Debunking the McGwire Myth

Mark McGwire hit a lot of home runs in his career. Everybody knows this. However, I've heard people argue that McGwire was only capable of creating home runs and steroids scandals, and that his numbers don't warrant the Hall of Fame honor, regardless of steroids. I hear, "It doesn't matter that he took steroids, all he was good for was home runs." I think that's just crazy talk.

This is what Bill James says about McGwire, in his Historical Baseball Abstract: "...about 55% of McGwire's career value is accounted for by his home runs, a high figure, but not as high as players like Dave Kingman and Steve Balboni. McGwire does other things well, other than hit home runs."

Mr. James ranks McGwire #3 among first basemen in his player ratings, so he holds McGwire's contributions in high regard.

A caveat: Mr. James's almanac was published in 2001, so his analysis of McGwire's career does not include the 2005 Congressional hearing fiasco, the subsequent fallout, McGwire becoming a pariah and an outcast, and his paltry Hall of Fame voting total of 23.5%.

I'm not here to discuss the past. Well, actually, I am here to do that. But I'm not here to debate whether or not McGwire took steroids (looks like he did) or how much of his power was derived from steroids (impossible to tell). What I'm here to do is determine, based on the numbers, whether or not he belongs in the Hall of Fame.

In 1998, McGwire hit 70 home runs. Every baseball fan remembers #62 and most people remember #70. But does anybody remember #162? That was the number of walks McGwire drew, and until Barry Bonds became the the King of the Intentional Walk, McGwire's 1998 season was the 2nd-highest total of bases on balls ever, after Babe Ruth's 1923 total of 170. Even after the astronomical BB numbers that Barry Bonds had put up, McGwire's 162 remains tied for the 5th-best single season walk total of all time.

His 1998 season was one of the best ever put up: a career-high .299 BA, the 70 HR, 147 RBI, the .470 OBP, an astronomical 1.222 OPS (16th-best all time, and one of only three people in that top-16 not named Ruth, Bonds, or Williams), and 1 stolen base in 1 chance (100% success rate, best of all-time). That is an all-time great season.

One of the main criticisms of McGwire is that his career batting average (.263) means that he doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame. Looking it up, only six players from the Live Ball Era (post-1920) who are currently in the Hall of Fame posted lower batting averages than McGwire, which would lend credence to that theory.

Little tangent here: the six Hall of Famers mentioned above were Harmon Killebrew (.256), Bill Mazeroski (.260), and Gary Carter, Ozzie Smith, Reggie Jackson, Luis Aparicio, who all oddly enough had career averages of .262. Carter was a catcher, Smith was a defensive wizard (the wizard pun is a little cheesy, I know, but I couldn't help it), Jackson gets in on his HR and RBI numbers (563 and 1702, respectively), and I really can't explain what Aparicio is doing in there. That just baffles me. Bill Mazeroski is in because of his walk-off home run in the 1960 World Series, and that's just about it (I mean, come on, he had a .299 OBP!). Ok, I'm done with that rant. I'll come back to Harmon Killebrew in a minute.

As I was saying, McGwire's low batting average would seem to count against him. However, I think the fact that his batting average was so low made his OBP so much more impressive. His career OBP was .394, which was 131 points higher than his batting average. During seasons in which he played in more than 100 games, he drew an average of 102 walks per season. I don't know about you, but that's a pretty good total to me.

Now back to Harmon Killebrew: When he retired, his 573 home runs were good for fifth on the all-time list, behind only Aaron, Ruth, Mays, and Robinson. His batting average is 120 points lower than his OBP, much like McGwire. When McGwire retired with 583 home runs, his total was good for sixth, leaving him ten home runs ahead of Killebrew for career home runs.

Despite the fact that McGwire played for only 16 seasons, and Killebrew played for 22, their numbers are very similar. I've never heard anyone say that Killebrew doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame. If you just look at the numbers, I don't think that anyone can argue McGwire doesn't also belong there.

I honestly don't believe McGwire will be voted into the Hall of Fame, and I personally think that's the right call for the folks in Cooperstown. There's a high probability that he used steroids, and they helped him to hit the 583 home runs. If you want to argue that McGwire doesn't belong in the Hall because of steroid use, that's fine. But if you want to argue McGwire should be kept out because his numbers weren't good enough, that's ridiculous and I will flick you in the ear.