This is the first in a series of diaries about Hall of Fame Veteran's Committee Candidates.  In this diary I'd like to get everyone's opinion on   art four in a hall of fame diary series that examines the hall-worthiness of some of the candidates for 2007.  You can follow these links to get to the other diaries:
Bert Blyleven

Jack Morris

Andre Dawson, Dave Parker and Jim Rice.

For reference, entire ballot can be seen here.  Results of the ballot will be announced February 27th.  If there is time and interest, I'd like to post diaries on the nominees that have a St Louis connection: Ken Boyer, August Busch Jr, Curt Flood, Whitey Herzog, Jim Kaat, Marty Marion, and Joe Torre.

Today I'd like to open up discussion on Jim Kaat.  His association with St Louis was not exactly critical to his career, but he did win his only ring with the Cardinals in 1982.

His 283 wins are 30th of the all time list  Among non-HOFers he is surpassed only by Bobby Mathews at 23rd with 297 wins, Tommy John (#25, 288), Bert Blyleven (#26, 287) and Tony Mullane (#28, 284).  Among the 51 HoF starting pitchers that played primarily in the MLs after 1893 (the year the pitching mound was moved back from 50' to the current 60.5' away from the plate), he would be 18th.

Of course Kaat's career losses also rank near the top of list.  The only non-HoFers above him are Jack Powell (#8, 254) and Bobby Matthews (#11, 248).  Among the aforementioned HoFers he'd be 12th.  Unsurprisingly his win percentage would be near the bottom of the HoF list, 44th of 52.  Some of the arguably weaker HoFers would be behind him: Eppa Rixey (#51, .515), Ted Lyons (#50, .531), and Rube Maquard (#49, .532).

Kaat's career ERA of 3.45 is nowhere near the career leader boards nor is his ERA+ of 107.  His ERA would be 45th of the 51 20th century starting pitchers in the hall; his ERA+ would rank him 47th. Only Herb Pennock, Early Winn, Catfish Hunter and Rube Marquard.

Kaat's 2461 strikeouts rank 33rd all-time and would place him 16th among 20th century HoFers.

As for dominance, Kaat had one season when he was the best pitcher in his league: in 1966 he 25-16 with a 2.75 ERA.  He won 20 or more 2 other times: in 1974 and 1975 with the White Sox.  And he did win 17 or more three other times.

Perhaps the best argument for Kaat is that most his comparables at baseball reference are in the HoF or very likely to make the hall in the future (Glavine and Blyleven).  Of course if Kaat goes in, Tommy John probably goes in too.  That would mean that 17 HoF pitchers were active from the late `60s, 70% more than the average across all years.  And that becomes perhaps the best argument against Kaat: that he was probably the 11th or 12th best pitcher of his generation and by that standard, he isn't very hall-worthy.

I have to admit, actually going through the numbers has changed my mind about Kaat.  I used to believe he should be a HoFer, but going through the numbers makes me believe he is perhaps the best pitcher in nearly 100 years not to be deserving make of the HoF.  But at the same time, if he was elected, I wouldn't call it a mistake.  He is better than probably at least 10% of the previous inductees.