ever reaching the Hall.

Carl Mays will never see Cooperstown because of the Ray Chapman incident.

Ron Santo might get elected this year, and either way it's going to be very close. Ryne Sandberg is a new Vets' Committee voter this year, and he stated during his induction speech in 2005 that he's voting for Santo. Peter Gammons is also a new Vets' Committee voter this year, and he's stated in the past that Santo is a glaring Hall omission so I'd expect Gammons to vote for Santo. Right now, Santo looks like the best hope to break through with the new Vets' Committee, and let's face it, the guy definitely deserves to be there.

I have no idea why Gil Hodges receives as much support as he does.

For the upcoming Vets' Committee election, there are 84 total voters. If everybody votes, 63 votes will be required for election. Here's the current voters for the upcoming 2007 Vets' Committee election ...

Hall of Famers (61)

Hank Aaron
Sparky Anderson
Luis Aparicio
Ernie Banks
Johnny Bench
Yogi Berra
Wade Boggs
George Brett
Lou Brock
Jim Bunning
Rod Carew
Steve Carlton
Gary Carter
Orlando Cepeda
Bobby Doerr
Dennis Eckersley
Bob Feller
Rollie Fingers
Carlton Fisk
Whitey Ford
Bob Gibson
Monte Irvin
Reggie Jackson
Fergie Jenkins
Al Kaline
George Kell
Harmon Killebrew
Ralph Kiner
Sandy Koufax
Tom Lasorda
Lee MacPhail
Juan Marichal
Willie Mays
Bill Mazeroski
Willie McCovey
Paul Molitor
Joe Morgan
Eddie Murray
Stan Musial
Phil Niekro
Jim Palmer
Tony Pérez
Gaylord Perry
Phil Rizzuto
Robin Roberts
Brooks Robinson
Frank Robinson
Nolan Ryan
Ryne Sandberg
Mike Schmidt
Red Schoendienst
Tom Seaver
Ozzie Smith
Duke Snider
Bruce Sutter
Don Sutton
Earl Weaver
Billy Williams
Dave Winfield
Carl Yastrzemski
Robin Yount

Ford C. Frick Award Recipients (14)

Marty Brennaman
Herb Carneal
Jerry Coleman
Gene Elston
Joe Garagiola
Ernie Harwell
Milo Hamilton
Jaime Jarrin
Harry Kalas
Felo Ramírez
Vin Scully
Lon Simmons
Bob Uecker
Bob Wolff

J.G. Taylor Spink Award Recipients (8)
Murray Chass
Charley Feeney
Peter Gammons
Jerome Holtzman
Hal McCoy
Jack Lang
Ross Newhan
Tracy Ringolsby

Former Veterans Committee Members (1)

John McHale (term expires after 2007 election)

remdog
01-12-2007, 12:00 AM
By Cyclone792:
"Ron Santo might get elected this year, and either way it's going to be very close. Ryne Sandberg is a new Vets' Committee voter this year, and he stated during his induction speech in 2005 that he's voting for Santo. Peter Gammons is also a new Vets' Committee voter this year, and he's stated in the past that Santo is a glaring Hall omission so I'd expect Gammons to vote for Santo. Right now, Santo looks like the best hope to break through with the new Vets' Committee, and let's face it, the guy definitely deserves to be there."

Personally, I disagree with your statement that 'the guy definately deserves to be there'. I'd say he's borderline at best. At the same time I don't think Ryne Sandberg should be voting because I don't think that Sandberg deserves to be in the HOF either.

By Cyclone792:
I have no idea why Gil Hodges receives as much support as he does.

Perhaps if you had seen him play you would have an idea.

Cyclone, I'm not beating up on you here because I appreciate your work but there are posters on this board that are number oriented and there are posters that are action oriented. I'm not saying one is better than the other but I am saying the perspective is different. I can read and understand the stats but, being 'action oriented', things that show up on the field but aren't necessarily easily numerated carry a lot of weight with me. One of those 'things' is who I feared in a lineup. Who did I hate to see come up in a crital time. Hodges was of that mold---Sandberg and Santo weren't. (shrug)

Rem

Cyclone792
01-12-2007, 01:14 AM
By Cyclone792:

Personally, I disagree with your statement that 'the guy definately deserves to be there'. I'd say he's borderline at best. At the same time I don't think Ryne Sandberg should be voting because I don't think that Sandberg deserves to be in the HOF either.

By Cyclone792:

Perhaps if you had seen him play you would have an idea.

Cyclone, I'm not beating up on you here because I appreciate your work but there are posters on this board that are number oriented and there are posters that are action oriented. I'm not saying one is better than the other but I am saying the perspective is different. I can read and understand the stats but, being 'action oriented', things that show up on the field but aren't necessarily easily numerated carry a lot of weight with me. One of those 'things' is who I feared in a lineup. Who did I hate to see come up in a crital time. Hodges was of that mold---Sandberg and Santo weren't. (shrug)

Rem

Contrary to what you may believe, I enjoy the different perspective far more than people reading my posts may guess. Different perspectives on the game and its players are necessary, otherwise as a fan, you're cheating yourself. I'm not naive to this; nobody is.

The large downfall of relying too heavily on an entirely subjective stance is when that subjectivity either contradicts the recorded, statistical record, or it is so loosely defined that it is in no way capable of fully defining the actual recorded, statistical record.

I just finished reading an old Baseball Digest article where numerous Hall of Fame hitters were asked to name the toughest pitcher they ever faced. Several of the hitters named Ewell Blackwell as that pitcher. He was "lean and mean," "a little nasty," and had that wicked sidearm delivery coming at you from third base. I guarantee you opposing hitters feared him.

Ewell Blackwell was a great pitcher, one of the best pitchers the Reds have ever had in their history as a franchise. Hitters hated hitting against him, and they've openly admitted they hated hitting against him. Still, by the current Hall of Fame standards with the pitchers inducted, that doesn't mean Ewell Blackwell is a Hall of Famer. The recorded, statistical events just don't support it.

One of the hitters I've feared the most in all my baseball watching just dropped off the BBWAA ballot this week. Is he a true, deserving Hall of Famer based on the current standards? Perhaps so, perhaps not. In his peak, he was absolutely feared not only by opposing pitchers and teams but also by fans. But the statistical record for that player makes him borderline at best.

savafan
01-12-2007, 02:43 AM
I'd like to see Kaat and Maris inducted.

RedsBaron
01-12-2007, 07:04 AM
I was looking at the list of players being considered by the Veterans Committee, including several with Reds connections (sorry, I couldn't get it to format right). Pinson had the most significant time, but Flood started with us, Mays had several good seasons in the 20's and Newcombe had a few years with us towards its end. Voting results will be announced February 27th.

Players Ballot


Dick Allen Mickey Lolich Tony Oliva
Bobby Bonds Sparky Lyle Al Oliver
Ken Boyer Marty Marion Vada Pinson
Rocky Colavito Roger Maris Ron Santo
Wes Ferrell Carl Mays Luis Tiant
Curt Flood Minnie Minoso Joe Torre
Joe Gordon Thurman Munson Cecil Travis
Gil Hodges Don Newcombe Mickey Vernon
Jim Kaat Lefty O'Doul Maury Wills

Of the players are that list, I would definitely vote for Ken Boyer, Ron Santo, Minnie Minoso, and Jim Kaat. I would give careful consideration to Tony Oliva, Joe Torre and Joe Gordon.

Jpup
01-12-2007, 07:36 AM
What's the opinion of Bobby Bonds? Any chance that he will ever get enough support? I think it's going to be very hard for any of these guys to make it outside of maybe Santo. I could see Torre making it after he retires from managing.

remdog
01-12-2007, 08:22 AM
By Cyclone:
The large downfall of relying too heavily on an entirely subjective stance is when that subjectivity either contradicts the recorded, statistical record, or it is so loosely defined that it is in no way capable of fully defining the actual recorded, statistical record.

By the way I read this statement Cyclone I take it that you are defining statistical records as the ultimate tool to judge a player. (Please let me know if that's incorrect.) I would certainly disagree with that idea and would say that there are times when stats make a player look more or less valuable than observation would indicate.

Rem

remdog
01-12-2007, 08:32 AM
Posters in this thread have expressed a desire to see a number of players voted into the HOF. Among them: Kaat, Maris, Boyer, Santo, Minoso, Gordon, Oliva and Torre. All good ballplayers, none great ballplayers, IMO.

I guess the question is who and what qualifies as great. We all have our pesonal standards but none of the players above make the grade with me. The question becomes: is this The Baseball Hall of Fame or The Baseball Hall of Pretty Good? That tipping point fuels the debate every year and will probably continue to do so as long as people watch and discuss baseball.

Rem

MrCinatit
01-12-2007, 08:50 AM
I would love to see Mickey Lolich, Tony Oliva, Sparky Lyle, Vada Pinson, Ron Santo, Luis Tiant, Curt Flood, Minnie Minoso, Joe Torre, Thurman Munson, Gil Hodges, Jim Kaat in there.
Lyle was the second wave of "new" relievers, after Face, Abernathy and Wilhelm. I always thought he made the roll of the reliever more respectable at that time, along with Fingers and Marshall.
I think Flood should go in for the whole free agency thing.
Both Torre and Hodges should go in because of a nice combination of a good playing and managerial career.
If only Minosa and Munson had the chance to play in the majors a longer period of time....
And, well, I've always been a fan of Lolich, Oliva, Pinson, Santo, Tiant and Kitty Kaat.

savafan
01-12-2007, 08:56 AM
Posters in this thread have expressed a desire to see a number of players voted into the HOF. Among them: Kaat, Maris, Boyer, Santo, Minoso, Gordon, Oliva and Torre. All good ballplayers, none great ballplayers, IMO.

I guess the question is who and what qualifies as great. We all have our pesonal standards but none of the players above make the grade with me. The question becomes: is this The Baseball Hall of Fame or The Baseball Hall of Pretty Good? That tipping point fuels the debate every year and will probably continue to do so as long as people watch and discuss baseball.

Rem

According to baseball-reference.com, the following players' careers are comparable with the following hall of famers.

Jim Kaat

Robin Roberts
Fergie Jenkins
Eppa Rixey
Early Wynn
Burleigh Grimes
Red Ruffing

Roger Maris

None

Ken Boyer

None

Ron Santo

None

Minnie Minoso

None

Joe Gordon

Larry Doby

Tony Oliva

George Kelly

Joe Torre

Bobby Doerr
Ryne Sandberg
Tony Lazzeri


Looks to me like a strong case could be made for Kaat, but if he makes it in, then Blyleven eventually has to as well.

Cyclone792
01-12-2007, 01:40 PM
By Cyclone:

By the way I read this statement Cyclone I take it that you are defining statistical records as the ultimate tool to judge a player. (Please let me know if that's incorrect.) I would certainly disagree with that idea and would say that there are times when stats make a player look more or less valuable than observation would indicate.

Rem

Primary tool, yes. Ultimate tool? Not necessarily. I could make a compelling case that Wes Ferrell belongs in the Hall of Fame, and if somebody looked at his stats they'd probably go "What?!"

Gil Hodges was a good player, a memorable manager due to the 1969 Mets, and also one of the nicest players in the history of the game. He played during an era of neutral run scoring, not a pitcher's era, and he played in a hitter's park for the bulk of his career and during his peak years. If Hodges was even borderline statistically, I wouldn't have a problem with those other factors giving Hodges the boost he'd need to make it. But statistically Hodges isn't even all that close to being borderline. Being a really outstanding guy just doesn't make up all the ground necessary, IMO.

Handofdeath
01-12-2007, 02:45 PM
Lefty O'Doul had a lifetime average of .349. 4th best all time. Weird career but deserves to be in.

dsmith421
01-12-2007, 02:59 PM
Lefty O'Doul had a lifetime average of .349. 4th best all time. Weird career but deserves to be in.

Also a bona fide civic legend in San Francisco and one of the driving forces behind that city becoming the great baseball town it is today. An ambassador for the game in post-war Japan as well.

It's kind of a travesty he's been ignored this long.

remdog
01-12-2007, 03:17 PM
Also a bona fide civic legend in San Francisco and one of the driving forces behind that city becoming the great baseball town it is today. An ambassador for the game in post-war Japan as well.

It's kind of a travesty he's been ignored this long.


Had a great tavern in DT SF for many years. :beerme:

Rem

RedsBaron
01-13-2007, 09:24 AM
According to baseball-reference.com, the following players' careers are comparable with the following hall of famers.

Jim Kaat

Robin Roberts
Fergie Jenkins
Eppa Rixey
Early Wynn
Burleigh Grimes
Red Ruffing

Roger Maris

None

Ken Boyer

None

Ron Santo

None

Minnie Minoso

None

Joe Gordon

Larry Doby

Tony Oliva

George Kelly

Joe Torre

Bobby Doerr
Ryne Sandberg
Tony Lazzeri


Looks to me like a strong case could be made for Kaat, but if he makes it in, then Blyleven eventually has to as well.

Technically, the comparison at baseball-reference.com does not compare the players' "careers"; it actually compares non-pitchers as "hitters", not as "players".
For example, the three Hall of Famers listed as comparable to Joe Torre are Bobby Doerr, Ryne Sandberg and Tony Lazzeri, secondbasemen all. Had those three guys been leadfooted firstbasemen, with virtually the same hitting statistics, none of them would have made the HOF.
Joe Gordon, a secondbaseman, should not be regarded as comparable to Larry Doby, an outfielder, even though their hitting stats were similar. A better comparison IMO would be between Gordon and Doerr, direct contemporaries at the same position.
Ken Boyer is shown as having no comparable hitters who made the HOF, but of the ten players listed as most comparable, only Robin Ventura, Ron Cey and Ron Santo were truly thirdbasemen. The other comparables are outfielders such as Fred Lynn, Reggie Smith, George Hendrick, Paul O'Neill and Del Ennis (Bobby Bonilla did play third, but he wasn't a thirdbaseman). A better comparsion of Boyer in my opinion is to compare him to Brooks Robinson and Ron Santo and Eddie Mathews, other guys who played his position.
If you check out Johnny Bench's comparables, while it includes catchers such as Berra, Gary Carter and Fisk, Bench's top ten will also include non-catchers such as Jeff Kent, Dale Murphy, Matt Williams and Ron Santo. If Murphy or Santo had been Gold Glove catchers, with their bats we wouldn't be debating whether or not they belong in the HOF; they would have each been elected a long time ago.
With his hitting stats, Rocky Colavito would've easily made the HOF had he been a catcher instead of a rightfielder. With his hitting stats, Ozzie Smith wouldn't have come close to the HOF if he had been a firstbaseman or leftfielder instead of a shortstop.
I use the baseball-reference.com list of comparables myself--it is useful--but it has limits when it is used to compare hitters who played different positions.