BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Hall of Fame Ballot Gathering Machine

Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Hall of Fame Ballot Gathering Machine

HOF % Leaderboard through 138 Full BBWAA Ballots…

93.4 - Alomar
79.7 - Blyleven
66.6 - Larkin
49.2 - J. Morris
47.1 - Raines
40.6 - Bagwell
39.1 - L. Smith
31.9 - Edgar Martinez
26.8 - Trammell
19.6 - McGwire
16.6 - McGriff
13.8 - L.Walker
12.3 - Palmeiro
. 8.7 - D. Murphy
. 5.8 - Mattingly
. 5.1 - D. Parker
. 4.3 - Baines
. 2.9 - K. Brown
. 2.2 - Juan Gone
. 2.2 - John Franco
. 0.7 - Tino
. 0.7 - Olerud (!)
. 0.7 - Surhoff
. 0.7 - Pete Rose (Write-in)

Top Partial Ballot Leaders… (162 Full/Partials)

136 - Alomar
124 - Blyleven

And thanks to icho1977 on the Twitter front and Pete L. with updates!

Repoz Posted: December 29, 2010 at 01:34 AM | 301 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: hall of fame, history, sabermetrics, steroids

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.

Page 3 of 4 pages < 1 2 3 4 >

201. Shock Posted: January 04, 2011 at 07:59 PM (#3723238)

202. Shock Posted: January 04, 2011 at 08:00 PM (#3723239)

Jesus is Primer is slow today

203. Shock Posted: January 04, 2011 at 08:01 PM (#3723240)

Barry Stanton: Morris, E.Martinez, T. Martinez, Mattingly, Surhoff

W
T
F

204. Shock Posted: January 04, 2011 at 08:03 PM (#3723244)

Any system where Jack Morris and Lee Smith get more votes than Jeff Bagwell needs to be seriously looked at and re-considered. Absurdity.

205. Mark Armour Posted: January 04, 2011 at 08:04 PM (#3723246)

I normally don't get worked up about individual ballots. With hundreds of people voting, I figure the "wisdom of the crowds" and the 75% requirement will produce a fair vote. If 75% of the voters want Jim Rice, I really have no problem with that. Its quite a consensus.

But I want the ballots to truly represent what the person believes. In the case of Stanton, I don't believe for a minute that he thinks that those are the best candidates. He just doesn't care. If you hand it a ballot, you are voting "no" on all of the people he did not check. His ######## ballot means that Blyleven needs to find three "yes" votes just to break even. This guy should not be a voter.

206. Shooty is in the Trust Tree

Posted: January 04, 2011 at 08:21 PM (#3723274)

Morris, E.Martinez, T. Martinez, Mattingly, Surhoff

Worst ballot this year?

207. Dag Nabbit has the talking pillow Posted: January 04, 2011 at 08:29 PM (#3723291)

Morris, E.Martinez, T. Martinez, Mattingly, Surhoff

Worst ballot this year?

Worst ballot of all-time.

208. Lassus Posted: January 04, 2011 at 08:32 PM (#3723294)

Jesus is Primer is slow today

Don't worry, look at the banned thread. Improvements are... there's going-

BWAHHHAHH hahha hah ahhad hhah! BWAHHH hhahhah!

Sorry, couldn't manage to finish.

209. Kiko Sakata

Posted: January 04, 2011 at 08:32 PM (#3723295)

Worst ballot this year?

That could be the worst ballot ever. Looking at Repoz's tally through 87 ballots, Stanton skipped over the top 4 vote-getters entirely and 13 of the top 15 vote-getters, and instead decided to give votes to two players who had received ZERO votes to date. I think if you were to get BBTF to rank the 33 players on the ballot from 1 - 33 in order, Stanton probably voted for more players in the bottom 10 (at least Surhoff, Tino) than in the top 10 on the ballot (Edgar MIGHT slip in here at #10 or so).

210. Shock Posted: January 04, 2011 at 08:37 PM (#3723306)

The other thing that gets me is the volume of ballots that are mostly reasonable...and then Jack Morris.

Tim Kurkjian. Boted for 10 last year and this year. Wanted to add Bagwell and Palmeiro to his ballot; so who does he kick off? Poor, poor Fred McGriff... The Morris Fetish is just disturbing.

211. Best Regards, L.M. Posted: January 04, 2011 at 09:06 PM (#3723342)

I think Barry Stanton accomplished his goal.

212. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: January 04, 2011 at 09:11 PM (#3723345)

I think Barry Stanton accomplished his goal.

Pesonally, if I had a plagiarism conviction on the old rap sheet, I'd try to keep a low profile.

213. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: January 04, 2011 at 09:19 PM (#3723352)

Any world where J. Morris gets more HOF votes than J. Bagwell is just warped.

Yawn. Morris is in his, what, 12th year on the ballot? Bagwell is in his first. Yes, the votes are wrong, but based on this level of support Bagwell still has to be a much better bet to eventually make the HOF. It's hard for me to muster up the outrage just yet.

Guys who haven't reached the automatic milestones typically take a few years to get in. Gary Carter, Ryne Sandberg, Carlton Fisk, Billy Williams. Don Sutton, Gaylord Perry, and Phil Niekro won over 300 games and it still took them each a few years to make it.

214. John Northey Posted: January 04, 2011 at 10:22 PM (#3723399)

Morris, E.Martinez, T. Martinez, Mattingly, Surhoff...

OK, Morris & Edgar it is easy to see why someone would vote for them. Mattingly if you are a NY homer. The other 2... hrm...

Does he likes last names that start with an M? Still doesn't explain Surhoff though.

My first guess is these 5 were all friendly to him (or gave him a story sometime that saved his job) and most others were not. I'm sure when other sportswriters talk with him they will ask 'wtf were you thinking with that ballot' as I can't imagine many other writers would be happy to see something that bizarre put out there. Examples like this just encourage the HOF to look at removing writers from having the right to vote.

215. Gamingboy Posted: January 04, 2011 at 10:29 PM (#3723405)

Barry Stanton: Morris, E.Martinez, T. Martinez, Mattingly, Surhoff

This is MADNESS!

216. Austin Posted: January 04, 2011 at 11:10 PM (#3723439)

At this point, the support for Morris doesn't bother me. I think it was Posnanski that said that what causes him to feel outrage is snubs or omissions, and that he doesn't so much mind those who get in undeservedly; I tend to agree with the sentiment. Where I do feel angry, or at least frustrated, is with the rather extreme aversion to any suspicion whatsoever of steroid use. Bagwell doesn't have the reputation of a first-ballot Hall of Famer, but there have, of course, been a lot of writers who refuse to vote for him specifically because he looked like he might have taken steroids at some point. McGwire is getting even less support than before now that he's admitted his use. Palmeiro's positive test perhaps makes his anemic support understandable, but even he deserves more, IMO. And Brown is probably going to fall off the ballot after being named in the Mitchell Report (which I hadn't even known - I didn't follow the steroid stuff closely when it was a big news item), although he never had a real chance of election regardless despite deserving it. I have to wonder if the writers believe that they will lose credibility or respect among their readership for supporting "cheaters," and so act allergic to even the slightest doubt about a player's integrity in that regard. What do others think about this? Might these non-votes have less to do with the ostensible moral standards of the writers and more to do with their worries about how others perceive them?

217. Paul has a cat named Manny Posted: January 05, 2011 at 12:01 AM (#3723480)

216: I agree. The undeserving inductees are frustrating to some extent, but I'd mostly give them a pass except that this year - and likely for the near future -- there are deserving candidates being left off ballots for undeserving ones, which ups the angst. Kevin Brown at least deserves a couple years of consideration, but he's likely to be gone after this year because people are voting for a far inferior starter in Morris. That's why this Morris thing has started to take on a life of its own among this community, I think. Morris may or may not be a better HOF candidate than Jim Rice (neither is a good one), but the circumstances this year, where there are 10 or more qualified candidates better than he is, makes voting for him more egregious.

218. icho1977 Posted: January 05, 2011 at 12:38 AM (#3723500)

Marc Topkin hall of fame ballot: Twitter and: http://www.tampabay.com/sports/baseball/rays/complications-make-baseball-hall-of-fame-voting-less-fun-than-it-used-to-be/1143491

Alomar, Bagwell, Larkin, McGriff, McGwire and Smith.

John Shea Hall of Fame Ballot:http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/giants/author?auth=186

Alomar, Blyleven, Larkin and Smith.

219. icho1977 Posted: January 05, 2011 at 01:24 AM (#3723528)

More more Ballots: Here: Scott Miller Hall of Fame Ballot:http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/14500569/when-it-comes-to-morris-hall-isnt-solely-about-numbers.

220. Baldrick Posted: January 05, 2011 at 01:56 AM (#3723551)

From that Miller ballot:

"Of all the pitchers I've been around -- Sandy Koufax, Don Drysdale, Jim Bunning, Don Newcombe -- he's as good a big-game pitcher as I've seen," Craig said. "He wanted the ball. He wanted the ball in the World Series.

"He was a little more competitive than some of those pitchers. They're all great. But he was a horse."

The more I think about it over the years -- and this is the 12th time I've voted for him -- the more I think that Morris not only is a Hall of Famer, but he should be a slam-dunk choice. He's not, of course. The 52.3 percent of the vote he received last year is his high-water mark. A candidate needs 75 percent of the vote for election.

Three of the four pitchers Craig named -- all but Newcombe -- are Hall of Famers. Morris compiled more wins (254) than Bunning (224), Drysdale (209) and Koufax (165) in an era in which, because of more bullpen use, wins were becoming increasingly more difficult to obtain. Yes, I know Sandy's career ended prematurely because of an arthritic elbow, and I know my friends in the Sabermetric community point to Morris' unseemly 3.90 ERA while arguing that wins are vastly overrated.

That's great. Of the four random guys that some other guy brought up, one of them isn't even in the HOF, two more are fairly mediocre picks, and one is a pure peak guy who almost could not be more different than Morris.

That's great that Morris has more win points than those guys.

The 'non-numbers' things that are brought up include: Morris being the ace of the staff on three WS winners. While I'm sure being the opening day starter is exciting and all, isn't it worth noting that in those various years he was outpitched by Dan Petry and Kevin Tapani and Scott Erickson? And probably Juan Guzman. And Jimmy Key. I guess those guys didn't have the same aceishness.

All that said, the rest of his ballot is pretty good (includes Trammell, Raines, Blyleven, etc.), so I probably shouldn't get too upset. Still, this Morris fetish is getting more and more unpleasant.

221. rawagman Posted: January 05, 2011 at 03:18 AM (#3723598)

MLB.com writers ballots are now up - http://mlb.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20110104&content_id=16389462&vkey=news_mlb&c_id=mlb

222. Repoz

Posted: January 05, 2011 at 03:43 AM (#3723609)

MLB.com writers ballots are now up

and I'll be pulling an all-nighter.

223. Walt Davis Posted: January 05, 2011 at 04:18 AM (#3723632)

MLB.com writers

I think we have some of these already (TR Sullivan?) but

Walker: 0 for 13
Bagwell: 5 for 13 (not even listed in Carrie Muskat's HoVG though hopefully that's just an oversight)
Raines: 4 for 13
Edgar: 3 for 13
Smith: 8 for 13

And since you all care, Blyleven 10 -- Morris 5 ... and I didn't notice a single Morris yes -- Blyleven no ballot. Also Alomar 12, Larkin 8.

Muskat has the shortest ballot at 1 (Alomar).

Bloom, Spencer and Sullivan vote for 10 with Bloom and Spencer finding 10 names better than Bagwell.

Worst ballot is a tough call. Muskat's is in the running. So is Gurnick with Blyleven and Smith (what an odd combo). Spencer rings a lot of bells with 10 votes but manages to put McGriff, Murphy, Mattingly and Smith on there above Bagwell.

And I learned something I hadn't realized before -- once you've been an "active member" of the BBWAA for 10 consecutive years you have voting priveleges for life. I assumed you at least had to remain a member but apparently not.

224. Shock Posted: January 05, 2011 at 04:24 AM (#3723635)

Man is Lee Smith getting a lot of love lately. How anyone can name fewer than 6 guys on this ballot and still name Smith is beyond me.

225. Baldrick Posted: January 05, 2011 at 04:34 AM (#3723644)

Hal Bodley
Ballot: Alomar, Blyleven and Morris.

Blyleven and Alomar will be shoo-ins this time. Morris, for whom I've been voting for years and who is on the ballot for the 12th time, is a long shot. What kept me from voting for Blyleven early on was the fact he missed 300 victories and never finished higher than third in Cy Young Award voting. Alomar was one of the best second basemen of all time. I think Morris is a Hall of Famer because he was one of the most dominant pitchers of his era. I have never been able to understand why he doesn't get more support.

So he didn't vote for Blyleven for all those years because he missed 300 wins and never finished higher than 3rd in Cy Young voting. but he's been voting for Morris every year, presumably because Morris failed to win 300 games and never finished higher than 3rd in Cy Young voting.

Even more, he can't comprehend how someone wouldn't vote for Morris...

I guess it's good that he finally came around on Bert.

226. Howie Menckel Posted: January 05, 2011 at 04:38 AM (#3723649)

"And I learned something I hadn't realized before -- once you've been an "active member" of the BBWAA for 10 consecutive years you have voting priveleges for life. I assumed you at least had to remain a member but apparently not."

Correct.

I know some people that haven't covered baseball for a LONG time who still have votes.
Theory seems to be that they did cover the guys now on the ballot, but....

227. Austin Posted: January 05, 2011 at 04:42 AM (#3723653)

How about this gem from Bloom:

I always vote for Smith and Trammell and won't give Barry Larkin a nod until the former Detroit shortstop receives his due. Their career stats are too similar.

Color me perplexed. Surely he realizes that he's going to be waiting essentially indefinitely for Trammell's election.

The biggest thing I've learned from seeing all of these individual ballots is just how diverse they are. I guess I've taken for granted the fairly high degree of consensus among the analytically minded set, and it's eye-opening to note all of the different lines of thinking that people employ (some reasonable, some clearly not). For instance, Newman doesn't vote for either Blyleven or Morris, seemingly a rare breed among those who vote for more than just a couple of candidates.

228. Lassus Posted: January 05, 2011 at 04:48 AM (#3723658)

Worst ballot is a tough call. Muskat's is in the running. So is Gurnick

Did you not see the Stanton ballot, from ESPN? That blows everything else out of the water in the race for worst.

229. DL from MN Posted: January 05, 2011 at 05:00 AM (#3723668)

That Kevin Brown total < 5% will make him the best pitcher nobody can vote for. How is it that pitchers can be the among best at their position and nobody freaking notices. His peak/prime argument is outstanding.

Flip Morris and Trammell's vote totals and I'd actually be satisfied with the ordinal ranking and HoF prospects of everyone else. As much as I don't like the idea of "relievers" as a separate standard, Lee Smith is about as good as Fingers and better than Sutter.

230. Best Regards, L.M. Posted: January 05, 2011 at 05:05 AM (#3723674)

Theory seems to be that they did cover the guys now on the ballot, but....

Well, then they should get a vote for 20 years after they become "inactive".

231. Mark Armour Posted: January 05, 2011 at 05:24 AM (#3723689)

There seems to be a bit of a Larkin surge. Not enough for 2011, but making me more confident in 2012.

232. Ray (RDP)

Posted: January 05, 2011 at 05:28 AM (#3723693)

So he didn't vote for Blyleven for all those years because he missed 300 wins and never finished higher than 3rd in Cy Young voting. but he's been voting for Morris every year, presumably because Morris failed to win 300 games and never finished higher than 3rd in Cy Young voting.

Yeah, the stupid hurts.

233. Repoz

Posted: January 05, 2011 at 05:30 AM (#3723694)

I think Morris is a Hall of Famer because he was one of the most dominant pitchers of his era. I have never been able to understand why he doesn't get more support.

Just before the 2008 HOF election, Hal Bodley was on a YESNetwork show with Murray Chass (it was the first year Chass could vote because of the NYT deal) and Bodley was asked about Jack Morris...Bodley said he never thought of him as a HOF type and had never voted for him (my notes go back to '03 and he nevah went Morris). Murray Chass browbeat (THAT WORLD SERIES GAME!!!!) the liver snaps out of the unsuspecting stuffed shirt and into pledging his confuded vote for Morris!

And this was after Chass said he cared little for the HOF and hadn't decided if he'd ever vote. HA!

Is Vitalis Voting block over with yet?

234. Austin Posted: January 05, 2011 at 05:42 AM (#3723703)

You would think that the writers would look back at Jack Morris' career statistics, see the 3.90 ERA, and think, "hmm, with an ERA like that, how could he have been the 'most dominant pitcher of his era'?" Sure, their perception is being colored by the wins and the 1991 World Series Game 7, but to me, it just seems like no one could find such a high ERA compatible with the notion of "dominance." Clearly, I'm wrong about that.

235. Everybody Loves Tyrus Raymond Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:00 AM (#3723713)

I think not voting for Bagwell from the standpoint of "Hey, let's give the steroid cloud few more years to settle and see what happens" is a defensible position. You've got 15 years to decide on him, after all - he's not falling off the ballot. It's not what I'd do, but I understand it. I'd vote for Bagwell if I had a ballot, and I say that as someone that suspects he probably used steroids during his career. Then again, I'd vote for McGwire and Palmeiro so it really isn't an issue for me.

Innocent till proven guilty and all that, but I ask - serious question:

Gun to your head, and you must give the correct answer to a question in order to save your life. The omniscient gunman knows the answer. The question: "Did Jeff Bagwell ever use steroids while a member of the Houston Astros?"

Your answer would be?

236. Von Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:08 AM (#3723715)

After seeing all the discussion about the Hall, i wrote a piece as a old feeble minded baseball writer explaining his choices. Hopefully you guys will get a kick out of it. http://vonscards.wordpress.com/

237. Godfrey Simmons Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:24 AM (#3723721)

"Ray Schalk may partly owe his election to being a "clean" member of the Black Sox. Who's the Ray Schalk of the "steroid era"?"

I actually think Mussina may be getting that Ray Schalk vote -- that guy was pretty unassuming, physically. I think he may have an outside shot of getting in with Maddux and Glavine in 2014. REAL outside. Kind of a Clemens/Steroid backlash in voting for three total finesse pitchers, you know? I mean, put Mussina in the NL and he has as many wins as Glavine in fewer years. I wonder if voters will think about the fact that only, ONLY AL pitcher better than Mussina during his career was Clemens, and a third of those 350 victories were Steroid-aided. If you kept Mussina out and punish Clemens, then what you're saying is that there were no HOF pitchers who spent their entire career (or at least, most of their career) in the AL (Pedro only spent half of his career in the AL). Could be interesting.

Can someone explain to me why Lee Smith is not getting any HOF love, but Trevor "Meat Pitch, Choke Artist" Hoffman will? Please help me out here.

G

238. Jolly Old St. Nick Done Jumped The Ship

Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:27 AM (#3723722)

Is Vitalis Voting block over with yet?

I think so, but the Lucky Tiger Liquid Butch Hair Wax caucus is still driving down from the Borscht Belt with their ballots in the trunk.

239. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:32 AM (#3723724)

Looking at this year's machine compared to last year's final (123 votes this year to 128 in the final tally in 2010), Alomar's up (from 87.5 to 92.7 and looks like a lock), Bert's down a bit (from 80.5 to 78.0, I suspect it will be close either way) and Larkin has made a nice jump (from 54.7 to 66.7 - could well reach election in 2012).

As for the rest, Morris is flat (47.7 to 48.0, not the trend he needs), Raines is up a little (41.4 to 44.7), Lee Smith is down a bit, Edgar down substantially (from 37.5) and McGwire (21.1 from 33.6) may learn that confession, while good for the soul, turns out to be not as healthy at the ballot box, promises from some to the contrary be damned.

240. Walt Davis Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:40 AM (#3723727)

I know some people that haven't covered baseball for a LONG time who still have votes.

Oh, I know that but I had assumed they at least had to keep their membership in the BBWAA active (i.e. pay dues ... I assume there are dues).

Did you not see the Stanton ballot

I meant worst ballot among the 13 MLB.com writers. Yes Stanton wins for worst ballot I've seen followed by Bob Nightengale's Alomar, Morris, Smith.

"Did Jeff Bagwell ever use steroids while a member of the Houston Astros?"

Easy, the answer is yes. I am 99% certain that Bagwell received at least one shot of cortisone in his career. He may have also had a rash or hay fever or other ailment requiring the use of a steroid. Add in the rather high probability of using an over-the-counter supplement tainted with a steroid. Then add in the probability of intentionally using anabolic steroids and I have little fear of getting shot.

Is it my fault that psychopathic, gun-wielding madmen don't specify "anabolic steroids" when they ask their life or death question?

241. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:54 AM (#3723732)

Oh, I know that but I had assumed they at least had to keep their membership in the BBWAA active (i.e. pay dues ... I assume there are dues).

I figured the same thing. And really, that should be required to keep the vote. If you're not interested enough to send in whatever meager dues are required, you forfeit your vote.

242. Lassus Posted: January 05, 2011 at 07:03 AM (#3723734)

"Ray Schalk may partly owe his election to being a "clean" member of the Black Sox. Who's the Ray Schalk of the "steroid era"?"

This would have to be Frank Thomas, right?

I meant worst ballot among the 13 MLB.com writers.

Whoops, gotcha, sorry.

243. Dag Nabbit has the talking pillow Posted: January 05, 2011 at 07:09 AM (#3723736)

123 full ballots - 5.63 names/ballot.

244. Everybody Loves Tyrus Raymond Posted: January 05, 2011 at 07:10 AM (#3723737)

Is it my fault that psychopathic, gun-wielding madmen don't specify "anabolic steroids" when they ask their life or death question?

I suppose the gun-wielding psychopath should have been more specific.

245. Shock Posted: January 05, 2011 at 09:00 AM (#3723769)

Gun to your head, and you must give the correct answer to a question in order to save your life. The omniscient gunman knows the answer. The question: "Did Jeff Bagwell ever use steroids while a member of the Houston Astros?"

Your answer would be?

"I don't know"

246. icho1977 Posted: January 05, 2011 at 09:16 AM (#3723770)

Good Morning: Another group of writers by grouping by newspapers to publish their votes. Hopefully others take the initiative.

Baseball Hall of Fame voting by the Pioneer Press

http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_17011794

Charley Walters: ALOMAR, BLYLEVEN, LARKIN, MARTINEZ, MORRIS, RAINES.
Bob Sansevere: ALOMAR, BAGWELL, BLYLEVEN, MORRIS.
Mike Bass: ALOMAR, BAGWELL, BLYLEVEN, LARKIN, MARTINEZ, MORRIS.
BONUS TRACK

Tom Powers: ALOMAR, MORRIS, BLYLEVEN.

247. rawagman Posted: January 05, 2011 at 02:53 PM (#3723812)

Richard Griffin of the Toronto Star reveals his ballot: Alomar, Blyleven, LArkin, McGriff, Morris, Raines, Walker.
http://www.thestar.com/sports/baseball/article/916126--griffin-alomar-blyleven-virtual-shoo-ins-for-hall

248. Moldorf Posted: January 05, 2011 at 03:35 PM (#3723842)

I just ran across this article on our friend, Barry Stanton: http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/04/who-the-heck-is-barry-stanton/

Looks like Barry's made the big time ...

249. Lassus Posted: January 05, 2011 at 03:49 PM (#3723852)

I would have liked a teensy bit more bite from Craig on that article, and I'm a total soft-shoe.

250. Dale Sams Posted: January 05, 2011 at 03:59 PM (#3723857)

Gun to your head, and you must give the correct answer to a question in order to save your life. The omniscient gunman knows the answer. The question: "Did Jeff Bagwell ever use steroids while a member of the Houston Astros?"

It's funnier if you imagine it's Jack Bauer asking.

"Did he? DID HE? TELL ME!!!!"

251. Repoz

Posted: January 05, 2011 at 04:00 PM (#3723859)

Where are Gammons and Verducci with usual solid HOF ballots? Not this mumbo-jumble MLB video shatz attack or making me read through the Verducci HOF Effects meandering meander on S.I.

252. lar @ wezen-ball Posted: January 05, 2011 at 04:06 PM (#3723866)

Speaking of worst possible ballot... any word from Mariotti this year?

I'm guessing that since I haven't heard anything about it, and since the only HOF ballot he'd ever cast would be one designed to attract the most attention possible, that means he's either not cast a ballot or no one has given him a forum to write about it.

This is probably a good thing.

253. SoSH U at work Posted: January 05, 2011 at 04:13 PM (#3723875)

I'm guessing that since I haven't heard anything about it, and since the only HOF ballot he'd ever cast would be one designed to attract the most attention possible, that means he's either not cast a ballot or no one has given him a forum to write about it.

I believe he sent in a blank ballot last year, which was definitely designed for that purpose. These days, he may be trying to attract a little less attention. Or maybe voting privileges are revoked for the incarcerated (whatever happened to his case?)

254. DL from MN Posted: January 05, 2011 at 04:39 PM (#3723908)

Best players you can't even vote for (non Pete Rose Division):

Bill Dahlen - the VC pioneer committee never seems to be able to find Bill Dahlen, he's one of the 10 best SS ever
Bobby Grich - somehow left off the VC ballot this time around despite being at least as good as Roberto Alomar
Lou Whitaker - The writers forgot about Whitaker in his only year eligible. Will wait for the VC without the benefit of having built up momentum with the writers

Soon to be joining this list - Kevin Brown. He's the Fergie Jenkins or Jim Palmer of his pitching generation. I understand why the vote totals are suppressed but Palmeiro was a jerk who took steroids and he still draws 12%.

255. sportic Posted: January 05, 2011 at 05:06 PM (#3723943)

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel writers join the party
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/brewers.html
Brewers beat writer Tom Haudricourt: Roberto Alomar, Bert Blyleven, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, Fred McGriff, Jack Morris, Tim Raines, Lee Smith.

Assistant sports editor Bill Windler: Roberto Alomar, Jeff Bagwell, Bert Blyleven, Barry Larkin, Mark McGwire, Rafael Palmeiro, Tim Raines, Alan Trammell.

Columnist Michael Hunt: Roberto Alomar, Jeff Bagwell, Bert Blyleven.

Editor/writer Mike Hart: Roberto Alomar, Bert Blyleven, Jack Morris.

256. lar @ wezen-ball Posted: January 05, 2011 at 05:18 PM (#3723956)

That ain't a bad short ballot from Hunt. If you're only going 3, hard to argue there. Windler's is fantastic, though.

257. DL from MN Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:13 PM (#3724020)

Bold prediction time: Bagwell outpolls Morris next year with Larkin getting elected.

258. Matt Clement of Alexandria Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:22 PM (#3724033)

Larkin and alomar seem to be following the Sandberg pattern with a big jump after a good first-year showing. All of them are obviously deserving HoFers without elect-me numbers. I wouldn't be surprised to see Bagwell follow a similar pattern next year - I think a significant portion of his lack of votes is coming not from steroids allegations, but from his greatness not being immediately obvious in his basic stats.

259. SoSH U at work Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:23 PM (#3724034)

Bold prediction time: Bagwell outpolls Morris next year with Larkin getting elected.

I think the first is definitely true (I think Bagwell's low vote total will spark considerable discussion) and Larkin is going to have a damn good shot in 2012.

260. Musk21 Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:30 PM (#3724039)

Minneapolis Star Tribune writers:

http://www.startribune.com/sports/twins/112931054.html?elr=KArksi8cyaiUqCP:iUiacyKUbPi87EK_g:D_GD7EaDh_0c:aD:aUs

La Velle E Neal III: Alomar, Bagwell, Blyleven, Franco, Larkin, E. Martinez, McGriff, Raines, L.Smith

Joe Christensen: Alomar, Bagwell, Blyleven, Larkin, McGriff, Raines, Morris, Trammell, Walker

261. Ok, Griffey's Dunn (Nothing Iffey About Griffey) Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:36 PM (#3724049)

La Velle E Neal III: Alomar, Bagwell, Blyleven, Franco, Larkin, E. Martinez, McGriff, Raines, L.Smith

Fantastic

edit: Wait, that's John Franco, not Julio... :-)

262. DL from MN Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:42 PM (#3724054)

John Franco and Lee Smith, not Kevin Brown. No sane GM would have traded Kevin Brown for John Franco and Lee Smith. At least he is the only MN writer not to vote Morris.

263. AROM Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:56 PM (#3724067)

edit: Wait, that's John Franco, not Julio... :-)

For some reason I saw that and had to look up Julio vs. John Franco. For a pair of players who came up in the early to mid 80's, I was surprised they never faced each other until 2001. Different leagues and old fashioned no-interleague-play and all that.

They faced 4 times, Julio had a single and 3 walks.

264. icho1977 Posted: January 05, 2011 at 06:59 PM (#3724069)

According to count my of the ballots of the Hall of Fame, to be exact are 125, new voters in 2011 and old writers, Barry Larkin has won 15 new votes. This percentage could be increased according to the ballots are coming.

Barry Larkin: 15

Robertp Alomar : 13

Tim Raines: 10

Bert Blyleven: 9

Jack Morris: 9

Alan Trammell: 7

Lee Smith: 4

265. Jick Posted: January 05, 2011 at 07:25 PM (#3724092)

ESPN's having a live chat with most of their Hall of Fame voters. Stanton said he was going to explain his ballot, but I haven't seen anything new from him in twenty minutes:

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/hof11/news/story?id=5988529

266. Chip Posted: January 05, 2011 at 07:30 PM (#3724094)

Just had to listen to Costas, Heyman, and Verducci in a row all spread idiocy on Bagwell.

Also, Heyman arguing that several guys deserved to exceed the 5percent rule and stay on the ballot, to encourage further debate on their careers. He mentioned Kevin Brown in that group, but then says he didn't vote for Brown.

267. Austin Posted: January 05, 2011 at 07:51 PM (#3724122)

What were they saying about Bagwell? I assume that they avoided the steroid speculation, but it's hard not to be impressed by his numbers. Were they docking him for the length of his career, or for his relative lack of awards, or simply for the fact that many of the counting stats don't look very good next to [fill in non-Hall-of-Famer here]?

Harold Reynolds just showed a video of a good play by Barry Larkin and praised him for how quickly he had turned his head to look at first base, and then immediately proceeded to marvel at how amazing a play by Roberto Alomar was because he made a no-look throw. Um, Harold, which one would you use an example for a young player? At least apply some consistency to your "analysis."

268. Baldrick Posted: January 05, 2011 at 07:52 PM (#3724123)

From the link in 265:

Here's Barry Stanton's comment about the rest of his ballot:

I have voted for Mattingly since he's been on the ballot. Same with Jack Morris, who is a better pitcher than Blyleven was.

I chose Tino because he was at the heart of a 4-time world championship team.

As for Alomar, I did not vote for him last year and seriously considered changing my vote for him. I expect him to get in on this election, so I won't have a chance to vote for him next year, but I'm fine with that.

That's gold, Jerry! Gold!

I particularly love how his "explanation" of the ballot mostly involves...telling us who he voted for.

269. Baldrick Posted: January 05, 2011 at 07:58 PM (#3724130)

Also:

I chose Tino because he was at the heart of a 4-time world championship team.

That's funny, I thought he played first base.

Also, Tino's career postseason line: 233/321/351.

270. Juan V Posted: January 05, 2011 at 07:59 PM (#3724133)

Am I the only one thinking the BBTF consensus was being too optimistic about Bagwell's initial chances? "Sillyball era first baseman who didn't challenge the big counting stat milestones" is a decent superficial case against.

271. Jick Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:00 PM (#3724134)

Many thanks to Repoz and everyone else for collecting the ballots again this year.

272. Jick Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:01 PM (#3724138)

Roberto Alomar 523 90.0%
Bert Blyleven 463 79.7%
Barry Larkin 361 62.1%
Jack Morris 311 53.5%
Lee Smith 263 45.3%
Jeff Bagwell 242 41.7%
Tim Raines 218 37.5%
Edgar Martinez 191 32.9%
Alan Trammell 141 24.3%
Larry Walker 118 20.3%
Mark McGwire 115 19.8%
Fred McGriff 104 17.9%
Dave Parker 89 15.3%
Don Mattingly 79 13.6%
Dale Murphy 73 12.6%
Rafael Palmeiro 64 11.0%
Juan Gonzalez 30 5.2%
Harold Baines 28 4.8%
John Franco 27 4.6%
Kevin Brown 12 2.1%
Tino Martinez 6 1.0%
Marquis Grissom 4 0.7%
Al Leiter 4 0.7%
John Olerud 4 0.7%
B.J. Surhoff 2 0.3%
Bret Boone 1 0.2%
Benito Santiago 1 0.2%
Carlos Baerga 0 0.0%
Lenny Harris 0 0.0%
Bobby Higginson 0 0.0%
Charles Johnson 0 0.0%
Raul Mondesi 0 0.0%
Kirk Rueter 0 0.0%

273. Baldrick Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:02 PM (#3724139)

Yay for Bert!

274. SoSH U at work Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:04 PM (#3724142)

Congrats to Robby and Bert (and Rich).

275. Jick Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:07 PM (#3724146)

Chris Jaffe did a great job with his predictions this year (and every year, it feels like) - pretty much exactly right on Blyleven, Larkin, etc.

Morris didn't do as well as we all feared he would.

276. Baldrick Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:08 PM (#3724148)

HOF results broke Primer.

277. John DiFool2 Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:09 PM (#3724150)

Glad there's some justice in the world (other than David).

Good to see Morris spinning his wheels, and Larkin positioning himself for a run next year (his only real shot for quite awhile). Raines didn't get quite the bump that the poll suggested, but it's better than nothing. But the vote totals for Mac, Raffy, Bags, and EMart are all shameful, not to mention Kevin Brown's one-and-done.

278. bunyon Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:13 PM (#3724152)

Franco got more votes than Brown. Amazing.

279. Coot Veal and Cot Deal make $486 every day Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:15 PM (#3724153)

the Machine got Bert's total exactly right.

280. Swedish Chef Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:15 PM (#3724154)

Justice served!

BBTF is going to feel strangely empty without pro and con Blyleven stories.

Oh, and Surhoff managed to pick up another voter, now they can start a club!

Poor poor Kevin Brown.

281. Dag Nabbit has the talking pillow Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:16 PM (#3724155)

5.98 votes/ballot. WOW. I thought I was high was my 5.85 prediction, too.

282. DL from MN Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:21 PM (#3724159)

2010 results

Andre Dawson 420 (77.9%), Bert Blyleven 400 (74.2%), Roberto Alomar 397 (73.7%), Jack Morris 282 (52.3%), Barry Larkin 278 (51.6%), Lee Smith 255 (47.3%), Edgar Martinez 195 (36.2%), Tim Raines 164 (30.4%), Mark McGwire 128 (23.7%), Alan Trammell 121 (22.4%), Fred McGriff 116 (21.5%), Don Mattingly 87 (16.1%), Dave Parker 82 (15.2%), Dale Murphy 63 (11.7%), Harold Baines 33 (6.1%), Andres Galarraga 22 (4.1%), Robin Ventura 7 (1.3%), Ellis Burks 2 (0.4%), Eric Karros 2 (0.4%), Kevin Appier 1 (0.2%), Pat Hentgen 1 (0.2%), David Segui 1 (0.2%), Mike Jackson 0, Ray Lankford 0, Shane Reynolds 0, Todd Zeile 0.

Alomar +16, Larkin +10, Raines +7, Bert +5, Trammell +2, Morris +1, Lee Smith -2, Martinez -3, Mattingly -3, McGriff -4

Parker 0 (no bump for last time on ballot), Baines -2 and done. John Franco outpolls Kevin Brown.

283. DL from MN Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:22 PM (#3724161)

Predictions for next year

Larkin +15, Bagwell +15, Morris +3, Trammell +3, Raines +5, Walker +5, Juan Gonzalez drops off the ballot

284. John DiFool2 Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:24 PM (#3724162)

BBTF is going to feel strangely empty without pro and con Blyleven stories.

Oh don't worry, the Jack Morris ones will keep us entertained, but like I said his clock is about to strike midnight: 22 percentage points is too many to gain, even in a weak year.

285. Benji Gil Gamesh Rises Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:30 PM (#3724163)

BBTF is going to feel strangely empty without pro and con Blyleven stories.

Never fear, SugarBearBot will now incorporate Blyleven's enshrinement into his Morris trollvocacy.

286. Benji Gil Gamesh Rises Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:32 PM (#3724164)

double post

287. Srul Itza Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:33 PM (#3724165)

Changes in raw vote numbers:

Roberto Alomar...............+126
Bert Blyleven....................+63
Barry Larkin....................+83
Jack Morris....................+29
Lee Smith.........................+8
Tim Raines.......................+54
Edgar Martinez....................-4
Alan Trammell....................+20
Mark McGwire....................-13
Fred McGriff....................-12
Dave Parker.........................+7
Don Mattingly....................-8
Dale Murphy....................10
Harold Baines....................-5

288. Dale Sams Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:33 PM (#3724166)

Same with Jack Morris, who is a better pitcher than Blyleven was.

wow..Jack's what? 55?

289. DanG Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:48 PM (#3724172)

This ballot is the last one to feature players who had their primes in the 1970's. With Blyleven's election and Parker's time running out, that leaves only a handful of players who played at all in the 70's. Murphy, Morris and Trammell first played as regulars in 1978; Raines had 6 pinch-running appearances in Sept 1979. That's it.

290. Austin Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:49 PM (#3724174)

Something that aggravates me about so many arguments against steroid users for the Hall of Fame (as was discussed on the simulcast) is that so many people seem to jump from "he used steroids" to "his numbers are inauthentic" to "his numbers are then not Hall of Fame worthy." The logic really just doesn't follow. I'm one of those who thinks that steroids are not such a huge boost for users in general, so I disagree with the conclusion that so many seem to make that some careers were built on steroids and would not have been good enough for the Hall otherwise. Jon Heyman, of all people, seems to recognize that some of these players were great regardless of their use and should go in, but as is pretty common, he does appear to use it as a major mark against the players who weren't the absolute all-time greats like Bonds and Clemens.

291. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:50 PM (#3724176)

Two excellent choices for the HOF. Congratulations to both Roberto and Bert!

Meanwhile, the backlog will still be there next election...

292. RB in NYC (Now Semi-Retired from BBTF) Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:51 PM (#3724177)

Oh don't worry, the Jack Morris ones will keep us entertained, but like I said his clock is about to strike midnight: 22 percentage points is too many to gain, even in a weak year.

I assume at some point they'll change the Veterans Committee and Morris might get in that way (or might not) but his chance at the BBWAA door is shut. Which, if I may brag a little, I've been saying for a while now. He'd need to gain something like 125 votes next year to get in. Then the big names hit, and that's it.

293. DL from MN Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:53 PM (#3724179)

McGwire -4 so much for those who said "I'll vote for him if he just admits it"

I think Raines is high enough to run the gauntlet of upcoming ballots.

294. John (You Can Call Me Grandma) Murphy Posted: January 05, 2011 at 08:55 PM (#3724180)

This ballot is the last one to feature players who had their primes in the 1970's. With Blyleven's election and Parker's time running out, that leaves only a handful of players who played at all in the 70's. Murphy, Morris and Trammell first played as regulars in 1978; Raines had 6 pinch-running appearances in Sept 1979. That's it.

Thanks for making me feel old, Dan.

295. Monty Posted: January 05, 2011 at 09:00 PM (#3724181)

Yay! Another Padre in the Hall of Fame!

296. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: January 05, 2011 at 09:01 PM (#3724182)

Can't believe Brown is one-and-done. He's the case the writers should be spending their time debating next year - not Morris.

297. Guapo Posted: January 05, 2011 at 09:04 PM (#3724184)

INTERNET ZEALOTS FTW

298. DanG Posted: January 05, 2011 at 09:17 PM (#3724191)

Since 1990, Hall of Merit members to get whacked by the writers in year #1:

2011 - Kevin Brown
2007 - Bret Saberhagen
2006 - Will Clark
2004 - Dave Stieb
2001 - Lou Whitaker
1998 - Willie Randolph
1995 - Darrell Evans
1994 - Ted Simmons
1992 - Bobby Grich

299. scotto Posted: January 05, 2011 at 09:20 PM (#3724195)

Don't I feel stupid.

300. Shock Posted: January 05, 2011 at 10:00 PM (#3724259)

I figured that with Lee Smith's record being broken he would slowly wind down, but he's actually gaining support. Mind boggling.

Page 3 of 4 pages < 1 2 3 4 >

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Hall of Fame Ballot Gathering Machine

Reader Comments and Retorts

BBTF Sponsor

Support BBTF

Bookmarks

Hot Topics