Article: The Twins' Next Hall Of Famer

[jimmer]

I think one reason WAR doesn't put catchers high up there with position players is because catchers don't play as much as other position players and it's a cumulative stat.

[D. Hocking]

The HOF is obviously a big honor and still a big deal, but do you think it is as highly thought of as it was in the past?  There is so much gray area now about who should be considered, who was doing what etc.  Plus sadly, I am not sure the younger generation cares as much about the history of the game just who is playing now or possibly who they watched while growing up (not to sound like an 85 year old curmudgeon).

 

I could see it go either way for Mauer, although currently trending towards not.  I think it might depend a little on how he plays the next few years and if in retrospect if it looks like his downtime was due to concussion or other issues.  A world series win the next couple of seasons would help.....

 

Too bad if he does not get in, because it did look like much more of a sure think 7 to 8 years ago, and it would have been fun to see a hometown player who seems in general to be a good guy to get in for his hometown team.  It would have to be a bit of a disappointment for him, but he seems grounded enough where he will still be able to enjoy spending his post-career at his "cabin" and watching his girls win the high school championship for whatever sport they are playing and being a color commentator for some network (the last one might be somewhat unlikely) .

 

 

 

[ken]

 

1. Obviously no Twins fan has a personal hatred for Mauer or anyone else on the team (possible exception of Halsey and Plouffe).

 

2. Nobody said WAR should be the only stat. But, WAR is commonly used as a starting point for evaluating the HoF credentials of a player and it is the object of the article. WAR is the most elegant stat out there for capturing career output. But, curiously, it doesn't value a single catcher in the history of the game amongst the top ~ 45 elite players of all time.

 

3. As somewhat of a sidenote, on a WAR/162 basis, Mauer is the greatest catcher of all time.

 

4. Given #2, how should Mauer's (or any other catcher's) HoF case be considered? One option might be to abandon WAR completely in favor of another stat or more likely, combination of stats. Another option would be to re-adjust the positional component of WAR so that the elite catchers of history are valued similarly to the elite players at other positions.

How long do we consider Mauer a catcher?  Is it fair to continue to compare him to catchers who caught twice as many games? 

 

Ernie Banks played more games as a shortstop and I don't think anyone is putting him in the top ten all-time shortstops.  Why does Mauer get the special treatment?

 

Also on the WAR, if you adjust it more to favor catchers, and Mauer is 50% catcher wouldn't you then have a negative adjustment for the other 50%?  You would just end up back where you started.

 

I think in trying to make the case for Mauer as a HOF, you have to ignore a lot of other questions.  The HOF doesn't need to fill a team, just enshrine the greatest players.  Mauer had a great start, but the finish isn't looking pretty and you can't just skip the part's that you don't like.

 

[Monkeypaws]

So, how many catchers have made ther HOF? 15 or so, including Piazza?

 

Joe did things unheard of as a catcher, righty batter, etc.

 

But, and it's a big one, he never won a World Series. Puckett got in for that. He's sitting at 1697 hits, as a 32 year old on decline. His numbers are very Tony O like:

 

As KGB said:

 

I think he'll end up like Tony Oliva and not make the hall of fame.It's getting harder to compare him to HOF catchers (Piazza caught 650 more games than Mauer) and if he keep playing 150 games he'll need to get 2,100 hits, he'll end up playing as many games as a non-catcher.

Tony O is a perfect equivalent: did great things as a youth, won batting titles, helped his team compete at the top of the heap, but won nothing, and had a HOF career cut short by injuries.

[D. Hocking]

 

But, and it's a big one, he never won a World Series. 

 

I am hoping you won't be able to say this when all is said and done...

[gunnarthor]

 

 

I've never heard of the Hall picking against the players' wishes.

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/14524076/ken-griffey-jr-wear-seattle-mariners-cap-mike-piazza-gets-new-york-mets-hall-fame-induction

Didn't Boggs or Winfield want to go in as a Devil Ray or Padre and the HOF over rode them?  I can't remember but I thought I heard something like the Rays offered Boggs some stuff ....   

[Willihammer]

 

I think one reason WAR doesn't put catchers high up there with position players is because catchers don't play as much as other position players and it's a cumulative stat.

If you're referring to the BillJamesonline.com article, the author used WAR/162 for that reason. Catchers still come up short.

[Willihammer]

 

How long do we consider Mauer a catcher?  Is it fair to continue to compare him to catchers who caught twice as many games? 

 

Ernie Banks played more games as a shortstop and I don't think anyone is putting him in the top ten all-time shortstops.  Why does Mauer get the special treatment?

 

Also on the WAR, if you adjust it more to favor catchers, and Mauer is 50% catcher wouldn't you then have a negative adjustment for the other 50%?  You would just end up back where you started.

 

I think in trying to make the case for Mauer as a HOF, you have to ignore a lot of other questions.  The HOF doesn't need to fill a team, just enshrine the greatest players.  Mauer had a great start, but the finish isn't looking pretty and you can't just skip the part's that you don't like.

Mauer is considered a catcher because that's the position he's played the most games at. Its the position he was drafted for and developed to play and its the position he'd still be playing if not for the concussions. 

 

I don't know what to tell you about Ernie Banks.

 

Its clear you aren't familiar with WAR. There is a positional adjustment. For fWAR there is a +12.5 run adjustment for catchers over 162 games, and -12.5 run adjustment for first basemen. So your concern about WAR overvaluing a part-time catcher is not really warranted. WAR will be benefit/penalize Mauer accordingly in seasons (games?) where he caught or played first. So even after these decline phase years at first base, Mauer still ranks among the best players whose primary position was catcher, on a WAR/162 basis. Admittedly this was written in Jul 2014 so he probably isn't ranked at #1 anymore. But then you get into a separate question of, why should short-but-great players like Koufax and Puckett make the hall but someone who plays longer at a declining level, not make it? 

 

The most interesting question to me, even besides Mauer's HoF case, is why isn't there a single catcher among the 45 greatest players by WAR/162?

[nicksaviking]

Didn't Boggs or Winfield want to go in as a Devil Ray or Padre and the HOF over rode them? I can't remember but I thought I heard something like the Rays offered Boggs some stuff ....

 

I think it was reported as fact that Boggs requested to go in as a Devil Ray. It was also reported that he agreed to sell his hat on his plaque to Tampa, though I'm not sure that was substantiated.

[stringer bell]

Justin Morneau and Michael Cuddyer won batting championships in their mid-30s, Morneau after suffering a severe concussion. If Mauer somehow managed to snag another batting championship, it might secure a spot in Cooperstown that is slipping away.

[ken]

 

Mauer is considered a catcher because that's the position he's played the most games at. Its the position he was drafted for and developed to play and its the position he'd still be playing if not for the concussions. 

 

 

Today, it is true that he has played the most games as a catcher.  But it's likely it will not be true when his career is over.  I don't think draft position is going to be a factor in the HOF voting, nobody classifying Craig Biggio as catcher because he started his MLB career as a catcher.

 

I think Mauer HOF problem is that they are going to look at his whole career, not just the catching part.  I'm not trying to hate on Mauer and time will tell which one of us is right, but I don't see him getting 75% of the votes.

 

Tony Oliva was a first ballot HOF talent who career was upended by injuries.  Even if you believe concussions are the reason for Mauer's downward trend, I doubt they will factor that in considering he'll play at least 5 years after the concussions.

[Brock Beauchamp]

http://www.billjamesonline.com/where_are_the_great_catchers_/

How have I never read this article before now? Great read.

 

Not only does it highlight just how good Mauer was behind the plate, it talks extensively about Carter, another guy who rarely gets the respect he deserves.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Tony O is a perfect equivalent: did great things as a youth, won batting titles, helped his team compete at the top of the heap, but won nothing, and had a HOF career cut short by injuries.

Tony O is a comparison but it's not a particularly good comparison.

 

Oliva played right field. That's hardly a demanding position. Mauer played the most demanding position and played it well.

 

Oliva had three batting titles. How many RF/DH have batting titles? Dozens? Mauer also has three batting titles. No other American League catcher has a batting title in 115 years of play. The last NL catcher to win the title did it before the end of WWII.

 

Will Mauer make the HoF? I don't know. Should Mauer make the HoF? Yeah, probably. He wasn't only elite at the position for a decade... In that decade, he was one of the top two or three catchers of all time. That's strong consideration - if not outright election material - for the Hall.

[Kwak]

Mauer belongs in Hall of Very Good Players--period.  Compare to Oliva/  Sure!  Tony played Hurt--frequently.  He had a finger so badly swollen the bat would repeatedly fly out of his hand if he swung and missed.  Mauer--well, let's just say he spent a lot of time on the injured list.  he mostly had knee problems.  Did catchers have knee problems (and concussion-symptoms) in the 60's and 70's?  Of course, but those guys played!  Joe is a hometown favorite.  It's great to be a huge fan--but was he great?  Great players are leaders.  Joe?  I can't remember anybody extolling that quality in Joe (as a Twin).  Post-season success?  This is often cited as a huge factor in HOF consideration.  Sorry, Joe doesn't have much.  That sort of forces Joe to the Ted Williams/Ernie Banks model for HOF consideration.  Sorry, Joe's numbers aren't at the level of those two.   

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Mauer belongs in Hall of Very Good Players--period.  Compare to Oliva/  Sure!  Tony played Hurt--frequently.  He had a finger so badly swollen the bat would repeatedly fly out of his hand if he swung and missed.  Mauer--well, let's just say he spent a lot of time on the injured list.   

You can't honestly believe Mauer - a guy who played catcher for ten seasons - didn't play hurt.

 

Every catcher plays hurt or they wouldn't play after the first few weeks of ST.

[Hosken Bombo Disco]

By the time Mauer is eligible, he will probably be considered the guy who dominated his position between the Pudge years and Posey years, and probably not as good as either. And as Ted wrote, Mauer needs to turn around his hitting significantly and sustain it, or it will be a rough road. 

[Thrylos]

Twins' next Hall of Famer?

 

Tony Oliva

 

Veteran's Committee.

[KGB]

 

 

 

The most interesting question to me, even besides Mauer's HoF case, is why isn't there a single catcher among the 45 greatest players by WAR/162?

Below is from the comment section, I think that give a pretty good explaination:

 

The writer commits a really common statistical blunder when he says Mauer's candidacy is already extremely strong due to the fact that his WAR/162 is the highest of any catcher in baseball history. Mauer's numbers look better compared to Bench -- a far superior player: Bench's WAR/162 through his age 30 season was 6.33, and this number is actually "hurt" by the fact that he stayed on the field more and therefore had a bigger denominator -- because we're only looking at Mauer's twenties and haven't given him time to decline (which he's already doing) and lower that number. I'm sure this was considered, but it wasn't mentioned.

To the point that catchers are historically underappreciated, it may very well be true that WAR fails to account for the difficulty of playing the position, pitch framing, etc; obviously this is a popular view among mainstream sabermetricians. If this is the case, then it's difficult to compare them to other position players using WAR. But leaving that aside, or even assuming that WAR could be tweaked somehow to account for this, there's no way you can adjust WAR for the fact that catchers, on average, play three-quarters of a season. They're not providing value during that time they're resting, and they're not providing value when their careers end sooner than other players. If you want to make this a Hall of Fame argument, you could argue for lowering the statistical threshold to account for the difficulties of playing catcher, but this has nothing to do with WAR itself

Also when the author says "Is it rational, then, that a strong candidate for the title of greatest catcher of all-time has a per-162 game rate that’s so far below the best players at every other position on the diamond? Is it rational to believe that there have been no really great catchers in major league history?" -- I think there might be a failure to account for a sort of selection bias that undoubtedly occurs when clubs decide which position players will play. Great-hitting young catchers are routinely moved from behind the plate at a young age because teams want to maximize the value they can contribute. it happened with Biggio; it would have happened earlier with Mauer, had the Twins had their way; it's happened with countless other young catchers: teams want their best young hitters in the lineup every day and to not age in dog years. It's very possible that the talent pool of major league catchers is diluted because of this. A somewhat analogous situation is relief pitchers: the reason relief pitchers in general are lesser pitchers than starters is that managers and front-office people have their best pitchers start games, because that's how they can pitch the most innings and give them the most value. Relievers shouldn't -- note shouldn't -- be compared against other relievers, but against other players. But this gets into a long tangent about how JAWS is dumb and how it de-accounts for position, one of the fundamental strengths of WAR."
8:56 PM Jul 22nd

[Willihammer]

Those are good points. It seems weird to think of catchers as sort of the positional equivalent of relief pitchers, because we tend to think there is so much more to the job, but it makes some sense. The best bats are often moved out of the position.

[SweetOne69]

 

But, and it's a big one, he never won a World Series. Puckett got in for that.

 

 

Puckett's WS wins has very little to do with why he got into the HOF.  If that was the case, Jack Morris would've got in as well.  Puckett was one of the best players of his time even without the WS wins.

[Michael (ClassicMNTwins)]

 

I think Jim Kaat has a better chance through the Veteran's Committee than anyone who built their reputation as a Twin.

At first, I read your quote, and was skeptical. But, there are some legit ideas you have, as I reflect. Jim was just short of 300 wins, yes, but he was an innovative guy who changed his delivery, and essentially created the slidestep. And, course, the intangibles of being a personable, well-spoken, knowledgeable announcer, and ambassador of the game may be factored too for his benefit. See Kaat and other members of the 1970 roster at my post from yesterday: http://classicminnesotatwins.blogspot.com/2016/01/1970-minnesota-twins-film.html