The Keltner List

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

For those unaware, the Keltner List is a Bill James creation used to eavluate the worthiness of a HOF candidate. You may have seen the list in other guises, particularly Meltzer's Wrestling Observer HOF. Most lists are a spinoff of this one. I've done about a dozen of these, which can be found using the board's search function. I have a list of names, and I draw one at random. Today's candidate is Lon Warneke.

 

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?

 

No.

 

2. Was he the best player on his team?

 

Yes, a good argument exists that Warneke was the best player on the Chicago Cubs from 1932-35.

 

3. Was he the best player in baseball at his position? Was he the best player in the league at his position?

 

Warneke was the best pitcher in the National League in 1932. Soon after, he was eclipsed by Dizzy Dean. In all of baseball, Lefty Grove was better.

 

4. Did he have an impact on a number of pennant races?

 

Warneke's Cubs won the National League twice, in 1932 and '35. Warneke won two games in the 1935 World Series, allowing just one run in 16.7 innings.

 

5. Was he good enough that he could play regularly after passing his prime?

 

No. Warneke suffered an arm injury near the end of the 1936 season, limiting his effectiveness. He effectively retired at 34, only returning when the war created a shortage of talent.

 

6. Is he the very best baseball player in history who is not in the Hall of Fame?

 

No.

 

7. Are most players who have comparable statistics in the Hall of Fame?

 

Some are and some aren't. Pitchers of Warneke's stature walk a thin line when it comes to the Hall. Pitchers such as Rube Marquard, Stan Coveleski, and Bob Lemon find their way in with similar win-loss records, while others miss the boat. Of Warneke's ten most similar players, four are in the Hall.

 

8. Do the player's numbers meet Hall of Fame standards?

 

Probably not. Warneke scores below average in the Black Ink, HOF Standards, and HOF Monitors scales. He scores decent on the Gray Ink test.

 

9. Is there any evidence to suggest that the player was significantly better or worse than is suggested by his statistics?

 

None apparent.

 

10. Is he the best player at his position who is eligible for the Hall of Fame?

 

No. My vote would go to Bert Blyleven.

 

11. How many MVP-type seasons did he have? Did he ever win an MVP award? If not, how many times was he close?

 

Warneke finished second in the NL MVP voting in 1932, losing out to Chuck Klein. Had the Cy Young award existed in 1932, he certainly would have won it.

 

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?

 

Warneke pitched in five All-Star games. He would have pitched in six had the All-Star game been played in 1933.

 

13. If this man were the best player on his team, would it be likely that the team could win the pennant?

 

Yes. The Cubs did win in 1932, with Lon Warneke as their best player.

 

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?

 

None apparent.

 

15. Did the player uphold the standards of sportsmanship and character that the Hall of Fame, in its written guidelines, instructs us to consider?

 

Yes.

 

Conclusion: Warneke is a borderline Hall of Famer. He was certainly quite good for half a decade. However, the evidence isn't overwhelming, and there are too many candidates at Warneke's level to merit his induction.