2024 Hall of Fame Ballot

[MilkSpiller22]

I am not sure he belongs in top 10 overall, but I agree he was an absolute stud.

not sure if he belongs... but belongs in the discussion... sure, when you add pitchers everything becomes more complicated... how do you rank pitchers vs offensive players??

offensively dominating an era, and being one of the best defensive players at one of the weakest positions ever... that is close to top 10...


I also think if you are the best player at your position, you should be in the discussion....

 

[calsnowskier]

not sure if he belongs... but belongs in the discussion... sure, when you add pitchers everything becomes more complicated... how do you rank pitchers vs offensive players??

offensively dominating an era, and being one of the best defensive players at one of the weakest positions ever... that is close to top 10...


I also think if you are the best player at your position, you should be in the discussion....

Completely off the top of my head, top 10 PLAYERS (I will miss some players, as I am doing completely on the fly)…

Mays
Bonds
Williams
Ruth
Ripkin
Schmidt
Aaron
Henderson
Trout
Fisk

This list is VERY OF heavy. I wanted to have a catcher, and that came down to Fisk or Bench, and I think Fisk’s longevity and the fact he stayed at catcher gives him the edge. Trout may be a stretch at this point, but he at least belongs in the discussion. I think Ruth is VERY over-rated, but he was still miles ahead of everyone playing at the time, and ultimately, that is what “great” really is, so he belongs. Ripken may be a stretch, but he is probably the top SS and his Ironman status is very impressive. I probably could have added Frank Robinson as well, but like I said, this list was too OF heavy, so I wanted to get some infielders represented.

 

[Cedrique]

Completely off the top of my head, top 10 PLAYERS (I will miss some players, as I am doing completely on the fly)…

Mays
Bonds
Williams
Ruth
Ripkin
Schmidt
Aaron
Henderson
Trout
Fisk

This list is VERY OF heavy. I wanted to have a catcher, and that came down to Fisk or Bench, and I think Fisk’s longevity and the fact he stayed at catcher gives him the edge. Trout may be a stretch at this point, but he at least belongs in the discussion. I think Ruth is VERY over-rated, but he was still miles ahead of everyone playing at the time, and ultimately, that is what “great” really is, so he belongs. Ripken may be a stretch, but he is probably the top SS and his Ironman status is very impressive. I probably could have added Frank Robinson as well, but like I said, this list was too OF heavy, so I wanted to get some infielders represented.

Morgan might be up there too

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Completely off the top of my head, top 10 PLAYERS (I will miss some players, as I am doing completely on the fly)…

Mays
Bonds
Williams
Ruth
Ripkin
Schmidt
Aaron
Henderson
Trout
Fisk

This list is VERY OF heavy. I wanted to have a catcher, and that came down to Fisk or Bench, and I think Fisk’s longevity and the fact he stayed at catcher gives him the edge. Trout may be a stretch at this point, but he at least belongs in the discussion. I think Ruth is VERY over-rated, but he was still miles ahead of everyone playing at the time, and ultimately, that is what “great” really is, so he belongs. Ripken may be a stretch, but he is probably the top SS and his Ironman status is very impressive. I probably could have added Frank Robinson as well, but like I said, this list was too OF heavy, so I wanted to get some infielders represented.

I have bench over fisk... don't even think Fisk is a top 5 catcher...

If I was smarter, and had the time... I would love to create an all inclusive stat that includes era, position played...

I do like baseball references black ink and grey ink tests a lot... but it does overvalue players who played pre expansion too much... as it is much easier to be the best of something when there is not many others...

I am a yankee fan... so of course I am partial to Ruth... but I am kind of tired of the idea that the greatest legends of the game were all from yesteryear...

I mean, clearly if that is the case then there has to be something that stats don't show...

For example, the average player must have sucked back then...

its interesting... all sports as we go on in time, the players get physically stronger/bigger/faster... but baseball USED to be America's sport where young athletes strived to play

now... the first sport the American athlete gravitates to is basketball, unless they don't have the body for basketball and then they go to football...

Baseball is #3 for the American athlete...

 

[Pure Steel]

Bench & Berra are ahead of Fisk……

 

[msgkings322]

Schmidt IMO is the most under-rated player in baseball history... Not sure how much I am exaggerating... but it is a shame he is never in conversation for the top 10 of all time...

This is true

Morgan might be up there too

Ty Cobb?

 

[navamind]

FWIW, here's the top 10 position players in WAR for the 80's:

#	Name	Team	G	PA	HR	R	RBI	SB	BB%	K%	ISO	BABIP	AVG	OBP	SLG	wOBA	xwOBA	wRC+	BsR	Off	Def	WAR
1	Rickey Henderson	2 Tms	1383	6206	137	1122	535	838	15.5%	11.2%	.144	.314	.291	.403	.436	.379		139	91.1	378.9	69.2	67.8
2	Wade Boggs	BOS	1183	5371	64	823	522	14	14.0%	6.3%	.127	.367	.352	.443	.480	.409		151	-8.2	320.8	80.4	60.0
3	Mike Schmidt	PHI	1320	5556	313	832	929	57	14.7%	16.6%	.263	.281	.277	.385	.540	.398		151	-4.7	320.8	38.3	56.5
4	Robin Yount	MIL	1446	6357	174	957	821	148	8.7%	10.2%	.180	.316	.305	.365	.485	.373		133	10.7	261.7	5.1	50.0
5	Cal Ripken Jr.	BAL	1315	5680	204	793	744	19	9.7%	11.2%	.183	.281	.277	.347	.461	.357		123	-6.7	146.5	138.8	49.0
6	Alan Trammell	DET	1389	5906	130	815	637	167	9.3%	9.0%	.142	.300	.290	.357	.431	.351		118	3.9	134.6	145.4	48.9
7	Eddie Murray	2 Tms	1500	6437	274	858	996	52	11.7%	11.4%	.205	.293	.293	.374	.497	.380		139	1.7	293.8	-47.6	47.6
8	George Brett	KCR	1252	5381	193	768	851	79	12.0%	7.6%	.210	.305	.311	.392	.521	.394		145	3.0	290.9	-19.2	47.0
9	Tim Raines	MON	1269	5621	87	866	490	582	12.5%	9.3%	.139	.323	.303	.391	.442	.369		134	79.6	301.6	-41.7	46.4
10	Ozzie Smith	2 Tms	1468	6159	17	703	477	364	10.7%	5.5%	.069	.275	.261	.343	.331	.308		93	37.2	-6.3	250.8	45.5

Major League Leaderboards - 1980 to 1989 - Batting | FanGraphs Baseball

www.fangraphs.com

Boggs was the only one within 10 WAR of Rickey. Feels pretty safe to say Rickey was the best player of the 80's. And if you're wondering about pitchers, none of them even have a higher WAR than Ozzie.

 

[Cedrique]

FWIW, here's the top 10 position players in WAR for the 80's:

#	Name	Team	G	PA	HR	R	RBI	SB	BB%	K%	ISO	BABIP	AVG	OBP	SLG	wOBA	xwOBA	wRC+	BsR	Off	Def	WAR
1	Rickey Henderson	2 Tms	1383	6206	137	1122	535	838	15.5%	11.2%	.144	.314	.291	.403	.436	.379		139	91.1	378.9	69.2	67.8
2	Wade Boggs	BOS	1183	5371	64	823	522	14	14.0%	6.3%	.127	.367	.352	.443	.480	.409		151	-8.2	320.8	80.4	60.0
3	Mike Schmidt	PHI	1320	5556	313	832	929	57	14.7%	16.6%	.263	.281	.277	.385	.540	.398		151	-4.7	320.8	38.3	56.5
4	Robin Yount	MIL	1446	6357	174	957	821	148	8.7%	10.2%	.180	.316	.305	.365	.485	.373		133	10.7	261.7	5.1	50.0
5	Cal Ripken Jr.	BAL	1315	5680	204	793	744	19	9.7%	11.2%	.183	.281	.277	.347	.461	.357		123	-6.7	146.5	138.8	49.0
6	Alan Trammell	DET	1389	5906	130	815	637	167	9.3%	9.0%	.142	.300	.290	.357	.431	.351		118	3.9	134.6	145.4	48.9
7	Eddie Murray	2 Tms	1500	6437	274	858	996	52	11.7%	11.4%	.205	.293	.293	.374	.497	.380		139	1.7	293.8	-47.6	47.6
8	George Brett	KCR	1252	5381	193	768	851	79	12.0%	7.6%	.210	.305	.311	.392	.521	.394		145	3.0	290.9	-19.2	47.0
9	Tim Raines	MON	1269	5621	87	866	490	582	12.5%	9.3%	.139	.323	.303	.391	.442	.369		134	79.6	301.6	-41.7	46.4
10	Ozzie Smith	2 Tms	1468	6159	17	703	477	364	10.7%	5.5%	.069	.275	.261	.343	.331	.308		93	37.2	-6.3	250.8	45.5

Major League Leaderboards - 1980 to 1989 - Batting | FanGraphs Baseball

www.fangraphs.com

Boggs was the only one within 10 WAR of Rickey. Feels pretty safe to say Rickey was the best player of the 80's. And if you're wondering about pitchers, none of them even have a higher WAR than Ozzie.

Those 1100 runs are eye popping

 

[MilkSpiller22]

this is a ranking for 2000

FWIW, here's the top 10 position players in WAR for the 80's:

#	Name	Team	G	PA	HR	R	RBI	SB	BB%	K%	ISO	BABIP	AVG	OBP	SLG	wOBA	xwOBA	wRC+	BsR	Off	Def	WAR
1	Rickey Henderson	2 Tms	1383	6206	137	1122	535	838	15.5%	11.2%	.144	.314	.291	.403	.436	.379		139	91.1	378.9	69.2	67.8
2	Wade Boggs	BOS	1183	5371	64	823	522	14	14.0%	6.3%	.127	.367	.352	.443	.480	.409		151	-8.2	320.8	80.4	60.0
3	Mike Schmidt	PHI	1320	5556	313	832	929	57	14.7%	16.6%	.263	.281	.277	.385	.540	.398		151	-4.7	320.8	38.3	56.5
4	Robin Yount	MIL	1446	6357	174	957	821	148	8.7%	10.2%	.180	.316	.305	.365	.485	.373		133	10.7	261.7	5.1	50.0
5	Cal Ripken Jr.	BAL	1315	5680	204	793	744	19	9.7%	11.2%	.183	.281	.277	.347	.461	.357		123	-6.7	146.5	138.8	49.0
6	Alan Trammell	DET	1389	5906	130	815	637	167	9.3%	9.0%	.142	.300	.290	.357	.431	.351		118	3.9	134.6	145.4	48.9
7	Eddie Murray	2 Tms	1500	6437	274	858	996	52	11.7%	11.4%	.205	.293	.293	.374	.497	.380		139	1.7	293.8	-47.6	47.6
8	George Brett	KCR	1252	5381	193	768	851	79	12.0%	7.6%	.210	.305	.311	.392	.521	.394		145	3.0	290.9	-19.2	47.0
9	Tim Raines	MON	1269	5621	87	866	490	582	12.5%	9.3%	.139	.323	.303	.391	.442	.369		134	79.6	301.6	-41.7	46.4
10	Ozzie Smith	2 Tms	1468	6159	17	703	477	364	10.7%	5.5%	.069	.275	.261	.343	.331	.308		93	37.2	-6.3	250.8	45.5

Major League Leaderboards - 1980 to 1989 - Batting | FanGraphs Baseball

www.fangraphs.com

Boggs was the only one within 10 WAR of Rickey. Feels pretty safe to say Rickey was the best player of the 80's. And if you're wondering about pitchers, none of them even have a higher WAR than Ozzie.

Big but here though.... per 162 game season Boggs averaged 8.2 WAR vs Hendersons 7.9

but that is also because Boggs was a great defensive 3B...

one of the reasons i dont like measuring by WAR... overvalues defense, overvalues position, overvalues OBP....

 

[Pure Steel]

Completely off the top of my head, top 10 PLAYERS (I will miss some players, as I am doing completely on the fly)…

Mays
Bonds
Williams
Ruth
Ripkin
Schmidt
Aaron
Henderson
Trout
Fisk

This list is VERY OF heavy. I wanted to have a catcher, and that came down to Fisk or Bench, and I think Fisk’s longevity and the fact he stayed at catcher gives him the edge. Trout may be a stretch at this point, but he at least belongs in the discussion. I think Ruth is VERY over-rated, but he was still miles ahead of everyone playing at the time, and ultimately, that is what “great” really is, so he belongs. Ripken may be a stretch, but he is probably the top SS and his Ironman status is very impressive. I probably could have added Frank Robinson as well, but like I said, this list was too OF heavy, so I wanted to get some infielders represented.

How can he be overrated and miles ahead of everyone at the same time? He out-homered entire teams in a single season......Players should only be compared in the eras they played......trying to get in the Delorean and going back to compare players is absolutely pointless.....

 

[Cedrique]

How can he be overrated and miles ahead of everyone at the same time? He out-homered entire teams in a single season......Players should only be compared in the eras they played......trying to get in the Delorean and going back to compare players is absolutely pointless.....

I'm with you on that. Usually when someone is the stuff of legend or folklore someone will eventually come up with a documentary or research paper to show that some aspects were exaggerated. But so far no one has been able to interpret the numbers or poke holes in the narrative to show anything other than he completely dominated the game for a couple decades. And some of the offensive numbers might have been even better if he didn't spend his early 20's pitching 1200 innings.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I'm with you on that. Usually when someone is the stuff of legend or folklore someone will eventually come up with a documentary or research paper to show that some aspects were exaggerated. But so far no one has been able to interpret the numbers or poke holes in the narrative to show anything other than he completely dominated the game for a couple decades. And some of the offensive numbers might have been even better if he didn't spend his early 20's pitching 1200 innings.

There is a lot of Lore to Ruth... He was one of the only players paid enough for it to be his full time job... Most others needed a second or third job...

Also, other teams copied the HR way of playing... and by the mid 20s many teams had a big bopper themselves... sure ruth was still the best... but the comparison between him and the others are not as big as you would think...

Ruth was definitely the best of his time... but baseball was a different sport back then... he changed the game, so of course he was going to be better than the rest of the league... But that is also saying that the rest of the league wasnt very good by our standards...

Almost like baseball was the minor leagues back then... and they had a professional hitter facing poop on a stick...

 

[Pure Steel]

There is a lot of Lore to Ruth... He was one of the only players paid enough for it to be his full time job... Most others needed a second or third job...

Also, other teams copied the HR way of playing... and by the mid 20s many teams had a big bopper themselves... sure ruth was still the best... but the comparison between him and the others are not as big as you would think...

Ruth was definitely the best of his time... but baseball was a different sport back then... he changed the game, so of course he was going to be better than the rest of the league... But that is also saying that the rest of the league wasnt very good by our standards...

Almost like baseball was the minor leagues back then... and they had a professional hitter facing poop on a stick...

	​	(1920-1929)		​	(1930-1939)​	​
	HR​	Career	Pct.​		HR​	Career​	Pct.​
Babe Ruth	467​	714​	65​	Jimmie Foxx	415​	534​	78​
Rogers Hornsby	250​	301​	83​	Lou Gehrig	347​	493​	70​
CyWilliams	202​	251​	81​	Mel Ott	308​	511​	60​
Ken Williams	190​	196​	97​	Wally Berger	241​	242​	99​
Jim Bottomley	146​	219​	67​	Chuck Klein	238​	300​	79​
Lou Gehrig	146​	493​	30​	Earl Averill	218​	238​	92​
Bob Meusel	146​	156​	94​	Hank Greenberg	206​	331​	62​
Harry Heilmann	142​	183​	78​	Babe Ruth	198​	714​	28​
Hack Wilson	137​	244​	56​	Al Simmons	190​	307​	62​
George Kelly	134​	148​	91​	Bob Johnson	186​	288​	65​
	​		​

 

[MilkSpiller22]

	​	(1920-1929)		​	(1930-1939)​	​
	HR​	Career	Pct.​		HR​	Career​	Pct.​
Babe Ruth	467​	714​	65​	Jimmie Foxx	415​	534​	78​
Rogers Hornsby	250​	301​	83​	Lou Gehrig	347​	493​	70​
CyWilliams	202​	251​	81​	Mel Ott	308​	511​	60​
Ken Williams	190​	196​	97​	Wally Berger	241​	242​	99​
Jim Bottomley	146​	219​	67​	Chuck Klein	238​	300​	79​
Lou Gehrig	146​	493​	30​	Earl Averill	218​	238​	92​
Bob Meusel	146​	156​	94​	Hank Greenberg	206​	331​	62​
Harry Heilmann	142​	183​	78​	Babe Ruth	198​	714​	28​
Hack Wilson	137​	244​	56​	Al Simmons	190​	307​	62​
George Kelly	134​	148​	91​	Bob Johnson	186​	288​	65​
	​		​

not sure if you are trying to prove my point or was trying to prove against my comment...

 

[Pure Steel]

not sure if you are trying to prove my point or was trying to prove against my comment...

He dwarfs all the best players in homers and it's not even close.....I'm clearly talking about your comment.....

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Beltre and Mauer

Nailed it minus Helton

 

[MilkSpiller22]

He dwarfs all the best players in homers and it's not even close.....I'm clearly talking about your comment.....

i think you missed my point... and yes... he did... but what my point was that he changed the game... but it was an automatic change... other teams were able to get their big bopper...

before Ruth, there was basically no HR hitting... but right when Ruth showed that EVERYONE DIGS THE LONG BALL... many teams copied...

and once they did, other HR hitters were able to compare with Ruth season to season...

Nobody argued he wasnt the best... im just saying that the lore that he hit more homers than everyone else combined is an exaggeration... sure there were teams that stayed in the past... but most teams followed the yankees into the HR era... which there was one in the mid 20s to the 40s


But lots of stats were exaggerated back then because the average baseball player sucked....

 

[Pure Steel]

i think you missed my point... and yes... he did... but what my point was that he changed the game... but it was an automatic change... other teams were able to get their big bopper...

before Ruth, there was basically no HR hitting... but right when Ruth showed that EVERYONE DIGS THE LONG BALL... many teams copied...

and once they did, other HR hitters were able to compare with Ruth season to season...

Nobody argued he wasnt the best... im just saying that the lore that he hit more homers than everyone else combined is an exaggeration... sure there were teams that stayed in the past... but most teams followed the yankees into the HR era... which there was one in the mid 20s to the 40s


But lots of stats were exaggerated back then because the average baseball player sucked....

The dead ball era took care of the lack of homers up until the 1920's......He changed the game because no one hit homers so frequently like he did.....

 

[navamind]

I don't think you really need to look at WAR to come up with Rickey as #1. Schmidt and Biggs both had a wRC+ 12 points higher, but he still had a 139 wRC+. That's still one of the best hitters in the game. And combine it with unparalleled base running? But I do think WAR reflects that.

 

[Cedrique]

I don't think you really need to look at WAR to come up with Rickey as #1. Schmidt and Biggs both had a wRC+ 12 points higher, but he still had a 139 wRC+. That's still one of the best hitters in the game. And combine it with unparalleled base running? But I do think WAR reflects that.

I figured he would be hard to beat because the time period is kind of fortuitous for Henderson. Not many players have their best decade start on a year with a 0 at the end. (although if you went 1981-1990 I think he would be even a little better)