Jump to content

RedRamage

Putting Tram and Lou in the Hall together?

Recommended Posts

Why should he change his stance if the situation doesn't change?

Maybe after this year enough guys are off the ballot that he won't need more than 10. Griffey, pizza, and tram are now gone.

I think as soon as his choices fall back to 10, he will submit a ballot again, but who knows.

If he's only doing it in protest and not because he feels he can't fill out the ballot he wants to, then I think it will become silly.

He voted in 2014 when I think he also had more than 10 he though belonged. He started doing it after some writers asked the hall of fame to change the process and they refused lift the limit. It seems like a protest to me. If he is doing it solely based on the logic you suggest, then I guess it's OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He voted in 2014 when I think he also had more than 10 he though belonged. He started doing it after some writers asked the hall of fame to change the process and they refused lift the limit. It seems like a protest to me. If he is doing it solely based on the logic you suggest, then I guess it's OK.

I have no idea what is actually going on in his head. But I could see him voting in 2014 simply because it didn't occur to him to not send it in, but upon some reflection he determined that he wouldn't send one in if the limit remained while he still had more guys on his ballot than he was permitted to vote for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It isn't hard for me to see at all, WRT Tram and Lou.

Writers at the same time were more impressed by Morris than they were of Tram and Lou.

They were two guys who were very good at a lot of things, not truly elite at anything. Darrell Evans is much the same way. Joe Torre (as a player) as well.

Guys like that really didn't get into the hall unless they were on a lot of championship teams.

Not saying it is fair, just that it really wasn't that hard to predict. They were the last generation of players to play before Sabermetrics differently / better informed people how to evaluate player effectiveness.

THIS.

And there were players at the same position who were doing the same things (Ripken, Yount, Fernandez, Nomar, Rodriguez, Jeter) or pushing the offensive ladder higher for the SS position. Jeter (Played a key defensive position on multiple championship teams) is a 1st Ballot HOF with the numbers to boot.

Whitaker was competing against a less crowded field (Randolph, Grich, White, Garcia, Almoar, Bernazard, Baerga, Sax, Knoblauch) and only Alomar ranks ahead of him overall, him and Grich are close. He was not media-friendly and got pushed to the side for the next big thing that always came along in the AL.

The other issue is the Tigers had a perfect storm season 1984 and only Hernandez, Gibby and Trammell placed in the top ten in the MVP voting that year. Blowout team year, but the player weren't really having career years at that point. The 80's AL had a lot of turnover at the top of the standings, and no one ran away the entire decade, so they fall back to the numbers, and numbers guys were getting the votes into the HOF.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of thoughts:

1) there is no new York bias in hof voting. Jeter had a better career than trammell, imo. And he had much much much more post season success. That's why he will be a first ballot hof.

2) trammell and Whitaker are both borderline candidates. If they get in, I will be happy because they played for my team and I'm a "big(ger) hall" but. But the crying in Detroit that there is some sort of injustice that trammell isn't in the hall is misplaced. He was hurt too much and had too many down seasons to be a hall lock. Whitaker played longer but was never the best at his position.

3) morris shouldn't even be in the conversation.

4) as has been said, the tigers were a team that had some very good players in their prime, but no one player who had a slam dunk hof career. The only person from that team who belongs in the hof without a doubt is sparky Anderson.

5) I think gibby was probably the most talented guy on that team, but injuries and partying meant he never could keep it going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A couple of thoughts:

2) trammell and Whitaker are both borderline candidates. If they get in, I will be happy because they played for my team and I'm a "big(ger) hall" but. But the crying in Detroit that there is some sort of injustice that trammell isn't in the hall is misplaced. He was hurt too much and had too many down seasons to be a hall lock. Whitaker played longer but was never the best at his position.

I don't think there is that much crying by Detroit fans about Whitaker/ Trammell, not more than any other fan bases. The WAR crowd complains about it more. I actually think the Detroit media could promote them more than they do. I think they are borderline, but they are good enough where fans of other teams wouldn't complain if they went in. I think you can make a stronger case for them as a duo than as individuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lynn Henning said the first time that Lou and Tram would be eligible by one of the VC would be 2020 but then Morosi said it's actually December of this year.

I know that past VC have been a little stingy but it's a new process now. I could see them going in together. They need people within the game promoting them... guys like Leyland, LaRussa, Torre.

Morosi is saying Dec 2019 here:

Alan Trammell is proof that the Hall of Fame should revise its election rules | FOX Sports

The BBWAA's oversight should be mitigated by the next phase of Trammell's Hall of Fame candidacy: the Veterans Committee, which in December will vote on candidates from the Expansion Era who have been retired for at least 16 seasons. Trammell's longtime Detroit Tigers teammates Lou Whitaker and Jack Morris will be eligible.

Trammell won't, because of a rule that needs to change.

Since at least the 1940s, a clause in the Hall's voting rules has prevented candidates from being considered in two elections within the same calendar year. Because the BBWAA election results were announced in January 2016, Trammell is ineligible for the Veterans Committee vote in December 2016.

Why? Because that's the way it's always been. There is no rational explanation.

The rule should state that candidates can't be considered by multiple electorates for the purposes of the same July induction ceremony. That's sensible. The Veterans Committee convenes in December. The BBWAA vote is announced in January. A player should appear on a maximum of one ballot within a single winter cycle.

Instead, Trammell has to wait an additional three years -- until December 2019, when the Expansion Era committee next convenes -- simply because the BBWAA tally isn't announced until after Jan. 1.

Two decades after Trammell's last game, is there any logical reason to require at least 12 months between BBWAA and Veterans Committee elections, rather than 11?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They were two guys who were very good at a lot of things, not truly elite at anything. Darrell Evans is much the same way. Joe Torre (as a player) as well.

Guys like that really didn't get into the hall unless they were on a lot of championship teams.

Okay, so looking at the last line I quoted above: Had Tram or Lou been on a team that won 4 or 5 WS, do you think they would have made the hall? I think you'd argue either yes or that they would have had a better chance at least.

But could we not argue that WS rings don't make a player better, it's just window dressing? If the Hall is about person greatness then two players with identical stats with one having 5 rings and the other having 1 ring should both be in the hall, should they not?

I totally get it that the more rings makes the player seem more impressive and CERTAINLY makes the player more well known to fans/writers/voters so logical or not, more WS rings will assist a player's HOF chances even if we might make the case that it shouldn't.

Okay... sorry I know this seems like I'm rambling... but here's my conclusion: If we acknowledge that team/group accomplishments can shed favorable light on an individuals HOF chances (ie, a 5-ring Tram may have made the hall while a 1-ring Tram didn't (yet) ) could we argue that the parallel careers of Tram and Lou... being the longest standing double-play combo in baseball history should also shed favorable light on the players HOF chances?

In a nutshell, could the veterans committee take into account how long Lou and Tram played, together, on the same team, as critical defensive positions, and use that to justify boosting borderline offensive numbers and putting them in the hall?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why should he change his stance if the situation doesn't change?

Maybe after this year enough guys are off the ballot that he won't need more than 10. Griffey, pizza, and tram are now gone.

I think as soon as his choices fall back to 10, he will submit a ballot again, but who knows.

If he's only doing it in protest and not because he feels he can't fill out the ballot he wants to, then I think it will become silly.

I don't understand the logic here. I get that he wants to vote for more than 10 guys, but to not vote for any because he can't vote for 11 or 12 seems counter-intuitive for two reasons:

First, you're "punishing" deserve people because you can't reward everyone you want to. The players "earned" their right for a HOF spot by what they did on the field and you are taking away votes that you could give just because you can't give as many as you want.

Second, not all candidates are equal. Some are clearly more deserving of the honor than others and it shouldn't be *too* hard to rank them and simply hand out votes until you run out there by giving the most deserving a shot. If he argued that he had 12 candidates who all had nearly identical HOF credentials then maybe, but this clearly isn't the case.

And now as I'm finishing my rant, I just had a thought which might make all my above arguments wrong. How does the ballot counting work? Does a player need to reach a certain percentage of ALL ballots sent out, or just all the ballots returned?

If it's the former than I stand by my rant. If it's the latter then I take it all back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Okay, so looking at the last line I quoted above: Had Tram or Lou been on a team that won 4 or 5 WS, do you think they would have made the hall? I think you'd argue either yes or that they would have had a better chance at least.

But could we not argue that WS rings don't make a player better, it's just window dressing? If the Hall is about person greatness then two players with identical stats with one having 5 rings and the other having 1 ring should both be in the hall, should they not?

I totally get it that the more rings makes the player seem more impressive and CERTAINLY makes the player more well known to fans/writers/voters so logical or not, more WS rings will assist a player's HOF chances even if we might make the case that it shouldn't.

Okay... sorry I know this seems like I'm rambling... but here's my conclusion: If we acknowledge that team/group accomplishments can shed favorable light on an individuals HOF chances (ie, a 5-ring Tram may have made the hall while a 1-ring Tram didn't (yet) ) could we argue that the parallel careers of Tram and Lou... being the longest standing double-play combo in baseball history should also shed favorable light on the players HOF chances?

In a nutshell, could the veterans committee take into account how long Lou and Tram played, together, on the same team, as critical defensive positions, and use that to justify boosting borderline offensive numbers and putting them in the hall?

Exactly this. Just like other awards that are given out or selections to All Star teams really do not mean all that much. Great/really good players can play on teams that never even sniff the playoffs deserve to make it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that if trammell wins the mvp in 1987 he would have garnered many more hof votes. And if he wins the mvp in 87and the tigers won the series in 87, he would probably be in the hof right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't understand the logic here. I get that he wants to vote for more than 10 guys, but to not vote for any because he can't vote for 11 or 12 seems counter-intuitive for two reasons:

First, you're "punishing" deserve people because you can't reward everyone you want to. The players "earned" their right for a HOF spot by what they did on the field and you are taking away votes that you could give just because you can't give as many as you want.

Second, not all candidates are equal. Some are clearly more deserving of the honor than others and it shouldn't be *too* hard to rank them and simply hand out votes until you run out there by giving the most deserving a shot. If he argued that he had 12 candidates who all had nearly identical HOF credentials then maybe, but this clearly isn't the case.

And now as I'm finishing my rant, I just had a thought which might make all my above arguments wrong. How does the ballot counting work? Does a player need to reach a certain percentage of ALL ballots sent out, or just all the ballots returned?

If it's the former than I stand by my rant. If it's the latter then I take it all back.

Last things first, it is 75% of all ballots collected, not sent out.

WRT being on lots of championship teams, it absolutely helps if you are viewed as a marginal HoF candidate. Fair or not, that is how the balloting historically has worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly this. Just like other awards that are given out or selections to All Star teams really do not mean all that much. Great/really good players can play on teams that never even sniff the playoffs deserve to make it.

I don't think anyone here argues this, but the BBWAA voters historically have valued players on multiple championship teams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the same thing with regard to Chris Osgood... if the Wings win game 7 in 2009.... he'd be considered a HOF goalie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whitaker is a bigger oversight than Trammell...or perhaps anyone in the game.  Whitaker's 49th in the history of baseball in batter bWAR and 7th all-time at 2B (6th if you don't count Rod Carew, who switched to 1B just after the middle of his career).  The only people higher than him not in the hall of fame are Pete Rose, Bill Dahlen, some steroids guys (Bonds, Bagwell) and people who have not yet reached eligibility.

Also, by my count, there are at least 112 players with a worse career bWAR than Lou that have been inducted into the Hall of Fame.  He is in no way even a fringe candidate--he's a shoo-in.  When you couple this with his superior defense and soft factors like sticking with 1 team, it's a joke that he's not already in there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a thought out this today...

We talked in this thread about some things that have negatively affected Tram and Lou when they shouldn't have... like not playing in a major market or not playing in more WS.

But I wonder if the fact that they were the longest running DP combo in baseball might play in their favor.  Might it be something that keeps their names out there a bit longer than if they were just individuals from two different teams?  Obviously within "Tiger nation" they will always be linked but might they be linked outside of Tiger-nation too?  

Might that help with the veterans committee?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything, turning the most double plays as a tandem does help them with the VC, and I could easily see that on their respective plaques, but it is so hard to predict what way the VC will go it isn't much of a consideration for me as I consider their chances.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That "longest running DP combo" thing bugs me a little bit.   It depends on what numbers they cite.  Tram was a part time SS after the 1991 season.  He played in only a third of the team's games at SS from 1992-1996.  Maybe they were still the longest running combo but I'd say after the 91 season they were not a combo.

 

 

 

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Oblong said:

That "longest running DP combo" thing bugs me a little bit.   It depends on what numbers they cite.  Tram was a part time SS after the 1991 season.  He played in only a third of the team's games at SS from 1992-1996.  Maybe they were still the longest running combo but I'd say after the 91 season they were not a combo.

Let's not let facts get in the way of a good story, okay?? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×