Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

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

Monday, January 06, 2014

THT: Jaffe: Wednesday’s Cooperstown results today, 2014 edition

Chris Jaffe is back with his annual HOF predictions…and breaks down Gizmo to a mikron level!

My predictions

Enough of that already. It’s now time for the main show, how I think guys will do on Wednesday. Here are my predictions for the 22 main candidates, as well as a little blurb at the end to cover all other candidates. For comparison’s sake, I’ll include last year’s vote total so you can see who I think will go up or down.

Candidate	2014	2013
Greg Maddux	99	
Tom Glavine	94	
Frank Thomas	85	
Craig Biggio	76	68
Mike Piazza	71	58
Jack Morris	70	68
Jeff Bagwell	62	60
Tim Raines	50	52
Roger Clemens	38	38
Barry Bonds	36	36
Curt Schilling	34	39
Lee Smith	34	48
Mike Mussina	29	
Alan Trammell	26	34
Edgar Martinez	23	36
Larry Walker	16	22
Fred McGriff	13	21
Jeff Kent	11	
Mark McGwire	11	17
Don Mattingly	10	13
Sammy Sosa	 7	12
Rafael Palmerio	 5	 9
Others	         4

That’s 9.04 names/ballot.

...Biggio and Morris were practically tied last year, but the 2014 election looks better for Biggio. First, comparable candidates really hurt Morris more. Second, Repoz’s Gizmo currently has a huge split, about 20 points between the two. Third, as a rule of thumb, if one candidate takes 14 years to win two-thirds of the voters, while and another starts off with two-thirds, it’s going to be a lot easier for that second guy to win more voters. That’s also why I think Piazza will leapfrog Morris.

Repoz Posted: January 06, 2014 at 06:12 AM | 102 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: 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 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 
   1. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 06, 2014 at 09:32 AM (#4631176)
chris

you are sticking to the 'science' of your prediction, correct? I am hopeful that the 'gizmo' is not unduly influencing you.
   2. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: January 06, 2014 at 09:53 AM (#4631184)
Harv,

It's never been that scientific. The main influence of the Gizmo is noting how many voters are on each ballot.

I could be way off, but that's always a risk. All along, I've been waiting for the Gizmo's names/ballot average to drop, but it hasn't - and it has a fifth the overall total. I'm stunned.
   3. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 06, 2014 at 09:58 AM (#4631187)
chris

regarding the names/ballot average I mentioned why I thought that was the case.
   4. bookbook Posted: January 06, 2014 at 11:08 AM (#4631225)
Man, if we could just push Piazza and Bagwell over the line, that would go a ways towards managing the logjam.
   5. AROM, Instagram Gangsta Posted: January 06, 2014 at 11:13 AM (#4631232)
Especially if their votes came at the expense of Palmeiro and Sosa. That would knock 7 names from next year's ballot.
   6. Adam S Posted: January 06, 2014 at 11:36 AM (#4631252)
Good summary - might be a fun exercise another year to publish a pre-gizmo prediction as well. The rest of us can make fools of ourselves in the comments.

I'd take the over on the spread between Biggio and Piazza you have there. Interested in why you see the percentage gap narrowing significantly from last year.
   7. gehrig97 Posted: January 06, 2014 at 11:51 AM (#4631264)
As a Piazza fan, I'd be thrilled if he jumped all the way to 71% -- virtually guarantees his election in the next two years (I say "two," because the 2014 class is just as loaded as this year... he may need to sweat it out at, say, 73% next year before sailing in at 8383% in 2015).
   8. Mickey Henry Mays Posted: January 06, 2014 at 11:54 AM (#4631265)
Especially if their votes came at the expense of Palmeiro and Sosa.


I could be wrong, but a lot of people here seem to derive great pleasure from the lack of support these two are getting. I'm not saying that it's easy to find room for them on this ballot, but I gain no joy in excluding guys who's numbers easily clear the precedent set forth.
   9. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: January 06, 2014 at 12:02 PM (#4631274)
Is Chris Jaffe the same guy as Jay Jaffe?
   10. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 06, 2014 at 12:05 PM (#4631278)
no
   11. John Northey Posted: January 06, 2014 at 12:07 PM (#4631280)
I think many would like McGwire, Sosa, and Palmeiro off just so we could reduce the PED issues to the big 2. It seems safe to say none of those 3 will ever get voted in by the writers but should get in via a future vet committee (maybe 20 to 30 years from now) on an off year. Also a bit of a 'see, magic numbers won't even keep you on the ballot if you cheat'.

In truth it doesn't really matter too much. Odds are it won't change Biggio/Piazza getting in (no effect on Maddux/Glavine/Thomas obviously) and next year shouldn't be a major factor either in who makes it/doesn't make it. And who knows, in 5 to 10 years maybe they will see some momentum start up (post Bonds/Clemens getting in) and that will speed up the vet process afterwards.
   12. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: January 06, 2014 at 12:33 PM (#4631310)
Is Chris Jaffe the same guy as Jay Jaffe?
I only have an autograph from one of them.
   13. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: January 06, 2014 at 12:36 PM (#4631313)
These voters remember that Mike Piazza was a catcher who hit .322/.389/.579 over an entire decade ('92-'01), right?
   14. Crispix reaches boiling point with lackluster play Posted: January 06, 2014 at 12:59 PM (#4631334)
Oh, all the catchers were hitting like that back then. Mike Lieberthal, Tony Eusebio, Chad Kreuter, they all could have done it with steriods.
   15. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: January 06, 2014 at 01:33 PM (#4631362)
#14--For 24 games back in 2000, Tony Eusebio did exactly that!
   16. LargeBill Posted: January 06, 2014 at 01:36 PM (#4631368)
11. John Northey Posted: January 06, 2014 at 11:07 AM (#4631280)
I think many would like McGwire, Sosa, and Palmeiro off just so we could reduce the PED issues to the big 2. It seems safe to say none of those 3 will ever get voted in by the writers but should get in via a future vet committee (maybe 20 to 30 years from now) on an off year. Also a bit of a 'see, magic numbers won't even keep you on the ballot if you cheat'.


I'm not sure it is safe to say anything about future voting. Right now, voters are believing they are keeping all PED users the HOF. However, once Bonds and/or Clemens gets in that entire dynamic changes. McGwire is on his 8th ballot. So, he may not have time for the mindset to change. Sosa and Palmeiro have several more ballots left than McGwire and may have time for a groundswell to build after the first couple suspects are inducted. There is considerable group-think in most journalistic circles so it won't take much to make forgiveness/reassessment the cool thing to do. Also, I assume the most strident anti-PED voters are the older ones and not to be morbid, but . . . . Things can change dramatically in a few elections.
   17. Ivan Grushenko of Hong Kong Posted: January 06, 2014 at 02:06 PM (#4631393)
I'm amazed that Morris continues to get more support than Schilling or Mussina.
   18. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: January 06, 2014 at 02:18 PM (#4631402)
I'm amazed that Morris continues to get more support than Schilling or Mussina.

I think a lot of voters are reluctant to NOT vote for a player whom they voted for last year, which makes a certain amount of knee-jerk sense (i.e., "How could Jack Morris be good enough for the Hall of Fame in 2012 but not in 2013??? It's not like he pitched any worse!")
   19. zonk Posted: January 06, 2014 at 02:21 PM (#4631406)
I'm amazed that Morris continues to get more support than Schilling or Mussina.


It's his last year, so it doesn't really surprise me... He's the favorite chew toy of a certain subset of grizzled writers, so you've got a lot of them banging the drum for him - groupthink, as 16 said.

I think that both Schilling and Mussina will see their numbers grow and I also think both get in eventually, but perhaps somehwere in the Jim Rician (as in # of times on the ballot) sort of way. I guess a lot depends on whether the writers work through the logjam with appropriate due haste or if they let some deserving guys who probably will and almost certainly should go linger for years upon years.

Thomas, Biggio, and Piazza are perfect coal mine canaries, I think.... If all three of them go, I think we're in great shape. If two go, we're in good shape. If just one goes - we're in for a good decade of BBWAA bashing and murray chass drinking our tears. If none go, we really need to consider taking hostages because I don't see any other option.

What would folks puts the odds at for Morris making it?

I think if you give me 3 to 2 odds, I might take that bet... I have a sneaky suspicion he's going in.
   20. The District Attorney Posted: January 06, 2014 at 02:42 PM (#4631427)
I think many would like McGwire, Sosa, and Palmeiro off just so we could reduce the PED issues to the big 2.
If "many" means the same mooks who think they need to vote "strategically" on a Baseball Think Factory mock ballot, perhaps. Meanwhile, back in reality, even a writer who isn't voting for those three seems sad about the idea of them actually dropping off the ballot.

I personally will be quite sad if McGwire drops off the ballot. For one thing, I think he was by far the best player of those three. Much more importantly, I think it's horrible that a confession and apology is treated the same as a coverup. That precedent is going to make it immensely more difficult to discover the truth about this era going forward.

What would folks puts the odds at for Morris making it?
What, this year? No. The VC will put him in, most likely at the first opportunity.
   21. zonk Posted: January 06, 2014 at 02:44 PM (#4631430)
What, this year? No. VC will put him in probably at first opportunity.


I don't know... was Morris particularly beloved? I think the writers are his best shot.
   22. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 06, 2014 at 03:01 PM (#4631454)
So basically if you scan Chris's list above he has the guys towards the top gaining ground and the guys towards the bottom losing ground and the guys in the middle staying about the same.
   23. cardsfanboy Posted: January 06, 2014 at 03:06 PM (#4631463)
So basically if you scan Chris's list above he has the guys towards the top gaining ground and the guys towards the bottom losing ground and the guys in the middle staying about the same


Sounds right, the writers are adding on average nearly three names per ballot, anyone that had already exceeded 7 names in previous ballots had to drop names, and it's going to come from the bottom guys not the middle guys.
   24. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: January 06, 2014 at 03:28 PM (#4631484)

I think if you give me 3 to 2 odds, I might take that bet... I have a sneaky suspicion he's going in.


You think he's going in this year? That's not going to happen.

   25. Walt Davis Posted: January 06, 2014 at 03:35 PM (#4631495)
Yeah, what's been surprising me is that the ones at the top of the backlog have been gaining ground, I figured that at best they would hold steady. The deep backlog was gonna get crushed, it's only a matter of whether they clear 5%.

I'll take the over on Thomas and the under on Smith.

Have we seen a single "other" vote yet?
   26. Ray (RDP) Posted: January 06, 2014 at 03:37 PM (#4631497)
You think he's going in this year? That's not going to happen.


He's at 60%. It would be surprising but not shocking if he gets in. You act like it's a certainty that he won't get in, which would indeed make it shocking if he does.
   27. Mickey Henry Mays Posted: January 06, 2014 at 03:48 PM (#4631506)
I personally will be quite sad if McGwire drops off the ballot. For one thing, I think he was by far the best player of those three. Much more importantly, I think it's horrible that a confession and apology is treated the same as a coverup. That precedent is going to make it immensely more difficult to discover the truth about this era going forward.


I know, I guess that old "honesty is the best policy" credo we were told when we were kids is passe. This guy actually want's to punish him for coming clean.
   28. if nature called, ladodger34 would listen Posted: January 06, 2014 at 03:52 PM (#4631513)
FFS, I've posted this on other threads but it still amazes me that Mike Piazza isn't a 1st ballot guy. I always thought the biggest argument was going to be Mets v. Dodgers cap, not if or not he was going to get in.

Murray Chass can choke on a bag of dicks. Mikey has been a lityle salty towards the Dodgers (and called out Vin because Mike is stupid), but most of is LA fans still love him.
   29. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: January 06, 2014 at 03:53 PM (#4631514)
One of Palmeiro or Sosa falling off the ballot is a game-changer, I believe--there will be new rules in place for next year's vote if that happens.
   30. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: January 06, 2014 at 04:03 PM (#4631530)
He's at 60%. It would be surprising but not shocking if he gets in. You act like it's a certainty that he won't get in, which would indeed make it shocking if he does.


I act like it's a certainty he won't get in because I'm certain he won't get in.

As someone famously once said: It's over. It's always been over.
   31. fra paolo Posted: January 06, 2014 at 04:08 PM (#4631537)
One of Palmeiro or Sosa falling off the ballot is a game-changer, I believe

I don't agree. Both of them fall foul of the 'character clause'.

Next to the refusal to reward McGwire for 'coming clean', Sosa's low vote tallies for a HoF includes Gaylord Perry is probably the worst action by the current BBWAA voters. He's not been linked to steroids, has he? I thought he was like Bagwell in that regard, in that there's no known link apart from having a baseball career at the wrong time.
   32. AROM, Instagram Gangsta Posted: January 06, 2014 at 04:22 PM (#4631554)
Sosa was one of 104 players testing positive in the 2003 "anonymous" test. This information is on good authority, as it came from reporters who say anonymous lawyers with knowledge of the tests told them so.
   33. PreservedFish Posted: January 06, 2014 at 04:28 PM (#4631564)
As someone famously once said: It's over. It's always been over.


Of course we know that this really means: "It's over (except for that infinitesimally small chance that I'm wrong, whose existence of course, as an intelligent man, I do not deny ... frankly we are all aware of this chance that I'm wrong so there's no point in my even acknowledging it). It's always been over."

You clever dog you.
   34. alilisd Posted: January 06, 2014 at 04:31 PM (#4631569)
What, this year? No. VC will put him in probably at first opportunity.


I don't know... was Morris particularly beloved? I think the writers are his best shot.


I always find this prediction odd as well. The VC hasn't put very many players in recently. It's not the Frank Frisch VC any longer either. In fact, there's no guarantee the VC as it exists now will even be around the next time Morris is due to be considered by one. Who knows what it will look like or do in the future?
   35. alilisd Posted: January 06, 2014 at 04:32 PM (#4631570)
Is Chris Jaffe the same guy as Jay Jaffe?


Jay is the evil twin.
   36. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: January 06, 2014 at 04:39 PM (#4631585)
When Kevin Brown and Lou Whitaker and Kenny Lofton fall off the ballot with less than 5% of the vote, stat-nerds on the internet are outraged.

But once it happens to Sammy Sosa or Rafael Palmeiro--ya know, the guys with freakin' 1200 homers between the two of them--...well, the #### will hit the fan. Immediately.
   37. AROM, Instagram Gangsta Posted: January 06, 2014 at 04:44 PM (#4631593)
I have my doubts about Sosa for HOF in any case. First of all, only 58 WAR. There are a lot of guys with more value out of the hall.

Second, he's got +8 wins for outfield defense, which was mostly unnoticed by the managers and coaches who watched him play - zero gold gloves. His big positive years come from the 1990s project scoresheet data, and I have to take the credit and/or blame for those numbers being on BBref and Fangraphs. The thing is, there are a lot of inconsistencies with those datasets, and if I had the time I would revise my approach there. I hope that someone else (maybe Michael Humphries) can take this on and confirm or reject the ratings of that period. Could that +80 fielding runs be right? Maybe. Could it be less than that? Maybe. Could his true fielding ability be even greater than that? I'd say no way.

Sosa was a big homer bat in a big homer time in a big homer ballpark but he didn't do enough otherwise (mostly poor OBP) to be great. Then he became a 60 homer man, and those are legit great seasons. But he's doing that in a time when for whatever reason, homers are so plentiful that he's not getting that many wins for all the homers. He wasn't very clutch either, with his WPA being less than his context neutral batting wins.

From 1998 to 2003, Sosa had a 162 OPS+ and 36 WAR. From 1976-1981, George Foster had a 151 OPS+ and 32 WAR. Both players were superstar sluggers for a short time, and non-greats outside of that time. Sosa's raw numbers are way more impressive, but they really weren't worth that much more.

I'd definitely take the career of Dwight Evans over the career of Sosa.
   38. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: January 06, 2014 at 04:47 PM (#4631595)
Is Chris Jaffe the same guy as Jay Jaffe?

Which one invented the Fold-In?
   39. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 06, 2014 at 04:54 PM (#4631602)
arom

what I find particularly egregious about sosa's vote total is that in his heyday NOBODY was more lauded by writers than Sosa. Homer hitting, smiling, always seeming to be trying Sammy had oodles of admirers among the writers.

then 'it' happened and now these same guys have abandoned the guy en masse. it's despicable behavior

no hyperbole. it's despicable. to profit off a guy's efforts and then because of a bit of hearsay you skedaddle like roaches when the lights come on?

bah
   40. cardsfanboy Posted: January 06, 2014 at 04:57 PM (#4631606)
I'd definitely take the career of Dwight Evans over the career of Sosa.


Sosa has some good career numbers, but his hof case is about peak. And the nebulous inclusion of the word "fame" as part of the hof. I'll take Sosa's best six years over Dwights best six years, and arguably I would probably take Sosa's sixth best season over Dwights third best. And Obviously Sosa's best season dwarfs Dwights. Evans would only enter the discussion with Sosa by focusing on career length. Arguably Sosa is the Koufax of hitters. That might be giving Sosa too much credit, but he really was a force for a number of years.
   41. a-Bugs a-Bunny Posted: January 06, 2014 at 05:02 PM (#4631611)
Is Chris Jaffe the same guy as Jay Jaffe?

Which one invented the Fold-In?

Uggh. So many Jaffie gaffies. The man you want is SAM Jaffe.
   42. Slivers of Maranville descends into chaos (SdeB) Posted: January 06, 2014 at 05:03 PM (#4631612)
Much more importantly, I think it's horrible that a confession and apology is treated the same as a coverup. That precedent is going to make it immensely more difficult to discover the truth about this era going forward


Has McGwire offered a list of all players that he saw or heard admit to using PEDs?
   43. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: January 06, 2014 at 06:14 PM (#4631720)
From 1998 to 2003, Sosa had a 162 OPS+ and 36 WAR. From 1976-1981, George Foster had a 151 OPS+ and 32 WAR. Both players were superstar sluggers for a short time, and non-greats outside of that time. Sosa's raw numbers are way more impressive, but they really weren't worth that much more.

I'd definitely take the career of Dwight Evans over the career of Sosa.

AROM--excellent post, and I agree with your interpretation of Sosa's career value (as much as it pains me--no one was a bigger Cubs fan than me in 1998!).

I'm just saying, from the average fan's perspective, reading that the guy with 600 ####### home runs was kicked off the Hall of Fame ballot--that's a whopper, and it generates a ####-ton more time on ESPN than when it happens to Lou Whitaker or Brett Butler.
   44. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: January 06, 2014 at 06:18 PM (#4631726)
The VC hasn't put very many players in recently. It's not the Frank Frisch VC any longer either.

Actually, it kinda is again. They had the old style VC - 10-15 guys in a room for decades. The Frisch era was part of it.

Then they blew it up for the Joe Morgan SuperFriends. That lasted a decade and put in exactly zero players.

So they blew that up and went with a three-headed old school VC. It's still 10-15 guys in a room, but they rotate. One year you look at really, really old people. Next year, just really old people. Finally - old people. From 2008-14, they've put in 16 people. Granted, most are non-players, but they've put in some players - Ron Santo, Joe Gordon, Deacon White. They've mostly got non-players, but they've always put someone in each year.

When they do the recently old guys, the best available candidates have often been non-players. That's clearly the case this year with Torre-LaRussa-Cox.

The only time the VC didn't elect players was the SuperFriends era, when they had 90 guys mail in votes. Whenever they've put 10-15 guys in a room, they've always elected people.
   45. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: January 06, 2014 at 06:20 PM (#4631729)
Second, he's got +8 wins for outfield defense, which was mostly unnoticed by the managers and coaches who watched him play - zero gold gloves. His big positive years come from the 1990s project scoresheet data,

Sosa had a cannon for an army when he came up. He didn't have the best accuracy with it, but when he was on the Sox and even in his early years with the Cubs, he had a dangerous arm. He also had plenty of speed, and would sometimes play center. He would've played center more, but people wanted that arm in right.

He was always frustrating in the OF. He had great raw tools, but then would make bonehead mistakes. But he had great raw tools.
   46. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: January 06, 2014 at 06:27 PM (#4631743)
He was always frustrating in the OF. He had great raw tools, but then would make bonehead mistakes. But he had great raw tools.

It's been a very long time, but I believe Tom Tango's The Book speculated that Sammy's habit of not catching the ball with both hands cost the Cubs 2-3 runs per season.

...just to give you an idea. But he had that arm, and before he bulked up, he was a pretty fast player (in the 30-30 club twice), even playing a little center field early in his Cubs tenure.
   47. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 06, 2014 at 06:38 PM (#4631756)
Sosa had a cannon for an army when he came up.

Howitzer did that work?
   48. Pat Rapper's Delight Posted: January 06, 2014 at 07:14 PM (#4631790)
[Piazza] may need to sweat it out at, say, 73% next year before sailing in at 8383% in 2015

That's impossible. No one can get more than one hundred percent. By definition that is the most anyone can get.
   49. bobm Posted: January 06, 2014 at 07:25 PM (#4631803)
Uggh. So many Jaffie gaffies. The man you want is SAM Jaffe.

He's a better man than I am.
   50. theboyqueen Posted: January 06, 2014 at 07:32 PM (#4631808)
One of Palmeiro or Sosa falling off the ballot is a game-changer, I believe--there will be new rules in place for next year's vote if that happens.


Nobody is going to change any rules on behalf of these two. Neither have a prayer of getting in by vote so why not get them off the ballot as soon as possible?

Personally, I think the hall of fame without Sosa is ridiculous. Palmiero is a moustache and a nice swing; I don't really care one way or another.
   51. cardsfanboy Posted: January 06, 2014 at 07:55 PM (#4631829)
Nobody is going to change any rules on behalf of these two. Neither have a prayer of getting in by vote so why not get them off the ballot as soon as possible?


I think the argument is that they will eliminate the 10 vote maximum if players like Sosa and Palmiero drop off. I think that there is a very real possibility of that happening regardless if Sosa and Palmiero drop off of the ballot.

Personally, I think the hall of fame without Sosa is ridiculous. Palmiero is a moustache and a nice swing; I don't really care one way or another.


I think that is two players on the opposite spectrums, you have the peaky candidate with Sosa, and the Sustained quality career candidate with Palmiero. I think both are equally deserving. And it's not like Sosa really out values Palmiero...

By ops+

Sosa-----Palmiero

203---160
161---155
160---150
160---146
151---145
133---144
127---141
127---138
122---136


By war
10.3--6.9
6.4---6.3
5.8---5.7
5.7---5.5
5.4---5.2
5.3---4.7
4.8---4.5
4.0---4.4
3.8---4.3

Sosa has that one great season, but after that there isn't really anything separating their peaks... meanwhile Palmiero adds about 10 more seasons of plus play. Sosa wins out on a short peak basis, Palmiero for career. And contrary to what people say about Palmiero, he did have quality seasons (5 times top ten in war among position players), putting up 11 seasons of 4.0 war or better is impressive. It's not inner circle, but it's a point in his favor.
   52. The Yankee Clapper Posted: January 06, 2014 at 09:06 PM (#4631872)
I think the argument is that they will eliminate the 10 vote maximum if players like Sosa and Palmiero drop off.

Without the 10 vote maximum, you'll get a lot more "courtesy votes" for whoever is thought to be likable enough to warrant that unearned recognition. Not the worst thing in the world, but part of the long history of some BBWAA voters not taking their responsibilities seriously.
   53. cardsfanboy Posted: January 06, 2014 at 09:40 PM (#4631892)

Without the 10 vote maximum, you'll get a lot more "courtesy votes" for whoever is thought to be likable enough to warrant that unearned recognition. Not the worst thing in the world, but part of the long history of some BBWAA voters not taking their responsibilities seriously.


I'm pro courtesy votes, and have no problem with it. Not really sure it would change things much in that category though, very few voters have historically filled out their ballots anyway. (this year of course is different)
   54. Booey Posted: January 06, 2014 at 10:35 PM (#4631920)
Am I the only one who thinks it would be cool if the HOF election was a televised event like the Presidential election, where all the candidates are listed and we can see their percentages going up and down as more and more ballots are tallied? I'd totally watch that.
   55. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: January 06, 2014 at 10:52 PM (#4631946)
54--We'd need to find some sort of way to build an Electoral College system into it. Without colorful maps, televised presidential elections are dull dull dull.
   56. Don Malcolm Posted: January 06, 2014 at 11:15 PM (#4631971)
Uggh. So many Jaffie gaffies. The man you want is SAM Jaffe.

He's a better man than I am.


Actually, there were TWO Sam Jaffes. The actor, with the frizzy hair, and the agent, with no hair.

A question more for Repoz than for Chris, but have you (or possibly Ryan) tried to make a comparison of ballots casts by individual voters this year and last? It seems that we have enough overlap in the voting population to at least look at that.


   57. alilisd Posted: January 07, 2014 at 12:02 AM (#4631989)
44: I did specifically say players. Also, thanks for the insight into the VC format. What I meant by not like Frisch is that they aren't loading up the Hall with cronies.
   58. Rob_Wood Posted: January 07, 2014 at 12:27 AM (#4632001)

The only way the voting rules will be changed is if the BBWAA demands clarification on the PED issue (or else they will boycott voting as a group). I have it on good authority that neither will happen.
   59. Dr. Chaleeko Posted: January 07, 2014 at 08:46 AM (#4632073)
Re 58: Does your good authority believe the BBWAA will require voters to make votes public? (Presumably via the BBWAA site)

This strikes me as an important reform to align the HOF vote with all other awards voting, but I suspect the BBWAA would wish to shield legacy voters from criticism/ridicule. Or that public admissions might increase the pressure to remove those legacy voters, which would likely prove either divisive within the ranks or merely embarrassing to the organization.
   60. Rants Mulliniks Posted: January 07, 2014 at 08:46 AM (#4632074)
This is probably completely out of left field, but Sosa to me is sort of like Tony Mullane. Sosa had his massive homer explosion (48% of his career total coming in a 5-year stretch), and Mullane did the same thing with wins. He won at least 30 games the first five full years of his career, putting up 165 in that span. His career win total of 284 is fairly impressive on its face, but when you can win 165 games over 5 years yet not lead the league even once, it gives you a better idea of his career.
   61. Booey Posted: January 07, 2014 at 12:15 PM (#4632176)
This is probably completely out of left field, but Sosa to me is sort of like Tony Mullane. Sosa had his massive homer explosion (48% of his career total coming in a 5-year stretch), and Mullane did the same thing with wins. He won at least 30 games the first five full years of his career, putting up 165 in that span. His career win total of 284 is fairly impressive on its face, but when you can win 165 games over 5 years yet not lead the league even once, it gives you a better idea of his career.


Except that Sosa did lead the league twice, and he finished 2nd four more times. He already had five straight seasons as the leader or the runner up, plus he was leading in 1996 before he missed the last month with an injury. So that would've given Sammy seven 1st or 2nd place finishes in an 8 year span. The total numbers are certainly inflated by the conditions of the sillyball era, but that type of dominance is impressive in any era. That's why I'd consider him a no-brainer HOFer even if he's a borderline HoMer.
   62. AROM, Instagram Gangsta Posted: January 07, 2014 at 12:30 PM (#4632194)
It's a little strange to see a guy with a counting stat like 600 homers, and realize that his career value does not put him among the very best players outside of the HOF, but yet he is a good peak candidate. Such was sillyball.
   63. bunyon Posted: January 07, 2014 at 12:33 PM (#4632200)
Sosa and Palmeiro are HOFers in any world where PEDs are an issue and statnerds don't have the internet. I agree with everything anyone writes about Sosa being overrated and not being much "better" than Evans. I agree that Palmeiro was never a great player but was very, very good for a very long time. I also agree that, in general, round numbers don't mean much.

But, in the reality of human perception and story, round numbers are important. 600, 500&3000;. Those guys go in the HOF. They won't be inner circle, no one is going to describe them as best at their position, etc. But go look around the HOF. Not many of the plaques there talk about the guy being the best ever. The HOF is to commemorate the story of baseball and guys that do what those two guys did are a big part of that story. The HOF has never been purely about talent or value and until very recently there would have been no doubt whatsoever about these two guys being HOFers.
   64. Booey Posted: January 07, 2014 at 12:36 PM (#4632204)
It's a little strange to see a guy with a counting stat like 600 homers, and realize that his career value does not put him among the very best players outside of the HOF, but yet he is a good peak candidate. Such was sillyball.

Yeah. I get that Sosa is a borderline guy based purely on career value. It just surprises me that so many people think the HOF should suddenly be based entirely on overall career value when it never has been before (not accusing anyone specific of doing this). It's normally a tough question to answer when people ask how you determine which of the 55-65 WAR borderline guys should get in and which ones shouldn't...but rejecting the one with 600 homers that was averaging 60 homers and 150 rbi's a year during his peak seems like an odd place to start.
   65. Morty Causa Posted: January 07, 2014 at 12:38 PM (#4632210)
Yes, all those home runs and he never led league in OPS+. 600 home runs and 49.7 oWAR. In almost 10k PAs. Had to do better to stand out in the Flubber League.
   66. The District Attorney Posted: January 07, 2014 at 12:39 PM (#4632212)
The HOF is to commemorate the story of baseball and guys that do what those two guys did are a big part of that story.
Are you sure? Somehow I don't think it'd be difficult to "tell the story of baseball" without mentioning Rafael Palmeiro.

I have to reject the "it's the Hall of Fame" argument. Perhaps it'd contribute to the conversation if it were used judiciously, but as it's actually used, it's a BS dump, as Bill James put it.
   67. Booey Posted: January 07, 2014 at 01:50 PM (#4632303)
Yes, all those home runs and he never led league in OPS+. 600 home runs and 49.7 oWAR. In almost 10k PAs. Had to do better to stand out in the Flubber League.


His 200 something OPS+ in 2001 would've led the league most years, though. Finishing 2nd to a guy who slugged .863 is nothing to be ashamed of. A 200 that finishes 2nd is still better than a 160 that leads in a weaker season.

Again, we're not talking about a 40 WAR guy like Morris who's supporters are trying to put him in cuz of game 7, or the Maris supoprters who think 1961 should be enough. Sosa has what, like 58 WAR? That's right on the borderline even with no extra credit given at all. If memory serves it's right around Killebrew/McCovey/Stargell, and no one complains about their selections.

And Palmeiro is around 72 WAR. He's well over the borderline.
   68. AROM, Instagram Gangsta Posted: January 07, 2014 at 01:56 PM (#4632309)
It's normally a tough question to answer when people ask how you determine which of the 55-65 WAR borderline guys should get in and which ones shouldn't...but rejecting the one with 600 homers that was averaging 60 homers and 150 rbi's a year during his peak seems like an odd place to start.


Mostly it's just the ballot limitation. On my BBTF ballot, I didn't reject Sosa in favor of another 55-65 WAR guy, I rejected him because this ballot has 11 guys over 70 WAR.
   69. Booey Posted: January 07, 2014 at 02:41 PM (#4632385)
Mostly it's just the ballot limitation. On my BBTF ballot, I didn't reject Sosa in favor of another 55-65 WAR guy, I rejected him because this ballot has 11 guys over 70 WAR.


On this ballot it totally makes sense, with no explanation needed. Even with the bonus points I give him, he was the last player I put on my 10 man ballot in our mock election and that ballot would change daily depending on my mood. Half the time he wouldn't even be on my 10 man ballot either. I was meaning more in general. In a mythical HOF that didn't care about steroids but was otherwise the same as it is now, Sosa never getting elected would seem odd and inconsistent.
   70. Shooty Survived the Shutdown of '14! Posted: January 07, 2014 at 02:49 PM (#4632407)
Sosa never getting elected would seem odd and inconsistent.

Sure. Sosa not getting votes is almost 100% about steroids, just as it is with McGwire and Palmeiro and, to a lesser extent, Piazza and Bagwell. I even think it has affected Biggio's #'s as his counting stats are such that he would normally have been a slam dunk. A catcher/2nd baseman/CFer with 3000 hits? In a world with no steroids taint, that guy walks into the hall of fame at the first chance.
   71. theboyqueen Posted: January 07, 2014 at 03:25 PM (#4632451)
I think that is two players on the opposite spectrums, you have the peaky candidate with Sosa, and the Sustained quality career candidate with Palmiero. I think both are equally deserving. And it's not like Sosa really out values Palmiero...


I am definitely a peaky guy. I would put Jose Canseco in the HOF well before Palmiero. Palmiero is a better version of Harold Baines, maybe as good as that type of player can be, but it is not a type of player I personally care much about. It's Jimi Hendrix versus AC/DC.

Basically, my hall of fame would be guys you could at least imagine as the best baseball player on earth for some period of time. Sosa is borderline by this standard and Palmiero is a gold watch/retirement party guy.
   72. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: January 07, 2014 at 03:38 PM (#4632467)

Sure. Sosa not getting votes is almost 100% about steroids, just as it is with McGwire and Palmeiro and, to a lesser extent, Piazza and Bagwell. I even think it has affected Biggio's #'s as his counting stats are such that he would normally have been a slam dunk. A catcher/2nd baseman/CFer with 3000 hits? In a world with no steroids taint, that guy walks into the hall of fame at the first chance.


In a world without steroids taint, Biggio is in the exact same position (or worse) than he's been in the past two years. The difference is, Clemens, Bonds and Sosa go in on the 2013 ballot, and Biggio is fourth or fifth. Maddux, Glavine and Thomas go in this year, and Biggio is fourth or fifth (he may have flip-flopped with Piazza, who has undeniably been hurt by the whispers).

Robin Yount was a middle infielder who comfortably reached 3,000 hits (unlike Biggio, who stumbled across the finish line), who also happened to be a two-time MVP. He debuted on a ballot with Brett, Ryan and Fisk (IOW, one slightly weaker than a PED-less 2013 ballot), and he only received 77 percent of the vote. I don't see how Biggio matches that in the group he was bunched with.

Biggio may have lost a few votes here or there in 2013 to PED silliness, but the ballot he was on was going to make it a tough road. Now, if he debuted in 2012, he would have made the Hall of Fame on the first ballot, but his particular Cooperstown path was going to be more challenging than just about any previous 3,000-hit club member.
   73. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 07, 2014 at 03:40 PM (#4632471)
many people were surprised that yount made the hof with brett and ryan. he was an afterthought to most observers
   74. Booey Posted: January 07, 2014 at 04:01 PM (#4632504)
I am definitely a peaky guy. I would put Jose Canseco in the HOF well before Palmiero. Palmiero is a better version of Harold Baines, maybe as good as that type of player can be, but it is not a type of player I personally care much about. It's Jimi Hendrix versus AC/DC.


I get that argument (even if I strongly disagree with it), but Canseco is a bad example. He has an argument for being the best in baseball for only one season (1988). And he was only amongst the best one other season (1991).

Do you really think guys like Mattingly, Murphy, Gooden, Nomar, etc are better HOF candidates than Palmeiro, Whitaker, Murray, Winfield, Molitor, etc? Like I said, I understand the peak argument; I just think there needs to be at least SOME kind of a career too beyond the brief peak.

(Canseco is also an odd example cuz he has more of a career case than a peak one, IMO)
   75. Squash Posted: January 07, 2014 at 04:17 PM (#4632524)
many people were surprised that yount made the hof with brett and ryan. he was an afterthought to most observers

I remember that ballot, and that is definitely true. He was considered a distant third (or second, depending on how one thinks of it) to Ryan's 1A and Brett's 1B, with a decent/good chance to make it on that ballot but not great.
   76. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: January 07, 2014 at 04:54 PM (#4632572)

I remember that ballot, and that is definitely true. He was considered a distant third (or second, depending on how one thinks of it) to Ryan's 1A and Brett's 1B, with a decent/good chance to make it on that ballot but not great.


Likewise, Biggio would have been seen as a distant fourth (or fifth, depending on Piazza) if the PED issue didn't exist. It's easy to see him taking longer* to get in under this reality than he will under the PED-clouded system (where he'll go in this year or next).

*One scenario:

2013 - Clemens, Bonds, Sosa make it, Piazza fourth, Bagwell is fifth, Biggio sixth, followed by Schilling.

2014 - Maddux, Glavine, Thomas make it, holdovers remain in place (and, because the 2013 election saw three guys go in, we're not seeing 9-man ballots out of the BBWAA).

2015 - Johnson, Pedro make it. Smoltz moves into No. 3 slot, but falls just short. Sheffield joins Piazza, Biggio, Bagwell, Schilling in strong backlog.

2016 - Griffey makes it on first ballot. Piazza, Smoltz join him. Biggio and pal Bagwell move to top of backlog.

2017 - Lisa's making plane reservations, fortuitously killing two Killer Bs with one stone.

Of course, the skeptic would say that Bonds doesn't play his last game in 2007 in a world that doesn't care about PEDs. That's incorrect. While basking in the glow of the adulation of the entire sporting world, BB realizes it can't get any better than that as a player, and he retires to take a job in the commissioner's office.
   77. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: January 07, 2014 at 06:01 PM (#4632643)
Has McGwire offered a list of all players that he saw or heard admit to using PEDs?


You mean, is he now, or has he ever been, a member of the Communist Party?
   78. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 07, 2014 at 06:04 PM (#4632648)
voxter

good one
   79. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: January 07, 2014 at 06:07 PM (#4632652)
2013 - Clemens, Bonds, Sosa make it, Piazza fourth, Bagwell is fifth, Biggio sixth, followed by Schilling.


This isn't an "elect-three" kind of thing, though. I imagine Piazza would have made it on his first ballot without the steroids thing. The way he was talked about during his career -- he was a no-doubter. He might not have gone to 90% on that first ballot with Clemens and Bonds on it, but he and Sosa probably both would have gotten in. Even under today's crazy scenario, there's no way he's drifting around in 2016. He'll be in next year if not this.
   80. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: January 07, 2014 at 06:08 PM (#4632654)
@Harveys -- Thanks.
   81. theboyqueen Posted: January 07, 2014 at 06:09 PM (#4632655)
Do you really think guys like Mattingly, Murphy, Gooden, Nomar, etc are better HOF candidates than Palmeiro, Whitaker, Murray, Winfield, Molitor, etc? Like I said, I understand the peak argument; I just think there needs to be at least SOME kind of a career too beyond the brief peak.


I have no idea whether they are better Hall of Fame candidates, but Dwight Gooden is the perfect example of a career I would honor before any of the latter guys. Yeah his peak was brief, but during it he was possibly the most dominant pitcher EVER. Molitor had a GREAT career and would be an excellent inductee into the Milwaukee Brewers hall of fame but I honestly (not being a Brewers fan) don't care one way or another about him.

Again, AC/DC versus Hendrix. There is sustained excellence and there is transcendence, the latter being much rarer than the former (so much of which is luck dependent).
   82. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 07, 2014 at 06:13 PM (#4632659)
i guess i don't understand the framework where a guy with molitor's resume is not in the baseball hall of fame.

   83. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: January 07, 2014 at 06:28 PM (#4632681)
This isn't an "elect-three" kind of thing, though. I imagine Piazza would have made it on his first ballot without the steroids thing. The way he was talked about during his career -- he was a no-doubter. He might not have gone to 90% on that first ballot with Clemens and Bonds on it, but he and Sosa probably both would have gotten in. Even under today's crazy scenario, there's no way he's drifting around in 2016. He'll be in next year if not this.



Except they haven't elected four since the very first ballot. It's possible Piazza goes in first ballot, but it's not the most likely scenario.

And Mike's not likely to go in this year. He's got a good chance in 2015, better if Biggio holds on and slips in this year.
   84. puck Posted: January 07, 2014 at 06:41 PM (#4632697)
i guess i don't understand the framework where a guy with molitor's resume is not in the baseball hall of fame.

Or where the guy who gets in had basically a one year peak (since we're talking when
Gooden "was possibly the most dominant pitcher EVER").
   85. Born1951 Posted: January 07, 2014 at 11:05 PM (#4632901)
#14--For 24 games back in 2000, Tony Eusebio did exactly that!

Cool, didn't know you could link to a specific game log set like that. The pronunciation of Eusebio's name is listed as you-SAY-bee-oh. It's a whole sentence.
   86. AROM, Instagram Gangsta Posted: January 07, 2014 at 11:40 PM (#4632933)
Canseco vs. Palmeiro: only way Jose is better is looking at single best season. Any kind of multi year peak would put Raffy ahead.
   87. Dag Nabbit is part of the zombie horde Posted: January 07, 2014 at 11:49 PM (#4632940)
This isn't an "elect-three" kind of thing, though. I imagine Piazza would have made it on his first ballot without the steroids thing. The way he was talked about during his career -- he was a no-doubter.

I doubt he'd be a first-balloter. Look at how people talked about Ryne Sandberg in his career. Or Barry Larkin. Or Carlton Fisk. Or plenty of others who didn't get in on the first year. Plenty of guys were routinely believed to be no-doubt Hall of Famers who didn't get in right away.
   88. Ray K Posted: January 08, 2014 at 12:01 AM (#4632949)
But once it happens to Sammy Sosa or Rafael Palmeiro--ya know, the guys with freakin' 1200 homers between the two of them--...well, the #### will hit the fan. Immediately.


I disagree. I instead expect there to be much cheering.

Like it or not, there is a very large contingent of fans and sportswriters who are dead set against any of the presumed steroid users from EVER getting into the HOF because they are considered cheaters. And seeing a cheater with "mortal lock" stats being ignominiously stricken from the HOF ballot will be considered by this contingent as a victory for the integrity of the game.
   89. Infinite Joost (Voxter) Posted: January 08, 2014 at 12:21 AM (#4632956)
Except they haven't elected four since the very first ballot.


And we haven't had a situation like this since then, either.

This kind of argument holds no water, as far as I can tell. Things are always done one way until they're done a different way. And then everyone is shocked! Except they should be, because things change.
   90. Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos Posted: January 08, 2014 at 12:45 AM (#4632972)
Cool, didn't know you could link to a specific game log set like that. The pronunciation of Eusebio's name is listed as you-SAY-bee-oh. It's a whole sentence.
That's always how I heard his name pronounced when he was a player, too.
   91. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: January 08, 2014 at 12:50 AM (#4632975)
And we haven't had a situation like this since then, either.


Except when Brett, Ryan, Yount and Fisk all hit the ballot together. And only three made it, one of them just barely.

Oh, and the 1937 ballot, when Nap, Tris and Cy got the call, but they could find no room for scrubs Collins, Alexander and Keeler.

This kind of argument holds no water, as far as I can tell. Things are always done one way until they're done a different way. And then everyone is shocked! Except they should be, because things change.


This year, we're seeing voters use up almost their entire ballots, a response in part to last year's embarrassing shutout. And we still might not get four guys elected.

It's really hard to put four guys in when 75 percent of the vote is required for election, particularly when a percentage of the voters operate with a self-limiting mindset (thankfully, far fewer are doing so this year).
   92. Squash Posted: January 08, 2014 at 01:54 AM (#4633000)
Look at how people talked about Ryne Sandberg in his career. Or Barry Larkin. Or Carlton Fisk. Or plenty of others who didn't get in on the first year. Plenty of guys were routinely believed to be no-doubt Hall of Famers who didn't get in right away.

My feeling is we underestimate/forget how many people don't get in on the first ballot and how much who else on the ballot affects that. If Piazza comes on alone as the only major candidate then yes, I think he probably gets in at 80% of so. But it's hard to get in the first time if you aren't a SP/OF/1B type who can put up the massive counting stats, and even more so if there's anyone else on the ballot getting serious consideration.
   93. Kiko Sakata Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:03 AM (#4633001)
My feeling is we underestimate/forget how many people don't get in on the first ballot and how much who else on the ballot affects that


It seemed like there was a brief period where a bunch of guys were getting elected first-ballot. From 2001 - 2005, seven players were elected first-ballot: Dave Winfield, Kirby Puckett, Ozzie Smith, Eddie Murray, Paul Molitor, Dennis Eckersley, and Wade Boggs. I think that gave the impression that the standards for being elected on the first ballot had relaxed. And then they stopped electing first-year guys without magic numbers and I think some people got confused.
   94. Squash Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:14 AM (#4633004)
It seemed like there was a brief period where a bunch of guys were getting elected first-ballot. From 2001 - 2005, seven players were elected first-ballot: Dave Winfield, Kirby Puckett, Ozzie Smith, Eddie Murray, Paul Molitor, Dennis Eckersley, and Wade Boggs. I think that gave the impression that the standards for being elected on the first ballot had relaxed. And then they stopped electing first-year guys without magic numbers and I think some people got confused.

That was also a deadzone without a bunch of all-time studs in there. Without looking at WAR, the best guys in there are probably Ozzie Smith and Wade Boggs, who are both very worthy HOFers but not inner-circle types. Those are also the only two guys who got into the 90s percentage-wise (both around 92%), the rest are a bunch of guys in the low-mid 80s, which is the electorate's not-thrilled range. If you go backwards (or forwards) in time, the first-ballot types are generally of much higher pedigree and their voting totals generally reflect that.
   95. alilisd Posted: January 08, 2014 at 02:22 AM (#4633008)
Pretty sure four were elected in 1947 and 1955.
   96. Dr. Vaux Posted: January 08, 2014 at 05:14 AM (#4633038)
Wade Boggs isn't an inner-circle HOFer? Remember, he's a third baseman, and he was probably kept in the minors at least a year longer than he should have been.
   97. stevegamer Posted: January 08, 2014 at 07:32 AM (#4633042)
For "inner-circle" 3b, I think it's just Mike Schmidt.

Then there's Mathews, then Brett and Boggs - probably in that order for me.
   98. Harveys Wallbangers Posted: January 08, 2014 at 08:48 AM (#4633055)
gotta admit, I may take chipper over boggs

I think jones had the more well rounded game. and he was the anchor of the offense of a routinely very good to great team.

by a whisker I think I go with the hayseed
   99. Don Malcolm Posted: January 08, 2014 at 09:37 AM (#4633072)
Pretty sure four were elected in 1947 and 1955.


Yes, that was the question I asked in the main thread that was overlooked. The BBWAA (on its own) has elected four players twice (omitting 1936, of course, when the "Big Five" went in).

1947: Cochrane, Frisch, Grove, Hubbell
1955: DiMaggio, Hartnett, Lyons, Vance

   100. SoSHially Unacceptable Posted: January 08, 2014 at 12:05 PM (#4633236)
Yes, that was the question I asked in the main thread that was overlooked. The BBWAA (on its own) has elected four players twice (omitting 1936, of course, when the "Big Five" went in).

1947: Cochrane, Frisch, Grove, Hubbell
1955: DiMaggio, Hartnett, Lyons, Vance


It's worth noting that in both of those elections, the voters were instructed to vote for exactly 10 players, rather than up to 10 players.
Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 > 

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
A triple short of the cycle
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogSending Gordon | Joe Blogs
(32 - 7:05pm, Oct 31)
Last: Zach

NewsblogOT: Monthly NBA Thread - October 2014
(672 - 6:57pm, Oct 31)
Last: Squash

NewsblogJoe Maddon is to become Cubs manager, sources say
(140 - 6:55pm, Oct 31)
Last: Andere Richtingen

NewsblogMLB.com - In pursuit of Maddon, Cubs dismiss Renteria
(16 - 6:53pm, Oct 31)
Last: Zach

NewsblogAP: Sandoval, Shields Among 121 Free Agents
(21 - 6:52pm, Oct 31)
Last: cardsfanboy

NewsblogRelix: Watch the Exact Moment the Phish Crowd Found Out the Giants Won the World Series
(6 - 6:37pm, Oct 31)
Last: Bhaakon

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(4904 - 6:35pm, Oct 31)
Last: Merton Muffley

NewsblogFull Count » Red Sox sign Koji Uehara to 2-year contract
(37 - 6:34pm, Oct 31)
Last: Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman

NewsblogNo, Alex Gordon wouldn't have scored an inside the park home run
(158 - 6:31pm, Oct 31)
Last: Lance Reddick! Lance him!

NewsblogBoston.com: Youk Retires
(14 - 5:49pm, Oct 31)
Last: Bourbon Samurai

NewsblogStatcast: Gordon stops 90 feet from tying Game 7
(18 - 5:46pm, Oct 31)
Last: Barry`s_Lazy_Boy

NewsblogOT:  October 2014 - College Football thread
(545 - 5:43pm, Oct 31)
Last: Infinite Joost (Voxter)

NewsblogAFL Saguaros at Rafters
(4 - 5:15pm, Oct 31)
Last: Mike Emeigh

NewsblogFree Agency Contract Calculator - Beyond the Box Score
(1 - 4:38pm, Oct 31)
Last: fra paolo

NewsblogDeadline: World Series Ratings: Game 7 Scores Home Run For Fox
(33 - 4:11pm, Oct 31)
Last: BDC

Page rendered in 0.8237 seconds
52 querie(s) executed