I was watching the MLB Network the last couple nights, a show called "Clubhouse Confidential," and they came out with statistical comparisons that bode favorably for Alan Trammell as a Hall of Fame candidate.
The host, Brian Kenney, is excellent on the show. I watch it regularly, so I'm not bagging on him. I just had to laugh, though, at this sudden discovery he made that Trammell's numbers compared favorably to Barry Larkin, who is expected to get in the Hall this year, and if not, in the not- too-distant future. Or even with Cal Ripken, who was arguably the most prolific power-hitting shortstop of all time (It depends on whether you want to put Ernie Banks and Alex Rodriguez in the equation, because they switched positions mid-career).
He used both conventional statistics and Sabermetrics, the later which has some good elements and others, such as WAR (wins above replacement), that can be a stretch.
I vote for Trammell every year. I saw him play every day as a beat writer. He was the type of player if you saw one game, you might not be that impressed. If you witnessed him for an entire series, you'd start to see his true value. If you observed him for an entire season, you understood he was one of baseball's top players. If watched his entire career, it was obvious Trammell belongs in the Hall of Fame.
There does seem to be a groundswell of support for Tram lately - and that's good. It's probably because of Larkin and the numbers comparison being so close. It is splitting hairs. But come on, Trammell's been on the ballot 11 years. He only received 24.3 percent of the vote last year (75 percent is needed for election).
This much deserved support is coming a little late, isn't it?