Thurman Munson and the Hall of Fame

by Paul Semendinger

Some Parts Originally Published June 7, 2023

Updated August 2, 2024

***

Background - On August 2, 1979, Thurman Munson was practicing take-offs and landings with his new airplane. He crashed and died tragically. Today is the 45th anniversary of Munson's death.

I have argued, a lot, that Thurman Munson belongs in the Baseball Hall of Fame. This article takes some of my arguments and reasons for this and summarizes them together. I have also updated the facts to add in recently enshrined Joe Mauer and more.

***

Note - Numerous readers like to cherry-pick my articles, take a sentence here or there, sometimes take them out of context, use sarcasm, and the like, to try to refute my bigger arguments. Feel free to debate and discuss this with me. I love to have good honest and open debates. I did a Munson for the HOF on-line podcast for SABR a while back. Honest intellectual discussion is great. But, if you're going to debate me on any of this, you need to argue against the complete collection of facts presented here - not just the ones that serve your purpose. I believe when all of this is put together, the case for Munson is solid.

***

Argument 1 - Thurman Munson vs. Joe Mauer

Joe Mauer was just enshrined in the Baseball Hall of Fame. Mauer's case for inclusion comes from his career as a catcher. That was where he proved to be an excellent player.

There are those that state that Thurman Munson didn't play catcher long enough to be enshrined in Cooperstown.

Let's dig deeper:

In his career, Joe Maurer caught 921 games. Thurman Munson caught 1,278 games. That difference is substantial. Munson caught more than 25% more games than Maurer did. Munson caught more than two full seasons more games than Mauer did. If one believes that Mauer caught enough games at catcher to be Hall of Fame worthy, than Munson easily clears that standard.

Munson was also a more durable catcher. Playing primarily as a catcher, Maurer had only two seasons where he appeared in 140 or more games. Two. Munson did this seven times.

When he was primarily a catcher (and for this, I'll generously include Mauer's career through 2013 even though, by then he was not catching a lot) Maurer's WAR was 44.6. Munson played his whole career as a catcher. His WAR was 46.1..

Maurer won an MVP. So did Munson.

Maurer was a six-time All-Star. Munson was a seven-time All Star.

Maurer won three Gold Golves. Munson won three Gold Gloves.

Maurer never played on a team that won any post season series. His post season batting average was .275. He never hit a post season home run. he had one post season run batted in.

Munson was on three World Series teams. He was on two World Series winners. Munson was seen as the leader, and was the captain, of those teams. Munson's post season batting average was .357. He hit three home runs. He drove in 22 runs.

Maurer did win three batting titles. Munson never did. But Maurer never had a 100 RBI season. Munson had three of them.

It seems that Maurer and Munson come out pretty similar. To me it's difficult to conclude that Maurer was so much better than Munson that he should be in the Hall of Fame, but Munson shouldn't be. Their careers were similar. Very similar. Maurer's inclusion makes Munson's case stronger.

Argument 2- Lifetime WAR and More

Munson's lifetime WAR puts him in company with other Hall of Fame catchers.

The industry standard for comparing players across eras is WAR. For whatever faults WAR has, it has become the most accepted way to evaluate a player's overall worth, value, and ultimately (because this is what it most often comes down to) a player's Hall of Fame candidacy. WAR just isn't a tool, it is THE tool used as a baseline in that determination.

In my opinion, if a person uses WAR to make a case on one player's Hall of Fame worthiness, that measuring tool must then be used for all players that person argues for or against. (One cannot say, "WAR says Player X belongs in the Hall-of-Fame, so I'll use WAR, but I'll argue against WAR when making the claim that Player Z does not belong." The standard is the standard.)

And by that standard, WAR, Thurman Munson ranks as the 15th greatest catcher of all-time. By my definition, that's a Hall-of-Famer. (It would be difficult to argue that in the long history of baseball that the 15th greatest catcher of all-time isn't Hall of Fame worthy.)

Over the years, in addition to WAR, other statistical tools have been developed to try to do an even better job of determining who the greatest players are. All of these also seem to indicate that Thurman Munson was a Hall-of-Fame worthy baseball player.

Here is a short and quick summary of how Thurman Munson ranks all-time by a variety of measurements:

By WAR, Munson ranks 15th all-time

WAR 7 moves Munson to 8th place

JAWS ranks Munson 12th

WAR/162 ranks Munson 9th

oWAR puts him at 16

dWar is less kind - 35th

WAA = 15th

MVP share = 11th

If we look to OPS+, even with a shortened career, Munson ranks above Gary Carter, Bobby Doerr, Robin Yount, Ryne Sandberg, and many others, including even Derek Jeter.

Further, the Hall-of-Fame Monitor gives Munson a score of 90. He comfortably ranks alongside Hall-of-Famers George Kell, Enos Slaughter, Tony Lazzeri, and Lou Boudreau.

The Hall-of-Fame Standards measure is less kind to Munson (he's 410th), but his ranking is identical to Tony Oliva who was recently inducted.

In addition, some players are given consideration for "what might have been." In many of the articles about Tony Oliva, for example, people cited that he would have been that much better if not for his bad knees. People have used, "If not for the strike" to argue that Fred McGriff would have had better numbers. That same standard was also used for Kirby Puckett following his shortened career. Sandy Koufax gets that same treatment as does Dizzy Dean. The list here is almost endless, but that same consideration can and should be made for Munson. His best days may have been behind him, but it is possible (and probable) that he could have had a few more good years to close out his career.

There is also the question as to whether or not catchers are under-represented in the Hall of Fame. That is a slightly different argument, but, if so, I believe that fact also supports Munson's candidacy. There are only 17 catchers who played in the MLB in the Hall of Fame. Munson ranks with that class. He's in the lower portion, but he is, nonetheless, in that group.

Finally, if we look at the Keltner List, another standard used to determine a player's Hall of Fame worthiness, Thurman Munson scores a bunch of points there as well. He was a leader on his team, he won numerous awards, he was a winner, he put up impressive (for the time - and especially for a catcher) offensive and defensive statistics, etc... It would be impossible to argue that you can tell the story of baseball in the 1970s without talking about Thurman Munson. Also Thurman Munson is the best player at his position who is eligible and isn't yet in the Hall-of-Fame.

***

Argument 3 - Hall of Famers

The following was first published here at Start Spreading the News on November 7, 2019. (It has been updated.)

Thurman Munson is on the Hall-of-Fame ballot again.

The question is, does he deserve to be elected?

Let’s explore this together.

The Low Bar

Last year, through a similar second/third/fourth/etc-chance committee, Harold Baines was elected to the Hall-of-Fame. Baines was a nice player, a very good player, in fact, he was an excellent hitter (if nothing else) for a long long time. I don’t think anyone has ever argued that Harold Baines was not a very good baseball player. But, many have argued that Harold Baines was not a Hall-of-Fame player. Even though he’s now a Hall-of-Famer, understanding his election to the Hall is still puzzling.

According to Baseball-Reference, Harold Baines had a lifetime WAR of 38.7. That puts him 552nd all-time. That might be good, but it is certainly not great. That 38.7 WAR ranks as one of the worst among any player in the Hall-of-Fame. Baines ranks below such non Hall-of-Fame players as Carney Lansford, Mark Belanger, and even Brett Gardner.

Yes, Brett Gardner. Gardner’s lifetime WAR is 41.6.

By electing Baines, the committee set a low bar for inclusion in the Hall-of-Fame. The simple Hall-of-Fame test now is, “Does the player have a better WAR than Baines? If so, if Baines is in, why not _______?”

Now, granted, that’s far too simplistic, but it does allow at least for the start of an argument as to the relative worthiness of any Hall-of-Fame candidate. (One day we’ll have to compare the careers of Baines and Gardner.) Just for argument’s sake, Paul O’Neill, Darryl Strawberry, David Justice, Jesse Barfield, and even Giancarlo Stanton all have a higher lifetime WAR than Baines. Are any of those players Hall-of-Famers?

One thing is for certain, whatever his merits, they certainly didn’t raise the bar when the enshrined Harold Baines in the Hall-of-Fame.

Going forward, I plan to always base my initial determination on a player’s Hall-of-Fame credentials against the Baines test. On the most basic of levels, as a starting point, I will ask, “Did the player I am examining have a higher lifetime WAR than Baines?” If not, he does not belong in the Hall-of-Fame. If so, it makes sense to dig deeper. We’ll call this, the low bar. Before continuing to look at a candidate, he must be at least as good as Harold Baines.

As we look at Thurman Munson, the first test is that his WAR must be compared to Harold Baines’ WAR.

Thurman Munson’s lifetime WAR was… 46.1. This is good for 370th all-time. Munson is hundreds of players above Baines on the lifetime WAR list. While that shouldn’t be the criteria for election, we can, at least continue the discussion. Munson passed the Low Bar Test.

Other Catchers in the Hall-of-Fame

Now that we can look closer at Thurman’s candidacy, let’s examine how he compares to other Hall-of-Fame Catchers.

The catcher in the Hall-of-Fame with the highest WAR is Johnny Bench who owns a 75.2 lifetime WAR (good for 77th place all-time). Bench is the only catcher to crack baseball’s all-time top 100 players in WAR.

Believe it or not, the catcher who comes in second in WAR ranks just out of the top 100 at 101st. That player is Gary Carter with a lifetime WAR of 70.1.

The following are the next five catchers, in order (with their rank in parentheses):

1. Ivan Rodriguez, 68.7 WAR (113)

2. Carlton Fisk, 68.5 (115)

3. Yogi Berra, 59.8 (191)

4. Mike Piazza, 59.6 (192)

5. Bill Dickey, 58.4 (206)

All of those catchers are considered all-time great catchers. They are all in the Hall-of-Fame.

The next list of catchers above Munson includes the following: Joe Mauer (55.0, WAR), Ted Simmons (50.3), Mickey Cochrane (48.5), Wally Schang (48.0), Ernie Lombardi (46.8), and Gene Tenace (46.8). Of these, only Schang and tenace are not in the Hall-of-Fame.

Gene Tenace has a higher lifetime WAR than Thurman Munson? Yikes! But, wait. Gene Tenace only placed 892 games as a catcher. He's an outlier here. I do not believe that he caught nearly enough games to be considered with these other players who player catcher for many more games (even including Joe Maurer) than Tenace behind the plate.

Of "lifetime" catchers, only Wally Schang ranks above Munson in WAR and is not in the Hall of Fame. Schang is forgotten today by most, but he is also deserving of the Hall of Fame. He appeared in six World Series, winning four of them - with three different clubs: The Philadelphia A's, the Boston Red Sox, and the New York Yankees.

By this measure, it’s hard to argue against him.

Hall-of-Famers Below Munson

The following is a list of Hall-of-Fame catchers who have a lower lifetime WAR than Thurman Munson:

1. Roger Bresnahan, 42.5

2. Roy Campanella, 37.0

3. Rick Ferrell, 33.7

4. Ray Schalk, 33.2

5. Al Lopez, 21.9

Conversely, this seems to make Munson’s case a little more difficult. Roy Campanella was an all-time great who came to the Major Leagues later in his career due to the “color line.” As such, his lower WAR doesn’t reflect his overall career. Campy was a three-time MVP and an important player on the Brooklyn Dodgers. That only leaves only a handful of Hall-of-Fame catchers with a lower WAR than Munson.

And, I don’t think the Hall-of-Fame should be in the business of lowering the bar… BUT...

Munson’s Revenge

Let’s move on to a more thorough stat, JAWS, to see where Munson ranks against the best of all-time. Because JAWS looks at a few more factors (such a peak years) than WAR does, Munson actually moves up on notch to twelfth all-time (just passing Gene Tenace).

The only players above Munson are Hall-of-Famers. By this standard, Munson is the greatest catcher not in the Hall of Fame.

That’s pretty exclusive company. It’s impossible to argue that the 12th highest ranked catcher in baseball history does not deserve to be enshrined in the Hall-of-Fame.

Digging Deeper

If you look at WAR7, which is a compilation of a player’s seven best seasons, Munson ranks eighth all-time among catchers.

Munson, of course, died tragically in a plane crash during the 1979 season. He was only 32 years-old at the time. While there were reports that he was slowing down, it is fair to assume that he probably had at least a few more good years in him. (Because he wanted to be close to his family, those final seasons might have been with the Cleveland Indians.) In his last two seasons, Munson’s WAR was 3.3 (1978) and 2.4 (1979). Let’s average those two out to 2.85. Let’s then also give Munson just four more seasons before he would have retired at 36 years-old. Those final four years would have allowed him to accumulate another 11.4 career WAR. (I think that number is very conservative.)

If one gives Munson an additional 11.4 WAR, his new lifetime WAR of 57.5 would bring him to eighth all-time.

Argument 4 - MLB Network and Other Experts

Last winter, the MLB Network ran a series of players who are not in the Hall of Fame, but deserve to be there.

I took two screen shots of the lists published on the network that day:

In addition:

InThe New Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract, Munson ranks 14th among catchers.

In The Cooperstown Casebook by Jay Jaffe, Munson ranks as the 12th greatest catcher. Jaffe states, "As short-career guys go" he is Hall-of-Fame worthy.

David J. Gordon states in Baseball Generations that Munson (who he ranks 14th at catcher all-time) "Warrants inclusion in the Hall-of-Fame."

These are just some of the experts who make the case for Munson.

Argument 5 - Other Factors

A baseball player is, of course, more than his numbers. Besides his stats, what else did Thurman Munson bring to his team and baseball in general?

In Thurman Munson’s case, the answer is a lot.

Thurman Munson was the 1970 American League Rookie of the Year.

He won the 1976 American League Most Valuable Player Award.

In a career that lasted only from 1969 to 1979, Munson was a seven time All-Star.

He won three Gold Gloves.

On top of all of this, Thurman Munson was a leader. In many ways, he was the heart and soul of the late 1970s Yankees teams. Munson helped lead the Yankees to the World Series for three consecutive years. He was a two time World Series champion.

Munson died in that terrible plane crash on August 2, 1979. Is it a coincidence that the Yankees didn’t win another World Series until 1996 (when another leader, Derek Jeter, became a full time player)?

Thurman Munson was named the Yankees Captain, a position that no one held after Lou Gehrig. In fact the position was supposed to never be filled again. Thurman Munson was the type of player, the type of leader, that could fill Lou Gehrig’s shoes. That says a lot.

In short, was Thurman Munson part of the story of baseball? ABSOLUTELY.

Was he a franchise legend? ABSOLUTELY, again.

Add it all up, and, for me, it presents a compelling case. Thurman Munson, belongs in the Hall-of-Fame. It’s about time he takes his place among baseball’s immortals.