Trump and Schillings outward views on Journalists and politics plays a big part in this since he was a borderline candidate to begin with.
2017 MLB HOF ballot released
- Thread starter soxhop411
- Start date
Schilling would have sailed in had he kept his mouth shut. He's completely qualified, he's just a victim of a crowded ballot and being a douche. And it's really about him being a douche with a big mouth, rather than necessarily his politics. Johnny Damon campaigned for Trump and although he's a borderline candidate and probably won't get in, I am confident few or no voters are going to say "I'll never vote for a man who wants to make America great again!"
Meanwhile, the journalist stuff definitely cost Schilling votes.
Meanwhile, the journalist stuff definitely cost Schilling votes.
I find it exceptionally unlikely that we haven't had steroid users in the Hall for quite a long period of time. Maybe 20 years or longer.
Tom House was using them in the 70s, they were all over the NFL and there had to be some cross-pollination, and there's articles all over the place about how so-and-so bulked up with a Nautilus machine that look as suspicious today as TV broadcasters saying Darryl Strawberry couldn't play today due to some bad Chinese food.
Are Hoffman and Vlad locks next year or do the incoming names and the other big names that gained serious momentum set them back a year or two?
Joe Posnanski had a great blog entry on this very question yesterday. It basically boiled down to Pudge's otherworldly defense .. plus his longevity and general excellence at the plate but not a huge power guy - which is the skill one generally associates with PEDs. Basically .. "he may have used PEDs but they didn't make him a HOFamer."
Edit: link:
http://joeposnanski.com/ballot-9-ivan-rodriguez/
I think Vlad is a lock next year, but Hoffman might actually see his numbers go down as the voting group becomes more and more dominated by those who think only their way of looking at baseball is the right way
If they aren't locks, they're as close to it as makes no difference.
Chipper Jones and Jim Thome join the ballot and I would imagine they get in immediately for a four person class. I think the 2019 and 2020 classes are going to be interesting because there's only one guy coming in each year that you utterly have to vote for.
And I don't think he shook them "easily." He only made it by four votes. Someone with his career should have been over 90%
While simultaneously becoming less and less dominated by those who think only their way of looking at baseball is the right way and being dead ass wrong about it.
Really happy for Raines .. the third Expo to make it. To be followed by the fourth (Vladdy) next year.
Walker still has an outside chance.
Walker still has an outside chance.
I don't know if Pudge used or not, but this is apologia at its finest. The effects of PED's certainly would make it more likely that you stay strong enough to stay on the field and catch 150 games a year, and as we saw throughout the PED era, they changed the trajectory of age-related decline, which certainly helps contribute to "longevity." If Pudge was a PED user, then they absolutely might have made him a HOFers.
There's absolutely a structural break in his career between 2004 and 2005, which may just be the sudden onset of age-related decline at age 33. But for me, players who had declines from 2003-2004 to 2005-2006 go to the front of the testing line when we invent time travel.
Last edited:
Jose Canseco chimes in on Bagwell's induction:
I forgot how great his Twitter account is. Quite the read.
Easily in relation to Jeff Bagwell -- another guy where steroids are assumed but not confirmed. I assume the difference is "but Pudge wasn't a big power guy, so they obviously didn't help him much".
Edgar and McGriff expire in '19, Walker in '20.
Edgar at 58% should get in with Rivera in '19. (It took 2 years for Raines & Bags to go from 60% to 86% so it's reasonably to assume he's on a similar trajectory to just miss in '18 then make it in '19.)
And the changes in voting (public balloting & expiring credentials of non-baseball writers) will only help Edgar, I think.
Might go like this:
2018: Chipper, Thome, Vlad, Hoffman
2019: Rivera, Martinez
2020: Jeter, Clemens, Bonds
2021: Schilling, Mussina
Open to arguments for Rolen, but I see him hanging on the ballot for a long time.
That surprises me, I thought he had a chance to make it. Baseball ref has the 16th best catcher ever. He deserves better. I use his stoic retreat to clubhouse, after Ortiz' game 4 walkoff as an example of kids I coach about how to handle defeat with equanimity and class.
As far I can tell, Rodriguez is the first person inducted who has been accused on the record of steroid use by an alleged eyewitness/accomplice (Canseco). Piazza and Bagwell were suspected because of bulking up etc., but (at least in public) no one claimed to know for a fact that they were users. That is an interesting development. Yet he got in more easily than they did!
Posada was a great player. He is at worst a borderline HOF candidate. Maybe he doesn't deserve to be in, but he raked for years. He is a career 122ops+, Jeter is 115, Andre Dawson is 119, Jim Rice is 128.
Take a look at the career leaders in K/BB ratio. A not-insignificant predictor of pitching success. The leaderboard goes:
(1) a pitcher from the 1870s with 8 full seasons to his name,
(2) Chris Sale, aged 27,
(3) G38 (20 seasons)
(4) Madison Bumgarner, aged 26,
(5) Pedro f'ing Martinez
(6) Mariano Rivera
(7) Dan Haren (?!)
(8) Clayton Kershaw, aged 28
(9) Cliff Lee (13 seasons)
(10) Max Scherzer, aged 31
Throw out the prehistory guy and the active players who haven't yet had a decline phase, and you have Schilling listed right ahead of Pedro and Rivera in the primary stat for strikezone command. That is quite a claim to fame, even before talking about the postseason and other stuff.
Last edited:
I think it's just folks putting the PED era in some perspective. Bagwell had a career that should have put him on the ballot sometime in the first 3 years of eligibility. And it was probably Bagwell's case that finally got voters to start saying "You know, absent hard evidence, it's essentially impossible for us to determine who was clean or who wasn't. It's time to vote for the guys that have the stats, especially as MLB was essentially turning a blind eye to the problem".
This shift in attitudes probably bodes well for Papi when it's his turn starting in 2022.
Yes Alou and Posada both did it to toughen up the skin on their hands.
One major problem with Schilling was that as of the age of 33, his career record was 110-95. Had he retired then and there, he would have struggled to stay on the ballot more than a couple of years. I realize that W-L is meaningless when it comes to valuing pitchers, but the perception of Schilling at that point wasn't "potential Hall of Famer", but instead was "good pitcher who had a couple of nice seasons". And, it wasn't just W-L; he did not exceed 200 K's in a season until he was 30. It was also at that point he started to walk fewer batters. But then he started to tail off at age 32, and most assumed he was entering the twilight of his career.
Unfortunately, once the BBWAA voters (and fans as well) form those opinions, they tend to stick for a while. And while those same voters remember Schilling's starting his remarkable run in the desert, it's still too easy to dismiss Schilling as "late bloomer with some really nice years at the end.". Playoff success helps with some voters, but that can be a controversial topic with other voters due to the small sample sizes of most playoff careers. So he ends up being borderline.
And, as a borderline candidate, it helps to play the political game to some extent and stay out of trouble. It's something he could have done. He had a nice announcing gig for a while. Cancer survivor. Even his business misdeeds would be forgivable for most; lots of businesses fail every day. Likely, had he played nice, the Red Sox PR department would have started making the case for Curt as they did for Jim Rice, and all would have been good with the voters that rely on the advanced metrics to judge players. Instead, Schilling has done more to damage his own brand than most other former players. It's still a recoverable situation, but his narcissistic personality will probably make it way harder than necessary.
I believe it is over for Schilling. He was going to need divergent voters, logical stat heads, and those swayed by the drama of the post season to converge. There are many tough calls and a giy being a grade A assholes makes him easy to ignore. He missed his window, unless Trumpzisim has its Thousand year Reich and he is a sentimental choice.
What a load of bullshit. These nerds have had 20 years now to learn the basics of PEDs and that they can still come up with this type of bullshit is amazing
Edit: Pudge being in but not Bonds is laughable. I'm just going to sign off on anything that takes voting, voting sucks. Exhibit A: DJT. Exhibit B: Pudge over Bonds, Exhibit C: any season of the voice where the country/gospel person wins
Last edited:
Biggest public-private differentials for voting rates:
Barry Bonds, -22.4% (63.3 vs 40.9)
Roger Clemens, -19.1% (62.1 vs 43.0)
Mike Mussina, -16.1% (58.6 vs 42.5)
Edgar Martinez, -14.8% (64.8 vs 50.0)
Curt Schilling, -14.6% (51.2 vs 36.6)
Ivan Rodriguez, -7.8% (79.3 vs 71.5)
Tim Raines, -6.4% (88.7 vs 82.3)
Jeff Bagwell, -4.0% (87.9 vs 83.9)
Larry Walker, -2.6% (23.0 vs 20.4)
(...)
Trevor Hoffman, +2.2% (73.0 vs 75.3)
Gary Sheffield, +3.9% (11.7 vs 15.6)
Lee Smith, +6.0% (31.6 vs 37.6)
Fred McGriff, +14.5% (15.6 vs 30.1)
Interesting to me that if just private-ballot voters were voting, Hoffman would be in (barely) while Pudge Rodriguez would be out.
Barry Bonds, -22.4% (63.3 vs 40.9)
Roger Clemens, -19.1% (62.1 vs 43.0)
Mike Mussina, -16.1% (58.6 vs 42.5)
Edgar Martinez, -14.8% (64.8 vs 50.0)
Curt Schilling, -14.6% (51.2 vs 36.6)
Ivan Rodriguez, -7.8% (79.3 vs 71.5)
Tim Raines, -6.4% (88.7 vs 82.3)
Jeff Bagwell, -4.0% (87.9 vs 83.9)
Larry Walker, -2.6% (23.0 vs 20.4)
(...)
Trevor Hoffman, +2.2% (73.0 vs 75.3)
Gary Sheffield, +3.9% (11.7 vs 15.6)
Lee Smith, +6.0% (31.6 vs 37.6)
Fred McGriff, +14.5% (15.6 vs 30.1)
Interesting to me that if just private-ballot voters were voting, Hoffman would be in (barely) while Pudge Rodriguez would be out.
There will quite literally never be a unanimous player. Especially with votes becoming public soon, some writer won't vote simply to get clicks. Won't happen.
And don't blame LeBatard for Maddox, he got 97.2%, I don't even know how you could try to make an argument that it was Dan's fault (and I generally think he's kind of worthless overall). Quite frankly, you can debate if you want to give him credit or if it was a coincidence, but since he sold his ballot in order to make a mockery of the process we've finally started seeing some changes that were long overdue.
Yeah no chance Jeter is unanimous. If all it does is take one sportswriter to make it about themselves, you can call that a guarantee.
It's been 100% at least since 1965 when Pud Galvin went in, likely earlier (Ruth probably used PEDs). There's no going up from that.
Pre-greenies there were people like Pud (in 1889) using testosterone and other straight up steroids.
I recall somebody making a pretty persuasive argument that the ban on amphetamines is largely responsible for MLB's offensive decline.
I can guarantee that only a few pennies reside in the borough of ~5,000 nickels and dimes that comprises Montoursville.
