PDA

View Full Version : Ten Finalists Named for Pre-Integration Era Ballot For HOF



westofyou
11-01-2012, 03:35 PM
http://baseballhall.org/news/press-releases/ten-finalists-named-pre-integration-era-ballot-hall-fame-consideration-2013



Samuel Breadon, Bill Dahlen, Wes Ferrell, Marty Marion, Tony Mullane, Hank O’Day, Alfred Reach, Jacob Ruppert, Bucky Walters and Deacon White are the candidates for Pre-Integration Era Committee consideration for election for the Hall of Fame Class of 2013. All candidates will be considered based on the totality of their careers in the game, though Breadon, Reach and Ruppert are included for their contributions as executives, and O’Day is included for his contributions as an umpire. The other six candidates are inclusions primarily for their on-field careers as players. All 10 candidates are deceased.


Bolded have Reds connections.

I vote for Dahlen, and White for sure

redsmetz
11-02-2012, 05:36 AM
http://baseballhall.org/news/press-releases/ten-finalists-named-pre-integration-era-ballot-hall-fame-consideration-2013

Bolded have Reds connections.

I vote for Dahlen, and White for sure

I remember reading at the time Mullane was inducted into the Reds HOF that he might well be the most overlooked player from the pre-modern era. Looking at his HOF Monitor measurements on B-R.com, he seems deserving. And I've long felt Bucky Walters is an often overlooked player. His measurements would certainly seem to move him into that sphere.

How does Marty Marion even make that cut? In his MVP season, he nudged Bill Nicholson by one point to win, a war era year (probably the height of those years) where eight different players got 1st place votes. Only one of his comparable players is in the Hall (Durocher) and I would suggest he's a special case. Of players we'd remember, Rafael Ramierez, Mike Bordick, Rick Burleson, Tommy Herr and Jose Vizcaino. Some of them probably don't even make their own team's HOF.

RedFanAlways1966
11-02-2012, 07:38 AM
Sorry to side-track the conversation, but count me as one person who thinks having classifications such as "pre-integration era" is ridiculous. Same for veterans committee. Either you go in or you do not. No need for going in XX number of years after you did/could not make it during phase-1. And along these lines get rid of the you are not eligible after so many years... you are always eligible as long as you played MLB or were involved as a manager/owner/exec/umpire/etc.

But it is the Baseball Hall of Fame. Need I say more?

redsmetz
11-02-2012, 07:45 AM
Sorry to side-track the conversation, but count me as one person who thinks having classifications such as "pre-integration era" is ridiculous. Same for veterans committee. Either you go in or you do not. No need for going in XX number of years after you did/could not make it during phase-1. And along these lines get rid of the you are not eligible after so many years... you are always eligible as long as you played MLB or were involved as a manager/owner/exec/umpire/etc.

But it is the Baseball Hall of Fame. Need I say more?

I'm not sure what the rationale is for this particular classification, but there have been previous eras that did not get the consideration. Obviously we all understand why there was a special category for Negro League players, and to his great credit, Ted Williams first broached that issue in his acceptance speech entering the Hall.

With any of these other categories, players must be researched and I think a case can be made for some players overlooked, that voters weren't very familiar from past times. Certainly, I think that's true of players like Mullane who predate the modern era who weren't well known when the Hall first opened. Not sure about players from the 1920's until the late 1940's, but I think an argument can be made for some of them. I do know there were some players voted in who got there by who they knew and not solely on their talent. I would suggest that Walters is on that cusp. I haven't looked at those WOY mentioned.

But then again, I'm of an expansive mind when it comes to the Hall.

Cyclone792
11-02-2012, 08:30 AM
Bill Dahlen is a Hall of Famer; he's a very slight grade below George Davis and there's no doubt that Davis deservedly belongs (he got in back in 1998). Dahlen is arguably a top 15 shortstop of all-time, and that's enough for me.

Walters and Ferrell are interesting cases. Walters is probably the best pitcher in Reds history, certainly the best peak pitcher for the Reds over a number of five or so seasons. I've thought Walters should get some consideration, but I'm not sure if there's some Reds bias present there. He's borderline it seems. I'd love to look at him side-by-side to a number of other pitchers both in the Hall and not in the Hall.

Ferrell is also borderline, at least in terms of his pitching career. But on the other hand, he's also probably the best hitting pitcher the game has ever seen (if you exclude that Ruth guy). Ferrell and Walters put up very similar pitching careers, though Walters had a much stronger peak. But does Ferrell's offensive value push him over the edge? It's worth considering; the guy was literally a league average hitter his entire career. He had 1,345 lifetime career plate appearances with an OPS pushing .800. He even frequently pinch hit in games that he didn't pitch.

I had also read an interesting case for Ferrell many years ago that during his years in Boston, the Red Sox would supposedly protect Lefty Grove by pitching him against weaker teams, which thereby forced Ferrell as the Sox number two starter to have a disproportionate number of starts against the top teams in the league. I've never verified that this was indeed true, but it was certainly an interesting study if accurate.

I'd probably be in favor of Ferrell making it. He was a type of ballplayer that I just like all around too.

Jacob Ruppert was instrumental in building up the Yankees from the 1910s through the 1930s; he probably belongs.

Hank O'Day was a very longstanding umpire, and judging by the number of World Series he worked, likely highly regarded during his time. I have no idea what criteria is used in determining how an umpire makes the Hall, but I'd be fine with O'Day.

Deacon White and Tony Mullane were 19th century stars of which I do not know much about.

redsmetz
11-02-2012, 09:35 AM
Here's the Reds' HOF write-up on Mullane

http://cincinnati.reds.mlb.com/cin/hof/hof/directory.jsp?hof_id=119489

M2
11-02-2012, 03:17 PM
Deacon White also played three years with the Reds. Dahlen's an easy pick and shame on the committee if he doesn't make it. White was one of the big stars in 19th century baseball and it's mildly surprising he hasn't been included.

If only Walters had started his career as a pitcher. He probably would have waltzed in the HOF. He also gets downgraded because a decent chunk of his numbers were racked up during WWII. Had he been able to squeeze out a couple of quality seasons in 1946 and 1947, that would have gone a long way to solidifying his case. I'd love to see him get in because he was a truly exceptional pitcher, but I suspect he's not going to make the cut.

RedsBaron
11-03-2012, 06:45 PM
How does Marty Marion even make that cut? In his MVP season, he nudged Bill Nicholson by one point to win, a war era year (probably the height of those years) where eight different players got 1st place votes.

Marion's 1944 MVP award may have been the worst result ever in MVP voting. His teammate Stan Musial had a WAR score of 8.8, nearly doubling Marion's 4.6 WAR score. Putting Marion in the HOF would be as bad a joke as his MVP award.
I have questioned whether or not executives should be in the Hall of Fame. However, since Tom Yawkey and Bowie Kuhn :barf: are in the HOF, how in the world has Jacob Ruppert been kept out? Ruppert was the owner who helped found the greatest dynasty in American pro sports--if owners can be in the HOF he has to be there.

westofyou
11-03-2012, 06:55 PM
Bill Dahlen is a Hall of Famer; he's a very slight grade below George Davis and there's no doubt that Davis deservedly belongs (he got in back in 1998). Dahlen is arguably a top 15 shortstop of all-time, and that's enough for me.

Walters and Ferrell are interesting cases. Walters is probably the best pitcher in Reds history, certainly the best peak pitcher for the Reds over a number of five or so seasons. I've thought Walters should get some consideration, but I'm not sure if there's some Reds bias present there. He's borderline it seems. I'd love to look at him side-by-side to a number of other pitchers both in the Hall and not in the Hall.

Ferrell is also borderline, at least in terms of his pitching career. But on the other hand, he's also probably the best hitting pitcher the game has ever seen (if you exclude that Ruth guy). Ferrell and Walters put up very similar pitching careers, though Walters had a much stronger peak. But does Ferrell's offensive value push him over the edge? It's worth considering; the guy was literally a league average hitter his entire career. He had 1,345 lifetime career plate appearances with an OPS pushing .800. He even frequently pinch hit in games that he didn't pitch.

I had also read an interesting case for Ferrell many years ago that during his years in Boston, the Red Sox would supposedly protect Lefty Grove by pitching him against weaker teams, which thereby forced Ferrell as the Sox number two starter to have a disproportionate number of starts against the top teams in the league. I've never verified that this was indeed true, but it was certainly an interesting study if accurate.

I'd probably be in favor of Ferrell making it. He was a type of ballplayer that I just like all around too.

Jacob Ruppert was instrumental in building up the Yankees from the 1910s through the 1930s; he probably belongs.

Hank O'Day was a very longstanding umpire, and judging by the number of World Series he worked, likely highly regarded during his time. I have no idea what criteria is used in determining how an umpire makes the Hall, but I'd be fine with O'Day.

Deacon White and Tony Mullane were 19th century stars of which I do not know much about.


Hank O'Day was (I believe) the only man to play, manage and umpire in MLB.

CySeymour
11-04-2012, 07:40 AM
Dahlen has intrigued me for some time. I have never been able to figure out why he has been mostly forgotten and not in the HOF. Easily a better choice the such players like Maranville.

westofyou
11-04-2012, 08:02 AM
Dahlen has intrigued me for some time. I have never been able to figure out why he has been mostly forgotten and not in the HOF. Easily a better choice the such players like Maranville.

His career was unfortunately aligned with the demise of the 12 team NL and the emergence of the AL, it started in the mid 90s when there was no foul strike rule and hitting was high, ended when pitching was the name of the game. He was a fiery combative guy, I don't believe he was loved by the press very much

RedsBaron
11-05-2012, 06:32 AM
Bucky Walters is a borderline HOF candidate. Because of my Reds bias I would like to see him inducted but he is very very borderline.
If the Cy Young award had been created two decades earlier, while that would not have made Walters any better it probably would have improved his HOF chances. He clearly was the NL's best pitcher and would have won the Cy Young in 1939 and 1940, and he probably would have won the award in 1944. Having three Cy Young awards on his resume might have been enough to put him in.

MikeThierry
11-08-2012, 11:04 AM
Marion's 1944 MVP award may have been the worst result ever in MVP voting. His teammate Stan Musial had a WAR score of 8.8, nearly doubling Marion's 4.6 WAR score. Putting Marion in the HOF would be as bad a joke as his MVP award. I have questioned whether or not executives should be in the Hall of Fame. However, since Tom Yawkey and Bowie Kuhn :barf: are in the HOF, how in the world has Jacob Ruppert been kept out? Ruppert was the owner who helped found the greatest dynasty in American pro sports--if owners can be in the HOF he has to be there.

Totally agree with this. Marion was a great defensive player in his day however he is no where near HOF caliber. I've always advocated Marion's MVP be given an asterix next to it. It's the worst MVP vote in the history of baseball. Many people say it's Mickey Cochrane over Gehrig but the thing is, Cochrane not only had a brilliant offensive year for a catcher but he was player/manger as well. An argument could be made he should have won the MVP because of the player/manager factor alone. There is no logical argument for Marion to be MVP. He had by far the worst offensive season of any MVP winner in the history of the game (non-pitcher). I don't know if the voters were high that year but it should have went to Nicholson or Musial. Hall of pretty good, yes. Hall of Fame? absolutely not.

Nathan
12-05-2012, 12:00 AM
O'Day, Ruppert and White were inducted.

http://baseballhall.org/news/press-releases/hank-oday-jacob-ruppert-deacon-white-elected-national-baseball-hall-fame-pre

redsmetz
12-06-2012, 08:46 AM
O'Day, Ruppert and White were inducted.

http://baseballhall.org/news/press-releases/hank-oday-jacob-ruppert-deacon-white-elected-national-baseball-hall-fame-pre

Glad to see Deacon White going in, but sorry to see that neither Walters nor Mullane garnered much support. Had the Cy Young Award existed back then, Walters likely would have had one or two (being the only Reds pitcher to have won a CYA) and would possibly already be a HOF'er, IMHO.

M2
12-06-2012, 12:12 PM
Dahlen has intrigued me for some time. I have never been able to figure out why he has been mostly forgotten and not in the HOF. Easily a better choice the such players like Maranville.

And still not in. I'm baffled too.

westofyou
12-06-2012, 02:09 PM
http://www.baseballminutia.com/images/picture.jpg

Henry “Hank” O’Day was one of those rare men who played, umpired and managed in MLB.

Started his career in the 1880′s in the American Association; his catcher was Fleetwood Walker, the first black man to play professional baseball. Not a good pitcher in an era that boasts gaudy pitching numbers O’Day managed to throw 1600 innings and play in 3 different professional leagues before he hung it up with a sub .500 after the 1890 season.

O’Day joined the umpiring business in 1895 and is in that position that he gained most of his baseball fame. O’Day is most famous for being the umpire during the famous “Merkel Incident” and the second base umpire for the first triple play in World Series History.

The Cincinnati connection with O’Day is found in 1912, a year that O’Day found himself a manager in the National League and it was the Reds who gave the arbitrator his first chance at managing O’Day’s greatest accomplishment as a Red is that he was at the helm of the club when they opened the new stadium that was christened “Redland Field” and later renamed Crosley Field.

It was also the Reds who also gave him his first pink slip after the season ended. Back to umpiring went O’Day only to reemerge in 1914 managing the Cubs to their first sub .500 record in 12 seasons. In 1915 he was once again wearing blue and defending his calls to the players he managed the year before.

MikeThierry
12-06-2012, 02:22 PM
And still not in. I'm baffled too.

I'm looking at his stats and it might be because he wasn't a dominant player in his era. His ERA+ is 110. That's good but I don't know if it's HOF worthy. To me, it's like Ken Boyer. Both belong in the Hall of Very Good. I'm just not sure they belong in the Hall of Fame.

cumberlandreds
12-06-2012, 02:25 PM
http://www.baseballminutia.com/images/picture.jpg

Henry “Hank” O’Day was one of those rare men who played, umpired and managed in MLB.

Started his career in the 1880′s in the American Association; his catcher was Fleetwood Walker, the first black man to play professional baseball. Not a good pitcher in an era that boasts gaudy pitching numbers O’Day managed to throw 1600 innings and play in 3 different professional leagues before he hung it up with a sub .500 after the 1890 season.

O’Day joined the umpiring business in 1895 and is in that position that he gained most of his baseball fame. O’Day is most famous for being the umpire during the famous “Merkel Incident” and the second base umpire for the first triple play in World Series History.

The Cincinnati connection with O’Day is found in 1912, a year that O’Day found himself a manager in the National League and it was the Reds who gave the arbitrator his first chance at managing O’Day’s greatest accomplishment as a Red is that he was at the helm of the club when they opened the new stadium that was christened “Redland Field” and later renamed Crosley Field.

It was also the Reds who also gave him his first pink slip after the season ended. Back to umpiring went O’Day only to reemerge in 1914 managing the Cubs to their first sub .500 record in 12 seasons. In 1915 he was once again wearing blue and defending his calls to the players he managed the year before.

Amazing! He went from umpire to manager back to umpire. I would say he is the only person to ever do that. I'm sure Earl Weaver's head would explode thinking about this.

MikeThierry
12-06-2012, 02:31 PM
Amazing! He went from umpire to manager back to umpire. I would say he is the only person to ever do that. I'm sure Earl Weaver's head would explode thinking about this.

What the &*^% are you talking! :) (god I love Earl Weaver)

RedsBaron
12-06-2012, 02:46 PM
I don't know if it's HOF worthy. To me, it's like Ken Boyer. Both belong in the Hall of Very Good. I'm just not sure they belong in the Hall of Fame.

Ken Boyer belongs in the Hall of Fame.
I have no problem with the three people who were inducted. With regard to Deacon White, arguably being the best ever catcher in the 19th century probably merits HOF induction.

westofyou
12-06-2012, 02:48 PM
Ken Boyer belongs in the Hall of Fame.
I have no problem with the three people who were inducted. With regard to Deacon White, arguably being the best ever catcher in the 19th century probably merits HOF induction.

This book is fantastic and it's all targeted at 19th century receivers

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/511xSMk2ArL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg

http://www.amazon.com/Catcher-Behind-Plate-Became-American/dp/1566638704

MikeThierry
12-06-2012, 03:09 PM
Ken Boyer belongs in the Hall of Fame.
I have no problem with the three people who were inducted. With regard to Deacon White, arguably being the best ever catcher in the 19th century probably merits HOF induction.

I think he's borderline and that's coming from a guy that appreciates what Ken Boyer in his era. I think the one thing that needs to be more stressed with him is how great he was at defense. He won 9 gold gloves, 8 of which he won in consecutive years. What really hurts him, in my eyes anyway, is how he fell off the cliff later on in his career. After age 33, he was below league average. For 9 years though he was about as consistent of a player as you would find in that era.

MikeThierry
12-06-2012, 03:11 PM
I didn't realize how dominant Deacon White was in his era. His OPS+ of 127 is brilliant for a catcher. He should be in the HOF. By no means am I saying Deacon White was better than Bench because he wasn't but Bench had a career OPS+ of 126.

westofyou
12-06-2012, 03:17 PM
I didn't realize how dominant Deacon White was in his era. His OPS+ of 127 is brilliant for a catcher. He should be in the HOF. By no means am I saying Deacon White was better than Bench because he wasn't but Bench had a career OPS+ of 126.

OPS plus might not be the best way to gauge players from that era IMO, the mound was constantly undergoing changes, there was no foul strike rule, in 88 walks counted as hits... just too much noise in there to lean solely on that stat

MikeThierry
12-06-2012, 03:31 PM
OPS plus might not be the best way to gauge players from that era IMO, the mound was constantly undergoing changes, there was no foul strike rule, in 88 walks counted as hits... just too much noise in there to lean solely on that stat

It's not perfect but I think it's the best way to compare what a player did in their era compared to the rest of the competition. That isn't to say that an ERA+ of 127 is the same in 1910 as it was in 1975 or 2007. Just like WAR, to me it's an attempt to explain performance. It isn't the end all though.

Deacon White's OPS+ of 127 at least tells us he was a dominant player compared to the rest of the players in his area. It's especially great for a catcher.

powersackers
07-28-2013, 12:05 PM
I tried to find out but coudn't...

What cap/team will White be wearing in his induction plaque?

powersackers
07-28-2013, 12:13 PM
Decon's Brother Will was a long time SP for the Redlegs. He is 16th on the all-time MLB ERA list, just ahead of Mariano Rivera, and light years ahead of the next closest active MLBer Clayton Kershaw.

http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/w/whitewi01.shtml