Is Jimmy Rollins on pace for the Hall of Fame?

PBR - Jimmy Rollins was quoted last month saying his chances of reaching the Hall of Fame may increase if he stays with one club throughout his career.

Statistically, he's on the outside looking in, but he's closer than you may think.

Barry Larkin, widely believed to be a favorite to gain induction in 2012, spent 19-seasons with Cincinnati. So let's compare Rollins's career numbers to Larkin's.

Immediately, you can see a huge difference in batting average in favor of Larkin. You also see a sizable difference in RBIs, but keep in mind the difference in games played. The strikeouts, however, are what really sets Rollins back. He's played in 544 games less Larkin, yet he already eclipsed his career strikeout total.

Digging deeper, EYE (BB / SO) tells the story. Larkin was a much more patient hitter than Rollins and his patience led to more productive at-bats. You can see a major difference in Linear Weights (LINW) and Base Performance Value (BPV). The large difference in BPV means Larkin's raw skills (i.e., eye, hitting safely, hitting with power, etc.) appear to be better than Rollins's.

Larkin's BABIP (Batting Average on Balls Put in Play) is significantly better than Rollins's, reinforcing the logic that he was better at strategically placing the balls he hit. Though data is incomplete, Larkin's GB/FB ratio was 1.51 whereas Rollins's (with complete career data) is 1.15, meaning Rollins is more prone to the fly out than Larkin.

Looking beyond Larkin, Alan Trammell and Dave Concepcion are the two other shortstops that often enter the debate of worthiness for Cooperstown.

Trammell put up decent numbers over 19-seasons, making him comparable to Larkin. (Baseball Reference actually ranks Trammell as the most similar shortstop to Larkin.) Concepcion's offensive numbers are included simply to offer a fuller picture.

 

Offensively, the case is simple - Larkin and Trammell have better numbers than Rollins and appear to be more deserving. The tide changes a bit though when looking at where the four rank defensively.

Rollins's fielding percentage is significantly better than the others he's compared with in this study (he actually has the third highest FPct. for a shortstop in MLB history). His error-to-chance number is outstanding and he has won three Gold Gloves. Comparatively speaking, Larkin also won three Gold Gloves, Trammell four, and Concepcion five. 

Can Rollins's offensive shortcoming be negated by his defensive play, or is the entire conversation moot? How will this conversation sound in three or four seasons?

As of now, Larkin and Trammell rank ahead of Rollins. Also, you can't forget contemporaries Omar Vizquel, Alex Rodriguez, and Derek Jeter - all deserving of enshrinement before Rollins.

Rollins has been a great player, but he's flawed. Even if he surpasses the 2,000 hit mark and reaches 250 home runs, I can't see him getting in with Larkin, Trammell, Vizquel, Jeter, and Rodriguez all standing deservedly in front of him.

What is your opinion? Will Rollins finish his career with numbers worthy of Cooperstown?