2019 HOF ballot

[notin]

D

Hey, at least its not like the Basketball Hall of Fame where they kind of just throw everybody in.

 

The NFL Hall of Fame has the most questionable rules. They have to induct at least 3 members every year and cannot induct more than 6.

 

It’s worked out pretty well, but can’t we all envision that one year where the best name on the ballot is merely an average player?

[notin]

I

My thing is, why does any player need to be on the ballot more than one year? When a player becomes eligible, he's either voted in or he's done.

 

How is a player not good enough to be in the HOF for the first 5 years of eligibility, then is suddenly good enough in his 6th year? What has changed?

 

While they give too many chances (you can appear on the ballot up to 15 times!!), the reason some players are considered “hallworthy” after not getting in is that the writers have a limited number of votes. So sometimes players don’t get in simply because there were better names on the ballot.

 

And like for the same reason longevity can make you a Hall of Famer as a player, apparently it can as a candidate as well. Any player who can garner the minimum votes for 14 years stands a better chance at getting in on his fifteenth try. Like Jim Rice...

[mvp 78]

My ballot would be:

Bonds

Clemens

Edgar

Mussina

Manny

Schill

Walker

Rivera

Halladay

Helton

 

I think the people that will get in will be: Rivera, Halladay and Edgar. Mussina, Bonds and Clemens are long shots for this year. I think Helton eventually gets in, but will be treated similarly to how Bagwell got in and will have to wait a year or two. Not sure anyone else has a chance.

 

Since it's Edgar's last year of eligibility, there will be a very strong push from proponents to get him in.

[mvp 78]

I

 

While they give too many chances (you can appear on the ballot up to 15 times!!), the reason some players are considered “hallworthy” after not getting in is that the writers have a limited number of votes. So sometimes players don’t get in simply because there were better names on the ballot.

 

And like for the same reason longevity can make you a Hall of Famer as a player, apparently it can as a candidate as well. Any player who can garner the minimum votes for 14 years stands a better chance at getting in on his fifteenth try. Like Jim Rice...

 

They reduced it to 10 years.

[mvp 78]

I know you can't set absolute thresholds for stats that guarantee HOF status, but that would make things easier in terms of should a guy be in or not. I fear that over time so many undeserving players have been elected that it's lowered the bar. HOF should be for undisputed great players, not very good players.

 

(as close to undisputed as you can get, anyway).

 

That bar was lowered back in the 30's and 40's when the Veterans Committee let their buddies into the Hall. The Hall didn't become bloated over the last decade, arguably the players that have "snuck in" recently were far superior to the ones who entered in the mid 40's.

[moonslav59]

I still think only Mo and Edgar deserve to go this year.

 

Others may make it later.

[Carpin]

My ballot would be:

Bonds

Clemens

Edgar

Mussina

Manny

Schill

Walker

Rivera

Halladay

Helton

 

I think the people that will get in will be: Rivera, Halladay and Edgar. Mussina, Bonds and Clemens are long shots for this year. I think Helton eventually gets in, but will be treated similarly to how Bagwell got in and will have to wait a year or two. Not sure anyone else has a chance.

 

Since it's Edgar's last year of eligibility, there will be a very strong push from proponents to get him in.

 

I like your picks, Halladay might get in due his tragic death, I think he's borderline HOF, in normal circumstances he gets in after a few years in the ballot. I have the feeling Mussina will get the votes this year, if not, he will be very close.

 

Regarding the PED cheaters, I'd vote Bonds, Clemens and probably Manny, in my opinion they had HOF careers before the whole PED thing blew over.

[Spudboy]

Mo & Edgar.

 

The others can wait.

 

Same here.

 

That list is chock full of horses that will never win.

[notin]

That bar was lowered back in the 30's and 40's when the Veterans Committee let their buddies into the Hall. The Hall didn't become bloated over the last decade, arguably the players that have "snuck in" recently were far superior to the ones who entered in the mid 40's.

 

Such as Dave Bancroft and Ross Youngs (although Youngs might get some sympathy votes)...

[Kimmi]

D

 

The NFL Hall of Fame has the most questionable rules. They have to induct at least 3 members every year and cannot induct more than 6.

 

It’s worked out pretty well, but can’t we all envision that one year where the best name on the ballot is merely an average player?

 

That is a pretty messed up rule.

[Kimmi]

I

 

While they give too many chances (you can appear on the ballot up to 15 times!!), the reason some players are considered “hallworthy” after not getting in is that the writers have a limited number of votes. So sometimes players don’t get in simply because there were better names on the ballot.

 

And like for the same reason longevity can make you a Hall of Famer as a player, apparently it can as a candidate as well. Any player who can garner the minimum votes for 14 years stands a better chance at getting in on his fifteenth try. Like Jim Rice...

 

Again, this is all part of the reason why the voting for HOF is whack.

[Kimmi]

I still think only Mo and Edgar deserve to go this year.

 

Others may make it later.

 

IMO, if those others don't deserve to go this year, then they don't deserve to make it later.

[Fan_since_Boggs]

I know you can't set absolute thresholds for stats that guarantee HOF status, but that would make things easier in terms of should a guy be in or not. I fear that over time so many undeserving players have been elected that it's lowered the bar. HOF should be for undisputed great players, not very good players.

 

(as close to undisputed as you can get, anyway).

 

I agree with your comments. I presume you don't believe Rice should be in?

 

As much as I hate to say it, I don't think Rice should be in. But there are other players who shouldn't be in the HOF either, Phil Rizzuto, Jack Morris, and others.

[moonslav59]

IMO, if those others don't deserve to go this year, then they don't deserve to make it later.

 

Maybe not, but for the PED guys, I'm okay with letting them in, just make em sweat it out a while.

 

I wouldn't be upset, if Bonds, Clemens and Manny make it this year. They deserve to be in, IMO, but I wouldn't be upset if the didn't make it either (ever).

[Northern Star]

I agree with your comments. I presume you don't believe Rice should be in?

 

As much as I hate to say it, I don't think Rice should be in. But there are other players who shouldn't be in the HOF either, Phil Rizzuto, Jack Morris, and others.

 

I haven't looked at individual stats enough to have a comment on Rice.

[moonslav59]

I haven't looked at individual stats enough to have a comment on Rice.

 

It's the longevity argument he failed.

 

He was very great for a short time.

 

Close call, to me.

[mvp 78]

IMO, if those others don't deserve to go this year, then they don't deserve to make it later.

 

It's not whether they "deserve it" or not, it's project whether the writers will make the right decision or not.

[mvp 78]

I like your picks, Halladay might get in due his tragic death, I think he's borderline HOF, in normal circumstances he gets in after a few years in the ballot. I have the feeling Mussina will get the votes this year, if not, he will be very close.

 

Regarding the PED cheaters, I'd vote Bonds, Clemens and probably Manny, in my opinion they had HOF careers before the whole PED thing blew over.

 

Halladay dying is why I put him in. He's way better than a lot of HOF arms and sympathy pushes him in.

 

I think Manny will never get in because he was suspended for a failed test (Palmeiro treatment). I think Bonds and Clemens get in because they never failed a test.

[notin]

IMO, if those others don't deserve to go this year, then they don't deserve to make it later.

 

If that ever becomes the case, the limits for number of votes on a ballot has to be eliminated...

[Kimmi]

If that ever becomes the case, the limits for number of votes on a ballot has to be eliminated...

 

I agree with this.

[Northern Star]

Halladay should be in, even if he was still alive.

[Carpin]

Halladay should be in, even if he was still alive.

 

in the first ballot?

[Northern Star]

in the first ballot?

 

Is 200 wins, 2 x Cy Young and numerous All Star appearances first ballot-worthy? I don't know, I'm asking.

[Carpin]

Is 200 wins, 2 x Cy Young and numerous All Star appearances first ballot-worthy? I don't know, I'm asking.

 

He is, just not in the first ballot

[Jasonbay44]

I personally always think the "he's a hall of famer, but shouldn't be first ballot" argument is extremely stupid. How does a few years of waiting make him more worthy than before? Halladay is a Hall of Famer (at least IMO).

[Kimmi]

I personally always think the "he's a hall of famer, but shouldn't be first ballot" argument is extremely stupid. How does a few years of waiting make him more worthy than before? Halladay is a Hall of Famer (at least IMO).

 

I don't like the 'shouldn't be first ballot' argument either. You're either good enough to get in, or you're not. One and done.

[Northern Star]

Never heard of Fancred sports before. Putting aside the merit of Heyman's arguments, this article is riddled with typos. Absolutely appalling lack of editing.

 

https://fancredsports.com/articles/inside-baseball-my-hall-of-fame-ballot-why-bonds

[mvp 78]

Harold Baines and Lee Smith have been elected to the National Baseball Hall Of Fame, as announced on the MLB Network. The two longtime veterans were voted in by a 16-member panel reviewing candidates from the “Today’s Game” era (1988-present).

 

https://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/hall-election-of-lee-smith-makes-sense-but-harold-baines/

 

Baines, who took 59.7% of his career plate appearances as a DH and set records in that capacity that were later surpassed by Martinez and David Ortiz, collected 2,866 hits and 384 homers over the course of his 22-year career. Nonetheless, he was poorly supported by the writers; though he lasted through five election cycles before falling off the ballot, he topped out at just 6.1%. At least in the era of the “Five Percent Rule” (from 1980 onward), there’s no precedent for a candidate with so little BBWAA support gaining election by a small committee. While his election does offer some hope to players bumped off the ballot in their first go-round — such as Bobby Grich, Kenny Lofton, and Ted Simmons, who missed election by the Modern Baseball Era Committee by one vote last year — the custom of withholding first-year votes from all but the most qualified candidates helps to explain those mistakes; with Baines, 94 to 95 percent of voters consistently judged him to be unworthy.

 

Every bit as unsettling is the fact that Baines accumulated just 38.7 WAR (using the Baseball-Reference version) and 30.1 JAWS. Considered as a right fielder — I consider every DH candidate at the position where he accrued the most value — he ranks just 74th in JAWS, below 24 of the 25 Hall of Famers (19th century outfielder Tommy McCarthy is the exception). From under-supported BBWAA candidate Larry Walker (10th in JAWS among right fielders), to players such as Dwight Evans (15th) and Reggie Smith (16th) who have never sniffed a small committee ballot, that’s a troubling inequity. And everyone and their brother has a pet candidate just among the right fielders for whom a stronger case could be mounted. Tony Oliva, Rusty Staub, Dave Parker? All rank in the 30s in JAWS among right fielders, and appear to have stronger traditional credentials as well.

[moonslav59]

Just shows what a joke the MLB HOF election process is.

[Bellhorn04]

The election of Baines is causing as bit of a furor, deservedly so. Good ballplayer, but nowhere near the HOF.