He was, is, and ever shall be, the horse’s ass standard by which all other horse’s asses are measured.

As much as I loathe Barry Bonds, he’s still not as low as Pete in my book.

Not to say both weren’t great ballplayers, but every day that Pete is not in the HOF is another day filled with sunshine and blue skies.

Not that I’m carrying a grudge or anything… :)

You wrote “I have to add one more thing. This is the 12th comment on a post talking about a position played by Barry Bonds and Pete Rose… and it’s the first one to mention both of them.”

The NEWS Gauge has Bonds ranked as the #1 career by a left fielder and Rose as #4. I guess nobody has a problem with that. Can that be?

You are correct in saying that Amos Otis was a pretty good player for a pretty long time. His NEWS score is 249 which places him among the top 25 center fielders of the century. That will be my next article.

I find that almost amazing! :)

One nitpick – Tommy Leach only played 74 games in LF, while he played almost 1,000 at 3B and 1,000 in CF, so he really doesn’t belong in the list of LFers.

Ah, now you want to compare apples to oranges? There is really no valid way to compare position players to pitchers.

But, since you mention Koufax. There are only five pitchers in the 20th century who pitched in fewer than 2400 innings and still attained a NEWS score of 180. All five have HOF numbers according to the NEWS Gauge. Here they are.

Addie Joss
Sandy Koufax
Hoyt Wilhelm
Goose Gossage
Dizzy Dean

With the election of Gossage, all 5 are in the Hall of Fame – where they belong.

Then by your own admission, Sandy Koufax has no business in the Hall of Fame.

You wrote “Your NEWS Gauge weighe too heavily…FAR to heavily…on longevity. Tony Oliva was undeniably a better hitter and outfielder than many of the guys ahead of him on your list, and I’ll still take his “career” 8-year peak over ANY of the guys in front of him at that position.”

The NEWS Gauge includes only 25% of win shares beyond the ten best seasons. The more common criticism of this is that I DO NOT GIVE ENOUGH CREDIT FOR LONGEVITY.

I always find it interesting when a fan argues for a “peak” of 5,6,7,8 years because this suits his player best. Oliva played for 15 seasons – some of them quite short. For his ten best, he averaged 23.4 win shares per season – quite good. But Staub averaged 25.4 for his ten best – much better. There is no comparison there – and we are NOT talking longevity.

Tony Oliva was an outstanding player for a number of years. But not enough years to have had a Hall of Fame career.

Perhaps a better “career” comparison would be with Kirby Puckett. Oliva played in 1676 games while Puckett played in 1783. Not too much difference. But Puckett’s NEWS score of 256 is significantly better than Oliva’s 237.

8 outstanding years does not make a “great career.” Just ask Don Mattingly or Dale Murphy.

Your NEWS Gauge weighe too heavily…FAR to heavily…on longevity. Tony Oliva was undeniably a better hitter and outfielder than many of the guys ahead of him on your list, and I’ll still take his “career” 8-year peak over ANY of the guys in front of him at that position.

The Hall of Fame should NOT be about “Hall of Long Careers”, it should be about the best players. Pure and simple. And Tony Oliva was one of the best outfielders of his time for quite a stretch…eight years.

And his peak, btw, was almost as long as Sandy Koufax’ entire career (Koufax makes the Hall on five productive years, but Oliva can’t make it on eight? What is that all about?)

With all due respect to Rusty Staub, he wouldn’t have cracked the Minnesota Twins starting lineup when he broke in, and wouldn’t have cracked it until he’d been in the league 7 or 8 years, i.e. when the Twins fell from the top of the league in the early 70′s. To say his career was better than Tony Oliva’s?

Sorry, I’m not buying it. Ever.

Thanks for the comment.

You have to read more carefully what a stat is really suggesting. The NEWS Gauge is NOT saying that “Staub was a better player than Oliva.” That depends on your definition of “better player.”

What the NEWS is suggesting is that Rusty Staub had a “better career” than Tony Oliva – in fact, a much better career. And I believe that is indisputable.

Any stat that shows that Rusty Staub was a better player than Tony Oliva has a major flaw.