Man I think some of you would have Berkman's babies if possible.

The idea that Lance Berkman was robbed of a potential hall of fame career because of steriod users is one of the more interesting takes I've seen on TexAgs.

In reply to _lefraud_ Can you answer my question? I'm not lobbying for anything. Just trying to understand that WAR question.

In reply to Breggy Popup

Bregxit said:

---

Can you answer my question? I'm not lobbying for anything. Just trying to understand that WAR question.

---

Yes. fWAR has 570 per year for offensive players to divide up. If a bunch of juicers are having great seasons then there is technically a smaller piece of the pie.

In reply to Farmer1906

Farmer1906 said:

---

Bregxit said:

---

Can you answer my question? I'm not lobbying for anything. Just trying to understand that WAR question.

---

Yes. fWAR has 570 per year for offensive players to divide up. If a bunch of juicers are having great seasons then there is technically a smaller piece of the pie.

---

Thanks. That's what I thought I understood but wasn't sure. The paper I read mentioned the pool then just vomited out all of the other statistical calculations that go into it. I had an aneurysm before I got to anything about how it is divvied up.

So "potentially" Lance's WAR numbers could have matched Trout's if he didn't have the roiders' inflated numbers above his.

Sure, but here are Berkman's two best WAR years.



2001 was arguably his best year, and even then he finished behind guys like Shawn Green, Rich Aurilia and Cliff Floyd.

Berkman deserved to be on the ballot for more than a year but to suggest he should be in the HoF because he played amongst the juicers...naw.

What really killed Berkman in the Hall of Fame voting was the absurd nature of the 2019 ballot, which featured:

8 players who are now in the HOF: Mo Rivera, Roy Halladay, Edgar Martinez, Mike Mussina, Fred McGriff, Scott Rolen, Todd Helton, and Larry Walker

2 players who appear highly likely to get elected in the next year or two: Wagner and Andruw Jones

5 outstanding players with ties to steroids that probably kept them out of the Hall: Bonds, Clemens, Gary Sheffield, Manny Ramirez, Sammy Sosa

1 outstanding player who talked his way out of the Hall of Fame (Curt Schilling)

Remember, voters can only choose 10--so unless you were voting strategically or using the "character clause" to strike better players, it was hard to find a place on a ballot for Berkman.

In reply to YokelRidesAgain

YokelRidesAgain said:

---

What really killed Berkman in the Hall of Fame voting was the absurd nature of the 2019 ballot, which featured:

8 players who are now in the HOF: Mo Rivera, Roy Halladay, Edgar Martinez, Mike Mussina, Fred McGriff, Scott Rolen, Todd Helton, and Larry Walker

2 players who appear highly likely to get elected in the next year or two: Wagner and Andruw Jones

5 outstanding players with ties to steroids that probably kept them out of the Hall: Bonds, Clemens, Gary Sheffield, Manny Ramirez, Sammy Sosa

1 outstanding player who talked his way out of the Hall of Fame (Curt Schilling)

Remember, voters can only choose 10--so unless you were voting strategically or using the "character clause" to strike better players, it was hard to find a place on a ballot for Berkman.

---

I did a breakdown of this a few pages ago. And you're 100% correct. The pool was just too deep for a guy who played a crowded position.

In reply to _lefraud_

_lefraud_ said:

---

It's really odd you keep bringing up Berkman in a discussion about Mike Trout. But we can go a different route, WAR. Can't get screwed out of that metric.

You're also selling one of the best right handed bats in the past 30 years incredibly short in Miguel Cabrera, who Trout finished runner-up twice, one of which was a triple crown season for Miggy.

---

Trout is better as an overall baseball player than Berkman, no argument here.

BUT, Berkman the offensive player is pretty close to identical to Trout the offensive player when we look at OPS over a 10 year span of time.

I like WAR and find it useful at times but Trout is also a sabermetric dream come true. He's fast and athletic and those two traits by themselves help Trout rate well defensively and on the base paths which along with a positional boost for playing CF allows Trout to really pump up his WAR numbers. It doesn't mean I don't think he's great to also point out that he is a nearly perfect player to benefit from how WAR is calculated.

When we think of guys like Berkman should they be punished by WAR (and this rendered ineligible for the hall of fame) for the fact that they are slow runners or because of their defensive position? That's not exactly something in Berkman's control. Also in 2001 Berkman played LF and as pointed out by Bregxit, the formula punishes him by comparing him to other LFs like Barry Bonds.

For a ridiculous example, Tommy Edman in 2022 finished with a 6.3 WAR and an OPS of .725. Are any of you really going to argue that Edman was as valuable to his team than 2001 Berkman with a 1.051 OPS?

What about Kevin Kiermaier's 2015 with a .718 OPS and 7.4 WAR... do we really think Kiermaier was more valuable? Or can we admit the formula privileges athletic guys that play SS and CF?

Again, I'm not claiming that Berkman is equal to or better than Trout, but some of you are relying on metrics like MVP wins and WAR to make it seem like they aren't even comparable, but I don't believe that those metrics tell an accurate picture here. Offensively, Berkman is an all time great, just like Trout is.

Here's an SI article from after Lance retired in 2014.

https://www.si.com/mlb/2014/01/30/lance-berkman-retires-astros-rangers-cardinals

Of his HOF career, the author writes:

Thus, Berkman's retirement doesn't come as a great surprise, particularly given how close he was to hanging it up a year ago. It does leave us with the question of whether or not he is a Hall of Famer. Jay Jaffe's JAWS stats say no. Berkman's 51.8/.38.9/45.3 career/peak/JAWS scores all fall short of the standard at first base and left and rightfield, his three primary positions (he also played 166 games in center early in his career, which yielded this gem on Tal's Hill).

It may be surprising that Berkman doesn't at least meet the standard on peak score, but the combination of the offense-heavy era in which he played, the Astros' move to the hitter-friendly Enron-cum-Minute Maid Park in 2000, and some brutal fielding scores undercut those impressive statistics above. That, in combination with his short career, make the Hall seem like a longshot for Berkman, though he may get some extra points from the voters for his postseason performance, being a switch-hitter, and for his personality and honesty with the press.

In terms of a comparable candidate, one player that jumps to mind is Edgar Martinez. The legendary Mariners DH was also an undeniably great hitter who also had a memorable postseason moment, made essentially no contribution on defense by virtue of having been a designated hitter for the bulk of his career and had a similarly short career (just 12 qualifying seasons). Martinez hit .312/.418/.515 (147 OPS+) in his career to Berkman's .293/.406/.537 (144 OPS+). Berkman hit more home runs (366 to doubles-hitter Martinez's 309), but Martinez, perhaps crucially, surpassed 2,000 hits while Berkman did not (2,247 to 1,905). Martinez also played in more games (2,055 to 1,879) made more plate appearances (8,674 to 7,814), and had superior WAR (68.3 to 51.8) and JAWS scores (55.9 to 45.3). Martinez can also stake claim to being the greatest ever at his position, even if that position was designated hitter.

In reply to AggieEP

AggieEP said:

---

_lefraud_ said:

---

It's really odd you keep bringing up Berkman in a discussion about Mike Trout. But we can go a different route, WAR. Can't get screwed out of that metric.

You're also selling one of the best right handed bats in the past 30 years incredibly short in Miguel Cabrera, who Trout finished runner-up twice, one of which was a triple crown season for Miggy.

---

Trout is better as an overall baseball player than Berkman, no argument here.

BUT, Berkman the offensive player is pretty close to identical to Trout the offensive player when we look at OPS over a 10 year span of time.

I like WAR and find it useful at times but Trout is also a sabermetric dream come true. He's fast and athletic and those two traits by themselves help Trout rate well defensively and on the base paths which along with a positional boost for playing CF allows Trout to really pump up his WAR numbers. It doesn't mean I don't think he's great to also point out that he is a nearly perfect player to benefit from how WAR is calculated.

When we think of guys like Berkman should they be punished by WAR (and this rendered ineligible for the hall of fame) for the fact that they are slow runners or because of their defensive position? That's not exactly something in Berkman's control. Also in 2001 Berkman played LF and as pointed out by Bregxit, the formula punishes him by comparing him to other LFs like Barry Bonds.

For a ridiculous example, Tommy Edman in 2022 finished with a 6.3 WAR and an OPS of .725. Are any of you really going to argue that Edman was as valuable to his team than 2001 Berkman with a 1.051 OPS?

What about Kevin Kiermaier's 2015 with a .718 OPS and 7.4 WAR... do we really think Kiermaier was more valuable? Or can we admit the formula privileges athletic guys that play SS and CF?

Again, I'm not claiming that Berkman is equal to or better than Trout, but some of you are relying on metrics like MVP wins and WAR to make it seem like they aren't even comparable, but I don't believe that those metrics tell an accurate picture here. Offensively, Berkman is an all time great, just like Trout is.

---

Would he have benefitted more by just being a DH his whole career?

In reply to The Porkchop Express

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Here's an SI article from after Lance retired in 2014.

https://www.si.com/mlb/2014/01/30/lance-berkman-retires-astros-rangers-cardinals

Of his HOF career, the author writes:

Thus, Berkman's retirement doesn't come as a great surprise, particularly given how close he was to hanging it up a year ago. It does leave us with the question of whether or not he is a Hall of Famer. Jay Jaffe's JAWS stats say no. Berkman's 51.8/.38.9/45.3 career/peak/JAWS scores all fall short of the standard at first base and left and rightfield, his three primary positions (he also played 166 games in center early in his career, which yielded this gem on Tal's Hill).

It may be surprising that Berkman doesn't at least meet the standard on peak score, but the combination of the offense-heavy era in which he played, the Astros' move to the hitter-friendly Enron-cum-Minute Maid Park in 2000, and some brutal fielding scores undercut those impressive statistics above. That, in combination with his short career, make the Hall seem like a longshot for Berkman, though he may get some extra points from the voters for his postseason performance, being a switch-hitter, and for his personality and honesty with the press.

In terms of a comparable candidate, one player that jumps to mind is Edgar Martinez. The legendary Mariners DH was also an undeniably great hitter who also had a memorable postseason moment, made essentially no contribution on defense by virtue of having been a designated hitter for the bulk of his career and had a similarly short career (just 12 qualifying seasons). Martinez hit .312/.418/.515 (147 OPS+) in his career to Berkman's .293/.406/.537 (144 OPS+). Berkman hit more home runs (366 to doubles-hitter Martinez's 309), but Martinez, perhaps crucially, surpassed 2,000 hits while Berkman did not (2,247 to 1,905). Martinez also played in more games (2,055 to 1,879) made more plate appearances (8,674 to 7,814), and had superior WAR (68.3 to 51.8) and JAWS scores (55.9 to 45.3). Martinez can also stake claim to being the greatest ever at his position, even if that position was designated hitter.

---

Loved Big Puma as a player but he's in the "Hall of Very Good" and not a HOF player. Knew him a little bit when we were both at Rice but outside of parties baseball & football players didn't mix a ton and he didn't drink.

In reply to AgRyan04

AgRyan04 said:

---

AggieEP said:

---

_lefraud_ said:

---

It's really odd you keep bringing up Berkman in a discussion about Mike Trout. But we can go a different route, WAR. Can't get screwed out of that metric.

You're also selling one of the best right handed bats in the past 30 years incredibly short in Miguel Cabrera, who Trout finished runner-up twice, one of which was a triple crown season for Miggy.

---

Trout is better as an overall baseball player than Berkman, no argument here.

BUT, Berkman the offensive player is pretty close to identical to Trout the offensive player when we look at OPS over a 10 year span of time.

I like WAR and find it useful at times but Trout is also a sabermetric dream come true. He's fast and athletic and those two traits by themselves help Trout rate well defensively and on the base paths which along with a positional boost for playing CF allows Trout to really pump up his WAR numbers. It doesn't mean I don't think he's great to also point out that he is a nearly perfect player to benefit from how WAR is calculated.

When we think of guys like Berkman should they be punished by WAR (and this rendered ineligible for the hall of fame) for the fact that they are slow runners or because of their defensive position? That's not exactly something in Berkman's control. Also in 2001 Berkman played LF and as pointed out by Bregxit, the formula punishes him by comparing him to other LFs like Barry Bonds.

For a ridiculous example, Tommy Edman in 2022 finished with a 6.3 WAR and an OPS of .725. Are any of you really going to argue that Edman was as valuable to his team than 2001 Berkman with a 1.051 OPS?

What about Kevin Kiermaier's 2015 with a .718 OPS and 7.4 WAR... do we really think Kiermaier was more valuable? Or can we admit the formula privileges athletic guys that play SS and CF?

Again, I'm not claiming that Berkman is equal to or better than Trout, but some of you are relying on metrics like MVP wins and WAR to make it seem like they aren't even comparable, but I don't believe that those metrics tell an accurate picture here. Offensively, Berkman is an all time great, just like Trout is.

---

Would he have benefitted more by just being a DH his whole career?

---

This is an interesting question I hadn't thought about. But the previous article's comparisons to Edgar Martinez does raise that question in my mind. If they are similar in profile, then why is Edgar's WAR 17 higher? Shouldn't the formula punish a DH for being a non contributor on defense?

Even if we believe/know Lance was bad at defense, that couldn't have really been an issue more than 15 times a season. I seem to remember him always making the routine plays. Making those 250 to 300 routine plays a year should at least make him more valuable than a DH.

In reply to TarponChaser Did you play football there during the '96 season? I worked as an intern in the SID office during 96-97

In reply to The Porkchop Express

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Did you play football there during the '96 season? I worked as an intern in the SID office during 96-97

---

Yup- reinjured my knee early in the season though and was told I had to retire so I transferred out. Had to go to Blinn for a semester since I missed the application deadline and started at A&M in the fall of '97.