Let me be the first to say "It's early, but" there are some interesting trends. While obviously we watch for guys reaching 75%, I think this year there will be some big names fighting for 5%. Palmiero 500+ homers & 3,000 hits and off the ballot after one look? Kevin Brown one and done? I haven't seen more than one vote for either one of them.

How are Palmeiro and Brown doing? I kind of expected Brown to be one-and-done, but I wasn't as sure about Palmeiro. How close is he to 5%? Finally, I have to say I'm (pleasantly) surprised to see Walker at 15% (very early on, granted - that works out to what, 7 votes?). I figured him for one-and-done (and, of course, he may still be - it's not like 15% is a solid first step toward eventual induction or anything).

How are Palmeiro and Brown doing?

As soon as my computer stops fritzing I'll stretch the totals out...

This is from memory, but I think that Repoz numbers are usually:

1) Overshooting by 5-10 on the sabr faves
2) Underhooting by 10 on Smith and last-year-guys
3) Very close on everyone else.

So based on that, I'd guess something like

95 Alomar
76 Blyleven
-----
70 Larkin
57 Morris
54 Raines
42 Smith
42 Bagwell
29 Gar
25 Trammell
23 Mac
15 Walker
13 McGriff

Something like that. At least based on results so far.

#4 - last year's ballot gathering was very high on Alomar (87/74, IIRC).

No non-first year player has ever gotten over 90%. Excluding the 1936 crowd, the best showing by any player retired 7 or more years is Robin Roberts at 86.9% in 1976 (his fourth year of eligibility). Alomar has a chance to top that.

#4 - last year's ballot gathering was very high on Alomar (87/74, IIRC).

Yeah, the whole spitting indecent really sticks in the craw of those curmudgeonly writers who refuse to publish their ballots.

54 Raines

That would be a jump of >20% for Raines (he got 30.4% last year (which was 11% below Repoz's final tally)). That would surprise me (very pleasantly). My dream would be for both Larkin and Raines to top Morris this year. I suspect that will be true of Larkin (he and Morris were neck-and-neck last year and I think the boost from year 1 to year 2 is typically bigger than later boosts); for Raines, it's probably just a dream.

That would be a jump of >20% for Raines (he got 30.4% last year (which was 11% below Repoz's final tally)). That would surprise me (very pleasantly). My dream would be for both Larkin and Raines to top Morris this year. I suspect that will be true of Larkin (he and Morris were neck-and-neck last year and I think the boost from year 1 to year 2 is typically bigger than later boosts); for Raines, it's probably just a dream.

Agreed on all counts, though Rock's continued plus-60 percent showing in the Repoz counts is very, very encouraging. As far as I can recall, he's never shown anywhere near that level of support in previous small sample slices. Even if he just jumps above 40 percent, it would represent real proress toward eventual induction.

It would be completely and totally shocking to me to see a 3,000 hit guy not even make the 5% cut, esp. given how much esteem this milestone has traditionally been given. At that point I'd have to conclude that I'm living in Bizarro World. "Us never even let 'roider stay on ballot, no matter how many hits he have."

Are you rrrready, for the Palmiero Removal Machine?

Is next year the glut? I'm wondering if Raines can overcome that even with his jump, or if it's a longer wait.

Lassus, the glut comes in 2013. Next year it's just Bernie Williams.

Is next year the glut?

Two years. Next year is a fairly dead year: I think Bernie Williams is the best newcomer on that ballot. It's 2013 that has Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, Piazza, and Biggio, I believe.

Larkin looks to be in good shape to get in next year. I'd guess one other player goes with him: probably one of Bagwell, Raines, or Morris. Then, I think two years where we're probably not going to see any momentum getting built. But if Raines is over 50% this year and pushing 60% next year, I think he should be able to survive the glut and get inducted at some point on the other end of it (2015 or 2016, say?).

It's 2013 that has Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, Piazza, and Biggio, I believe.

Plus Schilling and Lofton.

But if Raines is over 50% this year and pushing 60% next year, I think he should be able to survive the glut and get inducted at some point on the other end of it (2015 or 2016, say?).

I can't imagine Raines gets over 50% this year. Repoz's tallies 1) are high on Raines, and 2) the early returns are higher still. I still remember when Raines first hit the ballot, he was at 50% around this time. He finished at half that.

Also, I don't think any backloggers will get in for a while after next year. WIth Clemens, Sosa, Biggio, Bonds, Schilling, and Piazza one one ballot - that could keep Piazza and/or Biggio waiting for one year. Hey - when Ryan, Brett, Yount, and Fisk all debuted at the same time, Fisk didn't it right away and Yount barely did (77%).

And then in 2014, you get Glut, Part II: Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Frank Thomas, Jeff Kent, Mike Mussina, Luis Gonzalez - I think that's all the main ones.

I figure by 2015 or 2016, Maddux, Glavine, Thomas, Piazza, and Biggio have all gone in. Plus Randy Johnson, who will be eligible by then. No idea on the 'roiders but it looks like the BBWAA won't put any of them in soon. Piazza might not be in .. . just 'cuz some think maybe he did, evidence/schmevidence.

That leaves Raines battling various surviving 'roiders, Mussina, Schilling, plus all the guys already ahead of him now .. . he ain't getting in soon. The goal/hope for him is to rise up high enough so that he doesn't get completely buried underneath them all.

I get the feeling the partial count is closer. Yes, it's (by definition) an undercount but probably not by much. Larkin at 38/76 seems like a better guesstimate than 36/48. Alomar and Blyleven are probably both 7-8 votes low so let's say Larkin is 5 votes low. 43/76 or just under 60%. That seems about right to me. So what's Raines' partial count?

You could probably make the guesstimate better by looking that partials and who they voted for last year. If they didn't vote Larkin/Raines last year, chances are not this year either.

Piazza

Based on what appears to be happening to Bagwell this year (under 50% on the full, obviously below 50% on the partial), I don't see how Piazza gets in his first year. Bagwell is polling better than Edgar but not by much. If Bagwell can't escape the steroid taint, I don't see why Piazza would.

Using Andy's categories, it looks like we might be looking at something like this:

25% non-blackballers (McGwire voters)
25% blackballers requiring Mitchell report, leaked name, Canseco or similar (extra Bagwell voters)
maybe 25% blackballers requiring only a mention or two, 60+ HR and other solid evidence
25% blackballers unless you are extra-double squeaky clean (Thomas voters)

Possibly that second group is larger -- Bagwell does seem under-rated -- but there's a very thin line between groups 3 and 4. Group membership will be fluid and arbitrary and no doubt vary some by performance other than the last group.

Repoz: Thanks.

My 12 last ballots: Klapish, Fletcher, Pluto, Erardi, McCaferry, Elsberry, Blair, Capozzi, McNeal, Albee, Knobler and Rosenthal.

Am I missing any?

ahhh Jack McCaferry vote Bagwell????????

Larkin at 38/76 seems like a better guesstimate than 36/48.

Larkin debuted over 50% last year. Ryne Sandberg seems like an apt comparison. His vote totals went 49.2% his first year (2% below Larkin), then up to 61.1% his 2nd year, then up to 76.6% and in his 3rd try. I'd expect the same thing for Larkin: something over 60% this year wouldn't surprise me at all. Going all the way up to 75% would surprise me a little bit, but, then again, I think last year several writers admitted that they just forgot about Larkin and/or did the "he never felt like a Hall-of-Famer to me". I could see him picking up a fair amount of those guys his second time around, now that they've been reminded of him and see that half of their fellow writers thought Larkin "felt like a Hall-of-Famer" to them.

Larkin looks to be in good shape to get in next year. I'd guess one other player goes with him: probably one of Bagwell, Raines, or Morris.

I agree with this. Blyleven and Alomar this year. Larkin and Morris next year.

The real question: With Jim Fear Rice and Jack Fear Morris successfully inducted, whose case do the nimrod writers take up next?

With Jim Fear Rice and Jack Fear Morris successfully inducted, whose case do the nimrod writers take up next?

He won't appear on the ballot for another 5-6 years at least, but Omar Vizquel is going to get a lot more mainstream HOF support than we BBTFers think he'll deserve. Andy Pettitte has Jack Morris's resume down pat (most wins in the 2000s; he lacks the single signature postseason start but I think he has postseason records for IP and W), although Pettitte's a lot more deserving than Morris.

Dale Murphy is one possibility: they'll start remembering that at his peak, he did "seem" like a Hall of Famer. (And even by us, Murphy is probably a better candidate than Rice or Morris.)

Ray Schalk may partly owe his election to being a "clean" member of the Black Sox. Who's the Ray Schalk of the "steroid era"? It would defy logic and generally make your head hurt, but maybe Andy Pettitte?

I think they've already chosen Thomas and/or Griffey as their "clean of the roiders," but since they were/are both slam dunks anyway, that doesn't really matter.

Good point on Pettitte. It will be amusing when he gets 15% his first year on the ballot and then in 10 years he's at 60% with the argument you had to be there to appreciate him. O:-)

Who's the Ray Schalk of the "steroid era"?

The guys I hear mentioned tend to be Ken Griffey and Derek Jeter. Of course, they're both obvious, slam-dunk, first-ballot HOFers by any measure, so I'm not sure we'd even be able to notice any kind of "clean" boost they got. Frank Thomas could benefit, but from our perspective, that would probably at best get his vote total closer to where it should be (100%?).

I can't think of a marginal guy who's praised by the mainstream media as a guy who would have been a Hall-of-Famer except for those other guys who used steroids. I kind of thought McGriff might get some of that, but I don't know - his vote totals seem consistent with his record.

I do agree with you, though, that reading some writers praising Andy Pettitte as the only honest PED user does tend to make my head hurt.

... Thomas and/or Griffey as their "clean of the roiders," but since they were/are both slam dunks anyway ...

I did say Ray Schalk, not Eddie Collins.

The real question: With Jim Fear Rice and Jack Fear Morris successfully inducted, whose case do the nimrod writers take up next?

Morris is by no means a certainty. Unless he cracks 60 percent this year, I still think he falls short.

Based on what appears to be happening to Bagwell this year (under 50% on the full, obviously below 50% on the partial), I don't see how Piazza gets in his first year. Bagwell is polling better than Edgar but not by much. If Bagwell can't escape the steroid taint, I don't see why Piazza would.

How much of Bagwell's lack of support is steroids, and how much is people just not understanding how good he was?

21. OCF Posted: December 29, 2010 at 12:49 AM (#3719347)

Ray Schalk may partly owe his election to being a "clean" member of the Black Sox. Who's the Ray Schalk of the "steroid era"?

It will be a thinner player assumed not to have used who probably used at some point.

Based on what appears to be happening to Bagwell this year (under 50% on the full, obviously below 50% on the partial), I don't see how Piazza gets in his first year. Bagwell is polling better than Edgar but not by much. If Bagwell can't escape the steroid taint, I don't see why Piazza would.

How much of Bagwell's lack of support is steroids, and how much is people just not understanding how good he was?

I'd expect Bagwell to get about 50% if there's no steroids cloud. That's right where Sandberg and Larkin were at in their first year.

It's hard to get 75% without some big hook - 500 homers or 3,000 hits or best defensive player or something like that. Bagwell's a slugger with a short career and bad postseason performance.

If he's well under 50%, there's a big knock on him for 'roids-suspicion. If he's right around 50%, then I think steroids played almost no role in the vote for him.

Ray Schalk may partly owe his election to being a "clean" member of the Black Sox. Who's the Ray Schalk of the "steroid era"?

Hard to say, especially if you're looking for someone with Ray Schalk's on-field contributions. Schalk himself was a VC pick over 25 years after he retired. Who knows what VC potluck will do.

The most noted outspoken opponent of steroids was Frank Thomas.

It's hard to get 75% without some big hook - 500 homers or 3,000 hits or best defensive player or something like that. Bagwell's a slugger with a short career and bad postseason performance.

Right. In the last twenty elections, I believe that only three players have been elected on the first ballot without hitting one of the "big three" career milestones:

Kirby Puckett
Ozzie Smith
Dennis Eckersley

Now, of course, Bagwell's far better than any of those guys, but all of them have hooks that he does not.

Hard to say, especially if you're looking for someone with Ray Schalk's on-field contributions. Schalk himself was a VC pick over 25 years after he retired. Who knows what VC potluck will do.

The most noted outspoken opponent of steroids was Frank Thomas.

It would take some sort of Veterans' Committee and probably wouldn't happen, therefore, for at least a couple of decades, but what about Ken Caminiti or Jose Canseco as the brave souls who laid bare MLB's dirty little secret? Talk about something that would make heads hurt.

Who's the Ray Schalk of the "steroid era"?

Omar Vizquel.

Bagwell was never ever going to make it in on the first ballot. The steroid question might mean he ends up taking four years instead of three or something. But he just isn't perceived as nearly as good by the voters as he is by BTF.

They're wrong, but I have a hard time getting worked up about guys taking an extra year or two. The Rices and Morrises and Trammells and such are the far bigger problem.

I can't think of a marginal guy who's praised by the mainstream media as a guy who would have been a Hall-of-Famer except for those other guys who used steroids.

Craig Biggio? Hey, could happen...

Craig Biggio at +66 WAR is not exactly in the Rice (+42) or Morris (+39) mold. Or Schalk (+23). He's closer to Thomas (+76), Griffey (+78) or Jeter (+70).

Omar Vizquel.

Now we're talking. +43 in 2850 games played. Of course, everyone who is primarily a SS and has 2500 games played has been elected to the HoF.

Well yeah. I'm being optimistic that the writers fumble their way into using their bad arguments to prop up a deserving candidate who would have gotten the screw job otherwise.

Do we have a comparison for last year's and this year's ballots writer-by-writer? It would be nice to know who, if anyone, put Blyleven on the ballot who left him off last year.

It would be nice to know who, if anyone, put Blyleven on the ballot who left him off last year.

Dave Albee is the only one so far I believe, but Blyleven has lost two...Phil Arvia (who has voted for him for years and might have been aa article typo...he never answered my questioning about it) and Maury Allen's death.

I found this with a Google Search. Repoz can comment on how it matches up with his.

If someone is willing to provide the data, I can throw together a quick little search-able web app for this.

I found this with a Google Search. Repoz can comment on how it matches up with his.

Yeah, I follow that...but he still has Brian Kenny as a voter.

Ryan,

Great link, thanks for posting. I like that he includes a separate column showing the 16 writers who inexplicably voted Morris yes and Blyleven no. I expect Bert to go in this year, but say he is one vote short which is possible since there seems to be some folks digging in their heels. If he is at 74.8% he'll be back on the ballot next year. If Blyleven is on the ballot next year it kills Morris' chances as he obviously pales in comparison. So, fools like Heyman are actually hurting their preferred guy Morris by holding out on Blyleven. Years from now it may be obvious that Blyleven not going in the 8th or 9th time on the ballot is what kept Morris' candidacy from gaining steam.

Mark Simon is member the BBWWA??

Jack McCaferry nine ballots or eight. Bagwell is nine????

He won't appear on the ballot for another 5-6 years at least, but Omar Vizquel is going to get a lot more mainstream HOF support than we BBTFers think he'll deserve. Andy Pettitte has Jack Morris's resume down pat (most wins in the 2000s; he lacks the single signature postseason start but I think he has postseason records for IP and W), although Pettitte's a lot more deserving than Morris.

If Vizquel goes in via the BBWAA, he would have the least MVP support during his career of any player they've enshrined. Which doesn't mean it's impossible, especially with the potential Schalk factor. But given the likely crowded nature of the ballots he'll be facing, I wouldn't bet heavily on his induction either.

Of course, he'd be a standard pick for the older versions of the VC. But nobody knows what the VC will look like in 5 years, let alone 25.

Pettitte might be interesting to watch, if only because it'll be fun watching people try to build a case for putting him on their ballots ahead of Mussina. (As of now, their winning percentages are nearly identical; Mussina has 30 extra wins, his ERA is 20 points lower (and he allowed fewer unearned runs), he has about 500 extra innings pitched, he walked fewer batters despite the extra innings, and he struck out hitters at a higher rate. Also, his postseason ERA is better, albeit in fewer starts. So he has those things going for him.)

Mark Simon is member the BBWWA??

Jack McCaferry nine ballots or eight. Bagwell is nine????

No on Mark Simon.

Yes on Bagwell and McCaffery's ballot is 10 if you include the Pete Rose write-in.

Here's his strange bit on Bagwell...

"That left the following under my strong consideration: Jeff Bagwell, Edgar Martinez, Fred McGriff, Rafael Palmeiro, Dave Parker and Larry Walker. All have Hall-worthy resumes. So it was left to the gut to decide, to the eyes, to a feel. It’s why the Hall of Fame process was long-ago willed to the baseball writers and not trusted to actuaries. And the gut said that of all of those hitters, none was better than Bagwell, who collected 449 homers in 14 seasons while hitting .297. He will be a Hall of Famer; it’s just a matter of when."

One of those not remotely considered was Roberto Alomar, whose disgustingly public spitting assault was not just a hateful attack on umpire John Hirschbeck, but on the sport. Alomar missed induction by just eight votes in his first try last season, but 143 electors did not vote for him, an indication that the sentiment against a player with otherwise first-ballot credentials is widespread and real. Hirschbeck, yes, has forgiven Alomar. But this is one place where an umpire does not get to call safe or out. So out it is, at least on this ballot, for the player responsible for the worst rain delay in baseball history.

Swap Trammell for Morris in the totals above and I'd be happy. I'll continue my crusade trying to convince people that by voting for Jack Morris they really should be voting for Trammell.

Pettitte might be interesting to watch, if only because it'll be fun watching people try to build a case for putting him on their ballots ahead of Mussina. (As of now, their winning percentages are nearly identical; Mussina has 30 extra wins, his ERA is 20 points lower (and he allowed fewer unearned runs), he has about 500 extra innings pitched, he walked fewer batters despite the extra innings, and he struck out hitters at a higher rate. Also, his postseason ERA is better, albeit in fewer starts. So he has those things going for him.)

I'll bet anyone right here and now a thousand dollars that Andy Pettitte won't make the Hall of Fame in a BBWAA vote. Unless he keeps playing and puts up a couple of more very good years, he's a marginal candidate to begin with, and the HGH admission will do him in with enough other voters to kill his chances. You might think you can imagine the excuses that some writers will make to ignore Pettitte's HGH use while maintaining a stonewall against McGwire, but in real life there won't be nearly enough of them to vote him in. He may be popular among the writers, but he's not that popular.

I mean Jesus, even if you assume that all 77% of the anti-McGwire voters are merely discounting his statistics, and nothing more, how can you say with a straight face that McGwire's statistical accomplishments aren't well above Pettitte's, not to mention how you can imagine that over half of the entire voting roster will come to that same silly conclusion?

The proper comps for Andy Pettitte's HoF case are guys like Kevin Brown and Rafael Palmeiro. Guys with solid but not overwhelming HoF cases, and open-and-shut PED use cases. They will barely make it to their second ballot, if at all. I expect Pettitte will do better than them, even though his case is clearly worse on the merits.

The writers really really love Honest Andy, and a significant number of them will twist themselves into embarrassing knots (not unlike Andy himself on his HGH use) to defend their votes.

I don't think he'll get in on the writer's ballot, but I expect him to get far more support than he should, and I expect a lot of hypocrisy and bizarre justifications in the votes.

icho177: I have one ballot that you don't:

• John P. Lopez, formerly reporter and columnist for the Houston Chronicle, now radio personality in Houston (KILT 610). Tweeted a picture of his ballot of Alomar, Bagwell, Blyleven, Larkin, and Parker. No e-mail listed, but given station e-mail protocol, I would guess John.Lopez@cbsradio.com.

Also, McCaffery has eight on his ballot - no Bagwell:

• Jack McCaffery, Delaware County Daily Times. In this article, McCaffery says there are no stunning newcomers on the ballot or any reason to change his ballot from last year (which included Andre Dawson and the following), Blyleven, McGwire, Morris, Smith, Mattingly, Raines, Trammell, and Larkin. No Alomar for him – nobody who spits on an umpire in the Hall of Fame! [Though he wrote in Pete Rose at the top of his ballot, per his usual policy…hmmm.] Beyond these, he says he gave “strong consideration” to Bagwell, Martinez, McGriff, Palmeiro, Parker, and Walker. “All have Hall-worthy resumes. So it was left to the gut to decide, to the eyes, to a feel. It’s why the Hall of Fame process was long-ago willed to the baseball writers and not trusted to actuaries.” Wow. At this point, I will not be surprising and any mind-numbingly dumb thing he says after this. E-mail sports@delcotimes.com.

I see Repoz read McCaffery differently than I did. I guess it is a yes to Bagwell, then, but it isn't that clear....

The Frank Clines Hall of Fame Ballot:

Palmeiro...........

http://www.expressmilwaukee.com/article-13417-bly-golly-this-time-he-cant-be-stopped_.html

Good to see a Pete Rose voter isn't hung up on PEDs

Per the somewhat dippy but also a little charming dialogue in that link, Clines voted for Morris last year, but he isn't voting for him this year.

Ballot: Blyleven, Alomar, McGwire, Palmeiro, Larkin and Trammell

As long as Blyleven and Alomar get in this year some backlog will be cleared. Bagwell & Larkin I'd love to see get in but figure they won't until next year. Raines, Trammell, Walker (I'm Canadian, we gotta support our own!), McGriff (Blue Jay fan too), Palmeiro, McGwire would also get my vote if I had one most likely although I suspect I'd put E Martinez in there instead of McGriff as he is more deserving (dang 10 name limit).

Phew, if those writers don't start putting in 3 or more guys in a year this ballot will be getting way too full. I didn't even mix in other favorites like John Franco, and Lee Smith (soft spot for the 400+ save crew even though they really don't belong) or for guys with freak show stats (Jack Morris).

Yet somehow they found the space for Bruce Sutter, Jim Rice, and Andre Dawson. Go figure.

Chaz Scoggins Annual Hall of Column from a few days ago.http://www.lowellsun.com/ci_16946014?IADID=Search-www.lowellsun.com-www.lowellsun.com

Kirby Arnold of the Everett Herald tweeted a partial that indicates he just sent in his ballot, including a vote for Edgar...no other details.

My 6 last ballots: Ladewski, Puma, Botte, Lopez, Clines and Scoggins.

Am I missing any?

I have all of those. I had Scoggins before, didn't realize that was one of the ones you were missing. The only other one I already posted - the Kirby Arnold partial (Edgar).

Please know that I come from an unabashed Edgar-supportive place, and this is pure speculation, but I have been ruminating over Edgar's almost 10% drop from his actual % total from last year, so far, and ultimately decided that this year has been a river of anti-sabermetric ballots released early. By my count, there are 26 voters who were pro-Edgar in 2010 who haven't announced yet that I am aware of (Antonen, E. Bloom, Conlin, Crasnick, Curry, Edes, Henderson, Henning, Hersh, Keegan, Knisley, Kurkjian, LaRue, Livingstone, Madden, McCoy, Miklasz, Newhan, Peters, Posnanski, Schulman, Shalin, Singer, Stark, Stree, Walters), with an equal number of anti-Edgar voters (Baker,Bodrow, Gage, Greenstein, Gurnick, Hummel, Jackson, Kennedy, Mariotti, Markus, McAdam, McClelland, Miller, Nadel, Newman, Nightengale, Pedulla, Quinn, Roberts, Rogers, Schultz, Smizik, Telander, Topkin, Van Dyck, Verducci) who announced last year remaining as well. My hypothesis, FWIW, is that voters who *tend* to be more pro-sabermetric remain unannounced in disproportionate numbers to those whose ballots we might like a bit less (and if Edgar goes 50-50 over the next 52 ballots, he would actually be very close to or even see a slight increase from his 36.2% showing (if our tracking is true).

Keep an eye out for these names, as guys who have announced in the past....

Updated: now with the dizzy USA Today picks.

Only 4 voters left there?

Looks like a USA Today (Dodd, Livingstone, Nightengale, Pedulla) dump here:

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baseball/hallfame/2010-12-29-hall-of-fame-preview_N.htm

Dodd: Alomar, Larkin, Trammell, Smith
Livingstone: Alomar, Bagwell, Gonzalez, Larkin, Martinez, McGwire, Raines, Walker, Palmeiro
Nightengale: Alomar, Blyleven, McGriff, Palmeiro, Morris
Pedulla: Alomar, Blyleven, Morris

Not looking good for Blyleven.

Ok, excelent. Chigago Tribune Voters, maybe tomorrow. (Rogers, Gonzalez, Greenstein, Hersh, Mitchell, Sullivan, Van Dyck and New voter Morrisey).

ahh, ESPN (maybe 13 or 15 voters) MLB (10 or 12) Fan House (7 or 9) and Milwakee Journal (5) in January.

UP the Ballots...

BTW, Pedulla voted for Larkin last year, but not this year, and voted for Alomar this year, but wouldn't last year because of the spitting incident. Pretty stupid.

Pedulla voted for Larkin last year, but not this year, and voted for Alomar this year, but wouldn't last year because of the spitting incident. Pretty stupid.

I wonder if some of these guys even remember who they voted for the year before, much less remember why.

Nightengale: Alomar, Blyleven, McGriff, Palmeiro, Morris

Seriously? How do you vote for both Palmeiro and McGriff, and neither McGwire nor Bagwell?

Of course, you've probably all seen JoePoz's "eight definites" blog post by now (brilliant, even if I don't agree with every word, I support most of the conclusions - wavering a bit on McGwire, hope Walker is one of the next two):

http://joeposnanski.blogspot.com/2010/12/hall-of-fame-eight-definites.html#more

I found a defender of Bert Blyleven, but I don't think the guy (Pat Duncan) has a badge (but if I'm wrong, I know this group here is the best place to find out):

http://www.argusleader.com/article/20101230/SPORTS03/12300304/1002/sports

Looks like Walker, Brown and Palmeiro are the tough decisions on Pos' ballot.

That's what I'd guess, too, DL. The comments on Palmeiro, after what he said about McGwire, will be interesting. Unless he draws a distinction between McGwire being caught *before* there was testing, and Palmeiro *after* (as some others have), it will really be a reflection of JoePoz's feelings about peak vs. longevity, because in many ways those two are at opposite ends of that spectrum. And it will be interesting to see what he says about Walker and Coors Field, the home/road splits, etc. I'd guess he leans toward Walker and Brown, but that's a tough call....

Looks like Walker, Brown and Palmeiro are the tough decisions on Pos' ballot.

You're forgetting Dale Murphy. Pos has voted for Murphy every year going back to 2003. Now unless he drops him...I'm sticking with Brown as his 10th pick.

Looks like Walker, Brown and Palmeiro are the tough decisions on Pos' ballot.

You're forgetting Dale Murphy.

I don't think he's mentioned McGriff yet either.

If anyone's curious, here are two numbers for all of the guys on last year's ballot.

First number: their percentage among the 128 voters Repoz tallied.

Second number: their percentage among the 411 voters Repoz DID NOT tally.

Given in order of their finish in Repoz's tally:

Alomar 87.5%, 69.3%
Blyleven 80.5%, 72.3%
Dawson 79.7%, 77.4%
Larkin 54.7%, 50.6%
Morris 47.7%, 53.8%
Smith 42.2%, 48.9%
Raines 41.4%, 27.0%
Edgar 37.5%, 35.8%
McGwire 33.6%, 20.7%
Trammell 25.0%, 21.7%
McGriff 20.3%, 21.9%
Murphy 10.9%, 11.9%
Parker 9.4%, 17.0%
Mattingly 6.3%, 19.2%
Baines 6.3%, 6.1%

Ordering them from largest to smallest gaps:
Alomar: Repoz higher by 18.2%
Raines: Repoz higher by 14.4%
Mattingly: Repoz lower by 12.9%
McGwire: Repoz higher by 12.9%
Blyleven: Repoz higher by 8.2%
Parker: Repoz lower by 7.6%
Smith: Repoz lower by 6.7%
Morris: Repoz lower by 6.1%
Larkin: Repoz higher by 4.1%
Trammell: Repoz higher by 3.3%
Dawson: Repoz higher by 2.3%
Edgar: Repoz higher by 1.7%
McGriff: Repoz lower by 1.6%
Murphy: Repoz lower by 1.0%
Baines: Repoz higher by 0.2%

Repoz's guys averaged 5.83 names per ballot.

The others averaged 5.54 names per ballot.

Good stuff as usual, Chris!

I love the Mattingly difference. It's huge - and for a guy at the bottom of the ballot.

I'm pretty sure I know the cause: NYC effect. Maury Brown once posted a complete list of BBWAA members. About one-fifth were based out of NYC. Less than one-fifth of columnists writing about their ballot are in NYC.

I also suspect the NYC-effect partially explains the Alomar gap. He sure got old quick when he went there.

Chris the one that has always bugged me was the consistent low early returns on Lee Smith...it seems the old coot veal vote loves closers.

Larry Stone just tweeted his once Partial to now Full ballot...

"My Hall ballot: Same 8 I voted last year (Alomar, Blyleven, Larkin, Edgar, McGriff, McGwire, Raines, Trammell) plus Bagwell, Walker"

Chris-

How consistent have those numbers been? It seems like just the random variation of who publishes their ballot could easily account for +/-5%, especially for players already in the range of 50%. It's hard for me to think that the gaps in the Morris and Larkin vote percentages would necessarily be predictive. (You noted in your column of one year ago that Jack Morris' vote percentages had been consistently overstated by Repoz' tally, but last year as you note here they were understated.)

How consistent have those numbers been? It seems like just the random variation of who publishes their ballot could easily account for +/-5%, especially for players already in the range of 50%.

At the risk of trying to explain random sampling error (which I think is almost certainly the dominant explanation for everything from, say, Blyleven down on Chris's list), the higher errors seem somewhat consistent with a notion that non-published HOF voters are more inclined to consider character. These people are less likely to vote for Alomar (spitting), Raines (cocaine), and McGwire (steroids), and are more likely to vote for Mattingly, who seems like the sort of guy who'd get something of a "good-character" boost. You could maybe extend that to Blyleven (quitting on his team in 1980) as well, although I suspect there you're really mostly just getting into normal sampling error (if you weren't there already). Going lower, Parker (cocaine) doesn't really fit, as he does better with the non-published crowd, and I might have expected more of a character boost for Edgar.

MCoA,

I don't have repoz's old 2009 election tallies handy. Guess I deleted the wrong file or email. here is 2008 (it's near the top).

Most of what you see in 2008 is what happened in 2010 as well. It's not always to the same extent (repoz was closer on Raines and Blyleven in 2008, for example), but the guys he's high and low on are usually the same. Morris is the big exception. Looking at that 2008 list, I remember John was always a guy he was high on.

While there's some variation from year to year who publishes their ballot, there's also a lot of consistency. More consistency than variation, frankly. It's not entirely random who posts ballot: it's active columnists/writers and some recent retirees for the most part. It ain't Seymour Siwoff (who has a vote).

One problem comparing lists then vs now: a lot of guys repoz's tally did a great job estimating are no longer on the ballot: Dawson, Rice, Goosage - Repoz was withint 1% of all of them.

Blyleven won't make it. It's already close, and IIRC last year he started strong and finished weak.

To Largebill at #42 above, I don't see this:

I expect Bert to go in this year, but say he is one vote short which is possible since there seems to be some folks digging in their heels. If he is at 74.8% he'll be back on the ballot next year. If Blyleven is on the ballot next year it kills Morris' chances as he obviously pales in comparison. So, fools like Heyman are actually hurting their preferred guy Morris by holding out on Blyleven.

1) Blyleven's got two more years of eligibility, win or lose, no?

2) This presupposes that the pro-Blyleven arguments are having some effect on the blockheads blocking him. I mean, late trends certainly seem to be heading that direction but last year I seem to remember him being much stronger earlier and still just missing that magic 75%.

I believe Blyleven is in his 14th year - so one more if he doesn't get in this year.

2) This presupposes that the pro-Blyleven arguments are having some effect on the blockheads blocking him.

Given that Blyleven's vote totals have skyrocketed over the last several years, that's a pretty good presupposing to make. In his first three years on the ballot, Blyleven was stuck under 20%. In the last half-century, only one person has had three sub-20% seasons and rallied to win 75% of the vote: Bob Lemon. And that was over 40 years ago. Last time ANY player who went on to win BBWAA-induction received under 20% even once was Luis Aparicio back in 1981. Before him, you have to go back to 1970 (Duke Snider). The point: Blyleven's rise in the BBWAA has no recent precedent, so clearly some arguments on his behalf have had an impact.

I seem to remember him being much stronger earlier and still just missing that magic 75%.

I actually looked at this earlier today. I have records of repoz's tally from last year at the 58 ballot marker. Yeah - Blyleven was better then than he is now. BUT almost everyone's looking different. Last year, through 58 ballots, Repoz's count averaged 6.28 names per ballot. This year, through 60 the average is 5.74. (NOTE: I know it's at 61 as I write this, but I but the results through 60 in my personal file earlier today, and that's ever so slightly closer to 58).

What that tells me: a lot of the guys who posted later last year are posting earlier this year, and some of the guys who posted earlier this year haven't posted this year.

Last year's full tally of 128 ballots averaged 5.83 names per ballot. Thus, if the first 58 guys averaged 6.28 names per ballot (which they did), the last 70 averaged 5.45 names per ballot.** I'll just add this in: last year I was stunned how high the tally was at this point. I've never felt that way that deep into any of the previous tallies. I wouldn't worry about how Blyleven stacks up this year versus how he did last year.

Some comparisons of last year's first 58 w/ this year's first 60:
Mattingly: 10.0% then. 5.0% now.
McGwire: 32.7% then. 23.3% now.
Blyleven: 84.5% then. 76.6% now.
Parker: 12.1% then. 5.0% now.
Smith: 43.1% then. 31.7% now.
Morris: 58.6% then. 51.7% now.
Edgar: 48.3% then. 26.7% now.
McGriff: 19.0% then. 13.3% now.
Baines: 10.3% then. 6.7% now.

Now, to be fair (and since I"m looking at the info), some guys have gone up:
Alomar: 84.5% then. 95.0% now.
Raines: 39.7% then. 53.3% now.
Larkin: 60.3% then. 70.0% now.
Trammell: 25.9% then. 30.0% now.

The only guy who hasn't changed is Dale Murphy (10.3% to 10.0%).

** Exact math: 746 names on 128 tallies in all (5.83), of which 364 names appeared on the first 58 tallies (6.28), so therefore 382 names appeared on the final 70 tallies (5.45).

Blyleven was five votes short last year. Has anybody ever been that close and didn't make it?

Wow...I thought BB was a lock this year, but if you take Repoz's latest tally and apply the standard 5-10% drop...yikes. That is not looking good.

Flynn,

Jim Bunning missed by 4 votes.

Nellis Fox missed by 2 votes.

Bunning had his big year in 1988. In 1989, Jim Kaat and Fergie Jenkins and Gaylord Perry hit the ballot, making him the 3rd of 4th best pitcher on it. Added bonus: Yaz & Bench hit the ballot that year, and none of hte newbie pitchers got in. Thus they were all there next year when Jim Palmer arrived. That was Hunter's last year. He didn't have a chance.

Fox got 74%+ in his last year on the ballot.

Both got in via the VC, though, so I'm not sure if that's who you're looking for. AMong players who missed Cooperstown altogether, below is a complete list of all players not currently on the ballot who EVER got over 50% of the vote even once without making into Cooperstown eventually:

Gil Hodges.

That's it. Everyone else who ever got over half the BBWAA vote either was elected in by the BBWAA or put in by the VC. And if it hadn't been for the Joe Morgan SuperFriends edition of the VC, Hodges might've been put in. Aside from putting in their friends, the VC routinely puts in the highest-voted on players the VC ultimately passed on.

Hello, new Ballot Rick Telander:http://www.suntimes.com/sports/3088812-419/palmeiro-ballot-hall-hits-vote.html

7: Alomar, Blyleven, Larkin, Smith, Raines, Parker, Trammell.

On the bottom of Telander's bit is this gem...

So I’ll pray and fill out my 2011 form with first-year guy Edgar Martinez (18 years, all with the Mariners, five Silver Slugger Awards, seven All-Star Games) and, what the heck, Harold Baines.

Repoz: I no read this lines. Thanks.

This Night The Full Ballots 61 a 63 Up. BBWAA votes????? 62 and 63???.

My 6 last ballots: Dodd, Livingstone, Nightengale, Pedulla, Stone and Telander.

Am I missing any?

This Night The Full Ballots 61 a 63 Up. BBWAA votes????? 62 and 63???.

icho, a few of the BBWAA votes I get don't want their name attached...so they just get entered into the total.

the dizzy USA Today picks.

Boy you ain't kidding. Bob Nightengale's is just bizarre. Alomar and Blyleven fine. And of course Morris (he won 20 twice and 19 once and "led" his teams to 4 WS). That's all not too wacky.

McGriff: Remove the players linked to steroids during his time, and McGriff ranks second in homers, first in RBI and third in hits from 1988 to 2002.

Palmeiro: I refuse to exclude him, because we don't know who was clean and who was dirty during his era.

Wha??? McGriff gets a vote because, if you exclude almost everybody better than him, he was one of the best of the era. Palmeiro gets a vote because we don't know who we should exclude and who we shouldn't.

All the other people better than McGriff ... no votes. No McGwire or Bagwell (or Edgar or Walker or ...)

Wow, someone trying to give Morris credit for the '92 Jays? I don't think even SBB would spin something that wacky.

Repoz, have you ever offered any writers who no longer have a gig (or the kind of gig where they don't have a platform) a one shot column on BTF about how they filled out their ballot?

I wish that some voter would write in Ichiro's name, if only to see if Ray is still alive. I wonder if he got buried under some 3 ft. high snow drift in Queens.

I wish that some voter would write in Ichiro's name, if only to see if Ray is still alive. I wonder if he got buried under some 3 ft. high snow drift in Queens.

He made a Vampire Hour cameo in the big Morris thread. As usual, he left 'em wanting more.

have you ever offered any writers who no longer have a gig (or the kind of gig where they don't have a platform) a one shot column on BTF about how they filled out their ballot?

I once asked Phil Pepe about this...but he was deeply involved working on a local production of Sigmund Romberg's Forbidden Melody at the time.

Actually, I've never had the chance...I'm mostly in contact with those who still have gigs.

Jack Curry (YESNetwork)...just tweeted.

Just completed my Hall of Fame ballot. Alomar, Blyleven, Larkin, Raines and E. Martinez got votes. Debated Bagwell and Morris for long time.

Mark Kreidler (ESPN) now in via FB...

My Baseball HOF votes officially cast. Remaining in traditionally picky mode: Robbie Alomar and Bert Blyleven, and even Blyleven made my pen rattle a little as I checked the box. The 60 shutouts just finally got to me. (Alomar should've gone in last year.)

Any world where J. Morris gets more HOF votes than J. Bagwell is just warped.

Jack Curry: Alomar, Blyleven, Larkin, Raines and E. Martinez got votes. Debated Bagwell and Morris for long time.

Grrr ... what's the debate?

JB: 297/408/540, 449 HR, 488 2B, 1517 R, 1529 RBI, 149 OPS+, 9400 PA, 202/78 SB, 1 MVP, 1 ROY, 1 GG, entire career in field,
80 WAR, 55 WAA, 39 best-5 WAR, 37 cons-5 WAR

EM: 312/418/515, 309 HR, 514 2B, 1219 R, 1261 RBI, 147 OPS+, 8700 PA, 49/30 SB, 0 MVP, 0 ROY, 0 GG, most of career at DH,
67 WAR, 38 WAA, 32.5 best-5 WAR, 30 cons-5 WAR

There is no way you can rationally argue that Edgar was better. The comparison to Raines is equally or more lopsided and Raines doesn't even have the BA advantage. This leaves us with two options:

(a) Curry is applying a steroid penalty of some sort to Bagwell
(b) 21st century humanity is so irrational we might as well just call it a day

The Tom Keegan Hall of Fame Ballot:

Twitter @TomKeeganLJW
Just faxed my HoF vote. From easiest to toughest calls: 1. Alomar, 2. Larkin, 3. Morris, 4. E. Martinez, 5. Bagwell, 6. Blyleven.

One More Votes for Larkin and Bagwell.