The fact that McGwire has not gotten in, does not bode well for Bonds and others who are presumed to be on steroids. McGwire has the testimony to haunt him too, but someone has to bust the bubble. Sportswriters will have some soul searching to do. Can someone actually not vote for Bonds?
You mean the award Palmerio got for some quality DHing?
Visquel was a good defense SS, but not an all time great one, and certainly not in Ozzie’s league. His longevity is impressive, but I don’t see much of a case.
The guy with the all time best fielding % in MLB history and 2 of the best fielding seasons all time wasn’t an all time great SS?
Nobody’s said Vizquel wasn’t a great shortstop.
I am disagreeing with your assertion that Vizquel was “probably the greatest defensive middle infielder of all time.” That’s a very different claim from just saying he was “great.” I do not believe he was, or even that he probably was. Ozzie Smith was the greatest defensive shortstop of all time, in my honest opinion. If I am not mistaken all advanced defensive metrics place him clearly as the best shortstop of modern baseball.
Omar was certainly a fine defensive shortstop but Ozzie was, to my eyes, the best defensive infielder I have ever seen.
Hawkeyeop said exactly that. OPINIONS!!!
Correct. Fielding percentage is a flawed stat in determining fielding performance. For starters it an opinion stat, a favorable home town scorer can drastically lower a player’s error totals. Beyond that it doesn’t measure range, all else being equal a player who gets to 700 balls and boots 10 is less valuable than one who gets to 750 balls and boots 20, yet fp says the opposite. There are more problems with it, but those are the most important. In 1993 Omar Vizquel got to a career high 735 balls. Ozzie Smith reached 771 8 times including a whopping 933 in 1980. Not in the same ballpark.
No, he said he wasn’t an “all time great”. COMPREHENSION!!!1111!! 
I think stat geeks are deluding themselves when they say they can rate a players fielding. At least to a meaningful level. Then they pretend they compare them to other players and eras. Infielders have to deal with short hops and bad bounces. Well, not Ozzie, he played on carpet. But each ground ball is a little different in speed, spin and bounce. I can not accept their ratings as definitive. I will agree that after a while you know a good defensive player from a weaker one. But only on general terms. Ozzie was a very good defensive player as is practically every major league shortstop. He may have been the best of his time but Vizquel, Trammel, Yount and others could cover a field very well.
I propose we ask the mods to deny gonzo the ability to respond to discussions involving defense. gonzo, you trot out the exact same arguments every single time, and refuse to even put one element of thought into the fact that there simply is no fancy “formula” or “rating” involved in adding up Putouts and Assists.
Or lying about Ozzie Smith’s 978 games played on natural grass.
Can you spit out some defensive stats (range factor, etc.) about those games? It would be interesting to see how much Ozzie’s rep was burnished by his “advantage” in playing on turf.
I was going to in that post, but baseball-reference doesn’t split out defensive stats like they do offense. I’m sure it’s available somewhere. Either way, his 4 years playing on grass in San Diego were absolutely outstanding. For his career, Ozzie got to and made a play on an average of 5.03 balls a game. For his 4 years in San Diego, he got to 5.45 balls. In St. Louis, it dropped to 4.90 (4.93 if you discount his final three seasons). For apples to apples, in his first 4 years in St. Louis, he got to 5.39.
In Vizquel’s career, he averaged 4.36 a game.
Not so much offended as annoyed by token votes. There’s legit debate at the top of the list for 2010 (Dawson, Blyleven, Alamor, Mac) that it annoys me that 7 voters spent time casting a vote for Ventura. The more I look at the process, the more annoyed I get. I understand that there’s no way to fix the “first ballot” distinction (I feel it’s useless) and there’s no way to stop friendly votes at the bottom of the ballot, but I wish there was.
I think we need 2 things to happen. First, we need someone to get in with 100% of the votes. Let’s remove the old arguement that no one has ever gotten in with 100% as a motivator for folks not to vote. Secondly, I’d like to raise the 5% needed to stay on the ballot to 10%. I’m not strictly small hall, but a little smaller wouldn’t be the worst thing. I’d also like to take the votes away from those who abstain year after year.
Eh…I’m just cranky about the results this year. My trip to Cooperstown every year is a highlight for me, and I imagine one-sided debates about how much the writers suck this summer. Maybe when the weather gets warmer my mood will improve.
So 7 people voted for Ventura-so what? They knew he had no chance, it’s doubtful that their doing so “stole” a vote from another more deserving player (tho, as I said, that’s about to change); they just wanted to express that he was likely a favorite player of theirs when active. I honestly don’t see why this is grounds to get thy panties in a knot. And like I also said, Ventura wouldn’t stick out too badly among HoF 3B: I think I could probably put him above George Kell, Freddie Lindstrom, and Jimmy Collins. There’s only 10 3B in the Hall, which definitely seems to be on the low side to me (Santo is the best eligible 3B not in tho and I’d vote for him first).
My “So What” boils down to…Vote for Hall of Famers.
Don’t withold votes for someone you’re going to vote for next year. Don’t cast token votes. Don’t make the process more unwieldy than it needs to be. I know that’s not the way it is, but it’s what I want. Here’s your ballot. Who’s a Hall of Famer? Vote for them. Simple. Then we can discuss the merits of guys who got in or almost got in. I have to question the way a guys mind works if he think Karros is a Hall of Famer…maybe his other criteria is lacking as well.
If a writer thinks Alamor’s spitting means he’ll never vote for him, I’ll respect that (I don’t agree) but for guys to come out and say “Not on his first ballot” annoys me. Token votes annoy me too.
If a writer loved a guy so much, he can write a damn column about him. That way votes are what they are…votes for the Hall of Fame.
Ventura is a bad example. Top defensive 3rd baseman and good hitter at under represented position. He deserved some votes. More so than say Jim Rice…
Andy, your post should be printed and attached to every Hall of Fame ballot issued to BBWAA members from now on.
http://freep.com/article/20100108/COL22/1080366/1319/Should-Alan-Trammell-be-in-the-Hall?-Absolutely Trammell should get more respect.
Yount 285/342/430
Alan 285/352/415
Yet Yount walks in and Trammell barely stays on the ballot.
Yount has a bit less than 3,000 more plate appearances than Trammell. That’s about 4 1/2 extra seasons.
3000 is pretty magical to voters. They were extremely similar players, but Yount’s ability to stay healthy for 550 more games over the same amount of years gives him a much bigger advantage. 550 is 3 years of games.