2022 HOF Candidates: Ortiz and Papelbon First Time on Ballot

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
16,035
Miami (oh, Miami!)
But that Mussina was a first ballot HOFer and Schilling is still waiting to get in speaks to Schilling's post-career nonsense that is obviously the reason why he's not getting the votes.
Generally two wrongs don't make a right.


The HOF has a 10 year window anyway, and, as part of the mandate, is backwards looking after that. Maybe steroid-using cheaters get in one day. But at the moment, I'm perfectly fine if they don't. There's no rush, and the onus isn't on the HOF to figure out how that happens, right now, for the convenience of the steroid-using cheaters.

Likewise Schilling. The man is currently vile. And that's the man who would be inducted and give his speech. As a society, we don't need him having a larger platform. In terms of institutional membership, I wouldn't want to be associated with Schilling as a fellow HOFer. In terms of role-modeling, I don't see how including him in the HOF improves the game or the public's perception of it.

If he wanted in, he had the option of not being an unremitting shitbag who burned down multiple chances to rehabilitate his public image.

So the correct answer is "let him wait."

Maybe he gets his shit together and does something mitigatory before he dies.
 

Trlicek's Whip

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 8, 2009
4,694
New York City
Can you imagine not voting for a guy for the HOF because you're worried what he might say during his induction speech?
Based on Schilling's personal makeup it's not far from giving the worst person in the world a huge platform (right wing politics and Q-berts, for example). And if Joe Posnanski had reservations based on a person's character issues (even outside performance enhancing drugs or bankrupting Rhode Island, etc), who knows.

MLB isn't immune to good or bad PR and optics. I'm sure they don't want cringe at Cooperstown. Or the uncertainty that Schilling, if voted in, would take the high road and honor the game. But maybe we get to see that anyway.
 
Last edited:

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,098
Holding my breath on Papi - I wouldn't be surprised if some of the people who'd leave him off their ballots due to PED suspicions are also the type to not advertise their ballots on Twitter.
 

OCD SS

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
A few people work up models based on the public ballots and expectations that the private ballots will lower the public percentages. This year I think there are fewer public ballots so far, but looking at known gains/ losses it doesn’t look good for Bonds Clemens. Papi is probably going to be a bit of a nail bitter, but here’s hoping…

Edit: Mr Tibbs, who runs the ballot tracker pointed to Jason Sardell as someone who’s been very close to the actual numbers the last few years. His last tweet has Papi at 77%.
 
Last edited:

mwonow

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 4, 2005
6,244

amRadio

lurker
Feb 7, 2019
768
Is it too cynical to think that the Hall and the people who work therein would lobby to have at least one player in for tourism/jersey sales purposes?

I found an interview with the HOF president from 2009 about cap selection for the plaques. For some reason, when I try to post the link in my edit, the entire tab instantly closes. So that's fun. But here's what he said about that:

According to Idelson, the cap decision is made by the Hall of Fame's senior staff and research team. "They'll look at a player's career numbers and look at the impact, and quite honestly, it's usually a no-brainer," Idelson told ESPN. "Then we have a conversation with the player, because we wouldn't do something unilaterally."
I thought there had to be some input from the player because I seem to remember Halladay's family lobbying for him to go in as a Free Agent instead of a Blue Jay over some grievances they had with the Blue Jays franchise.
 
Last edited:

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
3,746
Curious about someone like JD Drew. I’m 100% positive he’s not HoF potential…. Just wondering about types that never really connect to one specific team…
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
Is it too cynical to think that the Hall and the people who work therein would lobby to have at least one player in for tourism/jersey sales purposes?
No, considering that was discussed by multiple people in the other HoF thread.

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.
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.
 
Last edited:

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
27,583
I’m not sure what the HOF itself wants is really relevant, at least insofar as the BBWAA voting is concerned. Given the self-righteousness that so many writers have regarding the voting (and the thoughtful process some writers put into it) any lobbying would probably be rejected, leaked, and have the opposite of its intended effect.
 

Sandy Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 11, 2007
3,746
Would Rolen go in as a Phillie or a Cardinal?
Dunno. More and more I wonder if we’ll see players like him- having 2 or even 3 teams that could “claim” him.
I suspect the great ones will likely find a long term deal that will link them with a certain team- but I could see guys like Correa wind up with 2 teams connected with his best years.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
27,583
Dunno. More and more I wonder if we’ll see players like him- having 2 or even 3 teams that could “claim” him.
I suspect the great ones will likely find a long term deal that will link them with a certain team- but I could see guys like Correa wind up with 2 teams connected with his best years.
Or, you know, Mookie Betts.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
6,723
Or, you know, Mookie Betts.
If Mookie goes into the Hall, it'll be as a Dodger. He only spent a handful of (highly productive) seasons in Boston before DD mishandled the money and Bloom was forced to trade him. He signed for over a decade in LA. Barring a highly unlikely trade FROM LA, I don't see how Boston will in the conversation by the time he's voted in, if he is.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
8,447
Dunno. More and more I wonder if we’ll see players like him- having 2 or even 3 teams that could “claim” him.
I suspect the great ones will likely find a long term deal that will link them with a certain team- but I could see guys like Correa wind up with 2 teams connected with his best years.
This is hardly unusual. Frank Robinson excelled with both the Reds and the Orioles. Cy Young played most of his career for the Cleveland Spiders and the Bosox. Tris Speaker, Jimmy Foxx, Joe Cronin, Nap Lajoie, Johnny Mize, Pete Alexander, Lefty Grove, Goose Goslin all played for at least two teams in the prime of their careers. More recently, you can add guys like Reggie Jackson, Carlton Fisk, Rod Carew, Paul Molitor, Gary Carter, Orlando Cepeda, Rickey Henderson. Once free agency started, there are many players who played at a high level for several teams - Joe Morgan, Nolan Ryan, Gaylord Perry, Phil Neikro, Fergie Jenkins, Rollie Fingers, Roberto Alomar, Bert Blyleven. Cheaters Roger Clemens, Arod, and Gary Sheffield were all nomads, while Barry Bonds and Pete Rose both played for two teams.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
27,583
Going by Cy Youngs:

Red Sox: 3
Blue Jays: 2 (2 seasons, 2 CY 2 Triple Crowns)
Astros: 1
Yankees: 1
I’d be shocked if he’s not in as a Red Sox. That’s where he made his name and he was the face of the franchise for a decade. Plus he playedfor Boston more than double the length he did for the next/longest team, NY.
 
Last edited:

Ale Xander

killed off Vin Scully
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
45,145
I’d be shocked if he’s not in as a Red Sox. That’s where he made his name and he was the face of the franchise for a decade. Plus he playedfor Boston more than double the length of the next/longest team, NY.
Yup exactly. He basically had 2 back-to-back HOF careers
 

NoXInNixon

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 24, 2008
4,793
I’m not sure what the HOF itself wants is really relevant, at least insofar as the BBWAA voting is concerned. Given the self-righteousness that so many writers have regarding the voting (and the thoughtful process some writers put into it) any lobbying would probably be rejected, leaked, and have the opposite of its intended effect.
There's no reason the HOF couldn't choose some other group of people to be in charge of who gets elected. The current method has worked well for a long time. If it no longer works, it can be changed.
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
There's no reason the HOF couldn't choose some other group of people to be in charge of who gets elected. The current method has worked well for a long time. If it no longer works, it can be changed.
I would question that statement.

Yes, most of the people who belong in there are in there.
But I think that's in spite of the system, not a consequence of the system.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
27,583
There's no reason the HOF couldn't choose some other group of people to be in charge of who gets elected. The current method has worked well for a long time. If it no longer works, it can be changed.
It’s a bit holding-the-wolf-by-the-ears though isn’t it? The HOF gets a whole lot of free publicity out of deputizing sports writers to do their voting for them. No way they kill that golden goose.
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
Since the only way to get into the HoF is the system, I'm not sure what your point is.
That the system is in need of an overhaul, and simply pointing to the things they got right doesn't mean it's the right system, as many different systems would have gotten many of those things right as well.

How many systems wouldn't have put in Babe Ruth, Walter Johnson, Cal Ripken Jr., Pedro Martinez, etc.?
Their doing that isn't any sort of point for them.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
5,506
Boston, MA
That the system is in need of an overhaul, and simply pointing to the things they got right doesn't mean it's the right system, as many different systems would have gotten many of those things right as well.

How many systems wouldn't have put in Babe Ruth, Walter Johnson, Cal Ripken Jr., Pedro Martinez, etc.?
Their doing that isn't any sort of point for them.
Maybe you could give some examples of who you think hasn't been treated well enough by the BBWAA. Because it's hard to think of anyone who's been clearly snubbed in the last 20 years. This isn't the same group that made Joe DiMaggio wait for the second ballot.
 

Earthbound64

Member
SoSH Member
Maybe you could give some examples of who you think hasn't been treated well enough by the BBWAA. Because it's hard to think of anyone who's been clearly snubbed in the last 20 years. This isn't the same group that made Joe DiMaggio wait for the second ballot.
Why just people I think haven't been treated well enough? The system working well implies multiple facets. For instance, a system where Jack Morris was deliberated on in painstaking detail for 15 years, agonizing at not getting out in... Only to be tossed in a year later.

Not to mention all those who were responsible for Buck O'Neil not making it in during his lifetime.

And again, the issue is with the system – for instance, a system where awards given by these people during the player's career are then used by the same people as an evaluation criteria.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
16,035
Miami (oh, Miami!)
Why just people I think haven't been treated well enough? The system working well implies multiple facets. For instance, a system where Jack Morris was deliberated on in painstaking detail for 15 years, agonizing at not getting out in... Only to be tossed in a year later.

Not to mention all those who were responsible for Buck O'Neil not making it in during his lifetime.

And again, the issue is with the system – for instance, a system where awards given by these people during the player's career are then used by the same people as an evaluation criteria.
Out of the 339 members of the HoF, two who you think should have got in, got in. But not quickly enough for your taste?

That does not really suggest to me that we ought to go to a completely different system.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
5,506
Boston, MA
Why just people I think haven't been treated well enough? The system working well implies multiple facets. For instance, a system where Jack Morris was deliberated on in painstaking detail for 15 years, agonizing at not getting out in... Only to be tossed in a year later.

Not to mention all those who were responsible for Buck O'Neil not making it in during his lifetime.

And again, the issue is with the system – for instance, a system where awards given by these people during the player's career are then used by the same people as an evaluation criteria.
So your issue is with the various veterans' committees? They were responsible for both letting Morris in and keeping Buck out. And I don't think the people on any of them were BBWAA members who vote on the awards.
 

RobertS975

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
155
Schilling says in radio interview that if he was selected for the HOF , it wouldn't be a Red Sox cap on the plaque. He also had some "unkind" words about the Red Sox ownership. I suspect that he won't have to worry about the cap anyway. But his career between Philly, Arizona and the Sox is deserving.

https://bosoxinjection.com/2022/01/03/curt-schilling-wouldnt-wear-red-sox-cap-hall-fame-plaque/?a_aid=41466

It is a different era in baseball. There will not be nearly as many "one team" candidates for the HOF. This whole cap issue needs to be thought out to reflect that reality.
 
Last edited:

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
33,123
Southwestern CT
Schilling says in radio interview that if he was selected for the HOF , it wouldn't be a Red Sox cap on the plaque. He also had some "unkind" words about the Red Sox ownership. I suspect that he won't have to worry about the cap anyway. But his career between Philly, Arizona and the Sox is deserving.

https://bosoxinjection.com/2022/01/03/curt-schilling-wouldnt-wear-red-sox-cap-hall-fame-plaque/?a_aid=41466

It is a different era in baseball. There will not be nearly as many "one team" candidates for the HOF.
Schilling’s feelings about the Sox were made clear during his last season in Boston - he even posted about it here, though (for him) he was diplomatic. Unsurprisingly, the single biggest factor in the hard feelings he has for Sox ownership is his narcissism.

To be specific, when Schilling suffered the biceps tendon injury that ended his career, he wanted the surgery to be performed immediately. However, doing so would effectively end his career, forcing the Red Sox to eat his $8 million salary. Which is why the Sox enforced their contractual right to insist that Schilling attempt rehab before having the surgery. (Even if rehab was a long shot, it was the only chance the Sox had to get any value from the contract.)

Reporting at the time - and my recollection is that Schilling confirmed this on SoSH - was that the he was not inclined to follow the Sox' demands for rehab until they pointed out that failing to do so would void his contract. And, Curt being Curt, he seems to have taken this as a personal affront, which is why he describes the ownership group as being comprised of "very, very bad human beings."

I doubt he's getting in the Hall this year, so a tempest in a teapot.

This whole cap issue needs to be thought out to reflect that reality.
Notwithstanding Curt's apparent belief that he gets to choose, the player doesn't get to choose.

https://www.cleveland.com/tribe/2018/01/how_does_the_mlb_hall_of_fame.html
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
15,639
Maine
Schilling’s feelings about the Sox were made clear during his last season in Boston - he even posted about it here, though (for him) he was diplomatic. Unsurprisingly, the single biggest factor in the hard feelings he has for Sox ownership is his narcissism.

To be specific, when Schilling suffered the biceps tendon injury that ended his career, he wanted the surgery to be performed immediately. However, doing so would effectively end his career, forcing the Red Sox to eat his $8 million salary. Which is why the Sox enforced their contractual right to insist that Schilling attempt rehab before having the surgery. (Even if rehab was a long shot, it was the only chance the Sox had to get any value from the contract.)

Reporting at the time - and my recollection is that Schilling confirmed this on SoSH - was that the he was not inclined to follow the Sox' demands for rehab until they pointed out that failing to do so would void his contract. And, Curt being Curt, he seems to have taken this as a personal affront, which is why he describes the ownership group as being comprised of "very, very bad human beings."

I doubt he's getting in the Hall this year, so a tempest in a teapot.



Notwithstanding Curt's apparent belief that he gets to choose, the player doesn't get to choose.

https://www.cleveland.com/tribe/2018/01/how_does_the_mlb_hall_of_fame.html
Wasn't there a more recent spat as well? Like a reunion sort of deal at Fenway that Schilling wasn't invited to (15th anniversary of 2004 maybe)? Because despite his apparent disdain stemming from his contract/injury in 2008, he's appeared at Fenway for various functions since. He attended all the ceremonies and whatnot when he was inducted into the Red Sox Hall of Fame, for example.

Regardless, he's quite the grudge-holder, especially if it means he'll get attention for himself.
 

Mueller's Twin Grannies

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 19, 2009
6,723
Wasn't there a more recent spat as well? Like a reunion sort of deal at Fenway that Schilling wasn't invited to (15th anniversary of 2004 maybe)? Because despite his apparent disdain stemming from his contract/injury in 2008, he's appeared at Fenway for various functions since. He attended all the ceremonies and whatnot when he was inducted into the Red Sox Hall of Fame, for example.

Regardless, he's quite the grudge-holder, especially if it means he'll get attention for himself.
Yeah, ownership didn't want him around after he went off the deep end politically and socially. If he'd been able to keep it down for a couple months and play nice for the cameras, they might have invited him anyway. But Curt is Curt and he's going to always choose the worst option out of spite.

I'm sure his sound bites about ownership over the years have worn thin as well.
 

RobertS975

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
155
Players don't get to choose their team affiliation, but the decision is made with the players' input apparently.

My larger point is that this issue of "caps" will need to be systematically addressed and one team HOF careers are becoming rare events. Let's say Mookie has a similar (but not better) career with LA as he had with Boston. Why should the system force a choice without an obvious answer? With today's electronics, the cap could change every few minutes!
 

RG33

Certain Class of Poster
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
5,552
CA

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
33,123
Southwestern CT
The article pretty clear states that it is not a unilateral decision by the HofF and they do get input from the player. I would imagine if a player had some strong convictions one way or the other, that their input would be heeded.
That’s correct - it’s a decision made by the HoF with input from the player. Which is very different from the days when the player was allowed to make a unilateral choice.

Curt’s statement indicates that he thinks it’s still his choice. (Of course, none of this matters, as he’s unlikely to get in.)
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,216
(Of course, none of this matters, as he’s unlikely to get in.)
I wouldn’t be so sure of that. It’s true that he’s unlikely to be voted in by the writers this year, but he’ll just advance on to the VC in (I think) 2023 (the next year “Today’s Game” is up for election). And - being purposefully vague here so as not to violate the rules - I would not be surprised if the members of the VC are more forgiving of Schilling’s various transgressions than the writers.
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
33,123
Southwestern CT
I wouldn’t be so sure of that. It’s true that he’s unlikely to be voted in by the writers this year, but he’ll just advance on to the VC in (I think) 2023 (the next year “Today’s Game” is up for election). And - being purposefully vague here so as not to violate the rules - I would not be surprised if the members of the VC are more forgiving of Schilling’s various transgressions than the writers.
This is entirely possible. I should have been clearer about saying that he's unlikely to get voted in by writers.
 

Archer1979

shazowies
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
5,431
Right Here
I think it was Dave Winfield who helped change the policy where players picked their cap.
I recall this differently.

I thought it came to head (no pun intended) when Wade Boggs signed with TB. One of the terms in his contract was that he would go in with a TB Ray cap. The Hall didn't take too kindly to someone being able to monetize the honor.
 

Rovin Romine

Johnny Rico
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
16,035
Miami (oh, Miami!)
I wouldn’t be so sure of that. It’s true that he’s unlikely to be voted in by the writers this year, but he’ll just advance on to the VC in (I think) 2023 (the next year “Today’s Game” is up for election). And - being purposefully vague here so as not to violate the rules - I would not be surprised if the members of the VC are more forgiving of Schilling’s various transgressions than the writers.
Here's a link to the various Era Committees in the HOF: https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-famers/rules/eras-committees

Wikipedia has a listing of people on the recent modern era committee: it looks like there's a lot of turnover from year to year: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veterans_Committee#2021
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
27,583
Players don't get to choose their team affiliation, but the decision is made with the players' input apparently.

My larger point is that this issue of "caps" will need to be systematically addressed and one team HOF careers are becoming rare events. Let's say Mookie has a similar (but not better) career with LA as he had with Boston. Why should the system force a choice without an obvious answer? With today's electronics, the cap could change every few minutes!
And it's been addressed already that since the dawn of free agency, this has been an issue, and not one that has caused the pick-one-team-for-the-HOF-hat policy to change. Nolan Ryan and Reggie Jackson are both players that spent time with, and made material contributions to, multiple franchises. Ultimately, they allowed the player to have some input and they picked (Ryan chose Texas, Reggie chose New York).

It's really not the issue you seem to think it is.

As for Mookie, unless he comes *back* to Boston, or he gets moved to a different team within the next 5 years, he'll go in as a Dodger if he makes the HOF at all. Assuming he plays out his contract with L.A. and is HOF worthy, he'll have spent 13 years with L.A. vs. 6 with Boston, won at least one W.S. with L.A., and by virtue of being HOF worthy, will have been productive enough to be a face of that franchise for a generation.
 
Last edited:

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
15,639
Maine
Or maybe the plaques honoring Mike Mussina and Roy Halladay will become the norm in the future. The caps on their plaques have no team logo at all.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
25,753
Saskatoon Canada
I find the discussions around Schilling fascinating. From a baseball perspective, I lean toward him getting in. But, I lean towards not voting for him.
On one hand, I can understand not wanting to hand the microphone to a guy who may go off into an offensive rant. Then I expect there were voters who voted for Ted WIlliams who would have changed their vote had they known he would have used his speech to ask for recognition of the black players who didn't get a chance in MLB.