Scott Rolen Was Dominant
When a player first comes up on the Hall of Fame ballot, their career is likely still fairly fresh in a voter’s mind. It’s possible, however, that the fresh appearance can cloud the memory. After all, if a player is up for Hall of Fame consideration, they probably played 15-20 years, and the last eight of those seasons were likely out of that player’s prime. As we are now more than 15 years away from Scott Rolen’s prime, it is possible misconceptions and incorrect narratives are forming around the type of player Scott Rolen was when he played. He was dominant in his prime, but beginning his career on a team averaging 90 losses the first four seasons of his career and then moving to a team with Albert Pujols in a league with Barry Bonds tended to obscure Rolen’s dominance. His value as an all-around performer further hid his greatness.
While Rolen has taken a major step forward this season in Hall of Fame voting, he still needs another boost before he gets elected, so it is worth clearing up any misconceptions about his career. Looking at Rolen’s overall body of work, it’s not hard to see that he was a consistent performer at an All-Star level. As Jay Jaffe noted in his examination of Rolen’s case:
Rolen cracked the league’s top 10 in WAR a modest four times, but had six seasons of at least 5.0 WAR, tied for 10th at the position, and 11 of at least 4.0 WAR, tied for third with Boggs, behind only Schmidt and Mathews. That’s particularly impressive considering his career length. Take away his cup-of-coffee 1996 season, his injury-wracked 2005, and the two at the tail end of his career; in 11 of the other 13 seasons, he was worth at least 4.0 WAR, which is to say worthy of All-Star consideration. Only in 2007 and ’08 did he play more than 92 games and finish with less than 4.0 WAR.
Using FanGraphs WAR, Rolen actually has five top-10 finishes in league WAR. Those six seasons of at least 5.0 WAR help paint the consistently good picture, but it leaves a little out of the story. Let’s take a look at Rolen’s prime, which we’ll start with his first top-10 finish in WAR and go through his best season in 2004.
| Season | WAR | NL Rank |
|---|---|---|
| 1998 | 7.0 | 7 |
| 1999 | 4.8 | 19 |
| 2000 | 4.6 | 20 |
| 2001 | 5.6 | 13 |
| 2002 | 6.5 | 6 |
| 2003 | 6.2 | 9 |
| 2004 | 9.0 | 3 |
Rolen’s six five-win seasons are impressive as are his 11 four-win seasons in building up his case for the Hall of Fame, but his four seasons of at least six wins, including that nine-win season in 2004, might set him further apart. The only position players in history not in the Hall of Fame with at least four six-win seasons including a career single-season high of nine wins are Barry Bonds, Joe Jackson, Pujols, Alex Rodriguez, and Mike Trout. Now let’s see where Rolen’s WAR ranked among players from 1998-2004.
| Name | WAR |
|---|---|
| Barry Bonds | 66.8 |
| Alex Rodriguez | 55.7 |
| Scott Rolen | 43.8 |
| Andruw Jones | 43.4 |
| Bobby Abreu | 41.5 |
| Todd Helton | 40.3 |
| Chipper Jones | 39.6 |
| Brian Giles | 39 |
| Jim Edmonds | 38.4 |
| Sammy Sosa | 38.3 |
| Vladimir Guerrero | 38.2 |
| Jeff Bagwell | 37.8 |
| Manny Ramirez | 37.2 |
| Jason Giambi | 36.3 |
| Derek Jeter | 35.5 |
| Ivan Rodriguez | 35.4 |
| Gary Sheffield | 34.4 |
| Jeff Kent | 34.3 |
| Nomar Garciaparra | 33.5 |
| Jim Thome | 33.1 |
Averaging six wins a season for seven years isn’t consistently good, it’s consistently great. Rolen finds himself behind only two of the greatest baseball players in history. He’s just barely ahead of Andruw Jones, whose Hall of Fame case is built on his great early prime as he faded much more quickly than Rolen. There are five Hall of Famers below Rolen and a likely sixth in Derek Jeter. Looking at Rolen’s best seven seasons in a row can be a bit misleading as not every player above was in the middle of their primes like Rolen. One quick approximation is to look at players over similar ages. Here’s a table showing the best WAR over the last 50 years from age 23 through age 29.
| Name | WAR |
|---|---|
| Albert Pujols | 57.9 |
| Alex Rodriguez | 56.9 |
| Barry Bonds | 56.2 |
| Mike Schmidt | 49.9 |
| Ken Griffey Jr. | 48.8 |
| Frank Thomas | 46.3 |
| George Brett | 45 |
| Rickey Henderson | 45 |
| Mike Trout | 44.2 |
| Buster Posey | 44.1 |
| Scott Rolen | 43.8 |
| Andruw Jones | 43.3 |
| Wade Boggs | 43 |
| Johnny Bench | 42.7 |
| Cal Ripken Jr. | 42.6 |
| Jeff Bagwell | 42.3 |
| Gary Carter | 41.4 |
| Tim Raines | 39.8 |
| Mike Piazza | 39.5 |
| Chipper Jones | 39.3 |
That’s a list of dominant players. The only ones not in the Hall of Fame are Bonds, Jones, Posey, Pujols, Rodriguez, Rolen, and Trout (who still has two more seasons to go). To further make the point, I took a look at every seven-year stretch since 1970 to work in all ages and find the players who averaged six wins per season over a seven-year stretch. Some players accomplished the feat in multiple seasons, but this is the list of players who have done it with their high-water mark.
| Name | High 7-Year WAR |
|---|---|
| Barry Bonds | 66.8 |
| Mike Trout | 64.1 |
| Joe Morgan | 58.5 |
| Albert Pujols | 57.9 |
| Alex Rodriguez | 56.9 |
| Mike Schmidt | 56.8 |
| Wade Boggs | 56.1 |
| Rickey Henderson | 50.7 |
| Ken Griffey Jr. | 49.5 |
| Jeff Bagwell | 48.5 |
| Chase Utley | 47.6 |
| Frank Thomas | 46.3 |
| Johnny Bench | 45.7 |
| Buster Posey | 45.3 |
| George Brett | 45.0 |
| Cal Ripken Jr. | 44.9 |
| Gary Carter | 44.8 |
| Andruw Jones | 44.2 |
| Mike Piazza | 43.9 |
| Scott Rolen | 43.8 |
| Rod Carew | 43.6 |
| Miguel Cabrera | 43.3 |
| Chipper Jones | 42.4 |
The only non-Hall of Famers on the list are Bonds, Cabrera, Jones, Pujols, Rodriguez, Rolen, Trout, and Utley. A great number of Hall of Famers over the last 50 years never put up seven-year stretches close to Rolen. While the stellar third baseman was more good than great in his 30s, averaging closer to three wins per season, that solid play is what separates him from a player like Andruw Jones, who also has a good case for the Hall.
Maybe the seven-year stretch is too long of a period if we wanted to measure dominance. Maybe six wins a season is still in some minds more of a consistent really, really good. Let’s up the ante over a shorter period of time by looking at Rolen’s three-year stretch from 2002-04 in which he put up 21.8 WAR. Here’s a list of players who have averaged at least seven wins per season over any three-year stretch since 1970 with their highest total listed.
| Name | 3-Year High WAR |
|---|---|
| Barry Bonds | 35.4 |
| Joe Morgan | 29.1 |
| Mike Trout | 28.5 |
| Alex Rodriguez | 27.3 |
| Wade Boggs | 25.8 |
| Mike Schmidt | 25.7 |
| Ken Griffey Jr. | 25.3 |
| Albert Pujols | 25.0 |
| Buster Posey | 24.7 |
| Mookie Betts | 24.0 |
| Chase Utley | 24.0 |
| Rickey Henderson | 24.0 |
| Cal Ripken Jr. | 23.6 |
| Jason Giambi | 23.5 |
| Andrew McCutchen | 22.8 |
| Miguel Cabrera | 22.5 |
| Jeff Bagwell | 22.5 |
| Gary Carter | 22.3 |
| Mike Piazza | 22.2 |
| George Brett | 22.2 |
| Johnny Bench | 22.1 |
| Josh Donaldson | 22.0 |
| Rod Carew | 22.0 |
| Scott Rolen | 21.8 |
| Grady Sizemore | 21.7 |
| Andruw Jones | 21.6 |
| Brian McCann | 21.5 |
| Robin Yount | 21.5 |
| Bobby Grich | 21.5 |
| Yadier Molina | 21.4 |
| Jonathan Lucroy | 21.3 |
| Jim Edmonds | 21.3 |
| Mark McGwire | 21.2 |
| Evan Longoria | 21.1 |
| Nomar Garciaparra | 21.1 |
| Sammy Sosa | 21.0 |
Given the smaller sample size of seasons, this list isn’t quite as impressive as the last one. One might argue that Andrew McCutchen, Jason Giambi, and Josh Donaldson all appearing ahead of Rolen hurts the latter’s case, but given all three won MVPs during the times in question, it’s actually harder to argue against dominance for Rolen given similar numbers. There are numerous Hall of Famers below him and so few ahead of him. Injuries ruined Grady Sizemore’s career, but he was certainly great for a few seasons. Rolen’s 2002-04 was better than any three-year stretch from Mark McGwire or Sammy Sosa.
Scott Rolen put together a great career with a lot of very good seasons, but he had a great stretch of play that matches up well with many no-doubt Hall of Famers. This isn’t the first time I’ve written about Rolen’s case, as I previously discussed the standards third basemen have been held to in Hall of Fame votes. Rolen was as good a hitter as Jeff Kent, but was a stellar third baseman instead of being average at second base, yet there are many voters including Kent on their ballots and not Rolen. The Hall of Fame vote has been very encouraging for Rolen as many recognize his greatness on the field as both a hitter and defender, but it’s going to take one more push to get him elected. He wasn’t Barry Bonds, Alex Rodriguez, or Albert Pujols, but he dominated everyone else in his era and deserves to get the call next season.
Craig Edwards can be found on twitter @craigjedwards.
I have to wonder if Rolen also suffered from beginning his career playing for the same team that had been graced with the best 3rd baseman ever, just one generation earlier.
That might affect how he’s perceived in Philly, but I don’t think anyone else would care.
I think he suffers from a different problem. Rolen was a great defensive player and a really good hitter. He didn’t end up with tremendous counting stats, so older voters don’t really get how good he was. Had he been a great hitter, but just a really good fielder, he wouldn’t have any problem getting into the HOF.
I think voters of all ages can legitimately question how much weight defensive metrics should play in determining player value, particularly for players before statcast. Jay Jaffe is even quoted as calling them “largely estimates”.
Offensive metrics, traditional or otherwise, are not largely estimates. Offensive production is quantifiable and fundamentally more trustworthy.
Rolen derived ~40% of his career value from defense. No one should apologize for questioning the legitimacy of his fWAR totals when they’re so heavily weighted on his “largely estimated” defensive value.
This being FanGraphs, I understand that player value will often be framed around fWAR. It’s the site’s chief product. That said, I found these charts redundant. We all understand how well he measures in fWAR. But what about when we look at wRC+? Or OPS+? Or wOBA? I suspect the names are less favorable.
Since I expect that I’ll garner troves of downvotes for anti-Rolen blasphemy anyway, I’ll close with this: Rolen finished with a lower career OBP than Derek Jeter. Batting average matters. Deal with it.
Rolen’s defense is 153 of his 710 runs above replacement, not including positional adjustment. That’s only 22% of his value. Without any knowledge of his defense, he would still be worth 55 WAR. If you want to assign any value at all to his defense given his gold gloves, reputation, eye test, or advanced metric, he pretty easily jumps into a Hall of Fame caliber career. Citing mushiness of older or advanced (where Rolen graded out very well) defensive metrics when there’s ample evidence makes an argument from the desired conclusion.
Forgive my back of the napkin math. I was citing the Off (250) and Def (180) numbers on his player page to get to 40%.
Regardless, is there an argument against the mushiness of these statistics outside of the anecdotal reputation / eye test or otherwise scoffed at Gold Gloves? Because referencing those factors as evidence would seem to make an argument from the desired conclusion. Derek Jeter has Gold Gloves and passed the eye test for many, after all.
As I referenced below, he was only about the 30th best hitter in baseball during his prime. That I’m confident in. Whether or not he was a Top 3 defender is a bit more ambiguous. But, alas, we must assign a number, or else the formula will error out, so we do our best. But we can at least acknowledge that our best is just an estimation.
A more convincing argument for him could be made around his offensive value being obfuscated by that of his peers who were cheating. I could maybe get behind something like that.
Stand-out defensive players are super fun and generally don’t get enough credit compared to great hitters. I hate the idea that we should tip the scales even more toward hitters.
Plus, when the stats and the eye test agree to this extent it’s pretty dumb to just discount them just because. Rolen’s range was insane… he was great to his left and his right, he was awesome at bare-handing slow rollers up the line. His defense changed the feel of the game. Throwing out half of the game just because the measurements aren’t perfect is pretty stupid.
I was under the impression that political adjustments are not allowed on this site outside of Sheryl Ring articles
Rolen finished his career as a better hitter than Ozzy Albies will likely finish his career. Izzy is a glove first player as well!
Even without defensive metrics, Rolen was known as easily the best defensive 3B of his generation and arguably on a similar level to Mike Schmidt as one of the game’s all-time best defensive 3B just from watching him play.
Those lists are great for Rolen but even better for Posey. In the middle of the forest it can be hard to see the trees.
That’s a wonderful way to put Rolen’s peak in context. He deserves the Hall nod.
BTW, that 7-year table has Utley listed twice. Almost like you’re trying to make another point…
Haha. Thanks. Fixed.
Hall of Very Good. Not a Hall of Famer.
I likely wouldve made the same argument until I saw him playing for “my” Jays. Unbelievable fielder who was leaps and bounds above Donaldson who regularly grades out as one of the leagues best. He would get to balls that you had already conceeded as hits and then also make the throw to first. And then that bat…..
Yeah, about that bat…..
Rolen was good, but not great with the bat. Career 122 wRC+. Was good, but didn’t really excel at anything. Didn’t hit for average, didn’t hit for power, OBP was solid but not great, for the most part. And most importantly, he didn’t play long enough at a high level for his good-but-not-great offense to get him to any significant career benchmarks.
Plus he was injured too often, and he got himself run out of town twice–from the two teams he played the most seasons with. Just an unlikeable guy from a fan perspective.
His entire case rests upon his defense, and everyone knows that defensive metrics are at least a little bit sketchy. Look at the guys around Rolen on the gerrymandered leaderboards in this article. The only guys who depend so much on defensive WAR are catchers and the guys who aren’t Hall-of-Famers. The latter guys (Andruw Jones, Chase Utley) being like Rolen: Fine players. Hall of Very Good.
Best defensive 3B ive seen plus he was 22% better than average with his bat. Im not sure what else you want from a player short of the ability to defecate golden eggs
@beaster Pissing rainbows would be a plus, surely.
Both sound like nice parlour tricks, but neither would cause him to be a baseball Hall-of-Famer. Being great at baseball, rather than very good, would earn him more Hall-of-Fame votes. But he wasn’t great. Nothing wrong with very good. Just doesn’t get him into the Hall of Fame without buying a ticket.
.281 average, 300 homeruns…. “didn’t hit for average, didn’t hit for power”…
His totals need to be taken in context with the time in which he played.
His 314 home runs would have been an all time record by a mile if he had played in the 1800s! But his best three power seasons were 31 home runs in 1998 (Tied for 27th in MLB), 31 in 2002 (Tied for 23rd) and 34 in 2004 (Tied for 21st). Top 25 to Top 30 power hitter (at best) in the era he played in, considering these were his best efforts. That’s not a Hall-of-Fame level feared power hitter by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe Hall-of-Very Good though.
His best seasons for average were .298 in 2000 (Tied for 54th among qualified MLB hitters), .314 in 2004 (Tied for 18th), .296 in 2006 (Tied for 43rd), and .305 in 2009 (Tied for 27th). Again, these are his *best* seasons. Not a feared hitter, in terms of average, in the seasons in which he played. Again, Hall of Very Good.
Of course, this is Fangraphs, so you might say batting average doesn’t matter–talk to me about OBP or better yet, wRC+. Okay.
Best seasons for OBP: .377 in 1997 (42nd among qualified MLB hitters), .391 in 1998 (Tied for 24th), .378 in 2001 (Tied for 38th), .382 in 2003 (31st) and .409 in 2004 (11th). Best 5 seasons. Just missed the top 10 once. Barely made the top 25 in his second best season. Not elite here either among his peers.
Best seasons for wRC+: 140 in 1998 (28th among qualified MLB hitters), 127 in 2002 (Tied for 39th), 137 in 2003 (Tied for 25th), and 159 in 2004 (Tied for 8th). What’s remarkable is he had 4 additional seasons at exactly 126. In those seasons, this ranged from the 34th-best wRC+ in the game, among qualified hitters, to the 45th-best. These are his best seasons. One top 10 finish in his career year, and nothing elite after that. But he was extremely consistent at being in the top 40 or so in his better seasons.
Top 50-ish overall hitter in the game in the time he played? Good but NOT dominant. Great defense but a really unlikeable guy who clashed with his managers and the front office? Not a Hall of Famer. Hall of Very Good for sure though!
Do you understand who else played during that time? Bagwell, Biggio, A-Rod, Barry Bonds, Derek Jeter, Gary Sheffield, some absolutely dominant hitters so even if he performed extremely well you have these monolith hitters in the way
Of course I understand who played during his era. I didn’t watch only Scott Rolen during that time period, as that would have been a very good, but not great, baseball viewing experience!
You have named six hitters that were better than him in that time period. If he were the seventh best hitter, then you have a point. Maybe even the 10th or 20th-best hitter in his era. But if we suggest that he was perhaps the 50th-best hitter in his day–which is rather generous when we consider that even his *best* 4 or 5 seasons mostly failed to crack the top 20 or even the top 30 in any offensive category or metric–then there are a lot of guys “in the way” who are not even close to being Hall of Famers. Being behind that many guys on offense but also being a great defender moves him up into Hall-of-Very-Good territory, but not into elite Hall of Fame territory.
Um, he certainly did hit for average, power, and on-base ability, just not at an elite level save for 2004, but the combination of being a jack of all trades, master of none still makes him near Hall-worthy based on his offense alone. His elite defense (which is clear even without advanced metrics) then makes up for that.
See above. He was maybe about the 40th-best to 50th-best hitter in the game in the time period in which he played. Look at the leaderboards over the past few seasons. Are the 40th to 50th-best hitters near Hall-worthy? I see a lot of Travis Shaw and Jed Lowrie. So the answer is nope!
If they let larry walker in, then they have to let rolen in. I don’t think either should be in, but you can’t let walker in without rolen. ROlen actually put up more war in same amount of time.
Walker should’ve been in years ago. Don’t act like Walker being inducted is a bad thing.
The third chart, “WAR Leaders Age 23-29” is the first place I’ve seen Trout’s WAR look human. Then I realized he hasn’t had his age 28 and 29 seasons…
Troutgraphs strikes again 🙂
BTW, the author states that Trout has 2 years to go to be eligible. That is incorrect. He becomes HOF eligible with the 1st game that he plays this year.
And if Trout goes 0 for 4 in that game and calls it quits, he’ll go onto the 2025 HOF ballot with more career WAR than Jeter.
We used to say these things about Pujols and look how that turned out. Most players have to rely on their 30s to flesh out their HOF case. Pujols and Trout got in based on their 20s work only. Very impressive.
And I don’t think trout will suffer the same fate. He will end up challenging Ruth for best ever. I wonder if he can pitch?
That was my thought at first too, but then I realized he was actually talking about Trout having 2 more seasons left in the Age 23-29 range.
And it excludes his age 20-22 seasons!
Nice article but I think the emphasis on peak value vs other players in the same period (not necessarily their peak) is misleading. To me HoF needs to consider the player’s entire body of work and when you look at career WAR I think Rolen is not nearly a slam dunk. Also to compare his peak to the same period for other players is misleading at best.
For comparison some career WAR:
Schmidt 106.5
Chipper: 84.6
Boggs: 88.3
Brett: 84.6
Beltre : 84.1
Rolen: 69.9
I think it’s clear he’s a level below these no-doubt guys. Would be interesting to see their peak 6 vs Rolen’s.
Would probably put him in the Nettles/Santo category. Should get in.
Probably the weakest position in the Hall, that helps Rolen’s case as well.
I don’t think you know what misleading means. Craig is leading exactly where he is trying to. Everything else is just your opinion. By JAWS and WAR Rolen is the 10th best 3B of all time. Do you honestly not think that of all the players to ever play the game, that is not Hall worthy?
Unless I am reading the article incorrectly he leads with 1998 – 2004, distinguished only by being Rolen’s best six years. To me this is a bit misleading. The comparison of age 23 to 29 is a little better, but everyone who has looked at Rolen as a HoF candidate knows the issue is not his peak, but the relatively pedestrian nature of the non-peak years for Rolen. The article just doesn’t add much to the body of knowledge around Rolen’s candidacy.
And I agree he is Hall worthy, but it’s not the slam dunk he makes it out to be. As I said, a level below the no-doubters, but probably comparable to Santo/Nettles, ahead of guys like Traynor, Baker, and Jimmy Collins.
If you are Hall of the Very Good, a no doubter. Otherwise a borderline candidate.
Jay’s piece I linked to pretty well makes the case for Rolen’s body of work to get in. I also linked to a previous piece of my own discussing his overall career. I didn’t want to redo my own or Jay’s work here. Multiple voters have said they didn’t feel Rolen’s peak was good enough and this piece is, in part, a response to those voters. As for being miselading, the final seven-year table includes every player’s best seven consecutive years over the past 50 years and Rolen more than measures up with most Hall of Famers. It’s not cherrypicking, but even if it were, I added the three-year numbers as well. He also added another 26 WAR above what he did in those seven seasons to give him 69.9 WAR which puts him pretty clearly in a class with Hall of Famers.
Craig thanks for the reply. Agree he is Hall-worthy, but I think the overall weakness of the position really helps his case.
One other interesting data point from an ESPN HoF writeup earlier today that I was not aware of – only one top 10 MVP finish. Is that a dominant player?
I have always thought longevity/injury was the issue for Rolen, plus maybe the reliance on defense as a big part of his value. Nice balance of skills at his peak though. I am a Phils fan, he never connected with the fanbase here despite his obvious talents.
Tough call, will be interesting to track his candidacy over the next few years.
Rolen was in the top 10 in NL WAR five times. Not voting him for the Hall because writers didn’t properly appreciate his talents at the time just compounds and repeats a previous mistake.
But he was also tied for 27th and 31st in baseball in wRC+ and wOBA respectively during his noted prime period from 1998-2004.
His bat was good, but not good enough for the Hall and the defensive metrics just aren’t trustworthy enough. If bias is impacting him, it’s bias against defensive metrics/value.
We all know that MVP voters (especially in past generations) often don’t take defensive value into account. The crazy thing is that Scott Rolen did actually get some MVP votes (4th in 2004), yet somehow there are voters who have Vizquel (only appearance on an MVP ballot was 16th) on their ballots but not Rolen.
For me, Rolen got waylaid by his shoulder injuries which were devastating and ruined his latter year offensive output. I would guess he lost 15 WAR offensively. So he was on a path to be a no doubter, still managed to eek out a HOF eligible record. It depends on how you feel about “what could Have been.” He’s still way up on leaderboards for his position so I vote yes
Both are important factors.
Being a level below the no-doubt guys still leaves him at a still Hall-worthy level.
I wouldn’t mind Nettles getting in, but when you consider how many more games/ at bats he had than Rolen and Santo, he’s really not in their league even though you might think he is based on WAR.
STOP talking shit about this Hall of Fame ballot.
Scott Rolen was DOMINANT.
Derek Jeter was ICONIC.
Barry Bonds was PEERLESS.
Larry Walker was ELITE.
Omar Vizquel
Roger Clemens was MESMERIZING.
I believe you missed the “PEDESTRIAN” for Vizquel
I believe it was Bill James who wrote something to the effect of: You can cherry-pick what stats and over what time period and say that only this guy, Ted Williams, and Willie Mays did something no one else has done. James was right, and that basically the case Edwards is making for Rolen. I get it.
But does the eye test count for anything anymore? I saw Rolen’s entire career. He belongs in the Hall of Very Good, not the Hall of Fame. Honestly, it wouldn’t be that difficult to twist and turn Nomar Garciaparra’s career stats into something comparable to Rolen’s, and I don’t think anyone believes Nomar belongs in the Hall, even though his peak stats put Rolen’s to shame. I would also argue Don Mattingly deserves to get in on accomplishment before Rolen.
But then again, Baines is in. Jack Morris is in. And I’ll grant you, Rolen is better than either of those guys, whose careers I also saw in full. But none of them had better careers than Curt Schilling, who is on the outside looking in, just for one example. And while I’m at it, Pete Rose especially deserves to be in, but with the caveat that he’s never allowed to set foot on the grounds.
And steroid guys like Pudge Rodriguez and Mike Piazza and Jeff Bagwell are in, so the joint has been both diluted and corrupted already. So let’s keep lowering the standards until everyone with a 5 year career gets in and everyone gets a participation trophy.
Ruth, Cobb, Mathewson, Honus Wagner, and Big Train Walter Johnson must be rolling over in their graves.
Pudge and Piazza are arguably the best defensive and best offensive catcher of all time. How can you legitimately say they dilute the Hall? Bagwell is one of 12 players in history to hit 400 home runs and record an on-base percentage (OBP) of .400, and the only first baseman with at least 400 home runs and 200 stolen bases. Position matters.
I also saw all of Rolen’s career… and by my eye-test he was a no doubt HOFer. His bat was very good… his defense was dominant.
Pudge, Piazza and Bagwell were never proven to be juiced
By the eye test, Rolen was an excellent hitter and one of the best defensive 3B of all time.
I agree. If you saw Rolen he was every bit as good as the WAR metrics suggest. And in his time, he was considered one of the best. You don’t have to trust the stats on this one – everyone who saw him play says the same thing about his defense
Rolen was great. The voting process and standards need to to change as the game has changed in the past two decades.
I really have trouble seeing this guy as a hall of famer. I see an injury-prone player who made a few all-star teams and garnered some down -ballot MVP consideration during only 4 years of his career- with 1 single first-place MVP vote in 2004. I remember him doing nothing in the 2004 world series. Sure, he could throw some leather – buncha guys do that. Not seeing it at all.
He was so injury-prone that he only ended up with the 12th most games ever played at third base.
yeah, not as bad as i originally thought on that front- lotta seasons he was on two teams. but i still don’t want him in my hall. then again, i also don’t care about the hall and i really wonder why anyone takes it seriously at all.
pardon, the damned thing won’t let me edit. i did miss rolen’s 90s work because i thought steroids made the game a bit of a joke so i stopped watching for 5 or 6 years. but i just see one really peak season at age 29. the 122 OPS+ is so meh and i think defense is overvalued in the war estimate. i don’t understand why people want players like this in a hall of fame. i’d simply set the bar a lot higher.
Yeah, if by a “few,” you mean “eight.”
Interesting thought: Rolen may well end up with more WAR than Miguel Cabrera. Miggy is at 70.6 and he’s gone backward 2 of the last 3 years and has 4 more years on his deal while Rolen is at 69.9 forever.
Just to expand on the thought: Assuming Miguel Cabrera has 1,600 PA over the remainder of his contract, he is likely to finish with:
– 3,200 hits
– 520 HR
– 645 2B
– 1,570 R
– 1,870 RBI
– .303 lifetime BA
– 2-time MVP
– Triple Crown winner
(My crude methodology was to take his totals over his last 3 years from 2017-2019 (1,253 PA) and multiply them by 1.3 and add them to his career totals. That would give him 1,628 PA over the next 4 years which isn’t a bad estimate. Any differences in estimations of his final career totals are small within the context of my point)
Miggy is an inner circle, no-doubt, lock HOFer and Scott Rolen’s WAR was about equal to his and possibly better depending on whether Miggy goes backward the next 4 years.
What I got from this is a reminder that Bonds had a 3 year stretch where he AVERAGED 11.8 war per season
Dear God.
The fact that he is much higher than Chipper Jones on all the above list tells you something. Rolex was injured a lot, but would play 2/3 of a season and still put up 5 WAR. THAT’S GREATNESS! he should be a Hall of famer, no question!
Great analysis by Craig here. Clearly Rolen was a very good player for a long period of time, and was a great fielding 3B. His worthiness as a hall of famer is a function of whether you prefer a big HOF or a smaller hall of fame. He is more qualified than many current members, so on those grounds you can make a solid argument for his admission.
One factor working against him is the limited success in the postseason. Rolen’s postseason slash line was: 220/302/376 with OPS of 678. Not great, but he did have a good WS when he won his only WS title. I am surprised how little attention is given to the postseason career when evaluating HOF status. It seems to be essentially ignored in this analysis. None of the WAR stats consider postseason performance. In my view, the postseason should be given significant consideration in assessing HOF worthiness.
Overall, I think Rolen is one of the more under appreciated HOF candidates. I would put him above Vizquel, Kent, Wagner, and Jones, but below Schilling and Walker.
He’s a hall of famer. Probably Nettles is too. 3rd base is incredible hard to play, and he was one of the best. Aramis Ramirez who I think most people remember as a great hitter…finished with a W rC of 115 for his career to 122 for Rolen. Then the defense…ask a Pirates or Cubs fan whether defense at 3b matters.
I have a feeling Rolen is going to become the new Walker. Hopefully as more new voters come in, it doesn’t take ten years for him to get elected.
The thing I remember most about Rolen is his throwing to first base. Every throw I ever saw the guy make hit the first baseman right in the chest. I’m sure he made an occasional throwing error, but I never saw one. Just one perfect throw after another for like 15 years. Ridiculous.
One thing I find strange is that during his playing career, my memory is that Rolen was talked about as being a dominant, all-time great kind of player. Somehow, he seems to have gone down in estimation since retiring even though the advances in player evaluation all favor him.
Or maybe my memory is wrong or I was just overly affected by some small segment of coverage–he wasn’t on my team or “local” to me at any point, after all.
I think the real problem is that most people underestimate his defensive greatness. Using b-r WAR (sorry, but I’m still having trouble navigating this site), his oWAR is 16th among 3b all-time, while his dWAR put him 6th. 10th place overall. As good as it was, his offense just didn’t stand out in the minds of most people. It’s his defense that really puts him over the top.
The WAR Graphs tool under the Leaders tab isn’t used enough. Jeter’s only advantage using this tool I see is having a couple of decent years in his late 30s. Rolen was a better defender at his position, but Jeter played the tougher defensive position. Those canceled out. Hitting basically were equivalent value without the positional adjustment.
If Jeter being great on great teams in the postseason is the difference between 99.7% and 10.2% on the 1st ballot HOF vote, there should be a lot fewer HOFs.