The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum MMXV

DC47 · Post by **DC47** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 6:15 pm

Trammel and Whitaker are near the top of my list for players who should have gotten in within five ballots, but who never made it. See also Tim Raines, Dwight Evans, Bobby Grich, and my #1 choice: Minnie Minoso.

In the PEDS Suspect Suspect (Zero Evidence) category, Mike Piazza is the obvious #1. Among Miscellaneous MLB-Designated Criminals it's Shoeless Joe Jackson.

This is a HOF that includes Jim Rice, Phil Rizzuto and Andre Dawson, for godsakes. Not to mention a raft of undeserving old-timers like Jim Bottomley and Chick Hafey. I just looked Hafey up on Baseball-Reference. Among his most similars are Mike Greenwell and Ryan Braun. Must have been just a super awesome player.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 6:29 pm

Dick. Fucking. Allen.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 6:33 pm

Since 1960, Allen is fucking 10th in Fangraphs Offensive WAR on a per PA basis (5,000+ career PA). Miguel Cabrera has to improve to catch up ...

Barry Bonds: 55.7
Albert Pujols: 44.1
Mark McGwire: 43.5
Frank Robinson: 39.7
Frank Thomas: 39.1
Manny Ramirez: 38.6
Willie Mays: 38.2
Hank Aaron: 38.2
Jeff Bagwell: 37.8
Dick Allen: 37.1
Miguel Cabrera: 35.7
Alex Rodriguez: 34.6
Edgar Martinez: 34.6
Larry Walker: 32.1
Mike Schmidt: 32.1
Lance Berkman: 31.9
Gary Sheffield: 31.7
Chipper Jones: 31.7
Jim Thome: 31.6
Harmon Killebrew: 30.8
Albert Belle: 30.5
Willie Stargell: 30.4
Matt Holliday: 30.1
Willie McCovey: 30.1
Roberto Clemente: 29.5
Mike Piazza: 29.5
Brian Giles: 29.2
Rickey Henderson: 29.2
Jason Giambi: 28.5
Joe Morgan: 27.8

DC47 · Post by **DC47** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:03 pm

mister d wrote:Dick. Fucking. Allen.

Strictly my error. Not on my HOF game.

howard · Post by **howard** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:38 pm

You guys think Bonds or Clemens will get in by the writers, or only after a decade or two by an old timers committee?

Rex · Post by **Rex** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 7:40 pm

only scenario I can picture is on their deathbeds. Bonds at least. I think they let Clemens die.

DC47 · Post by **DC47** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:03 pm

I think they'll put them in the same ring with Palmeiro and McGwire. Only rule -- no weapons. The one that comes out alive gets into the HOF. Gamecast and pay-per-view with Pete Rose doing the color commentary. This way MLB makes some dough.

Rush2112 · Post by **Rush2112** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 8:16 pm

Shut your mouth about the Hawk friend. That man was a good of the diamond.

Weatherfrog · Post by **Weatherfrog** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 9:21 pm

I have always been a huge Piazza fan, so I admit I am biased. Still, how was he not a first ballot HOFer? He was top 5 all-time at his position. He was the best offensive catcher of all time. Only the faintest of PED rumors (no more than any other hitter whose prime was from 1993-2002).

Seriously, name another player who was #1 hitter all time for their position who wasn't a first ballot guy?

Oh.

Wait.

Bonds?

Yeah, but...

whatever

DSafetyGuy · Post by **DSafetyGuy** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 9:26 pm

brian wrote:Trammell should have hung around for three extra years past his prime to pad his counting stats. Dumb.

If only he had won the 1987 AL MVP instead of George Bell. Yeah, Bell hit .308 with 47 HR and 134 RBI (which is undoubtedly what many voters looked at) with a .957 OPS, but he had 5.0 WAR. Trammell had 8.2.

If only he hadn't been hit on the elbow by Todd Stottlemyre in 1988 and went on the DL. Played in only 128 games that year and still finished 7th in MVP voting.

If he hadn't broken his ankle early in the 1992 season. That one killed the end of his career, not just a season. He was already 34, but that certainly accelerated the end for him. The following season, Sparky Anderson moved him all over the place to keep his bat in the lineup, but reduce the load on him. He never played more than 63 games at short again and, to get back to brian's post, that injury makes it look like he did hang on just to pad stats.

Weatherfrog · Post by **Weatherfrog** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 9:35 pm

Weatherfrog wrote:I have always been a huge Piazza fan, so I admit I am biased. Still, how was he not a first ballot HOFer? He was top 5 all-time at his position. He was the best offensive catcher of all time. Only the faintest of PED rumors (no more than any other hitter whose prime was from 1993-2002).

Seriously, name another player who was #1 hitter all time for their position who wasn't a first ballot guy?

Oh.

Wait.

Bonds?

Yeah, but...

whatever

Hell, I guess Ted Williams probably has a pretty good argument that he was a better left fielder than Bonds, so, yeah. My point.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 10:13 pm

And he missed 3 early prime seasons. Pretty insane.

DC47 · Post by **DC47** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 11:05 pm

Rush2112 wrote:Shut your mouth about the Hawk friend. That man was a good of the diamond.

No doubt you are completely right. When they create the Hall of the Merely Good, he's a first ballot selection. I'd put him in a the first class, along with Norm Cash, Ken Holtzman, Tony Fernandez, and Amos Otis. A good among men.

MaxWebster · Post by **MaxWebster** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 11:06 pm

i have to find some way to channel my anger that The Greatest Pitcher in MLB HistoryTM was left off of 8.9% of ballots.

I blame Bush.

(....deep breath....)

rass wrote:So should rush turn off the MaxWebster signal or keep it on?

MaxWebster · Post by **MaxWebster** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 11:09 pm

John Smoltz got 3x as many votes as Edgar.

MaxWebster · Post by **MaxWebster** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 11:12 pm

some asshole voted for Darin Erstad.

reminds me of this:

http://youtu.be/pHf5OqwXEFo?t=41s

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 11:27 pm

MaxWebster wrote:i have to find some way to channel my anger that The Greatest Pitcher in MLB HistoryTM was left off of 8.9% of ballots.

I blame Bush.

(....deep breath....)

rass wrote:So should rush turn off the MaxWebster signal or keep it on?

HI MAX!!!!!!!

I bet more than half of those not including him did so strategically. There's no actual anti-Pedro argument and plenty have used that to save other potential sub 5%ers.

MaxWebster · Post by **MaxWebster** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 11:29 pm

MISTER D

possible responses:

a) which still would leave roughly half among the biggest morons in amerika

b) which proves how horrible the actual PRO-cess actually is

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 11:39 pm

Totally, on B. And a good section of the no-vote group is also trying to prove that point. In about 25 years, there should be some serious reform.

DC47 · Post by **DC47** » Tue Jan 06, 2015 11:52 pm

Pedro benefited from pitching in Fenway, his wicked change-up suggests he was all roided up, and he is a foreigner. He lost a big game. Also, he was short. No Catfish Hunter or Don Drysdale, that's for sure.

tennbengal · Post by **tennbengal** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 6:20 am

I don't buy body change with Griffey - because we saw what his dad looked like as a player into his 40s - thick (old man thick). Jr as he aged looked a lot like his dad.

Gunpowder · Post by **Gunpowder** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 8:24 am

I'm probably wrong but I just never thought "John Smoltz - there's a Hall of Famer"

tennbengal · Post by **tennbengal** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 8:27 am

I kinda wish Jr. had used, I guess, to deal with his injuries in his 30s.

I think the Mariners used up his legs on that turf and dealt high.

In his 20s, I don't know that I have ever seen a better baseball player than Jr.

Johnny Carwash · Post by **Johnny Carwash** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 8:39 am

Yeah, it seems like Griffey's drop-off doesn't get talked about as one of the great "what-ifs" that it was, especially considering how popular he was in his 20's.

Griffey, ages 19-29 (pre-trade to Cincinnati): 149 OPS+, 70.6 WAR, 7 top-10 MVP finishes
Griffey, ages 30-40: 117 OPS+, 13.0 WAR, 0 top-10 MVP finishes

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 8:46 am

It gets talked about round these parts, but that's probably proximity. I imagine you'll get several of these articles in the coming year.

Pretty wild that a guy who hit 630 home runs and ten straight Gold Gloves in CF can honestly be looked at as a what if.

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:19 am

tennbengal wrote:I don't buy body change with Griffey - because we saw ... his ... d...ick... looked a lot like his dad.

Ryan · Post by **Ryan** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:29 am

Is this a good time to revisit my Billy Wagner love or should I wait until I see more Hoffman backlash?

mister d · Post by **mister d** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:38 am

I considered it yesterday but it would have come off as more endorsement than comp of two guys who shouldn't make it where one of them will.

Rex · Post by **Rex** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:58 am

Surely there will be a rule where no reliever will be allowed in within 10 years of Mariano. I mean, like even with a ticket.

Post by **Shirley** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 12:30 pm

tennbengal wrote:I don't buy body change with Griffey - because we saw what his dad looked like as a player into his 40s - thick (old man thick). Jr as he aged looked a lot like his dad.

Well, he got big and muscular at a time when pretty much EVERY big league slugger was juicing. You'd have a hard time convincing me that he, like Bonds, didn't see less talented players passing him and decided to join in on the fun.

When Cecil Fielder hit 51 home runs in 1990, nobody had hit 50 since 1977 (and the most recent year before that was 1965). Griffey hit 56 twice and also went for 48 and 49. Maybe it's just a coincidence that such a talented (and clean) hitter came around at the exact same time as the steroid boom, but it's pretty unlikely.

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 12:38 pm

Shirley wrote:
tennbengal wrote:I don't buy body change with Griffey - because we saw what his dad looked like as a player into his 40s - thick (old man thick). Jr as he aged looked a lot like his dad.
Well, he got big and muscular at a time when pretty much EVERY big league slugger was juicing. You'd have a hard time convincing me that he, like Bonds, didn't see less talented players passing him and decided to join in on the fun.

When Cecil Fielder hit 51 home runs in 1990, nobody had hit 50 since 1977 (and the most recent year before that was 1965). Griffey hit 56 twice and also went for 48 and 49. Maybe it's just a coincidence that such a talented (and clean) hitter came around at the exact same time as the steroid boom, but it's pretty unlikely.

No offense, but I will cut you.

Post by **brian** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 12:46 pm

Shirley wrote:
tennbengal wrote:I don't buy body change with Griffey - because we saw what his dad looked like as a player into his 40s - thick (old man thick). Jr as he aged looked a lot like his dad.
Well, he got big and muscular at a time when pretty much EVERY big league slugger was juicing. You'd have a hard time convincing me that he, like Bonds, didn't see less talented players passing him and decided to join in on the fun.

When Cecil Fielder hit 51 home runs in 1990, nobody had hit 50 since 1977 (and the most recent year before that was 1965). Griffey hit 56 twice and also went for 48 and 49. Maybe it's just a coincidence that such a talented (and clean) hitter came around at the exact same time as the steroid boom, but it's pretty unlikely.

I'm not saying Griffey didn't juice, but there are other reasons why he might have hit that many home runs. The lack of 50-HR hitters between 65 to 77 to 90 isn't really proof of anything considering that a bunch of guys hit 50+ in the 1930s, 1960s,etc. well before PEDs were even a thing.

Post by **Shirley** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 1:00 pm

brian wrote:
Shirley wrote:
tennbengal wrote:I don't buy body change with Griffey - because we saw what his dad looked like as a player into his 40s - thick (old man thick). Jr as he aged looked a lot like his dad.
Well, he got big and muscular at a time when pretty much EVERY big league slugger was juicing. You'd have a hard time convincing me that he, like Bonds, didn't see less talented players passing him and decided to join in on the fun.

When Cecil Fielder hit 51 home runs in 1990, nobody had hit 50 since 1977 (and the most recent year before that was 1965). Griffey hit 56 twice and also went for 48 and 49. Maybe it's just a coincidence that such a talented (and clean) hitter came around at the exact same time as the steroid boom, but it's pretty unlikely.
I'm not saying Griffey didn't juice, but there are other reasons why he might have hit that many home runs. The lack of 50-HR hitters between 65 to 77 to 90 isn't really proof of anything considering that a bunch of guys hit 50+ in the 1930s, 1960s,etc. well before PEDs were even a thing.

Yeah, none of it's proof. Just evidence. His era, his size, his numbers - they all correlate nicely with all of the known juicers. I think people tend to give him a pass because he seemed so likable.

tennbengal · Post by **tennbengal** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:31 pm

Shirley wrote:
brian wrote:
Shirley wrote:
tennbengal wrote:I don't buy body change with Griffey - because we saw what his dad looked like as a player into his 40s - thick (old man thick). Jr as he aged looked a lot like his dad.
Well, he got big and muscular at a time when pretty much EVERY big league slugger was juicing. You'd have a hard time convincing me that he, like Bonds, didn't see less talented players passing him and decided to join in on the fun.

When Cecil Fielder hit 51 home runs in 1990, nobody had hit 50 since 1977 (and the most recent year before that was 1965). Griffey hit 56 twice and also went for 48 and 49. Maybe it's just a coincidence that such a talented (and clean) hitter came around at the exact same time as the steroid boom, but it's pretty unlikely.
I'm not saying Griffey didn't juice, but there are other reasons why he might have hit that many home runs. The lack of 50-HR hitters between 65 to 77 to 90 isn't really proof of anything considering that a bunch of guys hit 50+ in the 1930s, 1960s,etc. well before PEDs were even a thing.
Yeah, none of it's proof. Just evidence. His era, his size, his numbers - they all correlate nicely with all of the known juicers. I think people tend to give him a pass because he seemed so likable.

He was actually kinda an asshole in his Cincy stay. Course, he was injured for pretty much all of it, so maybe that led to his ill-humor...

Gunpowder · Post by **Gunpowder** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:34 pm

Weren't the balls kinda juiced in the 30s and the pitchers threw like straight 85 mph fastballs?

Post by **brian** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:46 pm

Gunpowder wrote:Weren't the balls kinda juiced in the 30s and the pitchers threw like straight 85 mph fastballs?

There's a lot of reasons, that was the point - expansion in the 60s, but there was also expansion in the 90s, which very possibly contributed to the HR totals (as well as PEDs, juiced baseballs, better (legal) weight training regimens, etc.).

A_B · Post by **A_B** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:51 pm

Expansion definitely played a role. Five man rotations as well, but that was probably offset by pitcher specialization.

Gunpowder · Post by **Gunpowder** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:00 pm

http://deadspin.com/curt-schilling-says ... 1678064839" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Like pretty much every MLB player is a Republican

Johnny Carwash · Post by **Johnny Carwash** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:12 pm

Best part of that is him thinking Smoltz is a Democrat, despite Smoltz having made his conservative opinions very public.

I still think Schilling should be in on merit, despite being one of my least favorite human beings associated with sports, but he's making it harder and harder for me to stick to that principle.

Brontoburglar · Post by **Brontoburglar** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:50 pm

Griffey's been doing some benching