Did the BBWAA overlook a former Astro?
One of the things we do once we establish a standard for the Hall of Fame is look more closely at all players within the 80/120 zone that are not in the Hall of Fame. We often call these guys “on the outside looking in.” The difficult part from here is finding something that ties these guys together.
Sometimes we do that by era, but this time we have something else that ties three of these guys together: they are all former Astros. In some cases they spent only part of their careers in Houston, but two spent virtually all of their careers in Houston. We should start with an obvious question. How do we arrive at Lance Berkman being labeled as a left fielder?
Yes, he played more games at first base than left field and I suppose one could easily just drop it there. However, he spent more games in the outfield than at first base. So, if we were to go between outfielder and first base then outfielder would make more sense. He played more games in left than any other outfield position.
Left field was also the position he performed at best amongst those outfield positions according to Rfield and defensive runs saved. He was better as a first basemen, so putting him there is perfectly defensible. Perhaps if he had played his entire career at first base or left field he would have come out looking better defensively. Of course, we are getting ahead of ourselves.
There can be no starker example of the limitations for counting numbers than Jose Cruz. The Astrodome might not have been the most hostile hitting environment in baseball history, but it is certainly up there. Fortunately, some sites like baseball-reference.com have neutralized statistics. However, those are just estimates and it is hard to know how those neutralized numbers would have been parceled out.
One of the more interesting parts about baseball is that while the aggregate is fairly predictable, how those events are dolled out individually is not. An extra hit or run at the right moment can turn history on its ear. A 6-3 game can become a 6-4 game or a one run game can suddenly become a new game.
Cruz Actual: .284, 2251 hits, 165 HR, 1036 Runs, 1077 RBI, 317 SB
Cruz Neutralized: .296, 2451 hits, 180 HR, 1169 Runs, 1216 RBI, 342 SB
Even the neutralized numbers don’t get to the median, but they come a lot closer. In point of fact, he looks like the median left fielder. He hit for good average, had moderate power, and good speed. Depending on how those numbers were parceled out, it could have made a difference.
It is important that we understand that being within 20 percent of the median doesn’t mean you automatically beyond. Even if someone is better than the median it doesn’t mean they belong. It means that they belong in the conversation. It never sat well with me that Lance Berkman dropped off the ballot after the first year. His contributions were drastically underrated.
Most historians consider him to be the second or third best switch hitter in the history of the game. Mickey Mantle is usually regarded as the best one. Chipper Jones and Eddie Murray are in that next group with Berkman. Depending on how you look at the numbers, Berkman could be considered to be better or worse than both of those guys.
Of course, we are getting ahead of ourselves again. As we have done with the other players, we have to look at the offensive and fielding numbers individually to get a sense for why these guys ended up where they were. Were they lesser than the median because of longevity or because of a lack of greatness. The answer will be different depending on the player.
Obviously, Berkman belongs in a group by himself in terms of these numbers. He was considerably better than the median. He was also considerably better than Gonzalez and Cruz. Yet, notice how Cruz was almost identical to Gonzalez in spite of the difference in power numbers. That is the power of the difference between the Astrodome and all of the places that Gonzalez played.
However, I let a statement about Berkman sit there and it needs to be finished or I will come out looking like an ass. There are four great switch hitters in history counting Berkman. Let’s see where he ranks in the numbers above.
Mickey Mantle: 172 OPS+, 51 Rbaser, .443 rOBA, .804 OW%
Chipper Jones; 141 OPS+, 4 Rbaser, .410 rOBA, .705 OW%
Eddie Murray: 129 OPS+, -9 Rbaser, .373 rOBA, .624 OW%
Lance Berkman: 144 OPS+, -24 Rbaser, .408 rOBA, .719 OW%
Again, it is fair to say that Jones was better due to his longevity, but I don’t think anyone would argue that Murray was a better hitter even though he played forever. I think calling Berkman the third best switch hitter ever is completely fair. How does the third best switch hitter ever get less than five percent of the vote? It just doesn’t make sense.
This is where Cruz and Gonzalez shine. The question for Veterans Committee voters is whether it is enough to make up for the shortcomings on offense. Of course, Gonzalez has a greater issue. It is naturally assumed that Gonzalez was one of the users. This is in spite of the fact that he never tested positive for steroids or ever admitted to taking steroids.
These are the times we live in. Suddenly going from a player with moderate power to someone that hit 57 home runs in 2001 was all the proof that some people need. Maybe it means he used. Maybe it means he cheated somehow. Maybe he just had a career year. I suppose we will never know.
As for Berkman, the total zone/UZR runs tell a different story than the overall defensive numbers. Berkman was a disaster in center field and right field. Take away those two positions and he was a positive impact fielder. It might not have helped the defensive value that much, but he would have looked better regardless.
I’ve talked about the MVP test in much detail in past articles. This is kind of a mixed bag for all of the guys. Nothing is ever completely clean. I’m trying to understand how the BBWAA could completely overlook Berkman when they thought so highly of him throughout his career. Yet, it is true that he was overrated when we look at the BWAR numbers.
Cruz and Gonzalez come up short. I think it is pretty obvious that if anyone is a Hall of Famer here it is Berkman. I loved Jose Cruz growing up and I appreciate him more now that I understand what hitting in the Astrodome was really like back then. However, it is hard for me to justify putting him in the Hall of Fame based on these deficient numbers.
I have a hard time justifying Gonzalez because the counting numbers were inflated. I’m not throwing him under the bus. Everyone saw their numbers explode during that time frame. That is why we look at the adjusted numbers in the first place. So, that leaves us to look at Berkman and our last test.
When we have borderline cases then we consult the playoff numbers. Berkman was instrumental in helping the St. Louis Cardinals win the World Series. That one championship helped round his career out. Until then, he was a part of an Astros team that always got close, but never quite got over the hump.
Most people would say that he came one or two seasons short of being Hall of Fame worthy. That point of view is justified when we look at the index and at the counting numbers. Give him two three win seasons with the requisite home runs, runs, and RBI and suddenly he looks like a Hall of Famer.
There’s something to that. However, every other number points at him being a Hall of Famer and that includes his postseason performance. What is done is done in terms of the BBWAA, but he should come back up when the Veterans Committee reconvenes. I’m not saying he is an automatic Hall of Famer, but he would probably get my vote. I tend to be swayed more by the percentage numbers than counting numbers. He definitely has those in spades.