Colin Wyers wrote an excellent article for Baseball Prospectus in response to the BBWAA not electing a single player on a ballot that had more than 10 qualified Hall of Famers.
the Hall is dedicated to preserving history, honoring excellence and connecting generations of baseball fans.
The debate over the latest slate of players focuses on the second point, and focuses on the idea of honoring rather than the idea of excellence. Writers seem reticent to honor players who they believe engaged in questionable conduct, and that’s understandable and, to an extent, admirable.
But that narrow focus ignores the other parts of the Hall’s mission. Leaving out a single player, or even a small handful, may still allow the Hall to preserve history. (Although Barry Bonds, as the greatest player the game has ever seen, may in fact be the single player who challenges that notion.) But by refusing to induct hitters like Bagwell and Piazza who are so far merely tainted by association with this period in baseball history, voters would be rendering the Hall incapable of fulfilling that part of its mission fully. And in terms of connecting generations of baseball fans, leaving aside the stars of an entire era of play is actively detrimental to that goal. Fans who grew up watching those players will not forget their accomplishments; the Hall is incapable of conferring fame, merely recognizing it. A Hall without them, without the greatest players of an entire generation, simply delegitimizes itself.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20130107/13514721599/sony-issues-bob-dylan-copyright-collection-volume-solely-to-extend-copyright-dylans-work.shtml
(dying laughing)
Brilliant. http://www.mccoveychronicles.com/2013/1/9/3855486/big-important-opinions-on-barry-bonds-and-the-hall-of-fame
And I wholeheartedly agree with his assertion that at least half of the players in the hall would have used PEDs if they had
1. been around when they were playing and
2. widely accepted by other players as helping them be good at baseball.
I haven’t been around much over the holidays, but you guys really missed out on all the great comments I didn’t type in because I was following OV on my phone!
Re: HOF. meh. Relax. Biggio will get in next year. So will Maddux and Piazza. Probably some others. Bonds and Clemens will be >50%. You heard it here first (unless some link that I didn’t read posted in the last 3 threads said so).
Why? There are 2 HOFs, maybe 3 depending on how you think about the Vets committee. None of these guys qualify in the electorate’s mind as first ballot HOFers (as opposed to general HOFers). Biggio is a HOFer, but is he a first ballot HOF? Is he a yes on >13 of those Keltner questions? Probably not. So a lot of folks didn’t vote for him this year because he wasn’t a clear superduperstar. Look at Alomar. 2nd year inductee.
Alomar was also hurt by spitting in the ump’s face. Year 2 he got 16% more of the votes. If the voters will deny him first-ballot entry because of that, then a whole lot more will do so for the PEDs guys. But next year many of them will vote for Piazza, Clemens, Bonds, Sosa… It’s the “I’m not going to award this jerk/cheat with first-ballot HOF status” approach. It’s way bigger than SK suggested when he was spitballing reasons to vote against candidates. Plus, lots of the voters aren’t going to vote for the PEDs guys because they just resent being put into the position of having to do it, but on the side, they know some of these guys belong, so they only need a good excuse to do so. (Think of all the “tell us what to do/how to vote/give us criteria” articles BBWAA members have turned out lately.) Now they’ll have the excuse. There will be backlash. The coverage is already about how no one was elected for only the second time since SK retired. It’s already enough to give a significant number of people cover to make the “we can’t change the past so we should accept it happened argument.”
No major change in HOF procedure will be forthcoming or necessary.
I was happy to see this in the Keltner thread:
At >1 WAR above anyone else on the Cubs last year, Darwin Barney has punched his ticket.
I return from the lurk, and I bring the always readable Charlie Pierce on today’s exercise in sanctimony:
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/midday-diversion-010913
@ SVB:
I think this is possible, but the ballot is getting crowded and even though they allow 10 votes ,a large portion of guys vote for only 5 guys or so. Without collusion I don’t see how guys who aren’t slam dunks get in.
As you mentioned, I don’t know if Biggio is a slam dunk. Piazza probably has a better case because he was the best hitting catcher ever, but then BACK ACNE!
Maddux will get serious votes and I’d be shocked if he doesn’t get in. Frank Thomas should, but he was never the friendliest guy and I can see people punishing him for being large in the steroid era even though he campaigned repeatedly for testing. He’s another guy that is not a “first ballot HOFer” to a lot of voters. Same with Glavine. I don’t know many people would deny he deserves to be in, but they won’t vote for him next year.
That’s still a shitload of guys who are splitting the rest of the 3 or 4 or votes most voters will have left after voting for Maddux. Guys like Kent and Mussina could be in danger of not getting the 5% (and if not them, then Sosa and Palmeiro’s 1,100 combined career HRs could fall off).
I think this blog and the readers here are as open to players getting in on their on-field performance without regard to the PED bullshit, and first ballot vs. non-first ballot nonsense as anywhere and we still only elected Piazza, Bonds and Raines. It’s going to be REALLY hard next year to get a 75% consensus on anyone not named Maddux.
Then Randy, Pedro, Sheffield and Smoltz join the parade with Nomar and Luis Gonzalez sucking up votes in 2015. There just aren’t enough votes being made for all these guys to get in AND also keep serious contenders from getting the 5% necessary to stay on the ballot. The ballot of rejected names will suddenly be more impressive than the Hall of Fame itself.
@ Urk:
(dying laughing)
@ Aisle424:
If voters stick to a 5 vote max, then I totally agree. Either way, I think this is the end for Trammell, who I truly think is deserving, because he doesn’t have enough years left to make it through the bottleneck. Also Mattingly, who I never thought was Hall-worthy.
But I think the same cover that will let folks vote for PED guys next year will also allow them to vote for more than 5. Those that have a strict rule and are really down on the PED guys might go with a vote like Maddux, Biggio, Morris, Martinez, Trammell. Or a “clean” ballot like Maddux, Biggio, Thomas, Trammell, Morris, with a grudging acceptance of Bonds and Clemens because their early career was hall-worthy. But I think you’ll see enough votes for Sosa and McGwire to keep them on. Palmeiro is probably toast though because the voters didn’t really support him before the bottleneck, unless enough people bundle him with Sosa and vote for both.
Kent will be interesting. As I recall, he was more of an ass to folks than Thomas, and I think he’s borderline (though only based on memory).
@ SVB:
There seems to be a stigma that one can’t vote for more than 6 without it diminishing the “power” of the vote. I don’t know how any sane person can look at this year’s ballot and not find at least 8 guys to vote for. I had a hard time narrowing my votes to only 10, but I’m not trying to punish anybody.with my non-votes. But you look through the ballots that guys published and they seem to average about 5 votes per ballot. There seems to be as few guys who used all 10 votes allowed as there were guys who only voted for one or none. Maybe I’m wrong, but I’m not wrong by alot. I’d be shocked if I found out the average ballot had more than 6 votes on it.
Well, I’m shocked. The average ballot had 6.6 votes. There were 3756 votes cast on 569 ballots. So they aren’t as bad as I thought, but by comparison the OV voters averaged almost 8.5 votes per ballot.
Biggio I see as being in the same class as Roberto Alomar and Ryne Sandberg. He’s a HOFer, but not a first-ballot type.
@ Aisle424:
6.6 is still quite low and a lot voted for 10.
Why does there need to be a first ballot distinction? Either you’re a hall of famer or you aren’t.
@ dmick89:
Jonah Keri mentioned that today in his piece: http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/47091/the-fallacy-of-the-baseball-hall-of-fame?fb_comment_id=fbc_406139676136097_2700723_406323242784407#f1362c1dc
dmick89 wrote:
Fixed
I think the reason i care so much about this is that i know how big of a deal this is for the players and their families. As we all know life is too short for them to have to not get their proper due.
It would have been really nice if one time Ronnie got to sign a baseball “Ron Santo #10 Hall of Fame”
I find it interesting how on the radio I get to hear a CBS Sports Minute rant about how terrible steroids were for the game, instantly followed by an ad for Force Factor (which always sounded like they were saying Horse Factor to me).
*clap*
@ Rice Cube:
An empty space is worth a thousand words.
@ Suburban kid:
IT is a fantastic job
http://www.awfulannouncing.com/2013/january/is-this-the-dumbest-question-in-espn-history.html
@ GBTS
Anyone remember when it was fun to watch ESPN? Yeah…It’s been so long ago that I don’t remember either. PTI and Around the Horn are about the only things I can watch on the Worldwide Leader these days.
@ mikeakaleroy:
I don’t watch any of the shows on ESPN. I’ll occasionally watch a game, but I avoid that channel for anything other than that.
@ dmick89:
Ditto. I remember the moment when I stopped watching ESPN. The day after the Bears lost the super bowl. I decided I didn’t want to hear any more of their shit and it has been great ever since.
@ dmick89:
@ WaLi:
I used to listen to/watch Mike and Mike every morning, but then it continually became Golic going on some rant about someone’s opinion and Greeny belittling sabermetrics and those that put stock in stats, and just got sick of it. I only started watching Around the Horn once Mariotti was no longer a part of it.
ESPN is the McDonalds of sportsnews: it’s cheap, it’s everywhere, and it’s technically food, but you’d rather have anything else. If you absolutely need it, you’ll consume it, but you know that’s it’s going to be pretty sad
@ Myles:
I often find myself crying in the fetal position whilst watching ESPN, so great analogy.
@ GBTS:
(dying laughing) wow. I can’t believe that question was phrased that way.
I’m not going to lie, when was thinking about RG3 being hurt and coming back in, I immediately though about Cutler and how he left the game and was ridiculed by media and fans. But I would never think that the two were related, and wouldn’t ask such a dumb question.
@ Myles:
Exactly.
Just outstanding
http://deadspin.com/5974860/
rick telander’s HOF choices are pretty amazing:
also amazing is that he thinks that noted cokehead tim raines was clean. raines openly admitted to having a 40k/year coke habit and said he used coke in between innings in the clubhouse. what the fuck.
@ EnricoPallazzo:
Does coke give you bacne?
No?
Then it’s clean.
The Great Baseball Cleanup continues:
My favorite part is someone replied and said “Uh oh Tony Campana”
(dying laughing)
not sure if anyone cares about arrested development but it looks like the release is officially set for May
new shit: http://www.obstructedview.net/major-league-baseball/daily-facepalm-1-10-13.html