Jump to content

Cast your 2014 Hall of Fame Ballot (Update: Maddux, Glavine, Thomas Elected)


Frobby

Cast your 2014 Hall of Fame Ballot  

586 members have voted

  1. 1. Cast your 2014 Hall of Fame Ballot


This poll is closed to new votes


Recommended Posts

I hope the mods will allow me to post this on the Orioles board, since the HOF announcement is tomorrow and a prominent ex-Oriole is among those on the ballot.

I could only list 10 options in the poll, so I eliminated a few who have been on the ballot before and aren't too likely to get in this year, even though they might be deserving. But if you want to cast your vote for someone I didn't list, just post it here. Remember, you can only vote for ten players total.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 178
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Its hard to say because in most years every single one of these people should be in. As a whole (if you had to pick only a handful) Biggio Morris and Thomas miss it, I guess the next miss would be Schilling/Mussina.

It will be a sad baseball world if Barry Bonds is not in the Hall of Fame. I don't see any reason for Glavine and Maddux not making it. I'd love to hear the justification for not putting Clemens in.

#witchhunt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its hard to say because in most years every single one of these people should be in. As a whole (if you had to pick only a handful) Biggio Morris and Thomas miss it, I guess the next miss would be Schilling/Mussina.

It will be a sad baseball world if Barry Bonds is not in the Hall of Fame. I don't see any reason for Glavine and Maddux not making it. I'd love to hear the justification for not putting Clemens in.

#witchhunt

You could site character issues, after all you didn't put that Cobb fellow in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why would you leave off someone deserving to make room for Morris?

I didn't necessarily pick the 10 guys I would vote for (if I voted for 10). But there's been some buzz about Morris since it's his last year of eligibility so I wanted to be sure the posters considered him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't necessarily pick the 10 guys I would vote for (if I voted for 10). But there's been some buzz about Morris since it's his last year of eligibility so I wanted to be sure the posters considered him.

While I am vehemently opposed to him getting in I was not honestly questioning you putting him in the poll. However I question leaving Raines off to make room for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The seven I checked (Biggio, Glavine, Maddux, Mussina, Schilling, Piazza, and Thomas) plus Bagwell, Raines, and Trammell.

Bonds and Clemens are tough for me, and with 10 others I think are obviously deserving, I decided I could leave them off.

The weirdest thing about this vote for me is the difference between Glavine and Mussina/Schilling. Glavine has 4413.1 IP with 1900 runs allowed (a 3.87 RA9); Mussina 3562.2 IP with 1559 RA (3.94 RA9); Schilling 3261 IP with 1318 RA (3.64 RA9). In terms of peripherals, Glavine is at 5.3 K/9, 3.1 BB/9, 0.7 HR/9; Mussina at 7.1 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9; Schilling at 8.6 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9.

Those stats are sort of similar - Glavine has the edge in length; Schilling in quality. But Glavine spent the entirety of his career, and Schilling the majority of his, in the NL, with 8-man lineups - Mussina was in the AL East. Mussina (82.7) beats Schilling (80.7) and Glavine (74.0) in rWAR; Schilling (83.2) has the edge in fWAR (Mussina 82.5, Glavine 64.3).

To me, all three are obvious Hall of Famers. But more importantly, all three are comparable pitchers. Glavine has the longest career, Schilling the highest peak, and Mussina the best sustained excellence. But somehow, the standard view seems to be that Glavine is a slam-dunk and that Schilling and Mussina are borderline. I understand how perception (and flawed voting for CY awards) colors things, but statistically, this distinction simply cannot be made. If Glavine belongs in the Hall (and he does), it should be obvious that Schilling and Mussina do as well, unless you place some odd length-of-career constraint and insist on 4000+ IP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I am vehemently opposed to him getting in I was not honestly questioning you putting him in the poll. However I question leaving Raines off to make room for him.

Raines, Bagwell, Sosa, McGwire and Palmeiro would all have arguments to be in the 10 on my list. I understand that Baseball Think Factory was able to poll 161 of the actual voters, and in that sample, Morris outpolled Raines (but was outpolled by Bagwell).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The seven I checked (Biggio, Glavine, Maddux, Mussina, Schilling, Piazza, and Thomas) plus Bagwell, Raines, and Trammell.

Bonds and Clemens are tough for me, and with 10 others I think are obviously deserving, I decided I could leave them off.

The weirdest thing about this vote for me is the difference between Glavine and Mussina/Schilling. Glavine has 4413.1 IP with 1900 runs allowed (a 3.87 RA9); Mussina 3562.2 IP with 1559 RA (3.94 RA9); Schilling 3261 IP with 1318 RA (3.64 RA9). In terms of peripherals, Glavine is at 5.3 K/9, 3.1 BB/9, 0.7 HR/9; Mussina at 7.1 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 0.9 HR/9; Schilling at 8.6 K/9, 2.0 BB/9, 1.0 HR/9.

Those stats are sort of similar - Glavine has the edge in length; Schilling in quality. But Glavine spent the entirety of his career, and Schilling the majority of his, in the NL, with 8-man lineups - Mussina was in the AL East. Mussina (82.7) beats Schilling (80.7) and Glavine (74.0) in rWAR; Schilling (83.2) has the edge in fWAR (Mussina 82.5, Glavine 64.3).

To me, all three are obvious Hall of Famers. But more importantly, all three are comparable pitchers. Glavine has the longest career, Schilling the highest peak, and Mussina the best sustained excellence. But somehow, the standard view seems to be that Glavine is a slam-dunk and that Schilling and Mussina are borderline. I understand how perception (and flawed voting for CY awards) colors things, but statistically, this distinction simply cannot be made. If Glavine belongs in the Hall (and he does), it should be obvious that Schilling and Mussina do as well, unless you place some odd length-of-career constraint and insist on 4000+ IP.

Glavine- 305

Mussina- 270

Schilling- 216

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Glavine belongs in the Hall (and he does), it should be obvious that Schilling and Mussina do as well, unless you place some odd length-of-career constraint and insist on 4000+ IP.

300 wins, baby, 300 wins. You may not care, I may not care, but a lot of the voters do care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Glavine- 305

Mussina- 270

Schilling- 216

I'm aware of this. And it's an idiotic argument: why use the worst stat to measure pitchers as the only analysis?

There are exactly 7 pitchers with at least 270 wins not in the HoF: Maddux, Glavine, and Randy Johnson are three of them. The other 4 are Bobby Mathews (1871-1887), Tommy John (62.3 career WAR), Tony Mullane (1881-1894), and Jim Kaat (45.3 career WAR).

300 wins, baby, 300 wins. You may not care, I may not care, but a lot of the voters do care.

Yes, I know, I know - but it's a bad argument and that should be said at least once in basically every thread like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm aware of this. And it's an idiotic argument: why use the worst stat to measure pitchers as the only analysis?

There are exactly 7 pitchers with at least 270 wins not in the HoF: Maddux, Glavine, and Randy Johnson are three of them. The other 4 are Bobby Mathews (1871-1887), Tommy John (62.3 career WAR), Tony Mullane (1881-1894), and Jim Kaat (45.3 career WAR).

Yes, I know, I know - but it's a bad argument and that should be said at least once in basically every thread like this.

Check the ballot again, you are missing names.

And yes, I agree that pitching wins are stupid, almost as stupid as saves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...