BBWAA Hall of Fame Ballot; Latest: Alomar and Blyleven elected (reply #35)

[RobertR]

My ballot:

 

Alomar

Blyleven

 

I see no real argument against either. They both stack up quite well against already qualified HoFers at their positions.

 

Larkin

Trammell

 

I think middle infielders, catchers, and third basemen have been underrepresented compared to corner outfielders and first basemen. I think they're both qualified.

 

Raines

 

He'd rank much higher if he wasn't a contemporary of Rickey Henderson. I'll take him over Dawson as well.

 

I'd probably leave it at that. Yeah, Parker deserves consideration if Rice and Dawson were in, but Parker fell off a steeper cliff and I consider Rice and Dawson mistakes as it is. Lee Smith is interesting, and I certainly think he's equivalent to Sutter, but I have him behind Hoffman and Rivera, and possibly Billy Wagner, on relievers not in the Hall and he's not a high priority to me. McGwire is probably qualified, but he has the steriod stink around him. I'm willing to make an exception for Bonds as a) I think his pre-PEDs career qualifies him and b) I think if it wasn't for Sosa and McGwire stealing the spotlight from Bonds when he was clean, Bonds might not have been tempted. I'll need some convincing on Bagwell as he fell off a cliff near the end, although his prime, especially considering the ballpark, makes an interesting case. Edgar Martinez is interesting, but I'd really have to figure out how to evaluate the DH. Molitor had defensive value when he played the field, Martinez didn't. Frankly, I'm willing to wait until Frank Thomas is up for a vote before deciding on Martinez. I don't have a particularly strong feeling on McGriff either way.

 

Robert

[joepepsi]

Great post Robert R. I agree on your selections.

 

Comparing a player like Parker to HOF members who arguably aren't deserving doesn't make a strong argument. Plus, Parker is similar, but slightly inferior to Rice as a hitter. He does compare to Dawson, but I don't think Dawson is that deserving. None of the 3 are outright disgraces should they all be elected, but neither do they "raise the bar" for enshrinement to the HOF. Instead, like Tony Perez, they open arguments for a multitude of similar players who had All Star careers, but are borderline HOF'ers at best.

[RockCoCougars]

In my view, Dawson is a no doubt Hall of Famer. Had he not played his home games in Olympic Stadium for most of his career, I think he probably hits 500 homers. Before the knees went, he was outstanding defensively as well. In my opinion, he was one of the top 5 players in baseball in the early 80's along with Brett, Schmidt, Murphy and Murray. I don't think that many would have rated him below Tim Raines in their primes. To me Raines was basically a Kenny Lofton type, who benefited by playing in a park that was made for him - lots of doubles and triples. I think if you look at the total package, Dawson was better than Rice hands down as well, because Rice was a butcher defensively. If you switch Dawson and Rice, Dawson playing his prime in Boston and Rice playing in Montreal, I bet Dawson's stats would have crushed Rice's. The major knock that I've seen against Dawson is a low OBP and batting average. Those are in large part due to the fact that he probably played a few years longer than he should have.

[TooLiveBrew]

Dawson posted an OBP of .340 or better five times in his 21-season career; it wasn't just playing too long. I can definitely get on board with the defense argument, but Rice was clearly the superior hitter. Rice's career park-adjusted OPS+ is 128, to Dawson's 119.

[Baldkin]

In my view, Dawson is a no doubt Hall of Famer. Had he not played his home games in Olympic Stadium for most of his career, I think he probably hits 500 homers. Before the knees went, he was outstanding defensively as well.

And if Raines doesn't get Lupus he may very well get to 3000 hits. We can say what if's all day long. Dawson did get hurt, and he wasn't great for that long as a result.

 

Raines career OPS+ is 123, Lofton's is 107. Raines stole 180 more bases and got caught 20 fewer times. They really aren't that comparable.

[crewcrazy]

Just guys I'd put in...I don't necessarily think everyone has to agree:

 

Alomar - One of the best offensive 2B ever.

Bagwell - If he played on the East coast he'd get the hype he deserves. Would've hit 500 HR if he didn't play most of his career early on in the Astrodome. Take a look at some of the OPS+ years he had.

Blyleven - The only thing that's kept him out is wins, and it's just ridiculous.

Larkin - Played about 4 years too long, but in his prime was one of the best players at his position. Won an MVP at SS before it was cool.

Edgar Martinez - Keeping him out because he was a DH for most of his career is silly, IMO. If you're going to have the DH, you might as well vote them into the HOF, and he was arguably the best in the 90s.

McGwire - Never really "got caught," the best power hitter of his time. Almost single-handedly restored national interest in baseball after the strike with the HR chase.

Palmerio - Unlike McGwire, he did get caught, but I don't personally care that much. Steroid Era was just another era in the game that should be represented in the hall, not talked about in hushed tones. He has the numbers to get in.

[DuWayne Steurer]

MNBrew brings up a great point. We know Gaylord Perry cheated and is in the hall of fame. McGwire was never 'caught', but he gets hardly a whimper of support.

Perry definitely doctored the ball (as did most likely Don Sutton and several others), but I don't think that's the same as utilizing a substance that increases your strength and muscle mass and improves your bat speed. In my opinion, none of the guys who have admitted and/or tested positive for steroids should even be on the ballot. How can they be when Pete Rose is not?

Isn't cheating, cheating, regardless of degree? Doctoring the ball was blatantly illegal, and these guys did it. How is that *more* illegal than using a banned substance? (Something McGwire has never been found GUILTY of?)

[RockCoCougars]

I think that altering one's body by using substances that increase strength and bat speed, and helping one recover faster from injuries is exponentially 'worse cheating' than applying KY jelly to a baseball. Going further the steroids were used behind the scenes, while Perry's 'greaseballs' were thrown literally right under the nose of the umpires who were supposed to enforce the rule, Perry was only caught once. Despite loading the ball, Perry still had to know how to control it, locate it well, etc. I think steroids are much worse, because all you have to do is look at what they did for guys like McGwire (who was never found guilty, but admitted using) and Clemens (no admission, but guilty as sin in my book). Both of those guys were regressing and/or injury prone during the early to mid 90's. Next thing you know they recover to be dominant forces. Palmeiro probably would have been about an average major league first basemen. He never did much with the Cubs, gets traded to Texas, meets Dr. Canseco and the rest is history. Though Bonds and ARod have better HOF arguments, how can you pinpoint when they started using? All of the accomplishments of these guys are tainted in my opinion.

[MNBrew]

I think that altering one's body by using substances that increase strength and bat speed, and helping one recover faster from injuries is exponentially 'worse cheating' than applying KY jelly to a baseball. Going further the steroids were used behind the scenes, while Perry's 'greaseballs' were thrown literally right under the nose of the umpires who were supposed to enforce the rule, Perry was only caught once. Despite loading the ball, Perry still had to know how to control it, locate it well, etc. I think steroids are much worse, because all you have to do is look at what they did for guys like McGwire (who was never found guilty, but admitted using) and Clemens (no admission, but guilty as sin in my book). Both of those guys were regressing and/or injury prone during the early to mid 90's. Next thing you know they recover to be dominant forces. Palmeiro probably would have been about an average major league first basemen. He never did much with the Cubs, gets traded to Texas, meets Dr. Canseco and the rest is history. Though Bonds and ARod have better HOF arguments, how can you pinpoint when they started using? All of the accomplishments of these guys are tainted in my opinion.

Using "foreign substances" to alter one's body to potentially gain a competitive advantage is more of an infraction than using "foreign substances" directly on the baseball explicitly to better deceive hitters, and thus gain a competitive advantage? Hardly. It's fundamentally the exact same issue.

 

The PED question has just gotten all the PR the past 5 years, and "spitballers" and other "cheating" pitchers just aren't the vogue issue of the day. But that doesn't change that it's the exact same issue.

 

I believe character matters. But for Perry to be embraced without question by his fellow HOFers while many of those same HOFers speak of the disgrace it would be if McGwire were inducted is a complete double standard that's been WAY escalated by the media based on the coverage the steroid stuff has gotten and the sensationalistic approach the media takes to anything that might be remotely controversial. That kind of "holier than thou" nonsense is absurd and completely for the birds. McGwire deserves to be in just as much as Gaylord Perry if not a whole lot more because he was one of the games absolute best HR hitters, period. Do you go back and un-induct all those guys who used "greenies" and other amphetamines in the '60s and '70s and '80s? Those were all about accelerating recovery just like steriods were. That'd knock Molitor and several of our other beloved out on their ears.

[endaround]

Alomar, Bagwell (he's much better than people think), Blyleven, Larkin, Martinez, McGwire, Palmeiro, Raines and Trammel.

[owbc]

Results:

 

Roberto Alomar 523 (90.0%)

Bert Blyleven 463

(79.7%)

Barry Larkin 361 (62.1%)

Jack Morris 311 (53.5%)

Lee Smith

263 (45.3%)

Jeff Bagwell 242 (41.7%)

Tim Raines 218 (37.5%)

Edgar

Martinez 191 (32.9%)

Alan Trammell 141 (24.3%)

Larry Walker 118

(20.3%)

Mark McGwire 115 (19.8%)

Fred McGriff 104 (17.9%)

Dave Parker

89 (15.3%)

Don Mattingly 79 (13.6%)

Dale Murphy 73 (12.6%)

Rafael

Palmeiro 64 (11.0%)

Juan Gonzalez 30 (5.2%),

[Outlander]

Pretty much what was expected, would have liked Raines to get a bigger bump. Surprised by how high Alomar's percentage was and how low Palmeiro's was.

[TooLiveBrew]

I'm surprised how high Alomar's was, too. Glad to see him get in, as well as Bert.

 

Sucks to see how little support Edgar Martinez got. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/frown.gif

[endaround]

Bagwell gets screwed because some guys think he may have at some point possibly used steroids

[splitterpfj]

I've thought Blyleven was obvious for years, and I was surprised when Alomar didn't make it last year...good for them!

 

My new choice for the most obvious guy who's still not in...Tim Raines.

[prophet]

MNBrew brings up a great point. We know Gaylord Perry cheated and is in the hall of fame. McGwire was never 'caught', but he gets hardly a whimper of support.

Perry definitely doctored the ball (as did most likely Don Sutton and several others), but I don't think that's the same as utilizing a substance that increases your strength and muscle mass and improves your bat speed. In my opinion, none of the guys who have admitted and/or tested positive for steroids should even be on the ballot. How can they be when Pete Rose is not?

Isn't cheating, cheating, regardless of degree? Doctoring the ball was blatantly illegal, and these guys did it. How is that *more* illegal than using a banned substance? (Something McGwire has never been found GUILTY of?)

I disagree. Not all cheating is the same. Doctoring the ball wasn't illegal, it was against the rules. Using steroids is both against the rules and illegal.

[chuckiehacks]

Bagwell gets screwed because some guys think he may have at some point possibly used steroids

Totally agree. There was an interesting Twitter discussion last night (I think Joe Posnanski started it) about Bagwell. The main question - list the best NL 1B of all time. Pujols is an easy #1. Then who? It's hard to not make a case for Bagwell.

 

As far as PEDs - this is by no means proof, but he wasn't in the Mitchell Report, wasn't on the "list of 103", and didn't have any of the circumstantial evidence against him that others had. He's spoken recently about his insane weightlifting regimine, and how it shortened his career. In addition, he attributes his power increase to the first season he worked with Rudy Jarimillo, who taught him how to efficiently hit for power. Jarimillo has a track record of being a great hitting coach.

 

Bagwell is the perfect of the writers making broad assumptions. This cheapens the HOF more than it would if they would just accept the fact that cheating hitters faced cheating pitchers for a long time (well before the 1990's and likely continuing in some fashion today) and we'll never know who was clean.

 

[Invader3K]

My opinion is that if they aren't banned from baseball, the guys who would get in based on stats should be voted for. I would have voted for Bagwell and also Palmeiro, among others.

[gregmag]

I didn't get in on this thread before, but Robert R obviously gets the prize for prediction, and he pretty much nailed what I think. I'm thrilled for Blyleven after too long a wait. Raines should be in. Larkin and Trammell should be in.

 

I also think McGriff, Bagwell, and probably Martinez should be in. Nobody talks about McGriff, but he played well into the 'roids era and hit 493 home runs. Three things, I think, are working against him. First, he was a lot like Eddie Murray -- insanely consistent over a long career, but never having that one breakout season that would put him at the top of the heap. I don't think that should be a negative for him; year after year, he kept putting runs on the board. But I think it makes his accomplishments less vivid in people's memories. Second, he moved around a lot and played for a bunch of nondescript teams. Third, and most interesting, I think he's caught in a 'roid era double bind. Five hundred homers used to be an automatic ticket to the Hall; 493 would have been close enough to force a guy into the discussion. But now a bunch of guys have hit 500 homers with chemical assistance, so that benchmark is (temporarily or permanently) dead. What should be happening is that McGriff should be getting credit as one of the best clean sluggers of his era (unless somebody knows something about him that I don't, but he was thin for a slugger his whole career). Instead, he has lost the benefit of a standard that he honored while others were trashing it.

 

Bagwell . . . is there any credible evidence that he used steroids? If not, he's a no-brainer. Martinez is a little tougher because he spent so much time as a DH. But his raw numbers certainly put him in the discussion -- he was every bit the hitter Bagwell was. Given that he's at least very close, I'm inclined to put a thumb on the scale because the Mariners jerked him around until he was 27. I'm not going to put a guy in for things he didn't do, but Martinez was so good for so long that I think losing his early years (when he also had defensive value) helps to push me in his favor.

 

Personally, I would take all three of those guys over Dawson, Rice, or Perez (or Parker), and I don't think it's especially close. Bagwell and Martinez were far superior hitters, and McGriff was somewhat superior. I don't think Dawson's defensive value, let alone Rice's, boosts them enough to close the gap.

[RockCoCougars]

Bagwell gets screwed because some guys think he may have at some point possibly used steroids

Though I don't think that he should get in anyway because he didn't hit any of the milestone (500 HR, 3,000 hits) numbers while playing in the juiced (balls and players) era of the mid to late 90's- I think that steroid use for Bagwell is a pretty safe assumption. Take a look at pictures of him during his rookie season and then about 3 years later....not even mentioning the fact that he was a teammate/friend of Ken Caminiti (unless you believe that it's a big coincidence that both of them all of a sudden develop a big time power stroke after the '93 off season) and the fact that his body abruptly broke down at the end of his career as is common with steroid users.

[sveumrules]

Even though Bagwell's never been "formally" connected the steroids suspicion has always been there for me because of the reasons RockCo mentions above. Look at his minor league power numbers, oh wait there's none to look at. Steve Finley and Luis Gonzalez were also teammates of Cam/Bags who went on to have curious power spikes in their later years, just a little more smoke.

 

People say steroids don't help you hit a baseball, but if you already are a great hitter like Bagwell was they'll certainly help you hit it farther and harder.

[gregmag]

I make no presumption when it comes to Bagwell and steroids, but if I'm reading the arguments right, the folks who think Bagwell was juiced are making an especially strong claim. The claim is that (a) Bagwell had no real power before steroids, (b) steroids caused his power to spike, and © (this is implicit) the spike lasted his whole career. That would be unprecedented, wouldn't it? As far as we know, what generally happened with steroids was either that the user was already a great power hitter and then juiced anyway for God only knows what reason (Bonds) or that the user wasn't a power hitter, juiced, and experienced a temporary power spike (Caminiti). I haven't focused on this, but I can't recall any case where a guy is thought to have owed his whole career as a power hitter to steroids.

 

Maybe that's what happened with Bagwell. Or maybe he juiced early in his career, got the power spike from the juice, and then went on to develop more "natural" power that sustained his power later (with or without a chemical boost). But I think the unusual character of the claim about Bagwell should at least lead us to think a bit more about what we have reason to believe happened to him.

 

BTW, I'm really not trying to argue "for" Bagwell. If he juiced, he should be treated the same as others who did, barring some extenuating circumstance or explanation. What worries me, obviously, is how we (and more importantly the HoF voters) should approach the question whether a given player used steroids. I also think that, if a guy who hasn't been publicly accused of steroid use is being denied because the voters believe he used steroids, then somebody owes us an explanation. Yes, such an explanation could trigger a defamation suit, but for that reason the BBWA institutionally should issue the explanation and defend the suit. IMHO it's cowardly to make a very public, very consequential decision based on nonpublic information and then keep quiet about the cause and effect.

[crewcrazy]

Bagwell gets screwed because some guys think he may have at some point possibly used steroids

Though I don't think that he should get in anyway because he didn't hit any of the milestone (500 HR, 3,000 hits) numbers while playing in the juiced (balls and players) era of the mid to late 90's- I think that steroid use for Bagwell is a pretty safe assumption. Take a look at pictures of him during his rookie season and then about 3 years later....not even mentioning the fact that he was a teammate/friend of Ken Caminiti (unless you believe that it's a big coincidence that both of them all of a sudden develop a big time power stroke after the '93 off season) and the fact that his body abruptly broke down at the end of his career as is common with steroid users.

Bagwell's body "abruptly" broke down at the age of 37. If abrupt injuries are a sign of steroid use, what do you think about Ken Griffey, Jr.? His body broke down and he played with admitted user Alex Rodriguez. By those standards, we have just as much evidence of Griffey using as we do for Bagwell, and no one's ever going to accuse Griffey. The picture argument doesn't prove much to me, either, since just about every player is going to get bigger as their careers progress...take a look at some pictures of Rickie Weeks during his rookie year and compare it to how he looked last year.

[Ennder]

I'll be pretty pissed if Raines never makes it in. Blyleven making it in was nice.

[RockCoCougars]

Griffey aged like Hank Aaron, more specifically, he developed a beer gut over 15 or 20 years. Bagwell went from a somewhat doughy rookie to a bodybuilder in a span of about three years. Based on what I've heard about Griffey's training regimen, or lack thereof, I highly doubt that he would go through the effort of using steroids. Griffey was basically injured on and off from '95 on, while Bagwell was playing about 150 games a year, develops an issue with a big joint (shoulder) and is done at 38..... coincidentally the same year that the MLB implemented strict steroid testing. Combine that with the fact that he played with a bunch of steroid users, and I think where you have smoke, you have fire.

 

At any rate, Griffey was a much better player than Bagwell anyway. Had Griffey used steroids, he might have hit 1,000 home runs.