I don't think so either. I don't think any of the people on the ballot are.
But one could make an interesting case for Charlie. It would go something like this:
- There are only 15 managers who managed at least 10 seasons since 1900 with higher winning percentages. 11 of them are in the Hall of Fame. The other four are Davey Johnson (also on the ballot), Steve O'Neill, Joe Girardi, and Billy Martin.
- Many Hall of Fame managers have lower winning percentages, including Anderson, LaRussa, Durocher, Francona (will be there eventually), Torre, Herzog, Lasorda, and Dick Williams.
- Many of the Hall of Fame managers have only one championship, including Weaver, Herzog, Durocher, and Cox. Al Lopez doesn't have any.
- He never had a losing season over a full season (of course, the two times he was having one, he was fired). There is only one other manager among those with 10 full years that can say that. (Interestingly, he is not in the Hall of Fame either, and he managed the Phillies for a couple of seasons--Steve O'Neill).
Of course, part of the reason Charlie's stats are so good is that he didn't manage very long compared to most of the Hall of Fame managers. That has helped some players get in, like Kirby Puckett, who had to retire before he declined much.
Again, I don't see Charlie as a Hall of Famer, and I can't imagine he would get in (his best comps are O'Neill and Girardi). But it is interesting to think about.
