Sports Reference Blog

2013 Hall of Fame Features

Posted by Neil on November 28, 2012

A little while ago, the Baseball Hall of Fame released the names that will be on this year's BBWAA ballot. Apropos of that, here are the Hall of Fame features we currently have for your browsing pleasure:

Please enjoy these features in this, the craziest of all Hall of Fame years.

10 Responses to “2013 Hall of Fame Features”

  1. Calcon10 Says:

    Imagine my shock discovering new stats on your ballot page. And here I thought WAR was the be-all end-all! But now, suddenly, we have a 7-year peak WAR, and a Hall of Fame worthiness stat unearthed from someplace.

    I hope that Jack Morris makes it, because I think he deserves it, but not Alan Trammell (my favorite player when I was young) because he doesn't. In my opinion, these are hard, cold realities that no amount of absurd, made-up statical manipulation can change.

  2. jason Says:

    just to let you know, as of earlier this afternoon you hadn't deleted the players who failed to make the ballot this year from the future years (alfonseca, wright, miller, myers, etc.). sorry if this has already been corrected.

  3. Scott Says:


    Could you provide detailed specs for "deserves it" stat? I want to make sure you're weighing all the variables correctly. Because by my calculation Trammell sneaks in just above "doesn't".

  4. Calcon10 Says:


    Trammell was injured a lot; played very good, but not Hall-worthy, defense, and just didn't seem like he was the kind of leader on whom you can hang the "intangibles" label.

    I've felt that way about my favorite player ever since he retired. Over the years, I've probably talked to dozens of baseball fans, and the consensus (like, unanimous): Trammell was a very good player, but not Hall-worthy, and not just by a little. If it makes you feel any better, people say this very sadly, because everyone liked him a lot.

    But being a class act shouldn't get you into the Hall, just like not being one shouldn't keep you out.

  5. BigMikeintheD Says:

    I do not care what stat or statistical analysis you use to quantify Alan Trammell's career. All of them, including winning, say yes, yes, yes to the Hall of Fame. Best SS not in and almost identical impact and career as HOFer Barry Larkin. Only knock against Tramm is that he wasn't as good as Cal Ripken Jr. and that is a lousy argument for anyone.

  6. StephenH Says:

    I love Alan Trammell as a player. For me he is a bubble guy. I would like to see him in, but would be surprised if he makes it. It just seems to me that his career petered out around the age of 32. I know the end of a players career can be just about padding stats, but I think he should have been an more effective player longer than he was. That being said, I think he was the 2nd best shortstop in the AL for most of his career. Being 2nd to Ripken is no insult.
    I do wonder, in this steroid voting age, if Trams productivity ending early will somehow help him, as if this is proof that he was clean. I know, an odd thought. I don't think comps to Larkin really help Tram, as Larkin was still playing 140+ games per year a few seasons after Tram.

  7. Locode Says:

    Trammell should only be compared to other SS's, and based on that he absolutely should be in the HOF.

    Morris has no business getting in.

    Tim Raines should already have been in.

  8. Dan Says:

    Locode - thank you. I'm still baffled that Morris gets as much support as he does and he will probably get in this year. A 3.90 ERA has no business in the hall (and his WHIP is like 1.28 I believe, also not Hall worthy). He was the recipient of great run support his whole career. If wins have no bearing on someone winning the Cy Young now, why should it be the main reason someone gets in the Hall? Morris had some success in the post season - he also had some failures as well. Hall of Good pitcher at best. But he'll get in.

  9. Neil Says:

    #4 - I shouldn't feed the semi-trolls, but... That's the beauty of the "leadership/intangibles" label -- you can hang it on whoever you want to, with no real justification whatsoever. Somebody else can say Trammell deserves it based on intangibles, and you can't really argue with it because there's nothing real backing up either opinion. This is why you have to rely on objective facts, and the facts say Trammell deserves to be in (based on established HoF standards, at least).

  10. JAWS and the 2013 Hall of Fame ballot Part I: Introduction | Hit and Run - Says:

    [...] me a ton of manual labor and make the system more accessible than it has ever been. B-R also has other great tools that are of use in any Hall of Fame discussion, including past voting results and projected future [...]