hall of fame, next vote...

Hall of Fame Ballot 2004

Bruce Sutter was the pitcher that brought back and popularized the split finger fastball, which considering how popular a pitch it has become in the past 25 years, it is something that he should get some credit.

"Boggs, for instance, is not a classic Hall of Famer, in my eyes, despite his 3,000 hits; he was a very, very good player, but not a dominant player."

Appearantly Buster forgets the mid 80s when Boggs career batting average was at .355 or so, he won 5 of 6 batting titles and his on base percentage was at a SABERMETRIC stoner high. He also won two of those batting titles by more than twenty points! After age 32, he only once hit over .330, but a bunch of players peak around that time in their career. Boggs average with runners on base and the bases loaded is also off the chart.

Oddly enough, I don't think Boggs was quite the same player after that whole scandal with Margo Adams broke. I think opposing teams quit putting chicken on the buffet when Boston was in town or something.

I think it would be interesting to know how many hits Boggs would have put up if he would have been brought up in 81, when he was 21 instead of 24. Boggs always claimed that he was just a good a hitter at 21, but since he played 1b was always behind Yaz in the depth chart and never got the chance to play in the bigs until he learned how to play 3b. He didn't get called up in 84 until they were wracked with injuries, then he hit over .400 for a month or so and stayed in the lineup from then on.

I grew up mostly watching NL baseball, but Boggs was one of my favorite players to follow and watch hit. Maybe not as fearful as some of the great power hitters of his day, but like Tony Gwynn, he was one of those hitters that seemed to dumbfound pitchers on how to get them out.

Earl OTM about Boggs, the guy was an offensive powerhouse.

It's the usual BS with guys like Sandberg -- 2B and 3B are underrepresented positions in the HoF because their offensive numbers aren't at the level of 1B or OF, they're not remembered for being "flashy" like SS, and they're not "on-the-field leaders" like C. Sandberg is a no-brainer.

Gossage should be in, I hear the arguments for Sutter that he wasn't great for as long as some other guys, but a) he was dominant for about the same length of time that Mo Rivera has been (and a lot of people consider him a future HoF player -- yeah, I know Mo's postseason performance is part of that, but still), and b) he INVENTED a pitch, which is a damned significant contribution to the game.

The Blyleven arguments boil down to the fact that he WAS great, but was pitching for bad teams. I think people are wising up to the idea that there are guys like Sutton who are in only because they pitched for good teams.

That season I remember seeing Jack Morris throw a no hitter on TV against the White Sox as it was the game of the week Saturday Afternoon on NBC. I can remember my dad was working in the garage and coming in every so often to check it out how the game was going, as he joked after the first inning or so wouldn't it be funny if he threw a no hitter.

But if that were the case, there'd be 80 or 90 members, except for what, 240 now?

By the established standard, Blyleven belongs. If you're "very good" for long enough (BB was in the top 10 in league Adjusted ERA 11 times from '71-89), that's worth 5-6 years of dominance (the peak vs career, Koufax vs Spahn argument). There was some research I read in the last year that showed Bert didn't suffer quite as much from his teammates' inadequacy as generally thought, but it wasn't enough for him to drop off my "ballot."

>The funny thing about Morris, as I recall, is that he always seemed to pitch just good enough to stay ahead.

"I know not seems..." I'll try to find a link for you, Thermo, but someone recently did a study of Morris's career in this regard, and it showed *no* special ability to pitch that way. He threw 1150 fewer innings than Blyleven and his career ERA was only 5% better than the league's (Bert 18%) -- that's not a negligible difference. Morris had a good career, but not a HOFer.

I'd vote for Gossage on greatness and longevity, Sutter on peak and pioneer role, close but unconvinced for Lee Smith. Rest of ballot: Boggs, Sandberg, and TRAMMELL, most deserving SS of that era below Ozzie. Dawson and Rice fall short.

It's sad that the Vets Committee process has obviously been fucked up to the point where they may never elect anyone, as I fear Ron Santo will die before his deserved induction.

I'm not sure that would be worst thing ever actually, but my problem with Blyleven is that during his time he was never really recognized as being one of the best in the game. He wasn't voted to All Star games, he didn't make Cy Young top 10s, he wasn't talked about as being a great pitcher. And I think that hurts him. NOW if the reason why none of those things occurred was that he toiled entirely in obscurity for shitty teams and if he'd been on the Dodgers, the Red Sox, the Yankees and the Reds for those years instead that there would be a complete about face and he'd be considered among the best pitchers of his era, well all I can say geez that's bad luck for Bert, but I think that's a hard argument to make conclusively.

MIR, here's a 4-year-old Neyer column on Blyleven... Alex, I think it's conclusive:

http://espn.go.com/mlb/s/2000/1213/943398.html

And he later wrote:

"Blyleven was, over the course of his career, a better pitcher than Ted Lyons or Early Wynn or Bob Lemon or Red Ruffing or Rube Waddell or Red Faber or Catfish Hunter or Lefty Gomez, all of whom are in the Hall of Fame... It's not Blyleven's fault that he generally pitched for unspectacular teams that played in hitter's parks. In fact, Blyleven pitched for 22 seasons, and in only four of those 22 seasons did Blyleven's home ballpark favor the pitcher, statistically..."

And to appeal to the butch old-timers: 242 complete games!

Four of 'em (third twice).

http://baseball-reference.com/b/blylebe01.shtml

http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=1815

It concludes that there is no evidence to suggest that he could.

That's the article I meant, MIR, thanks.

I think he's written a couple of other columns on Blyleven, maybe I can find them ...

Those are some mind-numbing stats!

This, and many other articles stating his HoF case are collected -- where else? -- on Blyleven's web page:

http://www.bertblyleven.com/hall_of_fame.shtml

xpost -- yeah, the Morris article is a bit of a numbers slog, but it's well done.

Enough, believe me. And I saw him compare him to two HOF pitchers, one of whom is IMO a mistake and the other who is basically in the Hall because he had a zillion strikeouts and a slew of no hitters. Compare him to Carlton or Seaver or Hunter or any of the really great pitchers from his era, if you want to make your point (that this guy is getting job) don't just claim he was "better than Don Sutton" cuz my response to that is so the fuck what.

That second ESPN article is much better btw and makes a pretty good case.

No, Bert is not Seaver or Carlton.

He played for fifteen years, and he had about four great years, four good years, and the rest were downright BAD. If he'd pitched for anyone other than the 70's A's and Yankees dynasties, there's no way he'd be anywhere near a serious HoF discussion.

See this is where I get the impression that cold-dispassionate analysis of the stats lies a little. For 5 years (71-75), Hunter was probably hands down the most feared pitcher in baseball. No he might not have been Koufax, but he was still by all accounts pretty amazing. Those five years count for more to me than 20 some odd years of just pretty good workmanlike pitching (I will admit that these breakdowns of Blyleven's stats are making a pretty case that he was better than that.) (I do have to wonder WHY if Bert was so great, he um didn't get snatched up by better teams? I mean that can't all be bad luck, right?)

Postseason Pitching

Year Round Tm Opp WLser G GS ERA W-L SV CG SHO IP H ER BB SO
+------------------+-----+--+--+------+-----+--+--+---+-----+---+---+---+---+
1970 ALCS MIN BAL L 1 0 0.00 0-0 0 0 0 2.0 2 0 0 2
1979 NLCS PIT CIN W 1 1 1.00 1-0 0 1 0 9.0 8 1 0 9
WS PIT BAL W 2 1 1.80 1-0 0 0 0 10.0 8 2 3 4
1987 ALCS MIN DET W 2 2 4.05 2-0 0 0 0 13.3 12 6 3 9
WS MIN STL W 2 2 2.77 1-1 0 0 0 13.0 13 4 2 12
+------------------+-----+--+--+------+-----+--+--+---+-----+---+---+---+---+
3 Lg Champ Series 2-1 4 3 2.59 3-0 0 1 0 24.3 22 7 3 20
2 World Series 2-0 4 3 2.35 2-1 0 0 0 23.0 21 6 5 16
5 Postseason Ser 4-1 8 6 2.47 5-1 0 1 0 47.3 43 13 8 36
+------------------+-----+--+--+------+-----+--+--+---+-----+---+---+---+---+

He didn't get many chances, but Blyleven pitched well in the playoffs and was a part of two World Series Champions.

Many of his best years came before free agency, so he didn't have much choice in the matter.

Even with free agency, it's only during the last ten years or so that all the best players end up on big-market winning teams at some point, since eventually those are the only teams that can afford them. If Jaret Wright can bounce around for a while, have one good season after a slew of crappy ones, and end up with a multi-year deal from a perennial contender, then Blyleven would have ended up playing for more winning teams too, if he was playing today.

Even so, every era has a few great players who toil away in relative obscurity. Look at Bobby Abreu, or even Carlos Delgado. If Delgado goes to the Mets, maybe in 20 years people will be saying "if he was so good, why did his teams always finish in third place?"

Alex, nobody's saying Hunter wasn't GOOD, just that Blyleven was better for MUCH longer, and that "good press" shouldn't be a measure of excellence. And I don't see Hunter '71-75 being "amazing" ... His most "impressive statistics" are wins (ie, having good teammates) and innings pitched (which blew out his arm, as MIR says). I think he got extra credit for the pennants and the sexy nicknames. And it's cute how you use high Cy Young finishes as relevant to Hunter, not relevant for Blyleven. (Also, I don't see Hunter's status as the first Big Splash free agent being relevant; see Marvin Miller's book for how clownishly Catfish handled that situation.)

The "cold-dispassionate analysis of the stats" is the most reliable evidence there is. Not "what you heard" (from Joe Morgan?). And it isn't so much that Blyleven toiled for bad teams (they were more often mediocre), but pitched in hitters' parks.

I hope it happens soon so that he lives to attend his own induction.

It's not lookin' good for Marv, MIR -- when the Vets voted last in '03, no one came close to getting 75% ... and of the 60 votes required for election, Miller got 35. He got three FEWER votes than Walter O'Malley -- or as we call him in Brooklyn, Satan.

Miller and other non-players are on the "composite" ballot. Here's this year's players' ballot:

http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers_and_honorees/veterans/2005/2005_vc_candidates.htm

The only one I'm sold on is Santo, but Dick Allen and Tony Oliva have decent cases -- as does Curt Flood for courage and legal pioneering.

Mickey Lolich won't get in the Hall, but his pitching in the 68 World Series may be the best performance ever in the fall classic by a starter. The guy out pitched Bob Gibson in Game Seven on TWO days rest. ESPN Classic was showed that game a few months back and it was great. Harry Caray was doing the play by play.

While I don't know if he is good enough player to make the hall, Al Oliver had a pretty good career and never gets put on these kind of lists.

My general point is that "b...b...but he was a bit of an asshole" is a criticism that's used far too often despite being irrelevant most of the time. As long as the guy didn't compromise the game of baseball (Pete Rose being the most obvious example) then I couldn't care less if he was moody and didn't get along with everybody. If he could bring it on the field, then that's the most important thing.

(xpost)

Haha I need to learn to check baseballreference.com before I say stuff sometimes.

That's the difference between Bautista and Joe Carter, who exceeded Bautista in the traditional HR/RBI/BA metrics. Carter really didn't have a single HOF-caliber season, and had many that were just barely above replacement level; Bautista had at least two HOF seasons, and arguably a third.

I think he definitely had three, and a fourth if we count his 92 game season (over a full season I think he comes out close to 7.0 that year.)

I don't quite yet want to be all, "I've seen enough. Joe Mauer is elected with etc etc" but it's looking more and more like he'll get in this year.

I think he's in. That old thing about analytic voters declaring early and old-school guys holding off--because they didn't want to explain themselves on PEDs or traditional stats--I don't think that applies so much anymore.

maybe more surprising to me than Mauer doing this well (83% now) is he's doing a bit better than Helton (who has a net gain of zero votes with over 35% of the ballots revealed.)

I am actually bummed about Sheffield not making it. Even recognizing how he was absolutely a detriment in the field, as a hitter he was just about as dangerous as anyone during his peak. He just put up some absolutely sick statistics. I know there are some PED issues swirling around him, but I feel like it's a gray area in his case. I think what actually is hurting him is the nomadic path of his career, not being defined by any one team at all. And yet, everywhere he went he had one or two or more absolutely all time seasons. San Diego, Florida, L.A., Atlanta, NY. Just such a force.

Whats also hurting him is his relationship to the media

Your opening sentence made me think they released results today. He's not out of it yet--just shy of 75%.

Just looking at everything, he needed to pick up 70-something votes in order to make it. He's picked up 10 so far with a bit over 40% of the vote in. I hope I'm pleasantly shocked by an unprecedented late rally!

Basically knock 5-10% off of whatever the score is for the hidden ballots they always sink everything. It wouldnt surprise me if helton missed by single digits

i hope David Wright sticks around awhile, despite the brief career he's eminently more qualified than the likes of Vizquel, K-Rod, and probably Wagner tbh. he's a Mauer type in that respect, just an absolute monster at his position. But catchers have more allowance for a brief peak. his fellow Met Jose Reyes is getting zero support but he's probably just a step below Rollins.

Make of this as you will:

https://i.postimg.cc/1zB4Jm08/glove.jpg

Jones is at 71%, Hunter at 4.7%. Did Hunter win all those GG on reputation? Seems like a wider gap than it maybe should be.

I think Hunter was good in the field, but not really vastly superior to others. if you look at the metrics, Jones was an all-time great. I think where they were actually closer in terms of career value was at the plate, Jones had bigger numbers in a couple of huge years but I think Hunter wasn't far off in his all around offensive game.

two who are also pretty close are Rollins and Reyes. i don't see Rollins getting in, he's nowhere near, though 29 votes vs zero for Reyes is probably a bit unfair to the latter, who was really quite the player.

Just realized this is tomorrow. All I know for sure: Beltre is in, DeSantis is out...Agree with all that about Jones/Hunter (although I'm trusting the defensive metrics on blind faith). I think a 60/40 split, or 65/35 split, would be more reasonable than 71/5.

Mauer is really holding steady, he's been consistently one or two votes ahead of Helton. it's always hard to tell but for most candidates with credentials some might find borderline, there's usually a 6-7% drop from where the tracker finishes. I feel like Mauer is somewhere between 73-79% in the end. Wagner and Helton are cutting it close.

it's going to be crowded again next year, anywhere from a dozen to fifteen players returning, plus Suzuki in the Adrian Beltre 95%+ shoo-in role, Sabathia, Pedroia as an Utley type, Kinsler as the poor man's David Wright, and King Felix.

I anticipate being bummed out at how little support Felix is going to receive.

Can't share, but these are Posnanski's predictions (many obvious by this point):

Will Be Elected -- Beltre, Mauer, Helton
Will Just Miss -- Wagner, Sheffield
Coming Soon To a Hall of Fame Near You -- Jones, Beltran
Solidly on the Ballot Going Forward -- Utley, A-Rod, Manny (seems to think A-Rod will eventually go in, Manny "not ever, not by the writers nor by any veterans committee")
The 15% Club -- Rollins, Abreu, Pettitte, Vizquel
Will Make Another Ballot -- Buehrle, K-Rod, Hunter, Wright
Will Not Make the Ballot Next Year -- the rest

He came up with a fun thing yesterday, based on something his friend said: a player's Hock Score:

I’m going to talk a bit over the next couple of days about my friend Jon Hock’s Hall of Fame thought experiment, which he sent in to express his support for Thurman Munson’s Hall of Fame candidacy:

"Try this as a thought experiment: Imagine Munson’s plaque in the Gallery in Cooperstown, then imagine watching a day’s worth of fans passing through. Tell me, where would Munson’s plaque rank in terms of fans stopping a little bit longer, maybe removing their cap and saying something about him to their daughter or grandson? I’d say top ten or 15 in the entire Gallery."

I’m not entirely sure that Munson’s plaque would draw quite that kind of attention, but I love the concept: Which players’ plaques would stand out in the Hall of Fame plaque room? That’s a really interesting way of thinking about the Hall of Fame, emphasis on the word "fame."

I can say with some confidence, that if Bartolo Colón somehow made the Hall of Fame, he’d have a HUGE Hock Score.

Just to clarify, his predictions are not reflective of his own preferences--he voted for Manny, always has, and lobbies hard for him. But: "...and I can certainly live with that." ("That" being what I quoted above.)

i kinda think Wagner might make up enough ground to get in but it'll be a true squeaker. i also think he'll be the last closer to make it for an extremely long time and maybe that's appropriate.

Think this is the first time I've ever watched this live...hey, I'm live-blogging!

let's go

Jose Bautista just ran across the screen and did a bat-flip...not sure what that means.

You take the first one, Omar.

Beltre, Mauer...

aaaaand Helton!

Still majorly surprised that Mauer is a first-ballot guy. Not complaining, just surprised.

Beltre, Helton, Mauer, and that's it

You were like 30 seconds ahead of me, Thermo. Is St. Marys that deep in the woods?

gonna be curious to see those percentages. not surprised Wagner didn't make it.

does this mean Posey is going to be a first ballot guy now?!

Sheffield is:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXP1MSFwMnc

Not sure how he'll fair with the VC, which is much the harder of the two to predict.

(Never doubted that Posey would be first-ballot, I guess because his career ended well rather than petering out--plus, obviously, the WS titles.)

Under 30% for Utley...that'll change quickly, I think.

the best chance for several of these guys is the upcoming desert of star candidates, post-suzuki. Posey, Molina, and uh Hamels are the "best" between the Suzuki ballot and the Pujols ballot.

not counting Cano and Braun, who seem like sub-10% guys potentially.

I'm glad Scott Boras isn't sitting on that couch.

i'd be shocked if Cano was under 10

Hard to say--the writers are especially punitive to players who tested positive well along the timeline.

plus it was two PED suspensions, and his stats are really impressive but not A-Rod/Manny territory.

i think he's also sort of a curiously forgotten guy, maybe because of the manner in which his career petered out statistically. i've gotta believe he'll do better than Braun for reasons both related to their stats and obv Braun's much worse behavior w/r/t his PED use.

Mauer's only the third first-ballot catcher after Bench and I-Rod.

poor billy

obviously there are arguments to be made about the true value of relievers, but he was lights-out when it was asked of him

Anyone else listen to Grimes’ “We Appreciate Power” and always hear “power” as “Mauer” and then start re-framing the lyrics to be about him?
No one? Ok.

Next five ballots: https://www.mlb.com/news/future-baseball-hall-of-fame-ballots-preview

Ichiro, Posey, Pujols, and Cabrera are first ballot inductees i bet. Molina, hard to tell. Sabathia? I'm maybe slightly agnostic on him; as far as lefty starters go he's probably closer to David Wells than he is Clayton Kershaw, but might have to dig in deeper considering the era he pitched in.

guys like Lester and Wainwright had nice careers, not dissimilar at all, but they should be in their team HOFs, not the MLB one.

really kinda curious to see where Granderson, Hernández, Kinsler, and Pedroia wind up in the voting next year. they were all great players to varying levels, though i don't think they would or necessarily should get voted in.

Jimmy Key (among my favourite Jays ever) and Russell Martin into the Canadian Baseball HOF.

https://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/article/martin-key-among-six-inductees-to-enter-canadian-baseball-hall-of-fame/

Paul Godfrey, I should mention, was instrumental in getting Toronto a franchise. He engineered the deal that almost landed us the Giants in '76, before George Moscone rescued them and kept them in San Francisco.

Comparison graphics frequently turn up on my FB wall. Some of them are far-fetched special pleading--someone trying to make a case that Dale Murphy was better than Reggie Jackson, stuff like that. One caught my eye today: John Smoltz vs. Kevin Brown. The graphic provided overall stats, i.e. including Smoltz's years as a closer, and their career lines were very similar. Just as starters:

Smoltz: 209-149, 3.40, 7.90 K/9, 2.92 K/BB, 1.192 WHIP, 3211.2 IP
Brown: 210-143, 3.26, 6.60 K/9, 2.67 K/BB, 1.219 WHIP, 3237.2 IP

Again, very close. I thought Brown might actually come out looking better, but I think there's a small but clear edge there to Smoltz. When you add 1) Smoltz's three seasons as a first-rate closer (a role that, if I remember correctly, he volunteered to step into), 2) Smoltz's stellar post-season record (overall, Brown was mediocre in the post-season in a much smaller sample), and 3) Brown's PED associations, it's more clear-cut why Smoltz in the HOF and Brown isn't than I thought it would be.