I don't get how Jeff Bagwell doesn't go first ballot- what's the argument against him?

I don't get how Jeff Bagwell doesn't go first ballot- what's the argument against him?

In an era of slugging 1B, he didn't get to 500 HR. He was also only a 4 time all star and 3 time Silver Slugger, and didn't get to the magic 0.300 career BA, and never won a WS, while sucking in his playoff opportunities (.226 .354 .321). Writers are also already forgetting about how badly the Astrodome hurt him (and all other Astros - Biggio is effected by this too) during the first half of his career.

I'd vote for him, but he's got a couple things working against him.

Bagwell: fell short of 500 HR and .300 lifetime average; hit .226 in a ringless postseason career; played in a monster era for offense, so his career totals are not as jaw-dropping as they look.

Not that I buy those arguments, but some voter will make them ...

Edit: someone bring Ryan Jones a Coke!

Bagwell also has the steroid taint hanging over him. He stopped playing the exact year that testing and penalties went into place. Of course he said he was injured that year, but notoriously there were a lot of big sluggers out that year- Bagwell had 39 games in 2005, none in 2006. Thome 59 games 2005, back 2006. Frank Thomas 34 games 2005, back 2006. Tim Salmon didn't play at all in 2005, one last hoorah in 2006. Bonds 14 games 2005, back 2006. Scott Rolen 46 games 2005, back 2006.

Look, this is just a coincidence, but it looks quite coincidental that all of these guys missed nearly all of 2005 after playing a lot of games (Salmon excluded) in 2004 and then came back to a lot of games in 2006. Bagwell never did come back, but he does fit the mold.

Bagwell does have the negatives mentioned above. Right now writers are looking for locks (500 HR, might be 600 now; 3000 hits; 300 wins) and for guys with great reps (Rice) and/or hardware.

Bagwell has 'just' 2314 hits - far below other guys who will never get there like Al Oliver. His 449 HR are nice but below Jose Canseco's 462. 297 batting average is a plus, but not the plus a 300 would be (dumb, I know, but remember who we are talking about here). 1529 RBI's are a plus, but not amazing enough to be a deal breaker. 202 stolen bases are a nice plus (78 caught) but writers will use that as a justification (and he even stole over 200 bases) not as a decision maker. Huh. Bagwell was twice a 30-30 guy. Totally forgot that. How odd for a first baseman eh? 4 All Star games, MVP for 1994 (the year we all want to forget about) and rookie of the year in 1991 - all pluses but the ASG's are low enough to be a negative for some writers. No batting titles, no HR titles, RBI title only in 1994.

Is Bagwell qualified for the HOF? Easily. Will the writers know it? Doubtful. Playing poorly in the postseason and stinking in his only World Series won't help either (1 for 8, a single). Heck, some will hold it against him that he was the poster boy for Stats Inc back in 1991 when they 'predicted' he'd win the batting title as a rookie.

While I would be in favor of Roberto Alomar and Barry Larkin in 2010 and Jeff Bagwell in 2011, I’m not at all convinced that any of these three players will make it in their first attempts.

I don't think any will make it in on the first try. There's standards to make the Hall of Fame, then there's standards to make it in via the BBWAA, then there's making it in on the first vote. Gaylord Perry, Don Sutton, Fergie Jenkins, Ryne Sandberg, Gary Carter -- they all made it in, but after a few years wait.

In an era of slugging 1B, he didn't get to 500 HR. He was also only a 4 time all star and 3 time Silver Slugger,

You're citing the Silver Slugger award?

Bagwell also has the steroid taint hanging over him. He stopped playing the exact year that testing and penalties went into place.

Completely and utterly false, 100%, every word.

Of course he said he was injured that year, but notoriously there were a lot of big sluggers out that year- Bagwell had 39 games in 2005, none in 2006.

He tried to play in 2006. He reported to spring training. He batted .219 with no power and couldn't throw. He had to retire.

Claiming "Philadelphia Freedom" as a favourite song is a huge demerit for Bagwell, whether or not the steroid allegations have any truth to them.

You're citing the Silver Slugger award?

While nobody pays much attention to them when they're awarded, in retrospect, I think they act as something of a proxy for how a player was perceived during his career. A guy who wins a lot of Silver Sluggers was likely a guy that people thought of as "the best hitting whatever-position-he-played" when he was playing.

Bagwell may end up being this generation's Santo. He's going to have real trouble getting in, much less on the first ballot, for all of the reasons mentioned above. Also, if he doesn't make it in his first few years he's going to get eaten by a huge backlog...

You're citing the Silver Slugger award?

I'm trying to think like a writer - a lot of them are very award driven in terms of their voting (All star, MVP, Cy Young, Gold Glove, and whatever else). As noted by Kiko, the Silver Slugger represents one of those things which a writer can quickly use as a shorthand for "He could really hit for a [fill in position here]".

As also noted, I'd vote for Bagwell.

The writers all know what the Astrodome was. I think more writers are going to give Bagwell credit for hitting like he did in THE pitchers park of his generation than you all seem to think will.

The writers all know what the Astrodome was. I think more writers are going to give Bagwell credit for hitting like he did in THE pitchers park of his generation than you all seem to think will.

I'd bet on that, too. The Astrodome's pitcher-friendly park effect is the most universally acknowledged of any venue in the Majors.

Just here for the Tom Petty references. Bitterly disappointed, I am.

The Waiting is the Hardest Part

"I won't back down!" sez Blyleven. (Har!)

I think more writers are going to give Bagwell credit for hitting like he did in THE pitchers park of his generation

Though as with Santo, the credit may be selective: Santo gets demerits from some voters, I think, for hitting in Wrigley Field, without compensating adjustment for hitting in the deadball 1960s.

Do you think that voters make any Astrodome adjustments? Jose Cruz got all of two HOF votes, ever. Cesar Cedeno got 2; Jimmy Wynn got none. Not that any of them are perhaps good candidates (though Wynn is in the HOM). But basically, they got no extra credit whatsoever for the Dome.

Claiming "Philadelphia Freedom" as a favourite song is a huge demerit for Bagwell, whether or not the steroid allegations have any truth to them.

It's enough to make me rethink Bagwell's qualifications. Elton John had a respectable peak--back in the early 70s. Given how long ago that was, it's as if the Pirates or some other god forsaken franchise kept trotting Neifi out until he was 60. Elton's like a misbegotten zombie from some grade-Z horror flick that keeps taking two in the head and coming back, and coming back, and coming back. It's truly grotesque that he hasn't retired, and it's a nightmare that any radio station plays any song he wrote after 1972.

I'm trying to think like a writer

It's not healthy to drink that much early in the day.

Claiming "Philadelphia Freedom" as a favourite song is a huge demerit for Bagwell, whether or not the steroid allegations have any truth to them.

It's certainly kept Billie Jean King out of the HOF.

Bagwell's career ended pretty dramatically and it was ugly. He was basically done after his age 36 season, and these days, that's a fairly short career.

Career-wise, Jim Thome is fairly close to Jeff Bagwell without the defense and speed, but he's already got 500+ HR and he's still accumulating. Right now, I think Thome and Bagwell are both HOF players, and I consider myself a small-hall guy.

I think he has a pretty easy road even with people passing him in HR. Yeah, he didn't hit 500 HR, but he's got over 1500 runs and RBI, and most sluggers don't steal over 200 bases either.

We're going to find out soon enough, but I get the feeling that 500 is going to stay a milestone but in a different way, and perhaps Bagwell will be the last player to sneak in. If you're a power hitter, instead of 500 HR making you a near-automatic selection, less than 500 HR will make you a near-automatic non-selection.

As an example, Delgado almost certainly needs more than 31 more HR to make the HOF, but without it, I don't see him having any chance at all.

I'm trying to think like a writer--

The number you have reached is not in service. Please check the number or try your call again. This is a recording.

Best Regards

John

Eugene Freedman Posted: January 07, 2009 at 12:08 PM (#3045373)

Bagwell also has the steroid taint hanging over him. He stopped playing the exact year that testing and penalties went into place. Of course he said he was injured that year, but notoriously there were a lot of big sluggers out that year- Bagwell had 39 games in 2005, none in 2006. Thome 59 games 2005, back 2006. Frank Thomas 34 games 2005, back 2006. Tim Salmon didn't play at all in 2005, one last hoorah in 2006. Bonds 14 games 2005, back 2006. Scott Rolen 46 games 2005, back 2006.

- oh no he dint

unless you going to say that the only reason he could have had a shoulder that was absolutely torn to shreds is because he used roids

he had that shoulder scoped and operated on a bunch of times. in 2004 he couldn't even throw the ball from first to second. he missed almost all of 05 because he tried a new operation to get his shoulder to work. i mean, this is all there and it is why he was out until september

and the owner was all sentimental about having him play in the playoffs/ws and he couldn't hardly even hit the freaking baseball. him sucking in the playoffs in the 90s and 01 - well that is a different story.

but bagwell stopping playing baseball because of drug testing is nonsense.

as for USING roids - well, maybe he did/maybe he didn't. i saw him up close (YES with clothes on) and he sure wasn't exactly ripped and yes i remember alex sqnchez/manny alexander and they wasn't exactly ahnold looking neither.

but then again i think almost all the ballplayers were using some sort of steroid/greenie and i just don't care. well, i mean baseball-wise care. i know it wasn't a real too good idea for their health

As an example, Delgado almost certainly needs more than 31 more HR to make the HOF, but without it, I don't see him having any chance at all.

I can't see him making it in without 500 HRs, and if he doesn't reach the round number I'd be surprised if it was at all close. I can see him as the first 500 HR, non-steroid-rumor guy who doesn't get in, and I can see that happening pretty easily if he plays something like two more years and ends up with "only", say, 512 HRs and 1597 RBIs. No MVP, 2 All-Star games, very little black ink... I don't see him going in unless he stays productive until he's 40.

It's truly grotesque that he hasn't retired, and it's a nightmare that any radio station plays any song he wrote after 1972.

Are you kidding? Goodbye Yellow Brick Road came out in 1973, and it's great. After 1976, I'll grant you.

Are you kidding? Goodbye Yellow Brick Road came out in 1973, and it's great. After 1976, I'll grant you.

Agree. Captain Fantastic was Elton's last really good (though not great) album, and it came out in 1975. Then he fired most of his band, made the atrocious Rock of the Westies, and it was all downhill from there. But that 1970-1975 stretch produced some glorious pop music...

Agree. Captain Fantastic was Elton's last really good (though not great) album, and it came out in 1975. Then he fired most of his band, made the atrocious Rock of the Westies, and it was all downhill from there.

So you're not a fan of his ever-changing tribute to Marilyn Monroe/Princess Diana/Heath Ledger?

I don't really see what's wrong with:

Don't go breaking my heart (1976)
Sad songs say so much (1984)
I guess that's why they call it the blues (1983)
Sacrifice (1990)

Also, Ryan makes fun of its subsequent iterations for obvious reasons, but there's nothing wrong with Candle in the Wind (1973) per se.

I agree with Vortex in 25, with the caveat that the Live in Australia album was some of the most gloriously fun schlock I've ever had the pleasure of hearing.

EDIT: Ray, those songs scream "decline phase". And that being said, Elton - to me - belongs in the class of performers who's work was exemplary enough that he gets a free pass on whatever dreck came after his peak.

I can't see him making it in without 500 HRs, and if he doesn't reach the round number I'd be surprised if it was at all close. I can see him as the first 500 HR, non-steroid-rumor guy who doesn't get in, and I can see that happening pretty easily if he plays something like two more years and ends up with "only", say, 512 HRs and 1597 RBIs. No MVP, 2 All-Star games, very little black ink... I don't see him going in unless he stays productive until he's 40.

If he stays productive until he's 40, he'll be pretty close to 600 2B and 600 HR. That's a hard player to keep out unless you're convinced he deserves a steroid discount.

I think Delgado needs between 2.5-3.5 quality seasons to cross the threshold, and I have no clue if he's got that in him or not. The guy rose from the dead last year, so is it a last gasp for air, or was his slump just a blip? I've never seen a player that I thought so done come back the way he did.

I don't really see what's wrong

That's a common problem for you.

Just here for the Tom Petty references. Bitterly disappointed, I am.

The Waiting is the Hardest Part

"I won't back down!" sez Blyleven. (Har!)


Stop draggin' my Bert around.

Does Rich go into a two or three-funk each time Bert comes up short for the HOF? He seems a bit too emotionally invested in the whole thing.

Just here for the Tom Petty references.

Don't come around here no more.

Actually, I've wondered how much Rich's effort have actually helped. I'm not actually saying that they haven't at all, as Blyleven has obviously climbed up in the voting since Rich's campaign started, but I also wonder how many of the writers contracted by Rich say that "You've convinced me" just to make him go away, and then they don't vote for Blyleven anyway.

EDIT: Ray, those songs scream "decline phase".

I guess I can't disagree with that, Lassus. And those were the best post-1972 songs I could find from a quick scan of his wiki page.

I guess I can't disagree with that, Lassus. And those were the best post-1972 songs I could find from a quick scan of his wiki page.

Billy Joel's decline was far more precipitous, IMO.

Bagwell was twice a 30-30 guy. Totally forgot that. How odd for a first baseman eh

I think he's the only first baseman to do it.

Don't come around here no more.

I like Petty but hate that song.

I do wonder if Bagwell's path won't be similar to Bert's. At first blush, it seems like it will.

EDIT: Ray, those songs scream "decline phase". And that being said, Elton - to me - belongs in the class of performers who's work was exemplary enough that he gets a free pass on whatever dreck came after his peak.

I have to disagree, and I don't think it's close. He's not John Coltrane or the Stones or the Beatles or the Who, for crying out loud. He had a nice little peak, but it wasn't a Koufax or Greenburg peak. It wasn't that great, and it was definitely short. Giving Elton a permanent pass is like giving that decent looking girlfriend of three months who was a pretty fair lay back in 1971 your PIN every time you change accounts. It's bloody senseless.

Either that, or you have the largest HOF of anyone, ever.

I can't see him making it in without 500 HRs, and if he doesn't reach the round number I'd be surprised if it was at all close. I can see him as the first 500 HR, non-steroid-rumor guy who doesn't get in, and I can see that happening pretty easily if he plays something like two more years and ends up with "only", say, 512 HRs and 1597 RBIs. No MVP, 2 All-Star games, very little black ink... I don't see him going in unless he stays productive until he's 40.

If he stays productive until he's 40, he'll be pretty close to 600 2B and 600 HR. That's a hard player to keep out unless you're convinced he deserves a steroid discount.

I think Delgado needs between 2.5-3.5 quality seasons to cross the threshold, and I have no clue if he's got that in him or not. The guy rose from the dead last year, so is it a last gasp for air, or was his slump just a blip? I've never seen a player that I thought so done come back the way he did.

I'm trying to see where we disagree, CBird. 2.5 to 3.5 quality season gets Delgado to 40, pretty much. Wrt that I was imagining the usual, fairly steep decline phase from a guy in his late 30s, meaning it'll take him 4 or 5 years if at all to have 2.5 to 3.5 good quality seasons. (I don't think it's splitting hairs to parse "quality" and "productive".) I wouldn't give him the discount, but he needs rather more than 500 given all the other guys there or likely to get there, lack of a great peak, and lack of great defense.

edit: to be more specific, by productive I meant good enough that someone gives him a job. At 41 Delgado could still be hanging in as a useful version of Alou for the Mets in 2007. In Delgado's case not a full timer, but productive enough that he's a solid bench guy, 1b fill-in, DH/PH.

I can see where Delgado becomes the new Fred McGriff, perhaps, but even Fred didn't get the opportunity to be the guy who PASSES 500 yet doesn't get in. Delgado will probably get the opportunity to probably be that guy. I think he will end up belonging, he's been that good, but it will require a lot more analysis depending on these next 4 years, absolutely. He may be a big argument in 10 years or so.


I have to disagree, and I don't think it's close. He's not John Coltrane or the Stones or the Beatles or the Who, for crying out loud. He had a nice little peak, but it wasn't a Koufax or Greenburg peak. It wasn't that great, and it was definitely short. Giving Elton a permanent pass is like giving that decent looking girlfriend of three months who was a pretty fair lay back in 1971 your PIN every time you change accounts. It's bloody senseless.

Well, Ark, your argument here is hurt by the fact that I personally find the Stones to be the most overrated band in the history of recorded sound. It's subjective, but there is it.

SECONDLY, you conveniently ignore Vortex and Ryan's points regarding your "AFTER 1972 HE SUCKS" hyperbole. "Don't Shoot me I'm Only the Piano Player", "Goodbye Yellow Brick Road", "Caribou", and "Captain Fantastic and the Brown Dirt Cowboy", none of which are worthy of radio airplay, eh? Ooooooook.

The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is a completely stupid idea and I refuse to go into those terms.

Elton's 1969 to 1975 run contains so many songs of such high quality that yes, he does get that pass from me. (And, of course, it wasn't 100% dreck after that, so even 80% dreck still means some quality output during his slide. Not like Roberto Alomar.) I stand by my statement.

SECONDLY, you conveniently ignore Vortex and Ryan's points regarding your "AFTER 1972 HE SUCKS" hyperbole.

I think you mean Vortex and Ray. I'm one of those people who are in the "AFTER 1972 HE SUCKS" camp, provided that the camp also includes the "BEFORE 1972 HE SUCKS" group. For whatever reason, I've never been able to stand anything that Elton John has done.

Actually, Vortex and Tom. Whoops.

I'd draw the Elton John prime/past-prime line around 1976.

He had a strong, consistent set of pop classics in the first half of the seventies. Towards the end of that run, "Philadelphia Freedom" is a great single, one of the hookiest pop songs ANYBODY has ever put together. "Someone Saved My Life Tonight" is a grand piano ballad, misogynistic theme aside. But that's about where it ends with Elton.

After 1976, he was Dale Murphy post-1987. SOME of his post-76 stuff is listenable ("Sad Songs Say So Much" is about the best; "Blue Eyes" is decent, a few others), but frankly, he should have retired in the mid-seventies and the pop music world wouldn't have missed a thing.

(As an aside, the first time I ever heard David Bowie's "Modern Love", through the din of a crowded bar, I remember thinking that was the best thing I'd heard out of Elton John in years. Felt like a fool when I found out who it really was.)

he sure wasn't exactly ripped

I don't know about the abs but he had massive biceps and forearms.

Don't go breaking my heart (1976)
Sad songs say so much (1984)
I guess that's why they call it the blues (1983)
Sacrifice (1990)

Oh good lord, go over to the Gossip Girl thread!

Either that, or you have the largest HOF of anyone, ever.

Nope, nothing but good lays, purely inner circle.

Oh good lord, go over to the Gossip Girl thread!

:-)

Hey, I didn't have much to work with.

Well, Ark, your argument here is hurt by the fact that I personally find the Stones to be the most overrated band in the history of recorded sound. It's subjective, but there is it.

Your honor, we find the defendent incredibly guilty.

My friend, we'll leave Elton by the curb where he belongs for the moment. There's NO sane measure that doesn't count the Stones as a great, great band. If someone wants to say that after 1980 they should have hung it up, fine. But Charlie Watts' behind-the-beat drumming alone on Street Fighting Man should convince you that there's genius even in the fragments.

Overrated? Sheesh. I fear for your soul!

The most overrated band in history in the Beatles. It's not close.
The greatest band in history is also the Beatles. It's not close.

The greatest band in history is also the Beatles. It's not close.

The John Coltrane quartets, when Elvin Jones was drumming, destroy the Beatles. That is all.

I'm trying to see where we disagree, CBird.

I don't think we do. Sometimes you get a "me too" with some content.

I personally find the Stones to be the most overrated band in the history of recorded sound.

I consider the Stones to overrated in the sense that Michael Jordan is overrated. Inner circle great, but not unquestionably the greatest ever. I consider the Stones the #3 band of all time, behind the Beatles and the Beach Boys, so it's not faint praise.