Thoughts on the Baseball Hall of Fame: 2008 Veteran's Committee Ballot

Yesterday, the Hall of Fame in Cooperstown announced a list of 10 names from the post-1943 era that will be up for consideration this year. Among those names are Gil Hodges, Joe Torre, Ron Santo, Jim Kaat, Dick Allen, Luis Tiant, Tony Oliva, Al Oliver, Maury Wills, and Vada Pinson.

Candidates from pre-1943 were announced, but that's for another time. The guys above are the meat and potatoes. They will be voted on by current living Hall of Fame members and will need 75 percent of the vote to garner induction. There are 64 living Hall of Fame members; meaning 48 will need to say "yes."

In past years, the committee has been relatively stingy with the election process, and Torre himself has fallen short in three separate election bids. The reasonable expectation would be for two or, at the most, three of these players to be inducted next July.

The fellas at the 'Table poured some beer and got into an old fashioned debate. Immediately, Dick Allen (350 home runs, but under 2,000 hits), Tony Oliva (never reached 2,000 hits), Gil Hodges (compares far too closely to George Foster, Jack Clark and Boog Powell), and Maury Wills (too one dimensional) were knocked out.

Those are the rules.

Let's breakdown the remaining candidates.

Joe Torre (C, 3B - Brewers, Cardinals, Mets, and Braves)

Torre was a nine-time All-Star, won a gold glove, and was MVP of the National League in 1971. Over his career, he amassed 2,342 hits, 252 home runs, and a .297 career batting average.

He finished in the top-10 in hits, OBP, and RBI four separate times, but none after 1971. Torre even won himself a batting title. From a statistical standpoint, he's very much like Gary Carter from a numbers perspective, but Carter spent his entire career behind the dish. From 1971 on, Torre spent his career at the corner-infield spots.

He's a dead ringer for Ryne Sandberg's numbers as well, and he played nearly the same number of years. It's tough to compare him to other players, such as Bill Dickey, strictly because war stopped some of those careers for a time.

As a player, he's borderline. We're not advocates of putting in players because someone else was in. Just because Carter is in (and we don't think he should be) does that mean we put in Torre? Our answer on that front is no.

However, voters are allowed to consider the managerial careers of these players. If we do that, there is no way you cannot include Torre. That being the case, it also is a shame he hasn't received more than 45 percent of the vote.

Our Verdict: IN, but just because he managed so well.

Jim Kaat (P - Washington/Minnesota, Chicago, Philly, New York, and Cardinals)

Kaat won 16 Gold Gloves in his 24 years of pitching, becoming one of the best ever at fielding his position. He recorded 283 wins, finishing in the top-10 seven times, good for 31st all-time. He had phenomenal control, finishing with one of the fewest walks-per-nine innings ratio in the game and registered in the top-10 for that category 12 times.

Kaat was a three-time All-Star to boot. His stats compare favorably to Bert Blyleven (who should be in as well), Robin Roberts, Fergie Jenkins, Early Wynn, Red Ruffing, and Ted Lyons. The latter five are legit Hall of Fame pitchers. In 1982, he added a World Series ring to his career totals.

There are those that would argue Kaat held on too long. After winning 20 games for the White Sox in 1975, Kaat was primarily a reliever from 1976 through 1983. He finished just short of several milestones, as he didn't register 300 wins and was just shy of 2,500 strikeouts. He also compares just as favorably to Tommy John.

Kaat was a contact pitcher that spent the better part of his career hovering around the .500 mark. No doubt, defensively, he was better than almost anyone at his position. The question comes around dominance, and was he that type of player?

Our Verdict: Out, just doesn't quite add up.

Luis Tiant (P - Cleveland, Minnesota, Boston, New York, Pittsburgh, and California)

His funky motion baffled hitters and helped to bring the Red Sox to the 1975 World Series against the Reds. He pitched for 19 years and spent a large part at the end of his career fighting off injuries. He's known for the cigar in his mouth and the mustache on his face.

"El Tiante" is everyone's friend, one of the nicest guys you could ask to meet. As far as Hall of Famers go, he just doesn't stack up. Tiant recorded 229 wins and recorded 20 wins on four separate occasions. He also recorded double-digit losses in seven of his 19 seasons, including one 20-loss year.

For his career, his WHIP was 1.19. That's a mind-boggling number. He struck out nearly 2,500 hitters and led the league in ERA twice and shutouts three times. As a Red Sox fan, it's hard to rule him out.

Yes, he compares very favorably to Catfish Hunter and Jim Bunning, but those players played four and two fewer seasons, respectively. They almost recorded as many wins, and Bunning had 400 more strikeouts. Tiant just didn't dominate long enough to be considered between those two pitchers.

Our Verdict: Out, and it hurts to say.

Vada Pinson (OF - Cincinnati, Cleveland, KC) and Al Oliver (OF - Pittsburgh, Texas)

So why group these two together? They have remarkably similar statistics. When the Hall of Fame added one to the ballot, they couldn't not add the other. On Baseball-Reference.com, the two are compared to each other directly and come up very close.

Pinson had a few more home runs, but Oliver drove more guys in. Oliver hit about 20 points higher, but Pinson stole 220 more bases. It's all about the balancing act and what is deemed dominant.

What got our attention on these two guys was the comparisons in various readings to Roberto Clemente, Joe Medwick, and Enos Slaughter. You start bringing those guys into the conversation, and you suddenly start swinging some big lumber. Statistically, that just doesn't make sense.

Why? Both Slaughter and Medwick had their careers interrupted by war, and Clemente had 3,000 hits. Oliver and Pinson both cracked 2,700, but they never hit the magical number that guarantees enshrinement.

Our feeling is that you can't induct one and not the other, but we don't know enough about either of these guys. Neither name resonates in the way that many of the other players of this era do. Not only that, Dave Parker and Bill Buckner are also on the list, and very close to the top.

These guys, though, just seem too close to Clemente to let go...

Verdict: In if we had a vote, likely out when the votes are cast by the committee.

Ron Santo (3B - Cubs)

Ok, Cubs fans, we still have to look at this rationally.

First, there is an incredibly shortage of third basemen in the Hall of Fame. It's a position that seems unduly scrutinized because so many amazing players manned the hot corner. Santo's name is brought up many times as far as debates. The question of belonging, though, is a tricky one.

Start with the numbers.

He's a career .277 hitter that hit 342 home runs and drove in 1,331. He hit .300 four times and cracked 100 RBI four times as well. Santo was a nine-time All-Star, making the team at every stage of his career. He won five gold gloves, finished in the top-10 for home runs seven times and for RBI eight times.

From a pure numbers perspective, he compares favorably with several Hall of Famers, including Carlton Fisk, Gary Carter, Yogi Berra, and Johnny Bench. All of them are strong names; they are also all catchers. Santo managed 2,200 hits in his career, similar to Dale Murphy, Gary Gaetti, and Ken Boyer.

Santo is a borderline candidate; the same way Murphy is a borderline candidate. Yet, we put Bill Mazeroski in the Hall of Fame strictly because of one hit and his defensive prowess. Can we do the same for a third basemen? And, if not, what are the real qualifications third basemen need to achieve? Mike Schmidt only comes along once a generation.

There's certainly a campaign and a sympathy vote out there for the guy. Santo is a tremendous player, and this vote will be close. The 'Table was 50-50 split on this one, so no real verdict initially. As a tiebreak, we went to what we feel the guys that have votes will likely do.

If he played a different position, this one is easy. At third base, much tougher.

Our Verdict: Out, but it will be REALLY close. (Please, don't throw things, Cubs fans).

The beer has gone warm, and the debate has gone on long enough. So join in, belly up to the bar, and let us know what you think. Just don't touch the jukebox.