Team HOF vs. Team Reject

by JohnBowen

Here are two teams. The first consists of the most recent players to be inducted to the Hall of Fame at each position:

Name (Year Inducted) WAR/pos G AB R H HR RBI SB BB BA OBP SLG OPS+
C Gary Carter (2003) 66.4 2296 7971 1025 2092 324 1225 39 848 .262 .335 .439 115
1B Eddie Murray (2003) 63.4 3026 11336 1627 3255 504 1917 110 1333 .287 .359 .476 129
2B Roberto Alomar (2011) 62.9 2379 9073 1508 2724 210 1134 474 1032 .300 .371 .443 116
3B Wade Boggs (2005) 88.3 2440 9180 1513 3010 118 1014 24 1412 .328 .415 .443 131
SS Barry Larkin (2012) 67.1 2180 7937 1329 2340 198 960 379 939 .295 .371 .444 116
LF Jim Rice (2009) 44.3 2089 8225 1249 2452 382 1451 58 670 .298 .352 .502 128
CF Andre Dawson (2010) 60.6 2627 9927 1373 2774 438 1591 314 589 .279 .323 .482 119
RF Tony Gwynn (2007) 65.3 2440 9288 1383 3141 135 1138 319 790 .338 .388 .459 132

The second team is the best players at each position to be rejected from the Hall of Fame from the 2012 ballot class, which was shut-out completely:

Name (%Vote) WAR/pos G AB R H HR RBI SB BB BA OBP SLG OPS+
C Mike Piazza (57.8%) 56.1 1912 6911 1048 2127 427 1335 17 759 .308 .377 .545 143
1B Jeff Bagwell (59.6%) 76.7 2150 7797 1517 2314 449 1529 202 1401 .297 .408 .540 149
2B Craig Biggio (68.2%) 62.1 2850 10876 1844 3060 291 1175 414 1160 .281 .363 .430 112
3B Jeff Cirillo (0%) 32.0 1617 5396 800 1598 112 727 63 563 .296 .366 .430 102
SS Alan Trammell (33.6%) 67.1 2293 8288 1231 2365 185 1003 236 850 .285 .352 .415 110
LF Barry Bonds (36.2%) 158.1 2986 9847 2227 2935 762 1996 514 2558 .298 .444 .607 182
CF Kenny Lofton (3.2%) 64.9 2103 8120 1528 2428 130 781 622 945 .299 .372 .423 107
RF Larry Walker (21.6%) 69.7 1988 6907 1355 2160 383 1311 230 913 .313 .400 .565 141

Now, I don’t post this in an effort to slam the recent inductees – indeed, everyone but Jim Rice can at least be justified for the Hall of Fame. Nor am I suggesting that Jeff Cirillo have his name on a plaque that isn’t somewhere in Miller Park.

With 2011 inductee Bert Blyleven (undeservedly rejected for 14 years by the BBWAA) starting for the Hall of Famers and 2013 Rejectee Roger Clemens starting for the Rejects, you have one team that would wipe the floor with the other. In a 162 game season, the team led by Barry Bonds and Jeff Bagwell would win approximately 91 games against the team of recently inducted Hall of Famers – who, once again, are all worthy of enshrinement.

This speaks to the historic nature of this year’s ballot – a ballot that the BBWAA shut-out despite featuring the best player, pitcher and offensive catcher that most of us have ever seen.

PED’s loom large over this ballot – easily the most tainted of all-time. But the time has come for the so-called journalists to answer for their ballots. You are not gate-keepers of morality, (and if you are, you all failed at your job during the 1990’s). You are, unfortunately, gate-keepers of history – and it’s beyond reprehensible to rewrite or erase history as it happened because the perpetrators didn’t live up to some bizarre moral code that you’ve asked them to live up to.

Furthermore, if you have evidence that someone that you arbitrarily find suspicious did steroids, at least have the guts to own up to the accusation. You know, like a journalist. Otherwise, you’re nothing but a coward and a liar. 

335 Responses to “Team HOF vs. Team Reject”

  1. Len Says:

    Well the big problem I see is that they are just arbitrarily judging whether somebody did steroids. Remember Tom Boswell already has said in the Ken Burns film that he knows for a fact one player in the HOF was using steroids.

    There’s rumors there are 3-5 HOF who did steroids. Nolan Ryan, Carlton Fisk, Kirby Puckett, Andre Dawson, Eddie Murray and Ricky Henderson’s names come up on the rumor mill. How about Cal Ripken. Go back and look at his 1991 season that seemed to come out of the blue at the age of 30.

  2. Thomas Wayne Says:

    I had an article ready to go for this but Chuck hasn’t published it yet…but in my piece I threw out my “ballott” for all to see and boldly predicted that Biggio, Morris and Bonds would make it in…wow…how wrong was I.

    Steroids or no steroids, the system must be changed. To many voters have no idea or thought process of evaluation passed the players name. To many other biases involved. As I mentiond in my article-soon-to-be-published a few years ago a chap by the name of Corky Something or Another who didn’t vote for Rickey Henderson because “he wasn’t a Rickey guy”. This guy and anyone like him shouldn’t be allowed to vote if thats the best he can do. Its pathetic and does nothing to celebrate the game, which is what the Hall of Fame, at its core, should be about. Celebrating baseball.

    70 years ago the BBWAA were the premier baseball followers of the world – following the team day in and day out living and dying with them…that’s why they got the honor of deciding who goes in and who doesn’t. But now, in this world we live in, dare I say that there are 15 year old kids who are better informed on the game day in and day out than many if not a majority of the BBWAA.

    I suggest a combined voting system. You take the BBWAA and add to it a random sampling of MLB alumni (former managers, players, GM’s, etc) whose only restriction would be a non-vote for a former teammate or player managed). My guess would be you would sample 300 at random from year to year. They are just as informed/mis-informed as the BBWAA. Then you get active HALL members, again, a random sampling of 100 living former players, managers, broadcasters, writers, etc. From their you get a random sampling of 300 fans, bloggers, non-bbwaa writers, etc. They all have to apply to get a vote and maintain some sort of online baseball presence. I can hear some of you now complaining about “some idiot fan with a vote”. To those I would say, some “idiot” voted for Aaron Sele this year as a member of BBWAA…so idiots are already voting and that will n ever change.
    From year to year this would change. No single individual can vote two years in a row from any single group, including members of the BBWAA. This makes the voting “special” and important again, not routine as it has become for some of these BBWAA clowns. You combine the vote totals (300 BBWAA plus 300 online plus 300 MLB alumni, plus 100 HOFers and you get 1000 votes. You would need 750 to make it in.)
    Another way to clear a lot of this mess up would be to limit players to the ballot only 3 of 5 years. Force the voters to choose them now as opposed to letting them hang out for 10 or 13 years before induction.

    Whatever happens, the BBWAA has lost its credibility and is nothing more than an overly biased “moral” authority. Its our game, our hall of fame. We should have a say in who we put up on high and who we don’t.

  3. JohnBowen Says:

    Sounds reasonable.

    The BBWAA is just antiquated. Before the internet, before TV was wide-spread, during the depression, people relied on beat reporters for news about baseball.

    They were the fore-most experts on the game.

    No longer. Many of these guys haven’t even covered the game in 30 years.

  4. Cameron Says:

    Hate to bring up something like this, but there is a longstanding rumor about Mickey Mantle receiving a primitive form of a testosterone treatment to help recover from his constant knee injuries.

  5. Raul Says:

    It seems to me that the last 4 months have been one giant bitch-fest and shitty time for sports.

    Crybabies abound because Mike Trout didn’t get the AL MVP over Miguel Cabrera.

    New Yorkers the world over losing their minds because the aged and one-dimensional Yankees didn’t beat the Detroit Tigers.

    Mediocre players like Shane Victorino, Anibal Sanchez and Edwin Jackson getting contracts they didn’t deserve.

    Good, but risky players like Zack Greinke and Josh Hamilton getting contracts they didn’t deserve.

    Terrible trades like the entire Miami Marlins to Toronto for 3 years of Pepsi.

    The Kansas City Royals trading the best prospect they’ve had in 30 years for Oil Can Boyd.

    Stat heads shitting themselves because baseball writers didn’t feel like electing marginal candidates like Tim Raines and Craig Biggio, or tainted players like Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens.

    Hockey suffering a 100+ day lockout, forcing me to read a million stories about how the sissy Lakers are a worse team with 2 more All-Stars.

    Replacement NFL Referees.

    An unwarranted #1 ranking to a glorified college like Notre Dame, only to see them systematically destroyed by Alabama on national television.

    ______________
    ______________

    I’m telling you, sports has really sucked ass lately.
    I can’t wait until Spring Training. Hopefully by then things will have settled down, and all your collective thongs will have been pulled out of your asses.

  6. Lefty33 Says:

    “Well the big problem I see is that they are just arbitrarily judging whether somebody did steroids.”

    What else are they suppose to do?

    The way the rules currently are written it requires them to account for “sportmanship” aka cheating but at the same time if a writer decides to ignore that or to overly apply that on too many guys there is no accountability/fallout/guidelines.

    The fault is not with the BBWAA. It’s with the haziness in the HOF voting rules.

    The system was not designed for this type of Salem Witch Trial.

    “Whatever happens, the BBWAA has lost its credibility and is nothing more than an overly biased “moral” authority.”

    And since they first started voting what has changed?

    Why do you think the HOF is full of marginal Yankees?

    Duh

    “They were the fore-most experts on the game.”

    And many of them still are.

    “Many of these guys haven’t even covered the game in 30 years.”

    Bullshit alert! Bullshit alert!

  7. Bob Says:

    Astros prospect Jonathon Singleton has been suspended 50 games for smoking pot. Though it could be worse. This years HOF class will be in suspense for another year.

  8. Len Says:

    @Lefty33,

    Well, cheating’s never been a problem before for the BBWAA because how do you explain them voting for Gaylord Perry, Don Sutton and Whitey Ford? They all openly said they cheated, hell they’ve even bragged about it and baseball in a strange way celebrated that behavior as “colorful.”

    One of the big problems baseball had/has compared to other sports is it tacit acceptance of cheating right from the beginning. Even the notion of an un-uniform playing field from team to team is rather odd and unique to baseball. Willie Mays is applauded for being one of the greatest sign stealers in MLB history. Corked bats, emory balls, shine balls, spit balls. The ‘51 Giants had a guy with a periscope stealing signs from the outfield. Groundskeepers used to sloop the fields for their teams advantage. Teams used to flood the fields to stop running games. Teams used to raise mounds to help their pitchers. There was massive amphetamine use.

    Guys like Brian Downing were downing steroids back in the 80’s and nobody gave a shit. Even when the HR started flying out in mid to late 90’s nobody gave a shit because they fans went crazy and baseball was making tons of money. They only started to care when Bonds turn MLB into a nintendo game.

  9. Raul Says:

    If you’re going to elect juicers now, what possible reason could you have to NOT elect them later?

    Oh, Bonds was a HOFer before the juice?
    Far as I can tell, Jeter is clean and a HOFer right now. Guess that gives him license to start juicing, because…why the fuck not?

  10. Chuck Says:

    “I had an article ready to go for this but Chuck hasn’t published it yet”

    You have to send it first.

  11. JohnBowen Says:

    And when he gets caught, he can be suspended for 50 games.

    You’re acting like Ty Cobb or Rogers Hornsby or Babe Ruth wouldn’t have done THE EXACT SAME THING given the chance. With zero repercussions, that’s precisely what they would have done.

    Just a little moral relativism is all I’m asking for.

  12. Chuck Says:

    Wait..Thomas…is this the one?

    http://www.dugoutcentral.com/?p=2633

  13. Raul Says:

    And when he gets caught, he can be suspended for 50 games.

    Big whoop. A suspension for a few extra million and HOF? Deal.

    You’re acting like Ty Cobb or Rogers Hornsby or Babe Ruth wouldn’t have done THE EXACT SAME THING given the chance.

    You can’t base shit on what people WOULD have done. Only on what they did. Hell, if all-around nice guy Cal Ripken came up in the same era and environment as Cap Anson, he probably would have been calling people nigger left and right.

  14. Chuck Says:

    The HOF didn’t elect anyone, so, what is there to talk about..nothing?

    If steriods didn’t exist, and everyone on this ballot was cleaner than an operating room, only Bonds and Clemens were worthy of first ballot consideration.

    Since they were also two of the biggest “cheaters”, and were not elected as a result, it only makes sense no one else got in, right?

    Like Raul said, everyone else is marginal, and while Bagwell, Piazza and Biggio will likely get in at some point, THEY ARE THE ONLY THREE OTHER NAMES ON THE BALLOT WORTHY!!

    Everyone else can go pound sand.

  15. Raul Says:

    Maybe the HOf will come to some sort of compromise…you know…Clemens and Bonds with HOF busts made out of plastic instead of bronze.

  16. Chuck Says:

    Barry Lamar Bonds

    Pittsburgh, NL, 1986-1992
    San Francisco, NL, 1993-2007
    Steriod User, 1995-2006.

    Used Performance Enhancing drugs to break single season and career record holder in homeruns.

    Put that on his plaque (and the others) and they can go in.

    They embarrassed the game.

    Payback’s a bitch..forever.

  17. JohnBowen Says:

    The fact that you could give a shit about every instance of cheating except this one says a lot more about you than it does about them.

  18. JohnBowen Says:

    “THEY ARE THE ONLY THREE OTHER NAMES ON THE BALLOT WORTHY!!”

    Incorrect.

  19. Raul Says:

    Ok so you’re saying that writers who overlooked wife-beating and racism 60 years ago serve as the precedent by which all current writers must abide when deciding whether to vote on juicers?

  20. JohnBowen Says:

    I’m saying evaluate people within the context of the era in which they played.

    That’s all.

  21. Raul Says:

    Ok.

    So that being the case, there’s little reason to ever compare one player not in the HOF with one who is, but who played in another era.

    So…no more of this Tim Raines/Lou Brock stuff. Deal?

    …sigh. I guess I’m being too much of a dick here. I’ll take that back.

  22. Raul Says:

    and goodnight

    http://i.imgur.com/lGViB.png

  23. Ralph Says:

    Chuck
    Everything I’ve heard and read had Bonds starting steroids in 1999. He also played until 2007. The league tested him from 2003-2007 and I believe one dirty test in 2003. The funniest thing is he has memorabilia in Cooperstown already. Really the game embarrassed itself. The list of stars suspected/caught with PED’s is unbelievable. Clearly MLB turned a blind eye.

  24. Chuck Says:

    “The fact that you could give a shit about every instance of cheating except this one says a lot more about you than it does about them.”

    The fact you wrote this nonsense says more about you…

    Or the fact you consider putting Vaseline on a ball and steriods to be the same thing…

  25. Chuck Says:

    #18..

    Nope, sorry.

    Take your WAR and shove it up your Kenny Lofton.

  26. Chuck Says:

    New to the ballot in 2014:

    Greg Maddux, Frank Thomas, Tom Glavine, Mike Mussina, Jeff Kent.

    Maddux is a lock. Personally, Glavine gets in at some point but he’s not first ballot to me, although I expect some sentimentality among the writers he and Maddux go together.

    There’s two.

    Thomas will get support, although he’s not first ballot and I personally would never vote for him.

    Mussina I’m on the fence about, I don’t see him as a HOFer, although he was better than both Morris and Schilling.

    If Edgar Martinez could play defense, you could subtract 20 from his WAR and he’d be Jeff Kent. He has no business being on the ballot.

    So, just for the newbies..we have two locks and one maybe.

    I expect there to be increased support for Bonds and Clemens, some guys may slap their hands for a year as some sort of punishment, although neither gets in.

    That said, the increased votes for them mean less for everyone else.

    2014 HOF Ballot.

    Whoever the VC selects, Maddux and Glavine.

  27. Lefty33 Says:

    “Well, cheating’s never been a problem before for the BBWAA because how do you explain them voting for Gaylord Perry, Don Sutton and Whitey Ford? They all openly said they cheated, hell they’ve even bragged about it and baseball in a strange way celebrated that behavior as “colorful.”
    Two problems with that Len:

    1. Everybody who apparently is a big hall person likes to use the asinine argument of “Well if they cheated fifty years ago, then I guess everybody can cheat at any time.”

    Wrong.

    Just because writers mostly long since dead or retired decided to do something wrong, that does not justify continuing to do the same wrong thing over and over.

    If you get pulled over by a cop for speeding he’s not letting you off just because you whine that everybody else was doing so I should be allowed to as well.

    If the HOF decides to change the voting rules and tells the BBWAA that they should just simply look at the back of the baseball card and choose guys via numbers only then that’s one thing but as of now, and more then likely forever, that’s not happening and that’s where the moral grey area begins

    2. Context

    If you know anything about Perry you would know that while he did cheat with his spitter, he was not loading up the ball every pitch and in fact he rarely was doing it during a lot of his starts.

    What he did employ was simply a mindfucking of the opposition to think that he was doing it even when he wasn’t. Kind of like Don Quixote looking for giants in the windmills that never existed.

    A mind game is a bit different from taking substances that were banned by Federal Law.

  28. Lefty33 Says:

    Maddux is a lock and Glavine with 300+ is a lock as well.

    Mussina has got a better chance then Schilling over time because of his silence although I can’t see him getting in for several years.

    Thomas might get in first ballot simply because he is the anti-Bonds in that he is beloved by BBWAA members for being personable and approachable.

    For ‘14 I’ll Maddux, Glavine and Thomas with Biggio getting 70%.

  29. JohnBowen Says:

    “Just because writers mostly long since dead or retired decided to do something wrong, that does not justify continuing to do the same wrong thing over and over.”

    But that’s just it.

    It’s not just the writers 50 years ago who turned a blind eye.

    It’s the writers who are voting RIGHT NOW who covered the game in the 1990’s and turned a blind eye.

    If they wanted to be superheroes, that was the time to get up on their high horse. But they condoned cheating even though they knew full well what was going on.

    The Hall of Fame is not a cathedral. It is not a place of moral integrity. It is not a place full of good people. It is a place of liars, adulterers, racists, gamblers, alcoholics, and yes – cheaters. Many many cheaters.

    It’s a museum of baseball history, pure and simple. To pretend that an entire era of the game never happened means that the HOF is a joke, pure and simple.

    Just like the writers.

  30. JohnBowen Says:

    “Take your WAR and shove it up your Kenny Lofton.”

    Can I shove it up my Bert Blyleven instead?

  31. Chuck Says:

    You’re the one missing an entire era of the game.

    If you’re OK with Barry Bonds’ plaque hanging on the wall next to Willie Mays, then you have no business being a baseball fan.

    Seriously.

  32. Chuck Says:

    Wherever, John. You pick.

  33. Chuck Says:

    Sabermetrics didn’t get Blyleven elected, genius.

    It was a ballot fuck-up of monumental proportions which was rectified, but a bunch of chest-beating nerds don’t deserve credit.

  34. JohnBowen Says:

    “If you’re OK with Barry Bonds’ plaque hanging on the wall next to Willie Mays, then you have no business being a baseball fan.”

    Willie Mays’ plaque already hangs next to fucking Jim Rice’s plaque.

    That’s a far bigger disgrace than letting in the most or second most dominant player EVER.

  35. JohnBowen Says:

    “Sabermetrics didn’t get Blyleven elected, genius.”

    Yes, they did.

    Basically every writer who changed their mind included something about “going back and looking at the numbers” aka, “wow, this is one of the top-15 pitchers of all-time and I have no credibility if I don’t vote for him.”

    His first year on the ballot, he got 17.5%

  36. Chuck Says:

    2015: Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, John Smoltz, Gary Sheffield, Carlos Delgado, Nomar Garciaparra.

    Johnson and Martinez are locks..Smoltz gets in but he waits a few years, Sheffield and Delgado have juice suspicions but probably aren’t worthy even if clean, and I mentioned Nomar just for Bob. He’s off the ballot after one year.

    2016: Griffey Jr. and Trevor Hoffman.

    Griffey is first ballot, Hoffman gets in but waits a few years depending on the fall-down from the ‘13, ‘14 & ‘15 ballots. I would never vote for a closer myself.

    2017: Pudge Rodriguez, Manny Ramirez, Vlad Guerrero, Jorge Posada.

    First two steriods, depending on attitude then..last two not worthy but will get some votes regardless.

  37. JohnBowen Says:

    Since all those guys played in the 1990’s, the appropriate thing to do is just assume they all used steroids.

  38. Chuck Says:

    There were other guys who started small like that too John who eventually got in, and there aren’t enough saber slanted voters to make up that much difference anyway.

  39. Chuck Says:

    #37..agree

  40. JohnBowen Says:

    But there’s enough of a following that, if you have a writer who openly rejects Blyleven, they simply won’t be taken seriously in the baseball community.

    Kenny Lofton is borderline from a purely statistical point of view, and he was probably around the 11th best player on the ballot.

    It’s a stupid rule that you can only vote for 10. And it’s also stupid that people who never saw Lofton play still get to vote on these awards. For fuck’s sake, yacht website writers?

  41. Bob Says:

    Thank you for mentioning Nomar.

  42. Chuck Says:

    “For fuck’s sake, yacht website writers?”

    Was a baseball writer for ten years.

  43. JohnBowen Says:

    “Was a baseball writer for ten years.”

    And probably never saw Lofton play ball. Or half of these other guys for that matter.

  44. Chuck Says:

    The biggest argument used by stat guys is their formulas tell the story, and is better than the “eye test”.

    Keith Law and Rob Neyer were originally turned down for BBWAA membership because they didn’t watch games.

    Watching games matters John, otherwise you’d have a vote.

  45. Chuck Says:

    What’s his name, John?

  46. JohnBowen Says:

    “Keith Law and Rob Neyer were originally turned down for BBWAA membership because they didn’t watch games.”

    Which, was of course, horse shit. They watched plenty of games, more than 90% of the BBWAA – and old writers weren’t comfortable with their emphasis on new statistics which, incidentally REFLECT EYE TESTS BETTER than things like RBI’s.

  47. Chuck Says:

    If you saw Kenny Lofton play and belief he’s a HOFer, then you’re less qualified to vote than some yacht writer who never saw him.

  48. JohnBowen Says:

    “What’s his name, John?”

    Who cares. Doesn’t watch baseball.

  49. Chuck Says:

    How do you know if you don’t know who it is?

  50. JohnBowen Says:

    “If you saw Kenny Lofton play and belief he’s a HOFer”

    Translation: Didn’t have enough RBI’s.

  51. Chuck Says:

    Translation: WAR is a stupid stat.

  52. JohnBowen Says:

    Sure. We don’t want to know how good a player is overall at baseball.

  53. Raul Says:

    So is it safe to assume that the new-age writers and statistically-inclined fans want to elect

    1. Barry Bonds
    2. Mark McGwire
    3. Roger Clemens
    4. Pedro Martinez
    5. Craig Biggio
    6. Jeff Bagwell
    7. Rafael Palmeiro
    8. Ken Griffey Jr
    9. Frank Thomas
    10. Curt Schilling
    11. Randy Johnson
    12. Tom Glavine
    13. Tim Raines
    14. Derek Jeter
    15. Mariano Rivera
    16. Trevor Hoffman
    17. Mike Piazza
    18. John Smoltz
    19. Mike Mussina

    I got that about right? 19 guys from one era?

  54. Chuck Says:

    #52..Watch games, you’d know.

    Obviously, you have to have some understanding of what it is your watching, which you don’t get from WAR.

    The replacement player doesn’t exist..it’s a made up, fictional player.

    Therefore, the stat is 100% subjective and not worth talking about.

    The fact a bunch of 150 IQ numbers crunchers could sit around and invent this and not realize it’s bullshit, or that people would accept it without question blows my mind.

  55. Len Says:

    @Lefty33,

    Well you make a bit of a straw-man argument in that so called “big” hall people condone cheating.

    My point was partly about baseball’s tacit approval regarding cheating compared to other sports. One of baseball’s big problems is that cheating is not only condoned it’s often celebrated as gamesmanship.

    A second point was the inconsistency & hypocrisy of the writers in regards to cheating. If cheating keeps you out of the HOF, then why was it acceptable even lauded when Perry, Sutton and Ford cheated? You’re not talking about 50 years ago? Sutton was voted in 1998 and Perry was voted in 1991 by many of these same writers?

    MLB and the writers are mostly to blame for the steroid problem. They didn’t do anything when HR balls were flying out all over the place during the mid-late 90’s because the fans loved it and they were making tons of money. They didn’t really start to react until Bonds started making baseball look like a nintendo game. They didn’t start testing until 2003 and they didn’t really get serious about the situation until Canseco wrote that book.

    Well you traffic analogy is a false equivalence. Mike Piazza Jeff Bagwell didn’t fail steroid tests? That would be like a cop giving you a ticket in 2012 because you drove a corvette on a road with no posted speed limit during the 1990’s. Did they speed, probably. Was there any proof other than circumstantial evidence. No. Was there any policy with set penalties other than a sign that read, “Don’t Speed.” No.

    So by your logic Perry is ok because he only cheated in 5-15% of his pitches. That makes absolutely no sense. Sometimes 2-3 pitches in a game can have a dramatic impact in a game. A pitch on a 3-2 count with the bases loaded is enormous. I agree with you that much of Perry’s tactic was a mind game but he cheated and baseball strangely looked at it approvingly as gamesmanship. Same thing with Whitey Ford. Ford is lauded as a hero with his number retired in Yankee Stadium etc. Why?

    Well if it’s a question of taking a substance that was banned by Federal Law, then why are Babe Ruth, Grover Cleveland and Jimmie Foxx in the HOF? They were renown alcoholics who took a banned substance (alcohol) and breaking a federal law (Volsted Act).

    How about amphetamines which have been illegal since 1970?

  56. Raul Says:

    I found this interesting…

    In the first year of the HOF, the class was Honus Wagner, Babe Ruth, Walter Johnson, Christy Mathewson and Ty Cobb.

    Cobb received more votes than Ruth (222 to 215).
    But I wonder why Mathewson received more votes than Johnson (205 to 189).

    Just about any way you look at it, Johnson was better.

  57. JohnBowen Says:

    In 1950, there were 29 Hall of Famers on active rosters.
    In 1959, there were 33 Hall of Famers on active rosters.
    In 1933, there were 53 Hall of Famers on active rosters.

    Now, maybe they don’t all fit in the same neat era, but then again, neither does your list (whose careers which ranges from 1979-present).

    Keep in mind, there are MORE teams now. Almost twice as many! It’s mathematically expected that there would be more Hall of Famers.

  58. Raul Says:

    Len, you’re being ridiculous if you’re suggesting that all cheating is the same.

  59. JohnBowen Says:

    “The replacement player doesn’t exist..it’s a made up, fictional player.”

    Sure he does. His name is Mark Reynolds.

    Do you not think the average player exists either? What about the good player? Great?

    “Therefore, the stat is 100% subjective and not worth talking about.”

    YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THAT WORD MEANS.

  60. Raul Says:

    “Keep in mind, there are MORE teams now. Almost twice as many! it’s mathematically expected that there would be more Hall of Famers.”

    Eh, I guess that’s a good point.

  61. JohnBowen Says:

    “Len, you’re being ridiculous if you’re suggesting that all cheating is the same.”

    It’s not all the same. Not even close.

    But if the Hall of Fame is going to condone cheating from one era as “fine” or “playful,” they have no right to get their panties in a bunch and erase history when more beneficial cheating becomes available (oh, and is condoned by the “journalists”).

  62. JohnBowen Says:

    Any statistic that simply takes raw numbers and uses historical correlation to gauge their relation to winning – and then assigns a weighted factor based on that mathematical correlation – involves literally no subjectivity.

  63. Lefty33 Says:

    “But there’s enough of a following that, if you have a writer who openly rejects Blyleven, they simply won’t be taken seriously in the baseball community.”

    Who cares about being taken seriously?

    Blyleven is in. That ship has sailed. Move on.

    “The Hall of Fame is not a cathedral. It is not a place of moral integrity. It is not a place full of good people. It is a place of liars, adulterers, racists, gamblers, alcoholics, and yes – cheaters. Many many cheaters.”

    All of that is irrelevant because it has zero to do with things that HAPPEN ON THE FIELD.

    I don’t give a toss if Cobb was a card carrying member of the KKK.
    What his personal beliefs were have zero importance.

    But what does matter is when you have a manager betting on the games he is managing knowing full well that it’s against the rules.

    Or a player taking multiple shots in his ass over the course of the season knowing fully that his performance will be affected because of it every AB or every pitch that he throws. Not even counting the fact that the substance that he is taking is likely illegal by US Federal Law.

    Big difference between that and being a horn dog, racist, drunk or a liar.

  64. JohnBowen Says:

    “the fact that the substance that he is taking is likely illegal by US Federal Law.”

    Um, greenies are illegal by US Federal Law.

  65. Chuck Says:

    It does when the foundation of what the stat is supposedly based on doesn’t exist.

    I can go to Retrosheet or BR or MLB.com and find Mike Trout’s stats..or Kenny Lofton’s for that matter.

    Where are the replacement player’s stats?

    And if the replacement player really is Mark Reynolds, or Mark Loretta, how come that’s not noted anywhere?

  66. Lefty33 Says:

    @58 – Thank You

  67. JohnBowen Says:

    “And if the replacement player really is Mark Reynolds, or Mark Loretta, how come that’s not noted anywhere?”

    Because there are literally INFINITE ways for a player to be a replacement player.

    He can hit .221/.335/.429 and be a crap 1B/3B.
    Or he can hit .260/.319/.460 and be a below average corner outfielder (Nelson Cruz).
    Or

    Just like there are INFINITE ways for a player to be average. Or great.

  68. Lefty33 Says:

    “Um, greenies are illegal by US Federal Law.”

    I agree with you.

    But the point again John is that we are having this discussion in 2013, not 1983 when the greenie issue would have been more relevant.

    You can’t change what has happened in the past and you can’t remove guys that are already in. But you can stop making the same mistake over and over and that started yesterday.

    Like I said yesterday, the HOF needs to step in and give some parameters to the BBWAA as to how they should treat this era of players.

    If not, there is going to be a lot of zero votes like yesterday or there will be the bigger embarrasment of having Bonds, as an example, accepting his plaque with an empty dais behind him.

  69. Chuck Says:

    “Because there are literally INFINITE ways for a player to be a replacement player.”

    Which in turn makes WAR subjective.

  70. Len Says:

    @Raul,

    No, I’m not suggesting all cheating is the same but the baseball writers and the baseball establishment have this pollyanna view of baseball as if they’ve completely forgot the game’s history. You played the game, you know it’s in the game’s lingo. One of the most famous and celebrated HR in baseball history (1951 Bobby Thompson) was the result of massive cheating.

    Lefty made the argument that steroids violated federal drug law. Again on that point, Piazza and Bagwell never failed a drug test. Also, if that’s the problem then why are alcoholics who violated the Volstead act or players that used amphetamines after 1970 in the HOF?

    And I don’t see how you just arbitrarily vote for certain players and not other. How do you know for certain Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Frank Thomas or Mike Mussina didn’t take steroids? Or Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez or John Smoltz? Or why do people assume Ken Griffey didn’t take steroids?

  71. Raul Says:

    I understand that we have to find some way to account for changes in the game, I’m just not sure we’re at the point where we can state things conclusively.

    Justin Verlander basically had the exact same season in 2012 that he did in 2011. Nearly identical. Yet his 2011 WAR was 8.3 and his 2012 WAR was 7.5.

    In terms of WAR, 0.8 is kind of significant.

    I mean, look. If Rickey Henderson runs a 3.8 to first base, and the league averages 4.2, and then the following year Rickey still runs a 3.8 but the league averages 4.4, Rickey didn’t get any faster.

    Now if you’re gonna tell me that 0.8 WAR doesn’t mean shit, well…okay.

  72. JohnBowen Says:

    My point, Lefty, is that even though they aren’t even remotely the same thing, cheating was condoned and accepted by the writers.

    This set a precedent – cheating, even in violation of US Law, isn’t a big deal, it doesn’t tarnish greatness, and it doesn’t violate the character clause.

    These same writers continued that precedent by condoning known cheating in the 1990’s.

  73. JohnBowen Says:

    “Which in turn makes WAR subjective.”

    Chuck – learn the definition of the word before you use it.

    Example of a subjective statement: Barack Obama is a better leader for this country than Mitt Romney would have been.

    Example of an objective statement: Barack Obama took 332 electoral votes to Mitt Romney’s 206 and won the Presidential election.

  74. Chuck Says:

    I know what subjective means, John.

    I realize English isn’t your first language, but come on. You’re embarrassing yourself.

  75. JohnBowen Says:

    “In terms of WAR, 0.8 is kind of significant.”

    Not really.

    “I mean, look. If Rickey Henderson runs a 3.8 to first base, and the league averages 4.2, and then the following year Rickey still runs a 3.8 but the league averages 4.4, Rickey didn’t get any faster.”

    But didn’t his skill-set become more valuable?

  76. JohnBowen Says:

    @74, you have no idea what the word is. Get a dictionary, learn it, and then get back to me. There are absolutely no subjective judgments made when calculating WAR>

  77. JohnBowen Says:

    Since I brought up the election, Chuck reminds me of the pundits who were criticizing Nate Silver.

  78. Raul Says:

    But didn’t his skill-set become more valuable?

    If you’re using “WAR” to determine value, strictly speaking. But people use “WAR” to determine greatness. And that’s not the same thing.

  79. Len Says:

    @Raul,

    As far as Mathewson and Johnson.

    You’re right Johnson was the better pitcher.

    I think one of the differences was that Mathewson was probably one of the most highly respected men in baseball.

    Mathewson also pitched about 10 years before Johnson so there’s usually a slight bias because of time and nostalgia for older players. Especially in that pre internet, pre Baseball Encyclopedia time period.

    I would imagine those writers were rather young when Mathewson was pitching so there’s a bit more off the idol/hero factor in that regard.

    Mathewson aslo died very young so there was also more sympathy regarding his story.

  80. JohnBowen Says:

    Ok, greatness. Isn’t a guy who hits 40 home runs in the 1960’s having a greater season than, like, Richie Sexson?

  81. Lefty33 Says:

    “This set a precedent – cheating,”

    No, because the type of cheating that was done with PED usage had never been done in this manner to this degree prior. A new precedent was started by Bonds and Co. that had never before been accounted for in terms of HOF voting.

    “even in violation of US Law, isn’t a big deal”

    Really?

    “it doesn’t tarnish greatness”

    Of course it does.

    “and it doesn’t violate the character clause.”

    That’s fucking moronic.

    Because you know sportsmanlike it is to win at all costs no matter what happens and/or no matter how you do it.

  82. Chuck Says:

    Nate who?

    Oh, isn’t that the guy who was predicting the Presidential election?

  83. Lefty33 Says:

    “Lefty made the argument that steroids violated federal drug law. Again on that point, Piazza and Bagwell never failed a drug test. Also, if that’s the problem then why are alcoholics who violated the Volstead act or players that used amphetamines after 1970 in the HOF?”

    Context Len, context.

    You have none.

  84. JohnBowen Says:

    “Because you know sportsmanlike it is to win at all costs no matter what happens and/or no matter how you do it.”

    Lefty – I’m talking about the message that the writers sent by condoning prior forms of cheating. I’m not personally condoning the message.

    But essentially, they drew no line before.

  85. Raul Says:

    Bagwell never failed a drug test.
    I know.
    And OJ Simpson was acquitted.

  86. JohnBowen Says:

    @85, I don’t think it would *shock* anyone if Bagwell used. Like, at all.

    But I’d like to see one of the 40% of writers who voted against him come forward with some kind of journalistic evidence. Since it’s, you know – their job.

  87. Raul Says:

    Ok, well some of you have said that the HOF needs to set some guidelines to help the voters sort out this steroid mess.

    What do you guys think some of the guidelines should be?

  88. Chuck Says:

    John supports cheaters, I don’t.

    The criteria for the voting allows for interpretation, it’s an individual choice.

    Just because you disagree with how a group of voters voted doesn’t make them wrong.

    I heard Keith Law on the radio yesterday and again on Twitter last night having a fit because he wanted the guy who voted for Aaron Sele to explain why.

    Fuck off, dumbass..you have no right of expectation for another voter to explain his ballot to anyone, especially someone who isn’t qualified to vote.

  89. Len Says:

    @Lefty,

    “Context”? Can you at least give a more substantial answer?

    Your the one who brought up that steroid users violated federal drug law. There’s never been a precedent that players that violate federal drug law are prohibited from HOF induction so you can’t use that as an argument against induction.

  90. Len Says:

    @Raul,

    At lest there was enough evidence against O.J. to arrest him.

  91. Raul Says:

    There’s plenty of evidence to accuse Bagwell of steroids. But none of it is ever any good for any of you…unless there’s a beer can with a syringe in it.

    I know enough guys around the mid-90s Astros farm clubs to know for virtual fact that Bagwell juiced.

  92. Len Says:

    Frankly, I really don’t care anymore if they vote anybody in the HOF.

    The problem I have is when these writers & MLB act all outraged about steroids when they let this problem go on for 20 years and did nothing to stop it. Then on top of that they’ve already probably elected 3-5 steroid users.

    Then they’re all happy because they act like they’re going to get “true” ballots next year and the year after etc. How the hell do they know that Maddux, Glavine, Thomas, Mussina, Smoltz, Griffey, R. Johnson, Pedro, didn’t take steroids at some point in their career?

  93. Chuck Says:

    Bagwell used.

    It’s not blindness which keeps you from seeing it, it’s ignorance.

    Wake up.

  94. Lefty33 Says:

    “There’s never been a precedent that players that violate federal drug law are prohibited from HOF induction so you can’t use that as an argument against induction.”

    I can use whatever argument I want the same as a writer can vote for or against a guy for any reason that they want.

    The process is 100% SUBJECTIVE.

  95. JohnBowen Says:

    Maybe Len wouldn’t be ignorant about it if any journalist had done their job and reported it. Ah, but that would require doing their job.

  96. Chuck Says:

    Holy shit, Len..really?

  97. Chuck Says:

    It’s not a writer’s job to reveal steriod users.

  98. Len Says:

    @Raul,

    I’m not saying that Bagwell didn’t do steroids, he probably did. But if all it takes are allegations and suspicion for a non-vote then don’t vote anybody into the HOF who played from 1987-2005.

    The writers are disingenuous as well when they vote for Biggio and not for Bagwell based only on appearance. There’s probably just as much a chance that Biggio did steroids as there is Bagwell.

  99. Chuck Says:

    “There’s probably just as much a chance that Biggio did steroids as there is Bagwell.”

    Guaranteed.

    Biggio got more votes because he has 3000 hits.

    150 fewer hits and Biggio gets fewer votes than Larry Walker.

  100. Len Says:

    @Lefty,

    Obviously, you can use any argument you want but doesn’t mean it’s a valid argument.

    It’s not a 100% subjective argument??? If that’s the case than vote for anybody for any reason? Vote for Jeff Cirillo because he wore #26 on the Brewers.

  101. Len Says:

    @Chuck,

    Biggio got more votes than Bagwell because he looks less like a steroid user than Bagwell and Piazza.

  102. Chuck Says:

    “If that’s the case than vote for anybody for any reason”

    You can..

  103. Chuck Says:

    Piazza is less likely to be a user than either of them.

  104. JohnBowen Says:

    “It’s not a writer’s job to reveal steriod users.”

    They’re reporters and journalists. It’s certainly part of their job to inform the public about the game. No, sorry – that’s THEIR ENTIRE JOB.

    By not voting for people against whom their is no hard, revealed evidence, these writers are admitting that they didn’t do their job.

  105. Chuck Says:

    Wrong again, John.

    Being as used to it as you are, though, no big deal.

  106. Lefty33 Says:

    “It’s not a 100% subjective argument???”

    No?

    Two words for you big boy:

    Aaron Sele

  107. Chuck Says:

    “It’s certainly part of their job to inform the public about the game”

    Agree.

  108. Raul Says:

    It gets widely reported that Jack Morris’ adjusted ERA is 105.
    Why no one notices that Craig Biggio’s adjusted OPS is 112 is beyond me.

  109. Raul Says:

    If you believe Designated Hitters can be elected to the HOF, then I see no reason whatsoever why Biggio belongs but Harold Baines doesn’t.

    For the record, neither does.

  110. Chuck Says:

    Anytime I need a really good laugh I go back to the old Baseball Reference archives and read the article supporting Rick Reuschel for the HOF.

    It’s pants wetting hilarious.

  111. JohnBowen Says:

    “Why no one notices that Craig Biggio’s adjusted OPS is 112 is beyond me.”

    He was a second baseman. Position matters. Frankie Frisch is at 110, Ryne Sandberg is at 114, Roberto Alomar is at 116.

    112 is about par for the course.

  112. Raul Says:

    So which one is it?

    Comparing players from same era or comparing same position throughout history?

  113. JohnBowen Says:

    OPS+, ERA+, allow us to compare players across era’s.

    Where it doesn’t make sense is to compare raw numbers (or morals) across era’s.

  114. Raul Says:

    See, you have to put your foot down some place, some time.

    If you’re going to say everyone was doing steroids so fuck it, let em all in…it’s like saying…yeah HSBC laundered billions for terrorist organizations and drug cartels, but all the other banks did illegal shit too, so fuck it, no prosecution.

    Although since that’s exactly what fucking happened with the banks, I might have just sabotaged my argument

  115. JohnBowen Says:

    “If you’re going to say everyone was doing steroids so fuck it, let em all in”

    I’m saying let in the best ones.

    Gary Sheffield and Sammy Sosa have the offensive numbers that would have gotten them in during the 1960’s. But in the context of the 1990’s and 2000’s, they come up a little short, especially considering their defensive weaknesses.

  116. Chuck Says:

    http://www.highheatstats.com/2013/01/one-and-done-the-best-players-to-fall-off-the-hall-of-fame-ballot-after-their-1st-year-of-eligibility/

  117. Len Says:

    @Lefty,

    Well the Aaron Sele vote is just one of the examples of the problem.

    What they really should have done after the initial voting in the 30’s was to create a weighted system like the MVP vote in 1945. They should have made a 15 player ballot, 15 points 1rst place, 1 point 15th place. Limit votes to the same people who vote for the MVP award, no lifetime voting. 1/3 of the voters this year weren’t even current baseball writers.

    Players aren’t kicked off the ballot you can vote for a player as long as he played a minimum 10 seasons.

    You add up the points and the top player gets elected every year just like the MVP vote. They could have expanded to 2 players in the ‘77 to deal with the expansion.

    No veteran’s committee except for a one time 19th century committee and a one old time negro league committee.

    There were 17 players elected before 1945
    1945-1976-32 players elected
    1977-2013-67 players elected

    That’s 123 players.

    The one time 19th century & negro league committees would give you about 20 players so that’s about 143 players. There’s 238 players currently in HOF including negro league players.

    If you think 143 players is too few than you could have increased the voting to 2 players from 1945-1976 and 3 players from 1977-2013. That would give up 192 players plus the 20 from the committees would give you 212 players.

  118. Chuck Says:

    Why is a vote for Aaron Sele a problem?

  119. Bob Says:

    Cause he shouldn’t fit the definition of a HOFER by anyones definition. Especially if your job is to contrast his record and stats to those who been already been accepted or rejected.

  120. Raul Says:

    I was going to make a smart-ass comment, but…actually…

    Salud, Bob. Spoken like a true gentleman.

  121. Chuck Says:

    You guys are so naive..really.

  122. Raul Says:

    Well, look…

    Chuck, it’s not like Aaron Sele’s vote prohibited someone from being elected this year. So in that sense, it’s not a big deal. But still, you’ve got to be one of those evil motherfuckers that wants to watch the world burn to actually vote for Aaron Sele.

  123. Len Says:

    Well it’s a joke vote for one and against the spirit of the HOF. Each vote in an unweighted system has the same value so essentially the voter is saying he thinks Sele has just as much a HOF case as any other player who received a vote. Voting isn’t a right it’s a special privilege.

  124. Bob Says:

    How are we naive for thinking and being disgusted by an Aaron Sele vote? I prefer the blank ballot to a voter making a mockery of the process. For the record, I have no issues with the results, though I would have voted for Piazza.

  125. Raul Says:

    We sat here and made fun of writers for giving Raul Ibanez an MVP vote.
    Seems right to do the same for the voter of Aaron Sele…you know…in the spirit of continuity or consistency or whatever word should be here.

  126. Chuck Says:

    Voting is a right, Len..an earned right.

    If the process was done hap-hazardly, then you could get HOF voting priveleges in Cracker Jack boxes.

  127. Chuck Says:

    When he was with the Padres, Steve Finley was driving home from a game at 1 am and stopped on the freeway to help a lady change a flat tire in a rain storm.

    The next day in the clubhouse, one of the Padres’ writers went up to him and thanked him…the driver was his sister in law.

    The guy voted for Finley yesterday.

    I know because he told me..and told me why.

    I have no problem with that..at all.

    The Sele vote could be for a similar reason.

    It’s a total load of shit if you think the Sele vote “made a mockery” of the process, and as far as thinking it throws off the value of a weighted system, well, LMAO.

  128. Raul Says:

    I guess from that perspective, I could see the logic behind that Finley vote.

    But, and I hate to be a stickler about this…that’s not really what HOF voting is about. I mean, nice as it is, that’s like low-grade cronyism or some shit.

  129. Chuck Says:

    Raul..I think John hacked into your DC account and is posting under your name.

  130. Bob Says:

    Nomar saved people from drowning in the Boston Harbor. Does that make him worthy?

  131. Bob Says:

    BTW, the players union has agreed to let players be tested for HGH. Good step.

  132. Chuck Says:

    “Nomar saved people from drowning in the Boston Harbor. Does that make him worthy”

    He wouldn’t have been able to do it without steriods, so one cancels the other.

  133. Bob Says:

    I think he needed lifesaving.

  134. Chuck Says:

    The 12 idiots who didn’t vote for Hank Aaron made a mockery of the process, one guy throwing a “buddy vote” a Aaron Sele isn’t worthy of mention.

    Except here and by Keith Law.

    Which is scarier than I thought.

  135. Bob Says:

    Millar and Rose were chuckling about it last night.

  136. Chuck Says:

    Well, now that it’s been a bit more than 24 hours and we’ve been unsuccessful in changing what happened, I think it’s time to move on and talk about things much more relevant.

    Bets on where Justin Upton ends up?

  137. Bob Says:

    On Opening Day? Arizona. He, Parra and Ross form a decent outfield.

  138. JohnBowen Says:

    I wouldn’t have as much a problem with it on a weaker ballot. Like, last year there were four guys I would have voted for. With a maximum of 10, I absolutely might have voted for Jeromy Burnitz, because he was a Brewer and when I was 9, I got to stand next to him on the field for the National Anthem and it was really cool.

    For a guy like Sele, it’s a nice gesture to get a token vote. Hell, just making the ballot was a nice accomplishment. It’s just that there were over 10 worthy candidates this year, and a vote was wasted on a completely unjustifiable candidate.

  139. Chuck Says:

    “It’s just that there were over 10 worthy candidates this year, and a vote was wasted on a completely unjustifiable candidate.”

    Not true, because one extra vote for anyone else wouldn’t have made a difference.

  140. Raul Says:

    Maybe Arizona needs to temper their expectations for Upton.

    He’s not worth a huge haul.
    Damn it. As I type that, I remember the Royals traded their entire farm system for the white Livan Hernandez.

    Thanks for ruining everything, Dayton Moore.

  141. Chuck Says:

    Time to make Raul bang his head…

    Instead of Fox, CNN’s sports coverage will now come from…….Bleacher Report.

  142. Chuck Says:

    My bad..scratch Fox…it’s Sports Illustrated.

    http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2013/january/cnn-moves-forward-with-bleacher-report-replacing-sports-illustrated.html

  143. Raul Says:

    In the 80s and early 90s, CNN was highly regarded for their news coverage.
    I remember watching Desert Storm in classrooms. CNN was really good.

    Now everything sucks.

  144. Chuck Says:

    Dbacks traded Justin Upton to Seattle today.

    Upton has four teams on his no trade..Seattle is on one of them.

    He rejected the deal.

    Per Ken Rosenthal.

  145. Chuck Says:

    In his list of “Best Under 25 players”, Keith Law chose Jason Heyward over Giancarlo Stanton.

    See, John, that fucking douchebag STILL doesn’t watch baseball.

  146. Raul Says:

    Well, he could watch baseball and just not know what he’s supposed to be looking for.

    It’s like trying to explain a good movie to someone.
    I have a buddy who tells me “Road House” (1989) was a great movie.
    This is the same guy who refuses to watch Pulp Fiction because “Tarantino movies are boring”

    This guy could watch the top 50 movies of all time and still not know a thing about cinematography or the subleties of acting.

    It’s kind of the same thing with baseball.
    If you don’t know what you’re looking for, you’ll go to a high school and miss the 6′3 lanky RFer with the rocket arm but weak hitting and instead focus on the 5′7 catcher who batted .428.

  147. Chuck Says:

    First time I saw “Pulp Fiction”, I hated it.

    I’ve seen it probably four or five times since, and it’s better every time.

    Samuel L. Jackson is so good in that movie it’s almost hard to describe.

  148. Chuck Says:

    Supposedly players in Upton deal would have been

    LHP Charlie Furbish, RHP Stephen Pryor, 2B Nick Franklin, and one of Taijuan Walker, James Paxton or Danny Hultzen.

    Kevin Towers would then be arrested for rape.

  149. Chuck Says:

    I just “unfollowed” someone on Twitter because he was live-tweeting the Critic’s Choice Awards.

  150. Raul Says:

    Wow @ that trade proposal.

    Figures…the way this offseason has been going.

  151. Raul Says:

    What the hell are critics choice awards?
    And wouldn’t that just be “awards”?
    That’s who picks awards…critics.

  152. Mike Felber Says:

    John, that was a clever comparison of the prospective teams in your article. And I agree that some not elected are worthy, + just rumors of PED usage are not adequate to bar them. And of course a standard that posits an average or replacement player is very rational-we just need to assure that it is defined accurately. Also much hypocrisy & subterfuge abounds in baseball history. And while some were clueless, others in management & reporters-whose job it is to expose corruptions of the game-turned a blind eye.

    But it explicitly is the BBWAA’s job to be arbiters f morality as it effects the game. Also as Lefty points out they use their judgement about how much & how severe the cheating & lying is. Largely in terms of effect.

    While we should be alert to hypocrisy, that others did wrong & then folks did not properly sanction them does not mean we should do (or not do) the same thing today. You want moral relativism, sure, then you look at how relatively bad an action was: was it legal, was it punished, how often was it done, & also how much of an influence was it likely to have on performance.

    Effective PED use gave an advantage all the time. Also violated the law of baseball since the start of the ’90’s punished or not, they knew it was illegal.

  153. Chuck Says:

    I love High Heat Stats, I would be sad if they shut it down.

    The entertainment they provide you can’t get anywhere, the best thing about it is they take themselves seriously.

    “Remember, it’s called the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Great”. “A great player isn’t necessarily famous”.

    Somebody else said Lou Whitaker should have been elected because in the year he was on the ballot, “he had the second highest WAR on the ballot behind Blyleven”.

    Or the guy who says Lofton should be a HOFer because he made more with Cleveland than Robbie Alomar did, so “the game valued him more”.

    And people rip on Tim McCarver for saying stupid shit.

  154. John Says:

    All those things are correct.

    YOU’RE wrong. Not everyone else.

  155. Chuck Says:

    Of course I am.

  156. Cameron Says:

    Wasn’t Lofton also in Cleveland for a good length of time more than Robbie?

  157. John Says:

    Yes, but don’t let facts interfere with a good narrative.

    Although those teams were stacked. Lofton, Ramirez, Belle, Thome…hell, the players they traded because they had no room (Burnitz, Sexson, Giles, etc) would make a pretty good team.

  158. Chuck Says:

    The DBacks would have received Danny Hultzen in the Upton trade.

  159. Mike Felber Says:

    Well what a player is paid does not show how valuable he is. Also Whitaker is qualified, but not as easily as his total WAR would suggest, since his peak was not as good. Super consistent, no knock against him, but he was not approaching Blyleven’s overall value.

    But they are 100% that how famous you are does not show how great. And some vote more for fame & reputation, rather than delving in deeper. I do think Lofton is not better than borderline, though Sm has him in: all his best years were between 25-32, not immortal though very good indeed, & 8 years after that were accumulating from .06-2.1 WAR, averaging ~ 1/2 a season.

    So as I said before, replacement at best accumulation should not be much of a credit. Though given his superb glove & base running, he may well deserve it.

  160. Mike Felber Says:

    I meant in 8 of those years subsequent to age 32, he also had a 3.2 & 3.4 WAR.

  161. Chuck Says:

    What do Kenny Lofton and Aaron Sele have in common?

  162. JohnBowen Says:

    A quarter of the HOF voters were retired by the time each began their career?

  163. Bob Says:

    Both one and done @ 161

  164. Chuck Says:

    Bob’s close enough..neither are HOFers and NEVER will be.

  165. JohnBowen Says:

    Remember kids: it doesn’t matter if you were actually great at baseball. What matters is if old people – who didn’t care enough to watch you play – “feel” like you were great at baseball.

  166. JohnBowen Says:

    There are 15 CF in the HOF from the 20th century.

    If you don’t think Lofton’s good enough, fine. But there are 8-9 CF worse than him.

  167. Chuck Says:

    It’s personal opinion John.

    You never saw Ron Santo play but it didn’t keep you from supporting him.

    Use WAR, use batting average, use stolen base percent..who cares.

    The writers made the right decision..you just happen to disagree with it.

    Your opinion.

  168. Chuck Says:

    “But there are 8-9 CF worse than him.”

    How do you know..did you see them play?

    “What matters is if old people – who didn’t care enough to watch you play – “feel” like you were great at baseball.”

    That applies to young people too..who never played and think the game magically happens on their laptops.

  169. Chuck Says:

    And there are 20 CF’s in the HOF.

  170. Chuck Says:

    “20th century”

    OK..

  171. JohnBowen Says:

    “That applies to young people too..who never played and think the game magically happens on their laptops.”

    I would love to have seen Murray Chass play baseball.

    That would’ve been *hysterical*.

  172. Chuck Says:

    You and him could have been a double play combo.

    Would have been like watching two drunks trying to pick up a quarter from the sidewalk.

  173. Chuck Says:

    “I would love to have seen Murray Chass play baseball.”

    I would love to have seen you play baseball.

  174. JohnBowen Says:

    You would’ve thrown up as soon as I backhanded a ball, since that would’ve involved fielding, which doesn’t matter in baseball.

  175. Chuck Says:

    Now Trade Rumors is saying the Dbacks would have received Walker instead of Hultzen.

    That’s just sick.

  176. Chuck Says:

    I would have thrown up when you showed up..with your ProKeds, Teenage Ninja Turtles sweatshirt, highwater jeans and $4 Kmart glove.

  177. Raul Says:

    Jack Z sort of got robbed on that Montero deal.
    This Dbacks trade would have ended his time in Seatte for sure.

  178. Chuck Says:

    Justin Upton’s a good player..maybe the light goes off and he becomes more than that, but for right now he’s not worth two prospects, much less four, and the best position player and pitcher in your system.

    Holy fack.

  179. Len Says:

    They’re 18 Center Fielders in the HOF and 16 from the 20th century. John might have added someone elected as a manager like Ned Hanlon.

    Mays
    Cobb
    Speaker
    Mantle
    Dimaggio
    Snider
    Hamilton
    Ashburn
    Dawson
    Doby
    Puckett
    Carey
    Averill
    Rousch
    Combs
    H. Wilson
    Duffy
    L. Waner

    L. Waner is one of the worst selections in the HOF. Combs, H. Wilson, Duffy, and Rousch are among the worst.

    The pre 1961 20th century standard for a HOF CF is about a Bernie Williams, Tori Hunter, Mike Cameron standard to put it in modern terms. Wally Berger was probably the only pre 1961 20th century player to meet those standards and not get elected. Paul Hines, George Gore, Fielder Jones, and George Van Haltren are about the only 19th century players to meet that standard and not get elected.

    The post 1961 standard for a HOF CF is somewhere between Joe Dimaggio and Duke Snider.

    Kirby Puckett was a bit of a fluke pick and really against what the BBWAA had been doing since the late 1980’s. His sudden injury and his illness mostly got him elected. Andre Dawson is also an odd pick by the BBWAA and completely inconsistent with their post 1980’s voting patterns. Kenny Lofton by comparison was a slightly better player than Dawson and he was one and done. Andruw Jones was another CF better than Dawson and I can’t see him doing very well in the voting. Jim Edmonds was as good as Dawson and I can’t see him doing well in the voting either.

    The only CF other than Griffey jr. I could see having a decent shot at the HOF in the 10-20 years is Carlos Beltran.

    I think John might have added someone who was elected as a manager

  180. Chuck Says:

    Centerfielders in the HOF.

    Ashburn, Richie
    Averill, Earl
    Bell, Cool Papa
    Carey, Max
    Cobb, Ty
    Combs, Earle
    DiMaggio, Joe
    Doby, Larry
    Duffy, Hugh
    Hamilton, Billy
    Mantle, Mickey
    Mays, Willie
    Puckett, Kirby
    Roush, Edd
    Snider, Duke
    Speaker, Tris
    Stearnes, Turkey
    Torriente, Cristobal
    Waner, Lloyd
    Wilson, Hack

  181. Len Says:

    @180

    I didn’t include Negro League players except for those that played in the majors (Doby).

    That list also doesn’t contain Oscar Charleston which is very odd because many consider him one of the 5 top players of all time.

    Willard Brown and Pete Hill aren’t on that list either.

    Andre Dawson isn’t on that list either.

  182. Chuck Says:

    Centerfield is a very difficult, taxing position to play. Injuries, especially to the legs, are common, and either end careers or turn them into left fielders.

    Cesar Cedeno and Vada Pinson were both better than Lofton but had injury problems that kept them from maintaining over their careers. Jimmmy Wynn, too. Amos Otis was another one.

    Speed is the primary tool to play the position well, so big offensive numbers, especially power numbers, are not common from CF’s.

    When you think of good centerfielders, you think of guys like Garry Maddox, Devon White, Willie McGee, Juan Pierre, etc..guys who could run, steal a few bases, punch and Judy their way to respectable but unproductive averages and OBP.

    Only five CF in history have played 2000 games at the position, and only Mays and eventually Griffey will make the Hall.

    Steve Finley and Willie Davis were very good players and All-Stars, but didn’t have the all-round games to warrant HOF discussion.

    Kenny Lofton doesn’t either.

    I’m with Len that there are a couple of really bad HOF choices from the postion which weakens it substantially in comparison. That, however, doesn’t mean we should compound the problem by continuing to make bad selections.

    The idiots are the writers who chose Waner and Wilson, not the guys who kept Lofton out.

  183. Chuck Says:

    “That list also doesn’t contain Oscar Charleston which is very odd because many consider him one of the 5 top players of all time.

    Willard Brown and Pete Hill aren’t on that list either.

    Andre Dawson isn’t on that list either.”

    Because they’re not in the Hall of Fame as centerfielders.

  184. Chuck Says:

    Charleston: first baseman
    Hill: left fielder
    Brown: Left fielder
    Dawson: right fielder.

  185. Len Says:

    Well that’s just sloppy by whoever set up that hof web site.

    Oscar Charleston was a center fielder. He may have moved to 1b at the end of his career but that would be like calling Mickey Mantle a first baseman.

    Hill and Brown were Cf.

    Dawson came up as a CF and his greatest period as player was between 1977-1983 when he played CF. That’s why he’s wearing an Expos cap. Again that would be like listing Ernie Banks as first basemen.

  186. Chuck Says:

    Dawson: 1281 games as a RF, 1027 as a CF.

    He’s a RF.

    Hill’s a leftfielder according to his Negro League bio, Brown played all three but apparently more in left than center.

    Why Charleston is at first is beyond me, but he’s not in the HOF as a CF, which is what the question was.

  187. Len Says:

    @Chuck,

    Willie Davis was a much better player Finley. You have to put his Davis’ career in context of the 1960’s/Dodger Stadium.

    Lofton was a great player: .299/.372/.423, 622 stolen bases @83% success, 3405 times at base who was a great defensive player during his time in Cleveland.

    I’m surprised you’re supportive of a steroid user like S. Finley.

    Lofton doesn’t get in the HOF or stay on the ballot because the current HOF CF standard for post 1961 players is somewhere between Joe Dimaggio-Duke Snider. So in the next 10-15 years you’re probably only going to have Griffey jr. in the HOF, maybe Beltran has an outside shot.

    So it’s going to look something like this:

    1905-1951-14 major league HOF center fielders started their careers 16 teams.

    1952-1976-0 major league HOF center fielders started their careers 16-24 teams.

    1977-1984-2 major league HOF center fielders (Dawson, Puckett) started their careers 26 teams.

    1985-today-0 major league HOF center fielders started their careers 26-30 teams. Griffey will join that list.

  188. Len Says:

    @Chuck,

    Well if you just go by games played than Ernie Banks is a first basemen and Stan Musial is a first basemen.

  189. Raul Says:

    Again, what is your counter to the argument Chuck makes that just because voters elected shitty candidates before, that they have to continue doing it now?

    I like Lofton better than Raines for HOF (because, you know, Lofton actually led off and shit), but neither would get my vote.

  190. Chuck Says:

    “Willie Davis was a much better player Finley. You have to put his Davis’ career in context of the 1960’s/Dodger Stadium.”

    Yes, he was, although I don’t need context..I saw them both.

    “Steve Finley and Willie Davis were very good players and All-Stars, but didn’t have the all-round games to warrant HOF discussion.”

    “I’m surprised you’re supportive of a steroid user like S. Finley.”

    Read slower.

    Lofton was a good player, even very good, he was not HOF worthy, and instead of ripping the BBWAA for screwing him over, maybe you should rip the idiots who invented WAR.

  191. Raul Says:

    It bothers me a little bit that so many people fail to understand that with more players and more teams and improving quality of play, HOF standards need to improve over time.

  192. Chuck Says:

    The opposite is true, Raul.

    It’s like the Jack Morris argument.

    If you’re the best player in a shitty era, that doesn’t make you a HOFer.

    Just lucky.

  193. Cameron Says:

    Yeah, Jack Morris is one of those players that is on my shortlist for “The Hall of Very Good”. I might turn that into an article series now that I have time.

  194. Raul Says:

    I think general quality of play has improved over time.

    There may be exceptions sometimes I guess

  195. Len Says:

    Well, if you don’t count Andre Dawson as CF and you assume that Griffey jr. gets in and Beltran or A. Jones don’t get in, you’re basically looking at:

    1905-1951-14 HOF center fielders started their careers,

    1952-2002-2 HOF center fielders (Puckett, Griffey jr.) started their careers.

    And Puckett wasn’t even a good selection.

  196. Cameron Says:

    He doesn’t look like a good selection because of the (lack of) career length. I think you add the “padding” phase of his career, there’d be a lot less bitching.

  197. Chuck Says:

    Ken Rosenthal:

    “Upton turning down the move to Seattle likely saved Jack Z’s job”.

    Good call, Raul.

    Wouldn’t be surprised if Rosenthal stole it from you.

    Wouldn’t be the first time something posted here ended up in one of their columns, either.

  198. Chuck Says:

    Griffey’s a lock.

    Jones juiced..he’s out. Edmonds too.

    Beltran, despite his injuries, is not quite there. He needs at least two years like this year to have a chance, three and he’s in.

    Beltran is so much better than Lofton it’s laughable.

  199. Bob Says:

    Milton Bradley could spend 13 years behind bars for a slew of charges. He is only 34 years old.

  200. Mike Felber Says:

    Beltran is in no way “so much better” than Lofton, whether with the laughable modifier added on or not.

    Lofton & Edmonds are actually next to each other on the Elorater, & Beltran clearly behind. Whether this is accepted or not, they are not very far separated.

    Can you not see how Lofton is at least close, easily in the ball park with Beltran? Let’s examine the details:

    First let’s check WAR, then you can deconstruct if & why WAR could be wrong.

    Lofton has a little more career WAR, & while Lofton has the best 1 year, Lofton has the best 2nd & 3rd best years.

    Now Beltran has a better OPS +, 107 to 122, & this is not very close. Though Lofton regains a bit of value due to a better OBP (& BA) portion of the formula, & recall the proper weighting for OBP & Slg is 1/8: 1.0.

    Beltran has an even better SB %, but that cannot make up for over 2X, 300 + more SB. And Lofton was also even better in the field=do you doubt those metrics-playing almost exclusively CF. A few less GIDP, many more SH.

    And he has a little more total AB now. So all this would seem to me to justify having Lofton marginally ahead-though when you consider more down years for Lofton, producing at no better than average starter level, you could go either way or favor Beltran slightly.

    Right now he is on the bubble, borderline like Lofton. 2 more decent years like 2012, surely he deserves to get in.

  201. Mike Felber Says:

    I meant that Beltran has the best single year, Lofton the next couple. And it is value ratio of 1.8/1.0 OBP/SLG. In terms of what contributes how much to runs, thus wins.

  202. Raul Says:

    All that writing only to conclude that with a few more great years Carlos Beltran cements his HOF ticket…just like Chuck said.

  203. Chuck Says:

    Something else laughable..Felber trying to teach us anything about baseball.

    Look at the heading first before writing, just to make sure where you are.

    If Beltran never plays another game he’s borderline.

    I doubt he’d get in, but I could see a Jim Rice like run on the ballot.

    Lofton, in the eyes of a handful of delusional statheads, is a HOFer.

    In the eyes of those whose opinon matters, it was an embarrassment for him to be on the ballot longer than a year.

    Maybe laughable was a bit too extreme, the gap is certainly closer than that, but it was more for emphasis anyway.

    But if you REALLY believe Lofton better than Beltran for their respective careers, then you don’t watch enough baseball to warrant any opinion on the subject.

    Just like John said.

  204. Raul Says:

    I can’t understand the Mariners. Honestly.

    Why would they want to trade all their pitching away?
    Seattle has the chance to field a rotation that could be all-star quality 1 through 4. And who knows? Maybe 1 through 5 had they kept Campos and Pineda.

    And let me tell you, with the lineups in LA and Texas, they are going to need all that pitching.
    Even Oakland could get really good on offense soon if their talent improves.

  205. Mike Felber Says:

    Raul. I did not even write that much. But you did not even notice most of what I concluded in a pretty to the point posting. I mainly was arguing that Lofton & Beltran are about equally good at this point. How could you miss the main point? Given better glove & SB & better OBP mitigating the admitted OPS + gap, PLUS a good 10% more PA, this makes sense.

  206. Mike Felber Says:

    Look at the heading before writing Chuck, huh?

    Yup, you can be & are wrong about some things regarding baseball.

    Nobody said there is nothing to gain from watching baseball. But it is shown in every scien-terrific related & baseball endeavor that just “watching”-even if you could see most of their games, which you don’t-is very susceptible to all kinds of perception biases. 1st impressions, confirmations biases, many other things.

    THIS is so established it is laughable.

    Beltran will seem significantly better to most because you NOTICE the much better slugging, & the somewhat better OPS +.

    But as we can show in so many cases, the accumulation of small things that make little impression can close or more than close the gap. In this case, better fielding, many more SB, & the important better OPS +, AND 10% more AB.

    You cannot reasonably call it a rational argument to cite NO evidence & only say I can tell he is better due to watching games. If true, like gravity existing, there is some evidence to cite.

    We do agree that Beltran is close-I would have him just in already, you nearly there, not a big difference. So instead of invoking reflexive high handed contempt: tell us just why Lofton is not as good as, & not even near as good as, Beltran (if his career ended today).

  207. Mike Felber Says:

    Rice is significantly worse than all of these guys. And James showed how the accumulation of small things made Roy White better, over a career, than Rice. Despite the flashy, context inflated #s Rice put up at his peak.

  208. Len Says:

    Going back and looking at Beltran’s numbers & career, it looks like he has a pretty good shot at election around 2025. He’s probably going to finish with 1500 runs & 1500 rbi’s with 400 HR, 300+ sb @86% success, 2500 hits, 1000 bb, 7 AS games, 3 GG, 2 SS. He’ll probably end up with about a 70 WAR. That should be enough to get him elected. The voting group will also be younger and more saber inclined as well.

    Unless voting patterns change radically among the BBWAA, I can only see Ken Griffey jr. and Beltran being elected among CF by 2025. Maybe Jimmy Wynn, Willie Davis or Vada Pinson has a shot with that Golden Era veteran’s committee. They’ve had it tough though because they played in the 1960’s and Wynn played in the Astrodome and Davis played at Dodger Stadium. Maybe Paul Hines or George Gore gets in on that pre integration veteran’s committee. Cedeno is the best CF candidate from the post 1972 veteran’s committee but I don’t think he’s has shot.

    Unless the BBWAA changes radically, I can’t see A. Jones or J. Edmonds getting any support from the BBWAA.

  209. Mike Felber Says:

    If Beltran gets ~ a 70 WAR, which the odds favor, I would take the under on him being elected before 2025. olks are going to recognize all he did, & how CFs are underrepresented.

  210. John Says:

    I love that Chuck rips any statistic that counters his preconceived notions. I swear, if the world were run by Chucks, we would still be searching for the wheel.

  211. John Says:

    Beltran is a HOFer.

    Because, you know, defense and baserunning matter in baseball.

  212. Chuck Says:

    “I love that Chuck rips any statistic that counters his preconceived notions.”

    Should I go back and post all your pro-Raines arguments, or will you concede now you do exactly the same thing?

  213. Chuck Says:

    “The voting group will also be younger and more saber inclined as well.”

    They’re already younger and more sabermetrically inclined, and Lofton still fell ten votes short of staying on the ballot.

    I wouldn’t roll my 401K over to that line of thinking just yet.

  214. Raul Says:

    To share a text message from my buddy…

    “I presume Milton Bradley didn’t use a bat to beat his wife, otherwise he’d have been called out on strikes.”

    He didn’t tweet it because while it’s really a Milton Bradley joke, it’s also about wife beating.

  215. Chuck Says:

    The best line about Bradley going to jail..

    “Milton Bradley to spend his “free” time in jail playing board games.”

  216. Bob Says:

    With his brother, Parker

  217. Thomas Wayne Says:

    Chuck,
    I take it you didn’t get my article? Whats your email address again…perhaps I…how shall I say this….Fucked up? Lol…
    I will try again,
    Thanks,
    TW

  218. Thomas Wayne Says:

    For the sake of argument I will post the article here…it will be long but since it is already a week out of date why bother placing it on the main page….so here we go…

    Thomas Wayne’s Hall of Fame Ballot

    Best way to get a tried and true baseball fan riled up is to tell them who does or doesn’t belong in the Hall of Fame when said fan carries an opposing opinion. We’ve all cried out for those who are in Cooperstown but shouldn’t be and those who have been left out but shouldn’t have and those who will or won’t make it when their time comes. Some of us sight old school numbers and compare them with those already enshrined; others scream new school numbers and rank potential members exclusively via mathematical formula taking the debate even further.

    On January 9th the BBWAA (Baseball Writers Association of America) will unveil the 2013 Hall of Fame class – a class filled with FLAT OUT STUDS, but many of those studs may or may not of had a little help along the way via the needle or the pill. When you couple all of this with the fickle and sometimes selfish or unreasonable behavior of many of the voters of the BBWAA you get a less than accurate accounting of Hall of Fame status. Anyone remember Corky Sampson of Arizona who didn’t vote for Rickey Henderson based on the fact that he “wasn’t a Rickey guy”? It’s true, and he wasn’t alone. 28 voters didn’t vote for Rickey, presumably for bullshit personal reasons like Sampson. Under any standard, old or new, Henderson is about as Hall of Fame worthy as a man can get retiring as the all time leader in Walks, Runs, and Stolen Bases to go along with 3000 hits, an MVP, 10 all star appearances and two World Series rings yet Corky and 27 of his pals didn’t vote for him based on personal beliefs and not the facts. Here in lies the rub of Hall of Fame voting. I dare say that when you couple this hubris with the fact that the vast majority of BBWAA writers really don’t know shit about baseball-as-a-whole we get the foundations of our never ending Hall of Fame debate.

    For this year, officially, there are 37 names on the ballot. Most of those guys (like Todd Walker, Royce Clayton, Jeff Cirillo and roughly 12 to 13 others) won’t receive a vote, except maybe from Corky, and will fall off the ballot going into next year.

    That leaves us with roughly 24 or 25 men. The next group of 6 men will get some votes (very few votes but votes nonetheless) and may or may not hang around for a ballot or two (or more) depending on the mood of the voters: Shawn Green, Reggie Sanders, Julio Franco, David Wells, Steve Finley, and Kenny Lofton.

    I can already hear some of you rumbling and mumbling from your own personal friendly confines.
    But keep this in mind:
    Reggie Sanders and Steve Finley are two of eight men who have 300 career homers and stolen bases. The others are Barry Bonds, Bobby Bonds, Willie Mays, Andre Dawson, Carlos Beltran, and Alex Rodriguez.
    Julio Franco has over 2500 career hits. Shawn Green was a stud for a solid 8 years. Kenny Lofton, in some circles, is revered as a Tim Raines type (I don’t see it but I have heard it said). In the end all will never see enough votes to make it to Cooperstown.
    That leaves us with this group of men. The men who will receive the bulk of the writer’s votes. They are as follows (along with number of years on ballot):
    • Jack Morris – 14th
    • Jeff Bagwell – 3rd
    • Lee Smith – 11th
    • Tim Raines – 6th
    • Alan Trammell – 12th
    • Edgar Martinez – 4th
    • Fred McGriff – 4th
    • Larry Walker – 3rd
    • Mark McGwire – 7th
    • Don Mattingly – 13th
    • Dale Murphy – 15th
    • Rafael Palmeiro – 3rd
    • Bernie Williams – 2nd
    • Barry Bonds – 1st
    • Roger Clemens – 1st
    • Mike Piazza – 1st
    • Curt Schilling – 1st
    • Craig Biggio – 1st
    • Sammy Sosa – 1st
    The BBWAA will choose primarily from this list. The ballot allows you to vote for no one, or as many as ten.
    With all of this in mind I’m going to submit my ballot – which means nothing in the large scope of things since my vote has zero pull or power for those who do or don’t get into Cooperstown.
    Without further ado – here is my ballot:
    1. Jack Morris
    2. Jeff Bagwell
    3. Tim Raines
    4. Alan Trammell
    5. Edgar Martinez
    6. Larry Walker
    7. Barry Bonds
    8. Roger Clemens
    9. Mike Piazza
    10. Craig Biggio

    Some of you may note that I’m a big Mark McGwire guy and that I did not vote for him – I believe McGwire should be in the Hall, but based on overall numbers, postion played, and so on I couldn’t place him ahead of the ten men who did get my fictional vote
    Now here is my prediction – Your BBWAA voted Hall of Fame Class will be….
    Jack Morris, Barry Bonds, and Craig Biggio (with Tim Raines coming up just short).
    I would write more but something tells me I should save it for the comments section.
    I await the debate…..

  219. John Says:

    TW – your article was posted. I’ll move this article from the features section.

    If you scroll to the top of this page, you should see a link to it.

  220. Chuck Says:

    The problem isn’t with my email, Thomas, maybe the home page isn’t coming up for you?

    I posted the article on January 8th and there’s already 114 comments on it.

  221. Raul Says:

    Holy Fuckballs.

    In ranking the best 25 players under age 25, Keith Law ranked Jason Heyward 3rd.
    THIRD!!!!!!

    Ahead of Giancarlo Stanton, Stephen Strasburg and Clayton Kershaw.

    That’s ….holy fucking shit. That’s the dumbest fucking thing I’ve read all winter.

  222. Cameron Says:

    I like Jason Heyward, but ahead of those guys? Ahead of Clayton “I Won the Fucking Triple Crown” Kershaw?

  223. Raul Says:

    Unbelievable.
    This is a guy who makes his living writing about prospects.

    It’s absolutely staggering that anyone could make such a statement.

  224. Cameron Says:

    As a pure athlete, yes, Heyward is better than all of them. However, athleticism is the least important thing that makes a good player compared to just about any other professional sport. …Unless you count golf or bowling.

  225. Raul Says:

    As an athlete, Cameron Maybin would be a top 5 player in the league.

    That’s not how baseball ratings work though.

  226. Chuck Says:

    It all depends I guess on your own definition of an athlete.

    Michael Jordan was a great basketball player, he was not a good athlete.

  227. Cameron Says:

    Which is funny, because athleticism in the early part of Jordan’s career probably mattered more in baseball than basketball. Now it’s the other way around.

  228. Cameron Says:

    Interesting history in multiple sport players. Danny Ainge is one that comes to mind. Mediocre fielder, bad on the basepaths, but lit up the floor as a member of the Celtics. Baseball slow, basketball fast.

  229. Mike Felber Says:

    Athleticism certainly helps many players, though it matters less in baseball. Also hand-eye coordination, which can be called one specific type of athleticism, is huge.

    Jordon was not a good athlete? That cannot be. To be 1/2 way decent when not taking up baseball until late in life, after another sports career, takes some ability. Him not playing other sports is a separate question from raw athletic ability-speed, jumping ability, agility, the strength & endurance he built, but he always had a lot of the former, recall how he could run full speed up & down the court tirelessly for years, some of that is natural ability too, like keeping extremely low body fat that few could when young.

  230. Cameron Says:

    Comparative to the rest of the NBA, Mike. Jordan looked as good as he did off skill, not raw talent. Excellent footwork, superb court vision, and on defense it was all about placement. He knew just where to be to fuck everything up on that. It wasn’t that he was a better player than everyone physically, it’s how much SMARTER he was than everyone else out there.

    And the dunks? Little bit of athleticism, little bit of knowing when to take off. He saw a chance to elevate, it was it.

  231. Raul Says:

    You walk a fine line with that comment, Chuck, because invariably some asshole will come out and say that baseball players are lazy, fat bastards with little ability.

    When the truth is that baseball players, maybe more than just about any other athletes, are perfectionists and thinkers.

    I played 1B, a position that doesn’t demand as much as others, and I couldn’t even count how many different scenarios I’d have to play out in my mind before EVERY SINGLE PITCH.

    That’s tougher than some runningback knowing he has to hit the A-gap on the next play.

  232. Mike Felber Says:

    That comment has some merit Chuck. I was saying this is one of the things he developed-which of course does not point to native ability-but the ability to do it at the hyper rate he did for years is, in part, a native ability.

    There are also many plays for other athletes to master, obviously more so for a position like QB. Though yes, baseball players do rate highly on the thinkin’ scale, but even there, it is not rare to have a slugger whose game is fairly one dimensional, & since the ‘roid era, a mindless free swinger in too many cases, as many here have decried Raul.

  233. Mike Felber Says:

    Cameron, you are way, way off in your assessment of Jordan.

    Firstly, Chuck had said that Jordan was not a good athlete, in extreme & untenable statement. As you know the average NBA player is an excellent athlete. Even someone like Larry Bird had great native abilities besides height-court vision & operating in space is an athletic ability.

    Secondly, of course Jordan had the skills you described. But this was “necessary, not sufficient” to account for his p[articular brand of dominance. You cannot see that even amongst the NBA he had outlier explosiveness, humping ability & agility?!

    Years ago they measured “hang time”, & it was true that Jordan’s way of rising made it appear he was in the air longer than he was. Though he still routinely spent 7/8ths of a second aloft-which only a few others have been able to do. Including the very top ballet man, I believe Baryshnikov-without a basketball.

    One guy had one second air time. But by no measure was Jordan JUST smarter & more determined than the average NBA player. The dunks were FAR more than a “little bit” of athleticism. He did not win 3 straight dunk contests & be able to do all those moves & take off from behind the foul line having “a bit” of athleticism”.

    If I saw a man of any height, let alone max 6′ 6″, doing great dunks where the middle of his face reached the rim level, that ALONE would mean he had some great athleticism.

  234. Mike Felber Says:

    Now it is an unfortunate typo that I accidentally referred to Jordan’s “humping ability”. I will avoid all the obvious jests…

  235. Cameron Says:

    Too easy even for me.

  236. Mike Felber Says:

    What are you on about Chuck?

    http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/athlete

    Athlete: a person who is trained or skilled in exercises, sports, or games requiring physical strength, agility, or stamina.

    No reasonable definition of athlete could establish that Michael Jordan was “not a good athlete”.

    Whether you stress native ability, developed skills, the tie & effort dedicated to acquiring & perfecting same, there is no way on earth any rational human could claim to be accurate saying:
    “Michael Jordan was a great basketball player, he was not a good athlete”.

    I don’t know where you think that idea is salable: might as well say Jordan was Queen of Sheeba or an egg salad sandwich.

  237. John Says:

    Now, hold on.

    Obviously, Michael Jordan was never a serious prospect to play MLB.

    But, having never played baseball and having no discernable baseball skills, he hit .220 in a professional baseball league.

    Only a great *athlete* could pull that off. 99% of people who played T-ball all the way through D1 college could never have done that.

  238. John Says:

    Fine, he OPS’ d .560 at AA – again, having never played and lacking any learned baseball fundamentals.

    Only a man of pure athletic prowess can just show up and do that.

    Obviously, he sucked relative to his peers. But compared to even people who played ball in college, that’s really damn good.

  239. John Says:

    Coming from the guy who never could have OPS’ d .560 at AA?

  240. Raul Says:

    Jordan actually played baseball in his youth and was pretty good at it.
    Not exactly the same as a person who never played and putting them at AA.

    I don’t think it’s some major accomplishment that Jordan hit .220 in AA.
    I think it shows how difficult baseball is. It’s far more likely that your good recreational basketball player could be stuck in the NBA and do better than your good recreational baseball player could do in MLB.

  241. John Says:

    I don’t think Jordan had played in high school or college.

    The point isn’t that Jordan had an impressive MiLB career, it’s that he had to be athletic to even do what he did. Most actual college baseball players – 99% probably – would’ve performed worse than Jordan, who was at a significant fundamental disadvantage – again, proving his athleticism.

    And Chuck, our minor league numbers were the same, so it doesn’t even matter.

  242. Raul Says:

    Just in case anyone wanted the details…

    Michael Jordan, AA – 1994.

    127 Games
    497 PA
    .202/.289/.266
    88 Hits
    17 Doubles
    1 Triple
    3 Home Runs
    51 RBI
    30 Stolen Bases
    18 Caught Stealing
    51 Walks
    114 Strikeouts

    Fielding:
    119 Games
    230 Chances
    6 Assists
    11 Errors

    Michael’s .556 OPS wasn’t the worst on the team.
    It was 2nd-worst, ahead of Dan Pasqua…who played just 4 games.

  243. Raul Says:

    My two cents:

    I was a young kid in 1994 and I remember thinking it was bullshit that Michael Jordan even got the opportunity to play AA baseball, because he did nothing to earn it. So hateful as it may seem to some, I was quite thrilled when he failed miserably.

  244. Bob Says:

    Well he did wonders for the city of Chicago, so the White Sox repaid that ( or invested in him) while he sat out a year from basketball.

  245. John Says:

    Again: shitty numbers.

    And again: 99% of actual baseball players who’ve played their whole lives through college could have never even did that.

  246. Raul Says:

    Out of curiosity, how shitty would the numbers have to be for you to call them shitty even for Michael Jordan?

    Because it seems like you’re holding this guy to an unbelievable standard.
    Jordan played exactly as shitty as everyone would have expected. And you’re somehow saying he accomplished something because…what? He didn’t bat .031?

  247. John Says:

    “Jordan played exactly as shitty as everyone would have expected.”

    Maybe. But the only reason anyone would have expected him to even pull off 88 hits and 21 extra bases is because he was a tremendous athlete.

  248. Raul Says:

    I don’t get Silva.

    First he stopped writing regular articles to focus on his radio show and new website or something.

    Now he gives up the radio show.

    Pretty soon he’ll just be tweeting daily trivia bullshit like HighHeatsStats

  249. Len Says:

    Man, what happened to this web-site?

    Now you’re debating whether a college All American AP player of the year, NBA rookie of the Year, 5 time NBA MVP, 6 time NBA finals MVP, 14 time NBA all star, 10 time Field Goal Champion, 11 Time Point Champion, 19 time player of the month, 6 Time NBA Champion and all time MVP Shares champion was a good athlete???? Seriously, WTF?

  250. Cameron Says:

    You know what sport I might start watching? Australian Rules Football. I watched some clips of it and the best I can describe it is a mix of rugby, American football, and soccer played with no form of protective equipment and the experience of watching it is like throwing raw meat to a pack of wolves. It’s glorious.

  251. Cameron Says:

    You haven’t dealt with Chuck’s trolling nearly as long as most of us have Len. You get used to him after a while.

  252. Cameron Says:

    To be fair, you have admitted to intentional trolling before, but that was just a friendly jab. Sorry for the offense, man.

  253. Cameron Says:

    Just for clarification (and since I tuned most of this out because of my “step to the side of the fan” policy), what disqualifies Jordan from being a good athlete?

  254. John Says:

    Apparently you’re only a good athlete if you’re the best player ever in two sports. Being the best player ever in just one sport doesn’t qualify you to be a good athlete.

  255. Chuck Says:

    John..delete every comment I posted starting with #226 to now. Thanks.

  256. John Says:

    Lol, why?

  257. Raul Says:

    This is getting ridiculous. No one is saying Jordan is a piece of shit.

    It’s just like that Cameron Maybin comment I wrote.
    If you were to take Cameron Maybin and Miguel Cabrera and run them through a series of athletic events, Maybin would kick Cabrera’s ass. Maybin is athletically superior. But he isn’t a better player.

    That’s the point I made regarding Cameron’s statement about Jason Heyward.

    Michael Jordan was a great basketball player. But take him and Tim Duncan, throw them in a pool and see who the better athlete really is.

  258. Raul Says:

    That’s what Chuck was trying to say, I think.

  259. Len Says:

    What context??

    You’re the one who made the asinine and ridiculous statement @226, “Michael Jordan was a great basketball player, he wasn’t a great athlete.”

    You make it seem like Michael Jordan was only successful because he was some sort of abnormal pituitary case like Manute Bol.

    So even though Michael Jordan was chose by ESPN as the #1 North American athlete of the 20th century he’s not a great athlete because he only excelled at one sport? So according to your logic, Wayne Gretzky, Muhammad Ali and Carl Lewis weren’t great athletes as well.

  260. JohnBowen Says:

    Lol, Chuck’s getting testy.

  261. JohnBowen Says:

    “But take him and Tim Duncan, throw them in a pool and see who the better athlete really is.”

    Um…I think I’d guess Jordan?

  262. Raul Says:

    Just want to note that the ESPN greatest athletes is reknowned for its legendary bullshit.

    Secretariat? Really?

    If that list had any fucking credibility it would have been filled with decathloners.

  263. Bob Says:

    Duncan was a very good swimmer IIRC.

  264. Len Says:

    Seriously, what happened to the web site? Didn’t you guys used to post 2-3 articles a day about baseball??? I seemed to remember back when you were at baseball reference that you even had former major league players post articles etc.

    Now it just seems like this is a message board about various random topics and then there’s the weekly debate about Jeff Bagwell, Curt Schilling, Tim Raines or the extent of Keith Law’s homosexuality.

  265. Bob Says:

    Bob Melvin got a 2-year extension.

  266. JohnBowen Says:

    Ah, I did not realize that @Bob.

    @264, we used to post 2-3 articles a day back when we had 50 writers.

    Now we have 3. And we all have other things going on. Also: it’s the off-season.

    If you’d like to write an article and submit it, I’d be happy to post it for you.

  267. Chuck Says:

    Feel free to submit an article, Len.

    You make a lot of good posts, no reason that can’t translate to an article.

    Doesn’t have to be some 3000 word montrosity…500 would suffice.

    Email to mjohns2@cox.net and I’ll post it for you, or you can send it to John.

  268. JohnBowen Says:

    That said, I think I’ll write something now.

  269. JohnBowen Says:

    In the mean time:

    http://mlbmemes.lockerdome.com/media/104825924?utm_campaign=SMCT&utm_source=FB&utm_medium=103868420&utm_content=104825924

  270. Bob Says:

    LOL at that link.

  271. Chuck Says:

    “or the extent of Keith Law’s homosexuality.”

    OK, you got my attention…

  272. Len Says:

    I’m not really interested in writing articles but I seem to remember you guys used to put out 2-3 articles a day on a wide variety of baseball topics back @baseballreference.com. I thought it was a pretty good baseball web site back in the day. I stop posting because I really thought this web-site just folded when I didn’t see it @baseball reference. I did a Google search over the summer and was kind of surprised that you were still operational.

    What happened? Was it too expensive to stay on BR and what happened to all the ex-baseball players and the writers?

    What are the plans if any for the future?

  273. Cameron Says:

    I think Len won the topic. Kudos sir.

  274. Cameron Says:

    We also used to have a much larger userbase. …And a much less broken submission system.

  275. Chuck Says:

    Long story short.

    Pags and Adam were in negotiations to buy a vacant spring training site in Florida, when that deal went south, so did the site.

    Pags still has his scouting service, but Adam left him and went and got a real job.

    That’s why MLBTradeRumors is on BR now, they didn’t renew any contracts when they expired.

    There are no plans for the future..the two main owners/administrators are gone, it’s just us.

    We can’t accept new writers..anyone can sign up to post, but other than John, Thomas and myself. Our log-ins have been kept active, but no newbies can sign up.

    Anyone can post a comment, that part still works too.

  276. JohnBowen Says:

    But again, both Chuck and I are happy to post articles.

  277. Len Says:

    I don’t really know the history of the web site. I remember you guys used to be @BR and you used to post about 100 articles a month and they were pretty good and they used to be about a wide range of baseball subjects. Then you guys just disappeared from the BR site and I just lost contact.

    What was the original intention of creating “dugout central.” Was it just to promote something else?

    I know that Mike Pagliarulo was involved somehow because his photo was on the old homepage. Didn’t he have some sort of Asian scouting group and didn’t his group get criticized by the Yankees because of the Kei Igawa signing?

    So Dugout Central was tied into a Spring Training deal that Mike Paglarulo and Adam were trying to set up? What was the whole point about setting up a web site? Where they trying to get money from this web site or did they want to use it to promote the spring training site?

    Were they paying Sean Foreman a lot of money and were they forced to leave once the spring training deal fell apart?

    What was the motivation for the ex ballplayers and the writers to post articles? Were they getting paid and did they leave once the money ran out? Or were they promised the possibility of some money which never came because the spring training deal fell apart and then they left?

  278. JohnBowen Says:

    Chuck knows this stuff better than me – but basically, Adam’s subscription to BR expired. When that happened, other writers went off and did their own thing. Bill Chuck still publishes Billy Ball on his own site. Silva does his thing. Kerry has some projects, but he’s a professor of astro-physics, so he’s a busy guy as it is.

    I might start writing frivolous posts while I have the time. Just to be prudent, I’m planning on going off the grid once I get to my submarine – that will be sometime this summer.

  279. JohnBowen Says:

    Also, just wrote a post about Michael Bourn. You inspired me, Len.

  280. Chuck Says:

    “What was the original intention of creating “dugout central.” Was it just to promote something else?”

    No. The site was the starting point for everything, plans were for it to be a big site with a scouting lean, but with input elsewhere.

    “I know that Mike Pagliarulo was involved somehow because his photo was on the old homepage.”

    He owned the site.
    “Didn’t he have some sort of Asian scouting group and didn’t his group get criticized by the Yankees because of the Kei Igawa signing?”

    Yes, and yes.

    So Dugout Central was tied into a Spring Training deal that Mike Paglarulo and Adam were trying to set up?”

    DC was part of Mike’s company, it wasn’t necessariy “tied in”.

    “What was the whole point about setting up a web site?”

    Website was first.

    “Where they trying to get money from this web site or did they want to use it to promote the spring training site?”

    Both.

    “Were they paying Sean Foreman a lot of money and were they forced to leave once the spring training deal fell apart?”

    I doubt there was any money exchanged, and there was no “forcing to leave”. The contract expired and Pags didn’t renew it.

    “What was the motivation for the ex ballplayers and the writers to post articles?”

    Promote themselves. John Paciorek wrote a hitting book and would post excerpts here, Chris Donnells worked for Pags in Japan and posted articles about Japanese baseball. There were also chats and plans for podcasts.

    “Were they getting paid and did they leave once the money ran out?”

    Pags is a millionaire, I doubt the “money ran out”. As far as him putting them on salary, wouldn’t know that.

    “Or were they promised the possibility of some money which never came because the spring training deal fell apart and then they left?”

    Maybe, although I doubt it, because I’m still here.

  281. Len Says:

    Thanks Chuck.

    I didn’t realize Pagliarulo used to own the web-site. I thought that guy Adam owned the site and Pagliarulo was there as some kind of special guest to promote his scouting group.

    I wasn’t positive about Pagliarulo’s group and Kei Igawa.

    I remember Paciorek, I remember there was a Royals ex catcher, Mike Macfarlane or Bret Mayne, I’m not sure. Then there was that guy Billy Ball that John talked about and Kerry the rocket scientist.

    That’s too bad that it didn’t turn out into something bigger and more permanent. I found it by accident one day looking up something at baseball reference.

    Then you guys just disappeared, I just kind of assumed that was it. I thought it might have something to do with Sean Foreman asking for too much money of something like that. There was that blog from BR, it was ok nothing great. Then Foreman closed that thing and then those guys formed High Heat stats.

    I’m not a big fan of high heat stats. Seriously most of articles are about as interesting as reading a tax return. I made some minor criticisms to some of that guy Andy’s articles and he got really pissed at me so I didn’t even bother going back to that site anymore.

  282. JohnBowen Says:

    Brent Mayne used to post catching tips.

    http://www.dugoutcentral.com/?s=brent+mayne

  283. JohnBowen Says:

    The High Heat Stats twitter account once accused me of being an alcoholic because I had a beer in my profile picture (I was at a baseball game, ironically).

  284. Len Says:

    @JohnBowen,

    Brent Mayne!! good one. I think there were quite a few other major leaguers who had relatively short careers posting on that site. There was a relief pitcher who played for the Tigers or the Rockies for about 2 years in the late 1990’s and he wrote an article asking for $5 grand for some baseball program for his kid’s school or something like that and he wanted us to donate money. I remember Chuck basically told him to go “F” himself because the guy made enough money in the majors and he could pay for it himself. I remember the back and forth was classic. I think that scared the shit out of that guy and he never wrote another article again.

    That’s a crazy that High Heat story. I remember I used to post at that site sometimes but really the articles were kind of dull and boring. That guy Andy was making all these top lists about a year 1/2 ago and I commented on a few of them. They were really odd esoteric type lists like most like “most underrated first basemen from 1997″ or “worst hitting season by a third basemen on a first place team from the 1970’s”.

    Anyway some of the names didn’t even really make sense on his list or they worded is such an odd way that they could be interpreted differently. Or else he had his own unique way of the definition of “underrated”. He’d look at how they did in MVP voting compared to their WAR totals. Anyway, I posted a comment criticizing this and he gave me this whole lecture about the proper way to post a comment. And then I went back and forth with him and then he asked me not post again at High Heat.

  285. Mike Felber Says:

    Well I cannot defend that sort of high-handed high heat stat conduct. Though they do have many erudite, & some amusing & clever posts that go further afield than baseball, & nostalgic elegies of quality. As when the older gentleman Frank Clingenpeel died.

    Swimming was Duncan’s sport, an unfair comparison. Decathletes are amongst the best, but Bolt saying he was the best athlete ever, which was a joke. The best sprinter ever surely, but that is only a single component of athleticism.

    One thing I did not know is that it was Pag’s site. It was also a shame when we lost a lot of the old archived material. Lot’s of times if you know the right wiz, you can extract seemingly vanished info without spending a fortune.

    Since we are discussing (ad)ventures in publishing, here is one for print-my sophomore issue of the HK: ArtiST Festival I began in ‘09. It is much bigger & better, 220 densely packed pages with the cover, stuffed with art classic, visionary, expressive, & my favorite, surreal. Also many profiles, some community/art leaders, fiction, poetry, festival info-even a long interview I did + harassed The Rubin Museum into a submission!

    Cover can be clicked on, inside back & back covers, works I recruited, any blame for micromanaged headlines (& a few spreads) + our folk’s images I selected for windows accrue to me. An early post has much of the layout in preview, hard copy will arrive in a couple of weeks. Launch party in Empire State Building Bar.

    https://www.facebook.com/AttheEdgeMagazine

    Though I was misinformed by some sources that should be in the know re: what I needed to sell it effectively, especially through distributors. First time I will sell it, & it seems easy to get sidetracked with small guys, need to get national distributors who subcontract, & can get you into various venues & transportation hubs, let alone a Goliath like B & N…

    Yes, print is struggling mightily but…Not Dead Yet. A well marketed niche publication can sometimes do well, like my friends at Carrier Pigeon. Very fancy printing/cover & a built in toy, so even if less pages, they sell for $25, $20 at the fairs I see them at. My $8 is moderate for a large perfect bound mag.

  286. Raul Says:

    Why would Duncan/Jordan swimming be an unfair comparison?
    Nevermind, I forgot who I was talking to

  287. Mike Felber Says:

    Never mind being cynical & negative Raul. I am relentlessly rational, agree or not.

    That was Duncan’s sport. It is fine to use it in tandem with all other evidence. But using just baseball would be unfair to Duncan. Anyway, both were excellent athletes, but in raw speed, agility, jumping-”The Big Fundamental” was not as great.

  288. Chuck Says:

    Pags used to post here quite often, would even host chats once in awhile.

    He stopped after being trolled by a couple of those fuckwads from FJM, including one who was a pretty regular “contributor” here.

    The whole company was Pags’, Adam worked for him, he just ran the business side of things.

    I remember emailing about something with Adam and he finally said call, so I called the number listed on the contact list and Pags answered the phone.

    The office was in his house.

    Go figure.

  289. Chuck Says:

    “There was a relief pitcher who played for the Tigers or the Rockies for about 2 years in the late 1990’s and he wrote an article asking for $5 grand for some baseball program for his kid’s school or something like that and he wanted us to donate money. ”

    Jason Grilli.

  290. John Says:

    Yup, Pags got FJM’d:

    http://www.firejoemorgan.com/2007/09/pags.html

    So, did Bill Chuck…those guys really didn’t get that Bill’s posts were intended to be light-hearted and fun.

  291. Cameron Says:

    Didn’t Grilli get busted for amphetamines a while ago?

  292. Len Says:

    I never understood those FJM guys. O.K Morgan was a lousy announcer but to dedicate your life to get the guy fired? Seems like a big was of time. Seriously who gives a shit about the guy that’s broadcasting ESPN Sunday night baseball? Pretty petty shit if you ask me.

    Why they hell did they go after Mike Pags??? Mike Pags seemed like a pretty decent guy, I rooted for him when he was a player. They just seemed like nasty petty pricks over at FJM.

    Why’d they go after Bill Chuck? He was like someones grandfather. Those posts used to be pretty lighthearted. Man, what a bunch of assholes.

  293. Len Says:

    Jason Grilli!!! That’s it. I can’t believe he’s still in the majors. He’s scheduled to make about $7 million in ‘13&’14.

    I wish you guys still had the archive because he wrote an article asking for 10 grand for a deaf school. I think someone looked up his earnings in the big leagues and it was something like 2 million. Chuck told him to give the school the 10 grand himself instead of asking strangers for the money. Oh man, it went back and forth like crazy.

    I think it was part of this guy Jimmy Scott’s blog who used to contribute to DC.

    Then I think it ended up that he really needed $2 million but he felt asking for 10 grand was more achievable.

    Then all of this was happening right around the time the stock market collapsed so half of the dc readers were probably unemployed or broke.

    Then there was this whole back and forth about a ballplayer earning $800,000 that year asking for money during that terrible economy.

    Then that guy Jimmy Scott wrote another article defending ballplayers and then he got into it with this guy named Ilya? I don’t remember him but he was telling Grilli to get his team-mates together to put up the money.

    Some of it’s still on Jimmy Scott’s web site.

  294. John Says:

    FJM mentioned many times that they didn’t actually want to get Joe Morgan fired but that he was just a figurehead for sportswriting stupidity, which if you read his JoeChats, he kinda was. The website was devoted to calling out bad/lazy/uninformed sportswriting.

    Pags wrote an article about how miserable Billy Beane was like, the literal instant the A’s stopped winning division titles. If he had written the same article in 2011, I doubt he would’ve been ridiculed too badly.

  295. Chuck Says:

    Wow, Jimmy Scott, never thought I’d hear that name again.

    He used to spam his own website stuff here, Adam finally told him to provide original stuff or go fuck himself.

    A couple others I remember:

    Teddy Mitrosilis..one of my two recruits (along with DelGrippo) from Bleacher Report. Teddy played baseball at UNC and was teammates with Dustin Ackley and Matt Harvey. He was buddies with Tyler Hissey (remember him?).

    Teddy works now as a correspondent for ESPNLA. I asked him on Twitter the other day if he still hears from Tyler and he said no. Last he heard was he got a job in Boston after college then kind of fell off the grid. Personally, I think he walked into a Red Sox bar and started talking shit about Jim Rice using WAR and stuff and ended up floating in the Charles.

    Tyler’s cousin Pete is a minor league outfielder with the Sox’ AA team in Portland.

    Sky Kalkman: He’s made somewhat of a name for himself in the sabermetric community, he used to manage the “Beyond the Boxscore” site on SBNation and is with Baseball Prospectus now as a feature writer. He also wrote “The Hall of Nearly Great”, the ebook advertised on the HHS site.

    Paul Catalano: A Yankee and sabermetric fan who knew nothing about the Yankees or sabermetrics. I think his only real purpose here was to piss off Raul and me, and fellate Pags every time he stopped by.

    Jeff Moore: He owns the minor league site “MLB Prospect Watch”, it’s kind of a MLB Trade Rumors site for the minor leagues; very little orginal writing, mostly he pulls links from other people’s sites. He turned that talent into a once a week column on, I think, Hardball Times.

    Daniel Greenia: Used to work for Bill James and wrote “The Hall of Merit” for Baseball Think Factory. BBTF still does Hall of Merit, but Greenia’s name isn’t listed on the site, so who knows where he is.

    John Quemere: Our beloved “John Q.”, some middle aged dude who was trying to learn sabermetrics and didn’t know shit, but would rip people for ripping him. Finally got tired of being called out and went to the BR blog, where it appeared he learned pretty quickly amongst a more lenient group. He’s disappeared as well, but I think it’s because BR and Jay Jaffe ripped off his idea of using a player’s best seven WAR seasons when determining peak value. There’s more to it I’m sure, but I’ve done the best I can to forget. I’d be pissed too if someone was getting rich and famous off something they plagarized from me.

    The vision Pags and Adam had for the site was revolutionary. You had guys like Sky and Daniel..if you wanted to talk sabermetrics, you could. You had players like Mayne and Donnells, if you wanted to ask them about scouting or hitting, you could. Then you had a mixed bag of feature writers like Bill Chuck and Thomas.

    To this day there is still no site like it, and if things had worked out, we’d be right up there with the big boys.

    I have no doubt of that.

    Still kinda sucks when you think about it.

  296. Cameron Says:

    Speaking of Jimmy Scott, you read the back pages of the website and there’s an interview with Jason Grilli about how he runs his own marketing firm in the offseason.

    …Is it just me, or is Jason Grilli kind of a douchebag? Millions of dollars in MLB salary, runs his own company, and he tries to bum money for charity off other people? To him, ten grand is like fifty bucks.

  297. Mike Felber Says:

    What are the odds that Pharmstrong will actually take full responsibility & deeply apologes for leading the whole US team in years of fraud & lies? For stealing all those Tour de France Titles< for threatening or suing for slander all those who accused him of the tremendous cheating he did?

    For threatening to make life a "living hell" for those who made his success possible, his teammates, if the breathed a word of his crimes?

    He is forever going to remain in contempt & a joke if he cannot humbly take responsibility & deeply repent for the length & breath of the evil & harm he has done. Chief amongst this is to his sport, & nation's reputation in same.

  298. Len Says:

    @John,

    I remember the site but I rarely read anything on it because the whole idea seemed rather snarky to me. Reading it now they just come across like arrogant douche-bags. I can’t see getting all worked up about a guy who broadcasted one night a week on Sunday night baseball. Maybe it’s just the idea of the site. Instead of just attacking people, they should have tried to create something.

    I wish you guys still had the archive because then I could actually read the Mike P. article. If you read their comments about Mike P. They look like they have a massive axe to grind with the guy. Man, they’re just brutal and patronizing towards him.

    And talk about Ad-hominum attacks. they basically call him illiterate and make dozens of nasty comments comparing Mike to a chimp. The whole thing is one nasty long diatribe.

    It is amazing to see what the cult of Billy Beanne was like back in 2007.

    The problem I have with “Moneyball” the book/movie is how disingenuous it was to what really happened with those 2000-2003 A’s teams or specifically the 2002 team. I haven’t read the book in 10 years but the film made it out that the 2002 A’s won 103 games because of Scott Hatteberg, Chad Bradford and David Justice. Justice was a horrible signing and a waste of limited resources, Hattebeberg and Bradford were good cheap pick-ups but not game changers. I don’t think Hudson, Mulder, Zito, Tejada and E. Chavez are even mentioned in the film. I don’t think they even mention that Zito won the Cy Young and Tejada won the MVP.

    The keys to those teams were 6 guys they developed who were all very good/great and were making no money whatsoever. Tejada, Giambi, Chavez and Hudson were all drafted & signed while Sandy Alderson was the G.M.

    The A’s had the #2 pick overall and chose Mulder while Beanne was the G.M in 1998 and Zito was a #9 1999 pick.

    I think you can assume that most of the scouts that recommended Mulder & Beanne were still the same scouts from the
    Alderson era.

    I think the lesson to learned from the Beanne era is to take over a team that’s lousy so you get some high draft picks. Build a team starting from a nucleus of 3 strong young pitchers who come to the majors at the same time so you save tons of money in salary. Then have 1 or 2 strong position players (Tejada or Chavez) developed from your minor league system so that they don’t cost you anything either.

  299. Chuck Says:

    Who gives a shit about Lance Armstrong…

  300. Chuck Says:

    Link to the FJM criticism of Pags’ article.

    The article was originally posted on the pre-Dugout Central site, I don’t think it was ever here. I remember vaguely asking Adam for a link which he posted.

    http://www.firejoemorgan.com/search/label/mike%20pagliarulo

    Ken Tremendous or whatever he calls himself now knows NOTHING about baseball. The site was about ripping bad journalism, not baseball itself.

    Funny thing, he’s the one laughing now.

  301. Raul Says:

    The thing about Tyler was that I actually thought he was a good writer. I just disagreed with nearly everything he wrote.

    To John’s credit, John only uses WAR as one way to look at players. Tyler used to take it literally and worse, he spouted about WAR Dollars all the time.

  302. Raul Says:

    When Shaun used to write here, the biggest problem with him is that he could never see anyone’s point of view but his own.

  303. Lefty33 Says:

    “Is it just me, or is Jason Grilli kind of a douchebag?”

    It is just you because he’s far from it.

    I talked with him multiple times during his time with Lehigh Valley in 2011 and if there is one thing that Grilli is not, it’s a douche. Plenty of other guys on that team who were quasi-major league talent like Grilli was at the time were a douche like Dave Bush, Nate Bump, Aaron Heilman, Dane Sardinha, Joe Savery, and Domonic Brown.

    A couple of those guys were ignorant, foul, and holier than thou to everyone they met more often then not (plus for some their off the field activities with prostitutes and being drunk the majority of the season didn’t exactly show a big commitment to playing the game) but I can’t say I ever saw Grilli turn down a chance to talk baseball or life to anyone at anytime be it in the pen before a game or after getting off the bus after a ten hour ride from Louisville.

    At times he’s a bit too Jesus-born again-preachy but he’s 100% an honest down to earth good guy that cares about his family and about signing for fans and doing the right thing.

    He overcame what was a potentially career ending injury in 2010 to being the Pirates closer in 2013. Not too shabby.

    “runs his own company”

    At the time of the interview his company wasn’t even two years old and even now it’s a very small time operation. He’s not making big bucks off of any of that.

  304. Chuck Says:

    “It’s not sabermetrics, it’s sabermatrcians”.

    I made up that line because of Shaun.

    If I were a die-hard sabermetric believer, I STILL would have told him to STFU because he was making us all look bad.

  305. Chuck Says:

    Stuart Scott has cancer..for the third time.

    Never a fan of his act, but that sucks big time.

  306. Chuck Says:

    Grilli’s father was a major leaguer.

    http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/g/grillst01.shtml

  307. Chuck Says:

    “(plus for some their off the field activities with prostitutes and being drunk the majority of the season didn’t exactly show a big commitment to playing the game)”

    I can close my eyes and flashback to the ‘79 Reading Phillies with Dickie Noles and his band of assholes and swear you were talking about them.

  308. Len Says:

    @Chuck,

    Wow, I forgot about half of those names. I don’t think I even realized how many people contributed material to the web site. I remember there was something like 90 articles a month?? (not sure). It’s too bad it didn’t take off to something bigger.

    I totally forgot about that guy Jimmy Scott. I found him by accident when I looked for Jason Grilli.

  309. Len Says:

    @Cameron

    I think the problem with that Jason Grilli incident was that it was badly presented. I think the whole program for the deaf kids was something like $2 million but Jason decided to go around asking for 10 grand never mentioning the 2 million project total. So what happened is that people were taken aback that a guy who made $2 million in the majors would ask for $10 grand for a $10 grand project.

    I think another problem is that this came to DC not from Jason Grilli but from this guy Jimmy Scott. Then Jimmy Scott added fuel to the fire by writing an asinine article defending players who made $800 grand a year as “not rich.” Then Jimmy Scott was getting pissed at everybody because nobody wanted to donate money. On top of everything else this was happening as the economy was collapsing. I think it was finally found out that the cost was $2 million not $10 grand.

    The whole thing could have been avoided if he just said right from the beginning that this was a $2 million dollar project and leave the address to anyone who wanted to donate.

  310. Raul Says:

    Who is the better player to have?

    Chase Headley or Jay Bruce?

    Let’s hear it, gentlemen.

  311. John Says:

    Well, Bruce is still young, and Headley’s 2012 season kinda came out of nowhere. So, I’ll say Bruce. But Headley’s been the better player the last few years…and why did you ask that?

  312. Bob Says:

    Fantasy keeper league?

  313. Raul Says:

    Because they both seem like quality under-the-radar players.

  314. John Says:

    Tyler Hissey is alive and well, at least he was as of…Christmas, which is his last facebook activity.

  315. Raul Says:

    Nationals sign LaRoche.
    Then sign Rafael Soriano instead of trading Mike Morse for a cheap reliever like Joba Chamberlain.
    Did they forget all the money they gave to Jayson Werth?

    These idiots in Washington must have money to burn because making financially sound decisions don’t seem to be important to them.

  316. John Says:

    Is Bruce under the radar? I keep having visions that he’ll bust out and OPS .950 with 45 home runs. Seems like he’s been a bit of a disappointment, no?

  317. Raul Says:

    Lol no Bob.
    I’ve never done a keeper league but I would take Bruce if I did.

  318. Raul Says:

    I dunno about disappointment.
    You kinda wish Bruce could up his BA a few ticks. Like hit .270 instead of .250. It’d make a big difference

  319. Bob Says:

    Can one assume Headley gets traded?

  320. John Says:

    @315, interesting development, where’d you see that about Soriano?

    The Nats have been all over the place. They traded for Denard Span, even though Harper was tremendous in CF last season – so Morse was shifted to 1B – and then they bring back LaRoche after a career year, albeit on a short-term deal.

    That team doesn’t have a lot of holes…bullpen was top-notch last year. Maybe trade for a #4-5 caliber starter? But they brought in Haren for that..

  321. Raul Says:

    I think Headley will be traded. But how much time does he have before FA?
    If it’s at the end of 2013, he will go. But if he’s got another year, SD is gonna ask for a lot of prospects for him.

    I dunno where he’d go. Who needs a 3B?
    And who can afford the prospects?
    Seattle? Ugh. Not sure Headley would like to hit in another canyon.
    Milwaukee?

  322. Raul Says:

    I suppose the Nationals have a good problem with their depth. But the value of a guy like Morse has to dip if he’s only getting 250 PAs a year.

  323. Bob Says:

    Francona’s book will be out in a week. Yes, I will purchase it.

  324. Raul Says:

    When Joe Torre left the Yankees to manage the Dodgers and released a book about his time in New York, everyone…EVERYONE crucified him for it.

    Francona is doing the same shit and nobody says a fucking word.

    Such bullshit.

  325. Raul Says:

    Even worse, Francona wrote it with that spineless coward and fuckfaced idiot, Dan Shaughnessy.

  326. Bob Says:

    Shaugnessy is a fuckface. But I respect Francona.

  327. Raul Says:

    I like Francona too, but this book didn’t need to be written now.

  328. Raul Says:

    Whatever, it’s not like he needs to take me into consideration when writing a book.

  329. Bob Says:

    LOL @ 328.

  330. Raul Says:

    White Sox pitcher John Danks confirms shoulder feels great; paving the way for a mediocre 2013 season.

  331. Raul Says:

    Sammy Sosa has purchased distribution rights to needle-free injection company. Also laments this technology not available in the 1990s

  332. Chuck Says:

    “Chase Headley or Jay Bruce?”

    As much as I like Headley, I have to go Bruce.

    2/28 for Soriano?

    You can have him.

    Why write a book? It’s not like he’s going to release any dirt.

    #331..I saw that..laughed for an hour.

  333. Cameron Says:

    Francona is releasing the book now because he just realized he’s managing the fucking Indians. He needs to find SOME way to get talked about anywhere outside of the Cleveland Plains-Dealer.

    As for Headley vs. Bruce, Bruce. Headley is a decent bat of good contact and mediocre power while Bruce is a decent bat of mediocre contact and good power. Ultimately, Bruce is a better runner and his arm in right is a slight nudge even though Headley’s not a slouch at third.

    And for the Nats… I think Dan Snyder secretly bought them, because this seems like the same shit the Redskins pull ALL THE TIME!

  334. Mike Felber Says:

    John Q. was not well treated here. The info about some of the other guys is engaging, some new to me.

    Many care about Pharmstrong. If it is not your particular bag, & you would rather troll re: Jordan being nothing more special than a Special Olympics quality athlete, have at it Chuck!

  335. Chuck Says:

    He doesn’t seem to post on HHS either…they lost a bunch of guys after the move.

Leave a Reply


RSS
Categories
Fan Duel
FanDuel - Daily Fantasy Baseball
YardBarker
Advertisement