Hall of Fame Ballot Announced, Grave Injustice to Follow

by Eric Simon on Nov 28, 2007 1:01 AM EST in Awards Comment 19 comments

The 2008 National Baseball Hall of Fame ballot was announced on Monday. Here is the docket, with my would-be votes in bold:

Brady Anderson
Harold Baines
Rod Beck
Bert Blyleven
Dave Concepcion
Andre Dawson
Shawon Dunston
Chuck Finley
Travis Fryman
Rich Gossage
Tommy John
David Justice
Chuck Knoblauch
Don Mattingly
Mark McGwire
Jack Morris
Dale Murphy
Robb Nen
Dave Parker
Tim Raines
Jim Rice
Jose Rijo
Lee Smith
Todd Stottlemyre
Alan Trammell

Bert Blyleven's candidacy has been trumpeted by far better writers and baseball minds than my own. Like this one. Or this one. Or this one. Or all of these.

Rich Gossage, the Goose, defined the closer's role in baseball and was a better pitcher for longer than Bruce Sutter, a first-ballot inductee last year. In 1975, 1977 and 1978 he threw 409 (!) combined relief innings, whiffing just shy of a batter per and posting ERAs of 1.84 (ERA+ of 212), 1.62 (243 ERA+) and 2.01 (180 ERA+). (I left out 1976 because he was a starter all year). Gossage excelled for most of his 22 years, and it's inexplicable that Sutter is somehow remembered as the better pitcher.

Mark McGwire wears the mark of a steroid user despite never testing positive for any banned performance enhancing drugs. He took andro, not banned by baseball at the time. Did he take anabolic steroids? Maybe. Were they banned by baseball and/or did he ever test positive? No. Is he a hall-worthy baseball player? 583 homeruns and a career .263/.394/.588 batting line seem to indicate as much. Hardly the one-dimensional slugger people remember, Mac drew 90 or more walks seven times and 100 or more five times. He is twelfth all time in OPS+ at 162. He was a very, very good baseball player.

Tim Raines is probably the second-best leadoff hitter in baseball history. He has a career .293/.385/.425 batting line with 808 steals in 952 attempts, an 84.9% success rate which is substantially better than Rickey Henderson's 80.8%. He never hit a lot of homeruns but he collected a lot of doubles and triples and was a true four-tool star when that still actually meant something (his throwing arm was bleah).

That's my ballot. What about you guys?

0 recs | Comment 19 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Same as you but...

I've always supported Trammell. I think his overall numbers (when you account for fielding) are comparable to, say, Robin Yount, who is in, or Derek Jeter, who is SURE to get in. Why does Trammell languish in the lower tier of the ballot? He should have won the MVP in 1987. And check out his five year peak from 1983-1987 - he posted a WARP3 of 52.0. In roughly the same time frame, Yount's peak was 52.3, and Ozzie Smith was at 48.3. Cal Ripken had a 60.3 peak from 1982-1986.

by vonhayes on Nov 28, 2007 9:08 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

looks good

especially mcgwire. i'm a big fan of mcgwire and all the so called 'tainted' players of the 90's. sometimes i really hate sportwriters.

by kendynamo on Nov 28, 2007 9:43 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

McGwire

I still can't decide if he was good enough without the juice. Bonds belongs in, Sosa doesn't, but I still can't decide if McGwire deserves it.

Other than that, I agree with Eric. Blyleven, Raines, and Gossage all belong in.

Let's Go Meters in New York!!!

by Greenpoint Ian on Nov 28, 2007 12:59 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Before the juice

Check out the pre-juice pics of McGwire circa his rookie year. 49 homers as a rook tells he was good enough without.

Before and after: http://www.wisecamel.com/images/McGwire%20B%20and%20A%202.jpg

"It's Father's Day today at Shea, so to all you fathers out there, Happy Birthday." -- Ralph Kiner

by dissento on Nov 28, 2007 5:43 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

I would put Rice in before McGwire

I think with his non-testimony before congress there enough circumstantial evidence to say he roided up

Keep Lastings Milledge Free

by DoctorK16 on Nov 28, 2007 1:17 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Completely Agree

Rice is getting shafted by the juice era. He was one of the most feared hitters of his day. There was a time when 46 HRs, which Rice hit in 1978, actually meant something. Rice's weakness is he didn't last late into his career and he wasn't a particularly good fielder. However, I'd vote for him over McGwire in a heartbeat.

by millsy on Nov 30, 2007 12:41 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Same as you, but

I would include Alan Trammell.

How come there's a big space after the posts here, before the comments?

by JohnP on Nov 28, 2007 2:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Hmm

Blyleven, Raines, Trammell. Probably Gossage. Still undecided on McGwire.

Any of you people say Mediocre Mattingly and I'm going to fucking smack you.

by Josh on Nov 28, 2007 3:15 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

'roid taint?

No McGwire because of steroid taint? Or because he wasn't good enough?

Because that's insane. He was one of the greatest hitters of his era. BEFORE the whole andro thing. Look it up.

And he wasn't any more one-dimensional than Tony Gwynn; in fact, he was less so due to his OBP.

Finally, he wasn't as bad in the field as some other sure-fire HOFers with good offensive numbers (Jeter, again).

by vonhayes on Nov 28, 2007 5:02 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

my problem with McGwire

He had a great season in 1987, a great season in 1992, and several really good ones in between. Then he got hurt, and when he finally came back healthy, he was more than likely juiced to the gills.

Are we really going to put McGwire in the hall for his performance over 6 seasons from 87-92?

Let's Go Meters in New York!!!

by Greenpoint Ian on Nov 28, 2007 7:55 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

i would be bet money

that the roiding happen even before the St. Louis years. So says Canseco and he's probably right being he been right about so much about this whole thing.

Keep Lastings Milledge Free

by DoctorK16 on Nov 28, 2007 8:03 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

VOTE EARLY AND OFTEN

Your picks look good to me; the only one I struggle with at all is Blyleven. He was just so beatable for so many years, it's hard to think of him as a HOFer.

And I will continue to cast my fuitle imaginary vote for Dale Murphy.

"It's Father's Day today at Shea, so to all you fathers out there, Happy Birthday." -- Ralph Kiner

by dissento on Nov 28, 2007 5:38 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

But he wasn't beatable

Because of how he pitched, but because his teams sucked balls.

"I got my pregnant wife (the Yankee fan) with me. Hoping my kid learns to kick her everytime the Mets score." -Schifftis-

by future on Nov 28, 2007 6:25 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree On Both Counts

Rightly or wrongly, I lump Blylevin in with Tommy John - a good, but not great, starter who racked up a lot of wins b/c he pitched into his 40s. I never saw him as a dominant pitcher of his era.

I also think Dale Murphy is one of the guys getting shafted by the juice era. In his prime, he was a great all around player. He could do it all - hit for avg, power, walk, steal bases and play an outstanding CF. Murphy faded quickly which has clearly hurt him. Everyone also forgets he played on a lot of weak Braves teams and had little protection in the lineup so he was pitched around a lot.

by millsy on Nov 30, 2007 1:11 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

Stop looking at W/L

by vonhayes on Nov 29, 2007 9:35 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

Weak Year But I'd Pick

Goose Gossage - Everything Eric said is right. The guy was a dominant reliever who along with Rollie Fingers redefined the closer role. I think Gossage has been hurt by sticking around too long and collecting a check long after he had lost his effectiveness.

Tim Raines - I agree with Eric. Great leadoff guy with tremendous ally power. Ricky hit more HRs and stole more bases but Raines hustled more and was every bit as dangerous.

Jim Rice - As I said above, getting overlooked by the juiced era when the Albert Belle's of the world were hitting 50 HRs a year. Main weakness was he couldn't field but that's not an HoF disqualification

On the bubble in my mind is Dale Murphy, who was arguably the best player in the NL from 1982-87. During that era, he won 2 MVP awards, hitting 214 HRs with a .288 BA, .914 OPS and 90-100 walks per year. He also played a top notch CF. Murphy and Rice share the same problem that they both faded quickly and didn't get to 400 HRs.

by millsy on Nov 30, 2007 1:01 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Rice

And his career OBP is barely .350, and his offensive output outside of Fenway wasn't that great (.277/.330/.459).

And also the thing about the fielding like you guys said.

by Josh on Nov 30, 2007 3:03 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

My picks

Blyleven
Raines
Gossage
Trammell
McGwire

"I got my pregnant wife (the Yankee fan) with me. Hoping my kid learns to kick her everytime the Mets score." -Schifftis-

by future on Dec 2, 2007 1:36 PM EST reply actions 0 recs

Seriously?

Can people stop playing stupid about whether McGwire juiced. In life, when you don't deny doing terrible (in context) things, other reasonable people should reach the conclusion that you did those terrible things and would rather not, are unable to or a have a good reason (like let's say committing perjury) not to lie.

This is not a court of law (and in fact in most civil cases, a refusal to answer can be used as evidence as though the answer was negative). "Innocent until proven guilty" should not apply when it comes to the most significant honor in American Sports. I'm not saying speculation is appropriate, but a non-denial is pretty solid evidence (see our legal system).

In my view you have to be a pretty big McGwire apologists to make the "no positive tests" argument.

I'm not sure if I put McGwire in or not, but we should not debate about whether or not he juiced.

by Nick T on Dec 3, 2007 10:53 PM EST reply actions 0 recs