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

[bachslunch]

I tend to think of a compiler as a player who hung around forever and (as appropriate) amassed counting stats without ever being a great player. They also usually lack a peak. For me, Omar Vizquel and Harold Baines qualify in baseball, while Jim Marshall and Alex Wojciechowicz qualify in football.

[TanksAndSpartans]

I tend to think of a compiler as a player who hung around forever and (as appropriate) amassed counting stats without ever being a great player. They also usually lack a peak. For me, Omar Vizquel and Harold Baines qualify in baseball, while Jim Marshall and Alex Wojciechowicz qualify in football.

I can see that - so a player who was great but played few extra years to break a record or whatever wouldn't be included then.

[Rupert Patrick]

I tend to think of a compiler as a player who hung around forever and (as appropriate) amassed counting stats without ever being a great player. They also usually lack a peak. For me, Omar Vizquel and Harold Baines qualify in baseball, while Jim Marshall and Alex Wojciechowicz qualify in football.

By that definition, Pete Rose was the ultimate compiler for his playing for about 4-5 years too long as he was chasing Cobb's career hit record.

Baines was also a compiler by this definition, but at age 40, playing in 135 games, he still banged out 25 HR, over 100 RBI's and batted .312; he aged well. Also, as a DH, there was no defensive liability. Vizquel did play a few years too long, perhaps he was staying around for the paycheck, but I would not be surprised to see him get inducted to the HOF in time, probably thru the back door like Baines did. He was a great fielder and won 11 Gold Gloves.

If you haven't read it, I recommend Bill James book on the BBHOF that was published about 25 years ago. It is not an analytical book, but explains the history and the processes. It's pretty much the same book re-released under a different title "The Politics of Glory" was the first book, the re-release was "Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame?". I never read the re-release.

Frank Gore was mentioned as being a compiler, but he's been in the top ten in rushing six times in his career. Part of it is due to the fact that he plays in San Francisco and Indy (post Manning) and Miami and doesn't play for a perennial playoff team like Pittsburgh or New England or Green Bay. If Frank Gore had put up those career stats for the Steelers, people would be calling him a superstar from the day he entered the league because the Steelers are always on TV and make the postseason just about every year.

I can't believe we are having a baseball discussion in the PFRA forum. This is so cool.

[rhickok1109]

Lee Smith held the MLB record for saves for 13 years.

[Reaser]

Frank Gore was mentioned as being a compiler, but he's been in the top ten in rushing six times in his career. Part of it is due to the fact that he plays in San Francisco and Indy (post Manning) and Miami and doesn't play for a perennial playoff team like Pittsburgh or New England or Green Bay. If Frank Gore had put up those career stats for the Steelers, people would be calling him a superstar from the day he entered the league because the Steelers are always on TV and make the postseason just about every year.

A month into the 2016 season we had an interesting thread about "Gore for HOF" where I brought up Bettis -- a comparison similar to what you're saying about the "Steelers". It also covered the topic here about compiling and statistics.

Entire thread is worth a read: http://www.profootballresearchers.com/f ... ore+Bettis

I cut two of my relevant posts:

Funny is the same things that would potential keep Gore out of the HOF are the same reasons Bettis is in. I'd take Gore over Bettis any day. Early career Gore over Bettis (for both it's really the only time you could put them near the very top though neither was ever the best back in the league), mid-career Gore over mid-career Bettis and now late-career Gore over late-career Bettis. Better football player, easily. Better running back, better receiver out of the backfield, etc.

Gore did have a major injury in college, back when "The U" had an incredible stable of RB's.

I'd rather wait for his - or any player's - career to be over before HOF yes/no, but no, I would say he's a good player worth remembering but not worth immortalizing.

And in response (wow, don't remember laying the sarcasm on so thick) to someone saying unlike Gore, Bettis played a key role in a longer run of success for his franchise and that Gore needed more production to be a HOF back, like Bettis.

Since we're using stats ...

... and Gore apparently "needs more production" before he's on Bettis' level.

In 11 seasons and 5 games (169 career games) he has 15,588 yards from scrimmage.
Bettis in 13 seasons (192 career games) had 15,111 yards from scrimmage.

Gore in his 11 previous seasons had 8 1,000 yard seasons, averaged over 4.1 ypc for all of them.

Bettis in 13 seasons also had 8 1,000 yard seasons, only averaged over 4.0 ypc for half of them (i.e. needed a million carries to get to a 1,000 yards because he was so "productive")

Yup, Gore definitely needs more production to be on the level of Bettis . . .

Let's look at Jerome's Steelers career and the "key role in a longer run of success for his franchise" he had.

Year before he joined the Steelers they were playing in a little game called the Super Bowl. Sure, Bettis gets credit for other things he didn't do so lets go ahead and give him this too and say he magically was the key to their 1995 season.

His first two real years in Pittsburgh he was productive. He was productive as part of a perennial playoff team that he joined - a team we can probably assume would have been in the playoffs without him since they were making the playoffs before Bettis got there anyways.

By his third year in Pittsburgh the transition is complete and Bettis is getting a million carries and he promptly plays a key role in leading the Steelers to 3 consective seasons of not making the playoffs - including the only two seasons he started all 16 games. Arguably the best ran franchise in the NFL and a great coach, once the team was fully built around Bettis they have losing seasons. "Key role in the long run of success", or at least the end of a run of success that others had built?

That's fine, because 2001 things were back to normal for Pittsburgh. Helped by the fact that Bettis was injured roughly 2/3rds of the way through the season, yet the Steelers kept winning. Kept rushing for a lot of yards and finished the season 1st in rushing. Interesting. Almost like the team was a good rushing team and it didn't really matter who carried the ball. Of note, Zereoue averaged more yards per carry than Bettis. Shocking.

2001 Playoffs Bettis is back and ready to go. Nope, injection debacle and he can't play in the Divisional Round. Steelers win anyways. Hilariously Bettis STILL gets the credit for this win even though he didn't play. The team magically was motivated to win (a playoff game mind you) once they found out he couldn't play so all credit goes to Bettis for this one.

Evidently they weren't as motivated to win when he actually played in the AFC Championship the next week and had a key 9 carries for 8 yards performance.

The rest of his Steelers career was basically Pittsburgh trying to replace him with Zereoue, then Staley, and finally Parker. With Bettis getting the short-yardage TD's and a real productive 3.3 yards per carry.

Meanwhile Gore joined what was arguably at the time one of the most disfunctional teams in the NFL and was one of the few bright spots on a terribly ran franchise. Then when they finally got a good coach he was the starting RB on teams that went to 3-straight NFC Championship games and a Super Bowl apperance. Starting, not a backup or role player.

Lets compare their playoff careers since being a key to the success of a team comes in the playoffs. Key to the success, like when Bettis fumbled against the Colts and almost cost the Steelers their eventual Super Bowl season.

Gore's teams went 5-3 in the 3 seasons of playoff appearances in his 10 seasons with the 49ers. As a starter his team went 5-3.

Bettis obviously joined a much better team and the Steelers had 14 playoff games in 6 seasons of playoff apps in his 10 years with the Steelers. Digging a little deeper on him being a key to their success.

He was active for all 14 of those playoff games but only played in 13 (due to the previously mentioned injection issue) ... Note: They won when he didn't play.

He was the starter in 7 of those 14 playoff games, that's half for a player that was so key to the success over all those years. That's also one less playoff GS than Gore.

Record in the games Bettis started? 3-4.
Record when the Steelers started another RB? 6-1.

That's 6-1 with Amos and Fast Willie leading the way.

In Gore's 8 career playoff games to date he's had 646 yards rushing (4.61 ypc) and 813 yards from scrimmage.

Bettis 13 career playoff games he had 674 yards rushing (3.39 ypc) and 731 yards from scrimmage.

Hmm. These "stats" aren't helping out Bettis so lets go back to the regular season.

Gore's only season when he got over 300 carries (312) he had a career-best 1,695 yards rushing (5.4 ypc) ... Bettis needed 375 carries to get his career best 1,665 yards (4.4 ypc). That's 30 yards less than Gore on 63 more rushing attempts and a full yard per carry less. He even had one less TD run.

Stats ... ha.

I prefer to use my eyes and general knowledge of football. Gore is a much better RB and football player than Bettis was. Regular season, playoffs, Super Bowl, early career, mid-career, late career, at their peak, etc.

And I never watched Gore and thought "that's a HOF back". But hey, stats!

Regardless, both fit one definition of "compiler" being used. Interchangeable with "longevity" in this case. Obviously people use these terms in varying ways.

[Bryan]

I tend to think of a compiler as a player who hung around forever and (as appropriate) amassed counting stats without ever being a great player. They also usually lack a peak. For me, Omar Vizquel and Harold Baines qualify in baseball, while Jim Marshall and Alex Wojciechowicz qualify in football.

I agree with this. I don't view guys like Bruce Smith and Pete Rose as "compilers". Smith was usually an All Pro and Rose would regularly lead the league in hits and runs. Yeah, they hung around at the end of their careers to get a record, but IMO that doesn't diminish their peak.

The ultimate compiler IMO was Eddie Murray (baseball version, although a great 'coincidence' is that the football version was a big compiler as well). He had a couple years in the early 80's finishing in the top 3 MVP voting when the Orioles were good, but for the most part was never a serious MVP candidate in any given year. The only time he led the league in any major stat was in the strike-shortened 1981 season, when he led the AL in both HRs (21) and RBI (78). He made some All-Star games in his late-20's prime and had 8 total appearances in 21 years; a nice total but not really an ASG 'mainstay'. He won a few Gold Gloves early in his career at 1B, but he wasn't known as a great fielder. The most HRs he hit in a season was 33. Yet when Eddie Murray retired, he was one of three players in MLB history to have 3000 hits and 500 HRs...Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, EDDIE MURRAY. It was the most surprising baseball stat I've ever heard.

The amazing thing about Harold Baines is he played 22 years as a corner OF (or a DH), and he never had a season where he finished in the top 8 in MVP voting. He led the AL in slugging in 1984, but that is the only time he led the league in anything. His resume` is completely devoid of 'excellence'...just an indefensible HOF selection.

[Jeremy Crowhurst]

Regardless, both fit one definition of "compiler" being used. Interchangeable with "longevity" in this case. Obviously people use these terms in varying ways.

You can now add touchdowns to that. Bettis finished with 94 total, 91 + 3 receiving. Gore has 95, 77 + 18 receiving.

[JohnTurney]

I tend to think of a compiler as a player who hung around forever and (as appropriate) amassed counting stats without ever being a great player. They also usually lack a peak. For me, Omar Vizquel and Harold Baines qualify in baseball, while Jim Marshall and Alex Wojciechowicz qualify in football.

I agree with this. I don't view guys like Bruce Smith and Pete Rose as "compilers". Smith was usually an All Pro and Rose would regularly lead the league in hits and runs. Yeah, they hung around at the end of their careers to get a record, but IMO that doesn't diminish their peak.

The ultimate compiler IMO was Eddie Murray (baseball version, although a great 'coincidence' is that the football version was a big compiler as well). He had a couple years in the early 80's finishing in the top 3 MVP voting when the Orioles were good, but for the most part was never a serious MVP candidate in any given year. The only time he led the league in any major stat was in the strike-shortened 1981 season, when he led the AL in both HRs (21) and RBI (78). He made some All-Star games in his late-20's prime and had 8 total appearances in 21 years; a nice total but not really an ASG 'mainstay'. He won a few Gold Gloves early in his career at 1B, but he wasn't known as a great fielder. The most HRs he hit in a season was 33. Yet when Eddie Murray retired, he was one of three players in MLB history to have 3000 hits and 500 HRs...Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, EDDIE MURRAY. It was the most surprising baseball stat I've ever heard.

The amazing thing about Harold Baines is he played 22 years as a corner OF (or a DH), and he never had a season where he finished in the top 8 in MVP voting. He led the AL in slugging in 1984, but that is the only time he led the league in anything. His resume` is completely devoid of 'excellence'...just an indefensible HOF selection.

Tend to agree...Cal Ripken (longevity) was not a complier, IMO, MVPs so far apart...all the All-Stars. Marshall = Compiler (not that great esp. from 1972-79)

I tends, for me, if the extra years are at a pretty high level then it adds to career. Yount, to me, escaped "compiler) with the 2nd MVP

[bachslunch]

Baines was also a compiler by this definition, but at age 40, playing in 135 games, he still banged out 25 HR, over 100 RBI's and batted .312; he aged well. Also, as a DH, there was no defensive liability.

It's true Baines aged well. Trouble is, even at his best, he was a HoVG level player. And while it's true he wasn't creating the kind of defensive havoc out there that, say, Manny Ramirez did, he didn't add anything in the field either. He also didn't add anything else of value, such as base stealing ability. He was strictly a hitter, and a good, durable one. There's a lot to be said for that, but it's not the stuff of a HoF level career.

Vizquel did play a few years too long, perhaps he was staying around for the paycheck, but I would not be surprised to see him get inducted to the HOF in time, probably thru the back door like Baines did. He was a great fielder and won 11 Gold Gloves.

Vizquel was very good with the glove, but not as otherworldly as some think. Gold Gloves are not the most reliable indicator of fielding expertise anyway (Rafael Palmiero infamously won a GG in 1999 while only appearing in 28 games at the position -- he was a DH that year for the most part). And inertia tends to play a heavy role in these selections (look at Jim Kaat, who won this 14 consecutive years, or Greg Maddox, who won this award 18 of 19 seasons in a row). It helped Vizquel that Ozzie Smith played in the NL during the earlier part of his career, allowing him to stand out among the best fielding SSs of the AL at the time.

And if you're going to hit like Vizquel, you'd better be truly amazing with the glove. WAR numbers for him and Ozzie Smith:

Ozzie: 76.9 overall WAR, 48.8 oWAR, 44.2 dWAR, 87 OPS+.
Vizquel: 45.6 overall WAR, 32.9 oWAR, 29.5 dWAR, 82 OPS+

The former is a legit HoFer because he was indeed as good as advertised in the field and hit okay relative to the position played. Vizquel not so much.

Smith's 76.9 WAR places him 6th all time at the position. He's surrounded by HoFers such as Robin Yount, Luke Appling, Arky Vaughn, Barry Larkin, Bobby Wallace, HoF cinch Derek Jeter, and criminally overlooked 19th century player Bill Dahlen.

Vizquel's 45.6 WAR places him 28th all time at the position. That's in the area for HoVG guys like Jim Fregosi, Miguel Tejada, Art Fletcher, Jimmy Rollins (who may do better than expected once he becomes eligible), Vern Stephens, Tony Fernandez, and Roger Peckinpaugh. The HoF SS closest by and above him is Dave Bancroft, widely considered a Frankie Frisch era mistake. And the only HoF SSs below him are either bad selections (Travis Jackson, Rabbit Maranville, Phil Rizzuto) or folks with a good bit of managerial credit (Hughie Jennings), combo credit (John Ward, also a solid pitcher), or 19th century pioneer status (George Wright). Jackson and Maranville are fairly close by Vizquel, actually.

[Bryan]

Update...Mike Mussina makes the baseball HOF! Roger Clemens and Curt Schilling do not!