Mike & The Mikettes: 2014 HOF Ballot

[Edgy MD]

Well, it's both --- a morality issue and an integrity issue. And of course they're intertwined. The case that "we can't trust these numbers" is certainly made.

I'm not sure which ineffective steroids users you're suggesting are getting a pass.

[nymr83]

Almost all of the arguments I see advancing Morris' case are of the cherrypicking variety; "he was the best at X from arbitrary date A until arbitrary point B" seems to be the most common, which proves only that better pitchers' careers that overlapped with his didn't exactly overlap. but when compared to inducted HOF starters and past near misses his career numbers fall in with the near misses. so the argument for Morris really has to be a lowering of the bar and the opinion that there are another 20+ starters who should have gotten in but didnt.

i happen to thing the overall level of HOFers is about right, despite misses on both sides of hte bar (Tony Perez in, Alan Trammell out)

[Frayed Knot]

Back to Chass for a minute and his disavowal of any player with tenuous or even rumored steroid connections; it all reminds me of former pitcher Tom House talking about how he and several other early '70s Atlanta Braves were taking all kinds of stuff saying that "performance-enhancing drugs were widespread in baseball in the 1960s and 1970s" and that they were taking 'amphetamines, human growth hormone and "whatever steroid" they could find in order to keep up with the competition'.

All of which brings to mind his teammate Hank Aaron who, while virtually tied with Mays & Mantle for career HRs through age 34 [HA = 510; WM = 505; MM = 496], suddenly out-homered those two 245 to 155 (Mays) to 40 (Mantle) after that age. Aaron also had his highest HR season ever at age 37, something that normally doesn't happen but did here, perhaps not coincidentally around the same time House admitted that a number of his teammates were "doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses". It was also in 1973 that the Braves boasted three 40+ HR guys including Davey Johnson who clubbed 43 despite never having hit more than 18 before or after.

Is any of this proof? No, but it's at least as damning as the stuff Chass is using to argue for outright bans on more recent players.

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Frayed Knot wrote: Back to Chass for a minute and his disavowal of any player with tenuous or even rumored steroid connections; it all reminds me of former pitcher Tom House talking about how he and several other early '70s Atlanta Braves were taking all kinds of stuff saying that "performance-enhancing drugs were widespread in baseball in the 1960s and 1970s" and that they were taking 'amphetamines, human growth hormone and "whatever steroid" they could find in order to keep up with the competition'. All of which brings to mind his teammate Hank Aaron who, while virtually tied with Mays & Mantle for career HRs through age 34 [HA = 510; WM = 505; MM = 496], suddenly out-homered those two 245 to 155 (Mays) to 40 (Mantle) after that age. Aaron also had his highest HR season ever at age 37, something that normally doesn't happen but did here, perhaps not coincidentally around the same time House admitted that a number of his teammates were "doing steroids they wouldn't give to horses". It was also in 1973 that the Braves boasted three 40+ HR guys including Davey Johnson who clubbed 43 despite never having hit more than 18 before or after. Is any of this proof? No, but it's at least as damning as the stuff Chass is using to argue for outright bans on more recent players.

Well, the Braves moved into a stadium called "The Launching Pad," which probably didn't hurt. (Then again, what year did they move into that stadium? 1968? Several years before the 1973 offensive burst.) Then again, Mantle popped a bunch of homers into that ridiculously short porch in MFYS I.

Wonder how many homers Mays lost to that deep centerfield at the Polo Grounds.

Davey seems like a "tell it like it is" kind of guy. Has he ever talked about that 43-homer season in relation to PEDs?

[Edgy MD]

Almost all of the arguments I see advancing Morris' case are of the cherrypicking variety; "he was the best at X from arbitrary date A until arbitrary point B" seems to be the most common, which proves only that better pitchers' careers that overlapped with his didn't exactly overlap.

I'd add that the cherrypicking argument extends to "he was the best at X from arbitrary date A until arbitrary point B... by the rather arbitrary standard of wins credited."

Other outsiders as good as or better: Vida Blue, Dwight Gooden, Mickey Lolich, Dennis Martinez... .

[Edgy MD]

As per Tom House, Deadspin posted a serious rip job the other day on a softball ESPN story (not actually about softball) in which Tom House was consulted as a mechanics guru for Tim Tebow, and they called into question whether Tom House was any sort of authority at all --- not because he had a baseball background, but because they never heard of him and they're Googling didn't turn up anything. About 120 readers had to log on and let them know that House was pretty well known in baseball circles, and famously introduced to Nolan Ryan late in his career the notion of training by throwing footballs.

[ashie62]

I wouldn't be opposed to a consensus that PED & Steroid abuse have no bearing on voting for or against a player..

[Frayed Knot]

metsguyinmichigan wrote: Well, the Braves moved into a stadium called "The Launching Pad," which probably didn't hurt. (Then again, what year did they move into that stadium? 1968? Several years before the 1973 offensive burst.) Then again, Mantle popped a bunch of homers into that ridiculously short porch in MFYS I.

That stadium--originally just Atlanta Stadium and later dubbed Atlanta-Fulton County Stadium--was pre-built for the Braves move in 1966.
And while it was a good HR park (people forget that, prior to the moves out west to Denver & Phoenix, Atlanta was the ML city at the highest elevation for many years) it wasn't THAT out of the ordinary and it certainly wasn't something that would have suddenly inflated HR stats seven years into its lifespan.

Wonder how many homers Mays lost to that deep centerfield at the Polo Grounds.

Probably not as many as some of his fans like to think. I've read studies on this before and, IIRC, it's tough to make the case for more than a few dozen in total.

Davey seems like a "tell it like it is" kind of guy. Has he very talked about that 43-homer season in relation to PEDs?

Not that I know of. And there's certainly no upside in ever doing so even for someone as yappy as Davey, particularly since he knows he'd automatically be indicting Aaron just by bringing it up even if he swore while telling the story that Hank never took anything stronger than a milkshake.

[dinosaur jesus]

Aaron's 1971 season was a little flukey, but it wasn't completely out of nowhere. He'd been benefitting all along from the move to Atlanta. His home runs on the road were almost identical before and after the move (a little under 20 a year, counting from his first 40-homer season in 1957). But his home runs at home went from about 17 a year to over 25. I think that when you take the parks into account, he was pretty much the same hitter all along. It's true you'd expect him to drop off a bit. But in his age 35 season, 1969, not only were the rules changed to benefit the hitters, but in Atlanta the fences were brought in, especially in left center. Whatever the other guys in Atlanta were taking, I don't see anything suspicious in Aaron's stats.

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Probably not as many as some of his fans like to think. I've read studies on this before and, IIRC, it's tough to make the case for more than a few dozen in total.

That's interesting. Boy, you add a couple dozen to 660 and you are getting pretty close to 700. Wonder what it would have been like if it had been him and not Aaron chasing Ruth -- or him AND Aaron chasing Ruth!

[Frayed Knot]

dinosaur jesus wrote: ... Whatever the other guys in Atlanta were taking, I don't see anything suspicious in Aaron's stats.

I don't especially either, I'm just trying to point out that, based on the logic and levels of "proof" being used to disqualify other players, these voters can't stay consistent while giving Hank a pass based on the circumstantial evidence surrounding him. Chass in particular is acting as the hanging judge on Piazza based on less than what I can concoct against Aaron if I were so inclined. Then there's that guy whose ballot listed Morris only based on the idea that, as far as he's concerned, everyone from the steroid era is ineligible!. Given House's admissions, the contemporaneous and somewhat unusual rise in several of his aging teammates, and his comments that numerous guys on all teams in that era were partaking and/or experimenting, does he really want to try and make the case that the "steroid era" has a specifically defined and agreed upon starting and ending point or that Morris didn't at least partially coincide with it? Point also being that if these PED-absolutists are going to cite Brady Anderson's out of the blue 50 HR season as iron-clad proof of his cheating how do they let Davey's '73 season (or Maris's '61 for that matter - he never hit 40 except for that year) pass without comment?

Also, staying with the guilt-by-association logic here, considering that there were a dozen major leaguers and various minor league players suspended this past year (hell, a top Minnesota prospect was just nabbed last Saturday) it looks like Miguel Cabrera and Justin Verlander are tainted too because, whenever the steroid era started, it sure ain't over.

[Guest d'Kong76]

.
[bigpurple:1rtkidft]Out![/bigpurple:1rtkidft]

[nymr83]

I am boycotting the HOF until such time as Piazza is in it.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

No Biggio either (74.8%).

Palmeiro, Moises Alou, Luis Gonzalez, Hideo Nomo, and Armando Benitez among those dropped from the ballot.

[batmagadanleadoff]

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr wrote: No Biggio either (74.8%). Palmeiro, Moises Alou, Luis Gonzalez, Hideo Nomo, and Armando Benitez among those dropped from the ballot.

If the stupid Mets had a say, Armando wouldn't of even been on the ballot.

[Gwreck]

Armando got one vote.

Biggio missed election by 2 votes.

[HahnSolo]

74.8%???????
So the difference for him is literally 1 or 2 votes?

[nymr83]

Alou, whose number match up pretty well to Reggie Jackson, is off the ballot.

I dont think he is a hall of famer, but the ballot is such a mess that nobody can even talk about it

[Guest d'Kong76]

Gwreck wrote: Biggio missed election by 2 votes.

74.8% is tough love.

[Zvon]

Kong76 wrote: Gwreck wrote: Biggio missed election by 2 votes. 74.8% is tough love.

This is mind boggling. What the hell do you have to do to get in? Grow the fuck up HOF voters.

metsguyinmichigan wrote: Probably not as many as some of his fans like to think. I've read studies on this before and, IIRC, it's tough to make the case for more than a few dozen in total. That's interesting. Boy, you add a couple dozen to 660 and you are getting pretty close to 700. Wonder what it would have been like if it had been him and not Aaron chasing Ruth -- or him AND Aaron chasing Ruth!

It was he and Aaron chasing Ruth, and when I became a fan of the game it was Mays who was pegged to pass him (circa 68-69), not Aaron. But Willie fluttered out of the game and Hank kept sluggin'. Henry won the last few laps of that race.

[Edgy MD]

Korea won a couple of early laps there also.

Looks like Seaver's record is out, too.

[Gwreck]

Zvon wrote: This is mind boggling. What the hell do you have to do to get in?

Get 75%?

There are all sorts of problems with Hall of Fame voters but obviously nobody could intend for Biggio to get that exact total. He will get in next year.

[Gwreck]

Edgy MD wrote: Looks like Seaver's record is out, too.

??

Maddux got 97%.

Tom's safe until Cap'n Intangibles makes the ballot.

[Edgy MD]

Well, then, I mis-read the ballot. Or clicked the wrong link. YAY!!

(Yay?)

[Zvon]

Gwreck wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Looks like Seaver's record is out, too. ?? Maddux got 97%. Tom's safe until Cap'n Intangibles makes the ballot.

I always felt that if Ripkin didn't top Tom his record would be safe during my lifetime. Jeter will not top Ripkin. You can mark those words.

[nymr83]

Is there an automatic steroid haze surrounding Ken Griffey jr. As well? Elligible in 2 years and once looked like a future unanimous kind of guy

[Edgy MD]

If anybody should "look good" it's him. He was great in his 20s and faded, seemingly naturally, in his 30s.

But that's one of things were trying to sort out. The era not only allowed some buys to disqualify themselves by extending their career, but also hurt other guys (Raines, Griffey, and such) by creating new expectations about what a Hall of Famer's career arc should look like).

[Guest Mets Guy in Michigan]

Randy Johnson is next year, with Pedro. Did Johnson have bacne? Someone ask Murray Chass.

[Guest d'Kong76]

As much as they pained me year after year after year ... it's
kinda nice that the two Los Bravos go in together. No?

*runs to hide behind jukebox*

[nymr83]

metsguyinmichigan wrote: Randy Johnson is next year, with Pedro. Did Johnson have bacne? Someone ask Murray Chass.

How many voters will penalize him for killing that bird?