2017 HOF Ballot Part 1

Photo: from bbstmlb.com

Votes	Player	Percentage
315	Jeff Bagwell	71.6%
307	Tim Raines	69.8%
296	Trevor Hoffman	67.3%
230	Curt Schilling	52.3%
199	Roger Clemens	45.2%
195	Barry Bonds	44.3%
191	Edgar Martinez	43.4%
189	Mike Mussina	43.0%
150	Lee Smith	34.1%
92	Fred McGriff	20.9%
73	Jeff Kent	16.6%
68	Larry Walker	15.5%
51	Gary Sheffield	11.6%
46	Billy Wagner	10.5%
31	Sammy Sosa	7.0%

Above you have the players still eligible for the Hall of Fame. These guys have struck out on past voting, with the percentage they got during last year's vote.

In 2017 I expect Bagwell, Raines and Hoffman to get over the 75% hump, though I don't expect any of them to go crazy and reach, say, 95%. Bagwell has those whispers of PEDS use, but now that Piazza is in, this shouldn't be a problem. Piazza's whispers were louder, though one look at Bagwell in his rookie year, and then him looking like King Kong in later years...well, whatever. As I've said before, the writers can't moralize when they vote, as many of them would fail morality tests of their own. And Bagwell has never been accused by MLB for using PEDs. So he gets a pass with me. One of the best sluggers, defenders and taker of a walk that you're likely to ever see.

Key stats: Career .408 on-base %; 449 homers and 1529 RBIs; .540 slugging %; .948 OPS; 128 HBP. Top-50 career in every positive offensive stat, and JAWS says he's the 6th-best 1B ever. 'nuff said.

Raines, as I've written before, was overshadowed by Rickey Henderson his entire career, and there was that vial of crack cocaine that shattered in his back pocket in a slide at home, all caught on national television. Oops. (I'm pretty sure crack was on MLB's banned drug list at the time.) But he's worthy of the HOF, and would've been in already had he not played at the same time as Rickey.

I'm not crazy about closers making the HOF, but Hoffman does have over 600 saves. Not too many closers deserve it. Mariano will in a few years, and maybe the writers are waiting to put him in first. He deserves it more than Hoffmann, as did the Eck. I'm not convinced of Hoffman's dominance, exactly, but he should get in for career value at the position. Lee Smith should not, because Hoffman dominated more than Lee Smith ever could. I never felt Hoffman was elite during his entire career.

Clemens and Bonds are this generation's (and maybe all-time's) kings at their positions, and should eventually get in. I'd rather see that sooner than later. Neither has been accused by MLB as having used PEDS, though of course both did. I'll fall back again on my stance that writers should not moralize. They were the peak value and career value greats, and should be in, although they were also both greatly disliked by ballplayers and writers while they played. But look at the numbers.

Mussina and Schilling both deserve to be in, as well. I have played that tune before and won't again now. They're both all-time great pitchers and are ranked 28th and 27th by JAWS. I'd take Schilling over Mussina anyday. The Moose might be a Veterans Committee (or whatever it's called now) pick.

The rest are a no-go, even Sosa. Caveat there, as he and McGwire straight-up saved baseball in the mid-nineties and are now treated as lepers. But baseball bureaucrats have the right to be hypocrites.

Next up: New players on the 2017 HOF ballot.

Red Sox 2016

Photo: David Ortiz at the White House, from his Wikipedia page. Just click here.

Yes, I know it's been a long time. Inexcusable, considering the good season. There were lots of entries I could have made here, and I was about to, but then something relevant came up. Also I didn't want to write an entry about how the season ended, considering the abrupt turnaround and the much-improved play. So...

--Let's start it off with a trivia question: When Randy Johnson won his 300th game, for what team was he pitching for? Answer towards the bottom of the column.

--Yes, a disappointing end, but let's remember what they've been the last few years. Bottom line: A much-improved team that now should make the playoffs regularly for a long time to come. And now those who played in a playoffs for the first time (which was almost all of the offensive players, especially those whose offense was . . . well, offensive) will be better prepared for next time. The Big Bs were all shut down this time, but they won't be next time.

--And it looks like Pedroia was playing with a bum knee for much of the season. Didn't know that. But when a player has major surgery a few days after his season ends, that's what that means. Pedroia himself had a resurgent year, and has entered himself into potential HOF talk. Amongst this generation's second basemen, his career is building up to be one of the best.

--Baseball-reference and JAWS say Pedroia's the 19th-best ever, and his fielding % is 4th-best, ever. (Click on the link for his page and stats.) Is there another second basemen you'd rather have? I'll take a leadoff batter with a .350+ OBP, 200 hits and great defense. Can't count the number of times this year I saw him make a great play going up on the ball, rather than just down. Amazing defense.

--And it looks like Betts, Bogaerts, Bradley and Benetendi will be good players for a long time. I have a 10 baseball and a 10 autograph of Betts and Bradley, by the way. Look at the blog about Betts's ball by clicking here.

--Don't be surprised if Ortiz has a tough time, at first, getting into the Hall. He's a DH, and he's got a cloud of PEDS suspicion, especially with HGH. True, his name (and the others) were not supposed to be leaked from the Biogenesis report--but it still was there. And I don't know that the country's sportswriters revere him like those in New England do. But I do think he'll eventually get in.

--If he does, Edgar Martinez should, too. But Ortiz was better. And he wasn't exactly the defensive liability that Edgar Martinez was. Ortiz could play first base if you were truly desperate, but I wouldn't have put Edgar Martinez on the field under any circumstance, especially at third base.

--His F-bomb after the Boston bombing will win over some of the out-of-New England writers, and his extreme popularity with other players and with the media cannot be ignored. That kind of stuff shouldn't matter with the writers' HOF vote, but it always does.

--It's a good thing, though, that the umpires don't do the voting. Ortiz, in all honesty, would make the HOF of Home Plate Whining at Umpires. And, for a few years there, the HOF of Contract Whining.

--Bradley may be one of the streakiest hitters of all-time. Not too many batters have led their league in longest hitting streak, as Bradley led the American League this year with his 29-gamer, and yet still finish at .267 or so for the year. In the playoffs this was especially frustrating.

--Any STATS employee or sabermetrics virtuoso, please feel free to look that up and leave a comment. Who has the lowest batting average of anyone who led his league that year with the longest hitting streak? My guess: Jackie Bradley, Jr. 2016.

--Worthless stat that just popped in my head: What player had the lowest batting average and yet led his league in homers? Answer: Tony Armas, Boston, .218. In the mid-80s, maybe before your time.

--I've met him--Jackie Bradley, that is, not Tony Armas--and spoken with him twice. Good guy, very soft-spoken. I'm glad he's finally made it. (Made the two autographs I have of him worth more, too.)

--The Sox may have the MVP and Cy Young on the same team for the first time since 1986. (Roger Clemens won both that year.)

--While we're at it, the trivia answer from the top: Randy Johnson won his 300th while pitching for the San Francisco Giants. (!) Yeah, I wouldn't have guessed that, either. I just happened to be on his baseball-reference page before I started this column. I wanted to see who was greater, Clemens or Johnson. Answer, Clemens, and it's not close, both in peak value and in career value. Both are top-10.

--And don't even bother telling me that one took PEDS and one didn't, because I don't believe that either one of them could've pitched that long, at that level, and that hard, without some help. I know Nolan Ryan just had Alleve, but still...he may have benefited from the same stuff that apparently helped Mantle and Ruth, if you catch my drift.

--Every time Bogaerts swings at a pitch low and (way) outside, he needs to drop and give me 20. Right there at the plate, like Willie Mays Hayes.

--The entire Boston team in 2016 may have been one of the streakiest ever. Without that 11-game winning streak, they may not have made the playoffs at all.

--And at least Ortiz got to go out at Fenway.

--Goodbye, Big Papi. It won't be the same without you.

--And good luck to Tito Francona and Mike Napoli. And Lester and Lackey, too, if they make it.

Patriots 27 NYG 26

Photo: The catch that wasn't, from Jason Szenes of the New York Times.  Article at NYTimes.com. BTW, note to the Times: The caption beside this photo says, "The Giants' Odell Beckham Jr. made a catch past the Patriot's Malcolm Butler (21)."  No, he didn't.  That was the play of the game, you know.

A few things from this game, the best I've seen all year and probably better than a few playoff games to come:

--"The receiver had not yet become a runner."  That was from Ed Hochuli, who seems to have toned down his tight-shirt accentuating his toned upper-body thing.  No better explanation necessary for why an incompletion is so, even in the end zone.  And, I noticed at the time, the receiver's second foot had not made solid contact with the ground before the ball had popped loose.  In short, the receiver has to make the catch and complete some other kind of football play.  That didn't happen.

--And Malcolm Butler, who knocked the ball out of Odell Beckham's hands on that play, really saved the day, and more than made up for his one awful play--the throw on the second play from scrimmage that allowed Beckham...to...go...all...the...way.  (Though McCourty actually ran into him on that play, and it was more McCourty's fault overall than his.)  The Giants had to settle for a field goal a few plays later, which put them ahead only by 2 with about 1:30 left.

--Losing Edelman for anything longer than this game is really going to hurt.  He does so many things well, but he's also really Brady's favorite receiver.  And with Dion Lewis out, that's especially painful.

--The true great ones win in dramatic fashion even when they're not at their best.  That was Brady today.  Really fortunate not to have 1 or 2 more INTs in this game, and a TD is taken back on a holding call, and he throws a pick on the goal line...and they still win.  After completing on a 4th and 10, no less.

--Gostkowski may be the best kicker in the NFL right now, and maybe has been for quite awhile.  Nothing against Vinitiari, and these comparisons are sort of useless anyway.  But a 54-yarder is not a gimme, of course, and this was to win the game, after being iced once, in hostile territory.

--Eli Manning vs. Tom Brady and the Patriots is like Geno Petralli vs. Roger Clemens.  Go figure.  And you get a safety if you leave a comment to explain this one, since you'd have to be my age and a serious Sox fan to get it.  But it's a solid comparison, in its own way.

--Amendola is another Edelman, who himself was another Wes Welker.  Unbelievably awesome receivers who run for a ton of yards after the catch, and make great catches, and catch 7-10 passes per game, and can be used as occasional running backs.  They're also short--much shorter than average in the NFL--and bounce back up after catastrophic hits.  The Patriots keep churning out these guys.

--The Patriots have, in MHO, the best quarterback, tight end, kicker, receiving corps and coach in the NFL.  That'll equal a lot of victories.

--I'm going to bet that Belichik does not retire when Tom Brady does.  But they'll forever be thought of together, now and in the Hall of Fame.

--The Patriots barely beat the Giants in their almost-perfect season as well, for those who remember.  So let's not get cocky here.

2016 HOF Ballot

Photo: Ken Griffey, Jr. from his Wikipedia page

I know I promised a lot of blogs about last year's HOF ballot and winners & losers, and I really dropped the ball on that (pun intended).  I'll follow through this time.  I think.

The ballot: Garret Anderson, Brad Ausmus, Jeff Bagwell, Barry Bonds, Luis Castillo, Roger Clemens, David Eckstein, Jim Edmonds, Nomar Garciaparra, Troy Glaus, Ken Griffey Jr., Mark Grudzielanek, Mike Hampton, Trevor Hoffman, Jason Kendall, Jeff Kent, Mike Lowell, Edgar Martinez, Fred McGriff, Mark McGwire, Mike Mussina, Mike Piazza, Tim Raines, Curt Schilling, Gary Sheffield, Lee Smith, Sammy Sosa, Mike Sweeney, Alan Trammell, Billy Wagner, Larry Walker, Randy Winn.

My 10 picks, and the order of my vehemence (c'mon, that's a nice phrase):

1. Ken Griffey, Jr. (of course)
2. Alan Trammell (yes; see recent blog entry)
3. Barry Bonds
4. Roger Clemens
5. Mike Piazza
6. Jeff Bagwell (I know the sniff of steroid scandal surrounds these last four, but none of them ever failed an MLB drug test, or got suspended for PED use. And it's time the writers got off their high-horse.)

These first six are no-brainers, in my opinion.  And repeat after me: Baseball writers are not judges or pariahs.  Baseball writers are not judges or pariahs.  Baseball writers are not...

The next four should go in, but I'm ambivalent about them, in almost equal vehemence. I'd be okay with none of the four getting in, but the stats show that they should:

7. Mark McGwire OR Sammy Sosa (Repeat after me again: Baseball writers are not...McGwire gets the nod from me because of his Gold-Glove caliber defense at first.)
8. Curt Schilling (May place ahead of McGwire and Sosa, whose stats are better and who made bigger overall impacts during the regular season.  Schilling's numbers are better than Mussina's overall, but not by as much as you would think.  Voters aren't supposed to consider the post-season while voting, but...How could you not with Schilling?)
9. Mike Mussina (I see him as a Veterans Committee pick many years from now.)
10. Edgar Martinez OR Trevor Hoffman (The writers see these guys as part-time players, almost.  In truth, Hoffman might have a better shot than Edgar.  But the closer role and the DH are positions, nonetheless, even if a typical closer pitches just 75 innings a year and the DH essentially pinch-hits 5 times a game.)

I still can't justify Tim Raines getting in, though I mentioned last year that if he hadn't played at the same time as Rickey Henderson (and if that vial of coke hadn't shattered in his uniform pocket when he slid into home that day), then he'd be in the Hall.  I still believe that.
  
Lee Smith, as I said last year, was simply not a dominant closer.  Period.  Eckersley and Rivera were, and they're in the Hall.  Hoffman was not dominant like those two were, ever, but he was more than Smith was, every year.  I'm not sure he was dominant enough to make my Hall.  Probably at some point.  Not this time.  The writers will vote him in, anyway, because they won't vote in the steroids-stained, despite their innocence in MLB's court of law. But he should get in before Billy Wagner does.  Wagner probably doesn't belong at all. Same goes from McGriff and Sheffield, though Sheffield was probably more of an overall force than McGriff.  Had either played for the dominant teams of their time, however, each would be a lock for the Hall.  But whispers surround them as well, especially Sheffield.

I'll have to research Jeff Kent's numbers, but I'd be surprised if he wasn't among the top-10 best-hitting second basemen of all-time.  I hear that when Kent played with Bonds on the Giants, a reporter asked everyone else on the team not named Kent or Bonds to vote for the most-hated man on the team.  Every player said it was Kent, and it wasn't close.

Had Nomar never been drilled in the wrist that day, he would've been better than Jeter, especially in peak value.  But baseball is full of what-ifs.  He broke his wrist and he faltered.

My 2015 Hall of Fame Ballot

I'm not eligible to vote, of course, but if I were, I would vote for:

The three first-time no-brainers:

1. Pedro Martinez (highest peak-value pitcher of my, or any, generation; best two consecutive seasons ever; unbelievable when considering that MLB was at its offensive peak his entire career; best ERA+ ever; one year he and Clemens finished 1-2 in ERA--and Clemens' ERA was about two runs per nine innings higher that year; Red Sox personnel who saw both Martinez and Clemens pitch say unanimously that Pedro was a greater, more dominant pitcher)
2. Randy Johnson (won over 300 games; #2 Ks lifetime--and famously gave John Kruk nightmares)
3. John Smoltz (though I wish he'd remained a starter; his greatness is hard to statistically prove, but I saw his whole career, and it's there nonetheless)

A few who MLB and the Commissioner have never excluded from HOF voting because they have never, ever, not once, been proven by MLB to have used performance-enhancing drugs.  And, the media is not of a higher moral caliber, AND it's the Commissioner's job to discipline or banish ballplayers (see: Pete Rose and ARod), not the HOF voters / print media.  Therefore:

4.  Roger Clemens (statistically one of the top-3 pitchers of all-time, with Walter Johnson and Cy Young; struck out 20 batters, in one game, twice--ten years apart)
5.  Barry Bonds (statistically the best ballplayer ever, if you forget Babe Ruth would've also been in the Hall as a pitcher; the only player I've ever seen consistently intentionally walked with the bases loaded; the only player to come close to walking over 150+ times a year, every year, and who actually walked over 200 times a year--and more than once.  Bonds and Clemens are amongst the few players ever to rate amongst the top-5 all-time in peak value and career value.  We have never seen any one player effect a single game as much, as frequently, as Bonds did)
6.  Craig Biggio (quietly kept from the Hall so far because of very quiet PED whispers; see above, and 3,000 hits and GGs at three different positions don't lie)
7.  Mike Piazza (mentioned in the same breath as Yogi Berra, Roy Campanella and Johnny Bench as the best offensive catcher of all-time--though I think I could steal second off him, even now.  The stats show that Piazza is the best hitting catcher of all-time; why he wasn't made a first baseman or left fielder much earlier in his career, thereby saving him from at least three career-ending concussions, is a mystery)
8.  Jeff Bagwell (with hesitation, but a .297 career average, with 449 career homers, 1500+ career RBIs, 1401 career BBs, and a career .400+ OBP and a career .500+ Slugging % all mean he had one of the all-time best slugging careers--and he was a GG first baseman, too; one of the highest career-value players of all-time)

And two who are vastly underrated, if you look at their career stats versus the average HOF starting pitcher.  In short, these two are slightly--or better than slightly--greater than the average HOF starting pitcher.  In other words, they're Hall of Famers:

9.  Curt Schilling (and not just for the bloody-sock game; one of the few pitchers to be one of the all-time best for three different teams: Phillies, Diamondbacks and Red Sox.  And he was considered borderline or slightly better than borderline great while still active.  #1 all-time, Ks per walk, amongst starters.  He won't get too many votes in RI, or from people he pissed off with his mouth, but...)
10. Mike Mussina (career stats are better than 40 of the 59 starting pitchers in the Hall.  These two are the two bulldogs of their generation--though Mussina was much quieter about it, possibly to his detriment--but are also vastly underrated considering the offensively-explosive American League East that they spent much of their careers in.  Not to mention the entire offensive juggernaut all of MLB was during their whole careers, where ballparks were like pinball machines)

A few other comments:

Trammel / Morris

Many writers have put Alan Trammel on their ballots.  This cannot, of course, be taken seriously, especially with Jack Morris still knocking on the door.  To include his name and not Morris's is a travesty, though I am not a fan of Morris as a person.  But when I think of a HOF player from the early-to-mid 80s Tigers, I think Jack Morris, not Alan Trammel.  Plus, his Game 7 shutout...Jack Morris fits definition-B of a HOFer, to a T--Amongst the greatest at his position for any 10-year stretch.  (Like Jim Rice, 1975-1986; Rice fits that to a T as well, and is not in--and should not be in--for any other reason.)  I'll put it to you like this: Who won the most games in the 1980s?  Jack Morris.  The Tigers and the Twins do not win the World Series without him.  I would've put Morris on my list, but you can only have 10, and the above 10 are more deserving.  Maybe next year.

Tim Raines

His name has also been mentioned on many ballots.  This is a surprise, yet not.  Had he not played his career alongside Rickey Henderson, he'd already be in the Hall.  Well, and if he hadn't slid across home plate and shattered the vial of crack cocaine in his back pocket.  So, if I have it right, voters would keep Bonds and Clemens out of the Hall because of their never-proven (Did they use?  Of course.  But in what court was that proven, besides the Court of Public Opinion?) use of steroids, but Raines should slide in despite his very obvious use of crack cocaine?  Wasn't crack cocaine on the list of banned substances as well?  Having said that, he's arguably a worthy HOFer.  But not this year.

Fred McGriff

Has essentially the same qualifications as I mentioned for Bagwell, but less so.  But still: 2,490 hits, with 493 HRs and 1550 RBIs, with a .284 career average, a .377 career OBP, and a .500+ Slugging %.  The line I draw here is a) Bagwell has to get in before McGriff; b) Bagwell was a GGer at 1B and McGriff wasn't; and c) Bagwell was considered borderline-to-better great while still playing, and McGriff wasn't.  He was never even considered to be great at all during his career, nor even the best on his team.  Having said that, if McGriff had gotten 10 more hits and 7 more Homers, you could say he was a .285 hitter with 500 homers and 1,500 RBIs, which would get him in, sooner or later.  I'm not keeping him out because of 10 singles and 7 homers.  But not this year.

Carlos Delgado

See: Fred McGriff.  I'd take the Crime Dawg over Delgado in a pinch.

Lee Smith

Here's where a long career can vex lesser voters.  His overall career numbers have piled up, but a pile-up of Yugos doesn't mean you have a lot of value.  You just have a big pile-up.  To be blunt: I saw Lee Smith's entire career, and he wasn't great.  He wasn't lights-out, as a voter said today.  Rivera and The Eck were lights-out closers, year in and year out, and for their careers.  Trevor Hoffman, Uehara, and maybe Lee Smith had one or two or three great years (Uehara had half of a great year and turned it into a World Series ring), but that doesn't make them great.  I turned away from games (though not Sox games, as Boston hit Rivera well) when Big Mo came in.  But I never turned away when Lee Smith came in, especially when he pitched with the Sox.  I felt teams always had a decent chance against him.  A good pitcher will save the vast majority (80% to 85%) of games he pitches in, especially for just three to five batters.  And that's what Smith did.  Makes him good, maybe even very good, and maybe he had a couple of great seasons, but that's not the Hall of Fame to me.  Rivera and The Eck didn't walk too many (they're amongst the best all-time, for relievers, at Ks per walk) and they didn't give up too many hits per nine.  Lee Smith did both.  With a very high 1.25 WHIP.

Pressing--Indians 8, Sox 4

--I can't imagine what the team is going through here.  It's 5 in a row now--and the Rays have lost 5 in a row as well--and I was right yesterday: It really will be a race between the PawSox and the BoSox to win their first game of the year.

--I've been on some bad teams in my playing days (ALL my teams really have been bad teams; no correlation to the fact I was on them, of course.), but the difference is that we knew we were terrible, and we didn't exactly expect to win most of our games.  But the Sox were picked to win the World Series by most experts, for God's sake.  There's still time to do so, of course, but they need to win a game now before they play the Yanks.  If you can't beat the Indians, how can you beat the Yankees?

--You can't hit 2 batters and walk another one, down by one late in the game, and expect to win.  Ever.

--The Sox lead the majors in homers allowed.  That won't get it done.

--Before today's game, the Sox as a team were hitting below .200.  That won't do it, either.

--Lester has to show he's the ace by stopping this losing streak.  That's what an ace does.

--No Sox pitcher, starters or relievers, have impressed overall yet.

--The Sox pitchers have the highest ERA in all of MLB.

--I don't think Youk purposely dropped the ball at third.  Bad call by the ump.

--Speaking of which, the homeplate ump. made about 20 lousy ball/strike calls tonight.  Even when he reversed his own call, how do you not see the ball drop and roll at the plate?

--Something annoys me about Jade McCarthy and I don't know what it is.  Though this may be just the losing streak talking.

--Bonds not taking the stand in his own defense is a no-brainer.  Someone that unlikable should never take the stand.  Period.  That was his lawyer throwing the personality white flag.

--Prediction: Bonds guilty on all remaining counts, or almost all of them.  And no jail time.

--Clemens is next.  Though not as unlikable as Bonds, his lawyers have to worry about his arrogance as well.  Fans around here will never forget when Clemens complained to the media in the late 80s about having to carry his own bags across the airport.

--You STILL cannot keep Bonds and Clemens out of the Hall--especially Bonds.  There's just something wrong with keeping the all-time hits leader and the all-time homerun leader out of the Hall.  What else does everyone but the most serious fan go to the park to see?  And Clemens is the Bonds of pitching.  Can't keep him out either.  You can keep them out until their last year of eligibility, but I don't like that, either.  Then it becomes more about the voting writers than about the players, or anything else.  And the writers as pariahs doesn't sit well with me, either.  Many of them aren't exactly saints, as well.  Keep the morality bloodhounds away from the voting process.

--There might be parity in terms of talent across MLB, but not when it comes to attendance.  Remember how the Rays and Braves didn't draw well, in a good economy, when both teams were in the playoffs?  Now, in a bad economy, I worry.  Have you seen the sparse crowds during the highlights across all of MLB?  About 6,500 in Cleveland tonight; I'll be in a Triple-A ballpark tomorrow night with over 9,000 others.  That's sad.  I've seen low numbers in most of the home games shown this week.