JM Catellier: Is Pedro Martinez a First Ballot Hall of Famer?

Welcome back, JM Catellier…and his “own unique statistical formula”!

The average 20th century Hall of Fame starting pitcher has 258.3 career wins. That number is dragged down by Sandy Koufax’ 165 victories, but he can’t be omitted from this exercise as I consider him the best starting pitcher to ever throw a baseball.

Former Boston Red Sox ace Pedro Martinez retired following the 2009 season with just 219 wins and only two 20-win seasons. Is it possible that he’s a first ballot Hall of Famer?

Looking at recent trends in history, it sure seems like a long shot. If the aforementioned list is narrowed down to the nine Hall of Fame starting pitchers that were active since 1980, the win average jumps to 306.6. Martinez didn’t come close to that number in his career—falling 87 wins short. So why are we even having this discussion?

...Using my own unique statistical formula, I ranked the ten most dominant individual seasons by a pitcher since 1930. Martinez showed up twice on the list. His 2000 season ranked ninth, while his unbelievable 1999 campaign ended up being right up there at the top of the list. That’s almost unimaginable considering the seasons that the pitcher-friendly 1960s produced as well as the fact that Martinez was likely facing a juiced lineup on any given night in his career. Koufax, by the way, finished second (1965) and third (1963) in my top 10.

Though his career totals may lack in comparison to many of the current members of the Hall of Fame, Pedro Martinez’ average output on the mound and dominance during the Steroid Era blows the competition away in many cases. Martinez should be a lock for the Hall of Fame, and he should get in on the first ballot.

MLB: Talking past, present and future with Ryne Sandberg

Per Sandberg: Self-Appointed Chairman of the Committee on HOF Justice. #norynonoryno

MLB.com: During your Hall of Fame acceptance speech in 2005, you spoke a lot about playing the game the right way. What was your take on the most recent voting?

Sandberg: Well, first of all, the voting is in the hands of the sportswriters who follow the game, and I think that the writers once again sent a strong message to baseball that illegal drugs and all that is not and should not be a part of baseball. I think it was very loud and clear. I think that’s a strong stance, and it’s good for the future of the game.

MLB.com: So basically, if you had a vote, that’s the way you would vote.

Sandberg: I’m not a sportswriter. I don’t get to vote. I don’t get the ballot in the mail, so it’s out of my hands either way. I can say that in the history of the Hall of Fame, there are no suspicions about guys who are in the Hall of Fame. It’s an elite group. And once you’re in the Hall, you’re in the Hall. Up until now, I think the voting system has handled things very well. And like I said before, there are no suspicions in the Hall of Fame.

MLB.com: But in your speech, you did say that Andre Dawson should be in. You said, “He did it the right way, the natural way.” So you have voiced your opinion, even though you don’t have a vote.

Sandberg: But that wasn’t about drugs. That was about a player whose numbers, I thought, were being dwarfed by those put up in that era. I played with the guy and against him for most of my career. I saw most of his career. For a number of years, he was overshadowed by the guys who hit 60 or 70 home runs. Those numbers were astronomical and were numbers I could not relate to. I thought he was a Hall of Famer and had had a Hall of Fame career. That’s why I voiced my opinion on that, and I was very happy to see him go in.

Catellier: Baseball HOF Discussion: Gil Hodges, Los Angeles Dodgers

Plus he’d wait on line for an Ebinger’s black-out cake just like the rest of us!

Is former Brooklyn and Los Angeles Dodgers great Gil Hodges the best eligible position player not in the Hall of Fame? No, Barry Bonds is…or maybe Jeff Bagwell. But five years ago, the answer very well may have been “yes”.

Without all this newfangled steroid nonsense clouding the picture, Hodges’ case depicts perhaps the most lopsided argument in history regarding a player’s Hall of Fame merit. It seems that the lone split in the debate occurs between the people that actually make the Hall of Fame decision and everyone else in the baseball world. When Jim Rice was elected on his 15th and final ballot, Hodges reclaimed the stigmatic title of ownership of the most cumulative HOF votes over time without being inducted. The former all-star averaged over 57 percent in the voting totals during his final ten seasons on the ballot, eclipsing 60 percent three times. Within the Veterans Committee process, Hodges has come as close as one vote shy of making it to the Hall. Though he’s come within an arm’s length of Cooperstown many times, it’s extremely difficult (if not impossible) to single out the exact reason for this legend’s continued failure to actually reach it. Let’s look at the history.

Hodges was the first baseman and team leader for the Brooklyn Dodgers of the 1950s. During that decade, only his teammate Duke Snider (a Hall of Famer) was able to rack up more home runs and RBI. His OPS during the 50s was a solid 0.884 which ranked him 12th overall. All 11 players ahead of him in that category are in the Hall of Fame. If that’s not enough, a very telling comparison comes at the first base position, where frankly, Hodges’ superior numbers make it no comparison at all. Looking at all of the first basemen in the decade, Hodges ranks first in virtually every major offensive category. He led the pack in hits (1,491), runs scored (890), home runs (310), runs batted in (1,001), and OPS (0.884). No other first baseman even comes close.

...But whatever the reason, it’s not enough to justifiably explain the mistakes of both the BBWAA and the Veterans Committee. Hodges is a true Hall of Famer in every sense of the term, and thus far has nothing to show for it.

Catellier: Baseball HOF Discussion: Steve Garvey, Los Angeles Dodgers

“Garvey was a huge run producer nevertheless.” Fixed/Neutered.

In the seven-year stretch from his MVP season of 1974 through 1980, it could be argued that there wasn’t a better hitter in baseball than Garvey. No one had more hits during that period… not Rose, not Rod Carew, and not George Brett. Only Philadelphia Phillies Hall of Fame slugger Mike Schmidt had more RBIs (732 to 730), and as far as first basemen are concerned, only Carew (another Hall of Famer) comes close to Garvey’s offensive statistics. But even Carew lags way behind in run production. So how is it that all of these guys have made it to Cooperstown, yet Garvey is still without a plaque?

Defensively, Garvey’s résumé gets even better.  He is currently ranked seventh in history in fielding percentage as a first baseman—but at the time he retired, he was ranked first in that category. When Kevin Youkilis (1B) and Placido Polanco (2B) each finished the 2007 season with a perfect 1.000 fielding percentage, they joined Garvey as the only three infielders in baseball history to achieve the feat while playing over 1,000 innings in the field. Garvey won four Gold Gloves during his career, though he finished in the top three in fielding during 11 of his 14 full seasons in the Majors. He also led the league in putouts six times and his career total of 19,004 ranks him 12th all time.

Garvey was on the Hall of Fame ballot for the full 15 years, but he was never able to eclipse the 50 percent mark in voter support. It’s perplexing. This guy was a postseason beast, the best player at his position for nearly a decade, and possibly even the best position player in baseball for a stretch of six or seven years. It doesn’t make sense. I expect that the Veterans Committee will acknowledge Garvey’s career at some point in the not-so-distant future—perhaps even later this year, when they announce the 2014 veteran inductions.

NRO: Hutchison: Eject Gaylord Perry from the Baseball Hall of Fame

This is taking Vaseline’s® new Spray & Go® a bit too far!

Consequences for cheating? If you do well enough, you make the Hall of Fame. MLB won’t do anything about it. The Steroid Era may get the headlines, and it may fuel the debate today, but the seeds were planted when baseball let Gaylord Perry get away with throwing the spitball.

What is more damning is that Perry’s 1974 autobiography provided enough evidence for him to at least be suspended. Imagine if then-commissioner Bowie Kuhn had announced, in light of Perry’s admissions in his book, that he would be suspended for the 1975 season and that any further violations would result in his being banned from baseball. Could that have headed off the Steroid Era? We will never know.

We do know, however, that corruption often starts out small. In this case, baseball’s failure to deal with a pitcher who routinely violated the rules against doctoring the baseball sent a signal to players that cheating didn’t necessarily have consequences. The same attitude underpinned the use of steroids and performance-enhancing drugs for two decades after Perry retired.

If players who used steroids are to be kept out of the Hall of Fame, then it seems that Gaylord Perry deserves the same treatment. He was ejected only twice in his major-league career. But a third ejection is in order. It’s time to eject Gaylord Perry from the Baseball Hall of Fame.

Five Hall of Famers to Serve as Judges for Mint Design Competition for Commemorative Coin

And we have a winner!

The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum and the United States Mint announced today the names of the judges who will help choose the image for the obverse (heads side) of the 2014 National Baseball Hall of Fame Commemorative Coin. The judges are all Hall of Famers and represent more than half of the nine positions on the diamond: Joe Morgan (second baseman, elected 1990); Brooks Robinson (third baseman, elected 1983); Ozzie Smith (shortstop, elected 2002); Don Sutton (pitcher, elected 1998); and Dave Winfield (outfielder, elected 2001).

The design competition, which began April 11 and runs through May 11 at noon ET, is open to U.S. citizens and permanent residents ages 14 and older. The winner of the design competition will be awarded $5,000 and the winner’s initials will appear on the minted coins.

“This is a Hall of Fame lineup that’s sure to produce a winner,” said Jeff Idelson, President, National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum. “Our Hall of Fame members show year-round support for our efforts to fulfill our mission to Preserve History, Honor Excellence and Connect Generations, and this is yet another example of the legends of the game stepping to the plate for the Museum. We are so appreciative of the efforts of Joe, Brooks, Ozzie, Don and Dave - and we all look forward to the final design selection.”

Guidelines for submitting designs include:

  • The obverse design must be “emblematic of the game of baseball” and must include the inscriptions “Liberty,” “In God We Trust,” and “2014.”
  • Two-dimensional designs must be monochrome, not color, and three-dimensional models must be made using neutral plaster or a durable plastic material and should be approximately 8” in diameter.
  • Designs must not include the name or depiction of a real player or any other person, living or not.
  • Designs must not include depictions, names, emblems, logos, trademarks or any other indicia associated with any specific commercial, private, educational, civic, religious, sports, or other organizations whose membership or ownership is not universal, including any current or former baseball team, either professional or amateur.
  • Designs must not include any depiction of a real baseball stadium, field, arena, either in whole or in part, whether or not currently existing or in use.
  • Employees of the Department of the Treasury, including the United States Mint and other Treasury offices and bureaus, are ineligible.

Schoenfield: Hall of Famers without their home parks?

Home was not home
Your room was home
A corner was home
The place they weren’t, that was home

We now know you

Jim Rice
When Jim Rice hit the Hall of Fame ballot after his 16-year career with the Red Sox, the debates got ugly. Rice was feared, argued his supporters; Rice was overrated, a beneficiary of Fenway Park, argued his detractors. During most of Rice’s career in Boston, Fenway was a terrific hitter’s park, the traditional Fenway of “no lead is safe” lore. Overall, Rice hit .320 with 208 home runs at Fenway but .277 with 174 home runs on the road. In his 1978 MVP season, Rice hit .361/.416/.690 with 28 home runs at home and .269/.325/.512 with 18 home runs on the road. The debates lasted until Rice’s 15th and final year on the ballot when he made it in.

Sandy Koufax
Through 1961, Koufax was 54-53 in his career with a 3.94 ERA, a talented but erratic left-hander. Suddenly, in 1962, he put it all together, and over his final five seasons in the majors went 111-34 with a 1.95 ERA, leading the NL in ERA all five seasons. Koufax’s control did improve dramatically, but something else happened in 1962: The Dodgers moved out of the L.A. Coliseum and into Dodger Stadium. In 1961, Koufax had a 2.77 ERA on the road … but 4.22 at home. In 1960, he had 3.00 ERA on the road … but 5.27 at home. In 1962, Koufax had a 3.53 ERA on the road … but 1.75 at home. In 1963, he was 2.31 on the road … and 1.38 at home. He had always been pretty good on the road, but the difference was he became unhittable at Dodger Stadium.

Nolan Ryan
Before finishing his legendary career with the Rangers, Ryan spent eight seasons with the Angels and nine with the Astros; that’s 17 years in parks that heavily favored pitchers. Check out his career home/road splits, including his days with the Mets and Rangers: 189-136, 2.77 ERA at home; 135-156, 3.73 ERA on the road. Yes, Ryan had a career road record 21 games under .500.

Perry: Tim Hudson, 200 wins and the Hall of Fame

On Friday night against the Pirates, Braves right-hander Tim Hudson will make his first attempt at earning career win number 200. While I have no use for pitcher wins and losses as a measure of value, this is still a relevant career benchmark. It also raises the question of whether Hudson is cobbling together a case for the Hall of Fame.

In addition to being on the brink of 200 victories, the 37-year-old right-hander also boasts a .657 career winning percentage (21st all-time), a 126 ERA+ (61st all-time) and 1,814 strikeouts (92nd all-time). On a broader level, Jay Jaffe’s JAWS system, which compares players to the established hall-of-fame norms at their respective positions/roles, paints the following picture for Hudson as things presently stand:

...Hudson’s best chance will come via the “career value” path. After all, it’s unlikely that a 37-year-old is going to drastically improve his peak indicators. And those peak indicators (no Cy Youngs, merely three All-Star appearances, for instance) leave something to be desired when it comes to the high standards of the Hall. But Hudson has indeed been remarkably consistent over his career. To put a finer point on it, only once, in 2006, has Hudson logged a seasonal ERA+ worse than 110. He’ll reach 200 wins, of course, and 2,000 strikeouts should come in 2014.

One of the keys for Hudson will be sustaining his rate value (i.e., his run-prevention numbers) while continuing to climb the innings list. At present, Hudson ranks 190th on the all-time innings list with 2,700 1/3 frames to his credit. On that front, Bob Lemon (himself a dubious choice for Cooperstown) probably represents the low end for hall-of-fame innings, with 2,850. That’s certainly within reach, should Hudson choose to continue pitching beyond this season. Hudson could also get to 3,000 innings late 2014 and something in the range of 3,250 would likely place him in the top 100 all-time (Andy Pettitte and Roy Halladay are the only active pitchers ahead of Hudson on the innings list).

Thanks to Los.

The Bill James Mailbag

Bill with some Roy Halladay, Todd Helton HOF speak and this…

Why do analysts uses replacement level player as a point of comparison, as opposed to for instance major league average?

Well, it’s not that we use one and don’t use the other.  We figure both (comparison to average and comparison to replacement player); we publish both, we use both.  But that’s a quibble, in that you’re certainly correct that the replacement player comps get 90% of the attention.

The “average” is a nothing point, an imaginary line which has no real-life consequence.  Suppose that a player creates 100 runs, whereas an average player would have created 80 runs and a replacement player would have created 60 runs.  The 100 runs is analogous to “gross receipts” for a store, for example.  The +40 (100 runs over 60) is analogous to “profit”.  But what is the +20 analogous to (100 runs over 80)?

It’s not analogous to anything; there is no such concept.  It’s a non-existent line.  The real-life consequences center on whether or not you are good enough to play—which means, better than the replacement level.  If you drop below THAT line, there are real consequences. 

Running at this from a different angle. . .a comparison to AVERAGE does not indicate VALUE.  A below-average player has positive value.  An average player has real value.  An average player, compared to the average, is at zero, no value.  But an average player has real value.  An average player is paid $4 or $5 million a year—more than that if he’s a regular.  In fact, I would argue (and have argued) that MOST value in baseball consists in being average or less than average.  Only a small portion of value consists of being BETTER than average. 

Every year, almost, some loses a pennant race that they would have won or fails to qualify for a playoff position that they could have had, had they had an average player at some position.  You NEED average players, to win; you need lots of them.  You don’t measure from the average, because that is not a point of no value.

Hall of Fame 3B Schmidt, Brett undecided about attending Cooperstown ceremony in July

Not what Gossage was counting on.

Hall of Fame third basemen George Brett and Mike Schmidt are both undecided if they’ll attend this summer’s induction ceremonies at Cooperstown.

No one was elected to the Hall of Fame this year. For only the second time in four decades, baseball writers didn’t give any player the 75 percent required for induction. Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Sammy Sosa were among the Steriod Era stars shut out .

Houston Astros second baseman Craig Biggio, 20th on the career list with 3,060 hits, and former star catcher Mike Piazza also failed to receive enough votes to earn induction

Schmidt, who hit 548 career home runs with the Philadelphia Phillies, expected Biggio and Piazza to eventually join him in Cooperstown.

“I believe they’ll both get in the Hall of Fame in the next year or year after,” Schmidt said. “For sure, Biggio. They’ve got a little bit of a hill to climb next year with all the attention that’s going to go to the other guys that’ll be locks for the first ballot.”

...Brett, who supported Biggio, rolled off the 500-homer, 3,000-hit, 300-win milestones that used to mean automatic entry to Cooperstown.

“I think it’s going to be harder and harder for these guys to get in nowadays because of the scandal that’s followed baseball the last 10, 15 years,” Brett said.

The Bill James Mailbag

How dare you challenge Rick Aguilera and his 3 (0.6%) HOF votes!

It seems like a team of The Best Players Currently Excluded from the Hall would crush a team of the Worst Included Players. C – Piazza, 1B – Bagwell, 2B – Biggio, SS – Trammell, 3B – Darrell Evans, OF – Barry Bonds, Raines and Dwight Evans, SP – Clemens, Schilling, Tiant, Saberhagen, Kevin Brown, RP – Lee Smith, Reardon, Myers, Franco, Aguilera with a bench of Ted Simmons, McGwire, Whitaker, Concepcion, Torre, Dale Murphy and Larry Walker would be favored over C- Ferrell, 1B – George Kelly, 2B – Mazeroski, SS – Travis Jackson, 3B – Lindstrom, OF – Hafey, Lloyd Waner, Tommy McCarthy, SP – Haines, Marquard, Catfish, Candy Cummings, Rixey, RP – Sutter, Fingers, Gossage, Eck, Wilhelm, and a bench of Schalk, Bottomley, Joe Gordon, Rizzuto, Kell, Dawson and Jim Rice. I was wondering: if these two teams played each other heads-up for 162 games, what do you think their respective records would be?

1) Do you think Darrell Evans is the best third baseman not in the Hall of Fame? Intuitively, I would have gone with Graig Nettles.

2) There are weaker outfielders in the Hall of Fame than Dawson and Rice.

3) It is ALWAYS true that a team of the best players left out of the Hall of Fame would crush a team of the weakest players in the Hall of Fame. It is almost axiomatic, because if you construct a list of the best players at any position, 15 or 20 will be in the Hall of Fame, and it is almost impossible for those to be EXACTLY the 15 top players; therefore, there is almost always, at each position, at least one player excluded from the Hall of Fame who is better than one player selected, and therefore, when you make teams, the “excluded” team is always better at every position, and thus would always crush the “included” team.

4) This is especially true NOW because of the mess made of the voting by the combination of the expansion time bomb and steroids.


5) My guess. . .and it is just a guess. . .is that the “excluded” players would win at least 95 games, and the “included” players would win no more than 67.

Jay Jaffe: Johan Santana faces an uphill climb to Cooperstown

If Dizzy Dean is in, then…

Thus far, Santana has thrown only 2,025 2/3 innings over the course of his 12-year major league career (2000-2010, 2012) with the Twins and Mets, with the first three of those years totaling only 238 innings. Only in seven of those seasons did he throw enough innings to qualify for the ERA title. That’s an extremely small workload for a Hall of Fame pitcher; only three of the five enshrined relievers (Bruce Sutter, Rollie Fingers and Rich Gossage) and one starter (Dizzy Dean) threw fewer total innings. Even Addie Joss and Sandy Koufax — two standouts whose careers were extinguished in their primes, the former by death due to meningitis in 1911, the latter by elbow woes in 1966 — had roughly 300 more innings pitched during their brief careers, and reliever Hoyt Wilhelm racked up about 200 more during his lengthy one.

...What if Santana had won a third Cy Young? Along with winning the trophy in both 2004 (20-6, 2.61 ERA, 265 strikeouts, 8.6 WAR) and 2006 (19-6, 2.77 ERA, 245 strikeouts, 7.5 WAR) — years in which he led the league in both ERA and K’s — he recorded a season that was nearly as strong in 2005 (16-7, 2.87 ERA, 238 strikeouts, 7.2 WAR). In terms of everything besides won-loss record, he outdid winner Bartolo Colon (21-8, 3.48 ERA, 157 strikeouts, 4.0 WAR), and he was far more valuable than runner-up Mariano Rivera (43 saves, 1.38 ERA, 4.0 WAR) as well. By the time the dust settles, none of the eight three-time Cy Young winners (Clemens, Johnson, Steve Carlton, Maddux, Koufax, Martinez, Jim Palmer and Tom Seaver) is likely to land outside the Hall; had voting justice been done in 2005, Santana would have stood out as the exception there, though if one wants to nitpick each of those winners’ cases on a pure WAR basis, the picture might change significantly.

If Santana can’t make it back from this shoulder injury, he’ll likely remain outside Cooperstown, but there’s no shame in that. He has had a great career, and he’ll be remembered as one of the dominant pitchers of a high-scoring era. His battle back from his 2010 shoulder injury, which reached its apex with his no-hitter last June, was memorable and inspiring; watching it myself, I found it impossible not to get choked up, or to enjoy the revelry in a bar full of Mets fans handing out free shots in his honor.

Al Kaline: Tigers’ Miguel Cabrera ‘a Hall of Famer already’

And he doesn’t even have 399...uhh 400 HR’s yet!

A Hall of Famer called him a Hall of Famer, the highest baseball compliment of all.

Such was the welcome that awaited Miguel Cabrera on Friday before his first workout of spring training.

“Even if he never played again, he’s a Hall of Fame player already,” Al Kaline said of the Tigers Triple Crown winner. “To see what he accomplished last year was unbelievable.”

You can debate, if you wish, whether Cabrera has Hall of Fame credentials so soon. Some will.

Others will say if Kaline thinks so, it must be true.

But you can’t argue that as praise goes for players, there are no loftier words than these — “A Hall of Famer already” — according to one who knows how difficult the game is.

Johnson: So What Exactly is an “Honorary” Hall of Fame Voter?

Plus I just found out that Paul Oberjuerge no longer has a HOF vote…I guess covering amateur soccer in Abu Dhabi will do that.

The following HOF voters have been identified from the BBWAA.org’s own website as having case a ballot in the recent HOF election as “honorary” members. I’ve included some information as to what they are doing now, how they got their BBWAA ballot, and some side comments on published interviews, biographies, and the like relating to them (all my comments are highlighted). It’s not pretty reading if you advocate for a more professional approach to HOF induction, believe me. (My additional comments on this are in the “Bottom Line” section following this list, if you have the stomach to make it through to the end…) So here goes…the honorary HOF voters of the BBWAA:

Frank Clines- Retired, now writing with some guy named “Artie” or something for a online thing called Milwaukee.com. They call themselves “The Observers”, which must be something like “The Watchers”, those supreme beings in the Marvel Comics universe who stand around all day just checking things out, but doing nothing of substance…

Lowell Hickey- Went into advertising after being a sports writer and editor. Latest- the president of the Castro Valley Sports Foundation, which promotes youth sports in Castro Valley California. How any of this advertising or foundation work relates to the HOF is beyond me.

Mark Kreidler- Columnist at the scaremnto bee for 14 years. Now runs Kreidler Communications since 2007, so I guess you can say he’s not on the beat anymore.  But he did write a book about surfing, which counts for something- as, who am I kidding? As far as HOF voting qualifications go, it counts for squat.

Phil Pepe- Has over 50 years of sports reporting, and was the New York Yankees beat writer for the New York World Telegram & Sun (1961-1964) and New York Daily News (1971-1984). He has written or co-authored dozens of books, including Slick and Billyball and also wrote regularly for The Sporting News.  So what’s the most pertinent fact in this bio regarding having a HOF vote? It is that Pepe finished covering baseball as a beat writer in 1984.

Glenn Schwarz- Became sports editor of the SF Chronicle in 1987, then retired in 2009 after 40 years in the biz. But still has a HOF vote.

Kruk, Schmidt, Showalter talk about state of baseball, Hall of Fame during Seacrest fundraiser

Buck? Mike? They were one nut away from an R.E.M. reunion.

With the heated discussion of performance enchaining drugs (PEDs), Kruk, an ESPN baseball analyst, commented.

“From an analyst side I don’t like it,” he said. “From a realistic side, there are a bunch of guys who think they need it to compete.”

Alex Rodriguez again is in the news for PEDs. He has admitted using them in the past.

“When you have been great and your stats start slipping, sometimes you change it up,” Kruk said. “Some want to say ‘kick them out of baseball.’ Pretty soon you will be kicking them all out.”

...Schmidt is not so sure “how I would have handled it during my career. I’d like to think I would make the right moral decision. I understand how those things can happen. Right or wrong, it is not for me to say.”

He and Kruk are concerned that the baseball writers who select those enshrined in the Hall of Fame may be too cynical. Craig Biggio and Mike Piazza, eligible for the first time this year, did not get enough votes. Biggio has never been mentioned in PED discussions, while Piazza has denied any use.

“They both have the credentials and will get in,” Schmidt said. “What about next year, are the writers going to vote in Greg Maddux? Can they doubt him?

Donnellon: Better to judge baseball talent with the naked eye

Thing is, I saw Jack Morris pitch, and he was great. Great enough for the Hall of Fame? All I know is there are less great players in there.

It’s one reason I don’t use my Hall of Fame ballot. Statistics, even the more contrived ones, have value. Greatness, though, is a naked-eye assessment. If they’re going to argue that Morris or even Curt Schilling are less significant than guys already in there, guys like Bert Blyleven, then they ought to call the place the Baseball Bureau of Statistics. Because to the naked eye, it’s absurd.

Here’s another thing that bothers me: The valuation of regular-season statistics over postseason ones. Some of the game’s more selfish players have recorded some gaudy regular-season statistics. Others have built their impressive résumé playing for poor teams in pressureless environments. Statistics built in the AL Central over the last two decades are not equal to statistics built in the AL East.

That’s a naked-eye assessment. I’d probably put Morris into the Hall too, probably for the same reason stat mavens would throw him out. He won more games than anyone in the 1980s, but many, including our own David Murphy, have compellingly argued that a pitcher’s won-lost record is among baseball’s greatest irrelevancies.

Murphy has mentioned Cliff Lee’s 2012 season as recent evidence of this. There is no doubt that Lee deserved better. But the naked eye, the one that watched the season in its entirety, recalls at least a handful of times when he received substantial leads and could not hold them. Morris would say, I suppose, that in those cases, he failed to pitch to the scoreboard.

Clearly, statistics are not irrelevant. But they should be used to support the naked eye, not create an alternate reality.

Thanks to Butch.

Jack Morris Joins Sportsnet as Blue Jays Baseball Analyst

And to honor this historic Jack Morris event…Sportsnet 590 will now be called Sportsnet 3.90!

Welcome back, Jack.  A familiar face is returning to Toronto as former Toronto Blue Jays pitcher Jack Morris returns to the city where he won two World Series titles as Sportsnet’s newest Blue Jays analyst. Morris will provide analysis for Sportsnet 590 The FAN’s Blue Jays radio broadcasts, and will also make appearances on Sportsnet’s Blue Jays game telecasts, Blue Jays Central, Baseball Central at Noon and sportsnet.ca.

Best known in his playing days for his devastating forkball, the right-handed pitcher and five-time All-Star will forever be known to Blue Jays fans as the first 20-game winner in club history (21 wins) and for propelling his team into the playoffs for the first of their back-to-back World Series Championships in 1992 and 1993.  Morris retired in 1995 and has spent time as a colour analyst for the Minnesota Twins and as well as a guest on Detroit Tigers broadcasts.

“I’m thrilled to be joining the Sportsnet team and to be returning to Canada, “said Morris. “I’ve had a lot of great experiences here and am looking forward to this next chapter. This has been one of the most exciting off-seasons that Blue Jays fans have ever seen, and I’m honoured to have the opportunity to be covering this amazing team for the next three years.”

Goose Gossage doesn’t mince words when it comes to cheating in baseball

I don’t know how often I can discuss one incident ~STEROIDS OMG!!!~ in my entire life, but I’ll continue to do that.

When it comes to the topic of not allowing certain major league baseball players into Cooperstown, the Goose is happy to let loose.

“We’ve got a bunch of cheaters that are up for the Hall of Fame,’’ offered Rich ‘Goose’ Gossage, who was himself inducted into the hallowed hall in 2008. “Absolutely not. I’ve taken a stand on that. I’ve said the pressures of taking steroids are tremendous. If you have two kids with the same talent level, one on steroids and one not on steroids, you have two different animals. I wish these guys who are lying would come clean. Roger Clemens was found innocent but so was O.J. and he killed two people. Stop lying and quit dragging baseball through the mud.

“I liken it to what they’ve done to Lance Armstrong, stripped him of his seven Tour de Frances. I would like to see them re-instate those great records that were broken and not recognize what these guys have done with these tainted records.’’

Baseball Hall of Fame voting trajectories

Dig in!

Carlos Scheidegger and Kenny Shirley, along with Chris Volinsky, visualized Major League Baseball Hall of Fame voting, from the first class in 1936 (which included Babe Ruth) up to present.

  All a fan can do is accept that Baseball Hall of Fame voting, conducted by the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA), is a phenomenon unto itself. If we can’t understand baseball Hall of Fame voting, though, maybe the next best thing is visualizing the data behind it. The set of interactive plots on this webpage is our attempt to do that. We were especially interested in two things: (1) viewing the trajectories of BBWAA vote percentage by year for different players throughout history, and (2) simultaneously viewing the career statistics of these players, to help find patterns and explain their trajectories (or to reassure ourselves that the writers really are crazy).

The interactive is on the analysis side of the spectrum, so you might be a bit lost if you don’t know a lick about baseball. However, if your’re a baseball fan, there’s a lot to play around with and dimensions to poke around at, as you can filter on pretty much all player stats such as home run count, batting average, and innings played. At the very least, you’re getting a peek at how statisticians pick and prod at their data.

Former closer Lee Smith recalls playing days at HOF ceremony

Does pre-booing Fenway two-arm bow for Smith.

“It’s been baffling the probably the last eight years,” Smith said. “There’s a lot of guys in the Hall of Fame who I had more votes than originally like Andre (Dawson), Bert Blyleven, guys like that and Bruce Sutter. Now I don’t really understand the voting. I’m not upset at the guys because it’s a tough thing to do.”

He was more puzzled than ever this year when no players from a star-studded ballot were elected. He doesn’t think steroid users should be kept out of the Hall.

“They talk about steroids with people like Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro,” Smith said. “But those guys could hit, let’s face it. Steroids aren’t going to make you a good hitter and they could flat out hit. Barry Bonds was the best hitter I’ve ever seen.”

Schoenfield: Big Hurt should be first-ballot Hall of Famer

Damn Secret Society He-Man-Haters Club!

All that said, three reasons he’ll have trouble getting in on the first ballot:

1. He only spent five seasons as a full-time first baseman. He did play a higher percentage of his games in the field than Edgar Martinez—42 percent to 28 percent—but the DH factor could work against him.

2. The Edgar Martinez factor. How much better than Martinez was Thomas? Thomas does lead slightly in career Baseball-Reference WAR, 69.7 to 64.4, and certainly has big edges in home runs (521 to 309) and RBIs (1704 to 1261), but if you add up their 10 best seasons, Martinez edges out Thomas 56.1 WAR to 56.0. Their final slash lines are pretty similar: .301/.419/.555 for Thomas, .312/.418/.515 for Martinez (Thomas played 232 more games). The point here is that Martinez actually compares quite favorably with Thomas, but has languished below 40 percent of the vote.

3. The first-year bias. Simply put: Many voters won’t vote for Thomas on the first ballot because they won’t perceive him as a first-ballot guy.

Real numbers or not.

Frank Thomas: No sympathy for steroids-tainted stars

Says the man who saw his HR total jump by 17 in 1993…

Retired Chicago White Sox slugger Frank Thomas feels even better about his career after watching steroids-tainted stars Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa and Roger Clemens fail to gain entry to the Hall of Fame.

“I think I’ve done enough to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer,” he said Saturday at the team’s fan convention.

“Watching all the nonsense unfold and not really knowing what was going on, it makes me much more proud of my career,” he said. “I competed in that era. I played at a high level in that era. There are a lot of great players, but as it unfolds, a lot of it was not the real deal. I know 100 percent I was the real deal.”

Bonds, Sosa and Clemens were denied in their first year of eligibility amid suspicions by some voters that their accomplishments were boosted by performance-enhancing drugs. Mark McGwire, 10th on the career home run list, received 16.9 percent of the vote on his seventh try, far short of the 75 percent needed for election.

“I wouldn’t say I feel bad for them,” Thomas said. “I respected them on the field, but they chose this. They made their own decisions off the field and they’ve got to live with it.”

He said their numbers were “incredible” but “fake.”

“Any time you look at the PED situation, you look at the Lance Armstrong situation _ you look at stuff like that, it’s serious out there,” Thomas said. “Thank God I’m blessed I did it the right way. I had a good family base that made me outwork everybody else because that’s the only way I made it to the big leagues.”

...Thomas thinks baseball’s drug-testing is on the right path. Players will be tested for human growth hormone throughout the regular season following blood testing during spring training last year. Those are in addition to urine tests.

“There won’t be any more scandals. Baseball is going to be 100 percent clean,” Thomas said. “They’re going to have to be.”

St Louis Post-Dispatch: Musial’s Link to the Griffeys

Brock Hanke spotted this article shows a link between Stan Musial and the Griffeys.

The Donora (PA) High School baseball team, from the 1939 high school annual, Dragon ‘39. Stan Musial (top row, fourth from left) was a junior on this team, and his younger brother, Edward (fourth from right, top row) was on the team too. Also on the team was Joseph “Buddy” Griffey (second from left, bottom row), father of Ken Griffey Sr. and grandfather of Ken Griffey Jr.

NatsGM: Exclusive Interview with Larry Rocca, Baseball Hall of Fame Voter

First Larry Rocca HOF ballot I’ve ever come across…but he gets an R for riginality.

LR: “I voted for Dale Murphy, Tim Raines, and Alan Trammell. “

NatsGM: “Obviously there is an absence on your ballot of those who played in the ‘Steroid Era’… Rather than ask about these players and their candidacy, I am curious what you think becomes of these 10-20 star players 15 years from now?”

LR: “At least for now, I am not voting for anyone who played the bulk of his career in the “steroids era.” Nobody had more power to rid the game of PEDs than the best players, so even those who didn’t use – if there are any – are at least guilty of complicity. Integrity is part of the criteria. Those who did not move to rid the game of PEDs have to get an F for integrity.”

Fair Lawn baseball writer (Murray Chass) discusses the hall of fame

I remember when The Record used to feature hard-hitting articles like 6-month-old wolf pups escaping Jungle Habitat...now they’re down to interviewing basement bloggers.

Hall of Fame baseball writer Murray Chass is an authority on America’s Pastime and a voter for the Baseball Hall of Fame that produced no new members as the steroid controversy has raged on.

For more than 45 years, Chass covered the sport for the Associated Press and New York Times, chronicling baseball greats across the historical timeline from Mickey Mantle to Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Mike Schmidt, Rickey Henderson, Ken Griffey Jr. to active greats like Albert Pujols and Derek Jeter. Since 1962, the 74-year-old’s been a member of the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA). Chass officially retired from the Times in 2008, but remains one of the most influential voices in the baseball media. Shortly thereafter, he started his own baseball site (murraychass.com).

...Chass feels the steroid link is why there were no players elected this year.

“Bonds and Clemens would’ve got into the Baseball Hall of Fame on the first ballot without question had they not (been linked to) steroids. Neither received more than 36 percent of the vote,” said Chass. “There’s another group of players who were suspected but were never caught, so they got a good amount of votes. That includes (former New York Met) Mike Piazza, Craig Biggio and Jeff Bagwell. I don’t know if any of them used. Of the three, I feel strongest about the possibility that Piazza used them than the other two. The reason is because through 2002, his back always had acne. I don’t know a lot about roids but I know acne on the back is a telltale sign of steroid use. As soon as baseball started testing for steroids, Piazza’s back cleared up. I think any writer who covered him believes he used steroids. He was never caught because he was smart. He stopped once testing came in.”