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, December 25, 2013

The 2013 HOF Ballot Collecting Gizmo!

The 2014 HOF Ballot Collecting Gizmo!

Final: Jan.9 - 11:30 ~ 209* Full Ballots ~ (36.7%* of vote ~ based on last year) (*new ballot/pct. record!)

99.5 - Maddux
95.7 - Glavine
89.0 - F. Thomas
79.4 - Biggio
———————————
67.9 - Piazza
61.7 - Jack (The Jack) Morris
56.5 - Bagwell
54.5 - Raines
42.1 - Bonds
40.7 - Clemens
36.8 - Schilling
26.8 - Mussina
25.4 - E. Martinez
24.4 - L. Smith
22.0 - Trammell
15.8 - Kent
12.0 - McGriff
10.5 - McGwire
  8.1 - L. Walker
  7.2 - S. Sosa
  5.7 - R. Palmeiro
———————————
4.8 - Mattingly
0.5 - P. Rose (Write-In)

Thanks to Butch, Ilychs Morales, leokitty & Barnald for their help.

As usual…send them in if you come across any ballots!

Repoz Posted: December 25, 2013 at 03:56 PM | 2002 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: history, hof

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 16 of 21 pages ‹ First  < 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 > 
   1501. Longshort1 Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:22 AM (#4633007)
Bonds and Clemens won't start to move forward in their percentages until a suspected PED user is inducted, with Piazza and Bagwell being the likely ones. It will be an emotional barrier that will be crossed. Some voters, now believing that steroid users have been elected, will take the next leap and begin to vote for known steroid users. That will cause momentum to start building. Just my guess.
   1502. SandlotBB Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:23 AM (#4633009)
#1478

I actually think Delgado will crack 5%, because of the New York contingent, and the fact that no serious PED allegations have ever been levied against him. His WAR is significantly lower than McGriff, but not enough to think that he won't get at least half the amount that McGriff is pulling right now. Meanwhile, his WAR7 is on par with Kent's, and puts him within the top 11 position players (with no serious steroid accusations) in WAR7 on the ballot.

Interestingly, for as fun as the logjam has been this year, next year is where it gets really interesting because there are no slam-dunk newcomers on par with Maddux, with the exception of Johnson. Will Schilling get a boost similar to Glavine this year? Who knows. Pedro will be a very interesting case because traditionalists may view his win totals disparagingly, and there may no doubt be some bitterness over Morris' exclusion. If the writers think that they can go back to 4- and 5-vote ballots again, they are going to be surprised. I expect the average votes per ballot to increase if for no other reason than that a lot of the writers are starting to show cracks in their reasoning for including or excluding certain players.

http://highheatstats.blogspot.com/2012/01/50-most-overrated-batters-in-baseball.html

   1503. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:26 AM (#4633010)
New York Times, USA Today, CBS Sports, Baseball Network... you've got to find a way to monetize this thing next year. The 2015 BTF Gizmo, brought to you by Vlasic Pickles. For that sour taste in your mouth.

The point of the HOF inductions is to celebrate the game and the inductees. Tomorrow at 12:00 there will be 50 times more writing about the process and the idiot writers than about the people who just got the best news of their life.

Someone should break that news to Mr. Look At Me Look At Me I Only Voted for Jack Morris.

There's a certain sadness in what's happening, but there's also a certain sadness in realizing that the cookies you left on the kitchen table never made it to Santa. The slovenly ballots, the vindictive ballots, the self-aggrandizing ballots. The inane or arrogant or perfunctory or careless or illogical commentary. The great underwater iceberg of never-revealed votes and never-written commentary. This IS the Hall of Fame. This IS the process.

Yup, the bitterness has been cranked up to eleven in recent years. But crises don't create character, crises reveal character. All of this has laid bare a media Mount Olympus that "thinking fans" should have stopped believing in long ago.

The last few years? To borrow a cheap cliche, it's been the Hall of Fame on steroids.
   1504. madvillain Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:30 AM (#4633011)
My buddy gchatted me today "only one thing more boring than January hot stove talk, hof talk".

I think his point is that this is what golfers refer to as "the silly season" and it's a good point. Silly season can be fun though, just don't take it too seriously.
   1505. alilisd Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:35 AM (#4633013)
@ 1417: Well, then I'll ask again by what measure? Because it sure as hell didn't by HR per PA or by ISO.
   1506. esseff Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:41 AM (#4633016)
New York Times, USA Today, CBS Sports, Baseball Network... you've got to find a way to monetize this thing next year.


Greatest Gizmo development since Lol Creme. To use a Repozian intro.
   1507. MelOtt4 Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:49 AM (#4633019)
I'd be very surprised if Pedro Martinez doesn't safely clear the 75% mark next year.The career wins aren't that high, but the peak was so historically dominate and playing for the Red Sox will help him.
   1508. Monty Predicts a Padres-Mariners WS in 2016 Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:49 AM (#4633020)
Pedro will be a very interesting case because traditionalists may view his win totals disparagingly, and there may no doubt be some bitterness over Morris' exclusion.


Anyone who doesn't vote for Pedro Martinez is crazy.
   1509. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:54 AM (#4633022)
[1506] lol wut?
   1510. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:56 AM (#4633023)
Also Pedro meets the "feels like a Hall of Famer" and then some.
   1511. steagles Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:56 AM (#4633024)
this is my first post in this thread, so apologies in advance if this has already been discussed, but:

is anyone else really surprised with the amount of support glavine is getting? he was a good pitcher, and he was a good pitcher for a long time, but i can't help but feel that he's benefited from being on the same first ballot as maddox, his former teammate. glavine is a HOF, no doubt, but he's not a "95% of the vote HOFer" while mussina and schilling are sitting at 63% of the vote on the same ballot, with their vote totals combined. that's absolute nonsense.
   1512. OCF Posted: January 08, 2014 at 03:00 AM (#4633025)
In the Hall of Merit election, I did vote in the order Glavine>Schilling>Mussina. That has something to do with me being a career-leaning voter, especially with pitchers. But, those three are close. You're right, it makes no particular sense to have Glavine singled out as far above and beyond the other two.
   1513. SandlotBB Posted: January 08, 2014 at 03:07 AM (#4633026)
#1507

I would vote for Pedro in a heartbeat, even as a Yankees fan, but traditionalists are going to look at his stat line and say that his peak was too short. With the exception of ERA, his career stats are very similar to Schilling's, even though he compiled them in far less time, and we all see how Schilling's chances are coming along. Pedro also may suffer from the fact that the one time he won a WS, Schilling was the pitcher of attention. My prediction: Pedro's vote totals will resemble Schilling's, and as we can see, the latter has quite a bit of ground to make up.



   1514. Longshort1 Posted: January 08, 2014 at 03:19 AM (#4633031)
#1511 -- To some degree, yes I am surprised that Glavine is sitting up in the 95-97% range. 300 game winners have all made the HOF, but not necessarily on the first ballot, and certainly not with that high a percentage. Glavine is deserving, but I think he is getting some uplift by being paired with Maddux. It's a two'fer vote. Many want to see them go in together, at least that's my guess. I strongly suspect if Mussina was a member of those Braves teams and put up the exact same numbers as he did in the A.L. (which means he would be a slightly lesser pitcher in the N.L.), he'd have more than 75% of the vote. Instead of Braves-themed Cox, Maddux and Glavine election, we'd be looking at Braves induction of Cox, Maddux, Glavine and Mussina!
   1515. Longshort1 Posted: January 08, 2014 at 03:24 AM (#4633032)
#1513 -- Yankee fan like you, although we'll disagree on Pedro. I think he makes it easy next year, clearing 75% by a good margin. He didn't have the longevity and the career wins of others, but he was recognized as the best pitcher of his generation. Schilling never held that title in the minds of voters. Schilling will eventually get in, but it's going to take a while. Pedro will go in as Koufax did.
   1516. SandlotBB Posted: January 08, 2014 at 03:24 AM (#4633033)
Methinks the Glavine support stems from his 300 wins, which appeases traditionalists. I am starting to see a trend in recent elections that players with strong career peaks are suffering relative to those whose numbers trended consistently. The traditionalist obsession with win totals is the only good reason I can think of as to why Morris ("winningest pitcher of the 1980s") is getting so much support, and Schilling and Mussina are getting shafted (if Mussina had 30 more wins, he would be trending with Glavine right now). Same thing with McGriff, who lacks any credible connection with PED scandals: give him the extra 7 home runs, and he's in (a vote jump that big? yes, I really do believe he would have gotten in before the logjam started). In other words, the old benchmarks that used to guarantee election are becoming the sine qua non for election on crowded ballots; Rice, Larkin, Alomar, and the like benefitted from retiring before the logjam began forcing writers to select the only the very top echelon of candidates

If the attachment with Maddux has benefitted Glavine, will Pedro's attachment with Schilling benefit them next year? My initial guess is no, because of the short time as teammates. I still think Pedro will fall short because many people forget his time in Montreal, a very small market team. Schilling, being teammates of both Pedro and Johnson, will probably not benefit from either because his tenure as teammate with both was too short. The Maddux/Glavine/Smoltz trio was unique in its longevity, although it will be interesting to see how the Yankees' core four fare on the ballot. Ultimately, if Smoltz fails to make the Hall by 10-15 percentage points, one might always wonder if he would have made it a year earlier.
   1517. Pete L. Posted: January 08, 2014 at 03:59 AM (#4633035)
The NY Daily News Ballot Dump (Harper, McCarron, Madden, Botte, Roger Rubin). We had Harper and Botte but I think the rest are new.

http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/baseball/hall-fame-ballots-cast-daily-news-writers-picks-article-1.1569463

John Harper's ballot: Jeff Bagwell, Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux, Edgar Martinez, Jack Morris, Mike Piazza, Tim Raines, Curt Schilling, Frank Thomas, Alan Trammell.
Anthony McCarron's ballot: Jeff Bagwell, Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux, Edgar Martinez, Jack Morris, Mike Mussina, Mike Piazza, Tim Raines, Curt Schilling, Frank Thomas.
Bill Madden's ballot: Craig Biggio, Tom Glavine, Jeff Kent, Greg Maddux, Fred McGriff, Jack Morris, Curt Schilling, Frank Thomas.
Roger Rubin's ballot: Jeff Bagwell, Craig Biggio, Tom Glavine, Greg Maddux, Edgar Martinez, Jack Morris, Mike Piazza, Curt Schilling, Frank Thomas.
Peter Botte's ballot: Jeff Bagwell, Tom Glavine, Jeff Kent, Greg Maddux, Fred McGriff, Jack Morris, Mike Piazza, Tim Raines, Curt Schilling, Frank Thomas.


   1518. Dr. Vaux Posted: January 08, 2014 at 05:20 AM (#4633039)
Man, every time I think about it, having Kevin Brown falling off the ballot after one year is the most ridiculous thing the HOF voters have ever done.
   1519. AJMcCringleberry Posted: January 08, 2014 at 08:20 AM (#4633046)
I'd be very surprised if Pedro Martinez doesn't safely clear the 75% mark next year.

Yeah, I expect Johnson and Pedro to be similar to Maddux and Glavine this year.
   1520. ThickieDon Posted: January 08, 2014 at 08:38 AM (#4633049)
Only a sub-moronic person would look at Brown and Morris's stats side-by-side and think Morris is the HOFer.
   1521. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 08, 2014 at 08:45 AM (#4633053)
this is like Christmas morning!
   1522. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: January 08, 2014 at 08:47 AM (#4633054)
Today I'm just going to be positive about the guys getting in. Maddux and Thomas were a lot of fun to watch. Glavine...well...he had a great career so congratulations to him, too!
   1523. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: January 08, 2014 at 08:51 AM (#4633056)
He votes for Bonds and McGwire, so he obviously has no hangups re: PEDs. He voted for 3 starting pitchers and 1 reliever, so he obviously finds lots of pitchers worthy of the Hall. He named 8 players so (a) he's cool with voting for lots of people, but (b) he still has room to add more players if he wanted to.

AND HE DOESN'T VOTE FOR ROGER FREAKIN' CLEMENS!? WHAT!? HOW!?

That may not be the worst ballot I've seen (I saw the "Morris. And nobody else." ballot), but it might be the most inexplicable. Huh?


There was a guy who voted for Palmeiro but not Bonds
   1524. Everybody Loves Tyrus Raymond Posted: January 08, 2014 at 08:52 AM (#4633057)
Biggio is dropping a little close to 75% for my liking. Hope he doesn't fall just short.
   1525. Misirlou's been working for the drug squad Posted: January 08, 2014 at 08:57 AM (#4633058)
My prediction: Pedro's vote totals will resemble Schilling's, and as we can see, the latter has quite a bit of ground to make up.


Pedro lead in CYAs 3-0. His vote total will be nothing like Schilling's.
   1526. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: January 08, 2014 at 08:58 AM (#4633059)
Pedro lead in CYAs 3-0. His vote total will be nothing like Schilling's.

Pedro will walk into the Hall on the first vote. He's idiot proof.
   1527. zonk Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:00 AM (#4633061)

I think his point is that this is what golfers refer to as "the silly season" and it's a good point. Silly season can be fun though, just don't take it too seriously.


Since the Cubs tend to be out of it by May -- this is my favorite time to talk baseball next to March and April.

Silly season today, silly season tomorrah, silly season forevah!
   1528. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:23 AM (#4633066)
Pedro lead in CYAs 3-0. His vote total will be nothing like Schilling's.


Schilling is apparently the next Bert Blyleven. A lot of SDCN's love him a lot more than voters do. He's not Glavine. He's not Pedro. He's a solid case for outer circle HOF, certainly, but he's on the Smoltz/Kevin Brown level, not the Glavine/Pedro level.
   1529. DL from MN Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:36 AM (#4633070)
solid case for outer circle HOF


Brown, Schilling and Smoltz are middle tier. Guys like David Cone and Bret Saberhagen would be in the outer tier compared to historical peers that were elected. They're not electing an outer tier for pitchers at the moment.
   1530. Jose Can Still Seabiscuit Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:39 AM (#4633074)
Pedro will walk into the Hall on the first vote. He's idiot proof.


While I agree that is the likely result never, ever, ever discount the amount of idiocy that the BBWAA can put on display.

One last update of what people need through 194 ballots;

Biggio - 73.3%
Piazza - 78.4%
Bagwell - 83.7%
Morris - 82.1%
Sosa - 3.7%
Palmeiro - 4.5%
Mattingly - 5.1%

I think Biggio is going to get in. Piazza has a better chance than maybe it appears. As I recall a high percentage of non-published ballots are NYC based and while the non-published group is more likely to be anti-steroid I wonder if the New York base will help Piazza. Mattingly is safe and Sosa looks safe but I won't be the least bit surprised if Palmeiro falls off.
   1531. AJMcCringleberry Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:42 AM (#4633075)
I just read that Stark column, it is good. I may not agree with his whole ballot, but he's clearly thought it through.
   1532. John DiFool2 Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:45 AM (#4633077)
In other words, the old benchmarks that used to guarantee election are becoming the sine qua non for election on crowded ballots; Rice, Larkin, Alomar, and the like benefitted from retiring before the logjam began forcing writers to select the only the very top echelon of candidates


Except that Sosa and Palmiero put the lie to that.

I do wonder what their vote totals (and Mac's) will do once Piazza is in (along with yes Bonds and Rocket)...
   1533. John Northey Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:49 AM (#4633080)
It will be interesting to see the end result. But as to next year never underestimate how stupid the choices by the voters can be. Not sure what all will be used against Pedro Martinez but for starters...
1) Mussina, Johnson, Clemens all have over 50 more wins than Pedro while Kenny Rogers has the exact same number of wins (56 fewer losses than Rogers but voters tend to get stuck on wins)
2) Under 3000 innings, no one who pitched after the 60's (Koufax) has made it with that low an inning total.
3) 'only' 6-4 in post-season and remembered for a blowup near the end (manager left him in too long)
4) lack of durability, even though he once led in complete games (while in Montreal)

I hope he gets in on the first ballot, but see too many excuses not to vote for him for the writers.
   1534. Mickey Henry Mays Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:55 AM (#4633083)


Schilling is apparently the next Bert Blyleven. A lot of SDCN's love him a lot more than voters do.


He's definitely one of those guys, like Bert, who's value is more apparent when you dig through the numbers, but unlike Bert, Schilling has the hook.
I think Schilling is being hurt more by the overwhelming talent that's on the ballot then lack of appreciation or fame, whereas Blyleven seemed to be lacking in both those things.
   1535. Esteban Rivera Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:56 AM (#4633084)
I would love to see all four of the Gizmo leaders make it (heck, if Piazza were to somehow also make it even better). That, along with Morris being off the ballot either way, should yield 4-5 possible ballot spots for next year. This should help in dealing with next year's candidates while providing some room for those squeezed out this year to gain some traction.
   1536. AJMcCringleberry Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:57 AM (#4633085)
3) 'only' 6-4 in post-season and remembered for a blowup near the end (manager left him in too long)

Possibly, but I think everyone blames the manager for that.

When I think of Pedro and the playoffs I remember the 6 innings of no-hit ball in relief while injured.
   1537. kwarren Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:00 AM (#4633087)
Schilling's a solid case for outer circle HOF, certainly, but he's on the Smoltz/Kevin Brown level, not the Glavine/Pedro level.


Kind of hard to quantify this conclusion:

Pedro JAWS 71.1 7-year peak 58.2 ERA+ 154
Glavine JAWS 62.9 7-year peak 44.3 ERA+ 118

Schilling JAWS 63.8 7-year peak 49.0 ERA+ 127
Smoltz JAWS 54.1 7-year peak 38.7 ERA+ 125
Brown JAWS 56.9 7-year peak 45.4 ERA+ 127

How one can group Glavine with Pedro rather than the other three is mind numbing. I'm sure it's the Maddux association and the 305 career wins, and if those are the things that one uses to evaluate players careers....so be it.

Without the longevity factor which is a valid consideration, he's likely the worst of this group. His ERA+ is a rather alarming stat, when comparing him to this group. It would be higher if had a shorter career, but then you don't have the 300 wins. And the wins out weigh the ERA+ in the minds of many people.
   1538. asinwreck Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:03 AM (#4633089)
[1506] Such a move would have consequences.
   1539. Mickey Henry Mays Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:07 AM (#4633090)
I won't be the least bit surprised if Palmeiro falls off.


If somebody offered me a bet that Palmeiro would fall off the ballot after a couple of years I'd have taken it and given odds. I just figured even in today's anti-steroid climate a guy with 569 HR and 3000+ H would at the very least have enough support to stay on the ballot for the full term. I guess I didn't expect the logs to get so jammed.
   1540. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:07 AM (#4633091)
[1506] Such a move would have consequences.

Like Billy Childish, Repoz will never sell out!
   1541. phishy Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:08 AM (#4633093)
another ballot revealed just now from Shi Davidi in Toronto: http://www.sportsnet.ca/baseball/baseball-hall-of-fame-2014-jack-morris-steroid-debate-roger-clemens-barry-bonds/

not sure how to submit it or check if anyone else already has.
   1542. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:10 AM (#4633094)
I think Morris is going to see an enormous bump from Gizmo to final vote. We all know non-Gizmo voters are far more inclined to support Morris than those making their votes public.

2010:
Gizmo: 47.7%. Reality: 52.3%

2011:
Gizmo: 49.2%. Reality: 53.5%

2012:
Gizmo: 58.8%. Reality: 66.7%

2013:
Gizmo: 59.3%. Reality: 67.7%

2014:
Gizmo: 61.3%. Reality: ???

Yup, Morris always does better outside the Gizmo. The downside for Morris, however, is that the Gizmo guys are supporting him about the same this year as in 2012 and 2013. That means he needs a definite surge in non-Gizmo support to jump the remaining 7.3% overall.
   1543. SouthSideRyan Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:13 AM (#4633096)
I'm getting worried about Sosa
   1544. Mickey Henry Mays Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:16 AM (#4633097)
How one can group Glavine with Pedro rather than the other three is mind numbing. I'm sure it's the Maddux association and the 305 career wins, and if those are the things that one uses to evaluate players careers....so be it.


I'm not understanding that either. I get the sportswriters overrating him, but I'd have thought baseball nerds would be more objective.
   1545. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:22 AM (#4633098)
is anyone else really surprised with the amount of support glavine is getting?

I'm stunned at the support everyone is getting, except Maddux.

Here's what I would've guessed if there was no Gizmo:

95 - Maddux
80 - Glavine
70 - Thomas
62 - Biggio
60 - Morris
56 - Piazza
55 - Bagwell
45 - Raines
35 - Clemens
35 - Bonds
30 - Schilling
25 - L. Smith
25 - Trammell
20 - E. Martinez
15 - Mussina
15 - L. Walker
11 - McGwire
10 - McGriff
10 - Mattingly
8 - Sosa
5- Palmerio
5 - Kent


And that would still be the most names/ballot in any BBWAA election in decades. And who knows - maybe it's better than my actual predictions. But I'm really surprised at how most guys are doing in the Gizmo.
   1546. LargeBill Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:23 AM (#4633100)
1536. AJMcCringleberry Posted: January 08, 2014 at 08:57 AM (#4633085)
3) 'only' 6-4 in post-season and remembered for a blowup near the end (manager left him in too long)

Possibly, but I think everyone blames the manager for that.

When I think of Pedro and the playoffs I remember the 6 innings of no-hit ball in relief while injured.


As an Indians fan that is sadly my biggest memory of Pedro. They had that series and then Pedro limped to the mound ala Gibson and our batters took rest of the day off. I admit slight embellishment with the Gibson analogy.
   1547. arrabin56 Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:25 AM (#4633102)
I wonder if the New York base will help Piazza


I'm not sure how much NY vote is left, but you are right it should help. So far out of NY:

NY Daily News
Yes: Harper, McCarron, Rubin, Botte
No: Madden

NY Post
Yes: Burke, Davidoff, Kernan, King, Puma, Serby, Vaccaro
No: Sherman

Newsday
Yes: Lennon, Herzog, Herrmann
No: Marcus

ESPN
Yes: Matthews, O'Connor, Rubin
No: NONE

MLB.com
Yes: NONE
No: Noble

That's 18/22, or 81.8%. However, that covers all the major New York papers (the Times famously does not allow its writers to vote). While I'm sure there are a few NY-based writers at large, I can't imagine it is enough of the electorate to boost Piazza past 75% this year.
   1548. SouthSideRyan Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:29 AM (#4633105)
The NY writers in question are the old timers who haven't been employed by anyone in 15 years
   1549. Rusty Priske Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:29 AM (#4633106)
While I have not sat down with Pedro's full numbers to come up with a strong opinion, I find it odd when people discount the importance of CAREER numbers over PEAK when the Hall of Fame is a CAREER award.

It is for the players who had the best careers, not for the people who had the best few years.
   1550. Joey B.: posting for the kids of northeast Ohio Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:31 AM (#4633108)
I'm getting worried about Sosa.

He's obviously never getting in, so I'm not sure what you're worried about.
   1551. Rusty Priske Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:33 AM (#4633111)
I am more worried about NOT ENOUGH players falling off. With packed ballots, those never-getting-in players are taking up votes and watering down support. (And I am PRO-Sosa...)
   1552. arrabin56 Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:33 AM (#4633112)
1548. SouthSideRyan Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:29 AM (#4633105)

The NY writers in question are the old timers who haven't been employed by anyone in 15 years


Those writers seem more likely to support Mattingly, who they actually covered. Remember Piazza did not come to the Mets until the middle of the 1998 season, and for writers who were not following day-to-day, was overshadowed in the market by Jeter, Rivera, Clemens, etc.. Not sure they will help him all too much.
   1553. Mickey Henry Mays Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:34 AM (#4633113)
While I have not sat down with Pedro's full numbers to come up with a strong opinion, I find it odd when people discount the importance of CAREER numbers over PEAK when the Hall of Fame is a CAREER award.


Pedro does pretty good on both accounts. If a guy is able accumulate more career value in an abbreviated career vs. the guy who had a longer career but less career value then who really had the better career? Basically Pedro vs. Glavine.
   1554. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:35 AM (#4633118)
I'm getting worried about Sosa.

He's obviously never getting in, so I'm not sure what you're worried about.


He's worried because Sammy's been looking pale lately.
   1555. arrabin56 Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:36 AM (#4633120)
1551. Rusty Priske Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:33 AM (#4633111)

I am more worried about NOT ENOUGH players falling off. With packed ballots, those never-getting-in players are taking up votes and watering down support. (And I am PRO-Sosa...)


Like who? Kent and Mussina seem to be the only newcomers staying on the ballot, both are certainly worthy of consideration (for the record I'm not pro-Kent as a HoFer, and while I'm pro-Mussina, I would not have him on my ballot this year.) None of the real longshots seem to be getting even courtesy votes, let alone nearing the 5% mark. And Mattingly was never going to fall off in year 14.
   1556. Lance Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:38 AM (#4633122)
I just wanted to note the Albany Times Union's citing of the Gizmo: http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Hall-of-Fame-results-could-be-hit-in-Cooperstown-5123729.php Someone at my local paper is lurking here!
   1557. Rusty Priske Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:38 AM (#4633123)
I would have liked to see Walker, Sosa, Palmeiro and Mattingly all fall off, simply because they aren't going to get in and the backlog would be better off without them.

This is despite the fact that I think three of them deserve to be in the HoF (all but Mattingly).
   1558. Davo Dozier Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:43 AM (#4633129)
1498
If Jamie Moyer had pitched until he was 50, I could have maybe seen him picking up a mainstream cult following.


He actually struck me as a guy who would do better on BBTF than he'd actually do in the real Hall of Fame voting either way. (He's in my personal Hall of Fame, fwiw.)
   1559. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:43 AM (#4633130)
It is for the players who had the best careers, not for the people who had the best few years.

There is a lot of gray area there.
   1560. AJMcCringleberry Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:46 AM (#4633134)
Davo, come back to the Lounge! We miss you!
   1561. Rusty Priske Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:49 AM (#4633137)
There is a lot of gray area there.


Oh, I agree with that, and I'm not really talking about Pedro (since I haven't gone over his numbers), more about the idea that a 'peak' is enough to get someone in. This is a career award, not an All-Star Game.

Hey, when does Mark Fidrych get in? He had a great (incredibly-narrow) peak!

But, of course, I am not saying that peak has no value. Of course not. I just don't think it is the FIRST thing to look at. It is more of a deciding factor once you see if a player has the career credentials.
   1562. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:53 AM (#4633139)
But, of course, I am not saying that peak has no vvalue. Of course not. I just don't think it is the FIRST thing to look at. It is more of a deciding factor once you see if a player has the career credentials.

This will sound milquetoasty, but I look at both. Careers can take all sorts of shapes and I don't really prefer one to the other. I don't mind a Hall with both Koufax and Sutton in it. The 10 year rule precludes any real flash in the pans getting in, but theoretically, if you had a player named Roy Hobbs and he only played 2 years but put up a slash line of 0.395/0.510/0.856 over say 1300 PA's, and then died, I'd be ok with that guy in the HOF.
   1563. DA Baracus Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:53 AM (#4633141)
One shouldn't need to "go over the numbers" for Pedro Martinez.
   1564. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:56 AM (#4633144)
As an example of what I mean, the Japanese elected this guy to their hall of fame.
   1565. cardsfanboy Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:57 AM (#4633146)
It will be interesting to see the end result. But as to next year never underestimate how stupid the choices by the voters can be. Not sure what all will be used against Pedro Martinez but for starters...


Your 4th point is going to be something that won't surprise me, lack of durability. No starting pitcher in the hof has less than 100 complete games (and Clemens and Maddux both exceed that) (Glavine only has 56)

Clemens has as many career shutouts as Pedro has complete games(46)

Pedro will sail past 75% most likely, but he won't approach Maddux and maybe not even Glavine's total.
   1566. ThickieDon Posted: January 08, 2014 at 10:59 AM (#4633148)
One of the new pro-Morris arguments is that all of his innings (and, yes, there were a lot) were pitched while "logging ace-duty", as opposed to being a back-end 4th/5th starter (I guess?).

Problem is, he pitched like a back-end guy. As somebody earlier brought up, his numbers are similar to Jeff Suppan's while on the Cards. I think Morris is clearly better than Suppan, but neither deserve HOF love.

If you want to bump Morris higher for logging 250-290 innings in some (not all) seasons, fine.

Bump him up a bit more for the Game 7 start (the rest of his postseason numbers are actually just "ok"). Fine.

Where does that leave you? Who is slightly better than Jeff Suppan in the last 20 years?

Kenny Rogers? Derek Lowe? Bartolo Colon? Mark Buehrle?

   1567. AJMcCringleberry Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:00 AM (#4633150)
This has made me go look at Pedro's stats again. In 2000, in the AL East, he had a 1.74 ERA and a 0.74 WHIP. Insanity.
   1568. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:01 AM (#4633152)
I'm stunned at the support everyone is getting, except Maddux.

I know I got pooh-poohed earlier but I was told and believe that there was a push for writers to fill out ballots. certainly not by the hof because they can't organize a pot luck lunch for 5 but likely writers themselves calling/emailing/texting peers telling them to stop being schmucks.

I doubt it's independent thought occurring en masse. someone(s) had to nudge
   1569. AROM Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:01 AM (#4633153)
I agree with Shooty.
   1570. ThickieDon Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:04 AM (#4633157)
Pedro put up Koufax numbers when offenses were twice as powerful.

Hm maybe he was juicing.
   1571. Ron J2 Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:05 AM (#4633158)
#1379 Correia pitched a few months with a broken arm (hairline fracture to be more precise) -- without reporting it to the team. I think it's reasonably likely that this is what ended his career.
   1572. Mike Green Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:05 AM (#4633159)
If the writers elect 4 players who are eminently qualified (which may be what happens), they will have had a very good year by their standards. It does appear that most of the writers have recognized the high quality of the options and have voted for more players than in previous years.
   1573. AJMcCringleberry Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:06 AM (#4633160)
One of the new pro-Morris arguments is that all of his innings (and, yes, there were a lot) were pitched while "logging ace-duty", as opposed to being a back-end 4th/5th starter (I guess?).

Problem is, he pitched like a back-end guy.


It was funny, I saw a guy on MLBN say that "he walked like a HOFer and he talked like a HOFer". I thought, "it's too bad that he didn't pitch like a HOFer".
   1574. Mickey Henry Mays Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:06 AM (#4633161)
As an example of what I mean, the Japanese elected this guy to their hall of fame.


Wow, a real life Sid Finch.
   1575. Rusty Priske Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:07 AM (#4633162)
One shouldn't need to "go over the numbers" for Pedro Martinez.


One should need to "go over the numbers" for EVERY candidate.

The reliance on what a voter remembers someone was like is how Jim Rice got in and pretty much the entire basis behind the Jack Morris support.
   1576. Morty Causa Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:07 AM (#4633163)
I'm rather surprised at some of the comments wrt Pedro. At one time hereabouts, this guy was God--the greatest pitcher ever, and the burden was on the dissenters. Now, some feel the need to reinforce and remind that he's a no-brainer HOF candidate?
   1577. cardsfanboy Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:08 AM (#4633164)
I'm not understanding that either. I get the sportswriters overrating him, but I'd have thought baseball nerds would be more objective.


Because his career is basically Schillings with an extra thousand innings of average starter performance. From 1991-2005 Glavine put up a 242-143 record, 3300ip, with an era+ of 128. Schilling in his career put up 216-146 record, over 3200ip with an era+ of 127 (unearned runs total for each, 116 for Glavine vs 65 for Schilling tilts it into Schillings favor, but then you get another 1000 innings of average pitching out of Glavine.

As I told a friend of mine yesterday...Schilling, Mussina and Glavine are all hof worthy and if I made a list of top 50 or so pitchers of all time, they would probably be in the 22-30 range grouped all together and immediately followed by Smoltz. The order that I put them in, would change on a daily basis personally.
   1578. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:10 AM (#4633165)
ron

yes. but that was not the popular reaction. he was perceived as having weight lifted himself out of a career.
   1579. Rusty Priske Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:11 AM (#4633167)
Oh, and I have no problem with Sawamura getting in. Specific circumstances require specific thought processes. There is no one-size-fits-all measurement.

I can't think of any player in the current era who would get that sort of consideration, however.
   1580. jmurph Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:11 AM (#4633168)
This has made me go look at Pedro's stats again. In 2000, in the AL East, he had a 1.74 ERA and a 0.74 WHIP. Insanity.


The best part of that line is that the guy who finished second in ERA, someone named Clemens, was almost two full runs worse.
   1581. cardsfanboy Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:13 AM (#4633169)
I'm rather surprised at some of the comments wrt Pedro. At one time hereabouts, this guy was God--the greatest pitcher ever, and the burden was on the dissenters. Now, some feel the need to reinforce and remind that he's a no-brainer HOF candidate?


I don't think anyone is saying that, they are trying to imagine how the writers are going to treat him. I think everyone here knows he's worthy. One person is questioning short peak preference for candidates over career candidates, yet also stated
Oh, I agree with that, and I'm not really talking about Pedro (since I haven't gone over his numbers), more about the idea that a 'peak' is enough to get someone in. This is a career award, not an All-Star Game.


We are more about questioning the collective intelligence of bbwaa writers. As proven by both the Maddux vote and the totals that Morris is getting, they have very low intelligence.
   1582. bunyon Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:15 AM (#4633171)
But, of course, I am not saying that peak has no vvalue. Of course not. I just don't think it is the FIRST thing to look at. It is more of a deciding factor once you see if a player has the career credentials.

This will sound milquetoasty, but I look at both. Careers can take all sorts of shapes and I don't really prefer one to the other. I don't mind a Hall with both Koufax and Sutton in it. The 10 year rule precludes any real flash in the pans getting in, but theoretically, if you had a player named Roy Hobbs and he only played 2 years but put up a slash line of 0.395/0.510/0.856 over say 1300 PA's, and then died, I'd be ok with that guy in the HOF.


Me too. Way back when, before I found online boards, I considered myself a small hall guy because I didn't want to put every starter from my favorite team in. Coming here, I'm an obese hall guy. I look at the top 15 or 16 guys on the ballot this year and think, yeah, sure, they're a HOFer. I think the "statnerd" (I say lovingly and for want of a better name) and the HOF voters share something: they've gotten way, way too selective about the HOF. If it had started as being reserved for only the inner circle guys, fine, but by now, we know who the HOFers are and a lot of guys who have played through my adulthood were as good as those guys and are being shat on. Some for sound* reason (PEDs) but a lot just because we've decided if you aren't Willie Mays, Ted Williams or Walter Johnson, you aren't good enough. It's insane.

* I wouldn't hold pre-testing use against anyone but I get why some do.
   1583. Rusty Priske Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:15 AM (#4633172)
(Oh, just to be extra clear that this is about the CONCEPT and not the PLAYER, I just went and had a browse through Pedro's career and I couldn't imagine him not getting my vote, were I to have one.)
   1584. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:18 AM (#4633173)
In 2000, Pedro's ERA in his losses would have led the major leagues.
   1585. TJ Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:20 AM (#4633175)
Oh, and I have no problem with Sawamura getting in. Specific circumstances require specific thought processes.


Go check out some of the great nicknames Japanese HOFers had. My two favorites were "Wild Bronco" and "Formidable Buffalo".

I so want a Japanese throwback jersey with "Formidable Buffalo" on the back...
   1586. bunyon Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:24 AM (#4633178)
As an example of what I mean, the Japanese elected this guy to their hall of fame.

Man, that's a lot of war credit.
   1587. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:29 AM (#4633184)

The best part of that line is that the guy who finished second in ERA, someone named Clemens, was almost two full runs worse.

I think the fact that he had more than twice as many strikeouts as hits, and by a pretty wide margin (284 to 128) is insane.
   1588. Mickey Henry Mays Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:29 AM (#4633185)
Because his career is basically Schillings with an extra thousand innings of average starter performanceFrom 1991-2005 Glavine put up a 242-143 record3300ipwith an eraof 128. Schilling in his career put up 216-146 recordover 3200ip with an eraof 127 (unearned runs total for each116 for Glavine vs 65 for Schilling tilts it into Schillings favorbut then you get another 1000 innings of average pitching out of Glavine


I wouldn't call a ~93 ERA+ average. Maybe somewhere between replacement and avg. but imo not enough to say definitively Glavine was better. I didn't really look at the RA in those extra yrs. for Glavine but if they were consistent with the rest of his career than that would drop those years closer yet to replacement.
It seems like this debate between Schilling/Glavine/Mussina has been going on ad infinitum with no end in sight.



edit: oops, I guess I hit code instead of quote. I'm not sure how to fix it.
   1589. Der-K and the statistical werewolves. Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:31 AM (#4633187)
It's close to average, once you account for inherited runners and whatnot. IIRC, league average ERA+ for a starter is normally around 96.

edit: To fix, just replace "code" with "blockquote" in your brackets.
   1590. jmurph Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:33 AM (#4633189)
I think the fact that he had more than twice as many strikeouts as hits, and by a pretty wide margin (284 to 128) is insane.


That 98-2003 stretch, literally every time he pitched I thought "he might throw a no-hitter tonight." Luckily my memory is that he was frequently shakier (for Pedro) in the first, so he ended the drama early.
   1591. Random Transaction Generator Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:36 AM (#4633191)
In 2000, Pedro's ERA in his losses would have led the major leagues.


But was surprisingly terrible in no decisions (4.55)...
   1592. Mickey Henry Mays Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:39 AM (#4633194)

edit: To fix, just replace "code" with "blockquote" in your brackets.


blockquote? Not seeing that.
   1593. DA Baracus Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:39 AM (#4633195)
But was surprisingly terrible in no decisions (4.55)...


So he pitched to the score...
   1594. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:40 AM (#4633196)
I'm not sure how much NY vote is left, but you are right it should help. So far out of NY:

About 20-25% of the BBWAA membership is based out of the NYC Chapters.

I assume this is one reason why the Gizmo is always low on Mattingly.
   1595. Random Transaction Generator Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:41 AM (#4633199)
Where it says [ code ] and [ / code ], replace with [ quote ] and [ / quote ] (no spaces).
   1596. cardsfanboy Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:41 AM (#4633200)
So he pitched to the score...


The quote button instead of code.
   1597. jmurph Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:42 AM (#4633202)
blockquote? Not seeing that.


It's okay, I think it fixes itself on the flip, right? So just post 5 more times (make them good, though!).

EDIT: Only 3 more times now!
   1598. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:43 AM (#4633206)
How one can group Glavine with Pedro rather than the other three is mind numbing. I'm sure it's the Maddux association and the 305 career wins, and if those are the things that one uses to evaluate players careers....so be it.


I wouldn't necessary put Glavine in the tier with Pedro. I'd put him in a tier between the top guys and the "inner ring suburbs" guys.

Tier 1: Maddux, Clemens
Tier 2: Petey, RJ
Tier 3: Glavine, Mussina
Tier 4: Schilling, Brown, Smoltz
Tier 5: Cone, Saberhage, Hershiser, Appier

"Stat nerds" can discount 305 wins all they want. They can run down a ground ball pitcher because he used his infield defense if they like. They can claim it was luck and umpire's bad calls or whatever they want to run with this week. At the end of the day, Tom Glavine is a no doubt, lock-down, not-quite-demi-god but definitely inner circle HOF pitcher. To argue otherwise on JAWS or whatever is to miss the forest for the trees.
   1599. Ron J2 Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:45 AM (#4633210)
#1396 There's also the fact that teams started to select for greater power. I've pointed this out before, but the percentage of PAs given to switch-hitters was declining -- fairly rapidly. And the guys losing their jobs were the fast, low ISO hitters.

I'd also point out that anybody wishing to attribute the increase in HR rate between 1993 and 1994 to steroids has just called Frank Thomas a user. Compare the change in HR per ball in play in 1993 and 1994. Thomas is among the leaders in increase from 1994 to 1993. So is Griffey Jr.
   1600. Rickey! On a blog from 1998. With the candlestick. Posted: January 08, 2014 at 11:45 AM (#4633211)
Fix.
Page 16 of 21 pages ‹ First  < 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
robneyer
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogNewsweek: Can Baseball Get More Interesting to Watch With Big Data?
(16 - 3:18am, Sep 03)
Last: PreservedFish

NewsblogTrevor Hoffman's Hall of Fame induction seems inevitable
(95 - 2:56am, Sep 03)
Last: bobm

NewsblogGleeman: Twins ask fans which brand of luxury car they are
(21 - 2:32am, Sep 03)
Last: vortex of dissipation

NewsblogOMNICHATTER 9-2-2014
(82 - 2:22am, Sep 03)
Last: Spahn Insane

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - September 2014
(14 - 2:21am, Sep 03)
Last: robinred

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1957 Ballot
(12 - 2:16am, Sep 03)
Last: bjhanke

NewsblogAdam Jones says he was joking about 'airport' comment at social media event
(26 - 2:06am, Sep 03)
Last: Rafael Bellylard: Built like a Panda.

NewsblogThe indisputable selfishness of Derek Jeter
(40 - 2:05am, Sep 03)
Last: Mom makes botox doctors furious

NewsblogExpanded Rosters Exacerbate Baseball’s Biggest Issue
(34 - 1:13am, Sep 03)
Last: Bhaakon

NewsblogOT: Politics, September, 2014: ESPN honors Daily Worker sports editor Lester Rodney
(324 - 12:45am, Sep 03)
Last: greenback calls it soccer

NewsblogPassan: 10 Degrees: Cole Hamels' trade value might be Phillies' lone bright spot
(7 - 12:23am, Sep 03)
Last: Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play

NewsblogPhoto of the day: Bill Murray, indy league ticket-taker
(128 - 12:21am, Sep 03)
Last: The District Attorney

NewsblogRule change means more players to choose from for postseason roster
(15 - 11:10pm, Sep 02)
Last: Pirate Joe

Hall of MeritMost Meritorious Player: 1958 Discussion
(2 - 11:00pm, Sep 02)
Last: DL from MN

NewsblogAstros Fire Bo Porter
(62 - 10:50pm, Sep 02)
Last: ReggieThomasLives

Page rendered in 0.8975 seconds
52 querie(s) executed