HoF: WAAS - 2003 Candidates

cheekimonk · Post by **cheekimonk** » Thu Feb 09, 2012 5:28 am

I'll put these in a spreadsheet eventually, but here are the WAR and WAAS numbers for the 2003 candidates for the Hall of Fame:

Kevin Haubert, RF: 17 seasons; 15 > WAAS; WAR: +73.2, WAAS: +41.3

Braggo Franco, SP: 17 seasons; 14 > WAAS; WAR: +122.9, WAAS: +94.2

Sam Kirkpatrick, SP: 13 seasons; 12 > WAAS; WAR: +85.5, WAAS: +61.0

Jack Maverick, 2B: 18 seasons; 10 > WAAS; WAR: +47.6, WAAS: +19.7

Archie Ayrault, 2B: 14 seasons; 12 > WAAS; WAR: +56.4, WAAS: +31.1

Rashardo Menne, Jr., SS: 16 seasons; 11 > WAAS; WAR: +57.8, WAAS: +34.0

Heath Rockefeller, P: 12 seasons; 11 > WAAS; WAR: +78.3, WAAS: +56.2

Hank Daniels, SP: 16 seasons; 14 > WAAS; WAR: +81.2, WAAS: +50.6

Gunga Oogolagunga, MR: 19 seasons; 0 > WAAS; WAR: +15.7, WAAS: +0.0

Hayden Finch, SP: 17 seasons; 16 > WAAS; WAR: +74.2, WAAS: +42.2

Glen Groves, CF: 16 seasons; 10 > WAAS; WAR: +51.0, WAAS: +28.8

Donnie Rotten, SS: 19 seasons; 14 > WAAS; WAR: +75.0, WAAS: +42.7

John Ross Riles, Jr., SP: 21 seasons; 18 > WAAS; WAR: +152.2, WAAS: +117.5

Alistar Sharpe, 3B: 15 seasons; 9 > WAAS; WAR: +42.6, WAAS: +17.0

Zebediah Williams, SS: 17 seasons; 7 > WAAS; WAR: +28.2, WAAS: +7.1

jcrmoon42 · Post by **jcrmoon42** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 3:08 pm

Interesting stuff. Franco is second in career WAAS, but he gets very little love on the ballot. Six votes in the bottom three this time around.

cheekimonk · Post by **cheekimonk** » Mon Feb 13, 2012 6:46 pm

Since the voting has pretty much concluded, both this set of numbers and the one for existing HoF members has made me wonder about WAR for pitchers vs. WAR for batters. No matter whose formula you subscribe to (in real life or OOTP) the numbers have to come from different sources. It just seems that pitching WAR is substantially higher than batter WAR. But I have only been looking at who we (OOTP) deem to be the elite, and it could be that a) it's easier to identify elite pitchers, and/or b) elite pitchers tend to be elite for a MUCH longer time than elite position players so they are naturally going to have MUCH higher WAR. I've been meaning to delve into this but haven't gotten around to it so far.

As to these numbers I think you hit on what was the most eye-opening thing to me and that's the number of seasons with positive WAAS vs. the number of overall seasons. I think it was Blake who made the argument of looking at all-star selections but I don't buy that (mostly because there could be, say, 5 future HoF first basemen who's careers overlap and so they take all-star selections away from each other). But WAAS does provide an objective way to say how many years a guy performed like an all-star even though he might not have been chosen.

jcrmoon42 · Post by **jcrmoon42** » Tue Feb 14, 2012 11:31 pm

I am a fan of using All Star appearances as a good tool. It is obviously only one tool, and it takes a back seat to rate stats over a reasonably long career in my opinion.

I do understand what you are saying about there being multiple All Star level players at any one position. One of the things that All Star appearances says is that you were one of the top most valued players at your position over a period of time. Since we don't require all teams to be represented, theoretically only the best that year are being put on the team. Of course, it would be more valuable if it were voted on after the season, but it is still an interesting measuring stick. It would be hard for a guy to make a bunch of All Star games if he wasn't the best in his league at his position during his career.

As always, of course, there are many definitions of a HOFer. Best at your position during a given decade is just one of my measures.

cheekimonk · Post by **cheekimonk** » Wed Feb 15, 2012 8:37 am

So, I'm an American League shortstop that broke into the league in 1982. That means I share a rookie season with one Calvin E. Ripken, Jr. I have a very good career and hang it up in 1995 while Mr. Ripkin keeps playing and keeps getting the nod for the All-Star squad until 2001 when he retires with 19 straight All-Star selections. My career stats are very comparable, and better in many categories, than other players in my candidate pool. Should someone, even as a tiebreaker, look at my career and say, "Well, he didn't get elected to any All-Star games." That doesn't seem to make any sense. WAAS at least is a way for someone to say, "No, he didn't, but he was good enough...just less popular/not as good as Cal Ripken." That's a category that would include a TON of other HoFers from other eras.

cheekimonk · Post by **cheekimonk** » Wed Feb 15, 2012 8:46 am

The other piece to that is that every actual MBBA season (basically 1995 to now), GMs have elected at least 1 player to the All-Star game with a WAR < 0.5 (2 in 2002, 3 in 2001, 3 in 2000, 3 in 1999, 4 in 1998, etc.). For comparison, WAAS for MBBA is set to the 20th percentile (i.e., the lowest 20%) of All-Star electees and that is a WAR of 2.0.

If you can't tell, I'm one of "those people" who has never liked the public vote for the All-Star game. Well, let me rephrase...I've never liked the public vote being 100%. Even with recent modifications it carries too much weight. Every year you look at the leading vote getters and the NL list is loaded with Cardinals while the AL is loaded with Yankees. I just don't think an actual selection to an All-Star squad means much in the big picture.

jcrmoon42 · Post by **jcrmoon42** » Thu Feb 16, 2012 12:04 am

Don't get me wrong. I am as much a stat head as anyone else and more than most. I'm not suggesting it is the best tool, or even a good tool, but it is certainly A tool. Particularly in this league, I think it is a reasonably fair measure.

The Brewster

The Brewster