The 2014 HOF ballot...who's in?

[uconndennis]

I think you have to factor in Biggio playing 2nd base. Generally, that's a position with lower stats, and rarely are opposing teams scared of second basemen: look at the list...other than Hornsby, are there any second basemen that scare you?. And he played catcher for some years--also, they don't tend to hit as high and for power.

He fits in the HOF based on his performances...but not as a slam dunk. His career average his middling (not necessarily the worst, but certainly no Hornsby), his doubles are impressive, hit total is impressive, and he has 4 Gold Gloves.

For stat geeks, his JAWS score is 53.3, below the average of the other 19 HOF second basement (57), he actually performs pretty well when put in the appropriate context: there are 10 second basement with worse JAWS than Biggio, so exactly right in the middle. You can't only put people in who are above the average. You can argue that some should not have been in, but even then, he ranks as about an average Hall of Fame second basemen.

He should get in, he will get in, but he's not one of the greatest players of all time. Few are--even Hall of Famers.

I get that he has some impressive totals compiled over a very, very long career but he was never a dominant player. Hell Jeff Kent was a more dominant player and he wont even get close

The position thing irks me a bit too....I get it that not a lot of second baseman have monster numbers so he looks good...and the fact that someone like Mazeroksi is in the HoF is confusing

on that note...if Mazeroski is in most likely on his defense..How is Keith Hernandez not included. Easily the best fielding 1B of all time, 1 MVP and top 5 three times. 11 straight gold gloves and respectable offensive numbers in the pre-steroid era

 

[tzznandrew]

I get that he has some impressive totals compiled over a very, very long career but he was never a dominant player. Hell Jeff Kent was a more dominant player and he wont even get close

The position thing irks me a bit too....I get it that not a lot of second baseman have monster numbers so he looks good...and the fact that someone like Mazeroksi is in the HoF is confusing

on that note...if Mazeroski is in most likely on his defense..How is Keith Hernandez not included. Easily the best fielding 1B of all time, 1 MVP and top 5 three times. 11 straight gold gloves and respectable offensive numbers in the pre-steroid era

Again, if you judge a second basemen against all other positions on the field, you will likely have few hall of fame second basemen. Piazza had some very good years, but he wouldn't sniff the HOF if we judged him against everyone. Instead, we judge him against other catchers, and he will likely be in, and his good numbers are great when in that context.

So I think you go position by position. Was this player one of the best few players at his position in his generation? How does he stack up historically? With 19 second basemen in the HOF, you're looking at roughly 2-3 per 15 year period (a reasonably long career). You don't put people in if they don't stack up historically just because they were one of the better players, but you do put them in when they rate well historically.

Yeah, I think Hernandez has a good argument, and it's strange to me that he never really got any momentum (never more than 10.8% of the vote). He has an MVP, another Top 2 finish, and a third Top 10 finish, along with 11 Gold Gloves and 5 AS.

I think because he was on the ballot in the middle of the steriods era (1995-2004), coupled with the fact that the stat-geeks hadn't yet gotten credence yet, meant that his low "counting" numbers (2182 his, 162 HRs, .296/.384/.436) for a firstbasemen doomed him.

 

[tzznandrew]

Whitey was 236-106 in his career vs. 216-146 for the Schill……….16 seasons for Whitey and 20 (not all full for either guy) for Schill and Curt was actually better in the post season at 11-2 vs 10-8 for Whitey………Whitey had 156 CG's vs 83 for Schill……..not a lot of closers hanging around for Whitey although he had 6 seasons of over 240IP while Schill had 4 which isn't too bad at all. Their IP are real close but again, Schill has more years than Whitey……ERA is 2.75 for Ford and 3.46 for Schill……..

Schills close and the only reason would be the post season……..but I think Andy Pettite would be a better comparison than Whitey to Schill…….256-153 in 18 seasons, 3.85 era, 19-11 in the post season, only 26 complete games but then again why would he have?

Schilling really needed a Cy Young, and he'd be in. He was 2nd 3 times: twice to Randy Johnson, and once to Johan Santana (when he was unreal). He compares very favorabily to a number of candidates despite his low win total and higher ERA.

I think the ERA, low win total, and lack of a Cy will keep him out for a while...but I'd vote for him. He was a feared pitcher who toiled on some bad Phillies teams...and when he got on good teams (Arizona, Boston) he did an awful lot of winning. From 1988-2000 (12.5 years with midyear trade) he went 105-89 for Baltimore, Houston, and Philadelphia; from 2000-2007 (7.5 years due to mid-year trade) he went 111-57...despite his ERA going up slightly from 3.36 to 3.54.

You give him a team like Arizona or Boston for his whole career (an advantage pitchers for the Yankees, say, had through the 1960s), and he's looking at 296 wins (taking his winning percentage over the later 7.5 years and translating it into total games). Philly had one winning year his time there (1993), Baltimore 1, and Houston none. In contrast, Arizona had a winning year every year he was there, as did Boston. You can't do that, but it's good to remember that players who pitch for good all around team tend to compile more wins.

 

[Waquoit]

Generally, that's a position with lower stats, and rarely are opposing teams scared of second basemen: look at the list...other than Hornsby, are there any second basemen that scare you?

Joe Morgan and Brian Doyle.

 

[tzznandrew]

Joe Morgan and Brian Doyle.

I certainly overlooked Morgan, and his two MVPs.

But just a comparion:
Morgan: 22 years, 2517 hits, 268 HR, .271/.392/.427, 5 Gold Gloves
Biggio: 20 years, 3060 hits, 291 HR, .281/.363/.433, 4 Gold Gloves.

Thier pretty comparable on basic stats.

WAR and JAWS is where Morgan destroys Biggio.

Morgan: 100.4 WAR, 79.8 JAWS
Biggio: 64.9 WAR, 53.3 JAWS.

By Jaffe's JAWS system, Morgan is the fourth best second baseman of all time, behind Hornsby, Eddie Collins, and Nap Lajoie...or, in other words, the best second baseman of the modern era.

As usual, I've proven myself an idiot...

As for Biggio, JAWS ranks him the 14th best 2nd baseman of all time...well ahead of Brian Doyle, although if you are a Dodgers fan, I understand the fear of Doyle.

 

[Deepster]

I certainly overlooked Morgan, and his two MVPs.

But just a comparion:
Morgan: 22 years, 2517 hits, 268 HR, .271/.392/.427, 5 Gold Gloves
Biggio: 20 years, 3060 hits, 291 HR, .281/.363/.433, 4 Gold Gloves.

Thier pretty comparable on basic stats.

WAR and JAWS is where Morgan destroys Biggio.

Morgan: 100.4 WAR, 79.8 JAWS
Biggio: 64.9 WAR, 53.3 JAWS.

By Jaffe's JAWS system, Morgan is the fourth best second baseman of all time, behind Hornsby, Eddie Collins, and Nap Lajoie...or, in other words, the best second baseman of the modern era.

As usual, I've proven myself an idiot...

As for Biggio, JAWS ranks him the 14th best 2nd baseman of all time...well ahead of Brian Doyle, although if you are a Dodgers fan, I understand the fear of Doyle.

JAWS? Jesus. The explosion of these "stat of the day" concoctions has really lessened my interest in following the sport.

 

[Husky25]

http://deadspin.com/dan-le-batard-l...d&utm_campaign=Feed:+deadspin/full+(Deadspin)

Le Batard has been banned for life for allowing fans to have a perfectly reasonable opinion on who should be voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame. More sanctimonious BS from the "Keepers" of the Game.

 

[MilliniumPrince]

I am a Yankees Fan and I don't think Donny Baseball belongs in the HOF.

If I had a vote, the first name on my ballot would be Barry Bonds, second Clemens, then the Braves Duo, Biggio, Thomas, and Mike P. I would have to think about the rest.

The Baseball Writers were given the vote in large part because the HOF wanted free publicity. Allowing the writers to vote also assured the HOF that writers all over the country would write about the HOF. How they became the protectors of Baseball Integrity (which is an oxymoron) baffles me.

 

[tzznandrew]

JAWS? Jesus. The explosion of these "stat of the day" concoctions has really lessened my interest in following the sport.

Fair enough. That's why I put both there.

But, I would say most people think Morgan is much better than Biggio...yet, by pure stats, it doesn't look like it. Advanced statistics like Wins Over Replacement and JAWS help to put a player in proper perspective to their era...and in their era put players in their proper perspective in ballparks (like ERA+).

I don't think we should throw out all the old stats, for sure. They're important. And sometimes advanced Sabermetrics might get things wrong. But it doesn't mean their not useful...especially in comparing Morgan to Biggio, say.

 

[mauconnfan]

I get that he has some impressive totals compiled over a very, very long career but he was never a dominant player. Hell Jeff Kent was a more dominant player and he wont even get close

The position thing irks me a bit too....I get it that not a lot of second baseman have monster numbers so he looks good...and the fact that someone like Mazeroksi is in the HoF is confusing

on that note...if Mazeroski is in most likely on his defense..How is Keith Hernandez not included. Easily the best fielding 1B of all time, 1 MVP and top 5 three times. 11 straight gold gloves and respectable offensive numbers in the pre-steroid era

Not easily at all, Mattingly was right there with him defensively and was a much better hitter than Keith. If he's not in Hernandez won't sniff it…….now Gil Hodges?

 

[Fishy]

I'm going to hold my breath until Roger Maris is in the Hall of Fame.

You could talk baseball for a thousand years and you still will never get to Tom Glavine or Frank Thomas....but Maris will come up right quick.

And it's a hall of fame, not a hall of really good for a longish period of time.

 

[Fishy]

http://deadspin.com/dan-le-batard-loses-hall-of-fame-vote-suspended-from-b-1498090172?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed: deadspin/full (Deadspin)

Le Batard has been banned for life for allowing fans to have a perfectly reasonable opinion on who should be voted into the Baseball Hall of Fame. More sanctimonious BS from the "Keepers" of the Game.

Please.

It was a publicity stunt.

He deserved to have his vote yanked.

 

[Husky25]

As a writer, Le Betard is no saint, agreed. However if his vote is yanked, there are about a dozen more that should be as well.

Le Betard's actions are far less aggregious than turning in a blank ballot only to "prove a point" or granting lifetime voting rights to a BBRAA "writer" who only covers golf and not baseball.

 

[The Viking]

I think talking about wins when it comes to comparing pitchers is pointless now unless you don't want any pitchers getting into the hall because few will ever hit 300 again.
What I think should be done, and this goes for comparing hitters too, is take the 10 best years of any player and compare. This gets rid of the "compiler" sneaking in. Show me your 10 best years and give the numbers for them and lets see how great you really were. I'm not going to even say 10 year span because if you're out with an injury for one or two of those years but you have really good years in year 11 and 12, you shouldn't be punished for that.

 

[Fishy]

As a writer, Le Betard is no saint, agreed. However if his vote is yanked, there are about a dozen more that should be as well.

Le Betard's actions are far less aggregious than turning in a blank ballot only to "prove a point" or granting lifetime voting rights to a BBRAA "writer" who only covers golf and not baseball.

I do not disagree with that - there are a lot of odd ducks who should have their ballots yanked.

But Le Batard turning his ballot over to Deadspin was just pandering for publicity - he was gobbling Deadspin's nuts for a kind word and a bump for his radio show.

That sort of stupidity even aces out dunces like Ken Gurnick.

 

[G0UCONN]

I think talking about wins when it comes to comparing pitchers is pointless now unless you don't want any pitchers getting into the hall because few will ever hit 300 again.
What I think should be done, and this goes for comparing hitters too, is take the 10 best years of any player and compare. This gets rid of the "compiler" sneaking in. Show me your 10 best years and give the numbers for them and lets see how great you really were. I'm not going to even say 10 year span because if you're out with an injury for one or two of those years but you have really good years in year 11 and 12, you shouldn't be punished for that.

That comparison may tell you who was the better player in their heydays and is fine but there is alot to be also said for someone who is really good for 20 years (compilers)....not many are able to do it...

That in and of itself is an accomplishment.

Take 3000 hits or 300 wins. That is averaging 150 hits or 15 wins for 20 years----both are great accomplisments and says you were a great ballplayer....

 

[G0UCONN]

I'm going to hold my breath until Roger Maris is in the Hall of Fame.

You could talk baseball for a thousand years and you still will never get to Tom Glavine or Frank Thomas....but Maris will come up right quick.

And it's a hall of fame, not a hall of really good for a longish period of time.

Fair point. Maris arguably belongs and he was the opposite of a compiler...

 

[Husky25]

Why is there a bias against players who play for a long time (i.e. the dreaded "compiler")?

Staying healthy enough to play every day for 20 years is as much a skill as quickly running 90 feet and avoiding the tag.

If Biggio*, Harold Reynolds, and Jeff Kent are not Hall of Famers by the numbers, then neither should Cal Ripken Jr. be. Certainly not a first ballot HoFer. Conversely, If Ripken is a 1st Ballot guy, then Biggio and Kent should have been elected this year.

*Based on 2014 results, will probably get elected in 2015

 

[Husky25]

Fair point. Maris arguably belongs and he was the opposite of a compiler...

Maris is right where he belongs. The 1961 season belongs in the Hall of Fame (and it is), but Maris did not put up HoFer number outside 1960-62.

 

[tzznandrew]

Maris is right where he belongs. The 1961 season belongs in the Hall of Fame (and it is), but Maris did not put up HoFer number outside 1960-62.

Maris was an All Star 4 years. If he played the other 9 years at a reasonably good level, he'd be in. But he missed a lot of games after those four years, and even when he played over 100 games, he wasn't terribly good.

But, I do sympathize with Fishy's position.

People who are against "compilers" want the hall to be pretty exclusive--more exclusive than it actually is. But still, from the 1870s until now, only 240 players have been elected. That's about 17-18 players per decade. And really, other than the small number of players from the 1800s, it's really more like 23-24 per decade.

 

[Husky25]

Maris was an All Star 4 years. If he played the other 9 years at a reasonably good level, he'd be in. But he missed a lot of games after those four years, and even when he played over 100 games, he wasn't terribly good.

But, I do sympathize with Fishy's position.

People who are against "compilers" want the hall to be pretty exclusive--more exclusive than it actually is. But still, from the 1870s until now, only 240 players have been elected. That's about 17-18 players per decade. And really, other than the small number of players from the 1800s, it's really more like 23-24 per decade.

Health is a skill. Without it, no one would hit 500 HR or get 3,000 hits. PEDs help in the short term to be sure, but they also make the user more susceptible to injury. That is why I am against Vikings 10 best year theory. Someone playing 15 years but missing the majority of 4, is probably not a Hall of Famer.

On the other hand have no problem if Clemens, Bonds, Palmiero, etc. got elected. It is the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum. Those players are at the very least (in)famous and the Steroid Era is a significant part of Baseball history. Baseball would be wise to embrace it, rather than try to deny it happened. They would probably dampen the negative rhetoric around this process. Go ahead and mention that the player played during the Steroid Era on his plaque. It's true isn't it? Don't say anything about being suspected of taking PEDs or failed tests. Point out only that all or parts of the Player's career was played between 1993 and 2002 (or whenever the Steroid Era is determined to have occurred). Are we sure that HoFers who played in the 60's-80's weren't popping greenies by the handful every day?

 

[60'sfan]

I think Sandy Koufax throws a lot of these arguments into the trash can. Sandy had a total of 165 wins and didn't even have 10 good years. He had at most 5 or 6 good years but those years were amazing. That he retired at age 30 after going 27-9 with at 1.73 ERA is unfortunate. He also had 27 complete games, 5 shutouts, pitched 323 innings and had 318 K's and just 77 BB's. He did not jave a long career but in his last 5 years he was incredible. He retired early because of extreme pain in his elbow. Does anyone think he doesn't belong in the Hall? I wonder what he could have done with the medical options that are available today.

 

[G0UCONN]

I think Sandy Koufax throws a lot of these arguments into the trash can. Sandy had a total of 165 wins and didn't even have 10 good years. He had at most 5 or 6 good years but those years were amazing. That he retired at age 30 after going 27-9 with at 1.73 ERA is unfortunate. He also had 27 complete games, 5 shutouts, pitched 323 innings and had 318 K's and just 77 BB's. He did not jave a long career but in his last 5 years he was incredible. He retired early because of extreme pain in his elbow. Does anyone think he doesn't belong in the Hall? I wonder what he could have done with the medical options that are available today.

Pedro Martinez is similar in terms of being great but not for an overly long time...and he will be HOFer

I don't think anyone is saying those great like that do not necessarily belong....

 

[tzznandrew]

Pedro Martinez is similar in terms of being great but not for an overly long time...and he will be HOFer

I don't think anyone is saying those great like that do not necessarily belong....

Pedro's peak was longer. About 8 years. He won his first Cy in 1997, and in 2004 he came in fourth for the Cy. Now, we could add 1996, where he was an All Star, and the first two years with the Mets, where he was also an All Star, but I don't think those are quite as good.

Over those 8 years, he won 3 Cys, was top 5 in voting 4 other times. He also was top 5 in MVP voting 2 times. He led the league in ERA 5 times, and compiled a 134-45 record, with a 2.43 ERA. If you add the other 3 years, he was 171-71 with a 2.71 ERA. Still damn good.

 

[G0UCONN]

The fact he did it in heyday of roids and age of HR and offense makes it more amazing...