Skip to content

Chris Jaffe predicts four Hall of Fame inductees

Jan 6, 2014, 9:35 AM EDT

Cooperstown

There’s nothing else to do between now and Wednesday’s Hall of Fame announcement other than talk about the weather and I’m already sick of that, so let’s look at another Hall of Fame projection.

We’ve seen Bill Deane’s projection of Greg Maddux and no one else. We’ve been watching Repoz’s Gizmo tracking the public ballots. Now comes The Hardball Times’ Chris Jaffe, who each year projects the exact percentage of the vote each candidate gets. He’s pretty good at it. He’s made 96 individual candidate predictions since he started doing this and he has been within five percentage points 79 times. His margin for error is 3.5 percent.

This year he thinks four guys are getting above 75 percent — Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Frank Thomas and Craig Biggio. Biggio is only at 76% though, so he’s within Jaffe’s margin of error.

More than just the predictions, however, I think Jaffe’s column is interesting for the conversation of the factors which go into vote totals, ranging from the overall strength of the ballot to dynamics connected with how long each guy has been on the ballot and late-eligibility surges and whatnot. Good stuff.

  1. stex52 - Jan 6, 2014 at 9:46 AM

    Poor showing for such a strong set of candidates. But I’ll sit back and just hope Biggio hangs in there to make it four.

    • hojo20 - Jan 6, 2014 at 11:20 AM

      If he gets in, Biggio should be put in the a new PED wing of the HOF

      • stex52 - Jan 6, 2014 at 12:59 PM

        Really weak troll, even for your low standards.

      • masher1965 - Jan 6, 2014 at 11:34 PM

        You do realize , Sunshine, that Maddox, Glavine and Thomas also played during the Steroid era and had the same drug results from tests and were never linked to PED’s , like Biggio. Either you are dumb or confusing Biggio with another

      • pftfan - Jan 7, 2014 at 1:31 AM

        He might be confusing him with Roberto Baggio, the Italian midfielder.

      • jberlat - Jan 7, 2014 at 1:40 PM

        Frank Thomas shouldn’t go in before Bagwell. They had almost identical stats until Bagwell retired.

  2. DelawarePhilliesFan - Jan 6, 2014 at 10:06 AM

    Will Tom Glavine go in as a Met?

    • stoutfiles - Jan 6, 2014 at 10:22 AM

      Only if Maddux goes in as a Cub.

    • Kevin S. - Jan 6, 2014 at 10:23 AM

      Hey, *I* thought it was funny.

    • redbirdfan81 - Jan 6, 2014 at 11:17 AM

      He will go in as a Brave as those were the bulk of his years & were his dominating years as well.

      • CJ - Jan 6, 2014 at 11:28 AM

        Hey look! No, not there, right over your head….

  3. nategearhart - Jan 6, 2014 at 10:11 AM

    This is the year we get a true measure of what percentage of voters won’t vote for PED guys, since it’s Clemens’s and Bonds’s second year. I believe I remember at least a few weirdos saying they would vote for guys like Bonds, but not their first year of eligibility. So now I have to imagine that whatever percent they don’t get, is the percentage that won’t vote for “confirmed” PED users under any circumstances.

  4. stoutfiles - Jan 6, 2014 at 10:21 AM

    Yeah I don’t see Biggio getting in, and I see Thomas squeaking in. Maddux and Glavine will coast in.

    Biggio again is punished for being on the Astros, which was a hotbed of purported steroid use.

    • stex52 - Jan 6, 2014 at 10:49 AM

      An interesting, if somewhat wacky, observation. I suppose “purported” is the key to your argument. Otherwise, what are you talking about? Ken Caminiti?

    • jrbdmb - Jan 6, 2014 at 11:44 AM

      Biggio’s biggest talent was getting plunked on the arm. Nice player, plenty of “grit”, marginal HOFer, certainly not qualified for first ballot entry.

      • stex52 - Jan 6, 2014 at 12:44 PM

        Here’s an exercise.

        1. Actually look at his stats.
        2. Compare them to other 2nd basemen and catchers.
        3. Come back and explain your position.

      • largebill - Jan 6, 2014 at 2:25 PM

        Also, might want to realize this isn’t his first year on the ballot.

      • masher1965 - Jan 6, 2014 at 11:37 PM

        He got 3000 hits, that isn’t “marginal

    • jberlat - Jan 7, 2014 at 1:41 PM

      Biggio has 3,000 hits All Star at two positions. What other criteria would you like?

  5. neilssportsblog - Jan 6, 2014 at 11:19 AM

    Biggio and the rest of them are all decent players but not Hall of Fame caliber.
    Barry Bonds should be unanimously voted in as the single best player of his era. Hands down….
    Come on people. Wake up.

    • Jack Marshall - Jan 6, 2014 at 1:06 PM

      And while we’re at it, let’s give Lance Armstrong all his medals back, because he’s the single best cyclist of his era. “Hands down.” Irony: when a coma victim tells everyone else to “Wake up!”

      • Kevin S. - Jan 6, 2014 at 1:38 PM

        Lance Armstrong – broke rules that had listed punishments.

        Barry Bonds – broke no rules that had listed punishments.

        But yeah, totally the same thing!

      • mikhelb - Jan 6, 2014 at 4:54 PM

        @Kevin S: you need to check the clause that stated that MLB prohibited everything the FDA deemed as illegal or restricted. As far as punishments goes, there were punishments albeit weak; you just need to read and inform yourself.

      • dcarroll73 - Jan 6, 2014 at 5:36 PM

        What ‘rule’ was Bonds ever proven to have broken? He didn’t fail a test, there is NO testimony claiming knowledge of steroid use, and the massive weight of the US government could not find evidence to convict him of perjury when he flat out denied use under oath (that “obstruction of justice” count is so bogus that it stinks like week-old fish.)
        So he went from Skinny Barry to Massive Barry. All you’ve got is supposition, no facts. He was the greatest hitter of his era and a case can be made for all time. Put him in the HoF or close the sorry place.

      • masher1965 - Jan 6, 2014 at 11:55 PM

        @ dcarroll, Bonds only got off because his athletic trainer refused to testify and stayed in jail FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT . Can you think or are you too blinded by worship to figure out why the trainer said nothing and went to jail?? If there was nothing wrong, why does the trainer simply support Bonds and say Bonds didn’t know ?? Please, we all know the trainer took a bullet and covered Bonds rear end .

    • paperlions - Jan 6, 2014 at 1:18 PM

      If you believe that to be true, then you also must think that about 80% of the guys already in the HOF don’t deserve to be in it.

  6. Jack Marshall - Jan 6, 2014 at 2:38 PM

    Kevin S.: 1) Breaking the law IS breaking a rule with listed punishments 2) a rule doesn’t have to have listed punishments for one to be cheating by breaking it 3) you really don’t know what “cheating” is, do you? Because what Armstrong and Bonds did—knowingly using methods to excel that were not permitted in the sport, covering it up and lying about, were exactly the same thing.

    But I’ll give you credit: the “rules aren’t rules unless there’s a listed punishment” dodge is a new one on me. Nice rationalization. I wonder why McGwire and Bonds haven’t used it…

    • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Jan 6, 2014 at 3:16 PM

      knowingly using methods to excel that were not permitted in the sport

      How was PED use not permitted in MLB? And enough with the Armstrong/Bonds comparisons. It’s one of the worst analogies someone could come up with as the only thing similar is PED use.

      • mikhelb - Jan 6, 2014 at 5:04 PM

        It was not permitted, MLB decided not to “punish” players after that cocaine fiasco in the 1980s when the MLBPA threatened legal action against MLB if players were suspended and/or were stripped of their salary.

        Surely you know about that, right?

        “the only thing similar is PED use”

        uhm… that’s why it is a perfect analogy, both used substances to improve their performance and convert themselves in the best athletes in their sport. Without PED they were already good, but PED pushed them to excel and improve their earnings 100 times or even more perhaps.

      • dcarroll73 - Jan 6, 2014 at 5:48 PM

        mikhelb, again WHERE is your evidence against Bonds? The only law he was convicted of breaking, obstruction of justice, was so misapplied in this case as to be a travesty. He answered questions in a LENGTHY cross-examination, and it is certainly not his fault that the prosecutor conducting the examination was an aimless Bozo. Have you read any of that testimony? A lot of it was posted on this blog. If that is all you have to hang your hat on, it is falling down. I care far less about this PED-use brouhaha than I care about the fact that a generation of great players are becoming the victims of a sorry witch-hunt. Biggio and Piazza have even more pathetic slurs against them, and yet they don’t get their well-earned place in the HoF? If that is what you vigilantes want, I would prefer that we close the HoF and only go to Cooperstown for Glimmerglass Opera.

      • churchoftheperpetuallyoutraged - Jan 7, 2014 at 1:17 PM

        It was not permitted, MLB decided not to “punish” players after that cocaine fiasco in the 1980s when the MLBPA threatened legal action against MLB if players were suspended and/or were stripped of their salary.

        Surely you know about that, right?

        So what you are saying is that MLB was going to enforce a rule it couldn’t, the players would have taken the league to court over it and won, so MLB didn’t enforce anything. Tell me again how that’s a rule?

        uhm… that’s why it is a perfect analogy, both used substances to improve their performance and convert themselves in the best athletes in their sport. Without PED they were already good, but PED pushed them to excel and improve their earnings 100 times or even more perhaps.

        Except the only similarity is use, and that’s it. One was blood doping, the other was using a strength enhancer. One failed a test, paid off the lab to not reveal it, and sued anyone who stated otherwise while the other took some PEDs and never failed a test. How are those “perfect” analogies?

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Who are the favorites for Rookie of the Year?
Top 10 MLB Player Searches
  1. J. Soler (3969)
  2. Y. Molina (2909)
  3. R. Castillo (2876)
  4. B. Posey (2270)
  5. A. Rizzo (2264)
  1. J. Ellsbury (2236)
  2. M. Cabrera (1991)
  3. A. Dunn (1981)
  4. D. Murphy (1952)
  5. D. Wright (1947)