Your HOF Ballot
We usually do this on a yearly basis, so I'm posting the diary. Feel free to weigh in with your ballot. You know the drill, vote for as many as you feel are worthy of the hall.
The list of eligible candidates:
Bert Blyleven
Alan Trammell
0 recs |
46
comments
Comments
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Shawon Dunston
Chuck Knoblauch
Mark McGwire
My wish list, because I think the Hall of Fame takes itself way too seriously and these guys in it would definitely take it down a peg. Knoblauch? Seriously? Why? Because Chris Berman yelled "Fundamentally sound!" during every single one of his highlights for his entire career?
by CU Adam on Jan 8, 2008 11:12 AM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Mark McGwire (assuming no PEDs)
Goose Gossage
Alan Trammell
Bert Blyleven
New votes:
Tim Raines
by Ryan on Jan 8, 2008 11:24 AM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by drerikbrady on
Jan 8, 2008 11:33 AM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Tim Raines
Bert Blyleven
Good mood ballot:
Tim Raines
Bert Blyleven
Andre Dawson
Rich Gossage
Lee Smith
Alan Trammell
Mark McGwire
by APV on Jan 8, 2008 11:41 AM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Goose Gossage
Mark McGwire
Alan Trammell
Tim Raines
by Jay on Jan 8, 2008 12:30 PM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by Jay on
Jan 8, 2008 12:31 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Gossage
McGwire
Raines
Trammel doesn't make it because of my silly logic that only 1 of his most similar players (Sandberg) is HOF.
If Blyleven doesn't make it, they should tear down the hall.
I vote McGwire because who knows which pitchers he faced who were also possibly on PEDs.
by emd2k3 on Jan 8, 2008 12:46 PM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
A statistically good case can be made for Blyleven, but when he was pitching he never seemed like an all-time great to me.
by DixonCayne on
Jan 9, 2008 6:51 AM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Tim Raines
If Rice does get in:
Harold Baines
Bert Blyleven
Dave Concepcion
Andre Dawson
Travis Fryman
Rich Gossage
Tommy John
Don Mattingly
Mark McGwire
Dale Murphy
Dave Parker
Tim Raines
Lee Smith
Alan Trammell
And a coupla write-in votes for Rocky Colavito and Albert Belle. Cuz, you know, if Rice gets in the bar for admission has been seriously lowered.
by mauichuck on Jan 8, 2008 12:59 PM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Blyleven
Gossage
i could be convinced on trammell, if i knew anything reliable about his defense, which at the moment i don't.
by emil minty on Jan 8, 2008 1:12 PM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by fwembt on Jan 8, 2008 1:24 PM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
http://www.baseball-reference.com/friv/scomp2.cgi?I=blylebe01:Bert+Blyleven&st=career
by emd2k3 on
Jan 8, 2008 1:26 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by 7foot3 on Jan 8, 2008 2:09 PM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Raines
Blyleven
Gossage is already in.
by maledicta on Jan 8, 2008 3:03 PM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Concepcion
Raines
Rice (and yes, I did read the other thread)
Gossage
Blyleven
by DaytonDogg on Jan 8, 2008 3:58 PM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by fwembt on
Jan 8, 2008 5:21 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by Ryan on
Jan 8, 2008 10:40 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by E5 on
Jan 8, 2008 10:47 PM EST
up
0 recs
How you figure?
Omar: 2588 G, .274/.340/.357, 84 OPS+, .257 EqA, 678 FRAR, 108.3 WARP3
by maledicta on
Jan 8, 2008 11:53 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: How you figure?
by Bogalusa Bomber on
Jan 9, 2008 8:54 AM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
I am right up there with most of you in using things like OPS+ for determining who the Indians should sign or trade for, etc. But, I think those types of stats are less useful than the traditional ones when it comes to HOF voting. This is mainly because of the longevity factor. I don't think a player with a 150 OPS+ deserves to be in the Hall if they only played 100 games. I know this doesn't necessarily help Concepcion's case because he doesn't have the big counting stats despite playing for 19 years (only 2326 hits). But, I think this helps show where I come from.
Also, Concepcion's prime was before my time. Therefore, I don't know how he was really thought of by fans, the media, and other players other than things like awards. Concepcion played on 9 all star teams, had 5 golden gloves, and 2 silver sluggers over his career. It is plain to see that he was thought of as one of the best shortstops of his era.
By the way, I'm not convinced in the least about fielding stats.
by DaytonDogg on
Jan 9, 2008 10:54 AM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Ozzie Smith and Omar Vizquel are pretty useful comps.
OPS+ (career)
Smith: 87 (19 seasons)
Concepcion: 88 (19 seasons)
Vizquel: 84 (19 seasons)
OPS+ (top 5 seasons)
Smith: 112, 105, 105, 101, 98
Concepcion: 116, 114, 114, 112 (and 4 more seasons above 100)
Vizquel: 110, 104, 99, 98, 95
EQA (career)
Smith: .263
Concepcion: .256
Vizquel: .257
SB percentage (career)
Smith: 80% (580 steals!)
Concepcion: 75% (321 steals)
Vizquel: 71% (380 steals)
So, Concepcion beats Vizquel handily offensively. I won't bore you all with the defensive stats, but I'm pretty sure they'll all say something along the lines of: Ozzie was historically great and Concepcion was one of the greats, maybe just a notch below Smith. As I recall, Vizquel doesn't always do all that well in defensive stats. Then most people excuse it by saying that defensive stats suck.
Now this is just based on my watching a hundred or so Tribe games, but I recall Vizquel as being among the worst baserunners I've ever seen. I'd be surprised if he wasn't picked off bases more often than the majority and I'd guess more often than most.
I think it is easier to argue for Concepcion in the Hall than Vizquel. But, Alan Trammel damn well better be there first.
by madherb on
Jan 8, 2008 11:37 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by Jay on
Jan 8, 2008 6:34 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
The other thread did a good job of telling me that Rice fails in comparison to guys like Manny and Thome, but I think Manny is a sure fire HOF'er and Thome could get tehre with another couple solid seasons, so that doesn't bother me. Belle is an interesting story because there are so many somewhat unique things in play. He had 6 incredibly dominant years and 4 more very good years. Still, his career was relatively short because of injury. He also played in a very offense friendly era. He still doesn't come close to the magic numbers like 3000 or 500. Then there is his personality that might keep him out more than anything, and I don't necessarily agree with it, but it is a reality. Although I remember him will, it is worth noting that Belle did make 5 All Star teams and 5 Silver Slugger awards, and we'll say he won an MVP for these purposes for his historic 1995 season. Easily a top AL OF'r over a decade.
Rice had 4 dominant seasons (I have defined this for Belle and Rice by OPS+ of over 140); 7 more very good seasons (defined by me of OPS+ of over 115); and 3 more above average seasons (OPS+ of over 100). Like Concepcion, Rice's prime was before my time, so I am more reliant on what others thought of him since I didn't see him play. Rice played in 8 All Star games, 1 MVP award and 2 silver sluggers. 1978 looks to be a really historically dominant season for him. He led the league in Slg., OPS, ABs, Hits, Total Bases, Triples, HRs, RBI, OPS+. Runs Created, and several other advanced categories. I realize he played in Fenway, that things like All star games are voted by fans and Boston players have an advantage, but Rice seems to genuinely be thought of as a great offensive player over a decade and has a good, deserving shot at getting into the hall.
by DaytonDogg on
Jan 9, 2008 11:12 AM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Belle had better seasons, adjusted for era than Rice. If the argument for Rice is his three-year stretch, Belle has that beat. I wasn't around for Rice's peak, but I know Belle was one of the most-feared hitters in the game in the mid-90s.
How about Juan Gonzalez? Career OPS+ of 132. He won a couple (perhaps undeserved) MVPs, wasn't exactly a media darling, played most of his career in launching pad. He also had a longer (or more consistent) prime than Rice, though he was, like Rice, done by age 33. Leave out the steroid stuff, and he's in if Rice is in.
How about Moises Alou? Don't laugh, his career adjusted rate stats are very similar. More consistent production, better longevity (though he got a later start). If Rice is in, you can make an argument for him.
by Ryan on
Jan 9, 2008 12:36 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
I'm not sure about Gonzalez, haven't really thought about him, but it wouldn't offend me if he was in the Hall of Fame.
by DaytonDogg on
Jan 9, 2008 12:52 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
On top of that, he was a hack defensively. It's just revisionist like crazy. All he did was hit and he only hit 50% better than the league twice. That's ridiculous. He needs to get in line behind a ton of other guys, including all these meh fielding good hitting outfielders like Gonzalez and Belle and all of the DH's-Edgar Martinez has about twice the case Rice does I think. Edgar's career OPS+ is 11 points under Rice's highest single-season OPS+.
He was a pretty good hitter for 3 years. He was overrated by writers voting for MVPs, he was overrated by opposing pitchers, and it was all made worse by his park. He was just an angry looking dude who everyone was afraid of. Big deal. Albert was angrier looking and more people were afraid of him.
And I don't think Albert should be in, or Gonzalez, or Omar, or Edgar. I wouldn't mind seeing some of those guys in but honestly, what's the point of the hall of fame if it's populated by guys like Juan Gonzalez? How much bigger is that plaque room going to have to get?
by afh4 on
Jan 9, 2008 2:23 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
All that said, I think I might be changing my mind on Rice after looking into it closer. He just doesn't quite have the total counting numbers that make me comfortable and I don't want a hall with thousands of players in it.
I therefore retract my LGT vote for Rice. Concepcion, on the other hand, I still would vote for.
by DaytonDogg on
Jan 10, 2008 1:33 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
1. Maybe there weren't really dominant sluggers in that era the way there are today. Two really amazing third basemen, some great all-around players who used speed as a key weapon. Scary Monsters? Not so much.
Rice is a pretty good comp with Magglio Ordonez as a hitter although Mags is (or at least was) a very fine defender as well. Anyway, is it that nuts to consider that in another era, a guy like Magglio might have been one of the very best hitters, just because that's how it turned out? This is kind of the opposite of Vizquel's dilemma -- say what you will of the guy, he'd have been considered a superstar 20 years earlier. Well, 20 years later, maybe Rice would have been considered someone who's almost as good as Brian Giles.
2. Various changes in the playing environment have introduced far greater variability into hitting statistics, such that we had 15 active players at the end of last season with a 140+ OPS+, compared with Rice's era, when there apparently were only a handful at that level. Any number of things conceivably could have produced such a change, including increased expansion, new ballparks, performance enhancing drugs, improved medicine and conditioning, improved training and development, harder balls, you name it.
To wit: In Rice's best years, from 1975 to 1986, there were 173 seasons where a player had an OPS+ of 140 or better, where in the past 12 years, it was done 268 times. That seems like a significant difference to me.
Now it may be that that era just didn't have truly dominant hitters, and a whole crop of truly dominant hitters has played in the past 10-15 years. But another possibility is that OPS+ is flawed in some way -- specifically, that it's too linear, based on comparing the OBP and slugging to league averages as simple ratios. But what if simple ratios are not reflective of the real differences in ability? What if it was really harder to produce a 140+ OPS+ season in 1980 than it was in 2000?
by Jay on
Jan 10, 2008 8:54 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
I always forget... so OPS+ doesn't adjust for era, just park and leage and... what else?
by Turkmenbashi on
Jan 11, 2008 10:45 AM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
This is a very interesting point, but I come to the opposite conclusion Jay. I think that if there aren't as many 140 OPS+'s during a certain era, it doesn't necessarily mean that there were simply less talented hitters, but that the game was different. You mentioned some of the changing factors like harder balls, PEDs and smaller parks, but somewhat less cynically, it could be because there was less focus on homeruns, walks, and power hitters that create high OPS's; it could be that there were better pitchers, better pitching strategies with the best pitchers going 300-350 innings instead of 200-225; it could be because of bigger stronger players from the increased focus on weightlifting and raw strength, PED's aside. It is certainly some combination of these factors.
Regardless, I think this strengthens my thought that Rice has to be compared to his era. He was thought of one of the best hitters for a 4 year run and an All Star for 9. Still, like I mentioned above, I have decided that this isn't enough and that he shouldn't get the nod.
by DaytonDogg on
Jan 11, 2008 11:20 AM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by afh4 on
Jan 9, 2008 2:28 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
Anyway the point is the lorists that posit Jim Rice was a hack in left field appear to be wrong - he wasn't all that bad.
by mauichuck on
Jan 9, 2008 4:54 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by Jay on
Jan 10, 2008 9:40 AM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by msmnsoda on Jan 9, 2008 10:22 PM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by emil minty on Jan 10, 2008 10:24 AM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by emd2k3 on
Jan 10, 2008 12:31 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by emd2k3 on Jan 10, 2008 12:33 PM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by mauichuck on
Jan 10, 2008 12:54 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by emd2k3 on
Jan 10, 2008 1:15 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by woodsmeister on
Jan 10, 2008 2:32 PM EST
up
0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
ERA IP ERA+
1.81 269 165
1.60 258.3 186
2.97 206 100
4.15 158.3 72
2.50 194.3 119
World Series champs, no? Well that's the starting five of the 1968 Cleveland Indians who went 86 and 75 - four games over their Pytagorean projections - and finished third in the American League tied with Boston. Now that's a little before Rice's time, but you can get an idea of how good the pitching was back then.
by mauichuck on Jan 11, 2008 6:50 AM EST 0 recs
Re: Your HOF Ballot
by mauichuck on
Jan 11, 2008 6:51 AM EST
up
0 recs








