He’s also considered to be one of the greats because he was such a dominant second baseman during his time.
how about inducting Cecil Fielder? 
j/k
I think official voters can vote for up to 10, so that’s what I’ll do.
My first pass through the list goes like this:
Bert Blyleven -possible
Joe Carter(x) - no way
Dave Concepcion - possible
Danny Darwin(x) - no way in hell
Andre Dawson -possible
Doug Drabek(x) - 1 Cy Young, but still no way.
Dennis Eckersley(x) - In just as a hero of my youth in Cleveland. 
Jim Eisenreich(x) - it is to laugh
Cecil Fielder(x) - I love him, but no
Steve Garvey - possible, but I always hated him, so no
Rich Gossage - possible
Keith Hernandez - has a great rep, but I hate him for taking money from Cleveland and then claiming to be injured, but not being too injured to go on Seinfeld. No vote from me.
Tommy John - possible
Jimmy Key(x) - no
Dennis Martinez(x) - no. Marichal remains the greatest Latino pitcher, even if El Presidente has more wins. I loved him when he ptiched for the Indians when he was nearing the end of his career, I can’t vote for a fellow who’s team previously made the World Series twice but didn’t let him start either time. ('79 or '83)
Don Mattingly - no. Donnie Baseball would never had been heard from if he played in Milwaukee.
Kevin Mitchell(x) - no
Paul Molitor(x) - in
Jack Morris -possible
Dale Murphy - close, but no
Randy Myers(x) - no
Dave Parker - possible, but drug scandal means no
Terry Pendleton(x) - close, but no
Jim Rice - possible
Juan Samuel(x) - no
Ryne Sandberg - possible
Lee Smith - possible
Dave Stieb(x) - close, but no
Bruce Sutter - in
Bob Tewksbury(x) - no way
Alan Trammell - as good as Sandburg at a tougher position. possible
Fernando Valenzuela - possible
Which leaves me with
In: Sutter, Molitor, Eck,
and Possibles: Fernando, Trammell, Sandburg, L. Smith, Rice, Morris, John, Gossage, Dawson, Concepcion, Blyleven.
I’ve already got 2 relievers on the ballot, so Smith and Gossage will have to wait for next year.
Morris was the best AL starter during the 1980s so he goes in.
Blyleven was consistently great even on so bad teams, and pitched well for the 1979 Series winning Pirates, so he goes in.
Fernando and John will have to wait too.
My final ballot reads: Sutter, Molitor, Eckersley, Morris, Blyleven, Trammell, Sandburg, Concepcion, Rice, Dawson.
I disagree. Checkout some of Gossage’s and Sutter’s peak seasons - they were averaging over an inning per relief appearance when they were at their best. In 1984, Sutter pitched 122.2 innings and recorded 45 saves. I doubt many of those were of the one-out variety.
That being said, my ballot would include all three of the above (Gossage, Eckersley and Sutter), plus Molitor, Sandberg, Trammell and Blyleven. Molitor’s an obvious choice. Blyleven was hampered by playing for shitty, small-market clubs and never got the attention he deserved. And I think voters are neglecting Sandberg and Trammell because of the inflated number’s today’s middle infielders are putting up. Trammell was the Derek Jeter of his day, and a better fielder as well.
I think I’ll even vote for Dale Murphy, as upon further reflection he didn’t tank nearly as badly as I thought he did, and his peak was huge. So it’s Molitor, Eckersley, Gossage, Sutter, Sandberg, Trammell, Blyleven, and Murphy for me.
(As a side note: man, was Danny Darwin mediocre for a long time. I can’t believe he played three more seasons after posting a 7.45 ERA at thirty-nine.)
Whether a relief appearance is one out or three, if the game is really already decided then the guy doesn’t deserve much credit for it. But the way the save rule is written, many of them really are meaningless. Yes, Gossage and Sutter had seasons where they really did affect the outcomes of a lot of games, but not that many, and not enough to make them equal with the existing Hall members. Longevity matters, too. Eck was truly dominant and over a long period, and a credit to the game as well, so he’s in on my card.
Danny Darwin is mute tribute to the effect of expansion on the talent pool. The Figger Filberts need a good, general fudge factor for “performers” like him.
I may add comments later, but just to give names -
Molitor
Gossage
Eckersley
Maybe:
Morris
Smith
Trammell
Everyone else:
Thanks for playing, here are your parting gifts…
They don’t have to be equal to existing members. They’re playing a different position than almost all of them (Fingers and Wilhelm are the only relievers in there).
That’s a big point in Sandberg’s favor. Realize that Mattingly played nearly his entire career as a DH and 1B, with only short sints at 3B or OF. All positions which are traditionally offensive producers over defense. Sandberg hit like a 1B over his career while playing upper tier defense at one of the tougher positions. He was basically the A-Rod of his era. If you compare him to 2B in the same era, no one really competes with him, whereas MAttingly fails miserably compared to his peers at 1B and DH, his good glove not withstanding.
One’s a second baseman and the other’s a first baseman?
The only obvious choices are Sandberg, Eck and Molitor. I’ll be shocked if Eckersley and Molitor don’t get in this year.
On my own ballot I would add Blyleven, but that’s never going to happen.
I’d vote for Sandberg and Sutter- the only two guys on the list I consider among the best ever at their respective positions.
Molitor is probably a lock, but he SHOULDN’T be.
No he’s got the 3000 hits. God knows that’s a pass.
He WAS a very good player for a long time, you gotta admit.
Very good player for a long time for some pretty poor teams in Milwaukee. Milwaukee, fer God’s sake!
Last time I checked, you made the HOF on your own merits, not on where you played or how good your team was.
Unless you were a shortstop for the Yankees who then became a broadcaster and who couldn’t get elected on your own merits and had to rely on your buddies on the Veterans’ Committee.
Frankly that applies to a LOT of guys who’ve been inducted by the Veteran’s Committee over the years.
But it’s true that playing in a major market appears to boost one’s chances. God help the Kansas City or Minnesota star.
You don’t make it based on how good your team performed, but it’s much easier to be overlooked as a good player if your team is in a small market, or if it was never successful.
I agree with that, but it looked like you were using where Molitor played as a reason why he isn’t qualified.
Not at all. Regardless of where he played, 3300 hits is 3300 hits. It would be foolish to keep him out. 3000 hits is still a huge milestone; it’s not becoming less important, like 500 HR is.
Well, Ryno and Donnie have similar numbers in some ways, although Sandberg stole 330 more bases and hit 62 more home runs and scored more runs and won his Gold Gloves at 2nd instead of at first (and Hrbek should probably have won some of those gold Gloves) and Mattingly never made the playoffs (as a YANKEE) while Ryno led the Cubs into the playoffs for the first time in 39 years…okay, the numbers are not so similar.
Ryno was the best at his position for a long stretch of time.
Mattingly was not.
My votes?
Molitor, Ek, Blyleven, Sandberg, Dawon, and nobody else.
Mattingly did make the playoffs, in his final year (1995); the Yankees were the wild card but didn’t get out of the first round.
Sandberg - Dominant second baseman in majors for a decade
Blyleven - fourth-most strikeouts in baseball history
Eckersley - excellent as reliever, pretty good as starter
Sutter - Dominant reliever in National League for a decade, master of the split-finger fastball.
Molitor - 3000+ hits, .300+ average.
Close, but no cigar:
Trammell - In top tier of shortstops of his time, but not necessarily THE best (Ripken, Yount), stats not otherwise HoF caliber.
Murphy, Mattingly - Excellent for a few years, but at their positions, the bar for HoF is higher…plenty at those positions consistently excellent for longer.
Smith - This is a toughie. I’d hate to leave the career leader in saves out of the HoF, but he never really dominated, and too many of his saves were cheapies.
Morris - Anoher toughie. Best pitcher of his era - but only if “era” is very rigidly defined. Middle of pack at beginning of career and middle of pack toward end of career. He was good, but he wasn’t a Carlton, a Palmer, a Seaver, a Clemens, a Johnson…or a Blyleven. So I say no.