Okay I would like to talk about Alan Trammell. Only 19% of VSNers voted for him last year, and so far I'm the only one to vote for him this year
(firsttimer has already dropped him from his ballot, not sure why). I believe Trammell deserves to be inducted into the Hall of Fame, here's my argument. Lets start by looking at the career numbers for a few players.
Player A: .285/.352/.415 69.5 WAR
Player B: .285/.342/.430 74.0 WAR
Strikingly similar numbers, and for good reason. They belong to two of the best shortstops of the 70's and 80's. Player A is Alan Trammell and Player B is Robin Yount. Robin Yount is already in the Hall of Fame while Trammell remains on the outside looking in. With such similar numbers, shouldn't they either both be in, or both out? For this argument of precedent to work, one has to believe Yount deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. Despite my obvious bias, I believe the assumption is correct. 77.5% of voters agreed with me when Yount was inducted as a first ballot Hall of Famer in 1999. So why the difference in opinion between the two players? They both had twenty year careers over the same period, their slash lines and WAR are almost exactly the same, Yount's OPS is only 5 points higher then Trammell's, and their wOBA is exactly the same. The difference comes in the counting stats. Yount had over 3,000 hits, Trammell only had 2,365. Robin Yount also had 66 more home runs, 35 more steals, 403 more RBIs, and 401 more runs. As usual baseball writer's have fallen over reliant on old fashioned counting statistics. Apparently Trammell does not have the milestone numbers that some voters look for. While 3,000 hits may be a way into the Hall of Fame, I do not think it should be a requirement. Trammell meets the 10 year requirement to be on the ballot; after that we can begin to ignore the counting stats and look at each player's peak.
Player A: 9,375 PA, 22.0 dWAR
Player B: 12,249 PA, 5.8 dWAR
Despite each playing for twenty years, Yount had almost 3,000 more at bats then Trammell. This explains why Yount's counting stats far exceed Trammell's, despite the almost identical rate stats. While Yount was able to stay relatively healthy throughout his career, Trammell was the victim of injuries. Considering their similar peaks and rate stats, I don't think it is fair to hold this against Trammell. After his age 29 season, Yount never played another game at SS, on the other hand Trammell played his entire career at SS. Playing the tougher position latter in his career, Trammell was made more susceptible to injury, leading to the missed playing time late in his career. While continuing to play the SS position hurt Trammell's counting stats, it didn't hurt his overall value at all. Trammell was an all time great defensive SS. His dWAR is the 34th highest of all time. This explains why Trammell and Yount's overall WAR numbers are so similar. Unfortunately, the current group of voters tend to overvalue counting statistics, and undervalue defense.
As I've already stated, I think it's fair to ignore Trammell's less then HOF milestone counting numbers due to the injuries late in his career. As long as his peak playing performance, and overall longevity are worthy of the Hall of Fame, then why should we concern ourselves with the numbers he put up late in his career? When compared to Robin Yount, Alan Trammell meets both requirements. They each twenty ML seasons, and their peak years are also similar. Trammell and Yount both had six seasons where their WAR was over 5.5. Dave Cameron wrote an article last year that compares the two player's peak years, which you can read here:
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/index.php/trammell-yount-and-the-value-of-career-length/
Now lets talk about something else voters tend to value, hardware. Alan Trammell certainly has that going for him. His Tiger's won the World Series in 1984, and Trammell was named the WS MVP. His postseason play was phenomenal, boasting a slash line of .333/.404/.588. Trammell also finished second in the AL MVP voting in 1987 (he received 12 out of 28 first place votes). Looking back on that season now, Trammell was much more deserving of the award then the actual winner George Bell. Other awards include 6 time All Star, 4 time Gold Glove winner, 3 time Silver Slugger.
Looking at the above argument, I think Trammell is a slamdunk candidate for the Hall of Fame. Looking forward to hearing why everyone seems to disagree.
