Remember, 10 votes maximum, you’re on your honor…
Sorry I goofed the alphabetical order; not a dig against Robbie Alomar or Carlos Baerga.
Poll is Public.
Maybe I’m feeling generous, but I voted for Alomar, Larkin, Raines, Martinez, Bagwell, Trammell, Blyleven, and McGriff.
I am not a small hall guy. I voted for Roberto Alomar, Jeff Bagwell, Bert Blyleven, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, Mark McGwire, Fred McGriff and Tim Raines.
I’m curious about those who voted for McGwire but not Palmeiro. Anyone want to offer any insight there?
I’m going with Alomar, Bagwell, Byleven, Larkin, Edgar Martinez, McGriff, Palmeiro and Raines. I should vote for McGwire - he probably deserves to get in. But, I never liked him as a player and he hasn’t covered himself in glory since he retired. So. No. A very spiteful illogical No. Also, if I could, I would put some negative votes down on Morris. On a positive note - I really hope this is Byleven’s year. If his acceptance speech is similar to his broadcast it should be pretty fun. Plus, he was an awesome pitcher. My wild guess on who is going to get in this year is Alomar and Byleven.
Man, it’s weird reading Kevin Brown’s stats. I remember him being so dominant. And, he was for a bit. But, he didn’t keep it up long enough. That '96 season was pretty good. I think I just remember him based on that, and figured he had to get in. Oh well. He made a lot of money.
I’m very small hall. Alomar only this year. No this year and every year on Blyleven.
:smack: I rushed my vote and left off Raines. I’m not a particularly big Hall type, but there are a lot of qualified candidates this year. I maxed out my ballot and still left off Raines.
A small hall type that includes Alomar, but not Bagwell?
His WAR is better than Roberto Alomar, Jackie Robinson, Juan Marichal, Yogi Berra…
It’s way ahead of Jim Rice. Brown wouldn’t be a horrible selection.
I voted for Bagwell, Blyleven, Alomar, Edgar Martinez, and Lee Smith. I should have voted for Larkin.
I voted for Alomar and Larkin and accidentally left off Raines. I also voted for Mattingly, but that’s a sentimental vote knowing he has no chance.
Bags, Larkin, Edgar, Crime Dog, Morris, Raines, and yes…Lee Smith.
Off the top of my head, without reviewing stats, I voted for guys I thought had the chops AND preserved the integrity of the game (for the most part).
Bags was a top level, dominating force at 1B for a long enough time. So was McGriff. Edgar was the most dominating DH of his time, and like it or not, DH is a position. So is closer, and Lee Smith should be an absolute stone cold lock for the Hall as a dominating closer for years. Larkin was the best SS in the NL for quite a while. Morris and Raines are borderline, but I consider both of them to have been dominating enough in their time.
Blyleven just does not impress me *that *much. His longevity is commendable, but I do not consider him to ever have been a really *dominating *pitcher.
Alomar will get in, but I’m not voting for him…not this time around. I know he’s got the chops but the lasting image I have of that a-hole is him spitting on an umpire. So, I make him wait for my vote.
I did not vote for the known juicers - BigMac and Raphie.
Jim Caple rips into the writers who left off suspected PED users - article here.
I get sick of the “integrity of the game” argument, as well as the “personal character” argument for leaving people off HOF ballots. The first class of the HOF included the biggest scumbag on the planet, Ty Cobb. In the great words of Old Hoss Radbourn: “As an undead ghoul, I am often out of the loop. Can someone tell me when the game that PED users desecrated was pure and sin-free? I forget.”
Smith racked up a buncha saves, but he was never the guy you were afraid to see at the end of the game a la Eckersley or Trevor Hoffman never mind Rivera.
He averaged 12 complete games and 3 shutouts a season, with a 3:1 K-BB ratio. What metric of “dominating” are you using?
Wins and losses.
I think Bert was a significantly better pitcher than Jim Palmer. Put Palmer in front of say those 70’s Cubs defenses, and he never wins 20 games and is now forgotten. But he had the fortune of a great defense (possibly the best defense in the history of the game) and a good offense, while Bert had mediocre defenses and offenses which simply didn’t score as many runs for him as they did for their other starters.
He was already bypassed last year, which was ridiculous given how good he was. It’s that much more absurd because Alomar and John Hirschbeck settled their differences a long time ago. I’m more than happy to keep the steroid users waiting. Frankly, I’m just not going to support any of them until I’m done being pissed off at them even though I’m well aware that baseball has a long and storied history of cheating and there’s no specific demarcation between these cheaters and the ones in the past.
Blyleven was apparently not considered all that dominating by his peers as he was selected to only 2 All Star games in his 22 year career and never sniffed a Cy Young. Now, I’m not saying All Star games and awards are a huge determining factor for a HOF career, but they are at least some indication of where a player stands in his era.
And forget about wins (which, granted, are a big part of the aforementioned awards), he never led his league in ERA. He led his league in K’s once. I just don’t think of him as a dominating pitcher.
I forgot Palmeiro.
Peak over career.
A few things (and we can start a Blyleven thread if this starts getting off-track): ASG selection is a truly terrible measure. He was on teams with tremendous offensive talent - and as a pitcher, that hurt his ASG selection odds. The manager selects the pitchers, and typically does a few things: select players from his own team, and is required to fill in players from any teams that don’t have offensive representation on the team. When a manager is picking 6-8 pitchers, great players are going to be left out. (Add in the faulty W-L emphasis at the time, and Bert’s screwed.)
As for Cy Young awards, we all know that it went to the guy with the flashy (and meaningless) W-L record. Bert pitched best in the 2nd half and in the post-season, exactly when you want pitchers to really dominate.
The “his contemporaries didn’t think he was dominate” argument is hollow. That’s why we wait 5 years before players are eligible for the HOF and give them 15 years after that to get to 75%. We don’t want his contemporaries making gut decisions - we want a calculated and reasoned determination of talent.
Anything else to it? Because you also voted for Blyleven, Raines, and Larkin, none of which had any particularly dominate peak at all. Just curious - I was initially wondering if it was PED-related or something.