Are we looking at Ventura and Longoria through the wrong lens?
We are following a similar pattern as we roll through the positions. The general idea is to run through every player not in the Hall of Fame within the 80/120 zone. We then will look at currently active players. I’m sure everyone is looking forward to that and I’m sure third base will not disappoint in that department.
We have two players on this list that are at different parts of the process. Robin Ventura received just 1.3 percent of the vote in 2010 and therefore dropped off of the Hall of Fame ballot. Evan Longoria just retired a couple of seasons ago, so he will not be on the ballot for another several years.
However, we are here to look at their Hall of Fame resumes as they pertain to these two players. They are the last two guys within the 80/120 zone that have retired. Ironically, they are fairly similar in terms of their credentials. Being within the zone doesn’t mean that you should be in. It just means that you reasonably can be.
Ventura is one of those unfortunate figures in baseball history. Even if we eliminate that unfortunate scene with Nolan Ryan using him as a human punching bag, we have a picture of a player that underachieved. Why do we have this conception? Ventura could potentially go down as one of the top five college hitters in the history. We can’t help but hold on to that nagging notion that he should have done more.
Longoria was also a storied college player and his career got off to such a promising start. So, the conception of both is that they were disappointments. That can be impossible to overcome when looking at a player for the Hall of Fame. We have to consider the players they were and not who we thought they should be. We see this with certain players at every position.
When we compare these two with the median counting stats we immediately notice they were probably a couple of seasons shy of getting there. This can be seen in the run and RBI totals. We go through the other tests to check to see if this conception is in fact reality.
The index numbers seem to indicate the same thing. In particular, both players needed two more prime seasons to get to the Hall of Fame median. Two more seasons on the back end might have helped as well, but we are probably looking at two to three win seasons as opposed to five or six win seasons.
Baseball history is riddled with players like this. If only they had been more healthy or if only they had one or two more really good seasons. The big question is why they came up short. Were they Hall of Fame level players that just didn’t do it long enough or were they simply not quite as good? These last three tests will tell the tale there.
Last time we saw that these numbers actually give us the quality and the quantity. The runs created shows the exact same thing that the counting numbers show. They needed two or three additional seasons to get to the Hall of Fame median. Yet, the other numbers also show that these two come up a bit short offensively as well.
Of course, that doesn’t mean that they aren’t Hall of Famers. It just means that they have failed the first test. We do not have an immediate idea as to why. It could be that they were Hall of Fame quality during their peak and simply couldn’t sustain it. It could also be that they never were that good. Some of our other tests will help answer that question.
These numbers complicate the situation considerably. If you were to poll most baseball fans, I’m sure they would be most surprised by Ventura’s fielding numbers. However, they shouldn’t be. He won six Gold Gloves, so the “experts” at the time obviously thought he was a good fielder as well. The question is whether the extra value as a fielder is enough to offset the issues he had on offense.
Longoria exists in a kind of middle ground. He was better than the typical Hall of Fame third baseman, but not nearly as superior as Ventura. On the other hand, he was a little closer to the median offensively. So, we have the same question with Longoria as we do with Ventura. The question we have moving forward is why they came up short.
The awards voting paints a picture and it isn’t a good one for either player. These were good baseball players, but they were rarely ever great. Sometimes perception really is reality. Sometimes when you think a guy should do more, the numbers actually back that up. The feeling with both players is similar. There was always an extra gear that they simply never reached.
The picture we have painted is that neither guy is quite Hall of Fame worthy. I think Ventura deserved a better fate based on the fielding numbers, but I can’t that he should be in the Hall of Fame. Longoria will probably have the same fate when his time comes. Both players are in the Hall of very good and not the Hall of Fame.
The final nail is in the coffin. If either player had performed well in the postseason we could excuse their shortcomings on the other end. Neither were a part of a World Series winning team. Neither put up the numbers in the postseason necessary to get their teams over the top.
The picture we see is clear. Neither of these two are quite good enough to justify a Hall of Fame vote. One of the key points to this whole exercise is to find the best player at each position not in the Hall of Fame. Neither of these two are close to that. So, we tip our hats to good careers and move on.