I think the most surprising player for 1st timers is Johan Santana. This guy had a 5 year stretch that was crazy good. Sure he doesn't have the longevity, but he certainly seemed like a HOFER during his prime.

IMO, even more surprising is Andruw Jones. The guy was one of the greatest defensive CF in history. 10-time Gold Glove. He was so bad after leaving Atlanta that I think it cost him a shot at the HOF. But to fall off the ballot after his first try is shocking. Very similar to Edmonds.

Johan is any interesting case. There's some precedent for someone in a similar situation making it in (Koufax, Dean), but the lack of longevity is a killer for him. You're right though. That stretch from 04-10 was HOF worthy.

W said:

---

as an aside...if Edgar Martinez makes the HoF...it may be time to go back and heavily criticize the mid-to-late 1990's Seattle Mariners as the most underachieving teams of all-time.

that Mariners era already has 2 Hall of Famers in Griffey Jr. and Randy Johnson in the prime of their careers (plus a young A-Rod). Edgar would make the 3rd Hall of Famer on those teams...that managed to miss the playoffs more times than not and never reached the world series -- just the ALCS once (1995).

that is some serious futility in the playoff expansion era (post-1994)

---

Its always a little surprising to look back at those Seattle teams and see they didn't have more success, but you have to keep in mind a few things:

A-Rod wasn't a full time player until 1996. Randy Johnson missed most of 1996. 1997 was really the only full year those two guys played together and Seattle won the division. Randy Johnson was traded in 1998.

Randy Johnson himself wasn't really the Randy Johnson we think of until 1993. Edgar Martinez missed most of 1993, he only played 42 games. (He was also hurt for half of 1994 but no playoffs). Martinez was healthy in 1995 and Seattle won the division.

Ken Griffey, Jr., for his part, also hit his prime in 1993. He was good before, but he became really good in 1993. Again, they didn't have Edgar for much of 1993 and 1994. In 1995, Junior actually missed half the season.

Seattle made the playoffs 4 out of 7 years from 1995 to 2001, winning the division three times.

You have to keep in mind the Rangers had 2 to 3 Hall of Fame level players on their roster in the mid to late 1990s, too.

Its just easy to overlook because of Juan Gonzalez and Rafael Palmeiro's connections to steroid use.

Another big bump. Up to 192 votes (45.3%)

Chipper (98.4%)
Vlad (94.8%)
Thome (93.2%)
Edgar (80.7%)
Hoffman (78.1%)
--------------------
Mussina (72.1%)
Shilling, Bonds, Clemens (65.6%)


Think about that. Basically 2/3 of all voters think 9 guys belong in HOF.

mathguy86 said:

---

Another big bump. Up to 192 votes (45.3%)

Chipper (98.4%)
Vlad (94.8%)
Thome (93.2%)
Edgar (80.7%)
Hoffman (78.1%)
--------------------
Mussina (72.1%)
Shilling, Bonds, Clemens (65.6%)


Think about that. Basically 2/3 of all voters think 9 guys belong in HOF.

---

Ignoring steroids, they do. I mean, it really comes down to Mussina and Shilling on that list.

I'm shocked how much respect Thome is getting.

612 HR, career OBP .402, career SLG .554, career wRC+ 145, WAR 69, 1699 RBI. He should be in and it shouldn't be close. It may be one of the few times the HOF ballot went the way it should.

100% agree

I just didn't think it was an opinion shared by a large majority.

It's the 7% that don't think he belongs that get me. The only excuse to not vote For Thome is you know he's in and you want to use one of your 10 somewhere else.

mathguy86 said:

---

It's the 7% that don't think he belongs that get me. The only excuse to not vote For Thome is you know he's in and you want to use one of your 10 somewhere else.

---

I don't mind that reasoning from a voter, except when they use one of their votes on a Matt Stairs instead of voting for the hall of fame guy.

I'll also add that maybe some guys didn't vote for Thome because he's not seen as a "first ballot kind of player". I think you could argue it either way, but I like that some guys are "first ballot" guys (Junior) and that other guys (should) have to wait (Biggio).

_lefraud_ said:

---

I'll also add that maybe some guys didn't vote for Thome because he's not seen as a "first ballot kind of player". I think you could argue it either way, but I like that some guys are "first ballot" guys (Junior) and that other guys (should) have to wait (Biggio).

---

That logic is nuts and petty. A guy is either a HOFer or not. You may not think he is initially and then later change your mind because you are convinced by some argument (I don't think Walker is but I'm willing to listen) but the "not a first ballot" argument is hogwash. As is the "we can't have a class bigger than 5 because the first class only had 5". Or the "no one is allowed to be unanimous" line.

I don't think it's hogwash, nuts, or petty.

Not all Hall of Famers are made equal. Not all are of the same quality.

The first ballot thing is a way to acknowledge that and add a little something extra to those guys who were truly giants among giants.

TXAggie2011 said:

---

I don't think it's hogwash, nuts, or petty.

Not all Hall of Famers are made equal. Not all are of the same quality.

The first ballot thing is a way to acknowledge that and add a little something extra to those guys who were truly giants among giants.

---

Precisely.

222 votes:

Chipper (98.6%)
Vlad (94.6%)
Thome (92.8%)
Hoffman (77.9%)
Edgar (77.5%)

--------------------
Mussina (71.2%)
Bonds (64.0%)
Clemens (64.0%)
Schilling (61.7%)
Walker (39.2%)
Vizquel (31.1%)
Manny (23.0%)

Everyone else is 20% or lower. Looks like a sure-thing for a 4-person class, with Edgar just missing out.

Looks like Damon, Andruw, and Santana will be falling off the ballot. Jones is just above the threshold, but it's pretty standard to see a drop in the unreleased ballots so I expect he won't make the cut.

Hypothetical if Jones, Thome, Guerrero, and Hoffman make it in.

Majority vote recipients for the 2019 ballot should be:

1. Bonds (7th)
2. Clemens (7th)
3. Kent (6th)
4. Martinez (10th)
5. McGriff (10th)
6. Mussina (6th)
7. Manny (3rd)
8. Rolen (2nd)
9. Schilling (7th)
10. Sheffield (5th)
11. Sosa (7th)
12. Vizquel (2nd)
13. Wagner (4th)
14. Walker (9th)
15. Halladay (1st)
16. Helton (1st)
17. Pettitte (1st)
18. Rivera (1st)
19. Young (1st)

I could Martinez, Mussina, Rivera, and Halladay coming off. Also McGriff loses his eligibility. That drops the rollovers to 14 again.

Then the list should start to dwindle. 2020 has Jeter, and then either players associated with steroids, or Harold Baines type players: Giambi, Abreu, Cliff Lee, Soriano, and Konerko. Plus either Walker is in, or he is off the ballot. 2020 may be the year in which the majority of ballots have less than 10 names as I don't see anybody outside of Jeter as a HOFer. That means at minimum Jeter and Walker are off leaving 13 rollovers to 2021.

The biggest addition to the 2021 ballot is Aramis Ramirez. This ballot would see Bonds, Clemens, Schilling, and Sosa on their 9th ballot if not already elected.

The 2022 ballot will have A-Rod and Ortiz.

Sorry for the above ramble, but one other thought that bugs me:

How can voters let Rafael Palmeiro fall off the ballot with less than 10% of the vote but still vote handily for Sosa and Manny? Sosa had the corked bat and received a suspension. Manny failed TWO drug tests and retired from baseball instead of taking a 100 game suspension. That should have had him off the ballot after only one go.

Purely my take on Palmeiro, but he didn't play in Chicago and Boston, and he seemed like an average joe that whopped 500+ homers. I think maybe some would argue he would have been a very average player (without the steroids). Not saying I agree, but I could see that being the perception. Palmeiro was never a "superstar" at least not compared to Sosa/Ramirez. I've also heard where he is/was a *****, and maybe writers/voters remember that?

Lastly, there is this



and two years later, he was busted.

Personally, a guy with 569 homers, 3020 hits and a .288 career average should be in the HOF (along with Bonds, Sosa, McGwire). They were the absolute giants, the best of the best, when practically EVERYONE was using...they should be in, as you can't erase history.

Quote:

---

I think maybe some would argue he would have been a very average player (without the steroids).

---

Without steroids, Rafael Palmeiro was going to be somewhere between Mark Grace, Rod Carew, and Tony Gwynn.

Quote:

---

Without steroids, Rafael Palmeiro was going to be somewhere between Mark Grace, Rod Carew, and Tony Gwynn.

---

That's a spot on comparison.

I'd argue that without steroids, Sosa would have been a career .250 hitter with 20 home runs. Scroll all the way to the bottom to see Sosa's similar players by age:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/sosasa01.shtml

He goes from Chili Davis and Jimmy Wynn to Jay Bruce and Jose Canseco to Ken Griffey Jr.

Another bump at 241 votes (56.8%).

Chipper (98.3%)
Vlad (94.6%)
Thome (93.4%)
Hoffman (78.8%) Holding steady.
Edgar (77.2%). Good news is Edgar is +11.5% over this same time last year. Bad news is his trajectory is downwards the last couple of days. He's not going to make it unless the unwashed masses of undisclosed voters come thought. And those are mostly idiots.

---------

Mussina (70.5%) He's gaining roughly 15% year over year to date each of the last 2 years. Seems pretty clear hes in next year.
Bonds and Clemens (64.3%)
Shilling (59.8%)

mathguy86 said:

---

Another bump at 241 votes (56.8%).

Chipper (98.3%)
Vlad (94.6%)
Thome (93.4%)
Hoffman (78.8%) Holding steady.
Edgar (77.2%). Good news is Edgar is +11.5% over this same time last year. Bad news is his trajectory is downwards the last couple of days. He's not going to make it unless the unwashed masses of undisclosed voters come thought. And those are mostly idiots.

---------

Mussina (70.5%) He's gaining roughly 15% year over year to date each of the last 2 years. Seems pretty clear hes in next year.
Bonds and Clemens (64.3%)
Shilling (59.8%)

---

That's unfortunate.

His 3.68 ERA would be in the bottom 4 of HOF ERA.

0 years with a 7+ WAR

Never came close to winning a Cy Young

Only won 20 games once

vs Shilling who will likely never get it

3.46 ERA, 3.23 FIP

4 years of 7+ WAR

Cy Youn Runner-up 3x 4th 1x.

3x 20+ game winner

Mr.Ackar07 said:

---

I'd argue that without steroids, Sosa would have been a career .250 hitter with 20 home runs. Scroll all the way to the bottom to see Sosa's similar players by age:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/players/s/sosasa01.shtml

He goes from Chili Davis and Jimmy Wynn to Jay Bruce and Jose Canseco to Ken Griffey Jr.

---

Agreed. From 1990-1997, Sosa averaged just over 25 homeruns a season. From 1998-2003, he averaged 62. He was a decent power hitter, but certainly nothing to write home about. He was an All-Star once and had 1 top-10 MVP finish. He had a 22.8 WAR from 90-97. Again, not bad, but not someone you envision on a path to Cooperstown. This isn't like Bonds or Clemens where it was clear they were surefire HOFers before they ever were suspected to have used PEDs.

With Bonds, heck, only one season stands out in regards to HR as he only topped 50 one time in his career. Before he was suspected of using, he already had 3 MVP, 7 top-5 MVP finishes, and 8 Gold Gloves. If you take all his HR totals from 2000-2004 and knock them down to 25, he still finishes with 629 on his career. He was a first ballot inductee long before he ever touched a PED.

Clemens is very similar. 1984-1997, he had a 213-118 record w/ 2.97 ERA. His ERA+ was 146 during that period, not to mention his 3 Cy Youngs, 5 CY top-5 finishes, an MVP award and a WAR of 93.2. He was another first ballot lock before he ever used PEDs.

wow, Thome a first ballot Hall of Famer?

just one top 5 MVP finish in a 20-year career...that's extremely unimpressive for a HR/RBI guy.

the standards for first ballot have really gone downhill

Knowing what we know now, Jim Thome would probably have gotten more MVP consideration...

And not knowing what we know now, a lot of those guys who got more MVP consideration than Thome would be Hall of Famers, rather than shamed steroid users.

W said:

---

wow, Thome a first ballot Hall of Famer?

just one top 5 MVP finish in a 20-year career...that's extremely unimpressive for a HR/RBI guy.

the standards for first ballot have really gone downhill

---

Career 145 wRC+

Compare his 2002 year to other MVPs. He had several MVP type seasons.

He was a HR/RBI guy that played on bad teams and was never hyped like others.

W said:

---

wow, Thome a first ballot Hall of Famer?

just one top 5 MVP finish in a 20-year career...that's extremely unimpressive for a HR/RBI guy.

the standards for first ballot have really gone downhill

---

He played in Cleveland on crappy teams. And that does matter for MVP. Or at that time did. . But has fantastic numbers. Absolutely belongs in the HOF.

Looking over the pre and post numbers on the tracker it seems really clear. The guys who release their vote and stand behind it versus the ones who crave anonymity are very different voters.

Anonymous voters like saves and wins for pitchers. They do not reward players for any advanced metrics. They do not like DHs or steroids. They only like you if they watch you and have no understanding of modern value or metrics.

I wish the Hall had not covered for these guys and said votes could continue to be private.

Yeah Thome definitely had the numbers, but I thought the general perception of him might make him have to wait a year or two. I guess playing in that era and not being considered a PEDs guy paid off.

Really bummed about Edgar not making it, and next year is his last chance.

Quote:

---

Really bummed about Edgar not making it, and next year is his last chance.

---

He'll almost be a lock for next year. My guess is that next year's class will look like this: Edgar, Rivera, and Halladay. I think Mussina falls just short.

Probably the most baffling thing for me w/ the vote yesterday is this:

Roger Clemens: 242 votes (57.3%)
Barry Bonds: 238 votes (56.4%)

How on earth do you justify voting for Clemens, but not Bonds? Both should have been in a long time ago, and it's starting to not look too good for them right now, but I just don't get the logic behind leaving only one off the ballot while voting for the other. They were both locks before PEDs ever came into the picture for them, with Bonds even more of a lock than Clemens.

mathguy86 said:

---

W said:

---

wow, Thome a first ballot Hall of Famer?

just one top 5 MVP finish in a 20-year career...that's extremely unimpressive for a HR/RBI guy.

the standards for first ballot have really gone downhill

---

He played in Cleveland on crappy teams. And that does matter for MVP. Or at that time did. . But has fantastic numbers. Absolutely belongs in the HOF.

---

Exactly. When the only ones ahead of you in major offensive categories are HOFers, those who are either future HOFers or PED users, then absolutely you should be in. You hit 600+ HR, especially without PED suspicions, you're going to easily walk in on the first ballot and rightfully so.

Quote:

---

How on earth do you justify voting for Clemens, but not Bonds?

---

Regional bias. Probably some extra Houston fans who believe Roger is innocent, just like him more, etc.

On the personal likability scale, not much to choose from.

I'm sure that was tongue in cheek, but I don't think any Houston fan thinks Clemens is innocent.


On another note, if Bonds and Clemens fail to gain traction, I do not think the Veteran's committee will vote them as long as Joe Morgan remains on the committee.