If you think the Pro Football HOF voting is questionable...

[sluggermatt15]

Baines is a terrible selection. There are so many more players who were 6+ time All-Star who are more deserving. I could go into a detailed argument, but I won't. Baines' numbers are laughable to be a member of the Hall.

[bachslunch]

I'm surprised Dale Murphy wasn't on the list of candidates. I would have taken Murphy over Baines, with the back-to-back MVP's, and along with Phil Niekro the heart and soul of the 80's Braves teams, although he had a relatively short career, but I watched him a lot in the 80's and thought he was an outstanding ballplayer and he seemed a good bet for the Hall of Fame during his playing career.

I think Murphy may be on another list, likely the same one Simmons is on.

[Rupert Patrick]

I'm surprised Dale Murphy wasn't on the list of candidates. I would have taken Murphy over Baines, with the back-to-back MVP's, and along with Phil Niekro the heart and soul of the 80's Braves teams, although he had a relatively short career, but I watched him a lot in the 80's and thought he was an outstanding ballplayer and he seemed a good bet for the Hall of Fame during his playing career.

I think Murphy may be on another list, likely the same one Simmons is on.

Along with Dave Parker, Al Oliver and Steve Garvey, all of whom were better players than Baines.

[Gary Najman]

I am a White Sox fan, and like Rupert, Baines was a favorite of mine (and a big reaseon why I became a basebll fan in 1983), but I agree he is not a HOFamer. I also agree that Dale Murphy and Ted Simmons are more worthy candidates.

[JWL]

I always liked Baines. He was one of those quiet guys who was a very good, steady ballplayer. Long career, but not really a compiler. . .

It is interesting that Rupert wrote Baines was not a compiler but bachslunch wrote that Baines was the quintessential compiler.

[JWL]

It is possible I never made a compiler "rant" on this forum. I found a bunch of stuff on another forum.

I will share some of that here rather than write new stuff from scratch.


I responded to a guy who thought it was wrong that Michael Strahan was inducted into the PFHOF. He wrote, "pass rushers are judged on getting to the QB, his compiled sack #s and deceiving rank amongst the all time sack leaders is a major reason why he made it."

I replied-

What is this "compiling sack #s" bit?

Did Strahan hang around for several years falling into sacks based on mediocre play?

The compiler business works in baseball much more than in football. Steve Carlton tacked on some extra wins while playing with four or so teams in his last three seasons. He wasn't great anymore but he did compile some additional stats.

Don Sutton could be considered a compiler in that he was not really ever dominant. He was good to very good in a very long career.

Craig Biggio compiled. He was probably never actually great or dominant.

Anybody, though, who played a long time compiled stats. Willie Mays was a compiler. Babe Ruth was a compiler. Hank Aaron was a compiler. Tom Seaver was a compiler. Bob Gibson was a compiler.

Compiling in the NFL could be seen in Tim Brown's year with Tampa Bay or Thurman Thomas playing with Miami or Emmitt Smith with Arizona. What those guys did late in their careers is what the sports statistics compiling notion actually is about. Those three guys finished their careers playing mostly ineffective football but got some stats added and helped move past or created more distance from others on all time record lists.

Strahan finished his career playing for a championship team. I didn't find him to be ineffective that season and I don't recall him falling into sacks because his teammates did all the work.

Do I think Strahan is a top tier Hall of Famer? No.

Do I think he belongs in the Hall of Fame? Yes.

[Jay Z]

I have tried explaining the flaws in the Baseball HOF process to the baseball guys. It falls on deaf ears.

There is a lot of contempt for football with a lot of the baseball geeks, that is one issue. They won't listen to an idea if football is attached to it.

Plus, they like to debate the size of the Hall. They view themselves as defenders of the sanctity of the game. I am trying to reason with analytics types. I have pointed out that if you are going to use analytics, you need to define your line of entry. The size of the hall is a preference, and bringing that into play encourages irrational arguments.

Baines was not popular with the writers. He would have not been elected under the PFHOF method. Because there you are electing a certain number of guys per year. If Baines goes in the advocates have to point out how he was better than players they are not voting for. I don't think he could have passed that test at this time. But it was never taken, since he got in through the back door on one of these committees the baseball HOF sets up when the writers aren't electing enough players.

[bachslunch]

I have tried explaining the flaws in the Baseball HOF process to the baseball guys. It falls on deaf ears.

There is a lot of contempt for football with a lot of the baseball geeks, that is one issue. They won't listen to an idea if football is attached to it.

Plus, they like to debate the size of the Hall. They view themselves as defenders of the sanctity of the game. I am trying to reason with analytics types. I have pointed out that if you are going to use analytics, you need to define your line of entry. The size of the hall is a preference, and bringing that into play encourages irrational arguments.

Baines was not popular with the writers. He would have not been elected under the PFHOF method. Because there you are electing a certain number of guys per year. If Baines goes in the advocates have to point out how he was better than players they are not voting for. I don't think he could have passed that test at this time. But it was never taken, since he got in through the back door on one of these committees the baseball HOF sets up when the writers aren't electing enough players.

I've noticed the contempt for pro football and its HoF in some baseball "geek" quarters as well. Not sure where that comes from. I'm all for analytics as the overriding standard for BBHoF election, as the tradition is well established and works really well for that game. Football is more problematic in that regard, though I think stats well considered and honors can and should play a role; a combo of this with good quality film study seems like the best route.

I don't think it's so much that Baines was unpopular with the writers as much as they clearly recognized that despite being well-liked, he shouldn't be getting in the HoF without a ticket. They've made a few blunders over the years of both commission (electing folks like Ray Schalk, Catfish Hunter, Rabbit Maranville, Rollie Fingers, and Herb Pennock -- and they may be on the cusp of electing another mistake in Omar Vizquel) and omission (not electing subsequent deserving inductees like Ron Santo, Johnny Mize, Alan Trammell, Arky Vaughn, and Hal Newhauser), but most of the terrible selections came courtesy of the Veterans Committee, usually via cronyism (a major historic problem with these committees). That being said, I think it's a good idea to have a Veterans Committee, as there are several deserving players who have been neglected by the BBWAA, including folks still not in ranging from Lou Whitaker to Ted Simmons to Bobby Grich to Dick Allen to Minnie Minoso to Dwight Evans to Keith Hernandez, plus there would be no Negro League players inducted otherwise.

My understanding is that Baines was very well liked by everyone he came in contact with. Putting him in a hypothetical Baseball Good Guys HoF would be fine with me, but not the Cooperstown one.

The issue of small hall-big hall is an old one, and a major problem -- especially with the BBHoF, but with every HoF I know of. The way to alleviate that of course is to have an agreed upon threshold for each position based on good use of stats, etc. Good luck finding a consensus everyone will respect, though. And there are still players and older writers who are hostile to sabermetric thinking and vote accordingly, though the latter will die off eventually. I like to look at what the tradition has been for election standards and determine what strikes me as a fair HoF.

[TanksAndSpartans]

JWL, I followed your compiler argument at the beginning, then got a little lost. The part about guys who tacked on stats at the end made sense to me, but then you pointed to some players as being compilers for their whole career (Sutton, Biggio). A player who played at an above average level their whole career isn't a compiler since they couldn't have been replaced with an average player, right? I liked your original definition that associates it with hanging on at an average or below average level better. I'm glad you posted - I was interested too, never really knowing what people meant when they used this term aside from that it was derogatory.

[JWL]

JWL, I followed your compiler argument at the beginning, then got a little lost. The part about guys who tacked on stats at the end made sense to me, but then you pointed to some players as being compilers for their whole career (Sutton, Biggio). A player who played at an above average level their whole career isn't a compiler since they couldn't have been replaced with an average player, right? I liked your original definition that associates it with hanging on at an average or below average level better. I'm glad you posted - I was interested too, never really knowing what people meant when they used this term aside from that it was derogatory.

I would have been confused too if someone else wrote that and I read it.

I will have to try to write on it again. I don't fully like the term. I think the term "compiler" should be eradicated because one can easily, easily argue that guys like Willie Mays and Hank Aaron and Peyton Manning and Tom Brady were compilers. I mean, heck, they compiled a whole bunch of statistics.

Then getting past the actual term, I've seen people argue about what actually constitutes "compiling." I think it usually means the guy was not on a good team (they could have stunk with or without the player) and he was not one of the top few players at his position in the year in question. If the team is good and goes to the playoffs but the player's performance was mediocre maybe it counts as "compiling" or maybe not. Umm, umm, or something. That is the problem.