Beltré, Helton, and Mauer Make it a Trio for Cooperstown

Jennifer Buchanan-USA TODAY Sports

The following article is part of Jay Jaffe’s ongoing look at the candidates on the BBWAA 2024 Hall of Fame ballot. For a detailed introduction to this year’s ballot, and other candidates in the series, use the tool above; an introduction to JAWS can be found here. For a tentative schedule, see here. All WAR figures refer to the Baseball-Reference version unless otherwise indicated.

Add a few more chairs to the dais. For the first time since 2020, BBWAA voters have elected multiple players to the Hall of Fame — three, in fact. Not only was Adrián Beltré elected as expected, with a hefty 95.1% of the vote, but fellow first-year candidate Joe Mauer and holdover Todd Helton cleared the 75% bar as well, making this the largest class since 2019 and the sixth of this millennium with more than two candidates elected. Though it appeared possible that Billy Wagner could join them, producing the fourth quartet of the past decade and the seventh class of more than three since the institution’s inception in 1936, he missed by just five votes.

While Beltré’s election was a foregone conclusion given that he received 216 out of 218 votes from among those published in Ryan Thibodaux’s indispensable Ballot Tracker prior to the announcement, the outcomes for Mauer (83.5% in the Tracker), Helton (82.6%) and Wagner (78.4%) all carried varying degrees of suspense up to the point when Hall president Josh Rawitch announced the results on Tuesday evening. Mauer’s high share of votes from among the “small Hall” ballots appeared to make his election a strong likelihood, but neither Helton nor Wagner had generated the volume of flipped votes — from no to yes — from among those public ballots that would have reduced their amount of uncertainty. In a pre-election forecast delivered Tuesday afternoon on MLB Now, Jason Sardell — whose probabilistic model has been the industry’s most accurate for the past several cycles — projected Mauer with a 99.9% chance of election, Helton with “about a 90% chance” (up from 71% Monday night), and Wagner with “about a one-in-four chance” (up from 18% Monday night).

Beltré and Mauer, who received 76.1% of the actual vote, are the first pair of first-year candidates to be elected on the same ballot since Mariano Rivera and Roy Halladay in 2019. Helton, who fell just 11 votes short of election last year while receiving 72.2%, received 79.7% of the actual vote, making it with 18 votes to spare. Wagner, who received 68.1% last year, climbed to 73.8% this year; he has one more year of eligibility remaining, and appears likely to join Tim Raines, Edgar Martinez, and Larry Walker in the annals of recent candidates elected in their 10th and final year of eligibility.

Not joining that list, alas, is Gary Sheffield, who made the second-largest jump of the cycle by climbing from 55% last year to 63.9% this year, his final one on the writers’ ballot. Two other candidates topped 50%, a strong indication of future election, namely Andruw Jones (61.6% in his seventh year of eligibility) and Carlos Beltrán (57.1% in his second year).

The trio of honorees is a welcome change from the recent past. Last year, voters elected only Scott Rolen, and barely at that, with just 76.2%. The year before that, David Ortiz flew solo, and in 2021, nobody got in at all via the writers’ ballot. Driven by a strong crop of first-time candidates — including not only Beltré and Mauer but also Chase Utley, who’s 12th in JAWS among second basemen but received a sluggish 28.8% in his debut, and David Wright, who retained his eligibility by receiving 6.2% — this election had more in common with those from 2014-20, when the writers elected 22 players over a seven-year span.

You Aren't a FanGraphs Member
It looks like you aren't yet a FanGraphs Member (or aren't logged in). We aren't mad, just disappointed.
We get it. You want to read this article. But before we let you get back to it, we'd like to point out a few of the good reasons why you should become a Member.
1. Ad Free viewing! We won't bug you with this ad, or any other.
2. Unlimited articles! Non-Members only get to read 10 free articles a month. Members never get cut off.
3. Dark mode and Classic mode!
4. Custom player page dashboards! Choose the player cards you want, in the order you want them.
5. One-click data exports! Export our projections and leaderboards for your personal projects.
6. Remove the photos on the home page! (Honestly, this doesn't sound so great to us, but some people wanted it, and we like to give our Members what they want.)
7. Even more Steamer projections! We have handedness, percentile, and context neutral projections available for Members only.
8. Get FanGraphs Walk-Off, a customized year end review! Find out exactly how you used FanGraphs this year, and how that compares to other Members. Don't be a victim of FOMO.
9. A weekly mailbag column, exclusively for Members.
10. Help support FanGraphs and our entire staff! Our Members provide us with critical resources to improve the site and deliver new features!
We hope you'll consider a Membership today, for yourself or as a gift! And we realize this has been an awfully long sales pitch, so we've also removed all the other ads in this article. We didn't want to overdo it.

What follows here are a few quick take-home points from the electoral results. I’ll have a candidate-by-candidate breakdown in my next installment.

Adrián’s Ascent

Whether it was the third baseman’s combination of 3,166 hits and 477 homers, or his number two ranking in fielding runs and number four ranking in JAWS, Beltré had qualifications that appealed to both old-school and new-school voters alike. While his four All-Star Game selections and five Gold Gloves felt a bit light for a typical Hall of Famer, those low totals reflect the way that perceptions of him changed over time. During the first 12 years of his 21-year major league career, spent in pitcher-friendly parks in Los Angeles and Seattle, Beltré never made an All-Star team, won only two Gold Gloves, and had just one obvious standout season, an incredible 48-homer, 9.6-WAR walk year in 2004. Once he moved to more hitter-friendly environments in Boston and Texas while maturing as a hitter, the breadth of his skill set was more greatly appreciated. And whether it was video clips of his diving stops, his towering home runs, or his antics with his teammates, social media played a role during the latter stretch, helping him become one of the game’s most respected and even beloved players.

All of that combined to elevate Beltré to the point where even a single voter leaving him off a published ballot was cause for an outcry on social media. He didn’t fare as well on the unpublished ballots (89.8%), but his share of the vote was still the second highest from among the 14 players born outside of the United States who were elected via the regular BBWAA process. That count does not include Roberto Clemente, who was honored via a special election in the wake of his untimely death in 1972, but it does include others from Puerto Rico, an unincorporated U.S. territory:

Highest BBWAA Voting Percentages
Among Players Born Outside the United States
Rk Name Birthplace Year Votes % of Ballots
1 Mariano Rivera Panama, PAN 2019 425 100.0%
2 Adrián Beltré Santo Domingo, DOM 2024 366 95.1%
3 Vladimir Guerrero Nizao, DOM 2018 392 92.9%
4 Pedro Martinez Manoguayabo, DOM 2015 500 91.1%
5 Rod Carew Gatun, PAN 1991 401 90.5%
6 Roberto Alomar Ponce, PRI 2011 523 90.0%
7 Luis Aparicio Maracaibo, VEN 1984 341 84.6%
8 Juan Marichal Laguna Verde, DOM 1983 313 83.7%
9 Bert Blyleven Zeist, NLD 2011 463 79.7%
10 David Ortiz Santo Domingo, DOM 2022 307 77.9%
11 Tony Perez Camaguey, CUB 2000 385 77.2%
12 Larry Walker Maple Ridge, BC 2020 304 76.6%
13 Ivan Rodriguez Manati, PRI 2017 336 76.0%
14 Fergie Jenkins Chatham, ON 1991 334 75.4%
SOURCE: Baseball-Reference

Beltré, the first native of the Dominican Republic to reach 3,000 hits, is the fifth from the tiny country to be elected to the Hall, after Marichal, Martinez, Guerrero and Ortiz. If his lofty placement on this list seems odd, it’s hardly inappropriate given that for a period from 2018–22, he had the highest hit total of any player born outside the U.S., until Albert Pujols surpassed him. Next year, Ichiro Suzuki, whom Beltré supplanted on the foreign-born hit list, could eclipse him in these rankings.

It’s Catching, Finally

When it comes to evaluating the position that may be the most important on the diamond and is certainly the most physically demanding, BBWAA voters have dropped the ball again and again. Prior to this year, they had elected just two catchers in their first year of eligibility, an embarrassing track record even if one doesn’t get too wrapped up in the “first ballot” distinction. Between their constraints on playing time and their susceptibility to injury, catchers’ offensive stats tend to be suppressed, which puts them at significant disadvantages when they’re compared to other position players. The comparatively recent introduction of pitch framing metrics helps to close some of the gaps when it comes to value, but it also limits the scope of historical comparisons.

Here’s a look at the rude treatment these catchers have received from the writers:

BBWAA Voters Not Catching On
JAWS Rk Name Career WAR Peak WAR JAWS H HR OPS+ Ballots Yrs After
1 Johnny Bench 75.1 47.2 61.2 2048 389 126 1 6
2 Gary Carter 70.1 48.4 59.3 2092 324 115 6 11
3 Ivan Rodriguez 68.7 39.8 54.3 2844 311 106 1 6
4 Carlton Fisk 68.4 37.5 53.0 2356 376 117 2 7
5 Mike Piazza 59.5 43.1 51.3 2127 427 143 4 9
6 Yogi Berra 59.5 38.0 48.7 2150 358 125 2 7
7 Joe Mauer 55.2 39.0 47.1 2123 143 124 1 6
8 Bill Dickey 56.3 35.4 45.9 1969 202 127 9* 8
9 Mickey Cochrane 49.7 36.6 43.2 1652 119 129 6* 10
10 Gabby Hartnett 55.4 30.6 43.0 1912 236 126 11* 14
17 Roy Campanella 42.0 35.0 38.5 1422 232 125 5 12
SOURCE: Baseball-Reference
* includes ballots prior to 1955, before the five-year wait rule was in effect. Years with multiple ballots (i.e., with run-off or nominating stage) only counted once. Prior to 1966, balloting was sometimes conducted annually, biennially, or triennially.

Berra, a three-time MVP, 10-time champion, and 18-time All-Star, needed to wait an extra year for election, as did Fisk, an 11-time All-Star who held the record for games caught until Rodriguez came along. Piazza, a 12-time All-Star who stands as the best-hitting catcher in AL/NL history, needed four years, though PED allegations played a role in that delay. Dickey, an 11-time All-Star and eight-time champion, received votes in nine elections (not counting runoffs), though to be fair, that tally began before the five-year waiting period was established; he was elected in what would have been his third year of eligibility by modern rules. Cochrane, a two-time MVP whose career ended in 1937, the year after the first Hall election, wasn’t elected until a decade later. Campanella, another three-time MVP, needed five ballots, not including runoffs.

As to why Mauer broke through despite his having to move out from behind the plate for his final five years due to concussions and their aftereffects, he had a uniquely impressive resumé. Not only did he win an MVP award and three Gold Gloves while making six All-Star teams, he won three of the eight batting titles ever claimed by a catcher (Ernie Lombardi is the only other repeat winner), two of the four on-base titles (Cochrane had the other two), and the only slash-stat Triple Crown. Despite catching only 921 games, his seven-year peak score — all from his years as a catcher — ranks fifth at the position behind only Carter, Bench, Piazza, and Rodriguez. Add to that the easy hook of his being the number one draft pick who made good in his hometown, and who had an exceptionally wholesome reputation (he endorsed milk!), and you can understand why he might stand out in a field that has its share of PED users, sign stealers, and domestic abusers.

Like the election of Edgar Martinez while Ortiz’s candidacy loomed, Mauer may have benefited from something of a reverse coattail effect. Buster Posey, who won’t be eligible until the 2027 ballot, had an even shorter career than Mauer, with over 2,000 fewer plate appearances and just 1,500 career hits. Yet he packed so much into that career — seven All-Star appearances, three championships, a Gold Glove, MVP and Rookie of the Year awards — before retiring to spend time with his family, a decision in which the effects of multiple concussions likely loomed large. Explicitly or implicitly, some voters tabbed Mauer with an eye towards supporting Posey down the road.

Big Comebacks, Continued

A five-time All-Star, three-time Gold Glove winner, and slash-stat Triple Crown winner, Helton was an exceptional hitter who served as the face of the Rockies franchise. He put up very big — and yes, Coors-inflated — numbers in the first half of his career, but his overall production still measures up once we adjust for his park and league scoring environment. He no doubt benefited from the 2020 election of Walker, his teammate in Colorado from 1997–2004. Injuries caused him to fade away, as he had just one good season out of his last four, but his peak score ranks 10th among first basemen, nearly five wins above the standard, and he’s about nine to 15 points above the recently elected Gil Hodges, Fred McGriff, and Ortiz in JAWS.

For as inevitable as Helton’s election seemed given last year’s showing, it was anything but a foregone conclusion when he received just 16.5% in 2019, his first year of eligibility. At that point in time, no candidate debuting with a share that low had ever been elected by the writers. Last year, Rolen became the first:

Lowest First-Year Voting Percentages
of BBWAA-Elected Players
Player Year % Year Elected YoB
Scott Rolen 2018 10.2% 2023 6
Todd Helton 2019 16.5% 2024 6
Duke Snider 1970 17.0% 1980 11
Bert Blyleven 1998 17.5% 2011 14
Larry Walker 2011 20.31% 2020 10
Mike Mussina 2014 20.32% 2019 6
For players who debuted on ballot in 1966 or later.

Wagner (10.5% in 2016) very nearly joined that list as well. Which brings us to the next topic…

Close Calls, For Better or Worse

The holder of the all-time records for strikeout rate and opponent batting average, albeit at just a 900-inning threshold, Wagner has made an incredible climb from his humble origins, both in real life — growing up in poverty, and learning to throw with his left arm because of repeated fractures of his right — and on Hall ballots. As I noted heading into this cycle, of the 30 candidates receiving between 65% and 70% of the vote since 1966 and still having eligibility remaining, 14 were elected the next year, and 21 within two years.

Wagner’s share of the vote in his early years on the ballot was suppressed by the presence of a slew of other strong candidates, including relievers Rivera and Trevor Hoffman. The latter, who held the all-time saves record from 2006–11 until Rivera toppled his mark, debuted on the ballot in the same year as Wagner but with the easy hook of that record far outpolled him, with 67.3%. The next year, he missed election by just five votes, while Rodriguez made it by just four votes, as noted becoming the first catcher after Bench to be elected on the first ballot. Sound familiar?

Players Within 5 Votes of Election Since 1966
Player Year Votes % Margin
Billy Wagner 2024 284 73.8% -5
Trevor Hoffman 2017 327 74.0% -5
Bert Blyleven 2010 400 74.2% -5
Billy Williams 1986 315 74.1% -4
Jim Bunning 1988 317 74.2% -4
Nellie Fox 1985 295 74.7% -2
Craig Biggio 2014 427 74.8% -2
Fergie Jenkins 1991 334 75.4% 1
Ralph Kiner 1975 273 75.4% 1
Early Wynn 1972 301 76.0% 3
Ivan Rodriguez 2017 336 76.0% 4
Joe Mauer 2024 293 76.1% 4
Ryne Sandberg 2005 393 76.2% 5
Catfish Hunter 1987 315 76.3% 5
Scott Rolen 2023 297 76.3% 5

All of those near-miss players eventually got in, though Bunning and Fox did so via the Veterans Committee. Hang in there, Billy Wags, your day is coming!

A Small but Generous Electorate

A total of 385 ballots were cast during this cycle, five fewer than last year and 196 fewer than in 2011, when a record 581 ballots were cast. This was the lowest total of ballots received since 1983, when just 374 ballots were cast. Amid an election cycle that spanned layoffs at Yahoo Sports, Sports Illustrated, the Los Angeles Times and more, it’s no secret that tough times in media are a factor in shrinking the electorate. So is the Hall of Fame’s 2015 decision to sunset honorary voters once they’re 10 years removed from active coverage. It’s all a reminder that it’s a privilege to participate in the process, one that shouldn’t be taken lightly, and for however off base you may think a given voter’s ballot is, their presence within the electorate is hard-earned.

Thanks to the influx of strong new candidates, voters rebounded from last year’s stinginess to average an even seven names per ballot, with nearly a quarter using all 10 slots:

Recent BBWAA Ballot Trends
Year Votes Votes Per Ballot All 10 Elected Blank
2012 573 5.10 N/A 1 9
2013 569 6.60 22% 0 5
2014 571 8.39 50% 3 1
2015 549 8.42 51% 4 1
2016 440 7.95 41.6% 2 N/A
2017 442 8.17 45.2% 3 2
2018 422 8.46 50.0% 4 1
2019 425 8.01 42.8% 4 0
2020 397 6.61 20.5% 2 N/A
2021 401 5.87 14.5% 0 14
2022 394 7.11 33.8% 1 6
2023 389 5.86 13.9% 1 8
2024 385 7.00 24.4% 3 0
SOURCE: Baseball-Reference
“All 10” and blank ballot figures via BBWAA. Yellow shading = modern record (since 1966).

Nobody sent in a blank ballot, which is the first time that’s happened since either 2019 (when Rivera was elected unanimously) or ’20 (when Jeter was left off of one ballot); the BBWAA did not report the total of blanks in the latter year or in 2016, when Ken Griffey Jr. fell just three votes short of unanimity. Blanks do count in the denominator of the vote total and thus require three “yes” votes apiece to offset.

Slow Movement

Whereas last year six candidates gained at least 10 percentage points thanks in large part to Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Curt Schilling, and Sammy Sosa falling off the ballot after 2022, this year just one candidate posted a gain that high, namely Beltrán, whose first-year share was tamped down by his central involvement in the Astros’ 2017 electronic sign stealing scandal. Three other candidates gained between five and 10 points, while seven of the remaining nine holdovers lost ground. In all, 24 of the 26 candidates received at least one vote, and 14 of those will return for the 2025 cycle:

2024 BBWAA Hall of Fame Voting Results
Player YoB Votes 2024% 2023% Change
Adrián Beltré 1 366 95.1%
Todd Helton 6 307 79.7% 72.2% 7.5%
Joe Mauer 1 293 76.1%
Billy Wagner 9 284 73.8% 68.1% 5.7%
Gary Sheffield* 10 246 63.9% 55.0% 8.9%
Andruw Jones 7 237 61.6% 58.1% 3.5%
Carlos Beltran 2 220 57.1% 46.5% 10.6%
Alex Rodriguez 3 134 34.8% 35.7% -0.9%
Manny Ramirez 8 125 32.5% 33.2% -0.7%
Chase Utley 1 111 28.8%
Omar Vizquel 7 68 17.7% 19.5% -1.8%
Bobby Abreu 5 57 14.8% 15.4% -0.6%
Jimmy Rollins 3 57 14.8% 12.9% 1.9%
Andy Pettitte 6 52 13.5% 17.0% -3.5%
Mark Buehrle 4 32 8.3% 10.8% -2.5%
Francisco Rodríguez 2 30 7.8% 10.8% -3.0%
Torii Hunter 4 28 7.3% 6.9% 0.4%
David Wright 1 24 6.2%
José Bautista* 1 6 1.6%
Victor Martinez* 1 6 1.6%
Bartolo Colon* 1 5 1.3%
Matt Holliday* 1 4 1.0%
Adrián González* 1 3 0.8%
Brandon Phillips* 1 1 0.3%
José Reyes* 1 0 0.0%
James Shields* 1 0 0.0%
SOURCE: BBWAA.com
* ineligible for future consideration on BBWAA ballots.

There’s plenty more to be said about this year’s results. I’ll have a look at every candidate’s performance in my next installment.





Brooklyn-based Jay Jaffe is a senior writer for FanGraphs, the author of The Cooperstown Casebook (Thomas Dunne Books, 2017) and the creator of the JAWS (Jaffe WAR Score) metric for Hall of Fame analysis. He founded the Futility Infielder website (2001), was a columnist for Baseball Prospectus (2005-2012) and a contributing writer for Sports Illustrated (2012-2018). He has been a recurring guest on MLB Network and a member of the BBWAA since 2011, and a Hall of Fame voter since 2021. Follow him on BlueSky @jayjaffe.bsky.social.

132 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Bernie Sanders
2 years ago

Thank you Jay, very cool!

The Duke
2 years ago

Nice series again Jay. Congrats to the winners. Sheff now becomes the most likely to be put in by vets.

Smiling PolitelyMember since 2018
2 years ago
Reply to  The Duke

Sheffield’s outcome is worse, given the dumb 10 year rule, but how in the world is Omar Vizquel getting more votes than Bobby Abreu???

pitts1971Member since 2025
2 years ago

Agreed, very unfortunate that Vizquel has more support than Abreu.

Fredchuckdave
2 years ago
Reply to  pitts1971

Abreu being the 20th best player in the league for 20 years doesn’t sell very well to most voters, there’s some vague chance he gets in on some random committee in like 2060 after the nuclear/AI apocalypse

Dmjn53
2 years ago
Reply to  Fredchuckdave

Omar Vizquel averaged out as being the 79th best position player per season in the first 19 seasons of his career, peaking at 15th in 1999 and his 2nd best showing being 55th in 1992.

His career spanned from 1989 to 2012, in which he was #1 in games played and #2 in total PA. He was also 54th in WAR in that timeframe, in between David Wright (who debuted in 2004) and Mark Teixera (2003).

Before we even get into his disgusting off field actions, he spent most of his career as being someone that shouldn’t have even been an every day player. Calling him mediocre is a generous compliment

Last edited 2 years ago by Dmjn53
carterMember since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  Dmjn53

I am not a fan of Vizquel, and clearly do not want him in the hall. But I am a bit confused by the math there. If you average being the 79th best position player in the MLB, how does that mean you shouldn’t be an every day player? 30 teams, lets not count catcher or pitcher, that is 210 starters. Platoon wasn’t really as common, I would think the 79th player would be a starter.

Dmjn53
2 years ago
Reply to  carter

Because it’s an average. He was worth 2 or less in 12 of those 19

Lanidrac
2 years ago
Reply to  Dmjn53

Vizquel had a bWAR of 2+ in 12 seasons, 11 by fWAR. Even if you exclude the years he rounded to exactly 2.0 WAR (which I wouldn’t), that still leaves close to half of his career (at least half if not counting his last three terrible years) as an everyday type player.

Although, it is interesting to note just how many bad years he did have and not just during his decline phase. Also note that even if the ’94 and ’95 seasons hadn’t been shortened, he wasn’t even close to being on pace for 2 WAR either year, anyway.

Last edited 2 years ago by Lanidrac
Dmjn53
2 years ago
Reply to  Lanidrac

as the comment says, I specified his “first” 19. I don’t think him being sub replacement level in his age 40+ years is relevant.

If you’d like to include those, his average of 79th drops even lower

Last edited 2 years ago by Dmjn53
carterMember since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  Dmjn53

Right but then you averaged them?

sadtromboneMember since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  The Duke

I don’t think so. The veterans committee typically treats these votes as a membership club. Unless he made friends with a lot more people inside baseball than the media I think he might be on the outside looking in.

IMO it’s pretty silly that Helton is in but Sheffield is not but I suppose if you don’t buy his story about PEDs then it makes sense (I am pretty convinced at this point he was telling the truth).

synco
2 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

One of the most disappointing things about the new Veterans Committee is that they cleaned it up to reduce cronyism and give more attention to different eras, and then one of the very first picks is a modern guy with a bunch of friends on the board.

Last edited 2 years ago by synco
MikeD
2 years ago
Reply to  The Duke

I don’t think any future Veteran’s Committee will put Sheff in. They’ve taken a pretty hardline against suspected PED users. I think his candidacy died permanently yesterday.

Smiling PolitelyMember since 2018
2 years ago

I love all three of these guys, wish Sheff (and others) were there with ’em, but I also wanna see Todd Helton pat Beltré’s head on-stage as they drape him in his HoF jacket just to see if he’s lightened up a bit :p

ackbar7Member since 2020
2 years ago

I don’t get why Rollins gets so many votes. The pitchers below him are much better candidates. Abreu is much more more deserving and is only tied rith Rollins. He seems like a guy who should be down with Wright and Hunter in danger of falling off but instead it seems like he will last all 10 years on the ballot.

mikejuntMember
2 years ago
Reply to  ackbar7

People remember Rollins as the best player on a team that went to back to back WS. His peak was short, but it was pretty good.

Now, I think we recognize that it was probably really Utley who was the best player on those teams, but that isn’t really how people thought of them then.

ackbar7Member since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

But what makes him stand out versus Colon. Similar career WAR. Star players of prominent teams who made the post season multiple times. Colon won a Cy Young while Rollins won an MVP. Colon goes 1 and done while Rollins sits at 15% and seems likely to hang around and could ultimately have a strong enough showing to be a regular on committee ballots after he leaves the BBWAA ballot.

Delgado4HOF
2 years ago
Reply to  ackbar7

Colon used PEDs

Left of Centerfield
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

While I wouldn’t vote for Rollins, he does have an MVP and 4 gold gloves at shortstop. Plus some “neat” counting stats: 500+ doubles, 100+ triples, 200+ home runs, 400+ steals. Granted that shouldn’t make him a HOF but there aren’t many players who hit all those milestones (and I think he’s the only SS to reach them all).

Lanidrac
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

Personally, I think Ryan Howard was better than either of them during their primes, especially compared to Rollins. While Rollins won an MVP, so did Howard.

Last edited 2 years ago by Lanidrac
Dmjn53
2 years ago
Reply to  Lanidrac

Howard had the sexy RBI totals, but outside of his monster 2006 he hovered around a 125-130 wRC+ and 2-3 WAR as a poor fielding 1B. He was at least a level below Rollins and multiple levels below Utley

Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  Dmjn53

It’s always worth noting with Howard’s RBI numbers that he legitimately hit better with runners on base.

His career RE24 is ~80 runs higher than his wRAA.

pitts1971Member since 2025
2 years ago
Reply to  ackbar7

Rollins was a bit overrated in his playing days and that continues in terms of his HoF support. He should have been “one and done”, instead he received the same support as Bobby Abreu and more support than Andy Petitte, Mark Buehrle, Francisco Rodriguez, David Wright, Jose Bautista, Bartolo Colon, Matt Holliday and Adrian Gonzalez.

Last edited 2 years ago by pitts1971
PC1970Member since 2024
2 years ago
Reply to  ackbar7

Honestly, I’d direct my ire more at Vizquel’s total than Rollins.

Rollins was both a better player & better person than Omar.

My sense is the advanced #’s underrate Rollins. Not saying he’s a HOF’er, but, I think he deserves a debate & not to be kicked off the ballot like it seems to be initmated in this thread.

ackbar7Member since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

I fully agree that Rollins is a much better candidate than Vizquel, but I understand the argument for Vizquel better. Highlight reel (though overrated) defensive shortstop that played a long time and racked up a lot of hits as a result. With Rollins it is less clear to me what it is that pushes him past the Hunter, Wright, Colon and Holiday tier and in to the Abreu, Pettitte and Buehrle tier.

Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  ackbar7

Highlight reel SS, WS ring…and a really good dude who people want to find a reason to support.

Delgado4HOF
2 years ago
Reply to  ackbar7

Rollins has better counting stats than Utley. People still vote off that. I’d vote him over those pitchers easily.

OddBall Herrera
2 years ago

Here’s hoping next year Andruw Jones gets the new record for lowest first year % for a HoFer. Nonsense that he still isn’t in.

Hoping for a big class next year: Ichiro, Sabathia, Jones, Beltran. Wagner is probably also in based on trends.

mikejuntMember
2 years ago

I think Beltran will probably take another year. Wagner looks pretty promising.

I’d like to see Jones get in but I don’t really think its a travesty that he’s not. He’s a borderline candidate due to career length, even though his peak was probably high enough to justify it.

Left of Centerfield
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

If/when Beltran gets in, he’ll become only the 5th Hall of Famer who played for the Kansas City Royals. Here are the others: George Brett, Gaylord Perry, Harmon Killebrew, Orlando Cepeda. Outside of Brett, the others only played one season – their final season – with the Royals. Kind of amazing that a franchise that a franchise that’s been around as long as the Royals have had so few HOFers play for them. Of course, Greinke will give them another one but still.

Lanidrac
2 years ago

Hmm, looking back through the years, it’s been a tale of two franchises for the Royals. They were consistently a good team most years starting with their 3rd year in 1971 all the way up to 1991 (including the 1985 Championship), but since then they’ve only managed winning records in the strike-shortened 1994 and their short window from 2013-2015 that gave them 2 more Pennants and another Championship, despite not having anyone on those teams who will ever make the Hall of Fame.

pitts1971Member since 2025
2 years ago

I seriously doubt that either Jones or Beltran will be voted in next year. Jones received 61.6% of the vote and increase from 58.1% in 2023. Beltran jumped from 46.5% in 2023 to 57.1 in 2024, even with another 10% increase he will still be well short of induction.
Wagner missed by 5 votes, garnering 73.8% of the vote, that and the fact that next year will be his tenth, and final, time on the ballot makers it highly likely that he’ll be make the cut rather than Jones or Beltran.

PC1970Member since 2024
2 years ago
Reply to  pitts1971

I wonder if Jones stalls out. I think his short career length, poor career end after signing with LAD, viable questions about defensive metrics (his case is really, best ever defensive CF..IF you don’t 100% buy that, his case is way shakier) & his DV case.

I could see 7-10% of the electorate choosing 1 of the 4 above reasons as a reason to not vote for him & him ending up in the 65-70% range like Sheff, Bonds, Schilling, etc.

Left of Centerfield
2 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

I agree. It’s always hard to know how many “hard no’s” there are. For example, people claim that Vizquel was on a path to the HOF but I have my doubts. I think there were 25%+ hard no’s out there and he wasn’t going to get elected even without the later character clause issues.

And the same may hold true of Jones and Beltran. Jones for the reasons you listed. And Beltran for his involvement in the sign-stealing scandal.

Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

Hell, the case isn’t even “best ever defensive CF.”

It’s “Best ever defensive CF by an absurd margin – so far beyond Willie Mays and Kenny Lofton that it isn’t worth mentioning them in the same breath.”

…and his DRS numbers in particular don’t really agree with that assessment.

For the record: I’d still put him in!

MikeD
2 years ago

Ichiro might join Rivera as the next to go in unanimously.

Wagner is a lock, although I don’t believe he should be in the HOF.

Sabathia will get in, although I wonder if he might take a year or two.

Beltran will be in the penalty box for a few more years.

Dmjn53
2 years ago
Reply to  MikeD

Sabathia’s well short of the (admittedly very high standard) of the average HOF starter. He compares pretty well statistically to Buehrle, who hasn’t sniffed election

synco
2 years ago

Congrats to all. Unfortunate for Gary Sheffield, here’s hoping for the various committees down the line.

I gotta say, Helton is really a mystery for me. He’s a 1B who played in Colorado but barely cleared 350 HRs, falls below the WAR threshold, and didn’t hit any of the big round numbers. His candidacy is basically a 5-year run during peak-Coors peak-sillyball.

Encouraged to see that Beltran will make it soon, and while Utley’s debut is disappointing, debuting around 30% means he has a good chance to make it down the line.

CC AFCMember since 2016
2 years ago
Reply to  synco

I was almost gonna say to myself, “I disagree with him on Helton, but it’s fine,” but how are you against Helton because he had a high peak without hitting big counting numbers and then pro-Utley who is high peak without hitting big counting numbers?

Last edited 2 years ago by CC AFC
mikejuntMember
2 years ago
Reply to  CC AFC

I don’t think this is hard to understand:

1: Utley played a position where the offensive bar is a lot lower than Helton

2: Helton played in an environment that produced big county numbers, at the position from which big county numbers are most expected.

With that said, Helton was a great offensive player, he just didn’t have the huge power profile to take advantage of Colorado to run the big HR numbers. He was like Freddie Freeman in that regard – a bit more tilted towards the BA/OBP side of offense than the archetypical first baseman.

But there’s a huge gap in offensive expectations between 1B and 2B. If Utley compares relatively equally to Helton, that is a *huge argument in favor of Utley* at a fairly under-represented position.

jtsnowdayMember since 2022
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

Of course, Utley doesn’t compare relatively equally to Helton offensively. Utley’s best season by OPS+ was 146 (in 2008). Helton bested that OPS+ five seasons in a row 2000-2004 and was in the 160s in 4 of those.

Obviously, defense, baserunning, and positional baselines matter, which is why their career WARs shake out to be fairly close, with Utley a little higher. But let’s not pretend that Utley was Helton’s offensive equal, even after adjusting for Coors. (I’m of the mind that they’re both HoFers FWIW)

Cool Lester SmoothMember since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  jtsnowday

I just don’t see much daylight between Helton and Olerud/Hernandez, beyond the fact that he played in pre-humidor Coors.

sandwiches4everMember since 2019
2 years ago

Both Olerud and Hernandez deserved a LOT better from the voters. I’d argue that problem here isn’t Helton being in, it’s those two being thoroughly dissed by the voters.

Lanidrac
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

1) There are no (or shouldn’t be) separate offensive bars between positions except pitcher (obviously) and catcher, where there is a natural playing time disadvantage. Utley gets extra credit for his defense for playing a tougher position, but that’s it. It’s not like Helton would’ve suddenly become a worse hitter if he had for some reason moved to 2B sometime during his peak, or vice versa for Utley moving to 1B.

2) Helton’s peak numbers are incredible even after you adjust for Coors Field. Besides, some of that adjustment should actually be given back to Helton to account for the Coors Hangover Effect.

Last edited 2 years ago by Lanidrac
synco
2 years ago
Reply to  CC AFC

Generally to be voted by the writers into the Hall you have to hit some kind of threshold – traditional counting stats, or (these days) WAR. Utley is a WAR candidate: he doesn’t hit the big round numbers, but he passes the theoretical 60-65 WAR threshold that usually puts one onto the HOF radar.

Helton passes neither threshold. He’s short of 60 WAR, and he didn’t hit any of the traditional counting stat round numbers despite being a 1B playing in the most pro-offense environment ever. He’s got the big peak, but it’s short. And he doesn’t have a huge narrative story – the Rockies didn’t win much, and he wasn’t FAMOUS like David Ortiz.

Don’t get me wrong, Helton was a great player – he’s classic HOVG. It’s just odd to me that of all the guys who have been locked out by the writers because they didn’t hit thresholds, he’s the guy who gets in pretty easily and no one really bats an eye.

Last edited 2 years ago by synco
__AL
2 years ago
Reply to  synco

Helton has over 60 WAR (bWAR, but that’s the lingua franca in HOF discussions).

The Presumption of Bacne
2 years ago
Reply to  __AL

Swaying old-school voters isn’t THAT hard when the candidate has a .316 batting average.

Lanidrac
2 years ago
Reply to  synco

Helton still topped 2,500 hits, 500 (nearly 600) doubles, and 4,000 total bases. Those are still some nice round numbers.

synco
2 years ago
Reply to  Lanidrac

They are, but no one ever cites those for the HOF.

The Duke
2 years ago

Jay if you do one more wrap up it would be good to see how the voting electorate changed this years (and past years). Did we lose another 30 older writers and pick up a new group?

Did it have any impact ?

mikejuntMember
2 years ago

Im glad the voters got Mauer right, and I’m pleased to see Beltre go in. He also makes the 3rd player in my lifetime of baseball fandom to debut with my team and then get into the HOF wearing someone else’s logo (Pedro, Piazza, and now Beltre). Clayton Kershaw sure heals a lot of wounds.

I’m sad Sheffield didn’t pick up momentum until so late- he was really hurt by Bonds being on the ballot, it feels like.

I admit I have never been so entirely without an opinion about something as I am about whether Todd Helton should be elected. Good for him, I guess.

PC1970Member since 2024
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

I agree on Helton. Just can’t quite wrap my head around his candidacy.

I go back & forth between “his peak was so good” & something similar to jdr’s posts above.

Don’t think he’s undeserving as much as I think there are other players I think deserve it over him.

mikejuntMember
2 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

I think Helton is one of those things where you have to look at other factors besides just the raw numbers, which is probably what makes me pretty indifferent.

We’re used to giving guys some extra credit for, say, meaningfully excellent postseason experience. But I’d suggest that there’s one other thing that should probably be true: If a guy is even in the ‘reasonable conversation’ category, and he’s incredibly important to the history of a franchise (or simply the best player in the history of a franchise), he should probably be in. Helton is that guy for the Rockies. Longoria will be that guy for the Rays.

There are guys in the hall for worse reasons.

The Duke
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

I agree – there’s a variety of subjective factors once you cross a certain numerical threshold

Jason BMember since 2017
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

“There are guys in the hall for worse reasons.”

Absolutely true, but also an abjectly rotten reason to support any candidate…

tung_twista
2 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

Helton’s candidacy is pretty easy to understand.
There is no eligible(*) 1B who had a better career than Helton outside the Hall while some 1Bs with worse career than Helton are in the Hall.

synco
2 years ago
Reply to  tung_twista

They aren’t eligible because they were all voted off the ballot. There were only 26 eligible players in the world going into this vote, and only one other (Adrian Gonzalez) was a full-time 1B. In recent years the writers have rejected Berkman, Olerud, and McGriff, all of whom were comparable or slightly better than Helton. The writers and now the VC have continuously rejected Dick Allen, who spent a good chunk of his career at 1B.

viceroyMember since 2020
2 years ago

Can someone explain why Ortiz was first ballot while Sheffield never made it in? Were the steroid suspicions really much stronger for Sheffield than Ortiz? Or is it the playoffs?

Both Mitchell report
Both 140 wRC+
Both 500+ HR
Both bad defense
Ortiz: “nice guy”
Ortiz: restraining order from an ex-partner

mikejuntMember
2 years ago
Reply to  viceroy

Ortiz did his hitting after the “PED” (actually double-expansion) era offensive boom, so it looked more anomalous and noteworthy, whereas Sheffield spent most of his career as an outstanding offensvie performer deeply overshadowed by names like Bonds and Griffey.

The reality is that Ortiz had a far more high-profile career, had great postseason success (at which he was often crucial) and was personally considered friendly and funny, whereas Sheffield was, well, exactly none of those things

Should those things make the difference? Probably not, but this is far from the first time that they have.

Six Ten
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

I’m of the belief that it’s pretty legit to consider profile and postseason success. It’s a Hall of Fame not a Hall of Excellent Play. You need numbers to get in the conversation, but the Hall is among other things a museum to the history of the game. It’s entirely fair to give a boost to players who helped define the narrative of an era, in the same way that it’s fair to give a boost to players who were super cool. Impact comes in lots of ways.

Personally I think Sheffield should get in. Watching him wave that bat at pitchers and then turn on the ball faster than anyone I’ve ever seen was super cool. And he was a great player.

tjcook87Member since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  Six Ten

This is my belief, too. It makes for a larger conversation around a lot of players – to be honest, I do struggle with it at times, as I find myself asking “doesn’t Jimmy Rollins fit that profile, then?” and talking myself in circles over and over again.

mikejuntMember
2 years ago
Reply to  tjcook87

The thing here is that you should credit postseason performance especially when it came over really large samples of games, but its more in the nature of ‘well maybe this dude is on the edge but all that gets him in’ not ‘this guy is clearly not there, but maybe the postseason gets him to the edge.’

Ortiz is the first, Rollins is the 2nd.

Some of these guys from that peak Yankees/Red Sox era played really significant numbers of postseason games. Ortiz has a good half a season of postseason PAs (369) at basically the same performance level (144 wRC+ vs 140 for his regular-season career).

Rollins barely reaches half that PA total at a performance level that is substantially below his overall career regular season total (and that doesn’t account for the fact that all his postseason appearances came during his peak). His postseason wRC+ is 79 in 215 PA!

These are not remotely comparable.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
2 years ago
Reply to  Six Ten

Curt Schilling is pretty famous at this point. Should he be in?

Six Ten
2 years ago
Reply to  airforce21one

BBWAA’s HoF elections rules speak very specifically to considering non-playing aspects of an eligible player’s candidacy:

5. Voting shall be based upon the player’s record, playing ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character, and contributions to the team(s) on which the player played. (emphasis added)

Whether that is in favor of or opposed to Schilling is in the eye of the beholder. Whether that should be of equal weight with the rest of what’s listed—or lesser or greater weight—is left up to each voter. But it’s very clear that fame is not a one-way street; the standards sure seem to me to be suggesting that fame and infamy are not the same thing.

I admit that Schilling is the HoF-level performer I have the least ability to be dispassionate about. I find him deeply, deeply detestable. There are many baseball players who do not share my politics; from my vantage point, there are very few who have gone out of their way to do active harm to large numbers of other people like he has. And that will always color my feelings about his candidacy.

Last edited 2 years ago by Six Ten
The Duke
2 years ago
Reply to  Six Ten

You are clearly a textualist Mr Scalia. The intent of the clause when written was to reward people with exemplary character. However, if you ignore intent, your reading is correct

jmlease1
2 years ago
Reply to  viceroy

It feels like Sheffield had three big factors working against him: some PED stink, playing for 8 different teams, and being one of the worst defensive players (and carrying that reputation) we’ve seen. I mean, even Manny was better out there on defense and his miscues were a national joke a times. I would say Sheff was so great of a hitter for so long that he deserves the honor, but I do think he’s not a slam dunk.

L. Ron Hoyabembe
2 years ago
Reply to  viceroy

Ortiz was not mentioned in the Mitchell report.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
2 years ago

Helton is a real borderline candidate. I don’t think I would have minded except for all the similar candidates who have struggled to gain traction over the years. But if he was going to get in, it’s better that he get in this year to free up a vote for someone else.

I also don’t really like Wagner’s candidacy but if he’s going to get in anyway it would have been better for him to get in now, just to get it over with.

Twitchy
2 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

What’s not to like? By RA/9 WAR, Wagner is the third best reliever of all time. There’s a pretty significant gap between him and every other reliever.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  Twitchy

Because the seventh best reliever of all time or whatever he is still doesn’t play enough to be Hall of Fame worthy. There’s only so much rate stats can do for you when Hall of Very Good starters like Bret Saberhagen are throwing for 2.5x as many innings. Or more. Johan Santana—whose career was infamously cut short—still threw for twice as many innings as Wagner.

Pretty much the only relievers who are Hall of Fame worthy are guys who pitched a LOT. Either because they had a very good career as a starter first (Eckersley), they threw more than one inning at a time (Gossage), or they were Mariano Rivera.

Famous Mortimer
2 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Cool, then let’s get rid of DHs too, if you want to introduce an arbitrary “players must do X” component to Hall eligibility.

PC1970Member since 2024
2 years ago

Since we’re talking about 2 DH’s- Edgar & Ortiz. Edgar had 8614 PA’s, Ortiz had 10,091.

Wagner literally faced 3643 batters in his career.

So, even with “only” being DH’s, both of them had well over 2x the outcomes that Wagner did..& that doesn’t include adding in the limited defensive plays they both had.

With that in mind, it’s fair to say relievers need to be truly great to get a vote.

& DH’s DO get a pretty significant penalty via WAR & with HOF voters. The fact we have 2 DH’s (which started in 1973) in the HOF & 7 relievers (Fingers, Gossage, Sutter, Smith, Mo, Hoffman, Eck) from a similar time period backs that up.

Last edited 2 years ago by PC1970
Thatguy47
2 years ago

Didn’t realize “accruing enough playing time to generate significant on field value” was an arbitrary component to Hall eligibility. Thought it was maybe the defining characteristic actually.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
2 years ago

Yeah but that’s why WAR is useful for this. DH’s have a DH penalty. And relievers have a “they didn’t play much” penalty. Even in terms of peak, Wagner didn’t have the innings to make a single year stand out.

You have to be insanely good to overlook something like that, when the peak years and total career WAR is about half of other inductees. Some people think Wagner meets that bar but those other guys I mentioned are actually not as far behind on total value as a guy like Wagner is.

Twitchy
2 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Is this a joke? Wagner had a 4 WAR year, a 3.8 WAR year, a 3.2 WAR year. Those aren’t a standout year as a reliever?

Twitchy
2 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

It’s an important position regardless. Yes, Saberhagan had a higher WAR, but relative to his peers he wasn’t that special. Wagner was, and you can argue he’s a top 3 reliever of all time. Calling him 7th best is a bit disingenuous.

If you have any reliever in the HoF outside of Rivera then you better have Wagner.

I’m not saying that every high end closer should be there. But Wagner 100% should be there as a top 3 reliever of all time.

cm26Member since 2025
2 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Kinda curious why Gossage makes the cut then. He’s 4 fWAR and 8 RA9 WAR ahead of Wagner but less than 30 and 40 respectively.

He has less RE24 and 3 more WPA. Wagner was clearly better on a per inning basis (does matter imo, I don’t know that if Wagner threw an extra 500 mediocre innings his case should be so much stronger)

I think saying only Mariano is totally fine, but I don’t think anyone else should be included (except guys who provided a ton of starter value too like Eckersley).

Once you start moving on to other high innings guys though, I think the Gossages are a lot closer to Wagner than they are to Mariano.

Honestly, I might rather have Wagner than Gossage because I think add on years should barely help if the career values aren’t in different worlds.

Last edited 2 years ago by cm26
mikejuntMember
2 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

The conclusion I’ve come to re: Helton is that among two borderline candidates, if one of them is the best player in the history of a franchise and the other isn’t, then that probably matters. Every fanbase should be able to look at the HOF and see the best player to wear their jersey and be able to be that’s our guy.

Walker might wear a CR on his cap, but a lot of his career and qualifications came elsewhere. Helton is just the Rockies. They can have that.

Delgado4HOF
2 years ago

Mariano Rivera at 100% still bothers me to this day. Doesn’t deserve the nomination of first unanimous HOF inductee.

Six Ten
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

This is a feeling I totally get, but only insofar as other people obviously should have got it before then. Nobody should have vote against him specifically to avoid this happening. That’s exactly how guys end up staying on the ballot longer than they should and costing other guys a chance to get a deeper conversation about their merits in the future. If everyone thought Rivera deserved to be in, and deserved it more than all but nine other guys, it was right that everyone voted for him.

Delgado4HOF
2 years ago
Reply to  Six Ten

It’s not that he’s unanimous. It’s that he’s the first one. Griffey should’ve done so before him. And others Junior just comes to mind first.

RobertMember since 2017
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

I mean Babe Ruth wasn’t unanimous, and I think highest vote share prior to Rivera was Ty Cobb (at least in a first year). With that said I’m glad the writers finally collectively junked that specific taboo so we can ignore it forever and for a player that pretty much deserved it.

I was happy (out of spite) to see Jeter not get in unanimously as he’s the most overrated player of my lifetime (still HOF worthy though)

Delgado4HOF
2 years ago
Reply to  Robert

Agree on Jeter, put Rivera right with him though.

RobertMember since 2017
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

Totally get this idea but the distinguishing factor to me was Rivera was by far the best to ever do it at his role on the diamond, which is a lot more defensible than not even being top 15 at your position historically.

And that’s before we get in stubbornly insisting on playing that particular defensive position over a vastly superior player despite being bad at it because of you ego but being known as a great leader.

Delgado4HOF
2 years ago
Reply to  Robert

A role that isn’t all that important. Any one can close games. Closers are just failures at being starters. Matt Stairs has the most pinch hit homeruns ever. He may be the best pinch hitter ever. That doesn’t make him a HOF.

Look Mariano has a place in the hall. No one is even debating that here (besides you). He shouldn’t of been the first ever unanimous though. Considering his impact on the game was so minor. If it takes 8 played innings AND a lead for you to be used, chances are you’re not that important.

PhilMember since 2016
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

Almost every position player who doesn’t play SS, CF or C is a failure at that position – are we going to refuse to vote for Miggy Cabrera because he couldn’t hack it at short?

(Yes, I know this is an absurd argument)

Not every pitcher is good enough to be a closer. Even amongst those, very very few are good enough to be Mariano Rivera.

Here are the top two on the Baseball Reference career ERA+ leaderboard:
Mariano Rivera 205
Bill Foster 164

The gap between 1 and 2 is the same as the gap between 2 and 95.

Delgado4HOF
2 years ago
Reply to  Phil

113 pitchers recorded a save in 2023. Dime a dozen.

Once again no one is arguing Mariano’s place in the hall. A guy who pitches maybe 4 innings a WEEK just doesn’t deserve to be the first unanimous player in the HOF.

And no, you don’t refuse to vote for a guy like Miggy due to that, BUT you do take position into account. You’d expect him to hit 500 homeruns at 1B,3B, or DH before you’d expect a SS or C to do so. And we vote accordingly. Look at Utley v Helton. Utley has a better peak, more bWAR, and probably was the overall better player most would say (even if I don’t think so). Helton has the counting stats. The offensive counting stats matter more at a position like 1B than 2B. Just like the defensive metrics matter more for 2B.

RobertMember since 2017
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

I’m merely explaining why I don’t have a personal antipathy towards Mariano getting it while I would have with Jeter (And I’m glad we’re over the hump on it now). Obviously vote share is a poor proxy for rating which players are the best hall of famers

Left of Centerfield
2 years ago
Reply to  Robert

Highest prior was Griffey at 99.3%.

Six Ten
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

No I understood your point. But what were voters supposed to do about it? Just refuse to vote for him so he didn’t get that distinction, out of spite for their own predecessors who didn’t vote for an entirely different set of candidates?

It’s fine to think he shouldn’t have been the first unanimous election—I agree, it should have been Mays or Robinson or Ruth or Aaron or any of a dozen other guys—but once the vote got to him, the previous votes that weren’t unanimous are non-factors. Those candidates aren’t on the ballot anymore. They got in. The question for each individual voter is “Should Mariano Rivera be one of your ten or fewer selections?” And if they all say yes, then he’s unanimous.

Unanimity isn’t some distinction bestowed from on high. It’s the result of a bunch of individual choices. Each individual voter is making a choice, in theory as if they are the only voter. If you want to get game-theoretical about it, that complicates it slightly, by adding the challenge of “which guys do I want to keep on the ballot who are likely to fall off if I do not vote for them?” Conversely, “Will this accidentally lead to a unanimous election I don’t want?” barely even enters the picture, correctly.

Someone was gonna be the first unanimous selection. The guys who didn’t get it before are in the past. It’s too late. The voters who had Rivera on their ballots couldn’t undo that.

The entropy of any closed system can only increase, it can never decrease. It is an arrow of time. With an infinite number of candidates on an infinite number of Hall of Fame ballots, eventually the randomness of vote results was going to lead to 100% of voters voting for a particular candidate. It hit 100 with Rivera.

So it goes.

Doug LampertMember since 2016
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

I on the other hand was overjoyed when Rivera got 100% because the “no one gets 100%” tradition was so insanely and over the top STUPID that anything that killed it was good.

If you think of 100% as some sort of special honor, then Rivera didn’t deserve it, because no reliever is all that good (or they’d be a starter).

But in fact 100% is what SHOULD HAPPEN with every single candidate who is obviously hall worthy and comes up when the ballot isn’t overcrowded with worthy candidates.

Because all the voters should vote for all the obviously hall worthy candidates unless they don’t have enough votes available, that’s kind of the POINT of voting for something like the Hall of Fame, to put worthy players on your ballot and get them in. Thus, it should be routine for obviously hall worthy candidates to get in on a unanimous first ballot, because when they don’t, it simply proves that some voters are not doing their job.

Delgado4HOF
2 years ago
Reply to  Doug Lampert

May have been stupid to you, and that’s perfectly fine. We all are entitled to our opinions. But I, like some of the writers, think the first 100% should’ve been an honor. Should’ve been Babe Ruth, Mays, Aaron. Not Rivera. At least some one who’s entire importance isn’t dependent on the 8 prior innings and 3-4 prior pitchers used.

mikejuntMember
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

The problem with this mentality is that it ignores the history. When the HOF debuted, there were even stricter limits on who you could vote for and a huge backlog of worthy people. This caused a lot of people to vote strategically – I only have 5 votes, we’re electing from a body of 50+ years of players, and Ruth will obviously get elected – I can skip him to vote for someone else I really like, right?

That made tons of sense. But people thinking like you did very quickly took over – if RUTH and COBB couldn’t get 100%, then no one ever could, because everyone was lesser in comparison. So once you did have a standardized process and more votes and that backlog was cleared out, you had people refusing to allow unanimity on this ‘principle’

But it is a bad principle – you’re comparing apples (5 votes for all players 1876-1937) to present (10 votes for a selection of recently eligible players).

Rivera’s clearly appropriate. He may be just a reliever, but he is, by far, by head, shoulders, and probably ribcage and hips, the best reliever who has ever relieved. He was exactly that good in the postseason, as part of an absurd dynasty that played in 6 WS in 8 years, and won 4 of them in the divisional era. He is *further* removed from his peers (other relievers) than any of those all-time greats are from their own. He is singular. It is fine.

And it was an incredibly stupid precedent. With that said, it’s *also* stupid to get angry at people who still vote strategically. Rivera’s plaque isn’t a different color. If someone left off Beltre because they wanted to vote for 10 people this year and wanted to throw a vote at David Wright to keep him on the ballot, that is also fine. It is not an especial honor.

It would only be meaningful if there was no vote cap at all – and it was purely a measure of what percentage of voters thought someone should be inducted. It never is, even if you disagree with their other choices. There’s never, ever been less people on the ballot than there are selections. There will always be strategic vote opportunities.

Delgado4HOF
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

You can claim the Ruth comparison is wrong because of the times and rules. That’s fine. What about Griffey Jr then? Easy HOF. Never a thought of PEDs. Great person. No scandals. 99.7%? He’s more deserving than Mariano, 7 days a week.

You may not think being unanimous is a special honor, but I promise you Mariano, and anyone who may get there in the future, believes it’s an absolute honor.

mikejuntMember
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

Yes, and Griffey wasn’t unanimous *exactly because of people like you* who said “Well if RUTH and AARON weren’t then this guy can’t be either”

Shirtless George Brett
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

It makes it even more bothersome when you see a guy like Wagner struggling to get in at all.

Delgado4HOF
2 years ago

Yeah I could have a hall without Wagner. Closers just don’t matter to me personally.

Shirtless George Brett
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

Well closer is a totally made up and arbitrary “position”. So it really shouldn’t factor in at all (even though it does because a single silly stat exists). In the end we are really just talking about relievers.

I dont think you can just not let any relievers into the hall of fame. Even if there is a sort of good argument for it (IE: the whole failed starter argument). I think the real issue is the nebulous standards for evaluating relievers.

PhilMember since 2016
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

Whereas I find it hilarious that this silly convention, just because voters weren’t smart enough to vote Ruth in unanimously then no one else can be a 100%, was broken by a reliever.

The Duke
2 years ago
Reply to  Delgado4HOF

But that informs us of how valuable writers think closers are. Almost everyone who was any good at closing gets voted in by the writers. They love closers. It’s not at all surprising Rivera got 100%.

airforce21oneMember since 2026
2 years ago

9% of voters did note vote for Pedro Martinez. I want names

RobertMember since 2017
2 years ago
Reply to  airforce21one

Somehow more voted for Vlad than him! Anyway it’s always been a shitshow. When Babe Ruth isn’t unanimous you know some people in the voting pool are nuts.

mikejuntMember
2 years ago
Reply to  Robert

Stuff from Ruth’s era was just radically different – they were voting on a huge pool (eg everyone from before the HOF was established) and they got only 5 votes. So there was LOTS of strategic voting.

RobertMember since 2017
2 years ago
Reply to  mikejunt

In context that makes more sense

Thatguy47
2 years ago

Never really understood why Vlad got to 92.9%. I guess he was a pretty distinctive player and was a favorite of mine when I was younger but he was never that great. Even at the time I had him pegged more as his generation’s Matt Holliday or Lance Berkman rather than an all time great.

Also was brutal in the playoffs. .263/.324/.339 (75 WRC+) in 188 PAs. Not sure why playoff performance can only work to a player’s benefit like in Ortiz’ case. Probably frankly bad faith just coming up with excuses to get a favorite player over the edge.

Besides that I’m glad to see the number of voters falling. 385 this year vs 425 5 years ago and like 550 in 2015. Problem with HoF voting has always been that many voters don’t have a strong understanding of the game because being a sportswriter isn’t always the most prestigious/exclusive/well paying job and doesn’t qualify one to understand Statistics that well but the votership seems to be improving in quality by a bit.

TKDCMember since 2016
2 years ago
Reply to  Thatguy47

Vlad’s very high career batting average was key to his easy induction.

Thatguy47
2 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

I get why he was inducted, even though I think he falls below most other HOFers.

I don’t understand how he got 92.9% after missing 75% his first year and with a pretty fringy resume.

synco
2 years ago
Reply to  Thatguy47

Agreed that cleaning up the voter pool is most definitely to the good. A lot of people really care about HOF results – the electorate needs to care at least as much as the fanbase does.

Shirtless George Brett
2 years ago
Reply to  Thatguy47

Original Recipe Vladdy is all about peak. He put up 41 bWAR over his 7 year peak which is pretty in line with other RF’s already in the HoF. Combine that with all the other things (after all, it is called the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Stats) and it shouldn’t be all that surprising he got in. Even with his relatively short career he is still 22nd all time in fWAR among RF.

I haven’t looked but I’m guessing the list of guys with 450 HR’s and a .318 career avg is pretty dang short.

Last edited 2 years ago by Shirtless George Brett
TKDCMember since 2016
2 years ago

Next year’s class is pretty strong with Ichiro a guarantee to get over 95% and Sabathia seems like he has to make it or else no starter between Halliday and Verlander will make it.

Pedroia and a couple others are likely to get over 5% too.

I think Andruw Jones is primed for making it in 2026, and I could see Beltran joining him. There are no plausible newcomers, as Braun will be lucky to get 5% and Hamels ain’t making it that’s for sure. Sabathia could make it too and I think Utley will get over the 50% mark in 2026.

2027 (Posey), 2028 (Pujols, Molina), and 2029 (Miggy) all have likely first ballot guys, so looks like most likely there won’t be another shut out anytime soon. I’d imagine the big four starting pitchers will start becoming eligible in the early 2030s too. Greinke to me is the only one of the four that has some chance of seeing a second ballot.

sadtromboneMember since 2020
2 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Ichiro’s induction is one I have been looking forward to a great deal. You don’t have that many cases, at least recently, where a guy built a hall of fame career in two of professional leagues. And he’s also incredibly cool.

TKDCMember since 2016
2 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

I’d imagine he will be the first hall of famer in any American sport (plus hockey) that had a whole, hall of fame worthy career in a different country and a different league and then still had enough in the tank to be a hall of famer in the U.S.

It’s something that theoretically could have happened in basketball years ago when great European players didn’t immediately always come to U.S. to play. I’m much less familiar with hockey but I assume considering how international it is that the best play in nhl from a young age. Football is of course still mostly just a U.S. sport. Baseball is maybe the only sport where this could happen and it’s very cool that it is happening, I agree.

P.s. including soccer feels weird as the U.S. league in that case is a far inferior one. David Beckham making the MLS hall of fame doesn’t seem all that impressive by comparison (or a very aged Pele, who apparently did make the U.S. soccer hall of fame after three seasons with a NY-based team).

PC1970Member since 2024
2 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

Arvydas Sabonis? Is he in the basketball HOF?

Six Ten
2 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

He is indeed, good shout.

RobertMember since 2017
2 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

Though I think that’s only because of his combined career (the basketball hall of fame covers your performance in college, internationally, and as a pro). I’m not sure Sabonis would make it on NBA career alone

RobertMember since 2017
2 years ago
Reply to  TKDC

I’m already gearing up for annoyance/being annoying about Pedroia having a strong chance of getting waived through and Kinsler (basically par career) maybe not making it off the first ballot

cwood41
2 years ago

There is a serious issue with solid players who were merely stat accumulators getting too many votes. Buehrle, a guy who got cy young votes once, got more than david wright, who was a top 5 player in baseball for a few years. In my view, a HOFer should be flatly one of the best players in baseball for X amount of years. 5-7.

ab
2 years ago
Reply to  cwood41

I’d certainly put in Nomar Garciaparra over Fred McGriff.

JoeyVottoIsGoneMember since 2016
2 years ago
Reply to  ab

You got a downvote, but I agree. Nomar is a HOFer for me. I only care about peak. I think it’s ridiculous to keep people out of the HOF for health reasons if they already had a comparable peak to other HOFers and made a huge impact in baseball. At some point if you’re one of the best in the game & you’re a household name, isn’t that what a Hall of Fame should be for? I’d rather celebrate brief excellence than consistently being above average. I know I’m not going to ever win this argument, but I feel strongly about it.

JoeyVottoIsGoneMember since 2016
2 years ago
Reply to  cwood41

I’d much rather put someone like Johan Santana, who was excellent for a shorter amount of time, in the Hall of Fame than someone who was merely good for a longer amount of years…but I’m in the minority. David Wright, Johan Santana, etc. are people I think are Hall of Famers. I basically only care about peak, in an ideal world, but yeah it’s a super unpopular view and I have to make peace with everyone else not agreeing with me.

sandwiches4everMember since 2019
2 years ago

I’m strongly peak-over-career, but I do think there’s a place for guys who may not have ever hit superstar level, but were very good very consistently for a significant period of time (Abreu is the prime example on this ballot).

Roger McDowell Hot Foot
2 years ago
Reply to  cwood41

This seems like one semi-interesting consequence of the meteoric ascendance of WAR into the media mainstream. For all the dumb arguments that the baseball media used to make about Hall cases, they at least knew that the old counting stats were counting stats.

cwood41
2 years ago

exactly. Nobody watching baseball at the time ever thought that a Bobby Abreu was a hall of famer, for example. EVER– and why should they have? He was an occasional all star who happened to play 20 years. But now, because he accumulated WAR, he is deserving? It just makes no sense to me–it is a repackaging of old counting stats, indeed.

cm26Member since 2025
2 years ago
Reply to  cwood41

That’s part of the problem though. No one began to think of him as a possible HoF because we didn’t have WAR at the time.

He wouldn’t have been an occasional All-Star if we had WAR. He would have been an All-Star lock for near a decade to start his career along with a bunch of down ballot MVP votes.

And since his best run was at the beginning of his career, there absolutely would’ve been HoF rumblings. Sure, more of it probably background stuff, and sure, more of the stat friendly crowd. But it would’ve been there. And it would’ve taken much less uphill digging to get him there.

Maybe this sums it up. He had a 140 wRC+ and 42 fWAR through his age 30 season. If Fangraphs was around then, he’d be absolutely viewed as a future HoF by a certain segment of the baseball fandom.

cwood41
2 years ago
Reply to  cm26

In Abreu’s best season, he was 25th in WAR. Sorry, but that is exactly what i mean by an accumulator. A very nice, very good player for 7-8 years or so, but if you, in your best year, had a lower WAR than Aaron Rowand, you are not a HOFer.

sandwiches4everMember since 2019
2 years ago
Reply to  cwood41

Don’t speak for me — you might not have thought that, but I sure did.

Also, just because he was criminally underrated at the time, doesn’t mean we repeat those mistakes.

RobertMember since 2017
2 years ago
Reply to  cwood41

I lean peak too but I don’t think David Wright is the right guy for this argument (someone below selected Nomar who is a better example since he beats Jeter’s peak score). I don’t think right was ever a top five player in baseball and I don’t think he was ever even the top player at his position.

jb1205Member since 2022
2 years ago

Very cool to casually perpetuate the PED narrative around Piazza, who never tested positive for a banned substance or was even creditably accused by anyone except Murray Chass.

Six Ten
2 years ago
Reply to  jb1205

I do not think he’s perpetuating the narrative here.

Here’s a look at the rude treatment these catchers have received from the writers.

Piazza, a 12-time All-Star who stands as the best-hitting catcher in AL/NL history, needed four years, though PED allegations played a role in that delay.

He’s making a claim about catchers generally facing delays. To offer no other note about reasons for a delay in Piazza’s enshrinement would imply that Piazza’s delay is best explained by the fact of being a catcher, like these other guys. But that would be intellectually dishonest.

The allegation—gross smear though it was—existed, and Jay probably knows better than any of us whether it had an impact on any voters’ choices. All he’s doing is acknowledging a caveat to his own original point about catchers.

FWIW I think you are also too generous to Murray Chass’s argument. You say Piazza wasn’t “creditably accused by anyone except Murray Chass.” But he wasn’t creditably accused by Chass either! Chass’s claim requires both a forensic memory of Mike Piazza’s back acne (weird) and the logical error of affirming the consequent (wrong). That certainly isn’t creditable, nor, I would say, is it even credible.

jb1205Member since 2022
2 years ago
Reply to  Six Ten

I was joking about Murray Chass. My joke fell flatter than the earth we live on.

sandwiches4everMember since 2019
2 years ago

the BBWAA did not report the total of blanks […] in 2016, when Ken Griffey Jr. fell just three votes short of unanimity.

If I had to guess, there were three blank ballots in 2016…