Originally Posted by RedsBaron
I am ambivalent about McGriff. He is virtually the definition of a borderline HOF candidate. Bill James created the Hall of Fame Monitor, a method of evaluating a player's chances of being inducted into the Hall of Fame based upon the player's statistics and historical voting patterns. The average member of the Hall of Fame has a Hall of Fame Monitor Score of 100.
McGriff's Hall of Fame Monitor Score? 100.
I love Tony Perez and I am glad he is in the Hall of Fame. Perez's Hall of Fame Monitor Score? 81.
The Jaffe WAR Score System ranks Perez as the 27th best first baseman of all time, with a career WAR score of 53.9 The 28th best first baseman? McGriff, with a score of 52.6. They both rank ahead of Orlando Cepeda, Frank Chance and Jim Bottomley, first basemen who are in the HOF.
Jim Bottomley and Frank Chance do not belong. These two are perfect examples of past players who have been inducted who should not of been. I am also a fan of Bill James and one point he often makes is just because the HOF has made the mistake in the past of lowering the bar by allowing players like them in means we should keep doing so.
I just stand by my original point that McGriff while a very good player IMO was basically a HR hitter in a HR era who simply didn't hit enough HR's or was dominant enough to warrant induction into the HOF.
The Perez and Cepeda points are very good ones. I love Tony but even I can look at things without rose colored glasses on and admit he is very much a borderline HOF player.
If McGriff gets in one day I won't lose any sleep over it because yes he was a very good player and there are much worse players than he was already in . He just doesn't get my vote.