I voted for Bonds and Clemens. Are you going to retroactively remove the 60s and 70s players that used uppers/greenies, which were as illegal as steroids? I considered each candidate in his time period, and for better or worse, steroids is a factor for the 90s players.
Bagwell and Piazza, both who are caught up in the steroid issue without proof, are also no brainers in my mind.
Biggio and Martinez are two I also believe are excellent HOF candidates, well above the average member.
Lastly, the underrated Raines and Trammell. Tim Raines was a significantly better baseball player than Andre Dawson, but didn't do any single item (other than stolen bases) like Dawson's home runs and throwing assists. Raines did a lot more overall, starting with getting on base and scoring runs. Larkin got in last year, not sure that he's better than Trammell, and Barry's a solid HOFer.
I didn't vote for McGwire or Sosa because I'm not convinced that they are deserving from a statistical viewpoint, not because of the steroids.
Demented and sad, but social, right?
Mr. Ultra Slim-Fast was misquoted. What he said was the HOF shouldn't be open to the most excessive eaters.
You must spread some comments around before flaming the Moderators again.
Interesting to note that so far no one is getting in the HOF this year... at least according to our ballot. Lots of folks in the 40-60% range, but no one reaches the magical 75% threshold.
-Jason "by the way, next year, the 2014 HOF class, should include Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux, Frank Thomas, Bobby Cox, Joe Torre, and Tony LaRussa" Evans
Add recently elected Hall of Famer Barry Larkin -- who played during the steroid era -- to the chorus of voices who do not think the PED cheaters should get into the Hall of Fame:
Jason, while you might be right that nobody will be elected by the BWA this year (too bad, I was hoping that Tim Raines would get it in a year with no obvious candidates, other than the cheaters), the veteran's committee (or whatever they arecalling it this year) will still meet and I'd be surprised if they didn't pick somebody.
Any chance for Marvin Miller to finally earn the election he so richly deserves?
I think next year is the Golden Age committee (1947-72) followed by the expansion era (72 on). Not much chance for modern players to get in, while they keep putting people in from before the world war(s)
Early indications are that DBR has it's finger on the pulse of hall of fame voting, with no one having the necessary 75% of ballots which have been publicly announced. We'll see if that changes tomorrow.
Demented and sad, but social, right?
Either way, I abhor this process although I find it fascinating.
Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.
You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner
You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke
I agree with pfrduke -- big difference between Tom Glavine and Greg Maddox.
Don't get me wrong -- I think Glavine is a HOFer ... but Maddox is one of the 5-6-7 greatet pitchers in history.
Glavine won 305 games ... Maddox 355
Glavine won 60.0 percent ... Maddox 61.0
Glavine pitched 4413 innings ... Maddox 5008
Glavine's career ERA was 3.54 ... Maddox was 3.16
Glavine's ERA plus was 118 ... Maddox was 132
Glavine won two Cy Youngs ... Maddox won four Cy Youngs (and I'll argue to my dying day that Maddox deserved the 1998 Cy Young that went to Glavine*).
And I guess I should mention Maddox's 18 gold gloves (the most for any pitcher)
The point is that both should go in -- but it's only a travesty if Glavine goes in before Maddox.
* In 1998, pitching for the same team in the same ballpark, Maddox had the lower ERA (2.22 to 2.47), pitched more innings 251 to 229, had a much better WHIP (0.98 to 1.20), gave up less hits (think about that -- in 32 more innings, he gave up LESS hits) and had a much better SO/BB ratio (4.53 to 2.82). Better ERA-plus too -- 187 to 168. But Glavine got significantly better run support (more than a run per game) and this ended up with 20 wins to Maddox's 18 -- so for that, they gave Glavine the Cy Young.
i\I know he won't get in, but I think Fred McGriff definitely deserves to be in the hall. If not for the strike shortened season he would have hit the random 500 hr mark, and his numbers are really good. I think (although I haven't double checked) that his numbers are better than Eddie Murray's across the board. The only think Murray had going for him was that he was a switch hitter (which is ultimately irrelevant in the grand scheme). I'm also a fan of Biggio, Piazza, Tim Raines*, and Jack Morris.
*I have heard stories that that the reason Tim Raines was nick named Rock, and the reason he always slid head first, was because of the coke he kept in his back pocket (also heard that about Dykstra). If there is truth to that, I'd be less likely to vote for him.
My Quick Smells Like French Toast.
Very happy to see the cheaters miss by so much -- Bonds and Clemens both under 40 percent, Sosa at 12.5 percent. And the holdover cheaters -- McGwire and Palmiero -- both saw thier vote totals decline.
I think it's obvious that the PED guys are never going to be voted in by the writers -- maybe in the distant future, some kind of veterans committee will force them down our throat -- but not the writers.
I was disappointed that some clean players didn't get in. I thought Biggio deserved it. I think Piazza and Bagwell are paying the price for some PED suspicions. As always, I think Raines deserved beter.
The interesting one is Jack Morris. He got 67 percent on his next-to-lasy ballot. If he doesn't make it next year (and with Maddox, Glavine, etc. on the ballot, he probably won't) then he'll becm thplayer with thehighest vote percentage ever to miss the Hall (right now that honor belongs to Gil Hodges at 63 percent) .. at eat he'll have that honor until a veterans committee puts him in.
Aren't some of Bonds' record breaking home run balls on display in the Hall already? It would seem that we have already honored some of his tainted achievements by placing artifacts from them in the Hall. If his statistical achievements still appear in the record books, I don't get why he would not be in the Hall.
I would love to see the Director of the Hall come out with a statement indicating that it would be up to the Hall, and not up to the player, to determine what information would be part of a player's HOF plaque and display. It would not just be about their golden moments, but also their notable failures... if appropriate. The message there would be, "if you induct one of these suspected PED abusers, we will make sure his display makes note of his tainted history."
As you can tell, I think the Hall needs to address the careers of players like Bonds and Clemens. There is little question that they are the best batter/pitcher of the past 25 or so years. Their play had a huge influence on a couple decades of baseball success for their teams. Omitting them from the Hall, like they did not exist, makes no sense to me. I don't want to see the taints on their careers glossed over, it should be a significant part of their Hall plaques. To me, it does matter that Bonds and Clemens were clearly on their way to HOF careers before they supposedly began taking PEDs. *
By the way, when Bud Selig is inevitably put into the Hall, his plaque should also make reference to him presiding over a dark era of baseball history where he and the other stewards of the game turned a blind eye to ridiculous abuse of PEDs.
--Jason "*- if Barry Bonds had died in a place crash in 1998, he would have been elected to the Hall with 90%+ the very next year" Evans
Craig Biggio not being selected was the one that kind of took me by surprise I thought 3,000 hits or 300 wins was almost a guarantee to get in on as a first ballot which makes Biggio the first person with 3,000 hits not associated with steroids or named Pete Rose to not get in on the first ballot since what '45. I also felt bad that Tim Raines didn't get selected again.
The fact that Murray was a first ballot HOF'er with 85% of the vote and McGriff hasn't gotten close, I think shows they weren't nearly the same player, statisically or in the eyes of the voters.
Last edited by JasonEvans; 01-10-2013 at 09:18 AM. Reason: fixed tags