I voted for the max again: Bagwell, Bonds, Clemons, Edmonds (just to keep him on the ballot, really - not sure if he deserves it or not), Griffey, Martinez, Mussina, Piazza, Raines, and Trammell.
In retrospect should probably find a way to get Schilling and Walker on there too… too much backlog.
In approximate order of preference:
Bonds
Clemens
Griffey Jr.
Piazza
Raines
Bagwell
Martinez
Schilling
McGwire
Trammell
I actually had exactly 10, didn’t have to leave anyone off, which is the first time in a while.
I guess Mussina would be #11. He gets a hella-big era adjustment, so I may be underrating him, but he gets the dreaded “just doesn’t feel like a HOFer” label (from me, at least). Still produced about as much value (or more) than all but the first three names on that list.
I just picked ten names quickly but I’ll now go through them and probably come to slightly different conclusions. I like seeing how my instant reaction differs from what I think when I really put some thought into it.
Hoffman, though, wouldn’t come close to making my list. I wouldn’t mind him getting elected but I don’t think he’s one of the 15 greatest players on that ballot.
I agree, which is why that’s not the only test. While it’s valid to find comparable players already in the HOF to use as measuring stick, there must be other criteria. And I certainly wouldn’t compare every player on the ballot to Sutter, who may be the worst voted in by the BBWAA.
Seven insta-clicks for me: six that I voted for last year (and have every year since they’ve been eligible), plus one newcomer:
M. Piazza
J. Bagwell
T. Raines
E. Martinez
A. Trammell
L. Walker
K. Griffey, Jr.
There are a bunch more that I’d be willing to have a discussion about, but I think the following three are pretty easy now that the log-jam has eased a tiny bit:
R. Clemens
B. Bonds
M. Mussina
Think about it for next year:
C. Schilling, Now Even More Definitively a Terrible Human Being (yes)
G. Sheffield (probably yes)
M. McGwire (probably yes)
J. Kent (probably no)
S. Sosa (probably no)
T. Hoffman (hellllll, no - pitched in probably the best pitcher’s park of his era, used extremely favorably, 200 IP short of Mariano and wasn’t nearly as good, 600+ IP short of Gossage/Fingers, only comparable in the HOF is Sutter who was maybe the worst BBWAA vote-in ever)
Not even 33% support for Mussina? Come on, people!
You mean, like:
“I never vote for anybody in his first year on the ballot”
“I never vote for anybody on his first ballot who’s still alive”
“If (fill in the blank - usually Hank Aaron; Howard Cosell was convinced that at least one voter didn’t vote for him because he didn’t want a black player to be the first unanimous selection) wasn’t good enough for unanimous selection, then none of these players are either”
There’s also “He wouldn’t give me an interview that one time, said he had to get on the plane or something, so I finally have a chance to get back at him real good.”
I’m surprised Mussina and even Schilling are getting as much support as they are. I think you have to put a lot of weight on Schilling’s postseason success, which is perfectly valid, to vote for him. I didn’t vote for either, but in retrospect, I could be convinced to vote for Schilling.
Interesting contrast. I think Mussina is a pretty clear HoFer (as more of a “big Hall” kind of fan), but as someone who watched a lot of baseball in the era in which he pitched, he never really seemed like that at the time. Odd…
For example, if you’re at all a fan of WAR, Baseball Reference has Griffey, Jr at 83.6 career WAR. Mussina? 83.0.
Mussina’s best years were also pitching in the AL East in the height of the steroid era, so the raw numbers look relatively less impressive. He had ten seasons of 5 or more WAR (baseball-reference edition), and only one of them came with an ERA under 3… but those were the years when the league average ERA was pushing 5. 2001 is a really good example: zero AL ERA qualifiers under 3 (albeit in the year Pedro got hurt), and Mussina probably deserved the Cy Young that year (but was never winning it when Clemens was 20-3).
So when Clemens (or any one of the other hundreds of roided-up pitchers) was pitching to Bonds (or any one of the hundreds of roided-up batters), how was there any advantage?
If you want to give special consideration to players who we know *didn’t *use PEDs (assuming that can ever be proven), then go for it…but in an era where ‘everybody’ was doing it, certain players still stood out far above their peers.
The bottom line is that they were just plain better ballplayers than the other men of their generation, and for that they deserve to be in the HoF.
And Schilling clocks in at 80.7. Tom Glavine? 74.
There is some weird effect going on in the “steroid era” (or for pitchers whose career spanned the '90s) - do we really think 3 of the top 9, 5 of the top 25, and 9 of the top 40 all started their careers between 1983 (Clemens) and 1992 (Pedro)? Is Kevin Brown really better than the best pitcher since Pedro? (Brown, 68.5; Roy Halladay 65.6).
…
That said, I think Mussina and Schilling both get in eventually, because the later crop of pitchers (up until maybe Greinke, or King Felix, or maybe even Kershaw) look to fall well short of them in terms of career length & accomplishment.
To me Griffey is the only slam dunk. I voted for Edgar & Bagwell as well though. Hoffman was borderline, probably will go in eventually, maybe in a few years.
Won’t vote for the steroid cheats. My opinion, my suspicions. That rules out Clemens & Bonds without any question and even Piazza I left off.
Moose is a player I am a fan of but I feel as though he belongs to the Hall of the very good. Same with Schilling. Both fall below my cut.
Lifetime WAR is not a great stat for HOF consideration in my opinion as pointed out above.
A big part of that is longevity… even if we completely ignore the PED aspect (Hi, Roger!), the advances in medical science are a big part of that. Tommy John and similar as something we can do, and as something that 90% of pitchers come all the way back from. Conditioning and awareness of fatigue/stress really started to get there in the 90s. So it doesn’t strike me as impossible that on a longevity-based metric, we’d be biased towards recent pitchers.
Flip side of that: lots of weird situations or unfortunate injuries with the best pitchers whose careers started in the mid-90s to mid-00s. Halladay being done in an instant at 35 (and racking up a hilarious negative 3 WAR in his age-23 year - put a positive 3 there and he’s over 70 and things make more sense). Cliff Lee not figuring it out until he’s 29. Brandon Webb breaking a month before he turned 30. Dusty Baker and Wood/Prior. Sabathia was that guy until he turned 32. I could keep going… for whatever reason, none of the absolute top talents in that generation combined “figured it out early” with “lasted fifteen years”.
(For what it’s worth, at the time I’d have sworn Webb was going to be the guy from that generation. Over 30 WAR in six years, not overly dependent on velocity, strikeouts, ground balls, and control, no real weaknesses. No reason he couldn’t roll off 5-WAR years into his late 30s. Then he just physically disintegrated.)
That said, the adjustments for the steroid era, especially in the AL, are also at the margins of what we’ve ever seen in baseball. So that’s a little weird too. Worth discussion!
OK here we go:
GARRET ANDERSON - Of course not.
BRAD AUSMUS - If Brad Ausmus had played before the Second World War he might well have been elected to the Hall of Fame. Guys who caught a long time and were good defensive catchers were pretty popular candidates. That’s over now, though; guys who caught almost 2000 games are common.
JEFF BAGWELL - Long overdue.
BARRY BONDS - There are a lot of guys on this list who are very obviously Hall of Fame players but aren’t getting in because they’re under the steroid cloud, are assholes, or both. Frankly, I’m just giving up and going by how much they did on the field. So Bonds is in. Let history sort out the roids.
LUIS CASTILLO - Castillo was as good a player as Garret Anderson but I think he’s best remembered for the time he played a whole year, hit pretty well, and only drove in 17 runs. Isn’t that amazing? I think it must be some kind of modern record.
If I paid the Blue Jays to let me play every day, could I drive in 17 runs? I’m pretty sure I could. Even with intense pre-season bating practice and coaching I’d probably hit no better than an OK pitcher, maybe .125 and I might luck out and drill a home run or two. But even then I bet I could stll drive in 17 runs by sheer luck. You’re gonna drive in a run on a groundout every now and then. How on earth did he do that?
ROGER CLEMENS - Am even bigger asshole than Barry Bonds. Actually, probably five times the asshole Bonds was; Bonds was surly and mean with the press, but Clemens was a proactive asshole to everyone. He was still a great, great pitcher and he should be in the Hall of Fame.
DAVID ECKSTEIN - Awww, he’s so CUTE! Who’s a good shortstop? Who’s a good little shortstop? Is it you? Is it you! Yes it is! Does the little by want a Hall of Fame vote? Does he? Does he? No.
JIM EDMONDS - Edmonds has a stronger case than you might think. Absent injuries he’d be a shoo-in. At the height of his powers he was an awesome player. He does not quite crack my ballot, but it’s close.
NOMAR GARCIAPARRA - Obviously an even more obvious case of a great player whose candidacy was ruined by injury. Prior to going down with a bad injury in 2001 he was a better player than Derek Jeter.
TROY GLAUS - I remember when the Blue Jays traded Orlando Hudson to get Troy Glaus they made a big deal about the fact Glaus was a World Series MVP, as if it made a damn difference on a team that wasn’t going to make the World Series. Glaus had an MVP-type season in 2000, and then was never that good again.
KEN GRIFFEY JR. - I wonder how many home runs he could have hit if he hadn’t gotten hurt in Cincinnati. 800? Possibly.
The Onion ran an arcticle once titled to the effect of “Nation Wishes It Was Ken Griffey Jr., Not Barry Bonds, Chasing Home Run Record.” So true. So very true.
MARK GRUDZIELANEK (SP?) – Obviously not a Hall of Famer, but he was a good player. When you think of him, how do you picture him? Probably a scrappy little guy, not as small as David Eckstein (who is?) but a little second baseman, right? Actually he was a reasonably big guy, a bit over six feet, close to 200 pounds. I just found that out. It’s weird how the way a player plays affects out mental image of them. You probably think of Willie Mays as a big athletic specimen, too, but Mays wasn’t near the size of Mark Grudzielanek. Neither was Hank Aaron.
MIKE HAMPTON – Nobody ever made a worse free agent decision than Mike Hampton deciding to go to Colorado.
TREVOR HOFFMAN – I appreciate that Trevor Hoffman saved 600 games or whatever, but relief aces just aren’t that valuable. Hoffman’s entire career basically amounts to four good seasons by Roy Halladay. There are probably 500 players I could name that were more valuable than Trevor Hoffman who aren’t in the Hall of Fame and never will be.
Yes, I know, that means I’m saying relievers should almost never get in. Oh well, they should have been full time players. It’s not my fault they’re used like pinch hitters.
JASON KENDALL – I sort of remember Jason Kendall.
JEFF KENT – Yet another asshole. Kent was fascinating to watch because he looked remarkably unathletic. He was stiff, I guess is the best way to put it. He played baseball without bending, like a man with a back brace on. He had none of the fluid smoothness you normally see in professional athletes, but he was a hell of a player all the same. Not quite HOF worthy.
MIKE LOWELL – I sort of remember Mike Lowell, too.
EDGAR MARTINEZ – As usual Edgar is polling very well, as he always does in these threads.
I’ll ask, as I did last year; why? What about Edgar Martinez makes him a better choice than Larry Walker, who right now has fewer than half the votes? Martinez was a better hitter; he was also a DH. Every analytical stat says Walker was, overall, just as good or better. So why does Edgar get such love? I wouldn’t mind seeing him elected, but geez, there’s a lot of candidates who used a glove, too.
FRED MCGRIFF – One of the few players to ever lead both leagues in home runs. I loved him when he was a Blue Jay, and was disappointed when he was traded, but that worked out pretty well.
MARK MCGWIRE – I said Yes to McGwire and I’m regretting it already. Leaving aside the roids, McGwire is still not a clear cut candidate; his career was very short.
MIKE MUSSINA – I said yes to Mussina and regret it not a bit. A terrific pitcher for a long time who went out on his own terms.
MIKE PIAZZA – Obviously yes. Not as bad a defensive catcher as he was reputed to be; he couldn’t throw out basestealers but in an era when there wasn’t a huge amount of basestealing anyway. He did other things well as a catcher.
TIM RAINES – I voted yes but it’s worth noting the analytical stats say Raines isn’t any better than a lot of other guys, which I admit surprises me. WAR rates him as being about as good as Kenny Lofton, and I bet Kenny won’t last a year on the ballot. Or didn’t. Much of the downgrade is based on his defense, which according to the analytical stats was really quite bad. I don’t know what to make of that; when Raines was in his prime I was too young to truly understand outfield defense, and they don’t have the full stats for back then they do now. I guess it’s possible but I’m giving Raines a little credit for a possible illusion of context. I say yes.
CURT SCHILLING – A King Asshole. WAR rates Schilling as an incredible player, about 80 WAR. According teo Fangraphs, Schilling was a greater player than Pete Rose, Brooks Robinson, or Joe DiMaggio. Bet you didn’t see that coming from a guy whose career record was 216-146.
I honestly think WAR overrates the contribution of pitchers in high offense years. Schilling really was a hell of a pitcher, though. So I voted yes.
GARY SHEFFIELD – Another roider. Taken in context his career is really no more impressive than, say, Ken Boyer.
LEE SMITH – Lee Smith wasn’t half the pitcher Dave Stieb was.
SAMMY SOSA – Again leaving out the roids, Slammin’ Sammy was not as slam dunk a case as you might think. Everyone was hitting home runs and hitting home runs was most of his value. He wasn’t any better a player than Dwight Evans was, or Andruw Jones. He just doesn’t make my ballot, even clean.
MIKE SWEENEY – In 2000, Sweeney batted .33 with 29 homers, 144 RBI. He had 206 hits and walked more often than he struck out. According to WAR, Sweeney that year was not as valuable as Kevin Pillar was this year.
Crazy though that might seem, that’s how much batting stats were inflated then. In 2000 the AVERAGE AL team scored almost as many runs as the Blue Jays did in 2015, when they scored more runs than anyone by a mile. Context is everything. Gaudy numbers like 500 homers aren’t the same thing in 1990s and early 2000s as they were in the 1970s and 1980s.
ALAN TRAMMELL – I have always wondered why Trammell didn’t get more credit. I guess he was just one of those players who was pretty good at everything. Trammell, to pick on Edgar Martinez again, was just as good as Edgar, but his skills was were spread out. I did not vote for Trammell this year but he’s kinda tied for 10th on my ballot with five other guys.
BILLY WAGNER – Wagner was a hell of a pitcher but it is perhaps reflective of his true value that only twice in his long career did he get mentioned at all in Cy Young voting.
LARRY WALKER – I said yes. Crazy underrated.
RANDY WINN – Sorry, but no.
Bonds and Clemons numbers are so over the top they’d still get in even if they didn’t use PEDs.
As usual, I hit 10. The PED Era needs to be put to bed and a lot of these players need to finally make it in (note that I think Bagwell, Griffey, and Piazza most definitely DID NOT use). I’ve also become convinced of the case for Tim “Rock” Raines, so he gets my 10th vote over Schilling (who I’m only lukewarm for as a HoF player anyway).
Jeff Bagwell
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Ken Griffey Jr.
Trevor Hoffman
Edgar Martinez
Mark McGwire
Mike Piazza
Tim Raines
Sammy Sosa
Larry Walker played much of his career with the Colorado Rockies when the “Coors Canaveral” effect was in full force. Because of that, people tend to discount Walker’s offensive stats as opposed to Edgar’s whose home stadium was just a little above sea level.
Neither of them got in the first three years they were on the ballot. What makes this year different?