2015 Hall of Fame Inductees

[Royals]

I can't believe there isn't a topic for this yet.
Pedro
Big Unit
Smoltz
Biggio

A good class, Smoltz is the only guy I'm even a little bit iffy on, and that's only a little bit. Splitting hairs, I'm a bit POed Johnson got a higher percentage of the vote than Pedro, although really that ANY writer left either of these two off their ballots just goes to show how freaking absurd the whole process is. Anyone who left either of them, especially BOTH of them, off their ballots deserves to lose their vote and be fired from ever writing about baseball ever again.

[BlueJays]

I can understand Pedro and Unit both not being 100%. There's probably a bunch of voters who didn't vote for them because they knew they were getting in anyway but still wanted to put fringe guys like Raines, Schilling, Mussina, etc. on their ballot (because of the 10 vote limit) to make sure they don't fall off the ballot.

I'd have a hard time including 1 but not the other, but Big Unit did have a better career (112 career WAR vs. 87), and did make a bird explode. At their peaks, yea, Pedro was better, and possibly the best ever.

[Cardinals]

I think some of the voters haven't written about baseball in 5 years or so, so firing them from writing about baseball won't accomplish much.

[Phillies]

Here's how seriously some of these guys take the HOF vote they "earned."

http://awfulannouncing.com/2015/worst-2 ... llots.html

[Athletics]

That right now is the biggest hindrance, voters having only 10 slots but some using less and some wanting more.

I read a few articles on why the HOF wouldn't want to move past 10 (think the highest they said they would go might be 12 but not any time soon). But in doing so, obviously some fringe guys that should make it get snubbed or get back logged as other continuously get added to the rolls and you end up with the 15 year types rather than being cleared off the list by year 5/6 in most cases one way or the other (Elected or dropped).

Next year should be fun, could be a six man class or it could be a two man class.

Griffey (1st ballot) and Piazza would seem like locks, but then you have Billy Wagner and Trevor Hoffman that are the best pitchers of the bunch but are both relievers and the HOF seems to shy away from those being 1st ballot (outside of the potential Mo Rivera election in the future) types along with Tim Raines and Jeff Bagwell.

[Guardians]

I'm fine with the class. I don't get not voting for guys who are clear locks. I think Biggio deserved it, so I'm happy with him. Other three are solid.

Someone explain the case for Tim Raines. I think he was a very good player, but among the best ever? I don't see it. In feeling or in numbers. I just don't see it.

[Astros]

If Tim Raines didn't play at the same time as Ricky Henderson everyone would realize how great he was. I never realized until I looked at the numbers

[Athletics]

If Tim Raines didn't play at the same time as Ricky Henderson everyone would realize how great he was. I never realized until I looked at the numbers

Exactly, compare him to Gywnn and he has a similar stat line, except more steals and walks and less hits.

[BlueJays]

The Long Unit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hELGlmietdk

[Padres]

I am 60 years old now and have been an avid baseball fan most of those years ... in my opinion Raines is the 2nd best leadoff hitter I have seen play - only behind Ricky Henderson and ahead of Brock, Biggio, Rose, Wills, Ichiro, Coleman, Wilson. Gywnn is a very comparable player though at their respective peaks Raines was better.

Here are a few articles for you to read in support of Raines HOF credentials. I am not disappointed in this year's class at all but I will be disappointed if Raines does not get elected in the next 2 years.

http://calltothepen.com/2015/01/05/2015 ... ok-ballot/

http://balleight.com/2015/01/05/tim-rai ... one-chart/

http://balleight.com/2015/01/07/compari ... lou-brock/

http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/eye-on-bas ... tony-gwynn

http://www.si.com/mlb/2014/12/18/jaws-2 ... tim-raines

After you read those consider these comment:

Tim Raines should be considered for HOF status on base stealing and scoring supremacy and team success. He has the highest SB percentage of anyone over 300 SBs (plus almost anyone under 300) and he could hit much better than many rabbits like Vince Coleman or Otis Nixon. He hit for a better lifetime average than Lou Brock. Because of the strike of '94, Lupus complications at the end of the 90s, and so many years on Astroturf and related injuries, he missed out on 3,000 hits. Nevertheless, how many players finish over 2600? Not many.
He healped four division winners after his peak as a seven time All-star and his last team he played for went on to win the World Series the season after he retired. Do you think his expertise and experience helped the Marlins in 2003? He was an extra coach for them as a pinch hitter in 2002.
Raines achieved more team success than Gwynn and I believe it is no coincidence. Speed and consistent danger to score wins games; Raines scared people more than Gwynn, and just that psychological threat helped his teams get other people scoring and RBIs (see Dawson, Wallach, Thomas, Jeter, etc). Gwynn's singles were much less threatening than Raines's walks. The difference between the two is that pitching could withstand Gwynn's singles because they would not cause as much damage. Walking Raines, as he is one of the 40 most prolific of all time, made for a battle on the bases, getting inside pitchers' heads, and generated runs. The second time Gwynn made it to the the World Series was Raines's second championship ring. Coincidence?
Both Gwynn and Raines go to the Hall. Perfection is hard to achieve like these two did, albeit with differing strengths.
Posted by: Ed Clinch at May 6, 2004 04:00 AM

[Mets]

Why do these jokers have votes:

Ken Gurnick Honorary (MLB.com) - Jake Morris (Let's screw other players so we can make a statement that nobody cares about)

Mark Kreidler Honorary - Biggio (only 1 vote?)

Garry D. Howard Sporting News - Mattingly, Morris, Schilling, Smith (anyone that thinks Mattingly is a Hall of Famer should not do sports for a living. Then again, his name is "Garry" with two "r's"

Ann Killion San Francisco Chronicle - Raines, Smith (so Tim Raines and Lee Smith were the only 2 players that deserved your vote this year?)

[Mets]

Rick Gosselin -

PS - check out this ass clowns XM interview if you can find it. He didn't vote for Pedro because he said he wasn't a first ballot. Also said that there should be no consideration of the steroid era when comparing to pitchers from the '70's, etc.

[Royals]

Rick Gosselin -

PS - check out this ass clowns XM interview if you can find it. He didn't vote for Pedro because he said he wasn't a first ballot. Also said that there should be no consideration of the steroid era when comparing to pitchers from the '70's, etc.

Ass clown is right, cuz that's some funny shit...

[Padres]

[Unfortunately the charts did not copy over well but you view them at: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/my-two-c ... me-voting/]

My Two Cents On The 2015 Hall of Fame Voting
by Tony Blengino - January 8, 2015

Well, the 2015 Hall of Fame voting results rolled in Tuesday, and just about every member of the baseball media has already checked in with his or her opinion. With any luck, I’ll have the last word — at least chronologically. What are we to make of the election of Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, John Smoltz and Craig Biggio, and its resulting future impact upon the holdovers? Let’s take a look at some trends, and hone in on a couple of players most significantly impacted by this week’s proceedings.

First, let’s take a look at some big-picture trends, to see how today’s ballot logjam formed, and what — if anything — this year’s results might accomplish towards its eventual clearance ...

In a nutshell, BBWAA voters, jaded by a fairly lengthy period at the beginning of the century that featured a dearth of exceptional Hall of Fame candidates, fell into a habit of placing an average of five to six names on their respective ballots. Enter a massive group of Hall-worthy talents beginning in 2010 — many of them tarred with the brush of the steroid era — and the BBWAA initially reacted by… continuing to place an average of five to six names on their respective ballots. Hilariously, in 2010, the average number of players per ballot plunged to a 21st Century low of 5.10. That, despite the initial eligibility of Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez and Fred McGriff.

In 2013, the crunch began in earnest, with the largest influx of talent ever to appear on the Hall of Fame ballot. Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds, among the very best at their respective crafts, appeared for the first time, along with Craig Biggio, Mike Piazza, Curt Schilling, Sammy Sosa and Kenny Lofton, the latter of whom was unable to garner 5% of the vote necessary to remain on the ballot. Now this was a problem, and the BBWAA responded by matching their highest votes per ballot rate of the century, at 6.60.

Of course, with Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Frank Thomas, Mike Mussina, Jeff Kent, Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, John Smoltz, Gary Sheffield, Nomar Garciaparra and Carlos Delgado all slated to appear on ballots in 2014 and 2015, no relief was in sight, and many started to blame the 10-player ballot limit, instead of the voters themselves for their refusal to use even two-thirds of the 10 ballot slots already allotted to them.

To the voters’ credit, they did respond a bit in 2014, electing Maddux, Glavine and Thomas immediately, and nudging Biggio to the doorstep of the Hall while increasing their average votes per ballot to 8.39. This was progress. With Jack Morris falling off of the ballot, there was plenty of capacity to accommodate the deep incoming Class of 2015.

Many are applauding the BBWAA for stopping the bleeding and electing four members. But let’s take a step back. The average votes per ballot remained almost completely steady at 8.42. This is preposterous. Any voter who looked at this year’s ballot and could not find 10 legitimate Hall of Famers really ought to have their privileges reviewed. Conservatively, I saw 15 players on this year’s ballot who I deemed worthy. If you want to take a stand on a couple of steroid guys, that number slips to 12 or 13. Any writer submitting a blank ballot, or even a less than half-full ballot is nothing more than a barrier to the essential purpose of the process: elect the worthy.

There clearly seems to have been an awful lot of coordination among groups of writers this year. The studies of Tom Tango and others document this quite well. There were those who threw Pedro Martinez and/or Randy Johnson overboard to make room for players who “needed” their votes more. Overall, I can’t get too worked up about this, as at least such writers were trying to get players elected. On the other hand, the gridlocked ballot wouldn’t be such an acute issue if the writers had done a better job a few years back when they decided Jim Rice and Andre Dawson were better players than Tim Raines or Alan Trammell.

This coordination of votes seems to have directly benefited John Smoltz. I really like Smoltz, and consider him a Hall of Famer. Is he better than Curt Schilling? Maybe. Is he better than Mike Mussina? No way, in my opinion — but we’ll get back to that. They still didn’t cast more votes overall, which remains the crux of the problem.

Let’s take a quick look at the recent vote trends for the remaining players on the ballot, and what they might mean for their chances of future induction ...

Tally up the 2015 vote totals for the holdovers, and there were 4.74 votes per ballot cast in 2015 for the holdovers who will appear on the 2016 ballot. Toss in another .97 or more for newcomer Ken Griffey Jr., and probably another .77 for Trevor Hoffman, who is likely to be next year’s Smoltz. Expect Jim Edmonds and Billy Wagner to get enough votes to remain on the ballot moving forward, maybe .30 between them. It’s doubtful anyone else will survive until 2017, and the whole crew might earn .08 between them. We’re now at 6.86 votes per ballot, with no growth projected upon the 2015 actual vote totals. This means there is 3.14 votes of ballot capacity remaining — but only 1.56 if the voters maintain their 2015 8.42 vote per ballot average. The truth is somewhere in between, but unfortunately, much closer to the latter figure.

Mike Piazza is getting in next year. He went up 7.7% in 2015, when the ballot was tighter, and only needs a 5.1% increase in 2016 to get over the top. Jeff Bagwell oddly has lost votes since 2013, and is very unlikely to get all he needs next year. The 2017 or 2018 ballots could be his chance to get in. Tim Raines made a big move this year, almost guaranteeing his eventual success. My best guess is he won’t quite make it next year, but he’ll move into striking distance to make it in his last year of eligibility in 2017. Curt Schilling’s big 2015 move greatly increases his eventual chance of induction. He’ll absorb quite a bit of Smoltz’ ballot space next year and move into strong contention for induction by 2018.

Clemens and Bonds? This is where a critical mass of the electorate is making their stand on performance enhancers. It’s silly to me, as these two are inner circle guys who would have easily been Hall-worthy with or without the “help” they are likely to have received along the way. Draw the line at Mark McGwire, Sammy Sosa, Rafael Palmeiro, for whom performance enhancers may have been the different between really good and truly great, I get it. Draw it at two of the best players any of us will ever see, I don’t. Best guess: 2019 is their year, when the BBWAA can conveniently pass their vitriol over to the potentially newly eligible Alex Rodriguez.

Trammell has no chance, at least until his case passes to the Veterans Committee — or whatever they call it these days. In my mind, this leaves three very interesting cases in the lower reaches of the 2015 list of vote-getters. Gary Sheffield is one. I’m on the fence about his Hall-worthiness, but he is a unique offensive player for his time. A power hitter who didn’t strike out. What a concept. He wasn’t a very good defensive player, but man: 509 homers, .393 OBP, 140 career OPS+, 300 more walks than whiffs, 253 steals. Oh, and he quietly had 202 postseason plate appearances, posting a .401 OBP and winning a World Series with the Marlins.

The two other very intriguing cases belong to Edgar Martinez and Mike Mussina. Edgar’s timing really couldn’t have been worse, showing up on the ballot right before the massive talent influx, and then having five years of eligibility shaved off at the back end of his eligibility period by a rule change that really hurts no one but him. Anyway, check out this list of all-time leaders in the career combined number of standard deviations above league average in OBP and SLG ...

While a statistical purist would rightly state that summing standard deviations is generally not a wise idea, this method is quite good at measuring greatness. In this case, it also isolates on-base and slugging ability, enabling us to find truly comparable great players. Martinez ranks 29th on this list of 30, and there are basically nothing besides slam-dunk Hall of Fame talents surrounding him.

There are a couple of unfortunate pieces of information here that might hurt Edgar’s case, though. With only 14 qualifying seasons, Martinez is tied for fewest on this list, with Frank Thomas, Jimmie Foxx, Lou Gehrig and, for now, Albert Pujols. On one hand, this underscores his greatness, as it took him only 14 qualifying seasons to accumulate a bit more offensive value than, say, Harmon Killebrew did in 16. Only 18 of the other 29 players on this list have a higher OPS+ than Martinez. That is way above the Hall of Fame line, DH or no DH.

The irony of the whole DH thing — beside the fact the Mariners kept Edgar in the minors years more than they should have because they were set at third base with Jim Presley — is David Ortiz in 2014 moved past Martinez on the above list, and now has at least a realistic claim to the “greatest DH” title that has always fueled Martinez’ candidacy. I’m afraid Edgar’s going to slip through the cracks, at least from the writers’ perspective, through no fault of his own. Hopefully he’ll be easy pickings for the next phase of the process in the Veterans Committee.

Then there’s Mussina. And here’s another chart of all-time cumulative standard deviation totals, this one for K/BB rate, relative to the league ...

Mussina ranks 14th on this rather esoteric list. Now there’s quite a bit more to a pitcher’s job than maximizing strikeouts and minimizing walks. Much of my recent work on contact management ability would attest to that. Still, running a strong K/BB is central to being an exceptional pitcher, and Mussina was a solid contact manager, as well. As with Martinez, these are Hall of Famers accompanying Mussina on this list. You want to say Mussina doesn’t have the counting numbers to be in the Hall? Then how is he present on a list like this, which is based on excellence over the long haul? You want to say it’s lack of quality, rather than quantity, that should exclude him? Then why is his ERA+ better than Fergie Jenkins, Robin Roberts, Bert Blyleven and Don Sutton?

Blyleven is actually a pretty good case to consider here. Like Mussina, the voters short shrifted him for myriad reasons, one likely being the fact his best years were pitched in a relatively small market. Over time, voters grew to accept the valid, largely statistically-based arguments that supported his candidacy, and his vote totals surged late in the eligibility period, just in time to beat the buzzer. Mussina crucially separated himself from Jeff Kent, Fred McGriff and Larry Walker in this year’s voting, and could blow by Martinez and Lee Smith next year.

Consider this: Mussina won 57 more games than Smoltz and 54 more than Schilling. His winning percentage is far superior to both, and his ERA+ narrowly trails both (Smoltz 125, Schilling 127). He logged more innings than either. The cumulative K/BB standard deviation exercise above speaks highly of both Schilling and Mussina, and a very strong case can be made that both were somewhat better pitchers than Smoltz. They’re all Hall of Famers, and as Schilling absorbs Smoltz’s vote capacity in 2016, Mussina is likely to do with Schilling’s after his induction.

In summary, the smoke has started to clear ever so slightly, and the Hall logjam has a chance to eventually clear if the BBWAA addresses the component of its membership that is failing to do its job, resulting in a further increase of votes per ballot in the near term. They don’t need a 12-vote limit; they just need to use the 10 votes they have, when there are 10-plus viable candidates in play. Oh, and in 2017, Ivan Rodriguez, Manny Ramirez and Vladimir Guerrero say “Hi.”

[Mets]

1) Does Manny get in or will his PED use and defiance to play defense hurt him?
2) If Manny gets in, why is Edgar Martinez still not in. Edgar arguably played better defense.
3) Does Manny cry either way due to the estrogen pills he got popped for?
4) Does Vlad get the Jim Rice treatment?

[Athletics]

Read the Fangraphs article, it was amusing since I am pretty sure I made similar points to Pat G yesterday when were discussing players, the only one I didn't bring up was Alan Trammel.

As for Manny R, I think he gets in (if the other PED guys manage to get in), but it likely takes him awhile.

Edgar should be in but the Mariners and DH kind of fuck him over...yet David Ortiz is likely to get in which makes no sense since he was a DH too.

Manny will cry...and potentially curse something in Latin.

Vlad is a borderline candidate and can go either way...he has some good numbers, some others that are not so good...but he has a better overall line than Jim Rice so I could lean better than 50/50 but he might run it out until year 10.

[Royals]

The Sox fan in me thinks Manny should get in, but objectively, I don't think he does because of the PEDs (and the defense). I also don't think he has a clue or gives a shit. Ortiz is a lock to not get in (DH + PED), and because of the PED's he doesn't deserve to. Nor do Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGwire, Arod, etc.

While I can understand folks suspecting the likes of Bagwell or Piazza of juicing, nothing has ever been proven against either and there haven't even been substantive rumors or accusations, just guilt by association with the era. They belong (even if Piazza was a shit catcher). Anyone who HAS tested positive, IMO, doesn't belong in the Hall. They'll have to console themselves with the massive piles of money they earned dishonestly.

I do think there should be a wing of the Hall dedicated to PED use that discusses those players that may have deserved spots in the hall otherwise.

If Ortiz DOES manage to get in, then I think we see Edgar get in as well immediately thereafter.

Vlad flat out belongs. He was a better hitter than Rice as compared to his league and he played in much more of a hitter's era. If Vlad had played anywhere other than Montreal, he would be a second ballot guy, first if he played in NY, Boston, Chicago, etc.

End ramble. For now.
-B

[Mets]

I forgot who said it on MLB.XM but they said "if they haven't found any evidence regarding Piazza or Bagwell by now, let them in. there's been more than enough time to prove these guys guilty and it hasn't happened".

[BlueJays]

Even without Peds I don't think Ortiz should get in. You guys realize before age 27 he was pretty much garbage, right?

[Royals]

I forgot who said it on MLB.XM but they said "if they haven't found any evidence regarding Piazza or Bagwell by now, let them in. there's been more than enough time to prove these guys guilty and it hasn't happened".

We need a +1 or thumbs up button or something.

[Royals]

Even without Peds I don't think Ortiz should get in. You guys realize before age 27 he was pretty much garbage, right?

Let's not go overboard, in his time in the majors prior to age 27 he was about league average. Which is better than garbage, but not any kind of endorsement. If someone could get into the Hall based solely on something like World Series performance, he'd be in (.455/.576/.795 in 3 WS and that 2013 performance was just unreal). But they don't and they shouldn't.

[Tigers]

I forgot who said it on MLB.XM but they said "if they haven't found any evidence regarding Piazza or Bagwell by now, let them in. there's been more than enough time to prove these guys guilty and it hasn't happened".

........or they just had more discrete sources than the others that have been exposed in the MLB witch hunt.

[Royals]

I forgot who said it on MLB.XM but they said "if they haven't found any evidence regarding Piazza or Bagwell by now, let them in. there's been more than enough time to prove these guys guilty and it hasn't happened".

........or they just had more discrete sources than the others that have been exposed in the MLB witch hunt.

Certainly possible, but unlikely. Even Lance Armstrong eventually got busted (which I never believed would happen) and he had an impressive support system.

[Athletics]

Even without Peds I don't think Ortiz should get in. You guys realize before age 27 he was pretty much garbage, right?

So he was shitty as a twin...and if he had gained 10 more WAR (60 WAR threshold) he would be more worthy but the whole DH thing should not be a factor, so you can't play defense but you hit the shit out of a ball and helped your team win is quite helpful.

And why the hate for the PED era Bren, it was likely already happening prior to the lockout and chicks dig the long ball (which PEDS doesn't even help really, just lets you recover quicker since they guys play year round these days).

The Hall of Fame was/is for the best players of an era, Bonds and Clemens were that and they were not just one trick ponies.

[Royals]

Some PED's help you recover faster, others will help make you stronger. Bonds would never have been the HR hitter he was without PED's. He cheated (as did every other PED user) and stole some of the most prestigious records in the game. When you cheat there's a price, and the Hall is part of that price.