After watching the highlights of last night’s Braves game, allow me to make a pick no one else has considered:[ul]
[li]Julio Franco–anyone who can still play effectively at 46 (not to mention still hit the long ball) deserves enshrinement in Cooperstown. In fact, I think anyone who lasts at least 20 years should be in the Hall.[/li][/ul]
His range isn’t average. It’s below average. That’s the problem.
Clay Davenport’s Fielding Runs metric does indeed correct for that. Along with corrections for turf, groundball/flyball, park effects (not too much of a consideration for shortstops, granted), and handedness of the pitchers. Jeter still comes in well below average. A fielding run rate of 100 is average - Jeter’s career rate is 91. His best year was last year with 99.
Barry Larkin’s career rate is 105. His worst rate in a season was 90 - or about Jeter’s career average.
Jeter has also consistently been at the bottom of zone rating.
So did Palmeiro. In a year he only played 28 games at first. Gold Gloves are the biggest joke award in baseball.
And 46 is only his official age. I’ve heard it rumored that he’s older than that. He’s an interesting case. He’s still got a .300 average for his career and still plays most games at 46 or more, but was he ever dominant enough? His career highs are 20 homers and 98 RBI, from 1994.
I agree on the merits of wondering if closers should go in. On the one hand, they pitch so few innings, and are so specialized, it almost demeans the other players in the Hall. But, they are an integral part of today’s game, so I think they should be considered. It doesn’t seem fair to exclude a whole class of players just because of their position.
Taking that into account, in my mind there are only 2 active closers that have a chance: Hoffman and Rivera. I think Rivera has the edge, partly on numbers, partly on the team he plays for, and the exposure he gets, plus the impact he has had for said team. Hoffman loses out on all counts, except for team impact. Haven’t done a quantitative study, but Hoffman might have the edge there if every game was equal. But some games are more important than others, and that’s what people write about and remember.
My guess: both are in, Rivera on first ballot, Hoffman after a few years.
Julio Franco is over 50. Guarantee you.
The problem is, if we let him in, then Jesse Orosco should be in too, since Jesse pitched for the 1908 Cub World Series team.
Trevor Hoffman is a Hall of Fame pitcher. He’s probably going to get to 450 saves before he’s done, if not 500. Rivera is good, but when you discount the Yankee Factor he’s not quite as dominant. If the roles were reversed, Trevor Hoffman would have 600 saves and Rivera would be bouncing around the league like Urbina.
I believe you. I just can’t find an estimate of somebody who’s uncovered the truth.
BaseballAlmanac.com has his HOF reading at exactly 100.0, which could be fun.
For whatever it’s worth, Hoffman’s postseason pitching stats are not great. 1-2 with three saves and an ERA over four in 10 total games. Basically pointless to compare, but with Rivera so feared and so unhittable in the playoffs, I find your comment hard to swallow. As far as I can tell, Rivera’s stats are all better. Hoffman has 60 more saves, but he’s been a full-time closer for two years longer.
I want Julio Franco to keep playing forever - as long as there’s a major-league player older than me, I won’t be old.
That doesn’t make any sense. Rivera has a career 2.43 ERA with a 190 ERA+. Hoffman has a career 2.74 ERA with a 148 ERA+.
The reason Rivera gets in to the HoF is because of his 0.75 ERA in 108.7 postseason innings. With over 100 IP, that’s not something that can be brushed aside for sample size issues like most postseason performances. That’s true domination when it counts, and he should get full credit for it in his HoF bid.
My comment about Rivera and the Yankee Factor means that because the Yankees provide him with more save situations, his numbers are better. Hoffman’s career has been spent on teams that often don’t get close to .500, so he hasn’t had quite the same opportunity that Rivera has to show his dominance.
10 games is too small a sample to compare postseason numbers, since Rivera has appeared in 7 times as many games.
(Also, Rivera’s similarity score at BR is 929, so they’re pretty close.)
That still doesn’t make sense. Rivera’s ERA isn’t better because he’s had more save opportunities, it’s better because he’s allowed fewer runs. And he’s done it in a league that’s generally tougher on pitchers what with the DH and all.
You heavily implied that the only reason Rivera gets any mention is that he’s on the Yankees and that if he wasn’t, he’d be bouncing around teams like some journeyman - which is, quite frankly, ridiculous. Rivera has been better than Hoffman.
Sure he has. He’s had more seasons than Rivera to show that he’s more dominant. He hasn’t done so. Rivera has a lower ERA.
Granted. However, it’s extremely unusual for a player to have that many postseason innings and still show few signs of moving closer to their career norms. I doubt Hoffman’s postseason ERA would be as good.
(Also, Rivera’s similarity score at BR is 929, so they’re pretty close.)
[/QUOTE]
snerkAll kidding aside, I agree with you. Anyone who can still play past the age of 45 deserves to be in the Hall on longevity alone! I think it’s as good a criteria as any.
Well, there’s three problems with this:
-
As you can tell just by looking at their career saves and blown saves opportunities, the difference in “Save opportunities” just isn’t very significant; it’s maybe 5, 6 a year, averaging out how many each of them had had since becoming a full time closer.
-
Rivera is a legitimately better pitcher, primarily because he’s much stingier with home runs. the difference isn’t huge, but it’s there.
-
Although Hoffman’s few postseason innings mean little, Rivera’s many postseason innings do count in his favour. You cannot discount the man’s outstanding postseason accomplishments. Those games do count. They’re not exhibition games.