Hall of Fame Ballot: 2019 Induction

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,151
I flat out do not understand the idea that Mariano Rivera "deserved" to be voted in unanimously. Here's stacking up his career against a few contemporaries, all Hall of Famers themselves.

Rivera: 2.21 ERA, 82-60, 1283.2 IP, 1173 Ks, 286 BBs, 2.76 FIP.
Player A: 2.13 ERA, 90-40, 1191.2 IP, 905 Ks, 204 BBs, 2.58 FIP
Player B: 2.63 ERA, 100-38, 1274.1 IP, 1746 Ks, 374 BBs, 2.60 FIP
Player C: 2.20 ERA, 104-32, 1221.1 IP, 1555 Ks, 268 BBs, 2.27 FIP

In Rivera's favor is the fact that his innings are all high leverage. Weighted against him is the fact that Player A and Player B accomplished those totals in a mere 5 seasons, while Player C has an injury abbreviated 6th season in there. If anyone "deserved" to be the first player (and a pitcher at that) to be voted in unanimously, it would be one of Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, or Pedro Martinez. Rivera was a Hall of Fame player...but he's not in the conversation with Inner Circle, potential GOAT, guys like that who really deserved to be put into the Hall unanimously.

Though it would be stupid, I can imagine some idiot not voting for Mariano but not Pedro or Maddux because Pedro "didn't have enough wins" and Maddux "was a postseason failure". But what's the convoluted logic where you'd vote for Mariano but not Randy Johnson?
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,067
The wrong side of the bridge....
I flat out do not understand the idea that Mariano Rivera "deserved" to be voted in unanimously. Here's stacking up his career against a few contemporaries, all Hall of Famers themselves.

Rivera: 2.21 ERA, 82-60, 1283.2 IP, 1173 Ks, 286 BBs, 2.76 FIP.
Player A: 2.13 ERA, 90-40, 1191.2 IP, 905 Ks, 204 BBs, 2.58 FIP
Player B: 2.63 ERA, 100-38, 1274.1 IP, 1746 Ks, 374 BBs, 2.60 FIP
Player C: 2.20 ERA, 104-32, 1221.1 IP, 1555 Ks, 268 BBs, 2.27 FIP

In Rivera's favor is the fact that his innings are all high leverage. Weighted against him is the fact that Player A and Player B accomplished those totals in a mere 5 seasons, while Player C has an injury abbreviated 6th season in there. If anyone "deserved" to be the first player (and a pitcher at that) to be voted in unanimously, it would be one of Greg Maddux, Randy Johnson, or Pedro Martinez. Rivera was a Hall of Fame player...but he's not in the conversation with Inner Circle, potential GOAT, guys like that who really deserved to be put into the Hall unanimously.
You're cooking the books by comparing peak rate stats for starters with career rate stats for the reliever. It would be fairer to compare the career rate stats for everybody, and pro-rate the counting stats per 1283.2 innings, leaving W-L out of it because that's even more meaningless for relievers than for starters. Here's what you get when you do that:

Rivera: 2.21 ERA, 1173 Ks, 286 BBs, 2.76 FIP
Maddux: 3.16 ERA, 864 Ks, 256 BBs, 3.26 FIP
Johnson: 3.29 ERA, 1513 Ks, 465 BBs, 3.19 FIP
Martinez: 2.93 ERA, 1432 Ks, 345 BBs, 2.91 FIP

The only one of the three starters who compares well with Rivera in this frame is Pedro. And I think the only reason why Pedro was not a unanimous first-ballot HoFer was the relatively short career and consequently modest counting stats.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
7,910
Though it would be stupid, I can imagine some idiot not voting for Mariano but not Pedro or Maddux because Pedro "didn't have enough wins" and Maddux "was a postseason failure". But what's the convoluted logic where you'd vote for Mariano but not Randy Johnson?

Ask Larry Rocca, or George Willis of the NY Post.

Unit got 99.1% of the public vote (and 97.3% of the overall vote). It's not like the sample of morons is all that large.
 

scottyno

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
4,810
You're cooking the books by comparing peak rate stats for starters with career rate stats for the reliever. It would be fairer to compare the career rate stats for everybody, and pro-rate the counting stats per 1283.2 innings, leaving W-L out of it because that's even more meaningless for relievers than for starters. Here's what you get when you do that:

Rivera: 2.21 ERA, 1173 Ks, 286 BBs, 2.76 FIP
Maddux: 3.16 ERA, 864 Ks, 256 BBs, 3.26 FIP
Johnson: 3.29 ERA, 1513 Ks, 465 BBs, 3.19 FIP
Martinez: 2.93 ERA, 1432 Ks, 345 BBs, 2.91 FIP

The only one of the three starters who compares well with Rivera in this frame is Pedro. And I think the only reason why Pedro was not a unanimous first-ballot HoFer was the relatively short career and consequently modest counting stats.
How is comparing rate stats of a reliever and a starter even remotely fair? The fact that those 3 are even close to Rivera is why they all should have been voted unanimously before him.
 

Rough Carrigan

reasons within Reason
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I think we can consider "The Backlog" to be largely cleared here, aside from Bonds and Clemens remaining. Next year only one sure-thing is joining the ballot (Jeter), and only 2-3 other "Vote-bait" candidates who aren't getting in but whose HOF Monitor rating is >100 (Jason Giambi 108 / 50.5 WAR, Alfonso Soriano 105 / 28.2 WAR, plus Bobby Abreu 95 / 60.5 WAR). Meanwhile, this year they elected 2 first-balloters, 1 long-building-campaign guy (Edgar), and 1 bubble guy who was probably getting in sooner or later, so sooner is better than later (Moose) - all of whom were going to siphon big shares of votes until they got in. I'm not sure that next year even the "Big Hall" voters will think there are >10 deserving candidates, so finally their vote will probably be concentrated on all those they think are worthy. That alone should bump the top candidates a few percentage points here and there.
Good points.
Lots to be happy about here for other candidates.
Mussina getting in is good for Schilling. Mussina threw 3,562 innings at a 123 ERA+ and 82.9 WAR (I know, not a great metric for pitchers). Schilling threw 3261 innings at a 127 ERA+ and 80.6 WAR.
Edgar's got a better OPS+ than Papi in almost identical plate appearances but Papi does have a better post season resume not that Edgar's is bad at all.
I guess my biggest surprise here is Mussina getting in and I might have a totally skewed perspective but I thought Clemens and Bonds would improve their percentages more than they did, just a couple percentage points each. I wonder if they're hitting a curmudgeon enforced ceiling.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
42,637
I might have a totally skewed perspective but I thought Clemens and Bonds would improve their percentages more than they did, just a couple percentage points each. I wonder if they're hitting a curmudgeon enforced ceiling.
Yes, and even worse, as Jeff Passan just resarched:

"Ryan Thibodaux's invaluable Hall of Fame tracker collates every ballot made public by a writer, and this season it published the choices of 232 voters. About 60 of them did not vote for Bonds and Clemens. I wanted to know why, so I reached out to them.

It's an interesting group. Only 10 percent or so are full-time baseball writers. Plenty are retired. Some are general sports columnists. A handful are football writers. Others cover hockey, golf, college basketball. Another does digital marketing. One writes for the American Heart Association."

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25826093/mlb-why-barry-bonds-roger-clemens-getting-hall-fame
 

Marbleheader

Dope
Dope
Sep 27, 2004
10,225
Someone explain to me how a closer can be the first player to get 100% of the vote and it takes a Edgar 10 tries. A closer pitches one inning in around 1/4 of the games and is involved in 3-4 plate appearances. Edgar plays in 140-160 games a year and during those games and has 4-5 AB during those games. At a minimum, closers and DHs should be seen on equal footing as specialists. Baseball writers are morons.
 

Danny_Darwin

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,239
I think we can consider "The Backlog" to be largely cleared here, aside from Bonds and Clemens remaining. Next year only one sure-thing is joining the ballot (Jeter), and only 2-3 other "Vote-bait" candidates who aren't getting in but whose HOF Monitor rating is >100 (Jason Giambi 108 / 50.5 WAR, Alfonso Soriano 105 / 28.2 WAR, plus Bobby Abreu 95 / 60.5 WAR). Meanwhile, this year they elected 2 first-balloters, 1 long-building-campaign guy (Edgar), and 1 bubble guy who was probably getting in sooner or later, so sooner is better than later (Moose) - all of whom were going to siphon big shares of votes until they got in. I'm not sure that next year even the "Big Hall" voters will think there are >10 deserving candidates, so finally their vote will probably be concentrated on all those they think are worthy. That alone should bump the top candidates a few percentage points here and there.
Further, the year after next, I’m not sure there are any first-timers who will make a second ballot. The best first-timers by WAR are Mark Buehrle, Tim Hudson, and Torii Hunter - can anyone make a case for those guys? I think that will ultimately be the year for Bonds and Clemens. Then we get to go through all of this nonsense again with A-Rod starting in 2021!
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,067
The wrong side of the bridge....
How is comparing rate stats of a reliever and a starter even remotely fair? The fact that those 3 are even close to Rivera is why they all should have been voted unanimously before him.
It's true that there's a discrepancy between RP and SP when it comes to rate stats, but it's not as big as you're suggesting. From 1995 to 2010 (roughly the period in question), MLB relievers had a FIP of 4.32, while starters had a FIP of 4.49. This gives Mo a (non-park-adjusted) FIP- relative to his group of 64, compared to Maddux' 73 and Johnson's 71. So, not as big a difference when looked at that way, but Mo still comes out ahead. (Pedro comes out at 65, virtually identical to Mo.)
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,067
The wrong side of the bridge....
Further, the year after next, I’m not sure there are any first-timers who will make a second ballot. The best first-timers by WAR are Mark Buehrle, Tim Hudson, and Torii Hunter - can anyone make a case for those guys? I think that will ultimately be the year for Bonds and Clemens. Then we get to go through all of this nonsense again with A-Rod starting in 2021!
Hunter might get enough votes to make it to a second year, coz Gold Gloves and team leader and stuff. The other two seem like longer shots, though the "more wins than Pedro!" argument could conceivably win some votes for Hudson.
 

uncannymanny

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2007
6,076
Boston --> NYC --> LA --> NYC
How is comparing rate stats of a reliever and a starter even remotely fair? The fact that those 3 are even close to Rivera is why they all should have been voted unanimously before him.
Isn’t this the exact same logic that got those guys not voted unanimously? Thank god we don’t have to hear this inane shit every year anymore. Vote percentage won’t be anywhere near my thoughts when I finally see Pedro’s plaque in the hall.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Jul 18, 2005
596
Maryland
Yes, and even worse, as Jeff Passan just resarched:

"Ryan Thibodaux's invaluable Hall of Fame tracker collates every ballot made public by a writer, and this season it published the choices of 232 voters. About 60 of them did not vote for Bonds and Clemens. I wanted to know why, so I reached out to them.

It's an interesting group. Only 10 percent or so are full-time baseball writers. Plenty are retired. Some are general sports columnists. A handful are football writers. Others cover hockey, golf, college basketball. Another does digital marketing. One writes for the American Heart Association."

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25826093/mlb-why-barry-bonds-roger-clemens-getting-hall-fame
What offends me the most is the sanctimonious, holier-than-thou attitude of these voters. The entire baseball community is complicit in the "steroid era," including the Commissioner's Office, the teams, the players and the sportswriters (and to a lesser extent, even the fans). Except for a very few, these sportswriters were more than happy to make a very nice living covering (and in many cases, glorifying) the exploits of these stars without raising a hue and cry about how they were cheating to get these results. My feeling is that unless they were calling for a boycott of the game to stop the rampant cheating, then they have forfeited the right to complain about it now. We have a pretty good idea that PED use was fairly widespread, but we'll never know everyone who used and who didn't. So it's impossible to really sort this out, and it's unfair to penalize just a few, who happen to be among the best to ever play the game. Especially when there was no similar penalty imposed for all those who cheated by using greenies, starting in at least the 60s.

Passan's article quotes CHB as one of the anti-steroid voters. And we all know he's a sanctimonious prick.
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
7,910
I think Passan knows exactly what CHB is. Read the paragraph where he's introduced in the article and see if that doesn't bring a smile to your face.
 

mauidano

Mai Tais for everyone!
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2006
27,506
Maui
A-Rod. This fucking guy. He is NEVER going to be in the Baseball Hall of Fame. NEVER.

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25833082/alex-rodriguez-says-roger-clemens-barry-bonds-deserve-make-hall-fame
"Look, I pray every day I get a chance to get in," Rodriguez said. "The Hall of Fame is the ultimate place...."I would love to get in, but I understand that I made my own bed. So if I don't make it to the Hall of Fame, I can live with that. I will be bummed, it would suck and I can't believe that I put myself in this situation. But if that happens, I have no one to blame but myself."

Live with it A-Rod.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
3,611
Last night on KNBR, Tom Tolbert was interviewing Bruce Jenkins, who's the oldest baseball writer out here (SF) and is constantly crying about new stats, pitch counts, etc. Tolbert talked for literally two minutes about how intense it was for him to vote on the NBA rookie of the year the one year he had to do it as a lead-in to asking Jenkins how much he deliberates when voting for the HoF. Jenkins said "it takes me 5 minutes, because I already know all of these guys and what they did, and I vote based on how I remember them at the time." He then tried to cover himself by claiming that he looks at their stats, but used that as a way to joke about how dumb modern stats are. It's unsurprising -- Jenkins is a horse's ass -- but it's a good reminder of just how miraculous it is when the writers' votes actually result in a sensible result.

Edited to add: Jenkins is a Manny voter, so I have to at least give him that.
 

Max Power

thai good. you like shirt?
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
3,517
Boston, MA
A-Rod. This fucking guy. He is NEVER going to be in the Baseball Hall of Fame. NEVER.

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25833082/alex-rodriguez-says-roger-clemens-barry-bonds-deserve-make-hall-fame
"Look, I pray every day I get a chance to get in," Rodriguez said. "The Hall of Fame is the ultimate place...."I would love to get in, but I understand that I made my own bed. So if I don't make it to the Hall of Fame, I can live with that. I will be bummed, it would suck and I can't believe that I put myself in this situation. But if that happens, I have no one to blame but myself."

Live with it A-Rod.
What's wrong with that quote? He realizes everything that happened was his fault and he's disappointed in it. It's not like he sued his personal trainer or anything.

I hated him as much as anyone while he was playing, but retired A-Rod is all right with me. He clearly loves the game more than anything or else he'd be hanging at home with his hundreds of millions of dollars instead of traveling around the country every week to be on TV. Jeter was clearly always the asshole and kept quiet to hide it. A-Rod is just an insecure weirdo who likes baseball and steroids and centaurs.
 

axx

lurker
Jul 16, 2005
6,094
A-Rod. This fucking guy. He is NEVER going to be in the Baseball Hall of Fame. NEVER.
Yeah, Bonds and Clemens only gained like 2 percent over last year despite the big gain in the public voters. Does look like none of the "Steroid Guys" are getting in, and that includes A-Rod and Ortiz.

Next year it looks like it's only going to be Jeter unless they also vote in Schilling which I doubt.
 

snowmanny

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
10,184
Yeah, Bonds and Clemens only gained like 2 percent over last year despite the big gain in the public voters. Does look like none of the "Steroid Guys" are getting in, and that includes A-Rod and Ortiz.

Next year it looks like it's only going to be Jeter unless they also vote in Schilling which I doubt.
I’d bet almost anything that Ortiz gets in by year 2 of eligibility.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
35,447
A-Rod. This fucking guy. He is NEVER going to be in the Baseball Hall of Fame. NEVER.

http://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/25833082/alex-rodriguez-says-roger-clemens-barry-bonds-deserve-make-hall-fame
"Look, I pray every day I get a chance to get in," Rodriguez said. "The Hall of Fame is the ultimate place...."I would love to get in, but I understand that I made my own bed. So if I don't make it to the Hall of Fame, I can live with that. I will be bummed, it would suck and I can't believe that I put myself in this situation. But if that happens, I have no one to blame but myself."

Live with it A-Rod.
He comes off well and sympathetic there, and I don’t like the dude. I hope he manages to find some joy while dating J-Lo and having hundreds of millions of dollars.
 

Bob Montgomery's Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
What's wrong with that quote? He realizes everything that happened was his fault and he's disappointed in it. It's not like he sued his personal trainer or anything.

I hated him as much as anyone while he was playing, but retired A-Rod is all right with me. He clearly loves the game more than anything or else he'd be hanging at home with his hundreds of millions of dollars instead of traveling around the country every week to be on TV. Jeter was clearly always the asshole and kept quiet to hide it. A-Rod is just an insecure weirdo who likes baseball and steroids and centaurs.
Yeah, I think it's a pretty good and honest quote.
 

uncannymanny

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 12, 2007
6,076
Boston --> NYC --> LA --> NYC
I just can’t buy A-Rod as sincere about anything like this. I see it as setting up his aw shucks persona for enshrinement so maybe people forget how calculating he was when lying about it.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
11,686
What offends me the most is the sanctimonious, holier-than-thou attitude of these voters. The entire baseball community is complicit in the "steroid era," including the Commissioner's Office, the teams, the players and the sportswriters (and to a lesser extent, even the fans). Except for a very few, these sportswriters were more than happy to make a very nice living covering (and in many cases, glorifying) the exploits of these stars without raising a hue and cry about how they were cheating to get these results. My feeling is that unless they were calling for a boycott of the game to stop the rampant cheating, then they have forfeited the right to complain about it now. We have a pretty good idea that PED use was fairly widespread, but we'll never know everyone who used and who didn't. So it's impossible to really sort this out, and it's unfair to penalize just a few, who happen to be among the best to ever play the game. Especially when there was no similar penalty imposed for all those who cheated by using greenies, starting in at least the 60s.

Passan's article quotes CHB as one of the anti-steroid voters. And we all know he's a sanctimonious prick.
Character is the way you act when no one is watching.

This post sounds like, “My friends made me do it!” Hence, the old saying, “If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you follow them?”
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
11,686
Yeah, Bonds and Clemens only gained like 2 percent over last year despite the big gain in the public voters. Does look like none of the "Steroid Guys" are getting in, and that includes A-Rod and Ortiz.

Next year it looks like it's only going to be Jeter unless they also vote in Schilling which I doubt.
I think Larry Walker will get a lot of votes when people start comparing him to Harold Baines.
 

Danny_Darwin

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
1,239
Yeah, Bonds and Clemens only gained like 2 percent over last year despite the big gain in the public voters. Does look like none of the "Steroid Guys" are getting in, and that includes A-Rod and Ortiz.

Next year it looks like it's only going to be Jeter unless they also vote in Schilling which I doubt.
Viewed a certain way, yes, maybe Bonds and Clemens have reached a ceiling of sorts. At the same time, since 2013, they've gone from 35ish percent of the vote to now about 60. The voting chapter of the BBWAA has been collectively changing its mind on the PED issue, in other words, over the course of just these six years. Now consider that A-Rod will potentially be on the ballot until 2031 - that's plenty of time for the hivemind to further soften to the point where they'd elect a guy with his history, especially since this is a group that seems a bit prone to the herd mentality. It might not be right away, but yeah, I think he'll get in.

As for Schilling, it seems the writers have decided he's spent enough time in timeout.
 

Lose Remerswaal

Leaves after the 8th inning
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Now that A-Rod is part of the media and seems to be good at it I think that will help him. Yes, he's broadcast, and the voters are writers, but they will see/hear him and hear the public's support of A-Rod as a broadcaster. Benefits Bonds and Clemens and Ramirez don't get (although Roger is pretty good on his occasional Sox broadcasts)
 

Spacemans Bong

chapeau rose
SoSH Member
Last night on KNBR, Tom Tolbert was interviewing Bruce Jenkins, who's the oldest baseball writer out here (SF) and is constantly crying about new stats, pitch counts, etc. Tolbert talked for literally two minutes about how intense it was for him to vote on the NBA rookie of the year the one year he had to do it as a lead-in to asking Jenkins how much he deliberates when voting for the HoF. Jenkins said "it takes me 5 minutes, because I already know all of these guys and what they did, and I vote based on how I remember them at the time." He then tried to cover himself by claiming that he looks at their stats, but used that as a way to joke about how dumb modern stats are. It's unsurprising -- Jenkins is a horse's ass -- but it's a good reminder of just how miraculous it is when the writers' votes actually result in a sensible result.

Edited to add: Jenkins is a Manny voter, so I have to at least give him that.
Jenkins is an old fart but he consistently submits decent ballots, his love for Vizquel aside. He voted for everybody who got in this year, plus Bonds, Clemens, Manny, and Sosa. That is decent work.

Ann Killion deserves your scorn. She is one of the worst voters out there. Her ballot this year included Fred McGriff and Omar Vizquel, along with Rivera, Halladay and Martinez. She once left Tom Glavine off a ballot because Greg Maddux was better, so Glavine could wait. She won't vote for any steroid guys because of "character", despite having worked in Bay Area sports media for well over 20 years and co-authoring a book with noted locker room leader Hope Solo. Absolute dipshit.
 

Dewey'sCannon

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Jul 18, 2005
596
Maryland
Character is the way you act when no one is watching.

This post sounds like, “My friends made me do it!” Hence, the old saying, “If all your friends jumped off a bridge, would you follow them?”
I think the better analogy is this: how many people obey the speed limit on the interstate when there's no enforcement? And even this analogy falls short, because it ignores the pressure/incentive to cheat when you know many others are doing it. It would be more like if Nascar didn't enforce any of the rules about ground clearance, spoilers, restrictor plates, etc.

Cheating is not right, but when the rules are not being enforced, and the other cheaters are being applauded for their accomplishments, then I find it hard to fault those who don't want to be left behind. And as I said, my biggest problem is with the hypocritical writers who said nothing about this at the time but who now trying to claim the moral high ground - I think they relinquished this by their actions, or rather, their inaction, during this period.
 

axx

lurker
Jul 16, 2005
6,094
I’d bet almost anything that Ortiz gets in by year 2 of eligibility.
It really depends on how likely you think the voters will lump him in with the rest of the Steroid Guys. Manny's not gotten anywhere beyond the mid 20s; Bonds and Clemens are stuck in the 50s, Sheffield is only getting 10s.

The one thing working for him is that there is nobody else new other than Jeter on the ballot the next four years. Maybe Beltran. Could be good news for Helton I suppose.
 

Savin Hillbilly

loves the secret sauce
SoSH Member
Jul 10, 2007
18,067
The wrong side of the bridge....
Cheating is not right, but when the rules are not being enforced, and the other cheaters are being applauded for their accomplishments, then I find it hard to fault those who don't want to be left behind. And as I said, my biggest problem is with the hypocritical writers who said nothing about this at the time but who now trying to claim the moral high ground - I think they relinquished this by their actions, or rather, their inaction, during this period.
Or as CS Lewis said,

Much is to be forgiven to a man in a corrupt profession at a corrupt period. The judge who takes bribes in a time or place where all take bribes may, no doubt, be blamed: but not so much as a judge who had done so in a healthier civilization.

About the writers: yeah, IIRC, not that many people seemed all that worked up about steroids until records started getting broken. The implicit message to Bonds and McGwire and Sosa was, "if you want to cheat to beat Kevin Brown, OK, no big. But if your cheating beats Babe Ruth, now we have a problem." To the extent that was true, the concern was not really about the integrity of the game but the integrity of its history, which is a quite different thing.
 

Plympton91

bubble burster
SoSH Member
Oct 19, 2008
11,686
It really depends on how likely you think the voters will lump him in with the rest of the Steroid Guys. Manny's not gotten anywhere beyond the mid 20s; Bonds and Clemens are stuck in the 50s, Sheffield is only getting 10s.

The one thing working for him is that there is nobody else new other than Jeter on the ballot the next four years. Maybe Beltran. Could be good news for Helton I suppose.
I just don’t see the comparison, especially to AFraud and Manny. The vast majority of Ortiz’s production came during the testing era, 2004-2016, and because of the never explained positive result in 2003, he was tested often during the following years. He never failed a test again. Manny failed two. Ortiz never showed up as a client in the raids of major steroid distribution rings. AFraud and Bonds and Clemens got caught red handed in those.

He may suffer from the rumors in the way Piazza, Biggio, and Bagwell did, but they all made it pretty easily. In addition to ‘roids, Sheffield admitted to tanking games on purpose to force a trade.

Abstracting from the steroid talk, I would hope that Jeff Kent starts making some serious jumps too. One of the Best hitting 2B in history.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
42,637
In addition to ‘roids, Sheffield admitted to tanking games on purpose to force a trade.
"But it was another comment he made during his breakout ’92 season that would forever dog him. “The Brewers brought out the hate in me. I was a crazy man,” he told the LA Times, “I hated everything about the place. If the official scorer gave me an error, I didn't think was an error, I'd say, ‘OK, here's a real error,’ and I'd throw the next ball into the stands on purpose.” He almost immediately disavowed the claim that he had purposely tanked plays. He said he was referring to single incident that occurred in A ball. A numberof people have investigated the claim, the consensus being that no such scenario ever occurred when Sheffield was with the Brewers. Still, one of the most damaging legends about a ballplayer was born."

https://shepherdexpress.com/sports/brew-crew-confidential/hated-man-gary-sheffield-brewer-part-two-pariah/