Comments on: What can we learn from the Hall of Fame voting this year?

By: churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged

churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 16:14:04 +0000

Well phooey, I completely forgot about that =\

By: teej414

teej414 — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 01:20:51 +0000

Bagwell was a juicer. Have you seen him lately? HAHA

By: Roger Moore

Roger Moore — Thu, 06 Jan 2011 00:14:07 +0000

If you extrapolate Bagwell’s 1994 season reasonably, you wind up with exactly the numbers he got. He got hit by a pitch and broke his hand just before the strike and would have been unable to play for the rest of the season even if there had been games to play. He never would have won his MVP if not for the strike.

By: tominma

tominma — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 22:40:59 +0000

Cheaters should never be in the Hall of Fame!! Character IS a criterion. He cheated , He even looked into the eyes of America and said he never used steroids!! He’s out! Bagwell suffers from the “guilt by association” syndrome. If anyone this year is a first balloter, Jeff Bagwell is!

By: schlom

schlom — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:54:41 +0000

How about the fact that even though everyone that was around at the time knew that Trammell was the best player on those Tigers teams, not Jack Morris?

By: Jonny 5

Jonny 5 — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:28:25 +0000

I learned that I want nothing to do with judging men. I’m the odd man out I guess…

By: churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged

churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:22:15 +0000

Also, Bagwell’s triple slash numbers are better across the board, but McCovey played in a worse hitting era so his OPS+ is only slightly lower. Bagwell was a far better basestealer. And Bagwell’s peak was a lot longer with multiple 8+WA*R seasons whereas McCovey only had one.

For fun, if we extrapolate Bagwell’s absurd ’94 season out to a full set of games, here’s what we get:

162 Games Played
216 Hits
153 Runs
171 RBI
47 2Bs
57 HR

13.1 WAR(!) tied for 22nd all time with only Walter Johnson (2x) and Babe Ruth (2x) breaking or tieing that mark since 1900.

By: Utley's Hair

Utley's Hair — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:11:21 +0000

And that would be why he says arguably up there.

By: Paul White

Paul White — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:10:27 +0000

Craig said “arguably” the best. And given that the list of all-time NL first basemen by OPS+ looks like this…

172 – Pujols
171 – Dan Brouthers
164 – Johnny Mize
152 – Roger Connor
149 – Bagwell
147 – McCovey

…and the same list by WAR looks like this…

89.1 – Cap Anson
83.8 – Pujols
80.4 – Connor
79.9 – Bagwell
73.7 – Brouthers
66.5 – Mize
65.2 – McCovey

…then, yeah, you can certainly “argue” that Bagwell belongs in that discussion, especially since he exceeds one of the guys you just “argued” for – McCovey – in both measures.

By: mtner77

mtner77 — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 21:00:37 +0000

Martinez absolutely deserves to be in the HOF. This is the vote that makes me the angriest. 32.9%??

If Gar is not worthy of the Hall of Fame, then very few players are.

If he had put up the exact same numbers, as a DH, in say New York instead of Seattle, what do you think his vote total would be? A LOT higher than 32%!

By: brianinva

brianinva — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:54:52 +0000

Wow, Bagwell is the best first baseman in NL history? Willie McCovey (not to mention Albert Pujols) will be surprised to hear that.

By: kaientai72

kaientai72 — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:47:34 +0000

Brilliant and concise synopsis. Palmeiro’s low total did not surprise me, but I did not think that Bagwell would be this low. Obviously, he has been (erroniously or not) tied in with the PED scandal, so it will be fascinating to see if he receives a serious jump in support next year. Bagwell was the #6 man on the baseball list from http://www.notinhalloffame.com, and it looks like he will stay there for a bit.

By: churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged

churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:41:13 +0000

Be a sports writer for many years
Get asked to join the BBWAA
Be a member for 10 years

It’s the last part that is keeping guys like Neyer (2017 i think) and Klaw (2018) from voting.

By: Paul White

Paul White — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:41:12 +0000

I continue to be baffled by the support for Larkin juxtaposed with the lack of support for Alan Trammell. Any reasonable comparison of the two leads to the conclusion that they were virtually interchangeable players. That’s the case if you consider them from the perspective of things voters traditionally look at (two shortstops who played 19/20 years for just one team, won a World Series, made multiple All-Star teams, won multiple Gold Gloves, had similar MVP voting results and excellent post-season records) and from the perspective of advanced metrics too (68.9 WAR for Larkin, 66.9 for Trammell using BBRef; 72.0 for Larkin to 71.3 for Trammell using FanGraphs). I just don’t the vast difference in their respective vote totals, and haven’t seen any reasonable explanations for it either.

By: lampdwellr

lampdwellr — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:26:03 +0000

Guys who might end up deserving it but probably won’t get in include McGwire and Beltran. Rolen has a real nice resume once you look at it, and might get in (and in my opinion should).

By: youcantpredictbaseball

youcantpredictbaseball — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:19:21 +0000

Disagree on Palmeiro not being a slam dunk. He had 3000 hits and 500 home runs! Without the PEDs, the voters would have been all over him.

Consider Eddie Murray. Murray stuck around for four years of 95 OPS+ ball while he brought himself over the two magic numbers. Without those four years (of 0.0 bWAR), he finishes with 441 home runs and 2820 hits. Would he have gotten into the Hall if he retired after 1993? Maybe. Would he have gotten 85.3% of the vote on his first ballot? No way.

By: bigtrav425

bigtrav425 — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:09:56 +0000

Edgar Martinez should be in the Hall as should closers.These F/n people who vote need to get over this BS.And how does 1 go about gettin a vote for the Hall?

By: sdelmonte

sdelmonte — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:08:38 +0000

The answer to my question: 14 to date, plus Jeter, Pujols, Piazza, Bagwell and Ichiro as players look like shoo-ins to me.

By: lampdwellr

lampdwellr — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:07:57 +0000

Raines’ 7% bump wasn’t too exciting for those of us in the Raines camp. I bet he gets a big boost next year, and possibly another one once the 2013 mess is cleaned up and he’s sitting on the ballot next to Kenny Lofton making Lofton look silly.

By: Detroit Michael

Detroit Michael — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 20:02:32 +0000

Correction: This was Barry Larkin’s second year of eligibility. Like Alomar, he seemed to get a strong second year boost.

By: sdelmonte

sdelmonte — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 19:59:18 +0000

Once upon a time, Santiago looked like something special. And here he is, just another good ballplayer that people remember for that one thing (those amazing throws from the knees). I wonder how many one-time Rookies of the Year are in the Hall. Gonna go look.

By: jkcalhoun

jkcalhoun — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 19:50:36 +0000

The Surhoff movement clearly demonstrated surprising growth. If not for that 5% requirement to remain on the ballot, things may have gotten interesting.

By: davidw7

davidw7 — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 19:44:45 +0000

BJ got two votes? Stanton wasn’t alone then lol

Surprised Boone and Santiago got a mere mention let alone a vote apeice.

By: amhendrick

amhendrick — Wed, 05 Jan 2011 19:39:26 +0000

I guess it is all about your expectations . . . I was surprised that Bagwell got 42% given all the ‘controversy’ about him in the last week