The 25 least-deserving members of the National Baseball Hall of Fame

The National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown has 312 members.  Some of them don't belong.

For the sake of this discussion, I won't be critiquing the following:

- executives (28)
- umpires (10)
- managers (22)
- players in segregated leagues (35)
- players who retired prior to 1900 (13)

For the 204 we ARE discussing here, I think Wins Above Replacement is as good a place to start the assessment as any alternative.  All WAR and other stats included here were taken from baseball-reference.com.

TIER 1 (100+ WAR): 26 players, including these famous ten...
Babe Ruth, Cy Young, Walter Johnson, Honus Wagner, Ty Cobb, Hank Aaron, Ted Williams, Greg Maddux, Lou Gehrig and Willie Mays.  

These are baseball's true elite.


TIER 2 (80-99.9 WAR): 24 players, including these famous ten...
Christy Mathewson, Jimmie Foxx, Roberto Clemente, Warren Spahn, Nolan Ryan, George Brett, Pedro Martinez, Bob Gibson, Cal Ripken, Jr. and Ken Griffey, Jr.  

These are also superb performers, who unquestionably deserve to be in the Hall.  Currently, there are a total of 50 players either in Tier 1 or 2.


TIER 3 (60-79.9 WAR): 67 players, including these famous ten...
Joe DiMaggio, Brooks Robinson, Ernie Banks, Johnny Bench, Pee Wee Reese, Tom Glavine, Ozzie Smith, Bob Feller, Tony Gwynn and Jackie Robinson.  

It would be very tough to make a case against anyone in this tier, either.


TIER 4 (40-59.9 WAR): 68 players, including these famous ten... 
Sandy Koufax, Hank Greenberg, Willie Stargell, George Sisler, the famous Tinker/Evers/Chance trio, Yogi Berra, Tony Perez, and Mike Piazza.  

A topic for another day...some of these players in Tier 4 are highly overrated.  Non-HOF guys like Kenny Lofton earned more than 60 WAR...so should all of these players REALLY be in, even if they had strong career peaks?  Toward the bottom of the range, I would say no.


And believe it or not, it gets worse.  There are 19 players in the 1900-present era of the Hall who didn't even accumulate 40 WAR.  

How did they get in?!

Well, in most cases, a seemingly drunk Veterans Committee made overly-generous selections.  Consider this...of the 19 players in the Hall with less than 40 WAR, 13 were elected by the Veterans Committee.  And of those 13, 8 were elected during the 1970s, when Frankie Frisch was in charge and shortly after his death in 1973.  He has been widely criticized for influencing the committee to admit subpar candidates during this era.  A bunch of them were teammates of his with the Giants (1919-1926) or Cardinals (1927-1937).  Frisch deserved the Hall of Fame, but his buddies didn't.  If you read the list below, you'll be dismayed to see how much this one man watered down Cooperstown.  

And sadly, the 1970s weren't the only era when the integrity of the Hall was under attack from within. The Veterans Committee (either under that name or the Old-Timers Committee) made a number of terrible picks from the 1940s all the way through the 1990s.  The writers make mistakes now and then, as well.

Without further ado, let's count them down, from least to most egregious.  The Frisch-influenced picks (early-1970s Veterans Committee) are in red.  I'll leave it up to you to decide where the cutoff should be for Hall inclusion.  Maybe you think all of these players should be in.  Maybe you think even MORE should be out.  That's the fun of it.  And to make this more valuable than mere whining, I give position-specific alternatives for every single player!  Here we go...



25) Dizzy Dean. P (1930-1941, 1947), mostly for the Cardinals.  
Only 42.7 WAR.  He was great during his 5 peak years, posting 190 or higher for his ERA+ four times.  But when your career essentially ends before age 30, you probably don't belong in the Hall.
Voted in by the BBWAA, 1953.

Want a better candidate than Dizzy Dean?  How about Mike Mussina?  He finished with 270 wins, 2800 strikeouts, and exactly 40 more WAR than Dean.  But he isn't in.  Somehow.



24) Catfish Hunter.  P (1965-1979), mostly for the Athletics.
Only 36.6 WAR.  104 ERA+ doesn't cut it.  Did win one Cy and 5 World Series titles, so this is basically a choice based on hardware.
1987 writers' pick.

Want a better candidate than Hunter?  How about David Cone?  He had an ERA+ of 121, won a Cy and 5 World Series just like Catfish Hunter, and earned 25 more WAR!  How is he not in the Hall?



23) Phil Rizzuto.  SS (1941-1956, missed time due to World War II), all for the Yankees.
Only 40.8 WAR.  93 OPS+ and only 1588 hits.  I don't care if he won 7 rings.  He couldn't even bat .250 in his postseason appearances. 
He was picked by the Veterans Committee in 1994.

Want a better candidate than Rizzuto?  How about Alan Trammell?  A 110 OPS+, more than 2300 hits, the 1984 World Series MVP and about 30 more WAR than Rizzuto.



22) Bob Lemon.  P (1946-1958), all with the Indians.
Only 37.5 WAR.  He was good, not great.  119 ERA+, top WAR season was 5.4.  Went 2-0 in the 1948 World Series, which helped his cause.  
1976 writers' pick.

Want a better candidate than Lemon?  How about Luis Tiant?  Even more quality and a lot more longevity.  He had FIVE seasons better than Lemon's best.  Like Lemon, he went 2-0 in a World Series (even though his Red Sox lost in 1975).  He accumulated 66.1 WAR, far more than Lemon.



21) Rollie Fingers.  P (1968-1982, 1984-1985), mostly with Oakland.
An absurdly low WAR total - 25.  A losing record.  A good-not-great 120 ERA+.  A career built largely on saves, which don't mean anything.  Here's why he's in the Hall...hardware.  He won a Cy Young and MVP in 1981 with Milwaukee, 3 rings with the A's, and a World Series MVP in 1974.

Want a better candidate than Fingers?  Even Flash Gordon, Lee Smith and Trevor Hoffman were worth a couple more wins than Rollie.  But I'd rather go with a starting pitcher (which inherently has more value) like Curt Schilling.  80.7 WAR, 127 ERA+, more than 3100 strikeouts.  Schilling had a pretty epic career, honestly.  I don't like him any more than you do, but he's a Hall of Famer.  The only reason he didn't win a Cy Young was because he finished second to his teammate Randy Johnson twice and Johan Santana once.  Reunite the man with his bloody sock!  



20) Roger Bresnahan.  C (1897-1915), mostly for the New York Giants.
Only 41 WAR.  Solid OPS+, but only 1252 hits!  Not nearly enough to warrant enshrinement, one would think.
Old Timers Committee picked him in 1945.

Want a better candidate than Bresnahan?  If we limit ourselves to catcher, it's actually tough to find.  But let's go with Thurman Munson.  Considering some of the other lowly catchers inducted, it's mind-boggling that Munson isn't in.  He had 1558 hits, a 116 OPS+, and earned 45.9 WAR in spite of not playing past age 32.  Munson was Rookie of the Year in 1970, MVP in 1976, and a two-time Series champion.  

Just for reference, here are some active or recently retired catching WAR numbers...

Mauer (active but now mostly 1B) - 50.3
Posada (retired in 2011) - 42.7
Kendall (retired in 2010) - 41.5



19) Hack Wilson.  CF (1923-1934), mostly for the Cubs.
Only 38.8 WAR.  Awesome OPS+ (144), and an unbreakable RBI record.  But he only had 1461 hits and 5 great seasons.  Not enough.
Veterans Committee, 1979.

Want a better candidate than Wilson?  How about Larry Walker?  He had a similar OPS+ (141), piled up about 250 more career RBI than Wilson, about 700 more hits than Wilson, won an MVP, and finished with 72.6 WAR.  Who cares about the Denver air?  Walker should be in.



18) Earle Combs.  CF (1924-1935), all for the Yankees.   
Only 42.5 WAR.  125 OPS+, which is respectable, but really only played about 9 full seasons and three partial years.  He didn't reach 2000 hits, but got the Yankee bonus (won 3 rings).  
Veterans Committee, 1970.

Want a better candidate than Combs?  How about Tim Raines?  He had a similar OPS+ (123), piled up almost 750 more hits than Combs, played on the 1996 World Champions, and earned 69.1 WAR.  Plus 808 stolen bases!



17) Jack Chesbro.  P (1899-1909), mostly for the Yankees.
Only 41.2 WAR.  Had four superb years, but only 6 seasons with an ERA+ over 100.
Old Timers Committee picked him in 1946.

Want a better candidate than Chesbro?  How about Tommy John?  His career ERA+ of 111 is identical to Chesbro's, and his 62.3 WAR and lengthy career is even more impressive considering his comeback from, um, Tommy John.



16) George Kell.  3B (1943-1957), mostly for the Tigers.
Only 37.4 WAR.  Good, but not great.  112 OPS+, 2054 hits.  Not a single season of 5 WAR!
Veterans Committee, 1983.

Want a better candidate than Kell?  Rather than wasting my time with guys like Beltre or Chipper Jones, who will be or should be in shortly, let's go with a solid snub like Buddy Bell.  Comparable OPS+ (109), 460 more hits (2514 total).  Four different seasons of 6+ WAR and a total of 66.1, which far outpaces Kell.  Bell > Kell.



15) Pie Traynor.  3B (1920-1937), all for the Pirates.
Only 36.2 WAR.  107 OPS+ for your career isn't Hall-worthy.  
Writers, 1948.

Want a better candidate than Traynor?  Well, I know he isn't eligible yet, but don't you have a sneaking suspicion that they'll keep Scott Rolen out?  Personally, I think that's a poor decision.  He earned 70 WAR, had an OPS+ of 122, had 2000 hits, 300 homers and 1200 RBI.  Not the best numbers in the history of the world, but DEFINITELY Hall-worthy in light of the other names we've looked at in this post.



14) Red Schoendienst.  2B (1945-1963), mostly for the Cardinals.
Only 42.3 WAR.  94 OPS+ and only 3 seasons of 4+ WAR.  
Yep, the Veterans Committee again...but 1989, so not Frisch's influence.

Want a better candidate than Schoendienst?  This one's easy.  We'll go with Trammell's middle infield buddy Lou Whitaker.  An OPS+ of 117 (23 points higher).  And ten, yes, TEN seasons of 4+ WAR (7 more than Schoendienst).  There is no comparison between the two.  



13) Bill Mazeroski.  2B (1956-1972), all for the Pirates.
Only 36.2 WAR.  Even worse than fellow Pirate, Traynor...84 OPS+ for his career.  Not a single year where he even reached 100 for that stat!  Let's face it.  He's in the Hall because he hit arguably the most famous homer in MLB history.  There is no other reason.
Veterans Committee, 2001.

Want an alternative to Mazeroski?  Even the unheralded Bobby Grich had a career nearly twice as valuable (70.9 WAR).  He had fewer hits, but an OPS+ that was a full 41 points higher than Mazeroski.  He even hit 3 postseason homers, even if none can match up to Bill's.  It's fine if you don't like my Grich choice.  Just know that Jeff Kent (55.2)...Chuck Knoblauch (44.6)...even Placido Freaking Polanco (41.3) had more valuable stints in the majors than Maz.  So we'd have a number of options.



12) Rabbit Maranville.  SS (1912-1935), mostly for the Boston Braves.
Only 42.8 WAR.  An ugly .258 BA and 82 OPS+.  Won 1 ring (1914).
BBWAA, 1954.

Want a better candidate than Maranville?  How about Bert Campaneris?  Although his OPS+ (89) and BA (.259) were BARELY better, he had an additional weapon - speed on the basepaths.  He racked up an impressive 649 SBs.  Like Maranville, he was solid with the glove.  His overall WAR was 53 - more than 10 higher than the Rabbit's.



11) Bruce Sutter.  P (1976-1986, 1988), mostly with the Cubs.  
Didn't even amass 25 WAR.  A save artist (300 total) back before they knew that was a meaningless stat.  A losing record (yes, I know that's even more meaningless, but still).  Sure, his ERA+ is solid, and he won a Cy Young.  But he isn't a Hall of Famer, in my eyes.
BBWAA, 2006.

Like I said for Rollie Fingers, you could look at a number of relievers who were SLIGHTLY more valuable...or go with a starter, like Bret Saberhagen.  I think this is an appropriate choice because Saberhagen provided MUCH more value during approximately the same era.  59.1 WAR and a 126 ERA+.  Two Cy Young Awards (1985, 1989) while with the Royals.  An awesome 1994 season when he struck out 11 for every walk (a record at the time).  Oh, and he was the 1985 World Series MVP.



10) Jesse Haines.  P (1918-1937), almost entirely with the Cardinals.
Only 35.7 WAR.  This is one of the famous Frisch-influenced picks, as they were St. Louis teammates for 11 years.  Haines was a solid pitcher, but not Hall-worthy.  Had only one season worth 5+ WAR.  ERA+ of only 109.
Veterans Committee, 1970.

Want an alternative?  I hope you notice that, as I go through this list, I'm left with fewer good choices.  Which is okay, because I'm replacing worse and worse current Hall of Famers as we get closer to #1.  So I don't have to do much.  Let's go with  Kevin Brown.  68.5 WAR, 127 ERA+, more than 2300 strikeouts.  



9) Jim Bottomley.  1B (1922-1937), mostly with the Cardinals.
Only 35.3 WAR.  Another Frisch teammate.  And another very solid but not spectacular player.  He did win the 1928 MVP and had a respectable 125 OPS+, but there are so many more deserving players out there.  Only two seasons of 5+ WAR.
Veterans Committee, 1974.

Let's look at possible 1B replacements.  How about Jeff Bagwell?  Voters seem to want to keep him out because of steroid suspicions, but he was great.  An amazing 149 OPS+, EIGHT seasons of 5+ WAR, a ROY and an MVP.  Much better.  Even if you want to be skeptical of Bagwell, we could look at a number of other choices with better production than Bottomley.  He doesn't belong.



8) Rube Marquard.  P (1908-1925), peak years with the New York Giants.
Only 34.2 WAR, 103 ERA+.  Had three excellent seasons (1911-13) and not much else to make his case.  Frisch teammate.
Veterans Committee, 1971.

All I have to do here is beat 34.2 WAR and a 103 ERA+?  OK, how about Chuck Finley.  Keep in mind that some of these spots could just be vacated.  Heck, I'd rather keep Catfish Hunter if the alternative is Rube Marquard.  But given the choice, Finley is the guy here.  He won 200 games, had a higher ERA+ (115), struck out 2610 batters and earned 58.5 WAR.  A really solid career.



7) Ross Youngs.  RF (1917-1926), all with the New York Giants.
Only 32.2 WAR.  Did have a respectable 130 OPS+ but only played 8 full seasons and only 2 of those were worth 4+ WAR!  Won two rings in 1921-22.  Fewer than 1500 hits.  A Frisch teammate.
You guessed it...Veterans Committee, 1972.

Want a better candidate than Youngs?  How about Dwight Evans.  He earned 66.9 WAR, had more than 2400 hits, and kept a 127 OPS+ over the course of 20 seasons.  Impressive.  Certainly better than Ross Youngs.  


6) Chick Hafey.  LF (1924-1935, 1937), mostly with the Cardinals.
Only 30.1 WAR.  A 133 OPS+, but not a single season worth more than 5 WAR.  Won rings in 1926 and 1931.  Fewer than 1500 hits.  His resume is eerily similar to that of Ross Youngs, and equally undeserving of the Hall.  A Frisch teammate.
Veterans Committee, 1971.  

Instead of favoritism of the mediocre, how about a solid player with a cool story?  Bob Johnson was born on a reservation in Oklahoma, joined his older brother Roy in the majors, and accumulated 57.2 WAR...2051 hits...and an excellent 139 OPS+.  Where is the Veterans Committee when you really need them?


5) Freddie Lindstrom.  3B (1924-1936), mostly with the New York Giants.
28.3 total WAR, with only 3 seasons worth more than 3.  A 110 OPS+ and only 1747 hits.  Frisch teammate and Frisch pick.
Veterans Committee, 1976.

I'm picking Ken Boyer as the replacement here.  I'd say EIGHT seasons of 5+ WAR is significantly better than what Lindstrom managed.  Boyer finished at 62.8 WAR, with 2143 hits and a 116 OPS+.  


4) George "High Pockets" Kelly.  1B (1915-1917, 1919-1930, 1932), mostly with the New York Giants.  
Only 25.2 WAR, and no seasons with more than 5.  An OPS+ of 109.  Only 1778 hits.  Frisch teammate and Frisch pick.  Take your high pockets and high-tail it outta here!
Veterans Committee, 1973.  

As our alternative here, I suggest an underappreciated hitter from my childhood.  Fred McGriff almost hit 500 HR (493), almost had 2500 hits (2490), and finished with a 134 OPS+.  And his total of 52.4 is just a tad better than ol' High Pockets.  Mind your pockets, sir, when the Crime Dog is around.  Okay, sorry, I'll stop.


3) Rick Ferrell.  C (1929-1945, 1947), with the Senators, Browns and Red Sox.
Good grief.  He earned less than 30 WAR (29.8) and his BEST season was worth 3.2!  Good for him, he had a long career as a catcher...but finished with an OPS+ of 95?  Fewer than 1700 hits, and there's not even a postseason performance excuse for this pick.
Veterans Committee, 1984.

As much as I hate to go with a Cardinal, the best choice here is Ted Simmons.  50.1 WAR, 2472 hits, 118 OPS+.  I'm actually shocked, considering the general favoritism for New York teams and the Cardinals, that he isn't in already.  His numbers are great for a catcher.


2) Lloyd Waner.  CF (1927-1942, 1944-1945), almost entirely with the Pirates.
Didn't reach 25 WAR, and didn't even have a 4 WAR season.  Sub-100 OPS+.  2459 is a decent hits total, but I feel that he was given credit for being Paul's brother.  Which is pathetic.
Veterans Committee, 1967.

Kenny Lofton may not be among the top, say, 100 players ever.  But he measures up well against the lower tiers in the Hall.  And he's quite a bit better than Lloyd Waner.  Only 107 OPS+, but that's still better than Waner.  2428 hits, which is only a small amount fewer.  And 622 stolen bases, which is excellent.  Did I mention 68.2 WAR?  That's a LOT better.  He wasn't very good in the 2000s, but that basically makes him the light-hitting version of Ken Griffey, Jr.


And the least deserving is.......


1) Ray Schalk.  C (1912-1929), almost all with the White Sox.  
Somehow, we found a worse pick at catcher than Ferrell.  28.5 WAR, an OPS+ of 83, and only 1345 hits.  Wow.
Veterans Committee, 1955.

I'm not sure how to replace Schalk.  There were only a couple decent catchers left (Munson and Simmons), since Cooperstown has already been too lenient in admitting them.  And they've been used earlier on the list.  So we'll leave this spot open for now.  Someone has to earn it.



Please leave comments, whether you agree or disagree.  And remember: some of my suggested alternatives might not deserve to be in the Hall, either!  But they certainly are better than those they're replacing.  That was the only point of the exercise.

The top 8 Reds right fielders since 1900

Since I already went through this exercise with the shortstop position in my last post, in honor of Zack Cozart, I figured I'd do the same positional rundown for Jay Bruce.

At first glance, it might seem like RF has not been a particularly productive position in Cincinnati.  If you go to baseball-reference.com and enter a query stipulating that the players must have spent at least 50% of their time at a given position, and earned at least 30 WAR, you get the list below: 

C - Bench and Lombardi
1B - Perez, Votto, Klu, McCormick
2B - Morgan (plus BP and Frey have accumulated 29 WAR each)
3B - Groh
SS - Larkin and Concepcion
LF - Foster
CF - Pinson, Roush, and Davis
RF - no one

But this leaves out two ENORMOUS names in Reds history - Pete Rose (#1 all-time in Reds WAR with 77.7) and Frank Robinson (#4 all-time, with 63.8).  Both of them switched positions frequently during their careers, so they aren't really "attached" to a given position.  I think the most fair thing to do is to include them in this discussion, but only count the seasons when they played most of the time in RF.

Wins Above Replacement

1) Frank Robinson - 29.4 total, earned during 1961, 1962, 1964 and 1965 (his seasons predominantly in RF with Reds)

2) Ken Griffey, Sr. - 25.3 (mostly during his first stint with the team from 1973 to 1981)

3) Pete Rose - 22 total, earned during 1968-1971 (his seasons in RF with Reds)

4) Reggie Sanders - 21.4 (1991-1998)

5) Ival Goodman - 21.4 (1935-1942)

6) Curt Walker - 18.8 (1924-1930)

7) Jay Bruce - 16.1 (2008-2016)

8) Wally Post - 15.8 (during two stints in the '50s and '60s)


Conclusion:

Griffey Sr. is the best among the full-time right fielders, but Robinson and Rose put up big numbers in only four years.

Bruce fits nicely into the next tier, which are hard to really separate.  Sanders, Goodman, and Post especially are well-respected in Reds history, and I believe Bruce deserves a place in the Reds Hall as well.  I'm almost 100% certain he'll make it.

Unlike at the shortstop position, where Cozart simply hasn't had enough time to accumulate WAR, Bruce has actually played with the Reds as long (or longer) as anyone else on the list.  His counting stats are impressive, but it's his lack of ability to get on base (career OBP .319) and his defensive deterioration that have held down his WAR.  Nevertheless, he is an all-time Red.  Given more time, he probably would've gotten very close to Bench for most HRs (he had 233, Bench had 389).  And he was one of the most likeable Reds in recent memory as well.  So long, Jay.  

The top 8 Reds shortstops since 1900

There has been a lot of discussion of Cozart potentially being traded.  While I would disagree with the move, it's a good time to look at where he stands among Reds shortstops in terms of all-time productivity.

Let's compare a few statistics...

Baseball-reference Wins Above Replacement

1) Barry Larkin, in a landslide.  70.2 WAR in a career spanning 1986 to 2004.

2) Dave Concepcion.  39.8 WAR from 1970 to 1988.

3) Roy McMillan.  Earned 18.3 WAR from 1951 to 1960.

4) Leo Cardenas.  14.8 WAR from 1960 to 1968.

5) Billy Myers.  13.6 WAR from 1935 to 1940.

6) Zack Cozart.  12.3 WAR from 2011 to 2016.

7) Buck Herzog.  12.0 WAR in only 3 seasons, 1914 to 1916.

8) Eddie Miller.  10.6 WAR, mostly earned during his second stint in Cincinnati from 1943 through 1946.


Offensive WAR only

1) Larkin - 67.5

2) Concepcion - 32.3

3) Cardenas - 13.8

4) McMillan - 12.4

5) Myers - 10.7

6) Buck Herzog - 9.1

7) Felipe Lopez - 6.4

8) Zack Cozart - 6.1



Defensive WAR only

1) Concepcion - 20.9

2) McMillan - 14.4

3) Larkin - 13.8

4) Miller - 10.5

5) Cozart - 9.1

6) Cardenas - 8.5

7) Hod Ford - 7.6

8) Myers - 7.3


NOTE: oWAR and dWAR do not sum to WAR, for a couple different reasons not worth going into in this post.


So it's clear that Larkin and Concepcion were in a class by themselves, as far as all-time Reds shortstops.  Cozart falls into the next tier with guys like McMillan, Cardenas, and Myers.  But with his consistently solid defensive game, and dramatic improvements on offense, I have little doubt that Cozart would (have) move(d) into the top tier within the next couple seasons, and be a sure-fire Reds Hall of Famer. 

The end of the Bruce / Phillips / Votto era

I'm 32 years old.  I started watching baseball in 1990, precisely when the Reds last won it all.  I heard about the Big Red Machine from my dad, and have since studied and watched them extensively.

The last 26 years have been frustrating.  But even when the team isn't making the playoffs, it's natural for a die-hard fan to get attached to individual Reds.  With rumors swirling about a trade of Jay Bruce, let's take a step back to appreciate the stability, productivity and longevity of this recent core group of players.  

Bruce, Phillips and Votto have been the primary starters at their respective positions for 8 consecutive seasons (2009-2016).  Only Machine-era combinations of 3+ players met or exceeded that.

Bench / Perez / Rose - 9 seasons (1968-1976)

Bench / Concepcion / Rose - 9 seasons (1970-1978)
Bruce / Phillips / Votto - 8 seasons (2009-2016)

Bench / Concepcion / Morgan - 8 seasons (1972-1979)

Bench / Concepcion / Perez / Rose - 7 seasons (1970-1976)
Helms / May / Perez / Rose - 6 seasons (1966-1971)
Cardenas / Pinson / Rose - 6 seasons (1963-1968)
Bell / McMillan / Temple - 6 seasons (1953-1958)
Groh / Roush / Wingo - 6 seasons (1916-1921)

All three have been extremely productive during their time as well.  There is no doubt that they will all end up in the Reds Hall of Fame.

Here are their rankings in some key stats...

Games played:
1) Rose - 2722
7) Phillips - 1566
20) Bruce - 1220
22) Votto - 1209

Hits:
1) Rose - 3358
9) Phillips - 1711
15) Votto - 1321
27) Bruce - 1116

HR:
1) Bench - 389
7) Bruce - 233
8) Votto - 210
12) Phillips - 186

RBI: 
1) Bench - 1376
10) Phillips - 824
15) Bruce - 718
17) Votto - 685

WAR (position players)
1) Rose - 77.7
8) Votto - 45.2
18) Phillips - 29.3
30) Bruce - 16.5


A number of things worked against this group.  While they had a solid pitching staff from 2010 through 2012, there were always weak links in the lineup, or mishaps along the way.  Most Reds fans believe we could've taken a championship in 2012, if not for Cueto's injury in Game 1 of the NLDS.  It certainly would have been interesting.  

While the postseason results have been disappointing, we've still had the opportunity to watch one of the most productive cores of position players in Reds history.  Let's appreciate that.

Reds could win a 5th straight series this weekend, which is rarer than you think

And no, I'm not trying to be snarky about the Reds' lack of quality since 2013.  Rarely do you see long streaks of series victories or losses, for any MLB team.

There are exceptions, of course.  The 2001 Seattle Mariners won:
- 9 straight series to open the season with a record of 22-6
- 7 straight from May to June, including a 14-game winning streak
- an insane 14 series in a row from July to September, improving their record from 74-29 to 106-41

The craziest thing about that last streak?  It only improved their winning percentage from .718 to .723!  Unreal.

But getting back to the Reds...

If the Reds manage 1 win on Saturday or Sunday in San Diego, they'll reach 5 straight series victories.  That would tie the following streaks in recent history:

April 2006 - won 5 in a row
September 2008 - won 5 in a row
May 2010 - won 5 in a row
June/July 2010 - won 5 in a row
July/August 2010 - won 5 in a row
May 2011 - won 5 in a row
July 2012 - won 5 in a row
June 2014 - won 5 in a row

To find a streak of series wins LONGER than 5, you have to go back to 1999.  Those exciting (even if ill-fated) Reds won 9 series in a row in July and August.

What about losses?  During that same time period, here are the Reds' series LOSS streaks of 5 or more:

May 2001 - lost 5 in a row
July 2001 - lost 6 in a row
April/May 2005 - lost 6 in a row
May 2007 - lost 8 in a row
June 2007 - lost 6 in a row
July/August 2008 - lost 5 in a row
July/August 2009 - lost 5 in a row
August 2015 - lost 7 in a row

Not any more common than the series winning streaks, but some of them lasted a bit longer.

So, to summarize, the Reds could actually have their longest series winning streak in 17 years if they just win ONE more this weekend (should happen), and somehow take 2 of 3 against St. Louis at GABP (the much more difficult part of this equation).  As unfortunate - if unsurprising - as this season's results have been, they could still accomplish something impressive.

What to do with Barry Bonds and his numbers...

Most baseball fans are aware of ESPN's recent communal effort to rank the top 100 players in MLB history.  Many of you thought #MLBRANK, poorly-conceived hashtag and all, were...well, rank.  Some of the picks were, to be certain.  I had strong disagreements with many of the personalized lists - the only possible exception being Jayson Stark's.  He seems to always make an effort to be level in his judgements.  But I'll delve into that topic in some upcoming posts.  Here, I want to focus on Bonds.  

If you look at the top 10 in all-time Wins Above Replacement on baseball-reference.com, only two come with baggage:

1) BABE RUTH - 183.7

2) CY YOUNG - 170.3

3) BARRY BONDS - 162.4

4) WILLIE MAYS - 156.2

5) WALTER JOHNSON - 152.3

6) TY COBB - 151.0

7) HANK AARON - 142.6

8) ROGER CLEMENS - 139.4

9) TRIS SPEAKER - 133.7

10) HONUS WAGNER - 131.0

Yep, the 'roiders.  Here we go again.

Many fans seem to take one of these two extreme and opposite stances on Bonds' statistics:

1) "I'm tired of thinking about steroids.  He accomplished all of these amazing things, and he was on a pretty awesome trajectory before steroids anyway, so let's just count all of it and say he was in the top 3 all-time."

2) "DAMN ANY PED-USING DEVIL TO HELL!  NO HALL OF FAME AND NO TOP TEN OR TOP ONE HUNDRED OR TOP ONE BILLION FOR THIS AMORAL FOOL!"

Why can't there be a middle ground?  Probably because it's so difficult to find.  I'll try my best to present a reasonable alternative.

I'll keep this simple.  Bonds diverged from "reality" around age 36 and onward.  Elite power hitters don't put up their BIGGEST numbers at that age without the cream and the clear.  

I have a couple bar graphs to show you.  Don't be scared.  

Let's look at all (actually, most) of the hitters in MLB history who hit 400+ homers and accumulated 100+ WAR.  There have been exactly 13 such players.  

I excluded only 3.  Which 3, and why?

1) A-Rod - two reasons.  He is also a known PED user, and therefore not a good reference point.  Also, he is an active player so he isn't done accumulating stats.

2) Pujols.  I'll leave the PED speculation alone.  This is just because he's an active player.

3) Gehrig.  A legend who was derailed by ALS, and walked off the field at age 36.  It would be depressing to include his zeroes in these graphs.

OK, ready?

Bonds is the clear outlier here.  268 HR and 51.5 WAR...AFTER age 35?  Yeah, right.

Williams only shows such high percentages because he lost three of his peak years to World War II, lending added weight to the tail end of his career.  Aaron and Musial had pretty awesome HR production in their later years, but nothing to compare with Bonds.

My suggestion is as follows:

Apply the MEDIAN percentages from the other hitters in these graphs to Bonds.  See what we get.  That means Bonds only gets to add totals worth 15.5% for WAR (like Musial) and 19.1% for HR (like Mays) to what he had entering the year 2001.

What's the result?

Bonds would have a total of 131.4 WAR (adding 20.4 instead of 51.4) and 611 HR (adding 117 instead of 268).

This would place him 9th in WAR (assuming no further adjustments to the list) and 8th in HR (with A-Rod still third).

It's a real shame that he had such hubris and went for the records, when he could've been respected forever as a legitimate top 10 player.  Instead he'll be debated and, in many circles, disdained forever.