2023 Hall of Fame ballot

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
34,443
Is it crazy to think no one gets in this year?

The incoming class is also quite weak, I see multiple <5% candidates (immediately falling off the ballot).
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
21,566
Maine
Is it crazy to think no one gets in this year?

The incoming class is also quite weak, I see multiple <5% candidates (immediately falling off the ballot).
I don't think it's crazy at all. I think Rolen has the best shot (63.2% last year) and we might see Wagner make a jump since he's only got two years left on the ballot, but other than that, no one is likely to come close.
 

E5 Yaz

polka king
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
92,002
Oregon
Ellsbury, Napoli, and Lackey, with Stephen Drew eligible but not put on the ballot. That's a disturbingly large contingent from the 2013 title team.
True, though I always think of Lackey and Napoli as grizzled vet types and Ellsbury as much younger
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,612
I’m curious to see how Beltran does. I’d guess voters punish him for the Banging thing, but maybe it’s more like the Roberto Alomar thing where he went in the next year anyway. I don’t think that itself should be fully disqualifying, personally.
 

Daniel_Son

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2021
1,852
San Diego
I'm also curious to see how K-Rod does. 4th-most saves of all time, single-season saves record (62), 12th all-time in R-JAWS. I'm not sure if he's a HoFer, but I could see him sticking on the ballot for a few years.
 

Sad Sam Jones

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2017
2,694
It's interesting that Scott Rolen always seemed a bit underrated or overlooked, but this is set up for him to get a lot of attention this year and push him over the top. Unfortunately, this is also set up for some idiots on the contemporary committee to believe it's up to them to vote in an undeserving player or two just so there a couple of people to induct.
 

Philip Jeff Frye

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2001
10,435
If it weren't for the committee of the damned, I'd bet that Rolen and Helton would make it so as to avoid a Cooperstown shutout, but since several of those guys seem likely to get in, I guess that won't matter this year.
 

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,307
Portland
I'd go:
Beltran - (compares favorably to Yount, and well above average offensive centerfielders are rare).
Rolen
Wagner
Pettitte - I think modern starters don't get enough love. 256 wins in the steroid era, a great post season resume, 68 fWAR (30th since 1900)
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,612
Feels like there's less discussion this time around, maybe because Bonds, Clemens, and that other guy aren't on the ballot anymore.

Anyway, each of the next two ballots should produce one non-controversial first balloter (and a couple more who'll probably make it eventually), but then there won't be any new additions who are deserving of election at all until Pujols shows up.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,175
Anyway, each of the next two ballots should produce one non-controversial first balloter
Who? Beltran? He's not getting in on the first ballot. And he's the only new one who you can make a case for.

The whole Veterans Committee thing was pretty obviously done because they knew the voters wouldn't be voting in anyone; and this is the perfect time to get Bonds and Clemens in.
 

Yelling At Clouds

Post-darwinian
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
3,612
Who? Beltran? He's not getting in on the first ballot. And he's the only new one who you can make a case for.

The whole Veterans Committee thing was pretty obviously done because they knew the voters wouldn't be voting in anyone; and this is the perfect time to get Bonds and Clemens in.
"Next two" meaning "next year and the year after."

Saving everyone a Google: Adrian Beltre and Ichiro.
 

Sad Sam Jones

Member
SoSH Member
May 5, 2017
2,694
A little googling couldn't tell me who actually makes up the Contemporary Era committee, so it's a little hard to predict their preferences/biases, but I'm guessing it consists of enough old-timers who resent the steroid players for ruining what they considered a pure game. They won't induct Bonds, Clemens, etc., especially not immediately after the writers spent a decade saying those players aren't acceptable for induction. I think it takes another decade of transitioning to younger voters or possibly a scandal where someone already in is revealed to have been a huge PED user and everyone just throws their hands up and says, "@%*$ it all, just let everyone in".

My prediction is Scott Rolen gets voted in by the writers and the committee adds Fred McGriff. Maybe the committee gets a little greedier and puts a second one in (probably from the "clean but less deserving" portion of the ballot).
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
8,233
Boston, MA
Beltran was a better player than Rolen. Better hitter, better baserunner, better health, better playoff resume. The only thing Rolen has going for him is what advanced metrics say about his defense.

I'd probably only vote for Beltran if I had a ballot. Maybe Sheffield, who was named in the BALCO news, but never was punished during his career. I couldn't vote for A-Rod or Manny, even though he's my favorite non-Pedro player. There's a difference between doing something when there aren't really rules against it and getting suspended when there are.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
23,270
Pittsburgh, PA
Against the rules! And as we all know, while the penalty for doctoring a ball or corking a bat or even intentionally injuring an opponent might be ejection, or a short suspension, the only punishment appropriate for roids is excommunication and ban from the Hall of Fame.

Leave aside that 50-100 game suspensions have already been determined to be appropriate punishment for this infraction. All punishments administered by the teams and league and umps are insufficient! HOF voters are the last bastions of that justice, they know better, and this is the only infraction meriting such treatment (and permanent ban from the Hall, the only just punishment).
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
I'd go:

Pettitte - I think modern starters don't get enough love. 256 wins in the steroid era, a great post season resume, 68 fWAR (30th since 1900)
Wins are a flawed stat to begin with, but he benefitted from the steroid era in getting those wins as much as it made it difficult for him. Plus, you know, he was using steroids himself.

The thing with Pettitte is that his career success has far more to do with being on a decade’s worth of world-stomping Yankees teams (and one really good Astros team) than his personal performance. I wouldn’t be upset if he gets selected because he was a good to very good pitcher for a pretty long time (but so was Mark Buehrle; so was Tim Hudson, Kevin Brown, Chuck Finley, etc…) but I think he’s borderline at best.
 
Last edited:

grimshaw

Member
SoSH Member
May 16, 2007
4,307
Portland
Wins are a flawed stat to begin with, but he benefitted from the steroid era in getting those wins as much as it made it difficult for him. Plus, you know, he was using steroids himself.

The thing with Pettitte is that his career success has far more to do with being on a decade’s worth of world-stomping Yankees teams (and one really good Astros team) than his personal performance. I wouldn’t be upset if he gets selected because he was a good to very good pitcher for a pretty long time (but so was Mark Buehrle; so was Tim Hudson, Kevin Brown, Chuck Finley, etc…) but I think he’s borderline at best.
I think your steroid argument trumps everything else. I had forgotten. My larger point is that I think the standards are too high for starters, there are far more of that position than any other and that it is incredibly difficult to be well above average for so long because of how often pitchers break. I think years from now these guys will be more appreciated.

I also think that if Glavine was a shoo in for his win total, playing on great teams and combined with his less than hall of fame caliber peripherals, Pettitte at least compares well on some of the other stuff.

Tom Glavine - ERA+ 118, WHIP 1.34 bWAR 67

Andy Pettitte - ERA+ 117 WHIP 1.35 bWAR 61

Interestingly, some of the other guys you mentioned ought to be considered more closely and I'd fine being more big hall with them in it.

Mark Buerhle - ERA+ 117, WHIP 1.28, bWAR 60

Tim Hudson - ERA+ 120, WHIP 1.24, bWAR 57

tl/dr - they are borderline, but I think the borderline is too high.
 

Leather

given himself a skunk spot
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
28,451
I think your steroid argument trumps everything else. I had forgotten. My larger point is that I think the standards are too high for starters, there are far more of that position than any other and that it is incredibly difficult to be well above average for so long because of how often pitchers break. I think years from now these guys will be more appreciated.

I also think that if Glavine was a shoo in for his win total, playing on great teams and combined with his less than hall of fame caliber peripherals, Pettitte at least compares well on some of the other stuff.

Tom Glavine - ERA+ 118, WHIP 1.34 bWAR 67

Andy Pettitte - ERA+ 117 WHIP 1.35 bWAR 61
Tom Glavine was a probable Hall of Famer when he left the Braves for the Mets in 2002, though. His win total was a nice bonus credential but he had about 250 wins, and ERA+ of 123 and two CY awards (and 4 other top-3 finishes). Pettitte has one top 3 finish and a few top 5s.

I think there should be a high standard for HOF admittance, but I respect that reasonable minds can disagree.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Moderator
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
72,695
I’d love to know what Tom Glavine’s career would have been like with an automated strike zone, dude pounded the area six inches off the plate so consistently that the umps seemed to always give it to him.
 

NJ_Sox_Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 2, 2006
11,425
NJ
Based on the quality of players in the Hall already, I’d be fine with Helton/AJones/Rolen/Manny/ARod/Pettite making it in.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
23,270
Pittsburgh, PA
I have no problem with him voting for Rolen, A. Jones or Kent. No problem with him choosing not to vote for Manny or A-Rod given the PEDs stuff (it's sad, but it's not an uncommon viewpoint), nor obviously Sheffield and Pettitte. But:

- Jimmy Rollins? He acknowledges the 95 OPS+ right upfront, and then just yadda yaddas over it. Dude, your man was a below average hitter!
- "Carlos Beltran: He probably will make it eventually but he’s the one player named in the worst team scandal in a century. Hard to honor in Year 1." -- so you're not voting for someone you think worthy because you don't think he's Year-1 Worthy? I get people being persuaded to vote for someone over time, but have the courage of your convictions!
- "Todd Helton: Terrific rate stats, but it feels like someone who played his whole career at Coors (mostly before the humidor) could have bigger career totals." We have adjustments we can make for those park factors, Jon. If you apply them, Helton's still got a HOF resume. Are we just automatically disqualifying someone because they played at a hitter-friendly ballpark? No hitter playing half their games there could possibly overcome the park factor? What's the threshold to be deserving, Jon? Make it make sense.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
8,233
Boston, MA
Helton wasn't as good as Larry Walker, who took 10 years to get elected himself. That's probably what he's looking at when it comes to comparables in late 90s Denver.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
76,393
Helton was a better and much more consistent hitter and therefore probably more helped by the Coors effect but Walker was a legit 5 tool player. I view Helton closer to Galarraga than Walker.
He (Helton) shouldn’t be in imho
 

trekfan55

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 29, 2004
11,747
Panama
- "Carlos Beltran: He probably will make it eventually but he’s the one player named in the worst team scandal in a century. Hard to honor in Year 1." -- so you're not voting for someone you think worthy because you don't think he's Year-1 Worthy? I get people being persuaded to vote for someone over time, but have the courage of your convictions!
You are a Hall of Famer or you are not.

There's 10 votes, use them on who you think should be in the Hall of Fame.

This is what gets us players like Willie Mays and Ken Groffey Jr not having 100% of the vote, or very worthy players being left off.

The persuasion part is understandable.