2022 Hall of Fame Class

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,566
Maine
The references to Baines in this context don't really work for me. He was a Veterans Committee pick. Clearly he's not the standard by which the BBWAA voters decide worthiness, as they rejected him pretty soundly when he was on their ballot. He peaked at 6.1% and dropped off the ballot after his fifth year.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,612
Another thing that got lost in the shuffle of the VC vote is that Tony Oliva is the first post-1960 position player to be elected by any voting bloc (writers or the committees) with fewer than 2,000 hits. It's hard to say whether that will be a precedent-setting election - the Eras have not operated with any consistency - but it might.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,452
Of course there is. If you won't vote for "Steroid Guys" there are no other viable candidates.

Ortiz will likely end up in the low 70s but that's a good sign in getting in eventually.
There are 2 of the best players of all time at their positions on the ballot who writers can't even pretend had any ties to peds
 

richgedman'sghost

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 13, 2006
1,925
ct
I want him to get in, but if Ortiz isn't getting in this year, I can live with nobody else getting in either. Him being the one and only would be tremendous theater.
Jim Kaat and Tony Oliva among others were elected already by the various Veterans Committees this year so it's not like Big Papi would have stage to himself.
 

Hoya81

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2010
8,579
The criteria for HOF voting is likely going to have to go through a serious overhaul in the near future because of how different players careers are now. We already know that the traditional HOF benchmark stats for pitchers (3000 K, 300 wins etc) are likely a thing of the past, but I think even the batting stats are going to become increasingly rare. There's 7 active players right now under the age 32 that have more than 250 homeruns (Stanton, Trout, Freeman, Arenado, Harper, Machado and Rizzo). 4 of those I think are near locks for 400+ HRs (Trout, Harper, Freeman, Stanton) but the rest seem real iffy. What happens around 2032 or so when this cohort of players starts retiring?
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,175
There are 2 of the best players of all time at their positions on the ballot who writers can't even pretend had any ties to peds
I don't know who you are talking about, but Schilling isn't getting in for reasons already beaten to death; and Rolen is kind of the next guy up and he's not getting in either. I think Rolen is getting the want-to-vote-someone-in sympathy vote... so if Ortiz manages to break through it kind of kills that.

Jim Kaat and Tony Oliva among others were elected already by the various Veterans Committees this year so it's not like Big Papi would have stage to himself.
Yeah but the Hall prefers at least one voted in every year for tourism reasons. Ortiz getting in next year certainly works for them since in 2024 you'd have Beltre and 2025 Ichiro. Changing the voting rules so that the top vote getter always gets in is a simple solution if they feel like they need it.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,566
Maine
Yeah but the Hall prefers at least one voted in every year for tourism reasons. Ortiz getting in next year certainly works for them since in 2024 you'd have Beltre and 2025 Ichiro. Changing the voting rules so that the top vote getter always gets in is a simple solution if they feel like they need it.
Occasionally before 1968, if no one garnered 75% of the vote, they'd have a run-off of the top 20-30 vote-getters and the winner of the run-off was enshrined. That's how Luke Appling (1964) and Red Ruffing (1967, his last year on the ballot) got in.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,452
I don't know who you are talking about, but Schilling isn't getting in for reasons already beaten to death; and Rolen is kind of the next guy up and he's not getting in either. I think Rolen is getting the want-to-vote-someone-in sympathy vote... so if Ortiz manages to break through it kind of kills that.
Schilling should have been years ago before any of his craziness even started, he's been a more than viable candidate for years and they still didn't vote for him. He should have been a 1st ballot guy along with Mussina.

Rolen is a better candidate than Ortiz, people aren't voting for him as a sympathy vote, they're voting for him because he's one of the best all time at his position, and holds up pretty well overall when you ignore position too.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,899
Hingham, MA
Schilling should have been years ago before any of his craziness even started, he's been a more than viable candidate for years and they still didn't vote for him. He should have been a 1st ballot guy along with Mussina.

Rolen is a better candidate than Ortiz, people aren't voting for him as a sympathy vote, they're voting for him because he's one of the best all time at his position, and holds up pretty well overall when you ignore position too.
Unsure on Rolen. He had 1 top-5 MVP season (2004 - 4th), and only one other top-15 MVP season (2010, 14th). He did make 7 ASG and was ROY, but it never felt like he was a great hitter, just a very good one. Of course he was also one of the best ever defensive 3B which probably does put him over the edge. But offensively he was more very good than great IMO.

Some comps as I am looking through his B-R page are Paul O'Neill, Shawn Green, and Aramis Ramirez. Again the D helps his cause a lot.

Another interesting comp is Eric Chavez. Both great D, Chavez with a career 115 OPS+ vs. 122 for Rolen. Rolen amassed ~3K more PAs so the counting stats are way better, but would Chavez have been HoF if he played more / longer?
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,452
Unsure on Rolen. He had 1 top-5 MVP season (2004 - 4th), and only one other top-15 MVP season (2010, 14th). He did make 7 ASG and was ROY, but it never felt like he was a great hitter, just a very good one. Of course he was also one of the best ever defensive 3B which probably does put him over the edge. But offensively he was more very good than great IMO.

Some comps as I am looking through his B-R page are Paul O'Neill, Shawn Green, and Aramis Ramirez. Again the D helps his cause a lot.

Another interesting comp is Eric Chavez. Both great D, Chavez with a career 115 OPS+ vs. 122 for Rolen. Rolen amassed ~3K more PAs so the counting stats are way better, but would Chavez have been HoF if he played more / longer?
If those 3k PAs didn't bring his rate stats down then yeah he'd be in the conversation, but Rolen was a much much better fielder. Like Rolen is one of the best defensive 3b of all time, Chavez wouldn't even be close to that even if you gave him 4 more good years.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
8,233
Boston, MA
Rolen is a better candidate than Ortiz, people aren't voting for him as a sympathy vote, they're voting for him because he's one of the best all time at his position, and holds up pretty well overall when you ignore position too.
How is Rolen a better candidate than Ortiz? I know he's worth 15% more than Ortiz on a per game basis by WAR, but that just tells me WAR is bullshit when it comes to comparing good and bad defensive players. Would any GM have traded David Ortiz for Scott Rolen? There's no way the Red Sox would have won those three World Series trophies with Rolen on the team rather than Ortiz.

Would as many people be on the Scott Rolen for the Hall of Fame train if WAR didn't exist and it didn't say "70" at the top of his Baseball Reference page? He was a great defensive third basemen who was a good hitter and injured a lot. He wouldn't be the worst guy in the hall, but he's much closer to Ron Santo than George Brett.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,566
Maine
How is Rolen a better candidate than Ortiz? I know he's worth 15% more than Ortiz on a per game basis by WAR, but that just tells me WAR is bullshit when it comes to comparing good and bad defensive players. Would any GM have traded David Ortiz for Scott Rolen? There's no way the Red Sox would have won those three World Series trophies with Rolen on the team rather than Ortiz.

Would as many people be on the Scott Rolen for the Hall of Fame train if WAR didn't exist and it didn't say "70" at the top of his Baseball Reference page? He was a great defensive third basemen who was a good hitter and injured a lot. He wouldn't be the worst guy in the hall, but he's much closer to Ron Santo than George Brett.
There was some Rolen discussion in the SoSH ballot thread. Not a ton of his support there was based on WAR alone. He's one of the best 3B of all time by OPS+ (9th all time of players with 1500 games played, 75%+ at 3B). That, his great defensive prowess, and the severe lack of 3B in the Hall (least represented position other than DH) are the strongest arguments for his inclusion.

He's not a sure-fire lock for induction, but he has a strong case.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,899
Hingham, MA
How is Rolen a better candidate than Ortiz? I know he's worth 15% more than Ortiz on a per game basis by WAR, but that just tells me WAR is bullshit when it comes to comparing good and bad defensive players. Would any GM have traded David Ortiz for Scott Rolen? There's no way the Red Sox would have won those three World Series trophies with Rolen on the team rather than Ortiz.

Would as many people be on the Scott Rolen for the Hall of Fame train if WAR didn't exist and it didn't say "70" at the top of his Baseball Reference page? He was a great defensive third basemen who was a good hitter and injured a lot. He wouldn't be the worst guy in the hall, but he's much closer to Ron Santo than George Brett.
Santo, Adrian Beltre, and Rolen are all fairly similar IMO, but of course Beltre blows the other two away in counting stats.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
25,961
Miami (oh, Miami!)
There was some Rolen discussion in the SoSH ballot thread. Not a ton of his support there was based on WAR alone. He's one of the best 3B of all time by OPS+ (9th all time of players with 1500 games played, 75%+ at 3B). That, his great defensive prowess, and the severe lack of 3B in the Hall (least represented position other than DH) are the strongest arguments for his inclusion.

He's not a sure-fire lock for induction, but he has a strong case.
Sometimes it's useful to look at B-ref's offensive WAR. https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/WAR_off_career.shtml

I can see an argument for Rolen, when you add tip-top defense to that. I can also see him merely being in the hall of the very good.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,899
Hingham, MA
I struggle to get past only 3 top-20 MVP finishes for Rolen: 4th, 14th, and 20th. That has to be a very low number for a position player in the HoF.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
92,002
Oregon
We're up over 100 ballots now on the tracker. Ortiz, Bonds, Clemens hanging in the low 80s. One interesting note is that in the extremely SSS number of anonymous ballots tabulated, Papi is polling much better than the other two. If that is the precursor to a trend, that would seem to work in his favor when the non-tracked come into play at the end
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
8,233
Boston, MA
Sometimes it's useful to look at B-ref's offensive WAR. https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/WAR_off_career.shtml

I can see an argument for Rolen, when you add tip-top defense to that. I can also see him merely being in the hall of the very good.
To be clear, offensive WAR also includes a positional adjustment. That might be what you're looking for as you compare offensive contributions across positions, but just being higher on that list does not mean the person was a better hitter.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,612
I don't know who you are talking about, but Schilling isn't getting in for reasons already beaten to death; and Rolen is kind of the next guy up and he's not getting in either. I think Rolen is getting the want-to-vote-someone-in sympathy vote... so if Ortiz manages to break through it kind of kills that.
Could be Andruw Jones and Billy Wagner, also, assuming you consider “closer” a position.
So you think Rolen should have gotten more MVP votes in his career?
Not to repeat the other thread, but there’s a couple of issues with looking at his MVP support in a vacuum - first, his prime coincided with a lot of other historically great players, including at least one future-HoF teammate. His best season was probably 2004. He finished fourth in the voting, but who would you bump who finished ahead of him? He didn’t even have the “great defensive 3B on a playoff team” lane to himself that year? The other thing is that this was back when voters did things like give the award to whoever led the league in RBIs. By modern standards, Rolen in his prime would get a lot more recognition.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,452
How is Rolen a better candidate than Ortiz? I know he's worth 15% more than Ortiz on a per game basis by WAR, but that just tells me WAR is bullshit when it comes to comparing good and bad defensive players. Would any GM have traded David Ortiz for Scott Rolen? There's no way the Red Sox would have won those three World Series trophies with Rolen on the team rather than Ortiz.

Would as many people be on the Scott Rolen for the Hall of Fame train if WAR didn't exist and it didn't say "70" at the top of his Baseball Reference page? He was a great defensive third basemen who was a good hitter and injured a lot. He wouldn't be the worst guy in the hall, but he's much closer to Ron Santo than George Brett.
Both of those guys are top 10 3b all time, so not really sure the relevance of being closer to one than the other, other than that Santo also should have been elected long before he was.

And you aren't comparing "good" and "bad" defensive players here, you're comparing one of the 100 most valuable defensive players of all time with a guy who barely played defense ever. Over a whole career that's a pretty massive difference. I'd also say you have no idea what they would have won or not won with Rolen instead of Ortiz, but just for fun Rolen was a 9 win player in 2004 so I think they might have been ok.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,452
So you think Rolen should have gotten more MVP votes in his career?
Considering in the same time period Ryan Howard was getting consistent votes with mostly shitty seasons because he hit BOMBS I'm going to go with yes
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
10,552
Could be Andruw Jones and Billy Wagner, also, assuming you consider “closer” a position.

Not to repeat the other thread, but there’s a couple of issues with looking at his MVP support in a vacuum - first, his prime coincided with a lot of other historically great players, including at least one future-HoF teammate. His best season was probably 2004. He finished fourth in the voting, but who would you bump who finished ahead of him? He didn’t even have the “great defensive 3B on a playoff team” lane to himself that year? The other thing is that this was back when voters did things like give the award to whoever led the league in RBIs. By modern standards, Rolen in his prime would get a lot more recognition.
Man, just look at Bonds’ stats that year. A .609 OBP is preposterous. A 1.422 OPS (good for 263 OPS+) is absurd. How was he “only” worth 10.6 WAR that year? I guess the 120 intentional walks denied him the opportunity to put up more counting stats (helped the OBP, though).
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
25,961
Miami (oh, Miami!)
To be clear, offensive WAR also includes a positional adjustment. That might be what you're looking for as you compare offensive contributions across positions, but just being higher on that list does not mean the person was a better hitter.
Yes. But no matter how you sort the stats (even counting or rate stats, given a minimum career) there's going to be a clustering of HOF hitters at the top, then there's going to be a cluster of HOVG hitters some of whom have good reason to be in the HOF, based on less capturable attributes or era, and and others who don't.

The use of MVP, CY, and other awards voted on by Baseball writers in their voting for the HoF is blatant confirmation bias.

It basically ensures a continued "Good Ol' Boys" network.
To an extent, yes, and to an extent no. Sometimes those awards go to the statistically dominant players. Sometimes they go to players that have a special circumstance for that particular season, or a but-for performance. It's the seasonal MVP - there's a degree of subjectivity by necessity and design.

I think the point that Rolen was never seriously considered the best player in baseball for that year, or captained a team, or was never a perennial runner up type has some weight to it. Not dispositively so, but some. Has anyone ever hung with bated breath on a Scott Rolen at bat? It is the Hall of Fame after all.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
47,117
We have another attention seeking dummy who sent in a blank ballot and wrote this drivel as his reasoning

Sez Me …

As might a drunken, obnoxious uncle on rubbery legs, the new year has moved in with no clear sign of a sober departure.

But let’s use this time to celebrate those who achieved greatness without pharmaceutical enrichment — and actually played the game of baseball with a fielding glove on one of their hands.

Long overlooked and overdue senior players Bud Fowler, Gil Hodges, Jim Kaat, Minnie Minoso, Buck O’Neil and Tony Oliva have been granted access to the Baseball Hall of Fame by the Hall’s Golden Days Era Committee.

Take it away, Eras. Atta go. That’s plenty good enough for me.

Because, just as my 2020 Hall ballot for modern players went back empty, 2021’s had no names checked, either.

It may seem strange, given the way elections are viewed in this country, but I don’t vote for any person/player I don’t believe deserves it.


I consider Cooperstown’s Hall an incredibly tough make. It should be easier to get into the Vatican Archives.

Vested baseball writers are allowed to vote for 10 players retired for five years (some are added and some run out of eligibility every year). I’ve never voted for 10. And, in that I don’t select many, if I don’t go for someone the first time he appears on the ballot, he’s never getting my vote. What has he done to change my mind?
Anyway, no one added to this modern ballot excited me. And, in that I don’t vote for druggies or designated hitters (I prefer real baseball players), the residue is 30 unchecked boxes.

If we get dominating players, there will be better luck next time.
https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sports/sports-columnists/story/2022-01-01/column-nick-canepas-sez-me-column

DH does not exist according to this "voter"


Wonder what he is going to say when the NL adopts the DH......
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
76,393
Apparently Mr. Drivel forgot that Tony Oliva didn’t have a glove on the last 1/3 of his career.
 
Last edited:

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,452
Bet that clown who doesn't vote for DH's thinks Frank Thomas and Paul Molitor are HOFers and has no idea they started more games at DH than any other position
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
47,117
Bet that clown who doesn't vote for DH's thinks Frank Thomas and Paul Molitor are HOFers and has no idea they started more games at DH than any other position
Apparently Mr. Drivel forgot that Tony Olivia didn’t have a glove on the last 1/3 of his career.
Someone should honestly ask him this, and see the cockamamie logic he tries to use to justify them being in the HOF
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
To an extent, yes, and to an extent no. Sometimes those awards go to the statistically dominant players. Sometimes they go to players that have a special circumstance for that particular season, or a but-for performance. It's the seasonal MVP - there's a degree of subjectivity by necessity and design.
It's the same sports writers voting for the awards and the hall.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
92,002
Oregon
This guy reminds me of the clown who got into it with the board once over his baseball views, and challenged SoSH to write a better column. I think it was TRic who took the challenge
 
Last edited:

Remagellan

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Bet that clown who doesn't vote for DH's thinks Frank Thomas and Paul Molitor are HOFers and has no idea they started more games at DH than any other position
Isn't Mariano Rivera the only unanimous HOFer? Exactly how many at-bats did he have in his career?

The argument against the DH is ridiculous given pitchers in the AL have barely stepped to the plate since 1973, and relievers practically never do. And with the current "never let a pitcher go three times through the order" craze, fewer and fewer NL pitchers will step to the plate going forward. These idiots have to stop with this ludicrous anti-DH prejudice. It's a specialty, just like being a closer is a specialty. If you're going to keep a DH out, they should apply the same logic to relievers and keep them out since none of their aggregated numbers can match those of starting pitchers.
 
Last edited:

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
The ineffable nature of quantifying defense, especially past defense, is going to be a problem for awhile…

How is Rolen a better candidate than Ortiz? I know he's worth 15% more than Ortiz on a per game basis by WAR, but that just tells me WAR is bullshit when it comes to comparing good and bad defensive players...
I'm pretty sure there's a pretty good number of Yankee fans who felt the same way about Jeter's defense at SS (and probably a good number here who now look at X through similar lenses). I don't think it does us any favors to basically declare any idea or discourse that doesn't align with our own views or fandom to be garbage. Most "eye tests" tend to reveal myopia in the tester IMO, rather than compromising the numbers they argue against.

I think the issue probably lies more with WAR treating the DH as just another 1Bman, rather than an actual position (like a good percentage of the BBWA members with ballots seem to do); how accurate is the positional adjustment along the deffensive spectrum is one detail, but the fact that DH's are not assessed as someone suffering the PH penalty through all of their PAs strikes me as defining of the DH as a legitimate position. I'd like to see this assessed for players who were actual full time DH's, but there have been very few full-time DHs as opposed to players cycling through it as a line up spot for rest or a partial day off. The last time I looked Ortiz was one of the few players who hit better at DH vs his offensive splits while in the field, which points to him actually handling the difficulties of his position for me.

Would any GM have traded David Ortiz for Scott Rolen? There's no way the Red Sox would have won those three World Series trophies with Rolen on the team rather than Ortiz.
OTOH it would be great fun to break open the hypothetical Manny for Rolen trade discussion.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,452
The ineffable nature of quantifying defense, especially past defense, is going to be a problem for awhile…



I'm pretty sure there's a pretty good number of Yankee fans who felt the same way about Jeter's defense at SS (and probably a good number here who now look at X through similar lenses). I don't think it does us any favors to basically declare any idea or discourse that doesn't align with our own views or fandom to be garbage. Most "eye tests" tend to reveal myopia in the tester IMO, rather than compromising the numbers they argue against.

I think the issue probably lies more with WAR treating the DH as just another 1Bman, rather than an actual position (like a good percentage of the BBWA members with ballots seem to do); how accurate is the positional adjustment along the deffensive spectrum is one detail, but the fact that DH's are not assessed as someone suffering the PH penalty through all of their PAs strikes me as defining of the DH as a legitimate position. I'd like to see this assessed for players who were actual full time DH's, but there have been very few full-time DHs as opposed to players cycling through it as a line up spot for rest or a partial day off. The last time I looked Ortiz was one of the few players who hit better at DH vs his offensive splits while in the field, which points to him actually handling the difficulties of his position for me.
Not sure if the part about most guys being better hitters when playing in the field is true, but regarding Ortiz I don't think you can tell much from his splits because nearly half his career appearances at 1b were with the Twins, and most of those were his first full year in the league.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
8,233
Boston, MA
OTOH it would be great fun to break open the hypothetical Manny for Rolen trade discussion.
There's a very strong relationship between the highest scoring teams and the ones who win the most games. There isn't much of a relationship between the best defensive teams and winning. I think it would be fun to see the limits of that. How would a team of 8 Manny Ramirezes plus a pitcher and catcher do against 8 Scott Rolens? The Mannys would give up 3 or 4 runs every game by not being able to catch the ball, but they'd also score 10.
 

Gdiguy

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
6,395
San Diego, CA
Rolen to me is really the epitome of the 'are you a peak or career HoF person' debate

FWIW I'm in the former - to me the idea that Rolen is a Hall of Famer but say Johan Santana (2 CYs, led the league in ERA+ 3 years in a row) is not is ridiculous. But the HoF has historically been more biased towards the latter, so I can certainly see how he has a reasonable case for the HoF by standard career-focused metrics (and I'm generally a big-hall person anyway, so I'd lean yes on him but he'd be somewhere around 10-12th on my ballot)

With Manny, honestly I can't really get that worked up about it - if Bonds (especially) & ARod aren't in, there's no way Manny should be, so it is what it is
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Not sure if the part about most guys being better hitters when playing in the field is true, but regarding Ortiz I don't think you can tell much from his splits because nearly half his career appearances at 1b were with the Twins, and most of those were his first full year in the league.
I had originally looked at those numbers back when there was a lot of debate about shifting Papi to 1B to slot Manny into the DH spot; following up, the years he had a better OPS + as a 1Bman (Sox only) were 2006, 09, 12 & 15, but all of the sample sizes for 1B play are pretty small…

By comparison Manny wound up loosing around 40 - 50 points of OPS when DHing over his career (granted with a third of the PA’s, but this is about what I remember finding when this was an issue with the Sox).
 
Last edited:

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
54,626
Meh not a fan of this characterization. Bonds and Clemens are very close to where they usually are for private ballots. To say that they are in “ good shape” is premature. Papi…unclear (def better though)

If I'm looking at it right, last year Clemens final number was 11.6% lower than than tracker had him. If that holds, he won't get in. Bonds is similar. Clemens was around 73% last year on this tracker. So, he *has* improved. They have both gained 2 votes from last year and lost 1.

Anyway, I mostly posted this for Papi.
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
22,834
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
If I'm looking at it right, last year Clemens final number was 11.6% lower than than tracker had him. If that holds, he won't get in. Bonds is similar. Clemens was around 73% last year on this tracker. So, he *has* improved. They have both gained 2 votes from last year and lost 1.

Anyway, I mostly posted this for Papi.
Oh I know, I was being critical of the headline of the article, not your post....

I've ALWAYS said, and I hope bears out...let the vets committee sort out the PEDS mess. It's THEIR Hall. Let them decide.

I suspect one or both eventually get in that route, and if they do, I am fine with it.

I think Ortiz will squeak in...
 

GrandSlamPozo

New Member
May 16, 2017
112
So you think Rolen should have gotten more MVP votes in his career?
I'm not sure if this was meant to be a rhetorical question, but looking at his stats year by year, the answer is a resounding yes.

Ex.
1998 - 6.7 WAR, .290/.391/.523 in 711 PA as a gold glove winning 3rd baseman = 3 MVP votes?
2000- Only 541 PA but still slashed .298/.370/.551 as a gold glove winning 3rd baseman = 0 MVP votes?
2001- .289/.378/.498 in 653 PA as a gold glove winning 3rd baseman = 1 MVP vote?
2002- .266/.357/.503 in 667 PA as a gold glove winning 3rd baseman, also put up .278/.354/.561 with 14 HR in 55 games after being acquired by the Cardinals and helping lead them to a 39-21 record down the stretch ... 0 MVP votes?
2003 - .286/.382/.528 in 657 PA as a gold glove winning 3rd baseman (although BBRef didn't like his defense this year) = 0 MVP votes?
2006- .296/.369/.518 in 594 PA as a gold glove winning 3rd baseman = 0 MVP votes? (Note: Nomahhh finished 13th in the MVP voting this year while putting up very similar offensive numbers AS A 1ST BASEMAN with 71 fewer plate appearances!)

2009 is also an interesting case, his full season numbers were probably good enough to garner MVP consideration, except for the fact that he split the year between the NL and AL.

Even though WAR and OPS weren't officially recognized for most of his career, most writers at the time still understood that OBP and SLG% are highly valuable offensive stats and that fielding and positional scarcity are things that contributes to a player's value. So the fact that he had few or no MVP votes in those seasons is pretty baffling. Even though offensive numbers were through the roof across the board in that era, it's still pretty shocking to see some of the first basemen/corner outfielders who finished ahead of him in the MVP race in the above seasons despite putting up similar/worse offensive numbers and much lower defensive value.