Marvin Miller and Ted Simmons Are Now Hall of Famers

SAN DIEGO — To the extent that the Hall of Fame’s Era Committees exist to right past electoral wrongs — a debatable proposition given some of the results over the years, to say nothing of those from its late and unlamented predecessor, the Veterans Committee — the Modern Baseball Era Committee in one fell swoop fixed the Hall’s most glaring and embarrassing omission on Sunday while also giving hope to candidates squeezed off the writers’ ballot before their cases could get a full airing. By electing former MLB Players Association Executive Director Marvin Miller, the voters finally enshrined the most important non-player and one of the most impactful figures in the game’s history. By electing eight-time All-Star catcher Ted Simmons, they finally honored a candidate who quite shockingly received less than 5% of the vote from the BBWAA in his first ballot appearance and was thus ineligible for future consideration in that context.

Miller and Simmons were the two honorees elected from among a slate of 10 candidates who made their greatest impact upon the game during the 1970-87 period. Each member of the 16-voter panel consisting of Hall of Fame players, executives, and media members/historians was allowed to vote for up to four candidates, with 75% needed for election. Simmons received 13 votes (81.3%), Miller 12 (75%). This was the third election cycle of the new staggered Era Committees — via which more recent eras are considered with greater frequency — since a 2016 reorganization. Each one has selected two honorees, and five of the six have been living ex-players — which is five more than were elected by the expanded Veterans Committee and the older Era Committees from 2003-16.

As executive director of the MLBPA from 1966 to ’82, Miller revolutionized the game, overseeing its biggest change since integration via the dismantling of the reserve clause and the dawn of free agency, thus shifting a century-old balance of power from the owners to the players. Miller helped the union secure a whole host of other important rights as well, from collective bargaining to salary arbitration to the use of agents in negotiations. During his tenure, the average salary of a major league player rose from $19,000 to over $240,000, and the MLBPA became the strongest labor union in the country.

Yet both in his lifetime and since his death at the age of 95 in 2012, petty politics prevented him from receiving proper recognition via enshrinement in the Hall of Fame — so much so that in 2008, Miller, still feisty well into his 90s, took the unprecedented step of asking voters not to consider him on another ballot. In a letter to the BBWAA, whose Historical Overview Committee constructs the ballots, Miller wrote:

“Paradoxically, I’m writing to thank you and your associates for your part in nominating me for Hall of Fame consideration, and, at the same time, to ask that you not do this again. The anti-union bias of the powers who control the Hall has consistently prevented recognition of the historic significance of the changes to baseball brought about by collective bargaining.”

Before Miller passed away in 2012, his son Peter ruled out the family’s participation in any posthumous honor by the Hall:

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.

“No one in our family will attend or speak at any HOF ceremony regardless of the outcome of the HOF vote. It’s important for union members and the media to understand why, so that the story does not get misrepresented as ’sour grapes,’ personal pique, or anything of the sort.”

When Miller was included on the 2014 Expansion Era ballot, his children repeated their stance, with daughter Susan calling the committee “cowards [for] doing it after he died.” How exactly the Hall will handle his induction next July 26 remains to be seen.

While I don’t begrudge the family its permanent boycott of the institution, one simply can’t credibly tell the story of major league baseball without the man who revolutionized the game and its business practices. Both his accomplishments and the stain of the institution’s failure to honor him during his lifetime are now part of that story, and while his plaque will be the same size as all the others, its presence will stand as a towering middle finger aimed at the small men who conspired against him during his lifetime and after, and who colluded against the players in efforts to break the union. No plaque will seem smaller in the presence of Miller’s than that of former commissioner Bowie Kuhn, who wound up on the short end virtually every time the two sparred during Miller’s tenure, yet was elected in 2008; upon that occasion, the Associated Press declared, “At last, Bowie Kuhn beat Marvin Miller at something.” The induction speech that Miller never got to give would have been epic, but even without it, his legacy will long outlive those of his foes.

Simmons, who spent the first 13 years of his career with the Cardinals (1968-80) before moving on to the Brewers (’81-85) and Braves (’86-88) was one of the game’s elite offensive catchers, hailing from an era with a bounty of them; Johnny Bench, Gary Carter, and Carlton Fisk are already enshrined, while Thurman Munson was on this ballot as well. When he retired, Simmons held the record for most hits as a catcher (1,908, since surpassed by five players), and even today his total of 2,472 hits is second among all players who spent the majority of their careers behind the plate. That total ranked fourth among all switch-hitters at the time of his retirement; Simmons is now 10th in that category.

Simmons was also one of baseball’s true iconoclasts. He denounced the Vietnam War and wore his hair long (yielding the nickname “Simba” for his leonine mane). In 1972, his age-22 campaign, he played more than half the season without signing a contract, setting up a potential challenge to the reserve clause that was quelled when the Cardinals signed him to a two-year, $75,000 deal in late July (he had sought $30,000 for one year but was unilaterally renewed at $25,000). Not known as a great defender, he was traded away from the Cardinals by manager/GM Whitey Herzog, and while he helped the Brewers to the 1982 World Series against Herzog’s Cardinals, he had trouble transitioning to other positions. Nonetheless, he’s a career .285/.348/.437 hitter (118 OPS+) who ranks 10th in both WAR (50.3) and JAWS (42.6) among catchers.

Simmons is the first player to be elected after going one-and-done on the writers’ ballot and the second to be elected after falling victim to the Five Percent Rule, which took its current form in 1980. He owns the second-lowest peak voting percentage of any Hall of Famer whose career took place after World War II, behind Larry Doby:

Hall of Famers with Lowest Peak BBWAA Voting Pct.
Player MLB Career Peak % Vote Year
Jake Beckley 1888-1907 0.4% 1942
Elmer Flick 1898-1910 0.4% 1938
Billy Hamilton 1888-1901 0.4% 1942
Joe Kelley 1891-1906, 1908 0.4% 1939
Satchel Paige 1948-1949, 1951-1952, 1965 0.4% 1951
Rick Ferrell 1929-1945, 1947 0.5% 1956
Buck Ewing 1880-1897 0.7% 1939
Jesse Burkett 1890-1905 1.7% 1942
High Pockets Kelly 1915-1917, 1919-1930, 1932 1.9% 1960
Jack Chesbro 1899-1909 2.2% 1939
Kid Nichols 1890-1901, 1904-1906 2.7% 1939
Bobby Wallace 1894-1918 2.7% 1938
Harry Hooper 1909-1925 3.0% 1937
Amos Rusie 1889-1895, 1897-1898, 1901 3.1% 1939
Larry Doby 1947-1959 3.4% 1967
Ted Simmons* 1968-1988 3.7% 1994
Sam Crawford 1899-1917 4.2% 1938
Freddie Lindstrom 1924-1936 4.4% 1962
Earl Averill 1929-1941 5.4% 1958
Harold Baines** 1980-2001 6.1% 2010
Travis Jackson 1922-1936 7.3% 1956
SOURCE: Baseball-Reference
* = removed from BBWAA ballot after falling below 5% in first year of eligibility. ** = removed after falling below 5% in sixth year of eligibility

Both Miller and Simmons had previously fallen one vote short in past elections. Miller, who was considered in various contexts six previous times (2003, ’07, ’08, ’10, ’11, and ’14), missed by one vote via the 2011 Expansion Era Committee ballot. Simmons, who after 1994 wasn’t considered again until that same 2011 ballot, fell one vote short via the ’18 Modern Baseball ballot. As I noted on Friday in analyzing the makeup of the 16-member committee — a necessary chore given the small committees’ long history of cronyism, which extended to last year’s Today’s Game panel, when White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf and White Sox and A’s manager Tony La Russa were said to have significant impact on the proceedings that resulted in the election of Baines — this panel appeared to be a favorable one for both while avoiding such obvious conflicts.

All six Hall of Fame players on the committee (George Brett, Rod Carew, Dennis Eckersley, Eddie Murray, Ozzie Smith, and Robin Yount) were among those who participated in the seven-week 1981 players’ strike led by Miller, and five of them (all but Brett) went through free agency at least once. Additionally, only one owner (David Glass) was among the six executives on the committee, but he didn’t buy the Royals until 1993, well after Miller’s tenure as executive director. None of the five other execs (former GMs Sandy Alderson, Dave Dombrowski, Walt Jocketty, Doug Melvin, and Terry Ryan) were in upper management during Miller’s run nor were they legacies of labor skirmishes like so many Gileses and MacPhails; Reinsdorf, who was pivotal in both the game’s late-1980s collusion scandal and the 1994 players’ strike, as well as on last year’s Today’s Game Era Committee, was not involved in this vote. Additionally, Brett, Carew, Eckersley, Yount, Alderson, Glass, and media member Steve Hirdt of the Elias Sports Bureau were on the aforementioned 2018 Modern Baseball panel, where Simmons fell just short.

Media members Bill Center, Jack O’Connell, and Tracy Ringolsby rounded out the panel. Hirdt, O’Connell, and Ringolsby also served on the 11-member Historical Overview Committee that built this ballot.

The crossover from the 2018 panel appeared as though it might favor Lou Whitaker, whose longtime double-play partner Alan Trammell was elected that year along with another former Tigers teammate, Jack Morris. Whitaker, who came in at just 2.9% in 2001, his lone BBWAA ballot appearance, was making his first Era Committee appearance and probably received the most publicity of any candidate in the run up to Sunday’s results. He received six votes, a middle-of-the road total that should by no means quash the dreams of those hoping for his eventual enshrinement (this scribe included). Both the fact that his candidacy is back in circulation, and that a precedent for a one-and-done candidate to be elected in this format has been set, bode well for him down the road.

Here are the full results as announced by the Hall of Fame:

2020 Modern Baseball Era Committee Voting Results
Candidate Votes Pct
Ted Simmons 13 81.3%
Marvin Miller 12 75.0%
Dwight Evans 8 50.0%
Dave Parker 7 43.8%
Steve Garvey 6 37.5%
Lou Whitaker 6 37.5%
Tommy John ≤3 ≤18.8%
Don Mattingly ≤3 ≤18.8%
Thurman Munson ≤3 ≤18.8%
Dale Murphy ≤3 ≤18.8%
SOURCE: Baseball Hall of Fame
12 votes (75%) needed for election

Evans was also making his first appearance on an Era Committee ballot; he had gone even longer than Whitaker without being considered, having slipped below 5% in 1999, his third year on the writers’ ballot. Munson had not been considered since 2003-07, via the biennial ballots of the expanded Veterans Committee that failed to elect anyone. Garvey and John, like Simmons, had appeared on the past three Era Committee ballots (2011, ’14, ’18), while Parker was on the past two, and both Mattingly and Murphy were on the 2018 ballot. While this era is chock full of other good candidates — manager Billy Martin and players Bobby Grich and Keith Hernandez stand out — if history is a guide, all will have other chances in the future.

Via the 2016 reorganization of the Era Committees, the Modern Baseball panel won’t meet again until the 2023 ballot, to be voted upon in December 2022. At next year’s Winter Meetings, both the 2021 Early Baseball (covering those whose greatest impact occurred from 1871 to 1949) and Golden Days (1950-69) Era Committees will meet and consider separate 10-candidate slates. The 2022 ballot will be devoted to Today’s Game candidates, those whose greatest impact occurred since 1988.

Postscript: Here’s my Monday afternoon MLB Now appearance discussing the voting results with Brian Kenny, Dan O’Dowd, and the great Peter Gammons.

Meanwhile, as somebody who has written about Simmons at length both here at FanGraphs and previously in The Cooperstown Casebook, it was gratifying to hear him acknowledge the role of sabermetrics in reviving his candidacy. This is from Sunday night’s conference call:

And this from Monday’s press conference:

I’ve said it for a while. It was really the metrics people who revived my candidacy. The comparisons that come from the statistics in general is what makes this game part of what it is, so exciting to so many people. The controversies and the discussions just abound, especially around the numbers.

So when I was essentially, you know, one and done, for lack of a better phrase, people started examining that and looking at the numbers and making the comparisons, and then discussions started. Pretty soon people were walking up to me saying things like, Well, did you know? And I just said, I got a body of work here. It’s not something I think about day and night. I’ve done what I can do. Pretty soon people were coming up a lot, and then they started talking to each other and then they started talking to everybody and it just grew.

Now there have been a lot of people who had a lot to do with this, but the Sabre Metrics [sic] people brought me back to life.

Regarding Miller, Simmons said, “I couldn’t have hand-picked anybody I would rather be going in with,” and he told a few stories about the late exec as well. The full transcript of his presser is here.





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.

57 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
BKJ
6 years ago

Simmons isn’t even the WAR leader of non-enshrined ’67 first round picks! That’s Grich!

sadtromboneMember since 2020
6 years ago
Reply to  BKJ

Grich is probably the most egregious oversight of all of them.

sandwiches4everMember since 2019
6 years ago
Reply to  sadtrombone

Bobby Grich has taken up the Ron Santo Memorial Biggest Ongoing HOF Snub title.

epitaz
6 years ago
Reply to  BKJ

You can’t make a HOF case based on WAR. That .266 career batting avg. and 1833 hits don’t really scream HOFer

Fredchuckdave
6 years ago

Should be interesting to see who speaks on behalf of Miller

dl80Member since 2026
6 years ago
Reply to  Fredchuckdave

Curt Flood would have been a great choice, but he passed a long time ago, unfortunately. Maybe Nolan Ryan, the first $1 million player?

The Ancient Mariner
6 years ago
Reply to  Fredchuckdave

My guess would be Tony Clark.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago

I’d kind of guess the guy that Miller’s folks would most want to do it would be Donald Fehr.

emh1969
6 years ago

Nice to see Miller and Simmons finally get recognized. On the other hand, with Parker + Garvey getting more votes than Whitaker + Munson, I have a feeling we’re going to get bainsed again in a few years.

emh1969
6 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

BTW, I do wonder what the end game for these committee is. At some point, doesn’t someone have to say that there’s no one left from a particular era who’s worthy of election? But who gets to make that decision???

Magician_531
6 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Maybe you make a rule that if a committee goes x cycles without inducting anyone that era is done.

emh1969
6 years ago
Reply to  Magician_531

Maybe but does such a rule exist?

Anyway, what I’m realizing is how much of a tradeoff is involved with these committees. To get Trammell into the HOF, we had to accept Morris as well. To get guys like Whitaker and Grich elected, we may have to accept guys like Garvey and Parker. Larry Walker may involve Omar Vizquel.

dl80Member since 2026
6 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

That’s a really interesting point. My feeling is that it is worth it to accept some lesser candidates in order to get deserving guys in. Sort of the same principle as the legal system, where we accept some guilty people going free in order to try to minimize the number of innocent people imprisoned. (I know that’s a terrible analogy)

WARrior
6 years ago
Reply to  dl80

I think it’s a good analogy. A more fundamental comparison is with false positives and false negatives, understanding positives in this context to be undesirable and negatives to be desirable outcomes.

sandwiches4everMember since 2019
6 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Baines is really about far as (I hope) it gets from deserving that still allows truly exceptional players to get their due.

I’ll take the occasional Baines if it means Whitaker gets the nod he truly deserves. Garvey and Parker sadly have a better case for the HOF than Baines ever did.

epitaz
6 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Omar Vizquel may be the best defensive shortstop ever and has 2877 hits and will be probably make the HOF on the writers ballot at some point. He’s hardly a tradeoff.

The Duke
6 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

They’ve already done that with committee structure. The real old-timers hardly get any committee votes anymore. It makes sense that they are focusing on 1970 forward.

There are at least 10 players in the modern era that deserve consideration: Munson, Parker, Evans, nettles, Bando, Reggie Smith, Hernandez, Garvey, al oliver. I think tommy john and Dale Murphy and Tiant

NewfyMember since 2024
6 years ago
Reply to  The Duke

Whitaker…

Pepper Martin
6 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Offhand there’s only one player I can think of from the 1900-1950 period who deserves any consideration at all, Sherry Magee. But there’s still one 1800’s player whose absence from Cooperstown still bugs me — Ross Barnes technically doesn’t meet the eligibility criteria in that he only played in 9 seasons, but that’s not entirely his fault since the “major leagues” as such didn’t exist before 1871. But he was professional baseball’s first big star, and it’s difficult to tell the full story of the sport without talking about Barnes. Besides, unlike a game like basketball where a player can find a loophole to exploit that requires a rule change to close it, there are very few baseball players who had rules changed specifically for them, and Barnes was one of them (the rule that a ball must land in fair territory past first or third base exists because Barnes’ specialty was hitting balls that would bounce in fair territory and then shoot off foul, forcing fielders to leave the infield to field them).

Lanidrac
6 years ago
Reply to  Pepper Martin

How does forcing MLB to close a loophole in the rules increase his Hall of Fame case? Should we be giving Hall of Fame consideration to Eddie Gaedel? What about the foul ball artists that necessitated that foul balls be counted as the first two strikes? Or the guy who ran backwards to steal first base?

Pepper Martin
6 years ago
Reply to  Lanidrac

Look at Barnes’ numbers, particularly his black ink, and tell me that’s not somebody kids learning the game should hear about.

hombremomento
6 years ago
Reply to  Lanidrac

You do know Ross Barnes was one of the first baseball All-Stars and was very influential to baseball, correct?

epitaz
6 years ago
Reply to  Pepper Martin

Joe Jackson ( 1900 – 1950 ), Bobby Mathews and Tommy Mullane ( both 1800’s )

PC1970Member since 2024
6 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Yeah, the Garvey thing is odd, but, he was a huge figure in the game. Certainly, a bigger “star” when he played than Whitaker or Simmons. Same with Parker. & if you would have asked people in 1985, who was a HOF’er, Garvey would have beaten Lou or Simmons easily.

I’ll piggyback on your other comment about horse trading & doing so to get deserving players in. I would be fine with that, too, I guess. It is a Hall of FAME, & guys like Garvey or Parker were huge stars & had many of the accomplishments (awards, round #’s, AS Games, etc) that typically led to HOF induction. May not like it, but, if it gets Whitaker, Grich, etc. in…

The only odd ball, of course, is Baines..who was neither a “star” or deserving via advanced analytics.

The Duke
6 years ago
Reply to  PC1970

I would disagree about Baines. He was definitely a star. He didn’t have the awards or play on great teams but he was a star.

Parker was the best player in the game for a few years and Garvey was the best player on a great team for years so not surprised they would get support

Slappytheclown
6 years ago
Reply to  The Duke

Whoa…Garvey was the best player on a great team for years?? Even taking aside his limitation to 1b and just looking at W/RC the clear leader of the dodgers during the 70’s was the criminally under rated Ron Cey. Look it up. And then, at times, you had Reggie Smith (another HOF oversight with Grich), Wynn for a few years, Dusty Baker towards the end, Lopes who never had the W/RC of Garvey but was a better baserunner for sure, heck even the catcher Ferguson was a well above average hitter for 4-5 years. That doesn’t even go into the pitchers…

emh1969
6 years ago
Reply to  Slappytheclown

Looking at BR, Garvey was normally about 4th or 5th on the Dodgers in WAR (pitchers included).

WARrior
6 years ago
Reply to  Slappytheclown

Definitely the case. Reggie Smith is almost certainly the most deserving of HOF of anyone on those Dodgers.

epitaz
6 years ago
Reply to  Slappytheclown

Yeah Garvey would just go out and collect about 200 hits, drive in about 100 runs and hit around .300 but please, tell me more about this Ron Cey

emh1969
6 years ago
Reply to  Slappytheclown

BTW, I happened to look at Cey and the 3B JAWS leaderboard. What struck me is how identical his career was to Robin Ventura’s.

Whether it’s raw stats like WAR or WAR7, counting stats like G, PAs, Runs, HRs, RBIs, walks and K’s or rate stats like BA, OBP, and SLG, they’re nearly identical.

Seriously, take a look at this. Don’t think I’ve ever seen two careers that were so closely matched before.

https://www.baseball-reference.com/leaders/jaws_3B.shtml

epitaz
6 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Compare Schilling to Mickey Lolich. Lolich even has a better post season heroic, don’t believe me, ask Bob Gibson

The Duke
6 years ago
Reply to  Slappytheclown

And yet we don’t talk about any long them in a hall context. Garvey was the face of the Dodgers and considered their best player at that time. His hall case is hurt by advanced metrics which make him seem lesser but Garvey was, in his day, the best known player on those teams and considered the best player. It’s why he keeps getting nominated on the vets ballot and why he did well this year

He peaked at 42% with the writers. Ron Cey was hardly noticed and doesn’t make the vets committee ballots. Similar but worse stories could be told for Wynn, Ferguson, Lopes and Baker.

I’ll grant you Smith but he only had a couple full years with the dodgers so he can hardly be called the face of the dodgers. Look it up as you say

epitaz
6 years ago
Reply to  The Duke

Garvey played in a time where guys took pride in their batting average and it actually meant something. Players like him would have a hard time not laughing at a defensive shift. Too many Rob Deers and Pete Incaviglia’s in today’s game. Not enough Tony Gwynn’s or Rod Carew’s. Analytics seems to hate .300 hitters.

Slappytheclown
6 years ago
Reply to  The Duke

just offense again…Cey career OPS+ 121, Garvey 117, Garvey had about 1000 more PAs. So…Garvey was not the best player on the dodgers, he wasn’t even the best hitter. Above average player (like Cey) but certainly not HOF based on any other metric except perhaps the harold baines metric.

epitaz
6 years ago
Reply to  The Duke

I always felt Parker should be in. To me he’s on the same level as Rice and Dawson who deserve to be in. Baines was a star he just quietly went about his business and deserved his induction. I think John and Jim Kaat should also be in. The analytics crowd may not like Kaat but 283 wins and 3.45 era and 16 gold gloves, not too shabby.

epitaz
6 years ago
Reply to  emh1969

Baines finished his career in the top 50 all time in hits, home runs and rbi’s. He wasn’t a big star, just consistently really good for a long time and in the end his counting ( real ) stats make him a Hall of Famer.

hombremomento
6 years ago
Reply to  epitaz

Counting stats aren’t the only “real” stats. By that logic, ERA and AVG aren’t “real” stats.

epitaz
6 years ago
Reply to  hombremomento

Sure they are, there’s an actual real formula to determine them. WAR is flawed, case in point one player has a much higher WAR than another who led the league in AVG., Home Runs and RBI’s. Something is really wrong with the formula.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago

it’s amazing how deep this ballot was. 6 guys totaling 52 votes.

Keep in mind 16 electors and they only get 4 votes per elector. So only 64 votes total. The most that could get elected would be 5- and the 16 voters would have to literally conspire to do that just about.

DBA455
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

Minor editorial note: I believe the table should show less than *or equal to* 3 votes for John, Mattingly, Munson, Murphy. Not less than three.

I wish the Hall had released full details because I’d love to see if all 64 votes were used or if some of the electors thought fewer than four guys from this list deserved enshrinement.

stever20Member since 2017
6 years ago
Reply to  DBA455

it’d be something if all 4 of those got 3 votes each(which is possible).

DBA455
6 years ago
Reply to  stever20

That’s my (uninformed) guess – that each of the 16 voters filled up all 4 spots on their ballot.

BenZobrist4MVP
6 years ago

Does Ted Simmons’ election do anything to improve Joe Mauer’s candidacy? They were both similar in total career WAR and both primarily catchers who also played 500+ games at other positions, although of course Simmons played a lot longer and Mauer played even more of his games at 1B and DH, but had a higher peak.

2wins87
6 years ago
Reply to  BenZobrist4MVP

I tend to think Mauer’s candidacy will be better received by the voters than most people seem to assume. From a stats perspective, he’s sort of borderline, but I think clearly above the line for most statistically inclined voters. The traditional voters do seem to like longevity, but he also did some things that I think they would find noteworthy, like being the only catcher to ever win 3 batting titles.

I think it’s always been too hard to make the hall as a catcher, because so few guys are as productive for as long at catcher as the best players at other positions tend to be. So I guess any expansion of the pool of catchers in the Hall will help his chances.

The Duke
6 years ago
Reply to  2wins87

He won’t do well – I don’t see him going in

sadtromboneMember since 2020
6 years ago

I’m 50/50 on Simmons, personally, so I’m not sad or excited or anything. Fine outcome. But I’m super excited about Marvin Miller. The man is a legend.

Psychic... Powerless...
6 years ago

And somewhere a journalist is crying because Derek Jeter will have to share the stage.

KervinMember since 2020
6 years ago

2 inductees from the Modern Baseball Era Committee, to show their re2pect

WARrior
6 years ago

Does this mean the writers who intentionally turned in ballots with only Jeter regret this?

Imagine an induction ceremony with Jeter, Miller, Simmons, and maybe Schilling. All POV represented.

D-WizMember since 2019
6 years ago

This article taught me that someone in history went primarily by the name “High Pockets”. Baseball is great.

SnowLeopard
6 years ago

My opinion:

* The voters got it right, Simmons was the most deserving candidate of the bunch

* Lou Whitaker, Dwight Evans, and Tommy John are worthy HoF candidates.

* Next time they do this, they should drop Parker and Garvey – they are not HoFers – and pick up Luis Tiant, Rich Reuschel, Bobby Grich, and Keith Hernandez. And if they want to enshrine Mattingly in part for being a manager, fine, but for actual playing accomplishments I’d go with one of the guys above, or even with Reggie Smith and Graig Nettles.

epitaz
6 years ago
Reply to  SnowLeopard

Parker’s better than anyone else you mentioned. Craig Nettles got caught corking his bat with super balls. He’s never going in.

SnowLeopard
6 years ago
Reply to  epitaz

Parker: -159 defensive runs, 6.7% walk rate, 58% SB% on 267 attempts, only six seasons with > 1.2 WAR – pass.

epitaz
6 years ago
Reply to  SnowLeopard

Parker >290 career avg. 2712 hits, 526 doubles, 339 homers, 1493 rbi’s. 1 MVP, 3 gold gloves, 3 silver sluggers. Not sure why you don’t like him.

Jon SealsMember since 2018
6 years ago

Thanks for your work on Simmons and all of these players, Jay.

rubesandbabes
6 years ago

This is an excellent and highly enjoyable article.

Jaws is a compounding of WAR and totally stupid. An idea sorta far off from what sport (male professional baseball) actually is.

Yep, love the Harold Baines inclusion, and good on the other new guys this year , too.

The voting results for the losers are melancholy , but okay. Dale Murphy. If any of those guys advance in future years, it will really strengthen the Jose Canseco, Richie Allen and Miguel Tejada HOF candidacies.

All three of those guys are above Baines and Simmons, by the way. No? You say no? Jose Canseco is actually real life famous. and Miguel Tejada vs. Lou Whittaker, Alan Trammell or Edgar Martinez? Please. Edgar never was good enough to take the field as a defender. True story.

Tim Lincecum is coming soon. You gonna run him off the playground super fast, too? Like Tejada??