Hall of Fame Candidate Thread: Jon Mick

[usnspecialist]

Here's the place to talk about the career of:

Jon Mick
(1B/DH)

Accomplishments

Active Career	2029-2042 (14 seasons)
	2x Puckett Silver Sluggers
All-Star	6-Times

Hall of Fame Metrics:

Category	Score	Avg HoF
BLACK INK	23	22
GRAY INK	138	111
HoF STANDARDS	41	53
Hof Monitor	162	128

Hall of Fame Voting History:

Year	Score
2047	48%
2046	44.1%
2044	41%
2044	41.4%
2043	35.5%

# An integral part of some truly fearsome Madison offenses in the 2030s, Porky Mick benefitted greatly from hitting behind a duo in Mons Raider and Steve Dempsey that set the table nicely for him over the years, allowing him to pile up RBIs in a manner that few have in the history of the BBA. Similar to Rupert Grant in that he does not bring much to the plate besides raw power, but was a little better rounded and was a part of better offenses so his numbers stand out more.

Comparison to Hall of Fame Designated Hitters:

Mick DH.PNG (11.41 KiB) Viewed 13246 times

Comparison to Hall of Fame 1st Basemen:

Mick 1B.PNG (10.04 KiB) Viewed 13246 times

[bcslouck]

I was a no until I saw his HOF metrics. I'll have to give this one some thought.

[7teen]

I was a no until I saw his HOF metrics. I'll have to give this one some thought.

Based on the metrics, he and Winson may be the two best in the class....

Granted, I'm all about me some Mick getting in the HOF haha

[bcslouck]

I was a no until I saw his HOF metrics. I'll have to give this one some thought.

Based on the metrics, he and Winson may be the two best in the class....

Granted, I'm all about me some Mick getting in the HOF haha

I didn't even realize how go Winson's metrics line up. That and the Silks should make him a lock.

Wait, are Mick's metrics being compared to LF's? It says he's a LF in the OP.

[usnspecialist]

I was a no until I saw his HOF metrics. I'll have to give this one some thought.

Based on the metrics, he and Winson may be the two best in the class....

Granted, I'm all about me some Mick getting in the HOF haha

I didn't even realize how go Winson's metrics line up. That and the Silks should make him a lock.

Wait, are Mick's metrics being compared to LF's? It says he's a LF in the OP.

That is a typo on my part and has been fixed. For ease of formatting i copy and pasted the same initial post (using alfredo salazar as a template) and changed the relevant data. I guess i missed that one...

Also for the metrics, i pull those from in game, which seem to use all of the same numbers so guessing those are position independent. I suppose i could put them in my spreadsheet to get averages by position, but trickier to figure those out for current guys.

[bcslouck]

That is a typo on my part and has been fixed. For ease of formatting i copy and pasted the same initial post (using alfredo salazar as a template) and changed the relevant data. I guess i missed that one...

Also for the metrics, i pull those from in game, which seem to use all of the same numbers so guessing those are position independent. I suppose i could put them in my spreadsheet to get averages by position, but trickier to figure those out for current guys.

No problem. I wasn't sure if it was that or the game being weird and you pulling those numbers for him as a LF, which would be wrong. S+ has a metrics sheet and he still matches up solid in certain metrics, but his JAWS and WAR7 numbers for 1B aren't in the Top 30 all-time. So he's an interesting case.

Side note: There are a lot of players that show up in S+ as DH's on the HOF Metrics Sheet. Nebraska does and a bunch of other non-DH studs. I hope that's just something wrong there and not something that mess with numbers in game. If that's some weird glitch, may have to tell Dave about it.

[usnspecialist]

That is a typo on my part and has been fixed. For ease of formatting i copy and pasted the same initial post (using alfredo salazar as a template) and changed the relevant data. I guess i missed that one...

Also for the metrics, i pull those from in game, which seem to use all of the same numbers so guessing those are position independent. I suppose i could put them in my spreadsheet to get averages by position, but trickier to figure those out for current guys.

No problem. I wasn't sure if it was that or the game being weird and you pulling those numbers for him as a LF, which would be wrong. S+ has a metrics sheet and he still matches up solid in certain metrics, but his JAWS and WAR7 numbers for 1B aren't in the Top 30 all-time. So he's an interesting case.

Side note: There are a lot of players that show up in S+ as DH's on the HOF Metrics Sheet. Nebraska does and a bunch of other non-DH studs. I hope that's just something wrong there and not something that mess with numbers in game. If that's some weird glitch, may have to tell Dave about it.

Before I believe 2007 pitchers batted in the BBA, so my guess is that is why.

[indiansfan]

Surprised his numbers weren't higher. Seemed like he was always near the top of the HR and RBI leaderboards. I know some of you folks don't think RBI's are a huge stat, but I like a guy that hits when guys are on base.

[7teen]

His stats seem off on Randy's spreadsheet. He has 549 homeruns and 1,741 RBI. Looks like his last season's totals haven't been added. I don't think anything changes from red to green but there is a difference in the totals.

What Mick has in his favor:
HR total is 17th all-time. Everyone with 500 or more HRs is in the HOF.
RBI total is 13th all-time. Everyone over 1,572 is in the HOF (minus the guys on the current ballot)
He was top 10 in RBI 10 times in his career. Top 4 9 times.
Top 10 in HRs 11 times in his career.

Against him:
WAR numbers are weak compared to a HOF guy. And it's very weak in comparison.

[indiansfan]

His stats seem off on Randy's spreadsheet. He has 549 homeruns and 1,741 RBI. Looks like his last season's totals haven't been added. I don't think anything changes from red to green but there is a difference in the totals.

What Mick has in his favor:
HR total is 17th all-time. Everyone with 500 or more HRs is in the HOF.
RBI total is 13th all-time. Everyone over 1,572 is in the HOF (minus the guys on the current ballot)
He was top 10 in RBI 10 times in his career. Top 4 9 times.
Top 10 in HRs 11 times in his career.

Against him:
WAR numbers are weak compared to a HOF guy. And it's very weak in comparison.

Well you know my opinion of WAR when it comes to guys like this. Mick is a yes for me especially after this additional info on rankings.

[recte44]

Yeah, WAR is truly irrelevant when it comes to most 1B/DH types.

[usnspecialist]

bump for HOF candidate discussion

[bcslouck]

I can't remember what I voted on him and will need to think it over. The metrics are pretty good.

[jleddy]

Belly bump for 2045 HOF candidate discussion

[aaronweiner]

Strong maybe. Love the counting numbers.

[bcslouck]

Very good counting numbers. Good metrics. Do wonder if 116 OPS+ and wRC+ should be good enough to get in for a DH.

[Ted]

Here's a different argument for all you people voting for Dusty Rhodes, Steve Dempsey, and Jon Mick. These guys were the core of a Madison team that was a .500 team over a ten year span. They were a BAD team half of those years. Find me a team that had 3 "Hall of Fame" batters through the most productive parts of their careers, all at the same time, that wasn't that good. These guys aren't that good. That's why Madison wasn't that good. When you add in Mons Raider (who actually looks like a Hall of Famer) the had 4 "Hall of Famers" during their best years and still weren't winning that much. That's not possible. Again. Nice players. Productive players. Not hall of famers.

[aaronweiner]

Here's a different argument for all you people voting for Dusty Rhodes, Steve Dempsey, and Jon Mick. These guys were the core of a Madison team that was a .500 team over a ten year span. They were a BAD team half of those years. Find me a team that had 3 "Hall of Fame" batters through the most productive parts of their careers, all at the same time, that wasn't that good. These guys aren't that good. That's why Madison wasn't that good. When you add in Mons Raider (who actually looks like a Hall of Famer) the had 4 "Hall of Famers" during their best years and still weren't winning that much. That's not possible. Again. Nice players. Productive players. Not hall of famers.

If you go through those years, you can see their hitting is better than their pitching every year, sometimes significantly so. There are Hall of Famers and there are Hall of Famers, remember: they can't all be Pucketts and Nebraskas.

[Ted]

Here's a different argument for all you people voting for Dusty Rhodes, Steve Dempsey, and Jon Mick. These guys were the core of a Madison team that was a .500 team over a ten year span. They were a BAD team half of those years. Find me a team that had 3 "Hall of Fame" batters through the most productive parts of their careers, all at the same time, that wasn't that good. These guys aren't that good. That's why Madison wasn't that good. When you add in Mons Raider (who actually looks like a Hall of Famer) the had 4 "Hall of Famers" during their best years and still weren't winning that much. That's not possible. Again. Nice players. Productive players. Not hall of famers.

If you go through those years, you can see their hitting is better than their pitching every year, sometimes significantly so. There are Hall of Famers and there are Hall of Famers, remember: they can't all be Pucketts and Nebraskas.

I think you stating that I'm trying to make guys with WARs in the mid 20's like guys with WARS over 100 is absurd. We're not talking about borderline stats players in the 40 WAR range. We're talking about mid 20's Mid. Freaking. 20s.

[Ted]

You talking about putting Gary Templeton, or Ander Ethier, or Cliff Floyd, or Delino DeShields, or Willie MeGee, or Chase Headley in the Hall of Fame. That's what mid 20's WAR is. Yes, they can't all be Steve Nebraska or Chip Puckett. But they can at least be elite players. Fuck, lets just put everyone in.