2011 Hall of Fame Ballot

[ashie62]

oh dear...

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Can someone in the Palmeiro camp make his case for me? Very good for a while, with nice counting stats... but at an offensively-loaded position, in a very offensively-loaded era, and with little else to recommend him (yes, he's got Gold Gloves... but he was no great fielder; no other outstanding positive asterisks, either). He seems borderline at best even before one takes potential heavy PED use into account.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Seemed to have modest Keith Hernadez-y power at the start of his career and then WHAMMO!

[G-Fafif]

If someone handed me a ballot with John Olerud's name on it (for anything, not just baseball), I'd have a very hard time not placing next to it:

� A check mark
� A smiley face (adorned with hard hat)
� And an aaahhh...

It's the same principle that would likely keep me from ever voting for Roberto Alomar, except the pleasant inverse.

I'd also be the guy who throws one vote Lenny Harris's way in deference to pinch-hitters everywhere.

The rest, personally, is que sera, sera territory.

By the way, I thought the waiting period was five years, yet Franco, Leiter and Olerud were all Mets about five minutes ago. What the hell?

[Gwreck]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Can someone in the Palmeiro camp make his case for me? Very good for a while, with nice counting stats... but at an offensively-loaded position, in a very offensively-loaded era, and with little else to recommend him (yes, he's got Gold Gloves... but he was no great fielder; no other outstanding positive asterisks, either). He seems borderline at best even before one takes potential heavy PED use into account.

Palmeiro is not a "potential" PED user; he was caught and suspended. But let's leave that aside for the time being.

No doubt his "counting stats" are his main asset but I am hesitant to attach a negative connotation to them. His career WAR and career OPS+ aren't at the top of the career leaderboard, but they also aren't out of line with other HOF players (and not just the borderline ones, either).

As for those counting stats, they are impressive. Perhaps less so in the context of the era, but he's still at the top of the heap and I do think that playing at a high level for a long time means something.

---
Now, as for how he was able to play well for so long? I'm quite sure that will keep him out of the HOF.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Did Prince just exclude John Franco from the Hall? Not that there's anything wrong with excluding John, but I figured that if it's up to Prince, Matt Franco and Julio Franco also get in.

Put me down for one more smiley for Olerud.

[G-Fafif]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Did Prince just exclude John Franco from the Hall? Not that there's anything wrong with excluding John, but I figured that if it's up to Prince, Matt Franco and Julio Franco also get in. Put me down for one more smiley for Olerud.

John Franco got two John Franco Days already. Anything else would be anticlimax.

[Vic Sage]

Can someone in the Palmeiro camp make his case for me? Very good for a while, with nice counting stats... but at an offensively-loaded position, in a very offensively-loaded era, and with little else to recommend him (yes, he's got Gold Gloves... but he was no great fielder; no other outstanding positive asterisks, either). He seems borderline at best even before one takes potential heavy PED use into account.

from Baseball reference:

Gray Ink = 183 (Average HOFer ? 144)
Hall of Fame Monitor = 178 (Likely HOFer ? 100)
Hall of Fame Standards = 57 (Average HOFer ? 50)

Similar Batters:
Frank Robinson (887) *
Eddie Murray (885) *
Ken Griffey (861)
Dave Winfield (836) *
Reggie Jackson (825) *
Gary Sheffield (821)
Mel Ott (812) *
Manny Ramirez (788)
Al Kaline (787) *
Fred McGriff (776)

* - Signifies Hall of Famer

I don't know, these different rankings seem to indicate a clear-cut HOFer to me.

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

Fairly or not, Palmiero is gonna get more scrutiny than most for the roids thing for at least 2 reasons:

1) His physical transformation from his 97-pound weakling Cubs rookie days was as dramatic as any except maybe Bonds'

2) He literally was a spokesman for "performance enhancement" with that whole Viagra thing, and when combined with the Mitchell revelations, really paints him as less of a man in so many ways.

I think he has no shot till after most voters of today are dead and buried.

[metirish]

Alomar for me is a HOF....

Can one vote in say Bagwell but not Walker?

[G-Fafif]

metirish wrote: Can one vote in say Bagwell but not Walker?

Only if you want Larry Walker to fix you with the evil eye.

[seawolf17]

Walker's painted with the Colorado brush, apparently. Todd Helton's going to run into that too someday.

I have a hard time with big slugging first basemen and the Hall. The "fear" factor is important to me; I don't know that I was ever afraid of Rafael Palmeiro in a big spot, or even Bagwell for that matter. Walker? Yes.

There is ZERO chance Palmeiro ever gets within sniffing distance of 75% of the voting population.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

metirish wrote: Alomar for me is a HOF.... Can one vote in say Bagwell but not Walker?

Tasty 7-year peak (with 1994-- 39 HR, .750 slugging, and a ridiculous 300 TB in 400 AB-- as the peak of that), with 6-7 nice years as bookends before his injury-riddled victory lap.

Walker was almost as nice for mini-stretches, and put up 2-3 years that rival Bagwell's '94... but the injuries (in a career three years longer than Bagwell, he put up almost a thousand fewer PAs) and the fact that all of his peak took place in pre-humidor Coors make it real tough to take those numbers seriously, don't they?

Bagwell had a better career OBP (.408 to .400), and put up similar Isolated Power numbers (.252 to ..243) in a less-run-friendly environment. I think it's close, but Bags is on the right side of the borderline in my mind.

[Guest Edgy DC]

seawolf17 wrote: I have a hard time with big slugging first basemen and the Hall. The "fear" factor is important to me; I don't know that I was ever afraid of Rafael Palmeiro in a big spot, or even Bagwell for that matter. Walker? Yes.

Well, to be fair, he only played 10 games against the Mets after he left the Cubs in the 1988-1989 offseason.

How do folks feel about Gallaraga?

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Nice guy. Shook my hand once at the Vet. Manos de carne, lemmetellya.

I have him on the Tony Perez shelf. And Tony Perez isn't a HOFer in my mind.

[G-Fafif]

Saw him hit a homer off Pulsipher (in his second go-round) that I swear flew by me from my seat in the first row of Mezzanine.

He was invited to Omar's first Spring Training and then retired as not quite a Met.

Regarding HOF, he scared the hell out of me. I'd have put him in the Hall just to get him out of the batter's box.

[batmagadanleadoff]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: and the fact that all of his peak took place in pre-humidor Coors make it real tough to take those numbers seriously, don't they?

I wouldn't vote for a pre-humidor Rockie unless his unadjusted numbers rivaled Willie Mays'.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I wrote a letter to him that spring.

Dear Mr. Gallaraga, You've been in the league for 20 years and only now, that you've been invite to spring training for my favorite team, do I realize how shockingly enormous your arms are. It's simply unsettling. I wake up scared to know your arms are even out there somewhere. Please don't hurt me. Love, Edgy

[Guest Edgy DC]

Oh no, somebody got him angry.

[Frayed Knot]

The consensus of most baseball folks is that of course McGwire deserves to be in *If Not For* ... -- while Bagwell is going to be looked at more cautiously by many and outright dismissed by some.

But if I were to offer you an exact clone of each - meaning you get the same strengths, same weaknesses, same injury histories, same career length, etc. - and say he's your starting 1B for the rest of his career, who would you take?

The only stats McGwire leads in are HRs & SLG.
Bags racked up ~1,700 more PAs & ABs, 700 more hits, 350 more runs scored, nearly doubled Big Mac in doubles while triples & SBs weren't even a contest.
He walked more (even IWs!), struck out less, and had advantages in BA (35 pts) and OBA (14 pts) - and then we can throw in the edges in fielding (huge) and base-running (also real big - above and beyond just the SBs).


I've been of the opinion for many years now that I'd prefer to have Jeff Bagwell v2.0 than the McGwire clone and I'd have a hard time thinking that my HoF ballot would be any different. Not that you can't say 'Both' or 'Neither' in an HoF ballot as opposed to the 'one or the other' choice in this hypothetical exercise, but I'd certainly list Bagwell before I'd list the big redhead and that's without even throwing the steroids thing into the vat.

[Guest Edgy DC]

Saves of Baseball
McGwire 1
Bagwell 0

[metirish]

More Annoying

Big Mac fist pumps

Killer Bees music

Bees?

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Bagwell had a theme song?

What, did he and Biggio wrestle at VAs for extra cash on the weekends?

[seawolf17]

Jumpin' Jim Bronzell and B. Brian Blair! Good times in the old WWF days.

[Valadius]

Well, I'm not content to just let this thread slide off the front page.

I'm willing to defend Larry Walker's Hall credentials up and down. Yes, he played in Colorado during his most productive years, but unless you can prove there were steroids in the air at Coors Field, the altitude in Denver is as much a part of baseball as the Green Monster, the wind in Candlestick Park, or the Astrodome. It's a ballpark feature. Deal with it.

The fact is, Larry Walker was a pretty complete player. He hit for average, he hit for power, he was a very good right fielder (check his range factor numbers and assists), and he even knew how to steal a base. Yes, injuries hurt him. Yes, he walked away from baseball without all his counting stats in order at the age of 38. But as I look back on it, there wasn't a hitter I personally feared more in the late '90s in the National League than Larry Walker. He's a Hall of Famer in my book.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

So, in essence, he's Dave Parker minus the drug problem, playing in the run-inflation capital of a run-inflation era.

[batmagadanleadoff]

Plus, him and his Coors screwed Piazza out of an MVP. Okay ... so it was the Chavez Ravine Piazza. Still. Screw Larry.

[Frayed Knot]

... the altitude in Denver is as much a part of baseball as the Green Monster, the wind in Candlestick Park, or the Astrodome. It's a ballpark feature. Deal with it.

Bringing the Coors Field effect into the discussion IS dealing with it.
That doesn't mean his accomplishments should be dismissed on account of where he played, only that they should be examined as to the context.

[Guest The Second Spitter]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: and the fact that all of his peak took place in pre-humidor Coors make it real tough to take those numbers seriously, don't they? I wouldn't vote for a pre-humidor Rockie unless his unadjusted numbers rivaled Willie Mays'.

I don't know. Personally I'm disinclined to attribute Helton's pre-humidor doubles numbers to the Mile-High club.

[Guest Edgy DC]

I don't get it. The math is in place to adjust the numbers accordingly, and it's easy enough to use. We shouldn't be arguing in 2010 whether to embrace the numbers at face value or throw them out entirely.