Anybody think both will make it to the HOF this year? Last year was a complete embarrassment in regards to those who decided Biggio was not worthy of being voted in. I wonder if the voters will screw up again this year.

They both better go in.

Bagwell may struggle this year too, but Biggio should get those extra votes this year, though the rookie class of guys is pretty stout again.

Biggio will make it this year.

still going to be a while longer for Bagwell unfortunately

Biggio yes, Bagwell no. At least not this year unfortunately. I'll never understand this HOF process. I can't understand why a guy isn't deserving the first 10 years but then all of the sudden he is the 11th

Biggio will get in this year along with probably Randy Johnson, Mike Piazza, and possibly Pedro Martinez. Bagwell will take another significant step forward this year but I think he will still come up a bit short.

I may be way off base, but I see Pedro as waaaaaaaay more of a lock this year over Biggio.

Absolutely ZERO chance Biggio doesn't get in this go round

If I'm not mistaken, biggio wasv1 vote short last season. He's a shoo in this season. I'd be surprised if bagwell makes it this year though. I bet it'll take him 2 years after this year's vote

lifetime Astro fan. Biggio will be in this year. I don't think Bagwell deserves it. He's in the Hall of Very Good in my book. His career numbers are lacking. I put him in the same class as Don Mattingly and Todd Helton. Really quality players, but just coming up a little short.

Biggio will get in. Will be hard for Bagwell to get enough votes with Johnson and Martinez joining the ballot. Still voters that probably won't vote for him because he played in the steroid era.

In 2 less seasons, bagwell has 100 more runs, 80 more home runs, 100 more RBI, and twice as many top 10 mvp finishes as Helton.

even though its 2 less seasons, his numbers are still a little "bleb" for HOF

Piazza getting in may be good for Bagwell -- there were plenty of rumors about the former Dodgers/Mets catcher as well back in the day

Biggio gets in this year, but Bagwell won't. It's a shame because it would be very fitting for them to go into the Hall together.

Bagwell will get there eventually, but this year's ballot is stacked. With Biggio missing by 2 votes last year, I figure there's no way he won't get in this time around.

what year is going to be the next "non-stacked" HoF ballot?

seems like there are 2 or 3 locks each time

doing a quick check...

2016 could be the year -- Griffey Jr. is the only first time lock

Congrats to #7!!

quote:

---

In 2 less seasons, bagwell has 100 more runs, 80 more home runs, 100 more RBI, and twice as many top 10 mvp finishes as Helton.

---

I'm not sure that "better than Todd Helton" is going to be enough to get into the HOF

quote:

---

I still do not understand the people who try to say Bagwell's numbers do not warrant him getting into the Hall of Fame. First of all, and this not a knock on Biggio, Bagwell was simply the better player of the two. The only thing Biggio has on Bagwell is longevity. Second, if you actually look at his numbers (and not just whether he hit 500 homeruns), you will see that he his one of the top 5 or 6 first basemen ever to play the game, especially if you use adjusted numbers to factor in that he played in a extreme pitcher's ballpark during most of the prime of his career.

---

Agree

The biggest factor for Bagwell isn't steroid speculation it's the market he played in. If he played in San Fran, Atl, or NY he'd be in.

Always been that way and always will be. Look at Altuve now.

quote:

---

especially if you use adjusted numbers

---

But who in the hell is going to look at adjusted numbers to make their Hall of Fame vote? They look at the guy and say - he is or he isn't.

Bagwell hit 449 HRs, 2,314 hits, 488 doubles, 1,529 RBI, 202 steals and hit .297. He won ROY in 1991 and MVP in 1994.

Vladimir Guerrero also hit 449 HRs, 2,590 hits, 477 doubles, 1,496 RBI, 181 steals and hit .318. He won MVP in 2004.

When I look at Vlad, I don't even think for 5 seconds he should be in the HOF, and his numbers are carbon copies of Bagwell's, plus he fairly decent in the post-season (.263 average).

That's how Bagwell is viewed by most of the country - very good for a long time, but not HOF.

quote:

---

I still do not understand the people who try to say Bagwell's numbers do not warrant him getting into the Hall of Fame. First of all, and this not a knock on Biggio, Bagwell was simply the better player of the two. The only thing Biggio has on Bagwell is longevity. Second, if you actually look at his numbers (and not just whether he hit 500 homeruns), you will see that he his one of the top 5 or 6 first basemen ever to play the game, especially if you use adjusted numbers to factor in that he played in a extreme pitcher's ballpark during most of the prime of his career.

---

Just for the record- I think Bagwell deserves to be in, and I don't need to compare him to Biggio to think that.

However, part of the problem is "the numbers", the "adjusted numbers", etc... suggest that half of major league baseball had one of the best first baseman ever on their roster in the past 10-15-20 years. Pujols, Thome, Thomas, Bagwell, Palmeiro, Helton, Gallaraga, McGwire...

By some indexes, John Olerud is a top 20 or so first baseman. He made 2 All-Star games and that's probably not a terrible injustice to him.

Guys are stronger, healthier in the long term, i.e. they have longer careers, ballparks are smaller, technology is better, etc... There are lots of reasons for their being so many successful sluggers in recent decades and its not just because of steroids.

quote:

---

quote:

---

especially if you use adjusted numbers

---

But who in the hell is going to look at adjusted numbers to make their Hall of Fame vote? They look at the guy and say - he is or he isn't.

Bagwell hit 449 HRs, 2,314 hits, 488 doubles, 1,529 RBI, 202 steals and hit .297. He won ROY in 1991 and MVP in 1994.

Vladimir Guerrero also hit 449 HRs, 2,590 hits, 477 doubles, 1,496 RBI, 181 steals and hit .318. He won MVP in 2004.

When I look at Vlad, I don't even think for 5 seconds he should be in the HOF, and his numbers are carbon copies of Bagwell's, plus he fairly decent in the post-season (.263 average).

That's how Bagwell is viewed by most of the country - very good for a long time, but not HOF.

---

My money is on Vladimir Guerrero being in the Hall of Fame one day.

Congrats to Biggio, well deserved

As for Bagwell, I look at him compared to Frank Thomas. They are essentially the same hitter, the difference being that Bagwell's wrecked shoulder gave him some lackluster seasons at the end, and cut his career short. Bagwell was a far better defender, and one of the best baserunners I've ever seen. If you look at the game of baseball, it's a no brainer that Bagwell should be in, especially when you consider that he didn't get free time as a DH. If you only look at offensive stat sheets, his totals are borderline, only because the totals are a few years short.

At the end of 2005, did you not think that Frank Thomas was a solid HOFer, before he went on his finale with Toronto & Oakland?

These are the stats for Bagwell and Thomas through 2005:

Bagwell/Thomas
R: 1,517/1,300
H: 2,314/2,057
2B: 488/451
HR: 449/440
RBI: 1,529/1,435
BB: 1,401/1,427
SB: 202/32
Games: 2,150/1,888

If people complain that Biggio is the definition of cummulating stats just because he played a long time, then the same should be applied to Frank Thomas. If you averaged the above stats over 162 games, this is the difference between Bagwell and Thomas over those seasons through 2005:

R: 2.76
H: (2.14)
2B: (1.93)
HR: (3.92)
RBI: (7.92)
BB: (16.88)
SB: 12.47

Take into consideration that for Bagwell, about half of that seasonal difference are from stats accumulated in the Astrodome, and you can't tell me that Thomas is a first ballot and Bagwell is a "Hall of Very Good". They are identical, and Bagwell didn't have the luxury of DH'ing.

quote:

---

If people complain that Biggio is the definition of cummulating stats just because he played a long time, then the same should be applied to Frank Thomas. If you averaged the above stats over 162 games, this is the difference between Bagwell and Thomas over those seasons through 2005:

---

Its a give and take, yeah?

Longevity has to mean something positive. We don't elect guys who won rookie of the year and then fell off the map. We don't elect guys who were mediocre than find All-Star form for a year or two at some random point in their career. At the same time, I know someone like Michael Young probably won't be in the Hall of Fame for being "pretty good, but rarely great" or whatever for a decade plus.

Each vote should apply the same standards, but maybe that is what has happened? Biggio and Thomas are in, Bagwell is still out.

quote:

---

quote:

---

especially if you use adjusted numbers

---

But who in the hell is going to look at adjusted numbers to make their Hall of Fame vote? They look at the guy and say - he is or he isn't.

Bagwell hit 449 HRs, 2,314 hits, 488 doubles, 1,529 RBI, 202 steals and hit .297. He won ROY in 1991 and MVP in 1994.

Vladimir Guerrero also hit 449 HRs, 2,590 hits, 477 doubles, 1,496 RBI, 181 steals and hit .318. He won MVP in 2004.

When I look at Vlad, I don't even think for 5 seconds he should be in the HOF, and his numbers are carbon copies of Bagwell's, plus he fairly decent in the post-season (.263 average).

That's how Bagwell is viewed by most of the country - very good for a long time, but not HOF.

---

First, if someone is factoring statistics into their HOF vote at all, they should certainly consider adjusted numbers to some extent. It is a fact that if a hitter plays 81 games in a hitter's park he will hit more home runs. If adjusted numbers are not used, it is simply not fair to the player playing the pitcher's park.

Second, you just cited to a lot of standard/traditional statistics but not necessarily the statistics that most people now know are the best numbers to use to evaluate baseball players, which are WAR and/or some of slugging percentage and on base percentage. According to Baseball Reference, Bagwell is 37th all time among position players. There are very few first baseman ahead of him on the list, and for example, Frank Thomas is 52nd (and played four more seasons than Bagwell) and Vladimir Guerrero (your example) is 122nd.

I respect Jayson Stark a lot because he really does his research in making his votes and evaluations. You should read his articles and analysis on Bagwell over the last several years. If he does not persuade you, nothing will.

This thread is a great chance to remind everyone to read Bill James' Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame?

I am all for Bagwell getting in as well as Guerrero, but the fact is as much as fans want to ignore the obvious and its the only reason Bagwell is not in right now and its "suspicion". Fair or not, true or not, that's the reason. It has nothing to do with numbers. I understand the Bagwell was a workout machine but he played in era that produced several medically enhanced monsters. Its not his fault at all, as long as he himself is innocent but It's tough to convince writers of the era who were fooled many times over by denials.

**** Dan Shaughnessy and his ***** ass North East bias. Not voting for Biggio, a great all around player with 3,000 hits but says fat ass, steroid using One way player David Ortiz is a first ballot? Smh. Reasons like this and that putz writer from Cleveland who said he won't vote for pedro because pedro always beat Cleveland. Stupid. Voting needs to be changed

Dat arm dow