2017 National Baseball Hall of Fame Vote

On Wednesday, January 18, 2017, the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) vote for enshrinement to the National Baseball Hall of Fame will be revealed. The BBWAA holds the keys to such an elite fraternity, which must be a daunting task. They are voting on players to proverbially sit next to Ruth, Aaron, Mays, Mathewson and the like.  As done in years past, I will provide my ballot as if I were a BBWAA member.

Here is the full 2017 Ballot (courtesy of Baseball-Reference.com)

There are a few major factors that cannot be ignored when it comes to voting.

1) The specter over the Hall will continue to be Performance Enhancing Drug (PED) use in baseball primarily in the 1990s, for which many players accused are now appearing on the Hall of Fame ballot.  There are players whose performance clearly merits first ballot election, however because of their associated with substances that enhanced their performance, members of the BBWAA has been hesitant to cast votes their way.  Because the official voting rules include the words "integrity, sportsmanship, and character" and integrity, so their reluctance is justified in my mind.  For my selection, I will not presume guilt, but if there is legal (including Mitchell Report) or anecdotal evidence of PED use, I will strongly weigh against voting.  I'm not alone, since fewer than half of voters have written in Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens, who no doubt Hall of Famers if not for PEDs.

2) A batch of candidates making their way onto the ballot or relief pitchers who specialized in finishing games in which their team was winning by 3 or fewer runs.  In other words, closers.  To date, Bruce Sutter, Rollie Fingers, Dennis Eckersley, and Goose Gossage are the modern day versions in the Hall.  Three candidates on the ballot have more saves than each of them.  It's a measure of how the game has changed (with the advent of the specialty closer0 whether or not they get strong consideration from the BBWAA.

3) A final point of discussion is how to handle starting pitching.  Whereas the 300 win plateau used to be a norm, it's become increasingly more difficult to get wins in the era of specialty relievers with starters leaving the game before the end of the sixth inning many times in close games.  Conversely, however, one would think this would benefit starting pitchers ERA by seldom going through a lineup more than 3 times.  In the end, I strongly weigh dominance over a discernible period of time, along with Cy Young Awards, All-Star games, Win titles, and ERA.

4) There is also first and last ballot bias.  First ballot some BBWAA voters will hold their vote to protect some sort of integrity of being a "first ballot hall of famer".  Evidence, three voters who did not include Ken Griffey Jr. last year.  Likewise, when a player is on his last ballot, voters who previously withheld tend to pay a bit more attention to their candidacy considering it's a final shot.  So a bump is normal (not significant, but 5% ish).


With a limit of ten players on a ballot, here are the players I would put on my ballot (in order of credibility).  I don't use all ten votes.

1) Vladimir Guerrero - A five tool player (.319 average. 449 HR, top arm/glove in the league, and plus speed). Nine All-Star Games, an MVP, and a hit title.  His career numbers fall short of some major benchmarks (like 500 HR) as he retired at age 36.  If he had taken PEDs he might have played another 5 years and approached 600 HR.  No doubt one of the most feared hitters for a decade or so.

Factors against him: Lack of single team identity, no World Series titles, first ballot bias

To me, he meets all of the criteria and should get in with about 80% of vote.

2) Jeff Bagwell - He was an offensive machine in the mid-1990's, career numbers reflect that (.297, 449 HR, 1529 RBI). More walks than anyone else on the ballot besides Bonds and Sheffield (fear factor and eye), .408 OBP.  He also stole 200 bases and was an above average 1B (Gold Glove in the closet). No hard evidence of PED's, although suspicion without evidence seems to be an argument against.  His numbers are nearly identical to Vlad yet he sits here in his seventh year on the ballot.

Factors against him: Perceived use of PEDs, playing in a small market, lack of postseason success.

At 71.6% last year, it would be historic if he dropped back from that.  He'll get in this time (just barely, not much over 77%).

3) Trevor Hoffman - One of two members of the 600 career save club (and we know the other will get in first ballot).  That's 40 saves per year for 15 years (average).  Seven All-Star appearances and twice finished runner up in the Cy Young, which is rare for a reliever.

Factors against him: reliever bias, played in a small market, was probably never the number one reliever at any given time

At 67.3% last year, the first ballot bias should be overcome. The NL reliever of the year award is named after him, he'll get in with 81% of the vote or so.

4) Ivan Rodriguez - The only think moving him from number 1 to number 4 is potential PED suspicions.  Note that for Rodribues, the evidence against him is mostly anecdotal (from Jose Canseco).  I suspect he was using, but not extensively.  That behind us, his numbers as a catcher are elite:  .296 average, 311 HR, an MVP, best arm behind the plate in the game and a great teammate.  Ten straight Gold Gloves (six of those years he won a Silver Slugger).

Factors against him: Perceived PEDs, first ballot bias

Tough to forecast if he'll make the cut due to PED suspicions.  There might be enough to hold back their vote to keep him in the 65% range.  Most interesting total to see on the ballot IMO.

5) Larry Walker - He was another 5-tool player, finished his career with a .313 batting average, higher than anyone else on the ballot besides Vladimir Guerrero.  Let me repeat that, second highest batting average of anybody on the ballot. Also stole 200 bases, also hit 383 home runs. He has so many gold gloves he probably had to build an extra section on his trophy case. Like Bagwell, he won one MVP. He's also a member of the .400 OBP club (with Bagwell, Manny Ramirez, Bonds, and Edgar Martinez the only four on the ballot).

Factors against him: Perceived higher numbers due to playing in Colorado, soft-spoken personality, injury-prone (only 4 seasons of 140+ games).

He only received 15.5% of the vote last year (regressing), that needs to trend up significantly for people to start noticing. He's not going to make it.

6) Edgar Martinez - He's of the mold of the previous two players. Hit for high average, good (but not awe inspiring) power, gets on base all the time. While I am not a fan of the DH, if MLB has it as a position, you can't hold that against him. With the previous two, defense pushes their case, for Edgar it can't but he still deserves it. Career .312 hitter, .418 OBP, slugged .515 (more than Fred McGriff). He's also a member of the 300 HR club for a guy who didn't try to lift the ball as much as others.

Factors against him: Primarily a DH, played in small market, lack of speed

He was voted for the affirmative on 43% of last years ballots he's moving up slowly.  He needs to get closer to 50% to continue the momentum, now in his eighth year probably not going to make it now

7) Billy Wagner - This pick might raise some eyebrows, but when comparing to the four major relief pitchers already in the Hall (Eckersley, Sutter, Fingers, and Gossage), he has 30 more saves than each of them.  And a lower ERA.  And a better K/9 IP.  His 7 All Star Game appearances are comparable to all as well.  He sits sixth in career saves and his stuff was dominant.  I noted above we're teetering on how to treat relievers, I believe we're going to see fewer relievers going forward with huge career numbers because so many are going to flame out with arm problems given their use.  Wags should get strong consideration.

Factors against him: relief pitcher bias, lack of postseason success

Only in his second year (10% vote last year), he's more likely to fall off the ballot than to surge to even more than 25%.  I'm guessing he never gets in during the 10 year window, but may get in on a veteran ballot in decades to come once the Hall figures out how to handle relievers.

8) Lee Smith - As mentioned, the Hall of Fame is still figuring out how to accommodate closers, it's my opinion that they are indeed a key element to the game and the best of the best should be included. With Smith, it's not about the numbers (ERA, W-L) as much as the raw pile of saves he accumulated (478, which was tops for a long time after his retirement). No matter where he played, he never seemed phase by a momentary lapse of success. Fourteen seasons in a row of 25 or more saves shows a level of consistency matched by few. If there are going to be closers in the HoF, Smith should be there.

Factors against him: relief pitcher bias, wasn't overpowering, lacks team identity

Languishing around 35% of the vote last year, he'll need more than double to get in in this, his last and 15th year.  He might get to 50% and like Wagner, maybe get in later once relievers get their due.

9) Jeff Kent - Quietly one of the top offensive second basemen of all time.  His line across the major stats is .290, 377, and 1518.  He has an MVP in his closet, and three other Top 10 finishes.  Add to that six All-Star appearances.  His power numbers dwarf Ryne Sandberg and Roberto Alomar, but is getting very little buzz or momentum.

Factors against him: Very average on defense, played in a power era in which his home run numbers aren't considered extraordinary, cold to media

With below 20% of the vote last year, no reason to think he'll move significantly now, or over the next six years.

First four out

10) Tim Raines - Rock falls just short on the numbers. Besides SB's (of which he is more than deserving), his average and power are lackluster, no Gold Gloves. He did accumulate 2,600 hits playing to the age of 40.

Factors against him: mostly small market teams, average defense, never was higher than 5th in an MVP vote, not a feared hitter.

At 69.8% last year and in his last year, wow this is going to be close.  How much of a last ballot bump will he get?

11) Mike Mussina - Without 300 wins or a dominant ERA, he's not quite Hall worthy in my opinion.  No Cy Young Awards, a one-time 20 game winner, five All-Star games.  Career ERA is 3.68, not spectacular even in the power era (considering he didn't face line ups four times in most starts). 

Factors against him: Doesn't have 300 wins, not dominant, played on winning teams but never won a World Series.

At 43%, surprising he's below Schilling.  Won't move much until he approaches the end of the ballot.  Not likely to get in during the 10 year window.

12) Fred McGriff - You can't ignore the near 500 home runs, but he hung on a while to get so close and wasn't elite enough in his prime to warrant the Hall. Average defense, below average speed, not an outstanding OBP. He also never broke 110 RBI in a season.

Factors against him: Unspectacular batting average, lack of dominating seasons, lack of speed

At only 21% last year, he's not moving much. I doubt he gets much closer in this, or the next two years.  Could be a veteran ballot candidate, was very popular with teammates and media and did things the right way.

13) Curt Schilling - Seems to get way more media discussion than others as deserving (like Kent or Mussina or even a Bagwell).  3.46 ERA and barely over 200 wins (216).  For careers starting after World War II, only Don Drysdale has fewer wins in the Hall (six fewer seasons, ERA half a point better).  Postseason success aside, it's not a strong case at all.

Factors against him: Low wins, unspectacular ERA

At 52% of the vote, he could make a move (fourth highest returning).  If he can get to 60% now he could eek across 75% by year ten.

The remaining repeat candidates fall into the PED category.

Steroid specter (stats more than deserving, even before they might have juiced, but would not get my vote): Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Roger Clemens, Manny Ramirez, Gary Sheffield.  Ramirez gets his first consideration, it will be most interesting to see how he fares.  Sheffield was surprisingly low last year considering he's a member of the 500 HR club with a batting average over .290.  Goes to show the PED mountain is too high to climb.

Newcomers that might stay on the ballot (besides those mentioned above and Ramirez): Jorge Posada

So my opinions aside, here's who I think gets in (in order by vote percentage).
Trevor Hoffman
Vlad Guerrero
Tim Raines
Jeff Bagwell

They will join "Today's Game" enshrinees John Schuerholz and Allan H. “Bud” Selig, along with J.G. Taylor Spink Award (writers) winner Claire Smith, and Bill King as the Ford C. Frick Award winner for broadcasting excellence.  The induction ceremony is a homecoming of baseball elite, and will be July 30, 2017.

2014 National Baseball Hall of Fame Vote

On Wednesday, January 8, 2014, the Baseball Writers Association of America (BBWAA) vote for the 2014 Major League Baseball Hall of Fame will be revealed. Holding the keys to such an elite fraternity must be a daunting task. You're voting on players to proverbially sit next to Ruth, Aaron, Mays, Mathewson and the like.

Click here for the list of 2014 candidates

The pervasive theme the past several years remains the specter of performance enhancing drugs that infiltrated the league during the so called "Steroid Era". On the bubble now are the first generation "users", ones that presumably were clean earlier in their career but found a "fountain of youth" late which contributed significantly to jaw-dropping numbers.  Many, by all counts, were no doubt Hall of Famers before their transgressions.  But how do you handle this?  In my opinion, with little mercy.

If I were asked to vote (and of course I believe I should be), below reflects my ballot.  It looks very similar to last years' ballot, since nobody got in.  Except with the new bumper crop of first time candidates. The players on the ballots these days usually span my late childhood through young adulthood. I watched and attended a lot of games and have memories of all these players. I don't think I would be alone in allowing my personal (but not biased) "feeling" about a player influence the vote. What I mean by that is, when this player came to the plate or pitched, what was my feeling of how they would perform? Did they always seem to get the big hit, pitch their team to victory, make the heartbreaking defensive play, etc.?  Were they a feared entity anytime they stepped between the lines?

This years crop features one 3000 hit club member, three 300 win club members, four 500 HR club members, another three with 400 HR.

Players I would put on my ballot (in order of credibility) 

1) Greg Maddux - The whisper around media circles is that Maddux "may" be a unanimous vote.  It just takes one to not vote for him so I'm guessing that won't be the case.  But 355 wins, 3.16 ERA, 4 Cy Young Awards, 18 Gold Gloves, 6 All-Star games, and a World Series Championship are a strong resume.  Probably the greatest pitcher of his generation (Clemens could argue, although his career seemed to resurge about the time he was accused of using PEDs).

Factors against him: 11-14 in Postseason play, "only" one World Series title, .610 winning percentage is middle of the pack for Hall of Fame candidate pitchers

Maddux will get in with somewhere between 92% and 98% of the vote.

2) Tom Glavine - One of three 300 win club candidates (with Maddux and Clemens), a five-time 20-game winner (Maddux only twice), two Cy Young Awards, and 10 All-Star games (more than Maddux).  He also won a World Series (with Maddux) in 1995, there just aren't a lot of holes in the resume.

Factors against him: 14-16 in Postseason play, "only" one World Series title (sound familiar).  A .600 winning percentage and mediocre ERA (as compared to other greats) at 3.54

Glavine will likely get in, I don't think that much above 80%.

3) Craig Biggio - The biggest cred Biggio brings is his membership in the 3,000 hit club.  Only Rafael Palmiero (positive PED test), Derek Jeter (still active, sure-fire first ballot) and Pete Rose (lifetime ban from the game) are members of that club, but not the Hall of Fame.  His batting average (.281 lifetime) or power numbers (291 home runs) won't wow you, but another feather in his cap is playing three (defensively challenging) positions as a regular in his career (C, CF, 2B).  He also has seven All-Star nods, three Top 10 MVP finishes, and four Gold Gloves.  Finished his career 5th in doubles all time. 

Factors against him: Ordinary batting average, playing in a small market, lack of postseason success

There may have been some that didn't vote him first ballot in principle, with 68.2% of the ballot in his debut, he's likely to get the nod right near 78%.


4) Mike Piazza - He is probably the best power hitting catcher in history not named Johnny Bench.  He smacked 427 career home runs and a .308 batting average while playing all but 70 games behind the plate.  Both those numbers far exceed Bench (albeit in a different era).  He played in 14 All-Star games (over a 15-year span) and finished in the Top 10 in MVP voting seven times. 

Factors against him: Perceived use of PEDs, below-average defensively

Piazza got 57.8% of the vote in his ballot debut, with the PED suspicions, I don't expect that to bump up significantly, his numbers are clearly worthy, those voting against PEDs won't budge.

5) Frank Thomas - The Big Hurt was big when he came into the league, and wasn't just about power, with a career .301 average.  I mention big when he came into the league, because he's largely escaped any PED accusations (and even criticized heavily those who used).  He got to the 500 career home run plateau (521) and had a .419 career OBP with 1704 career RBI.  He was a 2-time MVP and made five All-Star games.  The numbers are there.

Factors against him: Never played in a World Series, and voters sometimes do not like to vote in big offensive numbers for a player who accumulated them as a DH (his last season over 90 games at 1B he was 29 years old).

Thomas was very popular with the media, his peers, and fans.  He may be close to the cut off because of the deep ballot and because of the first-time voter bias.  I think he gets in around 80% of the ballot.

6) Jeff Bagwell - He was an offensive machine in the mid-1990's, career numbers reflect that (.297, 449, 1529 RBI). Only Palmeiro, Bonds, Sosa, Thomas, and McGriff on the ballot have more RBI. More walks than anyone else on the ballot besides Thomas and Bonds (fear factor and eye), .409 OBP. He also stole 200 bases and was an above average 1B (Gold Glove in the closet). No hard evidence of PED's, he was a weight-lifting machine and didn't see anything late in his career that would lead one to believe he was juicing.

Factors against him: Perceived use of PEDs, playing in a small market, lack of postseason success.

He moved from 41% of the vote in his first year to 56% in year two to 60% last year.  He seems to be trending up, but 15% more would be a stretch.  I think he hits low 60% this year and languishes.


7) Larry Walker - He was another 5-tool player, finished his career with a .313 batting average, higher than anyone else on the ballot.  Let me repeat that, highest batting average of anybody on the ballot. Also stole 200 bases, also hit 383 home runs. He has so many gold gloves he probably had to build an extra wing on his trophy case. Like Bagwell, he won one MVP. He's also a member of the .400 OBP club (he, Bagwell, Thomas, Bonds, and Edgar Martinez the only four on the ballot).

Factors against him: Perceived higher numbers due to Colorado, soft-spoken personality, injury-prone (only 4 seasons of 140+ games).

He only received 22% of the vote last year (regressing), that needs to trend up significantly for people to start noticing.  I don't think it will.

8) Edgar Martinez - He's of the mold of the previous two players. Hit for high average, good (but not awe inspiring) power, gets on base all the time. While I am not a fan of the DH, if MLB has it as a position, you can't hold that against him. With the previous two, defense pushes their case, for Edgar it can't but he still deserves it. Career .312 hitter, .418 OBP, slugged .515 (more than McGriff). He's also a member of the 300 HR club for a guy who didn't try to lift the ball as much as others.

Factors against him: Primarily a DH, played in small market, lack of speed.

He was voted for the affirmative on 36% of last years ballots flat year-over-year.  He needs to get closer to 50% to continue the momentum, now in his fifth year and not moving much.

9) Lee Smith - The Hall of Fame is still figuring out how to accommodate closers, it's my opinion that they are indeed a key element to the game and the best of the best should be included. With Smith, it's not about the numbers (ERA, W-L) as much as the raw pile of saves he accumulated. No matter where he played, he never seemed phase by a momentary lapse of success. Fourteen seasons in a row of 25 or more saves shows a level of consistency matched by few. If there are going to be closers in the HoF, Smith should be there.

Factors against him: Voters don't trend toward closers, wasn't overpowering, lacks team identity.

Received 47.8% of the vote last year, is trending flat or down in his 12th year.  Half the people isn't enough!

10) Jeff Kent - Quietly one of the top offensive second basemen of all time.  His line across the major stats is .290, 377, and 1518.  He has an MVP in his closet, and three other Top 10 finishes.  Add to that six All-Star appearances.  His numbers dwarf Ryne Sandberg and Roberto Alomar, there's no reason he shouldn't get the vote eventually.

Factors against him: Very average on defense, played in a power era in which his home run numbers aren't considered extraordinary. He was also very cold with the media, just didn't like that part of his job.

I think he will probably follow the Bagwell trajectory, getting near 50% the first few years as his legacy is more discussed and people realize how strong his offensive production really was.

First four out

11) Tim Raines - Rock falls just short on the numbers. Besides SB's (of which he is more than deserving), his average and power are lackluster, no Gold Gloves. He did accumulate the most hits of anyone on the ballot (besides Palmeiro, Bonds, and Biggio) playing to the age of 40.

Factors against him: Played in Montreal during his prime, average defense, never was higher than 5th in an MVP vote, not a feared hitter.

At 52.2% now in his seventh year, he made a decent 4% leap last year, but can the momentum continue?

12) Mike Mussina - Without 300 wins, I have trouble putting Moose on my first ballot.  No Cy Young Awards, a one-time 20 game winner, five All-Star games.  Career ERA is 3.68, again, higher than his peers discussed above.  I might come around, but first ballot is way too soon.

Factors against him: Doesn't have 300 wins, wasn't THAT dominant (ERA mediocre), played on winning teams but never won a World Series.

13) Jack Morris - He was a gamer who was consistent, just not consistently great. A three-time 20-game winner, but 3.90 ERA shows me he outlasted a lot of opponents for those wins instead of dominating them. Never had an ERA below 3.05 in a single season. I probably hold starting pitchers to the highest standard when considering Hall of Fame, if you start to take 250 game winners and folks with ERA's near 4.00, you start to let in a lot of slightly better than average pitchers.

Factors against him: ERA, lack of dominating presence, allowed a lot of baserunners (WHIP).

At 67.7% last year, it's 50/50 whether or not that last ballot mojo carries him.  I lean toward it not.

14) Fred McGriff - You can't ignore the near 500 home runs, but he hung on a while to get so close and wasn't elite enough in his prime to warrant the Hall. Average defense, below average speed, not an outstanding OBP. He also never broke 110 RBI in a season.

Factors against him: Low average, lack of dominating seasons, lack of speed.

At only 20.7% last year, he had a drop from the year before. Numbers are inferior when compared to the seven hitters I would vote in, I doubt many voters put 8 hitters on their ballot given the talent.  He may fall off the ballot.


The remaining repeat candidates fall into two categories, steroid specter or double digit ballot opportunities, the numbers aren't there.

Steroid specter (stats more than deserving, even before they might have juiced, but would not get my vote): Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Roger Clemens, Rafael Palmeiro, and Mark McGwire
Vets with short stats: Alan Trammell, Don Mattingly, Curt Schilling
Newcomers that might stay on the ballot: Moises Alou, Luis Gonzalez

Much discussion of the 10 vote limit, those who want to vote in PED users (for legit reasons, they're not banned from the game, baseball didn't do it's job, I get it) will certainly hurt those guys who are close (Edgar, Biggio, Bagwell, McGriff, Kent) and might be enough to keep them out.  But with a 15 year window, the bubble will get through and if you're deserving, you will eventually get the call.

2013 National Baseball Hall of Fame Vote

On Wednesday, January 9, 2013, the Baseball Writers vote for the 2013 Major League Baseball Hall of Fame will be revealed. Holding the keys to such an elite fraternity must be a daunting task. You're voting on players to proverbially sit next to Ruth, Aaron, Mays, Mathewson and the like.

Click here for the list of 2013 candidates

The pervasive theme this year is the specter of performance enhancing drugs that infiltrated the league during the so called "Steroid Era". On the bubble now are the first generation "users", ones that presumably were clean earlier in their career but found a "fountain of youth" late which contributed significantly to jaw-dropping numbers.  Many, by all counts, were no doubt Hall of Famers before their transgressions.  But how do you handle this?  In my opinion, with little mercy.

If I were asked to vote (and of course I believe I should be), below reflects my ballot. The players on the ballots these days usually span my late childhood through young adulthood. I watched and attended a lot of games and have memories of all these players. I don't think I would be alone in allowing my personal (but not biased) "feeling" about a player influence the vote. What I mean by that is, when this player came to the plate or pitched, what was my feeling of how they would perform? Did they always seem to get the big hit, pitch their team to victory, make the heartbreaking defensive play, etc.?  Were they a feared entity anytime they stepped between the lines?

Players I would put on my ballot (in order of credibility)
1) Craig Biggio - The biggest cred Biggio brings is his membership in the 3,000 hit club.  Only Rafael Palmiero (positive PED test), Derek Jeter (still active, sure-fire first ballot) and Pete Rose (lifetime ban from the game) are members of that club, but not the Hall of Fame.  His batting average (.281 lifetime) or power numbers (291 home runs) won't wow you, but another feather in his cap is playing three (defensively challenging) positions as a regular in his career (C, CF, 2B).  He also has seven All Star nods, three Top 10 MVP finishes, and four Gold Gloves.  Finished his career 5th in doubles all time.

Factors against him: Ordinary batting average, playing in a small market, lack of postseason success

As a member of the 3,000 hit club and someone who played the game with hustle and humbleness, I expect him to get in first ballot.

2) Mike Piazza - He is probably the best power hitting catcher in history not named Johnny Bench.  He smacked 427 career home runs and a .308 batting average while playing all but 70 games behind the plate.  Both those numbers far exceed Bench (albeit in a different era).  He played in 14 All Star games (over a 15-year span) and finished in the Top 10 in MVP voting seven times.

Factors against him: Perceived use of PEDs, below-average defensively

3) Jeff Bagwell - He was an offensive machine in the mid-1990's, career numbers reflect that (.297, 449, 1529 RBI). Only Palmeiro, Bonds, Sosa, and McGriff on the ballot have more RBI. More walks than anyone else on the ballot besides Bonds (fear factor and eye), .409 OBP. He also stole 200 bases and was an above average 1B (Gold Glove in the closet). No hard evidence of PED's, he was a weight-lifting machine and didn't see anything late in his career that would lead one to believe he was juicing.

Factors against him: Perceived use of PEDs, playing in a small market, lack of postseason success.

He garnered 41% of the vote last year in his first eligibility, then up to 56%.  He seems to be trending up, but 19% more would be a stretch.

Both Bagwell and Piazza seem to fit the category of "they just look like they did steroids".  Which gets to the point of a witch hunt.  If evidence surfaces of positive use, I'll gladly move him down to the PED line below.  Otherwise, no question, his numbers are good enough to get in.  Period.


4) Larry Walker - He was another 5-tool player, finished his career with a .313 batting average, higher than anyone else on the ballot. Also stole 200 bases, also hit 383 home runs. He has so many gold gloves he probably had to build an extra wing on his trophy case. Like Bagwell, he won one MVP. He's also a member of the .400 OBP club (he, Bagwell, Bonds, and Edgar Martinez the only four on the ballot).

Factors against him: Perceived higher numbers due to Colorado, soft-spoken personality, injury-prone (only 4 seasons of 140+ games).

He only received 23% of the vote last year, that needs to trend up significantly for people to start noticing.

5) Edgar Martinez - He's of the mold of the previous two players. Hit for high average, good (but not awe inspiring) power, gets on base all the time. While I am not a fan of the DH, if MLB has it as a position, you can't hold that against him. With the previous two, defense pushes their case, for Edgar it can't but he still deserves it. Career .312 hitter, .418 OBP, slugged .515 (more than McGriff). He's also a member of the 300 HR club for a guy who didn't try to lift the ball as much as others.

Factors against him: Primarily a DH, played in small market, lack of speed.

He was voted for the affirmative on 36.5% of last years ballots, he needs to get closer to 50% to continue the momentum, now in his fourth year and not moving much.

6) Lee Smith - The Hall of Fame is still figuring out how to accommodate closers, it's my opinion that they are indeed a key element to the game and the best of the best should be included. With Smith, it's not about the numbers (ERA, W-L) as much as the raw pile of saves he accumulated. No matter where he played, he never seemed phase by a momentary lapse of success. Fourteen seasons in a row of 25 or more saves shows a level of consistency matched by few. If there are going to be closers in the HoF, Smith should be there.

Factors against him: Voters don't trend toward closers, wasn't overpowering, played for a lot of teams.

Received 50.6% of the vote last year, might start to trail off now in his 11th year.  Half the people isn't enough!

First four out

7) Tim Raines - Rock is another guy who falls just short on the numbers. Besides SB's (of which he is more than deserving), his average and power are lackluster, no Gold Gloves. He did accumulate the most hits of anyone on the ballot (besides Palmeiro, Bonds, and Biggio) playing to the age of 40.  Not a feared hitter.

Factors against him: Played in Montreal during his prime, average defense, never was higher than 5th in an MVP vote.

At 38.7% now in his sixth year, needs to get close to 50% or his candidacy may lose support.

8) Jack Morris - He was a gamer who was consistent, just not consistently great. A three-time 20-game winner, but 3.90 ERA shows me he outlasted a lot of opponents for those wins instead of dominating them. Never had an ERA below 3.05 in a single season. I probably hold starting pitchers to the highest standard when considering Hall of Fame, if you start to take 250 game winners and folks with ERA's near 4.00, you start to let in a lot of slightly better than average pitchers.

Factors against him: ERA, lack of dominating presence, allowed a lot of baserunners (WHIP).

At 66.7% last year, I think he makes it this year.

9) Fred McGriff - You can't ignore the near 500 home runs, but he hung on a while to get so close and wasn't elite enough in his prime to warrant the Hall. Average defense, below average speed, not an outstanding OBP. He also never broke 110 RBI in a season.

Factors against him: Low average, lack of dominating seasons, lack of speed.

At only 23.9% last year and only up 5% from the year before. Numbers are inferior when compared to the five hitters I would vote in, I doubt many voters put 6 or 7 hitters on their ballot.

10) Julio Franco - He is an enigma to be sure.  Franco batted .298 for his career with over 2,500 hits, just a tad below Roberto Alomar in both categories.  What Franco did that nobody else did, was play until he was almost 50 years old.  In his youth, he was an above average baserunner and above average defender (who could play a lot of positions).  I don't think he is worthy in the end, but definitely worth a mention.

Factors against him: Never an elite player, lifetime numbers inflated by career longevity.

I hope he exceeds 10% and stays on the ballot for a few years (thus stirring future debate).  He deserves at least that, but not really a Hall of Famer by any stretch.

Last year on the ballot
Dale Murphy - Just a case of not enough "oomph" (code for numbers, clout) to warrant induction.  A great guy, one of the top players of his era (a dead ball era, mind you), but joins a long list of players who were pretty good, just not quite good enough.  Almost 400 career home runs, but the .265 average was pretty ordinary.  Two MVP's, five gold gloves are nothing to shake a stick at, for sure.

Factors against him: Low batting average

He's only been tickling the low teens (14.5% last year) that might double, but otherwise, he's had a good 15-year run, but just not good enough.

The remaining repeat candidates fall into two categories, steroid specter or double digit ballot opportunities, the numbers aren't there.

Steroid specter (stats more than deserving but would not get my vote): Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Roger Clemens, Rafael Palmeiro, and Mark McGwire
Vets with short stats: Alan Trammell, Don Mattingly, Bernie Williams

There is dearth of good pitching candidates, Clemens plus Schilling hit the ballot (neither probable) hard to believe Aaron Sele, Mike Stanton, David Wells, Woody Williams, and Roberto Hernandez are some of the better new candidates (none are really that close).

(Jointly published with http://sports-kings.com/readingbetweentheseams/)

2012 Major League Baseball Hall of Fame Vote

Tomorrow, January 9, 2012, the Baseball Writers vote for the 2012 Major League Baseball Hall of Fame will be revealed. Holding the keys to such an elite fraternity must be a daunting task. You're voting on players to proverbially sit next to Ruth, Aaron, Mays, Mathewson and the like.

Click here for the list of 2012 candidates

Mixed in to this responsibility is the specter of performance enhancing drugs that pervaded the league during the so called "Steroid Era". On the bubble now are the first generation "users", ones that presumably were clean earlier in their career but found a "fountain of youth" late which contributed significantly to jaw-dropping numbers.

If I were asked to vote (and of course I believe I should be), below reflects my ballot. The players on the ballots these days usually span my late childhood through young adulthood. I watched and attended a lot of games and have memories of all these players. I don't think I would be alone in allowing my personal (but not biased) "feeling" about a player influence the vote. What I mean by that is, when this player came to the plate or pitched, what was my feeling of how they would perform. Did they always seem to get the big hit, pitch their team to victory, make the heartbreaking defensive play, etc.?

Players I would put on my ballot (in order of credibility)
1) Jeff Bagwell - He was an offensive machine in the mid-1990's, career numbers reflect that (.297, 449, 1529 RBI). Only Palmeiro and McGriff on the ballot have more RBI. More walks than anyone else on the ballot (fear factor and eye), .409 OBP. He also stole 200 bases and was an above average 1B (Gold Glove in the closet). No evidence of PED's, he was a weight-lifting machine and didn't see anything late in his career that would lead one to believe he was juicing.

Factors against him: Perceived use of PEDs, playing in a small market, lack of postseason success.

He garnered 41% of the vote last year in his first eligibility, I expect that to go up 20% or so.

2) Larry Walker - He was another 5-tool player, finished his career with a .313 batting average, higher than anyone else on the ballot. Also stole 200 bases, also hit 383 home runs. He has so many gold gloves he probably had to build an extra wing on his trophy case. Like Bagwell, he won one MVP. He's also a member of the .400 OBP club (he, Bagwell, and Edgar Martinez the only three on the ballot).

Factors against him: Perceived higher numbers due to Colorado, soft-spoken personality, injury-prone (only 4 seasons of 140+ games).

He only received 20% of the vote last year, that needs to trend up for people to start noticing.

3) Edgar Martinez - He's of the mold of the previous two players. Hit for high average, good (but not awe inspiring) power, gets on base all the time. While I am not a fan of the DH, if MLB has it as a position, you can't hold that against him. With the previous two, defense pushes their case, for Edgar it can't but he still deserves it. Career .312 hitter, .418 OBP, slugged .515 (more than McGriff). He's also a member of the 300 HR club for a guy who didn't try to lift the ball as much as others.

Factors against him: Primarily a DH, played in small market, lack of speed.

He was voted for the affirmative on 32.9% of last years ballots, he needs to get closer to 50% to continue the momentum, now in his third year.

4) Lee Smith - The Hall of Fame is still figuring out how to accommodate closers, it's my opinion that they are indeed a key element to the game and the best of the best should be included. With Smith, it's not about the numbers (ERA, W-L) as much as the raw pile of saves he accumulated. No matter where he played, he never seemed phase by a momentary lapse of success. Fourteen seasons in a row of 25 or more saves shows a level of consistency matched by few. If there are going to be closers in the HoF, Smith should be there.

Factors against him: Voters don't trend toward closers, wasn't overpowering, played for a lot of teams

Received 45% of the vote last year, might start to trail off now in his 10th year.

First four out
5) Barry Larkin - His numbers are just a hair better than Alan Trammell, someone who I think was great, but not HoF material. Only slugged .444 (Brian Jordan slugged better). .295 average, almost 200 Home Runs, I just don't see it. I will say his defense, speed, and team leadership (including postseason success) move him a little closer but just not enough. He has the one MVP and a Gold Glove. He just wasn't a guy to be feared in the lineup like the above three hitters.

Factors against him: Lack of overwhelming offensive numbers (that's pretty much it).

At 62% last year, he's the most likely candidate to get in.

6) Tim Raines - Rock is another guy who falls just short on the numbers. Besides SB's (of which he is more than deserving), his average and power is there with Larkin, no MVP's, no Gold Gloves. He did accumulate the most hits of anyone on the ballot (besides Palmeiro) playing to the age of 40. Like Larkin, he wasn't a feared hitter.

Factors against him: Played in Montreal during his prime, average defense, never was higher than 5th in an MVP vote.

At 37.5% now in his fifth year, needs to get close to 50% or his candidacy may lose support.

7) Jack Morris - He was a gamer who was consistent, just not consistently great. A three-time 20-game winner, but 3.90 ERA shows me he outlasted a lot of opponents for those wins instead of dominating them. Never had an ERA below 3.05 in a single season. I probably hold starting pitchers to the highest standard when considering Hall of Fame, if you start to take 250 game winners and folks with ERA's near 4.00, you start to let in a lot of slightly better than average pitchers.

Factors against him: ERA, lack of dominating presence, allowed a lot of baserunners (WHIP).

At 53.5% last year, he's got a shot this year to approach 75%. I think he still falls short.

8) Fred McGriff - You can't ignore the near 500 home runs, but he hung on a while to get so close and wasn't elite enough in his prime to warrant the Hall. Average defense, below average speed, not an outstanding OBP. He also never broke 110 RBI in a season.

Factors against him: Low average, lack of dominating seasons, lack of speed.

At only 17.9% he might fizzle this year. Numbers are distant when compared to the three hitters I would vote in, I doubt many voters put 5 or 6 hitters on their ballot.

The remaining repeat candidates fall into two categories, steroid specter or double digit ballot opportunities, the numbers aren't there.

Steroid specter: Rafael Palmeiro, Mark McGwire, and Juan Gonzalez
Vets with short stats: Alan Trammell, Don Mattingly, Dale Murphy

The new guys aren't even close except MAYBE Bernie Williams, but he'll only get a good piece of the vote due to the New York media and postseason successes. He wasn't a feared player in that lineup, never made a dent on MVP voting.

Amazing how few pitchers are even considered these days, Mulholland and Radke joining Morris and Lee Smith as the only ones. Perhaps for another blog, but an artifact of the Steroid Era? Roger and Curt coming soon.