Hall of Fame balloting

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
10,213
If Biggio didn't peak at the same time as the PED-era, his list of AS games and MVP voting would probably be more impressive. His 1998 season had him leading the leauge with 51 doubles, and he hit .325/20/88, was 50 for 58 on SB attempts, had 210 hits and scored 123 runs, got hit by 23 pitches and only grounded into 10 DPs despite leading the league in plate apperances. Despite all that, he only finished 5th in the MVP voting.
 
FWIW, Bill James LOVES Biggio and called him the best player in baseball when his abstract was revised in 2001. He also ranked Biggio 35th all time in his Top 100 Greatest Players list, also in 2001.
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
4,494
02130
RedOctober3829 said:
I don't agree that Craig Biggio is a slam-dunk HOFer.  Only 7 AS appearances out of 20 years and none after 32 years old.  He only got votes for MVP 5 times in 20 years and only twice was he even in the top 5.  To me, the HOF is the elite of the elite.  His JAWS rating is 15th all-time among 2B.  Chase Utley is one spot ahead of him.  Does anyone think Chase Utley is a HOFer?
15th best at a position is pretty dang good, and JAWS favors people who had a big 7-yr peak (like Utley) which Biggio didn't have as much. Who cares about the ASG or MVP stuff? That's subject to the same vagaries as the HoF voting itself.
 
If you think the Hall should be the elite of the elite then OK but Biggio is pretty close to that company. If you think it should be a bit bigger he compares pretty well with guys who are already in (like Alomar, for example, who was a contemporary). The mistakes that are Grich and Whitaker being out shouldn't count against Biggio.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
12,142
Mansfield MA
RedOctober3829 said:
I don't agree that Craig Biggio is a slam-dunk HOFer.  Only 7 AS appearances out of 20 years and none after 32 years old.  He only got votes for MVP 5 times in 20 years and only twice was he even in the top 5. 
This is just evidence that Biggio was underrated as a player. He did almost everything you would expect an underrated player to do - he hit a ton of doubles but only a fair number of homers. He stole bases but only once led the league. He was a .280-.290 hitter but not a consistent .300 guy. He played his prime in a terrible hitters' park. He almost never hit into double plays. He got hit by pitch a ton. He played on a team that was rarely on people's minds.
 
RedOctober3829 said:
To me, the HOF is the elite of the elite.  His JAWS rating is 15th all-time among 2B.  Chase Utley is one spot ahead of him.  Does anyone think Chase Utley is a HOFer?
JAWS is based on WAR, so it depends on how seriously you take dWAR's negative assessment of Biggio's defense (based mostly on pre-batted-ball data). If you consider just his oWAR, he leapfrogs guys like Grich, Whitaker, and Utley.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,197
Has anyone ever given a explanation (or even a bad one) why Bonds and Clemens can't be in but Gaylord Perry and Whitey Ford are OK?
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
10,213
Because most of the BBWA are old and cranky and upset that they didn't recognize that steroids were partly responsible for the success of these guys when they were playing. Most people knew that Perry was doctoring the baseball while he was playing, he even got suspended for it in 1982, and it was well covered in the media that Perry was a "cheater." I think the writers resent the fact that the PED guys hoodwinked them during most of their playing careers and thus are not going to support them going into HOF.
 
Another explanation might be that doctoring the baseball is a time-honored tradition that has been a part of baseball for a long time. Steroids, only became a problem during the last 20-30 years, so those seem a lot more ailen to many of the older writers.
 

8slim

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2001
12,909
Unreal America
Has anyone ever given a explanation (or even a bad one) why Bonds and Clemens can't be in but Gaylord Perry and Whitey Ford are OK?


Because when people cheated (or fought, or boozed, or womanized, etc) decades ago it makes for an amusing anecdote.

When they do it today it's a sign of the fall of Western civilization.
 

kieckeredinthehead

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 26, 2006
8,167
moondog80 said:
Has anyone ever given a explanation (or even a bad one) why Bonds and Clemens can't be in but Gaylord Perry and Whitey Ford are OK?
 
They're waiting until ARod is eligible so they can have an all-roid induction one year and then never mention it again.
 

Tyrone Biggums

nfl meets tri-annually at a secret country mansion
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2006
6,164
I can't support an institution that keeps Marvin Miller out of the HOF. If this was like the football HOF process (which it should be) Miller would have been in a long time ago, instead the veterans committee may eventually put him in. Biggio would have gotten in today and all those years of sanctimonious garbage of only electing one or two players or having years where they have elected no one never would have happened. How a player improves his HOF vote in 5-10 years after retirement seems ludicrous to me. You're either a HOFer or you aren't. Oh and the morons that voted for Nomo Jacque Jones JT Snow and Gagne should never be allowed to vote again. Biggio should be in, period. Having someone miss by 2 votes is terrible.
 

BCsMightyJoeYoung

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
5,203
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
Tyrone Biggums said:
I can't support an institution that keeps Marvin Miller out of the HOF. If this was like the football HOF process (which it should be) Miller would have been in a long time ago, instead the veterans committee may eventually put him in. Biggio would have gotten in today and all those years of sanctimonious garbage of only electing one or two players or having years where they have elected no one never would have happened. How a player improves his HOF vote in 5-10 years after retirement seems ludicrous to me. You're either a HOFer or you aren't. Oh and the morons that voted for Nomo Jacque Jones JT Snow and Gagne should never be allowed to vote again. Biggio should be in, period. Having someone miss by 2 votes is terrible.
 
Except that Marvin Miller - while an incredibly deserving inductee - stated he didn't want to be inducted 
 
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/marvin-millers-legacy-and-the-decline-of-labor/

 
[O]ne thing a trade union leader learns to do is how to count votes in advance. Whenever I took one look at what I was faced with, it was obvious to me it was not gonna happen…
[General Sherman] basically said, ‘I don’t want to be president. If I’m nominated I will not campaign for the presidency. If despite that I’m elected, I will not serve.’ Without comparing myself to General Sherman, that’s my feeling. If considered and elected, I will not appear for the induction if I’m alive. If they proceed to try to do this posthumously, my family is prepared to deal with that…
What [Groucho Marx] said was words to the effect of, ‘I don’t want to be part of any organization that would have me as a member.’ Between a great comedian and a great general, you have my sentiments.
   — Interview with Marvin Miller, 2008, after asking the Hall of Fame to stop nominating him
 
 
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
smastroyin said:
I realize that the announcement came after the start of the show, but it kills me that knowing they would do a segment on the deadspin ballot, neither felger nor Mazz read the reasoning.
 
They read LeBatard's column/statement/reasoning on the air multiple times in the 2 & 3 o'clock hours. 
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,197
Marvin Miller seems like a stretch.  He had enormous impact on the business side of the game, mostly for the better, and the ripple effects showed on the field, but is that what the HOF is for?  Guys like Peter Gammons and Bill James I can see a bit more, but if Miller, why not James Andrews and the guy who designed Camden Yards or some senator who got the ball rolling with taxpayer funded stadiums?
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
10,883
Maine
moondog80 said:
Marvin Miller seems like a stretch.  He had enormous impact on the business side of the game, mostly for the better, and the ripple effects showed on the field, but is that what the HOF is for?  Guys like Peter Gammons and Bill James I can see a bit more, but if Miller, why not James Andrews and the guy who designed Camden Yards or some senator who got the ball rolling with taxpayer funded stadiums?
 
Miller has a place in the Hall as much as any of the 33 executives who are already in. Miller's primary protagonist, Bowie Kuhn, is in.  No reason Miller shouldn't be in as well.  He was an executive who worked for the players instead of for the owners.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
30,521
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Red(s)HawksFan said:
 
Miller has a place in the Hall as much as any of the 33 executives who are already in. Miller's primary protagonist, Bowie Kuhn, is in.  No reason Miller shouldn't be in as well.  He was an executive who worked for the players instead of for the owners.
 
Miller repeatedly stated he didn't want to be in the Hall. If they want to honor the guy somehow the very least they could do is respect his wishes. Put a small exhibit in there or something, that's fine. But he didn't want a plaque and I think he had the right to demand that.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
10,883
Maine
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
 
Miller repeatedly stated he didn't want to be in the Hall. If they want to honor the guy somehow the very least they could do is respect his wishes. Put a small exhibit in there or something, that's fine. But he didn't want a plaque and I think he had the right to demand that.
 
I agree that if he doesn't want to be in, they should respect his wishes and if that's what they've been doing in not electing him, so be it.
 
But objectively, setting aside his wishes for a moment, he absolutely belongs there.  His contributions to the overall business of the game have had as much if not more impact than a lot of the team executives already enshrined.
 

moondog80

heart is two sizes two small
SoSH Member
Sep 20, 2005
5,197
Red(s)HawksFan said:
 
I agree that if he doesn't want to be in, they should respect his wishes and if that's what they've been doing in not electing him, so be it.
 
But objectively, setting aside his wishes for a moment, he absolutely belongs there.  His contributions to the overall business of the game have had as much if not more impact than a lot of the team executives already enshrined.
 
I don't know...maybe there are too many of them, but honoring the great GMs and owners seems a bit more directly tied to the product on the field.  If the anti-trust exemption was done away with tomorrow, that would have an impact on the level of anything Miller was involved with, but I'm not sure the laywers/judges/politicians should be HOF worthy.  They're just too apart from the game itself. 
 

Average Reds

Dope
Staff member
Dope
V&N Mod
SoSH Member
Sep 24, 2007
25,369
Southwestern CT
I know that we've (rightly) bashed Jon Heyman in this thread, and if what I am about to mention has already been noted I apologize. 
 
I clicked on MLB last night and was amused to see Heyman continuing to foam at the mouth about Jack Morris not getting elected.  What made it even better was observing the evolution of his core reason for thinking Morris deserved election - Heyman's observation that Morris received votes for the Cy Young Award in seven different seasons.  Not that he won the award (he never placed higher than third in any year) but that he was able to garner votes in seven different seasons.
 
The look on Brian Kenny's face as Heyman explained this was one of the most priceless things I have ever seen.
 

phrenile

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
8,942
Living off Hope
moondog80 said:
I don't know...maybe there are too many of them, but honoring the great GMs and owners seems a bit more directly tied to the product on the field.  If the anti-trust exemption was done away with tomorrow, that would have an impact on the level of anything Miller was involved with, but I'm not sure the laywers/judges/politicians should be HOF worthy.  They're just too apart from the game itself.
Kenesaw Mountain Landis was inducted. You could fairly draw the line somewhere after Miller but before the hotdog vendors.
 

terrisus

formerly: imgran
SoSH Member
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
 
Except that Marvin Miller - while an incredibly deserving inductee - stated he didn't want to be inducted 
 
http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/marvin-millers-legacy-and-the-decline-of-labor/
 
 
I feel like that was more because they ignored him for so long, and he didn't want to become a Jack Morris campaigning for his election, and figured that if they didn't recognize his importance, he didn't want to be associated with it anyway. If he had been elected when it first came up as a possibility, I doubt it would have been an issue.
 

Spacemans Bong

chapeau rose
SoSH Member
Miller's claim to not want induction was likely the product of sour grapes. He complained publicly about missing out induction on several occasions before speaking out.

That said, considering his candidacy being denied while Bowie fucking Kuhn sailed in, the Hall's right wing employees, and Miller's fury over steroids and how its users have been treated by the game, the media and the MLBPA, I guess you can't rule out him having a sincere change of heart.
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
 
They read LeBatard's column/statement/reasoning on the air multiple times in the 2 & 3 o'clock hours. 


Well then I gave them too much credit because at 5 pm they didn't seem to understand his reasoning. I thought it was pretty plainly laid out. I realize they have to create discussion, though.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
10,213
Ballots for globe writers:
 
Dan Shaughnessy: Glavine, Maddux, Morris, Schilling and Thomas.
 
Nick Cafardo: Bonds, Biggio, Clemens, Glavine, Kent, Maddux, Morris, Piazza, Thomas and Trammell
 
Peter Abraham: Bagwell, Biggio, Clemens, Glavine, Maddux, Mussina, Piazza, Raines, Schilling and Thomas
 
Bob Ryan: Bagwell, Biggio, Glavine, Maddux, Martinez, Morris, Piazza, Raines, Schilling, Thomas
 
Bob Hohler: Bagwell, Biggio, Glavine, Maddux, Piazza, Raines, Schilling and Thomas
 
Shaughnessy made a good point in his article today saying that the reason some people don't vote for Maddux was simply because they don't like the idea of someone getting 100% of the vote when guys like Willie Mays and Ted Williams didn't get it. Two wrongs make a right is their thinking.
 

BCsMightyJoeYoung

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 14, 2002
5,203
Halifax, Nova Scotia , Canada
Kliq said:
Ballots for globe writers:
 
Dan Shaughnessy: Glavine, Maddux, Morris, Schilling and Thomas.
 
Nick Cafardo: Bonds, Biggio, Clemens, Glavine, Kent, Maddux, Morris, Piazza, Thomas and Trammell
 
Peter Abraham: Bagwell, Biggio, Clemens, Glavine, Maddux, Mussina, Piazza, Raines, Schilling and Thomas
 
Bob Ryan: Bagwell, Biggio, Glavine, Maddux, Martinez, Morris, Piazza, Raines, Schilling, Thomas
 
Bob Hohler: Bagwell, Biggio, Glavine, Maddux, Piazza, Raines, Schilling and Thomas
 
Shaughnessy made a good point in his article today saying that the reason some people don't vote for Maddux was simply because they don't like the idea of someone getting 100% of the vote when guys like Willie Mays and Ted Williams didn't get it. Two wrongs make a right is their thinking.
 
I think there may have been some strategic voting going on as well - due to the 10 vote rule. Voters may have left him off knowing he was getting in anyways and didn't need their vote - so their was room to vote for their own personal binkie (J.T. Snow?????? Twice ??????????????)
 
How does Abraham rationalize voting for Clemens but not Bonds? Weird ..
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
10,213
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
 
I think there may have been some strategic voting going on as well - due to the 10 vote rule. Voters may have left him off knowing he was getting in anyways and didn't need their vote - so their was room to vote for their own personal binkie (J.T. Snow?????? Twice ??????????????)
 
How does Abraham rationalize voting for Clemens but not Bonds? Weird ..
 
I have no clue how someone can look at a ballot and vote for Jacque Jones, and another person can look at that same ballot and not vote for Craig Biggio or Bagwell. That more than anything is a bigger sign that this thing is screwed up.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
10,883
Maine
Le Betard kicked out of the BBWAA for one year and has had his HOF vote revoked for the Deadspin stunt.
 
Love this line...
The BBWAA regards Hall of Fame voting as the ultimate privilege, and any abuse of that privilege is unacceptable.
So handing his vote to an unauthorized person/body is abuse, but turning in a ballot with one name and it isn't one of the top five vote getters is a-okay.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
10,883
Maine
I think the process can be fixed in as few as two steps.
 
1) Remove the limit on votes per year.
 
2) Make all ballots public.
 
Sure, there are more drastic ways to "fix" things, but I think making every voter accountable for his/her choices would go a long way to taking out some of the idiocy.  It's telling that none of the jackasses who gave votes to Jacque Jones and Eric Gagne or JT Snow have the guts to make their votes public.  If they had to explain their ballot, maybe they'd leave those guys off and treat the vote respectfully.  And if they want to throw bones to guys like that because they treated them well in the clubhouse, the no limit vote means they're not taking votes away from guys like Bagwell, Biggio, Piazza, etc to throw those bones.
 

Kenny F'ing Powers

posts 18% useful shit
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2010
10,730
Spacemans Bong said:
Miller's claim to not want induction was likely the product of sour grapes. He complained publicly about missing out induction on several occasions before speaking out.

That said, considering his candidacy being denied while Bowie fucking Kuhn sailed in, the Hall's right wing employees, and Miller's fury over steroids and how its users have been treated by the game, the media and the MLBPA, I guess you can't rule out him having a sincere change of heart.
 
Oh...I think you can rule it out.
 

twothousandone

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 18, 2001
3,976
Subjectively avoiding the Veterans Committee selections and old-timers about whom I know nothing, to me, the line for pitchers is now between Don Sutton and Luis Tiant. You must be better than Tiant to get in, but only if you are better than Don Sutton can you be confident of getting in.(Which is insane, because if you are better than Tiant you already ARE better than Sutton.) I say Catfish Hunter was better than Sutton (but, of course, he wasn't better than Tiant.)
 
For batters, assuming Biggio gets in eventually, it is between Raines/Hodges and Tony Perez/Jim Rice  (and I know it had to be adjusted by position).
 
Hodges clearly doesn't cut it, and since there is no room to combine manager/player performance, he won't make it. I'd say Raines was better than Perez (but The Big Red machine is tough to fight). I think Rice is a bit more comfortable selection, but I know some disagree.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

All Hail King Boron
Dope
May 20, 2003
30,521
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Red(s)HawksFan said:
Le Betard kicked out of the BBWAA for one year and has had his HOF vote revoked for the Deadspin stunt.
 
Love this line...

So handing his vote to an unauthorized person/body is abuse, but turning in a ballot with one name and it isn't one of the top five vote getters is a-okay.
 
Exactly my thoughts. Le Batard said he did it because the process is flawed and wanted to give the fans a say. And that's the BBWAA's reaction? No wonder newspapers are dying.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
13,187
Deadspin's add-on is great.  And lets not forget who the BBWAA Prez is:  La Velle E. Neal III, who unilaterlaly re-wrote MVP eligibility rules by not voting for Pedro in 200 because he doesn't vote for pitchers even though they are eligible.
 
 
 
Le Batard did not accept money for his vote, only opened it up to fans. We've read their constitution, and there's no law against crowd-sourcing a ballot. (And Le Batard is not the only one to do that.) There's also no law against filling out a ballot just to antagonize bloggers, or against leaving names off to avoid a long Cooperstown ceremony, or against voting for a guy just to write a column about it, or against voting even though you're now a golf writer and haven't covered baseball in decades, or against being irredeemably stupid.
 
 

NortheasternPJ

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 16, 2004
13,266
Smiling Joe Hesketh said:
Exactly my thoughts. Le Batard said he did it because the process is flawed and wanted to give the fans a say. And that's the BBWAA's reaction? No wonder newspapers are dying.
No wonder everyone hates the BBWAA.
 

TheYaz67

Member
SoSH Member
May 21, 2004
4,712
Justia Omnibus
joe dokes said:
Deadspin's add-on is great.  And lets not forget who the BBWAA Prez is:  La Velle E. Neal III, who unilaterlaly re-wrote MVP eligibility rules by not voting for Pedro in 200 because he doesn't vote for pitchers even though they are eligible.
 
 
 
 
I so, so, so hope that Pedro in his induction ceremony speech manages to aim a veiled "fuck you" to Neal during that ceremony for that BS.....
 

Wily Mo Lester

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 26, 2007
365
Boston
TheYaz67 said:
 
I so, so, so hope that Pedro in his induction ceremony speech manages to aim a veiled "fuck you" to Neal during that ceremony for that BS.....
 
I'd rather Pedro rip the veil right off and give Neal the full Zimmer, personally.
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
13,187
TheYaz67 said:
 
I so, so, so hope that Pedro in his induction ceremony speech manages to aim a veiled "fuck you" to Neal during that ceremony for that BS.....
 
Given Pedro's command of English lanuage nuance, I'd like to see fulsome, over-the-top praise of the BBWAA President that no one actually believes, but that no one can say with certainty he didn't mean.
 

DanoooME

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Mar 16, 2008
15,712
South Jersey
I'd love to see someone decline the honor because the election process is shit.  Too bad that will never happen.
 

terrisus

formerly: imgran
SoSH Member
joe dokes said:
Deadspin's add-on is great.  And lets not forget who the BBWAA Prez is:  La Velle E. Neal III, who unilaterlaly re-wrote MVP eligibility rules by not voting for Pedro in 200 because he doesn't vote for pitchers even though they are eligible.
 
 
Yeah, I commented about it in the Media forum when that announcement was made, but, it's impossible to take an organization seriously when they have LaVelle E. Neal III as their president. What a joke that guy is. And definitely the last person who should be talking to anyone about how they interpret rules or choose to vote. So very hypocritical.
 
(Side note: 1999 was the year at issue with Pedro. Due to decisions like that though, he got even fewer votes in 2000, finishing 5th, despite an absolutely incredible season. Also, this further highlights how absurd it is to use placement on awards like the MVP when considering HoF voting. Yeah, Pedro never won an MVP - gee, I wonder why...)
 

Al Zarilla

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2005
50,128
San Andreas Fault
Mike Greenwall said:
After this week, I'm not convinced Pedro gets in next year.
I mentioned that some will leave him off because he had "only" 219 wins and, you know, wins are still it with some writers, but, are you serious?
 

Spacemans Bong

chapeau rose
SoSH Member
Unfortunately, I think Neal won't be president in 2015. I think the presidency changes every year.
 
Not that Pedro shouldn't ask Neal and George King to suck his balls on stage, since he's a Hall of Famer with a ring who can light cigars with more money than those two clowns make in a year.
 

czar

fanboy
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
4,149
Ann Arbor
Red(s)HawksFan said:
I think the process can be fixed in as few as two steps.
 
1) Remove the limit on votes per year.
 
2) Make all ballots public.
 
Sure, there are more drastic ways to "fix" things, but I think making every voter accountable for his/her choices would go a long way to taking out some of the idiocy.  It's telling that none of the jackasses who gave votes to Jacque Jones and Eric Gagne or JT Snow have the guts to make their votes public.  If they had to explain their ballot, maybe they'd leave those guys off and treat the vote respectfully.  And if they want to throw bones to guys like that because they treated them well in the clubhouse, the no limit vote means they're not taking votes away from guys like Bagwell, Biggio, Piazza, etc to throw those bones.
 
Making ballots public might quell some stupidity, but there remains a faction of writers who deliberately publish their ballot to draw clicks/eyeballs/whatever. Look at how people have been lynched on Twitter (in some cases, it's been entirely too over the top, as well) the last few years. That hasn't stopped guys like Gurnick or Morrissey.
 

Fishercat

Svelte and sexy!
SoSH Member
May 18, 2007
6,019
Manchester, N.H.
czar said:
 
Making ballots public might quell some stupidity, but there remains a faction of writers who deliberately publish their ballot to draw clicks/eyeballs/whatever. Look at how people have been lynched on Twitter (in some cases, it's been entirely too over the top, as well) the last few years. That hasn't stopped guys like Gurnick or Morrissey.
 
The data makes either a compelling argument that there is a substantial, non-attention-whoring difference between public and private ballots or that the people who post public ballots are more likely to have a progressive mindset
 
http://www.baseballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=22531
 

Yaz4Ever

stumps for Trump
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
BCsMightyJoeYoung said:
 
I think there may have been some strategic voting going on as well - due to the 10 vote rule. Voters may have left him off knowing he was getting in anyways and didn't need their vote - so their was room to vote for their own personal binkie (J.T. Snow?????? Twice ??????????????)
 
How does Abraham rationalize voting for Clemens but not Bonds? Weird ..
I was thinking the exact same thing
 

smastroyin

simpering whimperer
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2002
20,684
I think the argument would be that the strongest suspicion is that clemens only started after his injuries in 93 or 95, or perhaps not until he reached Toronto out the Yankees. Either way he had established hof cred if not longevity already. Whereas bonds is generally accepted to have been using for the majority of his career.

I don't agree and both would have made my ballot, but I presume the reasoning is something like that.
 

Rustjive

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2009
896
Yaz4Ever said:
I was thinking the exact same thing
Both his and Cafardo's ballot had 10 names. It could be just that Clemens/Bonds were both their 10th choice, so one had to be left off.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
10,883
Maine
smastroyin said:
I think the argument would be that the strongest suspicion is that clemens only started after his injuries in 93 or 95, or perhaps not until he reached Toronto out the Yankees. Either way he had established hof cred if not longevity already. Whereas bonds is generally accepted to have been using for the majority of his career.

I don't agree and both would have made my ballot, but I presume the reasoning is something like that.
 
Yeah, that's probably the rationale Abraham might espouse, but isn't the consensus that Bonds started the juicing in reaction to the McGwire/Sosa race ?  Splitting his career at that point (after 1998), the first half of his career gives him as strong a case as Clemens has based solely on his Red Sox years...411 HR, 164 OPS+, 3 MVP, 8 Gold Gloves.
 
I think Rustjive may have it though...they're 10th/11th on his ballot so only one got on.