The last couple months I have struggled with how I would approach discussing my IBWAA Hall of Fame ballot. For years I have cherished being able to vote for our Hall of Fame and it was a part of the game that brought me joy, even in unsure times. But that isn’t the case this year.
First, lets start with a quick look at my IBWAA ballot. I have been a part of the IBWAA for years now and love the privilege of placing my thoughts into these votes:
Nine votes for me this year with Hudson being the only first timer on the list. Hudson and Abreu are both guys I feel are borderline at best candidates, but I like keeping them on the ballot every year so we can continue evaluating their cases.
If you notice, there is no Barry Bonds or Roger Clemens on our ballot, as we voted them in back in 2018. I have always voted for players just based off of their numbers and have ignored everything else, including topics like steroids and character issues. To me, the Hall is a museum for everything about the game, good and bad. We will come back to this later in the article.
Here is the IBWAA’s results from this year, as we announced our voting a week earlier than the BBWAA:
So we elected no one this year, as Curt Schilling received the most votes at 64.67 percent. If I’m being honest, the progression we have made over the years in the IBWAA has been solid and I really have very little issues with how our voting has gone. Yes, I wish some players were higher on this list but more than anything we are seeing the right players moving in the correct direction (in my opinion).
But I have some major issues with the BBWAA and baseball in general when it comes to their handling of everything. First, here is where the voting is as of Friday morning:
We are four days from the announcement and no one is over the 75% threshold that is needed. Also, on most occasions whatever the numbers are a few days before, they decline by the time we get to the actual final results. By the way, if you want to keep up to date with the polling, follow Ryan Thibodaux on twitter (@NotMrTibbs). Ryan does a great job and should be your go-to source for Hall of Fame balloting.
So if these results play out as they are now, no one will be voted in this year. Luckily for the National Baseball Hall of Fame, they were never able to hold the induction ceremonies in 2020, so those inductees would be honored at Cooperstown this upcoming summer (if things go according to plan). But having no inductees this year feels like another fumble for the BBWAA.
First, I feel there are many candidates on here that are more than Hall worthy. Even if you are still against Bonds and Clemens, someone like Scott Rolen or Todd Helton should be in the Hall. Third base is highly underrepresented in Cooperstown and Scott Rolen is 8th all-time amongst third baseman according to the Hall of Stats. Helton is 18th among first basemen and 161st all-time, which ranks him in the top 0.8% of all baseball players according to the Hall of Stats. His numbers essentially line-up with the best first basemen that have ever played the game:
While I like that their percentages are moving up, it bothers me that while the ballot has started to not be as jam packed, we are still seeing writers being super conservative with their votes. Look, I get not every voter believes in a ‘Big Hall’ mentality like I do. Some writers feel like the HOF should only be for the best of the best. I get that and while I am of a different thinking, I can respect that opinion.
The issue at this point is that the game has grown over the last 55 years and yet it has gotten harder to be elected to enshrinement. Just look at this quote from the Hall’s website:
More than 19,000 players have stepped onto a major league diamond in the 150-year history of professional baseball. Only 235 have been elected to the Hall of Fame – a rate of about one percent of all major leaguers. Combined with the 29 Negro League players elected by committees and special elections, the total number of ballplayers enshrined is 264.
One percent. That is all. Just one percent of players that have played Major League Baseball are in Cooperstown. So if you are arguing that the Hall of Fame should be small, well, it is. Even if they went ahead and voted in 5 players every year for the next decade, it would still be a “Small Hall”. I’ve always said the more the merrier and I tend to believe if you allowed more players in, the interest in this entire process would get even larger. Instead, it feels like it is going in the opposite direction.
Part of my disinterest in this process has been the lack of actual players to honor. But a much bigger chunk of my indifference is the complete lack of direction by either baseball or the Hall itself. Steroids has been a hot topic issue for years now. Everyone has a different point of view to it and they all have been pretty vocal about that opinion. I have always been of the belief that baseball allowed that era to happen, so I am not going to punish players that weren’t having to succumb to drug testing. To me, baseball made their bed and they can lay in it.
But when it comes to how the writers should vote on this topic, the Hall has given them no direction. All that has been even slightly implicated is to look at the character clause and make your judgment. Sure, you can say the Hall HAS made their opinion felt, by changing the number of years a player is on the ballot and you wouldn’t be wrong by saying that. But it feels like a very passive stance for them to take and it sure isn’t very helpful for many writers who just want to know what their parameters are.
This is also true for the character clause, which within itself is very vague. To give you an idea, here is how it is worded in the election rules:
“…voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played.”
Once again, this is all left open to interpretation. It would be nice if they gave a little more input into what they are looking for, especially since Curt Schilling has left many a voter wondering how they should view his case.
For the record, I have voted for Schilling every year he has been on the IBWAA ballot. Since I have followed the rule of going purely off of on the field performance, I have ignored his behavior over the years and voted for him purely off of his playing career. I’ve always said that while I don’t agree with his politics, that shouldn’t matter when it comes to a baseball accomplishment.
In hindsight, maybe this is a case where your behavior outside of the game should be judged. I’ve long said that the National Baseball Hall of Fame is a museum, not a church. There are already awful human beings in those hallowed halls and while we might not like it, it is a part of baseball’s history. That being said, just because mistakes were made in the past, it doesn’t mean we have to continue making them. If there is a chance to leave Schilling out because it appears he is promoting hate, then he should be left out. We should be trying to make the Hall of Fame better and like Pete Rose, Schilling can be in the museum while not being personally honored for his career. I know for me, moving forward I won’t be voting for him.
Go look above and see how many words I spilled about issues that could be fixed if the Hall of Fame or MLB took the initiative and made their rules for voting a bit simpler. Because of this, over the last 10-15 years it has become more about the issues within the game than trying to honor the individual performances. I know the writers are mostly trying to do their best to honor the right people, but because of this lack of direction many writers want nothing to do with it:
I’ve always hoped that as more of the older guard of writers headed out, the newer ones would filter in and some of these problems would start to dissipate. Maybe that will happen, but because everyone in charge has decided to sit on their hands it has made many writers look at the situation like Britt does. I hate that. I wish this was something that every writer wore like a badge of honor. Instead, even I have lost interest in what the BBWAA does with the voting.
I’m tired of the bickering. I’m tired of there not being proper parameters set. I’m tired of players falling off the ballot and leaving their careers in the hands of a committee. Voting for the baseball Hall of Fame should not be this difficult and joyless, and yet here we are. Baseball has pawned off their responsibilities to their writers and it appears more and more like the writers are telling them “Nah, thanks bro.”.
Being honored in Cooperstown is still a treat and something every player should yearn for. But the process is stagnant and messy and no one involved wants to acknowledge that. I’ll still root for the Scott Rolen’s and Billy Wagner’s to get their due, but until the Hall of Fame decides that there needs to be a change, I can’t promise my interest will be there.
There is no greater honor in any sport than getting a plaque in the baseball Hall of Fame. I’m sure someone who believes the NFL or NBA is a greater honor will debate me on this, but there is never the sort of debate toward their hall’s as there is in baseball. That debate has grown into a fervor among baseball fans, writers and even players, as every one seems to have an opinion on this topic.
What has made it even more intense is what we should do with players who were “suspected” of enhancement thanks to steroids and other performance enhancement drugs, and whether or not they deserve a spot in the hallowed halls of Cooperstown or left on the outside looking in. In some ways, the people who vote on this honor are the judge, jury and executioner, as testing was not done during this period so for many of the players of that era there is no definite of what they did or did not do.
As a member of the IBWAA, this will be my fifth year of voting for ‘the Hall’ and as I have said in years past, I have no issue voting for anyone suspected for PED use, since I feel those players played within the parameters of the rules allowed at that time. I’ve long considered the Hall of Fame a museum of the game, not a church, and because of this I vote based on performance alone.
Now, there are a few differences between us in the IBWAA & our brethren in the BBWAA, one of which is the players we have already inducted. Last year we inducted Mike Mussina, Roger Clemens, Chipper Jones, Jim Thome, Trevor Hoffman and Barry Bonds, and in years past we had already voted in Edgar Martinez, so he will not show up on our ballot this year. Also, we are allowed to vote for up to 15 players, where the BBWAA can only vote for 10.
Before we get to my actual votes, you can read my previous votes: Here is 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018. Also, follow Ryan Thibodaux on Twitter. That way you can follow how the voting is going before the big announcement on January 22nd. Without further ado, here are my votes for the 2018 Hall of Fame ballot.
Halladay might very well be the last of his kind, a pitcher who finishes what he started. Halladay came along during a period where the big shift into using relievers more often hadn’t quite hit yet, but was getting closer and closer every day. Halladay was that guy who you handed the ball to and that day the bullpen was probably getting a bit of a reprieve.
But it wasn’t just his stamina that made him great, in fact that is just a small portion of the picture. “Doc” was an ace in every sense of the world, as he threw his fastball with a bit of sink to it, sprinkled in with one of the hardest cutters in the game and topped off with a curveball and the occasional changeup that was closer to a split-finger fastball. Halladay’s game was all about location and movement.
What the numbers tell us about Halladay is that he is right up there with the greats of the game. He is 42nd all-time in WAR for pitchers, 71st in strike outs, 25th in strike out to walk ratio, 40th in ERA+, 28th in pitching runs, 20th in RE24, and 15th in WPA. He posted eight years with 5 WAR or better and four of those years were above 7 bWAR. While his early years saw a lot of ups and downs, the later one showed a pitcher who developed himself into one of the best of his era.
This also showed in the awards and “black ink” he compiled throughout his career. Halladay won a Cy Young Award in both leagues, was selected to 8 All-Star teams, threw a perfect game back in 2010 against the Marlins and later that year threw the first postseason no-hitter since Don Larsen’s perfect game in the 1956 World Series. Roy led his league in wins twice, complete games seven times, innings pitched four times, and ERA+, FIP and WHIP all one time apiece.
While Halladay has the numbers, the achievements and the iconic moments, the real story of his greatness is that of a baseball player who was an even better human being. After his death from a plane crash in late 2017, former teammate Cole Hamels spoke fondly of him at a life celebration in Florida:
Roy showed everyone what to do. He was not boastful. He was the most humble human being I’ve ever met. The type of talent and integrity he had in the game of baseball. “And on the outside? He was a loving father, a loving husband. And that right there really exemplifies more than the game of baseball.
So while some believed it might take awhile for Halladay to get voted in to Cooperstown, he now looks like a lock for induction this upcoming summer. With close to half of the ballots known, “Doc” is sitting at well above 90% of the votes and will take his rightful place in the baseball Hall of Fame this summer.
While it will be a special moment for his family, it has to be a somewhat bittersweet that he won’t be there himself to accept the plaque. Halladay overcame his early career struggles and turned himself into one of the best pitchers of all-time. His is a story that should be told till the end of time, and hopefully this honor will cement that legacy that earned him a spot in the conversation in the first place.
There is going to be a big debate of whether or not former Colorado Rockies first baseman Todd Helton deserves enshrinement into the Hall of Fame and while some will question his numbers due to Coors Field, I do not. In my eyes, Helton was a well above-average hitter for a very long time, a plus defender and worthy of being a Hall of Famer.
But lets start with those numbers to really get a feel for what he accomplished over his 17 year career. Helton had a lifetime .316/.414/.539 line with 369 home runs, 1406 RBI’s and 61.2 bWAR. He ranks 67th all-time in batting average, 27th in on-base percentage, 36th in slugging percentage, 19th in OPS, 96th in runs scored, 97 in career hits, 62nd in total bases, 19th in doubles, 80th in home runs, 77th in RBI’s, 32nd in runs created, 40th in extra base hits and 34th in career WPA. I’ve always been a firm believer that if you are a great player you have to achieve numbers that litter the Top 100 of all-time and Helton does that.
But the elephant in the room that hurts Helton is the “Coors Field Effect”. Unfortunately, the splits tell us that Helton did benefit from playing at one of the better offensive ballparks in baseball, as he hit .345/.411/.607 at home and .287/.386/.469 on the road. There is a big enough disparity there that will cause some to shy away from voting for Helton, essentially saying he wouldn’t have his numbers if it weren’t for playing at Coors.
While he did perform better at home, the only real drastic difference in his home/road splits is home runs: he hit 227 at home and 142 on the road. Most of his other numbers are at least moderately comparable on the road, or at least enough that we shouldn’t discredit him for the work he did in his home ballpark.
The number that really should sway you to Helton’s side is his career OPS+, which is adjusted to a league average. Essentially, that number normalizes itself to factor in elements like ballparks and trends in different leagues. So even with that factored in, Helton has a career OPS+ of 133, which is 33% better than the league average. So when you take out the “Coors Field Effect”, Helton is still performing well above the normal hitter in baseball.
The numbers continue to speak of an elite hitter. Helton is ranked 18th all-time at first base at the Hall of Stats and his hitting stats are comparable to some all-time greats. His offensive similarity scores are right up there with Jeff Bagwell (HOFer), Miguel Cabrera (future HOFer), and Edgar Martinez (soon to be HOFer). Add in his elite defense and you have a guy who should be getting a plaque in Cooperstown at some point.
Helton can also add in some black ink (his 2000 season was an absolutely monster season), 5 straight All-Star nods, 3 Gold Glove awards and 4 Silver Sluggers at a very touted position. This all spells ‘Hall of Famer’ to me.
The good news is that while he won’t get the support I would like this year, he is polling at around 20% right now which should help him stay on the ballot for future years. Add in a number of players getting voted in this year and a few falling off, and you have a recipe for some to give him a deeper look in future years. Hopefully by the time it is all said and done, Todd Helton will receive the honor he deserves in the very near future.
If there is a name on this ballot that made me go back and forth on, it was Jones. 2018 was the first year he appeared on the ballot and while I took a long, hard look at his candidacy, in the end I passed. This year, I decided to take a deeper look and see if I should reconsider and on further review, Jones appears to be a prime candidate for election.
The strongest part of Jones’ game was his defense. He posted ten straight years of winning the Gold Glove Award and racked up 24.5 defensive WAR throughout his 17-year career. Elite defenders within the game should always get a second look, no matter how much we fawn over their offensive.
So while Andruw’s defense is without a doubt ‘Hall-worthy’, his work with the bat wasn’t that bad either. Career-wise, Jones hit .254/.337/.486 with 434 home runs, 1289 RBI’s and 62.8 bWAR. While these are very, very solid numbers, you can see where someone would be skeptical. But if you are like me, you appreciate a player’s 7-year peak.
Jones put up over six years of an OPS+ higher than 120 and ten years where he hit 20 home runs or more. 2005 was a stellar season for him, as he hit 51 homers, knocked in 128 runs and put up an OPS+ of 136. While that was the top of the mountain for Jones, in his prime he consistently produced well above-average offensively and was a force in the middle of the Atlanta offense.
When you add in his defense is where the numbers start really popping. Jones had six seasons where he had 5 win seasons (5 WAR or more) and eight 4 win seasons. When it comes to peaks, Jones was one of the elite players in the game and in fact he is 105th all-time in WAR for position players and 21st in defensive WAR.
Jones also has an impressive number of career totals that help his cause. He is 47th all-time in home runs, 88th in extra base hits and 66th in AB per HR. I normally prefer a Hall of Famer to have more numbers in the Top 100, but Jones’ superior defense brings his case right to the borderline.
So it comes down to how you feel about a player’s peak. If you are like me, you feel the peak is one of the biggest factors in a player’s candidacy and even if you fall off the board hard late in your career(like Jones did), the peak makes up for the regression.
If not, someone like Jones falls just short of the parameters for Cooperstown. This is why the case for him is a difficult one, since you are looking at a player who was a great, great player for a good chunk of his career. But once he started the fall, he fell hard and fast.
So while I wavered on Jones last year, this year it felt like the peak was so good and the defense was so elite that he was worthy of my vote. I can understand anyone who feels otherwise, as it really comes down to what you value on a player’s contributions to the game. To me, the fact Jones was the best defender at his position for close to ten years and a great run producer for around seven years for enough for me. For others, Jones’ case will fall just a bit short.
Just like Andruw Jones, Roy Oswalt is the case for inducting him based off of his peak years. During his prime, Oswalt was one of the best pitchers of his era. Unfortunately, his is a career that hit a wall due to injuries.
Let’s start with the basics: Oswalt threw 2245.1 innings in his big league career, striking out 1852 batters and a career ERA of 3.36. On the surface, those are good numbers, but maybe not instant ‘Hall-worthy’ stats. Not even the 50 bWAR, 127 career ERA+ and 20 career complete games push him in the definite category of Hall of Famer.
But the peak is definitely a great one. During his first seven years in the league, Oswalt threw 1413 innings, posting a 3.07 ERA and striking out 1170 batters. Throw in an ERA+ of 143 and a FIP of 3.23 and you start making the argument for Oswalt being an elite pitcher.
Oswalt can even toss in some black ink for his case. He led the league in wins back in 2004, WHIP in 2010 and strike out to walk ratio in 2006. He also posted five 4 win seasons (and almost a sixth in 2004 when he had 3.4 bWAR), which helps his case as one of the best pitchers of his era.
But the overall numbers aren’t too bad when you really start to digest them. Oswalt is 105th in WAR for pitchers, 99th in strike outs per 9, 105th in strike outs, 26th in strike out to walk ratio, 50th in ERA+, 43rd in RE24 and 59th in WPA. It’s very obviously Oswalt wasn’t a compiler and it really makes you wonder what would have happened if he had been able to stay healthy more often late in his career.
In fact, Oswalt might be the ultimate borderline pitcher. His similarity score is on par with other pitchers right on the line: Bret Saberhagen, Jered Weaver and Cliff Lee. The Hall of Stats has him ranked 79th all-time among pitchers and that feels pretty accurate to me.
So if you feel Roy Oswalt is just short of being a Hall of Famer, I can see that. He is right on that line where you have to decide what a player’s true value is. To me, Oswalt is just over that line but I don’t know if he will see a second ballot to continue the discussion. Oswalt is currently polling at 1.1% on the BBWAA ballot with 45% made public at the moment. It’s too bad, because at the very least he deserves to stick around so there can be more discussions about his candidacy.
Many voters have said the difference to them between Bonds or Clemens and Rafael Palmeiro or Ramirez is that the latter tested positive for performance enhancing drugs and was justly suspended. In fact, last year when I started filling out my ballot, I paused on Ramirez and had to really stop and think of which direction I wanted to go. Like I have said, my voting is performance based but an actual suspension (and for Manny it was multiple suspensions) muddies the water a bit.
After much contemplation, I went ahead and voted for Manny since he had put up Hall of Fame numbers before the suspensions. While Ramirez wasn’t a stellar defender (and that is evidenced by his career bWAR of 69.2), offensively he was a juggernaut. Manny posted a career line of .312/.411/.585 with 555 career home runs, and an OPS+ of 154. I firmly believe he could hit blindfolded and still produce league average numbers, as he was that good of a hitter.
Manny also contributed during the playoffs, where he hit .285/.394/.544 with 29 home runs and 78 RBI’s over 111 postseason games, all fairly on pace to his regular season averages. The awards are all there for him as he was a 12 time All-Star, 2 time Hank Aaron award winner, 2002 AL batting title, 2004 World Series MVP, and 9 time Silver Slugger award winner. If that isn’t impressive enough, the numbers are quite gaudy: 32nd all-time in oWAR, 32nd in On-Base Percentage, 8th in Slugging Percentage, 8th in OPS, 29th in total bases, 31st in doubles, 15th in home runs, 18th in RBI’s, 28th in OPS+, 21st in runs created, 17th in Adjusted Batting Runs, 20th in Adjusted Batting Wins, 16th in extra base hits, 11th in RE24, and 23rd in Win Probability Added. Those are Hall of Fame numbers and most of that accumulated before he tested positive for anything.
Would I hold it against anyone for not voting for him because of the suspensions? Nope. I get it.But for me, Ramirez has long been a Hall of Famer; the only thing those suspensions did was tarnish the perception of him, which is unfortunate. Instead of people remembering Manny for his child-like antics or immense hitting, he will be branded a cheater. He has no one else to blame for that, but I still felt like he had earned my vote, scarlet letter and all.
If there was a no-doubt, absolute lock on this ballot, it’s Mariano Rivera. There is no discussion, no trepidation or even a second thought: Rivera is the greatest closer in baseball history. The only reason to not vote for him would be if you are trying to save other players from falling off the ballot. That is how definite Rivera is.
Literally everything about his career backs this up. Thirteen All-Star nods, a World Series MVP, an ALCS MVP, and an astounding 0.70 postseason ERA just tell part of the story. He is 77th all-time in bWAR for pitchers, 3rd in WHIP, 8th in hits per 9, first in saves, 10th in strike out to walk ratio, first in ERA+, 18th in RE24, 5th in WPA and 4th in games played.
Rivera compiled 56.2 bWAR over his career, including 10 seasons of 3 WAR or more. The average Hall of Fame reliever has 38.1 bWAR over his career, a number that Rivera absolutely blows away. He simply was the best at what he did.
For him, it’s the numbers but also the moments. The playoff appearances, the World Series moments and the high-leverage situations that went along with it. Rivera was the guy you wanted on the mound if you need to protect a lead in a big game.
Rivera is currently polling at 100% on the known BBWAA ballots and is a lock to be in Cooperstown this upcoming summer. There has been a number of debates on whether or not he should or will get all of the votes, but to me that doesn’t matter. Whether he gets 99 or 100%, either way there is no doubt of his final destination. Mariano Rivera is a Hall of Famer and that is the end of the discussion.
If there is a player I voted for that I feel others will look past on first glance when they absolutely shouldn’t, it’s Scott Rolen. I mentioned last year how under-represented the position of third base is and voting for Rolen would go a long way toward making up some much-needed ground.
While the defensive metrics still feel a bit like a work in progress, there is no denying that he was an elite defender. Rolen sits 6th all-time in total zone runs as a third baseman, 32nd for range factor/9 innings for a third baseman and is second in defensive runs saved as a third sacker since 2002. Rolen was 48th all-time in defensive WAR, an eight-time Gold Glove winner and outside of maybe Adrian Beltre, was considered the elite defender at the position during his day.
Now, defense alone doesn’t get you in the hall, otherwise someone like Mark Belanger would have a nice little plaque. Luckily for Rolen, his offense was stellar as well. The stats don’t speak as a world beater as much as a consistent performer throughout his 17 year career; 99th all-time in WAR (67th for position players), 51st in career doubles, 74th in extra base hits and 104th in Win Probability Added. Like I said, not breaking any records but I doubt many would expect these kind of footprints stepping into the statistical records of baseball history.
But to truly honor Rolen’s greatness, all you have to do is view his place in third basemen all-time. Rolen sits 10th for third basemen all-time in WAR, 14th in WAR7, and 10th in JAWS. If you believe in those numbers as much as I do, you consider Rolen one of the greatest third baseman in history…but there is more. When considering the other players at his position, he is 6th in doubles, 15th in home runs, 14th in RBI’s, 14th in slugging percentage, and 11th in OPS.
To top it all off, the Hall of Stats has him listed as a 142 Hall Rating, 85th all-time overall and 8th among third baseman. In other words, he was great and totally deserves this honor. I really wish Rolen was getting more support this year, since I really feel like he is the third base equivalent of Alan Trammell. Great numbers, especially the more you dive into them but overshadowed by his peers who played at the same time. At some point he will get his acknowledgement, it’s just a matter of how long that takes to happen.
There might not be a bigger lightning rod on the Hall of Fame ballot than Schilling, who has caught quite a bit of scorn for his behavior on social media within the last couple of years. While I might not agree with his politics, I do realize it has nothing to do with his candidacy in the Hall and justly had no qualms in voting for him yet again this year.
Schilling’s numbers speak of a top-notch starter: 26th all-time in pitchers bWAR, 15th in strikeouts, 3rd best strikeout to walk ratio, 18th best Win Probability Added and 46th best ERA+. Those are just his regular season numbers; toss in the postseason and you have a surefire Hall of Famer.
Schilling has rubbed many a writer the wrong way (and by no means do I feel sorry for Curt; he would probably be better off learning when to keep quiet and because of that his vote totals have not been where they should be these last few years. I might not like Schilling the person, but the baseball player was one hell of a pitcher out on the diamond. For that, he has my vote.
Over the last few years I have gone back and forth on Gary Sheffield and his candidacy for the Hall of Fame. Maybe it was because he bounced around from team to team, or the fact that he bounced between the infield and the outfield throughout his career. Either way, it was easy to leave Sheff out of the conversation and feel like he was on the cusp of greatness.
But when I finally broke down the numbers, it really felt like his case has been one of the most overlooked when it comes to the hall. Sheffield played right field more than any other position, so I first stacked his numbers against the others at that position. Sheffield is 19th in WAR for right fielders, just below Shoeless Joe Jackson and Dave Winfield. He ranks a bit lower on his peak, as he sits 24th in WAR7, above Hall of Famers Winfield, Chuck Klein, Willie Keeler, and Enos Slaughter. He is also at 24th in JAWS while 7th in home runs, 8th in RBI’s, 12th in OPS and 15th in OPS+.
Now, right fielders are well represented in the hall (24 to be exact) so Sheffield holds his own in the position, even if he is slightly below the elite level. But as I mentioned earlier, I’m a big proponent of where players stack up all-time and that is where Sheffield shines. He is 35th in offensive WAR (obviously his defense dragged him down a bit in the WAR category), 88th in on-base percentage, 76th in slugging percentage, 58th in OPS, 69th in hits, 34th in total bases, 26th in home runs, 28th in RBI’s, 21st in walks, 78th in OPS+, 26th in runs created, 39th in extra base hits, 25th in RE24, and 16th in Win Probability Added. I’m sure the fact he played 22 seasons helped him compile a decent amount of those numbers, but he also was able to stay healthy and be a consistent run producer for almost the entirety of his career.
Sheffield had six seasons with an OPS+ of 150 or more and was above league average for all but two years of his career (one was his rookie year and the other was his age 39 season). So what has hurt Sheffield’s case? I’m sure a few people would mention that his name was in the Mitchell Report and had been linked to PED’s in the past. Like I mentioned, that doesn’t affect my voting. But the other concern was his defense. It didn’t really matter whether he was at shortstop, third base or the outfield, he just wasn’t a great fielder.
In the past I’ve not voted for Jeff Kent because of his defense and I didn’t vote for Omar Vizquel this year because of his lack of offense. So what was the difference with Sheff? His offense was so good that it crossed out any issues I had with his defense. I’m also a “Big Hall” guy and feel like Sheffield was one of the great hitters of his era. I can understand if someone leaves him off (he is a fringe guy in this regard), but for me he was far enough above the line to be considered one of the greats.
Wagner was a seven time All-Star, twice was in the top ten of the NL Cy Young award and took home the 1999 NL Rolaids Relief Award. While he sits in 6th place all-time in saves, that doesn’t mean as much to me as his 86% conversion rate, which is close to Trevor Hoffman’s 88.8%.
What does interest me is some of the deeper numbers when compared to fellow relievers. Wagner is 5th all-time for relievers in ERA+, 14th for relievers in bWAR (in fact, just under Hoffman), 4th in strikeouts for a reliever, 86th in Adjusted Pitching Runs, 93rd in Adjusted Pitching Wins, 55th in RE24, and 36th in Win Probability Added. All this was done in less than 1,000 innings, which for some is a hindrance rather than a positive.
I get that relievers today aren’t used in the same scenarios as their forefathers, and because of that their innings totals will seem meek in comparison. But that is also what the role calls for nowadays and there is something to be said for compiling numbers like this in a much shorter amount of time. For Wagner, it was more about the efficiency than the longevity; Wagner came in, shut down the opposing team and was done.
In some ways, Wagner and Hoffman are linked in that they both pitched about the same amount of time, in the same period and were equally efficient. Both were top of the food chain for their position and in my eyes, both should be in Cooperstown.
This was the third year I voted for Walker and my take on him seemed to be a bit different from a lot of folks. For many, the fact that Walker played a large chunk of his home games in Coors Field (Walker was a Rockie from 1995 to 2004) seemed to deter voters from placing a vote for him; I had no issue with that, since I knew he hit on the road almost as well as he did at home.
No, my issue with him was injuries, as he had 7 seasons of less than 130 games, 12 of less than 140. Walker’s issue wasn’t the ‘Rocky Mountain High’s’ as much as the ability to stay on the field and play. The numbers speak volumes: .313/.400/.565 career slash line, 141 career OPS+, 5 time All-Star, 1997 NL MVP, 3 batting titles, and 7 time Gold Glove winner.
So what changed for me when it comes to Walker? His place in history. According to JAWS, Walker is the 10th best right fielder of all-time. All-Time! Just seeing who he is better than sounds like a who’s-who of right fielders: Shoeless Joe Jackson, Tony Gwynn, Ichiro Suzuki, Dwight Evans, Dave Winfield, Vladimir Guerrero, Willie Keeler, Paul Waner and Enos Slaughter, just to name a few.
Walker is 86th all-time in bWAR, 56th in bWAR for position players, 55th in on base percentage, 12th in slugging percentage, 14th in OPS, 31st in power-speed #, 38th in RE24, and 36th in Win Probability Added. Those numbers are just a sliver of what he could do; there are 7 other categories where Walker is in the Top 100 of all-time.
What makes me curious is the voting for Walker during the first seven years on the ballot; He peaked in 2012 at 22% and last year bumped up a bit to 34.1% and so far is polling at 67% this year. One has to wonder if the voters viewpoint of him would change if he hadn’t played so many games in Colorado. It took me awhile to recognize it, but Walker deserves to be with the other elite right fielders in Cooperstown.
So there you go, my 11 picks to be inducted into the IBWAA Hall of Fame. It feels more and more like the ballots are starting to weed themselves out and there is more room for voters to work with. As of this writing, four players are above the 75% required for the BBWAA’s election and when you add Harold Baines and Lee Smith’s election from the Today’s Game Committee, it should make for a busy summer in Cooperstown. But don’t worry; while the voting will commence on Tuesday, the debate will rage on.
On Sunday night, it was announced that the Today’s Game Era ballot had been voted on and they would be inducting Lee Smith and Harold Baines into the Baseball Hall of Fame this upcoming summer in Cooperstown, New York.
The 16-member committee for this ballot consisted of Hall of Famers Roberto Alomar, Bert Blyleven, Pat Gillick, Tony La Russa, Greg Maddux, Joe Morgan, John Schuerholz, Ozzie Smith and Joe Torre; major-league executives Al Avila, Paul Beeston, Andy MacPhail and Jerry Reinsdorf; and veteran media members/historians Steve Hirdt, Tim Kurkjian and Claire Smith.
Smith getting inducted was no surprise, as he had reached as high as 50.6% on the BBWAA ballot and was a borderline candidate for years, mattering on where you stood on the induction of relievers into the hall. But Baines was another story.
Baines never received more than 6.1% of support on the BBWAA ballot and is probably the definition of a player with a good career that hung around long enough to compile some good numbers. Good, but not great.
So how did Baines get in? Well, it probably helped that he had a former teammate (Alomar), a former manager (LaRussa) and a former owner (Reinsdorf) on his side. Also, Baines was always known as a good guy and a good teammate. For those within the game, that carries quite a bit of weight.
But for many of us, being a “great guy” doesn’t always qualify you for being a Hall of Famer. Cooperstown is the best of the best, and the numbers say that Baines isn’t one of the elite. But what if the hall honored those players who might not have been “the best of the best”, but were good for the game? What if there was a separate wing for those that were admired and loved outside of their accomplishments on the field? What if they included the true “characters” of the game? Maybe an award for the “nice guys” of the game?
This subject was actually broached to me last year by a friend and it was amusing because I had thought of the idea years ago. What initially sparked adding a separate wing for me was Buck O’Neil. Lets be honest: Kansas City loved Buck. He was not only a symbol of Kansas City baseball, for his ties to the Monarchs and his attendance at Royals games, but he was the benchmark of what is great about baseball in general.
Buck was friendly, cordial, and loved talking baseball with anyone who wanted to. For him it wasn’t as much about giving back to the game as sharing something he loved with others. Who doesn’t remember Buck’s appearance in the Ken Burn’s documentary “Baseball”?:
In fact, despite not being inducted at Cooperstown, Buck did give a speech at the Baseball Hall of Fame induction ceremony back in 2006 to honor the pioneers in the Negro Leagues:
Buck O’Neil might not have been one of the greatest players in history, but he was the definition of what was great about the game. It was unfortunate that while O’Neil helped honor the greats involved with the Negro Leagues, he himself had been overlooked for induction despite all he did for baseball.
Buck would pass away in late 2006 and in 2008 the Baseball Hall of Fame would honor his legacy with the creation of the Buck O’Neil Lifetime Achievement Award. A statue was dedicated to the museum and every three years a new winner is announced. This is a great honor and one worthy of a man of O’Neil’s stature and character.
Now the Hall of Fame has done its due diligence when it comes to honoring those that are just as big a part of the game as the players. The Veterans Committe, which has lineage all the way back to 1939, would put together a subcommittee to consider candidates that not only involved players, but managers, umpires and executives as well.
The hall has also handed out the Ford C. Frick award annually to honor a broadcaster for their contributions to the game. So there is no stone left unturned, starting in 1962 they would also honor a baseball writer annually, also known as the J.G. Taylor Spink award.
But it would be nice if the hall could go a step further. The Baseball Hall of Fame is a museum and it would be fitting to include some of the more charitable and “class acts” that made the game better.
There would have to be a few guidelines to follow for this to happen. For one, the inductees for this achievement should be in a separate wing from the elite players who get inducted. There would have to be a definite difference between the two so fans are aware of this separate honor.
Also, to show this is a different award it would probably be smart not to give them the same plaques as the greats of the game. Maybe instead of a plaque, present videos on each player and why they are worthy of this honor. Since this would be a different wing, it should have a different feel to it.
So who exactly should be honored for this award? The criteria would obviously be quite a bit different, as statistics wouldn’t matter as much as the footprint you leave on the game. In my vision of this honor, it would be about everything that is great for baseball. The eligible should be those that are great ambassadors, those that were genuine big-hearted and charitable that didn’t cause any issues and even the players who made the game more fun.
In my eyes, this honor would be about players like Andrew McCutchen, who has spent years giving back with his charitable work and when he was in Pittsburgh, giving back to the community. It would also be for someone like former Royals first baseman Mike Sweeney, who has put together baseball camps for kids and has always been one of the great guys in the game.
It would also include some of the players who made the game so much fun to watch. Take Bartolo Colon for example. Colon has played into his mid-40’s and has a child-like demeanor when he is out on the field that makes it easy to cheer for. The same could be said about former Detroit Tigers pitcher Mark Fidrych. “The Bird” had a short career with a number of highs and lows, but was one of the most entertaining players in baseball history.
These players make the game better and while they won’t go down as one of the “all-time greats” in baseball history, that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be honored. Some of the greats weren’t good human beings, like Ty Cobb and former Boston Red Sox owner Tom Yawkey, who both have been elected to baseball’s hallowed halls. Since this is a museum, you sometimes have to take the bad with the good, which is why it wouldn’t be such a bad thing to include more of the benevolent people involved within the game.
From every story or conversation that has been thrown out this week, Harold Baines appears to be one of the great guys that helped build a solid foundation for baseball. Maybe if a separate wing is put into the hall for guys like him, there won’t be a need to slide someone in where they might not fit. This way we could talk about why they deserve an honor instead of why they don’t.
Last week it was announced that longtime Minnesota Twins stalwart Joe Mauer would be retiring after 15 seasons in the big leagues. When it became official, a small smirk spread across my face but not for the reasons you think.
No, I don’t hate Joe Mauer; in fact it’s quite the opposite. I have immense respect for Mauer and everything he did in baseball. The smirk wasn’t even about Twins fans, as I have no issues with them either. I even feel their pain when it comes to Joe, since this is probably going to be eerily similar to what happens next year involving Alex Gordon.
No, I smirked because when I picture Mauer, I picture him getting another hit off of a Kansas City pitcher. I know it isn’t the truth, but it feels like he got a hit off of the Royals every time he came to the plate against them. So no, he isn’t hitting 1.000 off of Kansas City for his entire career, but it felt like it.
It felt like it because Mauer owned the Royals. He was that guy who came up to the plate and in my brain I instantly thought ‘he’s going to get a hit right here’; more times than not he did. Lifetime against the Royals, Joe hit .319/.401/.442 with an OPS+ of 104.
But this got me to wondering what other players have owned Royals pitching over the years. I’m sure most of us can rattle off a few player’s names that always appeared to do damage against Kansas City, but will the numbers actually agree with our initial perceptions?
I decided to set a baseline. I went with batters with 180 or more plate appearances against the Royals, since that would show a more consistent level of sustained success. While it might not be everyone’s first choice for determining success, I started with batting average:
Based on our criteria, Dustin Pedroia has the highest batting average against the Royals for batters with 180 plate appearances or more. Out of active players, Mike Trout is 9th, Jacoby Ellsbury is 10th (yes, he is technically still active), Adrian Beltre 19th and Erick Aybar 20th. A few other notables include Michael Brantley, Francisco Lindor and Ian Kinsler.
How about the most hits against Kansas City pitching?
While Hall of Famer Rod Carew leads the pack here, it’s interesting to see Victor Martinez right behind, trailing by only 11 hits. It makes more sense when you remember that Martinez played almost his entire career in the American League Central, playing for Cleveland or Detroit for 15 of his 16 seasons.
Mauer sits in third here, followed by two Paul’s, Molitor and Konerko. When I started down this path, Konerko was one of the names that instantly popped in my head, so no real surprise here.
Let’s move on to home runs:
Alex Rodriguez is a surprising winner in this category, hitting 50 career bombs against Royals pitching. Not surprising is Jim Thome in second with 49 and the dreaded Paul Konerko in third with 45 homers. For active players, Miguel Cabrera and Carlos Santana are tied with 27 long-shots, although one has moved on to the National League and the other has begun the downside of his illustrious career.
In a bit of a shock, Grady Sizemore hit 25 career home runs off of Kansas City while posting an OPS+ of 131. Maybe it’s just slipping my mind but I don’t remember Sizemore being that much of a thorn in the Royals side.
Time now for the most total bases:
‘Royal Killer’ Paul Konerko compiled the most total bases against Kansas City at 418. He is followed by Cal Ripken Jr. with 410 and then A-Rod with 378. With Martinez and Mauer retiring, the highest total on this list for an active player is Cabrera with 322, followed then by notorious villain Ian Kinsler with 263.
That leads us to the highest tOPS+ all-time against the Royals:
And the winner is….Gerald Laird? Okay, I figured at some point we would run across a name that came out of left field and we just got it. He is followed by a couple other odd names in Chris Singleton and Craig Monroe.
Diving deeper down the list, the highest active player is Dustin Pedroia at 147, and a few more notches down you get Erick Aybar at 145 and Carlos Santana at 144. With tOPS+ being an adjusted stat and not a cumulative one, it makes sense it would be the one with players that wouldn’t just pop into your head. But considering we are basing this off of more than 180 plate appearances, it is still impressive at what Laird, Singleton and Monroe did against the Royals over the years.
Finally, a look at the total offensive contribution with Runs Created:
A-Rod had the most Runs Created all-time against Kansas City with 170.9, followed by Jim Thome and Frank Thomas. Mauer is fifth with 145.4 and Konerko right behind him with 144.7. To find an active hitter you have to travel all the way down to 18th on the list, where Miguel Cabrera sits with 118.9.
In fact the next active player that currently resides in the AL Central (and that doesn’t mean current free agents, like Michael Brantley) is Jason Kipnis at 81 with 72.8. It looks like there will have to be a new crop of players to replace the guys like Mauer and Martinez who have been pouncing on Kansas City pitching for years.
So what did this experiment teach us? For one, it shows us that we don’t need numbers to know that Mauer, Konerko, Martinez, etc., were abusing the Royals all these years. The eye test didn’t betray us in this regard.
It has also showed us what the unbalanced schedule has done to skew the numbers on this list. While it’s understandable why MLB has moved away from the balanced schedule, you do wonder if some of these numbers would be different if each team didn’t play the other teams in their division 19 times each year.
The perfect example is the total hits against the Royals. Would Victor Martinez only be 11 hits behind Rod Carew if they had the balanced schedule? Probably not. Could you imagine if Carew, after all those years with the Twins and Angels (who were in the American League West with Kansas City at the time) had played the Royals 19 times a season? It’s all a matter of preference, but the shift in the schedule does make one wonder what might have been.
What it does probably tell us is that the Royals having a lot of bad pitching over the last 20 years probably helped some of these numbers as well. It also tells me I won’t miss watching Joe Mauer spray hits into the outfield against Kansas City. Joe is a true baseball treasure, but he also owned a portion of the Royals, whether David Glass was aware of it or not.
On Monday, the ballot was revealed for the Today’s Game Era, featuring a combination of players, managers and an owner who will receive consideration for induction into the Baseball Hall of Fame:
Harold Baines, Albert Belle, Joe Carter, Will Clark, Orel Hershiser, Davey Johnson, Charlie Manuel, Lou Piniella, Lee Smith and George Steinbrenner are those receiving consideration for the class of 2019. Baines, Belle, Carter, Clark, Hershiser and Smith are included for their contributions as players, while Johnson, Manuel and Piniella are included for their roles as managers. Steinbrenner, who is the only candidate that is no longer living, is nominated for his role as former Yankees owner.
Voting will be taking place next month, December 9th at the Winter Meetings and it will be interesting to see just how the voting turns out for this. If anything, there are a few close calls and some absolute no’s littering this list.
Let’s start with the players, as they will be the ones receiving the most scrutiny when the votes are tabulated. The two names that instantly peaked my interest are Will Clark and Orel Hershiser, two stars of the 1980’s and 1990’s. Clark has a pretty good resume: 137 OPS+(97th all-time), slash line of .303/.384/.497 and is 93rd all-time in OPS, 76th in Adjusted Batting Runs and Adjusted Batting Wins.
The biggest argument for Clark is not only the level at which he performed for so long (15 seasons with an OPS+ above 120, including seven consecutive seasons) but how he was able to help his team. Clark ended his career with a WPA of 46 (51st all-time) and a RE24 of 455.42 (59th all-time), numbers that show he consistently helped put his team in a situation to win.
Hershiser might have an even bigger argument for induction than Clark. While his career ERA+ (112) and ERA (3.48) speak of a ‘good but not great’ pitcher, his place in history tells a different story. Hershiser is 95th all-time in WAR for pitchers and 114th in Win Probability Added while also being one of the top pitchers of his era. If you are someone who believes in a player’s peak being a large part of their place in history, Hershiser was an elite starter for a nice seven year span. In that period, Hershiser finished in the top five in the National League Cy Young voting four times (winning in 1988) and made three All-Star appearances.
From 1985 to 1991, Hershiser posted an ERA+ of 128, an ERA of 2.78, a FIP of 3.03 and a WHIP of 1.163. Throw in that he had a stellar career in the postseason (2.59 ERA, 2.83 WPA over 132 innings) and there is at the least a discussion on whether or not Hershiser is “Hall Worthy”.
Both Clark and Hershiser are members of the Hall of Stats (HallofStats.com), granted just barely. We can’t say the same for the other players on this list: Belle just didn’t play long enough, Baines was regulated to being a DH for most of his career (and wasn’t a dominating hitter like Edgar Martinez or David Ortiz was), and Carter falls well below the standard of a Hall of Famer.
It will be interesting to see how Lee Smith manages in this vote, since he was a player who stayed on the Hall of Fame ballot up until 2017, garnering up to 50.6% of the vote back in 2012. Smith had his proponents, those that believed in the longevity and career save total as arguments for his induction.
When it comes to the managers on the list, there doesn’t appear to be a big separation between the three. Davey Johnson, Charlie Manuel and Lou Piniella all have fairly comparable winning percentages and playoff appearances and all three have been at the helm of a world championship team:
Jay Jaffe of Fangraphs.com took a look at this list and was curious as to why Jim Leyland was left off:
The inclusion of Piniella, as the top returning vote-getter, I can understand, but retaining Johnson and introducing Manuel, who spent far less time than any of the others in the dugout, while excluding Leyland, who won as many pennants as that pair combined, seems off. And it’s not like Leyland, who last managed in 2013, is a threat to return to a dugout, whereas Baker, who’s just a year removed from his last job, might still answer the phone.
This leaves us with George Steinbrenner, the former owner of the New York Yankees. It’s easy to see both sides of the argument for George, and it shouldn’t be surprising that even in death he is a polarizing figure. The argument for is simple: he revitalized a Yankee’s organization that had fallen off in the late 1960’s-early 1970’s and turned them into a juggernaut in the late 1970’s-early 1980’s. During his tenure, the Yankees won seven World Series titles and 11 pennants.
The argument against is simple: his issues with former player Dave Winfield eventually led to Steinbrenner being banned from the game, starting in mid-1990 until 1993. Add in the circus he created in New York (ie. Billy Martin, Reggie Jackson, Ed Whitson, etc.) and it would appear to be enough to leave George on the outside looking in.
If I was to take a guess as to how the voting will go, I would say there is a very good chance that no one will from this group will be making the trek to Cooperstown this upcoming summer, unless they are doing so for a vacation. Personally, it doesn’t feel like there is a candidate worthy or overlooked on this list.
That being said, I also wouldn’t be shocked to see any of the managers get the nod or even Lee Smith. Smith received the most support out of this group during his initial cycle on the BBWAA ballot and it wouldn’t surprise me to see him receive the same support moving forward. As much as I loved Will Clark and Orel Hershiser when I was a kid, they still feel like borderline Hall of Famers in my book and will probably fall short yet again.
The good news is that at the very least ‘the Hall’ is doing the right thing by giving some of these guys a second chance. A number of players fell through the crack here and while I wasn’t shocked to not see a Mark McGwire or David Cone on the list, those players feel like stronger candidates than the ones currently receiving support. We will know the fate of the hopeful soon enough, as the Winter Meetings are just a few weeks away.
On Wednesday, the National Baseball Hall of Fame got a little bit bigger as the BBWAA (Baseball Writers’ Association of America) voted in four new inductees: Trevor Hoffman, Chipper Jones, Jim Thome and Vladimir Guerrero. Add in Alan Trammell and Jack Morris and you have six induction speeches on a sunny July afternoon in Cooperstown. Meanwhile, my brethren in the IBWAA did some house cleaning as well, as we inducted six players (Chipper Jones, Jim Thome, Mike Mussina, Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds and Trevor Hoffman) into our digital Hall of Fame. In my eyes, all the players mentioned above were worthy of this honor. It is also showing a shift in the thinking of baseball writer’s across the baseball landscape.
First, let’s discuss the BBWAA voting, which almost led to a five man class in 2018:
First, it was very obvious going into Wednesday that Chipper, Vlad and Thome were locks. All three were over 90% for the polling (which was sitting at around 55% of the ballots made public) that morning. Hoffman was a bit dicier, as he was sitting around 78.2% of public ballots. It appeared on the surface that he would get in, since he fell just five votes short in 2017.
Meanwhile, Edgar Martinez came up just a bit short, despite the fact he had been polling in the 80% range for the last couple weeks. The good news is that Edgar jumped up to 70.4%, less than 5% to the promised land as he enters his final year on the ballot in 2019.
Also making ground this year on the ballot was Mike Mussina and Larry Walker. Mussina bumped up to 63.5% and Walker 34.1%. Mussina feels like a lock for induction sometime in the next couple of years, while Walker has only two more years of eligibility left. Clemens, Bonds and Curt Schilling all appeared to stay put around where they have been, so next year could be a big one for all three of them.
I was glad to see Scott Rolen and Andruw Jones get enough support to stay on the ballot, and their climb could get a bit easier over the next couple of years, since there are less Hall-worthy candidates on the horizon. The one disappointment was Johan Santana, who is a borderline candidate for the hall. If you are like me and believe strongly in WAR7 (which is the seven-year peak or that players best seven years) and notice the similarities with Sandy Koufax, then you are probably leaning toward him being in. If you believe in a long career and lots of innings for a pitcher, then you are probably against him. The one thing that most of us can agree on is he probably deserved to at least stay on the ballot and let his case be judged for a few more years. Unfortunately, he is now bumped off and like Lou Whitaker, Jim Edmonds and Kenny Lofton before him, he won’t get a fair shake of letting his case be heard.
Overall I felt like the BBWAA did an admirable job and it does appear as if the ballot logjam is starting to sort itself out. That should be a good thing for fringe candidates and those players like Mussina and Martinez who need a little extra nudge to get them over the finish line.
Now onto an organization I am part of, the IBWAA. If you want to talk about making room on the ballot for the future, I believe we took care of that this year:
Six players are entering our “Digital Hall of Fame” and I’ll be the first to admit I was a bit shocked that we elected Clemens and Bonds, just because they have been floating around on our ballot as well. This is just me throwing out a theory, but our members tend to skew a bit younger and it has felt over the last couple of years like the younger writers have less of an issue with the “Steroid Era” than the older ones. I’m sure there are different reasons for that, whether it is the lack of testing during that period making it harder to really know who did what, or feeling like the rest of baseball was able to get off scot-free while inducting then-Commissioner Bud Selig just last year. Whatever the case may be, Bonds and Clemens were joined by Chipper, Thome, Mussina and Hoffman as part of the IBWAA Class of 2018.
With six players off the ballot, that should make it easier for us to focus on some other deserving candidates next year. Schilling and Walker both took big jumps and Scott Rolen posted a nice 44.7% of the vote in his first year on the ballot. Even Santana stuck around for round two, as he got 36 votes and sits at 21.1% in his first year. With next year’s class of Mariano Rivera, Roy Halladay and Todd Helton being the main first year candidates, it should be easy for us to keep honoring players who deserve this highest honor. We also get 15 votes instead of the BBWAA’s 10, which also helps us keep players on the ballot longer. All in all, I feel like we as a group did a great job this year and I look forward to the results in 2019.
In 2013, the BBWAA voted no player over the 75% threshold, which meant a very quiet summer in Cooperstown. Luckily, the last few years have made up for that error, as the writers have voted in 16 players over the last five years. Whether you prefer a bigger Hall of Fame or a smaller one, the truth is that we have seen a lot of worthy entries over these last few years. For every Tim Raines or Edgar Martinez that have to struggle and have people preaching their cause, there are the Chipper Jones’ and Jim Thome’s that have the numbers and look the part. Baseball is better when a light can be shone on the players of year’s past that helped make this the great game that it is. For all its flaws, baseball at its pinnacle is the grandest game of them all. To get to honor those that encompass that greatness…well, that just makes this process a whole lot sweeter.
There is no greater honor in any sport than getting a plaque in the baseball Hall of Fame. I’m sure someone who believes the NFL or NBA is a greater honor will debate me on this, but there is never the sort of debate toward their hall’s as there is in baseball. That debate has grown into a fervor amongst baseball fans, writers and even players, as every one seems to have an opinion on this topic. What has made it even more intense is what we should do with players who were “suspected” of enhancement thanks to steroids and other performance enhancement drugs, and whether or not they deserve a spot in the hallowed halls of Cooperstown or left on the outside looking in. In some ways, the people who vote on this honor are the judge, jury and executioner, as testing was not done during this period so for many of the players of that era there is no definite of what they did or did not do. Even Hall of Famer Joe Morgan has spoken out on the topic recently, which stirred the pot even more. As a member of the IBWAA, this will be my fourth year of voting for ‘the Hall’ and as I have said in years past, I have no issue voting for anyone suspected for PED use, since I feel those players played within the parameters of the rules allowed at that time. I’ve long considered the Hall of Fame a museum of the game, not a church, and because of this I vote based on performance alone. Now, there are a few differences between us in the IBWAA & our brethren in the BBWAA, one of which is the players we have already inducted. Last year we inducted Vladimir Guerrero and Ivan Rodriguez, and in years past we had already voted in Edgar Martinez, so he will not show up on our ballot this year. Also, we are allowed to vote for up to 15 players, where the BBWAA can only vote for 10. Before we get to my actual votes, you can read my previous votes: Here is 2014, 2015, 2016, and 2017. Also, follow Ryan Thibodaux on Twitter. That way you can follow how the voting is going before the big announcement on January 24th. Without further ado, here are my votes for the 2018 Hall of Fame ballot.
I have voted for Bonds every year and will continue to until he is finally elected. In my eyes, this is a no-brainer, as Bonds is one of the greatest baseball players ever, not just of his era. I could rattle off all the numbers that show how great he was, but I think the best way to explain it is this way: before there was any whispers about suspected steroid use, Bonds was a 5 tool player who could literally do anything on the baseball field…and then he became an offensive juggernaut that could not be contained. The all-time home run king took that whole era to another level and it wasn’t even close. You might not like him or what he had to do to elevate his game, but I am not concerned about any of that when it comes to voting. To me, Bonds is a slam dunk pick and should already be in the Hall of Fame.
Like Bonds, Clemens is an easy pick, the greatest pitcher of his era and one of the greatest pitchers of all-time. Clemens won the Cy Young Award seven times throughout his career, and is on a list of statistics that garner him near the top of almost all pitching leader boards. Both Bonds and Clemens seem to be garnering more support, as the election of former Commissioner Bud Selig to the Hall seems to have allowed some voters to start putting an ‘x’ in the box next to their names. At one time it appeared both men would have to wait until they showed up on the Veteran’s Committee ballot before they would get elected; now we could see that wall busted through in the next couple of years.
Wagner was a seven time All-Star, twice was in the top ten of the NL Cy Young award and took home the 1999 NL Rolaids Relief Award. While he sits in 6th place all-time in saves, that doesn’t mean as much to me as his 86% conversion rate, which is close to Trevor Hoffman’s 88.8%. What does interest me is some of the deeper numbers when compared to fellow relievers. Wagner is 5th all-time for relievers in ERA+, 14th for relievers in bWAR (in fact, just under Hoffman), 4th in strikeouts for a reliever, 86th in Adjusted Pitching Runs, 93rd in Adjusted Pitching Wins, 55th in RE24, and 36th in Win Probability Added. All this was done in less than 1,000 innings, which for some is a hindrance rather than a positive. I get that relievers today aren’t used in the same scenarios as their forefathers, and because of that their innings totals will seem meek in comparison. But that is also what the role calls for nowadays and there is something to be said for compiling numbers like this in a much shorter amount of time. For Wagner, it was more about the efficiency than the longevity; Wagner came in, shut down the opposing team and was done. In some ways, Wagner and Hoffman are linked in that they both pitched about the same amount of time, in the same period and were equally efficient. Both were top of the food chain for their position and in my eyes, both should be in Cooperstown.
If there is a position that is under-represented in Cooperstown, it is third base. Only 16 third baseman are enshrined into the “Hallowed Halls” (which is the lowest of any single position) but it looks as if number 17 will be inducted this summer, as Chipper Jones feels like a slam-dunk to get voted in. When it comes to just third baseman, Chipper is ranked high among the elite at his position: 6th in WAR, 8th in WAR7 (which are a combination of his seven best seasons), 8th in JAWS (which is a combination of the previous two WAR stats), 6th in hits, 3rd in home runs, 2nd in RBI’s, 7th in on-base percentage, 4th in slugging and 9th in OPS+. In the Hall of Stats, Chipper is ranked 6th all-time at the position and considering the other numbers that feels like a fair spot for him. While it is obvious he ranks among the best at his position, that did make me curious to see where his place was in the all-time rankings of baseball history. The numbers actually tell the story of a great baseball player: 51st in career WAR (32nd for position players), 25th in offensive WAR, 54th in on-base percentage, 51st in slugging percentage, 37th in OPS, 60th in career hits, 32nd in total bases, 33rd in home runs, 34th in RBI’s, 16th in career walks (this actually surprised me a bit), 72nd in OPS+, 25th in runs created, 28th in extra base hits, and 15th in career Win Probability Added. It is easy to tell that Jones was a Hall of Famer but there is more to it than just his place in history. Jones was drafted as a shortstop by the Braves, but ended up only playing 49 games at the position in the big leagues. While Chipper is known as a third baseman (and that is where he played the most games), Jones did spend the 2002-2003 seasons out in left field, as the Braves had Vinny Castilla playing at third base. To me, this felt a bit like Kris Bryant, who has floated around for the Cubs the last few years at third base and the outfield. Jones was also a switch hitter and easily one of the best of his kind in baseball lore. In fact, Fangraphs ranked the greatest switch hitters in MLB history a few years back and Jones came in at number two, just behind Mickey Mantle and ahead of Hall of Famers Eddie Murray, Tim Raines and Roberto Alomar. But what statistic stood out to me the most in Chipper’s career? From 1996 to the end of his career in 2012, Jones never posted an OPS+ below 116. In other words, for the duration of his career, Chipper never produced an offensive season below league average (his lowest was a 108 that he posted in his rookie year of 1995). To play 19 seasons in the big leagues and never get below the league average is the definition of consistency and is just one of many numbers that prove that Chipper Jones deserves induction to the baseball Hall of Fame.
Some hitters are adored for their ability to get on base, some are praised for their mastery of putting the ball ‘where it ain’t’…and then some are hailed for power and consistency; that would be the category that Jim Thome would fall into. Thome was one of the greatest home run hitters of his era and was that middle of the lineup force that few teams wanted to mess with. While the accolades are there (five time All-Star, a Silver Slugger award, 2002 Roberto Clemente award, 2004 Lou Gehrig Memorial Award and 2006 AL Comeback Player of the Year), the numbers are the meat and potatoes of Thome’s candidacy. Thome’s rank as a first baseman is a nod to just how great he was, considering how loaded that position is throughout the course of baseball history. Thome ranks 9th in WAR for first baseman, 19th in WAR7, 10th in JAWS, 2nd in home runs, 9th in RBI’s, 8th in slugging percentage, 8th in OPS and 13th in OPS+. This really amazes me, considering Thome is dealing with such classic first baseman as Gehrig, Foxx, Mize, Thomas and Pujols, just to name a few. Thome ranks 10th all-time for the position in the Hall of Stats, 96th all-time. Much like Chipper, his model of consistency was amazing. Outside of the 2005 season (where he appeared in only 59 games due to injury), he never posted an OPS+ below league average, and the lowest he posted in a season where he played at least 120 games was 117. In fact, he posted 10 seasons (10!) where he had an OPS+ of 150 or more. I’m a big proponent of where player’s rank all-time when it comes to their Hall candidacy, and Thome crosses those off with flying colors. He ranks 84 in career WAR (54th for position players), 44th in offensive WAR, 51st in on-base percentage, 23rd in slugging percentage, 18th in OPS, 41st in total bases, 8th in career home runs, 26th in RBI’s, 7th in walks, 47th in OPS+, 24th in runs created, 23rd in extra base hits, 5th all-time in at bats per home run, 21st in RE24, and 38th in Win Probability Added. While Thome wasn’t a great defensive player, teams weren’t employing him for his glove; it was all about his bat. But there is always one more thing that compels us to cheer for Jim Thome on his journey to Cooperstown: Thome might be one of the nicest guys that has ever played professional baseball. Don’t just take my word, take the word of Cleveland Indians President Chris Antonetti:
“The thing that stands out to me about Jim is just who he is — day-in, day-out,” Indians general manager Chris Antonetti told Rumblings. “It’s the way he treats the ushers and the parking-lot attendants, not just how great a guy he is in the clubhouse. He treats every person he meets with respect and dignity. And I’m not sure I can give anybody a better compliment.”
For those of you that wouldn’t vote for a Bonds or a Schilling for how they have acted in the past, Thome would be your measuring stick for the other side of the pendulum. A vote for Thome is not only for the great numbers that rank among the best in history. No, a vote for Thome is one for a guy who was a Hall of Fame player AND person. I’m pretty sure Thome is another lock to be giving a speech in upstate New York this upcoming summer.
Over the last few years I have gone back and forth on Gary Sheffield and his candidacy for the Hall of Fame. Maybe it was because he bounced around from team to team, or the fact that he bounced between the infield and the outfield throughout his career. Either way, it was easy to leave Sheff out of the conversation and feel like he was on the cusp of greatness. But when I finally broke down the numbers, it really felt like his case has been one of the most overlooked when it comes to the hall. Sheffield played right field more than any other position, so I first stacked his numbers against the others at that position. Sheffield is 19th in WAR for right fielders, just below Shoeless Joe Jackson and Dave Winfield. He ranks a bit lower on his peak, as he sits 24th in WAR7, above Hall of Famers Winfield, Chuck Klein, Willie Keeler, and Enos Slaughter. He is also at 24th in JAWS while 7th in home runs, 8th in RBI’s, 12th in OPS and 15th in OPS+. Now, right fielders are well represented in the hall (24 to be exact) so Sheffield holds his own in the position, even if he is slightly below the elite level. But as I mentioned earlier, I’m a big proponent of where players stack up all-time and that is where Sheffield shines. He is 35th in offensive WAR (obviously his defense dragged him down a bit in the WAR category), 88th in on-base percentage, 76th in slugging percentage, 58th in OPS, 69th in hits, 34th in total bases, 26th in home runs, 28th in RBI’s, 21st in walks, 78th in OPS+, 26th in runs created, 39th in extra base hits, 25th in RE24, and 16th in Win Probability Added. I’m sure the fact he played 22 seasons helped him compile a decent amount of those numbers, but he also was able to stay healthy and be a consistent run producer for almost the entirety of his career. Sheffield had six seasons with an OPS+ of 150 or more and was above league average for all but two years of his career (one was his rookie year and the other was his age 39 season). So what has hurt Sheffield’s case? I’m sure a few people would mention that his name was in the Mitchell Report and had been linked to PED’s in the past. Like I mentioned, that doesn’t affect my voting. But the other concern was his defense. It didn’t really matter whether he was at shortstop, third base or the outfield, he just wasn’t a great fielder. In the past I’ve not voted for Jeff Kent because of his defense and I didn’t vote for Omar Vizquel this year because of his lack of offense. So what was the difference with Sheff? His offense was so good that it crossed out any issues I had with his defense. I’m also a “Big Hall” guy and feel like Sheffield was one of the great hitters of his era. I can understand if someone leaves him off (he is a fringe guy in this regard), but for me he was far enough above the line to be considered one of the greats.
When thinking about Mike Mussina, what is the first thing that springs to mind? Is it his start in Game 7 of the 2003 ALCS? Or maybe his use of the knuckle-curve, which was his out pitch? Or does nothing specific pop into your mind when hearing Mussina’s name? I sometimes wonder if those of us on the Mussina bandwagon would have to praise his career if he had been even just a tad bit flashier.What I end up realizing is that part of what made him so great was that he wasn’t flashy and just went out for 18 seasons and performed as a top of the rotation starter in that span. There are no Cy Young awards on his mantle, but there are numbers that back up his greatness. Mussina has the 24th best bWAR for pitchers, 19th in strikeouts, 22nd best strikeout to walk ratio, 17th best adjusted pitching runs, 21st best adjusted pitching wins, 9th best RE24, and 10th best Win Probability Added. Mussina was that guy who you could count on for a big win or just to go out and save the bullpen from being overused. Mussina jumped up to 51.8% of the ballots in 2017 and it appears he is inching closer to the 75% he needs to reach the Hall. One of the pitchers that Mussina’s stats are comparable to is another former Oriole, Jim Palmer. While Palmer might have the accolades that Mussina does not have, the one thing in common is that both pitchers deserve to be in the baseball Hall of Fame.
There might not be a bigger lightning rod on the Hall of Fame ballot than Schilling, who has caught quite a bit of scorn for his behavior on social media within the last couple of years. While I might not agree with his politics, I do realize it has nothing to do with his candidacy in the Hall and justly had no qualms in voting for him yet again this year. Schilling’s numbers speak of a top-notch starter: 26th all-time in pitchers bWAR, 15th in strikeouts, 3rd best strikeout to walk ratio, 18th best Win Probability Added and 46th best ERA+. Those are just his regular season numbers; toss in the postseason and you have a surefire Hall of Famer. Schilling has rubbed many a writer the wrong way (and by no means do I feel sorry for Curt; he would probably be better off learning when to keep quiet) and because of that his vote totals went down last year, down 7.3 %, finishing at 45%. I might not like Schilling the person, but the baseball player was one hell of a pitcher out on the diamond. For that, he has my vote.
For the third consecutive season, I voted for Trevor Hoffman. There has been plenty of debate on whether or not closers should be judged on a different criteria than most other positions and to a small degree I get some of the trepidation. Closers today don’t always face the strongest part of the lineup and it seems odd to have your best bullpen arm only throw an inning or less an outing. The thing to remember though is that “the closer” is still a position and if you excel at it for 16 seasons, you should be rewarded justly. In some ways, the Hoffman argument is very similar to Tim Raines; Raines was the second best leadoff hitter of his time, behind another Hall of Famer in Rickey Henderson. Hoffman was the second best closer of his, behind future Hall honoree Mariano Rivera. Hoffman not only shouldn’t be punished for not being Rivera, but was about as consistent as one can be. During his career, Hoffman posted 15 consecutive seasons of 20+ saves (and I hate the save stat, but this is still very impressive) and had an 88.8% save conversion rate, which within itself is almost insane when you consider the amount of save opportunities he received in his career.Throw in his lethal change-up that was almost as deadly as Rivera’s cutter, and you have a one of the best relievers of all-time. He might be no Mariano Rivera, but then again who is? What Hoffman is though is a Hall of Fame closer.
Many voters have said the difference to them between Bonds or Clemens and Rafael Palmeiro or Ramirez is that the latter tested positive for performance enhancing drugs and was justly suspended. In fact, last year when I started filling out my ballot, I paused on Ramirez and had to really stop and think of which direction I wanted to go. Like I have said, my voting is performance based but an actual suspension (and for Manny it was multiple suspensions) muddies the water a bit. After much contemplation, I went ahead and voted for Manny since he had put up Hall of Fame numbers before the suspensions. While Ramirez wasn’t a stellar defender (and that is evidenced by his career bWAR of 69.2), offensively he was a juggernaut. Manny posted a career line of .312/.411/.585 with 555 career home runs, and an OPS+ of 154. I firmly believe he could hit blindfolded and still produce league average numbers, as he was that good of a hitter. Manny also contributed during the playoffs, where he hit .285/.394/.544 with 29 home runs and 78 RBI’s over 111 postseason games, all fairly on pace to his regular season averages. The awards are all there for him as he was a 12 time All-Star, 2 time Hank Aaron award winner, 2002 AL batting title, 2004 World Series MVP, and 9 time Silver Slugger award winner. If that isn’t impressive enough, the numbers are quite gaudy: 32nd all-time in oWAR, 32nd in On-Base Percentage, 8th in Slugging Percentage, 8th in OPS, 29th in total bases, 31st in doubles, 15th in home runs, 18th in RBI’s, 28th in OPS+, 21st in runs created, 17th in Adjusted Batting Runs, 20th in Adjusted Batting Wins, 16th in extra base hits, 11th in RE24, and 23rd in Win Probability Added. Those are Hall of Fame numbers and most of that accumulated before he tested positive for anything. Would I hold it against anyone for not voting for him because of the suspensions? Nope. I get it.But for me, Ramirez has long been a Hall of Famer; the only thing those suspensions did was tarnish the perception of him, which is unfortunate. Instead of people remembering Manny for his child-like antics or immense hitting, he will be branded a cheater. He has no one else to blame for that, but I still felt like he had earned my vote, scarlet letter and all.
If there is a player I voted for that I feel others will look past on first glance when they absolutely shouldn’t, it’s Scott Rolen. I mentioned earlier how under-represented the position of third base is and voting for both Chipper and Rolen would go a long way toward making up some much-needed ground. While Chipper’s case mostly lies on his offense, Rolen’s leans a bit more toward his defense. While the defensive metrics still feel a bit like a work in progress, there is no denying that he was an elite defender. Rolen sits 6th all-time in total zone runs as a third baseman, 32nd for range factor/9 innings for a third baseman and is second in defensive runs saved as a third sacker since 2002. Rolen was 48th all-time in defensive WAR, an eight-time Gold Glove winner and outside of maybe Adrian Beltre, was considered the elite defender at the position during his day. Now, defense alone doesn’t get you in the hall, otherwise someone like Mark Belanger would have a nice little plaque. Luckily for Rolen, his offense was stellar as well. The stats don’t speak as a world beater as much as a consistent performer throughout his 17 year career; 99th all-time in WAR (67th for position players), 51st in career doubles, 74th in extra base hits and 104th in Win Probability Added. Like I said, not breaking any records but I doubt many would expect these kind of footprints stepping into the statistical records of baseball history. But to truly honor Rolen’s greatness, all you have to do is view his place in third basemen all-time. Rolen sits 10th for third basemen all-time in WAR, 14th in WAR7, and 10th in JAWS. If you believe in those numbers as much as I do, you consider Rolen one of the greatest third baseman in history…but there is more. When considering the other players at his position, he is 6th in doubles, 15th in home runs, 14th in RBI’s, 14th in slugging percentage, and 11th in OPS. To top it all off, the Hall of Stats has him listed as a 142 Hall Rating, 85th all-time overall and 8th among third baseman. In other words, he was great and totally deserves this honor. I really wish Rolen was getting more support this year, since I really feel like he is the third base equivalent of Alan Trammell. Great numbers, especially the more you dive into them but overshadowed by his peers who played at the same time. It would be great to see Rolen and Trammell get inducted together; unfortunately, it appears Rolen will have to wait for his honor. At some point he will get his acknowledgement, it’s just a matter of how long that takes to happen.
There are so many factors when considering players for the Hall of Fame, and everyone’s criteria is different, especially since every player is a different case. Some of my main factors are placement on the all-time leaderboard, consistency, and being elite at your position. But what about longevity, you might be asking? While it can be a factor, I’ve always leaned more toward being great for a longer period, not just length of ones career. In other words, I strongly lean toward the seven-year peak, or WAR7, which defines a player’s best seven WAR years of his career. With that in mind, it was hard to say no to Johan Santana, a player who I’m sure some will say didn’t do enough in his career. I get that and even at first I wasn’t sold that he had performed good enough to deserve the honor. But breaking down the numbers showed while shorter than most, he packed a lot of great into his 12 year career. Let’s start with his ranking among starting pitchers, since that is really where the conversation begins. Santana ranks 100th in WAR, 63rd in WAR7 and 86th in JAWS. It’s interesting to mention JAWS in these conversations, as the man who created it, Jay Jaffe, actually has debated himself just where Santana stands in the pantheon of history:
From an advanced metrics standpoint, Santana is obviously short of the WAR-based career, peak and JAWS standards, but he outdoes many big-name Hall of Famers. His 51.4 career WAR (including offense) is tied for 102nd all time but beats that of 11 enshrined pitchers, including Sandy Koufax (49.0), Dean (44.9), and Catfish Hunter (41.4), not to mention Morris (44.1). His 44.8 peak score, which is tied with Dave Stieb for 61st, is higher than 25 of the 62 (or 26 of 63 if you include Morris), and his 48.1 JAWS, which ranks 85th, tops 15 enshrinees (plus Morris), including Koufax (47.5), Whitey Ford (46.0), Dean and Bob Lemon (both 43.9), and Hunter (38.3).
So despite his short career, Santana has managed to wedge himself into interesting company when it comes to some of the advanced metrics. I was interested to see where he placed when it comes to ERA+, and he did not disappoint, sitting in 16th place all-time at 136. But where I really wanted to check Santana was a comparison to Koufax, since both were great for a number of years and both retired at a younger age due to injuries. So here are some comparisons between the two:
When it comes to WAR, Santana trumps Koufax, 51.4 to 49.0.
For their seven-year peak, Koufax beats Santana, 46.1 to 44.8.
Now for JAWS, Santana slides by Koufax, 48.1 to 47.5.
Since both pitchers had 12 year careers, I thought I would look at some of the other stats and see where they stand. Koufax easily beats Santana in ERA, WHIP, Hits per 9, Strikeouts per 9, and Strikeouts, while Santana beats him in Strikeout to Walk Ratio.
Granted they played in different times, when starting pitchers were used differently, but there really doesn’t appear to be a huge gap between the two players overall. So then I ask the question: if you feel Koufax is a surefire Hall of Famer (which I’m pretty sure no one is arguing), then why isn’t Santana? To me he is, which is why I voted for him. The voting has not been going well for him so far (he is polling at 1.3% so far with 46.9% of the ballots known) and it appears he will fall off the ballot for next year. It’s unfortunate, because he really feels like a guy who should be getting a longer look. Instead, you have to hope the Modern Baseball Era committee will give him a longer look when that times comes. To quote Neil Young, “It’s better to burn out, than to fade away”.
This was the second year I voted for Walker and my take on him seemed to be a bit different from a lot of folks. For many, the fact that Walker played a large chunk of his home games in Coors Field (Walker was a Rockie from 1995 to 2004) seemed to deter voters from placing a vote for him; I had no issue with that, since I knew he hit on the road almost as well as he did at home. No, my issue with him was injuries, as he had 7 seasons of less than 130 games, 12 of less than 140. Walker’s issue wasn’t the ‘Rocky Mountain High’s’ as much as the ability to stay on the field and play. The numbers speak volumes: .313/.400/.565 career slash line, 141 career OPS+, 5 time All-Star, 1997 NL MVP, 3 batting titles, and 7 time Gold Glove winner. So what changed for me when it comes to Walker? His place in history. According to JAWS, Walker is the 10th best right fielder of all-time. All-Time! Just seeing who he is better than sounds like a who’s-who of right fielders: Shoeless Joe Jackson, Tony Gwynn, Ichiro Suzuki, Dwight Evans, Dave Winfield, Vladimir Guerrero, Willie Keeler, Paul Waner and Enos Slaughter, just to name a few. Walker is 86th all-time in bWAR, 56th in bWAR for position players, 55th in on base percentage, 12th in slugging percentage, 14th in OPS, 31st in power-speed #, 38th in RE24, and 36th in Win Probability Added. Those numbers are just a sliver of what he could do; there are 7 other categories where Walker is in the Top 100 of all-time. What makes me curious is the voting for Walker during the first six years on the ballot; He peaked in 2012 at 22% and last year bumped up a bit to 21.9%. One has to wonder if the voters viewpoint of him would change if he hadn’t played so many games in Colorado. It took me awhile to recognize it, but Walker deserves to be with the other elite right fielders in Cooperstown.
So there you go, my 13 picks to be inducted into the IBWAA Hall of Fame. One player that could get my vote next year is Andruw Jones. I reluctantly left him off this year, as I’m not 100% sold on him being one of the elite, but he is one that I did heavily consider during this process. One other player that fell quite a bit short was Omar Vizquel. There are those that believe his defense is enough to get him in. Unfortunately, his offense was more than lacking: a career OPS+ of 82 and only 45.3 WAR in his career shows that his defense was not enough to get my vote. 2019 should be interesting, as a number of big names will pop up on the ballot: Mariano Rivera, Roy Halladay, Todd Helton, Andy Pettitte, Lance Berkman and Roy Oswalt will all be on the list. It’s probably a good thing that it looks like as many as five players could be inducted this year, as a number of worthy candidates will be added next year. Don’t worry; while the voting will commence on Wednesday, the debate will rage on.
A few weeks back, the Modern Baseball Era Committee announced their results for the 2018 Hall of Fame election, where Jack Morris and Alan Trammell will be joining whomever will be voted in by the BBWAA later on next month. While the result wasn’t surprising, I am struck with a tinge of excitement and frustration when it comes these election results, both by who got in and who didn’t.
First, I was elated that Alan Trammell will be in the Hall. I came around a bit late to just how great Trammell was but felt really strongly that he deserved to be in the Hall a few years back. Here is a snippet of my argument for him back in 2015:
The argument for Trammell though outweighs a lot of the negatives; Trammell has a career WAR of 70.4, which makes him 94th all-time and 63rd amongst position players. To go a step further, Trammell has a career dWAR of 22.0, which places him 34th all-time.
Trammell is listed as the 12th best shortstop according to the Hall of Stats (hallofstats.com) and has a Hall Rating of 143 (100 is deemed Hall worthy). Trammell played in an era of Cal Ripken, Jr. and Ozzie Smith and while he wasn’t quite at their level, he was close and even beat Cal out for the Gold Glove four times. What is even more interesting is going back and comparing his numbers to Derek Jeter as Joe Posnanski did a few years ago:
Joe Posnanski has made the argument that if you are of the belief that Derek Jeter is a Hall of Famer, then you should compare his numbers with Trammell’s. Joe points out just how close Jeter and Trammell were as players, with Jeter holding a slight edge over Alan offensively, while Trammell was easily a better defender.
Trammell really felt like a player who could have gained momentum if more voters had digested his numbers. Instead, the highest he reached on the ballot was 40.9% (back in 2016) and one does have to wonder if the constant logjam of only being able to vote for ten players really hurt him in the long run. The good news is that his peers corrected this injustice and he will be claiming his rightful place in Cooperstown this summer.
Then there is Jack Morris. There is really no easy way to put this than to just say I don’t feel he is a Hall of Famer. Did he have moments of greatness? Obviously. He is viewed by many as the greatest pitcher of the 1980’s, which is easy to see when looking at stats like strike outs and wins. But when digging deeper he is 65th in ERA+ (league and ballpark adjusted) in the decade and 12th in bWAR for pitchers. It gets even dicier when you start digging through the all-time rankings. According to the Hall of Stats, Morris is 165th among pitchers all-time and has a Hall Ranking of 77, well below the necessary 100 to be “Hall Worthy”. In fact, over an 18 year career, Morris has only 44.2 WAR, which roughly averages out to 2.45 Wins Above Replacement a year. The truth is that much like Bill Mazeroski, Morris’ greatness is defined by one classic moment: Game 7 of the 1991 World Series, where he pitched 10 innings of shutout baseball and led the Twins to a World Championship over the Braves. It’s an iconic moment, but unfortunately for Morris it is not a complete representation of his career. The issue with putting him into the Hall is simple; the numbers don’t back up what the memory recalls. It might just be better to let Jay Jaffe of Sports Illustrated explain:
While Morris won 254 games for the Tigers, Twins, Blue Jays and Indians in his 18-year career—the 43rd highest total in history and seventh among those outside the Hall—his win total is a reflection of the great work of his teammates. He got excellent support from his defense, which included Trammell and his longtime double play partner Lou Whitaker, in the form of a .272 batting average on balls in play, 14 points better than league average. Relative to his leagues, the offensive support he received was six percent better than average (better than 41 of the 62 other Hall starters), while his rate of run prevention was just five percent better than league average. Among Hall of Famers, his 105 ERA+ tops only those of Catfish Hunter (104) and Rube Marquard (103). By comparison, Red Ruffing, whose 3.80 ERA was previously the highest among Hall of Fame starters, had a 109 ERA+, as he pitched during a higher-scoring era (1924-47).
In other words, Morris being in the Hall of Fame redefines greatness:
Still, his election lowers the bar for Hall of Fame pitchers and serves as a slight to numerous contemporaries such as Bret Saberhagen, Dave Stieb, Dwight Gooden, Orel Hershiser and David Cone. Win totals aside, all have far fuller résumés than Morris from a Hall standpoint, better run prevention combined with Cy Young awards and their own shares of records and postseason heroics. They now deserve an equally thorough airing in this context, particularly in light of the scarcity of viable starting pitcher candidates in the coming years.
This is not to say I wish ill on Morris; personally I like the guy and believe he has handled all the arguments about his Hall of Fame case like a champ. I just don’t personally feel he should be sitting among the greats of the game. The one silver lining to this is we can now be done with the Morris argument; it no longer matters since the Modern Baseball Era Committee made sure he is getting a plaque.
While Trammell felt like a step forward and Morris felt like a slight step back, the fact Marvin Miller was not elected just felt like a slap in the face. Miller is the former executive director of the Major League Baseball Players Association and was the driving force behind free agency in baseball. Without Miller, the players would probably never make the kind of money and have the freedom they have today. Once again, Jaffe said it best:
Miller, who oversaw the game’s biggest change since integration by dismantling the reserve clause and therefore shifting the century-old balance of power from the owners to the players, is the candidate with the strongest case of any individual outside Cooperstown, and perhaps the strongest case of any non-player in the game’s history.
It really surprises me that a committee of what was mostly former players didn’t vote in the guy who has had possibly one of the biggest effects on their career when it comes to the ability to make market value money. Hopefully this mistake will be rectified in the very near future.
The one thing this recent vote proves is that it just isn’t a perfect process. Whether it is the new committee or the BBWAA, this is a system where most of the voters are doing their due diligence to get it right. For every slam dunk like Ken Griffey Jr., there is an Alan Trammell who falls through the cracks. While I might not feel Morris is deserving, I was happy to see Ted Simmons (who I feel is deserving) fall just one vote shy of being added to this group. As long as the games continue to be played, the Hall of Fame debates will continue to be discussed. The fact that baseball is constantly trying to get this right should tell you that everything is moving in a forward direction, just possibly not at the speed everyone would hope for.
I received my IBWAA Hall of Fame ballot in my inbox yesterday. I look forward to it every year, as it is an honor to be able to vote for players I feel are worthy of baseball’s highest honor. It also gives me the opportunity to really dive into the numbers, or as my wife calls it “fall down the statistic rabbit hole”. You will see that article in about a months time, where I breakdown my votes and why I voted the way I did. Since I occasionally get asked this, in the IBWAA we do things a bit differently than the boys and girls over at the BBWAA. We have a number of guys who have been voted in (Vlad Guerrero, Edgar Martinez) that the BBWAA still has on their ballot. We are also able to vote for 15 players instead of the 10 the BBWAA are left with. Finally, we don’t have a former player like Joe Morgan send us a letter, trying to sway our vote with arrogant confidence and ignorant hubris…and for that I am grateful.
If you aren’t aware(or maybe in a cave), Joe Morgan sent out a letter a few weeks back, hoping to veer the writers of the BBWAA away from voting for players linked to steroid use. If you want to read the entire letter, here it is:
Teams lobby us to get their players into the HOF. This email from Joe Morgan arrived this AM to keep steroid users out… pic.twitter.com/BkLPJ8NUTK
Now, I’m not going to get into a huge debate over the Hall of Fame or steroid use in baseball; I have done that so much over the years that I’m just bored with it and it just seems to agitate me. I will tell you that if you want my opinion on the Hall, read this; I wrote this a few years back and it pretty much encompasses my feelings on “cheaters” in the Hall. So I’m not going to get into a big debate about steroid use and Cooperstown. But…I do have a few comments about what Joe said and just who Joe is speaking for.
First, let’s start with Joe’s comment about those linked to steroid use:
We hope the day never comes when known steroid users are voted into the Hall of Fame. They
cheated. Steroid users don’t belong here.
I hate to tell Joe, but I’m pretty positive there is someone (or likely more than one) in the Hall who used steroids. Oh yeah…Mickey Mantle took steroids. So right there, you have a player in those “hallowed halls” that falls below Morgan’s standard for Cooperstown. Pretty sure you won’t catch ol’ Joe looking to pull “The Mick” and his plaque.
Players who failed drug tests, admitted using steroids, or were identified as users in Major League
Baseball’s investigation into steroid abuse, known as the Mitchell Report, should not get in. Those
are the three criteria that many of the players and I think are right.
Look, there is a some validity to the Mitchell Report but lets not act like it is a 100% guilty verdict. That is just someone wanting to believe guilt without the proof.
Now, I recognize there are players identified as users on the Mitchell Report who deny they were
users. That’s why this is a tricky issue. Not everything is black and white – there are shades of gray
here. It’s why your job as a voter is and has always been a difficult and important job. I have faith in
your judgment and know that ultimately, this is your call.
Wait, so Joe knows the Mitchell Report is probably not 100% accurate, yet earlier wants voters to use that report as a template? Come on Joe…
But it still occurs to me that anyone who took body-altering chemicals in a deliberate effort to cheat
the game we love, not to mention they cheated current and former players, and fans too, doesn’t
belong in the Hall of Fame. By cheating, they put up huge numbers, and they made great players
who didn’t cheat look smaller by comparison, taking away from their achievements and consideration for the Hall of Fame. That’s not right.
Body-altering chemicals? You mean like performance enhancers? So players who used amphetamines, right? Because, if we are being honest, amphetamines are enhancing a players performance…and Greenies were used in baseball up until they started testing for amphetamines back in 2006. Greenies were prevalent in the game for years and were widely used during Morgan’s playing days. In fact, players like Hank Aaron & Willie Mays have both been linked to amphetamines over the years…and no one is asking those two to leave Cooperstown (nor should they).
It’s gotten to the point where Hall of Famers are saying that if steroid users get in, they’ll no longer
come to Cooperstown for Induction Ceremonies or other events. Some feel they can’t share a stage
with players who did steroids. The cheating that tainted an era now risks tainting the Hall of Fame
too. The Hall of Fame means too much to us to ever see that happen. If steroid users get in, it will
divide and diminish the Hall, something we couldn’t bear.
Does this include Gaylord Perry? Is he appalled by the cheating?
I care about how good a player was or what kind of numbers he put up; but if a player did steroids,
his integrity is suspect; he lacks sportsmanship; his character is flawed; and, whatever contribution
he made to his team is now dwarfed by his selfishness.
So when do we point out the selfishness of baseball for allowing steroids to be used all those years? The owners? The GM’s? Bud Selig? I’m sure their selfishness won’t allow them to return all the money they received from fans flooding the ballparks during this period. You can put some of the blame on the players, Joe, but there is enough blame to go all the way around.
Steroid users knew they were taking a drug that physically improved how they played. Taking
steroids is a decision. It’s the deliberate act of using chemistry to change how hard you hit and throw by changing what your body is made of.
See “Greenies” from earlier.
I and other Hall of Famers played hard all our lives to achieve what we did. I love this game and am
proud of it. I hope the Hall of Fame’s standards won’t be lowered with the passage of time.
For over eighty years, the Hall of Fame has been a place to look up to, where the hallowed halls
honor those who played the game hard and right. I hope it will always remain that way.
Honestly, baseball has never been a pure game and never will. If I’m being completely honest, when I first read this letter, it felt sanctimonious and hypocritical. Reading it again doesn’t make me change my mind. In fact, it just further cements my initial thoughts of the ignorance in Joe’s words…and how Joe is being used as a puppet.
Don’t get me wrong; I totally think Joe Morgan believes the words he wrote in this letter. But I also believe that what he wrote was allowed to be sent because the people on the board for the Hall of Fame and those involved agree with this sentiment. I also feel this is a direct reaction to seeing Barry Bonds’ and Roger Clemens’ vote total moving upward these last couple years. The honest truth is that testing for performance enhancing drugs was not being done when these players were putting up those “tainted numbers” that Joe mentioned. Maybe it’s just me, but since baseball wasn’t testing and those involved seemed okay with it continuing (that was until congress stepped in to put a halt to it), it feels self-righteous to then turn around and punish the players and no one else (including the true villain in this, Bud Selig). Luckily, the letter appears to have angered many a writer in the BBWAA and it makes one wonder if Bonds’ and Clemens’ total will continue to rise. As a member of the IBWAA, we don’t have to worry about any of this mess. I don’t expect a letter from Howard Cole telling us about “hallowed grounds” and “flawed character”. I thank Howard for that, as he appears to “get it”. I’m still going to enjoy the Cooperstown inductions next summer, as I love watching some of the best players in the history of the game get to celebrate their career in the best way possible. The real taint on the Hall of Fame is those involved who try to move the chess pieces to their liking by ignoring a section of history. History is exactly what it is, a part of the past. If you don’t ignore it, you aren’t likely to repeat it again. Now, it appears it’s time for me to go turn in my IBWAA ballot…
The baseball world was shocked on Tuesday by the death of former Toronto and Philadelphia pitcher Roy “Doc” Halladay in a plane crash off the Florida coast. Halladay was only 40 years old and he is expected to be a first ballot Hall of Famer when he is eligible for induction in 2019. The numbers don’t lie about Halladay’s greatness: two-time Cy Young award winner, 41st best WAR all-time for pitchers, 69th all-time in strike outs, 24th best K/BB ratio, 40th best ERA+, and 14th best WPA. He was a durable ace in a time period where starters didn’t finish what they started; Halladay led the league in complete games seven times and threw over 200 innings in a season eight times. Halladay’s closest comparisons are Zack Greinke, Dwight Gooden and Justin Verlander, three pitchers who have all been Cy Young winners and had long, productive careers. But while the numbers speak of greatness, the baseball world’s response to his passing speaks of how great he was as a human being, not just what he did on a baseball diamond:
When Roy threw his perfect game, he bought about 60 watches to commemorate the occasion each engraved and personalized. The case had a plaque that read "Couldn't have done it without you. Thanks" – Roy Halladay#FirstClass#LeadersLead#R.I.P.Doc pic.twitter.com/hoXNoAIFDX
Beyond gifted, but never spoke of it. Inspired with action, not words. Never compromised, backed down, or judged. Always respectful. Ever-kind. Genuinely humble. Quiet. Honest. Sincere. Caring. A Timeless example.
I could keep going with the tweets and the numbers, but you get the point. Roy Halladay was everything that was great about baseball. He’s a guy that was easy to root for and one your kids should be looking up to. Rather than writing a column looking back at the greatness of Halladay (and trust me when I say that article will happen when he is going into the Hall of Fame), I thought we could watch some of his greatness on the mound:
It’s amazing how watching a couple of videos can remind someone of just how great Halladay truly was. I hope younger players not only study how he pitched, but also the work ethic that went with it. Roy Halladay was an elite pitcher that didn’t just blow batters away. Location and control were his friends and helped him be more than just another good pitcher. I can only hope baseball receives more ‘Doc’ Halladay’s in their future; he was everything that is great about this game we love. Thanks, Doc. You will be missed.