PDA

View Full Version : MLB: Is Frank Howard a Hall of Famer?


Stax
03-30-2009, 04:52 PM
Haven't done one of these in a while, but someone asked on mlb.com and I thought it was an interesting question. Plus it lets me use baseball-reference's new format:

http://sandbox.baseball-reference.com/players/h/howarfr01.shtml

Frank Howard: .273/.352/.499 (142 OPS+), 382 HR over 7353 PA

Howard fell off the ballot after getting 6 votes (under 2%) his first year of eligibility. He falls on an unfortunate edge, not a long enough career to build a purely career argument but not dominant enough to build a purely prime argument. Also he played in one of the most deadball eras since the deadball era, as OPS+ shows he was actually quite an effective player.

Compare, for example, the meat of his career from 62-71 to another short career HoFer like Ralph Kiner:

Frank Howard, 62-71: .276/.358/.511 (150 OPS+) over 5902 PA
Ralph Kiner, career: .279/.398/.548 (149 OPS+) over 6256 PA

While the raw OBP/SLG look to heavily favor Kiner one has to remember the difference between playing in the 1960s (an era so pitcher dominated it brought on one of the first major rules changes since the liveball) and the 1940s/50s.

Average hitter over Kiner's career: .272/.346/.408
Average hitter over Howard's 62-71: .248/.316/.373

Once you account for these things Howard's average is actually MORE impressive than Kiner's, and his OPS is very similar.

All of that means that Frank Howard, at his core, was Ralph Kiner in a less friendly era with a few additional years of value bookending things.

http://www.baseball-almanac.com/treasure/Wingfield_Howard.jpg

Swurgen
03-30-2009, 05:42 PM
All I know is that Phil Rizzuto used to talk about his massive power and that's enough for me.

Stax
03-30-2009, 08:11 PM
He hit 44 home runs in 1968. The so-pitcher dominated year (particularly with regards to power) that the rules were changed. The year Bob Gibson set the ERA mark.

TheImpossibleMan
04-05-2009, 01:51 AM
No. Not enough H, HR, RBI, walks at a power position.

mongo
04-05-2009, 02:01 AM
rbi's shouldn't even be an individual stat.

Stax
04-06-2009, 10:23 PM
No. Not enough H, HR, RBI, walks at a power position.

You do understand when he played, yes? And RBI TiM? I thought better of you.

ADD
04-06-2009, 10:26 PM
rbi's shouldn't even be an individual stat.

There's no "s"

But agreed

Stax
04-06-2009, 10:26 PM
There's no "s"

But agreed

Some people trying to be cutesy call them RsBI.

ADD
04-06-2009, 11:26 PM
They should be beat in the crotch with a stick