Bro, you of all people left out Trammell? WTF?

My ballot:

 

Bonds

Randy Johnson

Mike Piazza

Mark McGwire

Roger Clemens

Pedro Martinez

Edgar Martinez

Sammy Sosa

John Smoltz

 

Uh...yeah.  When typing out my votes not when actually voting.  Coulda sworn I'd remembered to list him.

 

But, yeah, I DID vote for him.

Regarding PED users already in, you can't change the past, but you can make things better going forward.

No you can't. As long as the mediocre players, cheats, and horrible people are in, any case to make the HOF not look like a joke is washed away. Personally speaking, the only way to make the hall not look silly is to start it all over or just admit that the moral high ground stuff is bullshit.

Also, if you would have voted Henderson into the Hall, chances are you already let in a steroid user so the keep the louts out thing is double stupid.

To both Phil & El Dragon: The only problem I have with eliminating ped users is that we don't know for certain who did and who didn't. If wrestling has taught us anything, it's that peds work differently on different body types. Piper was juiced to the gills and looked like an average guy in shape, other guys didn't even look human. Canseco claimed 90% and while he's a self-serving douche, he hasn't been proven wrong yet, so I just figure everybody tried it and leave it at that.

OK you're forgiven.

 

 

Bro, you of all people left out Trammell? WTF?

My ballot:

 

Bonds

Randy Johnson

Mike Piazza

Mark McGwire

Roger Clemens

Pedro Martinez

Edgar Martinez

Sammy Sosa

John Smoltz

 

Uh...yeah.  When typing out my votes not when actually voting.  Coulda sworn I'd remembered to list him.

 

But, yeah, I DID vote for him.

 

John - I think you are missing the point with me.

 

I am not judging at all. Nor am I trying to decide who used and who didn't

 

I literally just did it to allow myself to vote for people who otherwise wouldn't have gotten the vote.

 

Votes for Bonds and Clemens would have meant no vote for Mussina and Trammell (just to pick two guys I voted for. I am not sure who I would have excluded)

 

I did think about years on the ballot and the like. Like I would rather use the vote now on Trammell before he is gone.

Bonds and Clemens will either still be there next year (or in the Hall)

My friend, assuming that you're not drunk (as it's a bit early in the day for that), how did you miss Biggio and Piazza?

Same way I missed Smith and Trammell: I decided against them.

You can argue I'm being too strict, but who on my list would you take out to put either of those two in?

It's the weird ones I don't see. Smoltz and Smith but not Clemens or Pedro? McGriff & Walker but not Piazza?

To both Phil & El Dragon: The only problem I have with eliminating ped users is that we don't know for certain who did and who didn't. If wrestling has taught us anything, it's that peds work differently on different body types. Piper was juiced to the gills and looked like an average guy in shape, other guys didn't even look human. Canseco claimed 90% and while he's a self-serving douche, he hasn't been proven wrong yet, so I just figure everybody tried it and leave it at that.

I don't disagree with you. Which is why I put Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, and Clemens in on my ballot.

What I am saying, is that if people want to play the "they use roids, so no Hall of Fame for you" card, then it's smarter to put the best players of there generation we have little reason to assume they did It other then "they were baseball players, they probably did it". If McGriff put up his career numbers in any decade that isn't the late 80's to Early 2000s, he'd have been in the Hall. But most voters who don't vote him in while saying he wasn't the best for his era, while then not voting for the best of his era because they think they cheated. It's a stupid double standard IMO.

How does anyone not vote for Pedro?

Talk to alstein and Dolfan

Screwed up and didn't see his name. I'd retract my Sheffield vote and give it to Pedro.

I am trying to figure out how you only voted for 6 guys (7 if I count you wanting to vote for Smoltz)

I won't vote for the needle in the ass gang, especially not BIg Mac or Sosa, who aren't hall of famers, even with the inflated stats. I think Bagwell, Edgar Martinez and Walker are at that level just below HOF. Don't think Mussina is quite there either, nor Jeff Kent. . . .

What's really gonna suck is that this year is so deep players that have a case to make it are going to eliminated from the ballot entirely due to there being so many names to "save"

I am trying to figure out how you only voted for 6 guys (7 if I count you wanting to vote for Smoltz)

I won't vote for the needle in the ass gang, especially not BIg Mac or Sosa, who aren't hall of famers, even with the inflated stats. I think Bagwell, Edgar Martinez and Walker are at that level just below HOF. Don't think Mussina is quite there either, nor Jeff Kent. . . .

Anyone who doesn't think Jeff Bagwell is HOF level needs to re-evaluate to me.

I voted for Clemens, Piazza, Bagwell and Bonds and debated not doing it because of the PED taint (even if the evidence for Bagwell and Piazza's usage is circumstantial at best).  

 

At this point I am ambivalent about PED-usage.  I have no problem if someone wants to penalize them for any PED taint, but I don't know that it's the job of the voters to determine what penalty to throw down on that.  Plus, as John stated, how do we draw the line?  It would be probably be safer to assume ALL of them used, rather than just a handful, given the environment.  But since PED's were not banned by MLB until the early-00's...clearly MLB/MLBPA didn't care.  So who am I to become judge, jury and executioner when the game itself didn't seem to care?

 

My whole thing is, the ballot is so damn loaded that guys like Sheffield and Carlos Delgado, for example, are going to get little consideration - not that I am in love with either as HOF'ers, but they both need consideration and would have gotten some consideration in previous eras.  The voters need to throw in 4-5 players this year or otherwise I seriously think in years to come voters are not going to give serious consideration to guys like Tim Raines who need voters to evaluate the full-scope of their games.

Bagwell, Biggio, Bonds, Clemens, Johnson, Pedro, Piazza, Raines, Schilling, Smoltz, and oh crap I'm already out of space.

 

This ballot doesn't have the ceiling that last year's did (minus Bonds and Clemens, of course), but the depth is still ridiculous. Biggio has to get in this year after coming so close last year, and I think Johnson, Pedro, and Smoltz get in without much difficulty.

Your and Tim's love of Schilling pains me to the bone

My Ballot

Bagwell

Biggio

Bonds

Clemens

Big Unit

Pedro

McGwire

Piazza

Smoltz

Walker

 

Voted for Bonds and Clemens since they should be in the hall of fame. I'm high on McGwire but my age probably has something to do with that since I remember the chase to break Maris fondly. Big Unit and Pedro are no doubters in my mind so they were easy. Bagwell is one of my favorite players of the 1990's and the bullshit steroid cloud over him that is costing him votes is crap. Biggio should already be in the hall so that was an easy choice and Piazza is the greatest hitting catcher in MLB history. Smoltz's record of saves and wins plus his great postseason numbers does it for me. I honestly could have chosen more then 10 but the last spot went to Walker because of how great a hitter he was.  

My argument for McGriff (and probably Walker too really)would be that if you someone tell me that you are not voting for steroid guys, then you should act like they don't even exist. McGriff's numbers don't look amazing for his era, but generally it seems most think the best players in his era were cheating, where as nobody seems to think McGriff is. Take out Big Mac, Palmero, and Bagwell (since people apparently think he did it because reasons) the only 1B in his era we can say was certainly better then him was Thomas.

And in how many other eras is a player with a career .284 average, 493 homers, and a .886 career OPS not getting in?

 

Fred McGriff should get in based on that Tom Emanski Skills commercial alone.  If ESPN didn't play that commercial 50 times a day in the mid/late 90s, they didnt play it at all.

 

Apologies. I think I did miss what you were going for and it makes perfect sense. I can't be too critical of a vote for a favorite player (unless someone's favorite player was Jermaine Dye), and I applaud the thoughtfulness of keeping Trammell on the ballot, though I begin to despair of the writers ever realizing what they were seeing when he played.

 

Can we all agree to make a special exhibit for the bloody sock and quit this nonsense of discussing Schilling as a HoFr?

 

John - I think you are missing the point with me.

 

I am not judging at all. Nor am I trying to decide who used and who didn't

 

I literally just did it to allow myself to vote for people who otherwise wouldn't have gotten the vote.

 

Votes for Bonds and Clemens would have meant no vote for Mussina and Trammell (just to pick two guys I voted for. I am not sure who I would have excluded)

 

I did think about years on the ballot and the like. Like I would rather use the vote now on Trammell before he is gone.

Bonds and Clemens will either still be there next year (or in the Hall)

 

 

I am trying to figure out how you only voted for 6 guys (7 if I count you wanting to vote for Smoltz)

I won't vote for the needle in the ass gang, especially not BIg Mac or Sosa, who aren't hall of famers, even with the inflated stats. I think Bagwell, Edgar Martinez and Walker are at that level just below HOF. Don't think Mussina is quite there either, nor Jeff Kent. . . .

Anyone who doesn't think Jeff Bagwell is HOF level needs to re-evaluate to me.

 

Why? Fall short on HRs, Hits and Rbis. . .  I'm very much a magic number guy, for better or worse.  Sorry, but 449 Hrs, 2314 hits, and 1529 RBI are not HOF worthy. Hall of very good, or great yes, but in my eyes he fall short.

Bagwell is one of my favorite players of the 1990's and the bullshit steroid cloud over him that is costing him votes is crap. 

It ain't a BS cloud.  He was a roider.  Let's just be honest with ourselves.  I didn't vote for him but it wasn't because of the roids, FWIW.

 

My argument for McGriff (and probably Walker too really)would be that if you someone tell me that you are not voting for steroid guys, then you should act like they don't even exist. McGriff's numbers don't look amazing for his era, but generally it seems most think the best players in his era were cheating, where as nobody seems to think McGriff is. Take out Big Mac, Palmero, and Bagwell (since people apparently think he did it because reasons) the only 1B in his era we can say was certainly better then him was Thomas.

And in how many other eras is a player with a career .284 average, 493 homers, and a .886 career OPS not getting in?

 

Fred McGriff should get in based on that Tom Emanski Skills commercial alone.  If ESPN didn't play that commercial 50 times a day in the mid/late 90s, they didnt play it at all.

 

 

 

Tom Emanski article

Sadly the guy I want in is past eligibility.

I still say Munson belongs in the Hall!

 

James

McGriff's my homer pick.  There are 1B worse than him who have gotten in.  Plus he will always make the Defensive Skills Drills video HOF.   Also was a key part of the strongest Braves team of their run.   Also character.

That said, I do find it funny they picked a guy who didn't have a great defensive rep for those videos.  I guess Mark Grace wasn't avaliable.

 

As for Larry Walker- even if it was Coors Field- his offensive numbers were insane, and they were good Early on in Montreal, which was a pitcher's park, so it wasn't all Coors.   Also a great defensive RFer , not Heyward class, but close.

 

Was still going strong at the end, could have played longer if he had wished and added to counting stats.

 

Larry Walker > Dale Murphy easily, and that hurts me to say but it's true.  I think he's underrated.   Walker also gets bonus points for character, I remember him being considered one of the ambassadors of the 90s, like how Dale Murphy was in the 80s. 

 

My rule on roids is I guess what the roids did for the player, and adjust.  Bonds is a HOFer under that criteria, Clemens almost is, Sosa is a Dale Murphy case, McGwire would have been replacement-level.  Non-HR, non-power pitcher stats are a bonus in these cases.   Also, I require proof of roiding, not just suspicion (so Bagwell I count as legit, as I would Andruw Jones even if his career died early due to a case of the Chris Hero diet)

 

I'll admit to bias against Curt Schilling for his level of douchebaggery post-career, he's hall of very good.

 

As for Pedro- he is HOF-worthy, ran out of names, I would vote him in most years. 

Ya know, it's perfectly okay to have a hero and admit that he's not a HOFr... My hero as a kid was Bazooka Joe Adcock, and while he was a formidable force with the bat, I knew at ten years old that he wasn't in the same strata as Mathews and Aaron. Munson was a fine player, but one who was already declining rapidly when he had his tragic crash. "Aging" and "productive" are not words used to describe catchers unless one is speaking of Carlton Fisk.

 

 

 

Sadly the guy I want in is past eligibility.

I still say Munson belongs in the Hall!

 

James

No way can I vote for Bonds

Then I guess you think there shouldn't be a hall of fame because he is unquestionably the greatest hitter to ever live.

I am trying to figure out how you only voted for 6 guys (7 if I count you wanting to vote for Smoltz)

I won't vote for the needle in the ass gang, especially not BIg Mac or Sosa, who aren't hall of famers, even with the inflated stats. I think Bagwell, Edgar Martinez and Walker are at that level just below HOF. Don't think Mussina is quite there either, nor Jeff Kent. . . .

Anyone who doesn't think Jeff Bagwell is HOF level needs to re-evaluate to me.

Why? Fall short on HRs, Hits and Rbis. . .  I'm very much a magic number guy, for better or worse.  Sorry, but 449 Hrs, 2314 hits, and 1529 RBI are not HOF worthy. Hall of very good, or great yes, but in my eyes he fall short.

He's 37th all time in WAR for position players. He's 21st all time in OPS at .947. He's one of the best hitters of all time. Your arguments against him are dumb.