HOF Future Eligibles

[glchen]

I don't think that greenies matter that much. I'm in the camp that it's more like coffee. Look for modern steroids, people have a lot of stats like for Bonds, pre-steroids, he hit X many home runs per year, and post (suspected) steroid use, his HR production went way up.

For any of the suspected greenie users, are there any stats out there that show that before the player used greenies, his stats were ordinary and that after he started using greenies, BOOM, he had HOF numbers? I don't know if anyone has ever shown this.

[packs]

There is a huge difference between greenies and steroids in my opinion. Unless I'm mistaken, greenies don't alter your body in the sense that a 165 pound player (like Pudge was when he came up) will morph into a 200 plus pound player in a season or two (like Pudge did) from taking greenies.

Greenies and steroids are both I guess PEDs, but they are in totally different leagues. You can't pop a greenie and go from hitting 40 homers to 70 homers. You can do that with steroids. I would argue that a greenie enables a player to play to their standard of play. Steroids enables a player to play above and beyond their standard of play. That's a big difference to me.

[dgo71]

Originally Posted by packs

There is a huge difference between greenies and steroids in my opinion. Unless I'm mistaken, greenies don't alter your body in the sense that a 165 pound player (like Pudge was when he came up) will morph into a 200 plus pound player in a season or two (like Pudge did) from taking greenies.

Greenies and steroids are both I guess PEDs, but they are in totally different leagues. You can't pop a greenie and go from hitting 40 homers to 70 homers. You can do that with steroids. I would argue that a greenie enables a player to play to their standard of play. Steroids enables a player to play above and beyond their standard of play. That's a big difference to me.

Bingo.

[MVSNYC]

I was on the HOF's website, and they have nice write ups about each candidate...thought this sentence was interesting about Biggio:

"Only player in baseball history with at least 3,000 hits, 600 doubles, 400 stolen bases and 250 home runs."

http://baseballhall.org/hof/2015-bbwaa-ballot

[sycks22]

Originally Posted by bnorth

Suspect Rickey LOL Rickey looked like he was juicing so hard at the end of his career that it was amazing he was not walking around with a needle sticking out his butt cheek.

To those comparing greenies to coffee, WOW. Ok to be fair 1 greenie would be like coffee if you could down 50 gallons of it in 5 minutes.

My all-time favorite player is Wade Boggs. He was never caught cheating(in baseball) but like your favorite player I can guarantee he did. Whether it was greenies, steroids, corked bat or something else they cheated. The poster boy of baseball Mickey Mantle did do greenies, had a corked bat, and was rumored to do steroids. Yes steroids were in sports during his time and the 50 years before his time. I am not saying Mantle did steroids because it was way before my time, just that it was rumored he and Maris both juiced.

Also David Ortiz should never be allowed in the HOF unless it is to visit with friends.

Right or wrong these are my opinions and till proven wrong I stand by them.

Guarantee Boggs cheated? He looked more like a beer vendor than a ball player. Did the 'roids or whatever you possibly claim he took help him flare thousands of balls to left field? He wasn't fast, didn't have much power and had an average arm. Which part of his game was aided by juicing? Just because someone is good doesn't mean they cheated.

[Runscott]

Enjoying the discussion on MLB Network. Costas seems to understand what the HOF actually is, much better than most. There's a doofus on there who is hanging in the conversation purely through yelling. I'm thinking we should invite him to join our forum.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Let's look at it this way, if we go my route and allow for steroid use since it was massively prevalent from around 1986 - 2006, the only ones hurt that way were the minority of players who were "clean" and never cheated, correct?

Give me a list of those "clean" players during this era whose stats warrant HOF selection. I bet we don't get much past a half-dozen or so, which is a far less impact than banning everyone we think or know did PED's. Anyway, those half-dozen or so would likely get in the Hall anyway. By doing this, we avoid the annual arguments about who did PED's, suspected of PED's, etc. which will never be definitively proven.

[Runscott]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Let's look at it this way, if we go my route and allow for steroid use since it was massively prevalent from around 1986 - 2006, the only ones hurt that way were the minority of players who were "clean" and never cheated, correct?

Give me a list of those "clean" players during this era whose stats warrant HOF selection. I bet we don't get much past a half-dozen or so, which is a far less impact than banning everyone we think or know did PED's. Anyway, those half-dozen or so would likely get in the Hall anyway. By doing this, we avoid the annual arguments about who did PED's, suspected of PED's, etc. which will never be definitively proven.

The PED users are already hurting the clean players, just by creating a log-jam on the ballot. You can only cast 10 votes. Go ahead and remove all the stats of the PED users for us - that way we can see who remains. Also, remove all the stats of clean players when they faced steroid users such as Clemens, or the stats of clean pitchers when they faced guys like Sosa, Bonds, McGwire, etc. (it's a long list). After you've removed all the PED-induced stats, show us the new stats of the top remaining players.

[Runscott]

No plot twists this time: Biggio, Martinez, Smoltz, Johnson. I was surprised Bagwell got over 55%.

Prediction for next year: Griffey Jr. and Piazza.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Agree with Scott for next year, Griffey & Piazza, that's it.

[Runscott]

Thoroughly enjoying the interviews with the HOF inductees - everyone but Johnson so far. Hoping we get to hear a good interview with Griffey Jr next year.

[darwinbulldog]

Harumph.

[Runscott]

I heard an interesting comparison of Raines and Mattingly. The argument against Mattingly is not enough great years. All Raines did was play a lot longer;however, he had fewer HOF years than Mattingly.

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by Runscott

All Raines did was play a lot longer;however, he had fewer HOF years than Mattingly.

By my count, Raines had 6 "HOF years" (1983-1987, 1992) and Mattingly had 4 (1984-1987). How did they define a HOF year?

[Runscott]

Not sure Glenn, but it sure is nice to be able to post someone else's opinions on this, rather than my own, to avoid nasty fights with forum members who think my opinions are rubbish

[earlywynnfan]

I came in at the end: Scott's opinions are rubbish.

Now, what are we talking about?

Actually, to start throwing stacks of 2 cents around:
Piazza and Jr. next year...
Greenies did give an advantage, although not as much as steroids...
David Ortiz is a giant cheater...
Want to see Raines get in so my collection is more valuable...
Mattingly is NOT a HOFer, sorry yankees fans...
With the clarity of hindsight, would anybody draft Biggio for their team over Piazza, knowing what they would do in their careers?


Ken

[bnorth]

Originally Posted by sycks22

Guarantee Boggs cheated? He looked more like a beer vendor than a ball player. Did the 'roids or whatever you possibly claim he took help him flare thousands of balls to left field? He wasn't fast, didn't have much power and had an average arm. Which part of his game was aided by juicing? Just because someone is good doesn't mean they cheated.

I never said Boggs did steroids, I said cheated.

Since most are way smarter than me in this area and was not stupid enough to try them I will describe how they really work. Your level of steroid use is what makes the difference. Its like Barry Bonds and his few insane years and Roger Clemens and his amazing long career.

Heavy users: These guys but up insane #s but only for a few years because your body just cant handle it. Look at Giambi, Bonds, and McGwire and how after they had the big steroid years they had crazy injuries.

Moderate users: These were the guys that put up really good #'s for a longer time before the injuries hit them.

Light/occasional user: These are the smart guys. Because they never had huge years but had long productive careers. This is the 75% of baseball players Canseco was talking about. They used them to stay healthy. IMHO at this level of use they received the same benefits as the guys using Greenies.

[Runscott]

I will offer one tiny bit of potential rubbish: I would trade Mattingly's 1989 for Raines' 1992.

[deadballfreaK]

Pleased with this year's class and I'll enjoy the inductions, but generally the HOF has gotten so screwed up that I'm not that interested. Plenty of guys in because they had high up cronies greasing the skids. Deserving guys who just played in the wrong city don't get a sniff. Now we have PED use. No way to decide who did and didn't. I generally just keep my own HOF in my head.

[bcbgcbrcb]

Not sure why Sheffield's name keeps coming up on MLB Channel all day for HOF. He was a known user, if Bonds & Clemens aren't getting in, no way Sheffield is. People are forgetting BALCO?

As an aside, since we talked all day about how dominating Randy Johnson & Pedro were as pitchers, just a moment to reflect back on 1986 and Mike Scott. You will recall the NY Mets were unstoppable that season, except when they played Houston and Mike Scott pitched. I'll always remember the NLCS, with Scott shutting out the Mets in Game 1 and again in Game 4 and then Game 6 going on forever with the Mets knowing that a loss would mean facing Scott again in Game 7. Of course the Mets ended up winning the longest playoff game in NL history and avoided Mike Scott in Game 7. To this day, both Darryl Strawberry & Dwight Gooden, the team's two biggest stars in 1986 will tell you that there was no way they were going to win a Game 7 against Scott.

[wolf441]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Not sure why Sheffield's name keeps coming up on MLB Channel all day for HOF. He was a known user, if Bonds & Clemens aren't getting in, no way Sheffield is. People are forgetting BALCO?

As an aside, since we talked all day about how dominating Randy Johnson & Pedro were as pitchers, just a moment to reflect back on 1986 and Mike Scott. You will recall the NY Mets were unstoppable that season, except when they played Houston and Mike Scott pitched. I'll always remember the NLCS, with Scott shutting out the Mets in Game 1 and again in Game 4 and then Game 6 going on forever with the Mets knowing that a loss would mean facing Scott again in Game 7. Of course the Mets ended up winning the longest playoff game in NL history and avoided Mike Scott in Game 7. To this day, both Darryl Strawberry & Dwight Gooden, the team's two biggest stars in 1986 will tell you that there was no way they were going to win a Game 7 against Scott.

+1 on Sheffield.

and Scott was clearly scuffing the ball in 1986.

[bcbgcbrcb]

C'mon, Steve, now that would be cheating.............

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by Robextend

I'm really torn when it comes to closer's. Can they be considered failed starters...maybe, but they are an accepted part of the game these days and there probably should be a place for them in the HOF. With that said, I would think you need to be a completely dominant one to get in, and I am not sure there are any in that I would consider dominant.

Even Eckersley, who is regarded as a top closer of all-time...take a look at his 11 year stretch as closer as far as ERA:

1987 - 3.03
1988 - 2.35
1989 - 1.56
1990 - 0.61
1991 - 2.96
1992 - 1.91
1993 - 4.16
1994 - 4.26
1995 - 4.83
1996 - 3.30
1997 - 3.91

His dominance fizzled after 5 years or so...his starting numbers were good, but certainly not HOF worthy as maybe a Smoltz would be considered.

So why is Eckersley in the HOF?

I've been asking that for awhile now. I didn't think he belonged when he got elected.

[Tabe]

Originally Posted by conor912

Awful defense? You don't win that many rings as a team with awful defense behind the plate. Either way, I'm not saying I think he should be in, I'm saying I think he'll get in based on the team he was on. Phil Rizzuto got in strictly for being on the great Yankee teams in the 50's. His career numbers are a joke compared to the rest of the HOF. Compare his numbers to Posadas and they are freakishly similar, down to identical lifetime batting avgs. Posada even had more hits and did it from both sides of the plate. I'm not making an argument for him over anyone else, I'm just saying don't be surprised if/when he gets in.

Yes, awful defense. 7 times in 17 years he had a negative dWAR. He was a bad defensive catcher. That's just a fact.

[Runscott]

Phil - thanks for the 86 memories. What an almost-magic year for Houston. I remember very well thinking "just get us to Scott". He was superman that year.

Regarding Sheffield, I watched mlb channel all day, and I didn't think there was much pro-Sheffield except for the one goober who wanted to ignore peds.

[baseball tourist]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Jr. next year...
Greenies did give an advantage, although not as much as steroids...
David Ortiz is a giant cheater...
Want to see Raines get in
Mattingly is NOT a HOFer, sorry yankees fans...

I have paraphrased Ken, as I agree with most....and would add:

-as a Jays fan I am sad to see Carlos Delgado fall off the ballot;
-rooting for McGriff for the same reason (former Jay);
-Mariano isn't a HOF'er in my book nor are any closers, relivers or strictly DHs;

[UnVme7]

I think cheating is cheating. Whether it's PED's or a corked bat. In my opinion, yes, I do feel Piazza, Biggio, Bagwell and Thome used. I would vote for Thome but I never saw Bagwell as a HOF caliber player.

That being said, it's a known fact that Jim Rice and Pete Rose used corked bats. Should we kick Jim Rice out?

Also too-- about a year ago, a Mickey Mantle game used bat had surfaced that was corked. It was being auctioned off as such, and the Mantle family found out about the auction and threatened to sue the auction house if they did not remove the auction due to ruining the family name, etc. It was removed and that was that. So take that for what you will....

[tjb1952tjb]

Originally Posted by eastonfalcon19

Yeah I don't see Vizquel getting in either right away but I could see him getting in down the road. The same thing with Fred McGriff ending his career with 493 HRS. If he had indeed reached the 500 club would that of made him an automatic pick?

Could McGriff eventually get in with his numbers?

I've always thought the Crime Dog deserves more love.......underappreciated.

[EvilKing00]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

I'm very surprised that we are now heavily into the PED time frame of HOF balloting and no one has commented on the fact that the most recent selectees are almost all pitchers, Maddux, Glavine, Pedro, Big Unit, Smoltz (most likely) with only Frank Thomas being a position player. This could continue with guys like Schilling & Mussina garnering more votes as the PED position players begin to show up more and more on future ballots. Is it realistic to think that the only "clean" players during this era were pitchers? Why do we assume that they were not using?

In my opinion, Bagwell was a user. His minor league and amateur resume just do not add up to his major league power numbers. I know anything's possible but.......

Piazza's minor league numbers match up somewhat better but did anyone see him during is first year or two in the minors? Was there a big difference in body size and type from his major league physique?

I would also like to make a comprehensive list of known users who finished with the best career stats. Off the top of my head, these are the ones that I can think of:

Bonds
McGwire
Sosa
Sheffield
Clemens
Pettitte
Palmeiro
M. Ramirez
I. Rodriguez
A. Rodriguez
Bagwell (IMHO)
J. Gonzalez
M. Tejada
Braun
Canseco

Does anyone else have any others that would be surefire HOF'ers based on their career stats?

sheffield

[bcbgcbrcb]

Steve:

Sheffield is on my list there.......

[bcbgcbrcb]

Regarding Tim Raines' candidacy, have we all forgotten the drugs? The same issue seemed to derail Dave Parker's HOF chances many years ago. I realize that Raines was a little better player than Parker for his career, although Parker had a higher peak IMHO. Although less qualified, Keith Hernandez too.........

[bcbgcbrcb]

I just took a look at the eligible players for the HOF going out to 2019, which is as far forward as you can go right now. I do not see any names going forward who have good enough numbers to get in but have strong suspicions of PED use. This does not include the confirmed users that I have already listed elsewhere in this thread (just added Ortiz to my list today).

The way I see it then, the only questionable names going forward are: Bagwell, Piazza & Kent (I might be in the minority on him). I think Bagwell is a user and should not get in, Piazza is a good possibility but nothing definitive so I would be willing to let him in at this point & Kent is also a good possibility, but no evidence. With poor defense and base running, I would say that he's on the borderline but it wouldn't be the worst thing in the world if he gets in either.

To me, none of the confirmed users get in until after Bonds & Clemens, which isn't happening anytime soon, maybe never.

So I guess going forward, the cloudy issue of who used and didn't use PED's may not be hovering over the HOF vote for too much longer. Ultimately, the decision will have to be made as to whether any confirmed PED users will get in though.........

[h2oya311]

It's amazing how quickly Rafael Palmeiro fell off the HOF ballot and off the radar for discussion. He had the sweetest left-handed swing I ever saw (even better than Griffey's), and at the time his career ended, was one of only three players with 500 HR and 3,000 hits. In fact, I don't know if anyone else has even accomplished that yet.

Anyone remember him? I haven't heard his name mentioned in several years.

As for Biggio, I couldn't be happier! It was only a matter of time. Just cause all you East and Left Coasters had never heard of him doesn't mean he wasn't a huge influence on the people in the Houston metropolitan area. He was the key ingredient to the rotating list of names that comprised the killer B's. No major league pitcher wanted to face the Astros line-up that featured Biggio, Bagwell, and D. Bell (or Berkman or Beltran in later years).

Before someone like J. Kent gets in, I'd love to see Crime Dog or Dale Murphy get their due. Murphy was the equivalent of A. Dawson during the '80s. He just didn't have as long of a playing career. The stats don't burst any eye-balls, but they did during the early to mid '80s when 30 HR was a Herculean accomplishment. They got swamped when the juice hit the game. Too bad IMO. Murphy is the kind of guy the HOF needs to have in its halls.

[Jobu]

Quite a thread here. My responses to a number of topics:

Mariano Rivera is 100% a HOFer. He was dominant for his entire career and is the greatest to play his position. Ranking the relative worth of different positions is a slippery slope. Even if you aren't a fan of closers, the top few guys at each position deserve to be in - once you move beyond the top 1-2 players at each spot for the era I can understand arguing against certain positions. The fact that Mo wasn't a successful starter at 21 years of age should not be a factor - lots of young guys with 1-2 awesome pitches struggle until they find a third and there is no reason to suggest Mo wouldn't have developed another pitch to become a great starter.

I think the PEDers will get in eventually. Right now they are paying the price for cheating, and getting caught for many of them, which I think is 100% fair. They did everything they could to win games, just like guys from every era (as has been pointed out here by many). Once they are in people will always look at their numbers and say "yeah, but...", epecially following not getting elected for a number of years, which to me is enough. If you were the best during an era when everyone cheated you belong in - the alternative is having a 20-year strectch of baseball where the guys who were clearly the best players are not included in the group that is supposed to contain the best players.

[bnorth]

I would have liked to see Fred McGriff get in. I actually collected baseball cards for a couple years before I ever watched baseball. Either the first or second game I ever went to was the Twins vs The Jays in Minnesota. I was amazed by what seemed like 100's of "McGriff is McGreat" signs. So after that game I followed his career and McGriff was McGreat.

[packs]

I've been reading a lot of articles from people who hold similar views on PEDs and the need to "prove" something when it comes time to punishing players. I've come away with this:

The HOF is entirely based on opinions: the opinion that someone was a HOFer. So if a voter has the opinion that someone cheated, that's all that matters. You don't have to prove anything. You just have to be of the opinion. Same principle that was used to vote in seemingly less-than HOFers.

[bcbgcbrcb]

I know, Derek. I grew up wanting to draft Dale Murphy every year in fantasy baseball leagues during the 1980's. To me, he comes out to be about the same as Don Mattingly with a little longer peak time and a little longer career overall. This makes him just a little more deserving than Mattingly, in my opinion. Maybe one day, he gets the Veteran's Committee vote.........

As far as McGriff, I think he is one of the most harmed players from the steroids era which made everyone's numbers so big. I also think McGriff gets in one day via Veteran's Committee vote, much more likely than Murphy, in my opinion.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by baseball tourist

-Mariano isn't a HOF'er in my book nor are any closers, relivers or strictly DHs;

Then should we kick out all the Negro League players? I am a small hall guy, but I also think we should be inclusive of all players. I want DHs and relieves but only the best. They are important to the game. Yes to Rivera, no to Hoffman. Hoffman was an accumulator, only 2 time Rolaids winner. Yes to Big Hurt and Molitor, no to Edgar and Ortiz.

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Jobu

I think the PEDers will get in eventually. Right now they are paying the price for cheating, and getting caught for many of them, which I think is 100% fair. They did everything they could to win games, just like guys from every era (as has been pointed out here by many). Once they are in people will always look at their numbers and say "yeah, but...", epecially following not getting elected for a number of years, which to me is enough. If you were the best during an era when everyone cheated you belong in - the alternative is having a 20-year strectch of baseball where the guys who were clearly the best players are not included in the group that is supposed to contain the best players.

I disagree. I don't think they ever get in. Joe Jackson has a better case and he has been waiting since 1936, 78 years. If you want to put Joe in next year, start t he clock on Rose, Bonds, and Clemens. When you get to 79 years of waiting, put them in.

[earlywynnfan]

Originally Posted by bcbgcbrcb

Regarding Tim Raines' candidacy, have we all forgotten the drugs? The same issue seemed to derail Dave Parker's HOF chances many years ago. I realize that Raines was a little better player than Parker for his career, although Parker had a higher peak IMHO. Although less qualified, Keith Hernandez too.........

Thank you for bringing this up! Raines seems to be the darling of the knowledgeable fans of non-steroid users. Yet he's a guy who slid headfirst so he wouldn't break his crack vial in his back pocket!

[Jobu]

I think Rose and Jackson are different than PED users. They aren't in because they tried to lose, fix games, or bet so frequently that it is hard to think they never factored their bets into how the game was played (I know there are arguments that Jackson didn't throw the series, but that is the accepted reason). The PED guys, on the other hand, tried everything they could to win, likely including sacrificing some years off the end of their lives, and PED use has nothing to do with throwing games.

Originally Posted by rats60

I disagree. I don't think they ever get in. Joe Jackson has a better case and he has been waiting since 1936, 78 years. If you want to put Joe in next year, start t he clock on Rose, Bonds, and Clemens. When you get to 79 years of waiting, put them in.

[ElCabron]

So much stupid. This thread is filled with so much stupid.

-Ryan

[darwinbulldog]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Thank you for bringing this up! Raines seems to be the darling of the knowledgeable fans of non-steroid users. Yet he's a guy who slid headfirst so he wouldn't break his crack vial in his back pocket!

Powdered cocaine, sir. Get your facts straight.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by earlywynnfan

Thank you for bringing this up! Raines seems to be the darling of the knowledgeable fans of non-steroid users. Yet he's a guy who slid headfirst so he wouldn't break his crack vial in his back pocket!

Why did he need crack while running the base paths? Did he carry his pipe, wallet and car keys in his other pocket?

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Jobu

I think Rose and Jackson are different than PED users. They aren't in because they tried to lose, fix games, or bet so frequently that it is hard to think they never factored their bets into how the game was played (I know there are arguments that Jackson didn't throw the series, but that is the accepted reason). The PED guys, on the other hand, tried everything they could to win, likely including sacrificing some years off the end of their lives, and PED use has nothing to do with throwing games.

Actually Joe Jackson was banned for knowing about the fix. There is no evidence that he took money or tried to lose a game. His stats for the 1919 World Series were very good.

The more important fact in Jackson's case was that throwing games in those days wasn't looked down on. Guys like Ty Cobb and Tris Speaker are known to have fixed a game. It was just that the spotlight of the World Series gave the game a black eye.

[Bored5000]

Originally Posted by Jobu

I think the PEDers will get in eventually. Right now they are paying the price for cheating, and getting caught for many of them, which I think is 100% fair. They did everything they could to win games, just like guys from every era (as has been pointed out here by many). Once they are in people will always look at their numbers and say "yeah, but...", epecially following not getting elected for a number of years, which to me is enough. If you were the best during an era when everyone cheated you belong in - the alternative is having a 20-year strectch of baseball where the guys who were clearly the best players are not included in the group that is supposed to contain the best players.

I don't think Bonds, Clemens, Palmeiro, etc. will ever get in. Look at sprinter Ben Johnson from the 1980s and the East Germans of the 1970s. It has been a quarter century since Johnson lost his gold medal and 35-40 years since the East Germans were at their peak. In that time, Johnson and the East Germans have not been viewed more legitimately.

It seems hard to believe that the PED users in baseball will be viewed more legitimately a generation from now or two generations from now when that has not been the case in other sports.

[Runscott]

Ryan - a hearty +1

McGriff definitely makes the HOAF, as does Delgado and many who somehow made the HOF. I also think there should be a HOL (hall of longevity) for some of the guys receiving forum tears.

[ALR-bishop]

According to the WSJ, the following have received a vote for the HOF

2014--Jacques Jones
2013--Aaron Sele
2012--Eric Young
2011-- Benito Santiago
2010-- David Segui
2009--Jesse Orosco
2008--Shawon Dunston
2007--Jay Buhner
2006--Walt Weiss
2005-- Terry Steinbach
1980-- Sonny Jackson

[Runscott]

Al, I'm wondering if these weren't cases of a buddy voting for them just so they could say they received a vote. If they only gave each voter 5 votes, that might change.

[conor912]

Originally Posted by Runscott

Al, I'm wondering if these weren't cases of a buddy voting for them just so they could say they received a vote. If they only gave each voter 5 votes, that might change.

Agreed. Anyone who legitimately thinks Jay Buhner belongs in the Hall should not be allowed to vote, period. It still irks me that guys like Jermaine Dye even make it on the ballot to begin with.