Worst HOF selections...

Well, not a bad HOF class this year. I don't have any complaints about Randy, Pedro, Smoltz or Biggio....

And I agree with Andy about the Fordam Flash gang. The problem with those guys being in is that they muddy the waters of any HOF debate. Anyone can say, my favored player is better than George Kelly, so why isn't he in?

As for MAZ, well, I think he's in because he's considered to the greatest ever defensive second baseman of all time.

There's a tendency among HOF voters (BBWAA or Vet Comm), to elect the "greatest ever" at something, even if they were NOT a truly outstanding player when taken in total.

Thus, Lou Brock is in as the all time stolen base leader, even though he wasn't truly great if one takes his career as a whole. Later on, Rickey Henderson's 1406 SB's made Brock's former record of 938 look kinda sick, and Rickey's total career as a leadoff man made Brock's career look even sicker, but at the time of his election, Brock's admission to the HOF made sense, and he got in on the first ballot. (Brock was elected in 1985, when Rickey was just getting started)

Brooks Robinson is in as the greatest defensive 3B (and I think he's a very worthy choice). Ozzie is in as the greatest defensive SS ever (and I think he's a very worthy choice, too). Before Ozzie, Tinker and Aparicio might have been considered the greatest defensive SS's of their generations, and the contemporary era of slugging SS's hadn't really arrived. I'm not saying Tinker or Aparicio is as Hall-worthy as Brooks or Ozzie, but in context, their elections make a certain amount of sense—if one accepts the premise that the greatest-ever defensive player at an important position deserves serious consideration.

I think I'd consider Candy Cummings about as bad a selection as one could want. There's significant debate about whether he actually invented the curveball. From what I can see, several pitchers found it more or less simultaneously as part of the natural evolution of the game, and as bontomn points out, he didn't do that much with the pitch even if he did invent it. His career was over by the time he turned 27.

I will say a word in favor of Red Ruffing. Ruffing really had two careers. He was a pretty bad pitcher for the Red Sox between the ages of 19 and 24, going 39-96 (a dismal .289) for the Red Sox. But Bob Shawkey thought they could fix a problem with Ruffing's delivery and the Yankees acquired him. Under Shawkey's tutelage, he became a new pitcher.

As a Yankee, Ruffing had a second career which was really pretty awesome. He went 231-124 (.651 w/l). During that period Ruffing won 20 games 4 straight times, and the Yankees won 7 pennants and 6 World Series. Then, in 1943, at the age of 37, Ruffing entered military service during WW2 (he had gone 14-7 the previous year). When Ruffing returned to the Yankees in 1945, he continued to pitch effectively (if sparingly) going 12-4 in his final two years with the Yankees. If Ruffing hadn't missed those two years to the military, he might easily have won 300 games (he finished with 273).

So, I don't see Ruffing as a bad HOF pick at all. He's certainly a much better player than many other guys in the Hall, IMHO.

Ozzie is in as the greatest defensive SS ever (and I think he's a very worthy choice, too).

How do Omar Vizquel's "regular' and advanced defensive statistics compare to Ozzie's. I know many scouts and managers actually considered Vizquel Ozzie's defensive superior, he had a better arm, and was a better offensive player.

I think Ozzie's induction should definitely make Vizquel's induction a decent possibility.

MAZ wouldn't be in without the 1960 Series winning HR. I'm positive many voters rewarded him for someone finally beating the Yankees.

How do Omar Vizquel's "regular' and advanced defensive statistics compare to Ozzie's. I know many scouts and managers actually considered Vizquel Ozzie's defensive superior, he had a better arm, and was a better offensive player.

I think Ozzie's induction should definitely make Vizquel's induction a decent possibility.

Well, the first thing to say is that regular and advanced defensive stats are still somewhat imperfect, and one wants to compare the advanced stats with subjective observation and see how these balance.

But the second thing to say is that Ozzie's defensive stats are the best in the history of baseball at any position, and that this lines up extremely well with the subjective impression that he was an unparalleled wizard with the glove.

Ozzie has the highest defensive WAR of all time: 43.4. Interestingly, the next highest is Mark Belanger at 39.4 and then Brooks Robinson at 38.8 (pretty good for a 3B). Not everyone would expect Cal Ripken to be 4th at 34.6, but he was a better defensive SS than many realize. That's pretty good fielding for Baltimore, btw, with #s 2, 3 & 4 defensive WAR all-time. Then we have Joe Tinker, followed by Aparicio (HOFers after all?—and btw, yet another Baltimore INF!) All in all, Defensive WAR is so far squaring up pretty well with subjective reputation. These numbers comes from http://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/WAR_def_career.shtml

Vizquel does very well for defensvie WAR, but he ends up tying Bill Dahlen for 10th with 28.7. If we accept Defensive WAR as a meaningful standard, it shows Vizquel as one of the best defensive SS of all time, but not quite in Ozzie's league.

Another interesting stat is Rtot (Total Zone Total Fielding Runs above Average). Here Ozzie leads Omar by a some bigger margin: Ozzie has 239 and Omar 134. This system sees Ozzie as saving 239 more runs in the field than an average SS, while Omar saved 134 runs. According to this system, Belanger saved 238 runs--right there with Oz—and Cal saved 176, well behind Oz but well ahead of Omar.

Oz was also a slightly better hitter than Omar, OPS+ 87 vs 82. So while I think there's a potential HOF argument to be made for Vizquel, it might be hard to argue convincingly that advanced sabermetric stats show Omar to be equal to or better than Ozzie defensively.

Thanks for the informative response. I got to catch Omar at the tail-end of his career in SF, but he was still wicked in the field. It would be nice to see him get some love from Cooperstown.

As for MAZ, well, I think he's in because he's considered to the greatest ever defensive second baseman of all time.

And this from an English Ph.D?? Sounds more like something Yogi Berra would say. One might think that "greatest ever second baseman" would have been sufficient, without the inclusion of the egregiously redundant "of all time."

One envisages Henry James turning over in his grave, not to mention the frenzied gyrating of William Ockham's corpse.

As for MAZ, well, I think he's in because he's considered to the greatest ever defensive second baseman of all time.

And this from an English Ph.D?? Sounds more like something Yogi Berra would say. One might think that "greatest ever second baseman" would have been sufficient, without the inclusion of the egregiously redundant "of all time."
One envisages Henry James turning over in his grave, not to mention the frenzied gyrating of William Ockham's corpse.

He failed to notice that post came from Outta Leftfield, who probably doesn't have an English Ph.D.:

As for MAZ, well, I think he's in because he's considered to the greatest ever defensive second baseman of all time.

Druid just can't stop shooting himself in the foot...


P.s. The fact he "envisages" frenzied gyrating corpses is truly disturbing.