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

Sunday, December 10, 2017

Jack Morris, Alan Trammell elected to Hall | MLB.com

Jack Morris and Alan Trammell were elected to the National Baseball Hall of Fame from among 10 candidates on the 2018 Modern Baseball Era ballot on Sunda

Jim Furtado Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:13 PM | 240 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: hall of fame

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 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 > 
   1. Chris Fluit Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:21 PM (#5589729)
Yay!
   2. Jorge Luis Bourjos (Walewander) Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:21 PM (#5589730)
Overjoyed to hear Alan Trammell, my childhood hero and all time favourite player, is finally in. Lou should be going in beside him.
   3. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:21 PM (#5589731)
It felt like a big victory when Morris timed out with the BBWAA, but victory is fleeting.
   4. Baldrick Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:24 PM (#5589737)
It felt like a big victory when Morris timed out with the BBWAA, but victory is fleeting.

For those who care, the difference between outright HOFers, and VC inductees has always been a significant one. And Morris definitely fits the bill. So at least there's that.
   5. Where have you gone Brady Anderson? Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:25 PM (#5589738)
And now we can stop talking about Jack Morris, which is a victory in itself.
   6. winnipegwhip Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:29 PM (#5589742)
outright HOFers?

I wouldnt consider players only elected by baseball writers as being something more deserving.

Joyful do you consider those selected by all committees as lesser HOFers?

   7. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:29 PM (#5589743)
Yeah, Morris doesn’t kill the quality of the HoF when they already had guys like Red Ruffing and Jesse Haines, but the modern VC had been keeping out better guys like Tommy John and Jim Kaat, so it’s not like Morris is a decent VC pick.
   8. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:33 PM (#5589748)
[6] I’ve been the HoF plaque room (visited in 2004) and there’s no distinction there between Hall of Famers by how they were selected. Obviously, the BBWAA selections are going to be better players- they get the first crack at selection, while the VC merely mulls over the leftovers.
   9. PreservedFish Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:33 PM (#5589749)
For those who care, the difference between outright HOFers, and VC inductees has always been a significant one.


I don't see that. They're all outright HOFers.
   10. winnipegwhip Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:34 PM (#5589752)
So players dont get a second shot because of the BBWAA is the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval in your book?
   11. winnipegwhip Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:36 PM (#5589754)
I guess Negro Leaguers are a lesser candidate to Joyful.
   12. winnipegwhip Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:38 PM (#5589757)
If Jesse Haines or Ross Youngs keeps you from enjoying the Hall of Fame one has a lot of problems with the world.
   13. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:40 PM (#5589760)

And now we can stop talking about Jack Morris
You're new here, aren't you.
   14. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:42 PM (#5589762)
Overjoyed to hear Alan Trammell, my childhood hero and all time favourite player, is finally in. Lou should be going in beside him.

Lou should definitely be the next cause taken up by those folks who campaigned for Blyleven.
   15. SoSH U at work Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:43 PM (#5589764)

I guess Negro Leaguers are a lesser candidate to Joyful.


It wasn't Joyful, and that's not really fair anyway.

   16. SoSH U at work Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:45 PM (#5589766)
Lou should definitely be the next cause taken up by those folks who campaigned for Blyleven.


I think Grich should be first in line.
   17. Jose Bautista Bobblehead Day Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:48 PM (#5589768)
Morris doesn’t kill the quality of the HoF when they already had guys like Red Ruffing and Jesse Haines
Hey now, Red Ruffing was a helluva ballplayer: 70 career WAR.
   18. The Duke Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:49 PM (#5589769)
Great day for Detroit. Congrats to them.

Simmons missed by one vote - unbelievable
   19. PreservedFish Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:59 PM (#5589774)

I guess Negro Leaguers are a lesser candidate to Joyful.

It wasn't Joyful, and that's not really fair anyway.


Yeah, come on. Give your fellow Primate a little credit please.
   20. Jarrod HypnerotomachiaPoliphili (TeddyF.Ballgame) Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:59 PM (#5589775)
If it takes Morris getting in to open the door for Trammell, then so be it.
   21. Booey Posted: December 10, 2017 at 08:59 PM (#5589776)
Congrats to fans of the 1980's Tigers. Trammel immediately becomes one of the VC's crowning achievements, right up there with Vaughan, Mize, and Santo. Are there any other no brainer HOFers elected by the various incarnations of the VC (besides Negro Leaguers, obviously)?

And Morris...well, he fits right in with most of the Frisch era VC selections.

It's gonna be a crowded stage this July with Chipper, Thome, Hoffman, and Vlad looking like locks to join them.
   22. Ziggy's screen name Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:09 PM (#5589780)
There are all of the deserving 19th c. players, but I don't think that's who you were talking about.
   23. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:16 PM (#5589781)
I support Negro League selections to the Hall of Fame. People who say otherwise are mischaracterizing my position.
   24. SoSH U at work Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:19 PM (#5589785)

I support Negro League selections to the Hall of Fame. People who say otherwise are mischaracterizing my position.


He thinks you made post 4, and everything has flowed from there.
   25. DJS vs. The White Knights Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:19 PM (#5589786)
Jack Morris. What a ####### joke. One of the worst Hall of Fame picks ever *and* disrespects women.

Amusing as hell that two weeks after the sanctimonious letter from Joe Morgan, with the tacit approval of the Hall, in which he goes on and on about morals and character, they induct Jack Morris, who proudly announced that women reporters shouldn't be in the clubhouse unless he's having sex with them.
   26. SoSH U at work Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:25 PM (#5589791)
Jack Morris. What a ####### joke. One of the worst Hall of Fame picks ever *and* disrespects women.


It's remarkable how the last two bad picks to the Hall (one by the BBWAA, the other nudged along by the writers) were such dicks to the reporters. Damn masochists.
   27. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:28 PM (#5589796)
I'm thrilled for Trammell, and while Morris is not a HOFer, IMO, there are some nice things about The Jack getting in:

- We won't have to debate him in the future;
- As a 43-yr-old who fell in love with baseball in the early '80s, Jack Morris was one of the most prominent players of my childhood. There aren't very many pitchers who even got a sniff of the HOF from that same exact time frame, so there you go.
- The election of both guys theoretically opens up room on subsequent Modern Game ballots. I'd love to see Dwight Evans, Lou Whitaker, and Bobby Grich on a future ballot, and I think Whitaker is arguably the next "cause" to be picked up.

I'm with those who think it is unfortunate if your enjoyment of the HOF is diminished because The Jack will have a plaque there. Whatever.

What an induction ceremony set for 2018! Trammell and Morris will bring out Tiger Nation; Thome will bring out Cleveland fans; Chipper for Atlanta fans; Vlad for Expos fans; and probably Hoffman for Padres fans.

That's good - because there are gonna be a lot of Yankees fans for a few years after that!
   28. Booey Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:34 PM (#5589801)
#25 - For some reason "character" has apparently referred almost exclusively to PED's for a decade. No reason to expect it to change now.
   29. . . . . . . Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:46 PM (#5589811)
Lou Whitaker was a platoon player. He doesn’t belong in the hall any more than Morris did.

Grich, on the other hand...
   30. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:49 PM (#5589812)
Lou Whitaker was a platoon player. He doesn’t belong in the hall any more than Morris did.

Platoon players don't get 10,000 PAs.
   31. ReggieThomasLives Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:55 PM (#5589813)
Every Jack Morris is more than worth it if they get us an Alan Trammel.
   32. Morty Causa Posted: December 10, 2017 at 09:58 PM (#5589814)
Of those players that the BBWA has shafted, Grich probably heads my old-timers' list. I worry that he always seems to be forgotten. Some sentimental favorite jockeys into place ahead of him and most fans here just shrug.

I also think Marvin Miller should be elected. His impact was cataclysmic, and he was very successful mano-a-mano with owner/management.
   33. Tubbs is Bobby Grich when he flys off the handle Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:04 PM (#5589819)
If Whitaker gets in, then it may help bring attention to Grich but the lack of 2000 hits is a killer. He's more than worthy though
   34. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:04 PM (#5589820)
Morris was elected because the Blyleven campaign was successful. This is basically the grumpy old farts saying #### you to stats nerds.
   35. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:05 PM (#5589821)
Lou should definitely be the next cause taken up by those folks who campaigned for Blyleven.

I think Grich should be first in line.


I like the idea of Lou joining Trammell as a HoF keystone combo, like Gordon and Boudreau / Rizzuto or Reese and Robinson. But I agree that Grich is equally deserving.

EDIT: And obviously Miller, but he's in a different category.
   36. DavidFoss Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:06 PM (#5589824)
Platoon players don't get 10,000 PAs.

Late in his career, they sat him frequently against lefties. Certainly from 1992-95, arguably quite a bit in 1990 & 1991 as well.

The thing is, if you are a left-handed batter who needs more rest because of age, it simply makes sense to do it against LHP's. It is better for you, and it is better for your backups as well.
   37. kwarren Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:12 PM (#5589827)
All in all, a nice political decision. We'll give you Morris if you give us Trammell. With maybe a little divine intervention from Ernie Harwell !!

And baseball's HOF continues the slow decline in its standards, gradually but steadily becoming more like the NFL, NBA, and NHL halls. Too bad really.

We really should be able to negotiate a litle something for putting Trevor in this year, a Larry Walker maybe or Andruw Jones.
   38. Walt Davis Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:25 PM (#5589833)
For some reason "character" has apparently referred almost exclusively to PED's

Except greenies of course.

If we are talking about the "standards" for inclusion in the HoF, there absolutely is a need to distinguish between those placed in by the VC rather than the BBWAA. (Note, NeL'ers and Old-timers were never really considered by the BBWAA and clearly are a different category). Maybe if it hadn't been for the horribly low standards of the Frisch VC era, such a distinction wouldn't be necessary but as it stands, probably about 25% of the HoF players really have no business being there ... or if they do, then there are about 300 more who belong as well.

This creates issues for the evaluation of things like HoF Monitor, Standards, etc. where one might be tempted to think that being as good as the average HoFer should make you a shoo-in but it tends to mean you are pretty borderline for election by the writers.

Nothing particular against Morris. I don't think he deserves it but it was pretty clear years ago that the VC would add him and that decision is fairly consistent with decisions they've made over the last 30 years or so (i.e. if you come close with the writers, the VC will usually push you over eventually). And we now have two post-expansion players added by the VC. I'm surprised Simmons did so well -- I don't particularly think he deserves it (or at least no more than Munson and Freeham) but it suggests that the current versions of these committees might be open to serious re-evaluation of players when warranted.
   39. Pat Rapper's Delight (as quoted on MLB Network) Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:31 PM (#5589836)
On the bright side, the VC finally elected some players again. On the down side, Jack Morris was one of them.
   40. Baldrick Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:33 PM (#5589837)
I wouldnt consider players only elected by baseball writers as being something more deserving.

I don't see that. They're all outright HOFers.

I didn't say that everyone had to care. I said that for those who DO care about the distinction, it's a meaningful one, and can continue to be reflected in Morris's status.

I agree, of course, that they're all HOFers, and I absolutely wouldn't want them marked separately in the actual setting in Cooperstown. But there is a clear distinction between those voted in by the writers and those admitted through the VC and other similar incarnations. Not everyone is obliged to care about that distinction, but for those who do, it remains meaningful that Morris wasn't admitted through the first process.
   41. Morty Causa Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:37 PM (#5589841)
Yes, but when someone like Johnny Mize has to go in through the back door, that really confounds the distinctions. Not that there are many like Mize who are neglected by the writers, but still, the elective/selective process has not resulted in distinctions of pure quality.
   42. reech Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:38 PM (#5589843)
As the voters on the Vet committee generally played against the nominees and/or are baseball lifers, wouldn't it PERHAPS be possible that:
a: they have integrity and this isn't some sort of "old boy network" (ie: the years when Frisch was getting his cronies in)
b: they know what they are talking about?
   43. Morty Causa Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:41 PM (#5589846)
For some reason "character" has apparently referred almost exclusively to PED's

I don't know. There's a strain of revisionism when it comes to race. I think there some on these boards who gladly have the HOF rolls purged of some who were bereft of state of the art foresight when it came to integrating baseball.
   44. SoSH U at work Posted: December 10, 2017 at 10:45 PM (#5589850)

Morris was elected because the Blyleven campaign was successful. This is basically the grumpy old farts saying #### you to stats nerds.


No it wasn't. Morris got elected because he got close with the writers. And Morris got close with the writers because he started from a decent place and had no obvious Hall-worthy pitchers join the ballot until after he'd been on the ballot for 14 years. I understand that explanation doesn't doesn't have the appeal of injecting ourselves into the narrative does. It just happens to be what happened.
   45. Rennie's Tenet Posted: December 10, 2017 at 11:00 PM (#5589852)
Tigers debuted 6 players in 1977 who combined for 264 bWAR. Two for 36.3 in 1976, three more for 66.3 in 1979.
   46. Cooper Nielson Posted: December 10, 2017 at 11:10 PM (#5589854)
The saber part of me knows that Jack Morris doesn't deserve to be in the HOF (or, rather, if he does, then so do dozens of other guys like Tommy John and Jim Kaat and Dennis Martinez and Frank Tanana). But the fan part of me, the part that was a 12-year-old kid in mid-Michigan in 1984, is pretty happy about this.

Overall, though Morris is obviously a lower-tier HOFer, I don't feel that he "cheapens" the HOF any more than Catfish Hunter or Lou Brock or Bruce Sutter did. To use a new but already tired cliche, "It's not the Hall of WAR," and there are elements of Morris's career that I think transcend his less-impressive WAR and WAA and ERA -- Game 7, the Opening Day streak, being the (nominal) ace on a bunch of really good teams, and even the "most wins in the '80s" thing.

To (the younger version of) me, he always "felt" like a future Hall of Famer when he was active, and I was surprised how uninspiring his stats looked at the end of his career. But part of that was due to two terrible years at the end -- if he retires after the 1992 World Series, he's got a 3.73 ERA (no longer the worst in the HOF), 237 wins (still comfortably in the middle third) and 2275 strikeouts (a bit better than average for a HOFer). His WAR goes up a bit and his ERA+ goes from 105 to 109, moving him past Early Wynn and Don Sutton. Obviously it's not fair to make this adjustment unless we make it for everyone, but I think it helps illustrate that he's not this huge outlier. While he's near the bottom, no one can honestly say that he's the worst pitcher in the HOF.
   47. Silas Wegg Posted: December 10, 2017 at 11:13 PM (#5589855)
Missouri compromise.
   48. Ziggy's screen name Posted: December 10, 2017 at 11:36 PM (#5589860)
b: they know what they are talking about?


They just elected Jack Morris, so I'm pretty sure that they don't.

I don't feel that he "cheapens" the HOF any more than Catfish Hunter or Lou Brock or Bruce Sutter did


Well, those guys cheapened it too. Doesn't mean that it's a good idea to continue to cheapen it.
   49. Fancy Crazy Town Banana Pants Handle Posted: December 10, 2017 at 11:47 PM (#5589861)
b: they know what they are talking about?

They just elected Jack Morris, so I'm pretty sure that they don't.

I mean, when have old baseball players ever shown that they know what they are talking about, about anything. Much less about actual baseball... "Walks clog up the bases!" "Lifting weights makes you less flexible, and you won't be able to hit or pitch!" "Productive outs!"
   50. QLE Posted: December 10, 2017 at 11:47 PM (#5589862)
Are there any other no brainer HOFers elected by the various incarnations of the VC (besides Negro Leaguers, obviously)?


Goose Goslin, Stan Coveleski, Pee Wee Reese, and Richie Ashburn, sticking only with players who played entirely in the 20th century.

After them, it depends on what we mean by "no brainer"- there are other VC picks that, from my perspective at least, were deserving, but they tend to be ones with more complicated arguments (in several cases related, in one way or another, to WWII).
   51. DJS vs. The White Knights Posted: December 11, 2017 at 12:08 AM (#5589865)
As the voters on the Vet committee generally played against the nominees and/or are baseball lifers, wouldn't it PERHAPS be possible that:

b: they know what they are talking about?


Being good at playing baseball doesn't make one a good baseball analyst any more than being good at baseball analysis makes one good at playing baseball. There's no mystery how runs are score and how runs are prevented in baseball - when experience disagrees with all the actual evidence, experience can take a long walk off a short pier.

The people who voted for Jack Morris may be very nice people, very good players, or very good reporters, but they're no more equipped for baseball analysis than a doctor unware of antisepsis is for being a surgeon.
   52. Howie Menckel Posted: December 11, 2017 at 12:14 AM (#5589867)
Overall, though Morris is obviously a lower-tier HOFer, I don't feel that he "cheapens" the HOF any more than Catfish Hunter or Lou Brock

you have to be under age 50. try writing MLB 1965-1985 without either.

I have never voted for either into my top 15 annual slots for Hall of Merit and never will - and I have voted in all of those since the first "1898 ballot" in 2003.

but Hall of Fame?

Brock and Hunter defined the vibe of that era (even if in retrospect, their career accomplishments were not as well understood).

Morris? he was the guy who started on Opening Day a lot and pitched a great WS Game 7. meh
   53. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 11, 2017 at 12:25 AM (#5589871)
To (the younger version of) me, he always "felt" like a future Hall of Famer when he was active, and I was surprised how uninspiring his stats looked at the end of his career.
But the most striking thing about saying this is that he falls in the class of player who people say "felt like a Future HOFer" despite never actually feeling like a present HOFer. He only made 5 all-star games in a long career. He never won a Cy, or even came close. He only had six first place Cy votes in his entire career. He led his dominant team in Ws, Ks, IP in 1984... and finished third on his team in the Cy voting -- seventh overall -- with but a single third place vote.
   54. Cooper Nielson Posted: December 11, 2017 at 12:47 AM (#5589875)
you have to be under age 50. try writing MLB 1965-1985 without either.

But the most striking thing about saying this is that he falls in the class of player who people say "felt like a Future HOFer" despite never actually feeling like a present HOFer.


As cheerfully disclosed, I was 12 in 1984 (so I'm 45 now) and I'm from Michigan. Both have certainly colored my view of Jack Morris, past and present. He was a very big star when and where I was growing up. I started following baseball around 1982, hence my relative disregard for Catfish and Brock, who I knew mainly as (i) the guy with a cool nickname and (ii) the guy whose records Rickey Henderson broke.

But don't get me wrong, if for some reason I was ever given a Hall of Fame vote, I would not vote for Jack Morris. By my personal standards, he doesn't merit induction (nor does Catfish or Sutter -- Lou Brock, maybe).
   55. The Ghost of Logan Schafer Posted: December 11, 2017 at 12:50 AM (#5589878)
So close for Ted Simmons, hopefully he gets nominated again in 2020.
   56. Howie Menckel Posted: December 11, 2017 at 01:11 AM (#5589880)
Cooper, I would recommend more research on the story of Catfish Hunter - and, ironically re Morris, his postseason exploits. and free agency. and the uniforms and all of it.

Brock in the 1967-68 WS, and his SB exploits making him a SI cover star. if you lived the era, he played a huge role.

neither Morris nor Sutter were as captivating.
   57. John Northey Posted: December 11, 2017 at 01:47 AM (#5589882)
I really hope the VC gets a brain (yeah right) and gets Lou Whitaker in someday. Insane that Jack Morris is there but not Sweet Lou. Even more crazy is Morris got 1 more vote than Trammel. 12 votes needed and Ted Simmons got 11. Sucks to be you Ted. Marvin Miller got 7 while 9 other voters forgot that the HOF is supposed to honor those who had massive influence as well as great players.

Wonder who voted for who? Voters were George Brett, Rod Carew, Bobby Cox, Dennis Eckersley, John Schuerholz, Don Sutton, Dave Winfield and Robin Yount; Major League executives Sandy Alderson, Paul Beeston, Bob Castellini, Bill DeWitt and David Glass; and veteran historians Bob Elliott, Steve Hirdt and Jayson Stark. If those 3 historians didn't all vote for Miller they should never be on the voting group again. Safe to say all 5 executives didn't as owners buttered their bread. Same for Bobby Cox and John Schuerholz. The 6 players all better have voted for Miller as without Miller they'd all be working winter jobs while still playing and now would be hunting for any work they could get instead of having more money than they can spend. Clearly at least 2 of either the 'historians' or ex-players didn't vote with their brains.
   58. John Northey Posted: December 11, 2017 at 01:50 AM (#5589883)
I wonder if in an alternate reality Lonnie Smith kept running in the 8th inning and scored thus Morris lost game 7 1-0 in 9 innings instead of winning it and never gets close to election.
   59. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: December 11, 2017 at 02:10 AM (#5589884)

Even more crazy is Morris got 1 more vote than Trammel.
I am sadly not surprised that Morris made it. But it astonishes me how easily he did. Almost everyone on the committee thought he was a HOFer? Really?
   60. greenback slays lewks Posted: December 11, 2017 at 02:11 AM (#5589885)
Brock in the 1967-68 WS, and his SB exploits making him a SI cover star. if you lived the era, he played a huge role.

Halberstam has documented how the trade in 1964 contributed to his narrative. It also helps that Brock hit 391/424/655 in those three World Series.

Among Cardinals fans who are 5-10 years older than I am, it is absolute heresy to take WAR seriously with Lou Brock. Brock was a good player, but his career almost looks like it was built to explain why baseball needed better metrics than batting average and stolen bases:

1. He didn't draw walks.
2. He hit for modest power, even by the standards of the period.
3. He played an easy defensive position.
4. He played that position at a mediocre, at best, level.

Good luck trying to convince a Cardinals fan, or any fan, from that era that Ray Lankford was just as valuable.
   61. -- Posted: December 11, 2017 at 06:16 AM (#5589891)
Being good at playing baseball doesn't make one a good baseball analyst


Premise fail -- the HOF voting isn't a merely analytical enterprise.

The insight of really good baseball players as to which players should be favored by posterity is a very valuable data point -- as valuable or more as the data points spit out by the various spreadsheets.

If anything, Morris's consensus is wider than most HOFers, extending to very close to the magic 75% of writers and 14 of 16 members of the VC. The baseball consensus is clearly that he's an HOFer. There's a small niche that remains opposed, but the consensus in favor is far wider and far stronger.
   62. Pasta-diving Jeter (jmac66) Posted: December 11, 2017 at 06:41 AM (#5589892)
they voted to the score
   63. bachslunch Posted: December 11, 2017 at 07:25 AM (#5589896)
Will echo those here who say:

-great to see Alan Trammell finally get elected, very deserving. Jack Morris doesn't deserve to get in unless he buys a ticket.

-still, am becoming more pragmatic about these things. Morris was going to get in anyway, and if that's the price to pay for Trammell's induction, so be it.

-agree that Morris was the anti-advanced-metrics candidate of choice, and as Omar Vizquel's early success suggests, that's going to be a problem for a while longer.

Still wondering why no one ever questioned whether Morris used steroids or not. Bulky and angry sort, with a few years career renaissance late. But then again, I've wondered that about Nolan Ryan as well. But once Morris became the anti-advanced-metrics poster boy, there probably was no turning back.

Too bad about Ted Simmons missing by one vote. Hope that bodes well for his future, but one never knows. Also not surprised Marvin Miller wasn't elected given the number of administrative sorts on the panel.
   64. bachslunch Posted: December 11, 2017 at 07:30 AM (#5589897)
@60: good points made regarding Brock. Would also add that his steals-to-caught-stealing ratio wasn't especially good, and he struck out a ton.
   65. BDC Posted: December 11, 2017 at 07:34 AM (#5589898)
Burleigh Grimes came up as a close career comp to Morris in a search I did for the other HOF thread. They actually have a lot of parallels. They both won a ton of games, largely for good teams (Grimes pitched in four WS for three different clubs, Morris in three for three). They both lost a lot of games too, and had relatively weak ERA+, and alternated good years with mediocre or worse. Neither was ever the real dominant ace of his time, but both were stars. They both had reputations for being kind of disagreeable, but highly competitive and good to have on your side. Excellent durability for both.

And Grimes also won a seventh game of a World Series, for the 1931 Cardinals. And like Morris he took a shutout into the ninth inning, though by that point the Cardinals were ahead 4-0. But Grimes faltered, walked the bases loaded, and gave up a 2-RBI hit to Doc Cramer of the A's. Bill Hallahan came in to retire Max Bishop, so Grimes went "only" 8 2/3 in his signature victory.

Both Morris and Grimes are in the HOF and neither is in the HOM.
   66. DL from MN Posted: December 11, 2017 at 08:42 AM (#5589906)
I feel like all the managers and executives from this era have been elected now besides Miller. Any I am overlooking?
   67. Rally Posted: December 11, 2017 at 08:43 AM (#5589907)
And baseball's HOF continues the slow decline in its standards, gradually but steadily becoming more like the NFL, NBA, and NHL halls. Too bad really.


I don't think this is true. It's harder now for great, deserving, non-inner circle players to get in (Mussina, Schilling, Walker, Edgar) without even mentioning the steroid guys. And as for the lower rung, Jack Morris is a much better HOFer than the less qualified players who got in previously.
   68. The Duke Posted: December 11, 2017 at 08:48 AM (#5589909)
I never quite understood the Jack Morris hate. He started during my baseball card collecting days and I remember him being one of the greats of that era. His stats look weaker than my memory would suggest but he’s a big Hall guy

Brock was famous in his day for his World Series exploits and breaking the Wills record. He’s a good Comp for Vizquel. Did one thing and did it really well - only One or two better base stealers. Vizquel only a handful of better shortstops and no one did it longer.
   69. BrianBrianson Posted: December 11, 2017 at 09:03 AM (#5589911)
There's often an unstated assumption that seems to infect people here, that you should only support HOF candidates that're average or above average Hall of Famers.
   70. John DiFool2 Posted: December 11, 2017 at 09:08 AM (#5589913)
Going over recent WS winners (2010 being the last year I evaluated) for any teams which may not have any HoFers (c.f. the '81 Dodgers):

2010 Giants: Posey? Bumgarner is a long shot after his injury-shortened 2017...
2009 Yankees: Jeter & Rivera if not ARod.
2008 Phillies: Utley is their best shot, and, given how the Hall has treated Grich & Whitaker, and still only has 1850 hits...
2007 Red Sox: Ortiz & Manny (Pedroia if he can have a resurgence)
2006 Cards: Pujols. Rolen by some far-future VC, and I've heard Molina talked up some...
2005 White Sox: Kind of doubt Konerko or Buehrle will even make a 2nd ballot...edit, didn't notice Hurt had missed most of the season.
2004 Red Sox: Pedro 1st actual HoF I've found, Ortiz & Manny again, Schilling...
2003 Marlins: Pudge is in.
2002 Angels: Nobody, really. Appier & Salmon best candidates, and IIRC they were one and done...
2001 DBacks: Unit in, Schilling too.
2000 Yankees: Jeter & Rivera if not Rocket.


So, out of that group, things look pretty dire for the 2002 Angels and 2008 Phillies.


   71. eric Posted: December 11, 2017 at 09:16 AM (#5589916)
And now we can stop talking about Jack Morris, which is a victory in itself.


Just like we no longer talk about Jim Rice. :)

The thing with the HOF is I believe that it's a socially self-correcting culture. Jesse Haines and Ross Youngs may be in there, but 99% of fans have never heard of them. Jim Rice, outside of hand-wringers on this site, doesn't get talked about much any more. Don Larsen has more name recognition than at least quarter and perhaps half or more of the HOF.

Kids visiting the HOF are still there to see the players they've heard of: Mays, Ruth, etc. The bigger concern with the Hall is the lack of Clemens, Bonds, et al, than it is the inclusion of a few players whose plaques will just get walked past on the way to more interesting exhibits.
   72. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: December 11, 2017 at 09:34 AM (#5589921)
Meh, I agree with the near-universal consensus -- Morris is a really bad pick.

But - if it's a karmic trade-off, I always maintained that I'd gladly trade a Morris induction if it would be automatically paired with a more deserving, but overlooked candidate.

I guess my only quibble is that I don't think Trammell needed be the pair - I think enough people realize it was a mistake not having him in and he'd have gone on his own. I'd have much preferred someone needing the help....
   73. TDF, trained monkey Posted: December 11, 2017 at 09:44 AM (#5589926)
The thing with the HOF is I believe that it's a socially self-correcting culture. Jesse Haines and Ross Youngs may be in there, but 99% of fans have never heard of them. Jim Rice, outside of hand-wringers on this site, doesn't get talked about much any more. Don Larsen has more name recognition than at least quarter and perhaps half or more of the HOF.

Kids visiting the HOF are still there to see the players they've heard of: Mays, Ruth, etc. The bigger concern with the Hall is the lack of Clemens, Bonds, et al, than it is the inclusion of a few players whose plaques will just get walked past on the way to more interesting exhibits.
The problem isn't Jack Morris, per se. It's that if Jack Morris, then also a couple hundred other guys.

I posted a couple of comparisons to Szym's twitter yesterday:

Add 364 IP at 1.16 ERA to Jack Morris's career, and you have Frank Tanana. Tanana didn't get a single HOF vote his 1 year on the ballot.


Better yet - Luis Tiant would need to pitch another 337 2/3 innings at 10.05 ERA to match Morris's career. The exact same panel that enshrined Morris didn't think Tiant was worthy of enshrinement
.
   74. Ford Prefect Posted: December 11, 2017 at 09:45 AM (#5589927)
Clearly at least 2 of either the 'historians' or ex-players didn't vote with their brains.

'Historians' will also know which side their bread is buttered on. Where do you think research grants come from?

As a 43-yr-old who fell in love with baseball in the early '80s, Jack Morris was one of the most prominent players of my childhood.

To (the younger version of) me, he always "felt" like a future Hall of Famer when he was active

[Morris] started during my baseball card collecting days and I remember him being one of the greats of that era.

One of the things that astonished me BITD was the way saberists leapt on the Blylevyn bandwagon with alacrity. I'm apparently a bit older than this trio of commentators but, if you like, Blylevyn is a sort of 'anti-Morris'. I fell in love with baseball in the late 1960s, at the start of my baseball card collecting days, and this younger version of me NEVER thought of Bert Blylevyn as a future Hall of Famer. He was a good pitcher, but not that good. And yet, there he is, in Cooperstown.

By the time the 1980s arrived, I had shaken the dust of my Michigan boyhood off and left the United States altogether. I didn't think Morris was a HoFer either. In fact if in 1986 (the year before my first Abstract) you'd said to me, 'Morris is equivalent to Blylevyn', I probably would not have argued. NEITHER of them were HoFers.

And now they both are. 'It's a funny old world,' as a dreadful woman once said.
   75. Rally Posted: December 11, 2017 at 09:49 AM (#5589928)
I'm a lot more happy to have Trammell in than disappointed that Morris is in. Morris wasn't better than some of his quasi-contemporaries who got no support, like Cone, Hershiser, and Saberhagen. That is why I did not support his candidacy.

But other than that, I have no problem with him being in. I see this more like the Kirby Puckett situation (not really contemporaries, but if Kirby is in then so should be Lofton and Edmonds) than the Jim Rice situation. Kirby and Jack Morris have really plusses to their case because of their postseason performance. There is no consensus on how much to weight that versus regular season performance, but it does exist.

Jim Rice is the greatly feared slugger with a .366 career postseason slugging percentage. He was on the winning side in the postseason only once, and they did it in spite of him. He hit .161 in the playoff against the Angels. He struck out in the 9th inning of game 5 for the first out, just before Don Baylor made it a one run game. After the Angels tied it up to send the game into extra innings Rice came up in the 10th with one out, first and third, and hit into a 6-4-3 to keep the Angels' hopes alive. He did make a nice catch at the wall in the bottom 10th when Gary Pettis of all people just missed a game ending homer.
   76. Spahn Insane Posted: December 11, 2017 at 10:00 AM (#5589937)
Good for Trammell. Morris I suppose was inevitable, but he's about the sixth most worthy inductee from the '84 Tigers roster. (Along with Trammell I'd put him behind Whitaker, Evans, and Lemon, about even with Gibson, who of course doesn't belong in there either. [Though if Morris's game 7 shutout warrants bonus points, no reason Gibson's homer off Eckersley shouldn't ...])
   77. bachslunch Posted: December 11, 2017 at 10:00 AM (#5589938)
@75: Morris was okay but not elite in the postseason: 7-4, ERA of 3.80. Pitched well in 1984 and 1991, badly in 1987 and 1992. It all comes out grey in the wash.

Rice also missed all of the 1975 postseason with an injury. He might well have made a difference in that WS had he been healthy.
   78. DL from MN Posted: December 11, 2017 at 10:01 AM (#5589939)
If Jack Morris and Trevor Hoffman make it easier for pitchers in general, so be it. Many modern pitchers easily clear the Jack Morris bar. A Hall of Fame without starting pitchers is boring.
   79. Sweatpants Posted: December 11, 2017 at 10:08 AM (#5589943)
I don't see Morris as all that similar to Puckett. Puckett was a very good hitter who raised his game in the postseason and had some memorable moments there. Morris was a good pitcher who just barely raised his game in the postseason, although he had his share of memorable performances, too. Puckett got in the Hall on his first try - he was viewed as a truly great player who failed to reach any milestones because of a career-ending eye disease. Morris was resoundingly viewed as not worthy of the Hall, but as time wore on the electorate changed its mind about how much of an ace he'd been. That was a lot like Jim Rice. It was also a lot like Blyleven, although in Blyleven's case it was his numbers that got reevaluated. With Rice and Morris, it seemed like people were reevaluating what they had thought of them while they were playing.
   80. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: December 11, 2017 at 10:20 AM (#5589946)
If Jack Morris and Trevor Hoffman make it easier for pitchers in general, so be it. Many modern pitchers easily clear the Jack Morris bar. A Hall of Fame without starting pitchers is boring.


The real problem with the idea "And a Morris shall lead them" is that all the SPs who have a better case than Morris - I think we could all probably come up with a dozen or so (and not all of them HoFers) - is that they're the sorts of cases Morris won't help. Indeed, he's actually a rejection of most of their cases.... I suppose maybe if want to start inducting 'favorites' - who most people would say shouldn't be in, but are longtime primate loves -- like Big Sexy or Jamie Moyer, they probably would owe it to Morris. But - he's not really going to help Stieb or Schilling, I don't think.

I've come around to applying a different standard to relievers -- so I'm OK with Hoffman. Mo won't need the help, but maybe someone like Wagner gets another look.

Frankly, if Morris wants to make things right with karma -- it would be nice if he would give a strong call-out to Lou in his induction speech.
   81. chemdoc Posted: December 11, 2017 at 10:33 AM (#5589960)
It's a good day for us Tigers fans. It'll also be a good day when Lou Whitaker is elected.

I think when I look at the Hall of Fame, I look primarily at the statistical accomplishments, but also at how the individual's career fits into how we tell the story of baseball. To me, it's that second aspect that separates a Hall of Fame from a Hall of Merit. I think that the accomplishments of Jack Morris don't look particularly HOF-worthy in isolation, but there's a gap in the story of baseball in the 1980s and early 1990s without Jack Morris, and one could make a reasonable argument that this gap is large enough that it pushes Morris over the line into justifiable induction to the Hall of Fame.

I think that's also the argument for Bruce Sutter, and maybe Jim Rice as well.
   82. Rally Posted: December 11, 2017 at 10:36 AM (#5589964)
So, out of that group, things look pretty dire for the 2002 Angels and 2008 Phillies.


2002 Angels best shot for a HOFer is to have a HOF manager. Scioscia has a reasonable shot at that - he's currently 22nd in manager wins and there is no reason to think he won't stick around in his job.

Frankly, if Morris wants to make things right with karma -- it would be nice if he would give a strong call-out to Lou in his induction speech.


I would be surprised if both Morris and Trammell don't put in a good word for Whitaker.
   83. Rally Posted: December 11, 2017 at 10:40 AM (#5589968)
The real problem with the idea "And a Morris shall lead them" is that all the SPs who have a better case than Morris - I think we could all probably come up with a dozen or so (and not all of them HoFers) - is that they're the sorts of cases Morris won't help. Indeed, he's actually a rejection of most of their cases....


He might be seen as a rejection of the cases of the types who have barely 200 wins, many fewer innings pitched, and much better ERA+. But it should help Mussina climb up in votes. Mussina beats Morris across the board.
   84. John DiFool2 Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:03 AM (#5590012)
Doing this decade, just curious, will have to extrapolate some guys (and/or apply the bus test):

2011 Cards: Pujols.
2012 Giants: See 2010.
2013 Sox: Papi & Pedroia, Lester will come up short I'd say.
2014 Giants...
2015 Royals: Yes, only two years ago, but NOBODY here seems to be on anything close to a HoF track.
2016 Cubs: 1st team where you truly can say it's too early. Bryant is the leading candidate here, followed closely by Rizzo.
2017 Astros: Altuve. Correa? [on the other end of the scale] Beltran?

BTW, has any 3 time WS winner (within say a 5-6 year period or so) gotten as little press as the 2010/2012/2014 Giants? Yet, unless Posey avoids the cliff that has claimed so many past catchers as they hit their 30's, they may not have ANY HoFers. That would be staggering.
   85. Booey Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:04 AM (#5590013)
2009 Yankees: Jeter & Rivera if not ARod.


Also Cano, and possibly Pettitte.

2008 Phillies: Utley is their best shot, and, given how the Hall has treated Grich & Whitaker, and still only has 1850 hits...


Also an outside shot for Hamels if he lasts a long time. Anyone think there's a chance Rollins gets more love than we expect? I could see some people erroneously comparing him to Trammell or Larkin, and Vizquel will likely be in by then as well to lower the bar for modern shortstops.

2007 Red Sox: Ortiz & Manny (Pedroia if he can have a resurgence)

Schilling, too.

2006 Cards: Pujols. Rolen by some far-future VC, and I've heard Molina talked up some...


Maybe the same VC that elects Rolen could toss Edmonds a bone while they're at it.

2003 Marlins: Pudge is in.


That skinny rookie, Cabrera, has a pretty good chance...

2002 Angels: Nobody, really. Appier & Salmon best candidates, and IIRC they were one and done...


Does anyone think K-Rod has an outside shot? I'd say no, but I've never understood the writers lovefest for relievers, so who knows?

2000 Yankees: Jeter & Rivera if not Rocket.


Also possibly Pettitte. I guess there's a chance Bernie and/or Posada could be future VC picks?
   86. Booey Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:07 AM (#5590020)
So, out of that group, things look pretty dire for the 2002 Angels and 2008 Phillies.


Go back a few more years, and thanks to PED's and the overall d0uchebaggery of their biggest stars (Sheffield and Brown), the 1997 Marlins won't have any HOFers any time soon (those 2 could be possible VC picks, of course).
   87. Booey Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:12 AM (#5590032)
2017 Astros: Altuve. Correa? [on the other end of the scale] Beltran?


Even ignoring the youngens like Altuve and Correa, I think Beltran is a near lock (for eventual - not 1st ballot election) and Verlander is also probable.

BTW, has any 3 time WS winner (within say a 5-6 year period or so) gotten as little press as the 2010/2012/2014 Giants? Yet, unless Posey avoids the cliff that has claimed so many past catchers as they hit their 30's, they may not have ANY HoFers. That would be staggering.


I still think Mad Bum has a decent shot despite his wasted 2017. If he even puts up borderline numbers - say, 200 wins - I think his postseason success gets him in. He's the playoff performer people think Morris is.
   88. Rally Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:14 AM (#5590035)
Does anyone think K-Rod has an outside shot? I'd say no, but I've never understood the writers lovefest for relievers, so who knows?


He's 4th alltime in saves, but he also looks to be done. If he came back and closed for another 5 years he could convince people who voted for Hoffman. As it is, he's got just a few more saves than Billy Wagner but nowhere close on the ERA+, and Wagner only got 10% of the votes.
   89. SoSH U at work Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:14 AM (#5590036)
Even ignoring the youngens like Altuve and Correa, I think Beltran is a near lock (for eventual - not 1st ballot election)


I do too. I think he's kind of pushed himself into a likely election, even if I'm not really sure how.
   90. RJ in TO Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:19 AM (#5590047)
Also an outside shot for Hamels if he lasts a long time. Anyone think there's also a chance Rollins gets more love than we expect? I could see some people erroneously comparing him to Trammell or Larkin, and Vizquel will likely be in by then as well to lower the bar for modern shortstops.
I certainly think it's likely Rollins gets a goodly amount of attention. He's a shortstop with almost 2500 hits, almost 500 steals (with a success rate around 82%), well over 200 homers, multiple gold gloves, all star games, a silver slugger, and an MVP (in a 30/30 season), strongly associated with a period of huge success for his franchise. His profile (basically Aparicio, or Maranville, or Vizquel, with much more power) is one you'd expect to get support from the writers. Dave Concepcion stayed on the ballot for teh full 15 years with a lesser version of this.
   91. Baldrick Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:20 AM (#5590052)
BTW, has any 3 time WS winner (within say a 5-6 year period or so) gotten as little press as the 2010/2012/2014 Giants? Yet, unless Posey avoids the cliff that has claimed so many past catchers as they hit their 30's, they may not have ANY HoFers. That would be staggering.

I'd say that Bumgarner and Posey are both on the HOF track. Still a long way to go for both, but they're also both pretty young.

Bumgarner already has 33 WAR, is only 27, and has 'greatest postseason pitcher EVER' in his back pocket. If he can pitch reasonably well for another 5-6 years, and then hang on for another 4-5 after that, he could easily end up with a solid enough career record to make it over the hump. And if he has another few years of peak performance before he fades, that will be even easier.
   92. Booey Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:23 AM (#5590058)
He's 4th alltime in saves, but he also looks to be done. If he came back and closed for another 5 years he could convince people who voted for Hoffman. As it is, he's got just a few more saves than Billy Wagner but nowhere close on the ERA+, and Wagner only got 10% of the votes.


K-Rod has the single season saves record and came out of nowhere to lead the Angels to a title as a 20 year old rookie. Relievers are all so interchangeable that it seems you need some kind of hook to get noticed by the writers, and those may be his.

(I wouldn't bet on it either, but I think he's the only player on the team with a non 0% chance)
   93. eric Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:33 AM (#5590067)
If Jack Morris and Trevor Hoffman make it easier for pitchers in general, so be it. Many modern pitchers easily clear the Jack Morris bar. A Hall of Fame without starting pitchers is boring.


Except that Morris in the HOF is not an acceptance of the placement of his bar, and therefore all those who clear it. Morris in the HOF is a reflection of people vastly overestimating the placement of his bar.

His election isn't going to make it easier on Mussina, Schilling and Brown, or even Saberhagen and Appier, or even Frank Tanana. It's the voters saying they think he's more worthy.
   94. Lance Reddick! Lance him! Posted: December 11, 2017 at 11:37 AM (#5590077)
I think when I look at the Hall of Fame, I look primarily at the statistical accomplishments, but also at how the individual's career fits into how we tell the story of baseball. To me, it's that second aspect that separates a Hall of Fame from a Hall of Merit.

It's what separates National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum.
   95. bachslunch Posted: December 11, 2017 at 12:18 PM (#5590126)
Also an outside shot for Hamels if he lasts a long time. Anyone think there's also a chance Rollins gets more love than we expect? I could see some people erroneously comparing him to Trammell or Larkin, and Vizquel will likely be in by then as well to lower the bar for modern shortstops.


I certainly think it's likely Rollins gets a goodly amount of attention. He's a shortstop with almost 2500 hits, almost 500 steals (with a success rate around 82%), well over 200 homers, multiple gold gloves, all star games, a silver slugger, and an MVP (in a 30/30 season), strongly associated with a period of huge success for his franchise. His profile (basically Aparicio, or Maranville, or Vizquel, with much more power) is one you'd expect to get support from the writers. Dave Concepcion stayed on the ballot for the full 15 years with a lesser version of this.

Agreed with all of this. I'm expecting Rollins will make a strong showing when he reaches the ballot and is very likely to get elected as a regular candidate, though after a few years wait. The bar is already fairly low for SSs, and he has more BBReF WAR than Jackson, Jennings, Maranville, and Rizzuto. His WAR number is 46.0, just above Vizquel's 45.3. In fact, he makes a lot of sense if you're a big-hall voter.
   96. John DiFool2 Posted: December 11, 2017 at 12:32 PM (#5590141)
I kind of doubt Rollins will do any better than Utley will, much less Omar, who has the glove rep that Rollins doesn't have. The backlog will probably be history by the time he's 1st eligible, so he may clear 5%, but I doubt he'll do much better.
   97. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: December 11, 2017 at 12:40 PM (#5590149)
So, Morris and Tram give the 1984 Tigers their first player HOFers. WS champs though 2009 without a HOF playewr on their roster at some point:

1981 Dodgers. Will likely be nobody. Sciosca or Dusty could get in as managers, but it's not the same thing.
1997 Marlins have 2 decent candidates in Brown and Sheff. Neither is likely, but not out of the question.
2002 Angels. Will likely be nobody, unless K Rod pulls off a late career miracle
2006 cardinals. Pujols
2007 Rad Sox. Ortiz and Schilling
2008 Phillies. Utley is deserving but questionable to make it. Hamels has a shot

Dodgers, Angels, and 2003 Marlins are only real question marks.
   98. Ziggy's screen name Posted: December 11, 2017 at 12:51 PM (#5590160)
The voting guidelines don't say anything about telling the story of baseball.
   99. bachslunch Posted: December 11, 2017 at 01:28 PM (#5590194)
The voting guidelines don't say anything about telling the story of baseball.


Agreed. That's one of those dumb platitudes some voters like to put forth, often to justify a vote for a poor candidate or snub a worthy one. Happens frequently with the Pro Football Hall as well.
   100. bachslunch Posted: December 11, 2017 at 01:28 PM (#5590196)
And flip.
Page 1 of 3 pages  1 2 3 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
BarrysLazyBoy
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(562 - 12:09pm, Oct 17)
Last: Dandy Little Glove Man

NewsblogOTP 2018 October 15: The shift in focus from sport to politics
(741 - 12:08pm, Oct 17)
Last: Greg K

NewsblogDodgers vs. Brewers: Benches clear after Manny Machado steps on Jesus Aguilar's foot at first base
(10 - 12:07pm, Oct 17)
Last: Zonk just has affection for alumni

Sox TherapyALCS Thoughts
(51 - 11:51am, Oct 17)
Last: SoSH U at work

NewsblogRosenthal: Manny Machado still has work to do if he wants to keep the focus on his performance – The Athletic
(30 - 11:49am, Oct 17)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-17-2018
(18 - 11:49am, Oct 17)
Last: Batman

NewsblogDerek Jeter gets his wish: The Marlins home run sculpture is outta there
(15 - 11:49am, Oct 17)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogManny Machado not worth the trouble for the Yankees
(1 - 11:45am, Oct 17)
Last: ??'s Biggest Fan!

NewsblogWhat It Took to Write About Baseball as a Woman
(22 - 11:33am, Oct 17)
Last: --

NewsblogMetro Exclusive: Astros may have been cheating in Game 1 against Red Sox
(14 - 11:31am, Oct 17)
Last: SoSH U at work

NewsblogSources: Indians warned Red Sox about man stealing signs for Astros
(2 - 11:17am, Oct 17)
Last: caspian88

NewsblogChili Davis ‘not going to blame myself,’ wishes next Cubs hitting coach better
(4 - 11:10am, Oct 17)
Last: Zonk just has affection for alumni

NewsblogRed Sox exorcise their postseason demons to beat Astros and even ALCS
(34 - 11:03am, Oct 17)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Force of Nature

NewsblogLEAGUE CHAMPION SERIES OMNICHATTER! for the 2018 Playoffs!
(1394 - 10:42am, Oct 17)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogCatch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (October 2018)
(302 - 10:21am, Oct 17)
Last: BDC

Page rendered in 0.6984 seconds
46 querie(s) executed