1909 T206 HOF George Davis

The Card

Photo: T206 George Davis, front and back.

For those interested, I bought this card for $36.33, including shipping.  T206.org says it's been selling recently at about $43, which is a very common value for a Hall of Fame T206 of a nondescript player in Poor condition.  (Poor condition T206s of the big boys--Cobb, Young, Walter Johnson, etc.--still run a couple hundred bucks.)  Anyway, that's a profit of $6.67.  Not much.  The Beckett Graded Card Price Guide (7th Ed. 2015) says it's been selling at about $50, which is a little high, on Ebay, anyway. That's a value of $13.67, which is a little better.

I'm just happy to have a T206 HOFer.  I have about 15 of those now, most of them in Poor or Good condition, because that's what I can afford, ya know?  This card is in good condition, for a Poor.

The Player / The Person

Photo: George Davis, while with the Chicago White Sox, from The Sporting News

Shockingly, the Veterans' Committee got it right when they inducted this guy into the Hall.  Normally the Committee's inductions are abysmal, especially players inducted from this era.  I've looked at a few of those lately, and when I checked Davis's card in my collection and I looked at his stats (via baseball-reference.com, just click it here to see), I was expecting more of the same.

But I was pleasantly surprised.  You may have to know a bit about the time to appreciate Davis's stats.  At a glance, they're not impressive.  He led the league in an offensive category exactly once: 135 RBIs in 1897 for the New York Giants.  (McGraw and Mathewson wouldn't join the Giants until later.)  This is a lot, but for the 1890s, pretty common for a league leader.  What impressed me a lot more was that between 1904 and 1908, the Chicago White Sox let him play full-time, in most of the team's games, although his offensive stats were way below the league's norms.

There's only one reason possible for this: Defense.  From 1890 through 1902, Davis's offensive stats are good, but not great.  They are, though, impressively consistent.  And consistency in 1890s baseball, for 12 years, is very rare, whether it's offense or defense.  The stats will pile up, as they did. So for peak value, Davis was not one of the best players in the league.  But in career value, he was.

And then came 1904-1908 with the White Sox, and those rather unimpressive numbers.  True, the game changed a little, but those are still bad stats.  Why would he still be allowed to play full-time? Could his defense have been that good?

Yes.  Turns out, it was.

His overall WAR (wins above replacement; click on the stat on the webpage if you're unfamiliar with it) was higher in 1904, 1905 and 1906 than it had been in any of his more impressive offensive years. This can only be due to his defense.  Any dWAR (defensive wins above replacement) in the positive is good.  (This happens a shockingly low amount of times, even for good players today.)  Anything above 1 is really good; anything above 2 is Gold Glove worthy.  Davis was a very good defensive player during his good offensive years (consistently between 1 and 2), but when his offensive skills eroded after 1903, when he sat out, due to problems with injury, salary, and constantly jumping between the Giants and the White Sox, and back (jumping teams was VERY common in the early 1900s, but his case was still odd.  Read about it at his Wikipedia page here), he must've realized that if he was going to still play, his defense had to get even better.

And for a few years, it did.  His defensive WAR, from 1904-1908, when his offense was terrible: 3.4; 2.8; 3.0; 2.9; 1.3.  With his average to below-average offense, but his incredible GG (before there was a Gold Glove Award) defense, his overall WAR from 1904-1908: 7.2; 7.2; 6.3; 4.6 and 2.1.  A 5+ is all-star worthy, and his defense alone made him 2 levels above that.

Over his 16-year career, the league averaged a .919 fielding percentage for the positions he played. Davis's fielding percentage was .936.  At shortstop, the league's was .923 and his was .940.  

If you're defending 17 percentage points higher than everyone else in the league, that's HOF exceptional.  Combine that with 1,545 runs scored (56th all-time), 2,665 hits (69th all-time), 453 doubles (100th all-time), 163 triples (33rd all-time), 619 stolen bases (17th all-time), and 1,440 RBIs (63rd all-time), and you're a Hall-of-Fame player.  JAWS says he's the 4th-best shortstop of all-time, and that's going head-to-head with Honus Wagner (#1), A-rod (#2) Cal Ripken (#3), Robin Yount (#5), Arky Vaughn (#6), Ernie Banks (#7) and Ozzie Smith (#8).  Derek Jeter, if you're curious, is #12, ahead of Barry Larkin, Lou Boudreau, Pee Wee Reese and Bobby Wallace (a contemporary of George Davis's)--but behind Alan Trammel (#11)!  [Take a look at Trammel's stats here and you'll be as amazed as I was.  I assure you, nobody--including the announcers and players who were around him--realized he was that good.  Alan Trammel, shockingly, is wildly deserving of the Hall of Fame. But that's another blog entry for another time.)]  All of these guys, by the way, were way above the average HOF shortstop's stats.  Normally shortstops can field, or they can hit, but they can't do both.

So why a blog entry about George Davis, who nobody in this generation (and in this century) has ever heard of?

Because he wasn't inducted into the HOF until 1998, and he died in 1940.  It came 58 years too late, but finally someone dusted off his stats and saw the HOF.  

Well, it started with Bill James, as these sabermetric things often do.  I'll let the Wikipedia page tell it:

In a 1995 book, baseball author Bill James referred to Davis as baseball's best player who had not been inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame.^[7]Also in 1995, Davis was featured in David Pietrusza's television film "Local Heroes" in the segment "Knocking on Cooperstown's Door."

In 1997, baseball researcher Frederick Ivor-Campbell said that Davis was "the most neglected player of the 19th century. He's definitely the best eligible player not in the Hall, and he's a lot better than a lot of guys already in."^[8] Around the same time, Davis was rated the 21st best baseball player of all time in the official baseball encyclopedia, Total Baseball.^[8]

Davis was up for a vote before the Hall of Fame's Veterans Committee in 1998. Before the committee voted, sportswriter Dave Anderson wrote an article in The New York Times on Davis's Hall of Fame candidacy. He pointed out the work of Cohoes city historian Walt Lipka, which favorably compared Davis to almost all of the shortstops in the Hall of Fame. Anderson supported Davis's election, saying, "It's as if he were discarded nearly a century ago into a time capsule that was forgotten until now... For too long, George Stacey Davis has been his era's most forgotten best player."^[9] He was selected for induction that year.^[4]

Prior to his Hall of Fame induction, a Society for American Baseball Research (SABR) chapter in New York put out a call to locate a descendant of Davis to be present at the induction ceremony and announced plans for a historical marker in Cohoes.^[10] As a great deal of time had passed since his death, no relatives could be located, but a group of about 50 people from Cohoes traveled to the ceremony in support of Davis.^[1]

Me again.  I don't know if George Davis was the 21st best player of all-time, but he certainly belongs in the Hall.  He was light years better than Phil Rizzuto, Joe Tinker, Rabbit Maranville, and lots of other marginal candidates who probably shouldn't be in the Hall, but who are.  Davis got in so late that nobody was around to even honor his plaque.

And why was that?  Well, that's not so Hall-of-Fame worthy, but hey, don't judge:

Davis returned to the minor leagues for one season as player-manager of the 1910 Des Moines Boosters.^[6] He managed a bowling alley in the early 1910s. He was the Amherst College baseball coach from 1913 to 1918, then he became a car salesman.^[3]

The circumstances of his death remained a mystery until baseball historian Lee Allen discovered its details through a campaign to track down historical baseball players, run in part in The Sporting News. Davis was admitted to a Philadelphia mental institution in 1934 suffering from paresis due to tertiary syphilis. He died in the institution in 1940.^[3] Davis was survived by his wife Jane, who was said to have been angry at him when he died. They had no children. His wife spent $41 to have him buried within a day at nearby Fernwood Cemetery.

Me again.  Yeah, so no kids to have kids to honor his HOF plaque 58 years after he died of syphilis. Of course, you can get syphilis many ways, then and now, but...well, his wife was really pissed at him, and buried him the day after he died, apparently sans wake and funeral.  And it was a quickie burial, costing just $41, which sounds to me like someone dug a hole in the cemetery, threw him in, and filled up the hole.  Maybe even without a coffin, and definitely without a chaplain or onlookers.

And that pretty much says it all. 

Sox 9-5 So Far; Beat Rays 1-0

It's been awhile, I know.  I was going to try to write a blog entry after every ten games, so I'm just four games late doing that.  Well, anyway, some thoughts, fourteen games into the season:

--Like everyone else, I like Mookie Betts.  He's young, and fast, and he has some pop.  He can steal second and third on the same pitch (which I'd never seen before, and I've seen literally over a thousand games), and he can break up the double play like he did today (thereby winning the game, as it was the game's only run).  He can run and he can field and he drove in some important runs in the Sox's first few games...

...but, despite the pro-Mookie commercials on NESN all season, he's hovering around .200 and not drawing any walks.  His OBP is below .300--and he's the lead-off hitter.  He's struck out a lot.

I know it's early, but let's cut the fanfare for now.  Maybe he's feeling some pressure--very understandable, if so.  If that's the case, let's not play the "Mookie is awesome" commercials.  Let's give him a couple of days off, if we can.  Let's remember that he's 22 years old.

--And let's give the cheerleading commercials and rave reviews to whom they belong: Brock Holt.  He's just as fast, if not faster.  He's hitting over .400.  He's playing Gold Glove defense in the outfield and in the infield.  He made two game-saving plays today against the Rays to preserve the 1-0 win.  And he's now the lead-off hitter.  So, if there are accolades to be given, let's give them to him.

--The Sox overall are hitting about .238 as a team.  That's just a few points higher than the Rays--and the Rays are thought to be the worst-hitting team in the league.

--Speaking of the Rays, Evan Longoria must be wondering what he did to deserve this year.

--But it's nice to see Rocco Baldelli again.  (He's coaching first base for the Rays.  He played for the Rays and Sox.  And he went to school and played ball about half a mile from my house.)  Rocco needs to lose the beard, though.

--For those who care, Lou Merloni played ball at PC, just ten miles from here.  And Rheal Cormier (who also played for the Sox and Rays) played ball at CCRI, just three miles from here.

--I'm (barely) smart enough to look up some stats before I type them here.  For the record, the Sox were a .500 team in 1-0 games last year, and they played more than you and I remember.  But I was going to type that they didn't play that many, and the ones they did, they lost.  Doesn't it seem that way?  But we live in a world of seems.

--Speaking of seems, Ryan Hanigan--the Sox catcher now that Christian Vazquez is out for the year--is hitting well below .200, but with a .400 OBP.  I've seen every game this year, and it seems like he's getting one or two hits per game to me.  Obviously, he's not. (He did today.)  But it seems like he's grounding at least one single up the middle per game.  And that two-run homer was a bomb.  But he's amongst the league-leaders in walks, with 8, which gives him a .400 OBP.  (He's also been hit by a pitch a few times already, including twice in the same game.  I'd be surprised if he wasn't among the league-leaders in HBP, too.)  And he's throwing runners out and calling a great game.  I have no problem with he and the other guy, whoever he is.

--You don't remember his name, either.  But he could throw us out at second, no matter where he is.

--Okay, I just looked it up.  It's Sandy Leon.  Oh, please.  You didn't know that, either.

--Junichi Tazawa looks like a new, refreshed guy this year.  And he's throwing like it, too.  If Ogando can stay as effective as he's been (and he blew away a Rays hitter with the bases loaded today to preserve the 1-0 lead), then the Sox have a potent 7th, 8th and 9th inning tandem with Ogando, Tazawa and Uehara.  That bodes well for the playoffs, if they make it.

--The starting pitching is what I thought it would be, so far: pretty good, with occasional blow-ups when they hang their splits and off-speed pitches.  All five of these guys have to hit their spots, play north-south-east-west with the strike zone, and not walk anyone.  None of them can just rear back and fire it past anyone.

--Having said that, I foresee an overworked bullpen all year long.  Especially in the playoffs.

--"Playoffs?!?  Playoffs???  Don't talk to me about the playoffs!  Playoffs?!?"  (Sorry.)

--Hanley Ramirez looks like another Ramirez in left field.  And, sometimes, at the plate.  (Only the second one there was a compliment, for those not in the know.)

--Victorino doesn't look like he's going to make the whole year, physically.  Or, based on his performance.  He suddenly looks older and slower.

--Panda needs to lose a little of the heft.  His is bigger than Ortiz's.

--And Ortiz needs to do something about his play at the plate.  He should take the one-day suspension and work on his swing--and his attitude.  (But he's not.  He's appealing it.  Is there a series coming up soon in a National League park?)

--Having said that, those two check-swings were not strikes.  But the past is maybe evening out on him now.  The umps must've gotten together over the winter and decided that they'd had enough.

--And Ortiz also looks older and slower at the plate.  He's swinging at things he hasn't before.  He's not swinging at things he should be.  And he's looking mostly overmatched and confused up there.

--The Sox have not lost a series yet.  (They split in Baltimore.)  They've won every single first-game.

--And they've played well against the Nationals, who're very good, and the Orioles, who could be.

--I haven't seen such poor defense played against the Sox like I have in these first 14 games.

--Nava might be a better first baseman than an outfielder.  He picks it out of the dirt really well.  He made some fantastic scoops in today's game, including the one that was the last out.  But he's not hitting, either.

--The Sox have already shown more hustle this year than they did throughout all of last year.

April 14, 2015 Sox 6-2 So Far

Just came back from Fenway.  Exhausted and not feeling so great.  Amidst a 22-hour day so far, as I have a headcold and awoke at 2 a.m. on the 14th and haven't slept since.  But there's lots to go over, so I'll return to this post later today (April 15th) after I've slept and returned from work...

Unbelievable game.  Sox beat Strasburg and the Nationals 8-7, and should've lost.  Nobody can play defense against the Sox yet this year, for some reason.  The Sox have seen the worst defense since Opening Day that I have ever seen them face to begin a season--and I've been watching since the mid-1980s.

Anyway, more soon...

Opening Day 2015 Red Sox 8 Phillies 0

Photo: Dustin Pedroia, in Baltimore, 2012.  From his Wikipedia page.

It's just one game.  But my observations so far:

--You can't ask for more than 7 shutout innings from Buchholz.  He struck out 9 and allowed only three hits and a walk.  He'll face teams better than the Phillies this year, but he came through in a start in which he had to show he could step up and be the Jon Lester fill-in.  He did that.

--And don't miss the work by the unknown starting catcher (with Christian Vazquez on the shelf), Ryan Hanigan.  He called a good game and caught a good game, and even had a base hit and a walk.

--Dustin Pedroia, of course, had two homers and two Gold-Glove calibre plays.  Good to see that his finger injuries are behind him for the first time in a couple of years.

--And Hanley Ramirez's 2 homers and 5 RBIs, including an Opening Day grand slam.

--And Mookie Betts had a homerun, a walk and a single so far.  Experts have picked him to lead the league in runs scored.  Let's hope he does.

--Pedroia had seven homers all of last year, and has had two already.  Thou shalt not try to sneak a fastball inside on Pedroia.

--Or Mookie Betts, apparently.  Also, Mookie Betts has one of the great baseball names today.

--As does umpire Fieldin Culbreth.  That's right: Fieldin.

--Pablo Sandoval turned two walks into two outs when he flailed on garbage with a 3-2 count on him each time.  He needs to take more and sport a better OBP.  But he's clearly a better fielder than Middlebrooks was.  I'll say it again as I said it frequently last year and already this year: I do not miss Middlebrooks.  Except for how he kept Jenny Dell happy, of course.

--Jenny Dell can do better, by the way.  The word is that she's actually a very nice person.  She'll talk to anyone, and went to a kid's prom, and didn't just treat it as a publicity stunt.  She'll sign and take pics without a problem, too.

--Right, Salad?

--Speaking of Salad, I dedicate this year's blog posts to ya, big guy.  Thanks for all the games.

--First up: April 14th, the second Fenway game of the year.  Against the Washington Nationals, so I'll probably blog about their pitching staff--the best since the Braves' staffs of the mid-90s. 

Red Sox 2015 Spring So Far, and My Picks

Some quick points--

--Remember, it's just the Spring.  I haven't seen a spring that really meant anything for the regular season since 1984, when the Tigers steamrolled through their spring and then started the Regular Season 35-5, thereby ending the race in June.

--Having said that, the Sox have looked good.  Or, more accurately, they haven't looked bad.  Everyone's hitting decently and nobody besides Rusney has gotten injured.

--In a weak-looking American League East, the Sox could win the division.

--Or, with injuries, they could finish last.  Who knows?

--I'm sorry to lose David Ross, but he wasn't getting younger, and the Sox need to see what Swihart and company can do.  The backup they got to replace Ross looks just as good defensively.

--Not sorry to see Middlebrooks go, especially since his stupid selfie took Jenny Dell away from us for awhile.  And, oh yeah, he wasn't hitting or fielding well.  And he did get in the way of the runner.

--Very surprised, and very glad, to hear that Jenny Dell is returning.  Figured she'd go to CA with him, since they're married and all.

--And here's to hoping that all that sordidness is behind us now, and Jerry Remy can laugh again.

--The ones to watch this spring are Brock Holt, Mookie Betts, Jackie Bradley, Weeks, Victorino and the newest outfielders, Rusney and Moncada.  I know Panda and Ramirez will hit.  In the later innings of games they're ahead, Holt or Betts will take over for Hanley in left.

--Gold-glove Jackie Bradley is the odd man out in the outfield, since he's defense-only at this point, and Holt can play the outfield and infield.  And Holt's still getting on base.  Bradley is, too, but he did at this time last year as well, and for about a month thereafter.  But then the wheels came off.

--And Daniel Nava should be looking over his shoulder, too.  He can spell at first, but so can Holt (surprisingly, for his size), and Nava's not going to be a defensive replacement in the outfield.  So if he's not starting, he's not playing at all.  Nava is an excellent three-quarters of-the-year player (see: two years ago, when he was in the top-10 in average and OBP), but even then he never saw the playoffs.

--Two new outfielders brand new in the country just got about $100 million between them.  There's a great hitter in left, GG-caliber Victorino in right, and Betts (a GG-caliber guy himself who gets on base), or Rusney Castillo when he gets healthy, or Moncada, or Brock Holt (who's almost GG-caliber himself sometimes) or Weeks in center.  So, where exactly is Nava to play, except to spell Napoli at first.  And what if Napoli is healthy again?  I like Nava, but...Bradley, Moncada and Castillo all open in Pawtucket (or Providence?!?) this year--and all three are potential Gold Glove winners.  And Moncada and Castillo are at least very good hitters.  And there are too many outfielders even without those guys.  If I'm Nava, I don't buy another house around here.

--Though he probably stays around if Napoli never gets fully healthy.  Might see a platoon there.

--It should also be said that great three-quarters players like Nava have much better careers in the NL.  Like in Philly, for example.

--Pedroia looks revitalized to me.  Hopefully his hands and fingers stay healthy.

--Not having an ace is not the worst thing in the world.  But Cole Hamels probably nails down the division for them.

--A trade for Hamels probably means Bogaerts and Betts and someone else from the outfield leaves, maybe Bradley if someone needs a GG-fourth outfielder, which NL teams often do, especially if the pitcher's spot comes up in the late innings.  If that happens, Nava still probably doesn't have a job, as Ramirez, Victorino, one or both of the newest guys, and Brock Holt are still around.  (Holt might go in that trade as well.)

--With this many pitchers who pitch to contact this year, the Sox infield had best be flawless.

--And I don't know that such a staff goes too far in the postseason, where firepower generally rules.

--Unless you're Detroit.

--Late-inning relief looks a little iffy, but I wouldn't be surprised if Uehara or one of the newest guys steps it up and does well.  Mujica, I'm guessing, is gone as part of a trade.

--Betts and Holt are the lead-off batters this year.  Victorino, Pedroia or Weeks in a pinch.  But there's no shortage of table-setters this year.

--Pencil Big Papi in for 25-30 and 90-100 this year.  But his 40/125 years are over.

--Youkilis and Manny are two more ex-patriots working for the Cubs this year, for those keeping track.  Now, with the Dodgers, there are two NL Red Sox teams this year.  Oakland used to be one.

--So...where will Boston finish?

--I don't see Baltimore repeating, though it could.  But there seems too much uncertainty, bitterness, and flat-out hostility and strangeness going on there.  Even Duquette didn't know if he wanted to come or go.  Very odd for a Cinderella team like that to suddenly hate itself.  I don't see Adam Jones or Davis producing like that again, at the same time.  The relief looks shaky again, especially with Andrew Miller gone to NY (!).  Markakis left and wasn't replaced.  If they finish in first, it won't be by much.  But I don't see it.  Baltimore had better start off very well, or it'll implode. 

--Toronto could surprise.  Nobody outside the offense really stands out, but...they could win 93 games, which might be enough to win this weak division.  And it should be said that the Wild Card will not come from the American League East this year.

--The Yankees, who have not replaced Rivera or Jeter, will not do well this year, as they are old, and hefty, and still A-rod-ridden.  (And boring to watch.  If John Sterling is the most interesting part of your team, that's not good.)  A-Rod will be a huge distraction, and will undoubtedly do something to get himself released or suspended.  Still, a bad team, and a circus.  No, thanks.

--Tampa Bay?  Maybe, but doubtful.  Often, they were a decent team held together by black masking tape and Joe Maddon.  And Maddon leaving tells me there was handwriting on the wall I couldn't see from here.  (And the Cubs definitely colluded to get him.  Where's that investigation?)

--So...Boston or Toronto or Baltimore finishes first.  I'll go with Boston, with reservations.  Toronto's second.  Baltimore will crash and burn, then right itself when Buck Showalter gives everyone the Death Glare, and micro-manages everyone into submission.  And then Dan Duquette will become his socially-endearing self and bore everyone into submission.  Baltimore then floats and finishes third, at, or slightly-above, .500.  New York will sink to the bottom, then panic and spend billions on over-the-hill but-still-good players and not finish in the basement.  Which is where Tampa Bay will be.  (Though it could be a flip with those two.)

My picks for the American League East, then:

Boston
Toronto
Baltimore
New York
Tampa Bay

That looks weird, but that's how I see it.

Any thoughts?   

Cult Baseball Players edited by Danny Peary

Interesting book that I'd hoped would be as good as The Glory of their Times.  It wasn't, through no fault of its own, exactly.
 
Glory was told to Lawrence Ritter by the ballplayers themselves (and then edited by Ritter). This book is written by professionals in other endeavors, like yours and mine, about their favorite ballplayers.  Because of this, and because the writers are usually writers themselves, this comes across as maybe better-written, but not as interesting, as it's not from the ballplayers' POV.

But there's a certain coolness in that as well.  It made you think of your own associations with ballplayers, if you've had any.  I have: Wade Boggs nonchalantly picked up and returned my baseball to me--without signing it; Matsuzaka ignored me so rudely that people around me openly wondered what his problem was; Jason Bay blanched and stammered in front of me at Fenway Park.  Not because of me, but...Well, you'll have to buy the thing that publishes it.  And that's what I mean about this book's coolness: It made me want to write about my own memorable experience with a ballplayer.  And then sell it to be published, of course, cuz that's what I try and do.

So here are pieces written by Elmore Leonard, without his iconic dialogue and violence; by Tim McCarver, who's as long-winded in print as he was on the Fox telecasts, and many others.

I recommend reading it in the winter, as I have, because it reminds you that there is in fact a summer, when games like baseball are played.  But also because the book is only sometimes about baseball; at times it is more about the players, the times they played in, and those who they played with.  It reminds you that there is more to life than what is currently going on in front of you, which in my case has been days and days of snow-blowing, followed by today's 40s, which will be followed by tonight's single-digits and Wednesday's 5"-8" of snow.

But that's okay.  Baseball is right around the corner.  Spring training is happening right now.  And the lives of those who play it go on and on, even off of the field.  It's important to remember this.

Having said that, my first game this season is April 14th, at Fenway.

About 53 days away.  And yes, I'm keeping track.  There's more to the ballplayers than what happens on the field, but the field is where we see them, and--right or wrong--is often all we care to know about them.

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.