Hall of Fame Candidate Tread: Zebidiah Williams

[RonCo]

. **** VETERAN'S COMMITTEE CANDIDATE ***** .
Here's the place to talk about the career of: Zebidiah "Yahoo" Williams

Shortstop

Active Career: 1984-2000 (17 seasons)
2,317 hits, 164 HR, 849 RBI, 1,185 SB, .285/.350/.399, 66.9 WAR
Zimmer Diamond Glove Winner
Two-Time All-Star

Hall of Fame Metrics: (average HoF)
JAWS: 53.9 (64)
Black Ink: 0 (22)
Gray Ink: 6 (105)
HOF Standards: 43 (53)
HOF Monitor: 32 (123)

----

The kid they called "Yahoo!" was a pretty good player overall. Good enough with the glove to win a Zimmer at a key position, and hardy enough to post 66.9 WAR in a career that saw som serious high-lights. But, the fact that puts WIlliams on the veterans list this year is that in one area he was better than any other player to set feet on the fake earth--at 1,185 steals, he's clearly the best base stealer that ever was...at least until Mons Raider turns, what, 27? We can't judge a guy by Mons Raider, though. Can we?

Not surprisingly, he led the league in steals six times. Holds five of the top twenty SB seasons of all-time.

[Ted]

Some context about the era he played in would be nice. If you just look at year by year WAR (which is a stupid way to vote for the HOF), you can make a pretty good case to keep Williams out. ON the other hand, if he was an elite top of the order guy for the first decade of his career, he should be in.

As an aside, this is why I have a problem with our current voting model. It makes it impossible to get more than three guys in unless we all vote the exact same way. Even three is tough. (Id didn't do the actual math, but you get my point).

Let's say I am a voter who has been convinced I should be voting for Sanguinacco and Glendenning after not doing it. And now we have Yahoo on the ballot. Odds are, there's a recently retired player who is a definite HOF guy. There will always be new guys.

And we have a model that caps the number of guys that get in because higher rankings are worth more points, instead of a simple yes/no. You could easily have a player be #4 on everyone's ballot for a decade and not get in. That's terrible. As is, my ballot will probably have the above mentioned names in the top 5 or so.

Furthermore, the current method allows voters to sabotage a players chances that they really disagree with on philosophy by putting them last. In all honestly, I've been on a "no relievers, because if they were good they would have been starters" kick for a few years. If just 15% of the voters think like that, and always put the relievers at the bottom of the ballot because by that philosophy, they ARE less worthy than above average players like Labrie Jr., no reliever will ever get in. Please, please, please let us go back to a check yes for HOF system with no voting cap. No artificial ballot constraints. Let's have a hall where people who are in are in because 75% (or whatever we use) of GMs thought they should be.

[recte44]

Being considered.

[usnspecialist]

I agree with ted, Williams is the sort of guy I would probably vote yes on, but not sure he would be top 3 on my ballot.

[RonCo]

I'd vote yes for Williams, even just looking down his WAR table. It basically says Williams was a star-quality player for a decade (sometimes a superstar) and then spent another decade being a perfectly good and useful player at a critical position. Add in the fact that he dominated the basepaths like no other player of his time, and you've got what, to me, is almost a no-brainer.

[bcslouck]

This could be a case of me not knowing the league history enough. I'd probably say no, but should probably look at how he stacked up in those years and what HOF SS's are in now.

[RonCo]

As I've settled on this question, I'll be voting yes for Zebediah based on the idea Chris and I talked about on our GM's Corner...that he dominated a category for his time and he's the best ever (until Raider finished his career...assuming, knock on wood, no injuries). Solid player in all catergories at a critical position, most dominant runner of his time. Your book may vary, but that's a yes in my book.

[7teen]

As I've settled on this question, I'll be voting yes for Zebediah based on the idea Chris and I talked about on our GM's Corner...that he dominated a category for his time and he's the best ever (until Raider finished his career...assuming, knock on wood, no injuries). Solid player in all catergories at a critical position, most dominant runner of his time. Your book may vary, but that's a yes in my book.

Williams and Raider will be interesting studies. Williams dominated stolen bases. Scored a lot of runs over a course of 5-6 seasons. But that's about it. Hit total is solid, not outstanding. I think he's borderline. I wouldn't have an issue of him getting or him not quite making it.

Raider right now has the Runs, Walks, OBP, and obviously the Stolen Bases to be able to make a slightly better case down the road if he can keep it going. Raider is more elite right now than Williams ever was and that's if you throw the SB out.