

Lou Whitaker, Thurman Munson, Dale Murphy worthy of enshrinement
When the Hall of Fame's Modern Era committee, a 16-member collection of Hall of Fame players, executives and journalists, meet on Dec. 8th to kick off MLB's Winter Meetings, they will be giving a second chance to nine of the game's greats from the era of 1970-1987 to gain entry into the Hall.
Thurman Munson, Ted Simmons, Don Mattingly, Steve Garvey, Lou Whitaker, Dave Parker, Dwight Evans, Dale Murphy and Tommy John, in addition to longtime union chief Marvin Miller - whose omission from the Hall is, perhaps, its greatest oversight - will each be considered.
Using my Hall of Fame monitor, the methodology for which you can read about here, I believe Whitaker, Munson, Simmons and Murphy deserve a plaque in Cooperstown. The monitor also rates Red Sox right fielder Evans as a borderline case.
Players get scores for their Era, their Peak relative to all players in history, their career rankings among all players and Bonus points for awards. A cumulative score of 100 means they are Hall worthy.
Below are their respective evaluations.
Thurman Munson
1969-1979
Score: 137
Analysis: Munson, obviously, is a unique case, having died in a plane crash at 32. My perception has always been that Munson simply didn’t achieve enough, tragedy aside, to merit inclusion, particularly because he was already declining for his last few seasons (WAR and OPS+ both declined annually from 1975 through his death in 1979). But Munson’s peak seven years rank eighth among ALL catchers in history. That plus a bonus he gets for his 1976 MVP season help earn Munson a place among the game’s greatest catchers.
Ted Simmons
1968-1988
Score: 100.3
Analysis: “Simba” has been a Hall of Fame discussion annually for more than a decade, and I’ve long viewed him as an oversight. He earns a bit less than Munson when compared with his peers and for his peak, but is most hurt by only eight bonus points (one for each All-Star appearance). Simmons lacks any major awards and his complete lack of any “black ink” on his stat sheet feeds the notion he was a “compiler.” However, as covered here, Simmons is the case that made me re-evaluate and realize my bias against compilers was perhaps a bit too strong. Simmons' career numbers compared with other catchers can't be ignored. He is 2nd in hits, 11th in homers, 2nd in RBI, 5th in runs and 9th in WAR. His points in the Historic category lift him just past the threshold, though on the borderline.
Dwight Evans
1972-1991
Score: 99.3
Analysis: I’ve never thought of Dewey as a Hall of Famer, but he comes a lot closer here than I originally believed. His rating among his era is very solid (2nd in WAR, 3rd in homers among right fielders). But his WAR7 places 28th alltime at his position, netting him zero points for his peak. He doesn't crack the top 1% in any category for Historic points so he doesn't max out there either. A single category in the top 1% would push him past. A pair of top five MVP finishes and eight Gold Gloves get him pretty close, but Evans comes up short.
Dale Murphy
1976-1993
Score: 113.6
Analysis: Murphy tops centerfielders of his era in homers, RBI and runs, is second in WAR and gets 30 points from a pair of MVP awards. Add a WAR7 ranking of 17th, and, despite falling short on the Historic scale outside of secondary bonuses for home runs and RBIs, the overlooking of Murphy’s Hall of Fame induction should come to an end.
Dave Parker
1973-1991
Score: 93.2 points
Analysis: Parker was feared and respected. He has an MVP award, plus four top five finishes, earning more than half of points based on MVP awards. But his WAR7 is 27th among rightfielders, and both his WAR and OPS+ among his contemporaries net him little. With Simmons, Parker's initial low score in the first formula caused some re-evaluation. And he gets secondary bonuses for hits, homers and RBI. But his ranking 8th in WAR and 12th in OPS+ compared with those in his era gave him two bit zeros he couldn't afford. He classifies as a borderline inductee, but on the outside looking in.
Steve Garvey
1969-1987
Score: 68.5
Analysis: Garvey’s peak ranks 52nd among first basemen. Respective to his era, he’s fifth in WAR at first base and 14th in OPS+, both of which bring down his era rankings to the point where his MVP award, another top five finish, and 10 All-Star appearances don’t get him anywhere near induction. He earns only one secondary bonus, for ranking in the top 5% in hits.
Don Mattingly
1982-1995
Score: 95.5
Analysis: It’s easy to forget how short Mattingly’s peak really was. His ‘84-86 trio of seasons were magnificent, and ‘87 was very good. But he reached a 4 WAR only once after that, and only one other season topped 3. His WAR 7 ranks 31st at the position in history, and his rankings against his peers for the duration of his playing days don’t give him enough to get there, even with 40 bonus points, a very strong number that push him into borderline territory. Does Mattingly get the remaining points needed without his back troubles? Probably a safe bet.
Lou Whitaker
1977-199
Score: 113.3
Analysis: Whitaker’s lack of bonus points demonstrate how underappreciated he was during his career (an argument Simmons could use as well). But his points vs his era compared with his fellow second basemen are the most of anyone on the Modern Era ballot. Whitaker should have gone in with double play partner Alan Trammell in 2018. But if there’s any justice, Whitaker will be enshrined in 2020.
Tommy John
1963-1989
Score: 46.2
Analysis: John was a very good pitcher. But when compared against his contemporaries, he falls considerably short: 13th in WAR, 15th in Ks and 27th in ERA+. Despite his longevity, he ranks 26th in wins and 59th in strikeouts. He earned three top five finishes in the Cy Young voting and four All-Star appearances, but falls nowhere near the dominance needed for Hall induction, a fact demonstrated by his WAR7 peak ranking 162nd in history.
Here’s to Munson, Murphy, Simmons and Whitaker getting the call to the Hall on December 8th!
Next time, we’ll look at this year’s standard Hall of Fame ballot.
