Oh NO! A Hall of Fame thread

I think it's a victory achieved by hitting the baseball.

Seldom used in serious sabermetric work due to its prevalence making it a rather useless stat.

 

Not denying Thomas is great and that these are interesting stats, but note that his OPS is the same as Dick Allen.

Allen has never seriously gotten HOF interest. And considering Allen's OPS came mostly in the low hitting 1960s, it does make one wonder...

 

His OPS+ is the same as Allen (not his OPS). OPS+ takes into account era played and ballpark considerations.

Frank Thomas had over .300 BA for his career plus over 500 HR. It would be hard to keep him out.

 

By most accounts, Allen was also a tremendous pain in the ass, a la Albert Belle. Those guys tend to fall off the ballot quicker than just "surly" guys like Jim Rice. Also, although I don't think Thomas was seen as an incredibly durable player, he did log 2,500 more ABs than Allen, which doesn't account for the 700+ advantage in walks.

At BP, Steve Goldman mentions that there is going to be a log jam with managers and other non-players because of how the Hall voting now works: http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=15383 (free article)

 

- Belle deserved better from the voters. There are plenty of HOFers with resumes that can't match his.

- Didn't read that article yet, but Goldman is a terrific writer.

 

Did not see the "plus" in the original post. And that makes sense because I was having trouble imagining Allen had that high of a regular OPS.

 

Allen is probably the best player NOT in the Hall of those once eligible and now not.

 

Was Joe Jackson ever eligible?

 

Allen may well have been the best player in baseball for his first few years in baseball. He was, arguably, the best offensive player in the NL, and he played third base well enough to hold the position. He was never recognized for this in his early years because of the number of marquee players still in their primes because of his race (to some degree), and because of the controversy he generated by some of his behavior. (Some of this was, truly, not Allen's fault, but some of it was, and he did have a problem with alcohol.)

I go back and forth over the issue of Allen and the HOF, but I'm pretty much a Dick Allen guy now. He helped his teams win; Bill James' allegation that Allen never helped his teams win is simply not true, IMO. His peak value is sufficient to merit HOF selection; he'd be in already if he were less controversial. I hate to put it this way, but he had a career about the length of Jim Rice's and he was so far ahead of Jim Rice, ability-wise, to where it's fair to say "If Rice, why not Allen?". Indeed, Allen is getting to where he's a highest common denominator case; no one who has done what Allen did is NOT in the HOF.

 

I wonder if part of the reason Jim Rice had to wait so long is because he had a reputation for being such a dick. I never met or dealt with Rice but he had one hell of a rep for being difficult.

I don't think Albert Belle is HOF worthy, but IIRC he got virtually no support from the voters. One longtime seamhead I worked with said he was the most difficult player he ever had to deal with during his career.

 

I think he was misunderstood to a large degree and was not as mean of a person as his reputation suggests. I think Belle was an unhappy man with a bad temper and, at one point, a drinking problem. His bad temper showed itself several times in high-profile situations. He did not like to talk to the press and preferred that they leave him alone. For these reasons, he was made out to be a villain. Either this characterization didn't phase him or it made him angrier, but he made no attempt to mend his reputation. In similar fashion, he made no attempt to draw attention to his positive characteristics. However, he was also known to be friendly to fans and quite charitable during his career. He was an Eagle Scout and graduated sixth in his high school class. He received a baseball scholarship to Notre Dame and an appointment to the Air Force Academy. Obviously, he did not pursue either of those opportunities, but I would say that the fact he was considered for them speaks well of him. I would almost call Belle the antithesis of guys like Steve Garvey and Roger Clemens - guys who will smile for the camera and know what to say at key times, but have no character when no one's looking. Belle, on the other hand, seemed to be a quiet guy who happened to have some serious character flaws which he made no public apologies for. He didn't worry about his reputation and preferred to stay out of the spotlight. Some people think athlete's are obligated to do more than that, but that's a matter of opinion. I don't know how or even if any of it affects his HOF candidacy, but that's my two cents on Albert Belle.

 

To the best of my knowledge, players banned from the sport were always considered ineligible from the Hall's founding, which of course was many years after the Black Sox. But I could well be wrong.