BBTF's Newsblog Discussion :: Baseball Hall of Fame ballot 2022: Alex Rodriguez, David Ortiz join; Bonds, Clemens, Schilling in final year

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

Monday, November 22, 2021

Baseball Hall of Fame ballot 2022: Alex Rodriguez, David Ortiz join; Bonds, Clemens, Schilling in final year

The ballot for the 2022 BBWAA Baseball Hall of Fame class was released Monday, and it’s headlined by some huge names in their 10th and final year on the ballot—- Curt Schilling, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens—as well as notable newcomers, like Alex Rodriguez and David Ortiz….

The big-name newcomers would be A-Rod and Big Papi, trickling down to Jimmy Rollins and Mark Teixeira. Some other notable first-timers include Joe Nathan, Jonathan Papelbon, Tim Lincecum, Jake Peavy, Justin Morneau, Carl Crawford and Prince Fielder.

As just announced by @baseballhall, here's the 2022 @officialBBWAA Hall of Fame ballot: pic.twitter.com/tesaStndwI
— Ryan Thibodaux (@NotMrTibbs) November 22, 2021

RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: November 22, 2021 at 12:29 PM | 96 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
Tags: hall of fame

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

1. DL from MN Posted: November 22, 2021 at 12:48 PM (#6053986)

Time for a "nobody likes these guys" ceremony? A-Rod, Bonds, Clemens, Schilling, Sosa, Manny, Sheffield, Ortiz, Bill Dahlen & Dick Allen

2. John DiFool2 Posted: November 22, 2021 at 12:49 PM (#6053987)

[1 ton bucket of popcorn at the ready]

3. BDC

Posted: November 22, 2021 at 12:57 PM (#6053989)

That's a really, really strong ballot top to bottom, almost all of them at least HOVG. Pierogi was not a great player, but is ninth all-time in games caught and aside from the "nobody likes him" factor a solid career.

The only "what were they thinking" addition is Papelbon, though I suppose among relievers he is not too far behind Nathan or even Wagner, and if you're going to consider relievers at all …

And I guess that Howard and Morneau are clearly not HOFers, and shouldn't even have been MVPs. But for a while both were fine ballplayers.

4. Steve Balboni's Personal Trainer Posted: November 22, 2021 at 01:06 PM (#6053991)

There are four guys on their final year of eligibility (the three listed plus Sosa), and it seems like none of them are going to get in, right?

1) Is this the most players on HOF voting history to "age off" of a ballot at once?
2) That is a tremendous number of checkmarks, or ballot slots, about to open up after 10 years of stagnation. I'd have to look at Ryan's data to answer this question, but I wonder how many voters over the last nine years have voted for most/all of these PED candidates, and hit the 10-player maximum? And of those who have been voting for BB/RC and Schilling (and to a lesser extent, Sosa), who are the players most often getting left off because of them?
3) What is most likely to happen to Clemens and Bonds:

a) Nothing different - the people who vote for them still will; and the ones who never have, still won't.
b) A chunk of voters have been waiting until year 10 to vote for them, feeling like making them twist in the wind for a decade is their way of delivering a penalty for their past behavior.
c) They actually lose some votes, as a number of voters realize they are not going to get to 75% this year, so they'll open up those slots on their ballot for players who still have years remaining, have always been their 11th choice on a crowded ballot, etc.

I think it will be A. Although I have always supported both (as well as Schilling, his off-the-field stuff as awful as it is), it has taken something that I've always loved - the Hall of Fame voting discussion - and made it less fun. I am sick of it, and hope ARod and Ortiz will not turn into 10 more years of the same thing.

5. winnipegwhip Posted: November 22, 2021 at 01:08 PM (#6053992)

How many writers will refuse to vote for ARod justifying there reason as he used performance enhancing drugs while they vote for David Ortiz?

6. TJ Posted: November 22, 2021 at 01:09 PM (#6053993)

Yayyyy! And at least there isn’t an Aaron Sele-type of newcomer to the ballot. Maybe A.J. Is the least deserving of the newcomers? Anyway, time for some early prediction challenges! (My answers in parenthesis)

1. Has Curt Schilling kept his name out of the headlines and his big trap shut enough the past year to gain the 4% he needs to get in? (Yes, barely).
2. Do enough voters think Bonds and Clemens have spent enough years in the steroid penalty box to let them in on their last ballot? (I will say yes).
3. Do Ortiz and A-Rod replace Bonds and Clemens in the steroid sin bin? Does only A-Rod land there with Big Papi debuting over 50%? (A-Rod goes into the 10-year box, Papi escapes).
4. How much support does Omar Vizquel lose after his Neanderthal behavior? (Falls below 20%)
5. Who keeps building significantly on past gains? Rolen? Helton? Sheffield? Others? (Only Rolen, and the gain isn’t that big).
6. Who falls off the ballot this time round from last year aside from those who time out at ten years? (Hudson, Hunter, Buehrle).
7. Which newcomers besides Ortiz and A-Rod make it above the 5% mark? (Crawford, Teixeira, Rollins, Howard (that MVP gets him to 5%), Papelbon.)
8. Does either new closer nominee make it over 5%? (Papelbon does, Nathan does not.)
9. Does anyone get shut out? (Maybe AJ- everyone else gets at least one vote).

Call your early shots!

7. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: November 22, 2021 at 01:10 PM (#6053994)

I think Bonds and Clemens get in. I think some writers wanted to make them wait as penance. But it's absurd not to have them in.

Schilling, idk, he seems kinda capped. I can't see people that aren't supporting him to flip.

8. Jack Sommers Posted: November 22, 2021 at 01:11 PM (#6053995)

I downloaded the BB REF HOF BALLOT TABLE

I was just playing around with JAWS, changing the weighting of WAR/WAR7 from 50/50 to 40/60 and 30/70, and then looking to see how ordinal ranking might have changed.

In both cases the only difference in the top 14 guys was Manny and Helton flip flopping from 7-8 to 8-7.

Then you get down to #'s 15-16-17, which goes Kent, Ortiz, Teixera, and when you go to the 30/70 version Teixera goes up to 15th, then 16, Ortiz 17.

Anyway, this is just compared within this year's ballot, not all time, and not all that meaningful, but I found mild interesting that weighting Peak 7 years that much heavier than JAWS currently does produced almost no change in the ordinal ranking.

Oh, and my two cents on the PED class:

In for a penny, in for a pound.

9. Jose Has Absurd Goosebump Arms Posted: November 22, 2021 at 01:20 PM (#6053997)

1. Has Curt Schilling kept his name out of the headlines and his big trap shut enough the past year to gain the 4% he needs to get in? (Yes, barely).

Yes he does.

2. Do enough voters think Bonds and Clemens have spent enough years in the steroid penalty box to let them in on their last ballot? (I will say yes).

No but they get close.

3. Do Ortiz and A-Rod replace Bonds and Clemens in the steroid sin bin? Does only A-Rod land there with Big Papi debuting over 50%? (A-Rod goes into the 10-year box, Papi escapes).

Papi gets enough that he gets in next year. A-Rod I think does a lot better than Clemens/Bonds did to start and eventually gets in.

4. How much support does Omar Vizquel lose after his Neanderthal behavior? (Falls below 20%)

Won't be shocked if he drops off.

5. Who keeps building significantly on past gains? Rolen? Helton? Sheffield? Others? (Only Rolen, and the gain isn’t that big).

I think everyone makes significant gains. The steroid anti-voters are going to see a ballot with no (or 1 depending on how they see Ortiz) viable new candidates.

6. Who falls off the ballot this time round from last year aside from those who time out at ten years? (Hudson, Hunter, Buehrle).
7. Which newcomers besides Ortiz and A-Rod make it above the 5% mark? (Crawford, Teixeira, Rollins, Howard (that MVP gets him to 5%), Papelbon.)
8. Does either new closer nominee make it over 5%? (Papelbon does, Nathan does not.)

Hunter, Nathan, Teixeira, Howard stay on the ballot, the rest of the new guys are one and done. wouldn't bet much on any of the returnees getting booted.

9. Does anyone get shut out? (Maybe AJ- everyone else gets at least one vote).

AJ and Peavy are the guys I'd expect to be most likely to miss out. Amusingly they seem to be two guys on the perception spectrum. No one liked AJ and everyone seemed to love Peavy.

10. Jack Sommers Posted: November 22, 2021 at 01:24 PM (#6053998)

1. Has Curt Schilling kept his name out of thread lines and his big trap shut enough the past year to gain the 4% he needs to get in? (Yes, barely).

As much as I think he clearly had a HOF career his is an induction speech I would pass on listening to.

2. Do enough voters think Bonds and Clemens have spent enough years in the steroid penalty box to let them in on their last ballot? (I will say yes).

It will be very very close. A handful of votes in either direction will likely make the difference.

3. Do Ortiz and A-Rod replace Bonds and Clemens in the steroid sin bin? Does only A-Rod land there with Big Papi debuting over 50%? (A-Rod goes into the 10-year box, Papi escapes).

I think you have this correct.

4. How much support does Omar Vizquel lose after his Neanderthal behavior? (Falls below 20%)

He wasn't getting in anyway, so not much of an issue here as far as ballot is concerned, other than maybe helping Rolen pick up a few votes.

5. Who keeps building significantly on past gains? Rolen? Helton? Sheffield? Others? (Only Rolen, and the gain isn’t that big).

I think Helton makes a surprising surge

6. Who falls off the ballot this time round from last year aside from those who time out at ten years? (Hudson, Hunter, Buehrle).

Hunter

7. Which newcomers besides Ortiz and A-Rod make it above the 5% mark? (Crawford, Teixeira, Rollins, Howard (that MVP gets him to 5%), Papelbon.)

Rollins and Howard.......I know...I know...

8. Does either new closer nominee make it over 5%? (Papelbon does, Nathan does not.)

Is anyone out there stumping for Nathan ? If someone is making a high profile case for him then maybe that influences enough voters to keep him over 5%, but I kinda doubt it. People just don't like Papelbon, and that will hurt him. So I say neither get over 5%

9. Does anyone get shut out? (Maybe AJ- everyone else gets at least one vote).

Peavy maybe

11. JRVJ Posted: November 22, 2021 at 01:32 PM (#6054002)

SHOULD get elected: Clemens, Bonds, Schilling, Ortíz, A-Rod, Rolen, maybe Lincecum.

WILL get elected: maybe Ortíz, maybe maybe maybe Rolen. I just don't see anybody else making it (even Schilling).

12. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: November 22, 2021 at 01:38 PM (#6054004)

. Has Curt Schilling kept his name out of the headlines and his big trap shut enough the past year to gain the 4% he needs to get in?

On the January 6 riots:

“You cowards sat on your hands, did nothing while liberal trash looted rioted and burned for air Jordan’s and big screens, sit back …. and watch folks start a confrontation for (expletive) that matters like rights, democracy and the end of govt corruption.”

After not being elected to the HOF:

"These same writers voted on those awards. Do those awards and 22 years absent of a single validating event to support their claims define me? Or does a “what he meant to say” tweet? Based on the vote and the pile of dung authored by morally decrepit men like Dan Shaughnessy it’s the latter. I cannot and will not say or do anything to possibly soften a weak willed mans opinion of me if it is not something I believe. Just or not."

You don't have to scroll back very far this year to find some really awful stuff on his Twitter feed. I don't think he's going to be winning over any new converts (although trashing Shaughnessy does make him slightly more sympathetic!)

13. Srul Itza Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:05 PM (#6054012)

It is not merely whether Curt has kept his trap shut enough; it is also whether he can restrain himself from saying stupid things between now and when the ballots are put in. People are going to be writing about him; some may seek him out for comment. The odds on him not saying something inflammatory between now and then are not good.

That being said, 71% is really, really close. He does not need that many more votes. So I think he will make it, but not with any great degree of certainty.

Bonds and Clemens, I don't think will make it. They have barely moved the needle in recent years. I don't think they were experiencing a "make them wait" penalty. I think, for more than 25%, it was a "I'm never going to vote for them" penalty.

A-Rod is definitely in the same box, I think.

Ortiz is not. His name was never associated with steroids to the same degree, with the same amount of publicity, as Bonds and Clemens and A-Rod. Some will dig it up when commenting on his vote, but for most voters, I don't think there is that same degree of knee-jerk animosity. It also helps him that in his last, post-testing years, he continued to mash, and did not turn up in any new scandals, unlike A-Rod. He posted a 154 OPS+ his last four years, which included an historically great World Series in 2013, and a league-leading OPS in his last year.

The DH thing may hurt, of course, but that stigma has been lessened by Edgar's induction (and possibly Baines', although that was a VC pick).

I think he gets in, but not this year.

14. Booey Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:05 PM (#6054013)

Predictions:

- Only Ortiz gets in (and barely)
- Bonds, Clemens, Schilling all stall out around 70%
- ARod debuts around 50%
- Rolen makes a big jump that puts him in line for election next year
- Helton also makes enough progress that he looks like a lock for future BBWAA election
- Andruw makes a jump that puts him into contention for future BBWAA election (but not a lock)
- Vizquel's support cuts in half
- Manny, Sheffield, Pettitte, and Kent make slight progress, but not nearly enough to give them any chance of future election (by the writers)

15. John DiFool2 Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:08 PM (#6054014)

The only "what were they thinking" addition is Papelbon, though I suppose among relievers he is not too far behind Nathan or even Wagner, and if you're going to consider relievers at all …

He's 10th in saves. Maybe it was the way his career ended, with such a quiet whimper; one day he's the closer for the Nats, next day he is released, couldn't even get a spring training invite the next year from anyone, and that was that. The Sox sites I frequent never had any sort of retrospective on his career, no what-if's, just pfft just another retired ballplayer, not a could-have-been HoFer if his fastball hadn't gone out to pasture so soon. Maybe his goofy persona was to blame there, shrug...

16. Booey Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:10 PM (#6054016)

The concerns about Ortiz are valid, but if he's not elected and enough voters are penalizing Schilling for being a dumb ass and aren't willing to end their snub of Bonds/Clemens, then we have a very real chance of a 2nd straight shutout, which would reflect badly on the writers (especially with such a stacked ballot).

Therefore, I think enough writers that might have otherwise been hesitant about Ortiz decide to throw him a bone and he gets in.

17. DL from MN Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:17 PM (#6054019)

we have a very real chance of a 2nd straight shutout

If the Era Committees select some players then the writers can send in blank ballots. My least favorite scenario is only Schilling gets elected.

18. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:27 PM (#6054022)

If the Era Committees select some players then the writers can send in blank ballots.

Gonna have some big crowds in Cooperstown to see a few dead guys get inducted.

19. Baldrick Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:34 PM (#6054024)

My long-standing opinion is that Ortiz would go in on the first ballot, and does so fairly easily. It does feel like there's a pretty wide potential margin there, but I still think that's what happens.

20. The Duke Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:44 PM (#6054029)

Is there any way to know which writers have been axed and which ones have been added to the electorate ? It seems that the PED guys do pretty well with the change in mix.

I suspect schilling doesn’t get in and in fact loses quite a few votes on the theory that the old-timers committee will immediately put him in. However, inwoikd the be surprised to see him go in either.

Whatever chances vizquel had have been ruined but for him, he needs to claw his way back up as far as possible to give himself a shot at the Vets committee. He’s playing a different game than everyone else in that regard

I can’t see Ortiz going in this year - I know most people think he will but DH, PEDs - I just think there’s not 75% of the people who think anyone with this pedigree can be first ballot. And what was that shooting all about ?

Lot of interesting first timers - I wonder who will get any traction

21. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:44 PM (#6054031)

Not a prediction, just who I'd likely vote for:

Clemens, Ortiz, Rolen, Schilling, Sosa.

22. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:50 PM (#6054033)

Ortiz will make it in within a few years. Maybe first-ballot.

A-Rod has no chance with the writers ever, IMO.

I doubt Schilling gets in with the writers. Didn't he ask to be removed from the ballot this year? Even though the HOF didn't honor that request, I think he'll lose enough votes from that to keep him out.

23. The Duke Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:51 PM (#6054036)

I’d like to see a Rolen/Boyer induction ceremony. That would be cool if you are a STL fan. Arguably, Boyer has the best stats case and Rolen is the most likely writers candidate so it’s at least theoretically possible

24. Mayor Blomberg Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:53 PM (#6054038)

Shilling did ask to be removed, and the ease with which Ortiz will get in suggests, to me, the importance of narrative over stats that will hurt his teammate; bloody fool trumps bloody sock.

25. SoSH U at work Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:54 PM (#6054039)

It also helps him that in his last, post-testing years, he continued to mash, and did not turn up in any new scandals, unlike A-Rod.

Basically his entire Hall-worthy career was post-testing. His only connection was the 2003 list, his first year in Boston (I can't find exactly when those tests were administered).

That said, I have no idea how he'll fare, and find the certainty of others perplexing.

If I had to bet, I'd put my money on another shutout. Schilling's got a chance, but I thought for sure he'd get in last year, and he went nowhere.

I think Rolen gets in with the 2023 class.

26. Eddie Gaedel Posted: November 22, 2021 at 03:56 PM (#6054048)

His [Papi's] only connection was the 2003 list, his first year in Boston (I can't find exactly when those tests were administered).

Unless I'm mistaken, the only evidence against Sammy Sosa was that he was one of 104 players to test positive during that same 2003 MLB "anonymous survey." USA Today

27. SoSH U at work Posted: November 22, 2021 at 03:59 PM (#6054049)

Unless I'm mistaken, the only evidence against Sammy Sosa was that he was one of 104 players to test positive during MLB's 2003 "anonymous survey." USA Today

Yes, it's the same for Sammy. The point I was making is that it wasn't like Ortiz kept hitting after testing came in. He didn't become David Ortiz until after reportedly failing that 2003 test.

28. Bad Fish Posted: November 22, 2021 at 04:08 PM (#6054051)

I doubt Bonds or Clemens make it, A-Rod will have 10 years for some of the sanctimony to get washed out of the voting process, but I don't think his case is a sure thing. All three of those guys are easy top 25 all-time players, how can you have a hall of fame without them?

I think Shilling and Ortiz make it.

29. Ziggy: social distancing since 1980 Posted: November 22, 2021 at 04:09 PM (#6054052)

This is Bonds and Clemens' last chance ever, isn't it? The point of cutting the window from 15 years to 10 was to get rid of them faster. After that, the hall is going to make sure that they don't end up on a VC ballot.

MLB started testing in 2003. Starting in 2004 players got two tests without prior notice. Starting in 2005 they were tested year-round. Here's Bonds from 2003-end of career

341/529/749
362/609/812
(effectively entire year on DL)
270/454/545
276/480/565

He led the league in OBP, five years after they started testing, and two years into the year-round testing, at age 42. His production did drop off between 2004 and 2006, but the man was also 41 years old and coming off an injury that cost him almost an entire season.

No one with anything more than rumors of steroid use has gotten elected yet. But it seems pretty clear that the electorate is going to find some excuse to vote for Ortiz. Unless Bonds also gets elected, it won't make any sense, but they'll come up with something.

As for the slate of candidates: very strong. A few of those guys would be the worst player at their position in the hall of fame, but they were all excellent baseball players for at least a while.

30. RoyalsRetro (AG#1F) Posted: November 22, 2021 at 04:11 PM (#6054054)

After that, the hall is going to make sure that they don't end up on a VC ballot.

31. SoSH U at work Posted: November 22, 2021 at 04:14 PM (#6054057)

After that, the hall is going to make sure that they don't end up on a VC ballot.

Mark McGwire made the first Today's Game ballot.

32. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: November 22, 2021 at 04:57 PM (#6054066)

Yea, I can't imagine the political thorniness of a committee circumventing the baseball writers' vote for any of these guys. The committee seems more to serve as a "hey, this guy got overlooked" function, not to reverse a message from voters that a guy shouldn't be in for reasons other than what is on his BB-Ref page.

It's not like there's a broad consensus amongst the writers that Bonds and Clemens don't belong in the HOF -- both guys were above 60% last election and will likely increase their total this year. I don't see the VC electing them right away but it wouldn't surprise me if it happens at some point.

33. SoSH U at work Posted: November 22, 2021 at 05:10 PM (#6054072)

34. DL from MN Posted: November 22, 2021 at 05:16 PM (#6054074)

both guys were above 60% last election

If you get a small enough sample it's pretty easy to randomly get a person with 60% support above 75%.

35. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Posted: November 22, 2021 at 05:56 PM (#6054081)

I think the Hall just wants to be hands off when it comes to the steroids guys. If the writers vote them in, so be it. If not, that's fine too. "Just don't make us pick a side" seems to be their guiding principle.

You're absolutely right, and can you blame them? What would be the point of alienating a large percentage of your potential visitors? Not to mention that it would probably feed into conspiracy theories about The Learned Elders of Cooperstown.

36. SoSH U at work Posted: November 22, 2021 at 05:58 PM (#6054082)

You're absolutely right, and can you blame them?

Not at all.

37. The Yankee Clapper Posted: November 22, 2021 at 06:27 PM (#6054090)

The point I was making is that it wasn't like Ortiz kept hitting after testing came in. He didn't become David Ortiz until after reportedly failing that 2003 test.

I don’t have a problem with electing Ortiz. However, I do think it’s inconsistent for those who are otherwise in the small Hall, anti-PED, DH-penalty, or WAR-determinative camps to do so.

38. Captain Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: November 22, 2021 at 06:32 PM (#6054094)

maybe Lincecum.

My only prediction about anyone mentioned in this thread is that Lincecum doesn't ever come close.

39. reech Posted: November 22, 2021 at 06:36 PM (#6054095)

Oh lord, if Schilling is the only electee and the Induction Ceremony becomes a MAGA rally...

40. The Yankee Clapper Posted: November 22, 2021 at 06:57 PM (#6054103)

I can't imagine the political thorniness of a committee circumventing the baseball writers' vote for any of these guys.

Every Veterans Committee selection ‘circumvents’ the BBWAA voters who declined to elect that player, many with a much smaller share of the vote than Bonds, Clemens & Schilling, who all cleared 60%. Why should a minority of the writers hold a perpetual veto on who is enshrined?

41. SoSH U at work Posted: November 22, 2021 at 07:01 PM (#6054104)

I don’t have a problem with electing Ortiz. However, I do think it’s inconsistent for those who are otherwise in the small Hall, anti-PED, DH-penalty, or WAR-determinative camps to do so.

No argument there. I think you can make a distinction between the Ortiz/Bonds/Clemens/Sammy group of pre-policy juicers vs. Arod/Manny/Palmeiro, but not Ortiz over Clemens or Barry.

42. Never Give an Inge (Dave) Posted: November 22, 2021 at 07:12 PM (#6054106)

Every Veterans Committee selection ‘circumvents’ the BBWAA voters who declined to elect that player, many with a much smaller share of the vote than Bonds, Clemens & Schilling, who all cleared 60%. Why should a minority of the writers hold a perpetual veto on who is enshrined?

Exactly, and keeping them off of the VC ballot would certainly be "picking a side". The Hall should treat these guys just like anyone else who came very close to election -- put them on the VC ballot and let the committee vote as it wants to.

43. Srul Itza Posted: November 22, 2021 at 07:46 PM (#6054112)

Oh lord, if Schilling is the only electee and the Induction Ceremony becomes a MAGA rally...

Hey, why not. The Orange Skinned Wonder might show up, or even be invited by his Schill. That could draw YUUUGE crowds to Cooperstown. And isn't that what the Hall of Fame is really all about -- financial gain for the village of Cooperstown?

44. The Duke Posted: November 22, 2021 at 08:02 PM (#6054115)

Was the 15 to 10 rule really about the PED guys? I know that’s the conspiracy theory but isn’t it an obvious in the days of Istanbul information / feedback thet writers shouldn’t need 15 years. What’s to think about for an additional five yeara?

45. McCoy Posted: November 22, 2021 at 08:19 PM (#6054117)

They shouldn't need 10 years either.

5 at the most and if you don't get at least 50% of the vote you're off.

46. The Duke Posted: November 22, 2021 at 09:00 PM (#6054121)

Istanbul - immediate. I do t get that one

47. John DiFool2 Posted: November 22, 2021 at 09:36 PM (#6054127)

Not Constantinople.

48. dark Posted: November 22, 2021 at 11:34 PM (#6054152)

"1. Has Curt Schilling kept his name out of the headlines and his big trap shut enough the past year to gain the 4% he needs to get in?"

No, he'll drop below 70, IMO.

"2. Do enough voters think Bonds and Clemens have spent enough years in the steroid penalty box to let them in on their last ballot?"

No, they'll fall between 65% and 70%.

"3. Do Ortiz and A-Rod replace Bonds and Clemens in the steroid sin bin? Does only A-Rod land there with Big Papi debuting over 50%?"

A-Rod, yes. Papi debuts over 60% and makes it either in '23 or '24.

"4. How much support does Omar Vizquel lose after his Neanderthal behavior?"

He drops to the low 40s and perhaps just below 40.

"5. Who keeps building significantly on past gains? Rolen? Helton? Sheffield? Others?"

Rolen, Helton, and Wagner gain significantly. Sheffield, Jones, and Kent make more modest gains.

"6. Who falls off the ballot this time round from last year aside from those who time out at ten years?"

Hudson. Hunter, Abreu, and Buehrle have a cushion.

"7. Which newcomers besides Ortiz and A-Rod make it above the 5% mark?"

Rollins and Nathan. Teixeira comes close, but is short. Papelbon gets some scattered votes, same w/ Lincecum, Howard, Fielder, Peavy, Crawford.

"8. Does either new closer nominee make it over 5%?"

Yes, Nathan does.

"9. Does anyone get shut out?"

Pierzynski only.

49. bookbook Posted: November 23, 2021 at 12:17 AM (#6054157)

Schilling will get fewer votes this year than last.

There are a bunch of folks OK with his previous garbage who draw the line at supporting insurrection against the United States. Coups ain’t cool.

50. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

Posted: November 23, 2021 at 07:51 AM (#6054183)

There are a bunch of folks OK with his previous garbage who draw the line at supporting insurrection against the United States.

Some people get "cancelled" for a tweet or a photo from 20 or 40 years ago, and now some people want to cancel what Schilling did on the field because of something he says 14 years after he retired.

I never rooted for that motherfucker from the day the Orioles stupidly traded him, but he never trashed the game he was playing, and he put up a solid Hall of Fame career. AFAIC that overrides all the political garbage he spews.

51. The Duke Posted: November 23, 2021 at 09:08 AM (#6054206)

It wasn’t an insurrection, but feel free to believe that nonsense.

52. SandyRiver Posted: November 23, 2021 at 10:08 AM (#6054222)

I don’t have a problem with electing Ortiz. However, I do think it’s inconsistent for those who are otherwise in the small Hall, anti-PED, DH-penalty, or WAR-determinative camps to do so.

Ortiz gets dinged for each of those items, especially the first and last, but I think the bigger-than-life narrative eventually trumps all 4. '22 or '23.

53. sanny manguillen Posted: November 23, 2021 at 10:09 AM (#6054223)

Was the 15 to 10 rule really about the PED guys?

I think no, but it was about needing to clear the ballot and the PED guys were the ones soaking up lots of votes. I think the Hall wants a steady stream of whoever, but the living Hall of Famers - who were headed by Joe Morgan - have been quite an obstacle.

54. The Duke Posted: November 23, 2021 at 10:42 AM (#6054235)

I’m happy with the 10 year rule. 15 seemed way too long. Frankly it could be 7-8. But the very simple thing they should do is not limit votes to 10 per ballot. I don’t even understand the concept that “you are a hall of famer, but not quite as good a hall of famer as these 10 other guys, so we can’t put you in”

55. reech Posted: November 23, 2021 at 10:53 AM (#6054239)

Schilling has the stats and the narrative of course.
However, y'know, the whole being a "scumbag traitor" sorta "trumps" the stats.

56. DL from MN Posted: November 23, 2021 at 11:06 AM (#6054242)

Schilling deserves to be elected based on his career performance. I don't want to give him a platform so he can make a speech in front of a crowd.

57. DL from MN Posted: November 23, 2021 at 11:53 AM (#6054250)

I'll run a mock-HOF ballot after I get done with the 2021 MMP election

58. DanG Posted: November 23, 2021 at 12:33 PM (#6054257)

Here's a run-down of the 30 BBWAA candidates for 2022 showing: BB-Ref WAR; their ranking in that stat; their ranking in the project at Baseball-fever.

BBWAA Candidate bWAR WAR Rk BBF Rk
Barry Bonds     162.7    4     3
Roger Clemens   139.2    8    10
Alex Rodriguez  117.5   16    14
Manny Ramirez    69.3  108    81
Curt Schilling   79.5   65    85
Scott Rolen      70.1  101   156
Gary Sheffield   60.5  181   158
Andruw Jones     62.7  161   177
Todd Helton      61.8  170   231
Sammy Sosa       58.6  206   236
Jeff Kent        55.5  241   241
David Ortiz      55.3  244   260
Bobby Abreu      60.2  187   262
Andy Pettitte    60.2  187   274
Tim Hudson       57.9  212   278
==== HOF Line ====
Mark Buehrle     59.1  200   343
Billy Wagner     27.7  974   346
Mark Teixeira    50.6  298   373
Jimmy Rollins    47.6  353   488
Torii Hunter     50.7  296   557
Jake Peavy       39.2  560   589
Joe Nathan       26.7        594
Jon. Papelbon    23.3        687
Carl Crawford    39.1  561   691
Omar Vizquel     45.6  392   740
Justin Morneau   27.0  
Prince Fielder   23.8  
AJ. Pierzynski   23.8  
Tim Lincecum     19.5  
Ryan Howard      14.7 

The Hall of Fame line is at #297 in the BBF ranking project. That's the point where the number of hall of famers not listed yet is equal to the number of eligible non-hall-of-famers listed ahead of them. So far 850 players have been ranked.

59. The Duke Posted: November 23, 2021 at 01:06 PM (#6054260)

I think the processes (like JAWS) used to rank are skewed due to the kind of crazy numbers the early era players put up. There’s like 10 pitchers from 1880s to 1920s that ramp up the JAWS average a lot which makes it much harder for today’s pitchers to measure up. Baseball changes in every decade and one could argue you can’t really use Ruth in a comparison with Betts but it still feels like largely the same game. But the game in the early years is SO much different using guys like old hoss and cy young to compare to Tim Hudson seems like a bad idea.

60. Random Transaction Generator Posted: November 23, 2021 at 01:27 PM (#6054268)

1. Has Curt Schilling kept his name out of the headlines and his big trap shut enough the past year to gain the 4% he needs to get in? (Yes, barely).
2. Do enough voters think Bonds and Clemens have spent enough years in the steroid penalty box to let them in on their last ballot? (I will say yes).
3. Do Ortiz and A-Rod replace Bonds and Clemens in the steroid sin bin? Does only A-Rod land there with Big Papi debuting over 50%? (A-Rod goes into the 10-year box, Papi escapes).
4. How much support does Omar Vizquel lose after his Neanderthal behavior? (Falls below 20%)
5. Who keeps building significantly on past gains? Rolen? Helton? Sheffield? Others? (Only Rolen, and the gain isn’t that big).
6. Who falls off the ballot this time round from last year aside from those who time out at ten years? (Hudson, Hunter, Buehrle).
7. Which newcomers besides Ortiz and A-Rod make it above the 5% mark? (Crawford, Teixeira, Rollins, Howard (that MVP gets him to 5%), Papelbon.)
8. Does either new closer nominee make it over 5%? (Papelbon does, Nathan does not.)
9. Does anyone get shut out? (Maybe AJ- everyone else gets at least one vote).

1. No. I think he falls short again.
2. No, I think they fall just short again.
3. Ortiz falls JUST short of getting elected this year. ARod got busted for PEDs TWICE, and was suspended for it. His case is SO much worse than anyone else's (other than Manny Ramirez), I can't see him getting in if they don't let Bonds/Clemens in.
4. Vizquel disappears from view and drops to about 31% of the vote.
5. Rolen is the only one with a significant gain. I think he breaks 60%.
6. Hunter and Hudson drop off, but Buehrle hangs on.
7. ARod, Ortiz, Teixeira, and Rollins are the only ones that survive the 5% minimum.
8. None of the new closers make it over 5%.
9. A.J. and Crawford get shut out.

61. The Duke Posted: November 23, 2021 at 02:25 PM (#6054289)

I’m kinda hoping A-rod doesn’t even get 5% - he’s the most egregious abuser of PEDs. Under what writers’ standard would he qualify ? What would the standard have to be? “I don’t care if you cheat and get caught (twice)” standard.

Most writers who vote for PED guys have said one of the following:

1. They were hall of famers before they cheated
2. Some guys accused of PEDs used them before MLB said you couldn’t so I’m giving them a pass up to that day
3. The original tests are flawed /not publicly known (The new Ortiz rule)
4. There’s a lot of evidence but we don’t have a positive test (the bonds rule )
5. They used them only to accelerate rehab (the Petitte rule) - btw, this is one I am ok with

What is the standard that allows you to vote for A-Rod ? He lost Jennifer Lopez, don’t take this too?

62. Infinite Yost (Voxter)

Posted: November 23, 2021 at 02:43 PM (#6054294)

It wasn’t an insurrection, but feel free to believe that nonsense.

Insurrection, defined: a violent uprising against an authority or government (Oxford Languages)

That is 100%, exactly what it was, and if you're too self-righteous or deluded to see it, that's your problem. But don't act like you're right and smart and everybody else is talking "nonsense."

63. The Duke Posted: November 23, 2021 at 03:22 PM (#6054301)

January 6th - the day this democracy almost came to an end! Yeah. Sure.

64. Captain Joe Bivens, Elderly Northeastern Jew Posted: November 23, 2021 at 04:22 PM (#6054311)

Troll harder, Dookie!

65. The Honorable Ardo Posted: November 23, 2021 at 04:30 PM (#6054314)

DanG's list in #58 is interesting from a Hall of Merit perspective.

- The top 9 and #11 Jeff Kent are (or will be, re: A-Rod) inducted.
- Sosa, Abreu, Ortiz, Pettite, Hudson, Buehrle, and Wagner are all being hotly debated this year. (Abreu, Sosa, and Pettite are the three highest returning players from the 2020 ballot.)
- No one below Billy Wagner is a serious candidate.

66. Walt Davis Posted: November 23, 2021 at 04:53 PM (#6054331)

Put me down for the first 7 plus Sosa from the list in #58. Borderline on Andruw and Helton (and a bunch more but I'm almost convinced Helton should squeak in). If I had to pick a pitcher, I'd go with Hudson.

67. TJ Posted: November 23, 2021 at 06:22 PM (#6054344)

What is the standard that allows you to vote for A-Rod ? He lost Jennifer Lopez, don’t take this too?

Fair question. I would vote for A-Rod just like I would for the rest of the PED crew. I used to be as anti-PED induction as anyone until the Hall inducted Selig (the commish who could have taken a tough stand but didn’t), managers like LaRussa, Cox and Torre who benefited by using players who they should have known were juicing (it is impossible to have your head stuck so far up your butt that you didn’t know when we mere fans did), and tolerate the BBWAA honoring colleagues who had to have known players were roiding but did not report it. That convinced me that it was unfair to make the players the only ones who should suffer a HOF penalty.

Baseball did not abrogate any records nor did they void any world titles. If baseball is willing to accept the outcomes of players using, then that is enough for me to now support their HOF induction. Baseball now has a punishment system that includes escalating suspensions leading to possible banishment. If baseball were to banish someone, then I would not vote for that player. Since they haven’t, I would vote for them.

Just my opinion, and I won’t argue that anyone who disagrees with it is wrong. Just how I see it…

68. Infinite Yost (Voxter)

Posted: November 23, 2021 at 08:38 PM (#6054378)

January 6th - the day this democracy almost came to an end! Yeah. Sure.

November 23rd -- the day you didn't actually read the comment.

69. Booey Posted: November 23, 2021 at 10:15 PM (#6054426)

#61 - I don't think it's hard to justify a vote for ARod at all. The rules don't say anywhere that PED's - or any other character related violation - need to be seen as an automatic disqualifier. Character is just one criteria amongst several that the HOF asks voters to consider; how heavily voters choose to weigh each criteria is left entirely up to them. It's not a requirement that they view suspensions as a trump card that renders all other criteria irrelevant.

It's also not an unreasonable position to think the penalties for PED use should be exactly what MLB rules say it is, and nothing more. Baseball can and should police itself, ARod served his time, voters don't need to get their pound of flesh too, etc, etc.

70. taxandbeerguy Posted: November 23, 2021 at 10:24 PM (#6054428)

Some predictions
Schilling - 76%
Ortiz - 71%
Bonds - 67%
Clemens - 67%
Rolen - 59%
Wagner - 51%
Helton - 50%
Vizquel - 46%
Sheffield -45%
A-Rod -42%
Jones - 40%
Kent - 34%
Ramirez - 31%
Sosa -20%
Pettitte -16%
Buehrle - 10%
Abreu -9%
Hunter - 8%

Hudson - 4.5%
Teixeira - 3%
Rollins - 3%
Papelbon, Nathan, Fielder, Howard, Lincecum - a sprinkling of votes
Rest - Less than 3 votes total.

2023 -Beltran makes an appearance, but doesn't get in first ballot; the lack of other new viable candidates means Rolen makes a run (probably falls a bit short, but gets in for 2024) and Helton, nicely set up for election in 2024/2025. Ortiz gets in with 80-82%.
2024- Beltre's a lock and will be 90%+, Mauer should get in as well, but could see him in the 80's. Rolen creeps over with like 77% and Helton's around 68-70%. Sheffield winds up with about 53%. Utley will struggle, but won't get buried. Wright's got a shot at 5%.
2025 - Helton creeps over with 75%. Ichiro! is 95%+. CC Sabathia debuts over 50% (possibly much higher). Beltran may get in around now as well. Wagner has stalled at about 60-65% and A-Rod is stuck around 50-55%. Kinsler and Pedroia could see a second ballot.

71. The Duke Posted: November 24, 2021 at 11:57 AM (#6054473)

69. All reasonable thoughts but that’s not how writers have approached it. They’ve set a standard on what they like/don’t like. The articles this winter explaining a vote for A-rod will be instructive. I actually think he will perform very poorly.

72. Booey Posted: November 24, 2021 at 12:49 PM (#6054474)

#71 - Manny's at 28% despite also being busted twice for PED use in the post testing era, and he's not nearly the player that ARod was. It would make no sense for Rodriguez to get less support than Ramirez.

73. taxandbeerguy Posted: November 24, 2021 at 01:57 PM (#6054480)

Oooh. In response to 6 from above. Sorry for the CAPS.

1. Has Curt Schilling kept his name out of the headlines and his big trap shut enough the past year to gain the 4% he needs to get in? NO, BUT GETS IN WITH YEAR 10 BOOST.
2. Do enough voters think Bonds and Clemens have spent enough years in the steroid penalty box to let them in on their last ballot? NO, THEY GET A BOOST BUT WIND UP AROUND 67%.
3. Do Ortiz and A-Rod replace Bonds and Clemens in the steroid sin bin? Does only A-Rod land there with Big Papi debuting over 50%? A-ROD STARTS IN the 40% RANGE, HE'S LUMPED IN WITH RAMIREZ, BUT IS FAR SUPERIOR PLAYER. BIG PAPI HAS A FEW DOUBTERS BUT DEBUTS CLOSE TO 70% AND IS SECOND YEAR ELECTEE.
4. How much support does Omar Vizquel lose after his Neanderthal behavior? CONTINUES TO DROP SOME, LIKELY IN THE LOW 40'S.
5. Who keeps building significantly on past gains? Rolen? Helton? Sheffield? Others? ROLEN AND HELTON AND MAYBE JONES, HOWEVER THEY WERE ADDS TO MANY FULL BALLOTS, IN THE PRESENCE OF A-ROD and ORTIZ, THEY WILL INCREASE LESS AS THEY ARE CANDIDATES TO BE REMOVED TO MAKE ROOM FOR A-ROD AND ORTIZ WHO MAY BE MORE QUALIFIED IN THE EYES OF SOME OF THESE VOTERS.
6. Who falls off the ballot this time round from last year aside from those who time out at ten years? HUDSON AS HE LIMPED ACROSS THE LINE LAST TIME.
7. Which newcomers besides Ortiz and A-Rod make it above the 5% mark? NONE, ROLLINS AND TEIXEIRA ARE CLOSEST.
8. Does either new closer nominee make it over 5%? NO.
9. Does anyone get shut out? PEAVY, CRAWFORD AND PIERZYNSKI.

74. Lassus Posted: November 24, 2021 at 02:17 PM (#6054482)

- Only Ortiz gets in (and barely)
- Bonds, Clemens, Schilling all stall out around 70%

These outcomes strike me as incredibly likely.

75. baxter Posted: November 24, 2021 at 11:22 PM (#6054591)

regarding pierogi, why is it that his Dwar is 8; his owar is 28 but his total is 24?
If anyone can explain, would appreciate it?

76. Sweatpants Posted: November 25, 2021 at 01:21 AM (#6054597)

Baseball-Reference includes positional adjustment in both dWAR and oWAR, but they don't actually double-count for the actual WAR total. For players with positive positional adjustment (such as catcher), this means that (oWAR + dWAR) > actual WAR; for players with negative positional adjustment, (oWAR +dWAR) < actual WAR.

77. cardsfanboy

Posted: November 25, 2021 at 08:05 AM (#6054602)

I despise Schilling politics, and absolutely think he'll use the hof podium to insult the writers and maybe even make it about politics also, but at the same time there is nothing in the rules, including the character clause, that prevents me from thinking he's a deserving hofer. I would put him in long before I consider Ortiz, Kent or other borderline candidates, Schilling isn't borderline.

78. cardsfanboy

Posted: November 25, 2021 at 08:16 AM (#6054603)

regarding pierogi, why is it that his Dwar is 8; his owar is 28 but his total is 24?
If anyone can explain, would appreciate it?

76 has it, but to clarify a bit more war includes a positional adjustment if you look at b-ref it's roughly rpos divided by 10, so he gets 12 war simply because he was a catcher for a long time.
dWar is basically positional adjustment added to rfield (in this case -43) which results in a total of 77 which based upon context comes out to 8.4 dWar.

oWar is rpos + rbat + rdp + rbaser + rRep (notice the addition of rRep, batters are compared to replacement level, while fielders are compared to average players, this is a necessary component of war) in this case you have 290 runs which based upon context comes out to 28.4 oWar.

War takes all these components adds them up, but doesn't double count rpos.

79. LargeBill Posted: November 25, 2021 at 10:52 AM (#6054610)

69. Booey Posted: November 23, 2021 at 10:15 PM (#6054426)
#61 - I don't think it's hard to justify a vote for ARod at all. The rules don't say anywhere that PED's - or any other character related violation - need to be seen as an automatic disqualifier. Character is just one criteria amongst several that the HOF asks voters to consider; how heavily voters choose to weigh each criteria is left entirely up to them. It's not a requirement that they view suspensions as a trump card that renders all other criteria irrelevant.

It's also not an unreasonable position to think the penalties for PED use should be exactly what MLB rules say it is, and nothing more. Baseball can and should police itself, ARod served his time, voters don't need to get their pound of flesh too, etc, etc.

That is sort of my thought. The penalty (for fighting, throwing a spitball, corked bat, whatever) is whatever the league decides at that time. If I bump an umpire and get suspended 30 games, the only harm to my future HOF case is fewer hits, HRs, RBI, Ws, Ks, etc due to the missed playing time. If I (or A-Rod) miss an entire year due to a suspension and still manage to have career stats that overwhelmingly merit election, then the suspension and the reason for it shouldn't invalidate my accomplishments.

80. LargeBill Posted: November 25, 2021 at 11:14 AM (#6054615)

Separately, I think Vizquel drops a lot more than some in this thread are suggesting. His support was not that strong and IIRC several voters last year said if they had heard of his behavior they would not have voted for him. Outside of a few Cleveland writers, I doubt he'll retain much if any support.

As a fan of the former team in Cleveland, it is weird to think that of those Tribe players of the 1990s, only the skinny third baseman will get in the HOF. I'm not counting Eddie Murray, Dave Winfield, or Jack Morris since none of them are in the HOF for their accomplishments in Cleveland. Loftin, Ramirez, Belle, Baerga, Sandy Alomar (two time Minor League Player of the Year and ROY) and even Vizquel had better odds of a HOF career in 1995.

81. The Duke Posted: November 25, 2021 at 12:29 PM (#6054620)

Schilling has no chance of going in. The newer writers love to fall over themselves to prove how socially responsible they are which is funny since most of them subscribe to the rigor of statistics to measure worth, but you can’t let facts get in the way of your politics. Vizquel, he’s going to drop like a rock if the stories about him are true and I’m fine with that. What he allegedly DID was miles worse than the silly things schilling SAYS.

82. Booey Posted: November 25, 2021 at 03:52 PM (#6054641)

#79 - Yeah. From my POV, if the powers that run the Hall of Fame thought that PED use was disqualifying, then they wouldn't put them on the ballot in the first place (a la Rose, or players who didn't hit the minimum service requirements, etc). The fact that they are on there tells me they're fair game, so I'm going to vote for them if the numbers warrant it.

If MLB doesn't think PED use is automatically disqualifying, and the HOF itself doesn't, then I don't see it as my job as a (fake) voter to overrule them.

(YMMV, of course)

83. the Hugh Jorgan returns Posted: November 25, 2021 at 04:36 PM (#6054643)

yes, I know the horse has bolted, etc. etc. Yet I will will continue to crow on about relievers and the HOF....

Mark Buehrle 59.1 200 343
Billy Wagner 27.7 974 346
Mark Teixeira 50.6 298 373
Jimmy Rollins 47.6 353 488
Torii Hunter 50.7 296 557

ANY system that ranks Wagner as having similar, more value or some other arbitrary ranking within the vicinity of the other 4 guys on this list is stuffed.

84. Infinite Yost (Voxter)

Posted: November 25, 2021 at 06:59 PM (#6054646)

Congratulations, Duke. Your contributions in this thread are so insipid that you're the first person I've added to my ignore list in something like ten years. Keep hitting yourself over the head with a mallet, you'll have one less person in your personal audience.

85. cardsfanboy

Posted: November 26, 2021 at 01:09 AM (#6054654)

yes, I know the horse has bolted, etc. etc. Yet I will will continue to crow on about relievers and the HOF....

Mark Buehrle 59.1 200 343
Billy Wagner 27.7 974 346
Mark Teixeira 50.6 298 373
Jimmy Rollins 47.6 353 488
Torii Hunter 50.7 296 557

ANY system that ranks Wagner as having similar, more value or some other arbitrary ranking within the vicinity of the other 4 guys on this list is stuffed.

I fully get that, but Wagner is not going to be compared to starting pitchers, he's going to be compared to relieves in the hall already. The leverage of a reliever in todays game (meaning post 80's or 90's) is a real thing. Closers actually have real value to a team during the actual season and are important to them.

86. Buck Coats Posted: November 26, 2021 at 12:35 PM (#6054667)

*citation needed*

87. cardsfanboy

Posted: November 26, 2021 at 06:41 PM (#6054706)

*citation needed*

Assuming that was directed at post 85, and I hate this stat, but look at the pitching WPA on pretty much any team and the closer is going to be the guy that is top three regardless of number of innings pitched. The Dodgers, one of the best staffs in baseball, their wpa number two and three guys are their trusted relievers. (that wasn't the case prior to the 80's for the most part)

And yes I understand the flaw with wpa as much as anyone on this site, which also means I understand it's strengths, and the narrative it's telling, and relievers and closers are so much more important in todays game than in the past, and wpa does reflect this. In the past those wpa moments were going to starters, they are now going to relievers, and the ones that can do the job, are doing the job. (Wpa is honestly only a useful stat for relief pitching and pinch hitting....It's borderline useless outside of those contexts)

88. vortex of dissipation Posted: November 27, 2021 at 03:48 PM (#6054872)

The comments link for the Adam Frazier trade links to this thread, for some reason...

89. Walt Davis Posted: November 27, 2021 at 03:55 PM (#6054876)

And we've lost a week.

90. The Duke Posted: November 27, 2021 at 05:45 PM (#6054894)

From Maddens article today:

In his 2018 book “Baseball Cop,” Eddie Dominguez, a former member of MLB’s Department of Investigations, details Ortiz’s close relationship with a convicted Dominican drug dealer nicknamed “Monga.” According to Dominguez, “Monga” had been a constant companion of Ortiz in 2005 and 2006, with access to the Red Sox clubhouse, and among other things was alleged to have placed large bets on baseball, even on the Red Sox, at a Dominican barbershop in Boston, before being arrested by ICE and deported. Despite all this, baseball has looked the other way on Ortiz’s “integrity/character” issues.

Is this widely known? I’ve never heard this come up before in the Ortiz candidacy discussions or is this just a writer spinning things to the worst possible effect for Ortiz?

91. LargeBill Posted: November 28, 2021 at 08:37 AM (#6054968)

90. The Duke Posted: November 27, 2021 at 05:45 PM (#6054894)
From Maddens article today:

In his 2018 book “Baseball Cop,” Eddie Dominguez, a former member of MLB’s Department of Investigations, details Ortiz’s close relationship with a convicted Dominican drug dealer nicknamed “Monga.” According to Dominguez, “Monga” had been a constant companion of Ortiz in 2005 and 2006, with access to the Red Sox clubhouse, and among other things was alleged to have placed large bets on baseball, even on the Red Sox, at a Dominican barbershop in Boston, before being arrested by ICE and deported. Despite all this, baseball has looked the other way on Ortiz’s “integrity/character” issues.

Is this widely known? I’ve never heard this come up before in the Ortiz candidacy discussions or is this just a writer spinning things to the worst possible effect for Ortiz?

"Widely known"? Nope, it seems some of the people who hyperventilate over any suspicion of PEDs are holding their tongue over Ortiz rumors. Don't know if it because he is more likeable than other targets, or what. Personally, I don't think PEDs should be a HOF consideration. Just as with throwing a spitball or fighting, if you get caught doing it, you get punished with a suspension and lose the ability to accumulate stats for duration of the punishment. If someone is able to put up HOF numbers despite missing playing time, for whatever reason, then base your vote on what is accomplished on the playing field.

92. TJ Posted: November 28, 2021 at 02:25 PM (#6054998)

First two ballots to be made public according to Ryan Thibs:

Jack McCaffery- here’s the article with his choices. I will leave it to others to comment… https://www.delcotimes.com/2021/11/28/mccaffery-jimmy-rollins-ryan-howard-passed-hall-of-fame-eye-test/

Lynn Henning- Holdovers Bonds, Clemens, Helton, Rolen and schilling to go with newcomer A-Rod. (Henning’s ae5icle is behind a paywall…)

93. SoSH U at work Posted: November 28, 2021 at 03:30 PM (#6055008)

So that's one roids voter who isn't voting for Ortiz, and one non-roids voter who isn't voting for Ortiz.

94. Walt Davis Posted: November 28, 2021 at 04:30 PM (#6055017)

Y'know, if you'd set the Adam Frazier HoF discussion over/under at 92 posts, I'd have definitely taken the under!

95. TJ Posted: November 28, 2021 at 04:48 PM (#6055019)

Sadi Lebrun ballot- Abreu, Clemens, Helton, Jones, Ortiz, Pettitte, Ramirez, Rolen, Schilling, Sosa. Pick up for Abreu, first vote for Ortiz, losses for Vizquel and Bonds.

10 player ballot, but why you drop Bonds but keep Sosa is beyond me…

96. Snowboy Posted: December 01, 2021 at 05:11 PM (#6055663)

21. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: November 22, 2021 at 02:44 PM (#6054031)
Not a prediction, just who I'd likely vote for:

Clemens, Ortiz, Rolen, Schilling, Sosa.

I'm not trying to pick an internet fight, and you don't have to respond, Jolly Old.
And maybe you've explained this before (believe me, I don't keep a diary on everyone who visits this site) but why would your ballot not include Bonds?

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

<< Back to main

Monday, November 22, 2021

Baseball Hall of Fame ballot 2022: Alex Rodriguez, David Ortiz join; Bonds, Clemens, Schilling in final year

Reader Comments and Retorts

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

Hot Topics