What does the Hall-of-Fame Tracker Indicate?

[egri]

Originally Posted by Jim65

Schilling asked to be removed from the ballot, I would laugh if the writers voted him in, just out of spite lol

When he said that last year, my first thought was he was trying reverse psychology.

[BobC]

Originally Posted by egri

When he said that last year, my first thought was he was trying reverse psychology.

You know, that might actually be a very good point about Schilling. LOL

[G1911]

Looks Ortiz is the only one with a good chance based on this. Bonds and Clemes are barely over 75% and the end result is usually lower than the early public ballots, so they aren't likely. Ortiz is borderline at this point, I'll get a good laugh if he gets in and the other roiders who were much better players get shoveled to the eras committee's instead.

Vizquel and Schilling will slide back for things that have nothing to do with performance. Accusations of sexually harassing batboys and beating women appears to be punished a bit more than being vocal about political views the hall voter base does not like, so far.

Jeff Kent continues to get no credit.

[Peter_Spaeth]

One thing I haven't seen brought up much in the Ortiz roids discussion, and maybe I just haven't read enough, is the big jump in his power stats upon moving to Boston.

[SyrNy1960]

Yes, and he tested positive in 2003.

[G1911]

His power explosion times perfectly with his failed test. But Ortiz is held to a completely different standard from everyone else. So is Schilling, for very different reasons.

The Hall has generally done a good job, I think, of rewarding performance. Some players took more ballots than they should have, some borderline guys are in and some out (which seems unavoidable, when you are down to the borderline players the differences are tiny and there logically must be a line somewhere) but the general standards have been followed well. Players who were not popular or well-liked have historically still gotten in if their performance merited it (Dick Allen is taking too long). Hell, Cepeda was a drug trafficker who was also arrested for threatening a man with a gun AND a borderline candidate and got in by the Vets committee, as most borderline players of his caliber eventually do.

This ballot seems to represent a clear shift, with baseball performance having a much smaller role in the results than it has historically. Schilling is a vocal conservative with much negative press from the voter base that generally has the opposite politics and seems to (as some voters have written openly about) be punished for this (if one wants to claim it's because Schilling requested to be kept off after being snubbed for 9 years, he was still punished for this for the first 9 years). Clemens and Bonds are kept out for steroids but more voters seem happy to ignore that Ortiz is guilty too because he's likable and doesn't have the reputational, attitude and woman-related accusations Bonds and Clemens do (well he does, with the restraining order after intimidating and threatening his ex, but again, the standards are different for Ortiz). Vizquel's nomination, who faces serious charges of sexual and woman-beating misconduct, went from likely to completely dead.

The counter-argument of the character clause is usually brought up about now, but it has never been used for off-the-field conduct to dismiss candidates before. Nor does it seem relevant to giving Ortiz preferential treatment while keeping out better players guilty of the same thing. At least Bonds and Clemens were Hall of Fame quality players before they starting dosing.

[Peter_Spaeth]

Bonds, Clemens, and ARod are three of the greatest players of all time, but at least as they have interacted with the baseball world are PR disasters and widely regarded as A holes. Ortiz isn't even close to their talent or achievement level, but he is a smiling, positive, beloved figure. Hell, IMO having watched them both he's a clear notch below Manny, another PR disaster. It seems to make all the difference in the world. Just spin and flip whatever argument you want to make to justify the result.

[howard38]

Originally Posted by egri

When he said that last year, my first thought was he was trying reverse psychology.

It worked for Harry Carson.

[chaddurbin]

it's not up to the baseball writers to erase a whole era of baseball history and to punish these guys retroactively even though these same writers knew what was going on as it was happening. if the owners/commissioner/powers that be were turning a blind eyes to what the players were doing because of how profitable it was, then the voters should accept that fact and vote these guys in!

it's a mockery that recent guys like baines, rice, and dawson are in and bonds and clemens are not...but life's not fair and i don't think either will make it by the end of the day.

[clydepepper]

Make a note:

Prince Fielder only got two more votes than I did.




.