The Politics of Glory or Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame? by Bill James MacMillan Publishing Co., 1994 There is no topic that is better guaranteed to cause debate among baseball fans than the Hall of Fame. Every baseball fan has a different definition of a) what the Hall of Fame is all about and b) who belongs in the Hall of Fame. In his fantastic The Politics of Glory (available in softcover as Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame?) famed baseball historian Bill James tries to answer these two questions and much more using his unique blend of sabermetrics and old-fashioned baseball logic and wit.

A large portion of the book is devoted to a history of the Hall of Fame, and, in particular, a history of the voting procedures and practices of the Hall of Fame. James takes you from the days when the Clark Foundation of Cooperstown first had the idea for a baseball museum as a way of attracting tourism to boost their hurting Depression-era economy all the way up to the Pete Rose for the Hall controversy of the early 90s. Speaking on the Veterans Committee and their many outlandish Hall of Fame selections over the years, James says, "They're all old; nobody gets on the Veterans Committee until he drives at least two hundred miles with his left blinker on."

This history of the Hall is interesting, but it is James' analysis of what should constitute a Hall of Famer and where exactly the Hall went wrong in its voting history that makes The Politics of Glory one of the better baseball books of the last decade.

One of the most effective chapters in the book is titled "Arguments." In it, James summarizes the ten main mistaken tactics that fans have used over the years to "prove" that So-and-so belongs in the Hall. These include "The Lowest Common Denominator," "If-One-Then Argument," and "The Insult Approach." James effectively deconstructs the basic tenants of each of these arguments in a matter of a few sentences. "The We-Can-Make-a-Group Argument" is another one that James decimates:

There are literally millions of ways to slice up a group of players--millions doesn't begin to say it, but that's the largest number we can deal with--and since every player is unique, you can always form a group of players, all of whom are in the Hall except our man. Want to make a Hall of Fame case for Tony Perez? Name the only eligible Hall of Famer with 900 extra base hits who isn't in the Hall of Fame. It's Tony Perez...Did you know that Amos Otis is the only player in baseball history who had 2,000 hits, 1,000 RBI, 300 stolen bases, 175 homers and a .340 on-base percentage and is eligible for the Hall of Fame but isn't in?...If I worked at it long enough, I'm sure I could get the entire starting lineup of the 1978 Royals grouped with Hall of Famers. Well, I'm not sure about the third baseman.

James has developed six different methods that he says might be used in combination with one another to help evaluate potential Hall of Fame candidates. They are:

• Similarity Scores -- using a system of statistical deductions, James has devised a method to compare any two players. The closer the similarity score, the closer the caliber of the players. James says, "We will find, in some cases, that Player A is comparable to Player B, who is in the Hall of Fame, but that on the other hand he is more comparable to Players C, D, E and F, none of whom are in or are strong candidates."
• The Hall of Fame Standards List -- a series of one hundred objective questions about a player's accomplishments. The typical Hall of Famer scores a fifty on the test, so if a player can score around that or higher, James argues that he may be Hall of Fame-worthy.
• The Black Ink Test -- an evaluation of a player's league leading performances. A player gets a certain number of points for every time he has led the league in a major statistical category.
• The Hall of Fame Career Monitor -- a points system that James used in all his old Baseball Abstracts to evaluate the Hall of Fame potential for current players. Using this method, a player gets a certain number of points for hitting 30 homers in a season or for winning an MVP award or for being on a championship team, etc.
• Fibonnacci Win Scores -- a method for dealing with starting pitchers for the most part. Combines wins, winning percentage, and games over .500 into one statistic.
• The Ken Keltner List -- a series of subjective questions about a player's accomplishments and popularity during his career.

What makes this book so much better than the typical "The Hall of Fame Sucks and I Know How To Fix It" book is James' writing ability combined with his wit and his willingness to outrage fans with his outspoken opinions. Speaking on the great Hall of Fame debate over Phil Rizzuto, a player that James doesn't feel belongs in the Hall, he compares him to film star Elizabeth Taylor, saying that while Rizzuto may have been a great player at one time, it's hard for him to believe it by looking back over his stats and the news stories of the time: "For thirty years I have seen Liz Taylor make the front page for doing absolutely nothing, when frankly I am utterly unable to understand why anyone would care if Liz Taylor were to cavort naked down Lexington Avenue. I'm sure she was a beautful woman once, but I wasn't there." On Shoeless Joe Jackson, James isn't afraid to speak out: "My own opinion is that the people who want to put Joe Jackson in the Hall of Fame are baseball's answer to those women who show up at murder trails wanting to marry the cute murderer."

The Politics of Glory builds up to its finest moment in one of its final chapters, titled simply "Don Drysdale." In the first part of the chapter, using the same methods that he has demonstrated over and over again over the course of the book, James convinces the reader beyond a shadow of a doubt that Don Drysdale belongs in the Hall and that anyone who wants to argue different is a blasted fool. Then in the second half of the chapter, using the exact same methods from a slightly different angle, James convinces you that Drysdale is no more deserving of enshrinement in the Hall than John Burkett is. It's an amazingly effective chapter, showing the reader exactly why Hall of Fame arguments can be so divisive and why a more standardized definition of what exactly a Hall of Famer is may be impossible to achieve. I think this chapter may be the best piece of writing that James has ever done.

The purpose of The Politics of Glory is not really to suggest where the Hall has gone wrong or to point out deserving players that they have missed over the years, though James does do this at times while trying to prove his larger points. Instead, James is trying to show that the problems the Hall has had over its history are correctable and that there is a better way to do things.

This is a remarkable book. No baseball fan will look at potential Hall of Famers in the same way after they are done reading The Politics of Glory. I can't recommend it enough.

The Politics of Glory or Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame? may be available for purchase on the net at one of these sites.

--JingleBob, April 9, 1999

© 1999 JC White