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

[G-Fafif]

Rey O needed one more year to qualify for consideration, so we have to let that one go, but the rest is clearly the same insidious anti-Mets bias that failed to acknowledge Ron Hodges's dozen seasons of yeoman backuppery.

And what is it the Hall of Fame has against Hodgeses anyway?

[batmagadanleadoff]

Other first time HOF eligible Mets who, like Ron Hodges, were excluded from the 1990 ballot:

Pete Falcone
Mike Vail
Craig Swan
Jerry Martin

First time HOF eligible Mets who did appear on the 1990 ballot:

Tug McGraw - 6 votes, 1.4% of the vote; one and done
John Stearns - no votes
Ken Singleton - no votes
Amos Otis - no votes
Mike Torrez - one vote; one and done

[Edgy MD]

Joe F. Sambito, 11 seasons, hammered down a 3.03 ERA, All Star appearance, drank from the MVP cup in 1979, fifth in Cy Young voting in 1980, appeared in four different post-season series, but, you guessed it, no ballot appearances.

[nymr83]

And none of these guys even deserve discussion for the hall, but the point still remains that many are much better than Tony Womack... Do guys like Womack just have a friend who can get their name on the ballot for fun? who knows!

[metsmarathon]

did womack get on the ballot for leading the league in stolen bases? does black ink get you on automatically?

[metirish]

KeithOlbermann Veterans Committee elects Ron Santo!

[seawolf17]

metirish wrote: KeithOlbermann Veterans Committee elects Ron Santo!

They named the Veterans Committee after Keith Olbermann?!?!

[metirish]

KeithOlbermann

12 votes needed: Santo 15, Kaat 10, Hodges 9, Minoso 9, Oliva 8, others less than 3 each #Hall of Fame

[metsmarathon]

well, at least they got santo right.

[Edgy MD]

Kaat's kind of astonishing, no? I figured this was a three-man race among Hodges, Oliva, and Santo, with Minoso expected to be a respectable fourth. I'm disappointed in Hodges counted out, but I can accept an argument that places him behind Santo and Oliva.

But Kaat?

[seawolf17]

Edgy DC wrote: Kaat's kind of astonishing, no? I figured this was a three-man race among Hodges, Oliva, and Santo, with Minoso expected to be a respectable fourth. I'm disappointed in Hodges counted out, but I can accept an argument that places him behind Santo and Oliva. But Kaat?

Kaat even came out himself and said he wasn't a HoFer; referred to himself as a number-three starter.

[metsmarathon]

except in 1969, his first year on the ballot, no player who drew more HOF votes than gil hodges failed to eventually make the hall.

[stevejrogers]

seawolf17 wrote: Edgy DC wrote: Kaat's kind of astonishing, no? I figured this was a three-man race among Hodges, Oliva, and Santo, with Minoso expected to be a respectable fourth. I'm disappointed in Hodges counted out, but I can accept an argument that places him behind Santo and Oliva. But Kaat? Kaat even came out himself and said he wasn't a HoFer; referred to himself as a number-three starter.

Kaat has a ton of MFY friends in the right low places (Kay for example). Especially using the "same or lesser" arguments with guys like Sutton, Niekro, Blyleven, etc

[metsmarathon]

SteveJRogers wrote: seawolf17 wrote: Edgy DC wrote: Kaat's kind of astonishing, no? I figured this was a three-man race among Hodges, Oliva, and Santo, with Minoso expected to be a respectable fourth. I'm disappointed in Hodges counted out, but I can accept an argument that places him behind Santo and Oliva. But Kaat? Kaat even came out himself and said he wasn't a HoFer; referred to himself as a number-three starter. Kaat has a ton of MFY friends in the right low places (Kay for example). Especially using the "same or lesser" arguments with guys like Sutton, Niekro, Blyleven, etc

don sutton 70.8 career WAR, 17.1 3 yr peak
phil niekro 96.8 career WAR, 24.3 3 yr peak
blyleven 90.1 career WAR, 22.2 3 yr peak
jim kaat 41.2 career WAR, 16.3 3 yr peak

think about that. 40% of his value over his 25 year career came in that 3 year stretch. h

[seawolf17]

SteveJRogers wrote: Kaat has a ton of MFY friends in the right low places (Kay for example). Especially using the "same or lesser" arguments with guys like Sutton, Niekro, Blyleven, etc

Michael Kay is on the veterans' committee?!?!?!

[stevejrogers]

seawolf17 wrote: SteveJRogers wrote: Kaat has a ton of MFY friends in the right low places (Kay for example). Especially using the "same or lesser" arguments with guys like Sutton, Niekro, Blyleven, etc Michael Kay is on the veterans' committee?!?!?!

No, but get enough people like Kay, Madden, etc in the media hammering the points, that starts planting seeds of "hey, maybe this guy is worth more looks"

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Tracking early returns at Baseball Think Factory.

Nice trending for Larkin, Raines, and Trammell, even... not so for Walker and Martinez and Williams.

[Valadius]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: Tracking early returns at Baseball Think Factory. Nice trending for Larkin, Raines, and Trammell, even... not so for Walker and Martinez and Williams.

Every single year I forget about this and then follow it obsessively once it's brought to my attention.

On another note, I'm so used to seeing Dave Parker on the ballot alongside Dale Murphy, but last year was his 15th on the ballot.

[Edgy MD]

You know, seeing Jack Morris at 63%, I challenge the voters who like his win-loss record (because the statistical argument for him begins and ends there) to ask themselves if maybe he didn't win so many games largely because he was backed through so much of his career by such a wonderful offense/defense combo a second and short, and maybe those guys are the ones you should really be looking at.

[seawolf17]

The more I look at Morris, the more meh I am. I've always been so confident he's a yes, but maybe not.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Jack Morris' career ERA: 3.90
League-average ERA during that time: 3.91

He's a durable guy who pitched pretty well for some very good teams, and had some of his biggest moments on a big stage; IOW, he's a scowling, mustached Suppan with slightly better counting stats.

[nymr83]

I don't think Morris is even close to being HOF-worthy, I'm amazed he's managed to stay on the ballot this long (well, not too amazed, the writers are pretty ignorant), and I hope he finally gets booted off over the next few years when Maddux, Glavine, Johnson, Smoltz, Schilling, and Clemens show up (all clearly better than him.). I don't know when they retired but I'd take Mike Mussina and Kevin Brown over him as well. Maybe even Al Leiter (better peak)

[Edgy MD]

The thing he has going for him is "Most Wins in the 80s" on his calling card. It plays into the hands of those who value wins by pitchers as a trump card over general effectiveness by pitchers, and fall into the very human tendency of viewing history in 10-year blocks.

I'm sure Kevin Brown's case would be much stronger if somebody ranked the top winners from 1992-2001, or Ron Guidry's if you framed it 1977-1986. But that's just as artificial a construct.

[Edgy MD]

Larkin smashing the field. Juan Gonzalez looking at taking his two MVPs, 434 homers, and 1404 RBIs and going home.

http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/files/newsstand/discussion/2012_hall_of_fame_ballot_collecting_gizmo/P100/

[metirish]

Dumb question but........if Larkin wasn't a HOF player last year why is he this year?, providing he gets in of course.

In 2010, his first year of eligibility for the Hall of Fame, Larkin was not elected, garnering 51.6 percent of the vote[7] (75 percent is needed for election). In 2011, he received 62.1 percent of the vote,[8] the highest of non-inducted players and third overall. He is considered the top candidate to the Hall of Fame Class of 2012.[9] He will remain eligible to be inducted by the Baseball Writers' Association until 2024. .

and what would account for such an increase in needed votes?

[nymr83]

AdamRubin on twitter says Bagwell, Larkin, Murphy,Morris.

I think that's a TERRIBLE ballot with two guys who don't belong in and ommitting Raines and Trammell. I'm not (yet) an advocate of Edgar Martinez, but I'd take him over Murphy as well

[Edgy MD]

metirish wrote: Dumb question but........if Larkin wasn't a HOF player last year why is he this year?, providing he gets in of course.

My answer would be: because perspectives evolve and arguments get made in one year that get absorbed in a subsequent year. Tough questions take a while to discuss and chew on.

A simpler answer would be because he looks better compared to this group than to others.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Bagwell and Raines are headed the right way. And the talk around Raines in public fora (voting and non-voting alike) seems to sound a little to me like the Blyleven talk of the last few years.

[Guest sharpie]

Larkin by hisself.

[Frayed Knot]

LARKIN ... and him alone.