Article: Running Down The Hall (Of Fame Ballot)

[wsnydes]

 

Bonds never failed a test. What he has said/done outside of the game, just like Schilling (as little respect as I have for his political stances), should have no bearing on his candidacy. If he was found guilty by the game, and he was in the game while testing was around, then there'd be something to claim, like with Manny, but that stance with Bonds also falls short as well.

That depends on whether you include the 2003 "anonymous" testing done by MLB leading up to the Mitchell Report, which I do.  That survey was done with approval of MLB and the MLBPA.  Bonds appears on that list, along with the aforementioned Manny.  In my opinion, there's plenty of evidence to support the notion that he used them whether baseball punished him or not.

 

I do agree with you on Schilling though.  I do tend to agree that anything done outside of the game should not necessarily be taken into account.  However, in Bonds' case, the 2003 list and other evidence and circumstances is enough for me.  If it isn't for you, I find that to be reasonable. 

[biggentleben]

 

That depends on whether you include the 2003 "anonymous" testing done by MLB leading up to the Mitchell Report, which I do.  That survey was done with approval of MLB and the MLBPA.  Bonds appears on that list, along with the aforementioned Manny.  In my opinion, there's plenty of evidence to support the notion that he used them whether baseball punished him or not.

 

I do agree with you on Schilling though.  I do tend to agree that anything done outside of the game should not necessarily be taken into account.  However, in Bonds' case, the 2003 list and other evidence and circumstances is enough for me.  If it isn't for you, I find that to be reasonable. 

 

However, there have been many people who have refuted the "leaked" list with many of the names on that list, so there is not definitive proof. That list was never officially given to the media by MLB or the MLBPA, so neither side has ever stated that the names on that list are even accurate. Some players have admitted to things or have done further damage by getting suspended since, but that's a whole other thing.

[wsnydes]

 

However, there have been many people who have refuted the "leaked" list with many of the names on that list, so there is not definitive proof. That list was never officially given to the media by MLB or the MLBPA, so neither side has ever stated that the names on that list are even accurate. Some players have admitted to things or have done further damage by getting suspended since, but that's a whole other thing.

I don't disagree with any of that and I don't fault you for your line of logic.  I think it's reasonable.  To my knowledge, the list and affiliated BALCO evidence is still sealed by the courts.  If there wasn't anything damaging to anybody, I find it odd that that would be the case.  In fact, I'd find it odd that it was ever sealed to begin with, though I'm not a lawyer.  

 

Regarding Bonds, there are multiple reports and links made between Bonds and BALCO that I feel comfortable with my opinion.  Keep in mind that I'm not condemning everyone on that list because I do realize that it hasn't been completely confirmed beyond a handful of names.  However, in the case of Bonds, enough other evidence has surfaced that I do feel that he cheated while playing.  Some players on the list have gone on to be punished so that removes any doubt others have not.  I continue to waffle on Clemens.  This is simply my opinion on the matter.  I'm not asking you to agree with it, I'm simply throwing it out there. 

Edited January 18, 2017 by wsnydes

[biggentleben]

Then again, you get into BALCO. That's not MLB-related. That's again outside of the MLB. Not a failed MLB test, but something outside of it. If baseball wanted the information strong enough (as they showed with their illegal activities in Florida), they could have gotten it to punish Bonds. They did not do that, and depending on who you believe about the BALCO case (my sister-in-law's divorce proceedings and two of the subsequent custody hearings are sealed until the children are 18, so there are lots of things that can be completely innocuous that end up sealing court records), Bonds was there discussing the deception and what he saw of the defendants, never actually implicating once that he took anything illegal.

 

Mantle has a legit discussion about a doctor using pure testosterone as part of an injection he gave him on a daily basis for over a year. Not a PED, not even a steroid, but pure testosterone. The doctor admitted it to multiple people in his life, however he is no longer alive to give credence to or refute the story. Should we then remove Mantle? In all seriousness, it has about as much carrying power as BALCO.

[jimmer]

Congrats to Bagwell (can't even believe it took this long), IRod (only the 2nd catcher in history to get voted in on his first ballot) and Raines!!!

 

And good job, HOF voters, for continuing to screw over Mussina and Schilling (among a few others).

Edited January 19, 2017 by jimmer

[drjim]

3 in a year is plenty. Voters did a fine job.

 

To me Posada dropping off is the biggest injustice.

[jimmer]

I have zero issue when players who aren't even close to being HOFers drop off 1st time.  Posada is one of those guys.  

 

Jim Edmonds, who had a legitimate argument to actually make the HOF, was gone after one ballot.

[drjim]

Probably right. I looked again and Posada wasn't as good as I thought.

 

And agree on Edmonds.

[stringer bell]

I agree on the three selections. I think all three deserved admission and it took longer than it should have for both Raines and Bagwell. Yes, there are plenty of jerks that get to vote on Hall induction, but there were enough that made the right choices. Clemens and Bonds have sullied their records. They certainly performed at HOF level. I shed no tears that they were not included.

[jimmer]

 

I agree on the three selections. I think all three deserved admission and it took longer than it should have for both Raines and Bagwell. Yes, there are plenty of jerks that get to vote on Hall induction, but there were enough that made the right choices. Clemens and Bonds have sullied their records. They certainly performed at HOF level. I shed no tears that they were not included.

Still no Mussina, still no Schilling.  In fact, Schilling actually DROPPED.

[jimmer]

Vlad Guerrero (with his 54 fWAR and 59 bWAR in 9,000 PA) barely misses it in his 1st shot and likely makes it next year.

 

EDMONDS (with his 65 fWAR and 60 bWAR in 8000 PA) is off the ballot in his 1st shot. 8 time gold glover and OPS over .900 (and he was primarily a CF).

 

Larry Walker (with his 69 fWAR and bWAR of 73 in 8000 PA) isn't going to make it. This guy did it all (hit, very good runner, very good defender). He is 10th in WAR for RF and every single guy in the top 14 for RF, with the exception of Shoeless Joe who is banned, is in the HOF.  Ichiro, who is 16th in WAR for RF, will make it too (likely 1st time).

 

But, of course, WAR isn't the end all be all (for some, it means zero)  When looking at positions, defense, wRC+ and OPS+ (which accounts for park and time frame) it's equally ridiculous to see Vlad so close on first time and neither of these guys having any kind of shot.

Edited January 19, 2017 by jimmer

[biggentleben]

The biggest drop off guy I'm still dumbfounded by is Lofton. That will confound me until he ends up being put in by the Veteran's Committee as deserved.

[stringer bell]

Comments about those that didn't make it:

 

Mussina-He'll probably go the "Blyleven route" and eventually get in the Hall. Qualified? IDK, he bet the Twins all the time. His numbers are very good. I think he's more qualified than some who have made it, but I can't say he absolutely belongs.

 

Guerrero-Not a huge fan. As noted above there are several people in Vlad's range who haven't been treated kindly, but as close as he was this year, he is a shoo-in. I confess I probably saw the "old Vlad" and mostly remember an aging DH more than seeing Guerrero in his prime.

 

Hoffman-I guess he'll get in next year, as well. He pretty quietly put up great numbers as a closer. I'm wondering what standard for relief pitchers there is as far as magic numbers (like 3000 hits and 500 homers for hitters).

[nicksaviking]

So the ballots were transparent this year correct? I'm just wondering if the one vote each for Veritek and Wakefield came from the same Boston beat writer or something.

[gunnarthor]

I don't like the Raines election because it's just the compiler argument.  But, at the same time, it's nice to see more guys from the 80s get in.  It's a bit surprising so many Expos are in and not enough Tigers but ...

 

Vlad's a worthy HOFer and I wish he had gotten in but it's pretty clear he will.  

 

Bagwell and Pudge getting in is pretty good news for the PED guys who have rumors but no direct failed test.  Seems a bunch of voters don't care as much as other voters did.  

 

I think Moose is the most underrated candidate on the ballot.  He's the Blyleven of this generation but, at the same time, it's not hard to see why.  Maddux, Glavine, Johnson, Clemens and Pedro averaged something like 4,260ip, 4 cy, 101 WAR, 307 win, 628 starts.  Guys a notch below - Moose, Schilling, Brown etc are going to look bad.  

 

I wish guys like Walker, Kent, Martinez had more support.  I'm not sure if they are all HOFers but they certainly deserve more discussion that is gets bogged down by the steroids/Schilling/new candidates every year.  

[gunnarthor]

I was really surprised by Manny's vote total.  Apparently about a quarter of the voters don't care at all that he had two failed PED tests during the testing era but they also didn't seem overly supportive of Sheffield, who wasn't quite the bat Manny was, but was close.

[biggentleben]

 

Comments about those that didn't make it:

Mussina-He'll probably go the "Blyleven route" and eventually get in the Hall. Qualified? IDK, he bet the Twins all the time. His numbers are very good. I think he's more qualified than some who have made it, but I can't say he absolutely belongs.

Guerrero-Not a huge fan. As noted above there are several people in Vlad's range who haven't been treated kindly, but as close as he was this year, he is a shoo-in. I confess I probably saw the "old Vlad" and mostly remember an aging DH more than seeing Guerrero in his prime.

Hoffman-I guess he'll get in next year, as well. He pretty quietly put up great numbers as a closer. I'm wondering what standard for relief pitchers there is as far as magic numbers (like 3000 hits and 500 homers for hitters).

 

Young Vlad is probably alongside young Andruw Jones as the most dynamic players I've ever witnessed in 30+ years of baseball viewing. Vlad at the plate was incredible, and his defense was the stuff of legends in right. Jones was more unseen before in the field and had dynamic ability offensively, whereas Vlad's bat was the thing that always stood out to me. Probably part of being AL/NL, but seeing Vlad for so many years made him an easy guy to vote in.

[biggentleben]

 

I was really surprised by Manny's vote total.  Apparently about a quarter of the voters don't care at all that he had two failed PED tests during the testing era but they also didn't seem overly supportive of Sheffield, who wasn't quite the bat Manny was, but was close.

 

Incredibly hypocritical to me. I voted for Manny because I vote for a guy's performance on the field, however, anyone who voted Manny but not Palmeiro, McGwire, Sosa, etc. screams hypocritical to me.

[drjim]

 

Young Vlad is probably alongside young Andruw Jones as the most dynamic players I've ever witnessed in 30+ years of baseball viewing. Vlad at the plate was incredible, and his defense was the stuff of legends in right. Jones was more unseen before in the field and had dynamic ability offensively, whereas Vlad's bat was the thing that always stood out to me. Probably part of being AL/NL, but seeing Vlad for so many years made him an easy guy to vote in.

 

I agree with this.

 

For me, unique players like Vlad earn extra HOF credit in my mind relative to a more straightforward data analysis.

[jimmer]

 

 

 

I think Moose is the most underrated candidate on the ballot.  He's the Blyleven of this generation but, at the same time, it's not hard to see why.  Maddux, Glavine, Johnson, Clemens and Pedro averaged something like 4,260ip, 4 cy, 101 WAR, 307 win, 628 starts.    

One of those guys is not like the others.

Edited January 19, 2017 by jimmer

[jimmer]

'Mussina had nine seasons with an Adjusted ERA+ better than 129. The only perspective you need on what that means is the list I'm about to unfurl. The only five starters since 1900 with more seasons that much better than the league average: Clemens, Walter Johnson, Christy Mathewson, Greg Maddux and Lefty Grove. Check!'--Jayson Stark.

 

Mussina has 82 WAR (that is a ton. That should get you in no matter what team you play on). Schilling 80 WAR. Glavine only 67 WAR (even though he played CONSIDERABLY longer than the other two).

 

Before looking at the comparison below, remember Glavine pitched in the NL (the non-DH league) his whole career, Mussina pitched in the AL East his whole career.

 

Mussina 3.57 FIP, Schilling 3.23 FIP, Glavine 3.95 FIP.

Mussina ERA+ of 123 (3562 IP), Schilling ERA+ of 127 (3261 IP), Glavine ERA+ of 118. (4413 IP)

Mussina 7.11K, 1.98BB, Schilling 8.60K, 1.96BB, Glavine 5.32K, 3.06BB (and he pitched to a lot of pitchers).

 

For those who care about wins and losses, Mussina had a .638 winning %. Glavine was at .600 and Schilling at .597.

 

I'm not sure what people can look at and say Glavine was a first ballot HOFer while Schilling and Mussina continue to wait, but I sure can't find it.

 

But Glavine gets in first ballot. He was a win accumulator who stuck around a long time to get to 300 wins (which seem to matter but the losses don't). Fortunate to be on great teams with great teammates in the rotation, 'Big Three'. The writers pushed the Big Three narrative and they rewarded themselves, and Glavine, because of it.

Edited January 19, 2017 by jimmer

[jimmer]

BTW, question abut HOFer IRod.

 

He was an awesome defensive catcher.  Has Yadier been even better?  I've watched both in their prime and  think Yadier might be even better defensively.

[TheLeviathan]

 

BTW, question abut HOFer IRod.

 

He was an awesome defensive catcher.  Has Yadier been even better?  I've watched both in their prime and  think Yadier might be even better defensively.

 

Pudge's arm might be the best I've ever seen, but he wasn't the total package Molina is.  

[Vanimal46]

Young Vlad is probably alongside young Andruw Jones as the most dynamic players I've ever witnessed in 30+ years of baseball viewing. Vlad at the plate was incredible, and his defense was the stuff of legends in right. Jones was more unseen before in the field and had dynamic ability offensively, whereas Vlad's bat was the thing that always stood out to me. Probably part of being AL/NL, but seeing Vlad for so many years made him an easy guy to vote in.

Vlad's bat was amazing. Whether the pitch was 3 feet over his head, or bounce before it reached home plate, somehow he made solid contact. IIRC he had a rocket arm in RF too.

[TheLeviathan]

Vlad the Expo was easily my favorite non Twin. Probably of all time or right there with Biggio.

[biggentleben]

Vlad's bat was amazing. Whether the pitch was 3 feet over his head, or bounce before it reached home plate, somehow he made solid contact. IIRC he had a rocket arm in RF too.

It wasn't just his cannon arm either. He had incredible range early, the type of athleticism that allowed him to be a consistent 40/40 threat.

[gunnarthor]

 

 

But Glavine gets in first ballot. He was a win accumulator who stuck around a long time to get to 300 wins (which seem to matter but the losses don't). Fortunate to be on great teams with great teammates in the rotation, 'Big Three'. The writers pushed the Big Three narrative and they rewarded themselves, and Glavine, because of it.

I think you're under rating Glavine a bit, which I think is a problem of WAR based analysis.  Glavine pitched a ****load of innings which is pretty important. 

 

Schilling career - 20 seasons - 3261ip, 127 ERA+, 6x all-star, 4 times top 10 cy. 

Glavine 1988-2002  3294ip, 124 ERA+, 2 cy young, 8x all-star, 6 top 10 cy votes.  He basically had a Schilling like career and then had another 1000+ innings at 105 ERA+.  We can do the same for Moose. Glavine also has a 3.30 post season ERA in about 100 more innings than the other two, as well.  Glavine pitched about two more seasons than those two but threw about 5 seasons more of starter caliber innings.  Yes, the other two struck out more batters but that's not the end-all, be-all. 

 

WAR has it's limits.  Glavine wasn't just a compiler of innings, he was a very good pitcher (and decent hitter for a pitcher - adding about 7 WAR over his career).  He had a lot of seasons where he was top 10 in both IP and ERA+ (and he did lead the league in WAR).  That's harder to do than you'd think.  I'm sure he benefited from having Jones in CF but Schilling and Moose had some good defenders (and explosive offenses) to help them, as well. 

 

Schillings career had some ups and downs but Glavine was a pretty constant force and sometimes the best pitcher in baseball (Moose, IMHO, has a much better argument than Schilling).  Only 29 pitchers threw more innings in baseball history than Glavine and only about 15 since integration.  He won two Cy Youngs (deservedly) and was the ace of some of the best teams in baseball.  He was a pretty easy choice for the HOF.  That doesn't mean that Mussina and Schilling (and Brown) didn't have HOF careers but Glavine is pretty clearly a HOFer, even if you're just looking at WAR (which has Glavine right above Carew and right below Ryan).

 

57. Ken Griffey+ (22) 83.6 L
58. Mike Mussina (18) 83.0 L
59. Nolan Ryan+ (27) 81.8 R
60. Tom Glavine+ (22) 81.4 L
61. Rod Carew+ (19) 81.1 L
62. Charlie Gehringer+ (19) 80.6 L
63. Curt Schilling (20) 79.9 R

[gunnarthor]

 

 

Vlad the Expo was easily my favorite non Twin. Probably of all time or right there with Biggio.

Biggio? That seems an odd choice.  Not a bad choice, simply odd.

 

Vlad, Suzuki, Griffey are probably my favorite non-Twins.

[jimmer]

 

I think you're under rating Glavine a bit, which I think is a problem of WAR based analysis.  Glavine pitched a ****load of innings which is pretty important. 

 

Schilling career - 20 seasons - 3261ip, 127 ERA+, 6x all-star, 4 times top 10 cy. 

Glavine 1988-2002  3294ip, 124 ERA+, 2 cy young, 8x all-star, 6 top 10 cy votes.  He basically had a Schilling like career and then had another 1000+ innings at 105 ERA+.  We can do the same for Moose. Glavine also has a 3.30 post season ERA in about 100 more innings than the other two, as well.  Glavine pitched about two more seasons than those two but threw about 5 seasons more of starter caliber innings.  Yes, the other two struck out more batters but that's not the end-all, be-all. 

 

WAR has it's limits.  Glavine wasn't just a compiler of innings, he was a very good pitcher (and decent hitter for a pitcher - adding about 7 WAR over his career).  He had a lot of seasons where he was top 10 in both IP and ERA+ (and he did lead the league in WAR).  That's harder to do than you'd think.  I'm sure he benefited from having Jones in CF but Schilling and Moose had some good defenders (and explosive offenses) to help them, as well. 

 

Schillings career had some ups and downs but Glavine was a pretty constant force and sometimes the best pitcher in baseball (Moose, IMHO, has a much better argument than Schilling).  Only 29 pitchers threw more innings in baseball history than Glavine and only about 15 since integration.  He won two Cy Youngs (deservedly) and was the ace of some of the best teams in baseball.  He was a pretty easy choice for the HOF.  That doesn't mean that Mussina and Schilling (and Brown) didn't have HOF careers but Glavine is pretty clearly a HOFer, even if you're just looking at WAR (which has Glavine right above Carew and right below Ryan).

 

57. Ken Griffey+ (22) 83.6 L
58. Mike Mussina (18) 83.0 L
59. Nolan Ryan+ (27) 81.8 R
60. Tom Glavine+ (22) 81.4 L
61. Rod Carew+ (19) 81.1 L
62. Charlie Gehringer+ (19) 80.6 L
63. Curt Schilling (20) 79.9 R

You make it sound like all I put was WAR (calling it a WAR-based analysis like that automatically makes it invalid which I guess for some it does), and I didn't just use WAR.  In fact, only one paragraph mentioned WAR. A lot of your argument goes back to the media/popularity argument  (no, he didn't deserve 2 CY, only one) and compiler issues I already pointed out.

 

Even without WAR (which you bring up, and discard, twice) I think he's overrated. It's not like I didn't list a bunch of other comparisons, right? FIP, ERA+, K/9, BB/9 NL versus AL, etc.  All of which favor Mussina and Schilling. I even mentioned winning % , which I don't care about but thought it should be mentioned because SOME do.  Winning % is as far away from WAR as one could get.

 

And I never said Glavine wasn't HOF worthy, just that Schilling and Mussina were better, yet Glavine gets in easily on first shot.  That's my issue.  He certainly doesn't stack up to the group of Pedro, Clemens, Big Unit and Maddux. 

Edited January 20, 2017 by jimmer

[jimmer]

So Jayson Stark made an interesting comment,  

 

'I'd even argue he was the greatest No. 1 overall draft pick of all time -- considering he played every game of his career for the team that drafted him..'

 

I love Chipper and he is a slam dunk HOFer, but there's a guy named Ken Griffey Jr.

 

Thoughts?