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.


  • Posts

    • 1:2 is good.  Elite is a player like Arraez who is 1+:1.  
    • https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/40027950/ravens-pick-nate-wiggins-nfl-draft-dabo-swinney-text  
    • Was reading Wiggins write up on ESPN. He appears to be more of a home run threat than Koolaid. He had a pick 6 each of the last 2 years.  
    • Starting point has changed.  Given the fact he has approx 1/7th of his season in the books at 1.139, to OPS just .780 for the season, he'd have to drop off to under .730 the rest of the way.  That sort of drop off wouldn't be acceptable to me. I'd like him to OPS .800 the rest of the way for roughly .850 for the season.  The more they use him in a platoon role, the better I think that number might be.
    • Can I ask how you timed it vs the DVR?  Did you use a stopwatch or count click with pause/FF, or something else?
    • I can’t fathom why anyone would want a Tanner Scott return. In 10 innings, he is 0-4 with a 1.78 whip. He was maddening before, and now he’s older. But I wonder if the Red Sox would part with Justin Slaten? He’s been pretty outstanding. Yeah, only 8 innings, but we hired Yohan Ramirez, and he’s been a catastrophe in 10. Yes, I know he’s a rule 5, and the Bosox are in the East. And their pitching is pretty thin, too. But they know they aren’t going anywhere in this division, and they might think getting a good return for a Free Rule 5 guy might be worthwhile.
    • This draft unfolded weirdly.  First with the *nix guys getting taken early and then how no defensive players got taken all draft, and then a bunch of teams reaching for OTs.  I'm pretty happy with how the draft unfolded because I think we got a player that I expected to be gone by the teens or early 20s.  I don't know what we're doing with our OL but hopefully we can maybe trade up from 62 to pick someone up.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...