Jump to content

Hall of Fame 2009


waroriole

Who gets your Hall of Fame Vote (if you had one)?  

165 members have voted

  1. 1. Who gets your Hall of Fame Vote (if you had one)?



Recommended Posts

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply

As much as I disliked Rickey Henderson, he's an obvious first ballot selection in my book.

My perception of Blyleven is that of a better than average pitcher who never achieved any "great" results which would bolster his HOF credentials. One 20 win season in a 22 year career, and that just barely, despite getting 40 starts that year. One 19-7 season. 5 17-win seasons. 6 seasons in which he won 10 games or fewer.

Tied for 134th in adjusted ERA with such luminaries as Lady Baldwin, Tom Burgmeier, Dean Chance, Harry Coveleski, Willie Hernandez, Ted Lyons, Mike Marshall, Jim McCormick, Sadie McMahon, Greg Minton, Tony Mullane, Alejandro Pena, Bob Stanley, Vic Willis, and Kerry Wood. Also tied with Blyleven were Warren Spahn, who's already in the HOF with the most victories by a southpaw, and Tom Glavine, whose 21st place in all time wins will probably get him into the HOF on the 1st ballot as well even if he goes ahead and retires.

Guys with a lower ERA+ who are in the HOF include Gaylord Perry, Dennis Eckersly, Steve Carlton, Fergie Jenkins, Phil Niekro, Eppa Rixey, Jim Bunning, Mickey Welch, Robin Roberts, Chief Bender, Waite Hoyt, Nolan Ryan, Jack Chesbro, Red Ruffing, Jesse Haines, Don Sutton, Pud Galvin, Burleigh Grimes, Early Wynn, Catfish Hunter, and Rube Marquard. Most of those guys have something extraordinary in their careers which elevated them to HOF selection, whether it's Pud Galvin's 5th place all time in wins or Jesse Haines's comradeship with Frankie Frisch.

Personally, I would cast a ballot for McGwire, even though I understand why some people wouldn't. As an article at MLB.com points out:

The career .263 batting average is a negative, but take away the questions and accusations, and it is indisputably a Hall of Fame career.

The problem with the questions and accusations is that there is no way of knowing whether or not any baseball player over the last 80 years was "clean" of steroids. Tom House claimed that a high number of players were experimenting with steroids back in the seventies, and has some credibility because he admits to using steroids himself. There were probably baseball players experimenting with steroids in the sixties and possibly even back in the fifties, when weight lifters and body builders first began using steroids in a big way.

Anyone who refuses to vote for McGwire because of the steroids issue should also decline to vote for anyone else who played before the tests were toughened a couple years ago because he has no way of knowing if his players were "clean" or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't realize Raines was up this year. Was he last year as well? I'd certainly vote for him.

I'd vote for McGwire too, I'd forgotten he was eligible.

So my ballot is now Henderson, Blyleven, Raines, and McGwire.

Same here. I would probably vote for Raines. That would be quite a class for leadoff men.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone who refuses to vote for McGwire because of the steroids issue should also decline to vote for anyone else who played before the tests were toughened a couple years ago because he has no way of knowing if his players were "clean" or not.

Would you care so much about McGwire if he wasn't a Cardinal?

Be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Henderson and Blyleven, for sure. And for some reason, the more I read the arguments around Rice, despite my disposition towards those opposing him I find myself leaning towards putting him in.

As for Raines, I wrote up an argument for him on Schmuck's blog today, comparing him with Henderson.

I think he's a lot like Blyleven: didn't quite get the milestones or records of other players, but their career stats match up well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Henderson and Big Mac.

McGuire may have used steroids to take his place as one of the best of his era, but I doubt Cobb would have hit .366 career if the fielders in those days didn't have gloves that resembled the ones I shovel the walk with. It's all about who was the best at their own time period.

And Blyleven is a barely above .500 pitcher. No thanks. If you put him in, I'd think you'd have to put Jamie Moyer in in a few years, and Moose is first ballot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Henderson and Big Mac.

McGuire may have used steroids to take his place as one of the best of his era, but I doubt Cobb would have hit .366 career if the fielders in those days didn't have gloves that resembled the ones I shovel the walk with. It's all about who was the best at their own time period.

And Blyleven is a barely above .500 pitcher. No thanks. If you put him in, I'd think you'd have to put Jamie Moyer in in a few years, and Moose is first ballot.

Looking only at a pitchers career record is a pretty silly way to determine if they are worthy of the HOF.

And I would put Mussina in on the first ballot. Moyer shouldn't get in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Henderson and Big Mac.

McGuire may have used steroids to take his place as one of the best of his era, but I doubt Cobb would have hit .366 career if the fielders in those days didn't have gloves that resembled the ones I shovel the walk with. It's all about who was the best at their own time period.

And Blyleven is a barely above .500 pitcher. No thanks. If you put him in, I'd think you'd have to put Jamie Moyer in in a few years, and Moose is first ballot.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=2283084

First, if you compare Blyleven to his fellow pitchers of the division-play era, he high-jumps off the page. He ranks No. 1 in complete games, No. 2 in shutouts (one behind Nolan Ryan), No. 2 in innings pitched (again trailing only Ryan), No. 5 in whiffs and No. 6 in wins (behind only Hall of Famers and future Hall of Famers).

Second, I admit I was swayed by a fabulous piece by Bill James in the new, indispensable "Hardball Times Baseball Annual 2006."

James couldn't figure out why a guy with Blyleven's stats won "only" 287 games, or ended up "only" 37 games over .500. So he walked through Blyleven's career, start by start, and then compared it to the careers of the best Hall of Fame candidates of that era.

He found Blyleven had the worst run support of any pitcher in the group except Don Sutton and accumulated the most "tough losses," a stat James invented personally to measure losses in which pitchers deserved better. There is zero doubt Blyleven already would be a Hall of Famer if he'd won 300 games. And that research helped explain the mystery of why he didn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...