Off-Topic Forum

I'm currently working on an update to this post, which will be posted separately and will be posted at around 8pm.

Thank you everyone for their opinions.

Also @Vvvergeer, thank you for your comment especially.

I'll have to concede that Jimmy Wynn is not a Hall of Fame talent. I did more research and just said - no, this guy is not a Hall of Famer. A great player, yes. A Hall of Famer, heck no.

As to Hack Wilson, I meant that his production dropped off substantially. To go from 190 RBI to at best 120 is a bit of a steep drop, no? Him getting a 156 RBI year the year before doesn't mean that 1930 wasn't a fluke. It was. But he does belong in the Hall. I admit I dropped the ball on that one.

And, since I'm doing everyone's suggestions (Never again....) yours alone took me 2 hours to research and write out.

I hope to see everyone at the updated post.

my old school opinion is that the HOF has been severely diluted over the years. the standard was established in 1936 and that should have remained the standard. the greatest of the greats. no sentimentality should be involved. managers, executives, umpires, etc. should be recognized, but in a separate category, like broadcasters. i feel the same about negro league players. they definitely deserve to be remembered, but, for the most part, the records are incomplete and based on hearsay. were the negro leagues on par with the 30's and 40's pacific coast league? why not start including career minor leaguers who had awesome stats but never excelled in the Major Leagues. personally, i think that more than half of the HOF membership needs to be re-classified or removed, only those players who were elite and totally dominated the game. marvin miller did 10 times the damage to MLB than shoeless joe, pete rose, bonds, clemons, mcgwuire, etc. bud selig? yuk.  i love the giants, my son's name is travis jackson kennedy, but does travis jackson belong in the same group as ruth, mathewson, cobb, wagner and johnson, absolutely not. i grew up idolizing willie mccovey, my all time favorite player. is he hall of fame worthy? no. edgar martinez, trammell, thome, trevor hoffman, bagwell, larkin, joe gordon - are you kidding me. the reject list can go on for many, many, of these guys. not to say that they were not great ball players. anyone of the 800 +/- players in the game at any one time are so much better than the millions of us wanna be's. the worst major leaguer in any given year is there for a reason. but the HOF should be reserved for the very few who completely dominated the game for at least 10 years.  just the opinion of a long time fan who hates change.

First, love the post. I thrive on this type of stuff. That said, if I answer fully, I'll be here all day. But I've got to respond in some way. 

Second, while I love stats and numbers and accumulating and spikes of greatness, etc., I also feel there's a pretty strong place for the eyeball test. Every year I get the complete Topps set. Every year, I spend literally hours going through the stats on the back of every card. And every year, I see WAR that just doesn't make sense. I'm not gonna take the time to go find an example now, but I know that I just saw a card where a guy had more homers, a higher OPS, higher batting average and played more in one year than in the year before. Yet, his WAR was lower in the seemingly better year. I know it's a complicated tool and there are carefully reviewed stats involved, looked at by professionals. But it is by no means perfect. I see pretty darn good seasons where the player has a .1 WAR. There's no way you'll convince me that the average minor leaguer could step into those shoes and be just as good. It's a useful tool, but greatly flawed.

Third, there's overall contribution to the game. So I'm not terribly offended by someone with 20 years of very goodness getting in. That guy's contributed a ton. Tommy John is an excellent example. He contributed in many ways and should be there. 

Fourth, I agree that if you include Shoeless Joe, you've got to include Charlie Hustle. We can all debate the merits of letting them in because of their off-field issues. But if we're throwing that out, they both go in. 

As for individual players: 

I can't argue much against your exclusions. I disagree with the Hack Wilson call. And I worry about some of your characterizations. His "fluke" 191 RBI season came directly after a 159 RBI season. His "dropp[ing] off the face of the earth" included an 123 RBI season in which he hit .297 two years later. He had six fantastic seasons in a short career. Sandy Koufax had 5 (maybe 6) fantastic seasons in an equally short career....Just sayin'.

Without going back to look at every stat, and even being a die-hard Cubs fan, Joe Tinker and Johnny Evers are questionable honorees. Even Frank Chance is on the edge. And there's Luis Aparicio, Red Schoendienst, Bob Lemon, PeeWee Reese, George Kell, Catfish Hunter, Phil Rizzuto, Nellie Fox, and ohmygoodness, Bill Mazeroski.

As for omissions, I don't disagree with your candidates too much. Jim Wynn just never stood out as one of the best. Never led the league in a major category, never finished above 5th in MVP voting. .250 career hitter, fewer than 300 homers, fewer than 1000 RBIs in a long career. Actually played the majority of his career after the year of the pitcher. Never hit above .282. Just no.  

Others to add? Old-timers (an aside, I'm befuddled by people who won't offer opinions about people they didn't see play; this whole thread is based on stats...): Ed Reulbach: .632 winning percentage; 2.28 ERA (18th all-time). Only guy to throw two shutouts in one day. Tony Mullane, Bob Caruthers, Pete Browning, Jim McCormack, Jimmy Ryan. 

More modern (most of whom I've seen play): Mark Grace (most hits of anyone in the 90s); Lou Whitaker (by the skin of his teeth); Stan Hack; Dave Concepcion (if we're leaving all those other middle-infielders in...); Vada Pinson; Dick Allen (better than Wynn); Dwight Evans; Ken Boyer; Tommy John; Tony Oliva; Steve Garvey; Don Mattingly; Harvey Kuenn. 

Ok, must stop now. Thank you again for this thread. 

v3