Strat-O-Matic Baseball 365

Hi all,

The discussion of Gil Hodges's HOF merits has been lively, but there are several other candidates on the table. In fact, on December 8 we will know the results of the deliberations of the "Golden Era Committee" covering the admission of new HOF candidates for the 1945-1972 period.

Hodges is one of nine players and one executive on the list for the HOF. Here's the list:

Dick Allen, Ken Boyer, Gil Hodges, Bob Howsam, Jim Kaat, Minnie Minoso, Tony Oliva, Billy Pierce, Luis Tiant and Maury Wills. The Hall of Fame explains the procedure and gives profiles on the candidates here:

http://baseballhall.org/hall-of-fame/2015-golden-era-committee-ballot

If I'm understanding this right, a candidate needs 75% of the votes from a 16 person committee, or 12 votes, to actually make it into the Hall. But you get to vote right now!

Who do you think is the most deserving of this group? Cast your ballot and if you feel like it, explain why.

Also, Baseball-Reference currently has a box with the stats of the candidates featured on its home page:

http://www.baseball-reference.com

I voted for Jim Kaat based on his 283 wins and three 20 win seasons. But now I'm having second thoughts. Maybe I should really have voted for Luis Tiant. El Tiante won 20 games four times and was a more dominant pitcher over all than Kaat. Tiant had fewer wins than Kaat, but with a higher W/L percentage (.571 vs .544). And he was a lot of fun to watch.

What do you think?

I gave my vote to Ken Boyer, whose stats from 58 to 64 are about as good as they get in an understated kind of way. Besides, 3B is a semi-neglected position both in the HOF and SOM (so when do we get Scott Rolen to play with here?). I'd be happy with DIck Allen, too.

Bill

I think Tiant, Boyer and Allen are all really good choices.

I've been saying for years that Dick Allen is the best player not in the HOF, so I voted for him. a .912 OPS playing mostly in pitching dominant years speaks for itself

I vote for Bob Grich- the forgotten man.
When was the "Golden Era"? I thought that was in ancient Rome or something.

labratory wrote:I vote for Bob Grich- the forgotten man.
When was the "Golden Era"? I thought that was in ancient Rome or something.

Why this is the "Golden Era" I couldn't possibly tell you. The other periods are

The Expansion Era (1973 and forward), the Pre-Integration Era (baseball’s origins through 1946).

Each year, now, a HOF committee meets to consider players from one of these three periods.

Grich's chance will come the next time "The Expansion Era" group is considered. So feel free to vote for one of these Golden Age guys and save your Grich vote for next time around.

BTW, the last time the Golden Age vote was held, in 2011, Ron Santo was selected, and he was inducted into the HOF in 2012, making a lot of Cubs fans happy. I think the Committee got the best available player in choosing Santo. Let's see how they (and we) do this time.

I had the same question as labratory. Even though Outta Leftfield says he couldn't possibly tell us he immediately does so IMO.

1945-72 Prior to this was pre integration. So it was after baseball was integrated. Though one might argue it did not fully come in until majority of teams were integrated. But now I am probably nitpicking, something you all will likely agree I do too much of. Ends with the beginning of the expansion era.

So here is my theory. Prior to the golden era baseball was diluted because blacks not allowed. The golden era ended when expansion began and it was once again diluted.

Based on this logic I would argue we are once again entering a new golden era. It has been decades now since the last expansion team was added. And we have more players entering the game from South and Latin countries, plus from across the Pacific, indeed from all over the world that the game is certainly no longer diluted. With all the drug testing including blood testing and aggressive investigating MLB is serious about pushing PEDs out of the game so stats are no longer inflated. Attendance and revenues are at an all time high. So I am declaring the beginning of a new golden era of baseball.

All that is left to decide is when we should call the expansion era to have transitioned to the steroids era and what year to designate as the end of the steroid era. My personal vote for the year of transition from steroid era to new golden era would be last year. That was the year baseball added blood testing for HGH and forced the suspensions of multiple players in the absence of positive tests. Evidence from investigations alone for the most part were used with the 2 most notable being Braun who had escaped a year before on a technicality and Arod who got nailed for an entire season. While PEDs will probably always be around to some extent as long as the game is played by humans there is little doubt in my mind vast majority are now clean or realizing it may be too difficult to confidently cheat the game to continue if they have been using.

All that will leave is deciding what year the expansion era ended.

I think it would be appropriate to mark the new golden era by the beginning of mandatory urinalysis.

Allen was strictly a brick-layer on defense and despite his reputation as a slugger hit 40 only once, although his breakout years were in the mini-deadball mid '60s.

Boyer and Hodges could flash leather and hit, Boyer could motor a bit earlier and Hodges a little less so. I have spoken for both of them in the past.

Hard to speak against Tiant,

and, Minnie's numbers are surely deflated by having played in old Comiskey.

torn about Wills, he sure is famous, but his numbers except for SBs are light, and although he is listed w/ 2 Gold Gloves, i think those may have been gifts, I wonder if Chico Cardenas or Gene Alley might not have been a better SS glove those years.