2020 HOF Ballot

[Docwaukee]

Jeter absolutely deserves to get in.  

[John Taylor]

This is last year's ballot. I think Schilling should get in this year.

Jeter will definitely be 1st ballot HoF.

I'd like Larry Walker to get in well as this is his last year of eligibility I believe (Then he would be subject to the Veteran's committee)

[John Taylor]

5 hours ago, Blarg said:

Mike Trout is currently at 73.4 fWAR. Let that sink in, he has a higher career WAR than anyone on that list that wasn't a cheating SOB and better than all but two of those as well.

Trout should be the first player inducted before he retires. lol

[cysomeawfulpitcher]

5 hours ago, Billy_Ball said:

Konerko was almost an Angel at one time.

So was Crocodile Dundee.

[cysomeawfulpitcher]

5 hours ago, Taylor said:

Derek Jeter doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame.

[cysomeawfulpitcher]

Schilling doesn’t belong just for his shady video game practices and nearly bankrupting Rhode Island.  He could be a bleeding heart liberal and I’d say no dice.  Nolan Ryan is far from liberal yet he earned it, Angels or not.  Schilling is a grifter punk.

[Troll Daddy]

Pete Rose or screw the HOF

[Vegas Halo Fan]

6 hours ago, True Grich said:

Coverage of Jeter is going to be 24/7 on ESPN.

I'm waiting for SiriusXM to add a Derek Jeter Channel to their sports lineup - 24 hours of nothing but Jeter interviews and people talking about Jeter.

[Docwaukee]

2 hours ago, Kevinb said:

Jeter 

Clemens

Bonds

Kent

Manny

Helton

Rolen

Schilling

Jeter

cheater

cheater

cheater

cheater

 

[Dtwncbad]

I think we all know some names that we firmly believe were the cheaters, but I am 100% certain we only know a small fraction of them.

I have no idea if Jeter, Schilling, Walker, Rolen, Jones, Helton, etc were clean or not.

Sorry to be so cynical but I just can’t make any assumption that ANY player in that era was not a steroid user.  Unfortunately I personally believe it was infinitely more common than anyone wants to admit.

Baseball wants to save face and pretend it was really a handful of villains they can brand as cheaters they can blame and act like there were all these clean players staying true to the game.

I am not buying it.  Certainly not every player was dirty, but there is a much greater chance that the vast majority were doing it than the chance just some were.

I am not sure I see even one name on that JAWS list that I would bet a years salary was clean.

The other problem is I am very sure all these “cheaters” were facing other cheaters literally every day, so did they really have an advantage or were they keeping up with the Joneses and it was a wash?

Remwmbwr when a 91/92 mph fastball was a good fastball and then suddenly every team had multiple relievers that were hitting 97/98/99/100?

No wonder homers went up.  Good contact at 99 mph goes further than good contact at 92.  That’s just a fact.

I hate the steroid thing.  It’s miserable.  But I refuse to do this lazy thing where I hate Bonds and Sosa and McGwire and pretend all these other guys were clean.  Bull.

Don’t forget Lance Armstrong passed hundreds and hundreds of tests.  Had he retired before they figured him out he would have been viewed as the clean guy among cheaters.

I am more comfortable assuming they basically all were juiced and shrug and just accept it and throw up in my mouth. I’m not sure I have a more reasonable or reliable way to look at it. 

 

[Stradling]

Frank Thomas is one of those guys that performed like a PED user that I’d bet a years salary wasn’t using.  

[Lou]

11 hours ago, cysomeawfulpitcher said:

Schilling doesn’t belong just for his shady video game practices and nearly bankrupting Rhode Island.  He could be a bleeding heart liberal and I’d say no dice.  Nolan Ryan is far from liberal yet he earned it, Angels or not.  Schilling is a grifter punk.

[T.G.]

I'd vote for Jeter, Schilling, Walker and Helton. I'd give some serious consideration to Kent and Rolen as well.

[Dtwncbad]

18 minutes ago, True Grich said:

I'd vote for Jeter, Schilling, Walker and Helton. I'd give some serious consideration to Kent and Rolen as well.

I would probably vote for Kent just to piss off JoeMorgan, who just despised the attention Jeff Kent got as one of the “all-time greats” at 2B.  Morgan as a broadcaster was so openly critical of Kent defensively with an obvious narrative to paint him as basically “invalid” to be judged against other 2B.

Joe Morgan is a whiny weasel.

[Dtwncbad]

Just now, Dtwncbad said:

I would probably vote for Kent just to piss off JoeMorgan, who just despised the attention Jeff Kent got as one of the “all-time greats” at 2B.  Morgan as a broadcaster was so openly critical of Kent defensively with an obvious narrative to paint him as basically “invalid” to be judged against other 2B.

Joe Morgan is a whiny weasel.

For the record, I would never actually vote for somebody based on how it would make another player FEEL.  I am just having fun with a point about Morgan.

And I only bring this up because one of my personal rules for determining if someone should get HOF votes is to completely remove my assessment of how that player would or would not personally feel rewarded or awarded by making it or not making it.

Obviously a player feels honored and feels massive recognition for “getting in”. . . 

But I feel like the best approach is to ignore that part, and just vote to try to maintain historical accuracy regardless of any even obvious result that a lousy person feels personally rewarded.

Withholding votes to personally “punish” a player, or to deliberately starve them the personal satisfaction they may get from getting in, to me anyway, contaminates the historical accuracy of the Hall of Fame.

Yes, there are things that can be literally disqualifying, sure.  But even then I want some discipline in the analysis devoid of being personally punitive.

You have the obvious one. With this specific discipline I disagree with Rose not being a Hall of Famer because his “crimes” happened after he stopped playing and I am judging him as a player.  As a player he belongs.

It is blatantly obvious that his exclusion is driven primarily by wanting to starve him personally if the satisfaction.

How Pete Rose personally feels about being in or not in the Hall of Fame should not have any bearing on any vote.  Hate him if you want.  That’s beside the point.

I am OK with a strict position of him just not being eligible based on what all went down.  But if he ever became eligible you know lots of voters would not vote for him simply because they would not want Rise to personally experience the satisfaction of getting in, and that’s lame.

 

[T.G.]

2 hours ago, Stradling said:

Frank Thomas is one of those guys that performed like a PED user that I’d bet a years salary wasn’t using.  

[Dtwncbad]

“What helped Frank Thomas get back on top of his wife, I mean his game?”

 

[Catwhoshatinthehat]

Some of the guys on the ballot who never tested positive outperformed some guys currently in the HOF but playing in the era they played in works against them.  Kent's offensive numbers are some of the best for a 2B but he wasn't really known for his defense and during his best years he finished top 5 in MVP voting only once in 2000 when he won the award while being in the same lineup as Bonds.  Todd Helton got MVP votes 6 times in his 17 year career finishing top 5 only once.  He has a great career OBP but playing in Colorado works against him.  Rolen had some good prime years and was very good defensively but only got MVP votes 5 years in his 17 year career finishing top 5 once.  Andruw Jones has strong career numbers but again finished top 5 in MVP voting 5 times during his 17 year career and only one of those was top 5.  Paul Konerko same thing with strong career numbers but finished top 5 in MVP voting 5 times in his 18 year career finishing top 5 only once.  If these guys played in the 80's and put up anywhere close to the numbers they did then I think they're all in.  I think at least one of them makes it in during their 10 years of eligibility while others could make it in after via the era committee. 

I feel old because these are all guys I knew of from collecting cards the moment they made it to the majors.  Kent's a local guy and we have a family friend who knew his family and I have an autographed card/ball somewhere from when he came to my friends birthday party when he was a rookie.  I'm sure my nostalgia probably overrates them some and baseball HOF voting seems weirder than any of the other major sports.  That said the NBA seems to be the hall of very good as well when you look at some of the players who get in but it's all a matter of perspective and the era guys played in is important.  If any of Bonds, Clemens or Ramirez make it in then all of them should before they fall off.  

[Duren, Duren]

The numbers don't lie, but perceptions and presumptions can provide different interpretations. 

Larry Walker has all the analytic numbers to deserve HOF recognition. 

https://www.cooperstowncred.com/larry-walkers-hall-of-fame-case-and-the-coors-field-conundrum/

Before Coors field he already was an established rising star with Expos and no doubt would have continued to put up gaudy numbers. Maybe not as many homers, but more doubles, significant run production quality fielding and overall excellence. 

Think of Vlad had he remained on his Expos trajectory. Also most likely a HOF career. Same thing that propelled Gary Carter, Andre Dawson and Tim Raines into the HOF. All got more recognition in bigger markets, but the core of their careers was established with the Expos.

But Coors Field immediately had the opposite effect. It delegitimized Walker to a notable degree. 

And Walker was much more than homeruns. A five tool player who was consistent in all phases of the game. Injuries are a consideration, but shouldn't be that much of a negative when evaluating his entire career. 

 

[Dtwncbad]

16 minutes ago, Duren, Duren said:

The numbers don't lie, but perceptions and presumptions can provide different interpretations. 

Larry Walker has all the analytic numbers to deserve HOF recognition. 

https://www.cooperstowncred.com/larry-walkers-hall-of-fame-case-and-the-coors-field-conundrum/

Before Coors field he already was an established rising star with Expos and no doubt would have continued to put up gaudy numbers. Maybe not as many homers, but more doubles, significant run production quality fielding and overall excellence. 

Think of Vlad had he remained on his Expos trajectory. Also most likely a HOF career. Same thing that propelled Gary Carter, Andre Dawson and Tim Raines into the HOF. All got more recognition in bigger markets, but the core of their careers was established with the Expos.

But Coors Field immediately had the opposite effect. It delegitimized Walker to a notable degree. 

And Walker was much more than homeruns. A five tool player who was consistent in all phases of the game. Injuries are a consideration, but shouldn't be that much of a negative when evaluating his entire career. 

 

Larry Walker was a better major league player than Derek Jeter.

[Lou]

I'd vote Kent to piss off Bonds.

[Tank]

3 hours ago, Dtwncbad said:

Withholding votes to personally “punish” a player, or to deliberately starve them the personal satisfaction they may get from getting in, to me anyway, contaminates the historical accuracy of the Hall of Fame.

joe freakin' dimaggio didn't get in until his third year. let that sink in.

[Dtwncbad]

2 minutes ago, Tank said:

joe freakin' dimaggio didn't get in until his third year. let that sink in.

I both “love” the Hall of Fame because I have emotion as a baseball fan AND at the same time I have very little respect for it because I have a brain.

[yamsi12]

On 11/18/2019 at 2:02 PM, Billy_Ball said:

Konerko was almost an Angel at one time.

And he will almost be in the Hall of Fame.

[Dtwncbad]

9 hours ago, yamsi12 said:

And he will almost be in the Hall of Fame.

You almost married Gisele.