My ten: Bobby Abreu, Carlos Beltrán, Mark Buehrle, Andruw Jones, Jeff Kent, Andy Pettitte, Manny Ramírez, Álex Rodríguez, Scott Rolen, Gary Sheffield

Apologies to Helton, who would get a vote with an unlimited ballot.

Another thing to worry about, will any of the BBWAA voters be wagering on the outcome of the vote?

I'd have the same ten as cookie, or if I were in a small hall mood, take away Buehrle (ouch), Kent, and Pettitte.

Scott Rolen is the only one that gets in, I'm pretty confident of that.

It's amazing a guy who's 37th all-time in offensive WAR doesn't get more love...

The only other guys in the Top 60 who aren't in the HOF are either not eligible yet, or have PED taint...

It's amazing a guy who's 37th all-time in offensive WAR doesn't get more love...

It helps that he's dead last in dWAR, if I recall correctly.

One True Hall Walt: Rolen, Manny, ARod, probably Beltran
Hall (BBWAA) Historical Standards Walt: Add Helton ... add Sheff if suspects allowed ... remove Manny and ARod if not ... maybe Wagner**
Not sure I can really make an internally consistent case against Walt: Add Andruw, Abreu

If I buy TZ/DRS totally, then I'd vote for Andruw, maybe even in the One True Hall. Abreu is just frankly dull -- a very solid overall contributor and offensive talent but it's like there was never a single moment of greatness. 877th all-time in MVP shares seems the exact summation of his career. He's only got 2 monthly and 4 weekly awards. He's the Lou Whitaker of Lou Whitakers.

** One True Hall has no closers except maybe Mo. I still wouldn't vote for Wagner even under the "historical" closer standards but it might be too close to call.

This is the first time in quite a while that I don't see 10 legit HOF candidates on the ballot:

Tier One: Guys who would make it under any reasonable standard, and who would have been HOFers with or without PEDs
Rolen
Manny
ARod
Sheffield

Tier Two: I get the argument, they don't lower the standard of the Hall, they'll probably get in someday with a veteran's committee...but they aren't what I think of when I hear "Hall of Famer"

Beltran
Kent
Jones

Tier Three: Can't get there.

Wagner
Abreu

Tier Four: Standards, people!

Pettitte
Buehrle

With Buehrle, who I liked a lot, I've heard his case as sort of a "Don Sutton of his generation". I get the comparison, and I understand pitchers are not used the same way today as they were in the 1960s-1980s...but c'mon - Sutton pitched 2000 more innings; had 145 more complete games; 50 shutouts vs 10...maybe Buehrle could have thrown a ton more innings - but he didn't. Basically, imagine that Buehrle had thrown all his innings, but then after pitched Sutton's career from 1979-1988. That's almost exactly 2000 extra innings. Sutton went 119-101, ERA+ of 105, another 305 starts...I mean, Sutton had almost as many shutouts in his last 2000 innings (9) as Buehrle had in his entire career (10).

I know it means fewer starting pitchers will likely be getting in the HOF going forward (or until pitcher usage changes again), but if starting pitchers are pitching a lot fewer times a year and/or innings per start...well, shouldn't fewer of them be making the Hall of Fame? Basically, if we're going to ask starters to do so much less, then they are going to have (generally) extraordinary peaks to get in the HOF. Buehrle and Pettitte just don't come close to that sort of resume.

My ballot:

Abreu
Hunter
Lackey
Napoli
Frankie Rodriguez
Street
Weaver

All who helped the Angels get to the playoffs, and 5 of the 7 were big contributors to the last Angel team to actually win a postseason series. Now I could put aside rooting interests and vote for the most qualified, but forget it. The BBWAA ended that practice years ago.

Voters must return ballots by a Dec. 31 postmark. Votes are counted jointly by BBWAA secretary-treasurer Jack O’Connell and Ernst & Young partner Mark Moran. Results will be announced by Hall of Fame president Josh Rawitch at 6 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 24, 2023, live on MLB Network.

It's amazing a guy who's 37th all-time in offensive WAR doesn't get more love...

The only other guys in the Top 60 who aren't in the HOF are either not eligible yet, or have PED taint...

Sheffield used Balco steroid cream and he was listed in the Mitchell Report.

Will Francisco Rodriguez get to 5% to stay on the ballot? The guy has more career saves than Wagner and the single season record. And it's a pretty weak ballot overall.

The only ones I'd vote for would be
Sheffield and Helton.
Aroid and Manny got busted for cheating.
Otherwise they'd be on my list too.

But if no one was elected at all I'd be fine with that.

Manny and ARod would be the two no brainers amd I'd give Carlos Beltran a vote as well.

My ballot

Abreu
Beltran
Buehrle
Helton
Jones
Kent
F. Rodriguez
Rolen
Sheffield
Wagner

Ramirez and A-Rod if allowed 12 slots and feeling generous. Voting for Buehrle and the relievers mainly to keep them on the ballot.

Rolen really need to make a big move this year. I don't think he will make it but he should get closer. I doubt anyone else gets in but Beltran should get 30-50% and then cruise in after a few years.

Voters must return ballots by a Dec. 31 postmark. Votes are counted jointly by BBWAA secretary-treasurer Jack O’Connell

I won my first Rotisserie League baseball title in 1984 (first year of the league).
Jack finished third. This (then relatively) youngster was pretty excited.

Jack is a wonderful fellow, btw.

as to the matter at hand, the ballot once again is ridiculously bloated.

as to the matter at hand, the ballot once again is ridiculously bloated.

Seriously, this ballot is particularly bad. Last year, the one-and-dones combined for 40 All-Star games, 2 MVPs, and 3 Cy Youngs. And the only guy with fewer than 3 All-Star appearances was AJ.

This year they have 26 All-Star appearances (despite 3 more total players) and 1 Cy Young. The only guy with more than 3 All-Star games is K-Rod. After Beltran and K-Rod, I'm struggling to see a guy who will get 5 votes, even with the relatively clear backlog. The best player is John Lackey, but no one is going to vote for him. Matt Cain has some nice aesthetics with the perfect game/single franchise, but I can't see him getting more than 2-3 votes at best.

I will never understand the Kent support around here. His career numbers don't stack up, his peak numbers don't stack up. He doesn't have the "but he was a good all-around player" argument. He holds the 2B HR record but that's probably more sillyball than it is having more power than Sandberg or Grich. He's as HoVG as it gets. He's the Jeff Kent of Lou Whitakers.

Tier One: Guys who would make it under any reasonable standard, and who would have been HOFers with or without PEDs
Rolen
Manny
ARod
Sheffield

Tier Two: I get the argument, they don't lower the standard of the Hall, they'll probably get in someday with a veteran's committee...but they aren't what I think of when I hear "Hall of Famer"

Beltran
Kent
Jones

Tier Three: Can't get there.

Wagner
Abreu

Tier Four: Standards, people!

Pettitte
Buehrle

Does Helton really not make any of your tiers, SBPT?

Rolen really need to make a big move this year. I don't think he will make it but he should get closer

As RR noted, Rolen is extremely likely to go in this year. And if not this year, then next.

I would keep voting for Buehrle and Pettite. Theyv just have some really good old school numbers. Petitte claims, I think, to just use steroids for rehab. I've always been of the view that if it helps, that's a good thing. But of course it's impossible to know who used what when.

Petitte has an amazing post season resume as well. Maybe we shouldn't credit someone too much for being on a good team but 20 wins and 275 IP in the post -season. Wow. He seems like a better version of Jim Kaat with small peaks spread around.

Buerhle, he's maybe a cut below but I still like him.

Some of the guys like Wagner and Kent getting big vote totals frustrate me when these two should be getting more support

I will never understand the Kent support around here. His career numbers don't stack up, his peak numbers don't stack up. He doesn't have the "but he was a good all-around player" argument. He holds the 2B HR record but that's probably more sillyball than it is having more power than Sandberg or Grich. He's as HoVG as it gets. He's the Jeff Kent of Lou Whitakers.

Kent does really well by the 'Are you in the top 25 ever at your position?' standard, which is probably the most straightforward standard that gives generally good results. It's really hard to come up with 25 second basemen better than Kent who are currently HoF eligible.

This is the first time in quite a while that I don't see 10 legit HOF candidates on the ballot:

Agreed. Off the top of my head, if I had a vote, Arod, Rolen and Beltran for sure.

Goold once proposed that the writers should have, yes, no, return next year option (or maybe, basically you vote to keep the guy on the ballot for another year, but your vote does not count as a yes) I still need more convincing for Abreu, Manny, Sheffield, Helton, Pettitte, Buehrle, and Andruw. I'm leaning towards Andruw/Manny as a yes, rest as a no, but not so hard I can't change my mind.

Kent does really well by the 'Are you in the top 25 ever at your position?' standard, which is probably the most straightforward standard that gives generally good results. It's really hard to come up with 25 second basemen better than Kent who are currently HoF eligible

He's 18th at 2B for me, one spot below Biggio all time (essentially tied). Good enough for my ballot, although he was off it for many years due to too many qualified candidates

Petitte has an amazing post season resume as well. Maybe we shouldn't credit someone too much for being on a good team but 20 wins and 275 IP in the post -season. Wow. He seems like a better version of Jim Kaat with small peaks spread around.

I've always been surprised by the lack of support Pettitte gets around here. He's borderline by bWAR, easily qualified by fWAR. He had lousy defenses behind him in NY (Posada, Knoblauch/Cano, Jeter and Williams for much of his time there) and performed much better in Houston with presumably more competent defenders.

He's got a supersized Andy Pettitte season of even greater quality in the postseason* (275 IP. Yes, the ERA is only slightly better than his regular season figure, but as he only allowed four UE in those innings, his RA is much better.

* I hate not crediting pitchers who have a lot of postseason work. You're essentially allowing them to absorb the extra wear and tear on the shoulder and elbow without any of the benefit. If you look at Buehrle, the only year he didn't have a Buehrle season was the year after the Sox won the title. Pitching is taxing, rest is good, and year after year Pettitte was throwing long after most hurlers' seasons had ended.

Fittingly, ten of these players belong and the rest don't. No PED penalties. Ranked from most to least qualified:

1) A-Rod
2) Manny
3) Rolen
4) Sheffield
5) Beltran
6) A. Jones
7) Pettite
8) Helton
9) Abreu
10) Kent

Petitte claims, I think, to just use steroids for rehab.

he swore he never used.
'ok, you caught me. but only once, and only for rehab.'
'ok, you caught me again. but only those two times, and only for rehab.'

can't imagine a third time happened......

IIRC, the issue with Pettitte was human growth hormone. FWIW, I believe the BBTF scientists were divided as to whether HGH is actually performance enhancing.

When John Lackey broke into the league, if someone told you he’d end up doing the impossible three times you’d assume he would be on his way to Cooperstown. Won a World Series with the Angels, Red Sox, and Cubs.

re 26: It's fair to credit Pettite for his body of playoff work, for reasons given. If I add 7% to his WAR total, he goes from 63rd among pitchers to 48th.
With Andy's mediocre peak, that would not get my vote.

I'd vote for Manny, A-Rod, Sheff, Rolen.

I'll run a mock ballot in December after the MMP voting is done.

I see a 9-player ballot for me.

(roughly in order): A-Rod, Rolen, Beltran, Helton, Jones, Sheffield, Ramirez, Pettitte, Abreu

The closest miss for me is Buehrle, but no.

Wagner, Kent, Vizquel… none of these guys are close for me.

This is the first time in quite a while that I don't see 10 legit HOF candidates on the ballot

Helton has a 10 year prime with an OPS+ of 144 and an average of 154 games played, IOW he was healthy the entire time. He has a 5 year peak with an OPS+ of 160 and 158 games played. Prime WAR of 54.9, an average per seasons of 5.5 or All Star level of play, on average, for 10 years. Peak WAR of 37.5, average per season of 7.5 with 3 MVP caliber seasons (B-R rating a season of 8 WAR as MVP level). His career WAR is about 4 below the average HOF 1B and his JAWS7 is about 4 above, IOW he's right on the average for JAWS for a 1B. He's right between Murray, with Helton having the better peak, and McCovey, virtually indistinguishable from Helton by JAWS. He hit like a HOF for both peak and prime while also playing an outstanding defensive 1B, Rfield top 10 all time with at least 1000 games played at 1B.

With Buehrle, who I liked a lot, I've heard his case as sort of a "Don Sutton of his generation". I get the comparison, and I understand pitchers are not used the same way today as they were in the 1960s-1980s

If you understand pitchers are not used the same way, then why do you go on about IP and CG? I don't know that I'd compare Buehrle to Sutton, but the way you make the comparison is not a valid one. A more reasonable one would be recognizing that, relative to his time, Buehrle was a workhorse. Ten seasons in top 10 for GS, 8 for shutouts, 7 each for IP and CG. For pitchers who started their careers in 2000 or later he's one of just 4 who made it to 3K IP. Scherzer might get there, but only pitched 145 last season. Kershaw and Wainwright look unlikely, no one else is even close. Not saying you have to support Buehrle for the HOF, but at least be intellectually honest in arguing against him.

12. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 21, 2022 at 07:52 PM (#6106367)
Will Francisco Rodriguez get to 5% to stay on the ballot? The guy has more career saves than Wagner and the single season record. And it's a pretty weak ballot overall.

I'm very curious to see how he does. I hate the reliever love the BBWAA has shown in HOF voting, and it will be interesting to see if they can ignore the Saves for him while still voting for Wagner. Is Wagner getting support because of the K's more than Saves? Will Rodriguez's DV history hurt him?

I think my ballot is Rolen, Beltran, Buerhle, helton and maybe Sheffield/Pettite

Im inclined to believe Sheffield is telling the truth when he said he was duped into taking the drugs. He was a fearsome hitter and I don't believe he was as bad at defense (from what I remember ) as the stats make him out to be. I don't think he'll get in but I'd like to see his vote totals ensure a second bite at the Apple from the Vets committee Pettite I think I'll add him as his PED case seems tenuous and to help get him on vets ballot.

Kershaw and Wainwright look unlikely,

Kershaw is only 193 K's away. Do you not think he lasts 2 more seasons?

I feel pretty confident about five guys (A-Rod, Rolen, Manny, Sheffield, Beltran) and reasonably solid on two more (Andruw and Helton). Abreu, Pettitte, and Buehrle are all on the borderline for me. I voted for Abreu as my 10th guy last year and left the pitchers off, but I've got room for them now I guess. Not feeling very excited about the prospect though.

Kent has been sitting on the bottom of my list for almost ten years now. He's good enough that I've always kept him hanging around, but I don't really see it.

Kershaw is only 193 K's away. Do you not think he lasts 2 more seasons?

I think he means IP, not K. Kershaw is probably 3-4 years short of 3000 IP given recent seasons

Probably 4 years shy of 3000 innings. I think Kershaw probably keeps going year-to-year but I definitely would not be surprised for him to keep going as long as reasonably healthy and effective.

In alpha order

Carlos Beltran
Mark Buehrle
Todd Helton
Andruw Jones
Andy Pettitte
Manny Ramirez
Alex Rodriguez
Scott Rolen
Gary Sheffield
Billy Wagner

Only A-Rod and Wagner are easy yes votes for me. A-Rod is of course inner circle, and Wagner is the 2nd best modern closer behind Rivera, and it's not close. On a per inning basis, no one else has been more dominant. The rest, they're fine. I'm a big hall guy, so it's easy to max out the ballot, but I wouldn't argue with someone who doesn't, or has a different second five than I do.

Kent does really well by the 'Are you in the top 25 ever at your position?' standard, which is probably the most straightforward standard that gives generally good results.

Or that's a good argument not to impose any such set standard such as "top X at a position" (much less how we got to 25 ... much less how we define "position" and why we think it's so damned important to stick a guy at a single position ... the latter not a concern for Kent who has nearly 2000 games at 2B and fewer than 150 anywhere else.)

Anyhoo, using JAWS for convenience, here's the #25 at each position

C: Charlie Bennett, 39 WAR. For players you've heard of, he's a smidgen ahead of Lance Parrish and Russell Martin, a smidgen behind Sundberg. Porter, Kendall, Posada all easily waved into the Hall.

1B: Joe Torre ... let's go with Jason Giambi and Will Clark tied at 46.3 JAWS (and 50.5 and 56.5 WAR). Olerud, Hernandez, Goldschmidt all welcome.

2B: Tony Phillips or Zobrist or Knoblauch. Altuve, Kent, Kinsler, Pedroia, Randolph (and Whitaker, Utley, Grich obviously).

SS: Nomah!!! Tulo and Tejada just miss, Fregosi, Campy and (finally!) Glasscock in.

3B: Cey. David Wright, Donaldson, Harrah just out. Hack, Machado, Arenado, Ventura, Evans, Longoria, Allen, Bando, Bell, Boyer, Nettles all in.

LF: Ryan Braun. Hey he's got more JAWS than Rice. Luis Gonzalez and Roy White just miss. Jose Cruz and Berkman in along with some pre-war guys.

CF: Max Carey who's actually in. Lynn, Murphy and Bernie just out; Damon, Lemon, Pinson, Cedeno, Wynn, Davis, Edmonds, Andruw, Lofton, Beltran all in.

RF: Slaughter who's in as are the guys just behind him. Brian Giles and Jack Clark miss the cut by a couple of JAWS. Sheffield is just #24. Bobby Bonds, Abreu, Reggie Smith, Evans now in. Mookie comfortably in buss territory.

CF nicely illustrates the problem. There are 17 CF between 40.1 and 45.4 JAWS. Here are some WARs:

Averill 51.5 (22nd by JAWS)
Puckett 51.2
Lynn 50.2
Bernie 49.6
Butler 49.7
Burks 49.8
Hunter 50.7 (36th)

Does anybody think there's a meaningful difference there. JAWS would add the "high" peak candidates Murphy and McCutchen based on WAR7. And remember, all of those guys are objectively worse candidates than Lemon and Damon. Far from applying some objective standard, the only way to potentially separate the worthy from the un-worthy is to deep dive into the individual cases. And if you deep dive on Kent you get ... he won an MVP he proably didn't deserve? (It was a very fine, even MVP-worthy season but there were better ones that year.) His defense probably wasn't as bad as it was said to be? (Note bWAR has no problem with his defense until those last 3 seasons.)

The "objective" standard "top 25" is just cover for taking a HoFer that doesn't belong (more often than not a Frisch pick ... or Rice, Puckett, Perez) and saying "this guy was better than him." Jeff Kent probably was better than Nellie Fox, better than Schoendienst, almost certainly better than Miller Huggins and presumably more valuable overall than Maz. That's the case really.

Come on, now. Other than for pure WAR/WAA slaves (and he's at 55.4/26.6 on those stats, so he's within the acceptable borderline range even there), it's not hard to see Kent's HOF case. Sillyball era or not, he put up offensive numbers that you just don't see with second basemen. .290/.356/.500 (123 OPS+). First 2B since Hornsby to post a .500 career slugging percentage. 377 homers (position record), 1518 rbi. 12 seasons with 20+ homers (including 9 straight), 8 seasons with 100+ rbi. MVP plus 3 other top 10 finishes, 5 all star games, 4 silver sluggers. Averaged .296 with 28 homers and 110 rbi for a 9 season peak from 1997-2005. That's a solid case for the voters who like "traditional" stats. And again, even his SABR case is borderline (albeit on the lower end) so not worth mounting the anti-election campaigns like we did for Rice, Morris, every closer not named Rivera, etc.

Plus it's cool seeing the rare players who put up HOF cases almost entirely in their 30's (14.5 WAR in his 20's, 41.0 in his 30's). ;-)

His motorcycle cop mustache sucked though. I will concede that...

Next years class has a bunch of interesting guys: Colon, Holliday, utley, David Wright, Adrian Gonzalez aside from the obvious guys. I'm interested to see if any of these guys get traction. Utley is loved by the sabr community so maybe he will do ok but I'm struggling to see him making a run. Should be a Beltré and mauer year

I hate the reliever love the BBWAA has shown in HOF voting

Seriously. Wagner and Buehrle should be flipped in their voting results. I'd rather put in the 60th best starting pitcher from an era than the 3rd best reliever. What is the message the writers are trying to send? "If only you were a shittier pitcher and could only throw one inning per game successfully, then you'd be a Hall of Famer. Instead you were a good pitcher. Tough break."

   38. Joyful Calculus Instructor Posted: November 22, 2022 at 02:35 PM (#6106474)

Kershaw and Wainwright look unlikely,



Kershaw is only 193 K's away. Do you not think he lasts 2 more seasons?

3000 innings pitched was being referenced, not K's.

Wagner is the 2nd best modern closer behind Rivera, and it's not close. On a per inning basis, no one else has been more dominant.

And in what way is this a qualification for the HOF? He's a guy with 903 career innings who's (edit: whose) claim to fame is he pitched primarily in the closer role, one inning at a time, and had an exceptional K rate. Whoopee! However, he was not a closer in 1995-96 so reduce that IP total by 52. He also was not a closer in 2000 or 2008, so lop off another 43 2/3. Now we have a guy with 807.3 career IP. But even within seasons he was a closer there were multiple games he was not filling that role, he was just throwing an inning. For example, in 1999 he had 9 appearances in wins/losses that were not Save situations, in 2002 it was 19, in 2003 it was 8, 2005 it was 18, and in 2006 it was 14. That's another 68 IP where he wasn't filling the oh so overrated closer role. No doubt his other closer seasons would tell a similar tale. Now we're down to well below 700 IP in the role he's being supported for election to the HOF.

But what about the Save with a 3 run lead and only needing 3 outs or fewer? How difficult is that? Is it worth even being recognized for as a significant achievement for a pitcher? I would say no, clearly not. I looked at all relievers with at least 200 save opportunities. There were 25 when I did it. Wagner has a 97.7% save rate in 3 run saves compared to his 85.9% save rate overall. Excluding him, Rivera and Hoffman, the 22 others collectively have a 96.9% save rate in 3 run saves, fully half of them half (edit: have) a 3 run save rate as high or higher than Wagner, including Eddie Guardado whose overall rate is only 79.6%, Armando Benitez with an overall of 83%, Doug Jones with an overall of 79.5%, and Jose Mesa, the great Joe Table, has an overall of 83.6% but a 99% conversion in 3 run situations. There's another 131 appearances by Wagner that are far short of any sort of qualifying event for HOF consideration, IMO.

How the heck does a guy with fewer than 300 appearances in crucial situations, only about 1/3 of his total appearances, qualify for the HOF? And keep in mind his contribution to those wins is dwarfed by the contribution of the starting pitcher who got the team to that point with the lead and only marginally more than any other reliever who held the lead, not to mention the offensive and defensive contributions of the position players. Being a really good closer who struck out a lot of hitters, on a rate basis only, is not a HOF level accomplishment.

If you had a utility player who in 300 PH situations in the 9th with the game on the line hit 250 homers he'd probably be considered a HoFer.

Next years class has a bunch of interesting guys: Colon, Holliday, utley, David Wright, Adrian Gonzalez aside from the obvious guys. I'm interested to see if any of these guys get traction. Utley is loved by the sabr community so maybe he will do ok but I'm struggling to see him making a run. Should be a Beltré and mauer year

I think Utley easily clears 5 percent and builds a slow case toward election, similar to Rolen.

Unless the writers hold his slide on Tejada against him, which would be perfectly fine with me.

How the heck does a guy with fewer than 300 appearances in crucial situations, only about 1/3 of his total appearances, qualify for the HOF? And keep in mind his contribution to those wins is dwarfed by the contribution of the starting pitcher who got the team to that point with the lead and only marginally more than any other reliever who held the lead, not to mention the offensive and defensive contributions of the position players. Being a really good closer who struck out a lot of hitters, on a rate basis only, is not a HOF level accomplishment.

This shows how little Wagner pitched and how poor he was in the postseason. If you add his postseason stats to his regular season numbers, his career ERA jumps from 2.31 to 2.41.

This kind of analysis is kind of like but what about all those times Babe Ruth didn't get a hit or didn't touch home plate?

Before you say "300 innings" isn't a lot you've got to come up with a baseline. Leverage index was one way to do that. Starting pitchers throw a lot of useless innings. What if modern HoF SP were after this type of analysis hot their workload reduced to 300 or so important innings?

I am not putting Wagner on the short list for my ballot, but I absolutely do think there is value in a reliable close beyond just ip/war/waa etc. I'm not going to make the argument, but already on this thread I've seen good Pettitte arguments and decent Kent arguments that shift my thought process. (Pettite add his post season war (which has to be at least 6-- his 1996 season very much aligns with his post season numbers with minus 55 innings, if that equals 5.6 it's easy to see his post season being at least 6 if not 7 war--note his post season numbers is actually better but the era is about the same so it's a safe way to look at) to his career total... this gives him 67 career war, and 34 waa, and changes his jaws7 to 36 or so if you just give him 220 innings credit for jaws war still borderline but definitely ups the conversation for him. (also it gives him 275 career wins if that is a stat you like)

Kent has some interesting arguments too, so I still like to see him on the ballot, same with Wagner, but that is going to be a lot tougher battle to win, as many people are cumulative value voters. Jeff Kent looks better if he didn't play his last three season, defensively his defense went to heck his last three seasons, even though he still had his bat to an extent, as to whether it's as bad as war thinks, I find it hard to believe a guy goes from average defensively to -18/-12/-11 his last three seasons, especially at second base, and especially considering there was no real remarks about him being a butcher in the field. Still it is what it is, but since I sometimes debate extreme defensive numbers on the positive, it also seems likely on the negative also. (still that makes maybe a 1.5 career war difference so nothing huge)

I don't really think relievers should be in the hof, but since they are, the standards are what I go by, and I will seriously consider a vote for anyone that is above the halfway point of people already in at their role/position. You have Mo, Hoffman, Smith, Fingers, Gossage and Wilhelm that are in strictly for their reliever numbers with Eckersley in as primarily a reliever and Smoltz in as primarily a starter. So that means there are 6-8 relievers in the hof, is Wagner the 4th/5th best reliever of all time? (note, this isn't is would he be top 4 in the hof, but is he as the time of the vote the 4th best all time, if so he gets my serious consideration. At the same time you have to acknowledge the special circumstances of Eckersley, Smoltz and Sutter, so maybe it should be 3rd best all time?)

I think Utley easily clears 5 percent and builds a slow case toward election, similar to Rolen.

I think Utley is a tougher sell to the writers than Rolen, who has not had an easy time of it himself. Rolen was famously injury-prone, but he has a full season's worth of PA on Utley. WAR thinks their defensive value is comparable, but Rolen has 8 Gold Gloves to Utley's 0. And Utley gets so much of his value from little things like never getting caught stealing (154/22 for his career, 84/6 from 2007-12) and getting hit by pitches (led the majors 3 times in a row, 8th all-time for his career), which are reflected nicely in WAR but hard to build a narrative around.

If Utley had gotten one of the two MVPs that were given out to his less-deserving teammates, he would have a better shot. As it is, I suspect he's going to struggle.

#53 - Smoltz shouldn't count as a closer. I don't really even see him as a hybrid candidate like Eckersley. He had 213 wins, over 3000 k's, and close to 3500 IP. He was a starter who happened to relieve for a few years. Take away all the saves and his traditional stats are pretty similar to Schilling's.

I think Utley is a tougher sell to the writers than Rolen, who has not had an easy time of it himself.

Rolen has had a spectacularly easier time of it than anyone who follows Hall of Fame voting ever imagined. The only question six years ago was whether he would see a second ballot, not how many ballots it would take to get in.

And sure, Utley may not be quite as strong a candidate as Rolen (though those fewer PAs also means he had a much higher peak). He may not get in, but I do see him easily clearing 5 percent and climbing from there.

I don't see Utley pulling a Rolen and working his way up to election either. With 8 gold gloves, I think Rolen is being seen as one of the best defensive 3B ever...who could also hit. With zero gold gloves, Utley won't be viewed as a historically great 2B, defensive WAR be damned. And his hitting stats are lower across the board.

When Rolen himself took a long-ish time to get elected, a poor man's Rolen is really going to struggle to build momentum, IMO. Plus yeah, Scott never broke anyone's leg with a bullsh!t slide.

If you had a utility player who in 300 PH situations in the 9th with the game on the line hit 250 homers he'd probably be considered a HoFer.

Yes, probably so. But that doesn't seem like an appropriate comparison. Even the best sluggers in history only homered in about 10% of their plate appearances, but saves are converted at a much higher rate than this -- even in these "crucial" situations it is certainly higher than 50%.

Getting 250 saves in 300 crucial situations, in terms of impressiveness, is more like the equivalent of the utility player "not striking out" in 250 of 300 plate appearances. It's good, but a lot of players are able to do it.

And sure, Utley may not be quite as strong a candidate as Rolen (though those fewer PAs also means he had a much higher peak). He may not get in, but I do see him easily clearing 5 percent and climbing from there.

That peak (which is quite good) resulted in zero top-5 MVP finishes.

I was on the optimistic side of the argument about Rolen. I am far less sanguine about Utley's chances (though naturally the voters could quickly prove me wrong). I'd guess he clears 5% (it's not likely to be a strong ballot) but I wouldn't bet on the climb.

#53 - Smoltz shouldn't count as a closer. I don't really even see him as a hybrid candidate like Eckersley. He had 213 wins, over 3000 k's, and close to 3500 IP. He was a starter who happened to relieve for a few years. Take away all the saves and his traditional stats are pretty similar to Schilling's.

I'm not really saying he was a reliever, but just including him in the thought process because of his years as a reliever really did make him go in a lot easier than other pitchers with his comparable numbers. Generally I'm trying to look for the worst level arguments as the base point and move from there. My base point is that relievers are going into the hof, we need to use the hof standards to determine who qualifies as a reliever, and then start working from there. That base standard includes Smoltz. After you include him, you eliminate him... but you acknowledge him in the discussion.

Utley is Bobby Grich, The league recognized his status based upon both of their high salaries, but the fans didn't really recognize it. I pretty much expect the same results in the election even with an improved understanding of stats. Unless someone is taking his case up, he's not remotely going to get into the hof.

Another thing that needs to be acknowledged regarding Rolen's climb up the ballot; AFAICT, it's literally unprecedented for someone to debut at 10% and eventually work their way up to election by the writers. Maybe I'm missing someone, but the 2nd lowest debut I can find for a BBWAA selected HOFer was 17.5% by Blyleven (although after debuting at 20%, Walker had dropped to 10% after 4 ballots).

Point being, Rolen's climb is (at least thus far) a historic aberration, not the norm. TBF, there's certainly an argument that voting trends are changing and we may see this type of thing start happening more often. Helton debuted at 16.5% and will probably get elected. Wagner (10.5%) and Andruw (7.3) might get elected by the writers too.

62. Ralph Kiner

Rolen's initial ballot was limited by the conflicting anti-ped guys with the excessive ped guys on the ballot.

Rolen's debut ballot had Chipper, Vlad, Thome, Hoffman, Edgar, Mussina, Clemens, Bonds, Schilling, Vizquel, Walker, (Vizquel probably never makes it, and Bonds/Clemens/Schilling were clogging up space)

Add in McGriff, Manny, Kent, Wagner, Sheffield, Rolen, Sosa, Andruw (Santana who was one and done and deserved more consideration and Damon)

Rolen isn't an aberration from his viewpoint, it's an aberration from the quality of the ballot. I think saying voting trends are changing, doesn't really justify the backlog for the most part. It's an aberration because of the depth of the ballot, that should for the most part, have worked it's way clear, with Arod and maybe Manny being the exceptional names on the ballot. It's a flaw in the voting process when there became a backlog to not expand the number of names, but that is the past.

Point being, Rolen's climb is (at least thus far) a historic aberration, not the norm.

True, but I think he'll start a little higher.

Again, I'm not saying he'll get elected. But I think he'll climb.

But I do find it kind of amusing how you guys are all bending over backwards to explain why he's not really like Rolen, when so many were using very similar arguments to explain why Rolen wouldn't hit 5 percent.

The electorate has changed considerably. I will be surprised if we ever again see a perceived clean guy who easily clears 60 WAR failing to get 5 percent. Hell, the "dull" Bobby Abreu is holding firm despite a far less impressive case than Utley's.

TBF, there's certainly an argument that voting trends are changing and we may see this type of thing start happening more often.

Voting trends are changing, but I'm not sure we'll see a lot of guys threatening election from starting points that low. Keep in mind, some of those players probably had first-ballot totals that were artificially low. They might had had first-ballot support, but not first-ballot room.

The electorate has changed considerably. I will be surprised if we ever again see a perceived clean guy who easily clears 60 WAR failing to get 5 percent. Hell, the "dull" Bobby Abreu is holding firm despite a far less impressive case than Utley's.

It's changed, not sure I would say considerably, but the point about Abreu still stands. I mean it's only 5-8%, but he's still a guy that more than likely wouldn't have lasted more than one vote on the ballot 20 years ago. At the same time we still have Edmonds being voted off the island with 2.5% just 4 years previously (again over crowded ballot helps explain that to an extent as Andruw was able to stay on the ballot just 3 years later) The electorate has changed, but not as much as some want to argue it has changed, it's a swing of around 10% so far. That same electorate put in Rivera unanimously, Jeter just missed a couple of votes, and Ortiz and Hoffman both went in easily.

But I do find it kind of amusing how you guys are all bending over backwards to explain why he's not really like Rolen, when so many were using very similar arguments to explain why Rolen wouldn't hit 5 percent.

I think where I went wrong with my initial Rolen prediction was the impact his 8 gold gloves would have on the writers perception of him (and I also factored in the strength of the ballot, as CFB detailed in #64). Utley has zero gold gloves. That's a big difference, as is the fact that Utley doesn't even hit the minor milestones that Rolen surpassed like 2000 hits or 300 homers. Rolen has a "prime" case with 10 seasons of 20+ homers (including 8 straight), whereas Utley has a "peak" case with just 5 such seasons.

The electorate has changed considerably. I will be surprised if we ever again see a perceived clean guy who easily clears 60 WAR failing to get 5 percent. Hell, the "dull" Bobby Abreu is holding firm despite a far less impressive case than Utley's.

I actually do see Utley topping 5%. Hell, maybe even 10%. But that doesn't necessarily mean he'll make any progress. I guess they don't qualify as "clean guys who easily clear 60 WAR", but Tim Hudson (57.9 WAR) barely survived the first ballot (5.2%) and then didn't live to see a third (3.2%). Mark Buehrle (59 WAR) saw his initial support (11%) cut in half and barely survived the 2nd ballot (5.8%). Abreu (60.2 WAR) barely avoided being one and done (5.5%) and still hasn't cracked 9% yet after 3 tries.

The electorate has changed a bit and that's a good thing, but I'm still not sure we're at a point yet where WAR is a major driving force behind a players vote total. In Rolen's case, I really think the bucketful of gold gloves are the larger factor (see 45 WAR Omar Vizquel easily outpacing Rolen on each of their first 3 ballots before the DV allegations sank his chances). And of course WAR (and logic and reason) are still ignored entirely when it comes to closers, as 27.7% WAR Billy Wagner working his way up to 51% and possible future election illustrates nicely.

I guess they don't qualify as "clean guys who easily clear 60 WAR", but Tim Hudson (57.9 WAR) barely survived the first ballot (5.2%) and then didn't live to see a third (3.2%). Mark Buehrle (59 WAR) saw his initial support (11%) cut in half and barely survived the 2nd ballot (5.8%). Abreu (60.2 WAR) barely avoided being one and done (5.5%) and still hasn't cracked 9% yet after 3 tries.

No, they don't. Utley's at 64.5, and it's a peak heavy case, unlike the peakless ones those three guys enjoyed.

Let me ask you this: Do you think Utley has a much better case than those three?

I think where I went wrong with my initial Rolen prediction was the impact his 8 gold gloves would have on the writers perception of him (and I also factored in the strength of the ballot, as CFB detailed in #64). Utley has zero gold gloves. That's a big difference, as is the fact that Utley doesn't even hit the minor milestones that Rolen surpassed like 2000 hits or 300 homers.

I think you're searching for reasons to explain why you think this time it's different. Maybe you're right this time. But I think Utley starts above 10 percent, and has a good chance of gaining ground with this new electorate, the same voters who are going to elect Rolen and Helton and possibly Jones*, guys who would have suffered the fates of Santo or Clark or Lofton had they come on the ballot a few years earlier.

If I had to place my money on why, it's a combination of understanding advanced metrics becoming an absolute necessity to be a modern baseball writer and the purge continuing to remove older guys year after year. That's the most likely explanation those three guys have gotten traction where players of similar caliber in previous years did not.

Now, why they still have a reliever fetish, that I have no theory on.

Now, why they still have a reliever fetish, that I have no theory on.

My broader theory is that the smart/savvy voters are pretty good at giving themselves reasons to vote for guys with more traditional cases than vice versa. Maybe it's just open-mindedness. The smartest 20% of the electorate looks at David Ortiz and sees a guy a bit short on the merits, but with a ton of narrative to add to it. They read articles from supporters. They hem and haw and tie themselves in knots on whether they should vote for Ortiz. A lot end up doing so simply because they consider it so much. I think this applies to relievers too - I know the statistical case against Billy Wagner, but I can put together some reasons to vote for him too that I'm not embarrassed by.

On the other hand, the dumbest 20% of the ballot is basically doing word association games with the ballot. They give a guy as much thought as it takes for them to read his name. The random number generator of the idiot electorate might land on a Chase Utley and vote for him now and then, but it's equally likely to land on Michael Young.

Let me ask you this: Do you think Utley has a much better case than those three?

I do. I'm just not sure that the actual voters will. Utley's career numbers don't look very HOF-ey. His case rests mostly on a 5 year peak (2005-2009) that was horribly underrated (no gold gloves, no top 5 MVP finishes), and his pretty WAR/WAA total is heavily boosted by factors that I suspect many voters won't notice or care about (great dWAR but without the hardware to show for it, lots of HBP, high stolen base percentage but with middling stolen base totals that aren't going to catch anyone's attention).

McCoy Posted: November 22, 2022 at 08:37 PM (#6106524)
This kind of analysis is kind of like but what about all those times Babe Ruth didn't get a hit or didn't touch home plate?

No, it's not anything at all like that.

Before you say "300 innings" isn't a lot you've got to come up with a baseline. Leverage index was one way to do that. Starting pitchers throw a lot of useless innings. What if modern HoF SP were after this type of analysis hot their workload reduced to 300 or so important innings?

This is rather incomprehensible, but maybe you could start by explaining how "starting pitchers throw a lot of useless innings." As for a baseline, it's well above 900 career IP, and it's way, WAY above 4 career games where they MIGHT have had to face a batter more than once in a game.