About two years ago, I drew up a list of player near the end of their careers who I felt would have a good shot at being inducted into the baseball Hall of Fame. The only official rule to get in the Hall is that you have to play at least ten years, so I excluded guys below that limit. It makes no sense, anyway, to discuss the HOF chances for Mike Piazza or Frank Thomas anyway.
So my list started with all of the 10 year guys and excluded the obvious players like Greg Gross who really don't belong, but did include guys like Kent Tekulve for whom there might be some argument, however slim. I broke it into four categories, "In", "Strong Candidates", "Marginal Candidates", and "Fringe Candidates".
The In list included guys like Rickey Henderson and Nolan Ryan. Strong Candidates included Wade Bogss and Ryne Sandberg. Marginal Candidates included Joe Carter and Tim Raines and the fringe candidates were guys like Rich Gossage and Vince Coleman.
Now you can argue about whether someone is a "strong" candidate or "in", I suppose, but they were grouped fairly logically so that probably all of the "In" canidates would make it, most of the "strong" candidates would make it, some of the "marginal" candidates, and probably none of the "fringe" players would get to the HOF.
I posted my list to a baseball discussion group on Usenet a few months ago. They were discussing the HOF merits of players like Jack Morris, Joe Carter, and Andre Dawson, so I thought my list might get some response. Several people responded with dismay that I had listed Tim Raines so low. One person said that Raines was one of the 5 or 6 best leftfielders of all time. Another said that Raines was the best player in his league for a five year stretch. Am I off the mark, or are these people seriously over-estimating Tim Raines?
As far as the best LF of all time, I looked up the starting leftfielders for all teams from 1960-1980. I feel fairly comfortable evaluating the major players from that era. I came up with the following names:
Hall of famers who | HOF - some seasons | Future HOF - some
were fulltime LFs | as a starting LF | seasons as starting LF
| |
Ted Williams | Henry Aaron | Pete Rose
Stan Musial | Harmon Killebrew | Orlando Cepeda
Carl Yastrzemski | Yogi Berra |
Billy Williams | Willie McCovey |
Lou Brock | Mickey Mantle |
Willie Stargell | Frank Robinson |
Other notable Lfs with some HOF support: Dick Allen, Don Baylor,
Jeff Burroughs, George Foster, Dave Kingman, Jim Rice
These players accounted for 10 of the 42 MVP awards in 21 seasons.
Stargell was a starting LF for 11 of his first 12 seasons before starting his last 9 seasons at firstbase, thus I think it is fair to include him as a fulltime LF. Rose started eight seasons in the outfield, in both left and right. He played more games in the OF than any other single position, so I think it is fair to consider Rose an outfielder, too.
So where does that leave Tim Raines? He certainly is not in the class of Ted Williams or Stan Musial. Stargell and Yaz were a notch below, but I think Raines is claerly not in that class either. That leaves a comparsion to Lou Brock. Many people argue that Brock is a mediocre hall of famer, that he was elected because of the aura surrounding his single-season and all-time stolen base mark. He also was the 14th player to get 3000 hits, a club that has since been joined by five others (Carew, Brett, Yount, Winfield, and Murray). Brock was only a six-time all-star, but he did play in the National League at the same time as Mays, Aaron, Clemente, Stargell, Cepeda and others who were battling for the all-star selections.
Side by side, Brock and Raines look like this:
Raines Brock All-Star appearances 7 6 Gold Gloves 0 0 MVP Awards 0 0 Led League in Batting 1 0 Led League in Steals 4 8 Best Average .334 .348 Best Stolen Bases 90 118 Times Avg .300 + 6 9 Times SB 50+ 8 12 Games (thru 1994) 1920 2616 Career Hits 2152 3023 Career Batting Average .296 .293 Career Stolen Bases 764 938
Clearly Brock was both better in his prime and played for more seasons than Tim Raines. Given Raines deteriorating hitting and stolen base numbers, he appears to have no more than three years left in his career. Raines will end up with less than 2500 hits, which will put him around 70th all time. Brock is currently 17th all-time.
As far as stolen bases, the feat that both players will be remembered for, the top five look like this (through 1994):
With 21 in 1993 and 13 in 1994, Raines has no chance to catch Ty Cobb. Vince Coleman, still active with 698, will likely pass Raines by 1996.
Lou Brock was clearly a better player than Raines: He had almost 1,000 more hits and 150 more SBs. If you don't believe that Lou Brock is worthy of induction into the Hall of Fame, then Raines doesn't even merit consideration.
So, evaluating Raines against the leftfielders of 1960-1980, I would argue the following ranking.
Better than Raines: Ted Williams, Carl Yastrzemski, Stan Musial, Hank Aaron, Harmon Killebrew, Willie McCovey, Yogi Berra, Mickey Mantle, Frank Robinson
Same class as Raines: Willie Stargell, Billy Williams, Pete Rose, Orlando Cepeda, Jim Rice
Not as good as Raines: Dick Allen, Don Baylor, Jeff Burroughs, George Foster, Dave Kingman, Jim Rice
Clearly, the argument that Raines is one of the 5 or 6 best leftfielders of all time doesn't have much merit. He's not even among the top ten for the two decade period of 1960-1980. If we include players from the fifties he drops even further down the list, behind Hall of Famers Jackie Robinson, Ralph Kiner, Enos Slaughter and Monte Irvin. We'll spare Raines a listing of 1900-1949.
I think a close study would show he doesn't even make the list of top 25 left fielders of all-time. Tim Raines was a good player who was among the best active players at his peak, but there's a lot of guys who can say the same that aren't even close to being inducted into the Hall of Fame. I still say Raines is a very marginal candidate and I would be surprised if he garners serious support from the voters.
