Yup - I suspect that’s likely. I think we’ve seen the vote actually improve since we’ve started doing public polls.
I wasn’t very active in those, because I was knee-deep in a new job, but thought they were excellent. The quality of discussion and voting in them was excellent - and I think it was because people were forced to make more of an effort.
This needs to be redone with Vizquel, perhaps the most controversial new candidate, included. He’s currently over the 75% mark in early voting.
Feel free to start an Omar Vizquel-specific thread. That might actually be a very different, interesting way of discussing the issue.
I wonder if some people think certain guys are tied to PEDs, like Thome. Was he ever? I don’t think so, but I don’t remember exactly for sure. I mean, he was a pretty big, strong guy, after all. A big, strong baseball player? Must be using. But Chipper, you know, he stayed pretty svelte, relatively speaking. So he must have been clean.
Despite the 600+ homers he accumulated, I doubt anyone ever really considered Thome the best 1st basemen in any given year or over a stretch of years. He is an accumulator more than a great but for me at least 600+ homers for a clean* player gets him a golden ticket into the hall.
Yes, Thome was big and strong, but he had more of a rawboned, barrel-chested build, which didn’t necessarily suggest steroids usage.
Chipper Jones is getting 80% of the vote here but at least one sports writer thinks he shouldn’t be put in the HOF.
Honestly, I enjoy the discussion and completely ignore the voting in these threads (aside from casting my initial votes). ETA - ugh, Chipper Jones is an Alex Jones fan? Bleah.
have no idea why but overlooked Trevor Hoffman. Should not have done so. That guy’s an easy HOFer.
From the list, I think I have the following:
Chipper Jones
Curt Schilling
Trevor Hoffman
Maybe, eventually…
Roger Clemens
Barry Bonds
(But while you’re at it, Pete Rose and Shoeless Joe)
Okay - I’ll bite. I’m really curious why people vote for Hoffman but not Mussina. Hoffman was an awesome reliever - far better than most. But Mussina is possibly one of the 20 best pitchers since integration. In the context of all pitchers, Hoffman maybe cracks the top 200?
I know I struggled with a bit of a perception problem with Mussina for a while. The tail end of his career wasn’t exciting, he was a Yankee, and he didn’t put up gaudy strikeout numbers. But digging a little bit deeper, he was an elite-level workhorse - a combination that rarely occurs. His command was brilliant for a very long period.
And I also think Schilling is HOF-worthy - but he’s a couple tiers below Mussina.
I’d rank Schilling with Mussina, quite clearly; I do not see how he was not at least Mussina’s equal. What did Mussina do better in the regular season? He sure can’t touch Schilling’s postseason brilliance.
I have to agree with this post. Schilling & Mussina are close to equal regular season and Schilling was a great postseason pitcher. (Damn it)
Outside of Schilling being an ass, they are both lesser HOFers but if anything Schilling > Moose. Oh, Moose was a better fielder, actually a really top notch fielder but I still give the overall edge to Schilling.
I dunno, I think they’re at worst mid range Hall of Famers. I can very easily name 25 Hall of Fame pitchers not as good as Curt Schilling. Juan Marichal wasn’t as good as Curt Schilling. Don Drysdale wasn’t. Catfish Hunter wasn’t. I could go on.
Mussina pitched about one season’s worth of innings more than Schilling did. Schilling had a very slightly better ERA, in context. They’re very close in terms of their regular season performance, unless someone has evidence their differing W-L records are a product of Schilling’s ineptitude, rather than just his having a lot of his good years with very bad Phillie teams. Unlike Mussina, Schilling had a hell of a playoff career.
The problem Mussina and Schilling both have is that they pitched at the same time as Clemens, Maddux, Johnson, and Pedro Martinez (and to a lesser degree, Glavine). “Arguably the fifth-best pitcher of his generation” is kind of weak, but I do think that people will eventually decide that yes, there were that many HOF-worthy pitchers all pitching at that time.
Roughly half of all players are pitchers. Roughly half of your Hall picks should be, too.
Martinez had one of the signature hits of my childhood, a walk-off double to beat the Yankees in a crazy playoff series in 1995.
Maybe not quite Schilling, but Mussina was an excellent post-season pitcher and doesn’t get enough credit for it. Look at his 1997, where he gave up 4 runs in 4 starts and beat Randy Johnson in his prime twice in a five game series. The numbers get skewed a bit due to much of his post-season career occurring past his prime, but nI’d take him in a big game with almost anyone. Regardless Schilling and Mussina are both clear hall of famers and it is silly to vote Hoffman, who threw one third of their innings over them.
Fifth/sixth best pitcher is historically a Hall-of-Famer. The complete lack of pitchers elections is a weird modern convention.
I thought “really, wow” until I saw that only reflected 10 ballots. That’s a little too early to be discussing percentages.
I would have to be convinced that Vizquel was a better defensive shortstop than Ozzie or Andrelton to make up for the career .688 OPS and 82 OPS+.
I’m more curious why the guy voted for Bonds last year but not this year.
Even with my rather lenient view of relievers and their HOF worthiness, I would not say half of the Hall should be pitchers.
He answered that in the first sentence of his letter “Although it’s quite obvious that past steroid and PED users have been inducted, it’s important to listen to Morgan and the Hall of Famers.” In other words, he’s listening to the idiotic words of Joe Morgan.