There is a heated discussion going on in one of my leagues about HOF voting. Many of the players who are eligible for the HOF have a certain portion of their careers played prior to season 1. Some as much as half of their ML career. The debate is whether or not to estimate statistics for those missing years when determining if the player is a HOFer or not. Some are adamantly for the estimation, some just as adamantly against. Thoughts?

Adamantly against. The only people for it are people with itchy trigger fingers who just can't wait to vote for Hall of Famers. If your world doesn't vote someone in until season 12, then they don't vote someone in until season 12. No one's talking about voting in J.R. Richard based on what he "could" have done with the rest of his career.

judge the player by what he's done "on the field"...who is to say the player wouldn't have been injured during those years or that the manager would have used him properly

But JR lost the back end of his career and posted zero stats. These players actually played in those seasons before year 1 and posted some kind of statistics. A guy with 12 ML seasons who was in the 6th year of his career in year 1 did something in those first 6 seasons. What those stats were is open to debate. Cumulative stats like HRs & RBIs might be a bit more predictable than stats like BA, ERA, or WHIP.

Quote: Originally Posted By bighead34 on 6/08/2010judge the player by what he's done "on the field"...who is to say the player wouldn't have been injured during those years or that the manager would have used him properl

+1

Luis Gonzalez...post 30, he had a HOF type career...pre 30, not so much

Then virtually no one will be elected to the HOF until their whole career actually show in the statistics. Which is fine if you feel that way.

Sure. I don't see the problem with that.

maybe HOF voting should not begin until 10 or so seasons after a world begins....

I am definitely in the 'on the field" camp, so even after 10 seasons, it's tough to find actual candidates. I would need to see about 3 Cys or MVPs for a guy retired at S10 to consider him. After about 15 seasons is when guys have generally been able to build a HOF resume.

Look, if the guy had 6-7 Sandy Kaufax years of domination (amazing peak years, weak career #s), vote him in. Otherwise, why the crying? How do you estimate? Some people bring their prospects up early, and some let them develop in the minors. How can you come up with a consensus of career start?

Go on what you know.

Whoops. Career Stats

Once you cheapen the HOF "baseline" stats, it's a slippery slope to a mediocre HOF. Come season 25 when there are probably 20 new owners, one of them will be saying "Well, if X made it in with 250 HRs, etc, then why shouldn't my guy with 275 HRs make it??"

I give credit for the "missing seasons", but I don't give full credit. For guys with great rate stats but w/o the milestones due to missing significant portions of their careers, I'll factor in up to 5 league average seasons to fill out their careers with a beginning "incline" phase (as opposed to a player's "decline" phase). The extra years don't make them HOFers, so much as give a raather conservative context for what their full careers were like.

But bottom line, it's basically a different way to get to whboone's "Koufax" approach. Pad Sandy's career with another 5 seasons of 100 ERA+ pitching and he's still a HOFer.

Quote: Originally Posted By coldfoot on 6/08/2010maybe HOF voting should not begin until 10 or so seasons after a world begins....

We are in season 11 and most of the guys up for the HOF have parts of their careers missing. Once you get to about season 15, you should start seeing full WIS careers. While I have no problem with estimating a guys missing years, it might be kinda like electing Hideki Matsui into the HOF by adding in his Japanese league stats.