Baseball Hall of Fame Vote
 

Congratulations to Barry Larkin, the only player selected this year by the BBWAA. I think they got it right this year with that one and only selection. Thoughts?

Next year should be real interesting, with folks like McGwire, Sosa, Clemens on the ballot...

Wow... I'm surprised. Surprised by all of it. Yet I shouldn't be surprised by anything the Hall does anymore...

Larkin, Sutter, man they let anyone in there nowadays.

Grant:

I think that you meant to say Bonds, Sosa, Clemens, etc.

I would counter that Sosa has absolutely no chance, Bonds about 50/50 and Clemens maybe a little less than that....... We'll see............

Biggio will be a very interesting case, my guess is that he gets in maybe his third time around, Piazza will likely take a while if he gets in.....

I'm not up to speed on the Hall of Fame voting. Are there still any serious candidates pre-1940 that will ever get in at this point?

I was hoping my boy Jack Morris would get in. Best single game pitching performance in World Series history. 10 inning shut out game 7 of the series for my Twinkies. I realize the perfecto by Larsen, but nothing matches up to that game.

WOW i give bonds more like 5% chance....

does anyone want to celebrate that man??? nobody i know wants to

I wish they'd vote Morris in. I know he doesn't measure up statistically, but he was the ace of the 80s. He was a consistent top performer for over a decade with practically no peer. Sure some pitchers shined brighter during that time, but not so consistently bright.

And Trammell definitely needs to be in if Larkin and Ozzie are in. If Trammell didn't fizzle out like he did in the 90s with his injuries I think people would see how great his career was, and how he was the SS that changed the position, Ripken coming along a few years after. In the words of Neil Young, "its better to burn out, than to fade away."

Tim Raines ought to be in.

My mind isn't made up on Martinez and Bagwell. I'm on the fence.

+1, Morris was an ace on three teams, an outstanding big-game pitcher, and the winningest of the 80's. Crazy that he's not in. He's up to 67% from 54% and has two more chances, so here's to hoping he can get in.

Congrats to Larkin!!

Clemens would have the best shot out of any of those, but he definitely wouldn't get in first ballot.

I give Bonds the best chance next year because I think that it is easier to identify the pre-steroids portion of his career than it is to identify that of Clemens. Most baseball experts will tell you that the pre-steroids career of Bonds, just up to that point, was first-ballot HOF material.

I'd prefer that no one with the taint gets in. Not Bonds, Clemens, ARod, etc. Heck, Canseco should get in just to spite these guys. Maybe 30 years later, the Veterans Committe can have a different look at this era, but make them wait 30 years.

I like Morris and I like Schilling on next year's ballot. I know people have problems with Schilling, but he was a big part in bringing a WS to both Arizona and Boston.

Phil,

I'm not disagreeing with you, but couldn't you say there is a strong chance it started when he was with the Jays?

Gary:

Good point about Schilling, he would be next in line after those previously mentioned. To me, he had a few really good seasons but not enough of those type of seasons like a Maddux, Glavine, Big Unit, etc.

Pete:

I think that you might be right on with that assesment. Prior to joining Toronto, Clemens had four consecutive "sub-par" seasons in a row for Boston after seven great seasons in a row. At that point, would you have considered him a first-ballot HOF'er? I think maybe not where Bonds definitely was prior to the 2000 season.

The vote is ridiculous when I see players like Eric young, Vinny Castilla, bill mueller and brad radke get votes. Whoever voted for these guys should lose their voting priviledges!

McGwire was on the ballot and I believe got 19%of vote.

Reasonable chance that Biggio is the first of the next bunch to get in.

Radke was a hall of famer innings 2-7.:)

Pete Rose should be allowed in before Bonds, etc. ...

jeff

I don't understand the Hall of Fame.The standards are really getting low. But not as low as allowing Phil Rizzuto in . today on MLB Network they were even talking about Bernie Williams getting in - what a joke ! I never thought of Bernie in the same way as Mantle , Mays etc. That's what it takes to get into the Hall in my opinion.


Hits HR RBI Bave. 162 game ave
Phil Rizzuto 1588 38 563 .273
Larkin 2340 198 960 .295 15 Hr - 71 RBI
Trammell 2365 185 1003 .285 13 HR - 71 RBI


How can Larkin get in and not Trammell ?
How could Rizzuto even be considered ?
How can Bonds even be questioned ? Great stats and speed long before any drug use ?

If Larkin is in, how can Trammell not be elected?

Rawn

They need to let Big Lee Smith in soon. He was the premeir closer of his era. Let Morris in also. The thing everyone seems to forget is that the players are supposed to be compared with their peers. If you use toadys standards, halfvthe players in the hall would not have been elected ti Cooperstown.

Morris and Tram....
 

IMO, if Morris and Trammell played in New York, they'd both be in already.

Matt

This is a really fun time of year on the board.... HOF balloting always brings out the baseball fan in most of us.

The HOF is very H20'd down but it is our shrine for our cardboard heros... it's the reason why we pay so much for a 33 Goudey of Eppa Rixey in nice condition. If Eppa Rixey (just one example, sorry Rixey fans) isn't in the HOF then the price of his card may be a little more than that of a common player. Sure, the guy won 20 games (or more) in three different seasons but he also lost 20 (or more games) twice. As the story goes and a lot of us know many of the guys voted in were done so by their buddies on the veterans committee. How does Cy Young not make it on the first ballot?

This is a fun time of year. One thing I wish the HOF would do is create a "pioneers of the game" section and recognize a few more 19th century players that are just as deserving (or more) as some of the common folk already enshrined.

I'm willing to bet Bonds was using way earlier than 2000, I'd say for most of his career. Why not Biggio, has 3,000 hits.

What you guys are doing, is comparing today's players to the players of Ruth, Cobb, Wagner, etc. The game has changed since then, so I think it's fine that less high stats players get in. If we only allowed players in who had stats like Ruth, etc then we'd barely have anyone in there(meaning current day players).

insidethewrapper,

I can not STAND the New York bias as far as the HOF goes.

I mean, take Rizzuto's stats and have him play for the Reds instead of the Yankees and do you think he even gets a sniff of the HOF? No.

Now, take Larkin's stats and have him play for the Yankees instead of the Reds. Guess what? Not only would he be a Hall Of Famer but probably a first ballot one at that.

David

Maybe cause as a Yankee, he'd won more rings. And winning it all, adds to your stats.

larkin
 

i am amazed that no one on this board sees the obvious
last year he got 61%....I would like to know how its possible that so many people didnt think he was a hof'er last year and changed their mind this year
thats the problem with the system....either u belong in or you dont
putting someone in just because theres no one else is ridiculous

I have said this before and I will continue to say this, as far as the HOF goes, anybody linked to PED use should be forever banned from baseball.

The Commissioners Office had a rule in place against PED use back in 1993 but the Players Association did not want to adopt it. Because the owners didn't want to fight the Players Association (and risk a strike) they let it slide.

So, I don't see why the players get to have their name go down into the history books (as far as being elected into the HOF) when THEY didn't want to pass a rule against PED use, THEY benefited financially from PED use and THEIR stats were enhanced because of PED use.

David

Biggio
 

Biggio should get in before any of these guys. His stats might be better than you think. He's the only player in MLB history with 3,000 H, 600 2B, 400 SB, and 250 HR. This is from a guy that played 14 of his 20 seasons between C and 2B. And he was an All Star at both positions.

I don't think that's true. It hasn't helped Don Mattingly get many votes, also votes weren't crazy for Bernie Williams. I'm not saying those guys or Larkin should be in though. I think it's getting a bit watered down these days. If you really have to think of a player he probably shouldn't be in.

I also agree with last comment...what changed so much from this year to last year with Larkin? Just because no one else isn't going in doesn't mean we need to get someone in just to have a ceremony.


Finally, Brade Radke and Mueller etc...getting votes?

These people should absolutely lose their voting priveledges. How can you possibly justify any votes for those players?

Biggio!!
 

+1 - - Biggio all the way...now coaching my high school alma mater!!

BTW, what ever happened to Dale Murphy? That guy was another one that fizzled out instead of leaving on top...

The whole "Hall of Fame is too watered down" argument is not very compelling to me. A sport with 150+ years of professional history and there are only 240ish enshrined? My goodness, the Baseball Hall of Fame is a fraction of the other three North American sports. Plenty of room if even a hundred more were added. My problem is that guys who deserve is it like Buck O'Neil, Lefty O'Doul, Cecil Travis, Gil Hodges and a slew of other 19th century and Negro League greats aren't in.

"Larkin, Sutter, man they let anyone in there nowadays ..."

I can't believe anyone would even question Barry Larkin's Hall of Fame credentials. He should have been inducted last year. Unfortunately, it seems to be fashionable for some folks (and tragically, some voters as well) to bash every would-be Hall of Famer, regardless whether they've studied the player's stats. Look up Barry's numbers, compare them to every other existing Hall of Famer at his position, and get back to me when you've done your homework. You'll discover he was better than at least half of them ...

"What changed so much from this year to last year with Larkin? Just because no one else isn't going in doesn't mean we need to get someone in just to have a ceremony ..."

Yahoo columnist Tim Brown, who gets to vote, wrote a column last year arguing why Larkin SHOULD NOT be in the Hall of Fame. This year, he wrote a column arguing why Larkin SHOULD be in the Hall of Fame. There was never a problem with Larkin's credentials. Brown's credentials are a different story ...

+1

Dale Murphy should definitely be in the hall. He was a great player and was/is a 1st class man. Injuries cut his career short; steroids would have extended it.

I agree with about Larkin being elected. However, it's important to realize that the Hall of Fame is not necessarily a mandate about how great a player truly is. It is, in fact, a MEDIA AWARD and a MEDIA AWARD only. Just like the Cy Young, MVP, Gold Glove, etc.....it is a media award comprised of sports journalists who may or may not be baseball followers.

How can Tim Raines not be in the Hall? The ones that should lose their voting privileges are the nine yahoos that filled out a blank ballot.

Mark

I think part of that may be because voter want to make sure at least one person get in per year. I honestly believe it's more than a secret ballot. There's much thought put into when a player gets in, rather than just whether he should get in.

Instead of thinking of it like Larkin got in this year because there was no one else worthy on the ballot. I'd like to think that he DIDN'T get in last year, because there was no one else on this years ballot..

There are a number of writers who believe that first ballot should be reserved for the very elite ballplayers, like Gwynn, and will not vote for a middle of the road HOFer on the 1st ballot but will do so the next time around.

FWIW, I think Larkin is a worthy HOFer given his position and era. Who was a better SS from 1990-1996? His career WAR is actually better than Gwynn, Snider, Murray, Santo, Carter, McCovey, Banks, Baker and quite a few other HOFers. He got an MVP, 3 Gold Gloves, had over 2300 hits and stole 379 bases. As a shortstop that is HOF worthy stuff. He wasn't expected to hit 50 HR and drive in 120 runs. That wasn't his job, which is why his WAR is better than so many big stats guys--they played at the slugger positions where massive production was expected.

"FWIW, I think Larkin is a worthy HOFer given his position and era. Who was a better SS from 1990-1996? His career WAR is actually better than Gwynn, Snider, Murray, Santo, Carter, McCovey, Banks, Baker and quite a few other HOFers. He got an MVP, 3 Gold Gloves, had over 2300 hits and stole 379 bases. As a shortstop that is HOF worthy stuff. He wasn't expected to hit 50 HR and drive in 120 runs. That wasn't his job, which is why his WAR is better than so many big stats guys--they played at the slugger positions where massive production was expected ..."

Adam, I nominate you as a Hall of Fame voter. You're better informed than most of them ...

Any thoughts on a SS with 2800+ hits, 401 SB's and 11 Gold Gloves?:)

Trammel
 

He'll get in...don't know when but he will. He was that good...Raines, too.

Too Watered Down!!
 

I think Larkin was elected because they needed somebody to put in! A very good player but not Hall worthy in my opinion. The Pro football Hall Of Fame is even more watered down! They have to have at least four inducted but no more than seven each year. How foolish is that.

Agree about Trammell and Raines. Now I'm not saying this guy belongs, but I'm still wondering how Lou Whitaker got written off so quickly?

The best pitcher of each decade since the beginning of baseball is in the Hall. Jack Morris was the best pitcher in the 80's. He should be in. He was the ace of 3 pitching staffs and lead each to a world championship. If he had "Red Sox" or "Yankees" on the front of his uniform, he would already be in.
There is absolutely no proof that Jeff Bagwell ever took PEDs or steroids. He should go in with Morris next year.

Before or After??
 

The question is not whether someone had a Hall of Fame worthy career before taking PEDs or after. If that's the case, then Pete should be in becasue he was only fingered for betting on baseball after his playing career was over - he's not being touted for his managerial career.

It's not when you did it, or for how long, or how many bets you made, it's the fact that you intentionally cheated the game and the basis for competition. If someone chose to do that, then they should not be in the Hall. The Hall will not be diminished because of shady characters being left out.

That's not the deal with Pete. Please find a copy of The Fix Is In, then read it. After that, even most diehard Reds fans understand why Pete should never go in (excepting for when he buys an admission ticket, 363 days a year).