Options
Is Joey Votto a future HOFer?
craig44
Posts: 10,543 ✭✭✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
In the past, I have heard/read that many consider Votto a future HOFer. I saw a report that he will be starting the year on the IL. It reminded me of those thoughts. I took a look at his record. I am underwhelmed. I see a player who hit with some power, but wasnt an elite power hitter. He played 1b. He does not have great counting stats. It seems he was very very good at one thing. Walking.
He was an elite walker.
To me, he is not a HOFer, what do you think?
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
0
Comments
No way. Not even close IMO.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
He achieved some career numbers that not a lot of hitters do;
Batting Average of .300 (actually .297)
OBP of .400 (.412, 33rd all time)
SLG of .500
OPS of .926 (48th all time)
OPS+ of 145 (51st all time)
Nearly averages 40 doubles and 30 HR a season for his career.
He was primarily a #3 hitter, so his walks are still a better value than if he hit clean up.
The negative on him would be his short(ish) career with only 7044 AB.
He did not miss much time, out of his 14 full seasons (I'm ignoring his rookie season and 2020) he played almost all the games in 12 of them.
I would have to see who else was on the ballot, but I can see him getting in.
I dont see averaging almost 40 2b and 30 HR. if you take out his 2 shortest seasons he played 14 seasons. I get averages of 31 doubles and 23 HR. if you factor in those 2 shorter seasons the average gets even worse.
If he plays another season or 2, his slg will fall below .500 like his BA has already fallen below .300
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Let's put it this way
Who would you prefer in your lineup, Harold Baines or Joey Votto?
He is actually similar to Lance Berkman
Berkman 7,814 plate appearances 144 OPS+, 366 HR and 1,234 RBI
Votto 8,504 plate appearances 145 OPS+, 342 HR and 1,106 RBI
Give him his proper credit for his walks.
For instance, he had 4,803 lifetime plate appearances with nobody on base where a walk is just as good as a single.
Give him that credit and he has a .388 batting average and .557 Slugging percentage in more than half his at bats.
Then he did his job with RISP hitting a slash line of .322/.471/.569. How many MLB hitters have hit over .320 with RISP in the last ten years(for their entire career)? Isn't that elite aside from the walks?
He was on a HOF pace early in his career until he decided to become a slap hitter trying to hit .400. He's not even remotely close to meeting the threshold for a first baseman especially not one that plays in whats basically a wiffle ball stadium in Cincy. If he gets in the HOF will lose even more credibility than it already has
His numbers are basically the same as Adrian Gonzalez and Lance Berkman and they played in much harder parks to hit in especially AGone before Petco moved the fences in
In 2021 he hit 36 home runs and slugged .563.
Not what I would call a "slap hitter".
Doing this at the age of 37 is pretty impressive.
You mean after hitting 12 in 2018 and 15 in 2019 when he played fulled seasons? 2022 .205 average 11 Hrs 91 games slug under .400. Go watch his at bats through his career watch where his hands are on the bat year to year.
He's 102nd all time in home runs. I wouldn't classify him as a singles hitter even if he had a couple 'singles hitting' seasons.
He had a late MLB start with only 84 at bats before age 24 and that is really the biggest culprit to his counting stats at this point. He actually is the rare lefty that was playing 162 games a couple times, and super close three other times. He didn't take advantage of platooning to save his percentages. That is a plus.
Players dont take advantage of platooning, its a decision forced on them by the team. If someone is getting platooned the team doesnt think they're anything more than a role player. Every lefty all star and especially HOFer faces pitchers from both sides.
As far as the singles hitter thing, that was something his approach changed for a bit and then went back. He was trying to do something at the end of his career and thats fine although as a teammate or a team I wouldnt have liked that. Hes a Canada HOF player just doesnt get close to what is needed for an MLB first baseman to get into the MLB HOF, or shouldnt be anyways
Yes, I understand the players don't have a choice about platooning, but the guys who do platoon have their percentages 'saved' by not having to bat in their hardest situations. It is the Ken Phelps factor. It makes them look a little better than they really are compared to the guys who played every day. Votto played every day.
You may be a little upset in about 8 years or so because Votto is going in.
I personally would like to see more at bats for his career too but he has some outstanding numbers. I won't hold the counting stats against him too hard because he was good enough to come up earlier than he did and he still has another year or two left.
PS Berkman gets overlooked too easily as well. Not saying he should be in, but he was completely discounted.
I can see him getting in also. Career OBP% of .412 (33rd all time) and OPS+ of 145 and led league in OBP% 7 times including OPS twice.
Doesnt hurt either that he's very popular among his peers and the public including the writers who vote.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Players that platoon dont look better than they are, the fact they get held out of the lineup so much shows exactly what they are. Teams know that, players know that, but if thats your only way to be in the bigs then it is what it is. Platoon players are nothing more than role players that are easily replaced.
Votto wont get in, nor should he. Berkman should be in Agone should be in if he gets in. McGriff didnt even get in and his numbers are much better especially considering his playoff numbers and the fact he was a major part of the 1995 Braves WS championship. If Votto played 2nd hed probably get in, but he plays first and a first baseman with maybe 400 Hrs and 3 100 RBI seasons isnt getting in. Jeff Kent has better numbers than him as a 2nd basemen and didnt get in. Votto has rarely ever even been the best first basemen in his division, never in the NL much less the league or an all time great just because he takes some walks. Two top years in a career doesnt make someone deserving of the hall
To quote myself from a very similar thread a couple years back:
"On the JAWS list, the only first basemen above Votto who aren't in the HOF are Pujols (HOF lock), Cabrera (HOF lock), and Palmeiro (would have been a HOF lock except for the cheating). Below him are McCovey, Murray, Greenberg, Sisler, Killebrew, Perez, Cepeda, and most of the old-timers.
Yes, a lot of Votto's value is in his walks and he'll probably have to wait awhile because of that. But as the voters who don't understand how valuable walks are retire and get replaced by more knowledgeable voters I think his chances are very good."
The only thing that has changed since then is that Votto has passed Palmeiro. Hopefully, the number of HOF voters who don't understand how valuable walks are has also changed, or will by the time Votto gets on the ballot.
Quiz: of SLG and OBP, which is more important (creates more runs) than the other?
Answer: OBP
Chicks and less knowledgeable fans love the long ball. Hitters who get on base 25% more often than average hitters are incredibly valuable and win more games. Votto's Win Probability Added is 42nd all time. Is he one of the 50 greatest hitters of all time? There's a very strong case that he is.
Theres no case that Votto is one of the 50 best hitters of all time. None. Not even top 100 or 200. 50 best first basemen maybe and that would even be a stretch
SLG creates more runs than OBP for base cloggers. Rickey Henderson types OBP could mean more, slow station to station Votto types SLG means more. Knowledgeable baseball people know this and that what you could do on base matters.
Palmerios stats blow Vottos out of the water. Trying to dictate walks being the most important over actual production and numbers is someone who believes analytics means more than actual results
Is win probability added really useful? I just looked at a list and Bob Johnson and Prince Fielder are ahead of Ty Cobb in WPA. I don’t even know who Bobby j is.
Also Tony Gwynn is ahead of your golden boy slugger Mike Schmidt.
What gives?
Gwynn is about 20 points ahead of Wade Boggs which I assume is a significant amount. Everyone always considers those two very similar, high batting avg not a lot of power.
It's a really bad stat that ignores a lot of things. Joe Morgan is 16th all time in it, Bagwell 24th all time. If you do something at the right time the algorithm likes you and you get a big boost and its cumulative for a career. Lance Berkman is 37th all time in it. Jason Giambi is 51 but Ken Griffey Jr is 55th. Its not a stat anyone pays any attention too
I have no comment on this, I just thought I'd quote it in case the author figures out why it makes me laugh and deletes or edits it.
Stop it, man, you're killin' me.
Yes, WPA is useful. It's not the magic bullet that renders all other stats useless, but it's definitely a piece of the puzzle.
For some reason, I think because play-by-play data isn't available, WPA isn't calculated until 1915, so Cobb is missing a lot of his best seasons. Just ignore anyone who played much before 1915.
Bob Johnson was a stud hitter, but he played for terrible teams so nobody remembers him. He was also an 8-time All-Star in a 13-year career. But, he also spent what would have been his "old man" years, having some of his best seasons during WWII, which makes him appear better than he really was, in WPA and a lot of other stats.
I can live with Gwynn being ahead of Schmidt. "You're a worse hitter - by one metric - than Tony Gwynn" must be among the world's mildest insults. Now, if Schmidt were behind George Brett, that would be embarrassing.
WPA, as opposed to most any of the other stats we commonly discuss here, takes into account situational hitting - what the hitter did with men on base or in scoring position. Almost everyone's OPS improves in those situations a little bit and that's what we see with Boggs - 5% improvement with RISP and 3% improvement with men on base. Gwynn, though, improved a mammoth 18% with RISP, and 11% with men on base. I don't know how that ranks - and can't know without looking up everyone else one at a time - but I'd bet it ranks very close to the top. Gwynn and Boggs were similar hitters in a lot of respects, but Gwynn got hits that mattered to a much greater degree than Boggs.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/wpa_bat_career.shtml
What did I say that was incorrect? Youre citing a stat that has Morgan as the 16th best of all time, Bagwell (who has a much greater HOF case than Votto) as 24th. Berkman as 37th, Ken Griffy Jr as 55th behind Votto which is just hysterical. Its a bad advanced stat to create discussions
I really hope Dallas takes Baseball 21 seriously and engages him.
King kong vs Godzilla discussion could be happening lol
I tend to agree with this side of the argument. I will always side with actual production (hits, 2b, 3b, HR) over potential production (BB) The reason I consider BB potential production is because unless the bases are loaded, the act of BB itself never drove in a runner. No walk that I ever heard of ever moved a runner from 1st to 3rd or scored a runner from 1st. Batted balls also always include the possibility of forcing errors on the defense. with the exception of bases loaded, BB are fully dependent on another batter to force the action. in the modern game where stealing is not really in play, and with slow players like Votto who are base cloggers, it becomes a station-to-station game.
And yes, Palmiero produced to a higher degree than Votto.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Some of these numbers are TOTALLY useless when comparing two players.
When someone used one that didn't make sense to me, I did a bunch of reading and one of the numbers (I can't remember if it was WPA) came right out and said it was not a good number for player comparisons.
Thanks Dallas for the WPA explanation. Some surprises when looking through it like Cal Ripken only at 15.5 points.
My two favorites Brett and Stargell are just barely behind Schmidt. 🥳
>
>
>
OBP is not "better" than SLG.
The best run production will have a combination of guys who get on base followed by a guy who drives the ball.
It's obvious that the guy with a high OBP and a low SLG offers less by himself than a guy who has a high SLG and low OBP.
Guys like Votto who do BOTH along with a high BA are rare.
Very few players average .300 get on base .400 and slug .500, especially in the modern times where I see a LOT of guys hitting around .200 and are considered "good" hitters because they hit a few home runs.
The numbers CERTAINLY show Votto needs to be looked at as a top 50 (or close) hitter all time. Fantastic OBP and very, very good BA and SLG, just what you want from a #3 batter. He would have also been a good leadoff guy, #2, or cleanup hitter. Very versatile and valuable hitter.
>
>
>
Yet another head scratcher.
The ONLY advantage Palmiero has is number of games played.
Votto has a clear advantage in BA, a huge advantage in OBP and a nearly equal SLG.
The reason Vottos rate stats SEEM better than Palmieros is because Palmiero has 3400 more ABs. Many of those ABs are spread out both before the age of 24 and after the age of 35. those are generally times when players are either too inexperienced to be great or in the old man years. Vottoe has about 1000 of those type of AB's. Palmiero has about 3500. that is 2000 either young or old man AB's that are lowering his rate stats. if you added those 2000 to Vottos totals, his rate stats would not be anywhere near where they are now. He really seems to be tanking after age 35
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Maybe if he juiced up like Palmiero he could stay on the field more?
Very similar hitters, with a big advantage to Palmiero in getting an early start and Votto's losing 2020 through no fault of his own. Last year was a bad year for Joey, but he was very good in 2021.
The park factor foolishly got brought in, so I'll counter with Palmiero playing on some incredibly good hitting teams in Texas and of course his proven steroid use.
I'll take Votto over Palmiero in a heartbeat.
Except Votto has a .513 SLG percentage and hits .320 with Runners in Scoring position...so he is doing what you are saying is important. Then on top of that, he gets on base at an elite level.
That is why his win probability is high. He has gotten a lot of hits with men on base at a high rate...isn't that what guys have railed on Mike Trout for supposedly not doing?
Aren't all hits with nobody on base just 'potential' runs too?
Yes, all hits with nobody on base are just "potential runs", but they may have a higher probability of scoring, like extra-base hits automatically puts the runner in scoring position. even singles give the fielder an opportunity for an error and base advancement that a BB doesnt.
He does have a .513 SLG percentage, but because he takes so many walks, he has less opportunity to do more. I haven't taken a really deep dive into his stats yet, but I wonder how many BB Votto is taking when men are on base? in scoring position? That is real production that is being missed out on by walking to 1b.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Yes, everyone's hits with nobody on base are what you say....so treat theirs like that considering that 60% of their hits come with nobody on base.
You want Votto to swing outside the strike zone with RISP?
With RISP and Votto draws a walk, and there is a batter behind him that has a 28% or 29% chance of getting a single and Vott has a 32% chance of getting a single(which goes down to 15-20% if swinging outside the strike zone), except now when the 29% guy is up there are MORE base runners to bat in.
Really isn't that complicated.
Say it ain’t so Craig!
You went with ‘deep dive’?
A little disappointed 😫
I know, stupid cliche. I will do better next time!!
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Except you don't know if the guy behind him has a 28% chance of getting a single.
It is called situational hitting. how many are on base/who is hitting behind you will dictate whether or not you open up your zone or not. opening up the zone 3-5" will not take Votto down to a .150 hitter. it will give him more chances to drive the ball.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
...
I know that I commented prior and said I was a deep dive kind of guy. I can't remember my precise words or the exact context presented by you, Daring Darin.
However, I have to say, I am a bit surprised now reading about your disappointment. Why? I knew you'd ask. It's because I distinctly (maybe) remember thinking that you were opposed to the idea of what a 'deep dive' represented, not the term itself. 😜🤷🤣🤣
So to follow that up now that it's all clear, @darin, what word or phrase do you suggest we go with instead?
If I recall, someone on the forum once started a thread about 'new sentences'. Maybe you can cross-post your answer there.
https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/1088318/new-sentence-an-old-game-a-doubledragon-hydrant-thisistheshow-production#latest
Generally speaking, I do not get too excited about bases on balls.
The #3 hitter has the (in my opinion) best run producer hitting behind him, so if he doesn't get a good pitch to hit, he shouldn't expand his strike zone to try to hit a bad pitch. You want him to be a good hitter for average and have a good OBP, if he also has a great SLG, you have the "perfect" guy for the job.
As I mentioned, Votto's low on plate appearances, but not because he has missed a lot of games through injury. Five plus years in the minors hurts.
Steroids aside, I would put Palmiero in ahead of Votto, but the facts being what they are, I would vote for Votto.
Just giving Craig a little crap. All the sports talking heads on tv started using ‘deep dive’. Before that they were going out of their way to work
‘down the rabbit hole’ into a sentence. 🤮
Ps- I remember when a woman would post a gorgeous pic on the internet yahoo would say ‘she just broke the internet’. That one got old real fast.
the one i hate the worst is when a talking head gets a difficult question to answer, they ALWAYS have to say, "that is a lot to unpack" I hear it most often on political-type shows.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
..
...and thank you for you're response, there is certainly a lot to unpack there, however in case I missed it can you please give me your most-liked alternatives?
Showtime,
How about I just thank Craig, Banzai,
Basebal21, Mr Robinson, Dallas and whoever else contributed to this thread.
I really enjoy the baseball discussion threads.
Arggggggg. I see what you did there...
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
....
Honorable mention to this guy...
a woman like that is called a smoke show, and i've got nothing to add outside of this emotionally uplifting picture of dallas and basebal enjoying a cold beverage together
Palmerio has over 200 more Hrs, about 1000 more RBIs, and about 700 more RBIs and scored about 500 more runs. Votto isnt going to close those gaps by much in his final year or two at his age. And yes for the HOF and judging a career cumulative counting statistics matter. Raffy also has just about the same number of career at bats as Votto. If Votto missed out on a chance to chase some of the other numbers because he was more interested in drawing a walk thats on him
Vottos high slug rate is largely weighted from 2009-2012 when he was a stud. He's had a slug under .500 6 times in his 15 year career including more than once just barely being over .400 and last year he was under .400. 2015-2017 he had a nice run too, but theres been plenty of years where hes been nothing special and even blow average.
6 premium years simply isnt enough to make someone a hall of famer. If thats all it takes open the flood gates because we have 1000s of players that need to be let in.
Opening the zone 5" is way to much and would be excessive. But your point is still valid. Its very clear watching Votto at bats that many times he was looking to walk (Soto is starting to do this too and his numbers have suffered greatly from it) as opposed to going up there and being the run producing stud Cincy wanted him to be. He certainly could have been more aggressive on those borderline fast balls he took pride in not swinging at that were completely hittable pitches to do some damage instead of take a walk and clog the bases
Correct. Do you think that's too low? You may be right.
I still don't know where you're going with this. Bagwell in 24th "feels" about right to me. Do you think that's too high or too low?
Still don't know what point you're making, or trying to make.
I suspect that your "point" is buried inside this one, but it would be hella helpful if you'd use your big boy words and just make a point rather than assuming we're going to figure it out by deciphering your hallucinations. Griffey was a fine hitter for half his career, and if the second half had been anywhere close to as good, he'd blow Votto away. But it wasn't. The second half of Griffey's career bounced between OK and putrid, and in the end Votto edges him out on this stat.
No, it's not. It's an excellent stat. And again, it's "an" excellent stat, it is not "the" excellent stat. What I'm seeing here, from you and others, is an unwillingness to consider what a statistic says if what it says contradicts the conclusion you've already reached.
Joey Votto is MUCH better than you, and others, think he is. WPA points you to what appears to be the largest gap in your knowledge about Votto (and presumably others). Before you ignore it, I recommend you try to understand it. But you do you.
And this, I think sums up the argument against Votto, and why that argument ultimately fails. Walks are real production. No ifs, ands, buts, or qualifications of any kind. They are real production. And how do we know they are real production? Because they produce real runs. Stats that don't recognize that fact are as useless as they are comforting to people's preconceived notions.
Quick quiz:
Bottom of the 9th, two outs, nobody on, score is tied.
Batter A hits a single.
Batter B walks.
Batter C gets a single, winning run scores, game over.
In a perfect stat, who would get credit for "producing" that game winning run?
If you think Morgan is the 16th best player of all time or Bagwell at 24th thats hard to actually have a real conversation about production if someone is hyper focused on a fringe stat.
https://library.fangraphs.com/misc/wpa/
"WPA is tricky because there’s an innate desire to use it as a measure of “which player has delivered when it matters most!” In reality, it’s far more complicated than that because it’s an additive measure. To accrue big WPA totals, you need to be presented with many opportunities to come through with the game on the line. A player with a 5.0 WPA for the year hasn’t necessarily been more “clutch” than one with a 2.0 WPA, they may simply have had many chances with the bases loaded late in close games."
Every single thing of WPA and the algorithm says not to use it as a comparison, or a prediction. You can have a higher one simply because your team gave you more chances to accumulate it over a career.
Its a very bad stat to focus on for a players career and teams dont use it. They use proprietary information which is why the Cardinals were punished for hacking into the Astros database being fined 2 million, losing draft picks, and Chris Correra got jail time and was banned for life
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/jan/30/st-louis-cardinals-hacking-scandal-punishment-houston-astros-mlb