2012 Hall of Fame Ballot (Actual, As It Were)

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Jeff Bagwell
Jeromy Burnitz
Vinny Castilla
Juan Gonzalez
Brian Jordan
Barry Larkin
Javy Lopez
Edgar Martinez
Don Mattingly
Fred McGriff
Mark McGwire
Jack Morris
Bill Mueller
Terry Mulholland
Dale Murphy
Phil Nevin
Rafael Palmeiro
Brad Radke
Tim Raines
Tim Salmon
Ruben Sierra
Lee Smith
Alan Trammell
Larry Walker
Bernie Williams
Tony Womack
Eric Young

With the underwhelming crop of noobs (in bold), the scuttlebutt among the sportsscribblers is that it's a light ballot this year (well, yeah, it is-- no f*cking Fonzie). So it's likely now or never for Mr. Back-Pocket Coke Vial, Larkin, and the gang, with next year's tidal wave approaching.

My ballot: Bagwell, Larkin, Martinez, McGwire, Raines, Trammell.
My prediction: I'm thinking it's Larkin, with a 50-percent chance of Raines and/or Morris, with an outside shot at Bagwell.

[Frayed Knot]

Raines

[Vic Sage]

YES: Bagwell, Larkin, Martinez, Raines
YES, EXCEPT...: McGwire, Palmiero
BORDERLINE: Trammell, Morris, Murphy, Walker
CLOSE BUT NO CIGAR: Smith, Mattingly, McGriff, J-Gonz
FIVE PERCENTERS:Javy Lopez, Tim Salmon, Bernie Williams
ONE AND DONE: Jeromy Burnitz, Vinny Castilla, Brian Jordan, Bill Mueller, Terry Mulholland, Phil Nevin, Brad Radke, Ruben Sierra, Tony Womack, Eric Young

how much ya wanna bet we start getting MFY fan rationales for Bernie Williams?

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Morris borderline? Really?

Fess up, Sage-- you're a whore for the mnustache, ain'tcha?

[Guest John Cougar Lunchbucket]

I'm afraid to look up Williams because he'll probably turn out to be one of those guys who's closer than I'd be comfortable with a career MFY coming to HOFness, which means he's probably a first-balloter mocking Raines on the way in.

[Guest sharpie]

MFY love for Mattingly or even Paul O'Neill was greater than for Bernie and neither of those guys are in.

Bagwell
Raines
Larkin
Trammell

[Vic Sage]

Morris borderline? Really?

yeah, really.

i think he pitched well for a long time, but was rarely great. His ERA for his era was absolutely nothing special. He walked alot of guys and didn't have a great K/BB ratio. He was an accumulator more than a dominator and yet didn't hit any of the key milestones. But he's been on the ballot for over a decade and his vote count has increased from the 20% range to the 50% range, which is another indicator that "borderline" is the exactly appropriate label for his candidacy. In fact, i'd say it's generous and optimistic but possible. Voters are still suckers for "big wins".

[G-Fafif]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: no f*cking Fonzie

My very first thought. Well, at least he won't be stiffed come January.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

G-Fafif wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: no f*cking Fonzie My very first thought. Well, at least he won't be stiffed come January.

My thing is... Phil Nevin over Fonzie? Eric Young? Hell, poor-man's-Eric-Young TONY WOMACK over Fonzie?

[seawolf17]

I saw somewhere where Fonzie was on the ballot...?

Voting for six: Bagwell, Larkin, Morris, Murphy, Raines, Trammell.

[ashie62]

Larkin, McGwire, Morris, Bagwell.

[Fman99]

Bagwell
Martinez
McGwire
Palmeiro
Raines

[ashie62]

Fman99 wrote: Bagwell Martinez McGwire Palmeiro Raines

You certainly pumped up your list.

[Fman99]

Yeah I did. So these guys doped up in the 1990s. Guys in the 1950s got their edge from amphetamines. And Ty Cobb was totally fueled by Negro-hate juice. They were all ballers though.

[seawolf17]

seawolf17 wrote: I saw somewhere where Fonzie was on the ballot...? Voting for six: Bagwell, Larkin, Morris, Murphy, Raines, Trammell.

Seven. Add McGwire back in.

[bmfc1]

Larkin, Morris, Murphy, Raines, Trammell.

[Frayed Knot]

Vic Sage wrote: Morris borderline? Really? yeah, really. i think he pitched well for a long time, but was rarely great. His ERA for his era was absolutely nothing special. He walked alot of guys and didn't have a great K/BB ratio. He was an accumulator more than a dominator and yet didn't hit any of the key milestones. But he's been on the ballot for over a decade and his vote count has increased from the 20% range to the 50% range, which is another indicator that "borderline" is the exactly appropriate label for his candidacy. In fact, i'd say it's generous and optimistic but possible. Voters are still suckers for "big wins".

You know that all his peripheral (ie. non-W/L) numbers would have been better except that he pitched to the score all the time, don't you?

[Gwreck]

Larkin
Trammell
Raines
McGwire
Palmeiro
Martinez

[Edgy MD]

Jeff Bagwell
Barry Larkin
Edgar Martinez
Tim Raines
Alan Trammell

Got nothing against Murphy getting in. Kinda lingered a while over Javier Lopez too.

[Valadius]

Bagwell
Gonzalez
Larkin
Martinez
McGwire
Morris
Palmeiro
Raines
Trammell
Walker

[MFS62]

Larry Walker (similarity scores include 4 hall of famers - Klein, Mize, Dimaggio and Snider - good enough for me)
Lee Smith - yes the rules for saves may have been more lax. But he pitched more than one inning to earn many of his saves, and that extra effort earns him extra consideration in my book.
Allan Trammell - should have been voted in long ago.
Jeff Bagwell - no scandal? no failed drug tests? no brainer. And his highest similarity score is Carlos Delgado (along with Stargell and Cepeda). Bagwell's entry would make it easier for Carlos to get in.
Tim Raines - just a smidgen over the borderline, on the good side.

Not this year - Larkin. I know, I know, if he deserves to be in the Hall, then he should be in the Hall. But I'd let Larkin stew in his own juices until the injustice to Trammell has been rectified.

Later

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

1) Trammell's great, and deserves in. But you're punishing Larkin for being, what? Later, or better? He was both.

2) Okay, so Vic's predicting it, more than he is endorsing it. But the rest of youse guys? Morris? Are you sure you're not mistaking him for Dave Stieb? 'Cause he's not that guy. That guy was better. Morris is the guy who put up a 3.90 ERA during a pitchers' era, led the league in earned runs given up and walks but never in ERA or pitcher WAR, finished top-ten in HR allowed more often than he did in ERA, and is 50th in career IP but only 141st in career WAR.

[metsmarathon]

bagwell
*palmeiro
larkin
walker
martinez
trammell
raines
*mcgwire

[MFS62]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: 1) Trammell's great, and deserves in. But you're punishing Larkin for being, what? Later, or better? He was both.

Yes he was, But I'm not voting for him until Alan gets in. As Dennis Miller used to say, "That's just my opinion and, I may be wrong"

I'm also never going to vote for a player who was primarily a DH, as Edgar Martinez was. Maybe if the lords of baseball see that some of the best of those guys never garner many HOF votes, they'll do away with that silly rule. Probably won't happen, but its one of my baseball dreams.

Later

[metsmarathon]

i don't see how you can vote for lee smith but not edgar martinez.

[Edgy MD]

Yeah, I'd have to look closer, but I don't remember Smith as the paragon of the multi-inning save that you do. At least, not for the lion's share of his career.

[batmagadanleadoff]

What should be done if, say, Bagwell gets in on this ballot, and then it later becomes known that he was a steroid user? Just askin'. I'd vote for him if I had a vote. And Raines, Larkin, Trammell and Martinez the DH.

[HahnSolo]

batmagadanleadoff wrote: What should be done if, say, Bagwell gets in on this ballot, and then it later becomes known that he was a steroid user? Just askin'. I'd vote for him if I had a vote. And Raines, Larkin, Trammell and Martinez the DH.

I don't know what would be done (probably nothing). I bet that's what a lot of voters are thinking, so I would be unsurprised if Bagwell didn't get in at least this year.

And I'm with you 100% on who you'd put in.

[Edgy MD]

I guess it would become harder to justify withholding votes from those known steroid abusers on the outside.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

MFS62 wrote: LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: 1) Trammell's great, and deserves in. But you're punishing Larkin for being, what? Later, or better? He was both. Yes he was, But I'm not voting for him until Alan gets in. As Dennis Miller used to say, "That's just my opinion and, I may be wrong"

By that logic, you should withhold your vote for Smith until the Vet Committee puts in Quisenberry (who WAS the dominant, multi-inning guy you're thinking of).