In three weeks, the National Baseball Hall of Fame will announce the inductees for the 2009 Hall of Fame class, as selected by the Baseball Writers Association of America.  Between now and January 12th, I'll be looking at each of the 23 players eligible for selection - some in more detail than others.  Today we start out with one of the more interesting candidates, Alan Trammell.

"It will take Alan a couple of years to get everything together, and when he does he'll control the game. The great shortstops all control the game." - Sparky Anderson, in 1980

THE NUMBERS

Played for Detroit (1977-1996)

.285 BA, 185 HR, 1003 RBI, 236 SB

Anyone who was a serious baseball fan in the 1980's had to appreciate the talents of Trammell.  He was a big hitting shortstop (back when that was out of the ordinary), played like a total professional, and was part of one of the decade's most dominant teams (the 1984 Tigers).  He was beloved both by managers and teammates alike.  But, being a professional does not a hall of famer make, so you have to look a bit deeper to see if he merits Cooperstown consideration.

The interesting thing about Trammell when you compare his numbers to those of other Hall of Fame shortstops (17, excluding players whose careers primarily spanned the 19th century - there's just no way to even compare modern hitters to them), he's pretty much in the middle in just about every category.  2293 games, 2365 hits, .285 batting average, and OPS+ 110 (his OPS relative to other players in his era - 100 is considered average) - he places 9th in that grouping.  His home run and steals totals are among the best in the category.  Add in his six All-Star selections, and he's a gimme, right?

Well, here's the problem with shortstops.  In the Hall, there are bat guys, and there are glove guys.  Some players were proficient in both - Cal Ripken was a very good fielder, as one example - but all of them were more productive in one area or the other.  So to really get a feel for whether a shortstop is hallworthy or not, you almost have to carve the position down even further and compare the hitters to hitters, and fielders to fielders.  And this is where Trammell's candidacy starts to run into problems.

He was a very good fielder (four Gold Gloves), but it's hard to classify him with guys like Ozzie Smith, Phil Rizzuto, and Luis Aparacio.  But, when you try and compare him to the bat guys...guess who the eight Hall of Fame shortstops in front of him in the above stat categories are grouped with?  Yep, the bat guys.  It gets even worse when you look at his steal success rate (68.4%, which is pretty poor), and then see that he never led even the American League in a significant category (his best was when he finished 3rd in batting average in the silly numbers season of 1987).

The one argument that Trammell advocates make that does bear some merit, is that his career numbers are very similar to Barry Larkin's.  If you look at them side by side, they do look pretty close.  But, when you look a bit further you realize that Larkin has more walks, almost 150 more steals, more extra base hits, and only 23 fewer hits than Trammell in over 300 less at-bats, not to mention that Barry has the 1996 MVP award over Trammell (though you could argue that he deserved the 1987 AL MVP that went to George Bell).

A case can be made overall for Alan Trammell, though it's one with a few holes in it.  Perhaps he will eventually get into the Hall through the Veteran's Committee, as did many shortstops that have been inducted.  But personally, I would not vote for him.  Great player, not a Hall of Famer though.

MLB hall of fame, alan trammell, detroit tigers, tigers