2024 Baseball Hall of Fame Tracker

[perezfan]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

So your argument for Wagner to go into the HOF is that Hoffman sucked in 1998?

If it were up to me relievers wouldn't be allowed in the HOF, if they are such great pitchers why do they spend so much time on the bench?

Maybe Smoky Burgess should also go in due to his .288 career average as a pinch hitter?

This reflects my feelings exactly. I almost mentioned letting Pinch Hitters in, but refrained. Not a fan of "closers" getting into the Hall unless they were spectacular like Mariano or Gossage. I view it as a contrived/made-up position.

[todeen]

Bronson Arroyo hints that many players were using PEDs while on the Red Sox. It's no surprise to me that Ortiz was too.

Sent from my SM-G9900 using Tapatalk

[Topnotchsy]

Originally Posted by Tabe

I disagree. He hit 58 points higher at Coors than elsewhere (.345 vs .287). In 3% more games (1141 vs 1106), he hit 60% more homers at Coors than elsewhere (227 vs 142). .469 slugging outside of Coors.

Double his road stats and you've got a .287 1B with 284 homers AKA a guy no one would advocate for.

I don't think that this is a fair way to assess Helton this way. Most players hit better at home, and many hit significantly better at home. There is also research that hitting at Coors (where the ball movement is different than in other parks) hurts hitters when they go on the road.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by G1911

Schilling is a grade A example of the problems with the hall now. Steroids are waived for media favorites (Ortiz), clearly below level players are out in via committees filled with their former managers, owners and friends (Baines), Schilling is kept out for being vocally against media narratives (some of the things said about him being an asshole or right-wing true and some completely fictional and easily disproved), and others kept out over allegations without any public facing evidence and weighing of it (Vizquel, who was trending in and then immediately reversed and won’t ever get in now). We’re in another era where people’s agendas is overweighing any honest evaluation of performance. Historically the Hall has done pretty good, but this seems even worse than the Frisch era where the open corruption was more easily eliminated than the new ideology that merit is not the key component.

This is the part that stood out to me the most. Tale as old as time, when it comes to our Nations pastime. The writers have always had an agenda, like when they screwed Ted Williams out of multiple MVP's because they didn't like him. The same writers have always had an agenda when it comes to voting for certain candidates. Hell the Veterans committee wasn't much better.

What Schilling said was detestable, however he put together a Hall of Fame level career. He belongs.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by perezfan

This reflects my feelings exactly. I almost mentioned letting Pinch Hitters in, but refrained. Not a fan of "closers" getting into the Hall unless they were spectacular like Mariano or Gossage. I view it as a contrived/made-up position.

My big issue is almost every, if not every, closer is a failed starter. What's more valuable a guy who can throw 6 -9 quality innings or a guy who can do it for 1- 2. A closer is worthless unless you are handing him leads.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

My big issue is almost every, if not every, closer is a failed starter. What's more valuable a guy who can throw 6 -9 quality innings or a guy who can do it for 1- 2. A close is worthless unless you are handing him leads.

Suppose a guy as effective as Rivera, but he was only brought in in the 6th or 7th inning and never closed. There is no way in hell he would make the Hall as a set up man even though his contribution would have been equal.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

Suppose a guy as effective as Rivera, but he was only brought in in the 6th or 7th inning and never closed. There is no way in hell he would make the Hall as a set up man even though his contribution would have been equal.

I agree, and that helps my point.

I will mention that a guy I think is at least interesting as a discussion for the hall is Dan Quisenberry, and contrary to my point above, even including the minors, he only started one game in his career (though it's interesting to note that one game was a complete game!) so there is the occasional guy who is slated to be a reliever from day one and that's likely more common now than it was back then. Quis was a special case because every pitching coach in history hated his delivery.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

I agree, and that helps my point.

I will mention that a guy I think is at least interesting as a discussion for the hall is Dan Quisenberry, and contrary to my point above, even including the minors, he only started one game in his career (though it's interesting to note that one game was a complete game!) so there is the occasional guy who is slated to be a reliever from day one and that's likely more common now than it was back then. Quis was a special case because every pitching coach in history hated his delivery.

He's still a failed starter because if anyone thought he was good enough to start, they would have tried him there first.

[BioCRN]

Gossage came off a stellar season in the pen to put in a season as a starter that would be chalked up as forgettable at best. That season put him back in the pen.

Over his 11 season peak, that 1 season starting he put up a 3.94 ERA and 1.36 WHIP. The other 10 relief seasons were all great.

This is also an era where a "closer" being asked to work 1.something innings rather than just 1 inning or rarely 1.1 or more IP.

The entire role of a "closer" wildly changed from it's emergence in the late 70s, to the early/mid 80s, to what we've been doing with the role the past 40-ish years.

Though it's relatively new, we've been doing it long enough that career longevity is a thing. The pickings of those who got a full career out of it and doing with consistent greatness is still thin over this past 40 years. We've had lots of greats, and very few greats with an entire career to show for it.

[doug.goodman]

I wouldn't put Mariano in either.

His team played 1,450 plus innings each year, he played 67 1/2.

If he was so good why did he play so little?

He seldom entered a game where his team had less than a 90% chance of winning. What other player is ever in a situation that he always has a 90% chance of success?

https://retrosheet.org/Research/Smit...fTheCloser.pdf


The only thing I'll give him credit for is having a beautiful autograph in an era of scribbles.

[John1941]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

I agree, and that helps my point.

I will mention that a guy I think is at least interesting as a discussion for the hall is Dan Quisenberry, and contrary to my point above, even including the minors, he only started one game in his career (though it's interesting to note that one game was a complete game!) so there is the occasional guy who is slated to be a reliever from day one and that's likely more common now than it was back then. Quis was a special case because every pitching coach in history hated his delivery.

As you can probably tell by my avatar I would not be averse to Quis being elected.

His peak was short but it sure was spectacular. If Bruce Sutter is in, why not Quis? (I know two wrongs don't make a right, but I'm biased so I don't really care in this case...) I'm a numbers guy, not typically disposed to HOF arguments that rest on intangibles, but he was an amazing guy as well as an amazing pitcher.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

I wouldn't put Mariano in either.

His team played 1,450 plus innings each year, he played 67 1/2.

If he was so good why did he play so little?

He seldom entered a game where his team had less than a 90% chance of winning. What other player is ever in a situation that he always has a 90% chance of success?

https://retrosheet.org/Research/Smit...fTheCloser.pdf


The only thing I'll give him credit for is having a beautiful autograph in an era of scribbles.

To his credit, his WHIP was outstanding.

[paul]

Doug, thanks for posting that article about closers. It's amazing and confirms what I always thought to be true. A team's chances of winning in a "save" situation has not improved with the introduction of closers. It really calls into question the value of closers, and why teams spend so much on them.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

To his credit, his WHIP was outstanding.

I don't dispute that he was great at doing the job he was asked to perform, I just posit that the job he was tasked with performing was not / is not / will not be worthy of HOF consideration due to the minimal amount of time he spent on the field.

If Freddie Lynn had become incapacitated after his ROTY/MVP season, would he have gone into the HOF?

He played a similar amount of innings that year as Rivera played in his entire career.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by paul

Doug, thanks for posting that article about closers. It's amazing and confirms what I always thought to be true. A team's chances of winning in a "save" situation has not improved with the introduction of closers. It really calls into question the value of closers, and why teams spend so much on them.

Don't thank me, thank David Smith, who is more deserving of a plaque at Cooperstown than Mariano (and others).

[cgjackson222]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

https://retrosheet.org/Research/Smit...fTheCloser.pdf

Interesting research, thanks for posting. I wish they'd allow starters to pitch longer, and even allow middle relievers to go all the way. I feel like the fewer the relievers, the better. Those multi-pitcher no-hitters always seem unsatisfying to me compared with a complete game no-hitter.

I think MLB's move to have relievers face at least 3 batters (or close out an inning) was a small step in the right direction.

That being said, it is a difficult subject to research, because teams went from not using closers to using them so quickly, so there wasn't a huge window of time to compare teams that used closers with those that didn't. The figure 12 in the research shows that relievers have had a lower ERA than starters since 1954 with the exception of two years. I'd like to see the same graph with WHIP to account for starters getting earned runs after they have left the game. Probably wouldn't make a big difference though.

Here is an article about how the save statistic is making baseball worse (and how Goose Gossage's expletive-laced rants on the subject have a point).
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...lief-pitchers/

And another article by Nate Silver contrasting pitchers who have been both starters and relievers in their career, and how to bring balance back to bullpens:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...lan-to-fix-it/

[jayshum]

Here's a story about Sheffield and his connections to PEDs. I've also read that he was an advocate for testing before it became a part of baseball so I think that makes his story more believable and that he should be voted in.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sport...e/71944010007/

[packs]

Originally Posted by Aquarian Sports Cards

I agree, and that helps my point.

I will mention that a guy I think is at least interesting as a discussion for the hall is Dan Quisenberry, and contrary to my point above, even including the minors, he only started one game in his career (though it's interesting to note that one game was a complete game!) so there is the occasional guy who is slated to be a reliever from day one and that's likely more common now than it was back then. Quis was a special case because every pitching coach in history hated his delivery.

Isn't this Hoyt Wilhelm? Wilhelm is one of the most underrated players in the HOF. He did save 228 games, but he pitched in over 1,000 games and clearly wasn't only in the game to notch the 9th.

He's also a challenge to this failed starter hypothesis. The one season they took the leash off Wilhelm led the league in ERA as a starter.

[butchie_t]

Helton is gonna make it. And that makes me happy!

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

He's still a failed starter because if anyone thought he was good enough to start, they would have tried him there first.

I can't call someone who was never given a chance a failure.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by packs

Isn't this Hoyt Wilhelm? Wilhelm is one of the most underrated players in the HOF. He did save 228 games, but he pitched in over 1,000 games and clearly wasn't only in the game to notch the 9th.

He's also a challenge to this failed starter hypothesis. The one season they took the leash off Wilhelm led the league in ERA as a starter.

oddly he WAS a failed starter in the minors, likely the typical issues of mastering the knuckler. Then prejudices against his age and his favorite pitch made teams reluctant to start him despite his success as an MLB starter.

People also forget that Gossage was an All-Star his one season as a starter, he had a fantastic first half and then fell off. He needed to learn to pace himself a little better. So, failure with an asterisk

[Chuck9788]

So who (besides Beltre) is going to get the call tomorrow?

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Chuck9788

So who (besides Beltre) is going to get the call tomorrow?

I think Beltre and Mauer will get in. Wagner and Sheffield will both fall short of 75%. Helton looks like a coin toss, but I think he may just miss by a few votes.

[bandrus1]

Idk how mauer gets in and Andrew Jones is held out

[The Detroit Collector]

Still cant see how Mauer gets in first ballot. Begs the question are we putting guys in as an answer to PEDS.

[BioCRN]

Originally Posted by The Detroit Collector

Still cant see how Mauer gets in first ballot. Begs the question are we putting guys in as an answer to PEDS.

Yeah. I thought Mauer would make the HOF, but I wouldn't have guessed 1st ballot...or 2nd...and wouldn't be shocked to see it 5th+

[packs]

I figured Mauer and Posey were going to be tied together in terms of Hall paths but if Mauer gets in first ballot, they might as well put Buster in now and waive the waiting period.

[Seven]

For those posting about Mauer, there seems to be a recent shift in how voters are evaluating catchers. My thoughts are they're giving a little more recognition to peak performance, and things that aren't necessarily measured by statistics. the latter is most prominent in the case of a guy like Yadier Molina, who has become some sort of darling to a lot of the baseball media and fans alike. Many are calling for his eventual Hall of Fame election, despite him putting up only above average statistics for the majority of his career.

In terms of the numbers, a lot of times when it comes to candidacy, I look at a players JAWS. To define it "A player's JAWS is their career WAR averaged with their 7-year peak WAR. Note that only batting or pitching WAR are used in determining the averages at a given position. The current Hall of Famers are then grouped by position and a position average JAWS is computed." While this method is not perfect it allows us to look at a players numbers in comparison to his contemporaries throughout the eras of baseball. When Looking at Mauer's, which I've linked this is what we see

He falls right between Dickey and Berra. This is not a be all, end all, far from it. We know baseball is certainly more than a game of just numbers, many other things factor in. On a personal level ranking the MLB catchers of all time, I have Berra in my top 3. Number wise, however, Mauer tracks. There have certainly been more egregious selections in past years. I wasn't expecting him to get in the first time around, but I'm not upset by it.

[packs]

I don't think that list is really representative of reality though. Bill Dickey caught over 1700 games. Joe Mauer caught less than 1,000. Berra won 3 MVPs. There is so much more separating them from Mauer than JAWS.

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

shocked to see he had as many plate appearances as Piazza, his career felt shorter.

[Seven]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't think that list is really representative of reality though. Bill Dickey caught over 1700 games. Joe Mauer caught less than 1,000. Berra won 3 MVPs. There is so much more separating them from Mauer than JAWS.

I fully agree, that's why I said the raw numbers aren't everything, and pointed out that there's been a recent shift with how media views catchers. I don't think Mauer gets into the Hall of Fame if this was 30 years ago. But newer voters value his peak of hitting more than his longevity.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by Seven

I fully agree, that's why I said the raw numbers aren't everything, and pointed out that there's been a recent shift with how media views catchers. I don't think Mauer gets into the Hall of Fame if this was 30 years ago. But newer voters value his peak of hitting more than his longevity.

I enjoy reading Jay Jaffe's write-ups about the Hall of Fame candidates every year in which he relies on his JAWS scores as part of his decision for how he casts his ballot. However, he does state that it's not the only criteria he uses.

It will be interesting to see the voting for Yadier Molina when he is first eligible. His JAWS score of 35.5 puts him 22nd for catchers while his WAR of 42.3 puts him 19th. Both are below the average scores for catchers already in the Hall of Fame. The averages are 44.2 JAWS and 53.6 WAR.

However, many people seem to think that Molina will be a certain 1st ballot Hall of Famer when he's eligible. For comparison, as you previously indicated, Mauer is 7th in JAWS (and 9th in WAR) while Buster Posey is 14th in JAWS (40.7) and 16th in WAR (44.8) for catchers. Posey and Molina are both below the average Hall of Fame catcher for these values while Mauer is above the average.

[The Detroit Collector]

I dont disagree Mauer should get in. Just not first ballot. I've posted this before but look at the stats between him and Piazza. Almost identical. Yet it took Piazza 4 times to get in.

[packs]

I don't know that you can really talk about Mauer as a catcher the same way you can talk about Posey or Molina.

Mauer appeared in 921 games as catcher but also 603 games as a first baseman. Compare that to Posey who appeared as a catcher in 1,093 games and only 229 at first base.

I think Mauer had essentially two careers, one as the premier catcher in the American League and another as a league average first baseman.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't know that you can really talk about Mauer as a catcher the same way you can talk about Posey or Molina.

Mauer appeared in 921 games as catcher but also 603 games as a first baseman. Compare that to Posey who appeared as a catcher in 1,093 games and only 229 at first base.

I think Mauer had essentially two careers, one as the premier catcher in the American League and another as a league average first baseman.

Not sure I understand the logic. Posey played about one season more at catcher than Mauer, yet we can't compare them as catchers?

[Aquarian Sports Cards]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't know that you can really talk about Mauer as a catcher the same way you can talk about Posey or Molina.

Mauer appeared in 921 games as catcher but also 603 games as a first baseman. Compare that to Posey who appeared as a catcher in 1,093 games and only 229 at first base.

I think Mauer had essentially two careers, one as the premier catcher in the American League and another as a league average first baseman.

Always hate when I have to agree with Packs on a baseball matter

To further his comparison Piazza caught 1629 of the 1793 career games he started

[packs]

Originally Posted by nolemmings

Not sure I understand the logic. Posey played about one season more at catcher than Mauer, yet we can't compare them as catchers?

Well, Posey was predominantly a catcher and I don't think it can be said that he had much of a career as a first baseman. But you can definitely talk about Mauer's second career as one.

Doesn't that make them different?

If it helps understand the point, Mauer played 15 seasons but from 2014 to 2018 he appeared as a catcher in 1 game.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by packs

Well, Posey was predominantly a catcher and I don't think it can be said that he had much of a career as a first baseman. But you can definitely talk about Mauer's second career as one.

Doesn't that make them different?

Mauer certainly played more games at first than Posey and the other catchers he's being compared to, but it's his years playing catcher that are going to (probably) get him into the Hall of Fame this year. His last 5 years playing first base did not do much to add to the argument he should be in the Hall of Fame other than help increase his career totals.

[packs]

Originally Posted by jayshum

Mauer certainly played more games at first than Posey and the other catchers he's being compared to, but it's his years playing catcher that are going to (probably) get him into the Hall of Fame this year. His last 5 years playing first base did not do much to add to the argument he should be in the Hall of Fame other than help increase his career totals.

I don't disagree. He was average at best in his first baseman role. But that was still a third of his career.

Posey did not play a third of his career out of the position and neither did Molina, Piazza or most other catchers.

If Mauer had retired at 30 after his time as a catcher had come to an end, would he have a stronger or weaker case for the HOF? I think his counting stats still help him. He'd have 105 home runs, just over 600 RBIs and just over 1,400 hits if he hadn't played those last 5 years as a first baseman and DH.

[nolemmings]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't disagree. He was average at best in his first baseman role. But that was still a third of his career.

Posey did not play a third of his career out of the position and neither did Molina, Piazza or most other catchers.

Mauer makes it into the HOF as a catcher, and his stats bear that out. What is so hard to understand about that? If anything, his numbers at 1b detract somewhat from his candidacy. He is not getting in as a compiler, he is getting in because of his work during peak performance, as noted by James in his post. He was a catcher during that entire time, again playing nearly as many games at the position as Posey. To say he could not be compared to Posey as a catcher eludes me.

[packs]

I didn’t say that. I said in the same way and I meant as a career catcher. It’s hard to play catcher and we all know that. I think more than anything else defense and longevity is the case for Molina. I’ve always thought Mauer will be the test for Posey’s candidacy because they had similar numbers but I view Posey having an edge because he finished his career as a catcher.

[jayshum]

Originally Posted by packs

I don't disagree. He was average at best in his first baseman role. But that was still a third of his career.

Posey did not play a third of his career out of the position and neither did Molina, Piazza or most other catchers.

If Mauer had retired at 30 after his time as a catcher had come to an end, would he have a stronger or weaker case for the HOF? I think his counting stats still help him. He'd have 105 home runs, just over 600 RBIs and just over 1,400 hits if he hadn't played those last 5 years as a first baseman and DH.

His increased career stats from playing 5 years at first certainly help him. Without them, his stats are generally below Posey except for a higher batting average. It looks like their WAR would be almost identical.

[G1911]

I don't see how the ~season gap in catcher games is a huge factor.

Counter to that is Mauer playing 1st base for another gap was a lot more valuable than Posey sitting at home. Mauer played another 500 games in his career, providing diminished value during that stretch but still value. A little over league bat for 500 games is a lot better than doing nothing at all.

C games > 1st base games

1st base games > not playing.

[Topps206]

ERA

Billy Wagner, 2.31
Trevor Hoffman, 2.87

WAR

Trevor Hoffman, 28
Billy Wagner, 27.7

ERA+

Billy Wagner, 187
Trevor Hoffman, 141


WHIP

Billy Wagner, 0.998
Trevor Hoffman, 1.058

Saves
Trevor Hoffman, 601
Billy Wagner, 422

It’s hard to have one without the other, and I question if Hoffman was better than Wagner, just a matter of getting more saves.

Absolutely, Wagner should be in, and playoffs shouldn’t negate that.

[BioCRN]

A slew of 1994 Wagner rookies got posted on Ebay after his 9th snub. Ha.

[cgjackson222]

Congrats to Adrian Beltre, Joe Mauer, and Todd Helton.

Beltré's 95.1% is the highest-ever for a Dominican-born player, topping the 92.89% from Vladimir Guerrero in 2018. George Brett will remain the leader for the highest vote percentage ever by a third baseman at 98.19%.

Mauer becomes just the third catcher ever to be elected as a first-ballot Hall of Famer after earning 76.1% of the vote. Previously, only Johnny Bench and Ivan Rodríguez made it through on their first chance. Bench's 96.42% of the vote remains the standard at the position.

Billy Wagner's attempt to become just the ninth Hall of Fame reliever fell just short. He finished with 73.8%, or five votes shy of induction. Gary Sheffield, meanwhile, received 63.9% of the vote in his 10th and final year on the ballot.

Carlos Beltran saw the biggest jump--going from 45.6% to 57.1%. Sheffield went to 63.9% from 55%, Andrew Jones went up ~3%, and most players saw little change, with ARod KRod Pettitte and Vizquel actually going down a bit.

[jayshum]

Helton got in with more room to spare than expected while Mauer made it by 4 votes and Wagner missed by 5 votes with 1 more year on the ballot.

[Mike D.]

Baseball Hall of Fame Announces 2024 Hall of Fame Voting Results

[G1911]

0 surprises

[bigfanNY]

The Hall of What ??? I wear my yankee hat out and about and anytime in the past 2 weeks anybody mentioned Baseball I asked them if they knew who Joe Mauer was. I was 1 for 18 with 17 responding ...who? So they have gone from the Hall of Fame to the Hall of Who?....How did he get in? ...
Shoeless Joe and Pete Rose are banned and cannot be voted in. Everyone understands that. I understand that. I will never understand How Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens and Arod are not in a place called the Baseball Hall of Fame. And By the way all 18 knew who Barry Bonds , Roger Clemens and Alex Rodriguez are.
And Andy Pettite won 256 games 60% winning percentage won over 100 more games than lost. Was 19 and 11 in postseason pithing 276 innings. Andy has Five world Series Rings All 3 of 2024's Hall of Fame class have zero...rings combined. And Only 13.5% of Baseball writers voting listed Andy....Chase Utley got 28% of voters voting for him... lol I no longer vist the Hall of fame. I do not support the Hall of Fame in any way. Simply because the sign on the front door is a lie. It is not the Baseball hall of Fame.