Today’s Game Ballot Is Tomorrow’s Headache
Will the Hall of Fame find room for an all-time saves leader in 2019 — besides current leader and first-ballot lock Mariano Rivera, that is? (He’ll headline the BBWAA ballot, to be released on November 19.) I refer instead to Lee Smith, the record holder from April 13, 1993 (when he overtook Jeff Reardon) to September 24, 2006 (when 2018 Hall inductee Trevor Hoffman surpassed him). At first glance, he not only appears to be the most likely ex-player to be elected from among the six on the 2019 Today’s Game Era Committee ballot, which also includes three managers and one owner, but the only one with a path to election. Released on Monday, the ballot, which centers on candidates who made their greatest impact upon Major League Baseball from 1988 onward, is as notable for its omissions as well as its inclusions.
The full slate of candidates alongside Smith includes former outfielders Harold Baines, Albert Belle, and Joe Carter; first baseman Will Clark; starter Orel Hershiser; managers Davey Johnson, Charlie Manuel, and Lou Piniella; and owner George Steinbrenner. Carter and Manuel are the ballot’s only newcomers besides Smith, which is curious because there wasn’t exactly a clamor to elect the rest, who served as bystanders when John Schuerholz and Bud Selig were elected two years ago. Six of the returnees received “fewer than five votes,” a shorthand the Hall typically uses so as not to embarrass any candidate. Piniella received seven votes, still far short of the 12 needed for election from among the panel of 16.
To these eyes, which have been studying the Hall of Fame voting since the 2002 election cycle, Smith isn’t necessarily the best candidate, but it’s not hard to see parallels with 2018 inductee Jack Morris, who was elected by the Modern Baseball Era Committee last December. Both candidates spent a full 15 years on the BBWAA ballot, Morris from 2000 to -14 and Smith from 2003 to -17; the latter was the last player to do so after a 2014 rule change that truncated candidates’ windows of BBWAA eligibility to 10 years. Both built up support slowly until they appeared to be trending towards election, with Morris crossing the all-important 50% threshold in his 11th year of eligibility and Smith in his 10th. The claims of both to a plaque in Cooperstown hinge(d) upon compiling big totals in a stat that’s since been devalued within stathead circles — 254 wins for Morris, 478 saves for Smith — but one that plays better in front of a panel where writers and historians generally constitute just a quarter of the electorate, with executives and Hall of Famers (both players and managers) making up the other three-quarters.
Admittedly, my comparison breaks down when it comes to the two candidates’ respective bodies of postseason work, which for Morris centers around his 10-inning complete game shutout in Game Seven of the 1991 World Series, where Smith struggled in his two tastes of October baseball. Nonetheless, the elections of Morris and longtime teammate Alan Trammell last year restored some relevance to a process that, though a handful of iterations, had not elected a single living ex-player since 2001, when Bill Mazeroski was tabbed. That such a process has Mazeroski (ranked 20th out of 20 Hall of Fame second basemen in my JAWS metric) and Morris (ranked 59th out of 63 Hall starting pitchers) as bookends isn’t a great advertisement towards that end, but Trammell (ninth among 22 Hall shortstops) serves to remind that there still exists a supply of candidates who deserve election despite slipping through the cracks of the writers’ vote, even if they’re not specifically on this ballot.
Indeed, a look at the actual list of candidates is one that quite rightly might induce some head-scratching. I’ll get to that momentarily, but first, a refresher course. The Today’s Game Era Committee doesn’t roll off the tongue, and if it doesn’t ring a bell, that’s because it’s relatively new. In 2016, six years after splitting the Veterans Committee into three chronologically based committees — the Pre-Integration Era (1871–1946), Golden Era (1947–72), and Expansion Era (-73 onward) committees — voted upon via a triennial cycle, the Hall again reconfigured its process for considering executives, managers, umpires, and long-retired players for election. Candidates are now separated into four eras to be voted upon with differing frequencies within a 10-year cycle, a laudable choice given that the earlier eras have been more thoroughly picked over by past committees, often to the Hall’s detriment. The three other committees besides the Today’s Game one are the Early Baseball (1871 to 1949), Golden Days (1950 to -69), and Modern Baseball (1970 to -87) Era Committees, with the schedule for consideration as follows. (Note that the year refers to that of induction; the balloting takes place the previous winter.)
2017: Today’s Game
2018: Modern Baseball
2019: Today’s Game
2020: Modern Baseball
2021: Golden Days and Early Baseball
2022: Today’s Game
2023: Modern Baseball
2024: Today’s Game
2025: Modern Baseball
2026: Golden Days
To be eligible, players have to have played a minimum of 10 seasons in the majors (one game in a given year is enough to count as a full season, same as on the BBWAA ballot), have to be retired for a minimum of 15 seasons (which, for this year, means that they last played in 2003), and can’t be on MLB’s ineligible list (tough luck, Pete Rose). Managers, umpires, and executives need to have spent a minimum of 10 years in baseball. Execs 70 years old or older may be considered even while still holding positions within an organization; such was the case for Schuerholz, then the president and vice chairman of the Braves.
It’s worth pointing out that, since the demise of the Veterans Committee, one major flaw in the era processes, both before and after the 2016 change, is that the former players — who have already passed through the BBWAA wringer, with the best of them elected — have been overshadowed. From 2011 to -17, eight of the 10 candidates elected were either executives (four), managers (three), or umpires (one); the two players elected, Ron Santo and Deacon White, were both deceased.
The Today’s Game candidates will be voted upon at the Winter Meetings in Las Vegas on December 9, with the results announced that evening at 8pm ET. Any candidate receiving at least 75% of the vote will be inducted next July 21 in Cooperstown, New York along with Rivera and anyone else elected by the BBWAA, the results of which will be announced on January 22. While it used to be that the names of the voters were released alongside those on the ballot, the 2016 reconfiguration appears to have done away with that custom, though the voters will be identified eventually.
On the other hand, the members of the Historical Overview Committee, the group of 11 BBWAA veterans who filtered through dozens of candidates in the process of putting together the ballot, were announced on Monday: Bob Elliott (Toronto Sun); Jim Henneman (formerly Baltimore Sun); Rick Hummel (St. Louis Post-Dispatch); Steve Hirdt (Elias Sports Bureau); Bill Madden (formerly New York Daily News); Jack O’Connell (BBWAA); Jim Reeves (formerly Fort Worth Star-Telegram); Tracy Ringolsby (Baseball America); Glenn Schwarz (formerly San Francisco Chronicle); Dave van Dyck (Chicago Tribune); and Mark Whicker (Los Angeles News Group).
As to the inclusions and the omissions, let’s do this in table form. First, the players:
| Player | Pos | Status | Career | Peak | JAWS | JAWS Pos | Dif | Yrs | Max % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Orel Hershiser | SP | ON | 56.3 | 40.1 | 48.2 | 61.8 | -13.6 | 2 | 11.2% |
| Will Clark | 1B | ON | 56.5 | 36.1 | 46.3 | 54.7 | -8.4 | 1 | 4.4% |
| Albert Belle | LF | ON | 40.1 | 36.0 | 38.1 | 53.5 | -15.4 | 2 | 7.7% |
| Harold Baines | RF | ON | 38.7 | 21.4 | 30.1 | 57.8 | -27.7 | 5 | 6.1% |
| Lee Smith | RP | ON | 29.0 | 20.9 | 24.9 | 32.3 | -7.4 | 15 | 52.3% |
| Joe Carter | RF | ON | 19.8 | 21.5 | 20.5 | 57.8 | -37.3 | 1 | 3.8% |
| David Cone | SP | OFF | 62.4 | 43.5 | 52.9 | 61.8 | -8.9 | 1 | 3.9% |
| Mark McGwire | 1B | OFF | 62.2 | 41.9 | 52.0 | 54.7 | -2.7 | 10 | 23.7% |
| Bret Saberhagen | SP | OFF | 59.0 | 43.3 | 51.1 | 61.8 | -10.7 | 1 | 1.3% |
| Chuck Finley | SP | OFF | 58.1 | 39.6 | 48.9 | 61.8 | -12.9 | 1 | 0.2% |
| Matt Williams | 3B | OFF | 46.6 | 34.0 | 40.3 | 55.7 | -15.4 | 1 | 1.3% |
| Kenny Lofton | CF | Not Elig. | 68.3 | 43.4 | 55.9 | 57.9 | -2.0 | 1 | 3.2% |
| Rafael Palmeiro | 1B | Not Elig. | 71.9 | 38.9 | 55.4 | 54.7 | 0.7 | 4 | 12.6% |
The most notable omission is that of McGwire, slugger of 583 home runs, the only candidate from among this group to receive more than 11.2% of the BBWAA vote in any year and the only one besides Smith to complete his full run of eligibility without slipping below 5.0% and thus off the ballot. There’s little doubt that the Hall would just as soon avoid spotlighting the never-ending debate surrounding candidates connected to performance-enhancing drugs; that was clearly the impetus behind the aforementioned rule change, which grandfathered only Smith, Trammell, and Don Mattingly but not anybody from the the so-called “Steroid Era,” whether they’d been implicated as users or not.
Also omitted were Cone and Saberhagen, two pitchers with similar credentials to Hershiser, Cy Youngs and postseason heroics included. Both do slightly better than Hershiser via JAWS but have lower win totals (204 for Hershiser, 194 for Cone, 167 for Saberhagen), and both fell short of 3,000 innings, below which election has become a rarity. That said, Cone’s got a huge advantage in strikeouts over the other two (2,668 to Hershiser’s 2,014 and Saberhagen’s 1,715), which is part of the reason his WAR is so high on him in the first place. It’s less of a mystery why Finley, a 200-game winner whose advanced stats put him on the same tier as that trio, was excluded: he lacks both a Cy Young and a signature October moment, but he hasn’t escaped my notice.
Of the other omissions, Williams is just an example of a contemporary who scores better in JAWS than most of the included candidates, though like Belle and McGwire, he’s short of 2,000 hits, a de facto barrier to election in that no candidate below that line whose career took place in the post-1960 expansion era has been elected. Both Lofton and Palmeiro are much stronger candidates than anyone on the ballot, from a statistical standpoint at least, though the latter did fail a drug test. Neither is eligible via this process until the Today’s Game election after what would have been their windows of BBWAA eligibility lapse. For Lofton, who went one-and-done on the 2013 ballot, that would be 2024, while for Palmeiro, it would be 2022.
The lack of timely recourse for candidates who fall victim to the Five Percent Rule — and the extent to which those low voting shares continue to influence how candidates are re-evaluated decades down the road by a subset of the same group that initially overlooked them — is an ongoing pet peeve of mine. That double jeopardy has turned the likes of Bobby Grich and Lou Whitaker, both of whom failed to receive even 5% in their lone BBWAA appearance and have yet to appear on a single small-committee ballot since, into afterthoughts, and they’re hardly alone. A fella could fill a book…
But I digress. As for the non-players, the managerial selections and non-selections look rather haphazard:
| Manager | Status | W-L | W-L% | G>.500 | Playoffs | Pennants | WS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lou Piniella | ON | 1835-1713 | .517 | 122 | 7 | 1 | 1 |
| Davey Johnson | ON | 1372-1071 | .562 | 301 | 6 | 1 | 1 |
| Charlie Manuel | ON | 1000-826 | .548 | 174 | 6 | 2 | 1 |
| Dusty Baker | OFF | 1863-1636 | .532 | 227 | 9 | 1 | 0 |
| Jim Leyland | OFF | 1769-1728 | .506 | 41 | 8 | 3 | 1 |
The inclusion of Piniella, as the top returning vote-getter, I can understand, but retaining Johnson and introducing Manuel, who spent far less time than any of the others in the dugout, while excluding Leyland, who won as many pennants as that pair combined, seems off. And it’s not like Leyland, who last managed in 2013, is a threat to return to a dugout, whereas Baker, who’s just a year removed from his last job, might still answer the phone.
The aforementioned absent players and managers aren’t necessarily strong enough candidates for election themselves; one can find comparables both inside and outside the Hall using traditional and/or advanced statistics as yardsticks. For reasons that I’ll explain in a series of articles over the coming days and weeks, while the actual candidates on the ballot certainly had their moments in the majors, they aren’t all that strong either, particularly in comparison to Smith given the likely tilt of the electorate. For those keen on bringing a stathead sensibility to the process, this may well turn into yet another frustrating chapter in the long history of the Hall’s small-committee voting. I’ll have a whole lot more to say about the credentials of the candidates and the snarls in the process in the coming days and weeks, as part of my first election cycle since joining the ranks of FanGraphs — and yes, I’ll be doing the same for the BBWAA ballot, as well. Buckle up, it’s election season.
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.
Where’s John Franco?!?!?!?!?!
Thanks, I just needed to get that out there.
Not eligible.
He’ll go in with his long-time tag-team partner Julio. 🙂
Pretty easy to return a blank ballot with this group of candidates.
But how do you properly value that Bret Saberhagen is the namesake and founding father of our modern sabermetrics? (don’t look that up just trust me)
I’m not entirely sure I’d vote for any candidate. Maybe a manager like Piniella or Davey, maybe Steinbrenner. Of the players, they’re underwhelming. Where I’d’ve voted for McGwire, Cone or Saberhagen, we got these six.
Smith and Clark are closest to their positional standard, and Hershiser’s got the awards, fame, record, playoff appearances, the title, etc. I’d probably rank the players Clark, Belle, Hershiser, Smith, Baines, Carter. No idea what Carter is doing here..
No place in the Hall for Steinbrenner as long as anyone is out for character clause reasons. Bonds and Clemens were jerks and cheated TO BENEFIT THE TEAM. Steinbrenner was a jerk and cheated to the detriment of his team. He doesn’t belong.
I disagree. Steinbrenner brought more passion to the game than any other owner. He may have been a headache for everyone in baseball, but he was added entertainment for the fans and an important part to the game’s history. I think his lasting net benefit to the game should give him a place in the HoF.
And I’m not a yankee fan.
I agree with this. It is the Hall of FAME and Steinbrenner was truly larger than life. He rebuilt the Yankees and made them relevant again. And in the era of Trump, he would be a perfect choice. Stylistically, they are very similar.
I am not a Yankee fan either but Steinbrenner is one of the most famous baseball personalities of the era I grew up in.
There’s a reason why he ended up on Seinfeld
Considering Steinbrenner was officially banned for life in 1990 (which obviously didn’t stick), I would say that his contributions from 1988 forward are not worthy of the Hall of Fame.
Steinbrenner was banned from 1990 to 1993. Those were not exactly the Yankees glory years. Plus, he wouldn’t be the first HOFer to be banned and then reinstated. Mickey Mantle, Willie Mays and Ferguson Jenkins are already members of that dubious club.
Bonds was banned NEVER and can’t get in
Ditto Clemens and at least 3 other players who deserve the Hall more than Steinbrenner if we’re just going to let in rule violators
The character clause is arbitrarily enforced and ultimately meaningless. I won’t consider it as a valid reason to exclude someone (aside from those who are officially banned) until the Hall of Fame kicks out known cheaters like Gaylord Perry and huge jerks like Ty Cobb.
Are you still relying on the slanderous Al Stump stories about Ty Cobb? Or the completely fictional Tommy Lee Jones movie?
There is no truth to the stories about Cobb sharpening his spikes (to the contrary, he asked Ban Johnson to require players to dull their spikes for safety), killing a man (never killed anybody, nothing even remotely close – the myth was entirely Al Stump’s slander), or being racist (he supported integration, and was from a family of abolitionists including a grandfather who was a preacher who fought against slavery and refused to fight for the Confederacy, and a father who was a state senator who supported his black constituents, fought for desegregation in public schools, and stood down lynch mobs).
Of all the “jerks” in baseball, for some reason too many people still single out Ty Cobb. Why not Cap Anson, Rogers Hornsby, or Orlando Cepeda?
I don’t know of anything Cobb actually did to deserve the awful things people say about him. He certainly does not deserve to be held up as the main example of “huge jerks” in baseball.
Great points. https://www.mlb.com/news/ty-cobb-history-built-on-inaccuracies/c-178601094
Even if he’s been slandered to such an excessive degree, his reputation as a huge jerk still has enough truth to it to violate the character clause. If those other guys were even bigger jerks, then they too need to be kicked out of the Hall before I can take the character clause seriously.
Carter’s peak vs career WAR is pretty funny. A good peak (not by HoF standards) and was otherwise terrible. Manuel included as a manager seems like a joke.
Let us all pledge to remember Lofton’s eligibility for this process in 2024 and to make noise about it then.
When you refer to Grich, Whitaker and the 5% rule do you mean that because they failed to get 5% of the vote in their lone ballot appearances they are *Never* eligible for a vets committee style election? Wouldn’t the same be true for Lofton who was also one and done?
Not “never eligible,” just forgotten about, or in danger of same. Obviously, there are candidates here that fell below 5% or never got above it, but it’s hardly a certainty that anyone receiving that treatment receives (or received) a shot via committee, especially because previous voting shares have been used to justify exclusion from secondary consideration.
Thanks for the clarification!
I gave up caring about what they did after they had the gall to select @&$)(;:/!!! Selig and the utterly average Jack Mortis.
It is funny that they completely disregard players implicated of PED usage, but they elected the man who oversaw the league during the era and appeared willfully ignorant of the epidemic.
I wouldn’t even say willfully ignorant. I would say “willfully complicit.”
Hopefully, Smith finally gets in. His election is long overdue. Saves may be a devalued stat (although not by nearly as much as Wins), but Smith’s dominance as a relief pitcher extends well into many more acceptable statistical measures. The only big argument against him is by those who think exclusive relief pitchers in general don’t belong in the Hall, a sentiment that I and most others certainly don’t share.
I don’t know about Cone or Saberhagen, but I think I know why McGwire was snubbed. He’s already appeared on the Veterans’ Committee ballot once before and didn’t even come close to election, so they’re not even bothering with his tainted case anymore. I expect the Committee will extend a similar one-and-done offer to Palmeiro and the other PED-connected candidates once they’re eligible.
My biggest problem with the cycle of committees as it is set up now is that they probably won’t get all the way through the cycle before they have to redo the system. They definitely won’t make it all the way through twice (because by then there will be a new era to add in).
Why is Lofton ineligible?
I know he got a weirdly low number of votes for a guy with 65 career WAR. A total higher than many current Hall of Famers. I’ve heard guys get called sure things with 10 less WAR for their career. Lofton was a great leadoff hitter and a gold glove center fielder. He was as dominant in center as Ozzie Smith was at SS. And he has far more WAR. He should he in the Hall of Fame. 65 career WAR is definitely enough when several guys in the low 50s are in. Plus he left before he truly declined.
He was as dominant in center as Ozzie Smith was at SS.
Oh hell no.
Don’t get me wrong, Lofton should be in the Hall, but let’s not get crazy.
WAR is still a lousy way to judge careers based heavily on defensive excellence, seeing as there still are no really good advanced measures for accurately judging defensive value. Lofton may still deserve election, but his case needs to be built on more than just WAR.
“To be eligible, players have to have played a minimum of 10 seasons in the majors (one game in a given year is enough to count as a full season, same as on the BBWAA ballot), have to be retired for a minimum of 15 seasons (which, for this year, means that they last played in 2003), and can’t be on MLB’s ineligible list (tough luck, Pete Rose).”
From paragraph 6, Lofton last played in 2007.
I have generally viewed any iteration of a Veterans Committee with extreme suspicion, and was very pleasantly surprised to see Alan Trammell receive the recognition he deserves last year. Having written this, until I see serious consideration for Lou Whitaker and Bobby Grich (and to a lesser extent, Dwight Evans), I will remain suspicious. All these arbitrary timelines won’t do anything to help.
While he’s come a lot closer, it’s also embarrassing that the Committee has yet to elect Ted Simmons.
Pass on the whole ballot. Hershiser and Clark are close but not quite. McGwire, Cone, Saberhagen, and Finley are all deserving and should be on the ballot. The BBWAA managed to miss all 4 of them and continues to be an inept laughingstock. Joe Carter? Seriously?
Kevin Appier is another snub.
Glad to see the numbers are with Cone, who’s as good a choice as Hershiser and better than the others
What happens if Rafael Palmeiro’s comeback succeeds, and he makes it back to the big leagues next year (have you seen his stats from indy ball?) Is he eligible for the writers’ ballot again? I’m 60% joking and 40% asking.
Yes. That’s happened before
I see no players above or below the cutoff who are eligible who I would even consider much less vote for.
Let’s get back to getting Simmons, Grich and Whitaker into the hall and revisit this when Lofton is eligible
Whoops, wrong link on my last post.