The Launch Angle

As we saw with the left fielders, when we rank order those on the outside looking in with those we would consider rank and file we should find similarities. We should find someone they are most similar to. At that point, it becomes easier to determine whether someone actually belongs. It becomes and if…then statement. Of course, the reverse is also true. If we don’t feel the player in the Hall of Fame should have been there then we are left wanting more.

Occasionally, we get an omission so glaring that the offended party has no direct peers. We see that here in center field. Jim Edmonds has some direct comparisons that probably fit him. Kenny Lofton does not. That isn’t to say that he is superior in every way to these other nine players. There are individual categories where he comes up short. Still, in the categories that matter he is superior in every way.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion and some of them are more informed than others. Occasionally, they are just plain wrong. I’m not really sure why a plurality of voters felt Lofton wasn’t good enough. Maybe it was a lack of power. Maybe it was because he never won a ring. Perhaps it was because he said their mother war combat boots. We will never know unless they declare it themselves.

CF WAR Seasons

This gets to the heart of the purpose of the Veterans Committee. Silly me, but I thought the purpose was to reverse obvious omissions. Is Jim Edmonds a Hall of Famer? Of course he is when you look at this list. He belongs right in that group. I’d argue that Billy Hamilton was better given the relative problems with 19th century schedules that limited opportunities for peak WAR performance.

You could certainly argue that Ashburn was more valuable and I’d be willing to listen to that argument. However, he clearly belongs in this group. If you belong in this group then you belong in the Hall of Fame. Perhaps, the voters thought he may have used. Maybe they just couldn’t respect his numbers because the period was known for heavy offensive production. Those are more than reasonable concerns even if I disagree with both of them.

Yet, if the Veterans Committee is there to right the most egregious wrongs then Lofton has to be the first priority. Admittedly, we did not include center field royalty and there are more of those guys than at most positions. We also didn’t include Carlos Beltran and Andruw Jones because they have not officially been inducted yet. Lofton doesn’t fit with the elites, but he surpasses this group. He stands in his own spot.

CF ROV and BPO

Billy Hamilton’s numbers are stupid. They jump off the page in any era and they especially do so when you consider that power was nearly non-existent before the turn of the century. He was as dominant in “inside baseball” as any player in history. The only downside is that we aren’t quite sure about the level of competition. The gap between the best and worst was greater than even the Dead Ball Era.

This is the area where Lofton does not shine. Admittedly, he is still well within this group, but given the offensive production of the era you could be forgiven if you felt underwhelmed. This is why we don’t focus on only one test. Edmonds comes out looking much better.

This is the downside to ROV and BPO. They are not normed for the era. This is why we look at numbers like OPS+ and offensive winning percentage. Edmonds is probably most comparable with Duke Snider. He was a little better defensively and Snider was better offensively relative to his era, but it comes pretty close to being a wash.

CF Total Runs

Again, Lofton has no peers in this group. If we wanted to compare him to any Hall of Famer he would probably compare most closely with Carlos Beltran. Beltran has greater offensive credentials and impressive defensive credentials. He was admittedly a better player. The idea here is that Lofton literally has no direct peers.

I suppose that makes it challenging to peg his place in history. There is no if..then statement at the ready. He is different from Andre Dawson (quite frankly better) but not as good as Beltran. Andruw Jones is somewhere near the neighborhood as well, but not quite as good as Lofton.

The only plausible explanation is that chicks dig the long ball. That is really the only “weakness” in Lofton’s game. It’s not really a weakness. He got on base, he wreaked a lot of damage on base with his speed. He defended his position well. I’m really not sure what anyone was looking for, but it needs to be rectified soon.

Originally published in Thoughts from A Native Texan on April 12, 2026. Feature photo by Jerry Reuss. Creative Commons License.