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

Wednesday, November 22, 2017

Ryan Thibs has his HOF Ballot Tracker Up and Running!

Ryan has received his first official ballot, courtesy of Adam Rubib. Ten votes, including Vizquel.

So who gets a higher percentage of vote this year, Trammell with the VC or Vizquel with the BBWAA? (Only partly a tongue-in-cheek question…)

TJ Posted: November 22, 2017 at 02:48 PM | 324 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 4 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›
   1. Peter Farted Again Posted: November 22, 2017 at 09:36 PM (#5580483)
Obviously a microscopic sample size, and not altogether random, but I am shocked at Vizquel starting out at 4 for 4. I would have expected 1, maybe 2 on a good day. Will he regress toward that 30%-ish mean I expected, or will he do much better?
   2. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 22, 2017 at 09:47 PM (#5580486)
Vizquel has been touted as a "future hall of famer" on baseball broadcasts since the mid-aughts. I don't think he'll clear 75%, but he'll probably get at least 50%.
   3. ajnrules Posted: November 22, 2017 at 09:57 PM (#5580490)
I think Vizquel will outperform Trammell while Chipper, Trevor, and Vlad will join Jack (The Jack) Morris on the Cooperstown stage. Thome will fall just short.
   4. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 22, 2017 at 11:12 PM (#5580503)
No way a guy with over 600 homeruns and no steroid allegations falls short.
   5. John Northey Posted: November 23, 2017 at 12:22 AM (#5580509)
Total insanity if Vizquel gets in before Trammell does as I guarantee when both played not one GM would've taken Vizquel over Trammell at any point. Even after Trammell retired.
   6. Kiko Sakata Posted: November 23, 2017 at 12:47 AM (#5580512)
Thome will fall just short.


I don't understand why people think this.

Then again, I don't understand why people think Omar Vizquel is a Hall-of-Famer, so what do I know. As I type this, Ryan has 4 ballots in his tracker. All four are 10-man ballots. All four include all of Bonds, Clemens, Vlad, Trevor Hoffman, Chipper Jones, and Jim Thome. And all four of them also found room to include Omar Vizquel. This seems so strange to me.
   7. ajnrules Posted: November 23, 2017 at 01:05 AM (#5580514)
I don't understand why people think this.

I just felt that I don't think with a stacked ballot like this that we'll have another four-man class. We know Chipper is a lock, but between the other three I just have the nagging feeling that the first-ballot guy (and the one that is most deserving of the Hall) would most likely get squeezed out.

And hey, if we get a five-man class with Vizquel squeezing in at 75%, I'll be happy with that.
   8. QLE Posted: November 23, 2017 at 01:29 AM (#5580515)
I just felt that I don't think with a stacked ballot like this that we'll have another four-man class.


Maybe it's pedantic of me, but I'm not sure that this is any more stacked a ballot than that of 2015, which had four inductees- there are fewer players returning from the last year than the year before (14 this time, compared to 17 then), and (while tastes differ) I don't think the number of candidates meriting induction is substantially different than it was then. Moreover, the purge that has taken place since 2015 should aid matters somewhat by getting rid of most of the low-information voters.

On a different point, there are elements of how this particular ballot will work that should be of interest- with Bagwell, Raines, and Rodriguez inducted and Lee Smith off, there will be a considerable number of ballots that will have three or four slots open up. Given that over 70% already have Hoffman and Guerrero, and even assuming Chipper makes all of these ballots (as well as a good number that didn't support at least one of Bagwell, Raines, or Rodriguez), it still leaves a good question as for who a lot of those voters will back with their other two slots- especially the high number who are already backing Martinez, Clemens, Bonds, and Mussina.

It's going to take a while longer to see how this dynamic plays out, but it should be rather interesting to watch the patterns that emerge.
   9. bachslunch Posted: November 23, 2017 at 06:04 AM (#5580521)
It’s also great to see Edgar on 3 of 4 ballots, including a writer who newly added him. It would be good to see him make a strong showing in his 9th year. Mussina is also on 3 ballots, while Schilling made two. Larry Walker is on only one, but it’s also a new addition. And Andruw Jones won’t be totally shut out, as he got a vote also.
   10. The Duke Posted: November 23, 2017 at 07:37 AM (#5580524)
Go Omar! He will definitely have a lot of sabr-types scratching their heads. I don’t see a first ballot induction with such a strong ballot but I hope he does well enough to generate momentum. I hope thome makes a good run and separates himself from the pack
   11. The Duke Posted: November 23, 2017 at 07:42 AM (#5580525)
This could be a six or seven person group going in if everything broke just right
   12. Rob_Wood Posted: November 23, 2017 at 10:57 AM (#5580563)
I was going to write a snarky post about how the early Vizquel returns suggest that Joe Morgan's letter targeted the wrong players, but given the holiday I decided not to do so. :)
   13. djordan Posted: November 23, 2017 at 10:57 AM (#5580564)
#3/4, Thome has my spiritual support, but there's a chance he comes in between 65 & 75%. Better than 50% he gets in on this vote, He'll definitely be in by next season.
   14. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: November 23, 2017 at 12:26 PM (#5580582)
On #8's point:

1) I wonder if there will be a coalescing among one or two candidates who were in the 50%-74% range last year. I believe 2017 set a record for the most candidates to get more than 50%, but not 75% - in other words, candidates who historically are very likely to get in soon. Last year, there was:

Hoffman 74%
Vlad 71.7%
Edgar 58.6%
Clemens 54.1%
Bonds 53.8%
Mussina 51.8%
Also, Schilling got 45%, and would likely be above 50% if he had kept his mouth shut...

Most people assume Hoffman and Vlad will get in this time, along with Chipper Jones. I think Thome will get awfully close, too. It *seems* like Edgar would be the natural guy for voters to rally around as he nears his 10-year mark, maybe get into the high 60s, then close the sale next year?

2) A quick look to 2019 suggests there is one slam-dunk candidates (Mariano Rivera), one who should start off in a solid way (Halladay), and two others who might get enough votes to stick around (Pettitte and Helton). It will also be Edgar's and McGriff's final year on the ballot, so anybody who is left after 2019 will be getting into (probably) the clearest field since the Steroid Era candidates started appearing on the ballot. For Bonds, Clemens, Ramirez and Mussina, 2020-2022 may be their legit shot to get to 75%...
   15. shoewizard Posted: November 23, 2017 at 12:44 PM (#5580588)
Total insanity if Vizquel gets in before Trammell does as I guarantee when both played not one GM would've taken Vizquel over Trammell at any point. Even after Trammell retired.


If in this day and age, Vizquel is deemed a HOF'er over Trammell then it's pretty much time to lock up the Plaque room and throwaway the key
   16. Don August(us) Cesar Geronimo Berroa Posted: November 23, 2017 at 12:45 PM (#5580590)
Based on very early results, I feel fairly certain that the HOF voters were watching an alternate reality Omar Vizquel play. How they can vote for him and not Larry Walker is befuddling, to say the least
   17. QLE Posted: November 23, 2017 at 01:39 PM (#5580597)
I believe 2017 set a record for the most candidates to get more than 50%, but not 75% - in other words, candidates who historically are very likely to get in soon.


1945 and 1950 each had seven players get to 50% without getting inducted- it is, however, a level the BBWAA hasn't reached since the early 1950s, when the electorate was casting full ballots, they were trying to assess the entirety of MLB history, and when there were mechanisms (such as their being sent lists of the top vote-getters) that seem to have encouraged that sort of concordance.


Most people assume Hoffman and Vlad will get in this time, along with Chipper Jones.


Given that the last player to hit 70%, still have eligibility time left, and not get inducted next time was Bunning, I'd be surprised if it wasn't the case.

It *seems* like Edgar would be the natural guy for voters to rally around as he nears his 10-year mark, maybe get into the high 60s, then close the sale next year?


The surge in support he received last time is promising in that regard- compare, for instance, to the rise in support that Bagwell and Raines received between 2015 and 2016.

2) A quick look to 2019 suggests there is one slam-dunk candidates (Mariano Rivera), one who should start off in a solid way (Halladay), and two others who might get enough votes to stick around (Pettitte and Helton). It will also be Edgar's and McGriff's final year on the ballot, so anybody who is left after 2019 will be getting into (probably) the clearest field since the Steroid Era candidates started appearing on the ballot. For Bonds, Clemens, Ramirez and Mussina, 2020-2022 may be their legit shot to get to 75%...


Quite- I've commented elsewhere that a lot about how this ballot goes (especially how many of the new players on this ballot make it to the next one) will play a considerable role in how the ballots will look in the coming years, as most of the coming players seem to be either first-ballot inductees or ones who won't make a second ballot. As a result, there is a chance for considerable backlog movement in the coming years, depending on how the BBWAA voters respond to this change.
   18. Adam Starblind Posted: November 23, 2017 at 02:33 PM (#5580605)
Based on very early results, I feel fairly certain that the HOF voters were watching an alternate reality Omar Vizquel play. How they can vote for him and not Larry Walker is befuddling, to say the least


That's a pretty funny comparison. Walker gets overcorrected for Coors, while Vizquel gets overcorrected for position and defense. Maybe they overcorrect right past each other.
   19. Lassus Posted: November 23, 2017 at 02:47 PM (#5580606)
The Baseball Hysterics of Fame, apparently.
   20. Walt Davis Posted: November 23, 2017 at 04:12 PM (#5580616)
I expect Thome to fall short too. I think it's a question whether he finishes ahead of or behind Edgar (if he retains momentum). Normally the entrance of a guy like Thome to the ballot would cause a guy like Edgar to stall or even fall back a couple of points because he loses the direct comparison to a similar type of player (bat only in this case). But with Edgar having momentum and coming up on his deadline, it might not work that way this year.

On Thome not making it in first ballot -- it wouldn't be unprecedented. Not that 600 is the new 500 but Mathews and Killer had to wait a few years and they recently made 3,000-hit Biggio wait a couple of years. In terms of overall performance, Bagwell was the better player and they kept him dangling for a long time. The ballot is less stuffed for Thome of course. But he also never won an MVP, never came particularly close, was only an AS 5 times, only led the league in HR once, never led the league in RBI (but did reach 100 on a regular basis), doesn't have a lot of black/gray ink. If he entered the ballot next year or the year after, he'd be a very good bet for 1st ballot but this is a tough year.

That said, there are a lot of votes freed up from last year's ballots and while names/ballot will surely go down, they would have to go down a lot for Thome to not at least come close. And he and Vizquel are now up to 5 for 5 as are Chipper, Vlad and Hoffman ... and Clemens (Bonds 4 of 5). This seems like a pretty weird group of 5 voters -- B/C haven't picked up any votes so these are voters who aren't anti-roiders but who also unanimously think Vizquel is an HoFer.

I can see Vizquel sharing the stage with Jeter. Put them together and you might have the greatest SS of all time. (Jeter's oWAR plus Omar's Rfield gets you to about 107-108 WAR.)
   21. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: November 23, 2017 at 04:18 PM (#5580617)
Put them together and you might have the greatest SS of all time. (Jeter's oWAR plus Omar's Rfield gets you to about 107-108 WAR.)


Pfft. Honus Wagner and his 131 WAR scoffs at your suggestion and points out that combined they are still nearly 20% short.
   22. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 23, 2017 at 04:57 PM (#5580619)
The weird thing about Vizquel is that there are two other top defensive guys on the ballot in Scott Rolen and Andruw Jones. I wouldn’t vote for either of them, but I do recall a period of time when both were considered top stars. I never recall that about Vizquel. It seemed like around 2004 or 2005 every announcer in baseball suddenly started referring to him as a future Hall of Famer and soon after sports writers just rolled with it.
   23. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: November 23, 2017 at 05:16 PM (#5580622)
The Vizquel love is odd. Everyone I know just figured Vizquel as a another really slick fielding, poor hitting SS in the Conception, Belanger mode. The phrase hall of famer was never brought up.
   24. taxandbeerguy Posted: November 23, 2017 at 05:19 PM (#5580623)
The Sadiel Lebron ballot is strange: Clemens, Vlad, Hoffman, The Jones boys (Andruw and Chipper), McGriff, Manny, Sosa, Thome and Vizquel

What type of ballot is this?

Likes defense (Vizquel and A. Jones) but what about Rolen?
No issues with PED's or whispers of PED use (Manny, Clemens, Sosa)
Doesn't like pitchers who didn't win Cy Young Awards or never held the all-time save record (Hoffman and Clemens)
Likes hitters that predominantly play the field (Thome, Manny, Vlad, C. Jones, McGriff) but what about Walker and Sheffield? (Edgar was too much DH, although everyone except Walker and C. Jones played quite a bit DH or should have based on their fielding reps)

However, there is one man who had all of the above and did it arguably better than any of these guys ever did and that is one Barry Lamar Bonds.

Given the rest of the ballot, while I wouldn't agree with it, if Bonds was on and whoever was 10th pick was off, I wouldn't have issues with it. But I'm having difficulty comprehending the rationale behind this one.
   25. RJ in TO Posted: November 23, 2017 at 07:00 PM (#5580625)
The Vizquel love is odd. Everyone I know just figured Vizquel as a another really slick fielding, poor hitting SS in the Conception, Belanger mode. The phrase hall of famer was never brought up.
Except he's the all-time leader in games played at the position, which means he's instead in a group with Maranville and Aparicio, who are both in the Hall. And the career length does matter - give an extra 25% to his counting stats at his career rates to match up his PA with Vizquel, and Concepcion is just under 3000 hits for his career, and likely already in the Hall.
   26. The Yankee Clapper Posted: November 23, 2017 at 07:52 PM (#5580628)
Thome has my spiritual support, but there's a chance he comes in between 65 & 75%. Better than 50% he gets in on this vote, He'll definitely be in by next season.

I wonder if we might see something of a reverse 1st ballot effect. Instead of imposing a higher standard, tactical voters on the fence about Thome but pretty sure he'll be elected within a few years, might think it better to have him voted in ASAP, freeing up votes in subsequent years for deserving candidates hurt by the ballot glut. Maybe not enough such voters to matter that much.
   27. Walt Davis Posted: November 23, 2017 at 07:58 PM (#5580631)
Pfft. Honus Wagner and his 131 WAR scoffs at your suggestion and points out that combined they are still nearly 20% short.

Sure, but no-fun pedants such as me might point out that the game has changed a smidgen or two in 100 years. Also -- and let's be honest, I am the only no-fun pedant to point this out -- only about 2/3 of Mr. Wagner's career was played at SS.

Spot quiz: who has more HRs, Honus or Omar?
   28. The Duke Posted: November 23, 2017 at 08:01 PM (#5580632)
Smoltz also had the “future Hall of famer John Smoltz” thing going on. If you can get some momentum early on with this branding it can do a world of good. Herd mentality
   29. Walt Davis Posted: November 23, 2017 at 08:03 PM (#5580633)
I wonder if we might see something of a reverse 1st ballot effect. Instead of imposing a higher standard, tactical voters on the fence about Thome but pretty sure he'll be elected within a few years, might think it better to have him voted in ASAP, freeing up votes in subsequent years for deserving candidates hurt by the ballot glut. Maybe not enough such voters to matter that much.

There are no more candidates "hurt by the ballot glut." Possibly Edgar who has just 2 years left so if your goal is to get Edgar elected, you have to vote Edgar although possibly getting Thome out of the way would help. After that you've got roids (Bonds, Clemens, Manny), the pitchers without CYAs or 300 wins slowly working their way up (one of whom many writers clearly don't want to help get elected) and guys the writers clearly don't think are HoFers (Walker et al). I mean Walker finished behind Manny and his roid suspensions last year and has to add 53% in 3 ballots. Thome's presence and Vlad's presence have no real effect on him.

So sure, shoving Thome through this year might help Edgar get over next year.
   30. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: November 23, 2017 at 08:07 PM (#5580634)
Spot quiz: who has more HRs, Honus or Omar?


I'm going to say Omar since you brought it up and without looking I seem to remember Honus around 100 homers. I have no doubt that Honus is killing Omar in the double and triple category though. Honus used to hit a lot of triples.

<checks>

d*mn, guessed wrong on the homers, Omar with only 80.
   31. Walt Davis Posted: November 23, 2017 at 08:31 PM (#5580636)
I think the key question is how quickly will votes per ballot drop. There are about 288% freed up from last year by the induction of Begwell, Raines, IRod and the loss of Smith and the <5%s. Chipper will probably eat up about 90 of those. Following tradition, Hoffman and Vlad will probably sail well past 75% and eat up another 25-30 between them. That still leaves about 170% to distribute somewhere.

As (nearly) always, there's lots of ways that could go. Thome grabs 80%, Vizquel grabs 50%, Edgar, Mussina and Schilling grab 10% each and the rest is spread around. Or 60 points is just lost and Thome grabs 60% and Vizquel grabs 45% and there's almost nothing left for anybody else.

And I suppose it's not impossible that votes/ballot will go up if this many folks do believe that Chipper, Thome and Omar are HoFers.

I'm confident that 5 years from now we'll see names/ballot at much lower levels than we do now ... but I don't know if that's going to be a rapid shift or a slow one. If it's a slow one, Edgar, Schilling, Mussina and Omar are in pretty easily and I'll name Kent as my dark horse and am not ruling out Wagner yet.

2021 is the year something breaks. The best debut candidates are Hudson, Buehrle and Torii Hunter (hey, could be a Puckett effect). Mussina and Schilling might still be around barely short of 75% -- they'll almost certainly go in if they haven't yet. Halladay is probably the next top backlogger ... again, he might be in already if he debuted ahead of M&S. Looking at these ballots, I find it hard to believe Omar won't already be in or be close. Pettitte will be doing depressingly better than he deserves but no better than 4th among those starters.

It's possible that the 2021 ballot will feature just Bonds and Clemens stuck, a resurgent Kent, an annoying Pettitte as the only candidates over 40% and nobody new to vote for. If there is anybody on the ballot ahead of them, even if it's Omar, they're going in. 2022 brings just ARod and Ortiz -- Ortiz is sailing in on that ballot. That will also be the last ballot for B&C (if they aren't in ... also Schilling and Sosa). 2023 will bring Beltran and probably Ichiro -- Ichiro obviously goes in regardless, Beltran looks like a 1st ballot guy on that ballot, certainly close. 2023 would be the last ballot for Mussina and Kent.

All of that might be good news for Rolen and Helton and players like that who enter in the next few years. Unless names/ballot drops to something like 4, those guys should at least be able to work their way up into the 40s-50s before they're gone.
   32. Sweatpants Posted: November 23, 2017 at 08:34 PM (#5580637)
Smoltz also had the “future Hall of famer John Smoltz” thing going on. If you can get some momentum early on with this branding it can do a world of good. Herd mentality
Another phenomenon that helped Smoltz with the voters was that he was actually a great player.
   33. Walt Davis Posted: November 23, 2017 at 08:37 PM (#5580638)
d*mn, guessed wrong on the homers, Omar with only 80.

The fact we even had to think about it is one indicator of how much the game has changed since Wagner's day. Of course it had already changed radically by 1930 so I'm not suggesting everybody doesn't know this. FWIW, Jeter does have slightly more TB in more PA than Wagner but Wagner wins easily on rate stats.
   34. RJ in TO Posted: November 23, 2017 at 09:31 PM (#5580644)
If it's a slow one, Edgar, Schilling, Mussina and Omar are in pretty easily and I'll name Kent as my dark horse and am not ruling out Wagner yet.


During his four years on the ballot, Kent has gone from 15.2% of the vote, to 16.7% of the vote. For him to jump from that to elected over the next 6 years would be absolutely shocking, especially since he's unlikely to see a notable boost in this or next year.
   35. QLE Posted: November 24, 2017 at 12:12 AM (#5580652)
A couple of questions, concerning #31-

1) How many of these calculations are based on general presumptions, rather than the opening of space on specific ballots? This won't matter as much for the new players- however, it could matter for the backlog, as these tabulations could vary significantly based on which backloggers already have support on given ballots, versus those without.

2) In these calculations, how much consideration is being given to support that is independent of new ballot space, e.g., that from the people who never cast full ballots? I can easily see sections of both the Chipper Jones and Vizquel votes (and possibly that for other candidates, especially the first-year ones) that comes from the folk who cast small ballots, and for whom the points concerning ballot space are negated.

Overall, these are both things to watch as votes come in- 1) will be apparently fairly quickly, while 2) might not get fully resolved until after the final tabulations are released.
   36. cardsfanboy Posted: November 24, 2017 at 12:13 AM (#5580653)
The Sadiel Lebron ballot is strange: Clemens, Vlad, Hoffman, The Jones boys (Andruw and Chipper), McGriff, Manny, Sosa, Thome and Vizquel

What type of ballot is this?

Likes defense (Vizquel and A. Jones) but what about Rolen?
No issues with PED's or whispers of PED use (Manny, Clemens, Sosa)
Doesn't like pitchers who didn't win Cy Young Awards or never held the all-time save record (Hoffman and Clemens)
Likes hitters that predominantly play the field (Thome, Manny, Vlad, C. Jones, McGriff) but what about Walker and Sheffield? (Edgar was too much DH, although everyone except Walker and C. Jones played quite a bit DH or should have based on their fielding reps)

However, there is one man who had all of the above and did it arguably better than any of these guys ever did and that is one Barry Lamar Bonds.

Given the rest of the ballot, while I wouldn't agree with it, if Bonds was on and whoever was 10th pick was off, I wouldn't have issues with it. But I'm having difficulty comprehending the rationale behind this one.


Even if I don't agree with the ten names selected, I can't find fault with a ten man ballot. If you are voting for ten names, then there is no requirement to vote for the ten bests, just ten worthy.
   37. cardsfanboy Posted: November 24, 2017 at 12:55 AM (#5580655)

During his four years on the ballot, Kent has gone from 15.2% of the vote, to 16.7% of the vote. For him to jump from that to elected over the next 6 years would be absolutely shocking, especially since he's unlikely to see a notable boost in this or next year.


I agree, but there is a reason he said "darkhorse" candidate, and one of the things about Kent is he was an a-hole and that probably hasn't helped his campaign at all, but as more and more voters join the ranks of voters who didn't have to deal with him directly, the more likely his numbers will push him up the ballot.
   38. bachslunch Posted: November 24, 2017 at 06:20 AM (#5580657)
Speaking of weird ballots, here’s one from Jose de Jesus Ortiz:

Clemens, Vlad, Hoffman, Kent, Edgar, McGriff, Mussina, Thome, Vizquel, Wagner.

No Bonds (who he did vote for last time) and no Chipper. Edgar, McGriff, and Mussina are new to his ballot. Probably some kind of weird strategic voting going on.

Improbably, Vizquel is now 6 for 6. Andruw got another vote, and Rolen now at least won’t be shut out, as he got one also.
   39. bachslunch Posted: November 24, 2017 at 06:35 AM (#5580658)
Jeff Passan wrote an article saying he’s giving up his vote as a protest against the Joe Morgan letter:

https://sports.yahoo.com/giving-hall-fame-vote-joe-morgans-letter-144738128.html
   40. TJ Posted: November 24, 2017 at 08:25 AM (#5580660)
Probably some kind of weird strategic voting going on.


Ortiz did a piece on his reasoning. Here's a link (forgive me if this violating some protocol). http://www.stltoday.com/sports/columns/jose-de-jesus-ortiz/ortiz-integrity-and-character-matter-when-weighing-hof-vote/article_dc7d1422-176a-5b4f-b837-600878a334ee.html

I found his rationale to be oddly intriguing. Don't know how much of it I agree with, but at least Ortiz had the decency to go public with it.
   41. The Duke Posted: November 24, 2017 at 08:45 AM (#5580663)
So Mussina, Martinez and schilling lose support as well as any newcomers Passan would have voted for. Bonds and Clemens lose another yes vote

I’m beginning to think rolen is going one and done. He’s probably not going to get 75% but he should get more than 5%.
   42. TDF didn't lie, he just didn't remember Posted: November 24, 2017 at 09:18 AM (#5580668)
A quick look to 2019 suggests there is one slam-dunk candidates (Mariano Rivera), one who should start off in a solid way (Halladay), and two others who might get enough votes to stick around (Pettitte and Helton).
Not if Joe Morgan has anything to say about it.
   43. Rally Posted: November 24, 2017 at 09:37 AM (#5580671)
I’m beginning to think rolen is going one and done. He’s probably not going to get 75% but he should get more than 5%.


I hope not. It would be nice if those who have columns or well followed blogs would talk him up in the hopes the he gets enough votes to stick around a little bit. It matters whether he starts at 10% vs. being one and done, even if he never gets in by the BBWAA. It will help him years down the road in getting consideration from the VC. It seems like BBWAA voting is considered in making out those ballots and is likely why Steve Garvey still gets on ballots but Grich and Whitaker don't.
   44. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: November 24, 2017 at 09:47 AM (#5580675)
@Rally, #43

In the Cooperstown Casebook, Jay Jaffe writes that in interviews with VC folks, the first question voters ask is, “How did he do with the BBWAA?”
   45. fra paolo Posted: November 24, 2017 at 09:56 AM (#5580678)
It seems like BBWAA voting is considered in making out those ballots and is likely why Steve Garvey still gets on ballots but Grich and Whitaker don't

I know that Grich has been the flavour of the month around here, but I do suspect that the reason he doesn't get on ballots is that he falls short of the 9000 PA Magic Number that seems to have become the de facto standard for HoFers in place of the Ten-Year Rule.

I have come to the conclusion we should shrug our shoulders and move on from promoting anyone with less than 9000 PA. That includes people like Dick Allen, Toby Harrah and Bobby Bonds.

Mind you, that will also catch Edgar Martinez. If he gets elected, then we can go back to Grich and the others.
   46. bachslunch Posted: November 24, 2017 at 10:26 AM (#5580683)
@45: Dick Allen got pretty close to election last time he was on one of these Vets ballots. Better to beat the drum in the darkness than give up, am thinking.
   47. Morty Causa Posted: November 24, 2017 at 10:36 AM (#5580688)
If elected, what are the chances that Allen would do something along the lines of a Bob Dylan wrt the Nobel?
   48. Baldrick Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:29 AM (#5580706)
Vizquel going 6/6 so far really undermines my faith in humanity.
   49. DanG Posted: November 24, 2017 at 11:59 AM (#5580712)
Vizquel going 6/6 so far really undermines my faith in humanity.
Do Low Information Voters tend to vote early?
   50. Booey Posted: November 24, 2017 at 12:33 PM (#5580722)
Vizquel going 6/6 so far really undermines my faith in humanity.


Remember when Milhouse was distracted with his girlfriend and Bart was taking advantage by making lopsided trades with their baseball card collections? Well, 25 years later, Bart's headless Omar Vizquel card for Milhouse's Carl Yastrzemski doesn't look like such a rip off now, does it?! Both ended up with a Hall of Famer!

Come to think of it, Bart's next trade - Milhouse's 1957 Mickey Mantle for Bart's picture of Homer on the couch - looks fair in hindsight too, since Homer was inducted into the HOF this year!
   51. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 24, 2017 at 01:34 PM (#5580735)
Jeff Passan wrote an article saying he’s giving up his vote as a protest against the Joe Morgan letter:

https://sports.yahoo.com/giving-hall-fame-vote-joe-morgans-letter-144738128.html


Wouldn't it make more sense for Passan to try to figure out a way to vote twice?

Why would Morgan care if a writer who doesn't care about steroids doesn't cast a ballot? But then maybe this is the way the Deep State operates.
   52. PreservedFish Posted: November 24, 2017 at 01:42 PM (#5580741)
I also think that Passan should have voted exclusively for suspected steroid users.

What's the point of protesting the vote? It's to undermine the legitimacy of the project. But do people really want to undermine the legitimacy of the Hall of Fame? Is it really time to burn bridges with this amazing institution just because known blowhard Joe Morgan sent a letter on letterhead that he obtained from a sinecure?

   53. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: November 24, 2017 at 01:51 PM (#5580746)
Yes, Passan should vote for Bonds and Clemens and write-in Palmeiro, Sosa, Caminiti, and any other no-longer-eligible "known" steroid users I'm forgetting. Voting for the guys Morgan wants to keep out and refusing to vote for the guys Morgan wants to let in is a much more effective protest than abstaining.
   54. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 24, 2017 at 01:55 PM (#5580748)
Yeah, the whole protest thing doesn't make much sense to me. You don't want me to vote for steroid users? I'm just not going to vote at all! That'll show him.
   55. RJ in TO Posted: November 24, 2017 at 02:27 PM (#5580763)
Yes, Passan should vote for Bonds and Clemens and write-in Palmeiro, Sosa, Caminiti, and any other no-longer-eligible "known" steroid users I'm forgetting.
It would be an interesting approach to write-in Sosa, given he's currently still on the ballot.
   56. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: November 24, 2017 at 02:56 PM (#5580771)
Heh, for some reason I thought that Sosa had dropped below 5% last year. Maybe Andy's right -- vote for the juicers twice.
   57. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:00 PM (#5580773)
How do you vote for Vizquel and not vote for A. Jones? Andruw saved a lot more runs than Omar did, and could actually hit a little.
   58. QLE Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:03 PM (#5580776)
Do Low Information Voters tend to vote early?


Thing is, there aren't the Low Information Voters- note that they all have Clemens, four of them have Bonds, four Martinez (including two switching their votes to him), four Mussina, and that all of them are backing Thome (who we are afraid the BBWAA as a whole may not support), as well as the fact that these are all people casting full ballots. The Low Information Voters are more likely to only have four or five people at most on their ballot and would have much stranger-looking ballots.
   59. Rob_Wood Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:21 PM (#5580786)
What's the point of protesting the vote? It's to undermine the legitimacy of the project. But do people really want to undermine the legitimacy of the Hall of Fame? Is it really time to burn bridges with this amazing institution just because known blowhard Joe Morgan sent a letter on letterhead that he obtained from a sinecure?


I cannot find it now, but I read a tweet from someone (the public relations director?) at the Hall of Fame stating that Morgan's letter spells out the Hall of Fame's position on the matter.
   60. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:24 PM (#5580790)
If I had a ballot I’d be tempted to vote for Bonds, Clemens, Manny, Sheffield and Sosa and write an article saying “fuck you, Joe Morgan.” That would still leave enough space to vote for Jones, Thome and Vlad, whom I want to see inducted this year. That would still leave two spots, one of which I’d give to Mussina; not sure about the last spot, maybe Walker because #### Curt Schilling too.
   61. McCoy Posted: November 24, 2017 at 03:38 PM (#5580797)
Honestly, there is no real reason that some building in bumblefvck, NY is the final arbiter of who is and isn't the greatest baseball players of all time. Cooperstown held sway for a very long time but they've botched it and they've been relegated to the bin just like their couterparts in other sports.
   62. Walt Davis Posted: November 24, 2017 at 05:26 PM (#5580823)
#61: Claiming facts not in evidence your Honor.

It would be useful if some HoFers who disagree with Morgan -- or just don't like his pompous ass speaking for them -- would release their own letter.

#35: I'm only considering the aggregate. In this scenario, that's almost certainly sufficient -- we have plenty of history from which to judge the aggregate year-to-year behavior of the voters. Every once in a while they'll surprise and some backlog guy will jump 20% and obviously an aggregate (or detailed) approach won't be so accurate as to suggest who's going to get 77% relative to 73%.

It's pretty standard. Votes are freed up by guys leaving the ballot, are eaten up by new entrants then some basic guesses on how much of the rest is lost vs. spread around. Humans are actually fairly consistent in their behavior and decision-making. If writer A thought 5 guys plus IRod, Raines and Bagwell were HoFers last year, he will almost always vote for those 5 guys again, on this ballot will almost certainly vote for Chipper and (it looks like) at least one of Thome and Vizquel. Then he will reconsider the rest of the backlog. In general, with enough new worthy candidates, the backlog doesn't make a lot of progress. Obviously there are always individual decisions to add or (more rarely) drop a player a voter passed over last year.

I suspect back-loggers will get more growth out of voters who last year listed 9-10 names than they do from guys with short ballots. A 10-vote ballot probably had all 3 HoFers (and a fair number had Lee Smith) but might have omitted some combo of Edgar, Walker, Mussina, Schilling or possibly Bonds and Clemens. It's more than reasonable that those voters might have wanted to vote for some of those guys but couldn't on a crowded ballot. Now they just need to decide that one of those is more worth than Vizquel and might even decide one is more worthy than Thome. There have been a good number of full ballots the last few years -- I'm guessing that's just due to the crowded ballots but maybe there are a number of voters who feel they "should" vote full ballots. That would help the backlog a lot.

But basically it's just the standard truth that, barring some external force like Rich Lederer, somebody who didn't think a player deserved a vote last year is very likely to deny that player a vote this year. Of course some will add him (especially if he's close) and others would have voted for him on a less crowded ballot but those numbers are generally fairly small in the overall scheme of things (adding 5% say). I suppose it's possible that Morgan's letter will play the role of Lederer here, leading to fewer votes for Bonds and Clemens ... with not many places for those voters to go, maybe they land on Edgar.

Edgar, Bonds and Clemens all had good jumps last year. Normally Chipper and Thome entering the ballot would be bad news for Edgar but maybe he has enough momentum along with any Morgan effect to take another 10% or so jump which will be close enough to make it next year. I was surprised by the jump for Bonds and Clemens last year so am interested to see how they do this year but Morgan's letter may have put the brakes on any real progress they were making.

Mussina had a nice jump last year although it ended up essentially being him and Schilling swapping spots. Moose will continue to grow towards induction and as the top SP back-logger on this ballot, he will probably see a solid jump. The question for 2019 is where Hallday debuts relative to M & S. On Schilling, I suspect voters will start to forgive him for being a moron and he'll start making progress again towards induction -- it's a good bit less likely now that he'll make it but I think he probably will.

On Kent ... as somebody noted for me, I did say "darkhorse." The most plausible scenario is if Chipper, Vlad, Hoffman, Thome, Mo and Vizquel are inducted over the next two years (Edgar is gone either way). Even by next year, possibly voters are looking at a ballot headed by Mo, Vizquel, Edgar. If you're an roids blackballer, who else are you going to vote for? Fine, Mussina, Schilling and Halladay. Six is probably enough they won't go looking elsewhere but that voter has a ballot with 4 pitchers, a defense-only SS and a DH. Somebody like Kent (or Rolen or even Helton) starts to look attractive.

So then in 2020 that voter has Jeter, probably all three SPs and ... again, maybe that's enough. Then in 2021, it's nobody but the pitchers left for this voter, maybe only two of them.

Regardless of how it works out, I expect Kent, Walker, Rolen, etc. will get closer looks over the next few ballots, especially from those not voting Bonds and Clemens, because the ballots are actually quite thin. Sure, I expect the most common decision for most such voters will be shorter ballots, which will lead to a pretty steep decline in names/ballot. But if they've gotten used to voting for 7-9 names such that names/ballot fall slowly, then those votes have to be distributed around somehow. We are also entering a period where there are few deserving hitters without a PED taint on those 2020-21 ballots and I don't know that we've ever seen a time when pitchers were the only viable candidates and whether voters will be comfortable with that. And in this case, none of those pitchers have 300 wins, only one has CYAs, so it's not like voters will be falling all over themselves.

2021 might see nobody elected. It might see Halladay, Schilling, Moose all around 65-70%, Bonds and Clemens stuck at 55-60% and ... who? Those percentages would represent fewer than 4 names per ballot. If everybody else is sitting at 20% that only adds about one more name. So that's what I'm uncertain about -- are we looking at a future of 4.5 names per ballot or are we looking at a future where there's substantial growth from somebody currently around 20% or one where everybody around 20% settles in at 40-50%? I just figure if they're gonna pick one guy out of that 20% mess to vote for, the most likely candidate is Kent (most HRs for a 2B, a MVP, no Coors ... Walker gone by 2021 anyway).

This is about the deepest 2021 ballot I can imagine:

Mussina, Halladay, Schilling: 65-70% in 2020
Bonds, Clemens: 60% in 2020 and stuck

Kent, Sheff, Manny, Wagner, Sosa

Probably still alive: Rolen, Andruw
Maybe still alive: Helton, Santana
Entrants: Hudson, Buehrle, Hunter

Maybe I should make Andruw my darkhorse candidate.

Note there are no issues for the HoF here. They've got a nice pipeline of popular 1st ballot inductees and will probably get 1-2 in 2021 then some more popular 1st ballot inductees (Ortiz then Ichiro with Beltre and Pujols on the way).
   63. cercopithecus aethiops Posted: November 24, 2017 at 05:39 PM (#5580824)
I cannot find it now, but I read a tweet from someone (the public relations director?) at the Hall of Fame stating that Morgan's letter spells out the Hall of Fame's position on the matter.


If this is the HOF's position on the matter, then they should grow a sack, define what constitutes sufficient evidence of PED use, and remove those players from the ballot. Because I am as sure that Ivan Rodriguez used steroids as I am that Sammy Sosa did.
   64. John DiFool2 Posted: November 24, 2017 at 07:10 PM (#5580834)
If elected, what are the chances that Allen would do something along the lines of a Bob Dylan wrt the Nobel?


As in, The Sex Pistols and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame?

That particular institution's voting patterns make the Baseball Hall voters look like sublime wholly impartial geniuses.
   65. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: November 26, 2017 at 09:12 AM (#5581059)
Only seven ballots in, and there five players who have appeared on all seven ballots:

Clemens
Vlad
Hoffman
Thome

and...


Vizquel
   66. PreservedFish Posted: November 26, 2017 at 09:40 AM (#5581065)
Have any of these voters submitted a justification for his Vizquel vote?

For years it was obvious that Vizquel would be the next Jim Rice / Jack Morris, but I never imagined that he might he easily and immediately blows past 50%.
   67. bachslunch Posted: November 26, 2017 at 10:06 AM (#5581070)
I guess all those Vizquel voters must think Rabbit Maranville is a HoF must. The two are reasonably good comps for each other. By PAs, WAR, and OPS+:

Vizquel: 12013/45.3/82
Maranville: 11254/42.8/82

By this thinking, anyway. And yes, I’m joking — I doubt too many of the voters even know much about Maranville or have much of an opinion on his HoF worth if they do.
   68. Downing Almost Deserves It Posted: November 26, 2017 at 10:42 AM (#5581082)
#66

After reading around here for 12 or 13 years, I believe this is my first time posting. And I'm doing so because even in a highly intelligent baseball community, I think we're giving too much credit to Vizquel.

We way overrate him when we compare him to the likes of Jim Rice and Jack Morris. Rice is easily a top-50 left fielder, and I can get him into the top-35 with the recent DRA adjustments offered by Michael Humphreys and Seamheads. Morris is worse than Rice and quite offensive as a selection, but I don't think he's any worse than Catfish Hunter or Lefty Gomez. Vizquel would be an abysmal selection, far worse than Rabbit Maranville, Travis Jackson, Phil Rizzuto, or Luis Aparicio. He's maybe the 65th or 85th best shortstop ever. If you're a peak-oriented voter who considers DRA, that is.

If elected by the BBWAA, he would be their worst selection ever (non-closer division), I think with some distance between him and other awful SS choices.
   69. PreservedFish Posted: November 26, 2017 at 11:20 AM (#5581086)
After reading around here for 12 or 13 years, I believe this is my first time posting.


Woohoo! Please contribute more.

Can you list the 64-84 superior shortstops?

In comparison to many here I'm pretty soft on the HOF - it doesn't really bother me if they elect one guy because he was interesting or unique and don't elect another guy that was certainly a better player. I'm not rigorous. I remember watching Vizquel when he was 40 and still a plus fielder at shortstop and thinking "Wow, something extraordinary is happening here." So I kind of get it. On the other hand, nobody ever ever ever thought he was a HOFer when he was at his peak. That's a big problem. I've got an open mind about extreme compiler cases. Vizquel still doesn't do it for me.
   70. BDC Posted: November 26, 2017 at 11:30 AM (#5581088)
I'm mildly surprised by the writers' love for Vizquel because, as far as my memory goes, Vizquel was never seen as a key player in getting his team to a championship. He did not win a World Series ring. I don't remember him being considered a huge part of getting the Indians to their two pennants – I remember flashy fielding highlights and a sense that Vizquel was a contributor, yes, but the big stars on those clubs were the big sluggers.

By contrast, Maranville was seen as the crucial player on the Miracle Braves, a big factor in making the Pirates contenders in the 1920s (though he left before they won their Series in '25), and a key to getting St. Louis back to the Series in 1928. Aparicio was central to the '59 White Sox and also seen as a major factor in making the 1960s Orioles contenders and ultimately champions. Ozzie Smith was a big star in 1982 (and 85/87), and of course Rizzuto and Joe Tinker played on dynasties.

But I may be remembering the mid-90s a bit hazily (and not only on the baseball front, believe me). There may have been more of a thinking-writer's sense that Vizquel was the real reason the Indians were in those Series at all.
   71. Booey Posted: November 26, 2017 at 11:31 AM (#5581089)
It boggles my mind that we might really see a HOF induction next summer with Jack Morris, Omar Vizquel, and Trevor Hoffman while Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Mike Mussina, Curt Schilling, Larry Walker, Alan Trammell, etc, were all available on the ballots to vote for instead.

I guess all it takes WRT Vizquel is a handful of writers referring to him as a future HOFer at the end of his career to make the entire profession collectively forget that they never viewed him as even a 2nd tier star during his actual prime; just one down ballot (8th place) MVP vote his entire career!

Seems impossible that simply playing forever could change someone's reputation so drastically to go from a complete afterthought to a first ballot HOFer.
   72. PreservedFish Posted: November 26, 2017 at 11:43 AM (#5581093)
The Vizquel case has been growing for a long time. There was always a sense that he was Ozzie Smith's heir to the throne, and I think there's another feeling out there that the best defensive shortstop is playing at a de facto Hall of Fame standard, no matter what else he's doing. Vizquel's longevity was really the kicker - he spent almost a decade in a visible team leader, elder statesman role, and that was a decade of thousands of appearances that were all opportunities to moot his HOF candidacy.

I also feel like every argument I've heard for Vizquel has been couched in terms that made it clear that the advocate knew it to be a controversial opinion, and I suspect we'll see more of that this winter, even if those supposedly contrarian opinions have proliferated so much as to become mainstream.

I do think he was seen as a key player on those Indians teams, part of the essential core, but that was a big core. Nobody thought he was more important than Belle or Manny or Thome or Alomar or Baerga or Lofton or possibly even Jose Mesa.
   73. Booey Posted: November 26, 2017 at 11:50 AM (#5581096)
I've got an open mind about extreme compiler cases. Vizquel still doesn't do it for me.


I usually do too; I think career totals do matter. For example, I think Winfield and Palmeiro are no brainers rather than borderline. However, one of my main problems with Vizquel's compiler case is that he wasn't even particularly great at the one category he compiled impressive totals in (hits). HIs .272 career batting average was basically league average (.269) for his era/ballparks. Being average for a really long time seems like a very bizarre HOF argument to me. It's like if a guy hit 480 homers today by hitting 20 a year for 24 years and doing little else of offensive value. 20 homers is basically average nowadays for a full time regular.

Yes, Vizquel also won a bunch of gold gloves, but those were way too subjective IMO during Omar's career to take at full face value (see Jeter, DH Palmeiro selections). Unless defensive numbers show that he actually deserved all those gold gloves, I can't give a player too much credit for the voters laziness (just mindlessly giving the award to whoever won the season before, year after year).
   74. Howie Menckel Posted: November 26, 2017 at 11:57 AM (#5581098)
Maranville also dropped dead of a heart attack at age 62, then was voted in a couple of months later.

maybe Vizquel isn't as healthy as he looks?
   75. PreservedFish Posted: November 26, 2017 at 12:06 PM (#5581101)
However, one of my main problems with Vizquel's compiler case is that he wasn't even particularly great at the one category he compiled impressive totals in (hits).

Well, this isn't fair to him. His most impressive total is innings (or games) at shortstop. Or, perhaps, above-average years as a shortstop. That sort of thing.

If Vizquel were still playing a plus defensive shortstop at age 48, I'd vote for him. That's ###### legendary, legendary enough to overcome a complete lack of any other case. What he did was impressive, very impressive, but not legendary.
   76. Sweatpants Posted: November 26, 2017 at 12:07 PM (#5581102)
By contrast, Maranville was seen as the crucial player on the Miracle Braves
I think this is a slight oversell, given that the primitive version of the MVP award that year went to Maranville's teammate Johnny Evers. Maranville did finish second in the voting despite substandard hitting numbers, though, so you're right that he was recognized as a key part of that team.
   77. Downing Almost Deserves It Posted: November 26, 2017 at 12:08 PM (#5581103)
#69, you shouldn't have asked.

And thanks for the welcome!

Not up for debate (28): Luke Appling, Dave Bancroft, Lou Boudreau, Bert Campaneris, Joe Cronin, Bill Dahlen, George Davis, Art Fletcher, Jim Fregosi, Jack Glassckco, Hughie Jennings, Derek Jeter, Barry Larkin, Pee Wee Reese, Cal Ripken, Alex Rodrigue, Joe Sewell, Ozzie Smith, Vern Stephens, Miguel Tejada, Joe Tinker, Alan Trammell, Arky Vaughan, Honus Wagner, Bobby Wallace, Monte Ward, George Wright, and Robin Yount. (I put Ernie Banks at 1B because he played more games there.

Easy calls for me (16): Dick Bartell, Donie Bush, Dave Concepcion, Al Dark, Julio Franco, Nomar Garciaparra, Travis Jackson, Herman Long, Rabbit Maranville, Freddy Parent, Roger Peckinpaugh, Hanley Ramirez, Phil Rizzuto, Jack Rowe, Troy Tulowitzki, and Maury Wills.

I'm comfortable with (14): Luis Aparicio, Mark Belanger, Jay Bell, Ray Chapman, Kid Elberfeld, Tony Fernandez, Rafael Furcal, Dick Groat, Johnny Logan, Ed McKean, Johnny Pesky, Rico Petrocelli, Germany Smith, and Terry Turner.

That's 58. So even though I rank him at #75, perhaps I exaggerated some in my earlier post (inadvertently, I promise).

A few things about my rankings: 1) I lean toward peak seasons, and Omar has virtually no peak; 2) I substitute DRA for about 2/3 or Rfield, and DRA sees Vizquel as a shade below average defensively; 3) I adjust for shorter seasons; 4) I count negative seasons, which I know some around here don't, bringing Vizquel down some more.

I realize my system isn't "right" in any way, though I do think it's been considered far more than most voters who select Vizquel. And if I may offer, I don't agree that Vizquel was a plus fielder at age 40. I do think he was a beautiful fielder though, even then. I'll trust my eyes to judge beauty, which is absolutely in the eye of the beholder. I'll go with the numbers of the many people smarter than I to evaluate defensive skill. I hope that distinction seems fair.




   78. dlf Posted: November 26, 2017 at 12:22 PM (#5581105)
I'm Curious AND lazy, a bad combination. Vizquel was selected to three All Star games in his career. Of players whose career started after the ASG began, are there any BBWAA enshrinees with that few appearances?
   79. PreservedFish Posted: November 26, 2017 at 12:34 PM (#5581109)
And if I may offer, I don't agree that Vizquel was a plus fielder at age 40. I do think he was a beautiful fielder though, even then. I'll trust my eyes to judge beauty, which is absolutely in the eye of the beholder. I'll go with the numbers of the many people smarter than I to evaluate defensive skill. I hope that distinction seems fair.


It's fair. (I tend to think that observation is pretty reliable.) It does seem that both DRS and UZR both find Vizquel to be a very strong fielder at that age.

If you see him as a below average fielder, then his entire HOF case is trash, of course.
   80. The Yankee Clapper Posted: November 26, 2017 at 12:34 PM (#5581110)
I'm mildly surprised by the writers' love for Vizquel . . .

It's still only seven votes in. Omar may have peaked a little early - let's see where he is when ~ 50 votes are in. But, yeah, if Vizquel goes in on the 1st ballot when better players have struggled, or even fallen off the ballot, one has to wonder about the collective wisdom of the voters.
   81. Sweatpants Posted: November 26, 2017 at 12:35 PM (#5581111)
I'm Curious AND lazy, a bad combination. Vizquel was selected to three All Star games in his career. Of players whose career started after the ASG began, are there any BBWAA enshrinees with that few appearances?
Bert Blyleven made two all-star teams.
   82. BDC Posted: November 26, 2017 at 12:48 PM (#5581114)
That's true, Sweatpants, Johnny Evers was the more miraculous Brave.
   83. Booey Posted: November 26, 2017 at 01:42 PM (#5581127)
I'm Curious AND lazy, a bad combination. Vizquel was selected to three All Star games in his career. Of players whose career started after the ASG began, are there any BBWAA enshrinees with that few appearances?


Omar's 3 all star appearances is pretty unimpressive, but sometimes a position is so stacked that even clear HOF types end up with a surprisingly low total. 1B in the '90's, for example, was so deep that Bagwell and Palmeiro each had just 4 selections, and Thomas and Thome had only 5.

What I think is even more telling about Vizquel though is how poorly he did in MVP voting. That one 8th place vote in 1999 gave him just 0.01 MVP shares, good for 1582nd all time. No one thought he was worthy of even down ballot votes in his prime. I can't imagine another BBWAA HOF position player that was considered less of an MVP candidate during his career...
   84. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: November 26, 2017 at 02:04 PM (#5581135)
It looks like the best comps to HoF'ers with Vizquel are Maranville and Aparicio...but Aparicio isn't that great a comp, IMO.

Aparicio had 10 All-Star games, nine Gold Gloves, and led the league in stolen bases nine years in a row. He was also the ROY, finished 2nd in the MVP vote during the White Sox's big 1959 pennant season, and received MVP votes in 10 different seasons.

Vizquel had 3 ASGs, 11 Gold Gloves, and never led the league in any category except sacrifice hits four times. He got MVP votes in one season, when he finished 9th in 1999.

To vote for Vizquel, you really have to value the Gold Gloves. Here is the list of players in MLB history with 10 or more GGs:

Maddux 18
Kaat 16
Robinson 16
Ivan Rodriguez 13
Ozzie Smith 13
Clemente 12
Mays 12
Keith Hernandez 11
Vizquel 11
Bench 10
Alomar 10
Schmidt 10
Griffey 10
Andruw Jones 10
Ichiro! 10
Kaline 10

Hmmm...the only ones not already in are Kaat, Hernandez, Jones, Ichiro, and Vizquel. Ichiro is getting in quickly.

Kaat is a pitcher, and we don't normally value defense from pitchers a whole lot. FWIW, the only 20th century pitchers with more wins not in the HOF than Kaat are Clemens and Tommy John.

Hernandez was a very good player, but not enough longevity or power to be a legit candidate for the HOF.

That leaves two guys...the two who are first-time candidates this year. I can't believe Jones is going to do terribly well on this ballot - Vizquel really is a unique situation.

I don't think he's a Hall of Famer, but here's where I'm at, as a saber-head: If he's going to get 50% or more in his first year on the ballot, then he is getting in (sort of the way I feel about Hoffman). You might as well root for him to get in quickly, because it is taking up ballot space for other players who really should be in.
   85. Booey Posted: November 26, 2017 at 02:13 PM (#5581138)
Vizquel had 3 ASGs, 11 Gold Gloves, and never led the league in any category except sacrifice hits four times. He got MVP votes in one season, when he finished 9th in 1999.

16th, actually.
   86. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: November 26, 2017 at 02:46 PM (#5581143)
My dream of a National Baseball Hall of Fame without Bonds, Clemens or Marvin Miller, but with Omar Vizquel, Jack Morris and Bud Selig is getting deliciously close.
   87. Ryan Thibs Posted: November 26, 2017 at 03:49 PM (#5581164)
Thanks for following along, gang. Someone ping me on Twitter when TR Sullivan posts his ballot here. :D
   88. QLE Posted: November 26, 2017 at 04:10 PM (#5581171)
Thanks for following along, gang.


You're quite welcome, and thank you for your willingness to continue doing this.
   89. Baldrick Posted: November 26, 2017 at 04:25 PM (#5581175)
It was during the summer of 1989 that I transitioned from 'liking baseball' to 'baseball is my life.' I was an eight year old Seattle Mariners fan, and Omar Vizquel was a fun young player for my team. He couldn't hit much, but he played hard and had smooth hands and we were used to players with flaws.

Omar was my shortstop, and I was happy to have him. When he left in 1994 to go to Cleveland, I was sad to see him go, and followed him happily as he matured into a nice little player for a great team. Then, as he stuck around forever, I enjoyed having him in the game as an elder statesman.

But at no point anywhere in his 24 years did I ever think he looked even remotely like a Hall of Famer.
   90. The Duke Posted: November 26, 2017 at 04:38 PM (#5581177)
84. This is the best argument for Vizquel. Andruw jones will have an interesting stay on the ballot for the same reason. Hernandez is getting closer in my mind. I’m willing to give him extra-credit points for his gray announcing. Jim Kaat should be in as well.
   91. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: November 26, 2017 at 05:17 PM (#5581189)
#85: I stand corrected. Vizquel finished 16th in 1999, the one season in which he received any MVP votes. A few notes about that:

- He finished 4th in the MVP voting that season...among shortstops! (Arod, Jeter, Garciaparra)
- He finished 3rd in the MVP voting on his team (Robby Alomar and Manny Ramirez; Bartolo Colon finished 4th in the CYA voting that year, too...and the fact that he is still playing is unreal.)
- There are 19 positions players on the ballot. The only one of the 19 to never get an MVP vote is Orlando Hudson. The only one of the remaining 18 to get MVP votes in only one season is...Omar Vizquel. Aubrey Huff got MVP votes in three seasons. Hideki Matsui got votes in multiple seasons.
- There are 14 pitchers on the HOF ballot. Most of them got MVP votes at least once, including guys that won't get close to 5%, like Chris Carpenter. I mean, Mike Mussina should be in the HOF, and he is stuck in the middle of the pack, and he is obviously a pitcher...and he got MVP votes in three seasons...and he won 7 GGs!

I guess the problem I am having with the Vizquel candidacy is that, if he gets in, he will be the Hall of Famer I watched the most in my life who I never thought would be a Hall of Famer. He had absolutely no peak period. He was never the best player at his position in his league, not a single season. He was never the best player on his team, not even really very close, not a single season.
   92. EddieA Posted: November 26, 2017 at 05:29 PM (#5581196)
If Vizquel is elected, it's like the Obama Nobel Prize, just chosen for being an anti-slugger.
And the man roided it up just like the rest of them. You just couldn't tell because when he first came up they could knock the bat out of his hands.
   93. Lassus Posted: November 26, 2017 at 08:38 PM (#5581247)
and DRA sees Vizquel as a shade below average defensively

I'm nowhere near "VIZQUEL IS A HOFer!", but am I not understanding something where this sounds kinda batshit?
   94. PreservedFish Posted: November 26, 2017 at 08:50 PM (#5581252)
Yeah, to tell the truth, I don't really know what DRA is.
   95. BDC Posted: November 26, 2017 at 09:01 PM (#5581253)
DRA is Michael Humphreys’ system, explained in his book Wizardry - it is very well-argued and it facilitates cross-era comparisons.
   96. PreservedFish Posted: November 26, 2017 at 09:16 PM (#5581258)
Interested, I just googled "DRA Omar Vizquel" and got this extraordinarily long and dense article.

Here's what Humphreys says about Vizquel:

I don't want to get too deep into DRA here; I'm just saying that Vizquel avoided errors but didn't prevent that many more ground balls from going through the infield for hits that an average-fielding shortstop would have. This should not be too surprising, given that in his long career, in which he played 136 or more games at shortstop 16 times, he never led the league in shortstop assists. He was among the top 3 only once.


And here is a wise observation on HOF voting for shortstops:

So it seems there have been three different ways for a shortstop to get voted into the Hall of Fame by the BBWAA.

1. Reach a career batting milestone (3,000 hits or 500 pre-steroid-era home runs) that guarantees induction regardless of what position you played.
2. Amass more innings at short than any of your peers at short and own a reputation as the outstanding fielding shortstop of your time.
3. Retire with a career batting average near .300.


#2 echoes what I said in #72 and is a nifty explanation of the Vizquel phenomenon.

Later in the article he apparently concludes that Bert Campaneris was a better player than Derek Jeter.
   97. Lassus Posted: November 26, 2017 at 09:19 PM (#5581260)
Is DRA by player listed somewhere? I don't see it at BP or BBREF.

   98. Downing Almost Deserves It Posted: November 26, 2017 at 09:20 PM (#5581261)
I highly recommend reading Wizardry.

Campaneris isn't as good as Jeter, but he's closer to Jeter than he is to Vizquel. And no, Vizquel isn't better than Jeter.

Again, the book is worth a read.
   99. Lassus Posted: November 26, 2017 at 09:23 PM (#5581263)
And no, Vizquel isn't better than Jeter.

I assume you mean overall. He's not a better fielder?
   100. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 26, 2017 at 09:46 PM (#5581269)
Interested, I just googled "DRA Omar Vizquel" and got this extraordinarily long and dense article

Talk about the Understatement of the Year. The Congressional Budget Office's analysis of the GOP's Obamacare Repeal bills would be easier to get through than that. It kind of figures that in his day job the author is an international tax advisor.

Later in the article he apparently concludes that Bert Campaneris was a better player than Derek Jeter.

Indeed he does, if only inferentially, but since he spends the overwhelming bulk of the article trying to tear down Jeter, whatever he has to say about Campy and Trammell almost gets lost in the wash. I doubt if he's going to change too many minds about any of those three players with the near-obsessive tone that he adopts.



Page 1 of 4 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Don Malcolm
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogRosenthal: He’s 53 and hasn’t played in the majors since 2005, but Rafael Palmeiro is eyeing a comeback, and redemption – The Athletic
(93 - 7:26pm, Dec 10)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogOTP 04 December 2017: Baseball group accused of ‘united front’ tactics
(1673 - 7:24pm, Dec 10)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogAlan Trammell worthy of Cooperstown call
(23 - 7:23pm, Dec 10)
Last: Ziggy: The Platonic Form of Russell Branyan

NewsblogRyan Thibs has his HOF Ballot Tracker Up and Running!
(324 - 7:15pm, Dec 10)
Last: Gonfalon Bubble

NewsblogOT - NBA 2017-2018 Tip-off Thread
(1895 - 7:03pm, Dec 10)
Last: don't ask 57i66135; he wants to hang them all

NewsblogThe Giancarlo Stanton Trade Shines a Light on the Sad Difference Between the Mets and Yankees
(25 - 6:54pm, Dec 10)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogYankees in talks on Giancarlo Stanton trade
(182 - 5:33pm, Dec 10)
Last: You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR)

NewsblogShohei Ohtani agrees to deal with Angels | Los Angeles Angels
(55 - 4:51pm, Dec 10)
Last: Walt Davis

Hall of Merit2018 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(313 - 4:40pm, Dec 10)
Last: bachslunch

NewsblogShohei Ohtani’s Value Has No Precedent | FiveThirtyEight
(19 - 4:31pm, Dec 10)
Last: PreservedFish

Gonfalon CubsLooking to next year
(296 - 4:03pm, Dec 10)
Last: Meatwad

NewsblogOT: Winter Soccer Thread
(288 - 1:16pm, Dec 10)
Last: Jose is an Absurd Doubles Machine

NewsblogIf Sandy Koufax is a Hall of Famer, Johan Santana Is Too
(46 - 12:40pm, Dec 10)
Last: karlmagnus

NewsblogMariners Acquire Gordon As Marlins Pick Up Trio Of Prospects | BaseballAmerica.com
(58 - 9:16am, Dec 10)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogBill Liningston's HOF Article
(24 - 8:47am, Dec 10)
Last: PreservedFish

Page rendered in 0.6789 seconds
47 querie(s) executed