The White Sox finished the 2024 season with my fourth-ranked farm system, and now they’ve added four good prospects via their trade with the Red Sox centered around lefty starter Garrett Crochet, who is under contract for two more seasons. You can read about Crochet and the Red Sox here. Coming back to Chicago in exchange are soon-to-be 23-year-old catcher Kyle Teel, 2024 first-round pick Braden Montgomery, 22-year-old developmental righty Wikelman Gonzalez, and data darling 23-year-old infielder Chase Meidroth. Two of those players (Teel and Meidroth) have a good chance to debut in 2025.
I thought this deal was much better than what the White Sox got back from San Diego last March for two years of Dylan Cease. A blockbuster rule of thumb: Get back at least one high-probability everyday hitter. Teel fits the bill. He’s a well-rounded player who is a virtual lock to remain at catcher and who will probably hit for enough power to be the White Sox primary catcher a few years from now. Montgomery is a switch-hitter with immense lefty bat speed, and he may also turn into an everyday, power-hitting right fielder down the line. Meidroth (elite contact, no power) and Gonzalez (three good-looking pitches that don’t play due to poor control) each have a plus characteristic or two that should facilitate an eventual big league role, and both have a puncher’s chance to be more than that. While it’s painful to part with a talent like Crochet (who was a bold, injured draft pick in 2020), a four-for-one swap in which each prospect they acquired has a special skill and potentially meaningful upside gives the White Sox a great combination of depth and ceiling in this transaction. Read the rest of this entry »
“Hey, they won’t have to say ‘we tried’ this time.” I can’t attribute that quote to anyone in particular, but the Winter Meetings were abuzz with variations on a theme. After missing out on Juan Soto and Max Fried earlier in the week, the Boston Red Sox switched gears from free agency to the trade market and found their star. In a blockbuster deal, they’re acquiring Garrett Crochet from the Chicago White Sox in exchange for Kyle Teel, Braden Montgomery, Chase Meidroth, and Wikelman Gonzalez, as Julian McWilliams of the Boston Globe first reported.
This is the biggest trade of the offseason, and it’ll almost surely still occupy that position when next season rolls around. Pitchers like Crochet don’t hit the market very often. He blew the doors off the league in his first year of starting, pairing premium velocity with two excellent secondaries. He threw 146 innings, struck out more than 200 batters, and barely walked anyone while doing so. His strikeout stuff, exploding fastball, and lanky lefty frame call to mind Chris Sale, another Sox-to-Sox trade piece, and with the White Sox in the middle of a gut-renovation rebuild, he was always likely to get traded. The only questions were who for, and which team was most interested in adding him to their rotation.
We’ll cover the ins and outs of the prospects included in the deal in a separate post. Broadly speaking, though, the White Sox got a little bit of everything in their return. Teel is a Top 100 catching prospect approaching major league readiness with impressive speed. Montgomery is a high-risk, high-reward outfield prospect, the 12th pick of the 2024 draft. Gonzalez has mouth watering stuff that took a step back this year, and a sky-high walk rate to match. Meidroth is an on-base genius with questionable power and an uncertain defensive future. The White Sox have so many needs that they don’t have to be choosy about filling particular holes or looking for particular profiles. They just need talent. This return fits well with that best player available mentality. Read the rest of this entry »
DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW:
Baseball Analytics supports the decision-making processes throughout Baseball Operations, including Player Valuation, Player Development and Major League Strategic Information. Core responsibilities include predictive modeling, long-term research, report creation, and delivering the output of one’s work in a clear and digestible manner.
POSITION OVERVIEW:
The Boston Red Sox are seeking a Baseball Analytics Intern for the team’s Baseball Analytics department for a portion of the 2025 summer period. The role will support all areas of Baseball Operations while working closely with Director of Baseball Analytics, and our team of analysts. This is an opportunity to work in a fast-paced, intellectually curious environment and to impact player evaluation, acquisition, development and strategic decision making. This internship is for current college or graduate students pursuing a degree in an analytical field such as statistics, predictive analytics, data science, engineering, applied math, physics, quantitative social sciences, computer science, computer vision, or operations research.
This internship will run for 11 weeks. It will begin in May 2025 and end in August 2025.
RESPONSIBILITIES:
Statistical modeling and quantitative analysis of a variety of data sources, for the purpose of player evaluation, strategic decision-making, decision analysis, etc.
Effectively present analyses through the use of written reports and data visualization to disseminate insights to members of the Baseball Operations leadership.
Maintain working expertise of leading-edge analytics, including publicly available research and novel statistical approaches, in order to recommend new or emerging techniques, technologies, models, and algorithms.
Other projects and related duties as directed by the Director, Baseball Analytics, and other members of Baseball Operations leadership.
COMPETENCIES:
Aptitude for and ability to apply academic or applied experience in a quantitative field such as statistics, predictive analytics, data science, engineering, applied math, physics, quantitative social sciences, computer science, computer vision, and/or operations research.
Understanding of modern statistical and machine learning methods and a proficiency with popular data science languages and libraries.
Practical understanding of how to approach research questions to drive actionable insights.
ADDITIONAL QUALIFICATIONS:
Pursing or recently completed a Bachelor’s or advanced degree in an analytical field such as statistics, predictive analytics, data science, engineering, applied math, physics, quantitative social sciences, computer science, computer vision, or operations research.
Proficiency with modern database technologies including SQL.
Demonstrated experience with programming languages (e.g., R, Python).
Exposure to probabilistic programming languages (e.g., Stan, PyMC3).
Demonstrated ability to communicate technical ideas to non-technical audiences using data visualization.
Attention to detail while also having the ability to work quickly and balance multiple priorities.
Other programming and database skills are a plus.
In addition to the above requirements, all roles within Baseball Operations are expected to effectively demonstrate our universal competencies related to problem solving, teamwork, clarity of communication, and time management, along with embodying our culture of honesty, humility, relentlessness, and commitment to DEIB.
DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW:
Members of the Baseball Systems Team at the Boston Red Sox are focused on designing, building, and refining the software and data pipelines used within Baseball Operations. These tools and applications are an integral part of the decision-making process, are directly integrated in the workflows of all departments within Baseball Operations, and provide an efficient, consistent, and accessible experience when interacting with our internal data sources and applications.
POSITION OVERVIEW:
The Baseball Systems Summer Intern will be a contributing member of the baseball operations software development team and is responsible for the design and development of software solutions. This individual must have the ability to learn quickly and iterate toward good solutions. Asking questions, taking initiative, being persistent, and paying attention to details are all important qualities for this internship. This internship is for current college or graduate students pursuing a degree in computer science, electrical engineering, or another similar field of study.
This internship will run for 11 weeks and is located in-person in Boston, MA. It will begin in May, 2025 and end in August, 2025. We will hire two interns: one in Software Development, and one in Data Engineering.
RESPONSIBILITIES:
Create leading-edge baseball solutions together with the software development team and others on new and existing baseball systems.
Contribute to the design and implementation of the software architecture and embrace a software engineering mindset.
Actively participate with other software developers in design reviews, code reviews, and other best practices.
Identify and implement creative solutions for technical challenges.
COMPETENCIES:
Aptitude and ability to apply academic or applied experience in software development or data engineering related field.
An understanding of front-end development and web applications.
Ability to pick up quickly and think both creatively and critically to solve problems.
A basic understanding of contemporary baseball and/or sports analysis and development practices.
A team-player that collaborates effectively with technical and non-technical stakeholders.
ADDITIONAL QUALIFICATIONS:
Some experience with JavaScript, Typescript, Python, C/C++, C#, or other programming languages.
Some experience with SQL and database design.
Some experience with design and documentation, testing and debugging, code reviews, and source control.
High level of attention to detail.
Comfortable using communication tools such as Slack and Trello.
Ability to maintain confidential information.
Excellent time management skills.
In addition to the above requirements, all roles within Baseball Operations are expected to effectively demonstrate our universal competencies related to problem solving, teamwork, clarity of communication, and time management, along with embodying our culture of honesty, humility, relentlessness, and commitment to DEIB.
DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW:
The Operations group within Baseball Operations is focused on strategic planning, long-term initiatives, player valuation, talent acquisition and administrative management and logistics for the Major and Minor League rosters. We support and collaborate with multiple departments within Baseball Operations, utilizing efficient processes that contribute to informed decision making and long-term departmental growth.
POSITION OVERVIEW:
The Baseball Operations Intern will contribute to various facets of the operations domain, contributing to both daily function and longer-term growth of the department while enhancing expertise and building a strong foundation across the broader baseball operations infrastructure. The intern will support day-to-day processes and projects within the operations domain, including supporting the chief of staff and leadership, baseball strategy, baseball initiatives and both major and minor league operations, while also contributing to department wide initiatives and projects.
This internship will run for 11 weeks and is located in-person in Boston, MA. It will begin in May, 2025 and end in August, 2025.
RESPONSIBILITIES:
Assist with day-to-day baseball operations including administrative duties, strategic initiatives, content development, logistical management and research.
Prepare and maintain information and materials for key front office decision making and operation.
Support content generation for leadership decision making and communication.
Provide strategic and logistical support for important baseball events such as the MLB Draft and Trade Deadline.
Operate and train critical player tracking and player development technology.
Conduct market research relevant to emerging projects for baseball strategy and initiatives groups.
Creatively pursue ways to improve operations processes and generate ideas for future team projects.
Develop core baseball operations competencies through hands-on experience, education and mentorship.
COMPETENCIES:
Identify, analyze, and solve problems in a process-oriented manner thinking critically and strategically.
Work effectively with others and communicate in a structured and organized manner.
Decipher between tasks based on their urgency and focus on the highest leverage priorities.
Demonstrate a working knowledge of modern baseball metrics and contemporary player development practices.
Apply a baseline understanding of key metrics and methodologies in day-to-day responsibilities.
Aptitude for player analysis/evaluation and a knowledge of baseball markets and ecosystem across acquisition spaces.
Ability to develop proficiency with cutting-edge technology within and outside of baseball.
High level of attention to detail and proactivity in relation to our processes and organizational workflows.
Ability to interact with analytics and predictive models to support department requests, conduct research, and apply to decision making.
Commitment to personal and professional growth with the humility to learn and adapt.
ADDITIONAL QUALIFICATIONS:
Willing to work nights, weekends, and holidays.
Ability to multitask in stressful situations.
Proficiency in Microsoft Excel and PowerPoint.
Experience with SQL, R, Python is a plus, not required.
Fluency in Spanish is a plus, but not required.
Current undergrad or graduate student entering their final year of studies is preferred, but open to all applicants.
In addition to the above requirements, all roles within Baseball Operations are expected to effectively demonstrate our universal competencies related to problem solving, teamwork, clarity of communication, and time management, along with embodying our culture of honesty, humility, relentlessness, and commitment to DEIB.
Today, at FanGraphs dot com, we’re turning over a new leaf. The last two times Aroldis Chapman changed teams — when he signed with the Pirates last January and when he was traded from Kansas City to Texas seven months prior — Jay Jaffe and I both referenced the Tattoo Infection Incident of 2022. It’s memorable and useful as a shorthand for the ignoble end to Chapman’s tenure with the Yankees — though both of his stints in New York were to a greater or lesser extent ignoble throughout.
More than that, Lindsey Adler’s story on the situation introduced a novel clause to the sportswriting canon, a literary construction so vivid it clearly fascinated both Jay and myself for months after the fact. But no more. I’m going to write an Aroldis Chapman story without quoting the phrase, “veritable moat of pus.”
Oh crap, I said the phrase that pays. What a pity; with that said, I’ll surely have another opportunity to write a clean transaction story about the veteran left-hander when he changes teams again. Because if Chapman is still able to command a one-year, $10.75 million contract from the Red Sox, it seems major league teams are determined to keep giving chances to a player who ought to have exhausted the sport’s patience by now. Read the rest of this entry »
A couple weeks ago, I introduced the We Tried Tracker, which we are using to document each time a team claims that it was also in on a free agent who signed elsewhere. I was truly moved by your response. Many of you sent excellent leads on social media. The tip line I set up, WeTriedTracker@gmail.com, received 30 emails and only 26 of them were spam, which seems like a pretty good ratio to me. As things have gotten cooking, we’ve added color coding to the tracker, and (at the suggestion of Twitter user @YayaSucks) links to the original reporting for each We Tried. I will do my best to keep tricking out the tracker until it’s so bright and confusing that looking at it hurts both your eyes and your brain. Thank you to everyone who reached out with a tip, and please keep up the good work! So many teams are out there trying right now, and it is both our responsibility and our great privilege to award them partial credit for those efforts.
According to the Free Agent Matrices (which now contain the We Tried Tracker), 13 free agents have signed so far. In theory, that means there have been 377 opportunities for a We Tried, but that might not be the most reasonable way to look at things. We have so far documented five We Trieds, and I’d say that going 5-for-13 strikes me as a solid batting average, especially this early in the process, when only two names from the Top 50 are off the board. With that, let’s dive into the week in We Tried.
The second official We Tried of the offseason came in controversial fashion. On November 21, Dodgers manager Dave Roberts and A’s manager Mark Kotsay spoke at the USC Sports Business Summit in a segment titled Inside the Dugout: A Fireside Chat. Maybe it’s because I went to a tiny liberal arts college, but I’m really blown away by the USC Sports Business Association’s Adobe Creative Suite budget. Somebody’s not messing around with Canva.
Below is a still from the event that I grabbed from the SBA’s Instagram reel. This isn’t necessarily the point, but I think we should all take a moment to note the conspicuous absence of a fire.
That’s not a fireside chat, my friends. That is just a chat.
While chatting, Kotsay mentioned that the A’s had talked to free agent Walker Buehler, but that Buehler had told them he didn’t want to play in Sacramento. Right out of the gate, Kotsay was testing the limits of the We Tried. They usually come from reporters, and when they do come from a team source, that source is almost never the manager. Moreover, Kotsay was speaking to a group of college students. He probably didn’t expect his words to get out to the general public at all. It just so happened that one of those college students, Kasey Kazliner, is also a sports reporter who wasn’t about to pass up the opportunity to break a story. Kazliner posted the comment 15 minutes into the chat. Less than 70 minutes after it ended, the hardworking R.J. Anderson had already published a full article about it for CBS Sports.
The second factor is that Buehler hasn’t signed anywhere yet. A week ago, I would have told you that by definition, We Trieds have to come after the free agent has actually signed, but after conferring with Jon Becker, I see now that I was wrong. A We Tried simply has to come when the team in question has decided that it’s out on a player, and if there’s one thing the A’s love, it’s getting the hell out of dodge. It may have been accidental, it may have come in a fraudulent fireside chat, and it may end up coming months before the player in question actually signs a contract, but the A’s have officially backed into the second We Tried of the season.
I have to be honest with you, I absolutely love that literally one day after creating the tracker we were already splitting hairs and getting pedantic about what counted and what didn’t count. What better way to spend the offseason than engaging in some light pedantry? And what’s the point of creating a leaderboard if you don’t get to argue about the score? That’s what makes it sports.
Two days before Thanksgiving, Christmas came early. Scoopslinger Jon Heyman set a season high by breaking three We Trieds in two posts. At 11:15 p.m. Eastern, he posted, “Red Sox were in on both Snell and [Yusei] Kikuchi before losing out. They seek rotation upgrades and have preferred a lefty.” This is a true classic of the form. There’s no quote, no attribution, and no supporting evidence. The Red Sox were simply “in on” Snell and Kikuchi, which could mean absolutely anything at all. Maybe they offered more money than the teams that actually signed them. Maybe they’d been meaning to look up their ERAs on the back of a Topps card. Either one would make Heyman’s words technically true. It’s the doubling up that makes it art, though. The Red Sox couldn’t have bothered to reach out to two different reporters, just for the sake of not making it look like they simply texted Heyman a picture of their shopping list? You have to ask yourself how many names could appear one announcement before you’d start to doubt its veracity. I think the answer is three. Say Max Fried signs somewhere on Tuesday, and Heyman posts that the Blue Jays were in on all of Fried, Snell, and Kikuchi. At that point, you’re in list mode. Once the reporter is using a serial comma, we’ve officially entered the realm of farce.
Shortly after Heyman’s post, Mark Feinsand cited a source who also included the Orioles to the mix of the teams that were in on Snell. But the night belonged to Heyman. Less than an hour later, he posted his third We Tried of the evening: “Yankees had a zoom call with Blake Snell just today. But their near total focus is on Juan Soto. Their plan Bs need to wait a bit.” This is really mixing it up. We’ve got one juicy detail to go on, and if there’s one thing I know, it’s that when you really mean business, you hop on Zoom. Sure, the Yankees have a private jet, but nothing says “I really, truly want to give you hundreds of millions of dollars” like a glitchy video call. There is no better way to entice a potential employee to join your organization than by forcing them to watch via webcam as the pallid November sunlight plays off the blotchy skin beneath your eyes and your reverb-drenched voice intones the magic words: “We think you’d look great in pinstripes.” Why didn’t the Yankees just announce that they’d sent Snell a carrier pigeon?
On Friday, Andy Kostka reported that the Orioles were in on Kikuchi as well, bringing them into a tie for first place with the Red Sox. More importantly, it gave “We were in on him” a commanding lead in terms of the language used. Of the seven We Trieds, four took the form of a team being “in on” the player, while three other phrasings were tied with just one instance. With that, our update is complete, and I’ll leave you with our first leaderboards of the offseason. We will keep tracking as the offseason continues, and as always, please let us know if you see a We Tried out in the wild.
BONUS CONTENT: Last week, Johnny Damon went on the “Shut Up Marc” podcast, hosted by Marc Lewis. He talked about signing with the Yankees following the 2005 season and described how the Red Sox made him the subject of a particularly cynical We Tried:
I had four great years there and then I accepted with the Yankees, the contract… A couple days later I get a package, a DHL package from the Red Sox: four-year, $40 million contract. And it’s like, ok… So that’s kind of showing faith that they offered me a deal so that can tell to the media that, “We offered them a contract, he just didn’t take it.” So yeah, that’s how things work.
The following article is part of Jay Jaffe’s ongoing look at the candidates on the BBWAA 2024 Hall of Fame ballot. For a detailed introduction to this year’s ballot, and other candidates in the series, use the tool above; an introduction to JAWS can be found here. For a tentative schedule and a chance to fill out a Hall of Fame ballot for our crowdsourcing project, see here. All WAR figures refer to the Baseball-Reference version unless otherwise indicated.
For the past few election cycles, as a means of completing my coverage of the major candidates before the December 31 voting deadline, I’ve been grouping together some candidates into a single overview, inviting readers wishing to (re)familiarize themselves with the specifics of their cases to check out older profiles that don’t require a full re-working, because very little has changed, even with regards to their voting shares. Today, I offer the first such batch for this cycle, a pair of elite hitters who would already be enshrined if not for their links to performance-enhancing drugs: Manny Ramirez and Alex Rodriguez.
Like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, both sluggers have transgressions that predate the introduction of drug testing and penalties in 2004. Via The New York Times (Ramirez) and Sports Illustrated (Rodriguez), both reportedly failed the supposedly anonymous 2003 survey test that determined whether such testing would be introduced. Had they not pressed their luck further, both might already be in Cooperstown alongside 2022 honoree David Ortiz, who also reportedly failed the survey test. Alas, Ramirez was actually suspended twice, in 2009 and ’11; the latter ended his major league career, though he traveled the globe making comeback attempts. Rodriguez was suspended only once, but it was for the entire 2014 season due to his involvement in the Biogenesis scandal and his scorched-earth attempt to evade punishment — a sequence of events unparalleled among baseball’s PED-linked players.
As I’ve noted more times than I can count over the past decade and a half, my own policy with regards to such candidates is to differentiate between pre-2004 transgressions and the rest; while I included the likes of Bonds, Clemens, Gary Sheffield, and Sammy Sosa on my virtual and actual ballots, I have yet to do so for any player who earned a suspension for PEDs, including this pair — two players who at their best were a thrill to watch, but who also did some of the most cringeworthy stuff of any players in their era. They and the other suspended players were well aware of the consequences for crossing the line, yet did so anyway. While this personal policy began as a ballot-management tool at a time when I felt more than 10 candidates were worthy of a vote, I’ve found it to be a reasonable midpoint between total agnosticism on the subject and a complete hard-line stance. My sympathies tend more towards the former group — those who refuse to play cop for MLB and the Hall, reasoning such players have not been declared ineligible à la Pete Rose — than the latter, but I respect both positions.
Anyway, Ramirez debuted with 23.8% on the 2017 ballot, didn’t surpass that mark until ’20 (28.2%), didn’t top 30% until ’23 (33.2%), and fell back a fraction of a point on the ’24 ballot (32.5%). That’s eight years to gain less than 10 percentage points, meaning that he’ll fall off the ballot after his 10th year (the 2026 ballot).
Rodriguez debuted with 34.3% in 2022, barely inched up in ’23 (35.7%), and receded slightly in ’24 (34.8%). Given that Bonds and Clemens topped out in the 65–66% range in 2022 and then were passed over by the Contemporary Baseball Era Committee the following year, nobody should be holding their breaths for either of these two to get elected anytime soon, though it will be awhile before we stop hearing about them. Read the rest of this entry »
Tyler Holton got a 10th-place vote in American League MVP balloting, and as you might expect, social media reacted like social media is wont to do. Responses to the news leaned negative, with a number of people saying that they had have never even heard of him. Some were disrespectfully profane, offering variations of “Who the [expletive] is Tyler Holton?”
Needless to say, not everyone who posts on social media platforms is an especially-knowledgeable baseball fan. Which is perfectly fine. There are many different levels of fandom, so if you mostly just know the big names — the Judges, the Sotos, the Witts — all well and good. Follow the game as you see fit.
Those things said, it is high time that more people become familiar with Holton. Much for that reason, Toronto Star columnist Mike Wilner doesn’t deserve the brickbats he’s received for his down-ballot nod to the 28-year-old Detroit Tigers southpaw. What he deserves is applause. And not just because he was willing to go outside the box. Holton has quietly been one of MLB’s most effective pitchers.
When I interviewed him back in January, Richard Fitts told me that his goal was to be a longtime big leaguer in Boston, and that his focus was simply on becoming the best version of himself. He’s since taken important steps on both fronts. The 24-year-old right-hander worked on fine-tuning his repertoire and usage at Triple-A Worcester, then impressed after receiving his first call-up in September. Moreover, he etched his name into the record books. Fitts didn’t allow an earned run over his initial 18 2/3 innings — this over three-plus starts — the most ever for a Red Sox pitcher to begin his career. As of right now, Roster Resource projects Fitts to be in the Red Sox rotation next season, though that could change depending on Lucas Giolito’s health and whether they sign a frontline starter or two this winter.
The Auburn University product had recently come to Boston via trade when we spoke 11 months ago. A sixth-round pick in the 2021 draft, Fitts was acquired along with Greg Weissert and Nicholas Judice from the New York Yankees in exchange for Alex Verdugo. At the time he’d been relying primarily on a four-seam fastball, with a slider serving as his best secondary. He described the latter as being “a little bit in between” a conventional slider and a sweeper.
How does the current iteration of the 6-foot-4, 245-pound hurler compare to the one I’d spoken to last winter? Is he basically the same pitcher? I asked him those questions on the final day of the regular season. Read the rest of this entry »
The team that signs Nick Pivetta this offseason will be getting a veteran starter who, as my colleague Ben Clemens stated in our 2025 Top 50 Free Agents rundown, has “long been a favorite of pitching models.” The team will also be getting someone who believes in pitching to his strengths. The 31-year-old right-hander is studious about his craft, but with a notable exception. Poring over scouting reports isn’t his cup of tea.
“I think about it not as a specific hitter, but more of, ‘Is he a lefty or a righty?,’” explained Pivetta, whose past four-plus seasons have been with the Boston Red Sox. “I have certain sequences that I do against lefties or righties. I do the same sequences against either side, no matter the hitter.”
That’s not to say he totally ignores weaknesses. As Pivetta told me in our last-weekend-of-the-season conversation, there are certain hitters who struggle with a particular pitch and/or location, so he might vary his “same game plan around a certain spot.” But for the most part, he is “doing the exact same thing over and over again, just trying to execute.”
The extent to which that is optimal is open for debate. As his 50 Free Agents blurb spells out, Pivetta’s numbers suggest that he has never reached — and perhaps not even approached — his full potential. The stuff is unquestionably plus, but the consistency has clearly been lacking.
The Victoria, British Columbia native has pitched more than 1,000 innings over eight big-league seasons, so opposing teams have a pretty good idea of what to expect when he takes the mound. Moreover, certain lineups will present, at least on paper, a greater challenge for his pitch mix and standard attack plan. Might adherence to advance reports be a meaningful advantage add? Read the rest of this entry »
The following article is part of a series concerning the 2025 Classic Baseball Era Committee ballot, covering long-retired players, managers, executives, and umpires whose candidacies will be voted upon on December 8. For an introduction to the ballot, see here, and for an introduction to JAWS, see here. Several profiles in this series are adapted from work previously published at SI.com, Baseball Prospectus, and Futility Infielder. All WAR figures refer to the Baseball-Reference version unless otherwise indicated.
2025 Classic Baseball Candidate: Luis Tiant
Pitcher
Career WAR
Peak WAR
S-JAWS
Luis Tiant
66.1
41.3
53.7
Avg. HOF SP
73.0
40.7
56.9
W-L
SO
ERA
ERA+
229-172
2,416
3.30
114
SOURCE: Baseball-Reference
Even in an era brimming with colorful characters and exceptional hurlers, Luis Tiant stood out. The barrel-chested, mustachioed Cuban righty combined an assortment of exaggerated deliveries with a variety of arm angles and speeds that baffled hitters — and tantalized writers — over the course of a 19-year major league career (1964–82) and an affiliation with the game in one capacity or another that extended through the remainder of his life. “The Cuban Dervish,” as Sports Illustrated’s Ron Fimrite christened him in 1975, died on October 8 at the age of 83. No cause of death was announced.
The son of a legendary Negro Leagues and Latin American baseball star colloquially known as Luis Tiant Sr. — a skinny lefty, in contrast with the burly physique of his right-handed son — the younger Tiant was exiled from his home country in the wake of Cuban prime minister Fidel Castro’s travel restrictions, and separated from his family for 14 years. Against that backdrop of isolation, “El Tiante” went on to become the winningest Cuban-born pitcher in major league history, and to emerge as a larger-than-life character, so inseparable from his trademark cigars that he chomped them even in postgame showers. On the mound, he was a master craftsman whose repertoire of four basic pitches (fastball, curve, slider, and changeup) combined with three angles (over-the-top, three-quarters, and sidearm) and six different speeds for the curve and change yielded 20 distinct offerings according to catcher Carlton Fisk.
I covered Tiant’s life at length — and I mean length — here at FanGraphs shortly after he passed. Now that he’s a candidate on the Classic Baseball Era Committee ballot, I invite you to (re)read that profile for the biographical details of the man’s fascinating life and career, which began with Cleveland (1964–69), and included stops with the Twins (1970), Red Sox (1971–78), Yankees (1979–80), Pirates (1981), and Angels (1982). I’m devoting this space to a more thorough review of his case and quest for Cooperstown in the context of this ballot, particularly as he’s competing for votes with one of his former teammates and contemporaries, Tommy John.
…
Tiant finished his career with a collection of accolades that at first glance looks a little light for a Hall of Famer. He won two ERA titles, posting a 1.60 mark in 1968, the Year of the Pitcher, and a 1.91 mark in ’72, when after a three-season odyssey of injuries, different uniforms, and diminished effectiveness he worked his way from the bullpen to the rotation and became a Boston folk hero. While he additionally led his league in shutouts three times, he doesn’t have much additional black ink when it comes to traditional stats. He made just three All-Star teams and never won a Cy Young award, topping out with a fourth-place finish in 1974, as well as fifth- and sixth-place finishes. That’s a little misleading, however. In 1968, he accompanied that 1.60 ERA with a 21-9 record in 258 1/3 innings, but that year Denny McLain became the first pitcher in 34 years to top 30 wins, going 31-6 with a 1.96 ERA in 336 innings. It was only the year before that the Cy Young had been split into separate awards for each league, and voters could submit only one name; not until 1970 would they be allowed to submit a top three. McLain won unanimously, but it’s quite possible that Tiant would have finished second if voters had been allowed larger ballots; in the MVP voting, he tied for fifth with the Orioles’ Dave McNally (22-10, 1.95 ERA in 273 innings), with McLain (who won both MVP and Cy Young) the only pitcher above them.
As it is, Tiant scores a modest 97 on Bill James’ Hall of Fame Monitor, which measures how likely (but not how deserving) a player is to be elected by awarding points for various honors, league leads, postseason performance and so on — the things that tend to catch voters’ eyes. A score of 100 is “a good possibility,” while 130 suggests “a virtual cinch.”
Speaking of the postseason, Tiant was very good within a limited footprint, going 3-0 with a 2.86 ERA in 34 2/3 innings. The fractional two-thirds of an inning came in mopup duty with the Twins in 1970, the rest in ’75 with the Red Sox. He threw a complete-game three-hitter with just an unearned run allowed in the ALCS opener against the A’s; a Game 1 shutout against the Reds in the World Series; a four-run, 155-pitch complete game on three days of rest in Game 4 — a start that’s the stuff of legends; and then a valiant seven-inning, six-run effort in Game 6, when he faltered late but was saved by Carlton Fisk’s famous 12th-inning homer. Had the Red Sox won Game 7, this “hero of unmatched emotional majesty” (as Peter Gammons called him) might well have been the World Series MVP.
Whether or not Tiant’s basic numbers scan as Hall-worthy depends somewhat upon the era to which you’re comparing them. Pitcher wins are an imperfect stat to begin with for reasons statheads have spent the past 40-plus years explaining, but historically they’ve remained foremost in the minds of Hall voters, and so I think the following is at least somewhat instructive. Of the 53 pitchers who have collected somewhere between 210 and 249 career wins, just 15 are in the Hall, nine of whom began their major league careers before 1920. None debuted during the 1921–49 stretch; of the other six, four arrived in the 1950–65 range, namely Whitey Ford (236 wins, debuted 1950), Jim Bunning (224 wins, debuted 1955), Juan Marichal (243 wins, debuted 1960), and Catfish Hunter (224 wins, debuted 1965). The other two reached the majors over two decades later, namely John Smoltz (213 wins, debuted 1988) and Pedro Martinez (219 wins, debuted 1992).
Meanwhile, of the 38 pitchers in that 210–249 win range who aren’t enshrined, 11 debuted prior to 1920, six more in the 1921–49 period unrepresented within the first group, three in the 1950–65 range (Mickey Lolich, Jim Perry, and Tiant), 11 in the 1966–87 span, and then eight from ’88 onward, including three still active or not yet eligible (Zack Greinke, Clayton Kershaw, and Max Scherzer). If we set aside the pre-1950 group and the ones not yet eligible, that’s six out of 24 pitchers in this range who are in the Hall versus 18 outside. While none of the outsiders won a Cy Young, neither did Bunning or Marichal. Run prevention-wise, Hunter is the only Hall of Famer from this group with a lower ERA+ (104) than Tiant (114). Even so, Mark Buehrle, Tim Hudson, Kevin Brown, and Curt Schilling are all outside with an ERA+ in the 117-127 range.
Viewed from this vantage, it shouldn’t be surprising that Tiant didn’t get elected. But when he first became eligible, on the 1988 BBWAA ballot, he had reason for optimism given that Hunter — statistically the most like Tiant as expressed by his Similarity Score (another James creation) — had been elected just the previous year with a comparable win-loss record and ERA (224-166, 3.26 ERA) to Tiant’s marks of 229-172 and 3.30. The second-most similar pitcher to Tiant by that method, Bunning (224-184, 3.27 ERA), had received 70% on that same ballot. While slugger Willie Stargell was the only candidate elected via the 1988 ballot, Tiant received 30.9%, far short election but a debut hardly without promise; meanwhile, Bunning inched up to 74.2%.
Alas, both pitchers got lost in the shuffle on the 1989 ballot. Not only did Johnny Bench and Carl Yastrzemski both debut and gain easy entry with vote shares in the mid-90s, but Gaylord Perry and Fergie Jenkins also debuted, both with more robust résumés than either Tiant or Bunning in terms of statistics and honors. Both were former Cy Young winners with more than 3,000 strikeouts, with Perry owning a second Cy Young and membership in the 300-win club as well. Bunning fell back to 63.3%, while Tiant slipped to 10.5%.
First-year candidate Jim Palmer, a three-time Cy Young winner, jumped the line to gain entry in 1990, as Bunning slid to 57.9% and Tiant to 9.5%. When Jenkins and Perry were elected in 1991, Bunning aged off the ballot (he would be elected by the Veterans Committee in ’96), while Tiant sank even further, to 7.2%. He had missed his window; after Jenkins’ election, it would take until 2011 for another starter with fewer than 300 wins (Bert Blyleven) to gain entry via the writers. As “That Seventies Group” reshaped expectations for Hall starters’ credentials, Tiant never even climbed back to 20%, topping out at 18% in 2002, his final year on the ballot.
Tiant’s candidacy has fared similarly amid ever-changing ballot formats since then. In three appearances on the Veterans Committee ballots (2005, ’07, ’09), he maxed out at 25%. He’s now on his fourth appearance on an Era Committee ballot. He was considered alongside the likes of future Hall of Famers Kaat, Ron Santo, Gil Hodges, Minnie Miñoso, and Tony Oliva, plus this ballot’s Ken Boyer as part of the 2012 Golden Era Committee ballot, for candidates who made their greatest impact on the game during the 1947–72 period, as well as a similar cast that also included this ballot’s Dick Allen three years later. In both cases, he fell short of the level of support needed to have his actual vote total announced; customarily, the Hall lumps together all of the candidates below a certain (varying) threshold as “receiving fewer than x” votes to avoid embarrassing them (or their descendants) with the news of a shutout. When the Hall reconfigured the Era Committee system in 2016, Tiant wound up classified within the Modern Baseball Era (1970–87); after finishing below the threshold for vote totals on the 2018 ballot, he was bypassed for the ’20 one, a ballot that finally gave Dwight Evans and Lou Whitaker their first shots.
As you can see from the table above, Tiant’s Hall of Fame Monitor score (HOFM) is the lowest of the group, but he fares better via advanced metrics. He ranked in his league’s top 10 in WAR eight times, leading in 1968 (8.5) and finishing fourth in both ’72 and ’74. While he cracked the top 10 in ERA just four times, he did so in ERA+ seven times (including the two league leads), a reminder that toiling in hitter-friendly Fenway Park may have cost him some recognition. While he’s on the lower side of That Seventies Group in terms of S-JAWS, the adjusted version of my Hall fitness metric that tones down the impact of high-volume innings totals from earlier eras, his ranking is still impressive. The newer version jumps him from 59th overall to tied for 42nd with Palmer and Smoltz, two pitchers generally considered no-doubt Hall of Famers; meanwhile, he’s 45th in both career WAR and in adjusted peak. Voters won’t see another candidate above those rankings until Kershaw and friends (a quartet that also includes Justin Verlander) become eligible.
In introducing S-JAWS, I noted that Tiant is below the standard — the mean of all enshrined starters — but basically at the median (53.6). While he doesn’t particularly stand out next to a cohort of 300-game winners, he’s got much stronger advanced stats than Hunter (who nonetheless had a Cy Young and five championships going for him) and Kaat (a Cy Young winner but a compiler whose lengthy broadcast career helped his 2022 Era Committee election). His S-JAWS equals or surpasses some other enshrinees whose careers overlapped, such as Don Drysdale (53.7), Marichal (53.2), Bunning (51.4), Ford (45.5), Sandy Koufax (44.2), and Jack Morris (37.4), but those pitchers all have higher Monitor scores, with Bunning (98) the only other one below 100. The enshrined starters he outranks in S-JAWS mostly had shorter careers in earlier eras, where innings totals were higher and runs even more scarce.
I’ve wavered on Tiant, mainly in light of older versions of JAWS and in direct comparison to his Era Committee competition, because even beyond the numbers his case hasn’t always jumped out. On my virtual 2018 Modern Baseball ballot, I tabbed Marvin Miller, Alan Trammell, and Ted Simmons, but left my fourth slot empty because I didn’t see any of the other seven candidates (Tiant, John, Morris, Steve Garvey, Don Mattingly, Dale Murphy, and Dave Parker) as strong enough. Morris was elected, but Tiant is by far the strongest of that group by JAWS if not more traditional reckonings. If I had a do-over, factoring in his cultural importance as one of the most high-profile Cuban player success stories, from battling racism in the minors after being cut off from his family to his mid-career comeback and emergence as a folk hero, I’d consider him more strongly — but including him on that ballot would have hinged upon how much extra weight to give John for his own comeback after the pioneering elbow surgery that bears his name.
I’m still wrestling with Tiant versus John on this ballot. Tiant — who pitched in the same rotation with John in Cleveland, New York, and Anaheim — is squarely ahead on a performance basis, and in a vacuum I think he’s Hall-worthy; I’m pretty solidly in favor of any post-integration pitcher with an S-JAWS of 50 or higher. What I’m less sure of is whether Tiant will emerge as one of my top three on my virtual ballot, or whether Hall voters’ unfortunate history of waiting until after a candidate’s death to recognize them — see Santo, Miñoso, and Allen for just the latest in the litany — suggests that I should put aside my soft resistance to the 81-year-old John and prioritize voting for him while he’s still around to appreciate the honor. With three more candidates to evaluate, I have a bit longer to think about it.
