2013 HOF Ballot: Who Gets Your Vote?

[Loophole]

Bagwell

Biggio

Lofton

Martinez

Piazza

Raines

Schilling

Trammell

Walker

Though I'm iffy on Walker and Lofton, admittedly. IMO the argument that "they're better than other guys in the Hall" doesn't hold much weight if you think the Hall SHOULD get smaller in the future and you wish you could kick out the dead guys who didn't deserve it in the first place. Ideally I'd like the standard minimum to be closer to 80-85 WAR. But in fairness, I'd vote for those guys to get their due, cause I guess that's what the HOF is now.

Now, about the roids: I don't really know. At least on a ballot this heavy, I'd prefer to hypothetically vote for the guys who aren't synonymous with the word "steroids," and probably vote for them when spots open up. But I still wouldn't vote for them with a smile. Whenever I see people defending them they always use the same arguments, both of which seem to miss the point: "they'd have been HOFers without the roids" and "there are already bad guys in the Hall, can't vote for Cobb and not vote for them". It's not about the talent (no one's disputing that part) and it's not about the general character of the player, it's that they cheated at baseball (regardless of anything else) and that a huge chunk of their careers feels phony and imagined. Just cause the rest of their careers don't have that phoniness doesn't mean the phony part should just be forgiven; they still used illegal drugs to enhance their on-field play and their careers were defined by it.

That said I'd still eventually vote for Bonds, Clemens, McGwire and maybe Raffy, probably because I'm under 30 and I'd feel obligated. But I can't really blame anyone for voting against them, even the crotchety anti-stat old guys, cause part of it does "feel" wrong and when people talk about putting the steroid era behind us, they're talking about the peaks of these guys' careers and the reasons we remember them. For me it's a bit hard to stomach the thought of them making speeches at Cooperstown. Anyway, ignoring all that, I would still have to be convinced to vote yes on Sosa, because he's one guy who I genuinely think would not be a HOFer without the juice. He might even have missed 500 homers if he kept on the same pace he was on before turning 30. Raffy I'm not sure about, especially cause he didn't have a massive steroidy peak, which also makes it less obvious when (and if) he was using. But his career was about staying healthy and productive for a long time, and steroids might've made that possible for him. And actually, fWAR is a lot more down on McGwire than I would've thought. Before the big homer explosion he had three sub-2.0 WAR seasons including those two injury years in his peak-age years. If he hadn't used he might be remembered as a great player that could've been if only it weren't for those injuries.

[Frobby]

I have six easy votes:

Curt Schilling (very similar to Mussina, and for me both of them deserve it) 76.9 rWAR

Mike Piazza (easy top-10 all time catcher, maybe top-5) 56.8 rWAR

Jeff Bagwell (otherworldly 8-year peak, career .948 OPS, no steroid evidence) 76.7 rWAR

Alan Trammell (still deserves it; I have him ranked around #8-12 all-time SS) 67.1 rWAR

Tim Raines (2nd greatest leadoff man ever is still pretty good; 85% career SB%) 66.2 rWAR

Kenny Lofton (Similar to Trammell: he's around the #8-12 all-time CF. A better choice than Andre Dawson, for instance. 64.9 rWAR

I hate the argument that a player is better than someone already in the Hall of Fame and therefore should be in. There are a number of guys in the HOF who shouldn't be there. Dawson (60.6 rWAR) is certainly borderline, and I don't want lots of borderline guys in the HOF.

That said, I'd concur that every one of your six guys deserves serious consideration. It looks to me like for the next 5-10 year it's going to be comparatively tough for players to get the required 75% vote because the competition is so tough. Five of the six guys you listed have rWAR of 60+, and the sixth is Piazza who was a 14-time all-star. Then you have the steroids issue lurking, with the question of what "proof" is needed to vote against a guy.

Then starting next year you have some very strong candidates -- Maddux (99.4 rWAR), Glavine (69.3), Mussina (78.1) and Frank Thomas (69.7) in 2014, then Randy Johnson (98.6), Pedro Martinez (82.6) and John Smoltz (62.6) in 2015, Griffey (79.2) in 2016. I think the guys who don't make it this year may be waiting for a while.

By the way, why no love for Lou Whitaker (71.1 rWAR) on your list?

[Rene88]

I'm going to leave the PED useage out of it. I know a lot of these players will lose votes because of allegations against them. Here are my six:

Bonds

Clemens

E. Martinez

Lee Smith

Palmerio

Biggio

Leave PED out of it, but no McGwire?

[Rene88]

I can only vote for 10, so these would be mine.

Bagwell

Biggio

Bonds

Clemens

Martinez

McGwire

Piazza

Raines

Schilling

Walker

I also think Sosa, Palmeiro, and MAYBE McGriff should make it, but there are too many great players on the ballot.

Sosa??? Sigh....

Walker and Martinez are definitely not HOFers in my eyes.

Schilling gives me a headache. I hope he doesn't make it.

[Rene88]

I don't think Skanar is taking it that seriously, he is just making his case. All good fun here.

I would take about 10 of these guys (including Lee Smith) ahead of Bruce Sutter. That is one player I just cannot comprehend. Perhaps some big Bruce Sutter supporter can explain that one to me.

[skanar]

I hate the argument that a player is better than someone already in the Hall of Fame and therefore should be in. There are a number of guys in the HOF who shouldn't be there. Dawson (60.6 rWAR) is certainly borderline, and I don't want lots of borderline guys in the HOF.

That said, I'd concur that every one of your six guys deserves serious consideration. It looks to me like for the next 5-10 year it's going to be comparatively tough for players to get the required 75% vote because the competition is so tough. Five of the six guys you listed have rWAR of 60+, and the sixth is Piazza who was a 14-time all-star. Then you have the steroids issue lurking, with the question of what "proof" is needed to vote against a guy.

Then starting next year you have some very strong candidates -- Maddux (99.4 rWAR), Glavine (69.3), Mussina (78.1) and Frank Thomas (69.7) in 2014, then Randy Johnson (98.6), Pedro Martinez (82.6) and John Smoltz (62.6) in 2015, Griffey (79.2) in 2016. I think the guys who don't make it this year may be waiting for a while.

By the way, why no love for Lou Whitaker (71.1 rWAR) on your list?

I agree with most of this. I also hate the argument that "Very Good (not Great) Player X is in; so Very Good Player Y, who was better, also deserves it" - I shouldn't have made it. WAR numbers for catchers (and relief pitchers, but I think only the absolute best of them deserve to go in) are lower; it's one reason why the BB-ref JAWS lists are so nice.

Craig Biggio (62.1), Larry Walker (69.7), and Edgar Martinez (64.4) are also all over 60 rWAR. Biggio, I think, is just as good an include as the guys above - I left him off that list since I also have the four steroid guys. Walker (pre-humidor Colorado) and Martinez (full-time DH) have external factors that make them a bit less enticing as candidates, but I could easily see none of these 9 non-steroid and 4 steroid guys making it this year.

The ballot is absolutely about to get extremely crowded.

Whitaker is ineligible for a vote, as he got less than 5% his first year of eligibility and fell off the ballot. Yes, really.

The argument against him is his lack of a high peak and the corresponding lack of MVP/AS hardware. He's a WAR compiler, without the counting stat magic numbers that other compilers have. Also, he lacks any one truly superior skill: he wasn't the greatest defensively, just very good; his power numbers were excellent for a 2B, but only for a 2B; he drew a ton of walks, but the OBP is only .363, etc., etc. In the Times On Base leaders list, he's at #85, near John Olerud, Chili Davis, and Ed Yost. I'd probably have voted for him, but I do see an argument that he's overrated by WAR, as far as WAR can overrate anyone. He certainly didn't deserve to be off the ballot in one go.

[skanar]

I don't think Skanar is taking it that seriously, he is just making his case. All good fun here.

I would take about 10 of these guys (including Lee Smith) ahead of Bruce Sutter. That is one player I just cannot comprehend. Perhaps some big Bruce Sutter supporter can explain that one to me.

Sutter was the best closer in the game for about 6 years. And nobody else was elected in 2006. That's the case. Oh, and he tied the single-season saves record (later broken). He did have a really high peak, for a relief pitcher; and many of his saves were multi-inning: he has more IP than Billy Wagner despite pitching in three fewer seasons.

My list of HOF relievers is Rivera, Hoffman, Billy Wagner, (none eligible yet), Gossage, Eckersley, Hoyt Wilhelm (all already in). On the borderline are Lee Smith and John Franco - they probably both deserve it. I could be talked into accepting Rollie Fingers, maybe.

[Moose Milligan]

Sutter was the best closer in the game for about 6 years. And nobody else was elected in 2006. That's the case. Oh, and he tied the single-season saves record (later broken). He did have a really high peak, for a relief pitcher; and many of his saves were multi-inning: he has more IP than Billy Wagner despite pitching in three fewer seasons.

My list of HOF relievers is Rivera, Hoffman, Billy Wagner, (none eligible yet), Gossage, Eckersley, Hoyt Wilhelm (all already in). On the borderline are Lee Smith and John Franco - they probably both deserve it. I could be talked into accepting Rollie Fingers, maybe.

Curious as to why you wouldn't accept Fingers if you're making the case for Sutter.

[skanar]

Curious as to why you wouldn't accept Fingers if you're making the case for Sutter.

PBC just asked what the positive case for Sutter was. I don't think it's enough of a case to get him in - you'll note he's not on my list.

[MarylandAaron]

(Not taking PED into account)

Bonds

E. Martinez

Biggio

Clemens

Bagwell

Schilling

Palmeiro

Walker

Lofton

[russ snyder]

Leave PED out of it, but no McGwire?

Good catch. He would get my vote as well.

[DrungoHazewood]

I missed this a week or so ago when I was on leave and not logging in much.

My list would be:

Bagwell

Biggio

Bonds

Clemens

Martinez

McGwire

Raffy

Piazza

Raines

Schilling

Trammell

L. Walker

But that's 12, and you're only allowed to vote for 10, so I guess I'd drop McGwire and Larry Walker for now.

[tennOsfan]

In order of preference:

Raines

Piazza

Biggio

[DrungoHazewood]

I hate the argument that a player is better than someone already in the Hall of Fame and therefore should be in. There are a number of guys in the HOF who shouldn't be there. Dawson (60.6 rWAR) is certainly borderline, and I don't want lots of borderline guys in the HOF.

The issue I have with this statement is that Dawson isn't anywhere close to the worst HOFer. He's far closer to the median than the bottom. He's 20 WAR ahead of Rice and untold numbers of Vet's committee selections. You may not want borderline guys in the Hall, but there have been borderline guys in the Hall since WWII. I find it difficult to draw a hard in line in the sand declaring, say, 60 WAR as borderline when there have been 30-40 WAR guys in the Hall since my grandfather was 20 years old.

By your standards we're saying no to guys who're not just a little better, but nearly twice as valuable as some current HOFers.

[DrungoHazewood]

In order of preference:

Raines

Piazza

Biggio

To me we're splitting hairs here. I might put Piazza first in this mini-list, only because he's the best hitting catcher of all time. But they're all no-brainer HOFers. Not inner circle, but well above any gray area.