HOF Results
 

What does everyone think of the Hall of Fame results -- Bud Fowler, Buck O'Neil, Gil Hodges, Jim Kaat, Minnie Minoso, and Tony Oliva? Looks like I'll be paying big bucks (sorry for the pun) for an O'Neil card. I have a team issue picture of him with the Cubs from the 1960s, but I think I still want to have a card of him from Cuba.

All worthy additions in my opinion. Or certainly more worthy than some of the other people the veterans committee elected in years past. We've been past the point of a "small hall" for a while now.

O'Neil and Minoso should have been elected some time ago. O'Neil was instrumental to getting the Negro Leagues recognized, I wish he would've been granted admission in his lifetime, the same goes for Minnie.

All of them are deserving and long overdue. Especially for Buck and Hodges.

All worthy candidates and glad they all got in.

Just many more deserving from the Negro League to get in. But with these committees not regrouping for a while the wait goes on for others

Great group!

Surprised the Golden Era Committee got so many players in though. Anyone thinking the people on that voting committee may have gotten together to ensure they got several deserving candidates in finally?

Does anyone know if players who were not inducted from these older baseball committees today are still eligible in 2032 or are they now off the ballots?

I'm surprised by how many were inducted; I had been expecting one or two. No complaints about who got in, I would've liked to see Billy Pierce get in as well though.

As a Mets' fan son of Brooklyn Dodger diehard parents, this really warms my heart. Their love for Gil Hodges knew no bounds, and baseball card collecting has always been a bridge between (usually) fathers and sons, so I love it!!!!!

Was surprised also. With 16 voters with 4 votes each, and needing 12 votes for election, that means at most the Golden Era Committee could end up electing 5 people. That they got 4 in makes me wonder if they didn't work together to get in as many past due, deserving candidates as possible.

Mostly happy for Gil. Looooong overdue.

Wow, I am shocked 6 were elected. It seems John Donaldon and Dick Allen were the 2 that pundits were high on who were not elected. Donaldson's numbers are certainly hard to fully grasp since they include so many semi-pro games. Allen was one, one!! vote short. Crazy......

Was Kaat any better than Tommy John? I don't object to him but at the same time am surprised, I thought Minoso for sure, maybe Hodges, outside shot Oliva.

This "card" was given out(SGA) when Tony got into the Twins HOF many many years ago. I got him to sign it a few years ago. Tony was very surprised to see the card and asked how I got it. When I told him I was there he got a huge smile and was a very nice gentleman.

Happy for those that got in. Most are well deserving.

Some real head scratchers for me to be honest. Not sure how Jim Kaat gets in but Tommy John doesn’t get considered. I’ll never understand the lack of respect given to Lefty O’Doul and his impact on baseball in the west & Japan. Also, how does Oliva get in but not Allen? I like Oliva a lot but always felt his chances were lower than Dick Allen.

Does this mean guys like Bill Madlock with 4 batting titles etc will someday be in the HOF ?

And now it is time for this:

230. Coming In from the Mold (also Grabbing the Raines)
When a long-retired player finally becomes a HOFer and you start digging through your old cardboard boxes in search of his cards.

See also: Vexaltation - being pissed that when you dig those cards out they are in awful shape because they’ve been rattling around in your commons/junk boxes all of these years.

See also: Mildewphoria - the delight in discovering you have a bunch of his rookie cards socked away.

See also: Epidemacclaim - the huge amount of overpriced cards suddenly appearing everywhere on eBay the moment the ballplayer is finally elected to The Hall.

See also: Prognostogainer - someone who speculated perfectly on the HOF vote and was able to cheaply load up on the player’s cards in advance.

See also: Windfault - spending a lot of money buying the rookie cards of a player you were sure was going to be enshrined this time, only to see him once again fall short.

The Golden Era is not bad. Minoso is, I think, long overdue and a clear hall of famer. Kaat, Oliva and Hodges are not bad choices, not great ones. They can reasonably be hall of famers without lowering the standard, and could reasonably not make it. The kind of guys this vote, after missing admittance for like 50 years, is made for. I'd probably pick Boyer over Kaat, but none of these are a bad choice. No Harold Baines garbage, no Lee Smith, no Jack Morris type pick. All reasonable.

However, it looks like collusion. 11/16 ballots were exactly the same, with a choice among 10 players who are all in the same 'close but not quite' boat (except, I think, Minoso who is extremely deserving). Really looks like there was some vote trading or something to align everything so we have several players elected.


The Pre-War ballot, frankly, I think has much to do with narratives. It's purpose was obviously to elect Negro Leaguers, with the recent declaration that they are all major leagues. This isn't a problem necessarily, most of the best players from that time period not in are from the Negro Leagues. But O'Neil and Fowler? O'Neil is getting in for being a great interview subject, I like him and his stories like everyone else but I don't think that's an appropriate reason. Character by itself is not enough. Fowler, I don't claim to be an expert on, but he's seems chosen as a first-of-something, not a great. They had better choices on this ballot to honor black players from this period, like Donaldson.

If I'm reading it right, Bill Dahlen got 0 votes though. Reynolds and O'Doul, the other traditional major league options, both did get multiple votes. Each of whom is obviously inferior as a player, and Reynolds even being there is downright ridiculous (25 WAR, less than 200 wins, why not Lopat if you want a good-for-awhile Yankee from the 50's?). O'Doul has claims to significance in Japan, which does not seem relevant to an American Hall of Fame that does not and never has honored success in Japan. I know he has fans here, but 3,600 at bats for a player elected for his batting is a little absurd. Dahlen was close to getting in in a previous vote. He got completely screwed if the results I have are correct.

Madlock is very similar to Oliva. I'm not saying I would vote for him, but he has a legitimate argument and should merit genuine consideration.

Not the strike season one, but weren't Madlock's other titles considered somewhat cheap given how many games he missed?

Anyhow Oliva was very popular. Madlock, not.

He won't get in ever IMO.

John wasn’t considered on the Golden Days ballot because his greatest impact was between 1970-87. He will almost certainly be on the Modern Baseball ballot when that committee convenes in December 2023.

https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-fam...ras-committees

FWIW, John had a really similar career as Kaat (minus all those Gold Gloves), so depending on the strength of that ballot, he may have a chance.

https://stathead.com/baseball/player...um=0&request=1

Interesting. Given that Kaat and John shared 20 or 21 seasons LOL, one would think of them as being in the same era.

Rod Carew was one of the guys voting and I'm sure he was pushing hard for Oliva and Kaat. Mike Schmidt was also a Kaat teammate. I also think the fact Oliva and Kaat are both still alive (83 years old) played a factor. It's always a shame when players die before getting in, like Buck O'Neil.

No complaints here.

A Fowler card is gonna be TOUGH, lol!!

I’m just thankful the lobbying didn’t lead to another Harold Baines level stupid choice. Kaat and Olivia are right on the border, it doesn’t lower the Hall to include them, at least.

Well said.

It's now inevitable that Tommy John gets in. His numbers are better than Kaat's numbers.

Oliva was a more impactful player.

Looks like for the Golden Days Era, all the voters got together and agreed to elect five players. Then one voter either miscast an extra vote for Minnie or just didn't get along with Dick Allen. Otherwise seems weird that ALL the votes would go to just five guys?

I’d nudge Oliva over him due to context and his excellence in a pitcher leaning era. But Madlock is very similar statistically. “Impactful” is a thing difficult to quantify if we’re referring to something out of statistics.

This. Boyer is as good as those selected. Maris typically gets some votes even if I think he shouldn’t. This result does not appear to be “honest”.

Exactly, I brought this up (twice) earlier in the thread already how this looked like voters got together to almost ensure they elected certain players, and Carew being one of the voters and teammate of two of the electees likely played a bigger part in all this than we'll ever truly know.

Where did you see that so many ballots were identical? All I have been able to find online was the vote totals that were released, and other than the 4 elected and Allen, everyone else is just grouped into three or less votes.

Results of the Golden Days Era Ballot (12 votes needed for election): Minnie Miñoso (14 votes, 87.5%); Gil Hodges (12 votes, 75%); Jim Kaat (12 votes, 75%); Tony Oliva (12 votes, 75%); Dick Allen (11 votes, 68.8%); Ken Boyer, Roger Maris, Danny Murtaugh, Billy Pierce and Maury Wills each received three-or-fewer votes.

Very nice

Great display

So very happy for Buck, a truly wonderful man. Wish he was around to enjoy it.

Like you, my father was a big Brooklyn Dodgers fan. He grew up in Brooklyn. I remember him talking about Gil Hodges. I have recollections that Gil lived in the neighbourhood.

Between his playing days and managing the Miracle Mets, his membership was long overdue. I'm glad he's been recognised by the Committee.

I agree with the majority of posts here: These choices don't water down the hall, and we probably all had a favorite to argue for in this group. (I thought Minoso deserved this a long time ago, and I always wanted Buck in.) I also agree that Tommy John should get ready to update his resume, he and Kaat are so similar.

How about some autographs?? Sorry to say, I don't have a Fowler. (Does anyone???)

I'm so happy that two of 'my three Cubans' got in!

This is a GREAT GROUP!- VERY WORTHY!!


It's great that Oliva & Kaat got in while still living.


It's a shame that Minnie and Gil weren't elected while they were still around.

Sad that Dick Allen fell one vote short...

GIL HODGES! Finally!

I love Buck O'Neil! What a great ambassador of the Game.

Lefty O'Doul was also a great ambassador for the Game...maybe next time.



I thought Ken Boyer and Billy Pierce were great players, but borderline HOF candidates.

I still want Luis Tiant, Jr. to be in.



.

The only one of the new inductees I have, obtained TTM in November 2014:

[IMG]https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/...4570c9d160.jpg [/IMG]

Talk about rarely getting an autograph. Outside of Manny Sanguillen and in hockey Mario Lemieux and J Bob "Battleship" Kelly. Not for sale:

You’d think so, but here is the last Modern ballot:

Dwight Evans, Steve Garvey, Tommy John, Don Mattingly, Marvin Miller, Thurman Munson, Dale Murphy, Dave Parker, Ted Simmons and Lou Whitaker

Now that Miller and Simmons are in, they will be replaced with 2 other guys like Tiant, Steib, etc…

Of these guys, do you think John would be a top 4 pick on 12/16 ballots?

Sitting here I would say we'll see John, Mattingly and Munson although I suppose that's not exactly the most diverse group in these sensitive times.

I think Jim Kaat getting in, bodes well for both Tommy John and Luis Tiant.


Steve

I'm very happy that Hodges got in. The honor was long overdue. Same with Minoso. I'm fine with Kaat and Oliva, but it's a shame that Dick Allen fell 1 vote short for the second consecutive time. If he's not a lock next time around, it's all a sham. Speaking of which...

How does the Early Baseball committee only elect 2 people??? That group only gets voted on every 10 years, and there is a backlog of deserving players, so put the max in for Pete's sake. I think John Donaldson and Bill Dahlen both got the shaft. I have to wonder if Dahlen will ever get in now. It's not looking good after this.

Evans (severely underrated), Tommy John, and Whitaker from that list. I’d add in Luis Tiant too.

Here is a tough to find early Buck O'Neil item.
http://starsofthediamond.com/buckoneilsol1.jpg
http://starsofthediamond.com/buckoneilsol2.jpg
http://starsofthediamond.com/buckoneil.jpg

I'm not saying Whitaker needs to be in, but there's something wrong with Trammell making it and Whitaker getting only a couple more votes than I got.

P+1

I think the snub here is Lefty O'Doul especially with O'Neil and Hodges getting in as I classify O'Doul in the same type of resume as those two guys (all-star player with great addition items in their life in baseball elevating them to a HOFer)...very happy about Hodge O'Neil and Minoso...ok with Fowler and Kaat and not sure about Oliva (bc I never have really done a deep dive on him)

hall of fame selections
 

All modern selections were well deserved choices, i.e., Hodges, Minoso, kaat and Oliva. I cannot comment on Fowler or O'Neil since my knowledge of the Negro leagues is not that great. I think that Allen, who was so close, should have made it. He was a very good player.
Like several other persons who commented on the selections, I was extremely happy to see that Gil Hodges made the Hall. Growing up in New Jersey in the late 1940s and 1950s the Dodgers were a fixture on WOR Channel 9. The Boys of Summer now have five starters in the Hall of Fame , Reese, Robinson, Snider, Campy and Hodges. I am sure that Doris Kearns Goodwin who wrote that classic, Wait 'Till Next Year, is also happy.
flpm42

Happy to see two fellow Twins getting in. Kaat / Oliva are great guys as well.

Happy for Buck but would have been more appropriate to induct him and Lefty at the same time for the same reason, Without Lefty O'Doul Shoei Ohtani wouldn't be playing For the Angels.

The committee's actually meet in person and discuss the candidates, then vote...so it's not particularly shocking they reached something like a consensus.

130, 142 and 130. Sure that's missing some time but not crazy. 565, 588 and 530 PA's. 530 is pretty low to the 502 required, but nobody seems to devalue Brett's run at .400 and the batting title he won with only 515 PA's.

Who's to say he wouldn't have hit even higher if he'd been healthier?

Can't agree with all of the approval of Jim Kaat making it.

A 3.45 ERA during a low-scoring era of major league history. Pitched a ton for a Twins team that won a lot of games during the '60s, or else his win total wouldn't have even sniffed HOF consideration.

It's trademark hall of very good stuff, and represents how the hall's standards continue to slowly lower (and how important it is to have the right buddies influencing the voting)

I think Kaat’s 287 wins have more to do with his 4,500 innings than being a Twin. His 108 ERA+ is his real problem. His WAR is fairly low. He also was consistently good for two decades and won a ton of gold gloves that certainly can give him a little bit of a boost. 7 of his top 10 similarity scores are hall of famers. Excellent but not great 20 year pitchers doesn’t seem a bad place to draw the line as the bottom tier of the hall of fame. I’d rank him over some hall of fame starters, he’s hardly lowering the general bottom standard, he’s right on the border. He’s really almost the same player as John, wonder if he gets in soon. They’re both a lot better than Jack Morris.

I agree that my "lowering the standard" statement might be too strong. But I still maintain that it's a poor choice (to go along with whatever starters you felt were even worse choices).

The Twins were around 140 games over .500 during Kaat's 12 full seasons there, so I imagine it was both that and the 4500 innings that account for his win total.

And even with his fielding, as you mentioned, his WAR (especially over all those innings) still isn't worth of the hall to me. Especially when you factor in that low ERA+ compared to the usual HOF standards

Was just going to say if you like Jack Morris in the hall, you can't bitch about Kaat.

I've learned over the years that any kind of gold standard I had will only make me salty when borderline guys are inducted - so I am happy for all.

With that said, Kaat made 3 All-Star teams in 25 years, and did not have too many "HOF years". Kaat's gold gloves are as, or more impressive than his win total.

The others are pretty well justified in my mind, would have liked to see Allen get in as well.

It's nice to see something go right with baseball at a time when its fearless leaders are mucking things up again with another strike. I'm particularly thrilled to see Minnie Minoso get in: I've personally campaigned for him to the point where I've annoyed some — but I did get a call from him one day thanking me, which was a wonderful surprise.

As for Dick Allen, of course he's a Hall of Famer. He was easily one of baseball's most feared hitters for a decade. Just look at his OPS from 1964 to 1974 — who hit the ball harder during that time? Nobody. His case for Cooperstown is convincing as Minnie's.

Yes, and they should have created a separate "Ambassadors" category for both of them. Electing Buck in any other capacity is a bigger joke than Harold Baines being inducted. As wonderful a human being as he was, O'Neil had no business being considered for enshrinement alongside people who were being elected predominantly on the basis of their level of play.

I'm not an autograph expert, but this Minnie was obtained in person in 1957 before my tenth birthday after a spring training game in Clearwater against the Phillies. I like it more now.

I only have two of the three famous M. M. autographs.

Minnie Minoso

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image.../minoso-minnie

Mickey Mantle

https://www.collectorfocus.com/image.../mantle-mickey

Moms Mabley


Does anyone have a Moms Mabley autograph for sale? :D

Let me know.

Just to play devil's advocate, if you wanted a WS win, are you going with Kaat or Morris? Morris appears to be a miserable human being, but he knew how to win. And I think a lot of the ugliness to his stats is because he'd let up if given a big lead. He didn't mind winning 6-4 instead of gassing himself to win 6-0.

Kaat and John had many more wins and played longer, but Morris was better.

Looking at careers, personally I’m picking Kaat. Over very large sample sizes, Kaat was better at not giving up runs, adjusted for context (Morris’ 105 ERA+ is even worse). If we look at post season only, in small sample sizes they have very similar ERA’s. Morris got absolutely shelled in 3 post season series, that’s always forgotten and only his good appearances remembered.. That Morris was particularly clutch I have a hard time finding support for in the data. I’d probably take John over both of them.

This is so true: just make separate categories for “ambassadors” (O’Neil, Fowler) and “executives” (Pompez, Manley) so that more actual HOF-caliber Negro League baseball players can get inducted such as Redding, Johnson, Scales, Marcelle, Lundy, Oms, and the like…

I think this would be a great addition for the Hall - Guys like Pesky, Don Zimmer etc. deserve a spot in the Hall imo - just not for playing/managing resumes.

Wouldn't it be hilarious if they did that, and Bob Uecker made it into the Hall? God, his acceptance speech would be classic!!!

Already happened as a broadcaster, and the speech was great.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7dG5HCKeWA

Morris did not exactly get shelled in three post season series, at least not as you would suggest. in '87 he lost and gave up 6, but did pitch a complete game. So too in the 1992 ALCS, where he gave up 4 but went the distance. Your manager does not leave you out there for the duration if you're no good.
His first start in the 1992 WS was a 3-1 loss to Tom Glavine.

As for the second appearance in each of those 1992 series, yes he did get rocked. At age 37 and pitching on three days rest, he had one bad inning against the A's, and had the same outcome against Atlanta, thanks to a two-out grand slam by Lonnie Smith. These are probably forgotten because, well, his team won the game and series against Oakland and had a 3-1 series lead when he faltered against the Braves.

So yeah, I guess a couple of blemishes in his final season at age 37 are overlooked, but it's not like the 1991 gem against Atlanta was a one-off. Morris was clutch when it mattered most.

In 1987, he gives up 6 earned runs in 8 innings for a 6.75 ERA. A 6.75 ERA is not being shelled? Pitching a complete game doesn’t mean he wasn’t shelled.

In 1992 he gives up 9 earned runs in 12.1 innings for a 6.57 ERA. A 6.57 ERA is not being shelled?

In 1993 he gives up 10 earned runs in 10.2 innings for a 8.44 ERA. A 8.44 ERA is not being shelled?

Total postseason results: 3.80 ERA. Respectable, not great. If you want to remember only his heroics and ignore his failures, then any player one likes is a hall of famer. It is not reasonable to expect others to do this. The Hall of Fame is a career honor, a players entire career counts, not the parts we like. He had 3 terrible postseasons, and 2 excellent ones (1984 and 1991).

Um, he did not pitch in the 1993 postseason. And as I said, he had two bad outings at age 37 in 1992. You cherry pick. Look up the 2000 NLDS, where the Braves got swept by the Cardinals. Greg Maddux ERA? 11.25. Tom Glavine's? 27.00. Should we remember those too?

Looks like the stats listed for 1993 were really his 1992 WS stats. Since one of the arguments for Morris getting into the HoF was his postseason dominance, I think it's fair to look at the series he wasn't so good. He only pitched in 7 postseason series - 3 were very good, 3 were very bad and 1 was mediocre - so it doesn't really show an overall dominance like people try to present when arguing he belongs in the HoF. Maddux and Glavine pitched in a lot more postseason series so a few bad series out of 23 (for Maddux) or 24 (for Glavine) is more like cherry picking than it is when you are talking about almost half of Morris' postseason appearances being bad.

There is no sensible objective standard by which Morris is better. Subjectively people can do whatever they want.

Yep, I’m a moron. He got shelled twice in 1992, I misread the year column. I don’t think it materially changes things, but I was wrong.

2 good post seasons, 2 bad ones

Fair points, but note that unlike Maddux (11-14) and Glavine (14-16), Morris had a winning record postseason (7-4). He averaged more than 7 innings per start, which is more than Maddux and Glavine. He had 5 complete games-- the same as Maddux and Glavine combined in their 47 postseason series. He won complete games of 3-2 and 4-2 in the 1984 World Series, with the AL MVP sitting in his bullpen. And of course the 10 inning 1-0 complete game in 1991. So I don't think it's imagined or overstated to say he took the ball in big games and was more than a bit successful.

Again, does anyone know what the current protocol is for players who were on the 2022 Early Baseball/Golden Era ballots but failed to reach 75% of the vote? Will they be on the 2032 ballot again taking up one of the ten slots or does the committee select 10 new names?

I'm really happy about Oliva. He was a truly great hitter. I think that he's been undervalued due to the fact that he played during the modern deadball era of the early and mid sixties when the game greatly favored pitchers and they were putting up sub 2.00 ERAs. His career was on the short side, but OPS+ of 130 or more for seven straight years is a helluva run. His rookie year was insane, especially considering it happened in 1964.

Serious question: why do you think Allen continues to fall short?

His performance was sustained and undeniable.

Are there perhaps some residual issues related to his surliness/perceived surliness (even if justified)?

Do we have a pre-Schilling Schilling situation?

I think we were all shocked to see him miss the cut again, but don’t think we can lean on any “living candidate” advantage Kaat or Oliva might have had. That did not impede Hodges or Minoso this year.

Was Allen a victim of a loaded ballot? Certainly not. Just trying to understand possible circumstances that led to him missing out for at least another 5 years.

Or perhaps his career unfortunately straddled both the Golden Days and the Modern Baseball era…almost perfectly so.

See for yourself. Very identical, although his pre-70 work was superior.

1963-69
https://stathead.com/baseball/player...to=1969&type=b

1970-77
https://stathead.com/baseball/player...to=1977&type=b

I wonder if he would have been better served on the Modern ballot. One could argue his “greatest contributions”, as per the definition of the eras, was after 1969.

Perhaps Allen's sometimes odd behavior kept him 1 vote shy?

This is a great question…can not find a definitive answer, though.

https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-fam...ras-committees

I cannot imagine a fresh ballot of 10 new names would be put forth. Think of how watered down the list would be after just a couple cycles. Likewise, because so many years would have passed between now and the next voing period, why would those who just missed out in 2022 drop off altogether?

Still looking to see if I can find more concrete info on this process.