Who on this year's Hall of Fame ballot do you expect to be elected today? Eddie Murray is the only shoo-in. I'd call Ryne Sandberg fairly likely, with Gary Carter right on the 75% cusp this year.

All three of those would get my vote, along with Blyleven (as underrated a candidate as Jack Morris is overrated), Gossage, Hernandez and Trammell.

I agree that Murray is a sure shot for the Hall but I think Kid Carter has a better shot this year than Ryne Sanderg, though he deserves to be in the Hall as well. A player I would like to see inducted is Dale Murphy.

What baffles me is the focus on "getting in on the first ballot." Whether a player is inducted in his first year of eligibility or third, or is voted in by the Veteran's Committee, he's still in the Hall of Fame. It's not like there's a separate wing for those who didn't make it in their first year of eligibilty and their plaques don't have asterisks by them.

~Adam

No argument with those choices, although I think if Hernandez and Gossage are viable choices, you'd have to consider Sutter and Garvey as well - without checking their stats, it seems they'd have to be comparable, if not better.

Sutter is comparable to Gossage, but didn't pitch for nearly as long. There is still no standard for admitting the New Breed of Relief Ace to the HOF; I think Rollie Fingers is the only post-Hoyt Wilhelm member. Goose has the best case in his group, which includes Sutter and Lee Smith -- until Dennis Eckersley becomes eligible next year.

Keith Hernandez might be my most marginal choice, but to me his brilliant defensive play -- fortified by his off-the-charts fielding stats -- puts him in. He also has a better offensive case than Steve Garvey: Mex's career on-base pct leads Garvey by a whopping FIFTY-FIVE points, and Keith's slugging pct trails the Big Dodger Phony by only 10 points... Garvey did chalk up a 1.000 "fielding average" for the '84 Padres -- it's harder to make an error when you can't move off the bag!

I'm going to be a contrarian here (big shock, eh?) and put out the idea that NONE of these guys are Hall-worthy. OK, maybe Eddie Murray, but the others? No way.

I think in some cases that the selection process is simply based on artifical ceilings: get 3,000 hits or 300 wins and you're automatically in. I mean, I watched Don Sutton pitch for the Dodgers and he was NEVER a staff leader; he was a solid #2/#3 guy but he's in, almost solely because he won 300 games just by hanging around a long time. Players don't hang 'em up at 32 like they used to--better care of the body/'roids prolong careers until guys are in their 40's now.

I once read that the criteria for inclusion in the Hall is that a player towers above the competition at his position during the time he plays. I don't see that with any of the names being put out here. I remember that for years, there was talk that Nolan Ryan wasn't worthy because he had a lot of walks! That said, he got in with 98% of the vote.

I loved Steve Garvey and would have sex with him in a heartbeat, but he doesn't belong in the Hall. No way.

[ January 07, 2003: Message edited by: Jim Allen ]

the hall of fame lets ANYBODY in nowadays! i think it should be way more exclusive, but i'm a traditionalist at heart.

Only Murray and Carter got in this year. Here's how the voting went:

Eddie Murray 423 85.3%
Gary Carter 387 78.0%
Bruce Sutter 266 53.6%
Jim Rice 259 52.2%
A. Dawson 248 50.0%
Ryne Sandberg 248 49.2%
Lee Smith 210 42.3%
Rich Gossage 209 42.1%

I would have thought Murray would have received more support, but I guess some sportswriters still carry a grudge. Makes you wonder if any of them will be ridiculous enough to not vote for Barry Bonds when his turn comes. I'm not comparing Murray to Bonds statistically, rather their image and perception with the media.

[ January 07, 2003: Message edited by: George_vikingfan ]

[quote]Originally posted by faydman:
the hall of fame lets ANYBODY in nowadays! i think it should be way more exclusive, but i'm a traditionalist at heart.

---

fayd, I'd say this is true about other sports' Halls of Fame. Hell, the NFL inducts everyone but their grandpa into their Hall. Without a doubt, baseball is the toughest into which to be inducted.

Perhaps this says something positive about how it regards its history. That, of course, is open to debate.

Who, specifically, has the BBWAA voted in recently that was a mistake? The only dubious honoree of late was Kirby Puckett, but he certainly wasn't as terrible as many of the gift inductions perpetrated by the Veterans' Committee in the '60s and '70s.

Jim Allen, how can you consider Carter and Sandberg below-HOF quality? The only retired catchers from the last 40 years who can stand with Carter are Bench and Fisk, and Ryno (whose low level of support shocks me) was the premier 2B in his league most of his career. (Plus the position is underrepresented in the Hall -- Bobby Grich has a good case too.)

Kid's in the Hall!

One question remains: which cap will Gary Carter wear at his induction ceremony? This is the first year that the decision rests in the hands of MLB brass. Carter had his best years, played in more games, won more Gold Gloves and was an All Star more times as a member of the Montreal Expos, although he did win a World Series in a Mets uniform. In my (biased) opinion the decision seems obvious, but you never know what might go on in the minds of the MLB braintrust. If Carter is inducted as a representative of the Expos it would be a first, and leave at least some trace in Cooperstown of a 30+ year old franchise that appears to be headed for San Juan, DC, or oblivion.

Today, Carter joked that MLB might decide to "split the hat - half Expos, half Mets." Well, he's no comedian, but his smile remains infectious and boy, could he play ball.

I would hope that Carter enters the Hall as an Expo. When I think of that franchise, I think of three players from those 80's teams who could all be argued as HOF candidates: Carter, Andre Dawson, and Tim Raines.

I'm very disappointed that Sandberg's vote totals were not higher, but I think he'll get in 2-3 years from now. Sutter's total was higher than Gossage? Travesty in my book. Can't argue with Murray as the leader of the class of 2003, and I hope he will be enshrined as an Oriole.

There is a great article on ESPN's website by John Stark talking about the lack of respect in voting for the 80's players. I'm not so sure about some of his ballot choices but at least he makes some convincing arguments for players that are overlooked because the 80's was such a decade of change in the game. Most of my childhood was watching baseball in that decade, so I have a special place in my heart for the Dale Murphys, Bruce Sutters, Jack Morrises, etc. Do they all belong in the HOF? No, but I think we'll see Sandberg, Lee Smith (Mr. Save, before they became the meaningless stat they are today), Jim Kaat (one of the best defensive pitchers ever), Goose Gossage (plain intimidation), and Andre Dawson enshrined eventually.

[quote]Originally posted by MSUBulldog:
I would hope that Carter enters the Hall as an Expo. When I think of that franchise, I think of three players from those 80's teams who could all be argued as HOF candidates: Carter, Andre Dawson, and Tim Raines.
Can't argue with Murray as the leader of the class of 2003, and I hope he will be enshrined as an Oriole. [QUOTE]

---

Kudos to Gary and Eddie for receiving such well deserved recognition (which, in the case of Carter, is several years overdue)....as Seph and Bulldog stated, I will be extremely disappointed if Gary's plaque doesn't include an EXPOS cap -- not to raise any conspiracy theories but with the decision now completely OUT of the hands of the player (thanks to Dave Winfield lining his pockets with Padres cash in exchange for an "SD" on his plaque ) if Gary Carter goes into Cooperstown as a Met and not an Expo, they ought to check Selig's phone records to find transcripts of some very suspicious conversations.

On to better subjects, I too would like to see Andre Dawson in the Hall along with Dale Murphy....the latter won TWO N.L. MVP awards while playing for consistently AWFUL Braves teams (how many fans even remember those days of last place finishes and dreadful attendance at old Fulton County Stadium in light of Atlanta's dominance during the 90s?) and Murphy definitely deserves FAR more recognition that he has received to date from the BBWAA.

I can't argue too vehemently against any of the other non-inductees this year but some holdovers who are "on the fence" had better hope to be enshrined before 2007 when Ripken, McGwire, and Gwynn will all appear on the ballot for the first time....I've had the pleasure of attending two H.O.F. induction ceremonies (the last one being three years ago when Ryan, Yount, and Brett all received worthy first-ballot induction) and I will definitely be in Cooperstown again in three years (if not sooner) to see that immortal class enshrined.

In regard to your final query, Bulldog, were you being intentionally sarcastic?....while Eddie Murray may have finished his career with brief stops in a few other cities (most notably Cleveland and LA) he will ALWAYS be an Oriole....I spent many enjoyable summer days at old Memorial Stadium on 33rd street in Baltimore enamored at Eddie's hitting prowess, particularly in the late innings with the game on the line -- I can honestly say that are few, if any, other players that I have seen that performed better IN THE CLUTCH.

Congrats Eddie and Gary! -- although their personalities were as different as two athletes could possibly be, they both brought immense pleasure to millions of fans with their style of play and dedication to the game and richly deserve to be included among the immortals of our National Pasttime.

[ January 07, 2003: Message edited by: gamecock ]

[quote]Jim Allen, how can you consider Carter and Sandberg below-HOF quality?

---

You know, I realized something while reading this thread. A lot of it has to do with the fact that I didn't SEE a lot of the pre-70's players in action; they take on sort of a mythic quality that way. I *do* remember Carter and Sandberg though and *shrugs* I always thought that Carter was overrated because he played in the New York hype zone for a portion of his career (the same one that was ready to annoint Shane Spencer a GOD after a good September in his rookie year but ignores great players like Garrett Anderson or Torii Hunter) and I guess I'm less inclined towards Sandberg because of his "I quit. Oh wait. No, only kidding!!!" handling of his "retirement". It's not a cold, hard reading of stats and all, but there it is. [quote]Who, specifically, has the BBWAA voted in recently that was a mistake?

---

Don Sutton. A solid, journeyman pitcher who strung 20 years of going 15-11* together to get 300 wins which = automatic enshrinement.

* Please don't bother writing back "But he went 19-9 in 1974!!" Here's his stats if you *really* must know. Note the solitary 20-win season and the plethora of 13-15 win seasons. Good but not worthy of The Hall, IMHO.

When does spring training start again? I can't wait for baseball to begin again with some semblence of labor peace in place.

Perhaps Carter was overexposed in the NY segment of his career, but 300+ homers as a catcher isn't the product of hype... and Sandberg has the *most* at 2B all-time.

Let's not elevate Torii Hunter to greatness yet; he hasn't proven he's better than Johnny Damon. Garret Anderson *could* be a great player if he doubled (at least) his walk total from last year's 30.

Labor "peace" there may be, but if Jose Hernandez can't get an offer of more than $2 million per, I smell another strain of COLLUSION...

This column makes the case that Ryne Sandberg should have been voted in.

A sports columnist on the sports news was making a point how FAME plays a part in who gets selected (or even considered) for the Hall of Fame. He compares Ozzie Smith's (first ballot) numbers with Alan Trammell (not considered) and debates if fame is a relative criteria.

OSmith
2460 hits, .262 batting avg., 28 HR, 793 RBI, 580 SB, .978 fielding pct., plus multiple gold gloves

ATrammell
2765 hits, .285 batting avg., 185 HR, 1003 RBI, 236 SB, .976 fielding pct.

One could also compare the numbers of Mark McGwire, with 2 quieter first basemen, Fred McGriff and Raphael Palmeiro, both likely to join the 500 club this season.

MMcGwire
1626 hits, .263 batting avg., 583 HR, 1414 RBI

FMcGriff (still active)
2403 hits, .286 batting avg., 478 HR, 1503 RBI

RPalmeiro (still active)
2634 hits, .293 batting avg., 490 HR, 1575 RBI

EMurray (first ballot)
3255 hits, .287 batting avg., 504 HR, 1917 RBI

Other players mentioned above (and comparisons):

RSandberg
2386 hits, .285 batting avg., 282 HR, 344 SB, 1061 RBI

compare with RAlomar (still active)
2546 hits, .304 batting avg., 201 HR, 462 SB, 1071 RBI

GCarter
2092 hits, .262 batting avg., 324 HR, 1225 RBI

ADawson
2774 hits, .279 batting avg., 438 HR, 314 SB, 1591 RBI

DMurphy
2111 hits, .265 batting avg., 398 HR, 1266 RBI

KPucket
2304 hits, .318 batting avg., 207 HR, 1085 RBI

JCanseco
1877 hits, .266 batting avg., 462 HR, 200 SB, 1407 RBI

[ January 09, 2003: Message edited by: canmark ]

[ January 09, 2003: Message edited by: canmark ]

[ January 09, 2003: Message edited by: canmark ]

The odd thing is that when it comes to non-pitchers, the public (and the writers) seem to revere players who pile up "counting stats," i.e. career hits, homers and RBIs. *Rate* stats, including the more "sabermetric" stats of on-base and slugging pcts., are still stepchildren. Mark McGwire compiled his numbers in many less games than McGriff or Palmeiro will arrive at. (McGriff isn't a HOFer to me, and neither is Mark Grace.) McGwire was the greatest slugger in the game for 4-5 years, and would merit induction for similar reasons Sandy Koufax did -- a stunning peak, as opposed to 15-20 years of consistency.

Yet for pitchers -- unless they hit "300" in wins -- being very good for a very long time doesn't seem to get enshrinement, so Blyleven, Kaat and Tommy John remain outside the HOF despite superior careers to early 20th-century Hall members.

Good points Bill W, which is exactly why Sutton was enshrined. And I think rightly so. There are two ways that I think players should get into the Hall of Fame: longevity with above-average numbers that put a player at/above certain milestones (HR's, hits, wins, etc.) or a career in which they might have been at the top or dominated their peers even though they might not have hit those milestones (the Kirby Puckett category).

I remember the terrible Braves years, because I always watched them on the Superstation. Murphy was a great player, but I think maybe it was for too few years to make the HOF. Andre Dawson, who had a little better numbers, had more longevity and possibly could make it someday.

I think when Dennis Eckersley makes the HOF, that might open the door for Lee Smith and Goose Gossage to finally get in as their stats are recognized as relievers. Sutter had too short a career to be up there with the other two, and I'm surprised he is the one getting more votes.

Sandberg in 2004! Sandberg in 2004!

Including Ozzie's batting stats in a comparison is a red herring of an argument. In his thirties he became a good offensive shortstop, but his real value is that he was possibly the best defensive player of all time.

According to this, Gary Carter wants to go into the Hall of Fame as a Met. Boo!

[quote]``I'll stand by whatever they decide, but there's something special about New York,'' Carter told The (Westchester, N.Y.) Journal News on Thursday. ``There's no question, I consider myself a Met.''
The 11-time All-Star catcher was elected to the Hall of Tuesday and will be inducted in July. Though Carter spent 11 of his 19 major league seasons with Montreal, he helped the Mets win the 1986 World Series and now works for the team as an instructor.

...

But the Expos' future is in doubt, and that's thrown doubt into Carter's mind.

``What if the Expos are no longer in existence after this year? What good does that do me?'' he said. ``I hope the Hall of Fame will understand where I'm coming from.''

---

How the voting went:

496 votes cast; 372 needed; x-elected
x-Eddie Murray 423, x-Gary Carter 387, Bruce Sutter 266, Jim Rice 259, Andre Dawson 248, Ryne Sandberg 244, Lee Smith 210, Rich Gossage 209, Bert Blyleven 145, Steve Garvey 138, Jim Kaat 130, Tommy John 116, Jack Morris 113, Alan Trammell 70, Don Mattingly 68, Dale Murphy 58, Dave Concepcion 55, Dave Parker 51, Fernando Valenzuela 31, Keith Hernandez 30, Darryl Kile 7, Vince Coleman 3, Brett Butler 2, Sid Fernandez 2, Rick Honeycutt 2, Tony Pena 2, Darren Daulton 1, Mark Davis 1, Danny Tartabull 1, Danny Jackson 0, Mickey Tettleton 0, Mitch Williams 0, Todd Worrell 0.

Kaat, Kile, Coleman, Butler, Fernandez, Honeycutt, Pena, Daulton, Davis, Tartabull, Jackson, Tettleton, Williams and Worrell are no longer eligible for election by the Baseball Writers' Association of America.

[quote]Originally posted by canmark:
How the voting went:

496 votes cast; Darryl Kile 7, Vince Coleman 3, Brett Butler 2, Sid Fernandez 2, Rick Honeycutt 2, Tony Pena 2, Darren Daulton 1, Mark Davis 1, Danny Tartabull 1

---

This is what is so wrong and subjective about the entire process. I'm going to just assume Kile's votes were to honor a man who died during the season who was a very reliable pitcher and a good teammate. I'm also going to assume that these 7 writers won't vote this way next year.

As for the others, come on! How seriously are we suppossed to take a vote for Danny Tartabull or Sid Fernandez?

[quote]Originally posted by JC:
Including Ozzie's batting stats in a comparison is a red herring of an argument. In his thirties he became a good offensive shortstop, but his real value is that he was possibly the best defensive player of all time.

---

In Ozzie's day, middle infielders weren't expected to do much with the stick. But in today's game, a glove man like Rey Ordonez is almost and anomaly. Omar Vizquel, the American League multi-gold glover has offensive stats superior to the Wiz. And look at the numbers put up by ARod, Garciapara, Jeter, etc.

Similarly, Ryne Sandberg was an offensive star at second base, but now his numbers are unimpressive compared to the likes of Soriano, Kent, Alomar.

Will the standards have to be raised, as 100+ RBI and 30+ HR seasons become commonplace? The aforementioned Fred McGriff, for example, will likely end his career with over 500 HRs, and everyone with over 500 HRs is in the Hall of Fame. Is the Crime Dog a Hall of Famer?