I came accross an interesting post in the forums by a user named jtrinsey. He posits that HOF candidates may be better identified through a process based on a process similar to how expected win percentage is calculated using run differential.
Basically, for every 10 runs over "0" of run differential, you should be that corresponding number of games over .500. In other words, a team with a run differential of +100 at the end of the season should be expected to be 10 games over 81-81, which would be 91-71.
As it relates to positional player, that same logic should apply, says jtrinsey. First, you determine how many runs a player produces over the average player, then divide that number by 10 in order to get how many wins he produces over the average player.
In order to determine those runs, you must factor in both offense and defense.
For offense, you must get an idea of the "average player" in our world. I looked at six seasons of our league - 3,6, 9, 12, 15, and 18 and came up with the following: an average player in our league bats .273, hits doubles on 16% of their hits, triples on 1.7% of their hits, homers on 13.9% of their trips, and walks on 8.5% of their plate appearances.
For defense, it is a bit more subjective. His reasoning is sound, and I won't go into detail, but basically he has come up with a way to value a player's worth in the field relative to an "average" player at that position using plus plays, fielding percentage, and other defensive statistics. Since the "average player" is worth 0 wins over .500, and since the "average player" will not always be able to be an average SS or CF, positional adjustments must come into play.
Season 18 NL MVP Ken Daly was plugged into the machine and it spit out that he was worth 4 Wins for his team above the average player. AL MVP Clinton Clifton was also put in and was worth over 6 games above the average player. It is also noted, and I have found, that All-Star type players are typically in the 2-4 range, while MVP candidates are worth above 4 games.
So let's look at our HOF members and see how they stack up.
Sir Charles is the Gold Standard for the Hall. If you come close to his numbers, you are in. He meant 96 games over .500 for the teams he played for, or roughly 5.6 games per season.
Lansing was worth 58 wins over 12 seasons, or 4.8 per season.
Walker was worth 63.4 wins over .500 for his teams over his 14 seasons, or 4.5 per season.
Reese is easy because his days in the majors are apparently over as he plays for OKC's HiA team. He was worth 64 wins over his 14 seasons, or 4.6 wins per year.
Beltre is a topic of much debate. He is worth only 27 games over .500 for his team over 12 seasons, or 2.2 per season.
Thom was seen as a borderline candidate. He was worth 34 extra wins over his 11 seasons. or 3.1 per season.
Sparky was worth 30.9 wins over his 10 seasons, or 3.1 per season
Vina was worth 30.1 wins over his 12 seasons, or 2.5 per season
Allen was worth 29 wins over his 12 seasons, or 2.4 per season
Anyone who averages 4 wins over.500 for the team per season belongs in the. Anyone less than that is up for debate.