Larry Walker’s Credentials Bear Repeating
On this year’s Hall of Fame ballot, four former players saw at least a 10-point increase in their voting share over the previous year. Vladimir Guerrero sailed into the Hall of Fame, Edgar Martinez solidified his status as a near-lock for next year, and Mike Mussina looks like a strong candidate for the 2020 class, if not the 2019 one.
Larry Walker, on the other hand, needs a lot of help. He received just 34.1% of the vote this year, leaving just two more cycles for him to reach the 75% threshold required for election. It’s not just that Walker needs some help to get elected: he wants it, too. And, most importantly, he deserves it.
Paul Swydan previously made a good case for Walker’s inclusion in the Hall, comparing him very favorably to Vladimir Guerrero. Here, though, I’d like to directly address a few points that still seem to cause confusion.
He Wasn’t Just Good Because of Coors Field
A lot of the arguments for Larry Walker’s inclusion in the Hall — including on sites like this one — are based on his very impressive 68.7 WAR. That figure ranks 66th all-time among position players and 39th since Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier. His WAR is sixth in that time among right fielders, just behind Reggie Jackson and ahead of every other right fielder you can think of except for a handful of all-time greats in Hank Aaron, Roberto Clemente, Al Kaline, and Frank Robinson
Walker doesn’t lack for impressive numbers by traditional measures. He has a lifetime .313 batting average, for instance, behind only Clemente, Vlad Guerrero, Tony Gwynn, Stan Musial, and Ted Williams among outfielders who’ve recorded at least 8,000 plate appearances over the last 70 years.
Walker also fares well by counting stats. He hit a lot of home runs, a ton of doubles, and stole over 200 bases. The list of players with more doubles, triples, homers, and stolen bases is a pretty small group, composed of just Aaron, Carlos Beltran, Barry Bonds, Andre Dawson, and Willie Mays. He won an MVP award in 1997, receiving more than three-quarters of the first-place votes from the writers. He also has seven Gold Gloves, five All-Star appearances, three Silver Sluggers. He earned at least one vote for MVP in eight different seasons.
There are those who might dismiss Walker’s accomplishments out of hand simply because of Denver’s thin mountain air. It’s certainly true that, with regard to the counting stats, some mental adjustment is necessary. As for estimates of his overall value, though, such considerations are irrelevant: WAR already penalizes Walker for whatever benefits he received from playing half his games at Coors Field.
From 1995 to 2004, a period that encompasses the latter half of Walker’s prime and nearly all his decline years, Walker played almost all his home games in Colorado. His overall slash line, home and road, during that time was .332/.425/.616. His wOBA — a metric that incorporates all his singles, doubles, triples, homers, walks, and outs — was .438 during that same period. Only Barry Bonds produced a higher figure among players with at least 4,000 plate appearances in that 10-year timeframe.
Even after adjusting for Coors, however, Walker was still excellent. Weighted runs created plus, or wRC+, is essentially the park-adjusted version of wOBA, and Walker’s 147 wRC+ ranks 10th within the aforementioned sample. Walker, in other words, was still one of the top hitters of his generation.
Or, here’s another way to think of it. Assume, for a moment, that Walker had produced the same numbers while playing at a totally neutral park. In that case, Walker’s line would translate into a 165 wRC+. Accounting both for hitting and baserunning, that translates to 440 runs above average. Walker’s overall career value in that case would have transcended 80 WAR. In reality, of course, that didn’t happen. Walker did play at Coors. So he recorded a 147 wRC+ instead and “only” 316 runs above average on offense. He produced just less than 70 WAR. Coors, in effect, “cost” Walker more than one WAR per season.
Of course it’s appropriate to consider Coors Field when discussing Walker and is necessary to downgrade his numbers somewhat. Don’t do it twice, though. Keep in mind that WAR has already lopped off 20% of Walker’s total value during his time in Colorado. And he was still great. Discounting Walker’s statistics even further is unnecessarily harsh.
He Was on a Hall of Fame Path Before He Arrived in Denver
Walker recorded the best season of his career during his time in Colorado and gained the most notoriety while with that club. That said, Walker was playing on a Hall of Fame level before he even joined the Rockies, while he was still a member of the Montreal Expos.
There are a couple ways to illustrate this while also demonstrating that Walker’s production in Colorado was just a logical extension of his time in Montreal.
Consider: from 1990 to -94 (age 23 through 27), Walker averaged more than four wins per season, with a very good age-27 season in 1994 cut short by the strike. If we take his 14.4 WAR from the three years before he got to Colorado, prorate the strike-shortened campaigned, and weight the years accordingly (50% for 1994, 33% for 1993, and 16.7% for 1992), we come up with an estimated talent level of 5.3 WAR for Walker’s 1995 season, his first campaign in Colorado.
That’s not a bad estimate, turns out: Walker posted a 4.6 WAR in the strike-shortened 1995 campaign. Prorated to a full season, that’s equivalent to… 5.3 WAR exactly. And, assuming a decent aging curve, a player who recorded 5.3 WAR in 1995 would be expected to produce roughly 45 wins over the 10 seasons from 1995 to 2004. That is almost exactly what he actually put up during his time in Colorado.
So, yes, alternate realities are impossible to predict. On the other hand, it seems that, even if Walker had gone to someplace that wasn’t Colorado, he could have been expected to perform as he actually did perform — which is to say, at a Hall of Fame level.
But that’s not the only way to arrive at that conclusion. Perhaps you prefer to answer the question using comps instead. With that in mind, I searched for outfielders from 1947 to -92 with 20-25 WAR from the age of 23 to the age of 27 who, like Walker, had at least 400 PA and a 120 wRC+ at 27. There were 14 outfielders who match those criteria. Of those 14, five are in the Hall of Fame. Of those 14, eight were corner outfielders and half of them (Jim Rice, Harmon Killebrew, Billy Williams, and Dave Winfield) are in the Hall of Fame. Another group (Roger Maris, Dave Parker, Reggie Smith, and Darryl Strawberry) were also impressive, if not Hall-worthy.
Of the players who played like Larry Walker when he was in Montreal, those who aged well made it to the Hall of Fame. Those who did not, fell short. Walker aged well and fits in nicely with the former group.
His Peak Compensates for His Lack of Longevity
WAR already does a pretty good job making the point above, but let’s take a look at the last 10 corner outfielders inducted into the Hall of Fame. Here they are, along with Walker.
| Name | PA | HR | AVG | OBP | SLG | wRC+ | Off | Def | WAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rickey Henderson | 13346 | 297 | .279 | .401 | .419 | 132 | 650.9 | -56.1 | 106.3 |
| Carl Yastrzemski | 13991 | 452 | .285 | .379 | .462 | 130 | 463.3 | -0.5 | 94.8 |
| Reggie Jackson | 11416 | 563 | .262 | .356 | .490 | 139 | 499.7 | -185.0 | 72.7 |
| Tim Raines | 10359 | 170 | .294 | .385 | .425 | 125 | 408.2 | -109.6 | 66.4 |
| Tony Gwynn | 10232 | 135 | .338 | .388 | .459 | 132 | 401.5 | -92.2 | 65.0 |
| Willie Stargell | 9026 | 475 | .282 | .360 | .529 | 145 | 457.5 | -185.0 | 62.9 |
| Dave Winfield | 12358 | 465 | .283 | .353 | .475 | 128 | 406.5 | -243.9 | 59.9 |
| Andre Dawson | 10768 | 438 | .279 | .323 | .482 | 117 | 230.5 | -11.8 | 59.5 |
| Vladimir Guerrero | 9059 | 449 | .318 | .379 | .553 | 136 | 370.2 | -115.0 | 54.3 |
| Jim Rice | 9058 | 382 | .298 | .352 | .502 | 128 | 297.5 | -106.3 | 50.8 |
| AVERAGE | 10961 | 383 | .292 | .368 | .480 | 131 | 418.6 | -110.5 | 69.3 |
| Larry Walker | 8030 | 383 | .313 | .400 | .565 | 140 | 427.9 | 3.5 | 68.7 |
I’ll note, first of all, that comparing Walker’s numbers to the average line produced by this group of 10 might actually be unfair to Walker himself. Yastrzemski and Henderson rank second and fourth in plate appearances, respectively, since 1947. They very possibly skew the average upwards. In terms of median performance, Walker actually compares even more favorably than this.
Even so, Walker makes up the performance gap relative to this group. His wRC+ is worse only than Willie Stargell’s. In terms of runs above average, he is right there with the Hall of Famers. He doesn’t have the same playing time as the rest, but he still comes out the same in total WAR, and that’s because of Walker’s defense.
Look at that list above and ask how many of those players were good at defense. Yastrzemski was, and that’s what helped him to become an inner-circle Hall of Famer. Andre Dawson spent a bunch of time in center field to help his numbers. Guerrero had a good reputation but never won a Gold Glove and ended up spending nearly a quarter of his career at designated hitter.
Walker ends up at the same place value-wise because he was better on offense and defense than most of the guys above. That helps him compensate for the relatively shorter career, for retiring at 38 after an above-average season (135 wRC+) instead of hanging around a few more years without putting up much value. Edgar Martinez has a better batting line (147 wRC+) with around the same number of plate appearances as Walker and he is likely to be elected next year. Voting for a slightly worse hitter with vastly superior defensive skills hardly seems like a stretch.
*****
Larry Walker needs a 41-point jump in the next two years to make the Hall of Fame. It would be a rare feat, but not an unprecedented one. Around 50 players since World War II have been elected in their third ballot or later, and roughly 10% made the same jump Walker requires in just two years time. The average jump from two cycles prior (where Walker is now) to getting elected (where Walker hopes to be in two years) is 24 points, which would put Walker at around 58% in two years.
Since the end of World War II, eight players have gone from under 50% to the Hall in two years, four players have gone from under 40% to the Hall in the same timeframe, and five players have added more than 40 percentage points in just two election cycles. Below is collection of the biggest two-year jumps since 1946.
| Player | Year Elected to HOF |
Voting % Two Years Before Election |
HOF Election % | Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Herb Pennock | 1948 | 20.3 | 77.7 | 57.4 |
| Hank Greenberg | 1956 | 38.5 | 85.0 | 46.5 |
| Joe Cronin | 1956 | 33.7 | 78.8 | 45.1 |
| Pie Traynor | 1948 | 32.2 | 76.9 | 44.7 |
| Luis Aparicio | 1984 | 41.9 | 84.6 | 42.7 |
| Harry Heilman | 1952 | 51.8 | 86.8 | 35.0 |
| Barry Larkin | 2012 | 51.6 | 86.4 | 34.8 |
| Tim Raines | 2017 | 55.0 | 86.0 | 31.0 |
| Eddie Matthews | 1978 | 48.7 | 79.4 | 30.7 |
| Jeff Bagwell | 2017 | 55.7 | 86.2 | 30.5 |
Hank Greenberg, Joe Cronin, and Pie Traynor didn’t face the sort of circumstances in their own candidacy as Walker does in his, but there they are. None of the modern players here, meanwhile — Bagwell, Larkin, and Raines — benefited from quite the boost that Walker requires, but they came pretty close.
Even if Walker’s potential move up were unprecedented, it might make sense: the backlog of deserving candidates and the influence of the 10-vote limit on support for Walker are also unprecedented in their way. In many years past, if a player received 34% of the vote, it is because only 34% of the voters have felt that he deserves one. Because of the high number of potentially deserving candidates over the past decade, however, it would be rather presumptuous to assume that only 34% of the voters believe Walker is a Hall of Famer given. Half of the voters fill out a full ballot and are prevented by the Hall from voting for all candidates they feel are deserving.
A fair number of voters will certainly have to change their mind on Walker before he is enshrined. After a couple larger Hall of Fame classes, however, and the subsequent clearing of the backlog, he likely already has a decent number of voters who might be able to vote for him for the first time next season.
Larry Walker has done everything that is generally expected of a Hall of Fame player performance-wise. He has solid counting numbers, hardware, and great WAR numbers as well. He was already on his way to a Hall of Fame career before he went to Colorado. He had 11 more great years after that and went out near the top of his game without padding a few worthless seasons to the end of an already great career. Walker needs some big gains the next two years to get into the Hall of Fame, but he deserves it.
Craig Edwards can be found on twitter @craigjedwards.
Larry Walker Rockies Career
590 home games- 154 homers 42 hr pace
580 away games- 104 homers 29 hr pace
Sorry but that’s just a huge gap. The only reason why his counting numbers are even solid is Coors. He has 335 homers instead of 383 and he’s not even close.
Le sigh
I didn’t really discuss it in my post, but it does get some mention in Paul’s linked above. Almost all players hit better at home than on the road so simply doubling the away numbers and assuming that’s what he would do in a neutral park is not a good way to think about the issue.
In addition, there is some evidence that playing home games at Coors makes away numbers even worse than we would expect. That 50-homer gap you’ve created because of Coors is actually way less, even if wRC+ didn’t already appropriately adjust his Coors numbers.
obligatory link to this excellent piece:
https://www.purplerow.com/2014/5/15/5712224/the-numbers-are-lying
I don’t know how much time you spent with those numbers, but if you’re just pulling the last four years of his career from the splits tool on Fangraphs (which is all that is up) he played that last year in St. Louis, where his wRC+ had a 60 point gap between home (164) and road (104) in wRC+. More specifically, he whacked 50% more homers at home, in a notorious pitchers park (9) than on the road (6) in the same number of at-bats. Would you like to blame that on Coors too?
This is besides the fact that a 29-home run pace in your last four seasons is generally considered pretty good, that home runs are not the only measure of worth, that home/road splits aren’t very accurate ways of capturing stadium effects…
Just looking at BR who has season splits- and using their OPS+ tool-
95 H 189 A 127
96 H 212 A 39
97 H 199 A 213
98 H 218 A 141
99 H 253 A 131
00 H 165 A 103
01 H 222 A 158
02 H 192 A 149
03 H 166 A 109
(the 96 number is not a typo for away- he had a away slash line of .142/.216/.307). The average taking away 96 and MVP year 97(best/worst)- 131. Last year had no 131 OPS+ guys- but had Hosmer, Rizzo, Arenado 132 Khris Davis 130. His home numbers same years- 201. (Trout was at 187)
I just see his numbers being way too Coors inflated. I’d be pretty sure voters have as well. Also, if you look at his numbers- he only hits 40 once and 30 only 4 times. Too short of a prime. I think it’s pretty easy to see why he isn’t in.
I actually went through and used the BR splits to manually calculate his road wRC+ during his Coors years a while back. I’m not at my home pc, so I can’t show my work, but it came out to 132 (.281/.385/.515), which is almost exactly the average for HOF corner outfielders in the table above. That assesses him no benefit for a possible Cooks hangover, or for the fact that almost every player hits better at home. No matter how you slice it, he produced at a hall of fame clip. Voters might think his numbers too Coors inflated, but by the standards they themselves have established they’re objectively wrong.
I have some real questions about the park adjustment used here if adding the humidor affected a supposedly park-adjusted statistic (as you mention below), and how you’re weighting each of those seasons (that should be a weighted average). And you can’t really just throw out a season with 300 PAs and say it is equivalent to one in which he had 664 PAs. But let’s take that all that at face value.
Walker spent a little over half of his playing career in Colorado, about 4500 of his 8000 or so PAs. What you’ve calculated covers about 3500 of that. About half of that was at home, so about 1750 PAs. If you’d like to lop 1/3rd of the value (which is the difference between his home and road sOPS+ that you’ve calculated here) for those 1750 PAs, that takes the total amount of value down by 30 runs, which penalizes total value by about 7%, and which takes the total amount of WAR down from 68.7 to 63.9.
(I think this is not actually correct because of position adjustments, though I don’t have that one handy…and it’s very close anyway)
So before taking into account the Coors hangover, the fact that many players perform worse on the road, the fact that this isn’t a weighted mean, that this doesn’t have any effect on his MVP year in Colorado (since that was excluded from that analysis), that the Park factor obviously isn’t working properly since the Humidor has an effect on his home/road splits, and that Expo27’s calculations actually have Larry Walker’s penalty at more like 3.5% than 7%…if you take all of that into account then you wind up with a guy who is slightly below Tim Raines and Tony Gwynn instead of slightly above him.
The problem you’re making is that you’re noticing these dramatic differences (which themselves are likely overstated) that only affect a fraction of a fraction of a fraction (etc) of his value.
1 thing I’d say also looking at his splits from BR- the 2002 and 2003 seasons at Coors were the smallest gaps of his career. Oh, and I looked… The Rockies started using the Humidor in…. 2002 https://www.denverpost.com/2017/05/13/colorado-rockies-baseball-humidor-coors-field/
How do Walker’s career road numbers compare to the average Hall of Famer’s road numbers?
Since most players play better at home, we need to do that correction for all players if we’re going to make a fair comparison. Road numbers only, what are the typical HoF credentials?
Jaffe’s JAWS has Walker right at the average line for HOF Right Fielders.
https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_RF.shtml
Here are the away splits for Dave Winfield and Vlad, who are below the JAWS line:
.286 BA / .356 OBP / .485 SLG
.312 / .376 / .536
Walker’s #’s outside of Coors:
.282 BA / .373 OBP / .500 SLG
So he’s a comparable OF to those two.
It’s not exactly what you’re asking, but Walker’s career road OPS (.865) is slightly better than Griffey’s career road OPS (.860).
Other notable road OPS from approximately that era:
Vlad: .912
Kent: .857
And some worse defenders:
McGriff: .887
Edgar: .926
And a little more recently:
Berkman: .940
And yet he still was outstanding in the outfield.
I don’t know if we have reputable statistics to do him justice, but he comes out almost exactly at zero for his career on defense.
To be more accurate, he comes out at 3.5 runs *above average* on defense for his career, which is very good for a corner outfielder (that is after the positional adjustment). The list of corner OFs who have 8,000 or more PAs and above average defensive value is actually quite short (I count 10 between LF and RF, though I’m not sure the positional breakdown is accounted for in the leader boards (some players with time spent in CF, etc. appear to be included in the LF/RF leaders).
If you just look at all OF (including CF) with a minimum of 8,000 PAs, there are only 21 who have above average defense (Walker being the 21st on the list).
Yeah, I was surprised to see Vlad at -115 for his career, so 3.5 is pretty legit.
I would love a discussion of the quality of the data that Larry Walker’s defense is based on. Not saying he wasn’t a quality defender, but quantifying something without valid data is just deception.
Actually Coors penalizes WAR on defense too. Coors has a huge outfield (probably the 2nd biggest at the time behind KC) – but it is adjusted like a hitters park (all small outfields).
He had a phenomenal arm. But at Coors that just doesn’t matter statistically. Maybe there is some data showing the batters/runners who didn’t stretch an extra base because he was in right field. But even if there is it would get drowned out by the high run scoring environment at Coors – which is a statistical outlier and normal distribution statistics (eg mean or standard deviation) SUCK at dealing with systemic outliers.
Can someone summarize why this data is wrong? I see 75 down-votes as of this moment, so it is must be pulled from thin air (pun intended). I get that there are arguments for more complex analysis, but are the splits correct?
I think the point is that we have ways to look at Coors Field with nuance and correctly adjust for the advantage, and his response is basically “Derr, more home runs at Coors, derr…”
He basically just cuts off the 50 home run difference, which is a dubious thing to do considering plenty of guys do better at home than on the road, and then says his “counting numbers” wouldn’t have been close, which also presupposes that we should be setting counting number cut offs below which you are ineligible for the HOF.
I was asking about the raw numbers. It sounds like those are correct. Whether you agree with his take or not (not hard to follow why you disagree), he points out a stat that people are going to hold against him.
No idea he was so productive in his last MLB season! 135 wRC+ for the Cards in 100 games in 2005.
And not at Coors!
My favorite line out of Swydan’s piece:
“Even at the tail end of Walker’s career, when he had endured eight surgeries and it hurt for him to turn his head to the left, Walker still had a better arm than Guerrero.”
https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/if-you-vote-for-vlad-you-have-to-vote-for-walker/
Larry Walker, man. Dude could play.
Walker had a better arm than Guerrero… What does the methodology look like for that?
This is all well and good, but you failed to account for the fact that Derek Jeter will need the entire 2020 HOF weekend to himself. Sorry, Larry.
This seems such a shame that Larry Walker’s Hall of Fame chances are on life support. Just in recent years, the 4th best Expos outfielder has been elected. The 3rd best Expos outfielder has been elected. The 2nd best Expos outfielder has been elected. But we can’t get the best Expos outfielder in??
Well said. Walker isn’t getting in (at least not in the next two years). Too many writers treat Coors like PEDs — automatic disqualification. Yes that’s stupid, it’s also true.
As well, I think there’s a group that complains about compilers while simultaneously not voting for high peak players who didn’t hang around until 42 compiling.
And then there are those whose bar suggests they believe the Hall should only have 50-75 players rather than the 200+ it has.
Net net, Walker is a clear HoF — the table says it all — but too many of those with the votes can’t see it. I do expect a big jump next year as 4 guys went in and only one obvious HoF added to the 2019 ballot.
(bracing myself to be down-voted…)
Walker’s #’s outside of Coors:
.282 BA / .373 OBP / .500 SLG
If you take his numbers outside of Denver and extrapolate them for the rest of his career, you’d get a total stat line that looks like this:
1956 H / 426 2B / 45 3B / 333 HR…
…which basically looks like Moises Alou’s career slash line (2134 / 421 / 39 / 332 HR).
Now, Walker’s case doesn’t rest on his bat alone – and we don’t need to adjust for Coors here.
Walker is Curt Flood with a glove (career 95 runs saved vs. Flood’s 99; both won seven gold gloves) and Brett Gardner on the base paths.
So the Q becomes – Is a Brett Gardner / Curt Flood / Moises Alou hybrid a surefire Hall of Famer?
At the very least… it’s on the edge.
That slash line, FWIW, is pretty similar to Tim Salmon’s 2001, where he put up a 135 wRC+.
Obviously it would be better to calculate his wRC+ outside of Coors instead of picking a random guy’s season in there and comparing him, but since Larry Walker’s career wRC+ is only 140, I’d say this isn’t that big of a deal, especially since a lot of players do worse on the road than at home.
And Jim Rice’s stats away from Boston were .277/.330/.459, or a worse OPS than Scott Schebler or David Peralta just put up. A flawed analysis doesn’t raise interesting questions.
That’s a big leap to assume his road numbers are reflective of his true talent. Especially given what we now know and continue to learn about the Coors Hangover plus the fact that most players hit at least a bit worse on the road regardless of what their home park is.
While WAR and wRC+ adjust for the average change from Coors, there’s no reason to assume it impacts everyone equally. To me it seems like Coors helped him. We might still want to give credit for that but I think it still helped him even after adjusting for park
There are probably a certain subset of voters who consider Walker lumped in with all of the other really good hitters from that era. For instance, Walker and McGriff each provided a little more than 400 runs above average on offense. Walker is perceived as having better rate stats because he didn’t play when he was injured and because he played in Colorado. But Walker is more valuable overall, because he brought a lot of value on defense.
More of these articles are needed for the types of players whose case is due to a well rounded set of skills.
Bonus graph: http://www.fangraphs.com/graphsw.aspx?players=1003091,455,11477,4940
I know it’s subjective, but Walker is maybe the best baserunner I have ever seen. Getting the extra base when it was available, and not running into an out when it wasn’t. And he was a phenomenal defender, not just a really good one.
I do wish he had managed to play a few more games than he did, but anyone who watched him in his prime knows this guy belongs in Cooperstown.
I’m not sure I agree that Walker was on a HOF path before going to Colorado.
When he was with Montreal, he averaged 4.3 WAR per 600 PAs. That doesn’t strike me as a HOF level, particularly for what should have been his peak years (ages 23-27).
So the idea that he would be projected for 45 WAR from ages 28-37 seems a bit unrealistic. And while he did, in fact, accumulate 49.2 WAR during that time period, he did so by averaging 5.9 WAR per 600 PAs.
That being said, obviously some players do get better as they age. And Walker may have been one of them. One of the theories that I’ve heard is that Walker came to baseball very late. Hockey was his first love and he only turned to baseball when becoming a professional hockey player didn’t work out.
Here’s a very telling quote from Wikipedia:
“Recalled Walker later in his major league career, “I’d never seen a forkball, never seen a slider. I didn’t know they existed. I had never really seen a good curveball. In Canada, as a kid, we’d play 10 baseball games a year. Fifteen, tops. Some pitchers had a thing they’d call a spinner, but nothing like this. Baseball just wasn’t big. The weather was against it. Nobody ever played baseball thinking about making the major leagues.” He was also unaware of many of the rules, attesting to his lack of experience playing when he turned a professional.”
Isn’t that the type of player that we might expect to get better as he ages? Someone who got by on raw athletic early on, but improved later when he was able to combine that athleticism with actual knowledge and skills?
Larry Walker is 1 of 2 players ever with an ISO of .250 or more, a .400+ OBP and over 200 Stolen Bases, the other one is Barry Bonds.
That covers power, getting on base and baserunning
His .965 OPS is 16th on the all-time list, that’s also helped by the rarefied air of Denver, correct, but consider this.
Walker’s 140 wRC+, sits ahead of Vladimir Guerrero, Joe Morgan, Ken Griffey Jr, George Brett, Fred McGriff, Wade Boggs, Rod Carew, Tony Gwynn, Jim Edmonds, Carl Yastrzemski and several others, it places him right in line with Alex Rodriguez (141), Chipper Jones (141), Mike Piazza (140), David Ortiz (140), Duke Snider (139) and Reggie Jackson (139), how about that for company
Wrote a full piece on it
Larry Walker career home/road wRC+ : 150/126 : 24 point gap
Barry Bonds career home/road wRC+ : 214/190 : 24 point gap
My point: MLB hitters hit better at home; even the best of them and regardless of whether they play in favorable or unfavorable home parks for hitting. Walker’s career splits are not abnormal.
Bonds wRC+ for his entire career is 173. How’d you get his career road wRC+ to 190?
Good point: I pulled those numbers from the FG splits pages for each player; in retrospect those splits numbers look like they only go back to the 2002? season when you select “career”.
Still this captures the “incredible hulk” phase of Bond’s career and 2.5/4 Walker seasons still with the Rox.
FWIW: Walker put up a 164 home / 104 away split in his final season playing as a St. Louis Cardinal and 145 / 167 in his 2004 season which was 50/50 Rox/Cards (SSS only ~80 games played that year).
The full Walker in Colorado seasons captured by FG splits data:
2003: 136 / 104
2002: 158 / 139
Bonds SFG season captured by FG splits data:
2007: 162 / 152
2006: 149 / 143
2005: 174 / 154
2004: 271 / 197 (LOL)
2003: 238 / 185
2002: 231 / 253
Anybody know where wRC+ splits are available from before 2002?
Because fangraphs splits is only offered from ’02.
Looking at Bonds’s entire career,
H: 379 HR .301 .449 .618 1.067
A: 383 HR .296 .440 .597 1.037
It is important to note that Bonds mostly played in
pitcher friendly ball parks, so adjusting it should make the gap larger.
For comparison, if we look at Walker,
H: 215 HR .348 .431 .637 1.068
A: 168 HR .278 .370 .495 .865
As a point of reference, pooling across all batters in 2017
Home: .261/.331/.437 OPS .769 wrc+ 101 3102 HR
Away: .249/.318/.415 OPS .733 wrc+ 92 3003 HR
Based on his away statistics, Walker should have been something like a career OPS .890 player in a neutral park rather than OPS 0.965 he is.
“It is important to note that Bonds mostly played in
pitcher friendly ball parks, so adjusting it should make the gap larger.”
…so…it is not important to note that Walker mostly played in a hitter friendly park, so adjusting it should make the gap larger too…?
Ultimately Walker is undone by his inability to stay healthy for full seasons. The poster above made a comment about compilers vs high peak/short career guys and I think it’s a great point. But Walker was ultimately neither. While he qualified for the batting title 11 times (if you include the shortened 1994), he managed 600 PA only twice in his career (& one of those was 601 PA). If he had managed full seasons more often, he would have managed even more MVP caliber seasons. He won the one MVP but only had 2 seasons with more than 5.4 fWAR. He had a lot of years where he was headed that way but just didn’t get in enough PA. Then, because of injuries, he didn’t stick around into his 40’s to get a bunch of compiler years.
While I agree that there are almost certainly a lot of HOF voters who just dismiss Coors out of hand, I don’t think it’s unfair to place a higher standard on guys who spent significant time in Coors. I understand park-adjusted stats but he hit 383 HR playing in the best offensive era in history in the best offensive ballpark ever (by far since most of his career was pre-humidor). He has a lower BA and fewer HR and RBI than Guerrero who didn’t play in Coors for over half of his career and to many writers those are still the main benchmarks and always will be.
Ultimately, I think that if Walker had gotten the extra 1,000-2,000 PA that most HOFers have over Walker, he would have cruised in 1st ballot. But he didn’t and he’s probably going to end up missing out because of it. (The change to the 10-year limit also hurts him quite a bit)
I’d vote for the guy but I’m a big Hall guy.
“I understand park-adjusted stats but he hit 383 HR playing in the best offensive era in history” so how does that apply, HR and best offensive era referring to steroids bloating HR numbers, to current players considering the last few years have surpassed the steroid era? Actually looking at the linked article below the HR’s never really tailed off after the steroid era but remained fairly constant.
https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/it-remains-a-game-of-constant-home-runs/
Walker, by all accounts, was steroid free throughout his career. He somehow still managed to out-produced the many steroid users.
so have many clean players in the post steroid era (if we are too believe they are clean).
Great point about his injuries. Hadn’t realized just how often he missed time.
His totals in the standard counting stats are pretty mundane as a result. 383 HR in that era really doesn’t feel that amazing. There are 9 hitters who have 600+ career HR, and Walker overlapped with 6 of them.
He’s also not top 100 in career Runs or RBI, and only has a bit above 2k hits.
I’d also vote for him, but for people who like traditional offensive milestones, he falls pretty short.
Most important skill set to get to cooperstown is health. Walker had an injury shortened career and it’s hurting him
Walker hit 154 HRs (40.2% of his career total) in 2,501 PAs (31.1% of his career total) at Coors. However, you have to consider that this was during the post-expansion HR friendly era and also during his apparent prime as a hitter, so even if he didn’t sign with the Rockies after leaving Montreal, he probably would have hit a disproportionate number of his HRs for his career at whatever home park for whichever team he signed with.
What’s interesting to me is he hit a HR in 6.2% of his PAs at Coors (compared to 4.5% for his career), but there are several parks where he hit HRs with more frequency. He apparently loved Padres pitching, because he hit 23 HRs in 322 career PAs at Jack Murphy/Qualcomm (7.1%). He also hit HRs at a 6.8% clip at Cinergy Field, 6.0% at River Front, 5.9% at Turner, 5.8% at Candlestick. My memory of those cookie cutter stadiums could be off, but I don’t believe any of those were considered HR friendly parks. There’s also a slew of parks where he played only a few games (O-Co, Jacobs Field, Rogers Center, Aneheim Stadium, Dolphins/Jacobs Field, Kauffman, Metrodome, Safeco) but collectively hit a HR in 12.3% of 117 PAs.
Thank you Craig. I’ve been dismayed at the lack of votes Walker received in this HoF go around and really hope that someone picks up the torch for him, similar to what Jonah Keri did for Tim Raines last year.
Also consider this: Bryce Harper has a 141 wRC+ through his first 6 seasons. So Larry Walker’s *career* 140 wRC+ is essentially prime-Harper. If Harper continued hitting at this level for another decade he would be a first ballot shoe-in, no questions asked. Not the case for Walker, unfortunately.
and a big part of why Harper would be a 1st ballot lock is that he would have already with another 600 pa’s per year had a good 1200 more plate appearances over Walker.
Also helping Harper is he started when he was 19. He’s entering his age 25 year. He’s got already 150 career homers and 785 hits. Walker entering same year was entering his 3rd full year and had only 35 homers and 250 hits. Walker with another 115 homers and another 535 hits would be a lock.
I would hardly call what Harper has been is prime-Harper. I’d say the next 5-6 years are his prime.
Walker on the Road career
278/370/495
.865 OPS
Beltran’s career
279/350/486
.837 OPS
Beltran was a CF, different evaluation of a player’s value, i get all of that, but the numbers show as a hitter, only as a hitter, Walker’s road numbers are an improved version of what Beltran’s career was
his road OPS of 865 is better than the career marks of Carlos Beltran (836), Buster Posey (850), Darryl Strawberry (862), Paul O’Neill (833), Don Mattingly (830), Chase Utley (828) to name a few.
Hard to care about the HoF, even putting aside all the PED arguments (and those arguments make it worse).
With recent inductees like Jack Morris and Trevor Hoffman, and going a bit further back, Jim Rice, you can make comparison arguments for a huge swath of players and lots of guys with objectively better careers than those HoF’ers will remain outside the HoF. There’s no hope of even somewhat reconciling it all in a consistent way.
I actually think it’s hard *not* to care about the HoF. The numerous comments and articles advocating for everyone to stop caring about the Hall of Fame only seem to underscore how much people do care about who gets in and who doesn’t. (Not to mention any fangraphs article about the Hall of Fame gets heavily commented on).
I also don’t think a little controversy is a bad thing. It seems like it makes people care even more. I wish there were better results in recent years. But there have certainly been other dud Hall of Famers elected in years past, and there are positives in recent years, too: Tim Raines, Alan Trammell via Veterans Committee, and Edgar Martinez on the precipice of joining. I think there’s real hope that things are becoming more consistent, and even more hope that the Hall of Fame stays relevant.
That’s always been true. The Veterans Committee back in the 60’s and 70’s put in a TON of guys from the 20’s and 30’s who have no business being in the HOF. If anything, the inductees over the last 20 years are quite a bit better than they’ve ever been.
One other very important factor, only 31% of Walker’s career AB’s were at Coors Field.
Walker should be in. And it’s not particularly close.
The real questions this situation raises are:
— What does an offensive player in Colorado have to do in order to gain entry into the HoF? If Walker wasn’t good enough is there some standard that would be? Barry Bonds-like production?
— How do you treat pitchers in Colorado? Are voters prepared to put in a player with 4+ ERA? Should we be getting ready for a Jon Gray HoF entry? If the offensive bar (using traditional stats) is raised incredibly high you must also lower the pitcher bar by a similar amount.
It’s silly to talk about BA and ERA but apparently, most HoF voters are still smitten with traditional stats.
I think Moyer should get into the Hall of Fame just for having the balls to bring his 70 MPH junk to Colorado in his late 40s.
The GM that needed him to bring that 68 mph heater belongs in a very special hof wing
Do we have fastball averages for Moyer in his late 20s? I think we only have it for the latter part of his career, when his fastball averaged in the low 80s.
If he was anything like that earlier in his career, he deserves to be inducted into the junkballer wing of the Hall of Awesome, alongside luminaries such as Barry Zito, Mark Buehrle, and Livian Hernandez.
“The list of players with more doubles, triples, homers, and stolen bases is a pretty small group, composed of just Aaron, Carlos Beltran, Barry Bonds, Andre Dawson, and Willie Mays.”
I don’t like these unbounded comparisons as you end up with a list of players basically the players equal at the very least and typically far better.
The only players better than Reggie Sanders in all four of those stats are Bonds, Mays, Beltran and Dawson and I’m not sure that is a good reason to put Reggie Sanders in the Hall of Fame.
—
In these four stats, Walker, Joe Carter and the average of the five players you listed
PLAYER SB 2B 3B HR
Walker 230 471 62 383
Carter 231 432 53 396
“Comps” 344 563 98 610
Agreed.
Copying off from a previous poster.
Fun with selective, arbitrary lists:
The list of players with 300 HR, 300 SB and 100 3B:
Babe Ruth
Willie Mays
. . . .and Steve Finley
Damnit…I took your list as gospel and texted it to a buddy of mine before verifying. Babe Ruth has nowhere near 300 SB haha
Oops… my bad.
turns out that the list of players with 300 HR, 300 SB and 100 3B is actually
Willie Mays and Steve Finley period.
This time, I checked.
I have to confess, I think that may have been my list from a year ago from a Vlad for HOF column and it’s pretty clearly wrong. Not sure what happened there.
But you can still have fun with 300 HR, 100 SB and 100 3B. That still gives you a list of:
Babe Ruth
Willie Mays
Lou Gehrig
George Brett
Rogers Hornsby
. . . .and Steve Finley
He was playing at a HoF level before he got to Colorado. He played at a HoF level after he left Colorado. There’s no justifiable reason to think he wasn’t playing at a HoF level while he was in Colorado.
And now the follow-up NotGraphs post: “Larry Walker’s Repeating Bear Credentials”
I have long believed Walker had a Hall of Fame worthy career. I have nothing to add to the analytically-based arguments presented and discussed here.
But I seem to recall that Sporting News had an annual survey of active players in the 1990’s and Walker may have been voted the game’s best player by his peers a couple times. I have been unable to find those survey results, my memory may be slightly off, and player evaluations of their peers are not foolproof. But . . . being regarded at the top by fellow players does say something and does carry weight with some voters.
If someone can check what I seem to recall, that would be appreciated.
As far as HOF intangibles go, you can’t discount how important he was to raising the profile of baseball in Canada. He was the favourite player of all of the Canadians who came up playing baseball in the Justin Morneau/Jeff Francis/Adam Loewen era where Canadian prospects started getting exposure and were soon being drafted in the first round.
Averaging 6 WAR per year in your age 34-36 season in the steroid era with dessicated juiced balls at altitude has me lukewarm. Save the votes for Barry Bonds, at least he had to overcome a tough park
Age 22-29 – 27 WAR
Age 30-36 – 40 WAR
I like Walker and would have no problem with him getting in. But the problem for him, perception-wise, is that he doesn’t stand out from other players in his generation.
From 1989-2005 (his whole career), he comes in 5th in WAR, behind Bonds, Griffey, Bagwell, and Arod, and just barely ahead of Thomas, Palmeiro, Biggio, and Edgar.
If we set the PA limit to 4000 over that time period, he’s 9th in batting average, 14th in on base, 8th in slugging, and 16th in wRC+. And he comes out almost exactly at 0 for defense.
Now, that’s a bit of an unfair comparison, since it doesn’t include the entire decline phases of guys like Griffey, ARod, and Thomas.
But Walker comes out looking like a jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none when you compare him to his peers. Again, that’s not entirely fair, and that is still a supremely valuable skill set. But I think that’s the perception. He was good or very good at a bunch of different facets, but he doesn’t stand out as being one of the top 5 in any phase during that period, and once people penalize him for Coors it makes him look just good instead of very good.
I’m not saying any of this is fair, but I think this is what’s happening.
He’s overshadowed by guys like Gwynn, Helton and Vlad when it comes to average, Bonds, Griffey, and Arod when it comes to power, and a bunch of other outfielders on defense.
“From 1989-2005 (his whole career), he comes in 5th in WAR, behind Bonds, Griffey, Bagwell, and Arod, and just barely ahead of Thomas, Palmeiro, Biggio, and Edgar.”
I’m confused how this is a negative, perception wise. So, for his career he comes in just behind four shoe-in HOFers and just ahead of other guys who are in or, excepting Palmeiro maybe, should be? Seems like that’s an argument for, not against.
Yeah you described his ‘peers’ who are all HOF worthy players, steroids be damned.
Sorry. I didn’t word that well.
I meant that among saber and stats-inclined fans (like most readers here), the 5th in WAR is very impressive. But it comes from being good or very good in a bunch of different facets, instead of excellent in just a couple. That means non-saber fans have a hard time putting it all together in a “5 good/very good skills = excellent superstar.”
And he’s overshadowed by some of the greatest hitters ever in Bonds and ARod.
I also happen to think that the prevalence of one-time or two-time awesome hitting seasons by random non-superstars (Brady Anderson, Vinny Castilla, Luis Gonzalez, Paul O’Neil, Tim Salmon, etc.) makes Walker’s consistent very good hitting seem diminished, again to the non-saber crowd. It’s the old “anyone could hit in that era, especially in Coors.”
I don’t know how many of the HOF voters are saber-inclined or not, but the votes for Omar Vizquel make me think there are at least 35% who won’t be swayed by Walker’s numbers.
WAR did not exist. The perception which you speak of did not exist during the scope of his career. His strongest argument for greatness has been created after he hung up his cleats. In his day, he was not viewed as a superstar.
We need to sic Jonah Keri on them again.
But, for real, this is just another (rather egregious) example of the voters being out of touch.
Yes, but I feel Coors in my gut.
Anyone else find it amazing that Walker put together 68.7 career WAR in just over 8,000 PA’s while the 10 most-recent HOF corner OF’s in that chart averaged 69.7 WAR in almost 11,000 PA’s?
Great 5 tool player.
Would love to see another Expo get in.
Negatives,Larrys durability,and to a lesser degree splits.
Still cheering for him.
The case against Walker is not about his splits, but about his lack of longevity/health. When I look at hall of famers, I like to look at great seasons. If you don’t play enough in a season, you get docked a bit. Walker played 150 or more games once. He played between 140 and 150 games 3 times. He played between 130 and 140 games 5 times. In context, Gary Carter, a catcher, played 150 games 4 times, more than 140 another 4 times and more than 130 twice. When you are significantly less durable and reliable than a catcher, you need to have some damn fine rate stats. Walker is close, and probably gets over the top in counting stats when you factor in his plus defense. Still, he missed a lot of time, and that can torpedo guys with HOF ability, like it did with Mattingly and Wright to name a few New York guys. At his best, he was clearly a hall of fame caliber player. The question was did he play enough? It’s close.
His rate stats don’t qualify as “damn fine”?
313/400/565 – 412 wOBA / 140 wRC+ all seem pretty solid. Oh yeah … plus runner / plus defender.
307/358/471 – 361 wOBA / 124 wRC+ is Mattingly’s line. Less PA’s, below average defender / below average runner.
296/376/491 – 373 wOBA / 133 wRC+ is Wright’s line. 1200 less PA’s, similar runner / defender to Walker.
Wright is terrific but you are basically seeing mostly healthy and mostly peak numbers. Walker endured major injury after major injury. And he played through his age 38 season. On a rate basis, Walker is significantly better than either AND he played more games AND he played until he was older AND he endured 6 seasons of playing in the outfield in Olympic stadium (aka Wal-mart parking lot). How Dawson, Raines, Guerrero and Walker could even walk after playing there still stuns me.
Finally, I suspect you were using hyperbole but Walker’s 8000+ PA’s would actually rank 12th all-time for catchers since 1921. Pretty hard to make the claim that he was less durable/reliable than a catcher.
My take on Larry Walker is that he is a Hall of Famer. He was a damn good player for a long time. He is genuinely interesting to me for several reasons. 1) He played his best years in Colorado and people just didn’t care much for what happened in Colorado offensively in that era. He also played in Montreal, which although not a mile high, relatively few people payed attention. He was not a household name. 2) He played in the steroid era. What he did just wasn’t that impressive in the context of the era, which leads me to 3. 3) He only had two top 5 MVP finishes, which is generally reflective of his status in the game. MVP finishes are a bit arbitrary, but he was never regarded as one of the best players in the game – he was more consistent than great – except for his MVP year, which was in Colorado. It was all kind of a perfect storm to obscure his credentials.
Larry Walker is literally the anti-Vladimir Guerrero. In Larry’s era, some of his skills were underappreciated in that he played good defense and walked a lot. Truth was, people did not care much about that in his time. Vlad could care less about taking a walk and the difference between he and Larry on defense was huge according to some crude 90’s metrics – I don’t claim to actually know how they compared.
Modern metrics do not value what Vlad was and they greatly value what Larry Walker was. I find this very tough to reconcile as their careers are not of this era… well, Vlad dabbled in this era and it actually reflects very poorly on him as he survived long enough to have skills that were out of place in the current game. In the real world, I think every team would have preferred Vlad to Larry by a wide margin, but modern metrics don’t tell that story. If it meant hundreds of millions of dollars and MVP awards, I wonder if Vlad could have played things a bit safer on the bases and in the outfield and taken some more walks – I have had time thinking that he couldn’t have as he could do anything else that he wanted to on the field. In fact, that is why I think his son’s plate discipline is so advanced – he doesn’t want to be compared to his dad in that regard.
My point is not to discredit Larry Walker, but to point out that he was a player from a previous generation with stats that cater to modern metrics, which did not exist when he played. I don’t think he had a great case for the HOF 15 years ago, but his case is stronger today as we now value what he was. He had a great career, but I don’t think people actually noticed at the time.
Larry’s MVP, 7 gold gloves, 5 all star appearances, 3 silver sluggers, and at least one vote for MVP in 8 different seasons beg to differ…
Based on what you are replying to, you must be arguing that he is not a Hall of Famer. I think you do an adequate job of making that point. Gold Gloves? Is there a more subjective, meaningless award than Gold Gloves? Can you imagine what Gold Gloves were based on in the 90’s – that was pretty much the impetus for refining defensive metrics. If you won one last year, then that probably got you half way to winning the next two – what else would it be decided by? Errors? When your lead is Gold Gloves, well that is certainly not HOF-worthy stuff. All Star games? He was elected to the All-star game 31% of the time in his career. All-star games are a pretty weak HOF credential, but he didn’t even make it one of three years – that is probably the strongest argument against his Hall of Fame case. A single MVP vote? I don’t have a robust justification for why those don’t matter. I assume local writers get votes too… which would be what finishing outside the top 15 in your league looks like, which he did 3 times. As I mention, he only had 2 top 5 finishes and was rarely regarded as an elite player in his league.
Despite your argument, I still think Larry is a Hall of Famer. I agree that he was not regarded as a superstar in his day, but modern metrics appreciate his skill-set. The all-time greats build their credentials during their career, not after – those are the guys that get elected quickly. One of the great things about baseball is that there are guys like Larry Walker who accumulate recognition of their value after the fact. I like the idea of inducting the games superstars as well as players like Larry Walker.
The biggest flaw with modern analysis is the false idea of value. A win is worth this… this player is worth that… Value is absolutely subjective. $100 is worth far more to the person begging on the corner, than it is to the person with a roof over their head and a fancy car. Baseball values change over time as well, and Larry Walker is a good example of this. He wasn’t valued like a Hall of Famer in his career, but now he is. As people who judge baseball have changed their values, players from the past see their perceived values change as well.
To illustrate my point, this very article favorably compares Larry to Vlad using contemporary metrics. In their actual careers, they were not perceived as similar at all. If I were to apply your argument against Larry Walker’s stardom to Vlad, it would line up like this: 9 All-Star games to 5. I would say, 1996 was Vlad’s first year he actually had a chance to make it, so he was regarded as an All-Star 64% of the time – more than twice as often as Larry Walker. The ONLY years Vlad did not receive MVP votes were the ones he did not exceed 100 games played and his last season – which seems like an awful slight to a future HOF player. Larry did win several Gold Gloves, but defense was not valued in that era the way it is today – or accurately measured, which has given way to the field of defensive metrics. It seems odd to have Larry’s best quality to be based on the most flawed criteria from that era. Larry’s perceived value is higher now than it was in his career and I am OK with that. I think there is certainly room for underappreciated players in the Hall of Fame.
Craig, you leave out a very important point. If you believe Walker was not a PED user he looks much better. If you strip out the guys who performed better over that period like bonds, Sosa, McGwire, a-rod, palmeiro, biggio, and bagwell he looks like one of the best players of his generation.
If you are not going to vote for the PED crowd you should also be giving bonus points to those who did it the right way. He and Mcgriff don’t seem to be getting the votes that aren’t going to the PED guys and that is perplexing to me.
Good job sneaking Biggio and Bagwell into the list with McGwire and Sosa.
So how certain are you that Walker never used PEDs? Would you say more or less certain than you were about Ryan Braun in 2011?
There is simply no way to no who was or wasn’t using PEDs in that era (or any really) outside of the few positive tests or court cases: Bonds, Clemens, etc.
I have zero interest in attempting to tear down anyone’s legacy.
Nobody is certain of anything but most people believe that list plus a few others were users. The list of hall eligible players is pretty short. Stripping these people out it’s fair to assume his relative stats would all be better as would his grey and black ink.
If you are a hall voter who believes this you should be voting for walker
Larry Walker and Fred McGriff should be in the Hall of Fame in 2019. Playing in Canada, for no good reason, hurts their chances, just like it did Delgado. Walker’s home/road splits are his sticking point.
Vladimir Guerrero:
Home: .323/.381/.568 239 HR. 367 BB. 484 K
Away: .312/.376/.536 210 HR. 370 BB. 501 K
Pretty similar.
Larry Walker:
Home: .348/.431/.637 215 HR. 444 BB. 546 K
Away: .278/.370/.495 168 HR. 469 BB. 685 K
That’s a huge difference. The best thing is to get people to focus on Walker’s career averages, career totals, defensive strengths, awards, value. Not his WAR and so on as all that does is get people to dig up all the minutia. Focus an what matters, what he did.
Um, you know that Vlad played 8 years, more than half his career, in Montreal, right?
Larry Walker career road wRC+: 126
Vlad Guerrero career road wRC+: 133
Dan O’Dowd has claimed that the positive impact of Colorado on hitters overall numbers is greatly misunderstood because what it gives at home it takes away on the road. His claim is that it is very hard for Colorado hitters to adjust to other ball parks, that their muscle memory about things like tracking curve balls make it difficult to hit. So the fact that Walker’s road numbers are also very good, even though not nearly as good as those at home, indicate that he was indeed a great hitter, not just a product of Coors.