« Two added to Forty | Main | Summary of Ranger Hitters By Position in Batting Order »
November 22, 2006
Keltner Test: Juan Gonzalez
The Keltner Test is a Bill James creation designed to test whether a player merits selection into the Hall of Fame. I've never seen a test on Juan Gonzalez, so here goes:
1. Was he ever regarded as the best player in baseball? Did anybody, while he was active, ever suggest that he was the best player in baseball?
I can’t find an example of anyone stating that Juan Gonzalez was ever the best player in baseball. Maybe, maybe, during July of 1998 when Gonzalez achieved 100 RBI by the All-Star break, someone gushed that he was the best player in the game. Otherwise, nope.
2. Was he the best player on his team?
I intend to answer these questions without using many derived statistics, but in this case the stats offer an interesting perspective. According to both WARP3 (Wins Above Replacement Player, a Baseball Prospectus stat) and Bill James’s Win Shares, Gonzalez was never clearly the best player on his team. Except for a first-place tie in Win Shares with Rafael Palmeiro in 1993, he never surpassed bridesmaid status. (Note that for obvious reasons I’ve excluded his tryouts of 1989 and 1990 and his post-2001 meltdown.)
Year |
Team |
WARP3 |
Team Rank |
Team Best |
Win Shares |
Team Rank |
Team Best |
1991 |
TEX |
6.0 |
6 |
Palmeiro |
19 |
4 |
Franco, Sierra |
1992 |
TEX |
7.9 |
3 |
K Brown |
19 |
2 |
Palmeiro |
1993 |
TEX |
10.0 |
2 |
Palmeiro |
31 |
T1 |
JG, Palmeiro |
1994 |
TEX |
6.3 |
T4 |
I Rodriguez |
11 |
5 |
Clark |
1995 |
TEX |
3.7 |
10 |
Rogers |
8 |
11 |
Rogers |
1996 |
TEX |
6.2 |
T5 |
K Hill |
21 |
3 |
I Rodriguez |
1997 |
TEX |
5.6 |
4 |
I Rodriguez |
19 |
3 |
I Rodriguez |
1998 |
TEX |
8.1 |
2 |
I Rodriguez |
25 |
2 |
I Rodriguez |
1999 |
TEX |
7.4 |
3 |
I Rodriguez |
24 |
3 |
Palmeiro |
2000 |
DET |
3.0 |
10 |
Higginson |
9 |
11 |
Higginson |
2001 |
CLE |
8.6 |
2 |
R Alomar |
23 |
3 |
R Alomar |
Surprisingly, Gonzalez was rarely even the best hitter on his team. His predilection to swing at everything usually stranded him behind more patient hitters in terms of Equivalent Runs (another Baseball Prospectus creation):
Year |
Team |
Equivalent Runs |
Team Rank |
Team Best |
1991 |
TEX |
80 |
4 |
Palmeiro, 123 |
1992 |
TEX |
91 |
2 |
Palmeiro, 92 |
1993 |
TEX |
114 |
2 |
Palmeiro, 122 |
1994 |
TEX |
64 |
3 |
Canseco, 90 |
1995 |
TEX |
64 |
5 |
Tettleton, 91 |
1996 |
TEX |
117 |
1 |
Gonzalez |
1997 |
TEX |
99 |
2 |
Greer, 119 |
1998 |
TEX |
129 |
1 |
Gonzalez |
1999 |
TEX |
118 |
2 |
Palmeiro, 138 |
2000 |
DET |
72 |
5 |
Higginson, 117 |
2001 |
CLE |
110 |
3 |
Alomar, 130 |
Despite this evidence, I believe the answer to this question is more “yes” than “no.” During eleven years as an everyday player, he finished among the top three in WARP six times, in Win Shares seven times, and Equivalent Runs eight times. If I hear someone say that Gonzalez was the best player in Texas during the 1990s, I don’t agree (it’s Ivan Rodriguez), but I also don’t question that person’s faculties. It’s not an unreasonable belief.
3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?
No and no. Barry Bonds, Albert Belle, Manny Ramirez, Vlad Guerrero, Larry Walker, and Gary Sheffield come immediately to mind as superior corner outfielders during the 1990s. There are others.
4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?
Yes. In 1998, Texas trailed California by 3.5 games with only twenty remaining. Texas finished 13-7 with help from Gonzalez’s line of .364/.417/.688. During a critical three-game series in Anaheim in which the teams were tied entering the season’s final week, Gonzalez had a homer, two doubles, a single, and four walks(!). Texas swept the series and won the division.
Texas didn’t face much of a threat for the division title in 1999, but Gonzalez did bat .392/.433/.741 during September and October. He hit three homers and drove in seven during a series with Oakland that clinched the division.
In 2001, Cleveland won the AL Central by six games largely by taking fourteen of nineteen from chief rival Minnesota. Gonzalez batted .361/.397/.639 against the Twins.
Gonzalez played and lost in four divisional series. In 1996 he nearly won the series by himself, batting .438 with five homers and nine RBI in four games. In 1998 and 1999, he and his teammates left their bats in storage. In 2001, he again hit well for Cleveland (.348 with three doubles and two homers against the 116-46 Mariners).
5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?
Surely you jest. Gonzalez has played in only 186 games since turning 32. He finished four consecutive seasons on the Disabled List and hasn’t played a Major League game in August or September since 2001. In 2006 he toiled for the Atlantic League’s Long Island Ducks.
6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?
He’s not better than Bert Blyleven, so “no.” The Evanses (Darrell and Dwight) are more deserving, as is Ron Santo. There’s a quick four without including his contemporaries.
7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?
Only four of Gonzalez’s most similar batters (per Baseball Reference) are Hall-eligible. Of those four, Johnny Mize and Duke Snider are in, and the Defiant Ones, Albert Belle and Dick Allen, are not. Of the others – Carlos Delgado, Manny Ramirez, Jim Thome, Moises Alou, Jose Canseco and Jim Edmonds – only Ramirez seems Hall-worthy at the moment. Those who continue to play and burnish their Hall credentials will become less comparable to Gonzalez, and other, lesser players will take their places.
8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?
In some respects, yes, superficially. Throw Gonzalez in the Hall and he’d rank 21st in homers, 41st in extra-base hits, 44th in RBI and 9th in slugging percentage among the 137 HOF hitters with at least 4,000 at-bats. Impressive.
Unfortunately, Gonzalez suffers terribly in consideration of the hitter-friendly era in which he’s played. Though Gonzalez would rank 21st in homers among Hall members, he presently ranks only 36th all-time. Fourteen active or recently retired players have more homers (the distant retiree being Dave Kingman). Likewise, Gonzalez’s .561 slugging percentage bests all but eight Hall-of-Famers but ranks only 21st all-time. All of the other higher-slugging players are contemporaries.
Of Bill James’s four quick-and-easy statistical tests of Hall-of-Fame worthiness – Black Ink, Grey Ink, Hall of Fame Standards and Hall of Fame Monitor – Gonzalez falls short in three of them.
9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?
Gonzalez played mostly during an extremely hitter-friendly era and largely in favorable parks. Park effects have crept into the public consciousness to the extent that even some BBWAA members are aware of them. Voters will understand in general that the hitting climate bolstered his numbers.
Was Gonzalez a better defensive player than commonly perceived? He did spend most of his first four years in center field. My recollection is vague, but the evidence suggests he played center only because of a lack of decent-hitting alternatives. Gonzalez was the One-Eyed King amongst blind outfielders Ruben Sierra, Kevin Reimer, and Dean Palmer, and he could outhit centerfielder Gary Pettis one-handed. During 1991-1992, he started 204 games in center but was replaced or moved to a corner in 70 of those games. After two years in left, he occupied right field for the rest of his career.
Gonzalez didn’t have much range and certainly was disinclined to sacrifice his body to catch a ball. He had a very strong and pretty accurate arm. He started about one-fifth of his 1,689 games at DH, probably fewer than most people think. Also, he never descended to full-time DH and laughingstock like Jose Canseco and was never as hopeless as Manny Ramirez. Yes, that’s awfully faint praise, but I believe it’s worth noting that Gonzalez’s fielding was only garden-variety bad, not outright terrible.
That said, my perception of his defense does not nearly compensate for the era’s and parks’ effects on his offense.
10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?
Gonzalez isn’t eligible yet, so let’s consider him in terms of his corner-outfield contemporaries. The answer is clearly no. Barry Bonds, Albert Belle, Manny Ramirez, Vlad Guerrero, Larry Walker, Gary Sheffield, and several others were/are better players.
11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?
Gonzalez won two MVP awards. He deserved them about as much as 2006 winner Justin Morneau deserved his, which is to say, not at all. He wasn’t even the best hitter in the league, much less the best player, in 1996 or 1998. Nevertheless, the voters thought differently, so he gets full credit. He also finished fourth in 1993, arguably his best year in the Majors, ninth in 1997 and fifth in 2001.
12. How many All-Star-type seasons did he have? How many All-Star games did he play in? Did most of the players who played in this many All-Star games go into the Hall of Fame?
Gonzalez played in only three All-Star games, an extraordinarily low number for a Hall-of-Famer. Among the ten most similar hitters according to Baseball Reference, Hall members or not, only 1B Carlos Delgado has played in fewer. Among the ten most similar hitters through his present age of 35, none has played in fewer. Gonzalez also had three or four additional seasons of All-Star quality.
However, having two MVPs and only three All-Star appearances is not without precedent. HOFer Robin Yount also only played in three All-Star games. Roger Maris played in four, Frank Thomas five.
13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?
In his prime, Gonzalez was better than anyone on the ’06 Tigers or ’05 White Sox. His prime tended to ebb and flow over the years, and he was almost always fighting some nagging injury. Still, the answer is yes.
14. What impact did the player have on baseball history? Was he responsible for any rule changes? Did he introduce any new equipment? Did he change the game in any way?
No, no, not directly, and no. Regarding new equipment, Gonzalez did take a petulant stand against baggy pants during the 1999 Hall-of-Fame game. Three years later, the Collective Bargaining Agreement contained new regulations on uniform pants, one of which discourages bagginess. Coincidence? Alas, to this day, Gonzalez’s role in the creation of the “shame on baggy pants” rule remains unclear.
15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?
I’ve avoided the subject of steroids to this point. Jose Canseco alleged that Gonzalez was a fellow user when they were teammates. In light of the lack of evidence, I’m assuming Gonzalez played clean (an assumption that automatically disqualifies me as a nationally syndicated journalist). Obviously, proof of PED-use will make this answer a resounding no.
That issue aside, while I think branding Gonzales “unsportsmanlike” or “of bad character” is overstating the case, he did have episodes of poor behavior. The baggy pants incident, publicly berating a scorekeeper for an unfavorable call, missing too many games with seemingly minor injuries, three divorces, and general moodiness have created an unfavorable, selfish image in the minds of most observers.
| SUMMARY OF ANSWERS Absolutely HOF-worthy – 4, 11, 13 Generally Worthy – 2, 12 Generally Unworthy – 7, 8, 9, 15 Absolutely Unorthy – 1, 3, 5, 6, 10, 14 |
CONCLUSIONS
What might have been. Among all players through their Age 31 seasons, Gonzalez ranked eighth in homers (397) and seventh in runs batted in (1,282). His comparables included Frank Robinson, Orlando Cepeda, Willie Mays, Eddie Murray and Duke Snider. Since then, he’s hit 37 homers and driven in 122, about a season’s worth of work.
As it currently stands, Gonzalez’s body of work leaves him short of the Hall of Fame. He was a brilliant player for several years, but he lacked the consistency and durability possessed by almost all Hall members. He’ll have to settle for being one of the best Rangers during their only extended period of success. No shame in that.
Posted by Lucas at November 22, 2006 12:32 PM