http://bbwaa.com/2016/11/17-hof-ballot/
Ballot tracker can be found here
https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=F2E5D8FC5199DFAF!7731&ithint=file,xlsm&app=Excel&authkey=!AE2Lu5P1f92OW8o
Last edited:
2017 MLB HOF ballot released
- Thread starter soxhop411
- Start date
Ballot tracker can be found here
https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=F2E5D8FC5199DFAF!7731&ithint=file,xlsm&app=Excel&authkey=!AE2Lu5P1f92OW8o
Bagwell
Bonds
Clemens
Edgar
Raines
Vlad
Manny
Pudge
Sosa
PEDs don't bother me none. I know Sosa has his warts, particularly WAR and OBP, but I can't leave off a guy who hit 600 hr and 60+ three times. I'd also have put McGwire in. I'm on the fence about Sheffield, I can't believe he was almost -30 bref dWAR.
Bonds
Clemens
Edgar
Raines
Vlad
Manny
Pudge
Sosa
PEDs don't bother me none. I know Sosa has his warts, particularly WAR and OBP, but I can't leave off a guy who hit 600 hr and 60+ three times. I'd also have put McGwire in. I'm on the fence about Sheffield, I can't believe he was almost -30 bref dWAR.
Ten I'd vote for:
Jeff Bagwell
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Vladimir Guerrero
Edgar Martinez
Mike Mussina
Tim Raines
Manny Ramirez
Ivan Rodriguez
Curt Schilling
Five I'd like to vote for, but have to leave off:
Trevor Hoffman
Fred McGriff
Gary Sheffield
Lee Smith (I think Smith is underrated and I'd like to vote for him, but other than Schilling, I'm not sure who I'd drop in his place.)
Larry Walker
Jeff Bagwell
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Vladimir Guerrero
Edgar Martinez
Mike Mussina
Tim Raines
Manny Ramirez
Ivan Rodriguez
Curt Schilling
Five I'd like to vote for, but have to leave off:
Trevor Hoffman
Fred McGriff
Gary Sheffield
Lee Smith (I think Smith is underrated and I'd like to vote for him, but other than Schilling, I'm not sure who I'd drop in his place.)
Larry Walker
Man, the traditional media is going to have a field day about self-righteously withholding their votes from Manny. Lots and lots of hot takez and think pieces on this one.
If he hits 25%, I'd be shocked.
Sounds about right. There will be no end to the gleeful anti-Manny arguments from many quarters.
This would be my list as well. I would only take Smith and Hoffman off your taxi squad though.
I'm going under. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it's less than 5% and dropped on the first ballot. He tested positive twice. Who knows if any of his career was clean. And then you have the awful defense, the time he quit on the Red Sox, and thee altercation with the travel secretary. Writers didn't like him at all. And compared with other users like Sosa, McGwire, and Bonds, his stats aren't that great.
I think you're right about how Manny fares on the ballot.
Don't underestimate racism as a factor -- this is a group of men who elected Mike Piazza but gave Sammy Sosa just 7% of the vote. Piazza was the better player of the two, but both had clear HOF resumes but for the PED issue, and both fall into the "didn't test positive, but everyone assumes he used" category.
You're wrong about Sosa being a better player -- go back and look at the numbers; even if you're generous in your assessment of Sammy's D, Manny was the better player. With two positive tests, however, I can't see Manny getting many votes.
Freddy Sanchez. Wearing a Red Sox cap.
Seriously though, he won two batting titles? Kudos to him for carving out a nice little career for himself.
Seriously though, he won two batting titles? Kudos to him for carving out a nice little career for himself.
I think Sosa getting 60+ HR 3 times is what would have many writers penciling him in above Manny if we obliviated memories of PED use. Granted more advanced offensive metric like Manny's OBP better.
The idea that PED probabilities for Piazza vs Sosa are the same, is not based in fact. That Piazza outproduced Sosa by any offensive measure despite being a catcher, whereas Sosa was a bad corner outfielder, that Piazza had a 7-8 year peak and was still productive at age 37 well after steroid testing was underway whereas Sosa had a clear 5 year peak and was done in 2005, the year testing took effect, also seems far more important than racism.
That's a fair point, and I think the Manny v. Sosa debate would also be colored by the usual debates about peak vs. career, the importance of defense, and the weight that should be given to postseason performance. (The Luddites would also like Manny's .312 career BA.)
But we're basically in violent agreement on this one -- given the way HOF voters tend to evaluate candidates, Manny and Sosa are similar candidates, so given Manny's two positive drug tests, it's hard to see him significantly exceeding Sosa's 7% support. I won't be surprised at all if he falls below 5%.
Piazza was clearly the better player of the two, but that's irrelevant to the discussion you and I are having. In a world where we were still ignorant of (or willfully blind to) PED use, both are first-ballot Hall of Famers.
Also, Sosa declined in basically a straight line from 2001 onwards; he didn't fall off a cliff when testing was instituted (in 2004, iirc). If you wanted to build a case that Sosa was clean (which I'm not doing, by the way), the way his performance steadily declined beginning at age 32 or so -- like baseball players throughout history, but unlike so many of his contemporaries -- would be the centerpiece of your argument.
Aside from players who tested positive or acknowledged PED use, or cases where there is other overwhelming public evidence of PED use (mostly players implicated in the BALCO scandal or named in the Mitchell Report), we aren't dealing with questions of "fact" in any of these determinations. Unlike most of their contemporaries, both Piazza and Sosa were both widely rumored to be PED users even during the prime of their careers, when baseball fans had their (our) heads in the sand on this issue -- but unlike guys like McGuire or Palmeiro who were under suspicion at that time, there still isn't hard evidence that either Piazza or Sosa used. The clouds of suspicion around both of them are therefore similar.
To be fair to Piazza, the fact that he wasn't named in the Mitchell Report counts for something, given the location of Mitchell's sources.
Realistically, though, I think the difference between Piazza and Sosa mostly boils down to Sosa's decision to answer questions through an interpreter in his native language when he was hauled before Congress. Given that two of his fellow players were criminally investigated based on their testimony that day, he was wise not to speak in broken English before legislators who, in retrospect, were pretty clearly laying a perjury trap. Yes, I think it's racist for the writers to hold that against Sosa.
Last edited:
Piazza also had a pretty standard career trajectory where he showed good power early on and then had his best seasons by OPS+ at ages 28, 26, 27.
Sosa had a much more suspicious career trajectory. At age 28, he had never hit more than 40 hrs in a season -- he then hit 66, 63, 50, 64, and 49 the next five years. His age 29-34 seasons were significantly better than his age 25-28 seasons. It's not impossible to naturally have a late peak like that, but it does raise some red flags.
Sosa had a much more suspicious career trajectory. At age 28, he had never hit more than 40 hrs in a season -- he then hit 66, 63, 50, 64, and 49 the next five years. His age 29-34 seasons were significantly better than his age 25-28 seasons. It's not impossible to naturally have a late peak like that, but it does raise some red flags.
I will be shocked if Manny doesn't get 5%. If this were five years ago, then maybe. But I don't think the steroid stench carries the same weight anymore, amd his numbers, post season included, are first ballot quality.
I am probably high on my original 25% for over/under, but I think 5% is too low.
I am probably high on my original 25% for over/under, but I think 5% is too low.
Bagwell
Bonds
Clemens
Martinez
Mussina
Raines
Ramirez
Rodriguez
Schilling
Walker
I've seen a few ballots with Guerrero over Walker and Hoffman over Smith and Wagner. Anyone want to explain the rationale for those?
Bonds
Clemens
Martinez
Mussina
Raines
Ramirez
Rodriguez
Schilling
Walker
I've seen a few ballots with Guerrero over Walker and Hoffman over Smith and Wagner. Anyone want to explain the rationale for those?
I think the counter argument to the racist non-Sosa vote is Bagwell. Now, I'm not entirely dismissing your claim, I just don't think it's that simple and if it was Bagwell would already be in the HOF.
There are certain guys who have that steroid stink on them stronger than others. If you could have a steroid Mount Rushmore, I think the faces would be Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, and Canseco. Now, is that entirely fair to Sosa? Maybe, maybe not. But his star was shining brightest when he was part of that great race with McGwire to finally pass 61, and when the rug was pulled out a few years later it left a lot of people (writers) really (pretending to be) pissed off at everyone involved. I think it's grandstanding on their part because they were more than happy to cover the story without question, but there you have it.
So yes, I'm sure race plays a role at some level, but I think there's more to it than that.
There are certain guys who have that steroid stink on them stronger than others. If you could have a steroid Mount Rushmore, I think the faces would be Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, and Canseco. Now, is that entirely fair to Sosa? Maybe, maybe not. But his star was shining brightest when he was part of that great race with McGwire to finally pass 61, and when the rug was pulled out a few years later it left a lot of people (writers) really (pretending to be) pissed off at everyone involved. I think it's grandstanding on their part because they were more than happy to cover the story without question, but there you have it.
So yes, I'm sure race plays a role at some level, but I think there's more to it than that.
Last edited:
My ten (If I had a vote):
Edit - list cleanup
- Jeff Bagwell
- Barry Bonds
- Roger Clemens
- Vlad Guerrero
- Trevor Hoffman
- Edgar Martinez
- Tim Raines
- Manny Ramirez
- Ivan Rodriguez
- Larry Walker
- Billy Wagner
- Fred McGriff
- Lee Smith
- Jeff Kent
- Curt Schilling
- Gary Sheffield
- Sammy Sosa
- Mike Mussina
Edit - list cleanup
Last edited:
Sosa also had the corked bat incident...though it is really hard to know how much impact (if any) that had on his reputation and on voters.
Doesn't Mark McGwire's 12% of the vote suggest maybe there's a little more to it? Mac had a higher WAR, higher JAWS, much higher OPS+, and came out the winner in their epic race.
My 10 for this year are:
Bonds
Clemens
Ivan Rodriguez
Edgar
Bagwell
Walker
Moose
Raines
Manny
Schilling
I would also vote for Guerrero despite his mid to late career short comings in the field and historically bad base running (13th worst BsR all time).
As to Hoffman and Smith. . . huge meh, though I'm sure Hoffman will get in eventually.
When Billy Wagner doesn't get a sniff because he didn't stick around past his prime to accumulate said stat, it's just moronic.
Saves:
Hoffman 601 (Hooray!!!)
Smith 478
Wagner 422
ERA+
Wagner 187
Hoffman 141
Smith 132
FIP
Wagner 2.73
Smith 2.93
Hoffman 3.08
WAR (which includes high leverage situations for relievers)
Smith 29 in 1289 innings
Hoffman 27.9 in 1089 innings
Wagner 27.7 in 889 innings
HR/9
Virtual tie at .6 though Hoffman and Wagner pitched when guys hit 20 home runs in their sleep.
K/9
Wagner 11.9
Hoffman 9.4
Smith 8.7
WHIP
Wagner .998
Hoffman 1.05
Smith 1.256
Bonds
Clemens
Ivan Rodriguez
Edgar
Bagwell
Walker
Moose
Raines
Manny
Schilling
I would also vote for Guerrero despite his mid to late career short comings in the field and historically bad base running (13th worst BsR all time).
As to Hoffman and Smith. . . huge meh, though I'm sure Hoffman will get in eventually.
When Billy Wagner doesn't get a sniff because he didn't stick around past his prime to accumulate said stat, it's just moronic.
Saves:
Hoffman 601 (Hooray!!!)
Smith 478
Wagner 422
ERA+
Wagner 187
Hoffman 141
Smith 132
FIP
Wagner 2.73
Smith 2.93
Hoffman 3.08
WAR (which includes high leverage situations for relievers)
Smith 29 in 1289 innings
Hoffman 27.9 in 1089 innings
Wagner 27.7 in 889 innings
HR/9
Virtual tie at .6 though Hoffman and Wagner pitched when guys hit 20 home runs in their sleep.
K/9
Wagner 11.9
Hoffman 9.4
Smith 8.7
WHIP
Wagner .998
Hoffman 1.05
Smith 1.256
At his peak, Lee Smith pitched 90+ innings for 5 consecutive seasons, including three consecutive seasons over 100 IP. During his peak years, Wagner averaged from mid 60s to mid 70s in terms of IP and had exactly one season as high as 85 IP.
The point is that it's hard to compare the stats of a pitcher like Smith to someone like Wagner. And I'm willing to bet that if Wagner put the kind of wear and tear on his arm that Smith did in his age 24-30 seasons, his numbers would look a lot different. That's obviously not Wagner's fault, but it does show the difficulty of comparing raw numbers for relievers with very different usage patterns.
Hoffman and Wagner had similar usage and your point is valid in this case. Hoffman gets in because of counting stats, which is unfair, but with limited space that's the reality.
I do think Wagner will get strong consideration after the logjam of players clears out in future years.
The point is that it's hard to compare the stats of a pitcher like Smith to someone like Wagner. And I'm willing to bet that if Wagner put the kind of wear and tear on his arm that Smith did in his age 24-30 seasons, his numbers would look a lot different. That's obviously not Wagner's fault, but it does show the difficulty of comparing raw numbers for relievers with very different usage patterns.
Hoffman and Wagner had similar usage and your point is valid in this case. Hoffman gets in because of counting stats, which is unfair, but with limited space that's the reality.
I do think Wagner will get strong consideration after the logjam of players clears out in future years.
I do think innings pitched ought to count more in Smith's and Hoffman's favor than I indicated. Holding down a job that long and staying healthy is a thing.
That said, Wagner had more innings than Smith over both of their final 10 seasons with one year apart in age (619 to 594) and was a lot better over that time when they were used as standard closers in a much different hitting environment. Wagner probably would have lost some effectiveness with more mileage, but he did retire with a lot left in the tank at age 38.
Anyhow - I'm not against Smith being in the Hall, so much as Wagner not getting his due - particularly when compared with Hoffman.
Sosa is a borderline candidate even if you accept his numbers at face value. He had a lot of holes in his game and never was able to control the strike zone (.344 OBP) until 98, which mitigated a lot of his value earlier in his career when he was a better all around player. Even considering context, his peak was beastly, and I can't completely argue with the logic of voting for him based on heavily weighted peak value. The bar is pretty damn high for HOF right fielders though, and home runs aside Sosa wasn't on Manny's level as an offensive force.
http://www.si.com/mlb/2015/11/25/
http://www.si.com/mlb/2015/11/25/
I like AR's approach:
(If I had a vote):
(If I had a vote):
- Tim Raines
- Vlad Guerrero
- Trevor Hoffman
- Edgar Martinez
- Ivan Rodriguez
- Larry Walker
- Lee Smith
- Manny Ramirez
- Billy Wagner
- Fred McGriff
- Barry Bonds
- Roger Clemens
- Jeff Kent
- Curt Schilling
- Gary Sheffield
- Sammy Sosa
- Mike Mussina
Rampant cheating of the game, and inspiring an untold number of young athletes to do the same is ok with Rubin, but tweeting stupid internet memes is disqualifying. Did he do a write in for Eddie Cicotte as well? Hey, look at all those wins! Yeah, he cheated, but c'non, if the offense had scored more runs and the fielders had made more plays, then his cheating wouldn't have mattered. And, it was only two games! All the rest of his career he was totally clean. He should get credit for that.
I should not be surprised that someone who chooses to brag about his portfolio gains in a thread about racism is now expressing outrage over Curt Schilling losing votes based on his "jokes" about lynching journalists.
I wasn't bragging and made that clear. The point was that plenty of people with real stakes in the game legitimately see Trump's economic agenda as a net positive.
Similarly, this post is clearly expressing dismay at the hypocrisy of the writer's selective application of the "character" clause in the HOF guidelines. If you want to keep Schilling out for retweeting bigoted crap that's fine, but don't then turn around and vote for three of the biggest, longest, and most unrepentant cheaters in the history of the game.
People are really voting for rampant cheating, wife beating, team quitting, traveling secretary assaulting Manny Ramirez?
OK.
OK.
Old link to spreadsheet busted. New link here
https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=F2E5D8FC5199DFAF!7731&ithint=file,xlsx&app=Excel&authkey=!AE2Lu5P1f92OW8o
https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=F2E5D8FC5199DFAF!7731&ithint=file,xlsx&app=Excel&authkey=!AE2Lu5P1f92OW8o
I don't disagree with what you've written, but the argument for that ballot is most likely that Bonds and Clemens are transcendent figures who may have only marginally benefitted from PEDs, while Schilling is marginal HOF candidate, even without his social baggage.
FWIW, I wouldn't vote for Bonds or Clemens on the whole PED issue, and hesitate on Schilling because he's a) marginal, and b) does not help himself with character/ambassador for the game issues.
Yup. You can see one media member's actual ballot earlier in the thread for proof.
That may have answered your question.
This may help too
-David Ortiz
Too much of that floating around from his peers, and too much of a steroids back-backlash starting to happen in the media, for Manny to fall off the ballot. I'll take the over on 5% all day, he's slowly trending up after hitting the nadir of his HOF value a couple years ago.
Agree, but this guy switch from voting for Schilling last year to not voting for him this year, while adding Manny Ramirez. Two positive steroid tests. Irrelevant to this guy.
Maybe he doesn't feel like voting for a guy who said he and his colleagues should be lynched. That's probably the reason you're looking for and shouldn't be too hard to understand.
Bonds and Clemens did get a bit higher % last year, but still are nowhere close. Manny's not getting in, that's for sure.
Schilling's case is entirely independent of Manny's, and his flaws are of a completely different character.
Even if we assume that he thinks their on-field merits are of equal value (which is a huge assumption), that he finds being a verbally abusive and racist asshole to be disqualifying while not thinking the same about PEDs is not the inherent contradiction you think it is.
Yeah, it's a good thing we don't have any verbally abusive racist assholes in the Hall of Fame. Whew!
And you know, as someone else posted above Manny's done a lot more in the abuse department than drugs. Beat up an old man, quit on his team, and slaps his wife around. But, no, he doesn't retweet bigoted bathroom jokes or campaign for Republicans. So it's all good I guess.
I think they are voting for this Manny.
12× All-Star (1995, 1998–2008)
2× World Series champion (2004, 2007)
World Series MVP (2004)
9× Silver Slugger Award (1995, 1999–2006)
2× AL Hank Aaron Award (1999, 2004)
AL batting champion (2002)
AL home run leader (2004)
AL RBI leader (1999)
29 postseason home runs - most in MLB history.