What Would a Modern Tim Raines Look Like?
The Baseball Hall of Fame will announce the 2017 class of inductees today, and thanks to the work of Ryan Thibodaux, we can be pretty certain that the Hall is going to welcome Jeff Bagwell and Tim Raines to Cooperstown this summer. Ivan Rodriguez might join them, depending on the percentage of votes he gets from people who haven’t revealed their ballots publicly, while Trevor Hoffman and Vladimir Guerrero look like they’re going to get close enough where their election next year is highly likely.
But the story of the year is Raines, who will get elected in his final opportunity. In no small part due to the lobbying efforts of Jonah Keri, Raines will likely clear the 75% threshold after getting 24.3% of the vote on his first time on the ballot, back in 2008, then falling to 22.6% the next year. Raines’ election is another sign that players are being evaluated differently now, with the triple crown stats losing their long-held positions of canon, and instead a player’s total contributions now being considered.
But I know that, for a lot of people — even many inside the game — it’s still tough to think of Raines as a superstar. He was a corner outfielder who didn’t hit home runs. He had the profile of a center fielder, but not the defense to go along with it. He was a square peg in a world of round holes, and because so much of his value came from walks and stolen bases, he wasn’t really seen as a superstar when he played.
These days, though, we have better tools to evaluate players, and things like wRC+ have allowed us to give different types of players their due, even if they don’t fit the traditional mold of production. So, just for fun, let’s take a look at what Raines would be if he were an amalgamation of modern players.
For these purposes, we’re going to call 1981 to 1993 the era of Peak Tim Raines. That was the 13 year period where he was essentially an everyday player, and while he still produced some value later in his career as a role player, we want to focus on what Raines was at his best, and this 13 year stretch was when Raines really showed he could do. Here is what Raines did offensively during that span.
| Name | PA | BB% | K% | ISO | AVG | OBP | SLG | wRC+ | BsR | Off | OFF/600 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tim Raines | 7971 | 13% | 9% | 0.132 | 0.299 | 0.388 | 0.430 | 130 | 94 | 371 | 28 |
Because the game has changed a lot, it’s helpful to put those numbers in context with the averages of the times; during that 13 year stretch, the league average walk rate was 9%, the average strikeout rate was 14%, and the average ISO was .130. So, in comparison to the average of the times, Raines’ walk rate was 47% higher than league average, and his strikeout rate was 39% lower than league average. Translate those numbers into the 2016 environment, you’d have an equivalent player put up a 12% walk rate and a 13% strikeout rate in today’s game.
So, let’s look for that kind of strike zone control. Finding an exact match is difficult because of how the game has moved towards strikeouts, but there are two guys who controlled the zone at a similar rate last year: David Ortiz (13% BB%, 14% K%, .93 BB/K) and Buster Posey (10% BB%, 11% K%, .94 BB/K). So that’s the kind of plate discipline a modern Raines would have.
Now, let’s talk about power. Raines’ ISO during his 13 year peak was almost exactly equal to league average, so this is easier; we just look for guys with about a .165 ISO last year. You’re not going to find a lot of premium sluggers in this range, but this is where guys like Kole Calhoun, Eric Hosmer, and Russell Martin hung out, and they hit 63 home runs between them last year. These aren’t sluggers, but they are guys with enough pop to hit in the middle of a batting order, and of course, none of these guys got on base the way Raines did.
And then, there’s the speed. From 1981 to 1993, Raines stole 743 bases, and he did so at an 85% success rate. That’s an insane number of extra bases gained for his teams, and that’s why Raines was credited with adding 94 baserunning runs above an average player during his prime. But that number actually undersells Raines’ accomplishments, because our baserunning totals prior to 2002 are based solely on stolen bases and caught stealing, and don’t include any extra value for doing things like going first to third on a single or avoiding a double play, where speedsters can add a lot of extra value.
For comparison, Billy Hamilton is the game’s current most valuable baserunner, racking up +36.6 baserunning runs during his three years in the majors. However, 45% of that total comes from the non-SB portions of the calculations, which we have now because of our better data sources since 2002. These elite speedsters can add a lot of value through baserunning that isn’t base stealing, and Raines isn’t getting any credit for that in our calculations. That +94 runs undersells him by a good bit, and if we assume that Raines’ speed helped him in a similar fashion on the bases, that should be more like +130 runs, or about +10 runs per year.
Now, of course, the game has changed, and it’s harder to steal bases in this day and age, but Raines speed would still be at or near the top of the charts in this day and age. At something like +10 baserunning runs per year, the only modern comparison is Billy Hamilton.
So, that’s the profile; the strike zone judgment of Posey or Ortiz, the power of Calhoun, Hosmer, or Martin, and the speed of Hamilton. Or, if we just want to cheat and use his total offensive value, we can note that he put up a 371 runs of offensive value during this 13 year prime, which translates to about 28 runs better than average on a per-season basis. And again, that’s without the full credit for his baserunning, so realistically, he’s probably more like +32 per year.
What kinds of players were worth 32 runs of offensive value last year? Well, there’s Miguel Cabrera at +33, Brian Dozier at +32, and Robinson Cano at +31. They’re all okay. Edwin Encarnacion, one of the best hitters in baseball, was worth +27 runs in offensive value last year. These would be Raines’ peers, in terms of pure offensive value.
And he did that for 13 years, plus hung around for another eight years as a solid part-time player after that. And that’s why Tim Raines is going to Cooperstown. That’s why he deserves to go to Cooperstown. Tim Raines was a great player, one of the very best of his era, and if he played today, there wouldn’t be any argument about the fact that he was a superstar.
Dave is the Managing Editor of FanGraphs.
David, these straightforward statistical comparisons are essentially perfect. You set out on a task, you do the work, and you communicate it clearly and we are all better for it. I would love to see a series of these on so called ‘marginal’ hall-of-famers.
Well, thank you.
I’d have to agree. The comparisons are so cut and dry, and devoid of opinion.
Closest active player “across the board” comps I can come up with in today’s game:
Mookie Betts (displays more power, less B, similar adj K rate)
Adam Eaton (less power, less BB, more K)
Also can Kenny Lofton get some love? 62.4 WAR vs Raines 66.4 career and a similar albeit slightly lesser offensive profile to go with plus CF defense at least the first half of his career.
Dexter Fowler’s 2016 season is a decent comp with a higher K rate.
So, Raines would be if Fowler matched his 2016 production for 10 years.
I was thinking of Betts (and by extension, Eaton) as well. He provides a lot less value on the basepaths, though he certainly has the raw speed to be CAPABLE of similar BsR totals. He also is a significantly better defender. His adjusted power profile (remember, he’s a right-handed hitter who plays in Fenway) is pretty similar to Raines.
So take the excitement of Betts’ 2016, deservedly second only to Trout on the MVP ballot, and imagine he does that every year for the next 12, and THEN has a long tail to his career where he is above-average but not stellar. There’s no question that kind of player would walk into Cooperstown under modern player evaluation methods, and would be recognized as one of the best players of generation in his prime.
* Bonus points to Mookie for being a 5th round draft pick and playing second base in the minors.
Those of us who played Strat-o-Matic knew he was a superstar!
When you look at his/stats rating in games like OOTP (and even converting those ratings to MLB17, The Show) … his ratings are eye-popping.
I think I completely under-estimated how much being in Montreal hurt his superstar status. At least, Dawson and carter had major seasons in big american markets that kind of brought them more fame.
Mike Mussina also falls in the category of being highly appreciated by video games.
I think most people thought of him as a very good player, at the very least. The problem was that he was a contemporary of Rickey Henderson, and had a similar type of game, and Rickey was a little bit better. When a player gets bracketed with someone who’s better, it diminishes them in comparison. It’s the same reason why Richie Ashburn didn’t get in for decades. He was a star center fielder at the same time as Willie, Mickey and the Duke, and while he was great, they were all even better than he was.
Tim Raines should have been in the Hall of Fame a long time ago. When Dawson got in, I commented that they put the second-best outfielder on the 1982 Expos in. Dawson’s basically in because he hit 49 home runs one season, but Raines was even better than him in 1987, by a wide margin.
Great article. Very well deserved for an unsufficiently appreciated (in the U.S.) superstar of his era. When I was a kid, I had the chance to watch Tim Raines playing with the Expos. Everybody, in Quebec, knew then that we had a superstar. Tim Raines to Cooperstown … all the way!!!
Excerpt of today’s Adam Kilgore article, Washington Post:
Bathed in the light of modern statistical analysis, though, Raines’s accomplishments began to look grander (…) As a younger generation of BBWAA members more likely to embrace newer methods of evaluation gained voting status, and older voters cycled out, Raines’s percentage surged (…) Raines earned his way to the Hall of Fame, but change, in the way the game is watched and the way votes are tracked, is what finally got him there.
No doubt an Expos cap, right? Vlad is more of a debate “‘spos vs Angels)
I don’t doubt the Expos cap for Vlad, unless he voices a preference for the Angels. It was with the Expos that he set all of his career highs, and he (plus Javy Vazquez) was the only watchable thing involved with those teams. He was a joy to watch in the field there, and he just missed a 40-40 season. The only argument in favor of the Angels is that he won his MVP there, and was able to play in the postseason with them, so he finally came to the attention of more casual baseball fans.
Vlad has expressed a preference for the Angels. Probably because the Expos no longer exist.
The HOF denied similar requests from Andre Dawson and Gary Carter because they spent more than half of their careers in Montreal, and the HOF wanted more Montreal stuff in the Hall to preserve the memory.
Both of those factors apply less to Vlad. He spent less than half of his career in Montreal, and his Angels career is only 616 fewer plate appearances than his Montreal time. Also, with Dawson, Carter, and now Raines, the HOF has less of a need for Montreal memories.
Anyone know when he stopped going by or being referred to as “Rock” Raines? I remember his mid-80s baseball cards always said Rock Raines on the front, even though I never remember any announcers calling him that. Also, anyone know where that nickname came from?
I had a “Rock Raines” signature Rawlings glove when I played little league in the early/mid 90’s FWIW
From what I heard it came from his cocaine habit.
I remember that the cocaine stuff played into the character clause issues early in his candidacy; that, not lack of appreciation for his game, caused those low early numbers (remember, there were still guys who had started their writing careers in the ’50s back then). Also, Bill James regularly sang his praises from early in his career, so few could claim they didn’t realize his contributions.
Actually, it was because he had an incredibly low body-fat ratio; he was very muscular, and that’s why they nicknamed him “Rock.” He had long kicked his cocaine problem before crack “rock” cocaine even existed.
I feel an equally compelling article would be “What would a modern Willie Mays Hays look like?”
My first thought was “Mike Trout”.
My second thought was “I misread the question. The answer, generously, is Billy Hamilton”.
My third thought was “if I pretend that I thought the question was ‘what would Wille Mays Hayes look like during Tim Raines’ peak?’, it would give me a reason to mention Cecil Espy!”.
So – Cecil Espy, circa 1988.
Ok now do Lou Whitaker
We already have strong comps for Whitaker and Trammell; Sandberg and Barry Larkin. You know, those easy call HOF’ers….Imagine if you had Larkin and Sandberg together on your team for 19 years…now imagine if they were Yankees. You’d still be hearing East Coast writers slobbering over the Greatest Keystone Combo ever. Which is what Tram and Lou ARE….you’ll just have to wait for the Vets committee to take the BBWAA -expletives deleted- to task.
Willie Randolph is not in the HOF.
But he should be…
I would love to see Sweet Lou Whitaker and Alan Trammell in their Tigers hats in the Hall… right next to Willlie Randolph in his Pirates hat!
All 3 of them deserve it, and the Hall would be a better, more interesting place with Randolph, Trammell and Whitaker.
I’ve always loved when it raines, and I love that one of my all-time favorite players has thrown off the raines of prejudice and raines in the HOF.
Outside of Trevor Hoffman, I hope that everyone else you listed gets in.
Before anyone asks.
“While Hoffman’s workload was a function of the period in which he pitched, its size puts him at a significant disadvantage when those innings are converted to value via WAR, even given his 141 ERA+, which is higher than any enshrined reliever save for Wilhelm (147). Hoffman’s 28.4 career WAR is less than half that of Eckersley (63.0) and well behind both Wilhelm (47.3) and Gossage (42.0); it’s much closer to those of Fingers (26.1) and Sutter (24.6). Meanwhile, his 19.6 peak WAR trails those of that trio (Eckersley 38.1, Gossage 32.0, Wilhelm 26.9) as well as Sutter (24.6), just beating out Fingers (19.2). Hoffman’s 24.0 JAWS, which is tied with Wagner for 20th among relievers, trails all of the Hall of Famers except Fingers (22.7) and is 10.4 points below the standard. Even if I exclude Eckersley from the set on the grounds that his work as a starter skews it, Hoffman is well off the standards in all three categories (35.0 career, 25.7 peak, 30.4 JAWS). There’s really no way to justify his inclusion in Cooperstown via JAWS and WAR.” – Jay Jaffe, Sports Illustrated
Also Rivera, about whom none of the difference in era or usage apply is over 56 WAR. To me he’s extremely borderline and its almost impossible to make an argument for Hoffman and against Smith
This is great work, Dave. But I’m still not sure a present-day Raines would have consensus “superstar” status, outside of saber-world.
Consider Chase Utley, Adrian Beltre and Ben Zobrist: All had 7-year peaks by bWAR as good or better than Raines, and multiple seasons above his best — but none was ever a superstar to the general public. Beltre is #2 in bWAR over the last 13 years, but he’s only made 4 All-Star teams.
Ian Kinsler’s 10-year bWAR is almost the same as Raines (and both had four 6-WAR years), but I wouldn’t recognize him on the street.
Not regarding Beltre as a star would be insane – he should be a lock for Cooperstown.
But the relevant word is “superstar.”
And by the way, Beltre’s general acceptance as a HOF lock is a very recent development, happening within the last 3 years, and there are still those who would grudgingly admit him as the best of the “compilers.” If you doubt that, go scour some baseball blogs from 2014.
He said superstar.
Raines, to many, was simply “not Rickey Henderson”. Then, in the NL, along came Vince Coleman and made Raines’s SB numbers look weak. Keep in mind, in the mid/late 80s, we did appreciate walks nearly as much as we did stats like stolen bases, home runs, batting average.
That was during his playing days. We have appreciation for Raines now, but during his playing days, even some of his peers over-shadowed him.
Beltre is a superstar and Zobrist had nowhere near the length nor anything like the sb totals.
I was a fan in the 80s and Raines was absolutely considered a star.
Maybe not aHOF player but he was always clearlya star.
Belter not a superstar? He is among the very best 3rd basemen who ever played the game. Beyond Schmidt, Brett, Matthews, Boggs and Rodriguez, who has ever been definitively better at 3B? I just don’t know anybody who would not agree that Beltre is a “superstar” baseball player.
Ditto for Chase Utley. I cannot imagine that anybody would not see him as a superstar. For 6 or 7 years, Utley was among the elite players in baseball.
Mookie Betts is the closest player I can think of to match elite speed, good plate disciple and avg pop. It is not a perfect match Mookie needs more walks and less def value.
He’s very similar to Kenny Lofton’s career numbers. So he’s Kenny Lofton in a harder offensive environment but with worse defense. I think they are pretty similar, and I think they are both edge cases. I’d vote for both, but it’s close.
The “value of spring training game” (May 2, 1987) would justify something in Cooperstown by itself, and will always remain one of my favorite baseball games
Very good aricle, Dave. But I must disagree with you on one point.
“He was a square peg in a world of round holes, and because so much of his value came from walks and stolen bases, he wasn’t really seen as a superstar when he played.”
I was in junior high school when Raines debuted and I saw his prime years. Raines absolutely was conisdered a superstar from 1981-87. This was an era where stolen bases were a big deal. And Raines was the best of the best. Sans the 1981 strike Raines may have broken Lou Brock’s 118 SB record before Rickey did. Raines said publically that he could steal 150 bases in a season if he just stole bases for himself. Raines was literally cosidered the NL’s version of Rickey Henderson. Sports Illustrated had a famous article about the two where many inside baseball considered Raines/Henderson the vanguard of the new leadoff man. Raines made seven straight NL All-star teams. He lead the NL is quite a few catagories. It is puzzling why after 1987 Raines ceased being an elite player.
Mostly injuries slowed him down after ’87. He missed a third of the 1988 season, and after that, frequently was on the DL or playing through nagging issues for basically the rest of his career. He stayed an above-average hitter through his age-38 season, but couldn’t stay in the lineup every day because his body wouldn’t let him. If he could have, he would have easily cleared 3,000 hits and would already be in the Hall of Fame.
“These elite speedsters can add a lot of value through baserunning that isn’t base stealing”
But not always. See Jose Altuve.
On the other hand, 30 wRAA per year is very impressive.That’s about half as good as Mike Trout, and 50% of Mike Trout should be an automatic qualifier for the HOF.
+170 runs actually, = +14 / year. 182% of his observed SB value.
If 45% of Hamilton’s baserunning is non-SB, then 55% is SB, so non-SB is 45/55 = 82% of the SB.
Trea Turner,should he remain in CF.
His speed,BS %,and over all tools would qualify.
Damn! If only Mad Dog Russo would’ve read this article before he and Jonah debated Raines’ candidacy yesterday.