On Tim Raines and the Hall of Fame (again)

Last year prior to the Hall of Fame voting period, I wrote a piece about Rock Raines:

https://writingsonsubjects.blogspot.com/2011/12/the-baseball-hall-of-fame-is-incomplete.html

I just want to add another statistical analysis to that piece for the upcoming vote this year. I want to take the interesting statistics from the Montreal Expos 1985 season. In that year, the leadoff man (the "run scorer") of the '85 Expos, Timmy Raines put up these stats:

Should-be Hall of Famer Tim Raines

AVG: .320
OBP: .405
SLG: .475
R: 115
2B: 30
3B: 13
HR: 11
SB: 70
CS: 9

Okay, so those are Raines' impressive stats. Now let's state the "RBI Guys" stats of that year. Meaning, the 3-4-5 slot power hitters who are supposed to drive in runs.

Hubie Brooks: .269, 13 HR, 100 RBI (in 605 at bats)

Hawk Dawson: .255, 23 HR, 91 RBI (in 529 at bats)

Eli Wallach: .260, 22 HR, 81 RBI (in 569 at bats)

Now, those are not those players best years that's for sure. The most interesting stat out of these is Hubanoid Brook's 100 runs batted in while only hitting .269 and hitting 13 homers. How did he manage to crack 100 ribbies while hitting quite below average? Because of Raines.

Raines was on base 40.5% of the time he got to bat this season (hence the .405 OBP). Since he hit leadoff and further in the game after the pitcher he usually had the bases open for him (this also as mentioned in the last article as the reason why his own RBI stats are low due to hitting in this position). Raines not only reached base 40% of the time, but stole 70 bases (only caught 9 times), hit 30 two-baggers, 13 triples, and homered himself home 11 times. So, not only was Raines making it safely on to the bases 40% of the time, but he was in scoring position by his own means many (or most) of those times. He'd draw a walk and steal himself into scoring position (even steal second and third sometimes), or he'd hit a double or a triple and be in scoring position too. Basically, Raines was the easiest guy, due to his speed, for an RBI guy to drive home. In some cases they just had to ground out or hit a fly ball to the outfield and Raines would score from third or tag up from third with his speed to score a run. Yes, sometimes Hubie, Hawk, and Eli only had to make an out to drive Raines in and get credited with an RBI. That's how Hubie could have had a 100 RBI season while hitting only .260 and hitting only 13 homers, he was often making outs and getting RBIs out of it thanks to Rock.

Let's say Hubie, Hawk, and Eli were hitting their best that year, how many runs would Raines have theoretically scored if they were? I assume Raines was left stranded at second or third an unusual amount of times in this season. If these three were hitting at their best documented levels, it's not farfetched to say that Raines could have had 130, 140, or even 150 runs scored that season.

With the heart of the lineup putting up off seasons, he still managed to score 115 times in the 1985 season, which is amazing, really.

Years ago, sabrematrician Billy James thought up a cool stat called Win Shares, which tries to isolate the team's overall success to the actions made by individual players during that season. Here are the win share ranks for the 1985 Montreal Expos:

1. Tim Raines 36
2. Vance Law 24
3. Tim Wallach 23
4. Andre Dawson 16
5. Bryn Smith 16
6. Hubie Brooks 15
7. Tim Burke: 13
8. Jeff Reardon 13
9. Joe Hesketh 11
10. Gully, Webster, Danny Driessen 9

Despite Hubie's 100 RBIs (which is a stat hall of fame voters would fall in love over), Hubie only has 15 win shares. As was shown above, due to Raines' speed, Brooks was getting RBIs on outs and that factors in to the win share formula and is representable in the data. Meanwhile Rock is credited with 36 win shares a full 12 more the second place Vance Law. So, yeah, I dunno any other way to say it. My father coined a good term once, where when a hockey goalie wins a game for his team despite his team being outplayed by the other team. He used to say, "that goalie is standing and his head to win it!" and I think that's the term that would apply to Tim Raines' 1985 season with the Expos. He was literally standing on his head to get them victories.

(note: I am as surprised as you are that Vance Law was second in win shares in '85. Could be from Vance's magic underwears he and those other mormon guys wear)

And to close this article out, for good measure here is the historical Montreal Expos all time win shares:

1 Raines, Tim ,,,,, 268
2 Carter, Gary ,,,,, 239
3 Dawson, Andre ,,,,, 216
4 Tim Wallach ,,,,, 211
5 Rogers, Steve ,,,,, 182
6 Guerrero, Vladimir ,,,,, 166
7 Vidro, Jose ,,,,, 119
8 Martinez, Dennis ,,,,, 111
9 Bailey, Bob ,,,,, 110
10 Cromartie, Warren ,,,,, 106
11 Grissom, Marquis ,,,,, 103
,,, Walker, Larry ,,,,, 103
13 Fairly, Ron ,,,,, 94
14 Parrish, Larry ,,,,, 92
,,, Staub, Rusty ,,,,, 92
16 White, Rondell ,,,,, 91
17 Galarraga, Andres ,,,,, 90
18 Alou, Moises ,,,,, 89
,,, Cabrera, Orlando ,,,,, 89
20 Smith, Bryn ,,,,, 83
21 Lansing, Mike ,,,,, 82
22 Burke, Tim ,,,,, 79
,,, Valentine, Ellis ,,,,, 79
24 Speier, Chris ,,,,, 76
25 Vazquez, Javier ,,,,, 76
26 Deshields, Delino ,,,,, 74
27 Brooks, Hubie ,,,,, 73
28 Renko, Steve ,,,,, 72
29 Reardon, Jeff ,,,,, 71
30 Rojas, Mel ,,,,, 69
31 Hunt, Ron ,,,,, 67
32 Fassero, Jeff ,,,,, 65
,,, Martinez, Pedro ,,,,, 65
34 Gullickson, Bill ,,,,, 63
35 Jorgensen, Mike ,,,,, 62
,,, Singleton, Ken ,,,,, 62
37 Fryman, Woodie ,,,,, 61
,,, Webster, Mitch ,,,,, 61
39 Cordero, Wil ,,,,, 59
40 Marshall, Mike ,,,,, 58
,,, Wilkerson, Brad ,,,,, 58
42 Urbina, Ugueth ,,,,, 57
43 Schatzeder, Dan ,,,,, 56
44 Owen, Spike ,,,,, 53
45 Stoneman, Bill ,,,,, 52
46 Sanderson, Scott ,,,,, 51
47 Fitzgerald, Mike ,,,,, 50
48 Perez, Tony ,,,,, 49
49 Law, Vance ,,,,, 48
50 Lea, Charlie ,,,,, 47
51 Fletcher, Darrin ,,,,, 45
,,, Wetteland, John ,,,,, 45
53 Hermanson, Dustin ,,,,, 44
,,, McGaffigan, Andy ,,,,, 44
55 Foley, Tom ,,,,, 43
,,, Foli, Tim ,,,,, 43
,,, Grudzielanek, Mark ,,,,, 43
,,, Segui, David ,,,,, 43
59 Walker, Tom ,,,,, 42
60 Hernandez, Livan ,,,,, 41
,,, Martinez, Dave ,,,,, 41
,,, Schneider, Brian ,,,,, 41
63 Hill, Ken ,,,,, 40
,,, Oliver, Al ,,,,, 40
65 Santangelo, F.P. ,,,,, 37
66 Torrez, Mike ,,,,, 36
67 Berry, Sean ,,,,, 35
,,, Cash, Dave ,,,,, 35
,,, Rodriguez, Henry ,,,,, 35
70 Barrett, Michael ,,,,, 34
,,, Ohka, Tomo ,,,,, 34
,,, Scott, Rodney ,,,,, 34
73 Morton, Carl ,,,,, 33
,,, Murray, Dale ,,,,, 33
,,, Palmer, David ,,,,, 33
,,, Perez, Pascual ,,,,, 33
77 Armas, Tony ,,,,, 32
,,, Jones, Mack ,,,,, 32
79 Andrews, Shane ,,,,, 31
80 Foote, Barry ,,,,, 30
,,, White, Jerry ,,,,, 30
82 Nabholz, Chris ,,,,, 29
,,, Perez, Carlos ,,,,, 29
84 Stevens, Lee ,,,,, 28
85 Hesketh, Joe ,,,,, 27
,,, Sosa, Elias ,,,,, 27
,,, Taylor, Chuck ,,,,, 27
,,, Telford, Anthony ,,,,, 27
,,, Widger, Chris ,,,,, 27
,,, Youmans, Floyd ,,,,, 27
91 Calderon, Ivan ,,,,, 26
92 Day, Boots ,,,,, 25
93 Lee, Bill ,,,,, 25
94 Chavez, Endy ,,,,, 24
,,, Mangual, Pepe ,,,,, 24
96 Henry, Butch ,,,,, 23
,,, Stanhouse, Don ,,,,, 23
,,, Woods, Ron ,,,,, 23
99 Bateman, John ,,,,, 22
,,, Francona, Terry ,,,,, 22
,,, Fullmer, Brad ,,,,, 22
,,, Kline, Steve ,,,,, 22
,,, McAnally, Ernie ,,,,, 22
,,, Stewart, Scott ,,,,, 22

Yes, Raines was responsible for more Expos victories than any other player in Expos history according to Billy James' formula. It's nice to see Cro up there at number 10 too.

If Carter and Dawson are Hall of Famers, then Tim Raines is 100% worthy to be in with them. Because, hey, Raines was better than both of them. It's becoming a December tradition for me to write about Raines and the Hall of Fame, I hope this December traditional doesn't go on for 10 years...I hope he gets in soon.

Canadian Election Super Power Rankings Mark II

The Incumbent Champion: Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Harp is the first Prime Minister who has ever hailed from the West and is the first Prime Minister who really gave more to the West than the East...and thusly he gets a lot of votes from the West.

Eastern Prime Minsters have messed with the West for many years. For instance, that jabroni Trudeau had a great chance with the Alberta oil sands in the early eighties when an American firm was going to come up and pay for all incurred expenses. This would have created the same job boom that occurred in the West under the Harper administration yet with a HUGE difference...all the jobs and economy boost but NONE of the expenses. To process that shitty oil from the sands has exceeded expected costs astronomically...the boom is already over out there and it was a very costly operation. Think about it though, if we got the boom, the jobs, and the work, but the Yankees covered ALL the costs and how great it would have been (not only for the West but all of Canada)....if only that little fucker Trudeau didn't pretend Canada was a glorious nation that didn't need help from anyone. Trudeau and the National Energy Program placed a ban on all foreign companies from developing oil fields in the "Crown Land." The worst thing about it is that a lot of Canadians knew this was a sure thing and put their life savings into the American firm, and when that shitty Trudeau pulled the plug at the last second he flushed the stock down to pennies in a matter of seconds and many peoples savings along with it. ("Developing Alberta's oil sands: from Karl Clark to Kyoto" By Paul Anthony Chastko is a good read on this era, specifically the "Lost Decade" portion of the book if you are interested in further reading on the matter).

Shit....cool lake bro!

I can see why Western Canada embraces Harper after having to put up with years and years of Easterners fucking with them but I don't think that gives them the right to keep this guy in office for another term. There are hundreds of sites out there devoted to his sins and failings so I don't think I need to get into them. I will bring up my favorite though which is the Fake Lake scandal which is so stupid it's funny. He wasn't thinking of the thousands of people who were going to riot in the streets but was more concerned over giving foreign press a nice backdrop (in a nation with enough lakes as is)...the press got a nice backdrop alright...cops beating kids in the streets. Haha.

Overall Score: 0/10


Michael Ignatieff

Whatchu thinkin' 'bout?

This is a fine young academic ninny and fiction writer from Harvard who thinks he has the chutzpah to be Prime. I feel he preformed the worst in the debates...just repeating his campaign ad over and over and answering softball pre-recorded questions from "concerned citizens" where he got to repeat his ad a few more times. I have the least to say about him because he is the blandest by all means (even more so than Harper).

He reminds me of class elections in school where we got to vote for one kid to be "president," I have a feeling this guy was voted as such as a youth for some reason and I bet it was on a "chocolate milk in the cafeteria" type of platform.

Overall Score: 0/10


Jackie Layton

take it RIGHT as I sign it!

The champion of the youth! Yay! All the university kids love this baldy with all their hearts. He's the "Left" guy, which means he's not "Right"...so that means he's the best. I guess.

I remember being at a David Suzuki talk at a university once and another man was on the docket that evening...a nice man named Albert Gore. The university kids went absolutely batshit buck nuts insane for Al Gore. Why?

Albert Gore is the wife of Tipper Gore (who put some rock and rollers on trial for anti-Christian activities in the eighties), and then he gained notoriety for attempting to become president of America this one time, and at some point he apparently took the initiative to invent the fucking internet. He faded into obscurity after losing the election but resurfaced years later when he felt compelled to make a slide show about pollution which not only won the hearts of some ninnies in Finland who awarded him the Nobel Piece Prize but also idealists around the world who fell in love with him.

These Gore-Groupies are the same ones who think they are saving the world by voting for Jackie Layton. Let's be serious for a minute though, okay? Jack Layton's main shtick is to further "socialize" the country, and make us pay more taxes. We pay a lot of taxes in Canada...we pay taxes on every single dollar we earn, we pay taxes on every single good or service we purchase, and then in April we pay some more taxes, and then we have some armed soldiers running around with a ticket quota taxing us for small infractions we make...and so on...and so on. Then the bureaucracy takes this money and builds fake lakes with it, or uses a few billion of it to hold an Olympiad during a worldwide depression, or pay some crooked mobsters ludicrous amounts of money to do small construction projects, or in the case of the Quebec's Caisse de dépôt in 2009...flat out lose 40 billion of it. The Canadian bureaucracy also features a cute little branch called the Senate, where super smooth rich guys who lived a sweet life or coached hockey for a few years are given large sums of tax payer money to chill out and continue being rich. This is one of the world's biggest and corrupted bureaucracies and anyone suggesting that they need more tax collectors to vacuum up more funds into this bureaucracy is 100% out of his/her mind. For those who insist that Layton is "different" should get real, a bureaucracy of this size has no chance of not being corrupt for it far too large in nature.

Overall Score: 0/10

Gilles Duceppe


For those who insist that he has no place in a federal election because he only represents a geopolitical/linguistic region of Canada must consider that Harper also represents only a small geopolitical/linguistic region of Canada as well. In fact other than Layton who has cute little idealists spread out on all 4 corners of the Nation, every guy in this election represents a balkanized geopolitical region of Canada (Duceppe = Quebec, Ignatieff = Ontario, Harper = Alberta/Saskatchewan) and thusly that argument is false. He has every right to be in this election and similarly he has every right to be as bad as the rest.


Overall Score: 0/10


Conclusion


People always get mad at me when I say I'm not gonna vote, or I'm gonna vote on the back of the ballot for someone more better, but hey...what can you do? They say vote for the lesser of all evils but what if all candidates are equally awful....then what the hell do you do? Who should you vote for?

Honestly, it's a big joke these things but at least in the American ones they got groundbreaking fun stuff going on like getting a black dude or a chick to be president. Look at these bums in Canada, why are they all white men in a nation that is one of the most mosaic in the world? Where are the black dudes, the chicks, the Native Canadians, the Chinese people, can't we get a more inclusive election going one year? Seriously, why is it only these rotten old honky-zombies who get a chance to be Prime Minister?

You wanna know how to get a better voter turnout next year? Do what the Americans did, get a pretty milfy woman who makes the men interested and the women all jealous...and run her against a charismatic black man. The Conservatives have one in stock already, that saucy little Rona Ambrose, and the Liberals can continue their act of recruiting old retired athletes and get in contact with baseball Hall of Famer and Canadian...Ferguson Jenkins. I guarantee a Jenkins vs. Ambrose election will raise voter turnout by upwards of 20 percent.

 *** Election 2012 ***
(that Rona looks like such a bad girl sometimes...)