RotoGuru Baseball Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: Active Players with HoF chance

Posted by: Nerfherders
- [308512415] Fri, May 30, 2003, 13:17

Gonna start a list of active players who I think have a legitimate shot at the HoF.

Locks:
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Greg Maddux
Tom Glavine

Will likely make it:
Rafael Palmeiro
Fred McGriff
Sammy Sosa
Mike Piazza
Randy Johnson

Need a few more years, but still likely:
Jeff Bagwell
Alex Rodriguez
Junior Griffey
Ivan Rodriguez
Mike Mussina
Curt Schilling

Good shots:
Bernie Williams
Nomar Garciaparra
Chipper Jones
Gary Sheffield
Edgar Martinez
Manny Ramirez
Roberto Alomar
Frank Thomas
Kevin Brown
Trevor Hoffman
John Smoltz (Depends how well Eck does in voting)

Outside Shots:
John Olerud
Mariano Rivera
Jason Giambi
Barry Larkin
Derek Jeter
Craig Biggio


This is by no means a complete list. Just off the top of my head. I considered nobody under age 30, except A-Rod. Please add to it or discuss!
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
96filthy
      ID: 302885
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 03:13
certain guys that are in, can be linked directly to some known offenders. i had idolized roberto alomar growing up, but to imagine that he stayed clean in baltimore is difficult. rickey henderson definitely has plenty of direct links as well. even cal ripken. so many guys ruined it for everyone. some guys just stay good and healthy forever but have been tainted by association, at least to me.

it's nice that some of them got enough votes to linger long enough for more details to hopefully come out. what are they gonna do with arod? i can't see bonds and clemens letting this go by as quiet as mcgwire, palmeiro and sosa have. palmeiro might drop off the ballot next year, sosa the year after. mcgwire, bonds and clemens will all linger 15 years on the ballot unless some major news comes out at some point.

the real problem this year, and likely next seems to be the wave of talent that hit the ballot. morris, bagwell, raines, murphy are the only returning players that went up in votes this year. murphy is off the ballot now. too many votes went to new players.

the following two year's will probably see 3-5 guys voted in total. the current remaining players might not see a spike until 2016. smith, trammell, and mattingly seem stuck playing out the stretch.

the votes should go to the new guys again next year, maddux, thomas, mussina, glavine, kent, a small spike for the top 5, and the 15th year. morris might see the double spike and make it. maddux should make it. biggio should see a large enough spike based on position to make it close, while thomas is a question mark because of his lack of position. he should get around 300 and have a similar fight to bagwell. glavine should get a large amount, but not make it, and mussina/kent will steal some votes too.

randro seem to be a lock in 2015. smoltz will steal votes. biggio should make it this time. thomas, bagwell and piazza will probably go in 2017, but one might sneak in 2016. mcgriff, walker, edgar will all linger around like mattingly, trammell, smith, murphy, raines. raines will probably emerge around 2017-2018. and schilling will probably rise along the way. i'd love to see mcgriff get a late push too, but unlikely.

2014- gmaddux(1), jmorris(15)
2015- rjohnson(1), pmartinez(1), cbiggio(3)
2016- kgriffey(1), fthomas(3)
2017- mpiazza(5), jbagwell(7)

that's my predictions for the upcoming traffic jam.

who am i overlooking? pudge, kent, schilling, chipper, smoltz, mussina, nomar, delgado, sheffield, hoffman, wagner, manny, vlad, think they'll make it? (chipper, kent, pudge, schilling, smoltz, maybe hoffman likely. i'd really love to see delgado get support)

mcgriff, walker, edgar, think they'll see a spike?

bonds, clemens, mcgwire, think something will bump them?
97Khahan
      ID: 39432178
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 09:16
I think Bonds and clemens make it. Maybe not next year but I think they'll be in. I think a LOT of voters wanted to make a statement for the first year but will vote in later years and we'll see a steady rise in vote totals for them.

98Razor
      ID: 177192916
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 09:47
What makes you think that, Khahan? Support hasn't increased for Sosa, Palmeiro or McGwire, players with Hall of Fame numbers.
99KrazyKoalaBears
      ID: 24650229
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 10:05
Following up on filthy's post, it's interesting to go back and look at the 1996 ballot, the last time no players were selected.

Guys as far down as 29.1% (Bruce Sutter, 3rd year) ended up making it eventually. Of those players who were eventual HoFers, but didn't get voted in on the 1996 ballot, it's also interesting to see when they made it...

1997: Phil Niekro (5th year, Only player selected)
A gain of 12% in one year. Was this an over-correction to the lack of inductees on the 1996 vote?

1998: Don Sutton (5th year, Only player selected)
56.8% > 57.4% > 63.8% > 73.2% > 81.6% from 1994 to 1998. Again, did the lack of inductees in 96/97 help move the needle? He only moved 7% across his first three ballots and then gains of 9.4% and 8.4%.

2000: Fisk and Tony Perez (9th year)
Again, a year with a lack of obvious choices beyond Fisk. Fisk wasn't going to be 1st ballot with Ryan, Brett, and Yount in 1999, so his jump from 66.4% to 79.6% makes sense. Perez's movement makes less sense (down years highlighted): 50.0% (1992), 55.1%, 57.7%, 56.3%, 65.7%, 66.0%, 67.9%, 60.8%, 77.2%

Is it a coincidence that the years Perez lost ground were years where only 1st ballot players made it? No. Is it coincidence that the years he made the biggest gains there were no other obvious choices? No.

2006: Bruce Sutter (13th Ballot, Only player selected)
A major down year for players available. The highest player who was on one of his first four ballots was Orel Hershiser at 11.2% on his 1st ballot. Rice (64.8%) gains again and is racing against time.

2009: Henderson (1st Ballot) and Jim Rice
Rice finally makes it on his last ballot by 1.4%. His induction was more a race against time than anything else as the last 5 ballots he was on showed steady gains: 59.5%, 64.8%, 63.5% (Ripken/Gwynn 1st Ballot), 72.2%, 76.4%.

In my opinion, the thin field in 2008 helped Rice get into the range where it was easy for a few extra voters to jump on board, despite Henderson's 1st ballot.

===

Biggio (68.2%) will make it. Whether he makes it next year or in the next "down" year, it won't matter. He'll make it.

Morris (67.7%) is going to cut it close. I can't imagine he'll get voted in with a guy like Maddux on his 1st ballot.

I think Bagwell and Piazza also make it eventually. The question is Tim Raines. He only went from 48.7% to 52.2% in a year when nobody was elected. That was an opportunity for him to make big gains and he didn't. It'll likely take a very "down" year for him to get close enough.
100Khahan
      ID: 39432178
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 11:28
Razor, difference with Bonds and Clemens is that people seem to think they pinpoint what year those 2 started PED's and both were generally thought of as HoF'ers before that year.
101Da Bomb
      Donor
      ID: 487112814
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 14:30
There should be an overcompassing guideline for the steroid era as every voter has their own logic on separating certain players from others. Some say Clemens and Bonds deserve to get in because they were HOFers before they used. Others argue that the fact they they used at all and therefore "cheated" should make them ineligible. Yet some of these same people are voting for Bagwell and Piazza, where no one would be surprised if it was discovered tomorrow that they used. What if they get voted in and then it was discovered years later that they used? Would some of those who voted for them want them removed from the Hall? And back to Clemens, there is another level of confusion as some won't vote for him because his trainer alleged he used and he was mentioned in the Mitchell Report, yet others can point to the fact that Clemens denied these allegations to a federal grand jury and was later found not guilty, so no one can really say 100% either way.

There's just too much grey area right now to make any sense of how to vote and for who.
102Perm Dude
      ID: 201027169
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 14:45
I think that's right. For many voters, the cloud of PEDs over some players injects an uncertainty into a process in which, to be elected, there should be an overwhelming amount of support.

Maybe in two years, when Omar Vizquel is on the ballot. Nothing like a 5'9" 180 lb player to make voters forget about PED's!
103Da Bomb
      Donor
      ID: 487112814
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 15:31
Don't forget about 5'-10" 180 lb., 50 SBer Alex Sanchez, the first player to be busted for PEDs.
104Perm Dude
      ID: 201027169
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 15:44
I hear he was 130 when he started...
105blue hen
      Dude
      ID: 710321114
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 16:04
A Hall of Fame without Roger Clemens and Barry Bonds is not worth much of my time.

Jack Morris was not the dominant starting pitcher of his era.
106Razor
      ID: 177192916
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 16:10
What's the difference between a Coopertown without Roger Clemens and the Tour de France record books without Lance Armstrong?
107Kyle
      Sustainer
      ID: 052753312
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 16:34
I keep hearing about how Morris was the most dominant SP of his era, but I'm not old enough to know his career (I was 7 when he retired) so I went back and looked at pitching stats from 1977 until 1994, cherry picking Morris's exact career.

Morris was very good over that time period, he led the league in wins over that period. But he also had the second most losses and started more games than anyone else. His complete games are very impressive in an era that started putting a good amount of value on closers, 45 more than Blyleven. But was he dominant?

He wasn't the most dominant or feared, that would go to Nolan Ryan. But was he second best? Well looking at fWAR he was behind Nolan Ryan, Roger Clemens, and Bert Blyleven and he had benefit of missing Blyleven's peak by 3 years and Clemens had 7 less years pitched.

Dwight Gooden, Bret Saberhagen, and Steve Carlton are just behind him.

I believe Morris was very good for a long period of time, but long periods of good aren't HoF worthy, you need to have some years of great, which Morris doesn't. When you compare to pitchers who have 7 less years than you or when you're just slightly better than guys who are out of their peak, you're not a HOFer.
108Perm Dude
      ID: 201027169
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 17:54
Jack Morris was not the dominant starting pitcher of his era.

Is this the threshhold? The dominant starting pitcher of his era?

Being very good for a long period of time is, IMO, something to be added to the mix. Not because of the "long period" portion but because of the "very good" qualifier (especially when you see that he went 21-6 at age 37).

I don't know that Morris is Hall worthy or not (I don't have a dog in this fight, but would lean a tiny bit toward not Hall-worthy), but disqualifying him based upon some overly-restrictive qualifications probably isn't the best way of looking at it.
109GO
      ID: 441171223
      Thu, Jan 10, 2013, 23:28
I feel its more like Top 5 pitcher for extended period. Can't be just the one guy obviously. Otherwise right off the bat you'd be voting Glavine out but Maddux in next year.
110blue hen
      Dude
      ID: 710321114
      Fri, Jan 11, 2013, 09:53
Just calling out the top one-liner used to get Morris in. By semi-advanced stats (to wit, ERA), he's probably out. So we have to look at some other measures, and they just aren't there. Morris had some serious postseason implosions and his overall numbers are unimpressive, so that's out. He won a lot of games specifically from 1980-89, but wins aren't that important and many of his exact peers had many more wins. Tom Glavine himself is a guy who trumps Morris, but still has people ahead of him- I'd take Glavine as a guy who didn't have to be #1 but is still worthy.

Dave Stieb was better than Jack Morris.
111Khahan
      ID: 39432178
      Fri, Jan 11, 2013, 10:05
Jack Morris is the Todd Helton of pitchers for his time. Nobody denies he's a good player. I doubt many batters were happy to see him on the mound. He got the job done better than most and had a few things about him that stand out. But the whole package, it just isn't there for him.

Don't get me wrong. If I were a GM and Morris came to me during his career and said he wanted to pitch for my team I'd be ecstatic. But if I'm voting for HoF, he's not on my list.
112GO
      ID: 811442813
      Fri, Jan 11, 2013, 12:14
Sele
113Perm Dude
      ID: 201027169
      Fri, Jan 11, 2013, 12:42
#109: This seems like a fair standard.
114GO
      ID: 811442813
      Fri, Jan 11, 2013, 13:34
I think Mussina is going to be this generations Jack Morris.
115RJ
      ID: 15041511
      Tue, Jan 15, 2013, 12:04
I feel like Moose is a HOFer
116Perm Dude
      ID: 431013412
      Tue, Nov 26, 2013, 16:11
Ballots released.

I would seriously doubt another "no choice" year is coming. I'm guessing Maddux and Biggio this year. Glavine only misses because Maddux is also on the ballot and voters are flaky and won't want two Braves pitchers going in at the same time.
117blue hen
      ID: 4739168
      Wed, Dec 04, 2013, 10:59
I can't do this without fewer than 11 names on my ballot.

Bonds, Clemens, Thomas, Maddux, Biggio, Piazza, Bagwell, Raines, Trammell, Walker, McGwire
118GO
      ID: 01020815
      Wed, Dec 04, 2013, 11:13
My guess for this year = Maddux, Glavine, Biggio, Frank Thomas
Bonds, Clemens, McGwire deserve to but continue to be shunned.
Trammell, Bagwell, Walker and Piazza need to hold on for a less packed year.
119Khahan
      Donor
      ID: 39432178
      Wed, Dec 04, 2013, 12:33
I could fill in all 10 slots this year. In no particular order:
Maddux, Glavine, Biggio, Piazza, Bonds, Clemens, Palmeiro, Sosa, Frank Thomas, Jeff Kent.

Who I think will actually get elected:
Maddux Glavine, Biggio

Thomas imho, should be there. But I think he gets a big hurt from being a roid era slugger even though he was never associated.
120Mith
      ID: 29182720
      Wed, Dec 04, 2013, 15:57
My 2014 ballot:
Maddux, Glavine, Biggio, Thomas, Piazza, Kent, Raines, Mattingly.


My guess at the baseball writers' 2014 ballot:
Maddux, Glavine, Biggio, Thomas, Piazza.
121Khahan
      Donor
      ID: 39432178
      Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 13:35
Guess we need to start considering Roy Halladay with his announced retirement (as a blue jay...1 day deal). Most of the message boards and articles about him call him a 'probable hall of famer.'


Here is his career line:
390 games started 67 complete games 20 shut outs
2749.1 IP with 2117 K's 3.38 era 1.18 whip
203-105 record (65.9% Winning %)
Issued 592 walks allowed 236HR 1034 ER and 1135 Runs. He had 8 seasons with a 5+WAR
In the post season he was 3-2 with a .74 whip a 2.37 era and a no-hitter.

Awards:
6 time allstar
2 time Cy Young award winner

122Khahan
      Donor
      ID: 39432178
      Mon, Dec 09, 2013, 14:12
Some interesting points about Halladay that may surprise you (and yes I'm cherry picking these stats because these are traditional 'HoF' type stats:

Halladay: 15 season: 203-105 2117 k's 3.38 ERA
Bartolo Colon: 15 season: 189-128 1950 k's 3.94 era
Tim Wakefield: 19 seasons 200-180 2156K's 4.41 era
Orel Hershiser: 18 seasons 204-150 2014 K's 3.48 era
Vida Blue: 17 seasons 209-161 2175k's 3.27 ERA
Lefty Gomez: 14 season 189-102 1468k's 3.34 ERA

Thats a mixed bag. Some have similar w/l and K's but don't compare in ERA. But some like Vida Blue and Orel Hershiser give us a pretty close approximation to Halladay's career stats.

Lefty Gomez falls 1 seasons worth of wins short of halladays total (of course his losses would nudge up some). His ERA is similar but his K's fall far short.

Some are in the Hall of Fame. Some aren't. Of course we can play the "but player X is/isn't in so Halladay does/doesn't deserve to be in" game all day long. This is just a random batch of players with a few similarities in their stat lines. Its a mixed bag of HoF, Allstar and very good pitchers.

Personally, I think halladay falls short in my mind of what HoF stats should look like. He has the awards. He has the presence on the mound. He has the dominance of an era. But not the overall counting stats. But he doesn't fall so short that I'd be upset if he did get in.

Going to miss Roy Halladay, thats for sure.
123Perm Dude
      ID: 431013412
      Tue, Dec 10, 2013, 13:27
I agree--I think he falls a bit short. He was a dominating guy on the mound for some time, but the numbers just aren't there, IMO.
124filthy
      ID: 4157202
      Wed, Dec 11, 2013, 04:47
I'd vote Halladay no matter what. But going up against Rivera (and then some) would make it very tough to justify that opinion even if I had a vote.

Hoping/assuming that Maddux this year, and Randy Johnson next are no brainers. That would leave Pedro, Schilling, Clemens, Mussina, Glavine, and Smoltz as the potential company by the time Halladay gets to the ballot. Rivera definitely first ballot. I'd think Pedro and Glavine can make it in by the time Halladay gets there. (Guess of how many years it takes)

(1)Maddux 2014, 355-227 3.16, 5008.1, 3371
(1)RJ 2015, 303-166 3.29, 4135.1, 4875

(3)Pedro 2015, 219-100 2.93, 2827.1, 3154
(4)Glavine 2014, 305-203 3.54, 4413.1, 2607

That leaves Clemens, Smoltz, Mussina, and Schilling as the comparables. He is closest to Schilling in overall triple crown numbers. Halladay probably would have had to pitch like Pedro to increase his chances without Glavine type volume. I can't see a whole lot of pressure for a few years after Halladay hits the ballot though, so he might have a chance of climbing his way in there. If Mussina, Smoltz, and Schilling are in or close by Halladay's debut, I'd like his chances to eventually make it. Clemens would be first ballot if not for that big asterisk hovering around him, he'll likely survive long enough to see some smoke clear from all this, who knows how that will effect things though.

(5)Smoltz 2015, 213-155 3.33, 3473.0, 3084, 154sv
(13)Schilling 38.8%, 216-146 3.46, 3261.0, 3116
(??)Halladay 2019, 203-105 3.38, 2749.1, 2117
(??)Mussina 2014, 270-153 3.68, 3562.2, 2813

(**)Clemens 37.6%, 354-184 3.12, 4916.2, 4672

A lot of tough entrants this year, I think it'll just be Maddux. Morris, Biggio, Bagwell, Piazza, Raines see slight gains but still fall shy. Morris heartbreaker, Palmeiro might fall off the ballot too. Thomas and Glavine should see great debuts. Mussina and Kent nice debuts. Luis Gonzalez and Moises Alou may survive to the second year. All the predictions for now, always love looking at this stuff and seeing how my opinions change year to year.
125filthy
      ID: 4157202
      Wed, Dec 11, 2013, 05:50
Average 2.5 new players per ballot last year, should be around the same this time, maybe even worse. Gonna be a tough year to climb. My prediction for this year in brackets before the players name.

Last year with previous results shown:
(95)Maddux
(70)Thomas
(70)Morris 67.7% -66.7% -53.5% -52.3% -44.0% -42.9% -37.1% -41.2% -33.3% -(14)
(69)Biggio 68.2% -(1)
(60)Bagwell 59.6% -56.0% -41.7% -(3)
(58)Piazza 57.8% -(1)
(54)Raines 52.2% -48.7% -37.5% -30.4% -22.6% -24.3% -(6)
(45)Glavine
(44)LSmith 47.8% -50.6% -45.3% -47.3% -44.5% -43.3% -39.8% -45.0% -38.8% -(11)
(38)Schilling 38.8% -(1)
(35)Clemens 37.6% -(1)
(34)Bonds 36.2% -(1)
(33)EMartinez 35.5% -36.5% -32.9% -36.2% -(4)
(25)Mussina
(29)Trammell 33.6% -36.8% -24.3% -22.4% -17.4% -18.2% -13.4% -17.7% -16.9% -(12)
(20)Kent
(19)LWalker 21.6% -22.9% -20.3% -(3)
(18)McGriff 20.7% -23.9% -17.9% -21.5% -(4)
(15)McGwire 16.9% -19.5% -19.8% -23.7% -21.9% -23.6% -23.5% -(7)
(10)Mattingly 13.2% -17.8% -13.6% -16.1% -11.9% -15.8% -9.9% -12.3% -11.4% -(13)
(10)Sosa 12.5% -(1)
(5)LGonzalez
(5)MAlou
(5)Palmeiro 8.8% -12.6% -11.0% -(3)

126Khahan
      Donor
      ID: 39432178
      Thu, Dec 12, 2013, 13:28
Here's something else interesting. Halladay's record of 203-105 is a 66% wining % which is pretty darned good. But his 308 combined wins and losses compared to 390 games started means he recorded a decision in 78.9% of his games started.

I'm not sure exactly how to express this but I've always felt a good quality pitcher is one who can be in the game long enough to affect its outcome. And I'd be willing to bet that a decision ratio is higher for good pitchers over a career (IE with a large pool of data). Not sure how to express this or exactly what it would be measuring. Obviously a bad pitcher could have a high decision ratio by losing every game..but he wont have a long career.

I wonder if there is any meaningful measurement that takes into account a pitchers W% in decisions vs the % of games started he gets any decision in. Or is it easier to just say 205 wins in 390 gs started is a better measurement.

127blue hen
      ID: 4739168
      Thu, Dec 12, 2013, 17:14
If you pitch worse but stay in longer, is that really a benefit? What about Quality Starts or Average Game Score?
128filthy
      ID: 4157202
      Fri, Dec 13, 2013, 06:26
Halladay's losses in his prime definitely felt tougher than a lot of pitchers. It's not so much the Yankees and Red Sox aces that would kill him regularly either, it was countless rookie pitchers that would come in and throw the game of their life against Halladay. I'll confidently guess that he had about a dozen losses in that fashion as a Jay, and I feel that might be modest. And it's not just Halladay, it's seems like an ace pitcher type thing sometimes. Think Matt Cain some years, or Johan Santana at times.

Is there a tough luck loss category? To lose while throwing a quality start is something that Halladay grew way too familiar with in Toronto. :(

The worst injuries of his prime were a comebacker broken leg and appendicitis. A couple little arm scares. Then this recent end of career. Add it all up and he lost 2-3 years worth of prime stats and another 2-3 years worth of non-prime stats potentially. Who's to say if missing the prime years didn't save his arm/back a bit though. It's easy to play what if, but it means nothing in the end.

Ultimately Halladay missed out on a lot of counting stats that Glavine, Maddux, Johnson & Mussina didn't miss. And every few starts he always seemed to have that one bad inning resulting in a tough loss no matter how dominant he'd seem, which cost even more counting stats plus kept his ratios just out of that elite Pedro territory. Does it even matter? He stands out from Jack Morris, Schilling and Mussina for me, but I'm pretty biased. (He actually stands out from Glavine and Smoltz to me as well, Maddux/Randro safe, I'm not totally nuts...)

All in all, it feels like somebody can finally stop using their Roy Halladay voodoo doll now, and let him retire in peace! The guy can't catch a break! Should've carried teams in Toronto to playoffs, and teams in Philly to rings, but always seemed so snakebitten. I already came to terms with missing him when he left the Jays and I could no longer watch all his starts with ease. But I had been holding out hope that they could bring him back as a free agent this year, I just didn't envision it going down like this! I'll still hold out hope that he unretires though. Will forever miss those dancin' fastballs and low pitch counts!
129Khahan
      Donor
      ID: 39432178
      Fri, Dec 13, 2013, 11:20
"If you pitch worse but stay in longer, is that really a benefit? What about Quality Starts or Average Game Score?"

I kind of addressed this point by stating this is something that has to have a large pool of data and mention relating it to games won. With a large enough pool of data you smooth out the extremes from events like you mention.


QS doesn't do it for me. Its a good stat but it doesn't do quite what I'm looking for. A guy who goes out and pitches 6 solid innings every game just isn't doing the same thing as a Roy Halladay or CC Sabathia (both average getting to 2 outs in the 7th as opposed to say an Andy Benes who averaged getting to 2 outs in the 6th or Randy Wolf who barely averages hitting the 6th inning).

Like I said, I'm not even sure exactly what I'd be trying to show. It just seems like there would be some correlation between pitching deep enough into a game to earn a decision and the quality of a pitcher. Not even sure how to show that.
130Perm Dude
      ID: 431013412
      Fri, Dec 13, 2013, 19:39
SP's, of course, get screwed by the rules a bit in that they have to stay in for 5 IPs to get the win, but not for the loss.
131Perm Dude
      ID: 431013412
      Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 14:11
Maddux Glavine and Thomas.
132Khahan
      Donor
      ID: 39432178
      Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 14:39
Awesome for Glavine and Maddux. Very awesome for Thomas. I think it is well deserved and am glad I guessed wrong at how the BBWAA would approach him.
133GO
      ID: 01020815
      Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 14:45
Maddux was a near-unanimous choice, garnering 97.2 percent of the vote. He was somehow left off 16 ballots. The four-time Cy Young Award winner and 18-time Gold Glove Award winner won 355 games over his 23-year career to go along with a 3.16 ERA. Glavine, who was on 91.9 percent of the ballots, was a two-time Cy Young Award winner and won 305 games during his career while posting a 3.54 ERA. Thomas, one of the game's most dominant sluggers during the 90s, received 83.7 percent of the vote. The two-time MVP produced a .301/.419/.555 lifetime batting line to go along with 521 home runs. Craig Biggio narrowly missed the 75 percent threshold by finishing on 74.8 percent of the ballots, but he'll at least carry some momentum in 2015. Mike Piazza, Jack Morris, Jeff Bagwell, Tim Raines, Roger Clemens, and Barry Bonds rounded out the top part of the ballot
134GO
      ID: 01020815
      Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 14:46
I almost nailed it - I had Maddux, Glavine, Thomas and Biggio (so close!). I am truly a savant.
135ChicagoTRS
      ID: 149171815
      Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 14:58
Biggio will definitely get in next year. Been reading a lot of complaining about Biggio not making it but...I do not think it is a stretch to suspect him of being a juicer for at least part of his career...he was on a team that had some known users and Biggio has his best two HR years at age 38 and 39...not many (any) clean players put up their best power years at that age.
136Khahan
      Donor
      ID: 39432178
      Thu, Jan 09, 2014, 14:33
This year there is 1 documented voter who only voted for jack morris and would not consider voting for anybody who played in the steroid era regardless of whether or not they were tied to roids.
There is another who, despite the hall ballot allowing for 10 people took it upon himself to limit his ballot to only 3 players. No more than that. He knows better than the HoF ballot rule makers.

Right there is your 2 votes for biggio to be in the hall of fame. Because of self-induced arrogance. Now, there are people who do not think Biggio is a HoF player. If they choose not to vote for him because they simply dont feel he deserves it, so be it. Possibly these 2 felt that way about him. But it doesn't sound like it (note the one guy didnt say he only felt there were 3 worthy players, he said he did not want too many going in at once, implying he felt more than 3 qualified).

Anybody who with holds a vote for a non-baseball or HOF regulation reason (IE: he bet on baseball is a reason to with hold, he used steroids could be a reason, he drank during games could be a reason, but "too many at once" or "nobody should be 100%" are not baseball reasons) should lose their vote. Of course enforcing that would be impossible.
137Khahan
      Donor
      ID: 39432178
      Thu, Jan 09, 2014, 14:39
Also, Palmeiro off the ballot? I was surprised to see that happen and do think its a shame. That does NOT bode well for clemens, bonds, mcgwire or sosa.

I'll be curious to see how the veterans committee handles these guys.
138C1-NRB
      ID: 33002310
      Wed, Jan 23, 2019, 17:10
Here's a fun read considering yesterday's HOF announcement.

Originally posted in 2003, revisited in 2008, once in 2012, pre-season 2013, and semi-regularly through 2013-14 off-season.
139Nerfherders
      ID: 33543714
      Thu, Jan 24, 2019, 12:18
It certainly is! I think the biggest thing we couldn't foresee was the fallout of the steroid era. That took Palmeiro, Sosa, and Mcqwire out almost instantly (and probably Manny). In the group discussion of 2003 I think we mentioned most of the guys that ended up making it (or will make it soon). I don't think anyone mentioned Edgar tho, at the time. Maybe because a DH-only player never really was considered at the time. The voters since 2003 have softened a bit on DH's and closers. Just look at the veterans vote this year. Small-Hall guys are probably freaking out about Baines getting in.
140Khahan
      ID: 80441414
      Thu, Jan 24, 2019, 13:54
Maybe we should start this conversation again with active players ending 2018/going into 2019 (note, I didn't consider anybody with less than 5 full years in the bigs):

Locks:
Albert Pujols
Adrien Beltre
Miguel Cabrera
Justin Verlander

Will Likely Make it:
Clayton Kershaw
CC Sabathia

Need a few more years:
Max Scherzer
Mike Trout


Good Shots:
Robinson Cano
Jose Altuve
Giancarlo Stanton


Outside Shots:
Chris Sale
Zach Greinke
Jacob DeGrom
Bryce Harper
Manny Machado
Yadier Molina

141Seattle Zen
      ID: 301361318
      Thu, Jan 24, 2019, 17:48
I love how in the first post Nerf gave Mariano Rivera an "outside shot". 100% of the voters disagreed. :)

John Olerud asked if he still has an outside shot.
142Nerfherders
      ID: 33543714
      Thu, Jan 24, 2019, 18:10
In 2003 there were almost no closers in the Hall. Since then, we've had six, including Rivera and Smith this year. As I said, the voters have softened on closers over the years.

On the new list, I like the first 8, not sure about the rest. It's a new era and it's going to be tougher to judge these players against those in the steroid era.
143Khahan
      ID: 80441414
      Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 10:42
Honestly, Cano surprised me the most in my list - and bumping him up past outside shots.
But look at what he has done in his career so far:
career .304 BA .355 obp .493 slg and .848 ops
311 HR 2470 hits 1188 runs 1233 rbis'

Lets give him 3 more years at an average of 145 hits a year, 15hrs a year, 75 rbis and 70 runs a year.
His totals become:
2905 hits, 356 HR, 1458 rbi's, 1398 runs.
Throw in a RoY, top 5 in mvp voting 4 times, 8 All star games, 5 silver sluggers
He's currently 3rd among all active players in career WAR, 5th in runs scored, 4th in hits, 10th in home runs.
He has a big knock against in him testing positive for PED's last season, but I think by the time he's up for consideration, we will have seen bonds and clemens in the hall.
Cano was very surprising to look at his career work.
144Nerfherders
      ID: 2211442615
      Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 12:33
Cano for me is in the Hall of Very Good. There are a ton of guys with better numbers in this century that won't even sniff the hall, especially if they had any connection to PED's.

Look at Lance Berkman this year. That guy was insanely good, just didn't quite play long enough, and played in the era of bloated numbers. Off the ballot in one year.

The one thing Cano does have going for him is playing for the Yankees.
145Khahan
      ID: 80441414
      Fri, Jan 25, 2019, 12:56
Nerf - Berkman was great for many seasons. But his career just doesn't stack up in any serious hall of fame conversation:

1905 hits. Didn't even get to 2000, much less have a good chance at 3k like Cano does.
366 HR thru 15 season. Cano is just 10 shy of the power hitter Berkman in 14 seasons.
.293 BA, .406 OBP - these are pretty good. obp over 400 for a career is elite
1146 runs 1234 rbis again not bad but Cano is 1 year less played than Berkman and comparable or better in the counting stats.
They have similar hardware.

There is a reason Berkman fell off the ballot so fast, though. Berkman has 0 HoF on his similarity scores. Cano has Sandberg, Torre, George Brett, Carl Yazstremski, Cal Ripkin Jr and Ivan Rodriguez on his.

I like Berkman. I like him more than I like Cano. But these 2 aren't even close in comparisons, despite a few very similar categories.
Rate this thread:
5 (top notch)
4 (even better)
3 (good stuff)
2 (lightweight)
1 (no value)
If you wish, you may rate this thread on scale of 1-5. Ratings should indicate how valuable or interesting you believe this thread would be to other users of this forum. A '5' means that this thread is a 'must read'. A '1' means that this is a complete waste of time.

If you have previously rated this thread, rating it again will delete your previous rating.

If you do not want to rate this thread, but want to see how others have rated it, then click the button without entering a rating, or else click here.

RotoGuru Baseball Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread




Post a reply to this message: Active Players with HoF chance

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Click here to insert a block of hidden (spoiler) text
Click here to insert a random spelling of Mientkiewicz
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour11
Last 24 hours11
Last 7 days76
Last 30 days2018
Since Mar 1, 2007142782462