Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, December 30, 2013

Bob Smizik: My Hall of Fame ballot

This year, for reasons beyond my control, my ballot will have the maximum number of 10 on it. I’ve gone from extremely discriminating to the type of voter I used to laugh at. My excuses for this behavioral twist? My colleagues made me do it. The Hall of Fame made me do it. MLB made me do it.

I will not leave a player off my ballot because he is tainted by the performance-enhancing drug scandals of the 1990s and that includes those annually rejected by well more than a majority of the voters. If MLB or the Hall of Fame, which is a separate entity, don’t want a player to be enshrined then do what was done to Pete Rose. Take him off the ballot.

I will not leave off a player tainted by the drug scandals and vote for a player who is not tainted when for all I know that player was a bigger cheat. I choose not to serve as the judge and jury on alleged cheaters of the steroids era.

Ten votes: Bagwell, Bonds, Clemens, Glavine, Maddux, McGwire, Palmeiro, Piazza, Raines, and Thomas.

On the whole, I think that’s a pretty good ballot.

Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: December 30, 2013 at 12:49 PM | 25 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: general, hall of fame, sportswriters

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

   1. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: December 30, 2013 at 03:50 PM (#4626624)
Good ballot. Not my ballot, but a good ballot nonetheless. Again, there are about 15-17 well qualified players and he's chosen amongst the entire pack available. He must like Raffy's hits/HR combo which is fair enough for a HOF voter.

Good to see he filled in all 10 slots...has anyone mentioned yet that this is a good thing?

   2. Rickey! weren't no D.J. he was hazy cosmic jive Posted: December 30, 2013 at 03:56 PM (#4626633)
Excellent ballot. I'd flip McGwire for Biggio on my personal ballot, but that's picking nits. Good job, Bob.
   3. JRVJ Posted: December 30, 2013 at 04:11 PM (#4626647)
I would replace McGwire and Raines for Mussina and Schilling, but ultimately, there's easily 15 HoF level players on the ballot today.

FWIW, I am starting to suspect that the backlog is going to clear up a little this year (I could actually see 4 players going into the HoF in 2014).
   4. Ray (RDP) Posted: December 30, 2013 at 04:19 PM (#4626657)
FWIW, I am starting to suspect that the backlog is going to clear up a little this year (I could actually see 4 players going into the HoF in 2014).


It can't clear up as long as the steroids players are there.
   5. Publius Publicola Posted: December 30, 2013 at 04:23 PM (#4626660)
I'd bounce Bonds, Clemens and McGwire and replace them with Schilling, Mussina and Trammell
   6. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: December 30, 2013 at 04:31 PM (#4626677)
It can't clear up as long as the steroids players are there.


I'm starting to think that Bonds and Clemens will go in by around their 5/6th ballot as I think a lot of anti PED voters will start to realise that they were both clearly HOFers whether you think the steroids helped or not. McGwire and Raffy will never get in as any anti PED voter will think that there is no way they could have amassed their value without some assistance.

I have no credible evidence for this, it's just a hunch.
   7. cardsfanboy Posted: December 30, 2013 at 04:49 PM (#4626701)
Excellent ballot, excellent article....and to save yourself some sanity, as always, don't read the comments from that page.

I love him chatising his fellow writers.
   8. rudygamble Posted: December 30, 2013 at 05:24 PM (#4626740)
I don't agree with his voting philosophy (the 'If you have to think about the player, he doesn’t belong" part, not the PED part) but great that he's filling out the ballot with 10 worthy selections.
   9. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: December 30, 2013 at 05:32 PM (#4626746)
I have no credible evidence for this, it's just a hunch.

Stop stealing the BBWAA's motto.
   10. Yastrzemski in left. Posted: December 30, 2013 at 05:47 PM (#4626754)
I'd bounce Bonds, Clemens and McGwire and replace them with Schilling, Mussina and Trammell


More pubiculousness.

@9 - Well said.
   11. gehrig97 Posted: December 30, 2013 at 06:10 PM (#4626767)
Great ballot. Swap Schilling or Mussina for Palmeiro and it's damn near perfect
   12. Rickey! weren't no D.J. he was hazy cosmic jive Posted: December 30, 2013 at 06:14 PM (#4626770)
I'm starting to think that Bonds and Clemens will go in by around their 5/6th ballot as I think a lot of anti PED voters will start to realise that they were both clearly HOFers whether you think the steroids helped or not.


Here's my gut instinct on this. As these things, it's just that, a feeling, no evidence, yadda yadda yadda. With that caveat...

I think the voters break down into three distinct camps. There are the Anti-PED Fundamentalists. They will never vote for any "steroid era" player, regardless of how stupid it is to not vote for Barry Bonds for the HOF. I think they're a marginal number of voters on what we'll call the "right wing" of the BBWAA.

I think there are similar "left wing" voters who not only don't care about PEDs, but find the Anti-PED Fundies to be offensive. They will vote for players regardless of "steroids" on whatever metric they have for their personal ballot. These are the folks keeping McGwire and Sosa (barely) above the 5% threshold right now. Again, I think this voting bloc is marginal.

I think there's a vast middle ground of voters who don't like the *feel* of the Sillyball Era sluggers, but recognize the craziness of keeping Bonds and Clemens out of the Hall. I think they are generally wishy-washy. Some vote for the inner circle guys, but not for Sosa or McGwire or Palmiero.

I think what you'll see in the coming years is that middle ground move "left" and vote the obvious inner circle Sillyball players in. I think you'll see McGwire's vote total increase over time, but probably not to the 75% threshold. I think the biggest lever in shifting these middle ground voters "leftwards" to "Good lord, it's Barry ####### Bonds!" is the fact that Tony LaRussa and Joe Torre sailed into Cooperstown no questions asked, and that sort of sets the standard for what the Hall really thinks about "steroid era" personalities of the game.
   13. Jose Remains The Most Absurd Thing on the Site Posted: December 30, 2013 at 06:21 PM (#4626775)
I'm with Hugh. He got ten and all ten come from the reasonable pool of players. No silly votes.
   14. Squash Posted: December 30, 2013 at 06:32 PM (#4626783)
I'm starting to think that Bonds and Clemens will go in by around their 5/6th ballot as I think a lot of anti PED voters will start to realise that they were both clearly HOFers whether you think the steroids helped or not. McGwire and Raffy will never get in as any anti PED voter will think that there is no way they could have amassed their value without some assistance.

This is exactly where I'm at, though I'd push the timeline back a bit for Bonds and Clemens. They'll get in eventually, but it will take a while -- sooner or later there will be an Enough Is Enough movement and they'll start to accumulate. That'll take some time though. The ones who will never make it are the one-trick-pony (by HOF standards) HR guys (McGwire, Sosa), or guys like Raffy with major PR blemishes. I'd guess Manny ends up in that boat too.

EDIT: Or, ditto Sam.
   15. John Northey Posted: December 30, 2013 at 06:41 PM (#4626788)
I could see many voters taking the 'never officially caught, not really banned' stance eventually leading to Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, and Sosa getting in someday while Palmeiro, Manny and A-Rod having a lot more issues (vet committee). McGwire and Sosa have the extra problem of being viewed as not being HOF'ers without enhancements though so them waiting until a vet committee someday in the future is possible/likely.
   16. Walt Davis Posted: December 30, 2013 at 09:38 PM (#4626888)
I've flipped and no longer expect B/C to get in. It's possible obviously -- 15 years is a long time, voters come and go, etc.

But I don't see how you can think the "right wing" is marginal. McGwire never topped 25% of the vote. Not all of those who didn't vote are "fundies" but they also didn't budge one bit on McGwire. There wasn't a 1-year penalty, there wasn't any traction after his confession.

Bonds and Clemens could be different but their vote totals this year are not substantially higher than they were last year. Remember, in the final gizmo last year, they were at 45% and 44% so they are currently only 3% ahead of last year's pace. And we don't seem to have seen many of the 2014 ballots from voters who had 10-man ballots last time, a few of whom might drop those two in order to vote for others. If they only come in at 40% on this ballot I see no reason to have optimism that they will go up from there barring something fairly major happening (like hints from the HoF, etc.)

   17. Peter Farted Posted: December 30, 2013 at 11:01 PM (#4626922)
It's interesting how many voters are turning in spectacular ballots, for reasons the average BBTF'er would faint over. No WAR, no JAWS...yet no problem whatsoever with this ballot. And, most importantly to some of us, no vote for "The John" Scott TP.

Fully agreed on #16. I think there is too big of a bloc/block (WAY over 25%) that will refuse to vote for Roger/Barry for any reason. When you're dealing with this level of deeply held values, it's a lot more difficult to convince the nay-sayers than the usual "herd changing its mind." It would not surprise me one bit to see Cy7/MVP7 stall around 60%...seemingly right on the verge of election...and yet in reality, have absolutely no chance of making it in via the writers.

I'm guessing that SOME future VC will find it in their hearts to put them in, but it's just a guess. So far I've guessed wrong on Gil Hodges too. Lee Smith...now there's a guy whose fate I have no clue about. Will he become the second 50+ percenter to stay forever on the outside?
   18. vivaelpujols Posted: December 31, 2013 at 02:49 AM (#4626967)
Seems like a lot of writers are changing their minds, changing their standards. I did not think that would happen. Kudos to them for not being obstinate.
   19. vivaelpujols Posted: December 31, 2013 at 02:50 AM (#4626968)
I would have put Schilling and Mussina over Rafa and Mac, but otherwise a very good ballot.
   20. vivaelpujols Posted: December 31, 2013 at 02:57 AM (#4626972)
The best chance for Bonds and Clemens to get in is for a lot of the current voting block to die/retire by the end of their run.
   21. BrianBrianson Posted: December 31, 2013 at 07:28 AM (#4626984)
10/10 would vote again. A+
   22. jacksone (AKA It's OK...) Posted: December 31, 2013 at 09:07 AM (#4627010)
I'm starting to think that Bonds and Clemens will go in by around their 5/6th ballot as I think a lot of anti PED voters will start to realise that they were both clearly HOFers whether you think the steroids helped or not. McGwire and Raffy will never get in as any anti PED voter will think that there is no way they could have amassed their value without some assistance.

This is exactly where I'm at, though I'd push the timeline back a bit for Bonds and Clemens. They'll get in eventually, but it will take a while -- sooner or later there will be an Enough Is Enough movement and they'll start to accumulate. That'll take some time though.

I don't think Bonds and Clemens get in until the backlog clears out big time. While there are still a large amount of worthy candidates it's easy to just leave B&C off the ballot and not really say anything about it. It seems like a common thing to only really discuss 4 or 5 guys you voted or did not vote for and just mention the rest of the names. Once the voters go back to only voting for 5 players each vote gets magnified again like in recent years. That's when I think we see the middle-ground voters start to feel some pressure to vote for B&C.
   23. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: December 31, 2013 at 09:18 AM (#4627019)
And we don't seem to have seen many of the 2014 ballots from voters who had 10-man ballots last time, a few of whom might drop those two in order to vote for others.


That's not a long-term problem though, but merely something that would mask their level of support over the next few years. If I had a vote this year, I might very well do the Edes thing and drop one of the two (and likely reverse it next year), due to the glut. Anyone who is willing to vote for Clemens/Bonds, even if he's not doing it in 2014, is one in the win column in terms of their eventual election.

   24. Yeaarrgghhhh Posted: December 31, 2013 at 09:32 AM (#4627037)
I agree with everything in #12. I'm surprised by how many writers seem to be softening their stance towards steroids and taking a more balanced approach.

I don't necessarily agree with this approach, but I think the "he wouldn't have been a HOF player without steroids" approach makes a little more sense than the "keep the dirty cheaters -- or at least the ones I think are cheaters -- out forever" approach. e.g., I think McGwire is a borderline candidate purely on the merits (only 7-8 excellent seasons, and only 2-3 historically great), he obviously took steroids, and it's very likely that the steroids made a big difference in his performance. If I had a say I'd probably vote for him, but I can understand why some would keep him out. OTOH, a HOF without Bonds and Clemens would be ridiculous.
   25. Karl from NY Posted: January 01, 2014 at 01:07 PM (#4627651)
Seems like a lot of writers are changing their minds, changing their standards. I did not think that would happen. Kudos to them for not being obstinate.

Well, there's some selection bias in what we see. The open-minded writers are the more likely ones to be publishing online with thoughtful columns.

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Kiko Sakata
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogBlue Jays agree to two-year deal with Donaldson
(1 - 8:49am, Feb 09)
Last: Obo

NewsblogOTP - 2016 February 8: There’s baseball, politics … and real problems
(121 - 8:47am, Feb 09)
Last: David Nieporent (now, with children)

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 2-9-2016
(2 - 8:08am, Feb 09)
Last: crict

NewsblogOT: 2016 NFL Playoffs Thread
(2227 - 8:03am, Feb 09)
Last: bunyon

NewsblogThe Private World Of The Negro Ballplayer
(4 - 7:38am, Feb 09)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

NewsblogStick to Sports? NEVER! The Intersectionalist Manifesto – HardballTalk
(137 - 6:31am, Feb 09)
Last: Frank Malzone Rating (GGC)

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - February 2016
(333 - 3:54am, Feb 09)
Last: stevegamer

NewsblogLeague Ownership Compliance in League Recruiting Forum
(14 - 1:24am, Feb 09)
Last: Meatwad wont hit were you tell him

NewsblogCops: [Delmon Young] chokes, threatens to kill valet, unleashes slur-filled tirade
(55 - 1:15am, Feb 09)
Last: Meatwad wont hit were you tell him

NewsblogOT: Wrestling Thread November 2014
(1308 - 11:55pm, Feb 08)
Last: Eric P.

NewsblogSchoenfield: Top 5 Hall of Fame classes
(49 - 10:58pm, Feb 08)
Last: Alex meets the threshold for granular review

NewsblogThe time my family invited itself to Gaylord Perry’s house for lunch – HardballTalk
(5 - 9:35pm, Feb 08)
Last: the Hugh Jorgan returns

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread - February 2016
(72 - 9:22pm, Feb 08)
Last: Spivey

NewsblogOTP - 2016 February 1: Donald Trump spends $450,000 on red baseball caps in just three months
(2773 - 7:17pm, Feb 08)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogEvaluating the 2016 Prospects: Colorado Rockies | FanGraphs Baseball
(3 - 6:34pm, Feb 08)
Last: Walt Davis

Page rendered in 0.5366 seconds
47 querie(s) executed