Gil Hodges screwed again!
TheMick6
Posts: 582
Why on earth is he out of the Hall and Ron Santo and Bill Mazeroski in????
0
Comments
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
Just for fun, let's compare Hodges to Eddie Murray, a great Hall of Fame first baseman, by averaging out their career numbers to one 550 AB season. Something an 8th grader could do. Remember, Murray got elected into the HOF on his first ballot. Pretty impressive! Murray also won 3 GG like Hodges, was elected to 8 All Stars like Hodges, won zero MVPs like Hodges, had four 30/100 seasons to Hodges' five, led his team to 3 World Series to Hodges' 7, hit zero game winning World Series hits to Hodges' 4, and is regarded as a great Hall of Famer, to which I agree.
Here's how their career numbers compare, based on their best RBI seasons and averaged to a 550 AB season -- Hodges to Murray: Hits 150.1 to 158.0, Runs 86.3 to 78.9, HRs 28.9 to 24.5, RBIs 99.5 to 93.1, RPA (Run Production Average) ( R + RBI - HR )(I know I used to say PDA, but I think RPA is more descriptive, so let's use RPA from now on) 156.9 to 147.5, BA .273 to .287, OBP .359 to .359, SLG 487 to 476, OPS 846 to 836. Notice anything? Hodges beats Murray in most categories! This my point!
OK, let's show their best 7 years based on RBIs and adjust them to a 550 AB season (you could base it on runs, hits, BA, whatever, but it still comes out about the same) -- Hodges to Murray: Runs 96.0 to 90.0, Hits 162.4 to 165.7, HRs 32.1 to 27.7, RBIs 111.3 to 102.4, BA .284 to .301, and RPA 175.2 to 164.7 (This is the most valuable number). So, now, please tell me, why is Hodges not in the Hall of Fame? Is it all about reaching arbitrary milestones like 500 HR and 3000 Hits? What if it took a guy 30 years? Someday men will be able to play that long with improved medicine and training. This is why I think Hodges is getting a raw deal. All his great contemporaries want him in. So who is stopping him? In 1993 they voted him in but Campanella's vote was nullified at the last minute. Williams said he had to cast it in person, in Ted's house. Campy was in the hospital. He died 6 months later. He said "Gil Hodges is a Hall of Fame man." So did Mays, Kiner, and Musial. Enough said.
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
<< <i>Why on earth is he out of the Hall and Ron Santo and Bill Mazeroski in???? >>
Gil Hodges has a career 44.9 WAR over 18 seasons. Ron Santo has a career 70.4 career WAR over 15 seasons. Not sure I see the case for comparison there.
<< <i>Gil Hodges has a career 44.9 WAR over 18 seasons. Ron Santo has a career 70.4 career WAR over 15 seasons. Not sure I see the case for comparison there. >>
I am not a big WAR guy, so correct me if I am wrong. Doesn't WAR literally mean wins above (a) replacement (think AAA player, or a little better?) player?
If Hodges compares favorably against a HOFer, why should we care how he compares against a ham-and-egger?
I have read several books on Mantle. Mays, Aaron, Berra etc. and Hodges ALWAYS gets mentioned as a superlative player. Look at his 10 year stretch from 1949-1958 pretty nice run.
I would put him, Oliva and Dick Allen in, all were special players. Maybe not "Top Tier" HOF worthy, but good enough for me.
<< <i>i imagine a caricature featuring the HOF with all it's honorary royalty inside, living it up, hoisting tankards and laughing while the borderline rejects stand outside staring through a huge picture window with exaggerated sad clown faces. >>
Jeff ... what a great subject for fellow board member Graig Kreindler to paint one day!
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
Most of us have someone we feel is deserving and does not get the respect he deserves -- my guy is Al Oliver.
Scott
Always plenty of PSA-graded cards in my ebay store -- https://ebay.com/str/thelumbercompanysportscards
<< <i>Just for fun, let's compare Hodges to Eddie Murray, a great Hall of Fame first baseman, by averaging out their career numbers to one 550 AB season. Something an 8th grader could do. >>
Doug, if you distill it down to one season we'd be seeing Brady Anderson on a HOF plaque. And that's just wrong!
not a single one of those players got a hit, win or championship since the BBWAA passed on them 15 consecutive times. I can see a committee meeting to vote on players that never appeared on the BBWAA ballot (dead ball era, negro league), managers, GM's, and multi faceted players like Minoso and O'Doul, but not players from the '40's thru now that have been vetted and declined many times over. Agreed, I'd love to see Gil in for sentimental reasons but it's the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Very Good, and players like Maz, Santo, Doerr, Blyleven and others have already weakened it.
But based on the profound effect he had on the game I cannot fathom why Marvin Miller isn't in- Effa Manley and Bowie Kuhn made it in, and I'm sure they'll totally jump the shark one day soon and vote in the village idiot, Bud Selig.
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
<< <i>Doug, if you distill it down to one season we'd be seeing Brady Anderson on a HOF plaque. And that's just wrong! >>
Anthony, I think you misread that. It's not based on one season ... those stats were based on 7-10 seasons (I believe) and then were averaged into a 550 AB season.
Doug
Liquidating my collection for the 3rd and final time. Time for others to enjoy what I have enjoyed over the last several decades. Money could be put to better use.
Agree completely on Marvin Miller.
Seems to me the HOF argument comes down to those who don't want anyone in who wasn't in the top 75% and those who make a case for players who are better than the bottom 25%.
<< <i>
<< <i>Doug, if you distill it down to one season we'd be seeing Brady Anderson on a HOF plaque. And that's just wrong! >>
Anthony, I think you misread that. It's not based on one season ... those stats were based on 7-10 seasons (I believe) and then were averaged into a 550 AB season. >>
yeah, thats what I get for reading it on a phone in a bumpy car!
Always looking for Topps Salesman Samples, pre '51 unopened packs, E90-2, E91a, N690 Kalamazoo Bats, and T204 Square Frame Ramly's
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.
<< <i>
<< <i>Gil Hodges has a career 44.9 WAR over 18 seasons. Ron Santo has a career 70.4 career WAR over 15 seasons. Not sure I see the case for comparison there. >>
I am not a big WAR guy, so correct me if I am wrong. Doesn't WAR literally mean wins above (a) replacement (think AAA player, or a little better?) player?
If Hodges compares favorably against a HOFer, why should we care how he compares against a ham-and-egger?
I have read several books on Mantle. Mays, Aaron, Berra etc. and Hodges ALWAYS gets mentioned as a superlative player. Look at his 10 year stretch from 1949-1958 pretty nice run.
I would put him, Oliva and Dick Allen in, all were special players. Maybe not "Top Tier" HOF worthy, but good enough for me. >>
The number would be a little different, but if used WAHOF the point would remain the same, he doesn't compare favorably. He falls short, and not by a small margin. When using WAR for the discussion for Hall entry the number people look for is a career 60 WAR (there are some guys in the Hall with less, but most people would say those shouldn't be in the first place, or the player had other circumstances like a world war interrupt their career). Anyway, so if we use 60 as the baseline and make that the new 0 Gil Hodges is a negative 15 WAHOF, so not a Hall of Famer.
<< <i>He certainly belongs in the HOF as much as or more so than Jim Rice does.. >>
If you're pointing to guys who do not belong in the Hall of Fame as a reason why your guy belongs in the Hall of Fame, your guy doesn't belong.
<< <i>Was waiting for WAR to rear it's ugly head. Hodges was a first basemen WAR isn't kind to them in regards to fielding. Don Mattingly by all accounts was a great fielding first basemen but according to WAR he's worth negative runs for his career??? >>
Could WAR possibly be flawed? Oh NOOOOOOOOOOO.
<< <i>
<< <i>He certainly belongs in the HOF as much as or more so than Jim Rice does.. >>
If you're pointing to guys who do not belong in the Hall of Fame as a reason why your guy belongs in the Hall of Fame, your guy doesn't belong. >>
Who said Hodges was my guy?
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.
<< <i>
<< <i>Was waiting for WAR to rear it's ugly head. Hodges was a first basemen WAR isn't kind to them in regards to fielding. Don Mattingly by all accounts was a great fielding first basemen but according to WAR he's worth negative runs for his career??? >>
Could WAR possibly be flawed? Oh NOOOOOOOOOOO. >>
I'll leave it at this, flawed or not, WAR at the very least gives a pretty good approximation of a player's career worth, especially comparing across eras. My initial beef was with comparing Santo whose WAR makes him a no doubter Hall of Famer to a guy who falls well short.
If was indeed deserving he would be a member by now.
IMF
<< <i>
<< <i>Why on earth is he out of the Hall and Ron Santo and Bill Mazeroski in???? >>
Gil Hodges has a career 44.9 WAR over 18 seasons. Ron Santo has a career 70.4 career WAR over 15 seasons. Not sure I see the case for comparison there. >>
I agree. If I had one vote, it would probably have gone to Minoso. FWIW, not of his comps at baseball-reference.com are in the HOF. His best comparison is Norm Cash. Minoso had an OPS+ of 130, compared to Hodges at 120. In addition, Minoso played a more demanding defensive position, won more gold gloves, and had to deal with the color line.
<< <i>I would put him, Oliva and Dick Allen in, all were special players. Maybe not "Top Tier" HOF worthy, but good enough for me. >>
I like your thinking my friend.
<< <i>
If you're pointing to guys who do not belong in the Hall of Fame as a reason why your guy belongs in the Hall of Fame, your guy doesn't belong. >>
Love this - this is exactly right. Just because they let people in the Hall that don't deserve it doesn't mean we should put more in. If comparing to other HOFers, I could say that Hodges, Kaat, and maybe Boyer deserved it, but ti would be coomparing them mainly to lower-tier guys that don't deserve it.
I would agree Hodges ahould be in there. I am a big Jim Kaat fan, but I am not sure he belongs.
<< <i>Hodges won as many gold gloves as Minoso and won the first three at first base from ages 33-36 im gonna assume he was seen as the best fielding first basemen in his late twenties and early thirties to. Just unlucky that that award was invented late in his career is all. He played in 7 World Series on some of the most historic teams ever. Yes Minoso delt with the color line I'll concede on that one but Hodhes gave at least two years to world war 2 in the Marine's no small sacrafice add onto that he is forever linked to the Miricle Mets, I realize those things shouldn't have a lot of bearing on entry into the Hall but can any of us really say Maz's homer didn't get him in? I just fell he shouldn't be judged on WAR alone I think that stat is only a helpful guide not proof of anything. If WAR was all that mattered why hasn't Nettles gotten in? He was basically one notch below Brooks at third and his WAR is 68. >>
Nice post. Much of the praise that came from the players I mentioned regarded Hodges' defense. Players don't seem to get much credit for being superior defensive players. Offense is much easier to measure.
I really like Jim Kaat. He played for my local team (Minnesota Twins) for much of his career, but I don't know if I would vote for him to get in the Hall. Certainly more deserving guys out there.
I don't know about anyone else, but if I was better than just ONE GUY in the HOF, I would wonder why I wasn't in. Spoken like a true ex-sales guy! LOL
His tenure as Manager of the Mets and his playing career should be enough to get him in.
Kaat has my vote too!
Hey Skip how's it going?
<< <i>Only 2 men hit 300 or more homers during the 50's, Hodges was one of them...
>>
Big deal. Are you saying he was one of the two best sluggers in the 50s? Because he wasn't. Just like Jack Morris and his "most wins in the 80s", this is an arbitrary cutoff used only to make a guy look better than he was.
Hodges never led the league in any offensive stat and had a career OPS+ of just 120. He doesn't belong.
No, the guy who truly got robbed this time around was Dick Allen.
<< <i>Why on earth is he out of the Hall and Ron Santo and Bill Mazeroski in???? >>
Because the HOF has been watered down and is not solely compiled of just elite players like it was intended to be. It always bothers me to see the lower tier players make it in, because I feel the HOF should be for the true greats. While I like Gil Hodges, he is another guy that doesn't qualify as a 'great', in my opinion.
They should set a minimum standard for modern players for enshrinement. 2500 hits, 300 wins, etc - something to that effect.
They call me "Pack the Ripper"
collecting RAW Topps baseball cards 1952 Highs to 1972. looking for collector grade (somewhere between psa 4-7 condition). let me know what you have, I'll take it, I want to finish sets, I must have something you can use for trade.
looking for Topps 71-72 hi's-62-53-54-55-59, I have these sets started
<< <i>What's the argument in favor of Kaat? Not a single truly great season, career ERA of 3.45 and ERA+ of 108. He played forever and won a bunch of Gold Gloves at a position where that means nothing. That's the argument. He doesn't belong and isn't even particularly close IMHO. >>
He would have won the Cy Young in 66 if they gave one for each league. Led league in Wins and IP, 6th in ERA. He was having a terrific year in 72 (10-2 with an ERA+ of 153). Seven of his top ten comps are in the HOF.
This group of clowns really missed the boat this time.I have respect for Kell and Maz however were they better than Kenny Boyer??????
<< <i>What's the argument in favor of Kaat? Not a single truly great season, career ERA of 3.45 and ERA+ of 108. He played forever and won a bunch of Gold Gloves at a position where that means nothing. That's the argument. He doesn't belong and isn't even particularly close IMHO. >>
+1000. Kaat was never dominant and doesn't even belong in the HOF discussion. It bugs me that he keeps getting so close (same with Mo Cheeks in basketball, but that's for a different thread). If I were ranking the players who were finalists this year I would go 1-Hodges, 2-Allen, 3-Oliva, 4-Boyer, 5-Minoso, 6-Wills, 7-Tiant, 8-Kaat and 9-Pierce.
<< <i>
<< <i>Why on earth is he out of the Hall and Ron Santo and Bill Mazeroski in???? >>
Because the HOF has been watered down and is not solely compiled of just elite players like it was intended to be. It always bothers me to see the lower tier players make it in, because I feel the HOF should be for the true greats. While I like Gil Hodges, he is another guy that doesn't qualify as a 'great', in my opinion. >>
StanTheMan, I have been enjoying reading your posts on these boards
Here are Hodges best league rankings in OPS+ 6th, 6th , 8th, 8th. No other top tens.
Here are Hodges best league rankings in Win Probability Added(which is everything RBI intends to measure, but does it better and more accurately): 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 10th, 10th.
So he never really dominated like one would expect for a HOFer. Not too bad in the Win Probabiliy Added.
Hodges only has 561 at bats after age 35, so he petered out much earlier compared to the typical elite HOFer. This might not be a death knell on his HOF, but when you add that he also did not dominate during his prime...it pretty much is good reason for him not to be in the Hall. Had he produced a Koufaxian prime, then he would have a better case.
A guy like George Foster is remarkably similar to Hodges. He has very similar career rankings, has slightly better peak dominance rankings, and he too was a key cog in a key team. So really, I don't see how a guy like Hodges gets put in, and George Foster doesn't.
Sure, you can put Hodges in, but then that opens legitimate inclusions for a host of others like Foster.
I might be in the minority here, but if it were up to me Shoeless Joe and Dale Murphy both get in the hall before Hodges.