2018 Hall of Fame--the silliest argument made

First off, congrats to Chipper Jones, Jim Thome, Trevor Hoffman, and Vlad Guerrero, all very deserving entrants into the Baseball Hall of Fame.  As someone who believes closers are essentially useless I have a problem with Hoffman’s election, as I don’t think pitching one inning every four or five days makes you that valuable, but I’ll get over it.

I want to talk about an argument I heard last week on MLB Network’s 2018 Hall Of Fame show discussing the eligible players.  Someone (I didn’t get his name) made what is possibly the silliest argument for putting a player in the Hall I have ever heard (and there are three players who are in the Hall primarily because they were in a poem).  Someone argued that Andruw Jones should be admitted to the Hall because he had 10 Gold Gloves and 400 home runs, and the only other players in that category were Willie Mays, Ken Griffey, Jr., and Mike Schmidt.  Ergo, Jones should go in, QED.

This argument was apparently rejected by most voters as Jones got only 7.3% of the votes, above the five percent mark so as to keep him on next year’s ballot but far away from the 75% needed for enshrinement.  There are a number of reasons for seriously considering Jones’ credentials (his Hall of Fame numbers at Baseball Reference are close, but a tad low), but the Gold Glove/home run combo is not one of them.

First of all, the Gold Gloves are voted on subjectively, and often the winner is based more on reputation than accomplishment.  How unreliable are the Gold Gloves?  There are statistical analyses indicating that Derek Jeter is the worst fielding shortstop in the history of baseball, yet he has five Gold Gloves.  That’s like the Golden Globes giving an acting award to Pia Zadorra.  The fact that Jones has all those Gold Gloves is nice, and maybe he earned them, but I wouldn’t base his Hall campaign on something so subjective.

Second, 10 Gold Gloves is an absurdly high standard to start cutting off Hall membership.  Those three players in the 400 homer club are a high proportion of the Hall members with 10 Gold Gloves.  Part of this is because being the best fielder at a position for a decade is an incredibly high standard; partly it is because defensive prowess has always taken a back seat to offense when considering Hall credentials.  Ted Williams didn’t win any Gold Gloves, so should he be chucked out?  How much did Harmon Killebrew’s defense play in his election?  Bottom line, you can be a great fielder and not have close to ten Gold Gloves, and you don’t have to be a great fielder to get into the Hall.

Next, the fact is that most multi-Gold Glove players are either pitchers (Jim Kaat, Greg Maddux) or light hitting infielders (Brooks Robinson, Ozzie Smith).  A 10 Gold Glove player with some pop, like Ivan Rodriguez, could still only muster 311 homers in his career.  So pointing out that Andruw Jones has more power than pitchers and shortstops is hardly a basis for a ticket to Cooperstown.

The flip side of that is the fact that players with 400 home runs are typically larger players who would not be expected to be gifted in the field, unless they were a first baseman or catcher.  Mark McGwire managed to win one Gold Glove, and that is pretty impressive, but to expect a power hitter to win 10 Gold Gloves is an unreasonable basis for Cooperstown.

The bottom line is, winning 10 Gold Gloves and hitting 400 homers is a sign of a unique player, with an unusual set of skills, but not necessarily a Hall of Famer.  Many players with 10 Gold Gloves do not deserve admission; likewise for players with 400 home runs.  A player with both of those qualities should be inducted only if they possess some other qualities as well.

This is another example of the “Texas sharpshooter” fallacy that Bill James documented in his book “Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame?”  A Texas sharpshooter fires six shots at a wall, then draws a circle around the bullet holes and claims he hit the target every time.  A Hall of Fame argument can be made for lots of players if you carefully craft your criteria.  For example, [as James points out, all stats accurate as of 1995] an argument for Vada Pinson in the HoF could be made by saying he is the only player in MLB history with 2,500 hits, 200 homers and 200 stolen bases who isn’t in the Hall [note—of course Barry Bonds now meets this criterion, but he isn’t in the Hall because of steroid use, not productivity].  Stealing bases and hitting homers are not usually combined, so it is easy to say that few players had that combination.

As I said, I have n complaints about who was voted in to the HoF this year.  I am disappointed that Edgar Martinez was once again left out, but at 70% he should make it next year.  People, if we elected closers who only work one inning every few games, why not admit someone who only bats and doesn’t field?  At least he isn’t hurting the team by fielding poorly.

I just wish that the quality of arguments for enshrinement would improve.