Comments on: Maury Wills thinks he should be a Hall of Famer for some reason

By: slapdashblogger

slapdashblogger — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 07:10:07 +0000

Here’s the video link for his interview.

http://www.sj-r.com/video/x661514392/Baseball-great-Maury-Wills-visits-Springfield

Here is the sports editorial:

http://www.sj-r.com/sports/x1798687525/Base-thief-Wills-being-robbed-when-it-comes-to-Hall-of-Fame

By: 78mu

78mu — Fri, 13 Jul 2012 02:26:08 +0000

Are you saying Gary Gaetti is not going into the HOF?

By: hornbuckle

hornbuckle — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:14:39 +0000

Conception belongs in the hall. He was a vital member of the Big Red Machine.

By: Mark Armour

Mark Armour — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 21:15:21 +0000

Plus, Craig made a math error above, and Wills’ % was actually 74%. So, rather than being well below the break even point, which was the claim, he was actually well above the break even point, about 15 points above it.

By: bbil2012

bbil2012 — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 20:56:24 +0000

” A career line of .281/.330/.381 was below league average…for the 60′s.”
I’m just wondering about this because from what I found the MLB average for the 60′s was
.249/.314/.374.
Wills for the 60′s .286/.334/.337.

By: yahmule

yahmule — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 19:48:20 +0000

Wills case for election is weak, but he makes one really good point. It drives me crazy when the various Halls of Fame decide to enshrine a player after he’s dead. The NFL loves to do this. Five years ago, the NFL HOF Veteran’s Committee made Marshall Goldberg a finalist for enshrinement. Though largely anonymous to today’s fans, he was something of a pioneer in the sport and worthy of a place in Canton. The problem was the man died in 2006 at the age of 88. Why the hell would they wait until 2007 to consider his case?

By: madaozeki

madaozeki — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 19:31:01 +0000

I think jaysaucer just won the thread

By: madaozeki

madaozeki — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 19:29:22 +0000

Yes, what Mark said. The 75% figure is for a specific era with a specific run scoring environment, and isn’t relevant when evaluating Wills’ steals. I don’t know offhand what the break-even point was for when he was active, but wouldn’t be surprised if it was as low as high-50′s or low 60′s for the extreme pitcher’s years.

Of course none of this makes him a Hall-of-Famer, but it behooves us to analyze his stolen base contributions in the proper context, rather than he was a “bad base stealer” based on a number that simply doesn’t apply to him. Was Ty Cobb a bad base stealer? For the seasons we have CS stats, he was about the same as Wills.

By: jaysaucer

jaysaucer — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 19:18:14 +0000

Wait a minute Craig – how do you get Maury’s 65% base stealer number??? According to baseball reference (http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/w/willsma01.shtml), he had 586 SB’s and was caught stealing 208 times. That equals a career % of 74% – much better than the article quotes (586 / 794 total attempts).

Sorry – I’m an accountant and can’t help myself from auditing numbers…..

By: Mark Armour

Mark Armour — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 19:06:35 +0000

As I said, the break even point, as calculated in 1982 by the man who essentially invented the concept, was 63.4% for all such situations in baseball history. The number 75%, likely obtained from a base-out table from the absurdly high run scoring era of the 1990s, is nonsense as far as valuing Wills is concerned. According to a study done a few years ago at a SABR conference, the number can vary from 55% to 75% just by applying era context (1960s vs. 2000). Adding in park, pitcher, and the game situation gives a much larger range.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:29:15 +0000

Well, yes…for any specific situation, such probabilities would be easily calculated, and people have calculated them, and when they are averaged across all events and the frequency of those events….you get about 75%. It is incumbent on you to show that such an estimate doesn’t apply to Wills (who was far worse at stealing bases)….saying you don’t like the generality isn’t constructive…..and a 10% gap is huge over the course of a career.

By: madaozeki

madaozeki — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:18:37 +0000

Actually it’s pretty easy to calculate a context in which a 65% success rate on stolen bases is break-even or better. Plus, the distribution of WHICH base is being stolen combined with number of outs can move the break-even point quite a bit. If a player is stealing home with 2 outs, he can be successful far less than 50% of the time yet still come out ahead. A depressed offensive environment with low power makes 65% perfectly cromulent for the low-offense 60′s and 70′s. Dead-ball era stolen base %’ages were in the 50′s and 60′s, but teams were still often breaking even or coming out ahead.

By: Mark Armour

Mark Armour — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:17:33 +0000

According to Thorn and Palmer’s “The Hidden Game of Baseball,” the break even percentage for a steal of second, in the average situation, was .634. For “last of the seventh, home team down by one” it is .61, or 61%. This is for all of baseball history, and does not consider the effect of depressed scoring that Wills played with, nor the effect of facing a great pitcher.

What happened is that these base-out tables were updated throughout the 90s and 00s and people ratcheted up these numbers considerably, using Craig’s 75% figure above, which might have been correct in 1996 or 2001, but is completely ungermane to 1965. People acknowledge that context matters, but fail to understand how much it matters. Depending on the time, place and situation, it might be 45% or 80%. With Wills, it was very, very low, certainly below 60%.

By: Jeremy T

Jeremy T — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:10:55 +0000

Baseball needs more halls. Just have like… the Baseball school, and each hall will be filled with baseball players of varying quality.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 18:00:09 +0000

You are correct in that break even points are estimates and always dependent on context. Nonetheless, there is no context in which making 35 outs to advance 65 bases is a productive exchange. The hardest part of scoring is just reaching base safely, making outs once you have done that is highly counter-productive.

By: 18thstreet

18thstreet — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 17:50:19 +0000

I’d happily put him into the Hall of Pretty Good, but he’s not getting into the Hall of Very Good without a ticket.

By: pjmitch

pjmitch — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 17:37:56 +0000

I think we all agree that his election will never happen so it’s a moot point.

The bigger question should be, who in the heck asked him the question in the first place?

Was that person’s next question? To Reggie Jackson of “When are you going to win the award for most humble human?” That is about on the same level

By: Detroit Michael

Detroit Michael — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:42:00 +0000

Oh, I’m pretty sure no one would ever hire Maury Wills as a manager again. It was a disaster the first time around.

By: bsbiz

bsbiz — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:41:25 +0000

Actually, I think he was running to the score.

By: deathmonkey41

deathmonkey41 — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:22:57 +0000

78mu – Jul 12, 2012 at 12:04 PM
Were some voters comparing their stats to what God would do if he were a MLB player?

I’m sure Derek Jeter will be a first ballot HoF’er….oh, you mean that God…

By: sisqsage

sisqsage — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:08:39 +0000

I always thought Maury was a little delusional. I remember when he used to compete in those cheesy Superstars competitions on ABC in the ’70s for pro athletes who were retired/past their prime. He started crying like a Little Leaguer on TV when interviewer Don Drysdale told him he didn’t make the final round.
I know these guys are super competitive, but get some perspective. It’s not like it was the 7th game of the World Series…or not making the HOF.

By: 78mu

78mu — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 16:04:55 +0000

Like anyone has seen Willie Mays Hayes in the HOF unless he bought a ticket. No one is even putting Major League on their top 100 movies of all time.

Oh, you mean THAT Willie Mays.

Yeah, he was pretty good. Actually, great is a better description. How could guys like him or Ruth or Williams not be unanimous choices for the HOF? Were some voters comparing their stats to what God would do if he were a MLB player?

By: Mark Armour

Mark Armour — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:57:17 +0000

I would not put him in the Hall of Fame either, but I believe the use of the 75% “break-even” number for stolen bases is unwise. First off, that number is dependent on the run-scoring environment, and Wills’s environment was much different than anything you youngsters have ever seen. Second, once you have a number number, it only means applies to the “average” situation faced in an average game against an average pitcher. The break-even stolen base number for Dodger Stadium against Juan Marichal in the seventh inning of a tie game was probably below 50%.

Again, none of this really matters to the overall point about Wills. I just am fighting a lonely battle to get people to stop over-using these so-called “break-even” numbers (for sacrifice bunts too!)

By: thefalcon123

thefalcon123 — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:47:45 +0000

Maury ranks 308th all time in WAR. The following players make up the 10 spots ahead of him (with highest HOF vote percentage in ()):

Rafael Furcal (active)
David Justice (0.2%)
Mark Belanger (3.7%)
Jim Gilliam (0%)
Darrell Porter (0%)
George Burns (1.5%)
Eddie Stanky (1.1%)
Mark Griffin (born in 1865, so…)
Gary Gaetti (0.8%)
Phil Rizzuto (38% and later put in via veterans committee)

So, 9 players that no one has ever confused as a Hall of Famer and one of the Hall’s weakest choices (and one whose WAR is depressed due to missing 3 prime years to WWII).

It’s okay Maury, you were merely a good major league baseball player. That’s still better than 99.9% of can ever claim.

By: WhenMattStairsIsKing

WhenMattStairsIsKing — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:47:02 +0000

Including Jack Morris. I mean, he pitched to the score, man!

By: CJ

CJ — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:46:57 +0000

The first thought that crossed my mind when reading the headline: Who?
The first thought that crossed my mind when reading the article: Why?

Come on man, seriously? Either get back in baseball and either be one heck of a broadcaster or one heck of a manager. Then you can be in the HOF, maybe. Or, be a member of the BBWAA for ten years and then vote for yourself (if even possible). Then you can feel good about getting a vote at least.

Complaining won’t help your case, either.

By: nelsonhound

nelsonhound — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:41:56 +0000

That’s a clown question, bro.

By: mybrunoblog

mybrunoblog — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:39:44 +0000

Poor Maury is delusional if he really believes he is HOF material. Funny thing, I don’t even think he is that close. There are lots of other guys we could debate before this guys name would ever come up.

By: qacm

qacm — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:37:33 +0000

Wins Above Replacement, 1962 — Maury Wills = 5.8, Willie Mays = 10.2

By: ajcardsfan

ajcardsfan — Thu, 12 Jul 2012 15:31:33 +0000

Is it just me, or does that photo make it look like he was running in clown shoes?