The Hall of Fame Ballot / big Hall-small Hall / Hall is broken-unbroken / WAR stinks-doesn't stink / BBWAA stinks-doesn't stink thread

[big dog]

Jeff Bagwell

Craig Biggio

Randy Johnson

Pedro Martinez

Lee Smith

John Smoltz

Alan Trammell

 

[Willihammer]

Did you look at stolen bases, or just ignore that? HR, what is the obsession with HR exactly?

 

His numbers are excellent, excellent. 

 

Top 20 in WAR for his era......ahead of Biggio, Gwynn, Piazza, Boggs, and lots of other players. He's hurt by his LF defense, for sure. but yes, he's a HoF player.

 

http://hardballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/12/05/the-hall-of-fame-case-for-tim-raines/

First off, I admit Raines was before my time and I never actually watched him play (that I can remember), so I am going just off his BB-Ref page.

 

His SB's are impressive but in Raines era they were worth, according to the weighted values of the 80s, just .2 runs, or roughly 1/11th of a home run. So even with 808 steals that's not such a huge amount of production in itself. And then there are the caught steals which obviously have a negative run value. They net to about 100 runs. I'm sure there's more value that SB/CS totals don't capture that add to his impact on the bases. On the other hand, that speed didn't seem to translate to very good or even above average OF defense, strangely.

 

edit: As for your link, I don't like going down the road of comparing candidate-x with player-y already in the Hall. Even in Gwynn's case, he was selected in 2007. The advanced stats we used to compare players weren't as trusted or accepted back then. Batting average and RBIs still carried a lot of weight which we now know to be pretty meaningless. It seems disingenuous to make a sabermetric argument for Raines and then compare him to someone like Gwynn who was selected primarily for his batting average.

[biggentleben]

First off, I admit Raines was before my time and I never actually watched him play (that I can remember), so I am going just off his BB-Ref page.

 

His SB's are impressive but in Raines era they were worth, according to the weighted values of the 80s, just .2 runs, or roughly 1/11th of a home run. So even with 808 steals that's not such a huge amount of production in itself. And then there are the caught steals which obviously have a negative run value. They net to about 100 runs. I'm sure there's more value that SB/CS totals don't capture that add to his impact on the bases. On the other hand, that speed didn't seem to translate to very good or even above average OF defense, strangely.

 

edit: As for your link, I don't like going down the road of comparing candidate-x with player-y already in the Hall. Even in Gwynn's case, he was selected in 2007. The advanced stats we used to compare players weren't as trusted or accepted back then. Batting average and RBIs still carried a lot of weight which we now know to be pretty meaningless. It seems disingenuous to make a sabermetric argument for Raines and then compare him to someone like Gwynn who was selected primarily for his batting average.

 

Gwynn's election had a very little bit to do with his batting average.  He was, without much debate, the most skilled hitter since Ted Williams with the bat.  He was also a tremendous athlete that provided a ton of speed at the top of the order when he entered the league.  It's pretty universal of pitchers that faced him that the toughest hitter they faced in their entire career was Tony Gwynn, regardless of when in his career (or theirs) they matched up with him.  Add on top of that that he was about the most media friendly player in the recent past, and you have an easy vote for BBWAA.

[Willihammer]

Gwynn's election had a very little bit to do with his batting average.  He was, without much debate, the most skilled hitter since Ted Williams with the bat.  He was also a tremendous athlete that provided a ton of speed at the top of the order when he entered the league.  It's pretty universal of pitchers that faced him that the toughest hitter they faced in their entire career was Tony Gwynn, regardless of when in his career (or theirs) they matched up with him.  Add on top of that that he was about the most media friendly player in the recent past, and you have an easy vote for BBWAA.

Universal? Really?

 

FWIW I would have voted for Gwynn too, based on his 8 batting titles which seems like a more concrete way of capturing Gwynn's otherworldly excellence at hitting (even if its not the best stat for measuring his overall production or offensive value).

[biggentleben]

Universal? Really?

 

FWIW I would have voted for Gwynn too, based on his 8 batting titles which seems like a more concrete way of capturing Gwynn's otherworldly excellence at hitting (even if its not the best stat for measuring his overall production or offensive value).

 

Every interview of a pitcher who faced him has identified him as either that pitcher's toughest batter to face or most annoying one to face, so, yeah, pretty universal.

[Willihammer]

Every interview of a pitcher who faced him. Wow, that is remarkable.

[biggentleben]

Every interview of a pitcher who faced him. Wow, that is remarkable.

 

Every one I've ever read or heard, certainly.  The "big 3" in Atlanta all three considered him as their worst foe to face, and I've heard guys like Rick Sutcliffe and others who pitched in the 80s/90s/early 2000s that broadcast now mention his name numerous times as the toughest guy to face. Either Glavine or Maddux mentioned him in their HOF speech last year with a pretty wide agreement from the people on stage.  He was simply other-worldly in his ability to make contact with the ball, and unlike what many spoke about Greg Maddux how he knew pitching so well backward and forward, but he spoke his own language on it, so no one could understand his ideas - Tony was well-regarded in teaching hitting as well.  I'm waxing poetic about the man, sure, but he's one of few players in my 30+ years of following the game that has been an absolute must-watch every single at bat for me, and that's saying something because I'd much rather watch a tremendous pitching and defense game any day than watch a hitter work, but Gwynn was nothing short of remarkable at it.

[notoriousgod71]

To be fair, I took Rincon off my ballot as soon as that was reported.

 

 

I took him off my ballot as soon as Sierra's blast left his bat.

 

My votes:

 

Bagwell, Biggio, Bonds, Clemens, Johnson, Pedro, Mussina, Piazza, Smoltz, Walker

 

There are going to be a lot of good players that get knocked off the ballot this year.

[gunnarthor]

People not voting for Raines, can you offer any good reason not to vote for him? Seriously, go look at his career numbers and get back to me......

I'm pretty torn on Raines but I'm not sure I'd vote for him.  The reality is he had an incredible peak but a lot of meh years.  From 83-87, he had an absolute incredible level of production and finished top 10 in WAR each year (although never higher than fifth).  But after that, he finished top 10 in OBP once and never top 10 in WAR.  That 5 year peak in great but if you start stretching his peak out to 7, 8 or 9 years, other non-HOFers had better longer peaks - Tony Oliva, Keith Hernandez, etc  And part of Raines high WAR comes from baserunning which isn't the most accurate part of WAR - his bat was solid but not as potent as Oliva's, for instance.  Raines was also a bad outfielder who ran bad routes and had a weak arm.

 

Outside of those 5 seasons, it's hard to say he had a HOF career.  He amassed 36 WAR in those 18 other seasons.  I think in a lot of ways he's a compiler but just of a stat some people like - he played long enough to get 68 WAR but is that any better than saying he reached 3000 hits or 500 HRs, if we aren't taking the seasons into account?  He was fortunate that his decline phase happened in an amazing increase in offense (and that he was constantly well rested as a part time player) which helped masked his decline. For example, after 87 his career OBP of .378 looks pretty good but it was actually 35th in baseball, behind guys like Chuck Knoblauch (who played in twice as many games) and if you look at things like wOBA for that period, he falls off the page completely (finishing way behind a lot of nondescript players like Matt Lawton, Grieve, aging Winfield etc).

 

I think those years outside of 83-87 count.  And those weren't even close to HOF years.  He amassed less WAR in the 90s than Lenny Dykstra did, despite playing in twice as many games.  In fact, he was 98th in WAR for that decade, despite playing in 9 of those 10 years.  So I'm not sure a 5 year peak is enough to get a guy into the HOF and that is really all of Raines claim to the HOF.  Nearly half his career WAR, 35% of his career hits and a third of his walks came in those 5 years.  

[Mike Sixel]

so he kept playing (as in, teams felt he still added value) a long time.....what if those other years were half as long?

 

A five year peak is actually a pretty long time, and that peak was high. BTW, his WAR is higher than Biggio, and Gwynn....and if you don't like "WAR".....just look at the offensive part.

 

If you doubt bsr, and you doubt uzr.....just use those to offset each other, and just look at the offense....

[tobi0040]

When it comes to the likes of Clemens, Bonds, etc.  I think the association should provide guidance to the voters.

 

It is silly to me that you have 3-4 different thought processes among the voters. Some say they don't care, some say I care, but these guys were HOF players without the drugs, others say absolutely not if they failed a test, others say absolutely not if they were linked at all.....

[gunnarthor]

so he kept playing (as in, teams felt he still added value) a long time.....what if those other years were half as long?

 

A five year peak is actually a pretty long time, and that peak was high. BTW, his WAR is higher than Biggio, and Gwynn....and if you don't like "WAR".....just look at the offensive part.

 

If you doubt bsr, and you doubt uzr.....just use those to offset each other, and just look at the offense....

Hell, a lot of non HOFers kept playing b/c teams felt they added value - Kaat, Buckner, Staub etc.  

 

If you think a 5 year peak is enough for the HOF then you would think that Chase Utley, Robinson Cano, Joe Mauer are HOFers already (David Wright too if you discount baserunning).  His oWAR is benefited by about 10 WAR by baserunning (if I'm calculating that right, which is not certain) and 1 WAR per season during his 5 year peak.  

 

And yes, his career WAR is higher than many HOFers but it's also lower than Jim Kaat's and many other non-HOFers.  My problem with Raines isn't his career numbers - he clearly reached a number that signifies HOFer to people based on a certain stat.  My problem is that his peak was very short and he hung on for a long time to get to magical number - aka a compiler.  We bring that up all the time when we talk about Biggio hanging around to get to 3000 hits.  Same thing here, just a different stat.

 

Raines' offense was solid but not as good as others, mostly propped up by his OBP.  His wOBA, wRC+ were lower than Gwyns, Oliva, Moises Alou and Keith Hernandez and was slightly above Biggio, but Biggio was a second baseman and Raines was a corner OFer.  And, again, nearly all of Raines strong positives came in that 5 year window.

[tobi0040]

I wonder who will be voted in this year?  Seems like they have an un-written rule to only let in a few guys each year.

 

I would think Biggio gets in because he was at 74.8% last year.  Randy Johnson and Pedro look like first ballot guys to me. Pedro only ended with 219 wins, but his overall numbers make him a no brainer.  Those are probably my picks for guys that get in this year. 

 

Others will get in, like Smoltz for example.  I don't see this as a year Raines and Bagwell jump from the 50's to 75%....I don't see PED guys ever going in on the first ballot.

[gunnarthor]

I wonder who will be voted in this year?  Seems like they have an un-written rule to only let in a few guys each year.

 

I would think Biggio gets in because he was at 74.8% last year.  Randy Johnson and Pedro look like first ballot guys to me. Pedro only ended with 219 wins, but his overall numbers make him a no brainer.  Those are probably my picks for guys that get in this year. 

 

Others will get in, like Smoltz for example.  I don't see this as a year Raines and Bagwell jump from the 50's to 75%....I don't see PED guys ever going in on the first ballot.

I think 4 guys get in - Randy, Pedro, Biggio and Smoltz.  (which, frankly, would be a pretty good class).

[tobi0040]

I think 4 guys get in - Randy, Pedro, Biggio and Smoltz.  (which, frankly, would be a pretty good class).

 

If I picked a 4th guy, it would be Smoltz.  213 wins and 154 saves.  But his overall numbers don't blow you away the way Pedro and the Big Unit's do.

 

Definitely gets in, but my guess would be next year.

[Thrylos]

I am a small HOF proponent, and do not believe at the Hall of Very Good.   My criteria are described in depth here.

 

I would pick the following:

 

Bonds
Clemens
Johnson
P. Martinez
Mussina
Bagwell
Schilling

 

based on who else is in the Hall (players like Alomar and Dawson, for example,) the following have been better than Dawson in that order:

 

Walker
Smoltz
Trammell

---------  (more than 10)
Raines
E. Martinez
Biggio
Sheffield

 

Regardless some BBCAA members' Holier than Thou stance on "PEDs", a reminder that Hank Aaron has admitted to the use of prohibited PEDs (amphetamines) should be in order.  If Aaron is in, Bonds should be in (and, heck, Bonds never admitted to taking them and was never found guilty; last time I checked, he should be presumed innocent.  And the hat size comparers should have a look at Frank Thomas'...)

[tobi0040]

I am a small HOF proponent, and do not believe at the Hall of Very Good.   My criteria are described in depth here.

 

I would pick the following:

 

Bonds

Clemens

Johnson

P. Martinez

Mussina

Bagwell

Schilling

 

based on who else is in the Hall (players like Alomar and Dawson, for example,) the following have been better than Dawson in that order:

 

Walker

Smoltz

Trammell

---------  (more than 10)

Raines

E. Martinez

Biggio

Sheffield

 

Regardless some BBCAA members' Holier than Thou stance on "PEDs", a reminder that Hank Aaron has admitted to the use of prohibited PEDs (amphetamines) should be in order.  If Aaron is in, Bonds should be in (and, heck, Bonds never admitted to taking them and was never found guilty; last time I checked, he should be presumed innocent.  And the hat size comparers should have a look at Frank Thomas'...)

 

Larry Walker is tough.  Career OPS was .965, but his OPS at Coors field was 1.172. He played 600 games there.  He hit 150 of his 380 HR there (40%) despite about 33% of his total games. The 350 he played in Montreals stadium his OPS was only .890. 

 

His career home/road split for OPS plus was 120 versus 80.

 

I have not stripped out Coors field and compared his numbers to other players of that era, but that is a process that would need to happen before I voted for him.

 

By contrast, Todd Helton had about the same career OPS, but his OPS at Coors field was only 1.048.  So it looks like Walker was helped more by Coors field. 

[diehardtwinsfan]

Bonds
Clemens
Johnson
P. Martinez
Mussina
Bagwell
Schilling

E. Martinez

Walker

Smoltz

 

Can't really argue with Thrylos's list.  First 7 are no doubt about it. 

[Thrylos]

Larry Walker is tough.  Career OPS was .965, but his OPS at Coors field was 1.172. He played 600 games there.  He hit 150 of his 380 HR there (40%) despite about 33% of his total games. The 350 he played in Montreals stadium his OPS was only .890. 

 

 

Gentle reminder:  Kirby Puckett's career OPS was "only" .837.  

 

And, again, I do have Walker out from an ideal HOF

[gunnarthor]

Gentle reminder:  Kirby Puckett's career OPS was "only" .837.  

 

And, again, I do have Walker out from an ideal HOF

They played different positions. When Puckett retired, Bill James had him listed as the 8th best CFer of all time.

[tobi0040]

They played different positions. When Puckett retired, Bill James had him listed as the 8th best CFer of all time.

You won't find a top ten ss list without ozzie smith. He had a 666 ops

 

I haven't done the math, but I am guessing walker is about an 850 ops guy in the 1200 games outside of coors. Mcgriff was 880 and dunn 850. I think you have a lot of guys from that era in that range.

[gunnarthor]

Tango had an article about HOF seasons - http://tangotiger.com/index.php/site/comments/how-many-hof-type-seasons-should-a-hof-worthy-player-have

 

He notes that "Raines doesn’t have the peak to distance himself from the borderline HOF cases."

[biggentleben]

A few more days left to vote.  I'll close voting at the end of Monday and post the results Tuesday before the announcement from MLB.

 

Currently, the vote leaders:

Randy Johnson 100%

Jeff Bagwell 86.67%

Pedro Martinez 86.67%

Craig Biggio 80%

John Smoltz 80%

Mike Mussina 66.67%

Mike Piazza 66.67%

Barry Bonds 60%

Roger Clemens 60%

Tim Raines 46.67%

Curt Schilling 46.67%

Alan Trammell 33.33%

Edgar Martinez 26.67%

Larry Walker 26.67%

Mark McGwire 13.33%

Eddie Guardado 6.67%

Fred McGriff 6.67%

Gary Sheffield 6.67%

Lee Smith 6.67%

[Bark's Lounge]

Craig Biggio

Mike Piazza

Jeff Bagwell

Randy Johnson

Pedro Martinez

John Smoltz

Tim Raines, Sr.

[snarkerbarnyard]

Bagwell

Biggio

Johnson

P Martinez

E Martinez

Mussina

Piazza

Schilling

Smoltz

Walker

I'd vote for Bonds and Clemens if there weren't so many choices. Integrity moves you down on the priority list.

[tobi0040]

A few more days left to vote.  I'll close voting at the end of Monday and post the results Tuesday before the announcement from MLB.

 

Currently, the vote leaders:

Randy Johnson 100%

Jeff Bagwell 86.67%

Pedro Martinez 86.67%

Craig Biggio 80%

John Smoltz 80%

Mike Mussina 66.67%

Mike Piazza 66.67%

Barry Bonds 60%

Roger Clemens 60%

Tim Raines 46.67%

Curt Schilling 46.67%

Alan Trammell 33.33%

Edgar Martinez 26.67%

Larry Walker 26.67%

Mark McGwire 13.33%

Eddie Guardado 6.67%

Fred McGriff 6.67%

Gary Sheffield 6.67%

Lee Smith 6.67%

I guess I don't get why pedro and bagwell are equal

 

Pedro put up these numbers in the steriod era

 

2.93 era. Era plus 154. 1.05 whip. 3rd all time in k per 9. 3 cy youngs. 4 era titles. Should have had an mvp.

 

I get he only had 219 wins but you can argue he was as dominant as any in the era

[Kirby_waved_at_me]

Annoucement is coming very soon - early polling shows Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and John Smoltz are in - maybe Biggio too. Piazza may fall just short.

[tobi0040]

Four are in.

 

Randy  97.3%, Pedro 91.1%, Smoltz 82.9%, Biggio 82.7% are in.  Large move up to 69% for Piazza

 

Clemens and Bonds still under 40%.

 

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/12128504/pedro-martinez-randy-johnson-craig-biggio-john-smoltz-voted-hall

[nicksaviking]

Pretty good haul for the HOF this year. 

 

Any voter who complains about not getting enough players in AND voted for PED players should probably give up their votes though.  Like it or not, voters with any reasonable statistical skill are going to realize that players aren't going to get 75% of the voters to forgive their PED use.  You want Trammel, Raines, McGriff or Mussina in?  Don't waste your vote on the PED guys who have no chance of getting in. 

 

They can make a political statement advocating for PED users, or they can do all they can to get their favorite borderline guys in, they can't do both and be taken seriously.

[Tuba]

7 players in two years is a pretty good change of pace. My concern is Piazza/whoever doesn't get in next year because voters will want Griffey 'to go in alone.'