No Bloom For Bagwell
I had intended on doing a fun Jeff Bagwell Hall of Fame article, comparing him to Killer B's already in the Hall, but then I saw Barry Bloom's Hall of Fame ballot. At the bottom of this article you'll note that there's a little blurb about why Bagwell was not voted for. This same note appeared in his Hall of Fame article last year as well.
Curiously, this isn't about steroid as both Mark McGwire and Rafael Palmeiro made his ballot. No, this is about Steve Garvey:
And just a note on Jeff Bagwell: Rumors about possible steroid use don’t bother me. I just think he’s a very good player, but not of Hall of Fame caliber. His numbers are very similar to Steve Garvey — Bags .297 batting average to .294 for the Garv, 2,314 hits to 2,599, 449 homers to 272, 1,529 RBIs to 1,308 . But Garvey had two NL Championship Series MVPs, an NL MVP, an All-Star MVP, the longest consecutive game playing streak in NL history (1,207), one of the highest fielding percentages as a first baseman (.996) and an errorless season (1984). Garvey also played on five NL pennant winners and a World Series winner in ’81 with the Dodgers. Bagwell did almost none of this with the Astros. And Garvey didn’t get a sniff from the writers for the HOF.
It's worth noting that Bagwell posted those regular season numbers in 182 less games.
Apparently 200 isn't much of a gap for Mr. Bloom offensively, nor is a .079 difference between Garvey's on base percentage (.329) and Bagwell's (.408). Defensively that's an entirely other story where Garvey's .996 fielding percentage is far superior to Bagwell's .993 at first base. Bagwell didn't have the success in the post season that Garvey did there's no denying that but neither did Mark McGwire, Tim Raines or Rafeal Palmeiro.
Several people have called Bloom out on twitter. One particular response caught my attention.
Where do the intangibles come in like Garv's 5-for-5 game-winning homer night in G 4 of the '84 NLCS for the Padres over the Cubs?
You'll have to excuse me for my dumbness here, but I thought a "5-fo-5 game-winning homer night" was something tangible. And I wonder if those same intangibles helped Garvey bat .200 in the 1984 World Series. In fact, if you take into account all the World Series Garvey played in he played like a below average first basemen. The scrappy David Eckstein has a World Series MVP award, but Garvey doesn't. Which I'm sure we can all agree trumps 2 NLCS MVP awards. I look forward to Bloom's support of Eckstein when he reaches the ballot in 2016.
While we're on "intangibles" let's talk a little bit about Bagwell's intangibles. You ask any Houston Astro fan and they will tell you Bagwell had loads of it. Heck, ask the players he played with and they'll tell you the same thing. Intangibles are what allowed Bagwell to play through a degenerative arthritic shoulder condition in his shoulder from 2001-2005.
Funny thing about intangibles though, It's not in the BBWAA Election rules:
Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player's record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.
As I'm sure you've noticed I've avoided referring to WAR, OPS+ or any of the other advanced statistics. You know them I know them, Barry Bloom doesn't know them and probably doesn't care about them. Instead I'd like to add a few more of the classic comparisons.
Stolen Bases: Bagwell - 202 Garvey - 83
Intentional Bases on Balls: Bagwell - 155 Garvey - 113
Base on Balls: Bagwell - 1401 Garvey - 479
Double Plays Grounded Into: Bagwell - 221 Garvey - 251
Clearly, very similar players.
Baseball Reference has what's called similarity scores. Garvey's number 1 similar batter is Garret Anderson. Carlos Delgado is Bagwell's number 1 but check out who's number 3...that's right the Crime Dog, Fred McGriff. The same McGriff who made it onto Mr. Blooms ballot is Bagwell's third comp.
It seems to me what this really boils down to is that Bloom is upset with Garvey not getting enough support. In 1993 Garvey got a 41.6% approval rating from the BBWAA for the Hall of Fame, yet another similarity. He would peak two years later at 42.6% and finish his time on the ballot with 21.1% in 2007.
Maybe this is a cry out against the advanced statistics, turning a should of been Hall of Famer into a non-Hall of Famer. Garvey is obviously a favorite of Mr. Bloom, his tweet about the memorable '84 NLCS says as much. And let's not forget Steve Garvey was a very good player. In his peak years from 1974-1980 he posted a 130 OPS+ and a 27.7 bWAR. Statistically though he still falls short of Jeff Bagwell. Uplifting one player over another player because of intangibles in one game is illogical and makes a mockery of the voting process.
What I and many others are confused by is Bloom's thought process. Bagwell's numbers are better across the board, there is no denying that. There is the post season thing but there are others on his ballot that have had just as bad and even weaker postseasons. What we don't get is the Bloom voted FOR Garvey on the 2007 ballot. Maybe it's against the voting process, I don't know.
I'll give Bloom credit, he is defending his stance on twitter, albeit unconvincingly. It's just unfortunate that his frustration is being taken out on Hall of Fame ballot, and more specifically someone worthy of induction.
34 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Told him on Twitter his comparison of was null and void
He replied:
Are you an Astros fan? If so, I fully understand.
1) My handle has ‘Astro’ in the title. Astros fan? Could be!
2) He did not offer any further explanation.
3) What does he understand? If he does understand my complaint, surely he should retract his nonsensical argument.
Frankly, I’m not going to waste any more time on him. Not worth it.
On another note, there has been a lot of debate about Edgar Martinez’s candidacy.
This is where sabermetrics helps Bagwell.....
The trend in baseball to use saber-influenced analysis is what helps Bagwell the most. The Garvey vs. Bagwell argument epitomizes sabermetrics vs. old style baseball ratings. Bagwell has 79 WAR. Garvey has 35 WAR—-less than half of Bagwell’s career rating, despite playing more than Bagwell. Oh, and fielding percent…give me a break. Bagwell’s defensive WAR component is 35 and Garvey’s is 4. Those of us who watched Bagwell know that he was an amazing defensive 1st baseman in his prime, and it’s a tribute to his ability that he could accumulate that high a total zone defensive result with a bum shoulder for the latter half of his career. I understand that Tim didn’t get into advanced stats because the Bloom doesn’t accept them. But, really, if Bagwell has more than double the career value of Garvey, how can Bloom’s argument hold any water?
I also didn’t get into the advanced statistics because the old style baseball ratings clearly show Bagwell as the better players.
Follow my ramblings on Twitter .
by Timothy De Block on Dec 29, 2011 8:52 AM CST up reply actions
I understand But it’s typical of the old style analysis to rely heavily on subjective analysis—-but unfortunately, sports writers don’t get the opportunity to watch players (other than the players they cover for their newspaper and those who are fortunate enough to appear in World Series games) for more than brief periods. Advanced stats, like WAR, will help players like Bagwell and Biggio whom were good at a wide range of skills. .
And he’s got a whole lot of subjective analysis. I may update the article with my twitter conversation with him but I’ll leave this for the comments:
via Twitter:
Just about everyone on the Padres had a bad ’84 WS. But Garv put them there. His signing also put franchise on the map.
Follow my ramblings on Twitter .
by Timothy De Block on Dec 29, 2011 10:38 AM CST up reply actions
I failed to mention that in a tweet to someone else Bloom said:
@DieHardAstros As an Astros fan I understand ur position. WAR means nothing when comparing players from different eras. No need to be snide.
Follow my ramblings on Twitter .
by Timothy De Block on Dec 29, 2011 1:37 PM CST up reply actions
OPS+ adjusts for different eras. Bagwell career OPS+ 149. Garvey career OPS+ 116.
Also, WAR can be used to compare players for different eras because offense is compared to replacement level at the time and defense is compared to average runs saved for players at that position in that year.
Bags was
a great role model and played in one of the biggest parks (astrodome) and put up pretty good numbers. Imagine if he was in Enron Minute Maid Park his whole career. He was a power hitter who was also a very good contact hitter when it called for it. His ability to run and play a great defensive 1st base make him one of the best. Hoping other writers and voters vote him in. No, he didn’t win a World Series, but that was partially due to his shoulder giving out on him. Can’t wait to see what happens.
Go ’Stros!!
In Houston we've had Hakeem "The Dream" Olajuwon and now we are STUCK with Kareem "The Quarterback's Dream" Jackson. Look he just fell down again.
I didn’t realize how ‘similar’ 449 career homeruns are to 272 career homeruns. What a tool.
Bagwell will get in one day.
The bird is struggling out of the egg. The egg is the world. Whoever wants to be born, must first destroy a world.
by Stupendous Man on Dec 29, 2011 9:11 AM CST via mobile reply actions
I know what Bloom's butt-hurt/problem is...
Bagwell played for the Houston Astros.
by mike_o on Dec 29, 2011 9:48 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
Bagwell's arthritic shoulder is rarely mentioned in any of these pieces
Today, Craig Calcatterra talks about how Kirby Puckett might have benefitted from having his career cut short while he was still in his prime from glaucoma, comparing him to Dale Murphy whose career just fizzled.
I find this interesting because Bagwell basically played with a bum shoulder from 2001. If you look at what he did in his first 10 seasons (.970 OPS), it compares very favourably to some greats: Bonds .938 OPS in his first 10 seasons, Alex Rodriguez .974, Pujols 1.050 (monster).
by AstroB on Dec 29, 2011 9:57 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
BBTF thread....
Baseball Think Factory (BBTF) has a thread on Bloom’s HOF vote. If you want to read more reaction, it’s here.
One comment points out that Garvey wasn’t even the best player on his own team (Dodgers) when he won a MVP. Ex-Astros CFer Jimmy Wynn had a 151 OPS+ and 32 HRs to Garvey’s 131 and 21. There is also some interesting discussion in the comments of the “old days” when OBP and walks were completely ignored. Wynn had 108 walks to Garvey’s 31.
Some of the commenters say think that Bloom is just mad that Garvey didn’t get voted into the HOF and is doing this out of spite.
by clack on Dec 29, 2011 10:51 AM CST reply actions 2 recs
Garvey was very lucky to get that MVP in 1974
Mike Schmidt and Joe Morgan among others had much better years.
Richard Justice, now writing for MLB.com (hmm..who does Bloom work for again), says rhetorically
Sure, Jeff Bagwell belongs in the Hall of Fame. How can anyone argue otherwise?
How much of Bagwell’s career did Justice cover with the Chronicle? Does anyone know when he joined. It would be interesting since RJ is one of the best placed to assess steroid allegations within the Astros clubhouse.
Some of the comments have FJM type humor:
Most of these articles should be subtitled: Why I Should Have My Ballot Taken Away from Me.
To the extent that hashtags are necessary, we really need a #LOLBBWAA hashtag.
by clack on Dec 29, 2011 11:07 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Justice has written many columns on Bagwell and steroids over the years. Knowing Justice, there probably was some flip flopping along the way, but my recollection is that Justice has always said that the he had no reason to disbelieve Bagwell’s explanations. I can’t recall when he joined the Houston Chronicle. I am guessing around 2002 or so.
Thom Loverro
of the Washington Examiner goes on a bit of a rant about McGwire and Palmeiro and how its all about context (the funny thing is, it reads as if it was written in 2005/6, when we had the original wagging of the finger and the ‘I have never done steroids, period.’).
He does not mention Bagwell and I have asked for clarification on this.
I’m getting most of this from Bill, who writes for the Platoon Advantage, he can be followed on twitter here.
Bagwell
Honestly, Bagwell has a strong case as one of the top-10 first baseman of all time. Not sure why the quality of one’s teammates should be more relevant than number of home runs, stolen bases, walks, runs, that insane 1994 season, etc.
Take it easy guys.
Just do like I do and avoid reading anything from a plant in heat.
by ntn on Dec 29, 2011 6:40 PM CST via mobile reply actions
Bagwell also missed 70 games in the prime of his career because of the strike.
15-20 homers, 60-80 RBIs, and 50 or so hits.
To be fair
He broke his wrist that season and would have missed the rest of the season anyway, he also broke his wrist in another season.
Bagwell is Greatness
I grew up watching Bagwell, he is the reason I love baseball. He played the right way and went about his business the right way. Charcter, Integrity, and sportsmanship all weigh in to hall of fame voting. It is hard to argue he was not one of the best in those categories. Furthermore his stats should let him be in the hall, the only first baseman in the 200/200 club, he also had 449 homers, and 1500 rbi’s and that is with a bum shoulder through what may have been his prime. Bloom may not like him for whatever reason, but Peter Gammons claimed he should be in the hall and he claimed he is a top 5 first baseman of all time. I believe he said #3 but it has been a year since he said it i do not remember the exact number.
Voting: Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.
The bolded section alone should explain why Baggy is deserving. The team had a great run for many years, and a lot of that was due to Jeff Bagwell. Sure, there wasn’t much postseason production, but that was a small part of his career.
He and Biggio were the heart and soul of this team for at least a decade – a decade during which they reached the playoffs more often than not. May not have been absolute success, but there was consistancy – ask Bobby Cox or Joe Torre how hard it is for a team to make it to the playoffs year in and year out.
"He walked 18."
"New league record!"
"Struck out 18."
"Another new league record! In addition he hit the sportswriter, the public address announcer, the bull mascot twice...also new league records! But, Joe, this guy's got some serious shit."
I posted this on another site about Bagwell's candidacy
Jeff Bagwell is deserving of election to the Hall of Fame, without question.
1) He has never been linked to steroids despite years of investigation.
2) He was, arguably, the most complete firstbaseman in baseball history. I say that because he is the only firstbaseman in history who could beat you with a)his bat b)his legs c)his glove and d)his eyes.
a) is one of 33 players with both 400 doubles and 400 homeruns. is one of 34 players with both 1500 runs and 1500 RBI.
b) 202 career stolen bases, only 30/30 firstbaseman in history (twice)
c) widely considered a great defender, gold glove in 1994.
d) 28th all-time with 1401 walks.
3) Eventhough, 1994 was his best season, from 1996-2001 he had at least 100 runs, 100 RBI, 100 BB, 30 doubles, and 30 homeruns for 6 consecutive seasons. Nobody in baseball history has ever done that. EVER. Lou Gehrig, Ted Williams, and Carlos Delgado did it 4 consecutive seasons. Albert Pujols did it 3 consecutive 2008-2010 (but not in 2011) Nobody else in baseball history has been able to manage more than 2. Not A-Rod, not Manny, not Chipper, not barry Bonds, nobody.
4) He was revered by everybody in the game for his sportsmanship, integrity, hustle, and “baseball IQ” . Listen to or read his teammates, oponents, and covering media members talk about him.
So, in short, He was an amazing player who dominated the majors for a significant period of time, amassed all-time great stats, was never linked to PEDs, and was extremely respected by everyone in the game.
How can anyone say he is not Hall of Fame worthy?
Bagwell vs Garvey yearly top 10 performances.
I understand that Garvey had some great post-season series. You can’t take that away from him, and it certainly counts for something. Similarly, Bagwell did not have much post-season success, which must also be considered. However, only 2.4% of Garvey’s career plate appearances were post-season, and only 1.3% of Bagwell’s were.
Its quite difficult to count less than 2.5% of a player’s career as more important than the remaining 97.5+%
These players were in completely different eras. It would not be fair to simply compare Bagwell’s numbers to Garvey’s. The era Bagwell played in was just too pro-hitting, and especially pro-power hitting. Instead, I am going to point out how well each produced vs the other hitters in his own era, by year.
By catagory, this is the number of times each player finished in the top 10 in the NL in a given year.
AVG: Garvey 6, Bagwell 3
RUNS: Bagwell 8, Garvey 2
HR: Bagwell 7, Garvey 3
RBI: each 7 times
WALKS: Bagwell 12, Garvey never.
HITS: Garvey 10, Bagwell 1
Doubles: Garvey 7, Bagwell 5
OB%: Bagwell 8, Garvey never
SLG: Bagwell 6, Garvey 2
OPS: Bagwell 7, Garvey 1
If I told you a firstbaseman finished in the top 10 in his league 3 times in homeruns, twice in SLG, twice in RUNS, and once in OPS would you consider him Hall-of-fame worthy?
Bagwell vs Garvey -fielding
Its funny. Garvey won 4 gold gloves, and Bagwell only 1.
Garvey has a .996 career fielding percentage, and Bagwell only .993.
However, 94.5% of Garvey’s total chances were putouts. That means that he either caught the ball thrown to him, or scooped up the ball and stepped on first base.
Despite nearly 600 fewer career chances in the field, Bagwell had nearly 700 more assists. This means that Bagwell actually made SUCCESSFUL plays throwing runners out, 65.9% more often than Garvey did, but only made errors 0.3% more often than Garvey.
Yet Garvey is considered the better defender?
Gold gloves are not a reliable indicator of defensive performance, particularly in previous eras. Voters were notorious for rewarding popular offensive players with gold gloves. Evidence of that is Rafael Palmeiro winning a gold glove at first base in a season that he was primarily a DH. Because GG votes have been criticized for so long, I think current Gold Glove voting has improved and is more defensible than in previous eras.
http://espn.go.com/blog/sweetspot/post/_/id/19626/denying-jeff-bagwell-the-hall-is-a-travesty
Figured I would drop this link here for any interested.
I'm not sure I want to live
in a world where someone who works for MLB.com is allowed to think that Steve Garvey was a better first baseman than Jeff Bagwell……





























