The Big Questions About the 2021 BBWAA Hall of Fame Ballot
In a welcome sign of normalcy amid the coronavirus pandemic, on Monday the Baseball Writers Association of America released its 2021 Hall of Fame ballot, featuring 25 candidates including 14 holdovers, four of whom received at least 50% last year, joined by a group of 11 newcomers headlined by Mark Buehrle, Tim Hudson, and Torii Hunter. If nobody from that trio jumps out at you as likely to join the recent flood of first-year honorees — 13 of whom have been elected on the first ballot over the past seven cycles, out of a record-setting total of 22 BBWAA-elected players in that span — you’re forgiven. This rather lean slate, the smallest since 2009, is the result of an imperfect storm, in that no obviously legendary player hung up his spikes following the 2015 season, and that after three years out of four featuring the suspense over whether a player in the final year of his eligibility would get to 75%, we don’t have that this time around. Instead, we’ve got a ballot consisting of the weakest class of first-time candidates since 2012 (sorry, guys) and a group of returnees led by three very polarizing figures, namely Curt Schilling, Roger Clemens, and Barry Bonds, all in their ninth year of eligibility.
2020 is just the gift that keeps on giving, isn’t it? I can see some of you already rolling your eyes if not scouting for the nearest exit, but I hope you’ll stick around. Rome wasn’t built in a day, and neither was the Hall of Fame’s plaque gallery. Some very good players in mid-candidacy have real opportunities to gain ground now that the spotlight is on them, even if they won’t get anywhere close to 75% this time around. And the ones with no chance at election? Their stories are worth telling, too.
Over the next seven weeks, I’ll profile all 25 candidates, either at length or in brief, examining their cases in light of my Jaffe WAR Score (JAWS) system, which I’ve used to break down Hall of Fame ballots in an annual tradition that’s now old enough to have a driver’s license. The series debuted at Baseball Prospectus (2004-12), then moved to SI.com (2013-18), which provided me an opportunity to go into greater depth on each candidate; in 2018, I brought the series to FanGraphs. Today I’ll offer a quick look at the biggest questions attached to this year’s election cycle.
First, it’s worth reviewing the basics. To be eligible for election to the Hall of Fame via the BBWAA ballot, a candidate must have played in the majors for parts of 10 years (one game is sufficient to be counted as a year in this context), have been out of the majors for five years (the minors or foreign leagues don’t count), and then have been nominated by two members of the BBWAA’s six-member screening committee. Since the balloting is titled with respect to induction year, not the year of release, that means that the newcomers last appeared in the majors in 2015. Each new candidate has 10 years of eligibility on the ballot, a reduction from the 15-year period that was in effect for several decades. The last candidate grandfathered into getting the full run was Lee Smith, whose eligibility expired in 2017; five current candidates (Bonds, Clemens, Schilling, Jeff Kent and Sammy Sosa) had their tenures reduced mid-candidacy.
To be elected, a candidate must receive at least 75% of the ballots cast, and in this case, they don’t round up; 74.9% won’t cut it. Likewise, candidates who don’t receive at least 5% of the vote fall off the ballot and can then only be considered for election by the Today’s Game Committee, an entirely separate process — but not until what would have been their 10-year run of eligibility expires.
The voters, each of whom has been an active BBWAA member for 10 years and is no more than 10 years removed from active coverage, can list as many as 10 candidates on their ballots, a number that’s become a point of contention in recent years given the high volume of qualified candidates. In 2015, the Hall tabled a BBWAA proposal to expand to 12 slots (I was on the committee that recommended the change). Last year, the fifth since the Hall purged the rolls of voters more than 10 years removed from coverage, 397 ballots were cast, 152 fewer than in 2015, the final cycle before the cutdowns. That’s a reduction of 27.7% over five years, and it represented the first time since 1985 that fewer than 400 writers voted.
Ballots must be postmarked by December 31 (yes, the BBWAA still does this by mail). Voters may still reveal their ballots prior to the announcement, as 54% of voters did last year; you can track the reported ballots via Ryan Thibodaux’s Ballot Tracker if you want. Voters can also check a box on the ballot to authorize the publication of their choices via the BBWAA’s website two weeks after the election results are revealed; between that outlet and the Tracker, 82.6% of voters revealed their ballots in 2020, just a whisker below the record-setting level of 83.0% the year before.
The results will be announced on MLB Network on January 26. The hope is that any players elected can join last year’s class of BBWAA and Modern Baseball Era Committee honorees (Derek Jeter, Larry Walker, and Ted Simmons, plus some recognition of the late Marvin Miller, whose family is on record as planning to boycott), which did not get its day in the hot Cooperstown sun in 2020 due to the pandemic. Induction day is scheduled for July 25, 202; based on last year’s timing, the Hall has until late April to decide whether conditions will be safe enough to go through with the festivities. Fingers crossed.
The 25 candidates, with the newcomers in italics:
Bobby Abreu, Barry Bonds, Mark Buehrle, A.J. Burnett, Roger Clemens, Michael Cuddyer, Dan Haren, LaTroy Hawkins, Todd Helton, Tim Hudson, Torii Hunter, Andruw Jones, Jeff Kent, Andy Pettitte, Aramis Ramirez, Manny Ramirez, Scott Rolen, Curt Schilling, Gary Sheffield, Sammy Sosa, Nick Swisher, Shane Victorino, Omar Vizquel, Billy Wagner, and Barry Zito.
In a cool feature we added last year, you can see the career statistics of the candidates in sortable tables, one apiece for hitters and pitchers. Now, on to the big questions…
Is this group of first-time eligibles really that weak?
Alas, it’s not a strong one, but in saying that, I don’t wish to slag any of these candidates. They had long and successful careers in the majors, and among the inductees, one can certainly find players who weren’t as good as they were. Buehrle and Hudson both topped 200 wins, made multiple All-Star teams, and won World Series rings; the former pitched a perfect game and another no-hitter as well. Yet neither of them won a Cy Young award, only once did either of them lead a league in a triple crown category, and whether you’re looking at Bill James’ Hall of Fame Monitor — which gives credit for awards, league leads, postseason performance and so on — or JAWS, neither of them is in the ballpark of the average Hall of Famer, though they’re both about 80 rungs above Jack Morris in the JAWS rankings. The situation is similar regarding Hunter, despite his nine Gold Gloves; even with about 500 more hits than Jones, a 10-time winner, Hunter was nowhere near as valuable, though he outranks five Veterans Committee-elected center fielders.
Hudson (48.1 JAWS), Buehrle (47.4) and Hunter (40.4) are the only newcomers with a JAWS of at least 40; not since 2012, when Bernie Williams (43.6) led the pack, has there been a ballot without a single newcomer breaking 50. Before that, you’d have to dial back to 2000, when Willie Wilson (40.1) was the only newcomer even to reach 40 JAWS, though from that crop of newcomers, Morris (38.0) and Rich Gossage (31.7) were eventually elected.
So, do any of the holdovers have a real shot this year?
Of the four returning candidates who got at least 50% last year, Schilling is the closest to election, having received 70.0%. For any other candidate, that would be “gimme” range. During the modern voting era (since 1966, when the BBWAA returned to annual voting), 21 candidates received at least 70% but fell short of 75% and still had eligibility remaining. Of those 21, 20 — all but Jim Bunning in 1988 — were elected the next year.
Schilling, however, has proven time and again to be uniquely corrosive and off-putting with his public persona, whether we’re talking about his penchant for hoarding Nazi regalia, cozying up to white supremacists, or pretending he was joking when it comes to the various expressions of hatred — against Muslims, against trans people, against journalists — he’s spewed on social media. At this writing, he’s spouting conspiracy theories and unfounded allegations of electoral fraud pertaining to the recent presidential election. It’s not unreasonable to think that a voter might look at themselves in the mirror and decide that giving Schilling the platform that comes with Hall of Fame induction is something they want no part of. That may not have been the intent that Judge Landis had in including the “integrity, sportsmanship, and character” clause on the BBWAA ballot — which looks rather ridiculous given that Landis spent his 24-year tenure upholding the color line, something that earlier this year sparked a movement by the writers to remove his name from the annual MVP awards — but ultimately, the Hall has left voters to interpret the clause for themselves.
Beyond Schilling, there’s Clemens (61.0%) and Bonds (60.7%), both with allegations related to performance-enhancing drugs as well as some unsavory off-field stuff as well. The gruesome twosome made big advances on the 2016 and ’17 ballots, jumping from the mid-30s to the mid-50s, percentage-wise, but they’ve each gained just 6.9 points over the last three cycles, and with two years of eligibility remaining, it’s entirely possible there exists enough entrenched dissent to filibuster them. Even if that’s not the case, history says that for candidates in the 60% range, it usually takes two years to break the 75% threshold, not one; since 1966, only four out of 18 who got between 60-63% and had eligibility remaining were elected the next year, with Schilling (60.9% in 2019) among those who did not; Walker leapt from 54.6% in 2019 to 76.6% last year, but he was in his final year of eligibility.
Vizquel, the other returning candidate with at least 50% of the vote — significant, because everybody who’s reached that threshold has gotten in eventually, with the exception of Gil Hodges and the aforementioned trio — has climbed to 52.6% of the vote in his three years on the ballot on the strength of his traditional numbers and accomplishments, though his case does not measure up well via WAR and JAWS. It remains to be seen how much that will matter long-term, but particularly during an election cycle where there won’t be much pressure to use all 10 slots, he’ll continue to pick up votes. Getting to 75%, however, is almost certainly a multiyear proposition.
Besides Vizquel, who else is building momentum?
Three returning candidates each added at least 15 percentage points last year, propelling them from the 13-18% range into the 30s, namely Scott Rolen (35.3% in year three, up 18.1%), Billy Wagner (31.7% in year five, up 15.0%), and Gary Sheffield (30.5% in year six, up 16.9%). A fourth, Todd Helton, nearly did the same (29.2% in year two, up 12.7%). All of them benefited from the clearance of so much traffic from the ballot, allowing voters who might have previously viewed them as the slate’s 11th or 12th-best candidate to find room for them. In 2018, voters averaged 8.46 candidates per ballot, and 50% of them used all 10 slots; those numbers dropped to 8.01 candidates per ballot and 43% using all 10 slots in ’19, and then 6.61 candidates and 21% using all 10 slots in this past cycle. In general, surges like those of Rolen, Wagner, and Sheffield tend to get other voters to reconsider their merits. We’ll see if this year’s electorate puts that extra free space to use.
Who is this ballot’s Mark Ellis?
While the official rules make anybody who played at least 10 seasons in the majors and has been retired for five seasons eligible — anybody who’s not on baseball’s ineligible list, that is, or has not already exhausted his eligibility — not everybody who meets those requirements actually lands on the ballot. That’s because there’s a stage that involves some subjective choices via the BBWAA Screening Committee, the six-member panel that determines the final slate; sometimes a player with a notable career but no shot at election, a player for whom just being included on the ballot is the real honor, slips through the cracks. Last year it was Ellis, the starting second baseman for four playoff teams in his 12-year career; his 33.5 career WAR was four wins better than Brian Roberts, a second baseman who did make the ballot. Ellis joined the company of players such as Shannon Stewart (2014), Chan Ho Park (’16), and Javier Vazquez (’17). This year, the dubious honor goes to Grady Sizemore, a three-time All-Star and two-time Gold Glove winner who accumulated 27.7 WAR during an injury-riddled career that limited him to just 209 games after his age-28 season.
Aren’t you forgetting something?
Reminder: tomorrow, for the first time, a Hall of Fame ballot will go in the mail addressed to @jay_jaffe.
— Ryan Thibodaux (@NotMrTibbs) November 16, 2020
It would be an exaggeration to say I’ve buried the lede, because it’s hardly the most important piece of news today, but if you’ve been following my work for any length of time, you know that after 10 years of BBWAA membership, and 19 years of covering Hall of Fame elections dating back to my days of blogging at FutilityInfielder.com, this year, I actually get to vote! I’m very excited, and I plan to write more about this particular angle once I’ve got the ballot in my hot little hands, which will be soon; according to the Hall of Fame, it wasn’t mailed until Monday morning.
How it started/How it's going pic.twitter.com/KKtmeNA7A5
— Jay Jaffe (@jay_jaffe) November 16, 2020
Sometime just before that December 31 deadline, I’ll go through the exercise formerly known as “My Virtual Ballot,” walking readers through the hard choices there are to be made, but the difference is that this time around, I’ll stick a stamp on that thing and take it to the mailbox.
I’m not the only FanGraphs writer who has joined the electorate this year, either. David Laurila, who like me first obtained his BBWAA card as a member of Baseball Prospectus in December 2010, will get a ballot, too. We’ll talk about that on a FanGraphs Audio episode sometime soon.
Obviously, there’s a whole lot more to be said about all of these candidates, the burning questions that surround them, and the ones I’ve dodged. We’ll get to those all in due time, I promise.
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.
Congrats Jay! Glad that you finally have a ballot. I can count on one hand the number of people who know as much as you do about the HOF.
And your offseason HOF work is definitely THE highlight of the offseason.
I was like, “oh yay it’s started!!!”
Really would like to see the best defensive center fielder of the past 50 years get a huge bump up in votes.
He was brutal after age 29. That’s make him a no.
Yes the end of his career was not pretty, but overall numbers are solid. Should be in on his defense alone.
So was Griffey.
They each put up roughly equal fWAR age 29 onward and Griffey took 2x as many PA to get there.
https://www.fangraphs.com/graphsw.aspx?players=327,96&wg=2
Age 20-25, really close; Jones leads in fWAr by less than a win. Though the strike hurt Griffey here; project his fWAR based on the percentage of actual games played to the same percentage of 162 games and Griffey gets an extra 3.4 wins, but I’m still going to call 36.5 vs 39.1* over6 years as close.
Age 28+: Really close, 19.9 fWAR for Jones and 20.6 for Griffey
That leaves:
Age 19- Jones only got a cup-of-coffee and Griffey played most of a season and has a pretty big edge there (+2.5 wins)
Age 26-27- probably Griffey’s two best seasons and destroys Jones at the same ages, 18.7 to 10.5.
Just to add things up:
19 + 26-27
Andruw Jones 10.5 fWAR in 1418 PA
Ken Griffey Jr 21.2 fWAR in 1848 PA
Otherwise
Andruw Jones 56.4 fWAR in 7246 PA
Ken Griffey Jr 56.3 fWAR in 9456 PA
The last line, with the strike adjustment from above
Ken Griffey Jr 59.7 fWAR in 9715 PA
Another way of putting it:
Griffey put up 9.1 fWAR in 10 seasons after age 29, with 5 seasons below replacement level.
Jones put up 6.0 fWAR in 6 seasons after age 29, with 1 season below replacement level.
And both should be in the Hall. Defensive greatness should get someone in the hall. When you are the best at what you do, that matters. Baseball is about more than just hitting. There is baserunning, pitcher, and defense to go along with it. Defense is huge.
Congratulations on earning you ballot. Thanks for all the work that you have published on the Hall candidates. I enjoy, reading, and for the holdovers retreading, your coverage of the players.
Looking at that list, there is a really good shot that nobody makes it this year.
In any other year I would say Schilling has a very good shot, but I think there’s a serious chance he loses votes this time around due to his persona and, uh, “current events.” You could call this bad timing for Schilling with the election and he might have had a real chance if, say, this vote was far after the current election. But he has also made his own luck on that front. so I don’t feel bad for him.
The election should have nothing to do with his Hall candidacy.
So those downvoting this believe that who you support in politics should alter your hall of fame chances? Seriously?
Interestingly, I never said he should be denied based on proximity to the election. I said he probably would be. Tensions are high right now. Lots of people (including journalists) don’t want to vote for a guy who pals around with American Nazi types and jokes about killing journalists. If you want to call that politics, then fine, go ahead. Not going to help his candidacy, and claiming that something vile is an honest political belief is not a get-out-of-jail free card.
I have seen a couple comments he has made that may have crossed a line, but for the most part he just sits on the other side of the social divide.
For me, it’s less about who you support and more about what lies, racism, etc. you attach your name to on your social medias.
Well of course, if someone supports racism thats not good. Hating people for their skin color or making decisions about people simply due to their skin color is very wrong.
If Schilling gets in, will there be an attempt to deny him entry on the basis that some of the mailed in ballots were received too late?
Well, if they don’t meet the deadline, they shouldn’t count.
You might want to check your snark alarm.
No snark there at all.
In terms of the actual voting, I wonder if there will be a bit of gamemanship regarding Schilling this year. At this point, it seems almost certain that he gets in. But some voters may be reluctant to have him be the sole electee. And some may not want him to share the stage with Derek Jeter.
As for surges this year, I’m a bit skeptical. There was obviously plenty of room on last year’s ballot and yet most voters simply chose not to fill out a full ballot. Obviously, having Jeter and Walker off the ballot will lead to modest increases for some candidates. But not sure we’ll see any surges.
I think the argument would be that it might feel weird for voters to fill out a ballot with nobody on it, or not to fill one in at all. But I could also see how those voters are unlikely to coalesce around a consensus candidate.
Oh, I don’t know about blank ballots. But I could see some people dropping Schilling this year, while still voting for other candidates.
I pulled up Torii Hunter’s career stats, and he has some impressive totals: 353 career HRs, nearly 1300 runs scored and nearly 1400 RBIs, plus nearly 200 career SBs. If you look at other players who’ve reached those thresholds, you get the following guys: Bonds, Mays, Aaron, ARod, Frank Robinson, Bagwell, Reggie Jackson, Beltran, Sheffield, Sosa, Winfield, and Andre Dawson. Interesting company!
Hunter obviously wasn’t in the class of those guys. But he was consisent. BR has him with 13 straight seasons between 2.6-5,4 WAR. Fangraphs has him with 13 straight seasons between 2.0-4,7 WAR. So for over a decade, you could count on Hunter for above average production.
Scott Rolen won’t get enough of a bump to make it, but he’s the guy that I wish a movement would form around. He’s a Hall-worthy 3B, but if he doesn’t get in before Adrian Beltre comes on the ballot, he may not have a shot. Of the non-Steroids Hall-eligible position players, I think he has the best Hall case in terms of two-way dominance at his position over his full career. (With apologies to Andruw Jones, who was a defensive marvel, but his offense fell off a cliff.)
Congratulations on your ballot! Somewhere, Luis Sojo is smiling.
I’ve gotta bang the drum for Buehrle here. Since 1999 he’s 5th in W, 2nd in IP, and 12th in fWAR (would be more like 6-7 if we go with bWAR because of the difference between FIP and RA), has several ASG & GG to his name, was instrumental in breaking his team’s long-running championship curse, and threw a no-hitter as well as a perfect game. And if he doesn’t get in, he’ll be the only pitcher in MLB history with 14 seasons of 200+ IP who isn’t enshrined. That last one is the kicker for me – I think there are only 12 guys on that list, and several of them were pre-WW2 players.
I realize he almost certainly won’t get in, but there are already at least a few pitchers with plaques that Buehrle surpasses.
Plus in this era of obsession with pace of play, the man worked quicker than nearly everyone else.
Buehrle strikes me as roughly similar to Jack Morris. But somehow i feel he’s going to get a lot fewer votes than Morris…
Buehrle was superior to Morris in every way except for that one game that is the only reason Morris got a plaque.
That’s not true. Morris has a better FIP and more Fangraphs WAR. On Baseball-Reference, he has a higher 7 year peak. There are plenty of other things where Morris leads as well.
BTW, I’m not saying that Morris was better than Buehrle or that I’d favor him for the HOF over Buehrle. But to claim that Buehrle was superior to Morris ” in every way” is absolutely incorrect.
Sorry, I looked at that wrong. Buehrle leads in 7 year peak WAR via BR.
But my broader point still holds. There are ways in which Morris was superior to Buehrle.
And Morris didn’t get in because of one game. He got in because, rightly or wrongly, he was seen as the “best pitcher of the 80s”.
But I think one of the reasons he was seen that way was…the one game.
He was my favorite player for a long time and that string of 200IP probably isn’t going to be matched for a long time the way pitchers are used today. That’s not nothing.
But he’s probably the poster child for the Hall of the Very Good for a long Time. Then again, Harold Baines belongs there as well. So if Jerry can hang on long enough to convince another veteran’s committee….
Not that he was as good as Buehrle, but Jim Kaat also had 14 yrs of 200+ IP and is not in. Several others were close, for example, Tanana (13), John (12). Buehrle was durable and relatively consistent, but to me, he belongs in the Hall of Very Good.
I’ll make the same plea to you that I would like to make to any HOF voter – please please PLEASE consider the “integrity clause” when it comes to Schilling’s vote. There are few MLB players (or ex-players) with views as despicable as his (Aubrey Huff comes to mind and that’s about it, though I’m sure there are others). Please think very carefully if you want a man like this to be enshrined in the hall.
In my opinion, Huff actually makes Schilling seem like a decent person. And I say this as something who absolutely despises Schilling. But wow, Huff is horrible.
“someone” 🙂 🙂 🙂 DOH….
Man, yeah. He’s a whole new level of vile.
Yep. Just today Amy Klobuchar tweeted “Wear a Mask” and in response Huff tweeted “Eat a D*ck”. Except, of course, he spelled out the full word, which I’m not about to do. Jsut a vile, vile human being.
I think John Rocker topped them all.
Honestly I think Huff is much worse than Rocker. Rocker made an awful ignorant comment but I think it was just that – ignorance. Huff knows *exactly* what he’s doing and takes great pleasure in it. Same for Schilling, just to a lesser extent.
Because you disagree with his political and social opinions?
There’s a clear difference between having disagreements on political/social issues and the kind of vile stuff that he says/posts. There are plenty of players whose views I completely oppose and I wholeheartedly support them.
He is wrong to insinuate anyone should die, thats wrong in just about any scenario. But most of the other things he has gotten reamed for; seem to be things people just have the opposite opinion about or got way too easily offended over, not much actually serious.
Being easily offended, I find your postings here offensive. You apparently don’t know vile language when you see it, which leads me to believe you are probably a bird of his feather. So let me clue you in: The stuff people like you and Schilling find “funny” is as offensive as ethnic jokes — they were acceptable once, now pretty long ago, but they’re not funny anymore.
You call tell by the downvotes that your attitudes are not fit for the modern world. This is hardly the most progressive readership on the internet, yet it won’t fly here. In point of fact, it doesn’t fly anywhere outside of the right-wing mediasphere. Spend more time outside it and you’ll find that true.
And I say that as someone who would hold his nose and vote Schilling in, based on his complete games and strikeouts alone.
More like based on the left leaning “I’m morally superior to everyone” world. It is sad. It is also not about what one finds funny. Two of Schillings more criticized comments/posts were about the WWII memorabilia he has that he posted and the comments about men and women and bathrooms. 1. WWII memorabilia is the type of things that you would see in a museum. He never claimed that the Nazis were good. He simply had memorabilia from all parts of that war. If a museum could hold those items, an individual could count themselves lucky to have that type of historical collection. You can have an item that represented bad people, and still look at it for the historical item that it is; just that a historical item. 2. The comments about who should go into what bathrooms that got him fired from ESPN, he was dead on accurate. It is sad that when people disagree on what is right and wrong, the left seem to take anyone who says their right is a wrong and vilify them instead of just disagree with them. There is right and there is wrong, those things are often subjective. Disagreement does not automatically make one side awful people and yet that seems to be where we are today. Highly unfortunate.
I’m use to the downvotes at this point, they are expected if you don’t fall in line with the typical and expected views. I don’t like WAR, those comments always get downvoted. I like the eye test and what you actually see from a ball player more than the in depth analytics, that gets downvoted. I believe that an MVP should only be from a player who helps his team to the playoffs, that gets downvoted. I still care about starting pitchers who can go deep in to games and work towards actually getting the win because to me it is results that matter more than the analyzed skill set and expected outcomes; that gets downvoted. And I don’t buy the mentality of live and let live, people can do whatever they want as long as it makes them personally happy (but don’t offend anyone while doing it) because morals be damned and selfish satisfaction is what matters.
Not fit for the modern world? The modern world is going to hell in a handbasket and fast, it is sat, I expect better from the world.
And millennials (technically I am one) are a major cause of so much of this crappy mentality today (and I’m guessing where most of my downvotes come from).
I for one don’t need a new megastar to be on the ballot every year. Reflecting on good to great careers is fun every year!!!
Speaking of reflection, some random notes…
– Boy was Grady Sizemore going places early on. Absolutely electric start to his career.
– I’m excited for another round of “Is Scott Rolen better then Derek Jeter?” discussion
– Am suffering from Bonds/Clemens fatigue. There is no simple answer for the nuanced question of how we handle imperfect stars. I absolutely loathe people who reduce cheating down to a simple binary morality test.
One interesting thing I’m interested in is how the Astros scandal will affect the voting for the ped users. Because people have made a lot of comp with the scandal to the ped usage. Regardless of how much one thinks of the severity of sign stealing compared to roids in affecting outcome of games, it’s clear that in spirit both are basically the same, in which players did something illegal in order to perform better and altered the outcome of games in which they participated in.
Thanks Jay! So excited for this series to start again, and for it to include my favorite player of all time — Mark Buehrle!
A single tear streams down LaTroy Hawkins’ cheek…
I love this series every year, and think it’s excellent that you get your well-deserved vote this year. Thanks, Jay!
I think we’ve gotten to the point where usage of pitchers has changed so much that comparing counting stats like war just isnt going to cut it. Buehrle isn’t necessarily the posterchild for this but I think they need to be prepared to rethink the inclusion criteria for SP. If we don’t we’ll be looking at some serious lean SP HOF ballots. And with all the intangibles that someone like Buehrle brought to the table I think it would be a shame if he didn’t get into the HOF. If I were a betting man I’d say he eventually gets in as this becomes more apparent over his stay on the ballot.
Here’s what I’m going with:
The Elected: Bobby Abreu, Curt Schilling, Scott Rolen
Who won’t get elected in 2021 but should: Andruw Jones, Todd Helton, Andy Pettitte
Deserves the HOVG: Omar Vizquel, Jeff Kent, Torii Hunter, both Ramirezes
Dropped in 2021: Nick Swisher, Shane Victorino, Michael Cuddyer, LaTroy Hawkins
Elected despite the fact they are NOT retired: Mike Trout, Bartolo Colon, Nelson Cruz
There is a 0.00000000% chance that Abreu gets elected this year. A 0.00001% chance that he is elected in any year.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t selection to the HOF supposed to be based on one’s ON-FIELD accomplishments? Based on that, Schilling should be in. It’s a no-brainer. He put up 79.8 WAR.
I’m not saying I agree with the political stances he’s taken. I’m just saying those shouldn’t matter as to whether he’s HOF-worthy. Just a couple quick examples: Ruth was a womanizer, Cobb was a racist, and if Clemens ever gets in, he was a pedophile. Remember Mindy what’s-her-name? And that’s without even getting into all the alcoholics who were inducted.
It’s really very simple. Either the “morals clause” applies to everyone on none at all. Either it’s about on-the-field performance only or it’s not.
Perfect comments, Green Mountain Boy! Let’s talk baseball here. Talk politics on CNN.
Cobb threw out a first pitch in a negro league game and his grandfather was a pastor who was removed from the South for preaching against slavery.
I still like your comment overall though
I say put all the PED guys in this year. Let’s use this dumpster fire of a year for the one benefit of not having to discuss this every year moving forward.
Agreed. The league enabled all of those years of steroid use – we should punish it, not the players who took advantage. This is the perfect year to put them in as it will not negatively impact any other legitimate candidates given the weak ballot + it will get subdued media attention. You cannot build an on paper ‘greatest baseball team of all time’ without considering Bonds and Clemens.
My favorite time of the year when you start this