2016 HOF Debate: Lee Smith

Dec 31, 2015
Written by
Hall of Fame Debates
Be the first to comment!
Last year, we did our first ever debate on Notinhalloffame.com where we tackled the Hall of Fame merit of twenty-four men who are on the Hall of Fame ballot, in what was in our opinion the most loaded ballot in our lifetime.

Since it was so much fun last time, we thought we would do it again!

One thing that has not changed is the number.  We will again debate twenty-four men who are on the ballot.

What has changed are the ones debating.  Last year I had the pleasure of having DDT, the curator of DDT’s Pop Flies blog and D.K. of the Phillies Archivist blog.  This year, Spheniscus, who has participated in past Rock and Roll discussions, will be joining me.



Chairman: Lee Smith retired as the all-time leading leader in Saves, and here we are entering his fourteenth year on the ballot where he came off of a 30.2 percentage, 20 points lower than what he got in 2012. 

How did he plummet so bad?  I think a large part of that is because the stat of the Save is not what it was and when you look at his advanced stats, he isn’t what he should be in reference to other closers.  His 29.6 bWAR and 25.4 JAWS put him ahead of new ballot relievers, Trevor Hoffman and Billy Wagner but with Smith what gets me is that unlike Hoffman, I never felt that Smith was a dominant closer, and what I mean is that did I ever feel he was one of the top two or three in the game.

I think what dissuades me the most about Smith is that for a reliever, how much he didn’t matter when the light shone brightest (his playoff numbers are terrible) and for all of the Saves he accumulated, how many do people remember?

Spheniscus, this is a guy who every year I talk myself more and more out of the Hall.

Spheniscus: I saw him play for two and a half seasons during my impressionable years when I followed every pitch of every game. Never once did I realize that he might be a Hall of Famer some day. All we talked about was how Smith wasn’t as good as the Steamer, Bob Stanley. And really, Bob Stanley wasn’t that good.

When we traded him to the Cardinals for former Twins “great” Tom Brunansky, there isn’t a Sox fan I know who didn’t think we got the better of the deal. Although, it helps that Brunansky made an incredible play in the right field corner to clinch a Sox playoff berth on the last game of the 1990 (the “Morgan Magic”) season. I mean we thought so highly of Smith that we were psyched when another former Twins “great” (and my former neighbor) Jeff Reardon was signed to replace him. And neither Reardon nor Brunansky are ever sniffing the Hall.

I already did his stats in the Trevor Hoffman section and I agree with you, he just doesn’t make it on paper. But at no point does he make it in reputation either. Literally the definition of a compiler. And a compiler in a category that no one cared about until Rivera retired. If someone passes Rivera in career saves people will notice. No one noticed when Hoffman passed Smith. And no one noticed with Rivera passed Smith either. I have 22 other people on this list ahead of him in my opinion. He’s not getting in. Ever.

Chairman: B. I. N. G. O.  

The Chairman cannot even remotely disagree with anything you said…however…

I can disagree with my own thoughts.

Had I a ballot twelve years ago I very well might have voted for Smith, erroneously believing that being the all-time leader in Saves should warrant him serious consideration for the Hall of Fame, and that would have been the wrong choice to make. 

There is no other stat in Baseball (and yes I will include wins and losses) that you can poke more holes in than the save.  You can stink and still get a save.  You can throw one pitch and get a save.  You have no opportunity to pick up a save if your team is never winning late in the game.  You called Lee Smith a compiler, and sure enough when I looked him up in Webster’s, there he was looking like he just came off of an advertisement for Soul Glo. 

There is no “lights out” feeling when Smith took the mound.  His playoff stats are not good, which was only 5.1 innings with an ERA near 9.  Some difference maker if he hardly got his team to the dance, and when he showed up it was the chicken dance. 

You called it when you as a Boston fan didn’t care when he left.  Did they at Wrigley either? 

He got over 50% in 2012 but last year he barely topped 30%.  He was lucky to get that. 

Spheniscus: And he won’t get that 15th year on the ballot bump either. If you had to choose between Hoffman and Smith for the 10th vote on your ballot, you would take Hoffman (again, you should take Billy Wagner over either but no one is going to do that). And believe me, he is the 10th vote on a lot of people’s ballots. My guess is that he ends up in the 20s and we unfortunately have this “debate” again next year. Then he mercifully drops off the ballot. This is one case where the new 10 year limit would have actually helped.

Chairman:  He will finish with his lowest total, and yes, he is now the third best reliever on the ballot.

I will go one step further in that he will never make a Veteran’s ballot in the future. 

My fictional vote is a no, and my prediction echoes yours:  24%.

Spheniscus: Looking at the list, he probably finishes somewhere around 12th overall. Last year, 12th got 12.9%. That seems like a big drop, so I’ll say 20%. 

Read more

2016 HOF Debate: Trevor Hoffman

Dec 31, 2015
Written by
Hall of Fame Debates
Be the first to comment!
Last year, we did our first ever debate on Notinhalloffame.com where we tackled the Hall of Fame merit of twenty-four men who are on the Hall of Fame ballot, in what was in our opinion the most loaded ballot in our lifetime.

Since it was so much fun last time, we thought we would do it again!

One thing that has not changed is the number.  We will again debate twenty-four men who are on the ballot.

What has changed are the ones debating.  Last year I had the pleasure of having DDT, the curator of DDT’s Pop Flies blog and D.K. of the Phillies Archivist blog.  This year, Spheniscus, who has participated in past Rock and Roll discussions, will be joining me.



Chairman: We have taken some flak for having Trevor Hoffman ranked in the 40’s on the Baseball Hall of Fame list and there have been so many articles written painting him as a lock.  Is he really though?

Hoffman was the career leader in Saves for five years (taking it over from Lee Smith, before being eclipsed by Mariano Rivera) but Saves are a stat that isn’t in vogue and for good reason, as you can go out, shit the bed for an inning and as long your team gets the win, you get that etched in the SV column, though I will say that 601 is a number that I can’t (or anyone) take lightly.

Here is my thing against Hoffman.  He is constantly compared to Mariano Rivera, but Rivera blows him away in every stat, traditional and sabremetric.  Actually in sabre, it is not even close. 

WAR: Rivera: 57.1, Hoffman: 28.4

JAWS: Rivera: 43.0, Hoffman: 24.0

WPA: Rivera: 56.65, Hoffman: 34.12

Well, proving that Hoffman is no Rivera doesn’t exactly prove that he doesn’t belong in Cooperstown and at the very least he has other HOF relievers beat in many statistical categories.

Still, I am struggling to find that special intangible, and I can’t find it.

Spheniscus, what am I missing?

Spheniscus: Well, he certainly is better than Mike Hampton. He is an interesting case to me. He held the record while he was playing, so people presumed he’d be a Hall of Famer. But having the record hasn’t helped Lee Smith get into the Hall. And perhaps that is where we should start. Rivera is so far and away better than Hoffman, perhaps it is unfair to compare the two. So let’s look at three sets of stats below…

PLAYER

 ERA

 ERA+

 FIP

 WHIP

 H9

 HR9

 SO/W

 ASG

 MVP/CY
A

 2.87

 141

 3.08

 1.058

 7.0

 0.8

 3.69

 7

 5/4
B

 2.31

 187

 2.73

 0.998

 6.0

 0.8

 3.99

 7

 2/2
C

 3.03

 132

 2.93

 1.256

 7.9

 0.6

 2.57

 7

 4/4


All three of these guys are currently on the ballot and none are Mariano Rivera.  If you could only vote for one, except for the number of times that he received an MVP or Cy Young vote, player B clearly appears to be the superior player to the other two players. His ERA is lower, his FIP is lower, his WHIP is lower, the hits he gives up per 9 innings is lower and his ERA+ and strike outs per walk is higher than the two other players. All of those things are good.

Bad news for both Hoffman (Player A) and Lee Smith (Player C) is that Player B is actually Billy Wagner. But Wagner has over 50 saves fewer than Smith and almost 200 fewer Hoffman and is likely a one and done. This despite getting the exposure of playing in New York versus Hoffman toiling away in San Diego and Milwaukee.

So is Hoffman a Hall of Famer, probably. Is he a shoo in? Not on this list. There are too many great players on this list. And with Mariano on the way, if he doesn’t get in soon there is a possibility that he may not get in at all.

Chairman:  I went on a tirade on Wagner where I crapped on his post-season numbers.  Hoffman’s are a lot better, but that isn’t difficult:

In six series, he pitched 13 Innings with 4 Saves, a 3.46 ERA and a WHIP of 1.231.  Those aren’t bad numbers, but it translates to an average pitcher, which bothers me considering he is supposed to be one of the best of all time at what he did.

You know that intangible I was trying to figure out about Hoffman.  I think I got it.  When I was checking out YouTube, I came across countless fan videos of him entering to AC/DC’s “Hell’s Bells”.  Not him pitching mind you…just coming out to pitch.  His Baseball Reference page is sponsored by a fan, who is waiting to hear that song when he accepts his induction to Cooperstown. 

That gimmick superseded that of comparable pitchers in larger markets…like Billy Wagner for example.

It happens all the time, most recently with “Linsanity” a couple of years back with the Knicks.  Was he on fire at the time?  Absolutely!  But if he wasn’t a dorky looking Chinese guy, there is no way he would be as popular?   Not a chance!

Honestly, I think that song accounts for a sizable chunk of his popularity, and yes if he is still on the ballot when Rivera gets there, he is screwed.

Spheniscus: He very well may be on the ballot when Rivera gets there, but he probably won’ t be screwed. Wagner will be gone. Smith will be gone. And who else is there to challenge him for the second closer spot? Danys Baez? Arthur Rhodes? Guillermo Mota? Francisco Cordero? Kerry Wood? Brad Lidge? Jason Isringhausen? Derek Lowe? Darren Oliver? I mean seriously, those are your closing options between now and 2019 when Rivera not only gets in on the first ballot but is carried aloft by a chorus of angels into Cooperstown. His competition in 2020? Jose Valverde, J.J. Putz, and Heath Bell. He’ll be fine.

If he is a Hall of Famer he should still be even if the greatest player at his position is a contemporary. The question is without the saves record for five years is he a Hall of Famer? I don’t think so. But he has that cache, so it makes it seem like he should be a Hall of Famer. Which means he probably gets in eventually. Just not this year.

Chairman:  Yep.  He probably will get in eventually, and agreed, not this year.  He wouldn’t get my pretend vote, but where will he finish this year?  I am going to throw out 38%, but if that swung twenty points in either direction I would not be surprised.



Spheniscus: He doesn’t get my pretend vote either. Billy Wagner was a better player, but literally no one thinks Billy Wagner is a Hall of Famer. That said he will definitely stay on the ballot and without Wagner and Smith to compare him to after this year will probably start making the climb to being a Hall of Famer sometime in 2022. Where does he start? The old folks will probably be swayed by the saves record. The young guys won’t. So I’ll say 30%.

Read more

Awards = HOF? Part Nine: The Silver Slugger (Third Base) (MLB)

Dec 31, 2015
Written by
From the Desk of the Chairman
Be the first to comment!
We here at Notinhalloffame.com thought it would be fun to take a look at the major awards in North American team sports and see how it translates into Hall of Fame potential.

Needless to say, different awards in different sports yield hall of fame potential.  In basketball, the team sport with the least amount of players on a roster, the dividend for greatness much higher.  In baseball, it is not as much as a great individual season does not have the same impact.
Read more

2016 HOF Debate: Mike Hampton

Dec 31, 2015
Written by
Hall of Fame Debates
Be the first to comment!
Last year, we did our first ever debate on Notinhalloffame.com where we tackled the Hall of Fame merit of twenty-four men who are on the Hall of Fame ballot, in what was in our opinion the most loaded ballot in our lifetime.

Since it was so much fun last time, we thought we would do it again!

One thing that has not changed is the number.  We will again debate twenty-four men who are on the ballot.

What has changed are the ones debating.  Last year I had the pleasure of having DDT, the curator of DDT’s Pop Flies blog and D.K. of the Phillies Archivist blog.  This year, Spheniscus, who has participated in past Rock and Roll discussions, will be joining me.



Chairman: I wasn’t planning to put Mike Hampton on this list as this is the man who when you say his name is known for signing a large contract he couldn’t live up to in Denver.  I can still remember an article where he was supposed the Rockies “Coors Field antidote”! 

That didn’t happen, but he did 7 Home Runs that year and won his second Silver Slugger award (of four).  Small consolation for that 5 plus ERA he had that year. 

Is this a complete waste of time?

Spheniscus: This is a complete waste of time. On the plus side, he is the only pitcher to win a Gold Glove and a Silver Slugger award the same year. He also was MVP of the 2000 NLCS. And… uh he really liked the school systems in suburban Denver?

His career ERA is over 4, he allowed 1.4 runners per inning, and averaged 5.5 strikeouts a game. Using the JAWS metric, he is the 301st greatest pitcher in baseball history (although it should be noted that #300 is HOF Jesse Haines, who may be the worst player in the Hall). His comparables are Aaron Sele, Bruce Hurst, Tim Belcher, Joe Nuxhall, and Bronson Arroyo. And as much as I enjoyed rooting for three of those five guys when they were in Boston none of those guys are close to being Hall of Famers. And unfortunately neither is he.

Chairman:  Apparently it was the Canadian school system that turned off the wife of former Toronto Raptor, Antonio Davis, who balked because her kids would be taught metric. 

Going back to Hampton, I didn’t realize he was 301st in JAWS, which no matter what you think of that metric, you have to agree that this paints as big a “no” as anything else ever could.

Spheniscus, you got me thinking of another collaborative article in the future.  Drafting 24 people of each major Hall of Fame who should be kicked out?

Spheniscus: Metric? Ewwww. Next thing you know, your kids will be putting unnecessary “u”s in everything and apologizing for doing so.

And I would definitely be up for a Hall of Fame Survivor Series. Just so long as we can get rid of non-players as well. No Hall does worse with non-players than the Baseball Hall. Bowie Kuhn? Tom Yawkey? Charles Comiskey? Get them out. Ooh, can we choose their replacements too? It would be awesome to throw out Kuhn and put in Marvin Miller or throw out Yawkey and put in Buck O’Neill.

Chairman: I never apologize for that “u”!  And metric rocks!   Clemens threw 160 kph up here!

Of course, non-players count!  Comiskey would be the first on my list!

Oh…Hampton is a no, and he finishes with no votes.  Borrowing from Dean Wormer…ZERO POINT ZERO.

Spheniscus: Sure he through 160 up there, but it was in 34 degree weather in the height of summer. Just not as impressive as when he was throwing 100 in 93 degree weather in Boston.

And we agree, none of the writers will cast a vote for Hampton.

Read more

2016 HOF Debate: Jeff Bagwell

Dec 31, 2015
Written by
Last year, we did our first ever debate on Notinhalloffame.com where we tackled the Hall of Fame merit of twenty-four men who are on the Hall of Fame ballot, in what was in our opinion the most loaded ballot in our lifetime.

Since it was so much fun last time, we thought we would do it again!

One thing that has not changed is the number.  We will again debate twenty-four men who are on the ballot.

What has changed are the ones debating.  Last year I had the pleasure of having DDT, the curator of DDT’s Pop Flies blog and D.K. of the Phillies Archivist blog.  This year, Spheniscus, who has participated in past Rock and Roll discussions, will be joining me.





Chairman: Spheniscus, last year we started with Jeff Bagwell, who is on the ballot for the 6th time.  I am going to start off with giving myself a pat on the back for my prognostication prowess as I predicted he would remain around the same percentage of votes as the year before, which wasn’t too far off as he marginally grew his percentage from 54.3 to 55.7%. 

I view that 1.4% growth as huge in a year where the ballot was so colossally loaded as a major win.  I am serious on that, as had he dropped by the same percent, it would show the “order” in which the voters see him.  When this site started he held the “1C” slot (the ineligible Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe Jackson hold 1A and 1B respectively) and the only reason he dropped in ranking (he is #5 right now) was because of the heavyweights entering the ballot. 

My first thought is that Bagwell is poised for a major jump and while he may not enter this year, he will be a lot closer to knocking on that door.

Spheniscus: Chairman, I agree with your analysis on this one. Looking at the nominees, this looks like a list that has somewhere between 13 and 15 Hall of Famers of whom they will elect two. Why that number? Because the same people who did no investigation when the steroids era took off now sit in judgment of the players who played in that era.

The dumbest part of their evaluation unfortunately strikes right at Bagwell and his candidacy. He just looks to the voters like he took steroids. He was very muscular as a player and he hit lots of homers. He must have been cheating, right?

Well… maybe. But there is exactly zero evidence against him. That hasn’t stopped voters from withholding their votes from him of course, but with the “other unproven steroid guy” Mike Piazza likely to get in this year, I think it will help clear the way for Bagwell to get in. So I also expect a jump, probably up to the 65-67% range. Particularly since there are only two real first ballot threats added this year. One of whom, Ken Griffey Jr., will be joining Piazza in this class.

Chairman: It’s true.  Bagwell has an unfair stain on him, as I personally think he should already be inducted.  He is only three points away from that career 3/4/5 (with a .297/.408/.540), is 21st all-time in OPS and is 38th all-time in WAR for position players.  Honestly, I think he was more valuable than his teammate, Craig Biggio, who already got in, and it should have been Bagwell opening the door for Biggio, not the other way around. 

There is no statistical argument against him.  We know what has been holding him back, and it is suspicion, nothing more.  He has done than enough to counter playing for low-profile Houston and playing a position that saw a lot of other power hitters with sexier names.  What worries me is that if he doesn’t make a significant jump this year, he will be in serious trouble, because this really seems to be the year for it to happen.

Spheniscus: I didn’t realize a career 3/4/5 was a thing, but it is damn impressive.

I am not worried about Bagwell getting in. He will get damn close this year. Somewhere into the 60s. And once he is there he will be easy for the people on the fence to vote for him. With next year’s class adding three serious candidates in Vlad Guerrero, Ivan Rodriguez, and Manny Ramirez, the last two of whom have serious PED issues attached, Bagwell will be inducted in 2017.

Chairman:  I think he has a serious shot this year, but failing that, he won’t have to wait any longer than a year.

As for my fictional vote, this is a solid yes for me, as it has been from the very beginning. 

Spheniscus: Clearly a solid yes for me as well. I think he ends up just short. But I hope to be pleasantly surprised. He will get in next year.

Read more

2016 HOF Debate: Garret Anderson

Dec 30, 2015
Written by
Last year, we did our first ever debate on Notinhalloffame.com where we tackled the Hall of Fame merit of twenty-four men who are on the Hall of Fame ballot, in what was in our opinion the most loaded ballot in our lifetime.

Since it was so much fun last time, we thought we would do it again!

One thing that has not changed is the number.  We will again debate twenty-four men who are on the ballot.

What has changed are the ones debating.  Last year I had the pleasure of having DDT, the curator of DDT’s Pop Flies blog and D.K. of the Phillies Archivist blog.  This year, Spheniscus, who has participated in past Rock and Roll discussions, will be joining me.



Chairman: Sometimes I just don’t know any better.

I know that Garret Anderson is not going to go to Cooperstown without a ticket.  However, this is a guy who had over 2,500 Hits in Major League Baseball and while that is not a number that makes people salivate, I think it is still one hell of an accomplishment and one that makes him worth a deeper look; even though I know this is a one and done candidate. 

Spheniscus: I agree that he is never probably getting in, but I give him a shot of sticking around at least a year on the ballot. But I do have to say coming into this, I expected him to have better numbers than he actually does. 

We are both AL East fans, so our exposure to Anderson was limited to maybe nine games a year. But it seemed that every time the Red Sox were out in Anaheim, Anderson just killed us. He is 5th on the ballot in hits, behind only Bonds, Griffey, Sheffield, and Raines. He is also 9th in RBIs. That is where the good news for him ends.
Using the HOFm metric, created by Bill James, Anderson is 24th of the 32 players on this ballot. He is behind other first timers like Billy Wagner and Brad Ausmus. He never walked much and his OPS is well behind guys like Mike Sweeney and Troy Glaus. Hell, he actually has a lower WAR than Randy Winn, who probably needs a ticket, an ID, and a copy of his birth certificate to get into the Hall.

So no, he’s not getting in. But he does have 2,500 hits. And his similar are guys like Steve Garvey, Dave Parker, and Bernie Williams, which may hold some sway for some people. Ultimately, if Nomar can get 5% last year it is entirely possible that Anderson could get 5% this year. But I put his chances at around well, 5% of that happening.

Committee Chairman:  I loved the Steve Garvey reference.  When I was going through his stats, I kept having the same thought process.  Garvey had seven seasons batting over .300 but his highest On Base Percentage was .361.  Anderson hit .300 five times and his highest OBP was .345.  This stat matters. 

When I was a kid, walks were met with polite applause from the crowd and for a missed pitch with no real action involved, a savvy baseball crowd (which is more and more the case) gives a bigger reaction because they appreciate the impact.  Anderson’s low OBP is a turn off and a big one at that.

Spheniscus: Not to get back to the Red Sox again, but the lack of appreciation for walks is why Wade Boggs was not nearly as beloved as he should have been in Boston. Boggs was a man ahead of his time, a modern stats darling. A man who we all hated every time he took a walk in a big spot rather than swinging the bat. Doesn’t he know how good he is? Why is he leaving it to Marty Barrett all the time? We didn’t know any better. We do now. And consequently the Sox just announced that they are retiring his number (after such luminaries as: Wes Chamberlain, Lee Tinsley, Alejandro Pena, Aaron Sele, Chris Snopek, Orlando Merced, Rob Staniford, Sean Berry, Lou Merloni, Freddy Sanchez, Ramiro Mendoza, Scott Podsednik, and Brock Holt have worn in the intervening years).

Anderson would have had a better chance of getting in when Garvey was on the ballot than he does now. Back when walks were unmanly. And unlike Garvey, he is probably not going to stay on this ballot for 15 years and certainly never getting over 40% of the vote. His OBP is WTL (way too low). Like Garvey, he is not getting in without a ticket.

So what is your prediction for Anderson? Would you vote for him and what percentage does he get?

Chairman:  Never apologize for bringing it back to the Red Sox!  I have to say that because I am always going to bring it back to the Blue Jays! 

He doesn’t get my vote, and not because of the crowded ballot.  I just don’t see him in the elite, and I think the voters will agree.  Prediction: 1.4% of the ballot, and that is very generous!

Spheniscus: That seems a little low. While he is a no for me on this list, there are approximately 550 voters. That means only 8 would vote for Anderson? Eh… there have to be at least that many homers from the Anaheim area right? Man, looking at it he’s probably not getting much more than that. But let’s round up. I give him 10 votes, which is approximately 1.8%. Thanks for playing Garret! You get Hall of Fame votes as your parting gift. Very few players can say that.

Read more

Awards = HOF? Part Eight: The Silver Slugger (Shortstop) (MLB)

Dec 24, 2015
Written by
From the Desk of the Chairman
Be the first to comment!
We here at Notinhalloffame.com thought it would be fun to take a look at the major awards in North American team sports and see how it translates into Hall of Fame potential.

Needless to say, different awards in different sports yield hall of fame potential.  In basketball, the team sport with the least amount of players on a roster, the dividend for greatness much higher.  In baseball, it is not as much as a great individual season does not have the same impact.
Read more

If I Had a Vote in the 2016 Baseball Hall of Fame Election

Dec 23, 2015
Written by
DDT's Pop Flies
Be the first to comment!
As we gear up for the 2016 Baseball Hall of Fame balloting and announcements, the overriding question is: Have we returned to normal?

To put that into perspective, how's this for abnormal? In 2013, with a ballot overstuffed with Hall of Fame-caliber candidates (I counted 14), not one candidate was elected to the Hall. Adding to the debacle was the first appearance on a Hall of Fame ballot by Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, both of whom brought the bubbling issue of players suspected or confirmed of having used performance-enhancing drugs (PEDs) to an apoplectic, moralistic boil.
Read more

30. Sage Erickson

Dr. Johnny Pervert
Be the first to comment!
The good doctor wonders if the horny fish have all of the fun in the Pacific Ocean. Why do I ask? They get to look at the yummy bod of Sage Erickson, the Californian surfer who delights beachfronts around the world. She might be more model than surfer, but isn’t that ok with us?
Read more

29. Natalie Gulbis

Dr. Johnny Pervert
Be the first to comment!
The good doctor is rapidly coming to a conclusion. If you want to find the really hot women in America, the golf course might be the place to find them. That is certainly what I think when I see the delicious Natalie Gulbis, all blonde, all hot and All-American. Now how come all I see is a sausage fest when I hit the links?
Read more
Subscribe to this RSS feed