Today marks the beginning of one of my favorite seasons of the year: Hall of Fame debate season. When we can argue about Bert Blyleven and Edgar Martinez and Jeff Bagwell and Curt Schilling and Mike Mussina and Gary Sheffield and Tim Raines. As always, Sports on Earth has a good rundown of the essentials here, and SI's Jay Jaffe has some Burning questions about this year's ballot. While I find Jaffe's commitment to JAWS scores a bit annoying (but hey, it's a stat he developed specifically to evaluate players for the HoF, so it's fair), I love his series of profiles on EACH AND EVERY PLAYER ON THE BALLOT--biographical background, career highlights, total statistical overviews, etc. As he points out, even guys who should be one-and-done on the ballot deserve a retrospective in recognition of their careers.
A proposal, gentlemen: we weigh in on these players. Start with your no-doubters, and then we can move on to more contentious guys. Eventually I think we should get our top 10 listed.
My automatics (as in, I think there should be no debate):
Randy Johnson
Pedro Martinez
After looking at the list of the 1st ballot hall of famers...automatics I would have to agree Randy Johnson and Pedro. There are a lot of players that had several good seasons but didn't have as many as i'm sure the voters would like to see (Schmidt, Nomar). Smoltz and Sheffield will most likely make it in years 3-4. Smotlz transitioned to a closer which will hurt him, but he ultimately turned into a pretty good closer and I believed returned to starting after a few years (could be wrong). So really I think that's it from this class. Two locks, two maybes. Biggio, Bagwell and Piazza get in this year.
ReplyDelete$#@^*@#&^ i just had a big long response and this website deleted it m#$%&fu@#%*#$
ReplyDeleteI will respond soon. I promise
ReplyDeleteOkay, here goes. Pedro Martinez and Randy Johnson are locks. They both dominated the league for significant stretches. They were considered the best pitcher in the league at some point, and they did things that transcended their generation and required comparison to all-time greats from previous generations. No-brainer. Absolute locks.
ReplyDeleteThis is where things get tricky. I'm going to leave all steroid guys out of this argument, which includes Clemens, Bonds, McGwire, and Sosa. I will also leave Sheffield out because of the BALCO thing. I will leave Mike Piazza in the discussion because bacne alone cannot be considered proof of steroid use.
I'm going to start by first disagreeing with Brennan. I don't think the transition to closer will hurt Smoltz. The transition occurred because they needed a closer and wanted to maximize Smoltz following an injury. This resulted in a dominant 3+ year stretch of dominance as a closer. Prior to this stretch, he was arguably the second best pitcher in the rotation for the Braves. He and Glavine were basically interchangeable, in my opinion In addition, I think his career compares favorably to Dennis Eckersly, who was a good starter for a long time, then transitioned to a closer. Eck was a better closer, Smoltz was a better starter. I think Smoltz should get in first ballot, considering Glavine did so, and I consider the two interchangeable. Just my opinion. I briefly glanced at Baseball reference.com to form these opinions.
Now to Mike Piazza... Hear me out Giants fan-boys. Mike Piazza, prior to Buster Posey coming along, was the best hitting catcher of all time. He hit for average and power. He was not a great fielder, but the guy could rake. I think this guy should also be a no-brainer.
I consider Craig Biggio to less than a lock. The numbers add up, but he was a compiler. I won't be pissed off if he takes a few years to get in. I think he should be in, but not ahead of any of the guys above. I know everybody wants him in because he played 10 positions in a league that only has 9 and had pine tar and dirt all over his helmet, but he just doesn't compare to the above locks.
Jeff Bagwell is also a guy who I won't be angry about if he gets in. However, He has all the numbers. I think he was a steroid user because he was HUGE, then looked like he was on a starvation diet the last two years of his career. However, I have no proof, so I won't hold him out on that. I think he is even with Biggio. He was a better hitter, but less valuable in the field.
I also think Tim Raines should receive consideration. He was great and was a great base stealer in a time when that actually mattered. I want him to get in, and I think he eventually does, but not on this fairly strong ballot.
Now that I've opined on the above candidates, I'll address the steroid users. Barry Bonds should have already been in. He is a grade-A asshole and admitted steroid user (by accident, my ass). however, before his head grew 8 sizes, he had already won multiple MVP awards and was considered by many to be the best player in baseball. The first 10 years of his career would have been enough in my book. He was the best player of his generation and not being in the HOF is a misrepresentation of baseball history.
Roger Clemens was also great prior to any steroid allegations. In addition, he never actually admitted doing steroids. He was a great pitcher and should be in.
The fringe guys are where things get kind of interesting. Jason and Brennan know my feelings on McGwire. I don't think he was a hall of famer despite the 563 home runs. He was a terrible hitter for most of his career and a bad fielder. He was Dave Kingman on steroids. Almost literally. Dave Kingman belongs nowhere near the hall of fame, and neither does McGwire. Same goes for Sammy Sosa. He was a bad hitter who hit a ton of home runs. I'm okay with both not being in.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure yet how I feel about Sheffield. He was a great player, but he is hard to evaluate considering the backlog of players that should be in but are not getting consideration because of PEDs. Yeah, I punted that one.
So we're agreed on Pedro and Randy Johnson. Good.
ReplyDeleteI think Smoltz should be in, and I actually think the stint as a very good closer followed by another couple of valuable years back in the rotation reinforces what Eric said--it was about maximizing his value following an injury, rather than any erosion of skills. Plus he has the post-season resume. I think his case is stronger than Eckersley's was.
Piazza, I agree, should be in, and there shouldn't be too much question. Even if he wasn't a great fielder (and BBRef's dWAR doesn't show him to be bad), he was clearly good enough behind the plate to hold down the position even though his bat would have played anywhere else on the field. The bacne is BS--he should be in, and I think he'll get there soon.
Bagwell, too, has been held up unfairly. If he was using illegal PEDs, he still didn't show up in the Mitchell Report or anything else, even when his teammates did (Pettitte, Caminiti, Clemens). And he made no secret of using creatine/andro while it was still allowed. My favorite thing about Bagwell is the fact that he wasn't just a bat hiding at first base and lumbering around--people liked his defense, and dude stole bases.
Biggio--in. I don't have a problem with him not going in first ballot, though. I get the argument that he was a compiled, I guess, but so were some other guys who got to milestone numbers, and he was very good for a long time even without the 3000 hits. Plus he played three up-the-middle positions--he was valuable defensively, whatever Eric's snarky comment about playing 10 positions was. I hope they put the HBP record on his plaque instead of his hit total, though.
Raines is the new cause celebre for advanced stats folks (now that Blyleven is in), and they've convinced me. He doesn't have some of the big numbers you might want to see, but looking at OBP, walks, runs, SBs, etc. he looks pretty good--though he suffers in the comparisons with Rickey Henderson, like anyone would.
Barry and Clemens: both jerks, both great. Add 'em, note that they were connected with PEDs in the later part of their careers (i.e. acknowledge both periods of their careers). Seems fair to me.
(continued)
ReplyDeleteJason Schmidt clearly has one of the greatest first names ever, had one great year, and was valuable in a bunch of others, including when he took $46 million from the Dodgers to pitch 43 innings across 3 years (hey, I'm a Giants fan--that was valuable to me). Nomar was the most likeable of the shortstop triumvirate, and since he and superstar soccer player Mia Hamm married and reproduced I expect none of our children will ever be the best in the country at his/her chosen sport. He put himself in position to be in this debate, but given the health problems after his age-29 season, he just never did enough long enough, alas.
McGwire and Sosa were obviously pretty one-dimensional, and it's only the huge numbers of home runs that make them vaguely interesting discussions. I don't think either will get in, which is fine with me. Meh.
Sheffield is more interesting. Vicious swing, big numbers, some BALCO connections. I'd like to give him the benefit of a doubt, but I also see really good performance throughout his 30s, following an uneven career in his 20s--which seems suspicious given what we know about aging patterns and decline. Lacking more evidence, and given what I already said about putting in deserving guys despite suspicions, I think I'd have to put him in. But I may also just want to see his plaque with his initials inlaid in gold on his front teeth.
Hmmm... We agree, Jason.. Completely.... We actually followed the mission statement of the blog!
ReplyDeleteThe mission statement doesn't say anything about arguing? We should update that...
ReplyDeleteWe should also add that the second (and only other thing besides Cal) that we agree on is baseball HOF voting. It may be the only thing that keeps us friends (well, probably not, but it doesn't hurt).
ReplyDeleteSchilling and Mussina?
ReplyDeleteMussina
ReplyDeleteAgreed on the Moose, but no Schilling? He doesn't have an iron-clad case, maybe, but I think he should be in. Pretty uneven early in his career, and wins totals fall short, but he pitched well even on some pretty mediocre teams, completed games/piled up innings, struck guys out, eventually developed great control. Three deserved runner-up Cy finishes to Randy Johnson (as in, he was damn good, but not as good as Johnson, which is hardly a crime), and he was arguably even better in the post-season. Not an all-timer, okay, but I think a Hall of Famer.
ReplyDelete