As I got more into baseball stats I got the feeling about Gwynn that he was elected more for interesting achievements (wow, those are some high batting averages!) than for actually being a first-ballot-caliber player. I’m not sure if this makes me more or less sure of that assumption, but it does make me think again about it. I mean, does this graph do more to support Gwynn’s case or to support the other three?

Name WAR WinShares
Gwynn 68.7 398
Edgar 70.7 390
Raines 69.5 305
Schilling 69.8 254

These numbers show the difference in WS vs WAR systems in that WS value defense much more than WAR. Positional players (Gwynn and Raines) get more of the share of the Winshares than DH’s (Edgar) and Pitchers (Schilling) compared to WAR

to Sky’s question is a difference in what a Replacement Level player is in both systems… Any system with a lower replacement level will yield higher numbers for players who stick around playing mediocre ball for many years.

Consider this way oversimplified hypothetical: 2 players, one (player A) plays three years and creates 100 runs (30, 40, 30) and another (player B) who plays 5 years and creates 140 runs (30,40,30,20,20). Now if the replacement level player is considered to be one who creates 20 runs per year, then player A’s runs above replacement would be 10+20+10 or 40. Player B’s runs above replacement would be 10+20+10+0+0, also 40! But who says 20 is the correct answer? Different methods use different standards for finding a replacement level performance. Say another method thinks replacement performance is actually 10. Player A in that scenario gets 20+30+20 or 70 and Player B gets 20+30+20+10+10 or 90!

In other words even using the same metrics to calculate the amount of “absolute” value a player has, if there is a difference in the math of how to calculate the “relative” value, the one with a lower relative comparator will benefit more those with longer careers. This is very frequently a key factor in differences in career win above replacement metrics, be it Win Shares, or any number of WAR formula.

I’ve seen lots of different displays of Gwynn’s various numbers, including WAR, versus other players. This graph might be one of the best ones.

Looking at Gwynn’s numbers relative to other players when asking the question, “Who goes into the Hall of Fame?” is probably one of the single best pieces of evidence to support the case that the Baseball Hall of Fame celebrates far, far more than on-field numbers. Consistently, WAR graphs including Gwynn make him look like a “borderline hall of famer.” As an earlier commenter indicated, Gwynn was indeed elected in – especially with such a high percentage – for reasons beyond just his numbers.

Exploring those other reasons would kind of be a fun conversation. Among the many qualities Gwynn demonstrated that Baseball loves to celebrate was his honesty, especially regarding the steroid issues. In a decade of Baseball marred by news of steroid usage among some of Baseball’s most beloved and highest profile players, what better message to send to the world than to take two guys who embody the intangibles – Gwynn and Ripken – and vote them in with high 90s percentages.

and one factor that is there for sure is All-Star Game appearances:

Gwynn: 15
Raines: 7
Edgar: 7
Curt: 6

Would be including a player whom you would consider exceptional in this regard and one player whom you would consider to be just slightly above replacement (although I know it’s hard for a replacement player to have that long of a career) to provide baselines. That would help me put this info in context.