I also believe that it is important to evaluate new evidence and consider it when deciding a case. Traditional stats count for something. Intangibles also count for something. Numbers may not tell the whole story at face value, but must be placed in their proper context. We have records to see where players generally batted in the batting order, how much run support per game a starting pitcher received, how effective a reliever was at converting saves, how much a player’s running and defense impacted the game, etc.

Where my evaluation begins is seeing if perception (my eyes) matches reality (hard numbers). If perception matches reality, this is an easy test. If perception does not match reality, the harder evaluation begins. Where intangibles can enter the argument is a question of what sort of impact said candidate has on the history of the game. This is why I back Lee Smith’s candidacy despite a less than stellar career WAR and ERA. I still feel that Andre Dawson and Jim Rice were not BBWAA mistakes despite low OBP. I’m a late convert to the candidacies of Trammell and Murphy, thanks in part to examining their cases through the lens of advanced metrics.