Hall of Fame Ballot

[Ceetar]

i mean, WAR is an estimate and relievers are the kings of small samples.

I feel like once you've accumulated a careers worth though, it's at least fairly useful. noise balances out, etc.

[metsmarathon]

yeah, i'm willing to back off on the above. a bit.

i think the difference in their WAR is most likely due to playing time. and if i scale wagner's career WAR to hoffmans same IP, then i get about 29 WAR for wagner. meaning he was more dominant for the amount that he played than was hoffman.

wagner has the third lowest ERA+ of any reliever ever, behind only mariano and kimbrel, and better than current notables kenley jansen and aroldis chapman. he's sixth in career saves, though its likely the three players immediately ahead of him never sniff the hall. lee smith, k-rod, and john franco.

i guess if i was compiling a list of the best relievers ever, wagner would be near the top. might probably be ahead of hoffman (who has a higher WPA, btw). i just don't know where the cut line is on my list for then making the hall of fame.

[Vic Sage]

A reliever has the same problem a DH has when considering HOF credentials, in that they're specialists whose roles require greater contextualization in order to evaluate them. But i think its absurd that some voters think that, because they're specialists, they don't deserve HOF consideration at all. First, they didn't necessarily choose their roles. Secondly, the presumption that they couldn't perform just as well as players with more generalized roles is just that... a presumption. In any event, you don't get to evaluate their credentials based on what you think they would have failed to do in another role. Of course, nor do they get credit for those roles they did NOT perform, so a DH doesn't have his defensive ability to weigh in his favor, and his bat has to carry the whole load. That being said, Edgar Martinez's bat DID carry the load. And a reliever doesn't have the IPs that a starter has, so they have to be even more dominant in their roles than a SP to earn consideration, like Mariano. But to rule them out entirely? Voters making up those sorts of rules for themselves should be stripped of their vote. Same with those voters who won't vote for more than a few candidates in a year because they refuse to consider each player on their own merits but have made up an arbitrary numerical definition of greatness that precludes them from voting for more than 2 or 3 guys. The PED thing is a separate matter, because the criteria for HOF selection does include a "character" element, regardless of how its been exercised in the past.

[HahnSolo]

I can be convinced that Hoffman may have been better than Wagner, but not as big of a gap as 78% to 9% would indicate.

[Edgy MD]

It's just my impression, but Hoffman may have made a few more friends along the way, with Wagner alienating folks in both Philly and New York.

Hoffman's brand also gets some helium from spending 16 years with one team, while Wagner was more of a hired gun.

[Guest 41Forever]

Retired Mercury News columnist Mark Purdy Tweets:

Mark Purdy ‏ Top candidates are on the ballot for 10 years. I vote for two or three per year. I don’t want 7 or 8 inductees each year like pro football. Small classes make Cooperstown the most elite HOF, IMO.

Votes for: Guerrero, Hoffman ... and Omar Vizquel?

Jim Thome's 600 homers don't make him worthy? At lease we know Chipper won't be unanimous.

[metsmarathon]

if all the voters would vote for who they actually thought merited enshrinement, just for like one or two years, the problem would go away all by itself, and we'd go right on with our small hall inductee classes after going through the correction.

[Guest Rockin' Doc]

I'm a rather stingy HOF voter. I think far too many people have been enshrined over the years. So I tend to vote for fewer players each year. I also have a personal bias against players that have been proven (or whom I strongly suspect) of having cheated to obtain their numbers. So as a result there is no Bonds or Clemens on my ballot. I respect other voters right to feel differently regarding this matter. With that said, I would vote for the following individuals if I had a vote.

Vladimir Guerrero
Jim Thome
Larry Walker
Chipper Jones
Trevor Hoffman

Close calls that I can see a case for are:
Mike Mussina
Fred McGriff
Edgar Martinez

[Guest 41Forever]

Today's ballot atrocity comes courtesy of Bill Ballou of the Nashua Telegram. He votes for five: Clemens, Bonds, Manny Ramierz, Chipper Jones and Vlad Guerrero.

Manny Ramierz and not Thome?

Some pearls of wisdom:

The Baseball Hall of Fame provides detailed background information on each candidate on each ballot for each season, and as a voter, I appreciate the effort. As a voter, I ignore it. The difference between Fame and Skill cannot be quantified. Either a player’s name hits me in the gut or does not, and no amount of research can change that.

The names of Bonds, Clemens and Ramirez have all been connected with PEDs. Ramirez actually was suspended for failing drug tests. I have explained at length my feelings on PEDs — I am not smart enough to parse the cheating. If it was OK for Gaylord Perry to break the rules and throw spitballs yet get into the Hall of Fame, why not PEDs? And what about the amphetamine users of the 1970s and ’80s? They didn’t grow muscles, but is it only cheating if it’s obvious?

I get more mail about Martinez than any other candidate, and he was a great player, no doubt. And yes, it’s not fair that David Ortiz got into so many more postseason games than did Martinez, and thus became larger than life. But that’s the Hall of Fame — larger than life, full of players who can fill a stadium just because they are in the lineup. Schilling? A stadium filler by the end of his career, but just not good enough over the length and breadth of that career. Thome? Reminds me of Sammy Sosa or Rafael Palmeiro. He was always one of the best, never the very best.

[nymr83]

Thome? Reminds me of Sammy Sosa or Rafael Palmeiro. He was always one of the best, never the very best

"one of the best" doesnt belong in the hall?

i bet he was a Morris voter too.

never of heard of Ballou before today, now i know to stop reading if i see his name in the byline.

[Vic Sage]

most of his points are dubious, but i agree with this one:

The names of Bonds, Clemens and Ramirez have all been connected with PEDs. Ramirez actually was suspended for failing drug tests. I have explained at length my feelings on PEDs — I am not smart enough to parse the cheating. If it was OK for Gaylord Perry to break the rules and throw spitballs yet get into the Hall of Fame, why not PEDs? And what about the amphetamine users of the 1970s and ’80s? They didn’t grow muscles, but is it only cheating if it’s obvious?

[Edgy MD]

Yeah, but it's rife with whataboutism. He may consider all competitive transgressions equal, but I don't think we should just take that at face value.

Some guys broke rules. Some guys have broken laws. Some have sworn back and forth on their honor that they weren't cheating while they were cheating like fiends. Some lied before Congress. Some maliciously slandered perfectly honorable folks.

Nuance, man. Nuance.

[Guest 41Forever]

Interesting perspective from Newsday's Jim Baumbach:

Jim Baumbach‏Verified account @jimbaumbach Abstained from voting in baseball Hall of Fame for 3rd straight year. Don't believe reporters should make news. (I do like getting ballot.)

I'm fine with this as long as his abstaining is not turning in a blank ballot. If he's turning in a blank ballot, then that is making news -- and hurting qualified candidates.

[Vic Sage]

Edgy MD wrote: Yeah, but it's rife with whataboutism. He may consider all competitive transgressions equal, but I don't think we should just take that at face value. Some guys broke rules. Some guys have broken laws. Some have sworn back and forth on their honor that they weren't cheating while they were cheating like fiends. Some lied before Congress. Some maliciously slandered perfectly honorable folks. Nuance, man. Nuance.

i agree that not all transgressions are created equal and one must make these independent assessments as a voter, without a blanket objection to anybody for any reason (including what position they played). I just think his point illustrates the hypocrisy surrounding the PEDS folks.

[Guest 41Forever]

Announced tonight, right?

I’m predicting Chipper, Thome and Vlad, with Hoffman falling just shy. Ballot tracker has Edgar at 80 percent. I don’t trust that, thinking old-timers who fon’t Post ballots don’t go for him and he falls just shy. Hope i’m wrong.

OE: The announcement is next week, Jan. 24. Oops.

[Guest 41Forever]

One more odd Hall of Fame ballot to digest and vent about. This one courtesy Jose de Jesus Ortiz of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/jose-de-jesus-ortiz/ortiz-integrity-and-character-matter-when-weighing-hof-vote/article_dc7d1422-176a-5b4f-b837-600878a334ee.html

Clemens, Guerrero, Hoffman, Kent, Martinez, McGriff, Mussina, Thome, Vizquel and Wagner.

So, Clemens but not Bonds? Thome but not Chipper?

He's basing votes around integrity and character.

The tide began to change significantly once Piazza, who was plagued by PED accusations throughout his career, was elected in the 2016 class. Then Ivan Rodriguez became the first player plagued by steroids allegations to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer in the 2017 class.

Was Piazza plagued throughout his career? Other than the infamous bacne incident later in his career, has there ever been anyone with credibility taking a shot at Piazza?

On Chipper, whom we as a group have no love for. His objection is based on offensive tweets.

But if you’re going to focus on character, Jones is quite lacking. “Y’all think if they took all them gators they trap in Fla and La and put them in the Rio Grande, it wud stop the illegals from crossing? Jk” Jones tweeted on June 8, 2013. Then on Feb. 6, 2015, Jones tweeted this gem: “So the FBI comes out and confirms that Sandy Hook was a hoax! Where is the outrage? What else are we being lied about? Waco? JFK? Pfff …” Many people die crossing the border in an attempt to find a better life in America. A man of character and integrity doesn’t dehumanize immigrants with jokes about migrants serving as gator bait. Jones eventually apologized for his truther tweet about the Sandy Hook massacre in which 20 children and six adults were killed. To be clear, Jones will not be the first despicable person inducted into the Hall of Fame, which already has inducted racists, spousal abusers and cheats in the past. As the trite saying goes, it’s the Hall of Fame not the Hall of Saints. Jones will cruise to induction based on his playing career, but his tweets show a tremendous lack of character and integrity, not to mention class.

And, on including Clemens but not Bonds:

I’ll consider character, integrity and Morgan’s request, so I’ll stop voting for Bonds this year. I’ll continue to vote for Clemens because he has done everything possible to clear his name, taking his fight all the way to the halls of Congress and then eventually to federal court, where he was acquitted on six counts of perjury. I’ll also continue to vote for Guerrero, Hoffman, Jeff Kent and Billy Wagner. I’ll add Mussina, Edgar Martinez, Fred McGriff, Jim Thome and Omar Vizquel. Walker barely missed the cut. Ramirez, Sosa and Sheffield fell short of the standards Morgan and several Hall of Famers have set in their request that we keep steroid cheats out.

[Edgy MD]

Well, he's being thoughtful, and trying to make nuanced distinctions. I'll give him that.

Clemens didn't take "his fight all the way to the halls of Congress." He was called there.

[metsmarathon]

this whole 10-person limit on the ballot irks me to no end.

in 1939, the MLB had 16 teams. we now have 30 teams. would it not make any sense to scale the number of ballot-spaces with the approximate size of the player pool, if not get rid of the limit outright?

and maybe then issue some guidance to the electorate that they should vote for anyone they think merits enshrinement, not simply those who they feel should be enshrined in that given year. becasue that's fucking ridiculous.

[metirish]

The numbers inside the bubble indicate what?, amount of voters??

[Edgy MD]

They should, yeah.

[Valadius]

Today's the day.

Here's the tracker through 239 votes (56.4% of the expected total):

Chipper Jones - 98.3%
Vladimir Guerrero - 95.0%
Jim Thome - 93.3%
Trevor Hoffman - 78.7%
Edgar Martinez -77.4%
Mike Mussina - 70.7%
Barry Bonds - 64.0%
Roger Clemens - 64.0%
Curt Schilling - 59.4%
Larry Walker - 38.5%
Omar Vizquel - 33.1%
Manny Ramirez - 22.2%
Fred McGriff - 19.2%
Jeff Kent - 13.4%
Scott Rolen - 12.6%
Sammy Sosa - 10.9%
Billy Wagner - 10.9%
Gary Sheffield - 10.5%
Andruw Jones - 5.4%
Johnny Damon - 1.3%
Johan Santana - 1.3%
Jamie Moyer - 0.8%
Hideki Matsui - 0.4%

I'm projecting a class of Jones, Guerrero, Thome, and Hoffman. Edgar would have to add twice as many new voters from the pool of votes we haven't seen yet as has from the votes that have already been made public in order to get over the hump. Guerrero needed 15 new votes and has gotten 44 so far; Hoffman needed 5 and has picked up 11. Edgar needs 73 and has picked up 25 with less than half the vote outstanding.

Next year's class could consist of Mariano Rivera, the late Roy Halladay, Edgar Martinez, and Mike Mussina. Other new names on the ballot include Todd Helton and Andy Pettitte.

[Vic Sage]

i don't think Hoffman or Edgar will make it. My feeling is that the more traditionalist voters will come in later (with the progressive voters having already put in their ballots so they could write about them and put forth their arguments), and they'll tend to overlook the value of relief pitchers and DHs, dragging down their percentage as we get down to the end. Just a hunch.

Chipper, Vlad, and Thome this year, methinks.

[nymr83]

Vic Sage wrote: i don't think Hoffman or Edgar will make it. My feeling is that the more traditionalist voters will come in later (with the progressive voters having already put in their ballots so they could write about them and put forth their arguments), and they'll tend to overlook the value of relief pitchers and DHs, dragging down their percentage as we get down to the end. Just a hunch. Chipper, Vlad, and Thome this year, methinks.

wouldn't it be the less traditional/more statistically oriented voters who put less value on relief pitchers and the bullshit Save stat?

[Valadius]

Nymr83 wrote: Vic Sage wrote: i don't think Hoffman or Edgar will make it. My feeling is that the more traditionalist voters will come in later (with the progressive voters having already put in their ballots so they could write about them and put forth their arguments), and they'll tend to overlook the value of relief pitchers and DHs, dragging down their percentage as we get down to the end. Just a hunch. Chipper, Vlad, and Thome this year, methinks. wouldn't it be the less traditional/more statistically oriented voters who put less value on relief pitchers and the bullshit Save stat?

This seems to be correct. Hoffman received a greater share of votes last year from people who didn't make their ballots public prior to the vote (older, more traditional voters) than among those who did. His percentage went up 1.3%. Assuming a largely stable electorate, we can expect a similar trend.

[Vic Sage]

Valadius wrote: Nymr83 wrote: Vic Sage wrote: i don't think Hoffman or Edgar will make it. My feeling is that the more traditionalist voters will come in later (with the progressive voters having already put in their ballots so they could write about them and put forth their arguments), and they'll tend to overlook the value of relief pitchers and DHs, dragging down their percentage as we get down to the end. Just a hunch. Chipper, Vlad, and Thome this year, methinks. wouldn't it be the less traditional/more statistically oriented voters who put less value on relief pitchers and the bullshit Save stat? This seems to be correct. Hoffman received a greater share of votes last year from people who didn't make their ballots public prior to the vote (older, more traditional voters) than among those who did. His percentage went up 1.3%. Assuming a largely stable electorate, we can expect a similar trend.

While i agree that Hoffman (specifically) has greater appeal to traditional voters, i think a greater appreciation of specialists exists among the more statistically-oriented voters. For example, they are more likely to vote for Wagner than Hoffman, and less likely to simply deem relievers and DHs irrelevant to HOF voting, as many traditionalists are wont to do.

[Guest 41Forever]

Chipper is the first named.

[Guest 41Forever]

Vlad is the second named!

[Guest 41Forever]

Jim Thome is the third named!

[Guest 41Forever]

Trevor Hoffman gets it!!!! That's four!

[Guest 41Forever]

And we're done. Looks like Edgar has to wait.