Thomas Wayne’s Hall of Fame Ballot

by Chuck

By: Thomas Wayne

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 have 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 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 , , 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 and may or may not hang around for a ballot or two (or more) depending on the mood of the voters: Reggie Sanders.

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.

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):

  • Tim Raines – 6th
    • Barry Bonds – 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:

    • Jack Morris
    • Jeff Bagwell
    • Tim Raines
    • Alan Trammell
    • Edgar Martinez
    • Larry Walker
    • Barry Bonds
    • Roger Clemens
    • Mike Piazza
    • Craig Biggio

    That’s my ballot. 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…..

Recent Posts

114 Responses to “Thomas Wayne’s Hall of Fame Ballot”

  1. Chuck Says:

    Well, Thomas, all I can say to this is I’m sure as hell glad you don’t have a vote.

    I promised myself I wouldn’t get into any HOF pissing contests this year, at least not until after the announcement tomorrow when there’s actually something to debate.

    I have to say, I can’t imagine heroin withdrawals being much harder.

    In case anyone gives a rat’s ass, I am predicting no one gets elected.

    Have at it, and talk to you tomorrow at about 2:15 EST.

  2. Bob Says:

    I say Piazza gets in.

  3. Raul Says:

    Nice job, Thomas.

    I didn’t think it was possible to express diarrhea in words but that ballot came about as close as any man could.

    Jack Morris? Tim Raines? Sigh. I’m gonna cough that up to you just not being here for 2 years, because we’ve covered it.

  4. Bob Says:

    And the Nationals re-sign Adam LaRoche for 2 years.

  5. Chuck Says:

    aka..Bryce Harper’s bodyguard and babysitter.

  6. John Says:

    Like the ballot except for Morris.

    I wouldn’t personally vote for Martinez or Walker, but I think they’re fine choices. I’ve always said Martinez either needed to have more full seasons in his role, or alternatively to have played a few more seasons in the field. Based on his away numbers, I think Walker was very, very good – far from a “Coor’s Creation” – but just not quite there

    I’ve often wondered how the folks who say “you just needed to see him play” with respect to Jack Morris could possibly havenot noticed Alan Trammell (or Lou Whitaker, for that matter). To your credit, you cast a much-deserved vote for Trammell.

    Raines, we’ve discussed here ad nauseum, and no one has ever convinced anyone else LOL – good to see I have someine in my side.

    I like Biggio, wouldn’t mind seeing him get inducted and would certainly love seeing him inducted alongside Bagwell. He’s borderline as a player, but 3000 hits should put him over the top.

  7. John Says:

    Michael Morse just tweeted a sad face. No, really.

  8. Raul Says:

    I would just point out that the only argument one can make for Jack Morris is his record. He went 254-186. Even “old fogies” like Chuck realize that doesn’t mean a whole lot…despite stat nerds constantly acting like all old fogies care about is Wins and Losses

  9. Chuck Says:

    “Michael Morse just tweeted a sad face.”

    How do you even know that?

    Better still, why would you want to?

  10. John Says:

    Steve Berthiume retweeted it, Chuck.

  11. Raul Says:

    Mike Morse makes a lot of sense for the Yankees.
    But I think the entire league is set on asking for the Yankees’ best prospects for even the most marginal of players.

    So I fully expect Mike Rizzo to ask for Gary Sanchez and Mason Williams.
    And Cashman simply should not make such a trade.

    However, if Rizzo is willing to take Joba Chamberlain and a C-level prospect, that should be a done deal. Face it, Joba needs a change of scenery and he would add depth to an already-good bullpen in Washington. I mean how much can you really expect to get for a 30-year old DH-type a few months away from Free Agency?

  12. Len Says:

    That’s a good ballot but the Jack Morris inclusion seems out of step with the rest of the ballot. I would switch Morris with Schilling.

    I really don’t get the Morris love. A career 3.90 ERA in a moderate scoring environment with some excellent defensive teams?Then there’s some kind of convoluted argument that because he had the most wins in the 80’s he was the best pitcher of that decade. It’s similar in saying Mark Grace was the best hitter of the 90’s because he had the most hits.

    Even in the 80’s Morris had a 3.66 ERA. Among pitchers with 1000 innings pitched he ranks 41st. Dwight Gooden had a 2.64, Hershiser had a 2.69, Clemmens had a 3.06 pitching in Fenway Park. John Tudor had a 3.13, Fernando had a 3.19, Steve Rogers had a 3.24, Jimmy Key had a 3.36.

  13. Raul Says:

    Morris doesn’t belong.
    Neither does Schilling.

  14. John Says:

    “It’s similar in saying Mark Grace was the best hitter of the 90’s because he had the most hits.”

    Or like saying Andy Pettitte is the pitcher of the 2000’s because he has the most wins.

  15. John Says:

    Curt Schilling was twice the pitcher Morris was.

  16. Raul Says:

    Maybe by weight

  17. Chuck Says:

    “Curt Schilling was twice the pitcher Morris was.”

    There you go.

    If Schilling isn’t worthy, and he’s twice what Morris was…..

  18. John Says:

    “If Schilling isn’t worthy, and he’s twice what Morris was…..”

    Worthy and “nice to reporters” aren’t the same thing.

    Just to illustrate: in 563 more innings pitched, Jack Morris gave up 404 extra earned runs, 679 extra walks, and 569 extra hits while striking out 638 fewer batters. It’s like they were playing a different sport.

    So in all those extra innings that Morris keeps getting credit for, he had a 6.46 ERA and 2.217 WHIP.

    And, to the extent that it matters (very little), Morris wasn’t even in the same zip code as a post-season starter.

  19. John Says:

    Another thing: I’m all for evaluating hitters within the context of their era’s, which is why I judge Walker and a hypothetically clean Sosa or Sheffield as non-HOFers, despite great raw numbers.

    But the door swings both ways. A guy like Schilling who pitches in that offensive environment deserves a significant bonus. That 3.46 ERA and 1.137 WHIP over 3261 IP are pretty damn great contextually.

  20. Bob Says:

    Here is today’s question, compliments of ESPN

    ‘Which athlete that came on the scene in 1996 have you enjoyed watching the most?

    1. Jeter
    2. Ray Lewis
    3. Kobe Bryant
    4. Tiger Woods

  21. Raul Says:


    And it’s not even close.
    The other three are some of the biggest douchebags to walk the face of the earth.

  22. John Says:

    Haha. I’m with Raul on that one.

  23. Lefty33 Says:

    “Maybe by weight”

    Ba-dum Bum.

    The only thing I’ll offer is my own opinion and what one BBWAA writer actually submitted for his ballot.

    My fake ballot:






    Actual BBWAA writer who does not make his ballot public:








    I have no idea who is getting inducted but my brother-in-law thinks, for what it’s worth, that none of the roid guys have any chance and that several writers are in some form or other abstaining from making a decision by filling out an empty ballot.

    He voted for those eight but his guess is that it’ll be Morris & Piazza with Biggio being very close but missing by a smidge.

    Past that I asked him who he thought would be close and he said Raines should be somewhere in the mid to upper 60’s and that no one else is going to get a vote total worth talking about.

  24. Lefty33 Says:

    I forgot to add Mattingly on as part of the eight.

  25. John Says:

    It seems like Morris is getting a ton of support, but I don’t know how much NEW support he’s getting, and that’s key if he’s going to make the jump.

    Almost no new voters are going to cast ballots for him, so he needs to actually convert people. Have any big-name writers changed their minds about Morris? Guys that could sway the pool? Superdelagates, if you will?

  26. Len Says:


    The Pettitte analogy is pretty good although I think he has a much better pitcher than Morris. Heck David Wells was a better pitcher than Morris.

    I’ve been reading some of the writers explanation as to how and why they voted for Morris and it is without a doubt some of the most intellectually dishonest, lazy and even bizarre HOF writing I’ve ever read. One guy’s case was mainly based on Morris’ opening day starts?? Brad Radke made 9 opening day starts so what?

    One guy made the case that Morris was the staff ace on teams with Blyleven and D. Stewart. For one, he never played with Bert Blyleven and secondly he had a 6.19 ERA on the 1993 Blue Jays with Dave Stewart. He was such a staff ace that he didn’t even appear in the 1993 post-season. He also failed to mention that Morris almost single handedly lost the 1992 World Series for the Blue Jays.

    Many of the other writers main case was the “most wins of the 1980’s.” Let’s look at it another way, Ron Guidry had the most wins from 1977-1986. Frank Viola had the most wins form 1984-1993? Guidry never went over 9% and was off the ballot after 8 attempts and Viola didn’t even get 1% of the vote and was one and done. Why should one 10 year period count more than another 10 year period?? It shouldn’t and that’s why the whole “most wins of the 1980’s is so ridiculous. Actually ironically, Guidry and Viola have much stronger HOF cases than Morris.

  27. Len Says:

    From what I”ve read so far I could really only see either Biggio or Morris being elected or maybe both or maybe neither. Bagwell will probably jump up to about 60%. Raines will probably pass the 50% mark maybe even somewhere in the 55-60% range.

  28. Cameron Says:

    I’m with Chuck and not gonna say anything until after all’s said and done. That said, I have some suspicions. We’ll see which ones are right.

  29. Raul Says:

    Raines won’t get in.
    Neither will Morris.
    Biggio shouldn’t get in either.

    Piazza goes in alone.

  30. Chuck Says:

    John..I agree with you on your impression of Heyman as a writer, but your obsession with Craig Calcaterra is strange..after following his Twitter stuff today, all he’s done is re-confirm his status as a douchebag of legendary proportions.

    I emailed a friend of mine this morning who has a vote, and this is what he said;

    Based on conversations with his peers, if you were to set the over/under on electees at 1 1/2, bet the under.

    If he could go to any one of the local casinos here in Phoenix and get 500-1 odds on ANY player, he would bet Piazza.

    He believes there is a universal disdain for steriod users amongst the membership, and some of the younger, more inexperienced sabermetric voters will use this vote as a way to “handjob in” their own “brotherhood”.

    He expects some increased support for guys like Raines and Walker, and some first ballot love for Schilling and Kenny Lofton.

    As a counter-measure, he expects a record number of blank ballots, or ballots cast exclusively for guys who have no legitimate shot like Dale Murphy and Fred McGriff.

    His vote is public and has already been published. I will share it tomorrow, but not his name.

  31. Lefty33 Says:

    “I’ve been reading some of the writers explanation as to how and why they voted for Morris and it is without a doubt some of the most intellectually dishonest, lazy and even bizarre HOF writing I’ve ever read.”

    Agreed, but I also agree with the Sporting News who has it handicapped that Morris will get around 80%. No one has ever made it this far without getting inducted and when a guy gets this close both the metric and non-metrically inclined go along with things. Obviously this has been happening more so every year or else he never would have gotten this far.

    My brother-in-law votes for Morris because he’s a Tiger fan.

    He’ll vote for any Tiger that makes it to the ballot from Morris to Trammell to Whitaker to John Wockenfuss to Aurelio Lopez.


    Not really, but then again he’s just being a homer the same as a lot of us would be.

  32. Chuck Says:

    My friend basically said the same thing.

    Guys like Morris and Raines, who are otherwise unqualified, received more than expected vote totals the past couple of years because of a mostly unqualified ballot.

    Steriods are a disqualifier, and some writers, no matter what, would rather vote for two or three borderline guys than submit a blank ballot..hence their vote totals.

    While the number of qualified guys on this ballot “based on numbers alone” is higher than usual, if you add the steriod/suspicion tag to them it drops to the level of the past couple of years.

    Nine percent of 600 is still a hell of a jump, I just don’t see that many guys jumping on the Morris bandwagon.

    It’s a bigger sin to vote for someone not worthy than to not vote at all.

  33. Cameron Says:

    John Wockenfuss, now there’s a name that brings up a fun image in my head.

  34. Chuck Says:

    Sorry, John, you can complain all you want about Jon Heyman having a HOF vote, but so does Joe Posnanski.

    That guy is a fucking asshole.

    He’s not qualified to be a school crossing guard.

  35. Len Says:


    Gill Hodges received 63% of the vote and was never elected. He’s the only player to receive 60% and not get in. Reaching 50% is basically a slam dunk into the HOF. Not counting the guys on this years ballot, I think Hodges is the only guy to get to 50% and not get in. Even 40% has been basically a slam dunk for eventual election by either the writers or the Veteran’s committee. I think only Hodges, Marion, Wills, Maris, Oliva, and Garvey reached 40% and weren’t eventually elected.

    Yeah if voting history is any kind of predictor, Morris will either be elected this year or next year.

    I don’t really understand the love for Morris it really makes no sense.

    It’s kind of odd how underrated Tiger players are. Norm Cash, Mickey Lolitch, Bill Freehan, Alan Trammell, Lou Whitaker, Lance Parrish, Chet Lemon. I don’t really understand why. Maybe it’s because they were in the A.L. East all those years and they so far away from the hub of teams on the East Coast.

    I’m really kind of shocked how poorly Trammell has done because when he played he was considered a future HOF. It probably has something to do with middle infielders crazy numbers during the steroids era. It also doesn’t help that they’ve already elected 4 short stops from the 80’s. It also doesn’t help that he was screwed over for the 1987 MVP.

    Lou Whitaker was also perceived as a solid HOF candidate back then. It’s really a travesty that he was one and done.

  36. John Says:

    Posnanski didn’t vote for Morris. So, kudos to him.

  37. Chuck Says:


    “I could name 100 guys in the HOF who shouldn’t be in”.

    I would bet him my house he couldn’t name 100 HOFers.

  38. Mike Felber Says:

    Not voting for any guys it is reasonable to conclude did PEDs, need to have atoned + clearly be good enough clean. The no-brainers:

    Bagwell, Piazza, Schilling.

    Those who I still find good enough, also in rough order:

    Trammell, Biggio, Walker, Martinez Lofton.

    Craig was also very good at his peak, he did the little things well, walks, SB/%, position. Trammel we all believe is long overdue. Walker was good enough even compensating for park. Best f/t DH ever did enough to deserve it, only so much penalty you can aasign there. Lofton gets there due to hsi superb glove in CF + SB, enough to offset an only decent bat.

    Now if someone is a small Hal man, then any of the last 5 could be omitted.

    I have been over this ad nauseum, but Len is correct, he is no lower than a “middle tier” HOFer. Any way you slice it he is deserving. You cannot find another pitcher with a 127 ERA +, & his # of IP, without a + defense, who is undeserving. Peak value, he had plenty. And having the best ever (barring Tommy Bond, who pitched when the mound was about 8′ away from home plate) K/BB ratio. No, that is not a trivial, quirky stat: those are 2 of the main 3 things a pitcher has any substantial control over. Fuhggetabout his excellent unearned runs & PS play.

    It is impossible to deny that many, some here, do not like him thus will not be able to overcome, even sometimes acknowledge, there contempt makes objectivity impossible. An extreme case is a rare belief that he used PEDs with no evidence whatsoever & opposed to his vociferous slamming of users. His politics are opposite mine, but that should play zero part in any evaluation.

  39. John Says:

    By WAR, there are 43 pitchers and 70 position players under 55 WAR. That’s 113 guys right there. Great place to start.

  40. Mike Felber Says:

    Whoops, I forgot Raines. I would have him near the bottom, but considering overall & peak value, in.

  41. Chuck Says:

    Bar is too low, John.

    By that theory, you’re accepting the early boneheaded VC selections.

    Average WAR for a hitter is 65, pitcher is 64.

    I’d raise both to 70 and start there.

    I would consider anyone between 65-70 on principle, and anyone below 60 would have to be considered for other reasons, like peak value..Koufax a good example.

    Dave Winfield is a 59.4 and played 22 years, and needed three full time DH years to get his 3000.

    If I’m a voter, I’d have a tough time with him.

  42. Chuck Says:

    In the writers vote (all are BBWAA voters), on Biggio was elected.

    Out of 16 voters, Curt Schilling got one.

    I would LMAO for a year if he didn’t get the five percent.

  43. Lefty33 Says:

    That’s probably pretty close to how it will go.

    Although Schilling will obviously get the 5%, pity, and I still don’t get the strong support for Smith more than anyone.

  44. Chuck Says:

    By WAR, there are just two players “worse” than Craig Biggio..Winfield, and John’s poster child for Raines being in..Lou Brock.

    Biggio played a long time and stayed reasonably healthy, thus he was able to put together some impressive numbers, which put him in eventually, whether this year or not.

    He was a good player, some years very good.

    He was never great, and he was never a star.

  45. Raul Says:

    John is going to use Chuck’s example of using WAR as a victory…even if it beats down John’s HOF arguments.

  46. Cameron Says:

    Watching the pre-announcement show on Al Leiter went on a mini-tirade about how the guys who were dirty colored the perception of guys like him who didn’t use (and come on, it’s Al Leiter, he didn’t use) and he was really pissed. Something you don’t think about that often. How does everyone else feel of a few (or more) bad apples spoiling the whole bunch for everyone?

  47. Cameron Says:

    And since it’s election day, here’s my mock ballot.

    Jeff Bagwell
    Tim Raines
    Alan Trammell
    Edgar Martinez
    Mark McGwire*
    Barry Bonds*
    Roger Clemens*
    Mike Piazza
    Curt Schilling
    Craig Biggio

    Couple qualifiers. This is if I was an actual BBWAA voter. I know any support can start a snowball, so some guys may not be as good on the others, but I think they have a chance and I wanna contribute to the snowball.

    And see those asterisks? Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, I think these guys were good enough to get in clean. They wouldn’t have had the video game numbers they did, but I think if you normalized them, they’d be good enough. Sosa and Palmeiro were not, these guys are (well, McGwire’s injuries and all… He’s a huge grey area for a voter).

  48. Chuck Says:

    Leiter said last night he had teammates he suspected of unusual activity..getting bigger, number spikes, etc.

    He said at the time no one suspected steriods, at least not out loud, only after everything broke was there the “ah-ha” moments.

    He said he lockered next to Piazza for six years and never, not once, saw or heard anything which even brought the question up, much less the suspicion.

  49. Chuck Says:

    Well, you certainly started the snowball…

  50. Cameron Says:

    Fully my intention, Chuck. I think these guys at least have a shot, but not everyone might. The earlier the bandwagon starts, the bigger it gets.

  51. Cameron Says:

    Piazza is a guy I question on steroids, but I give him benefit of the doubt. He always had those ridiculous numbers at the plate and he was always a musclebound freak. He might have (then again, you can say that about anyone back then, especially a member of the Mets), but benefit of the doubt for me.

  52. Len Says:

    The average WAR for a HOF actually varies by position. There’s also a drastically different standard for catchers because of the difficultly of the position. Johnny Bench & Gary Carter are the only catchers to go above 65 WAR for their careers. Using Average also skews the results a bit from certain positions because guys like Ruth, Cobb, Mays, and Aaron have such high totals. Also, 19th century pitchers war totals also skew the results. This also only covers “career” value and not peak value.

    Here’s the average Career HOF WAR per position:


    Here’s the players that meet or exceed the Career HOF WAR average:

    C-I-Rod, Piazza, and Torre
    1B-Pujols, Bagwell, Thomas, Thome, and Palmeiro
    2B-Whitaker and Grich
    SS-A-Rod, B. Dahlen, Jeter and Trammell
    3B-C. Jones, S. Rolen
    LF-Bonds, Raines, M. Ramirez
    CF-K. Griffey
    SP-Clemens, Maddux, R. Johnson, Pedro, Mussina, Glavine, Schilling.

    Then you have Biggio, Edgar and Rose that don’t really have comps because of their position. I also left off the 19th century pitcher McCormick.

    Here’s the avg. for best 7 seasons peak for an avg. HOF:


    Here are the players that meet or exceed those Best 7 peak HOF average:

    C-Piazza, I-Rod, Torre, Munson, Mauer and Simmons
    1b-Pujols, Bagwell, Helton, Thomas
    SS-Trammell, Nomar and Jeter
    3B-C. Jones, K. Boyer, D. Allen, A. Beltre, S. Bando
    LF-Bonds, Raines, M. Ramirez
    CF-K. Griffey
    RF-Shoeless Joe, Walker, Suzuki, Sosa
    SP-Clemens, R. Johnson, Pedro, Wes Ferrell, Halladay

    Then there’s Rose, Biggio and Edgar. Then I left off the 19th century pitchers.

    Jay Jaffe does a thing at BR where he combines the two and averages them:


    Here are the players that meet or exceed those numbers:

    C-Piazza, Torre. Simmons is extremely close (40.0), (Munson is close (39.2) would have reached if he didn’t die)
    1b-Pujols, Bagwell, Thomas, Thome, and Helton (Palmeiro is extremely close 51.3)
    2b-Grich. Whitaker is extremely close (54.0)
    SS-A-Rod, Jeter, Trammell, and Dahlen.
    3B-C. Jones (Rolen is extremely close 53.1)
    LF-Bonds, Raines and M. Ramirez.
    CF-K. Griffey (Lofton is close, 53.5)
    RF-L. Walker ((Shoeless Joe is extremely close 55.2)
    SP-Clemens, Maddux, R. Johnson, Pedro, Schilling, Mussina and Glavine. (Halladay is very close, 55.5)

    Then there’s Rose & Biggio who played multiple positions. And then there’s Edgar who was a DH. I left the 19th century pitchers off the list.

  53. Cameron Says:

    Bob Costas voted for Tim Raines? That seals it for me. …I’m serious. There isn’t a single journalist, not just sports journalist but outright journalist, that I respect more than Bob Costas.

  54. Cameron Says:

    Folks… It’s a shutout. Eighth time in history. The biggest vote-getter was Craig Biggio with 68% of the vote.

  55. Lefty33 Says:


  56. Cameron Says:

    Clemens – 37.6%
    Bonds – 36.2%

  57. Chuck Says:

    Amen…today just got a whole lot better.

  58. Chuck Says:

    Costas doesn’t have a vote Cam…his vote means the same as John’s.

  59. Cameron Says:

    Still, his opinion is pretty damn high in my book.

  60. Cameron Says:

    Costas just got a huge laugh out of me.

    “If you’re Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens and you think that if you retired in 1998 you’d be getting about a hundred percent of the votes, now you’re getting a third! That’s a pretty big kick in the ass!”

  61. Chuck Says:

    #52…That’s really good stuff Len..thanks

  62. Chuck Says:

    Three first ballots next year..Thomas..Maddux..Glavine…bye bye Jack Morris.

    Finally can shoot that horse.

  63. Cameron Says:

    I wouldn’t hold your breath. Morris was… 67.7% I think. 7.2% is a hell of a jump, but I think a bandwagon isn’t out of the question. I wouldn’t say he’s a slam dunk or even a safe bet, but I wouldn’t say it’s entirely safe he’s out either.

  64. Chuck Says:

    Voters are reluctant to turn in blank ballots, so to compensate for not voting for Bonds and Clemens, et al, they voted for guys they wouldn’t vote for otherwise.

    With those three guys next year taking most of the vote, everyone else, including Biggio, Bagwell, Morris, etc, will go down, and will stay down until there’s a shit ballot at some point.

  65. Cameron Says:

    Hey Chuck, Curt Schilling? 36.8%

  66. Cameron Says:

    I think Biggio and Bagwell actually get IN next year. Call me crazy, I think they try and compensate for this year with a huge year next year.

  67. Bob Says:

    Len yes. Post 52 was great.

  68. Lefty33 Says:

    If there is one guy that should be kicking himself right now it’s Schilling.

    It was always pretty obvious that none of the roid guys were going anywhere this year, last year, the year before, or maybe ever.

    But if he truly did what he did clean and after sitting back and watching what the BBWAA did to Blyleven mostly because he was douche towards them for years, all he had to do was take the Larkin route of being visible and likeable in a nice and posh analyst gig on ESPN or MLB Network and if not in he would be a hell or a lot closer then he is now at 38%.

    Hope he digs his nice-long-Blyleven-ish ride down the BBWAA superhighway towards an induction in 2025.


  69. Lefty33 Says:

    “Voters are reluctant to turn in blank ballots, so to compensate for not voting for Bonds and Clemens, et al, they voted for guys they wouldn’t vote for otherwise.”

    At least this year, I don’t think there was as much reluctance towards the blank ballot as normal. The thing to wonder will be is that going to continue next year and so on with all of these roid guys on the ballot and only more “rumored” roid guys yet to come?

  70. Chuck Says:

    Haha..Kenny and done…another sabermetric failure

  71. Cameron Says:

    Lofton didn’t have a chance. One and done I was surprised by, but better to get it out of the way. But Lofton was still a HELL of a player in his day. Not a HoFer, but damn good.

  72. Cameron Says:

    Saw a title of a video on the list on the stream that caught my eye. “Should Marvin Miller be inducted into the Hall of Fame?”. In my opinion, yes.

  73. Lefty33 Says:

    The bullpen phone per se is no more.

  74. Cameron Says:

    Not surprised, but a little sad to see.

  75. Chuck Says:

    Morris went up one percent from last year, Cam.

    No way he picks up 8% next year..not on that ballot.

  76. Chuck Says:

    21.6% for Larry Walker.

  77. Chuck Says:

    Bagwell went up 3.6%
    Raines went up 3.5%
    Morris went up 1%.

    Dale Murphy went up a little bit, but those were clearly sympathy votes.

    Everyone else went down.

  78. John Says:

    “[Biggio] was never great, and he was never a star.”

    Yes, he was. From 1991-1998, he was an all-star 7 times and hit .300/.391/.450 from the 2B position. Due to his high-OBP skills and baserunning skills (and the great Jeff Bagwell), he averaged 108 runs scored per year. He averaged 5.5 WAR per year, where 5 is typical of an all-star. By any measure, he was a star in the 1990’s, and basically average-to-above average after.

    “Haha..Kenny and done…another sabermetric failure”

    Or the result of a bloated ballot and a stupid rule.

    Make no mistake – the BBWAA embarrassed themselves with this ballot.

  79. John Says:

    “he had to do was take the Larkin route of being visible and likeable in a nice and posh analyst gig on ESPN or MLB Network and if not in he would be a hell or a lot closer then he is now at 38%.”

    Um…Schilling is an analyst for ESPN.

  80. John Says:

    “I wouldn’t hold your breath. Morris was… 67.7% I think. 7.2% is a hell of a jump, but I think a bandwagon isn’t out of the question. I wouldn’t say he’s a slam dunk or even a safe bet, but I wouldn’t say it’s entirely safe he’s out either.”

    Thing is, no new voters are putting them on their ballots. So he has to rely on scoring 3 additional votes from prior voters for every new voter added to the pool, not to mention adding like 40 new voters overall.

  81. John Says:

    *adding 40 votes from the current voting pool.

  82. Chuck Says:

    “Make no mistake – the BBWAA embarrassed themselves with this ballot.”

    No, they didn’t.

    They got it just right.

  83. Lefty33 Says:

    “Um…Schilling is an analyst for ESPN.”

    Um….he’s anything but visable and likeable which is the first part of what I wrote.

    I hear him whenever he’s on Cowherd during the season and he’s usually a complete potstirring douche. Obviously he learned nothing from Blyleven.

    You don’t try and show up the people who are the ones voting for you.

    They tend to have long memories and today was exhibit A.

  84. Lefty33 Says:

    “Make no mistake – the BBWAA embarrassed themselves with this ballot.”

    Make no mistake – no they didn’t.

    They did their job just like any other year.

  85. Cameron Says:

    I’m saddened by this ballot, but it’s defensible in light of the circumstances. Looking forward to next year. I’m predicting at least three inductees, I’m gonna place over/under at 4 and take the over.

  86. Chuck Says:

    Eight fewer hits per season and Biggio’s vote total is in the same neighborhood as Murphy and Walker.

    Let’s not kid ourselves here.

  87. Chuck Says:

    No reason to be sad, Cameron.

    The only real candidates on the ballot were tainted by cheating..the rest, meh.

    Bagwell will probably get in, Biggio and Piazza, too.

    No one else is worth talking about.

  88. Chuck Says:

    “I’m saddened by this ballot, but it’s defensible in light of the circumstances. Looking forward to next year. I’m predicting at least three inductees, I’m gonna place over/under at 4 and take the over.”

    You have a year to start saving.

  89. Cameron Says:

    Not sad that any specific candidates got in, just… Well, imagine the celebration at Cooperstown this year. It’s going to be quiet and there’ll be that air of this ballot hanging over it. It’s depressing to think about when you see something like that.

  90. Chuck Says:

    This is not a bad thing.

    Sure, the turnout in Cooperstown won’t be all that great, but that’s not Chuck’s problem, matter of fact, this year might be the perfect time to go.

    I’d rather watch the great grandson of some worthy dead guy give a speech than watch some stiff like Jack Morris be recognized for something he shouldn’t be.

  91. Lefty33 Says:

    From the never going to happen file:

    I think the BBWAA should punt on everyone next year as well unless the HOF issues some sort of guidance or parameters in regards to roid guys.

    The way things are now is too nebulous.

    The process wasn’t set up to handle this kind of a mess.

    It’s good that cheats like Sosa, McGwire, Bonds, etc. are being kept out but at the same time I think that the blank ballot killed this year and will next year as well kill legit guys because of rumor, innuendo, and suspicion.

    I love the idea of the cheats being kept out but hate the idea of possibly clean(er) guys being kept out unnecessarily.

  92. Cameron Says:

    Yeah, I guess you have a point, Chuck. It’s just kind of a depressing thought is all. Not a single player. Hell, I’d take a bone from the VC if I was there. I’m not, so I’m not really personally affected. It’s just the inner optimist thinking about it being a bummer. Nothing serious, Chuck. Ain’t the end of the world.

    However, if we get a shutout next year with Greg Maddux on the ballot, I am killing someone. Mad Dog is my absolute favorite player of all time and the textbook goddamn definition of a Hall of Fame player.

  93. Lefty33 Says:

    “It’s going to be quiet and there’ll be that air of this ballot hanging over it.”

    It would have been quiet either way.

    If Bonds, Clemens or major roid guy of your choice would have been inducted there would have been a mass protest by the living members of the HOF with a ton of them staying home.

    That would have looked great on ESPN with the offspring of some unknown umpire speaking and nothing but empty folding chairs in the background behind him.

    The controversy from this will put so much focus on the process/HOF/MLB that somewhere Bud probably is on his second case (of wine coolers) loving all the attention, interest and ultimately dollars that will flow to the sport because of this.

  94. John Says:

    “They tend to have long memories and today was exhibit A.”

    The fact that they let personal gripes get in the way is proof of why these people have no business deciding baseball history.

    “They got it just right.”

    This was the strongest voting pool, maybe ever, and they elected nobody.

    These people have no business voting on baseball. None, nada.

  95. Chuck Says:

    I talked to a former player a while back to told me the HOFers have agreed amongst themselves that if any “known” steriod user goes in, they will never return to Cooperstown, or participate in any HOF activity with them.

    Bonds, Clemens, etc, will all go in with an empty stage behind them.

    You’ll never see “Barry Bonds, HOF ‘13″ autograph on anything signed by another HOFer unless they signed it first.

    If you have Clemens’ name on a ball and you walk up to Phil Niekro and ask him to sign it, he won’t..and neither will anyone else.

    They may eventually all be HOFers..but they’ll still be outcasts.

    Think Jose Canseco.

  96. Chuck Says:

    Sour grapes do make the best whine, John.

  97. Len Says:

    The vote isn’t surprising but the whole thing is darkly comical and shows that the vast majority of these writers/reporters are spoiled douche-bags. I kind of wish they never vote anybody in for the next few years to continue this farce, then maybe they’ll lose their voting privileges.

    The best was seeing that douche-bag Jon Heyman crying and bitching like a little girl on MLB network about Morris not getting in. Then he was coming up with the most bizarre line of logic about how these steroid cheats indirectly cost Morris wins. And then he was coming up with some other nonsense about Morris pitching with the DH rule. I’m thinking to myself that if Heyman wasn’t such an asshole would have just pushed & voted for Blyleven’s elected then his candidate (Morris) would have probably been elected either 2 years ago or last year.

    The whole thing is a massive joke. The writers are journalists yes/no? What the hell were they doing for 20 years while this was going on? And now they’re indignant that this happened?

    I don’t think Morris is getting in next. He barely moved and he needs an 7-8% jump. Where’s he getting the votes? Plus there is Maddux, Glavine, Thomas and Mussina on the ballot next year.

    And seriously they’re hypocrisy and inconsistent logic about they’re ballots is bizarre. One guy voted for Piazza and not Bagwell because Bagwell “looked” like he did steroids and Piazza didn’t??? wtf?? Biggio got 67% of the vote but how does anybody know he wasn’t on steroids??? How do you know for certain Maddux and Glavine weren’t on steroids at some point in their careers??

    My guess for next year is just Maddux and Glavine get elected.

  98. John Says:

    And that makes those people, mostly cheaters in their own-right, lower than pond scum.

    Meanwhile, the “journalists” who turned a blind eye to this stuff get up on their high horse. If those punks had such a problem with PED’s, they should have reported something.

  99. Lefty33 Says:

    “The fact that they let personal gripes get in the way is proof of why these people have no business deciding baseball history.”


    It might be controversial but at least unlike the majority of guys on this year’s ballot no cheating or rule breaking occured.

    What was done is perfectly legal, legit, and clean.

    “These people have no business voting on baseball. None, nada.”


  100. Cameron Says:

    I’ll admit, seeing Costas gripe about Morris and McGrif not getting in… I love Bob Costas, but… Sorry, Bobby. No.

  101. Lefty33 Says:

    “I kind of wish they never vote anybody in for the next few years to continue this farce, then maybe they’ll lose their voting privileges.”

    Not possible

    “The vote isn’t surprising but the whole thing is darkly comical and shows that the vast majority of these writers/reporters are spoiled douche-bags.”

    No, it actually shows that a lot of writers were smart enough to say that they do not have the ability to discern who did what and when they did it by-in-large so they opted to punt.

    Some form of clarity needs to come from the top, i.e. the HOF itself, as to how writers should quantify this area because the process was not designed for this.

    What happened today was partial douche-bagery BUT it also was to me an almost a cry for help for clarity going forward.

    Phillies Comcast beat writer Jim Salisbury said that he voted for no one because of this reason and he knew of several of his colleagues who did the same because he said that they feel inept/inadequate to judge this and the governing body of the process needs to step in before it does become a bit of a farce.

  102. Lefty33 Says:

    “This was the strongest voting pool, maybe ever, and they elected nobody.”

    No, it was the most tainted pool ever and that’s why they voted for nobody.

  103. Chuck Says:

    I was watching the HOF Roundtable show last night on MLB Network, and two of the panel guests were Chris Russo and Joe Posnanski.

    Harold Reynolds was openly mocking Russo for saying he uses MVP/Cy Young votes and BR black ink as part of his process.

    Costas was mocking Posnanski for saying “there’s 100 guys in the Hall I could kick out”.

    Of course, Verducci was mocking Costas for saying he’d penalize juicers for a year “like the writers did for Robbie Alomar spitting”.

    Entertainment at its best.

  104. JohnBowen Says:

    Once again, there ARE 100 guys in the Hall you could kick out. And there’s only like 5-10 people who should be let in their place.

    So there’s small hall for ya.

  105. Chuck Says:

    Posnanski couldn’t name 100 HOFers..much less 100 guys he could kick out.

  106. Cameron Says:

    Posnanski said there were so many guys he wanted to vote in he wanted a 25 man ballot.

  107. Chuck Says:

    Posnanski: “There’s 100 guys I could kick out”

    Costas: “An you could replace them with 100 others”?

    Posnanski starts to answer “Yes”, at which point Costas cuts him off with “with Chico Salmon”?

    Posnanski, off guard, starts to stutter an answer then just stops talking.

    Fifty bucks says he never heard of Chico Salmon.

  108. JohnBowen Says:

    So what you’re saying is that Costas is being a moron. Kicking out 100 unworthy HOFers doesn’t mean that you’d replace them with a utility guy from the 1960’s (I had never heard of him either).

  109. Chuck Says:

    Time for your nap, John.

    Gettin’ cranky.

  110. JohnBowen Says:

    I’m rather glad that the people who vote on these things are no longer the middleman between the game and the fans.

  111. Chuck Says:

    Wait til next year.

  112. JohnBowen Says:

    Maddux should get in no problem.

    It’s going to be funny to see the disparity between Mussina and Glavine, over 35 extra wins. Mussina was, if anything, a little bit better.

  113. Mike Felber Says:

    Yes Mussina was. And I can see not voting in those legitimately tainted by steroids. But you either vote in those who have rumors only due to size (like Piazza, when some demonstrably can become that muscular naturally), or you lobby for an investigation process for those suspected-but do not hold out on voting them in before that. And it is a slippery slope-what vote in no one, whether Biggio Ozzie Smith-like, because they COULD have used PEDs?

    And John is right, it is totally unprofessional & immoral to not vote for a guy due to their resentment of comments, politics of anything, abrasive personalities, etc.

  114. Mike Felber Says:

    The best 7 years divided by total WAR is a good way to start.

    Then you gotta ask, did they lose or gain credit due to war years, a smaller factor is strikes, did they gain by playing during war or expansion years…

    I would also privilege peak over career, at least 1st amongst equals. Years are tricky since they can be abridged by injury or other factors, PAs or IP are better, but if the essentially lowest 1/2 dozen years for one guy is 2 WAR, & another is 3.5, even if they have the same total…The former was a league average starter for longer is all, not adding much per year in value. Thus longevity for its own sake should mean little.

    AND one must factor in when they disagree with WAR & by how much. But then a good reason should be given for those opinions.

    Generally at least a 47 should be recorded in the averaging of peak & career WAR. But the above factors may make you want to include or leave off some guys, despite being a bit o the other side.

    Schilling easily beats the HOF average-which is inflated by the giants-at every position. 62.6!

    This does not count post season play. And I do not believe anyone hear-& few voters & members of the general public-would say that they would not vote in many guys BELOW their position average for career & peak WAR.

    So anyone who feels Shilling is way overrated by WAR: have at it. Why precisely?

    This is of course rWAR. They revised it a little while back, & Schilling improved a bit-more proportionate to how he was rated by Fangraphs WAR.

    The fact is that barring a very unusual deficit in giving up homers &/or being inefficient at holding runners on, allowing significantly more hits than would be expected…someone who is virtually the best ever at BB/K with a decent # of IP WILL be HOF worthy.

    You can say the same thing about folks with a 127 ERA + with as many IP.

    Look at fielding support, unearned runs, privilege peak value, anything you like…He is hyper-worthy.

Leave a Reply