2013 Baseball Thread

[CaptainP]

So the Hall-Of-Fame vote is released today!!! It will be the most controversial ever, with the major players in the steroid era eligible.

Who would you vote for?
Who do you think will get in?

Eliglble players:

First Timers
Sandy Alomar
Craig Biggio
Barry Bonds
Jeff Cirillo
Royce Clayton
Roger Clemens
Jeff Conine
Steve Finley
Julio Franco
Shawn Green
Roberto Hernandez
Ryan Klesko
Kenny Lofton
Jose Mesa
Mike Piazza
Reggie Sanders
Curt Schilling
Aaron Sele
Sammy Sosa
Mike Stanton
Todd Walker
David Wells
Woody Williams
Rondell White


Holdovers
Bernie Williams - 9.6% last year
Rafael Palmeiro - 12.6%
Dale Murphy - 14.5% (this is his final year of eligibility)
Don Mattingly - 17.8%
Mark McGwire - 19.5%
Larry Walker - 22.9%
Fred McGriff - 23.9%
Edgar Martinez - 36.5%
Alan Trammell - 36.8%
Tim Raines - 48.7%
Lee Smith - 50.6%
Jeff Bagwell - 56.0%
Jack Morris - 66.7%

A player must be named on 75% of the ballots to be enshrined.



I will post my votes later this morning.

[pair8head]

My prediction is nobody gets in this year.

[CaptainP]

This year, and for the next several years of balloting, it will boil down to one thing: How do you consider the PED-tainted candidates. Additionally, there are candidates that are being down-played because they played in that era, although they have never once been linked to PEDs (via the Mitchell Report, Canseco, Radomski, etc). Some candidates, Bonds & Clemens being the most prominent, are looked at as "already a Hall-Of-Famer before the steroids". But if you vote for them, how can you NOT vote for someone else? Can you justify putting in Bonds but not putting in Palmeiro? Palmeiro's numbers have rarely been equalled in baseball history. What about Bagwell? He was never accused of anything....but he was a power hitter during the steroid era, so he MUST HAVE, right? There is a cloud of uncertainty over all of it.

In most years, guys would lose votes for lack of likeability. This year is no different there...maybe more so. Bonds and Clemens were notorious jerks, and their vote totals (PEDs non-withstanding) could suffer for it. But what about Piazza? For some reason, people just never liked him. He was a poor defensive catcher, true. But he had the best offensive career for any catcher ever (even Johnny Bench). His numbers are borderline HOF for any position, so why do people put him down? Because he was a pretty-boy? Because he wasn't tough enough? Because he couldn't throw well?

In the end, the voters can only vote for 10 players on their ballots. There are probably 15 candidates that should get serious consideration. Here is who I would vote for:

First Timers
Sandy Alomar No. He'll hang around the ballot for a few years, but never get in.

Craig Biggio Yes. He should get in. 3000 hits, Gold Glove defense at multiple difficult positions, only player ever with 50 doubles/50 steals in a year. Will he get in this year? I'll call it 50/50. Personally, I HATE the "first-ballot/non-first-ballot" argument. He is or he isn't. But he'll suffer for it.

Barry Bonds Yes. It's a tough call, and in the end, it comes down to two things...some will say he was on a HOF path before the PEDs. True. Others will say that he was the best cheater in an era of cheaters. Also true. In the end, what sways me is the uncertainty of it all. NOBODY KNOWS what happened, and NOBODY KNOWS the actual effect. He was a great player before, and the cloud over the era actually helps him...because so many were doing it. I know, it's a tough stance to justify, but I couldn't come up with enough reasons to say, in my mind, that Barry Bonds wasn't one of the greatest players of all time...on the field.

Jeff Cirillo No. He'll drop off the ballot.

Royce Clayton No. He'll drop off the ballot.

Roger Clemens My arguements for Clemens are the exact same as they were for Bonds. To me, I'm even stronger in favor of Clemens, because of how dominant he was from the very beginning. His first full season in the league, he went 24-4 and started a string of dominance. Could he have been juicing already? Sure! Does anyone know? No. Best pitcher in an era with a lot of great pitchers (Maddux, Johnson, Pedro, Schilling, Glavine, Smoltz, and so on)

Jeff Conine No. He should drop off the ballot.

Steve Finley No. He'll get just enough votes to hang around the ballot for a couple of years but won't ever be a serious contender.

Julio Franco No. He will hang around for a few years, too. Ironic, since he hung around baseball for so long.

Shawn Green No. He should drop off the ballot...his period of greatness was only about 2 years.

Roberto Hernandez No. Personally, I give closers more credit than the actual voters tend to do. 326 saves is a good run, since closing is so difficult, probably the toughest job in baseball to be good at for a long time. But he falls short. I'd guess he could even drop off the ballot after 1 year, but he was good. Just not good enough for me.

Ryan Klesko No. He was good, but not great. The numbers just don't stack up.

Kenny Lofton No. A great example of the difference between an All-Star and a Hall-Of-Famer.

Jose Mesa No. See "Roberto Hernandez" above.

Mike Piazza Yes. I never liked Piazza. But I can't argue with his career. Greatest offensive catcher ever, with apologies to Johnny Bench. True, he was a terrible defender, who likely should have moved to another position while still in the minors. Do his numbers stack up as HOF if he's a left-fielder? Borderline....but he wasn't a LF, he was a catcher. In the end, the debate is moot, because he'd have likely played 15-20% more games as an OF. But you don't know how many. Add another 15% to his counting stats, and he's probalby a no-doubter. When he was playing, I always told myself he was overrated, but I can't argue with his career. He gets in.

Reggie Sanders No. He should drop off the ballot. Was also one of the biggest jackasses ever to play.

Curt Schilling No. This was a very tough one for me. He's close, and will likely get in at some point, but not this year. For me, it boils down to him having way too many mediocre years sprinkled in among his good years. Yes, DOMINANT in the post-season, but look at his run. Great from 92-93. He was 18-23 over the next 3 years. Then 3 good years. Then he was 22-24 over the next 3 seasons. 2 GREAT years followed. Then spent the rest of his career alternating bad years with good. (Good in '04 and '06, not in '03, '05, and '07). The inconsistancy keeps me from voting for him. I could have my mind changed, but of all of the pitchers who were considered dominant during that era, he is the low man on the totem pole to me.

Aaron Sele No. Should drop off ballot. Same as Shawn Green, only a couple of great years.

Sammy Sosa No. That may be hippocritical after voting for Bonds and Clemens, but Sosa has something on his resume that they don't have...he was CAUGHT cheating!!!! Remember the corked bat? Steroid debate aside, that stands out to me. Two-time loser.

Mike Stanton No. Until middle-relievers start going into the Hall, he'll never be in. Only spent a couple seasons as a closer, but was good for a long time. But not great. Not a HOFer.

Todd Walker No. Will drop off the ballot.

David Wells No. Gets extra credit in the media because he was a Yankees hero. But he's not a Hall candidate.

Woody Williams No. Some good years, but will drop off the ballot.

Rondell White No. Should drop off the ballot.



Holdovers
Bernie Williams - No. He's one of those guys that will spend 15 years on the ballot and never get in. Very good, but not a Hall-Of-Fame career.

Rafael Palmeiro - Yes, I'd vote for him. Viagra-boy pointed his finger at a camera, lied, and ruined his chances. Too bad, he should be in based on his on-field stats. Rarely equalled. The steroid cloud will keep him out until Bonds and Clemens find a way to get in, then he'll get more consideration. Meanwhile, he won't be in.

Dale Murphy - Yes. I'd vote for him. No he won't get in. He suffers because the steroid era started in between the time he retired and the time he became eligible for the hall. His career stats suffer in comparision. Jim Rice had the same problem, and finally got in. I don't think it'll happen for Murphy. Veterans committee, come on!!!

Don Mattingly - No. Very good, but not good enough for me.

Mark McGwire - Yes. Jon will criticize this pick because Mac did nothing but hit HRs (Jon thinks the HR should be banned). But steroids aside, nobody EVER hit them like he did. Remember, he hit 49 homers as a 185 pound rookie. Yes, he juiced. He started because he couldn't stay healthy. It may be inconsistant, but he was a wonder to watch. I'd vote for him, but he won't ever get in.

Larry Walker - No. A great career that falls just short. He'll hang around the ballot for a long time. His numbers were boosted by playing in Colorado, but he was a great hitter.

Fred McGriff - Yes. I don't get why he doesn't get more consideration. Because he was boring? He was one of the most consistent players of his era and his overall numbers seem to be Hall-worthy. You'd think the anti-PED crowd would appreciate him and vote for him, but he gets no respect.

Edgar Martinez - No. I'm not one of those who will discount his career because he was a DH. Hey, it's in the rules, don't blame him! I just think his numbers fall a little short...if a pure DH is going to be in, they need to be able to do more than he did. Yes, a .300 average, but he also only averaged 17 HRs per year. A little light.

Alan Trammell - No. He was very good, but another of those guys who look like the difference between an All-Star and a HOFer. Just not enough to be immortalized.

Tim Raines - Yes. I got talked into this one in his first year eligible. Will he get in, I doubt it. I think he should. 2nd greatest leadoff hitter of all time....808 steals, nearly 200 HRs. His average was just shy of .300. 2600 hits. Gold gloves. I hate the "first-ballot vs. non-first-ballot" argument, but he is that guy. Not an all-timer, but belongs in the discussion.

Lee Smith - 50.6% Yes. Retired as the all-time saves leader. For me, that's enough. He's still 3rd all-time. I think the Hall is unfair to closers.

Jeff Bagwell - 56.0% Yes. Why didn't he get in? Because he was a power hitter in the Bonds era. But Bags was never linked to steroids in any way. He hit 450 HRs and hit about .300. That used to be good enough. Why not now?

Jack Morris - 66.7% Yes. 2nd-to-last year on the ballot. I've gone back-and-forth on him. You could compare him to Schilling...who I didn't vote for. But Morris, while his overall numbers are a little less (3.90 ERA), he was so great in the post-season (like Schilling). But unlike Schilling, he never had those slumps that lasted for years. From 1979-1992, he won at least 15 games every non-strike year. He should go in...and has 2 chances left.

To sum up, I voted for:
Biggio
Bonds
Clemens
Piazza
Palmeiro
Murphy
McGwire
McGriff
Raines
Smith
Bagwell
Morris

That's 12 names. Voters can only vote for 10, so I need to whittle down my list. So I will use the PED issue to help there. Palmeiro and McGwire will come off of my list to get me down to 10. Next year, I will probably put them back on. This was a tough year, and we've all known it was coming. Results come out in a couple of hours...we'll see what happens!!!

[Wino you know]

Biggio
Piazza
Murphy
Raines
Smith
Morris
Bagwell
Edgar Martinez

Those are the ones I feel should be enshrined.

[LIPH]

I don't think Rafael Palmeiro should get in. Yes, if you look at the numbers he seems to be Hall-worthy. But there are too many "buts" for me. He played 20 years in the major leagues and only made 4 All-Star teams. He never won the MVP, he only had 3 top 10 finishes in 20 years. He never led the league in any major offensive category, although he did lead the league in doubles, hits and runs scored once each. He won the Gold Glove 3 times but one of those was in a year when he was an almost full time DH, he only played 28 games at first base. He was a real good player who put up big numbers because he played a long time but in my opinion he wasn't a great player.

[CaptainP]

I don't think Rafael Palmeiro should get in. Yes, if you look at the numbers he seems to be Hall-worthy. But there are too many "buts" for me. He played 20 years in the major leagues and only made 4 All-Star teams. He never won the MVP, he only had 3 top 10 finishes in 20 years. He never led the league in any major offensive category, although he did lead the league in doubles, hits and runs scored once each. He won the Gold Glove 3 times but one of those was in a year when he was an almost full time DH, he only played 28 games at first base. He was a real good player who put up big numbers because he played a long time but in my opinion he wasn't a great player.

Do you also belive that Phil Niekro and Don Sutton should not be in? They were compliers who only reached 300 wins because they pitched for so long.

[CaptainP]

I have seen projections saying that NOBODY will get in.
I have also seen a projection saying that only Biggio will get in.

I'm more interested in the vote percentages than anything this year. It'll define what happens in subsequent years.

[LIPH]

I don't think Rafael Palmeiro should get in. Yes, if you look at the numbers he seems to be Hall-worthy. But there are too many "buts" for me. He played 20 years in the major leagues and only made 4 All-Star teams. He never won the MVP, he only had 3 top 10 finishes in 20 years. He never led the league in any major offensive category, although he did lead the league in doubles, hits and runs scored once each. He won the Gold Glove 3 times but one of those was in a year when he was an almost full time DH, he only played 28 games at first base. He was a real good player who put up big numbers because he played a long time but in my opinion he wasn't a great player.

Do you also belive that Phil Niekro and Don Sutton should not be in? They were compliers who only reached 300 wins because they pitched for so long.

A contrarian like me can make an argument for neither one of them being Hall of Fame caliber. 300 wins is a magic number for Hall voters, just like 500 home runs, but there's more to their numbers than just those 300 wins. Neikro had three 20 win seasons, and two 20 loss seasons, only 5 All-Star teams and no Cy Youngs in 24 years. He has the 5th most losses in major league history. His average record was 14-12. Sutton had one 20 win season, 4 All-Star teams and no Cy Youngs in 23 years. He has the 7th most losses in major league history. His average record was 14-11. I realize in today's game a 14-11 record would probably get someone a $15 million average salary but it's pretty mediocre.

[CaptainP]

I don't think Rafael Palmeiro should get in. Yes, if you look at the numbers he seems to be Hall-worthy. But there are too many "buts" for me. He played 20 years in the major leagues and only made 4 All-Star teams. He never won the MVP, he only had 3 top 10 finishes in 20 years. He never led the league in any major offensive category, although he did lead the league in doubles, hits and runs scored once each. He won the Gold Glove 3 times but one of those was in a year when he was an almost full time DH, he only played 28 games at first base. He was a real good player who put up big numbers because he played a long time but in my opinion he wasn't a great player.

Do you also belive that Phil Niekro and Don Sutton should not be in? They were compliers who only reached 300 wins because they pitched for so long.

A contrarian like me can make an argument for neither one of them being Hall of Fame caliber. 300 wins is a magic number for Hall voters, just like 500 home runs, but there's more to their numbers than just those 300 wins. Neikro had three 20 win seasons, and two 20 loss seasons, only 5 All-Star teams and no Cy Youngs in 24 years. He has the 5th most losses in major league history. His average record was 14-12. Sutton had one 20 win season, 4 All-Star teams and no Cy Youngs in 23 years. He has the 7th most losses in major league history. His average record was 14-11. I realize in today's game a 14-11 record would probably get someone a $15 million average salary but it's pretty mediocre.

A counter argument could be made that they were good enough to keep getting jobs. For 24 and 23 years, someone thought they were good enough to win them games...and they were right. It's the argument against compilers. But not many people have been good for long enough to put up those numbers. In Palmeiro's case, how many have 3000 hits and 500 HRs?

[LIPH]

But does being "good enough to keep getting jobs" mean they were great players? The Hall should be for great players, not just guys who were better than average for a long time.

As for Palmeiro, a lot of his big power numbers came in his mid-to-late 30s, when he was juicing. Or at least when everybody thinks he was juicing. That's another reason not to vote for him.

[pair8head]

Edgar Martinez - No. I'm not one of those who will discount his career because he was a DH. Hey, it's in the rules, don't blame him! I just think his numbers fall a little short...if a pure DH is going to be in, they need to be able to do more than he did. Yes, a .300 average, but he also only averaged 17 HRs per year. A little light.

As for Edgar a lot can be said for him. Most noteworthy of which would be the fact that the "Outstanding Designated Hitter Award" bares his name.

Edgar Martinez Award / Outstanding Designated Hitter Award

The Outstanding Designated Hitter Award was given each year by members of the Associated Press who are beat writers, broadcasters, and public relations directors. The award was given out during the first year of the designated hitter and has been an annual tradition ever since.

In 2000 the award was discontinued by the Associated Press, but picked up by the Baseball Writers Association where it continued & prospered. In 2004 the award was renamed the Edgar Martinez Outstanding Designated Hitter Award in honor of DH extraordinaire Edgard Martinez who announced his retirement at the end of the regular season.

[CaptainP]

Edgar Martinez - No. I'm not one of those who will discount his career because he was a DH. Hey, it's in the rules, don't blame him! I just think his numbers fall a little short...if a pure DH is going to be in, they need to be able to do more than he did. Yes, a .300 average, but he also only averaged 17 HRs per year. A little light.

As for Edgar a lot can be said for him. Most noteworthy of which would be the fact that the "Outstanding Designated Hitter Award" bares his name.

Edgar Martinez Award / Outstanding Designated Hitter Award

The Outstanding Designated Hitter Award was given each year by members of the Associated Press who are beat writers, broadcasters, and public relations directors. The award was given out during the first year of the designated hitter and has been an annual tradition ever since.

In 2000 the award was discontinued by the Associated Press, but picked up by the Baseball Writers Association where it continued & prospered. In 2004 the award was renamed the Edgar Martinez Outstanding Designated Hitter Award in honor of DH extraordinaire Edgard Martinez who announced his retirement at the end of the regular season.

True. But I am comparing him to other HITTERS. His primary, in fact only, job was to hit. And he did it well, but not better than a lot of guys who are being kept out.

[CaptainP]

But does being "good enough to keep getting jobs" mean they were great players? The Hall should be for great players, not just guys who were better than average for a long time.

As for Palmeiro, a lot of his big power numbers came in his mid-to-late 30s, when he was juicing. Or at least when everybody thinks he was juicing. That's another reason not to vote for him.

It was the viagra.

[CaptainP]

One thing to keep in mind. The HALL OF FAME, as an institution, is nothing more than a museum. It is there to display the history of baseball, and the significant moments from it.

The VOTERS have taken it upon themselves to become the Moral Compass of the HOF.

[CaptainP]

And the winners are:

NOBODY!!!!

Nobody was elected

[oph]

No Players Elected for First Time Since 1996

A winning candidate did not emerge from the Hall of Fame balloting conducted by the Baseball Writers’ Association of America and verified by Ernst & Young. There were 569 ballots cast, the third highest total in the history of the voting, but none of the 37 candidates in the 2013 vote gained mention on the required 75 percent for election to the National Baseball Hall of Fame.

Complete BBWAA Announcement

[oph]

the following players did not make the required number of votes to stay on the ballot:
Bernie Williams -19 (3.3%), Kenny Lofton - 18 (3.2%), Sandy Alomar Jr. - 16 (2.8%),
Julio Franco - 6 (1.1%), David Wells - 5 (0.9%), Steve Finley - 4 (0.7%), Shawn Green - 2 (0.4%)
Aaron Sele - 1 (0.2%), Jeff Cirillo - 0 (0%), Royce Clayton - 0 (0%), Jeff Conine - 0 (0%)
Roberto Hernandez - 0 (0%), Ryan Klesko - 0 (0%), Jose Mesa - 0 (0%), Reggie Sanders - 0 (0%)
Mike Stanton - 0 (0%), Todd Walker - 0 (0%), Rondell White - 0 (0%), Woody Williams - 0 (0%)

[CaptainP]

I find it interesting that Clemens got more votes than Bonds. I would think that anyone who was for Bonds would have been for Clemens, and visa-versa. Their HOF cases were practically identical.

[CaptainP]

I also wonder about the voter who gave Aaron Sele a vote!

[ragtopW]

Mike Piazza Yes. I never liked Piazza. But I can't argue with his career. Greatest offensive catcher ever, with apologies to Johnny Bench. True, he was a terrible defender, who likely should have moved to another position while still in the minors. Do his numbers stack up as HOF if he's a left-fielder? Borderline....but he wasn't a LF, he was a catcher. In the end, the debate is moot, because he'd have likely played 15-20% more games as an OF. But you don't know how many. Add another 15% to his counting stats, and he's probalby a no-doubter. When he was playing, I always told myself he was overrated, but I can't argue with his career. He gets in.


A he was a Dodger so he never gets my vote..
B. not from me: (see A) but don't you think the rumors on why he left LA might be the reason he get's snubbed?