Jump to content

2017 Hall of Fame Vote/Tracker


weams

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Probably Ivan Rodriguez, even though he's considered a PED user, right?  Looks like Bagwell should be getting the call, finally.  And Raines, so Drungo will be happy.

I'm kinda pissed that Vlad might not make it, I'm not sure how he doesn't on the first ballot.  Especially for someone that was never connected to PED usage.

Here's Ryan Thibbs' tracker:  https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=F2E5D8FC5199DFAF!7731&ithint=file,xlsm&app=Excel&authkey=!AE2Lu5P1f92OW8o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting piece about how Selig's induction helps the candidacy of Bonds and Clemens.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/barry-bonds-and-roger-clemens-are-going-to-be-hall-of-famers-heres-what-it-means-050127788.html

Quote

“When Bud was put in two weeks ago, my mindset changed,” Kevin Cooney, a longtime Philadelphia-area writer, said in an email. “If the commissioner of the steroid era was put into the HOF by a secret committee, then I couldn’t in good faith keep those two out any longer.”

For years, Cooney said, he had given priority to the players with clean records, something he admits “may have been silly.” He said he saw a tweet from Susan Slusser, the esteemed San Francisco Chronicle writer, pointing out the hypocrisy of Selig and Tony La Russa – who won championships with juiced players – being in the Hall but the players themselves seemingly blackballed. “The light bulb went off,” Cooney said.

Quote

The early results are staggering. Among the 57 public ballots, Bonds and Clemens have 42 votes. That’s 73.6 percent, an enormous jump from last year, when Clemens finished with 45.8 percent of the vote and Bonds with 45.5 percent, far short of the 75 percent necessary for induction.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

35.2% of Estimated number (153/435) are in:


votes	%		Name			+/-	(needed +/- from 2016)



143		93.5	Jeff Bagwell		14		12



139		90.8	Tim Raines		22		20



130		85.0	Ivan Rodriguez		x



118		77.1	Vladimir Guerrero	x



-----



110		71.9	Trevor Hoffman		9		38



108		70.6	Edgar Martinez		26		137



107		69.9	Barry Bonds		19		134



107		69.9	Roger Clemens		20		130



96		62.7	Mike Mussina		11		131



83		54.2	Curt Schilling		-10		98



44		28.8	Manny Ramirez		x



40		26.1	Lee Smith		0		186



40		26.1	Larry Walker		12		257



21		13.7	Fred McGriff		-3		239



19		12.4	Jeff Kent		-2		255



18		11.8	Gary Sheffield		0		277



17		11.1	Sammy Sosa		3		298



17		11.1	Billy Wagner		4		278



-----



7		4.6	Jorge Posada		x

At this point we have a pretty good picture of what's going to happen.  Two players are near locks with enough votes gained already to get them in:  Jeff Bagwell and Tim Raines.  It's not set in stone though cause you never really know with the silent vote.  Ivan Rodriguez looks good right now but I bet he loses in the silent vote; I would not be surprised if Vlad Guerrero finishes ahead of him.  So we're looking at those four.

A number of others made large gains, particularly Edgar Martinez, which bodes very well for him.  I think he gets elected now.  Bonds, Clemens, Mussina and Walker are also showing improvement.  Schilling's rough PR year has probably cost him votes.

Jorge Posada is in trouble of joining Bernie Williams as champion Yankees worth looking at for the HOF, but booted early (Williams in his second year I believe).

If I were to handicap next year right now, I would say Trevor Hoffman joins Chipper Jones (1st ballot) and perhaps Guerrero or I-Rod if they don't make it this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, 25 Nuggets said:

If I were to handicap next year right now, I would say Trevor Hoffman joins Chipper Jones (1st ballot) and perhaps Guerrero or I-Rod if they don't make it this time.

Jim Thome will also be on the ballot next year, right? I think he'll sail in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Can_of_corn said:

I don't think so, not with so much time as a DH.

He might make it, but if it does it will be close.

(Yes I know he has 1100 games at first and 500 at third)

Thome played a lot more games in the field than Frank Thomas did, and his offensive numbers are comparable (if a shade worse). And Thomas got in on the first ballot. I don't think there's any question Thome will get in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, PaulFolk said:

Thome played a lot more games in the field than Frank Thomas did, and his offensive numbers are comparable (if a shade worse). And Thomas got in on the first ballot. I don't think there's any question Thome will get in.

I think he will and should get in.  I just don't think it will be in year one and with a comfortable margin.

Of course the culled a lot of the old voters so his (and a lot of others) chances are better now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Can_of_corn said:

I think he will and should get in.  I just don't think it will be in year one and with a comfortable margin.

Of course the culled a lot of the old voters so his (and a lot of others) chances are better now.

I'll be sure to bump this thread in a year! I'll be surprised if he hasn't been inducted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




  • Posts

    • dWAR is just the run value for defense added with the defensive adjustment.  Corner OF spots have a -7.5 run adjustment, while CF has a +2.5 adjustment over 150 games.    Since Cowser played both CF and the corners they pro-rate his time at each to calculate his defensive adjustment. 
    • Just to be clear, though, fWAR also includes a substantial adjustment for position, including a negative one for Cowser.  For a clearer example on that front, as the chart posted higher on this page indicates, Carlos Santana had a +14 OAA — which is the source data that fWAR’s defensive component is based on. That 14 outs above average equates to 11-12 (they use different values on this for some reason) runs better than the average 1B.  So does Santana have a 12.0 defensive value, per fWAR? He does not. That’s because they adjust his defensive value downward to reflect that he’s playing a less difficult/valuable position. In this case, that adjustment comes out to -11.0 runs, as you can see here:   So despite apparently having a bona fide Gold Glove season, Santana’s Fielding Runs value (FanGraphs’ equivalent to dWAR) is barely above average, at 1.1 runs.    Any good WAR calculation is going to adjust for position. Being a good 1B just isn’t worth as much as being an average SS or catcher. Just as being a good LF isn’t worth as much as being an average CF. Every outfielder can play LF — only the best outfielders can play CF.  Where the nuance/context shows up here is with Cowser’s unique situation. Playing LF in OPACY, with all that ground to cover, is not the same as playing LF at Fenway or Yankee Stadium. Treating Cowser’s “position” as equivalent to Tyler O’Neill’s, for example, is not fair. The degree of difficulty is much, much higher at OPACY’s LF, and so the adjustment seems out of whack for him. That’s the one place where I’d say the bWAR value is “unfair” to Cowser.
    • Wait a second here, the reason he's -0.1 in bb-ref dwar is because they're using drs to track his defensive run value.  He's worth 6.6 runs in defense according to fangraphs, which includes adjustments for position, which would give him a fangraphs defensive war of +0.7.
    • A little funny to have provided descriptions of the hits (“weak” single; “500 foot” HR). FIP doesn’t care about any of that either, so it’s kind of an odd thing to add in an effort to make ERA look bad.  Come in, strike out the first hitter, then give up three 108 MPH rocket doubles off the wall. FIP thinks you were absolutely outstanding, and it’s a shame your pathetic defense and/or sheer bad luck let you down. Next time you’ll (probably) get the outcomes you deserve. They’re both flawed. So is xFIP. So is SIERA. So is RA/9. So is WPA. So is xERA. None of them are perfect measures of how a pitcher’s actual performance was, because there’s way too much context and too many variables for any one metric to really encompass.  But when I’m thinking about awards, for me at least, it ends up having to be about the actual outcomes. I don’t really care what a hitter’s xWOBA is when I’m thinking about MVP, and the same is true for pitchers. Did you get the outs? Did the runs score? That’s the “value” that translates to the scoreboard and, ultimately, to the standings. So I think the B-R side of it is more sensible for awards.  I definitely take into account the types of factors that you (and other pitching fWAR advocates) reference as flaws. So if a guy plays in front of a particular bad defense or had a particularly high percentage of inherited runners score, I’d absolutely adjust my take to incorporate that info. And I also 100% go to Fangraphs first when I’m trying to figure out which pitchers we should acquire (i.e., for forward looking purposes).  But I just can’t bring myself say that my Cy Young is just whichever guy had the best ratio of Ks to BBs to HRs over a threshold number of innings. As @Frobby said, it just distills out too much of what actually happened.
    • We were all a lot younger in 2005.  No one wanted to believe Canseco cause he’s a smarmy guy. Like I said, he was the only one telling the truth. It wasn’t a leap of faith to see McGwire up there and Sosa up there and think “yeah, those guys were juicing” but then suddenly look at Raffy and think he was completely innocent.  It’s a sad story. The guy should be in Hall of Fame yet 500 homers and 3,000 hits are gone like a fart in the wind cause his legacy is wagging his finger and thinking he couldn’t get caught.  Don’t fly too close to the sun.  
    • I think if we get the fun sprinkler loving Gunnar that was in the dugout yesterday, I don’t think we have to worry about him pressing. He seemed loose and feeling good with the other guys he was with, like Kremer.
    • I was a lot younger back then, but that betrayal hit really hard because he had been painting himself as literally holier than thou, and shook his finger to a congressional committee and then barely 2 weeks later failed the test.
  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...