Curious why not Beltran?My ballot would have had Ichiro, Sabathia, Wagner, Andruw Jones, ARod, and Manny on it.
But I don't get a vote. Bummer.
Curious why not Beltran?My ballot would have had Ichiro, Sabathia, Wagner, Andruw Jones, ARod, and Manny on it.
But I don't get a vote. Bummer.
Bang Bang Bang is the big reason.Curious why not Beltran?
I'd respect an argument along the lines of the latter, even if I disagree (particularly given his postseason heroics).Bang Bang Bang is the big reason.
And I think he was more of a compiler than a dynamically great player. (he obviously was terrific, don't misunderstand; just not sure he's HOF-level terrific)
I have said on various podcasts that I've been on that I know I come off as a hypocrite with respect to "cheating". My argument is this: I reject a person's HOF candidacy if they've been caught cheating, UNLESS their numbers are just otherworldly. And ARod, Manny, Bonds, and Clemens all fully qualify as having absolutely mind-boggling, otherworldly, all-time great numbers. Pettitte doesn't. Beltran doesn't. That's my distinction. Admittedly a subjective judgment, but everyone's vote and voting criteria is subjective so I don't apologize for that at all.I'd respect an argument along the lines of the latter, even if I disagree (particularly given his postseason heroics).
But the former doesn't make sense to me, and doubly so on a ballot that includes A-Rod and Manny, both of them suspended twice by the league for PEDs (they would both get my vote, to be clear, but drawing some sort of bright line between the two is odd to me). More importantly, he's already paid a price for that scandal - lost a pretty cushy job coaching the Mets, while every other player was granted immunity during the investigation - and most of all he's come clean and accepted full responsibility:
View: https://twitter.com/YESNetwork/status/1511021545187069955
What's the thinking for why you're grading his involvement there, which was shared among many people, more harshly than players cheating to benefit only themselves?
Nor should you apologize. Your opinions are your opinions. But how do you take into account the fact that the otherwordly nature of the stats you're relying on could have been, at least in small or large part, a direct result of the cheating they got caught at or very likely were involved in?I have said on various podcasts that I've been on that I know I come off as a hypocrite with respect to "cheating". My argument is this: I reject a person's HOF candidacy if they've been caught cheating, UNLESS their numbers are just otherworldly. And ARod, Manny, Bonds, and Clemens all fully qualify as having absolutely mind-boggling, otherworldly, all-time great numbers. Pettitte doesn't. Beltran doesn't. That's my distinction. Admittedly a subjective judgment, but everyone's vote and voting criteria is subjective so I don't apologize for that at all.
My thoughts on CCAnd I think he was more of a compiler than a dynamically great player. (he obviously was terrific, don't misunderstand; just not sure he's HOF-level terrific)
For sure Manny isn't at the same level as Bonds, Clemens, and ARod. Those guys are three of the very, very, very best baseball players ever. Manny isn't quite that. But he's still an all-time great. One of the greatest RH hitters ever. Far and above a bunch of guys who are no-doubt hall of fame players.Fair enough, thanks for explaining. Not everyone is going to view it the same and that's OK, you have nothing to apologize for.
...if we do the "one of these things is not like the others" with that group of 4 players, though, Manny is probably the one who looks nothing like the other 3. Career bWAR (rank all-time):
Bonds 162.8 (#4)
Clemens 139.2 (#8)
A-Rod 117.6 (#16)
...
Manny 69.3 (#109)
(still a HOFer in my book, but you'd have to say the other three are all-time greats and he's not in that group)
I assume, in fact, that a certain percentage of their production is via cheating. That's why my standard is that their numbers have to be so astronomically high that even if we take away X percent of their stats, they're still hall of famers. That's why Pettitte doesn't qualify, for example. Now, there's no formula in my mind for how to calculate it. It's just a subjective view.Nor should you apologize. Your opinions are your opinions. But how do you take into account the fact that the otherwordly nature of the stats you're relying on could have been, at least in small or large part, a direct result of the cheating they got caught at or very likely were involved in?
The best comp for Manny is Frank Thomas. They had nearly identical slash lines over almost the same number of at bats and about the same defensive value. If Thomas were busted for steroids twice, he wouldn't have gone in, either.For sure Manny isn't at the same level as Bonds, Clemens, and ARod. Those guys are three of the very, very, very best baseball players ever. Manny isn't quite that. But he's still an all-time great. One of the greatest RH hitters ever. Far and above a bunch of guys who are no-doubt hall of fame players.
Thomas didn’t play the OF thoughThe best comp for Manny is Frank Thomas. They had nearly identical slash lines over almost the same number of at bats and about the same defensive value. If Thomas were busted for steroids twice, he wouldn't have gone in, either.
His stellar work as cutoff man for Johnny Damon should garner a few votes from the voters more focused on defensive creativity. Not to mention his dugout comforting demeanor with such luminaries as Julian Tavares.Thomas didn’t play the OF though
Mark Feinsand on mlbn said he voted for Pedey also.Rob Stark VOTED for Pedey as a first-timer. All of a sudden, I have some hope that Dustin might just make it. Here's what Stark wrote:
"
As we approach a time when the Magic Number Club seems practically headed for extinction, I think future generations of Hall of Famers will be a very different group of stars — players who … A) Had big, unmistakable peaks of greatness. B) Had a clear impact on winning.
C) Had a period in their career when they were among the elite players at their position.
Doesn’t that describe Utley, Wright and Pedroia in particular? None of them made it to within 100 hits of 2,000 — let alone 3,000. But they were Stars, with a capital “S.” They were big, bold faces of those teams they played for. And they elevated everyone around them … until injuries slammed the brakes on their march toward Cooperstown. So I voted for all three of them — and one big reason is that I see Buster Posey coming (with exactly 1,500 hits) in 2027, when he’ll be a heavy favorite to get elected. Then what? Well, when Posey rolls into the Hall, it’s going to mark a dramatic redefining of what a Hall of Famer will look like."
Was it the same voter who left off Jeter?Ichiro, CC, Wagner
Ichiro left off one ballot
Pedroia finished with 11.9%
I don't think the Jeter non-voter was ever revealed, so who knowsWas it the same voter who left off Jeter?
Imagine that being your lasting legacy. "I'm the guy who kept HOF players from being unanimous hurr hurr hurr."Ichiro left off one ballot
Whoever they are, they're not proud enough of that distinction by making their identity publicImagine that being your lasting legacy. "I'm the guy who kept HOF players from being unanimous hurr hurr hurr."
And yet, not the biggest farce in the resultsAbreu being sub 20% and less than Felix is an absolute farce.
Him and Felix the only two unelected first-timers to stay on the ballot for next yearAre we surprised that Pedey got 47 votes? I thought he’d get more than 5 percent, but wasn’t sure how many more.
This seems about right to me. He stays on the ballot all 10 years but is never close to election, or drops below 5% in the next couple of yearsAre we surprised that Pedey got 47 votes? I thought he’d get more than 5 percent, but wasn’t sure how many more.
Might follow the Utley path and peak in the 30sThis seems about right to me. He stays on the ballot all 10 years but is never close to election, or drops below 5% in the next couple of years
He deserves not to be one & done but that's about it.
You should lose your vote going forward if you do. Whatever cutoff they want to use, whether it's 1 dissenting or 2 dissenting, anyone who is in that much of a minority should basically be considered a troll voter and not get to vote anymore.Imagine that being your lasting legacy. "I'm the guy who kept HOF players from being unanimous hurr hurr hurr."
I disagreeAbreu being sub 20% and less than Felix is an absolute farce.
That the BBWAA is filled with members who compete with each other to ferret out information, the fact that they refuse to release they ballots publicly is pretty sadYou should lose your vote going forward if you do. Whatever cutoff they want to use, whether it's 1 dissenting or 2 dissenting, anyone who is in that much of a minority should basically be considered a troll voter and not get to vote anymore.
What would you say is the biggest farce in the results? I assume Ichiro's non-unanimity?And yet, not the biggest farce in the results
YesWhat would you say is the biggest farce in the results? I assume Ichiro's non-unanimity?
How was Bobby Abreu a "compiler"? His candidacy is mostly based on rate stats. Career 395 OBP over 18 years, 7 year peak of 5+ WAR per season. MVP/ AS voting is relevant of course but there are guys that fall through the cracks, people talked about that w Abreu in real time.Not Abreu. He was a compiler. At least 4 tools but still a compiler.
Never a top-10 MVP only 2 ASG
Reporters break pettier information breathlessly out in the world, but when it comes to a single meaningless vote for a player voted into the HOF anyway the BBWAA turns into the thin blue line.That the BBWAA is filled with members who compete with each other to ferret out information, the fact that they refuse to release they ballots publicly is pretty sad
Does that leave Mariano Rivera as the only 100%er? Maybe the withholder didn't want Rivera to lose that distinction.What would you say is the biggest farce in the results? I assume Ichiro's non-unanimity?
Agreed, at the very least Abreu should peak at 50s percentage-wise, which doesn't look too likely based on the 19.6% result in his 6th year. However, with only 2 holdovers this year and little threat from the newcomers in 2026, maybe he has a surprise bump of 10-15% next year. I was looking at Gary Sheffield's voting history as a guide, these two are almost identical from an OBP standpoint, with Abreu having about double the stolen bases but .040 less on SLG. Abreu is 25th all-time in doubles at 574, but I think in the end his paltry 288 homers from a corner OF position will be what does him in. You kind of need to be a Ricky Henderson or Tony Gwynn to be less than 400 HR as a corner outfielder in the relatively modern game. Sheffield pays a BALCO tax for sure, he has 509 homers but think voters push him well below 500 in their "personal record books" thanks to the known steroid link - and he was at just over 30% in year 6 then obviously fell short at 63.9% his final year.How was Bobby Abreu a "compiler"? His candidacy is mostly based on rate stats. Career 395 OBP over 18 years, 7 year peak of 5+ WAR per season. MVP/ AS voting is relevant of course but there are guys that fall through the cracks, people talked about that w Abreu in real time.
Not much of an OF, didn't hit enough HR, ~2400 hits isn't enough and he never 'set the world on fire' so I'd be very on the fence voting for him but I agree w @Brand Name, and whatever he was, it wasn't a compiler.
Sale maybe.As I see it, the voting body and baseball fans who care about such things are overdue for a re-examination of the standards for Hall-worthy SPs to reflect the evolution of the role within the game over the past ~15 years, because otherwise they've got precisely four SPs* left to induct and then it's over. Johan Santana should've been the starting point for that, but here we are.
Other than taking pitches (both bad ones and strikes), what was Bobby Abreu ever elite in?How was Bobby Abreu a "compiler"? His candidacy is mostly based on rate stats. Career 395 OBP over 18 years, 7 year peak of 5+ WAR per season. MVP/ AS voting is relevant of course but there are guys that fall through the cracks, people talked about that w Abreu in real time.
Not much of an OF, didn't hit enough HR, ~2400 hits isn't enough and he never 'set the world on fire' so I'd be very on the fence voting for him but I agree w @Brand Name, and whatever he was, it wasn't a compiler.
Honest question--do you ever read what youre responding to?Other than taking pitches (both bad ones and strikes), what was Bobby Abreu ever elite in?
I repeat, he never finished in the top 10 in MVP voting even once. Players like /checks notes Jarren Duran have done that.
He compiled BB's, 2B, 3B. he should be getting more than 10% HOF votes.Honest question--do you ever read what youre responding to?
If starters aren't as an important part of the game as they were before, why should as many of them make it into the Hall of Fame? I don't remember the last time I was actually excited about a pitching matchup. No matter how good they are, you know it's going to end up with a parade of relievers once you hear Take Me Out to the Ballgame. If you're not drawing fan interest, and not contributing as much to team wins, then we shouldn't be figuring out ways to get you into the Hall.As I see it, the voting body and baseball fans who care about such things are overdue for a re-examination of the standards for Hall-worthy SPs to reflect the evolution of the role within the game over the past ~15 years, because otherwise they've got precisely four SPs* left to induct and then it's over. Johan Santana should've been the starting point for that, but here we are.
* - I guess six if you think Clemens and Schilling might still make it (I actually do, but it's not a prediction I'd bet my mortgage on). (This is not an endorsement!)