Chapter Five: A Short and Great Career

Title: BASEBALL’S BEST: The TRUE Hall of Famers
Author: Michael Hoban, Ph.D.
Formats: PDF (ebook) | Paperback
Pages: 223

In trying to determine which position players really have Hall of Fame numbers, one other question kept popping up in my mind. And that is the question of whether special consideration should be given to those players who had relatively short but great careers. Jackie Robinson comes to mind immediately. He played for only ten seasons but did so in a brilliant fashion. So, the question is: Is it fair to base his entrance into the Hall on the exact same criteria as a player who played for many more seasons? It would seem that some further analysis might be in order.

As we know, some great players have had short careers due to such factors as injury, military service or the color barrier. I would define “relatively short career” for our purposes to be less than 1800 games played during a career.

It is true that a couple of great players who are in the Hall and had short careers DO MEET the criteria of 280 or more NEWS. Here are the two players who fit this description (less than 1800 games in a career).

Of course, every fan knows of Joe DiMaggio in some context. But how many realize that Elmer Flick deserves to be in the Hall also?

Here are nine other Hall of Famers who do not meet the 280 criterion but had short and great careers.

Joe DiMaggio, of course, is a true superstar so his numbers are in a class of their own. (You will note that he is close to 400 career win shares while only Bill Dickey among the others has over 300.) But look at these nine players. They have the following characteristics in common:

1. Their NEWS score is 255 or better.

2. They each had a relatively short career of less than 1800 games.

These two characteristics taken together imply a short but very impressive career. And I believe that it may be fair to say that these nine Hall of Famers have HOF numbers even though they did not meet the 280 criterion because of a shorter career. Of course, there may be some fans who feel that some of these nine players should not be in the HOF. But since they are there, it would imply that the vast majority of the voters do believe that a short but brilliant career should be recognized.

And, it is important to note, I have not found any other retired position player who satisfies these “short and great” criteria. Now that is interesting. Every position player who fits these criteria has been elected to the Hall of Fame.

For example, consider Don Mattingly who some fans may feel also had a short but great career. Mattingly played for fourteen seasons and does satisfy the criterion for games played – he played in 1785 games. But when you look at his numbers, you find that he comes up a bit short. He had a NEWS score of 247.

Don Mattingly 263 241 247

Note something unusual about the numbers for Jackie Robinson and Larry Doby – the players credited with breaking the color barrier in baseball and in the American League, respectively. Their CV score is identical (257). Both players had shorter careers (due in part to the color barrier) but the NEWS approach shows just how good they really were.

If we use the 280 NEWS benchmark and SAG (short and great) criteria, then we have a total of sixty-eight (68) position players (of 120 in the Hall of Fame) who can be said to have HOF numbers. That would mean that 57% of the 20^th century position players in the Hall clearly have HOF career numbers.

As we will see shortly, there are a number of players who are not in the Hall of Fame but who would meet the 280 NEWS level. In fact, as I mentioned earlier, at the end of 2007, there were a total of only eight-four (84) position players who had done this (of whom fifty-nine were already in the Hall).

The breakdown by position of the sixty-eight (68) Hall of Famers above is as follows: eight first basemen, nine second basemen, five third basemen, eight shortstops, five catchers, nine center fielders, fourteen right fielders, nine left fielders and one designated hitter. Except perhaps for the right fielders, this is a surprisingly well-balanced distribution.

It is not my intention to say that other Hall of Famers such as Ernie Banks or Carlton Fisk do not deserve to be in the Hall. I agree that there may be other considerations that justify a player’s induction – even if his career numbers fall somewhat short. What I am saying is that the sixty-eight Hall of Famers discussed above certainly do belong in the HOF based on their career numbers.

It has been suggested by some observers that only the players who have been elected to the Hall by the BBWAA should really be considered true Hall of Famers. The belief on the part of some is that those selected by the Veteran’s Committee were influenced by things other than the player’s on-field performance. In the case of Phil Rizzuto, for example, it has been suggested that his years as a broadcaster influenced his selection by the committee. And I am sure that there are some fans who would say that would be appropriate.

The vast majority of these sixty-eight (68) players were inducted into the Hall by the BBWAA (the baseball writers). Only eleven (11) of them (16%) were elected by the Veteran’s Committee: Sam Crawford, Arky Vaughan, Johnny Mize, Fred Clarke, Frank Baker, Elmer Flick, Zack Wheat, Goose Goslin, George Davis, Earl Averill and Larry Doby. I confess that I was surprised that even this many were chosen by the VC.

This does seem to demonstrate that an effective Veteran’s Committee is really needed to ensure that great players overlooked by the BBWAA do get a valid second look (players like Ron Santo, for example, with a CV of 275 and a NEWS of 287).

The Hall of Famers who did NOT Meet the Benchmarks

I am now going to list the present Hall of Famers who do NOT have a NEWS score of 280 or better. Here are the players whose score is between 260 and 279.

As noted above, five of these seventeen players do meet the SAG criteria and are included among the sixty-eight (68) players above with HOF numbers: Earl Averill, Hank Greenberg, Lou Boudreau, Bill Terry and Larry Doby,

I think it is fair to say that some fans would view many of these players as “marginal Hall of Famers.” And the NEWS analysis would seem to support this feeling. However, I feel that some of these players such as Brooks Robinson and Ernie Banks would have many supporters for their place in the Hall.

Here is the next group of Hall of Famers with NEWS scores from 250 to 259.

Four of these players have SAG numbers and are included among the sixty-eight (68) Hall of Famers having HOF numbers: Jackie Robinson, Mickey Cochrane, Kirby Puckett and Bill Dickey.

Once again, I wish to emphasize that some of these players may deserve to be in the Hall despite not having the overall numbers. Ozzie Smith, for example, is generally considered to be the best defensive shortstop of all time. And I would definitely agree that the best defensive shortstop in baseball history deserves to be in the HOF.

Finally, here are the other Hall of Fame position players with NEWS scores of less than 250. There are thirty-one players on this list.

It is probably fair to say that serious followers of the game would consider most of the thirty-one players in this last group to be marginal Hall of Famers, at best. Of course, a strong argument could be made for some of these players such as Ralph Kiner and Roy Campanella. And perhaps even for Bill Mazeroski – generally considered by many to be the best fielding second baseman of all time. Be that as it may, these Hall of Famers do appear to have the weakest numbers among the position players in the Hall.

It is obvious to all fans that any attempt to rank existing Hall of Famers is subject to all sorts of pitfalls. I am sure that there are many fans who do not want to hear that some Hall of Famers (particularly their favorites) may not really have the credentials to be in the Hall. All I am saying is that the career numbers for some of the Hall of Famers do seem to be questionable.