Turns out I'd done the math on a lot of those guys already, so here's what I've come up with:

Absolute LOCKS:

1. Fautino Saenz - C (86 estimated WAR)
2. John Lofton - 1B/LF (67 estimated WAR, but with great Extras and a .959 lifetime OPS)
3. Carl Harvey - SP (57 estimated WAR)

Alternate Number ONE, strongly suggested:

1. Darren Harvey - C/DH (71 estimated WAR)

Remaining Alternates:

• Willis Tanner (92 estimated WAR)
• Marcus Shipley - COF/2B (68.2 estimated WAR)
• John Servais (67.7 estimated WAR)
• Roosevelt Curtis - SP (35 estimated WAR)
• Gabriel McKain (4 estimated WAR)

I'm fine with Lofton/Saenz (A little underwhelmed by him, honestly, but whatevs) and C Harvey, with consideration given to D Harvey (can explain his pros and cons in the writeup... but I've also gotta know a bit more about this WAR calculation that we're using here, because it seems like it's going to define a lot of our decision-making going forward and it is giving us some numbers I'd consider quite surprising. For instance, Willis Tanner here - Willis was a good reliever, a couple elite seasons, some late-career usage as a 130-inning guy by Fargo - a career 3.23 ERA/1.21 WHIP over 1439 innings that is certainly deserving of some consideration. But how is it that he is going to blow all these other candidates away with this "92 estimated WAR"? How do those #'s add up to that in any fashion? Mariano Rivera, the best reliever ever by essentially any measure, threw 1200 innings of 2.00 ERA/1.00 WHIP ball and has 56 WAR by BBREF. Now even if we ignore the raw # (56 may not mean 56 in HBD estimated context, which is fine), Rivera's WAR # is the highest of any true reliever, and yet it pales in comparison to most HOF position players or starting pitchers - which makes sense, it is generally agreed that even the most elite reliever ever has a lesser impact on the game than a very, very good starter or position player. So why are these WAR calcs coming up with essentially opposite results? Roosevelt Curtis threw 3,216 innings at 3.42 ERA with a 1.18 WHIP, but according to this, he was roughly ONE THIRD as valuable as Tanner was. That is... um... yeah. So again, while I'm appreciative of the efforts and the attempt to put these numbers into context, I think we need to understand more about how these calculations are coming about before we start blindly using them as gospel.

All that said, though, any calc that gives Gabriel McKain a Lol-worthy 4 WAR is one I can get behind.

Posted by pimpbotlove on 2/17/2022 2:43:00 PM (view original):
I'm fine with Lofton/Saenz (A little underwhelmed by him, honestly, but whatevs) and C Harvey, with consideration given to D Harvey (can explain his pros and cons in the writeup... but I've also gotta know a bit more about this WAR calculation that we're using here, because it seems like it's going to define a lot of our decision-making going forward and it is giving us some numbers I'd consider quite surprising. For instance, Willis Tanner here - Willis was a good reliever, a couple elite seasons, some late-career usage as a 130-inning guy by Fargo - a career 3.23 ERA/1.21 WHIP over 1439 innings that is certainly deserving of some consideration. But how is it that he is going to blow all these other candidates away with this "92 estimated WAR"? How do those #'s add up to that in any fashion? Mariano Rivera, the best reliever ever by essentially any measure, threw 1200 innings of 2.00 ERA/1.00 WHIP ball and has 56 WAR by BBREF. Now even if we ignore the raw # (56 may not mean 56 in HBD estimated context, which is fine), Rivera's WAR # is the highest of any true reliever, and yet it pales in comparison to most HOF position players or starting pitchers - which makes sense, it is generally agreed that even the most elite reliever ever has a lesser impact on the game than a very, very good starter or position player. So why are these WAR calcs coming up with essentially opposite results? Roosevelt Curtis threw 3,216 innings at 3.42 ERA with a 1.18 WHIP, but according to this, he was roughly ONE THIRD as valuable as Tanner was. That is... um... yeah. So again, while I'm appreciative of the efforts and the attempt to put these numbers into context, I think we need to understand more about how these calculations are coming about before we start blindly using them as gospel.

FWIW, I hate the estimates for pitchers because the best I can do for a "back of the napkin" calculation for them is take their Hall of Fame Monitor Score and make an estimation (Currently HOFM/1.3) but if you TC me your email address I can add you to the spreadsheet I use to make the calculations....several of the other members of the committee have already done so and I assume that's why they haven't asked similar questions. That being said, the rough estimates for the hitters are pretty close to the actual totals that I get when I adjust for park factors and take a fraction of the time. If anyone has a better idea about how to do a quick WAR calculations for the pitchers, I'd love to hear it....the other option is that we could just go by HOF Monitor Score. Lastly, none of these are necessarily intended to be "gospel", simply a place to start the conversation from.

I'm going to start calculating the park-adjusted WAR totals soon, and I suspect those will line up more with what you would have expected, but it takes significantly longer to come up with totals and can pretty much guarantee I won't have them ready for the end of voting this season.

I think John Servais needs to remain in the conversation. Not sure how long he has left to be on HOF consideration list?

My votes:
John Servais (he might be my only lock I would recommend but his def was not good)
Fautino Saenz (He fits in with other cathers we have in, again def was not great)
John Lofton (4 MVP's hard to argue but another 1B/LF)
Gabriel McKain ( I am a fan)

Carl Harvey (maybe but not excited about him)
As for Tanner, he was a good Mid RP and was a decent closer for Hon, but I would say he is not HoF worthy.

Seems like we all agree on Lofton and can get behind C Harvey enough.

I'm really underwhelmed by Saenz.

At the risk of taking too much time with this, are we missing something on Kris Watanabe? Dude had roughly the same offense (.850 OPS, more power, lesser average/OBP) we're looking at with the very borderline Servais, but played a GOOD 2b for half his career, and a bad SS for the other half (his owner should have just put him at 3b, but whatever). And he had 480-SB speed! So you've got a guy who put up strong offense, played a premium position well for half his career and a premium position badly for the other half. But like, that's the kind of player we should be rewarding here, not holding those - plays at SS against him, and celebrating the ++ defense he offered at 2b while delivery middle-of-the-order offense the entire time. I'd be excited to vote for him!

(Can then give D Harv and Saenz the discussion treatment, maybe?)

What is this shade for Saenz? He got on base like a lot, he won gold gloves, he was a stud. How many catchers have that many hits? I can go on with the love but to say he’s not a lock for the Hall of Fame is asinine. Put him already and move on. This isn’t hard guys.

Oh, he was your guy! Sure, fine, whatever, he's a good player (surprised by those gold gloves with those ratings and results but he sure did get on base), he's in, let's just move on.

We have other players to consider as well. My guy or not it’s the Hall of Fame. This isn’t about surprises from ratings, it’s about what players did.

Look at the impact they made when they played and go from there. Lock the guys who are locks, if it’s more than 3 then say so. Let’s put guys in, not debate how they make us feel. Lofton, Saenz, Harvey (P) and Harvey (C) could be the locks.

Gee whiz Jim, that sure is good advice. Anyway, for the umpteenth time, I don't think Darren Harvey is a hall of famer, dude was a part-time player who absolutely put up good numbers when he did play, but did so in some incredibly advantageous hitting environments (Tuscon's 3/3/4/3/3 for 7 seasons, Colorado's 3/2/3/4/4 for 2), got more than 400 Ab's twice, appeared in more than 110 games only thrice, had two elite seasons (in those awesome parks) and a lot of good ones, and would have counting stats that are lower than any player in our HOF. So I FEEL that he is not a hall of famer. To overcome his essentially part-time status, he would need to be an absolute monster in the times he did play, and look, a .943 OPS when you spent half your career at altitude is not enough. That's what I feel, based on what he did, asinine as it may be.

Okay, here is what I suggest we run with:

Absolute LOCKS:

1. Fautino Saenz - C (86 estimated WAR)
2. John Lofton - 1B/LF (67 estimated WAR, but with great Extras and a .959 lifetime OPS)
3. Carl Harvey - SP (57 estimated WAR)

Alternates - Let's discuss in World Chat:

• Darren Harvey - C/DH (71 estimated WAR)
• Willis Tanner (92 estimated WAR*)
• Marcus Shipley - COF/2B (68.2 estimated WAR)
• John Servais (67.7 estimated WAR)
• Roosevelt Curtis - SP (35 estimated WAR)
• Gabriel McKain (4 estimated WAR, but much beloved)

* Note to reader: this is our first season using the estimated WAR metric, and the PITCHERS NUMBERS may need a formula adjustment (to be applied in future seasons).

That is fine by me!

That works for me too, I'll make sure to prioritize the pitchers and Darren Harvey when I do the park adjusted formulas!

Whatever pimp the decider says I guess. Oh, and my name is not Jim. Jim isn’t even in my screen name but we all know pimp can read! Keep on with the smart talk though! Making a real difference in a hardball dynasty hall of fame pimp. I’d like to be off the committee. All the best guys.