Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Frank Thomas Elected To Hall Of Fame

The Baseball Writers Association of America has elected Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine and Frank Thomas to the Hall of Fame.

Maddux, often referred to as "The Professor," won 355 games with a 3.16 ERA in 5,008 1/3 career innings. He averaged 6.1 K/9 (3,371 career strikeouts) and 1.8 BB/9 (999 career walks) over that time and captured four consecutive NL Cy Young Awards from 1992-95. He also fired 109 complete games, including 35 shutouts, and picked up 18 Gold Glove Awards as well. Baseball-Reference valued his career at 104.6 WAR, while Fangraphs had him at 113.9.

His longtime teammate, Glavine, won two NL Cy Young Awards (and had three other Top 3 finishes) en route to a career 3.54 ERA. Glavine won 305 games, striking out 2607 batters (5.3 K/9) against 1500 walks (3.1 BB/9) in 4,413 1/3 career innings. He completed 56 of his 682 career starts and totaled 25 shutouts along the way. Baseball-Reference pegs him at 74 WAR, while Fangraphs values his career at 64.3 WAR.

Thomas was one of the game's most feared power hitters for the majority of his 19-year career. "The Big Hurt" owns a lifetime .301/.419/.555 batting line with 521 homers and 1,704 RBIs. He won the American League MVP in 1993-94 and had four other Top 4 finishes in that voting. Thomas' OPS+ of 156 is tied with the great Willie Mays for the 19th-highest in Major League history, placing him one point ahead of Hank Aaron. In terms of WAR, Baseball-Reference has Thomas at 73.6 compared to Fangraphs' 72.4.

Falling painfully shy of enshrinement is Astros great Craig Biggio, who received 74.8 percent of the vote, meaning he was two votes shy of being elected. That should bode well for his future chances, and one would imagine that he is a lock for election in the coming years.

Also of note is Jack Morris, whose 61.5% vote count did not get him elected in his 15th and final time on the BBWAA ballot. Opinions have varied widely on Morris, whose 10-inning shutout in Game 7 of the 1991 World Series against the Braves is considered one of the greatest postseason performances in history. He will now have to wait until at least 2016 for another chance at the Hall of Fame, when the Veteran's Committee can vote on his fate.

Maddux's 97.2 percent vote count is overwhelming, but also means that he was left off of an incredible 16 ballots. It was thought that he could pass Tom Seaver for the greatest total ever, but Tom Terrific's mark of 98.8 percent still remains the top in Hall of Fame voting history. Mike Piazza (62.2 percent), Jeff Bagwell (54.3 percent) and Tim Raines (46.1 percent) were among the other top vote-getters. Click here for the full results, and congratulations from the MLBTR team to Maddux, Glavine and Thomas on the well-deserved elections.


Full Story | 391 Comments | Categories: Uncategorized

391 Responses to Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Frank Thomas Elected To Hall Of Fame Leave a Reply

  1. Seth Guttman 1 year ago

    There was a living human being who had a hall of fame vote who used it on Jacque Jones. Can someone please find this guy and cycle through his mail every single year so we can burn his ballot?

    • slasher016 1 year ago

      Come on he had an 11.5 WAR season! Oh wait that was his career WAR? Can you believe there are 66 individual seasons with a higher WAR than his career and someone thought he was a HOFer?

    • Ruben_Tomorrow 1 year ago

      Someone voted for Aaron Sele last year. Guys like to do wacky things with their ballots to get some publicity.

      • letsgogiants 1 year ago

        The only logical explanation to that is he must have had a huge man crush on him.

        • Ruben_Tomorrow 1 year ago

          Some do votes like that is a tip of the cap to someone they followed or wrote heavily about. It happens all the time. Like I said, writers will do strange things with their ballots just to get some acknowledgement for their obscure vote. Yesterday, a writer publicly spoke about not voting for Maddux and using his only vote for Morris.

          • Zak A 1 year ago

            And that writer should be stripped of his ‘right’ to vote. He said he won’t vote for any one in the steroid era, well he’s not going to have anyone to vote for soon so might as well just remove him from the equation all together next year.

          • NickinIthaca 1 year ago

            Thankfully he has willingly given up his right to vote going forward.

          • JamieFC 1 year ago

            What’s the point in even having a voting system if you’re going to strip the right to vote from those who don’t agree with your point of view. The writers can – and should – be able to do whatever they want with their votes.

          • Zak A 1 year ago

            This isn’t the fan vote, these guys are supposed to make legit educated votes. They all talk a big game about the integrity of the sport, well when they make these nonsensical votes they diminish the integrity of the sport’s greatest honor

    • BobMarley22 1 year ago

      I heard one reason why they did this was respect for the player and they enjoyed watching thme but come on that is just a dumb way when more deserving players worked hard to get there.

    • John Donovan 1 year ago

      Don’t complain about the guys that got voted that you don’t think belong. They were on the ballot so they were worth voting for. We should be complaining about the guys that sent in blank ballots or just voted for 1 guy on this stacked ballot. Diminishing the career of Jacque Jones is just mean.

      • slasher016 1 year ago

        There is a big difference between diminishing a guy’s career and thinking they are HOF worthy. Even making it to the bigs is an achievement.

        • John Donovan 1 year ago

          And he isn’t in the Hall of Fame and won’t be on the ballot next year. It doesn’t hurt anyone that Jacque Jones got 1 vote including Biggio. Besides who says that vote would have went to Biggio or anyone in particular anyway. Maybe this voter just voted for 9 guys and would have voted for just 8 without Jones.

      • WazBazbo 1 year ago

        The only criteria for appearing on the ballot is that you played for ten seasons and have been retired for five. Appearing on the ballot honestly says nothing about your abilities as a player.

        • Yettyskill 1 year ago

          Well come now, it’s says you were good enough to last 10 seasons in the Bigs, An accomplishment. It just says nothing about your HoF worthiness.

          • Zak A 1 year ago

            Baseball has tons of journeymen AAAA guys.

        • John Donovan 1 year ago

          No that’s not the only criteria. There are plenty of guys that played for 10 years and were retired for 5 that were left off of this ballot. There is a long list of decent players such as Jose Cruz Jr., Geoff Jenkins, Jon Leiber, Matt Morris, Trot Nixon, Dave Roberts, Jose Vidro, Dmitri Young, and many more that were eligible for the ballot this year for the first time and were excluded. Getting on the ballot is a big accomplishment.

          • WazBazbo 1 year ago

            This from Baseball Reference: “A player is eligible for election to the Baseball Hall of Fame if satisfies the following criteria:The player must have competed in ten seasons. A single game counts as a “season” in the eyes of the Hall.
            The player has been retired for at least five seasons. If a player comes back and plays in the major leagues, the clock restarts. The easiest way to figure out the rule is to add six to the last season the player was active. Therefore, players eligible in 2007 played their last game in 2001.
            A screening committee must approve the player’s worthiness. Most players are given a token appearance on the ballot if they meet the ten year rule and they were a regular player for most of that time.”

            So apparently a player can be excluded on the 10/5 thing, but this seems to indicate that it’s not common.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            There are 36 names excluded and 19 names included on the 2014 ballot according to Wikipedia.

            In 2013, there were 30 eligible names excluded and 24 eligible names included.

            It’s like they say at the Oscars, it really is an honor just to be nominated. Some very good players were not.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            No problem, I research for a living…this is cake. I listed off the ones that were excluded in 2014 earlier in this thread. In 2013, guys such as Tony Batista, Mark Bellhorn, Juan Encarnacion, Mike Lieberthal, Mike Myers, Neifi Perez, Scott Spiezio, Jose Valentin, Bob Wickman, Preston Wilson, and Jaret Wright plus many others were left off.

            Now they are not the greatest players of all time, but they were legitimate major league starters for at least 10 years each.

            Here are the eligible players for 2015 that I got from the HOF website. About two thirds will not make the final ballot

            Rich Aurilia, Aaron Boone, Paul Byrd, Tony Clark, Carlos Delgado,David Dellucci, Jermaine Dye, Alan Embree, Darin Erstad, Kelvim Escobar, Cliff Floyd, Nomar Garciaparra, Brian Giles, Tom Gordon, Eddie Guardado, Randy Johnson, Mark Loretta, Pedro Martinez, Ramon Martinez, Doug Mientkiewicz, Kevin Millar, Troy Percival, B.J. Ryan, Jason Schmidt, Gary Sheffield, John Smoltz, Julian Tavarez, Jarrod Washburn, David Weathers

          • TheTruth 1 year ago

            I really hope they put Erstad on the ballot next year and he grabs a handful of votes. He’s the only player in MLB history to win a Gold Glove at more than one position. No, he’s not a Hall of Famer, but that’s a damn fine accomplishment worthy of some recognition.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            I agree
            If I had a choice I would go

            definitely on
            Delgado Dye Erstad Floyd Garciaparra Giles Gordon Johnson P.Martinez R.Martinez Percival Schmidt Sheffield Smoltz

            maybe
            Boone Guardado Mientkiewicz Washburn Weathers

            definitely off
            Aurilia Byrd Clark Dellucci Embree Escobar Loretta Millar Ryan Tavarez

        • John Donovan 1 year ago

          No that’s not the only criteria. There are plenty of guys that played for 10 years and were retired for 5 that were left off of this ballot. There is a long list of decent players such as Jose Cruz Jr., Geoff Jenkins, Jon Leiber, Matt Morris, Trot Nixon, Dave Roberts, Jose Vidro, Dmitri Young, and many more that were eligible for the ballot this year for the first time and were excluded. Getting on the ballot is a big accomplishment.

    • Erik Trenouth 1 year ago

      In 2 years time, Juan Castro will appear on the ballot. I would vote for him.

    • sourbob 1 year ago

      That vote doesn’t mean the guy thought Jacque Jones was HoF-worthy. Typically, in cases like this, a writer who had a friendship with the guy will cast a vote for him out of respect and to make sure that he doesn’t go out with zero votes. We saw the same thing recently with BJ Surhoff.

      Me, I save my rage for people not voting for people they should (SIXTEEN ballots let off Greg Maddux?!?!?) instead of getting worked up over meaningless symbolic votes for guys who are one and done anyway.

      • $3513744 1 year ago

        yeah but when you have a limited number of votes, casting a vote for a guy like Surhoff or Jones takes one vote away from guys who actually have had careers that are worthy of that vote. i’m not completely against the system, but in my eyes when you cast a vote for someone, you’re saying that you think they are worthy of the HOF.

        • sourbob 1 year ago

          If the guy had a full ballot and left someone good off, then yeah. But most ballots aren’t full anyway, typically.

          Though this year was crazy stocked.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            so my point stands. the ballot was sufficiently full.

  2. All three were very worthy candidates (obviously). That said, the fact that Craig Biggio didn’t get in once again is a complete farce.

    • Ruben_Tomorrow 1 year ago

      I disagree to an extent. Biggio was a tremendous player, but he was never a player that was dominating the league. Missing the Hall of Fame is not a knock to anyone, because people that get into the Hall should be considered as legendary. I also think when you have Biggio and Piazza it’s not even close which one is a Hall of Famer and which one is flirting with the Hall of Fame.

      • I agree. He was never a “dominant” player (probably because he got hit every other pitch). However, he lost votes to players like Jacque Jones, Armando Benitez and J.T. Snow. That’s what I’m concerned with. Whoever honestly thinks those three are Hall of Famers needs to get Pete Rose’d from baseball.

      • Shane 1 year ago

        You are wrong there, he was a dominating player, but at 2B. They have always said the magic number is 3000 hits and he has that. He was a all-star and 3 positions and has the most doubles as a 2B in history. U can not compare Biggio’s numbers to Piazza because he was not that type player. If you were just going by numbers there would be hardly no 2B or SS going into the HOF

        • Ruben_Tomorrow 1 year ago

          You need to compare Piazza and Biggio when there is only one spot available for the Hall. Piazza dominating the catching position. You can argue that Piazza was one of the best catchers to ever play the game. Was Biggio ever the best player to play the positions he played in the history of the game? Biggio was a great player, but the fact that people believe he is an automatic Hall of Famer I don’t understand. The 3,000 hits you could simply argue that he was a compiler, which the Hall of Fame seems to favor over dominance. Someone like Albert Belle, who completely dominated the game when he played, would never have a chance at the Hall of Fame for many reasons. However, his shorter career was a display of dominance.

          • Shane 1 year ago

            He is not the best catcher to play the game, Johnny Bench was. Piazza was a medicare catcher but great hitter. There were more than one spot available for the HOF so there was never just one spot? Glavine and Maddux made the HOF because they both deserved it. What 2B show be in the HOF then???

          • Curt Green 1 year ago

            Medicare catcher! Not ragging on you but that’s funny.

          • Shane 1 year ago

            Defensively he was not good at all, that is why they tried to convert him to 1B. That being said he is one of the top hitting C of all time and that should be enough for the HOF

          • Hurdled Again 1 year ago

            He has no idea what he said!

          • Zak A 1 year ago

            Who is looking at UZR for the HOF? The HOF is mostly about being stout offensively. Most of the defensive wizards are already in the HOF and you’d be hard pressed to put someone in now b/c of their defense if they are marginal elsewhere.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            vizquel will put up some good debate when he’s up for the ballot.

          • TheTruth 1 year ago

            Vizquel has almost 2,900 career hits and 11 Gold Gloves. If you are talking about the best defensive shortstop in baseball history, he’s certainly in the argument. I don’t think he’ll be a first ballot guy for the same reason Biggio isn’t, but he deserves a spot in Cooperstown.

          • Zak A 1 year ago

            And he’s been playing for what 40 years?

          • Shane 1 year ago

            Only 1 HOF 2B has more HRs, only 5 have as many RBIs, only 1 has as many Runs, only 3 has as many SB, only 2 has as many hits, Biggio also has the most doubles of any 2B! Most of these 2B are players that had very long careers. All that being said Biggio might be one of the top 2B of all time. (I didn’t even get into the all-stars and gold gloves)

          • The_Unnatural 1 year ago

            That’s not because he was one of the greatest, it’s because stuck around 20 years.

          • abes_seed 1 year ago

            you don’t stick around for 20 years for being just good.

          • The_Unnatural 1 year ago

            Ruben Sierra, Darren Oliver, Kenny Rogers. There’s a list with a ton of guys like that. Sometimes you don’t even have to be good to play that long. This guy Luke Sewell played 20 years and collected 3.8 bWAR for his career.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            don’t forget jamie moyer

          • The_Unnatural 1 year ago

            Him too. I didn’t include him because he played 25 years, not 20.

          • Shane 1 year ago

            I agree he stuck around and got those stats but so did most all the 2B that are in the HOF….even longer that Biggio. Good 2B stay in the league a while

          • Ruben_Tomorrow 1 year ago

            All-stars? Biggio played for 20 years and made the All-Star team only 7 times, which gives you an argument that he was not dominating the game for the majority of his career. Like I said, Biggio was a tremendous player, but not an immortal. The Hall of Fame has allowed too many players, and I think it should belong to the immortal players (including some of the steroid guys). Biggio is going to get in, but the fact that you can make a valid argument that he is or isn’t a Hall of Famer is a solid indicator of how Biggio was not a dominating player throughout his career. I think the players that get in should be without question Hall of Famers (like the guys that got in today and Mike Piazza).

          • -C 1 year ago

            Pretty sure all baseball players, save perhaps Julio Franco, are mortal.

            -C

          • Ruben_Tomorrow 1 year ago

            “Heroes live, but legends never die…”

            -The Sandlot’s Babe Ruth

          • Shane 1 year ago

            I come to you with the same question, what 2B makes the HOF. His numbers are just as good as just about every 2B in the HOF and they almost ALL had very long careers too. The way you are explaining what u need to be a HOF’er there would be no 2B in the HOF. Hell, Jeter should have been gone 2 years ago but he is still playing and compiling stats, so is he a HOF’er?

          • Ruben_Tomorrow 1 year ago

            Jeter and Biggio aren’t even in the same category. Jeter is a right-handed hitter with a career .312 average (Biggio isn’t even a .300 hitter), has been in the top ten MVP voting eight times (Biggio three), and has been one of the best post season baseball players in the history of the game (Biggio was a .234 hitter). All that has to count for something when talking about the HOF. What bothers me about making a case for Biggio, is that writers and others will argue “He did something only Rogers Hornsby did…” or some other gimmick stat. If you look at the numbers and the length of his career you can make an argument that Biggio is and is not a HOF’er which for me raises a red flag. Biggio will be in the HOF, but I think the HOF should be reserved for the guys that are no question HOF’ers (even though that is not the case).

          • legaryd 1 year ago

            Man Albert Belle…that dude could hit with a capital IT. He was totally made of glass and advil though.

          • vtadave 1 year ago

            Far from a compiler. Five years of a 130 OPS+ (Alomar had 6). The fact that you would criticize a guy for getting 3,060 hits makes no sense. If he had retired 2 years earlier, would that have helped? Still 2,800 hits.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            i don’t think he’s criticizing him for getting that many hits. he’s just saying that 3000 hits isn’t an automatic lock for immediate induction given the context of his career or this ballot.

          • -C 1 year ago

            Every hitter with 3,000 hits, save Rose (banned), Jeter (active), Biggio, and Palmeiro (steroids), is in the Hall of Fame. Contextually, as far as baseball history is concerned, Biggio is a lock.

            The fact is that his argument is a very poor one. Career context does not trump the historical context associated with reaching that benchmark.

            Tony Gwynn (and I’m a huge Gwynn fan) had only 81 more hits than Biggio over the same amount of years. That’s four hits per year. He wasn’t nearly the defender or baserunner that Biggio was, and he didn’t play a challenging position. He had less power than Biggio. Did Gwynn just collect his place in the Hall of Fame??

            -C

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            yes it is nearly a lock, but clearly it is not a lock. no one said they were locks to be in the first ballot or even the first few. i imagine he would’ve gotten in this year if the ballot wasn’t so stacked. that’s called context. whether you like it or not, career context does trump historical context. look at all the guys that were left off. for example look at how many guys have hit more than 60 homeruns in a season, and look at why sammy sosa isn’t in the HOF for doing it several times. look at Bonds. Clemens….that again is what we call context whether or not you agree with it.

          • -C 1 year ago

            I would file steroid use under historical context. It’s historically significant that players with these types of careers aren’t being voted in.

            -C

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            yep me too. but clearly some do not agree and consider this part of career context. but it doesn’t really matter what everyone thinkgs because it’s been shown time and again that stat accumulation is not an automatic lock for the HOF.

          • Gpantz 1 year ago

            Of the 28 player with 3,000+ hits, only 5 have careers of less than 20 years; 4 have fewer hits than Biggio. Of the 4 players with 20-year careers, Paul Waner has the most at 3,152; 92 more than Biggio (4.6 more hits/yr). Of the 6 players with 21-year careers, Honus Wagner (3,420) has the most. The least of the “21-year club,” George Brett, had 3,154. That’s 94 more than Biggio, or about a season’s worth of hitting. That’s just below Cal Ripkin’s 21-year total of 3,184; that’s also about a season’s worth of hitting a 124 more than Biggio. Ripken also had the lowest career batting average at .277. As far as I can tell, MANY in the 3,000 hit club could be said to have “compiled stats.” Since 1962, 17 of the 20 retired players with 3,000 hits went in on the first ballot. Who didn’t? Pete Rose (banned), Rafael Palmeiro (steroids), and Craig Biggio (Huh?)

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            out of curiosity, of those guys how many got in the HOF in less than 4 ballots? i only ask this because everyone’s so up in arms over him missing when it’s pretty clear he’s going to get in.

          • Gpantz 1 year ago

            Of the 8 “pre-1962″ players, all but Cap Anson (Veteran’s Committee) and Eddie Collins (4th ballot) were inducted on either the 1st or 2nd ballot.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            thank you. that just confirms it for me. i see nothing to be so upset about. biggio’s going to get in.

          • Shane 1 year ago

            GREAT point on Gwynn!!

          • Shane 1 year ago

            GREAT point on Gwynn!!

      • Peterborough Dave 1 year ago

        Biggio is one of those endurance players like Blyleven and Palmiero. He’ll get in eventually. Endurance guys never get in as fast as guys with huge peak years.

        • tmengd 1 year ago

          Well Palmiero is officially out now. Didn’t get the 5%

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            Now the Veteran’s Committee will put him in one day.

          • Peterborough Dave 1 year ago

            Missed that- interesting. 500 hr + 3000 hits. Pretty wild eh?

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            It really diminishes the Hall in my opinion. If a guy with those stats + the all time home run king + the all time hit king + one of the best strikeout pitchers of all time don’t get in, then what is the Hall of Fame, really? It is clearly not a collection of the best players of all time. Let’s just kick out Ty Cobb, Cap Anson, Eddie Murray and a bunch of other guys and call it the Nice Guys Hall of Fame.

          • Peterborough Dave 1 year ago

            Well said.

      • Contrarian30 1 year ago

        Jeter was never dominating either. But he did remain remarkably consistent throughout his career much like Biggio.

        • Shawn Baublitz 1 year ago

          Houston doesn’t get the Yankee love. Sad.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            it’s not that sad. they haven’t done anything to deserve it.

  3. Ted 1 year ago

    Frank Thomas only getting 83% is as absurd as Maddux only getting 97%. What are these guys thinking?

    • John 1 year ago

      They both got in, so whatever. I’m tired of expending energy caring about the ‘conspiracy’ to not let anyone get in unanimously. At this point, that is what it is, and these dinosaurs aren’t going to move past it. As long as deserving people (like Thomas and Maddux) aren’t outright snubbed, it’s not a big deal.

      • schaddy24 1 year ago

        Agreed. I know this is a long time down the road, but I’m curious to see what happens with Mike Trout’s voting. If he continues playing this way, I could see him getting 100% but it’s still not likely.

        • John 1 year ago

          My greatest-fear-realized would be the Derek Jeter circle-jerk somehow culminating in him being the first ever unanimous selection. You can’t just pass over Wiliams, Mays, Ruth, Aaron, etc. just to give it to that chummy media pal that was vastly inferior to those guys. At this point, I think if they’ve decided no one can be unanimous the first time, then that’s just how it has to be. Giving it to a random future player is to give him something all the other all-time greats didn’t deserve (for whatever reason), so just…keep that going.

          • Tommets 1 year ago

            You’re not worried about the same situation in 4 years with Mo?

          • Fat, Ugly Inner-City Sweathog 1 year ago

            No way that happens. There is plenty of anti-Yankee sentiment out there to balance out the “Yankee love” mythology. There are people out there who won’t give that honor to him just for BEING “Mr. Yankee”

        • John Donovan 1 year ago

          Really? Mike Trout? The guy has played two years and you are already putting him above the likes of Tom Seaver, Nolan Ryan, and Babe Ruth. He has had 2 great years, but you are WAY off.

          • Curt Green 1 year ago

            He said “if he continues playing this way”….. chill out.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            It’s still a ridiculous argument. You might as well say if Tanaka goes 24-0 for 15 straight years then he will 100% too.

          • John 1 year ago

            That’s not the same thing at all. Trout, through two years IN MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL, has done things virtually no one in the history of the game has done. At an age NO ONE has done it. You can project that and talk about that and speculate about that. You can talk about how he has actually performed, and what that looks like going forward. You can’t do that with someone who has literally zero performance. That’s not the same thing as a player who has never even signed with a major league team.

            But sure, if you want to bring up Tanaka, have fun with your projection.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            I think Tanaka is going to be a bust myself, so my projection is useless. I’m just saying that Fred Lynn started off his career like Mike Trout and then fell off rather quickly. Sure Trout could become a HOFer, but don’t assume just because he is great now that he will great in 5 years or after a 15 year career.

          • Curt Green 1 year ago

            As I said earlier, the original post said, “if he continues to play this way”.

          • John 1 year ago

            The first two years of Fred Lynn’s all-around career don’t come close to Trout’s.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            I didn’t say they were an exact match. But they were clearly similar.

          • John 1 year ago

            That’s my point though: they’re not. Trout beats him in virtually every statistical category, and in some cases (SB: 86 to 24, HR: 62 to 33) by a landslide, while also being a gold glove fielder, which Lynn most certainly was not. And the overall result of that outperformance, by WAR, is staggering: 20.8 vs. 12.5.

            The whole idea is that Trout is doing what has never been done before. Pointing out another guy who had a really good start to his career isn’t a valid counterpoint, because he doesn’t come close.

            And, for the umpteenth time, the original poster made clear that he was talking about an “if they continue…” pace, not an argument for the guy right now. And Trout, more than any other player in the game right now, has the most valid “if they continue…” argument to be made. That’s why he said it. Move on.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            First off, don’t ever tell me to move on. You are not the internet policeman.

            Secondly, Fred Lynn won the MVP in his rookie year…Trout did not. But seriously, They are similar, not in statistics, but in 2 year hype. Fred Lynn was called a future Hall of Famer early on although you are probably way too young to know that.

            Next, there is no such thing as “the most valid” if they continue argument. If there was it wouldn’t be a two year “veteran” anyway. It would be someone like Miguel Cabrera, Prince Fielder or Justin Verlander that has been around for several years.

          • vtadave 1 year ago

            NOBODY puts John Donovan in a corner. Nobody!

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            or else!

          • schaddy24 1 year ago

            Thank you for taking my words as they were, and understanding the point I was making.. A hat tip to you on this eve good sir.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            I didn’t say they were an exact match. But they were clearly similar.

          • abes_seed 1 year ago

            W/L record is overrated anyway… Technically you could go 24-0 with a 4.00 ERA…

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            you could, but has anybody done that?

          • deadgeorge 1 year ago

            Clemens went 21-3 with a 3.51 in 2001…thats as close as i can come.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            you could, but has anybody done that?

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            Technically you could go 24-0 with a 14.00 ERA as well, but that’s not likely to happen either. Technically you could have an OBP of .500 and not score a single run or drive in a single run, but that’s not likely either.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            exactly. and if you did, it would be a heck of feat since no one else has ever done it.

          • schaddy24 1 year ago

            As I said, it’s a long time down the road…

    • John Donovan 1 year ago

      Joe DiMaggio only got 88%…on his 4th ballot. Rogers Hornsby only got 78% to get in. Duke Snider didn’t get in until his 13th year on the ballot. Jackie Robinson only got 77.5% of the vote. These percentages really mean nothing. Frank Thomas IS a Hall of Famer. The rest is just meaningless.

      • westcoastwhitesox 1 year ago

        I’m ecstatic Frank Thomas got in on his first ballot! There have been so many sure-thing HOFers that didn’t make it in on their first chance.

  4. tmengd 1 year ago

    Biggio missed it by two votes. Yet People voted for Gagne, Jacque Jones and Armando Benitez. Pretty sad. Even if you are not an Astro fan you have to feel bad for him 74.8% of the votes and can’t use the excuse that 10 votes were not enough.

    • deadgeorge 1 year ago

      But if you’re not an Astro fan you probably didnt see enough of him to know one way or another. His career stats are eye-popping, but he played in an area of the country where most baseball people aren’t. Theres probably four times as many BBWAA eligible HOF voters in New York City as in all the Southwest.

      • NickinIthaca 1 year ago

        If a baseball writer isn’t informed enough about MLB overall, or is too lazy to call up stats on this crazy thing called the Internet, then they don’t deserve a vote.

  5. BMac 1 year ago

    PIAZZA???? Why NOT???

    • $3513744 1 year ago

      not enough votes…sorry. NOT ENOUGH VOTES!

    • The_Unnatural 1 year ago

      I thought everybody liked Piazza.

      • NYBravosFan10 1 year ago

        nah, some people skip right over the Piazza and go right to the chicken wings

      • vtadave 1 year ago

        Piazza had some critical words for Vin Scully in his book. That’s enough for me to ban him from the hall.

  6. FOmeOLS 1 year ago

    I wonder what was Greg Maddux’s worst game?
    Did he ever have one?
    At all?

    • Lionel Bossman Craft 1 year ago

      He had a few seasons with an ERA north of 5.

      • Bryan 1 year ago

        when he was 20 and 21

        • Lionel Bossman Craft 1 year ago

          Look again but even so he had several seasons with an ERA higher then 4.

          • not_brooks 1 year ago

            Yeah, when he was 38+ years old, a time when most pitchers are hanging ’em up.

            Maddux was utterly dominant from age 22 through age 37.

            When I was three, he posted a 5.61 ERA in 155 innings, and then didn’t post an ERA north of 3.57 until I was 19.

            That’s insane.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            you’re a lock for the HOF. you got my vote.

          • Lionel Bossman Craft 1 year ago

            The point I was making is that the person I was responding to (FOmeOLS) asked if Maddux ever had a bad game. I’m not disputing the guy had a great career. It’s like asking did Mariano Rivera ever blow a save.

    • bigb69 1 year ago

      I saw some 5 runs in 1 inning games from him

    • FS54 1 year ago

      By game score, his worst game (game score of 5) was in 1988 as a 22 YO against Phillies: 2.1 innings and 8 runs with only 2 Ks. If you ignore that, worst game (game score of 8) is as a 33 YO against cardinals where he gave up 8 runs while pitching 4.1 innings with 2 Ks and 1 walk or when marlins got him for 9 runs (7 earned) in 2 innings.

      • FOmeOLS 1 year ago

        Wow. I’m impressed….and by Greg, too.
        Thanks!

    • not_brooks 1 year ago

      From 1992 through 1996, a span of 159 starts, he gave up more than four earned runs five times.

  7. MB923 1 year ago

    Biggio fell 2 votes short. Yikes.

    And in other sad news – Jacque Jones, Armando Benitez, and Kenny Rogers all got a vote. In a year in which many of the BBWAA members were hopeful that in the near future, the ballots would be extended to maybe 15-20 names

    • letsgogiants 1 year ago

      As a Giants fan, I cringe even at the sight of Benitez’s (or he who shall not be named) name.

    • k26dp 1 year ago

      Kenny Rogers was about as good of a pitcher as Jack Morris.

  8. Morris’ comments in an interview today made me less sympathetic to his cause.

    • I Want My Bird 1 year ago

      Didn’t hear it, but personality aside he was WAAY more dominant than Glavine who worked the corner away with weak sauce, if he didn’t get that call from the ump he was toast, and didn’t go complete games or have huge shut down performances in the World Series.

      • Josh Griswell 1 year ago

        You mean like in ’92 when Morris had a 8.44 over 10 innings in the World Series?

      • Kevin Sheets 1 year ago

        You mean like Glavine WS MVP 1995, including a 8 in 1 Hit game against the leagues best hitting team???

      • Cobby_Box 1 year ago

        Didn’t have “huge shut down performances in the World Series”? Tom Glavine? He was the World Series MVP in 1995 including tossing an eight inning one-hit shutout in the clinching game.

      • k26dp 1 year ago

        In the early ’90s, Glavine’s circle-change was as dominant as any pitch I’ve seen. Hitters knew it was coming, knew where it was going, and couldn’t do a thing with it.
        That’s dominance.

    • johnsilver 1 year ago

      He’s got -0- reason to complain. Better SP than him have been bypassed for YEARS.. Jim Kaat, who didn’t have the luxury of playing on many winning teams being my main guy. Curt Schilling, better numbers, especially post season, but Jimmy Kaat, an iron man is the guy I will always bring up when people who deserve to be there are not, not mediocre starters like Morris.

      • ea19 1 year ago

        175 complete games and 28 shutouts is a little better than mediocre. He also has one of the greatest starts in World Series history with his 10-inning shutout in game 7 of the ’91 World Series…..which will most likely never happen again!! I agree with you about Jim Kaat too. A workhorse who also ate up a lot of innings in his career!!

        • not_brooks 1 year ago

          175 complete games puts Morris in 180th place on the All Time list. Tied with Bill Bernhard and Barney Pelty.

          28 shutouts put him in 134th place on the All Time list. Nine of the 10 guys he’s tied with aren’t Hall of Famers.

          What’s so Hall of Fame worthy about 180th and 134th place?

          • ea19 1 year ago

            My point was that he was better than “mediocre”. There are quite a few “question mark” type players in the Hall of Fame!! It is not the Hall of the Elite anymore. 61% saw his career as being worthy, so that is a little better than mediocre:)

          • WillieWildkat 1 year ago

            oh my, that Barney Pelty could ball. That’s rarified company

    • MB923 1 year ago

      What were they?

      • It’s on mlb. com.

        Some highlights

        “In my generation, I only won 40 more games than anybody else. I don’t know what that means, but apparently it doesn’t mean enough.”

        “Many of those writers are sabermetricians, who don’t really have knowledgeable eyes.”

        • letsgogiants 1 year ago

          If anything, most of the writers are probably more old-schooled. Even an old-school type of person would see his era is way too high to be in the hall of fame.

          Also, what does he mean by “knowledgeable eyes”?

          • I’d take a guess to say that they were too young to see how dominant he was in the 80s.

          • Chris_RG 1 year ago

            Why didn’t he complain about those less “knowledgeable” writers who never voted him higher than third in the Cy Young balloting when everyone supposedly knew he was so “dominant”?

          • johnsilver 1 year ago

            Want to try and put this into words, cause he (Morris) did have one point that I agree with there.

            When Morris was pitching? There was not all these statistics many of the youngsters that I call these people worship so vigilantly and treat as if they are the end all to how good/bad a player is. That was his point and I kind of agree with him there.

            I grew up in an A ball town, was at the park every day, knew the players, manager, hung around with some scouts and watched what they did. They didn’t track fancy numbers.. They watched what the kids did. Why? There was no fancy stats in the early 60’s thru the late 80’s and early 90’s.

            Scouts didn’t have radar guns in the early 60’s. They grabbed a seat and watched the game. How the pitcher handled himself out on the mound.

            One can say times have changed (they have) but Morris was saying times have changed between when he played and now. Don’t judge him from “now” players to how they were then. I still don’t think he belongs, but that was what he was saying is my 2c.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            I think he means people that watch games more than the numbers. He has a point, but he delivered it in a very poor manner. There are some things that don’t show up in the numbers.

        • Peterborough Dave 1 year ago

          Wow. Geez, Jack!

        • $3513744 1 year ago

          that should be the bigger story here when one believes they have a right to be in the HOF rather than it being a privilege.

  9. John 1 year ago

    All the attention directed at the Biggio shortcoming, but the Piazza snub to me is the most egregious. Greatest hitting catcher of all time in most categories, and he still can’t catch a break. Biggio still deserves to be in, but at the very least you can argue that he’s the weakest of the 3,000 hit club members.

    • Karkat 1 year ago

      PED allegations might not affect free agent contracts (see: Peralta), but they sure do affect Hall of Fame voting.

      • Tommets 1 year ago

        There’s a big difference. Peralta was actually caught in the Biogenesis situation. Piazza has never been caught and he also said he has never taken steroids in his book. Of course, there will still be people saying that you can’t just take his word out of a book. Others will say if you let the players of the steroid era that could have possibly been a part, then you’d have to let Rose, Strawberry, Gooden etc. in. Yet, being the top hitter at the position of catcher is something pretty extraordinary. First, it’s supposed to be a defensive position, yet he put up monster numbers. Second, to be in a category of the top at a position that included Berra, Bench, Munson, Carter, Fisk and more, then that’s pretty special. I really do hope that one day Piazza makes it into the Hall. I also think that Biggio deserved it, too. He put up numbers at a position not known for his type of offensive numbers, and he too should be awarded for that. Get em next year.

        • Karkat 1 year ago

          The reason people are not voting for Piazza is because they think he used performance enhancing drug. That is the reason, whether or not he actually did.

        • Curt Green 1 year ago

          A small part of the reason for the huge numbers, other than PEDS, could be from expansion. So many AAA pitchers were playing during the 90’s (and even today) that led to big numbers.

          • Tommets 1 year ago

            Irrelevant. If that’s the case then everyone during that time should have done that well. That reason really doesn’t make sense.

          • Curt Green 1 year ago

            Not a big issue for me but it is just common sense that if there are less teams, the better the pitchers will be. I am not going to take the time to look, but were homeruns, average, slugging etc. up during that time than from the 80’s? If so, then it did make a difference. Besides, I said it was a small part.

  10. John 1 year ago

    Good riddance to Jack Morris’ presence on the ballot. The veteran’s committee might push him in some day, but no one sporting a 4ERA needs to be finding their way in just because they won kind of a lot of games. 32nd all time in strikeouts, but 295th in K/9. He pitched a long time, and was a solid starter for most of it and an ace for part of it. But the end result was a career long on innings, and short on outright dominance.

    • Kevin Sheets 1 year ago

      Great postseason pitcher but nealry average everywhere else. However, wont ever forget the epic 1991 Game 7 duel between him and Smoltz

      • Peterborough Dave 1 year ago

        Or when he completely dominated in the 1992 post season….oh wait, he was awful.

        EVERYONE…please ignore the 1992 post season when remembering Jack Morris!

        Thank you. Carry on.

        • Guest 1 year ago

          Did you not read the part of “Great post season” pitcher? Or did you just want to agree with me?

          • Peterborough Dave 1 year ago

            My love for you knows no bounds.

        • Kevin Sheets 1 year ago

          Was thinking of 91 never mind

          • Peterborough Dave 1 year ago

            I’m just yanking your chain. :) That game plus Orel Hershiser in 1988 was the best post-season pitching I’ve ever seen (well, Verlander’s been pretty epic too….).

          • Kevin Sheets 1 year ago

            I meant I actually forgot he was awful in 92 with the Jays

        • not_brooks 1 year ago

          He was awful in ’87 too.

      • John 1 year ago

        Career regular season ERA: 3.90
        Career postseason ERA: 3.80

        ERA certainly ain’t the be-all/end-all of stats, but he certainly didn’t dominate the postseason anymore than the regular season.

    • Fat, Ugly Inner-City Sweathog 1 year ago

      Great pitcher, but there should be no “borderline” guys that eventually get in, IMO. If it takes 20 years, you’re not a hall of famer.

  11. richardb21 1 year ago

    For everything we’ve been through losing 100 games each of the last 3 years, this would have been great to finally have a Hall of Famer. Literally sick to my stomach right now that Biggio didn’t get it.

    • John 1 year ago

      Wait a year. You’ll be fine.

      • Ruben_Tomorrow 1 year ago

        Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, and John Smoltz will be on that ballot. That’s tough competition.

        • John 1 year ago

          10 spots, and he was two votes short this year.

          • Ruben_Tomorrow 1 year ago

            Do you think more than three players will be inducted in 2015?

          • John 1 year ago

            I don’t think there’s a collaborative effort between voters to determine such a thing.

          • k26dp 1 year ago

            I bet they get rid of the 10-player limitation. Fifteen players lost votes over last year, and the 10-player limit is probably the biggest reason.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            The biggest reason is everyone trying to be sanctimonious about who they elect. Bonds and Clemens should have gone in in 2013. Whether you like them or not, they are among the best of all time and there is no drug that will make you THAT good. Otherwise everyone would have been that good. Now those two names are clogging the ballot probably for the next 15 years.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            they should only go in if they have enough votes. fact of the matter is there’s no way to know how much better that stuff made them.

          • Jonas Salk 1 year ago

            The problem is you’ll never be able to prove what they would have done if they didn’t take steroids. Bonds would never have even sniffed Aaron’s record without it. Clemens was no longer dominant until he started using PED’s.
            Bonds to me is the more puzzling player because even without the PED’s he was on his way to the HOF. But then his ego couldn”t handle all the attention other guys were getting so he decided to turn himself into a cheater.

        • slasher016 1 year ago

          Morris will be off though, so that helps. Palmeiro fell off as well.

          • MB923 1 year ago

            Palmeiro got very few votes though. Maybe Morris going off though helps Biggio’s chances

        • John Donovan 1 year ago

          I think Smoltz will fall short next year and Biggio sneaks in. Don’t get me wrong, i think he is a Hall of Famer, but he was usually a clear #3 to Maddux and Glavine in Atlanta and he is a clear #3 to Randy and Pedro on the 2015 ballot.

          • WazBazbo 1 year ago

            Being a “clear #3″ to two first ballot HOFers isn’t a very strong argument for his not being HOF also…

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            I’m not saying he isn’t a HOFer. I just think he will come up short in his first year when compared to Pedro and Randy.

          • WazBazbo 1 year ago

            Possible… I wonder if next year will be the year that more players are voted in than have been in quite some time. If the voters stick with some unspoken “only vote in three or four” players, some worthy guys will get squeezed again, no doubt.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            Probably not next year , but 2016 looks like Griffey and the others. Trevor Hoffman is also on that ballot, but I see him as an eventually he gets in type guy. I am just guessing but I will put forth what I think

            2015 – Johnson, Pedro, Biggio
            2016 – Griffey, Smoltz, Bagwell or Piazza
            2017 – Bagwell or Piazza, Ivan Rodriguez (1st), Vlad Guerrero (1st),
            2018 – Chipper (1st), Jim Thome (1st), Raines or Hoffman
            2019 – Mariano Rivera (1st), Roy Halladay (1st), Raines or Hoffman

            What do you think?

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            unless the culture of these voters changes drastically by then, i see Pudge not getting in in 2017. whether you agree or not, there’s a pretty widespread belief he was a user as well and i think the votes will reflect that.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            I thought about that, but Pudge hasn’t really taken the heat that all the others have. He might have to wait a few years, but I hope not. He is one of the best catchers of all time.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            right but a lot of players haven’t taken the heat until this ballot comes out. look at guys like bagwell, piazza, etc. none of them took the heat like bonds and clemens yet they are clearly being punished for suspicion.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            True, but they are within striking distance at well over 50% of the vote. Bonds and Clemens are only at about 33% each. I’d say Pudge gets about 50% maybe more if Piazza is already elected by 2017.

          • WazBazbo 1 year ago

            Very difficult to argue any of that, and if your predictions come to light, those are all excellent induction classes. Not sure on Tim Raines, regrettably; I’d vote him in. I’ll be interested to see his support next year, if it rises or falls. I agree that Hoffman will be an “eventually” guy, which seems to happen to most relievers; even with his stats, he might be later than even your 2018 or 2019 prediction. The obvious exception to relievers being elected should be Rivera, another case of “why WOULDN’T you vote the guy in first ballot?”

            It’ll be fun to watch. I enjoy your posts.

    • Shane 1 year ago

      I got to admit, I was looking forward to it too after 3 straight years of losing 100 games…..

      • Curt Green 1 year ago

        Not to diminish your pain, but as a Twins fan, I look forward to the draft picks when my team stink.

        • Shane 1 year ago

          Yea but 2 of the last 3 were not the greatest drafts now this year looks to be loaded

  12. Kevin Sheets 1 year ago

    Why is it so many people care what percentage a guy gets? As long as the right guys get in, who cares? I would like to see Piazza, Biggio and Bagwell get in but thats just me

  13. TheTruth 1 year ago

    The logjam isn’t going away any time soon. Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, John Smoltz, and Gary Sheffield will be on the ballot for the first time next year, with Ken Griffey Jr., Trevor Hoffman, and Billy Wagner joining the year after, and Vlad Guerrero, Manny Ramirez, and Pudge Rodriguez after that. Personally, I think that Biggio, Bagwell, Piazza, Raines, Martinez, Smith, McGriff, Kent, Trammell, Schilling, and Mussina all belong in the Hall of Fame, but I fear that many of them don’t even have a chance.

    • John 1 year ago

      Sheffield will go the way of Sammy Sosa. Off a lot of ballots, and quickly forgotten. The way of most steroid players who are fringy without them.

    • Andy Patton 1 year ago

      You have almost the exact same thought process as me. (I’m not so sure on Smith and want Larry Walker in). I really hope these guys get a fair chance, but with the way it is set up right now these guys are victims of the BBWAA

    • John Donovan 1 year ago

      They will probably fix the logjam the same they fixed it in the 1950s, when the Veteran’s Committee was electing 3-4 guys per year because no one wanted to elect anyone to the Hall for several years. Go to Baseball Reference and look up the 1945 Hall of Fame vote. The top 33 names on the 95 player ballot eventually became HOFers and probably another 30 after that, but 0 were voted in in 1945 or 1946.

  14. Vmmercan 1 year ago

    Tough ballot this year. There are at least 11 players on the ballot worthy of the HOF so a perfect ballot would be impossible. Hopefully, Biggio, Piazza and Raines get their due soon.

  15. schaddy24 1 year ago

    Greg Maddux was the best pitcher I’ve had the pleasure to watch. Simply put, he was a master. My heart goes out to Biggio, but he will undoubtedly get his time in the sun.

    • johnsilver 1 year ago

      YES! Here comes a good-un:

      The: Sandy Koufax, of the Tom Seaver, of the Roger Clemens, of the Greg Maddux, of the Pedro Martinez of their times… Now Is it Clayton Kershaw? There really hasn’t been a dominant force along those lines to me.

      • East Coast Bias 1 year ago

        It has to be either Kershaw or Verlander. Maybe Halladay could be deemed that from the last decade?

        • John Donovan 1 year ago

          Don’t forget about Randy Johnson. On the whole he was probably better than Pedro Martinez. Martinez had two better individual seasons, but Randy Johnson was better for his whole career in my opinion.

          • schaddy24 1 year ago

            I agree that RJ was better than Pedro, even though he was more “thrower” than “pitcher”.

        • johnsilver 1 year ago

          Think you are right with kershaw. Let’s make sure he does it another year or 2, since Koufax unfortunately had to leave the game after 5 dominant seasons and martinez only had 6.

          Verlander.. questions there, but RJ is a possibility another brought up, then I discarded, I **did** forget about Bob Gibson however :-(

          • ea19 1 year ago

            Also, don’t forget about King Felix. He is out in Seattle, so he often gets forgetten!!

        • deadgeorge 1 year ago

          Verlander is probably closest; Kershaw has to keep it up for the better part of the decade–no easy feat for a hardthrowing pitcher. Halladay only has 203 career wins and 2,117 K’s. Not that it should matter but it does.

      • schaddy24 1 year ago

        I’m too young to have actually seen Koufax or Seaver, but they were certainly masters as well. I personally rule out Clemens b/c of steroids and the fact that his personality is so unlikable (to say the least). Pedro was flat out dominant but the end of his career was somewhat anticlimactic IMO.

        I will never forget watching Maddux dissect his way through a lineup, it was spectacular. Part of me died a little when he went to ATL. The icing on the cake is that he’s the best defender ever at his position too.

      • WazBazbo 1 year ago

        It says a lot for an era when Steve Carlton rarely even gets a mention any more as a dominant of his time…

    • RazorShines 1 year ago

      Best control pitcher I ever saw, I put him 4th behind Pedro, Randy and a pre-steroid Clemens. Man that guy could fool hitters

  16. BuhaySD 1 year ago

    I don’t think I’ll ever understand this process. If a guy is a HOF’er then he is…why does it matter how many people get in at the same time? And if people have to debate about whether he belongs or not then he probably doesn’t belong. It’s supposed to be for the elite of the elite not the pretty good player who played for 20 years to pad his stats.

    • Kevin Sheets 1 year ago

      I can see an argument for and against Biggio. Some might argue because there isnt any PED supsicion that should work in his favor. (Corrected: He did NOT win GG at 3 different positions)

      • TheTruth 1 year ago

        I don’t know who told you that Biggio won a gold glove at three different positions, but they were lying.

        • Kevin Sheets 1 year ago

          You’re right, just checked that. I thought he won something at 3 different positions but i was wrong. Wasnt all-star either.

    • John Donovan 1 year ago

      Where have you been? The Hall of Fame has always been the guys that play a long time to “pad his stats.” I also can’t stand that phrase. It’s like people are punishing players for longevity. I’d much rather have Craig Biggio over the likes of a Don Mattingly or an Albert Belle. Those two guys were both dominant and elite for a short time, but didn’t stay around to “pad their stats.” The most ability in any sport is availability and Biggio was always there.

      • BuhaySD 1 year ago

        Oh I’m not even talking Biggio here, that was just a general statement. I think Biggio belongs in HOF. I was more talking about why it takes guys 5 tries to get in. Shouldn’t it be obvious if he belongs there or not? But to your point, does that mean someone like Jaime Moyer deserves to get in? If he made it to 300 wins because he played 40 years should that make him a HOF’er?

        • John Donovan 1 year ago

          In my opinion yes. If you have the longevity to play MLB at a high enough level for long enough to accumulate those stats then you deserve recognition. No one is going to keep someone on their roster as a charity case, If Moyer is good enough to remain in the big leagues and can still win 40+ games or whatever he needs to get, then yes he does deserve to go into the HOF.

          • BuhaySD 1 year ago

            I guess i get your point, it’s just not what my vision is for the HOF. I think longevity is a factor but Moyer was never a great pitcher. Very serviceable, solid guy in the rotation for many years but never a dominant force. Shoot, Jesse Orosco pitched 24 yrs in the league and I don’t think anyone is upset that he’s not in. Except maybe Jesse…I guess that is part of the problem. What is the criteria for being inducted?

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            I understand what you are saying and a (very) small part of me thinks Jesse Orosco should be remembered. He is one of the best middle relievers of all time and he was a closer for a few years. However, Jamie Moyer was not hanging on as a LOOGY like Orosco either. He was a quality starting pitcher toward the end of his career, moreso than when he was in his 20s. I don’t think Moyer is a Hall of Famer, but if he had won 40 more games throughout his career then he probably would be on the level of a Don Sutton or Phil Niekro.

  17. livingpaint 1 year ago

    I like Frank Thomas and no dig on him as a feared hitter cause he crushed balls, but him getting in over Edgar is a little sad when he spent just about as much of his time as a DH as Edgar did. Edgar played the field early in his career too from 87 – 94 he was on the field almost as much as Thomas from 90 – 98. The rest of the time they both had single or double digits in the field (mostly for interleague play).

    • slasher016 1 year ago

      The difference is, Thomas was a superior hitter. 521 HRs vs 309, triple slash of .301/.419/.555 vs. .312/.418/.515. 73.6 WAR vs 68.3.

      • livingpaint 1 year ago

        His HRs were higher, but the other numbers are about on par or better for Edgar. The point is that they are both basically DHs and the writers, for about 5 years now, have snubbed Edgar because he was a DH.

        • BK 1 year ago

          Thats simply not true. A 40 point difference in slugging is a HUGE difference over 18 years.

          • ea19 1 year ago

            Only 5 WAR over Edgar though. They were both VERY TOUGH outs, but Thomas was more feared because of his power!!

      • tmengd 1 year ago

        Thomas also played his career in more of a hitter friendly park (yes both Whitesox parks) the Martinez did.

        • $3513744 1 year ago

          the kingdome?

        • Steven 1 year ago

          Thomas vs Martinez
          521 HRs to 309. 1704 RBIs to 1261. 974 OPS to 933. 2 MVP’s to 0 MVP’s

        • Steven 1 year ago

          Martinez got the benefit of having Ken Griffey Jr. and Alex Rodriguez as lineup protection as well….

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            actually he protected them

        • Jonas Salk 1 year ago

          Actually Thomas did not play most of his career in a hitter friendly park, especially in the 90’s when then the new Comiskey park was a pitchers park and not a hitters park. They moved the fences in 2000. Thomas’ best years and most dominating years were in the 90’s. He put up numbers that only Ruth and Mel Ott compared to during that time. Thomas was simply a better hitter than Edgar was the most dominating hitter the game had seen in over 50 years.

      • The_Unnatural 1 year ago

        Using WAR doesn’t really help your case. Thomas started almost twice as many games in the field as Gar and his WAR is barely higher. DHs get docked a lot of points.

    • johnsilver 1 year ago

      Pro on Thomas is Jim Rice did, negative is.. How did Rice get in and I am a Red Sox fan. Thomas’s numbers are better and Jim Ed played DH his 1st few years, then was a brutal left fielder after that.

    • John 1 year ago

      Thomas was better.

    • WhoKilledTheRallyMonkey 1 year ago

      I also think that Frank Thomas’ strong stance against steroids in baseball had something to do with his selection; the voters are, with good reason, very anti-PED and Thomas was the only player who voluntarily spoke out against steroids during the Mitchel Report investigation.

      • livingpaint 1 year ago

        Like I said, I like Frank, he’s a great player but for 5 years Edgar’s been snubbed because he played primarily at DH and Frank got a lot more time to shine by playing primarily as DH too after the 1997/1998 season. Frank SHOULD be a HOFer and Im glad he got the nod today, but Edgar should have at least gone in years ago or at least in 2013 when NO ONE was voted in by the BBWAA. Just sayin Edgar shouldnt stay marred by being a DH like the BBWAA are shunning him for.

    • $3513744 1 year ago

      Edgar was awesome, but Thomas was better.

      • livingpaint 1 year ago

        I was advocating that Edgar should get the same “look” that Thomas did; The BBWAA is not giving Edgar credit for since they say he was primarily a DH. Had Frank not played as DH after 1997, his numbers would still be good but not as staggering.

        • $3513744 1 year ago

          I know, and i don’t disagree but fact remains is that not only was Thomas a superior hitter, the perception was that he was as well. Honestly I think that’s what it really comes down is that a lot of people still perceive Thomas as a 1B.

        • Steven 1 year ago

          Edgar having only 309 homers vs 521 for the Big Hurt pretty much sums the argument right there. 300 Home runs is not that impressive of a career milestone.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            yeah but he had way less stolen bases

          • Steven 1 year ago

            Haha not sure either of them would be remembered for their base stealing prowess

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            it was awesome any time they did

      • The_Unnatural 1 year ago

        The point is they’re both great and they both should be in the Hall of Fame.

    • Steven 1 year ago

      Frank Thomas won 2 MVP’s (should have won a 3rd in 2000), is 14th all time in OPS, 11th in career walks, 18th all time in home runs. Martinez was a very, very good player, but without 500+ home runs it’s tough to put a 1b/dh into the hall

      • DieHardMsFan 1 year ago

        I would agree with you here, except for the fact that the hall of fame has let in players who were good/very good players. If the HOF only elected the best of the best than that is a different story. With players like Jim Rice, etc., getting in Edgar should definitely be in the HOF or at the very least have more than 25% of the vote…..

        • Steven 1 year ago

          I think the (relatively speaking) low home run total is what is keeping Martinez out. 309 just doesn’t scream hall of famer to the voters. He might get in someday, but having only one 30+ home run season hurts when you spent the majority of games as a hitter

          • DieHardMsFan 1 year ago

            I see where you are coming from but in my mind a good hitter is not just one who hits a lot of home runs. I mean Edgar had a 300+/400+/900+ splash line and to my knowledge everyone with a 300/400/900 splash line is in the HOF. Also his OPS+ is better than many HOFers…

          • DieHardMsFan 1 year ago

            I guess I’ll just have to wait for more voters to value more of the advanced stats rather than the classics (wins, era, HR’s, AVG, etc.)

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            The classics worked much better for the time. Pitcher wins were very important in from around 1993 and before because pitchers routinely pitched into the late innings and completed 10+ games per year. Wins mattered a lot more then because it did show how effective a pitcher was. Now with most teams using 6+ pitchers a game, wins are more sporadic and spread around and are becoming somewhat of a useless stat. But they haven’t always been useless.

        • johnsilver 1 year ago

          It’s that double standard thing…

          Throw out the old elected guys.. The Ray Schalk types that who knows why/how got elected..

          Lets focus on why/how Tim Raines, Dwight Evans, Orlando Cepeda as hitters are not in the HOF, yet we have people every few years make it that put up less numbers than any of those.

          Same with Lee Smith. He *had* the all time Save record when he retired, it easier to play until you break a record, but you go out on top like he did?? No respect for the guy he was and he was as good as any, including Gossage who played far less time.. But of course being a NYY didn’t hurt his chances any.

          Jim Kaat I mentioned earlier has been off the ballot for years, he will only get a chance with the old timers committee now.

          Edit: Ha! My mistake.. Cepeda did finally make it.

  18. John 1 year ago

    To tell you how much the 3,000 hit club clouds people’s judgment: Jeff Kent got 15% of the vote, and Biggio 74%. And, quite frankly, Kent was the better hitter, plain and simple. Albeit he had a shorter career, but he is absolutely in the same conversation. And certainly not worth ONE-FIFTH the consideration for the HoF.

    • John Donovan 1 year ago

      The 3000 hit club means something. It always has and (should) always will. Getting 3,000 hits means you were a very good player for a very long time. That is an average of 200 hits per season for 15 years or 150 hits for 20 years. No matter how you get it, there is not one player that has gotten 3000 hits that shouldn’t be in the Hall of Fame, including Pete Rose. The 500 home run number has been tainted forever, but the 3000 hit mark and the 300 win mark should stand forever.

      • DieHardMsFan 1 year ago

        Why is the 500 home run mark tainted and yet the 3k hit mark and 300 wins isn’t? Steroids didn’t just help inflate power numbers but also helped players recover faster from various injuries and get back on the field. 3k hits and 300 wins are both longevity type of accomplishments and steroids could have definitely helped in one achieving them….

        • DieHardMsFan 1 year ago

          Not accusing anyone like Biggio using steroids but just pointing out a flaw in your argument…

        • John Donovan 1 year ago

          Because guys were getting 50+ home runs a season, but weren’t getting 30 wins or 300 hits per season. Steroids does the opposite regarding longevity. It creates nagging injuries as you get older. Look at ARod who was just about guaranteed to break Bonds’ record three years ago and now can barely walk.

          • DieHardMsFan 1 year ago

            Ok let me rephrase this as I worded it wrong. Yes steroids do in fact lower ones longetivity but many PEDS actually enhance ones longetivity or help them recover from some sort of injury.

      • John 1 year ago

        The problem with milestones is that they cloud perspectives: Is Fred McGriff really VASTLY inferior to Eddie Murray (or even not deserving while Murray is) just because Murray hit 504 homers and McGriff only 493? Like I said, Biggio deserves to be in, but Kent does, too. And while he didn’t play as long (or as far past his prime, mind you) as Biggio did to get those milestones, he was every bit the hitter during his career.

        • John Donovan 1 year ago

          It may not have come across, but I do actually agree with you. My point was that there still is something special about the 3000 hit club. I don’t think that people that don’t make it shouldn’t get in. I think people that do make it deserve special attention for that difficult accomplishment. And I totally agree that McGriff and, to a lesser extent, Kent should get in along with Walker, Trammell, and several others that probably won’t ever get in.

        • ea19 1 year ago

          Eddie Murray also had 3,000 hits!!!

          • -C 1 year ago

            He was also a switch-hitter. Not too many switch-hitters with 3,000/500.

            -C

      • RazorShines 1 year ago

        I agree with u. Besides Rose the only other 3000 hit members not in are Biggio, Palmeiro who was a juicer and is now officially off the ballot with 4% of the vote, and Jeter who will be in first ballot in about 7 or 8 yrs when he’s eligible.

        • John Donovan 1 year ago

          I think Palmeiro should get in as well. Sure he is very unlikable, but this isn’t a vote for class president. It is a vote for the best baseball players of all time and he was one. Albeit one with a disclaimer.

          • NickinIthaca 1 year ago

            I feel like Palmeiro was punished for flat out lying to congress about steroid use. He was better than Sosa and McGwire, and I’m amazed he was voted off the ballot this quickly…

            At least Sosa pretended he couldn’t speak English.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            What amazes me is the fact that the baseball writers have the hubris to have taken it upon themselves to punish Palmeiro while Congress did not punish him. I’d like all the HOF voters to both take a drug test and supply their permanent school records. Any that are found on illegal drugs of any kind or cheated on a test in school should be banned from voting ever again.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            i honestly see nothing wrong with those standards. but if you’re in WA or CO, is that a loophole?

  19. liberalconservative 1 year ago

    Hall of fame player is somebody you want to see play not somebody who played. All 3 players were worthy of that.

  20. BlueCatuli 1 year ago

    I wonder if some voters vote so blatantly wrong just because they want to see change. I’m not talking about guys like Ken Gurnick and Maury Chass. I’m not even referring to anyone specific. I just wonder if certain voters are doing it on purpose. What person, with the facts and knowledge at hand today would not vote for Greg Maddux? Have to think someone is using their right NOT to vote so a new process can be implemented. 16 people didn’t vote for him. That is so unthinkable to me.

    • Kevin Sheets 1 year ago

      Some knew he get in so they voted for others, some actually dont want him to be unamious because that would mean in their eyes that hes better than Ruth or Gehrig.

      • k26dp 1 year ago

        I really hope the latter is not the case, since there’s been several players get in with %s bigger than Ruth or Gehrig.

  21. DieHardMsFan 1 year ago

    I don’t understand how Glavine makes it and Mussina isn’t even that close to getting in. Only thing Glavine really has on Mussina is wins, ERA (slightly) and IP. Otherwise Mussina has more SO, less walks, higher ERA+, higher WAR, etc. Just looking at the numbers Mussina was the better pitcher throughout his career…
    In my opinion a lot of these voters need to get their right to vote on the hall of fame revoked…
    Edgar and Frank Thomas are also close comparatives. Now don’t get me wrong here Frank Thomas was the better player and hitter (just look at the stats) but there is no way that the difference between the two should have been that high. I mean Thomas received over 80% and Edgar is below 30%?
    Case could also be made that Kent was a better player than Biggio…..Ehhh I guess I will never really understand the MLB Hall of Fame voters.
    BTW because they messed up in not giving Babe Ruth, Hank Aaron, Cy Young, etc., an unanimous selection to the Hall of Fame doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have given it to Maddux….I would love to hear the arguments from anyone who didn’t have Maddux on their ballots….

    • Steven 1 year ago

      Thomas vs Martinez

      521 HRs to 309. 1704 RBIs to 1261. 974 OPS to 933. 2 MVP’s (should have won his 3rd in 2000) vs 0 MVP’s

      • DieHardMsFan 1 year ago

        I am not saying that Edgar was the better player just that he is comparable. They have similar numbers in hits, OPS+, OPS, doubles. Sure Thomas has the edge in HR’s/RBI’s. The 40 point difference in OPS is huge when you factor in an 18 year career. Likewise is the 9 point difference in OPS+.
        That said there is no way that Thomas should have gotten over 80% of the vote and Edgar under 30%….

        • Steven 1 year ago

          Thomas is #14 all time in career OPS (Martinez is 33rd), 11th all time in walks, has 2 MVP’s (should have won 3), 521 HR vs 309 is a HUGE gap as well, Thomas is a career .555 SLG% vs Martinez .515 is dramatically lopsided

          Are they comparable? Yes, but Thomas is better in every single statistical category except career average (.301 vs .312).

          • DieHardMsFan 1 year ago

            Well the 2000 MVP should have been Pedro Martinez to be honest or Carlos Delgado (both had better years than Frank Thomas or Giambi). That said Edgar should have won the 1995 MVP award. Also 33rd all time in OPS should make him a HOF type of player along with an OPS+ that ranks 41st should put him on a lot more ballots than what he is currently on. Also HR numbers should not define how good of a hitter Edgar was. The fact that everyone with a 300/400/900 splash line (that I am aware of) is in the HOF….

          • Steven 1 year ago

            Also I think that with Thomas on the ballot now it would be tough for voters to put him in since Thomas boasts better career numbers. He was a great hitter, but realistically he needs another 191 home runs to solidify his case

          • Jonas Salk 1 year ago

            Thomas deserved the MVP that year because he played for a division champion also.

        • Karkat 1 year ago

          The are comparable in the sense that I can compare them and find Frank Thomas to be considerably better, yes.

  22. Guest 1 year ago

    If deadspin can buy a hall of fame vote then there is something wrong with the hall of fame process.

    • FlaveFlava 1 year ago

      Considering some of the guys that got votes and looking at their ballot, deadspin didn’t seem to do that bad a job.

    • Tko11 1 year ago

      Apparently Lebatard claims he gave them the vote for free to show that the process is a joke. I refuse to believe he didn’t take money for it but I will admit I do hate Lebatard almost as much as Jim Rome.

  23. BMac 1 year ago

    I heard Pedro Gomez refused to vote for Bagwell b/c he “Thought” he might have used PEDS

    • westcoastwhitesox 1 year ago

      I think a lot of people ‘think’ he might have used PEDs!

  24. citizen 1 year ago

    Im guessing Maddux and glavine gets elected as a Brave and Thomas as a white sox, not Oakland A.

    • MB923 1 year ago

      Yeah that’s kind of obvious.

    • John Donovan 1 year ago

      I think you are right, but Maddux was no slouch with the Cubs.

  25. MB923 1 year ago

    2015 key newcomers on the ballot – Big Unit, Pedro, Smoltz
    2016 – Griffey Jr and Trevor Hoffman

    Perhaps the guys who have been in the 50-60% see an increase in voting, maybe even get in the HOF, by the 2016 ballot.

    • Tko11 1 year ago

      I can only imagine what would have been if Griffey wasn’t slowed down by injuries. I am excited for Pedro who in my opinion had the greatest single season for a pitcher in 2000. Plus the greatest 4 year span ever? 97-2000. Would have won 4 Cy Young awards in a row if not for Clemens.

    • JordanMantor 1 year ago

      Pedro Smoltz? I loved him!

  26. stillwaiting 1 year ago

    i would like someone to make a case AGAINST Jeff Bagwell that does not include a guess about steroid use.

    ready…. go.

    • k26dp 1 year ago

      Um… he had a batting stance that should be textbook “what not to do” to little leaguers…
      Yep, got nothing. Hope he and Biggio can go in together next season.

    • ea19 1 year ago

      Without having “proof” of Bagwell ever using steroids……I think his numbers are Hall of Fame worthy!!

    • Jonas Salk 1 year ago

      You have to remember that a lot of people know who took steroids and who didn’t even if it is not “public” information. So some former teammate goes off the record and tells you he knows Bagwell juiced you can’t publish it because you can be sued, but it doesn’t change the fact that you know he did it (if you believe the source to be truthful). All I am saying is that for guys like him not to get in there has to be an aweful lot of “behind the scenes” talk amongst voters that he was a user and a cheater.

      • stillwaiting 1 year ago

        if that were the case, if people “knew” he used steroids then why aren’t his numbers down with Sosa or McGwire or other known steroid users.

        no, his lack of support is simply because people are assuming he did

  27. dc21892 1 year ago

    Congratulations to these guys for getting in. Three great players.

  28. Daniel Copans 1 year ago

    Maybe my homer goggles are strapped too tight here but Moose getting only 20% is a joke. He’s superior to Jack Morris in pretty much every way and very comparable to Schilling and Glavine, even better in some ways. If my favorite pitcher ever misses out just because of his awful luck and never getting a ring, I’ll be steamed.

    • Steven 1 year ago

      Mussina was a good pitcher, who often pitched for excellent teams. But possessing above-average talent and the fortune to play with high-caliber teammates does not qualify a player as a Hall of Famer.

      Mussina’s career 3.68 ERA would be the third highest among Hall of Famers. His lone 20-win season came at age 39 for a non-playoff team.

      And there’s this: Mussina is a study in “almost.”

      He almost won a World Series in 2001, but didn’t. He almost pitched a perfect game in 2001, but didn’t. He almost won the Cy Young in 1999, but didn’t.

      He led the AL in a few categories in 1995, including wins (19), shutouts (4) and walks per nine innings (2.0). But the only time he led the league in any category after that was in games started in 1996 (36) and innings pitched in 2000 (237.2). Notice, his “dominant period” ends in 2000. But he hung on for eight more seasons, pitching for an explosive Yankees team that helped him pile up 123 wins in eight seasons.

      His postseason record was 7-8. In three World Series games, when his team needed him the most, he was 1-1 with a 3.00 ERA.

      • Daniel Copans 1 year ago

        I don’t care about pitching wins, and neither should any serious baseball fan. For a prime example of why, look at his performance in Game 6 of the 1997 ALCS where the Birds lost and got eliminated: 8 IP, 1 H, 2 BB, 10 K, 0 R. Guess he just wasn’t good enough, eh?

        His ERA might be high compared to the averaged HOFer but he also played through all of what was probably the toughest time for pitchers in MLB history. To pitch as well as he did in that time period is exceptional.

        I hate when one player is criticized for something his TEAM failed to do like winning in the postseason, especially a SP. He can only go out there every four days or whatever and no matter how good he is, he’s only one small part of a larger machine that needs almost every part working. It drives me nuts that in recent years you can only win an MVP if your team makes the playoffs (see: Cabrera over Trout, Verlander over Ellsbury, etc.) It just shouldn’t be like that. You can be the best player in the league even if you’re on a subpar team.

        • $3513744 1 year ago

          actually serious baseball fans do care. just because it’s not a great stat doesn’t mean it should be ignored altogether. the stats combined tell a whole story. like it or not, it’s a team sport and the point is to win, not accumulate stats. ignoring his stats is just as bad as not looking at the context of those stats.

          • bjsguess 1 year ago

            Anyone who has a HoF vote and seriously factors in Wins as a major category should immediately lose their ability to vote. Mussina had NO control over his teams offense or defense or the era he played in. All he could do is go out and pitch to the batters he faced.

            Since ERA is so fraught with contextual issues let’s use something that compares the pitcher to the ERA and competition they played in … ERA- (lower is better). Below are stats for Mussina and a few other no doubt HoF pitchers:

            A: 83 (-ERA) / 3400 IP / 2500 Ks / 6.5 K9 / 2.9 KBB
            B: 87 (-ERA) / 5200 IP / 4100 K’s / 7.1 K9 / 2.3 KBB
            C: 79 (-ERA) / 4800 IP / 3600 K’s / 6.9 K9 / 2.6 KBB
            D: 82 (-ERA) / 3500 IP / 2800 K’s / 7.1 K9 / 3.6 KBB
            E: 86 (-ERA) / 4400 IP / 2600 K’s / 5.3 K9 / 1.7 KBB
            F: 79 (-ERA) / 3900 IP / 2200 K’s / 5.0 K9 / 1.7 KBB

            Put another way – in this group the players are ranked:
            A: 4th -ERA / 6th IP / 5th K’s / 4th K9 / 2nd KBB
            B: 6th -ERA / 1st IP / 1st K’s / T-1st K9 / 4th KBB
            C: T-1st -ERA / 2nd IP / 2nd K’s / 3rd K9 / 3rd KBB
            D: 3rd -ERA / 5th IP / 2nd K’s / T-1st K9 / 1st KBB
            E: 5th -ERA / 2nd IP / 4th K’s / 5th K9 / T-5th KBB
            F: T-1st -ERA / 4th IP / 6th K’s / 6th K9 / T-5th KBB

            Player A had the shortest career. He was middle of the pack with his contextual ERA and K’s. He had excellent control. Drysdale was elected to the HoF in 1984.

            Player B had the longest career. Big points on throwing 5000+ innings. Worst contextual ERA but strong K and BB numbers. Steve Carlton was elected into the HoF with 96% of the voters supporting him 1994.

            Player C was solid across the board. Great contextual ERA, a ton of innings, strong K and BB numbers. Tom Seaver was elected in 1992 with 98% of the voters supporting him.

            Player D was a group leader in K9. He was 2nd in K’s despite pitching less innings than everyone but Drysdale. His contextual ERA is just behind Seaver. He also had the best control of the bunch. His KBB ratio is absurdly good. Mike Mussina received support on 20% of the ballots.

            Player E had the 2nd worst contextual ERA. He pitched a ton of innings but was poor when it came to K’s. His KBB ratio ranked near the bottom for this group but somehow Glavine managed to be named on nearly 92% of the ballots.

            Finally we have Player F. Tied with Seaver for the best contextual ERA. A mixture of decent longevity and pedestrian K and BB ratios. Jim Palmer walked into the HoF in 1990 with 93% of the vote.

            In this group I would rank them as Seaver 1st, Carlton/Mussina/Palmer are duking it out for 2nd/3rd/4th, Drysdale at 5th and Glavine at 6th.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            who said anything about factoring it in as a major category? all i was saying was that it’s as much of a farce to ignore as it is to consider it a major stat.

          • stl_cards16 1 year ago

            Wins should be ignored when evaluating a pitcher. If you want to use wins for pitchers, you might as well use fielding % to evaluate defense.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            right. so if a guy has 5 wins versus 300 we’ll just ignore it because you say so. looking at all the stats as a collective whole is pretty ridiculous. i don’t know what i was thinking.

          • stl_cards16 1 year ago

            Wins should be ignored when evaluating a pitcher. If you want to use wins for pitchers, you might as well use fielding % to evaluate defense.

        • Tko11 1 year ago

          “he also played through all of what was probably the toughest time for pitchers in MLB history” which is what makes Maddux, Glavine and Pedro so much more remarkable. Pitching in the same era no way is Mussina even close to their level.

          • Daniel Copans 1 year ago

            Pedro and Maddux are two of the best ever, but please do explain to me how Moose is “not close” to Glavine.

          • Tko11 1 year ago

            Mainly because Glavine had some outstanding seasons that Mussina can’t compare to. Glavine won two Cy Youngs and had two 2nd places finishes and two 3rd place finishes. Mussina finished 2nd one time and he has a 3.50 era that year. Mussina was good but not HOF worthy in my opinion.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            yeah but besides that

  29. I’m not sure how you can leave a player like Maddux off of your ballot, except to try to prevent someone from getting a unanimous election (which is… lame – what is wrong with acknowledging one of the best players as such?). Did 16 people really not think he was HoF material? I am dubious.

    • John Donovan 1 year ago

      They possibly left him off the ballot because they wanted to vote for 11 guys and figured that Maddux would get in without their vote, but maybe a guy like Larry Walker or Alan Trammell needed that vote more to stay on the ballot and maybe get elected in a year when the ballot is not so stacked. It’s what I would have done.

      • RIYankeeGuy 1 year ago

        Then they should change the 10 vote limit. Imagine a scenario (albeit an unlikely one ) where the majority of the writers agreed with you and left off Maddux and his induction eligibility to preserve the voting rights of a borderline Trammell or Walker.

      • MB923 1 year ago

        Could be that, but it’s also because some feel “If Ruth or Gehrig or Williams didn’t get in unanimously, no one should”

        I don’t think Any player will get in unanimously ever.

        • NickinIthaca 1 year ago

          At least not until the old guard of writers retires…

      • $3513744 1 year ago

        imagine if all of them thought each other would do that and no one voted for him. it was like when Bart ran for class president.

    • rundmc1981 1 year ago

      Same here. I would love to hear more opinions from the dissenters. And if the main argument is that he played during the steroid era, then sorry you checked your journalistic integrity at the door.

    • antsal 1 year ago

      To the voters: Someone should be able to ask the questions. What did Maddux fall short of? If you listed players on your ballot, are they MORE deserving of a vote than Maddux? Are you such a big Tom Seaver fan that you want him to have that voting “record” forever? If you are in a selected position to vote on this you should be in a position to answer the questions that come with it. It’s not like politics where everyone of age can vote. You are selected from a group of thousands for this privilege. If Maddux’s accomplishments don’t scream HOF then I’m not sure what does. If you think he was on steroids tell me one thing that makes you think that? Other than a few “as you get older” pounds, he looked the same on his rookie card as he did when he retired. Stats+awards+character+class+image+winner=unanimous. You can always win more, no one has ever won EVERYTIME but I can’t think of anything he DIDN’T accomplish….and I’m a Phillies fan who had to watch him pitch against us 61 times!! Unless you remember Warren Spahn, there is no other pitcher in you lifetime that won more games than Maddux. At some point winning baseball games has to be worth something!

  30. neoncactus 1 year ago

    Going to be nice seeing Maddux, Glavine and Cox inducted in the same ceremony.

  31. Erik Trenouth 1 year ago

    So, if Biggio didn’t get in there this year, why would he get in next year? If 25.2% didn’t think that he was deserving of the HOF this year, why would they change their mind for next year? HOF voting is probably the worst thing about baseball.

    • Yettyskill 1 year ago

      Because voters are weird like that, they won’t vote for a certain ballplayer until a few years on the ballot. They think they are sending messages about what level of Hall of Famer each candidate is to them.

      In other words, yup it is

    • John Donovan 1 year ago

      Well that 25.2% now has three extra spots on their ballots with the removal of Maddux, Glavine, and Thomas. So Biggio’s name could occupy one of those spots.

      • Erik Trenouth 1 year ago

        But that still means that they thought there were 7 other players who should get in ahead of Biggio. And there will be more great players on there again next year. But next year, Biggio will top 90% anyway, because the HOF voting is ridiculous like that.

  32. GoFish 1 year ago

    Put Pete Rose in after Bud’s retirement!

  33. WhoKilledTheRallyMonkey 1 year ago

    You know voting is a joke when the voting included one blank ballot, cast by a senior members of the BBWAA.

  34. Tko11 1 year ago

    So Biggio missed it by .2% but Armando Benitez and Jacque Jones received votes…what a travesty this voting system is. Plus I think Schilling deserved more than what he got, I heard a good argument on the radio today comparing his numbers to Glavine. It will be interesting to see what % Pedro gets next year.

    • $3513744 1 year ago

      it’s a voting system though. there are always outliers on both ends

      • Tko11 1 year ago

        Not sure how it works but I assume every player gets to be on the ballot since Mike Timlin was there? But maybe that is the issue, they should have a vote prior to this one on who should be on the ballot. That way you would ideally get rid of the Armando Benitezes and Jacque Joneses.

        • $3513744 1 year ago

          i wonder how it’d go to let the fans make the initial vote

        • John Donovan 1 year ago

          There were actually 36 players left off the ballot this year including Jose Cruz Jr, Geoff Jenkins, Matt Morris, Trot Nixon, Dave Roberts, and Jose Vidro. Not that any of them should be in the Hall, but they were solid starters for over a decade in MLB.

  35. Tko11 1 year ago

    So Biggio missed it by .2% but Armando Benitez and Jacque Jones received votes…what a travesty this voting system is. Plus I think Schilling deserved more than what he got, I heard a good argument on the radio today comparing his numbers to Glavine. It will be interesting to see what % Pedro gets next year.

  36. scrand 1 year ago

    The Baseball Hall of Fame is and will always be a joke when those selected are voted on by people who have never played 1 inning….but they sure have watched a lot of free ball. And you know that none of those self righteous “writers” hold no grudges against any player or players who they have probably never met. It’s been suggested that living members of the Hall should get a vote and I’d be all for that…but until something is changed my path will never darken a Cooperstown doorway – pfffffffffft!

  37. Ryan 1 year ago

    I can’t believe 16 Writers left Greg Maddux off their ballot

  38. NatsTown 1 year ago

    I’m looking at Jack Morris’ numbers and I don’t get the support. His traditional “triple crown” numbers dont look great and his “saber” (ERA+, WAR) numbers dont look great. Mussina and Schilling were far superior players and deserve it more than if, if they even deserve it

    • Sky14 1 year ago

      I agree Morris should be left out along with Mussina and Schilling. I will say if you look at Morris career stats at face value they aren’t all that great but his last two years (well last 5) make it even worse. His ERA not including his last two seasons, when he clearly was ineffective, is 3.73. This number is a better indicator of who he was but its better but still not HOF worthy by most peoples standards. It will be interesting to see how CC Sabathia does when eligible, he may end up with a similar profile as Morris but with more Ks .

    • bjsguess 1 year ago

      Mussina and Schilling both belong. Morris does not. It’s not even remotely close. Both Schilling and Mussina were amazing pitchers. Morris was very good but not nearly good enough. If CC can turn in another 2-4 years of 2.5 WAR baseball he should be a shoo-in. Right now he’s a borderline candidate IMO.

  39. dmm1047 1 year ago

    Biggio that close? You’re kidding. Dwight Evans had miuch better numbers, plus 6 GG’s. Ridiculous.

    • John Donovan 1 year ago

      Except Dwight Evans is not on the ballot.

      • $3513744 1 year ago

        he also didn’t play 2b so not totally sure what his point was.

  40. Justin Broederdorf 1 year ago

    The sad part when it is talked about that voters need more than 10 votes per person is that only 84% of the votes were submitted. 917 votes could have been put to use in helping to elect more players or keeping players eligible for future ballots.

  41. WhoKilledTheRallyMonkey 1 year ago

    Interesting fact: Mike Mussina (116 HoF Votes) posted a career WAR of 83 over 18 years, Glavine (inducted into the HoF with 525 votes) posted a career was of 81.4 over his 22 year career.

    Its a rather crude way to compare them but really shows how players are rewarded for quantity over quality careers in HoF voting.

    • monkeyking42 1 year ago

      Mussina’s a weird case because he’d have the 2nd highest ERA of anyone in the Hall of Fame if he were elected (Red Ruffing). But when you consider the era he pitched in, the division and the ballparks, he was a lot better than that 3.68 number would indicate.

    • Kevin Sheets 1 year ago

      In fairness, you’re using only one statistic. We can argue over the details all we want, but I think Mussina will get in eventually. Afterall, that is what truely matters, isnt it?

      • bjsguess 1 year ago

        WAR is technically one statistic but it’s not like saying we should only look at Mussina’s K’s or Wins. WAR takes into account multiple statistics in order to create an overall value. It isn’t perfect but it is much, much better than the typical W/L or ERA argument.

    • Kevin Sheets 1 year ago

      In fairness, you’re using only one statistic. We can argue over the details all we want, but I think Mussina will get in eventually. Afterall, that is what truely matters, isnt it?

  42. RyanWKrol 1 year ago

    Excellent class of Hall of Famers. Proves that despite the steroids controversy that the same era still had great players who are worthy. And we may see three more starting pitchers elected next year at the earliest.

  43. Dbacksfan44 1 year ago

    Well desrved and congrats

  44. Jacob Viets 1 year ago

    Is it possible that those 16 ballots Maddux was left off of were those of voters who knew he’d get in and wanted to use their votes elsewhere to keep a larger variety of players on the ballot or try to get them in?

    • Mike1L 1 year ago

      One ballot we know was from a voter who voted for Morris only, claiming anyone who played in the steroids era was tainted. Of course, Morris’ career including parts of the steroid era, but this gentleman had a selective memory.

      • $3513744 1 year ago

        so technically since he voted in the steroids era his vote wast tainted. so if his vote is tainted, then they should all get his vote?

        • Mike1L 1 year ago

          Not what I meant. The writer wanted to make a statement that if you played in the steroids era, you were guilty, even if there was no credible evidence. Well, that’s a position that has some consistency, I suppose, although it’s pretty unfair to the clean players. But steroids/PEDS have been around since the late 70’s, so why give Morris a free pass? I’m not suggesting he juiced at all. But I doubt Maddux or Glavine did either. The writer has apparently decided he will no longer vote for the HOF

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            right. but by his own logic that means his votes don’t matter therefore he should have them revoked.

      • John Donovan 1 year ago

        I can’t stand that argument. Anabolic steroids were first created in 1931, so technically Babe Ruth and Ted Williams played in the steroids era too.

  45. Mike1L 1 year ago

    The most interesting number there was the 4.4% that Palmiero got. That bumps him from future ballots. He will be left to the mercies, such as they are, of the Vet’s Committee many years from now. He’s the first real victim of the PED Era. The other prominent accused juicers: Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGwire are still on the ballot and will continue to have a chance as baseball history is adapted to deal with PEDs. But Raffy is done. Interesting justice for a man who waved his finger.

    • John Donovan 1 year ago

      If Bonds or Clemens ever get in then Raffy deserves to get in too. He has 500 HRs and 3000 hits and that still counts for something. There is not too many guys with that combo in history.

  46. Lazershow15 1 year ago

    Biggio needs to be on!

  47. slider32 1 year ago

    The hypocritical sports writers have lost all credibility, 16 voters snubbed Maddux. A Hall of Fame without Bonds and Clemens, who by they way never failed a test and were acquitted in court, is a joke. These are the same guys who looked the other way when Big Mac and Sammy were bombing the ball over the fences. Anyone who didn’t vote for Maddux should lose their vote. It’s time to put the best players in the Hall, players like Shoeless Joe, Pete, and all others who were the best in their time period.

    • -C 1 year ago

      Uh, hate to burst your bubble, but Bonds was convicted in court.

      I don’t really care if he gets in or not, tbh. If he does, fine. If not, cool.

      -C

    • $3513744 1 year ago

      you lost all credibility when you decided to use the never failed test excuse.

    • NickinIthaca 1 year ago

      I’d say these writers weren’t turning their backs – they were right there in the press box and writing articles about how it was the most exciting summer in baseball history and was exactly what was needed after the 94 strike. The only people more hypocritical than the writers are MLB executives and owners…

      • John Donovan 1 year ago

        The press wrote about McGwire and andro in the summer of ’98, but the public at large didn’t care and definitely didn’t vilify them because they were still producing. After their careers were over, people went back and said that they were cheaters and don’t deserve the HOF. Without McGwire and Sosa, baseball would never have made the comeback it did after the strike and they deserve recognition for that no matter what. Without them (and Cal Ripken) in 2013 MLB would be down there with the NHL and MLS in popularity.

        • $3513744 1 year ago

          the thing about andro back then was that it was a perfectly acceptable supplement you could easily find over the counter. it was just the culture then, just like creatine. people were already calling mcgwire a cheater then, but he kept denying use of steroids, saying that he just used andro. obviously now after he confessed it just confirmed he lied for years and was cheating. i’ll admit that it was fun watching them at the time and they should be credited with helping with bringing back the excitement. but he still cheated and lied.

          • John Donovan 1 year ago

            I agree with that, but my question is if he hadn’t cheated and lied, would baseball have even made it back? It’s the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Perfection. Without McGwire, Sosa, Bonds, Clemens, Raffy, and all the rest…we might not be talking about this right now. We might actually be following *gasp* basketball.

          • $3513744 1 year ago

            yeah probably. maybe not as quickly or as triumphantly but something would’ve brought the fans back eventually.

    • Jman1213 1 year ago

      Bonds and Clemens were found not guilty.

      By the way, so were O.J. Simpson, Casey Anthony, and Michael Jackson. Just sayin’.

  48. DarkBob 1 year ago

    Poor Biggio

  49. I’m surprised that Craig Biggio didn’t get in this year. He will likely get in next year, along with Pedro Martinez. (Randy Johnson is also a first-time eligible next year.) Mike Piazza and Jeff Bagwell may get in eventually, but probably not until the latter part of the decade.

  50. Zak A 1 year ago

    HOF is a sham w/out guys like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGwire et al going in. Might as well just put a closed sign on the doors b/c you can insinuate that every player from the last 20+ years was on something.

  51. Lefebvre Believer 1 year ago

    These past few years I’ve been able to learn about the voting process, along with some of the reasoning by these writers who vote, and I just can’t take the Hall of Fame seriously anymore.

  52. Brandon Lee 1 year ago

    Not sure how the voters saw Thomas as a lock and Piazza as having to wait three years. Their average seasons are near identical, with Thomas playing the easiest position in the game and Piazza playing the hardest. Trying to figure out why the greatest hitting catcher ever to play the game is being snubbed by nearly 40% of the voters, and worse, 20% that thought he was more deserving than Piazza.

    • Steven 1 year ago

      Thomas is tied for 18th all time in HR, is 14th all time in OPS, 11th all time in walks, has a career .419 OBP vs Piazza’s .377, has a career .555 SLG% vs Piazza’s still great .545, Thomas has 2 league MVP’s and arguably should have won a third in 2000, Thomas was one of the most outspoken critics of ped users and called for stronger testing throughout his career. It’s the widely suspected PED usage that is killing Piazza’s chances

      • Brandon Lee 1 year ago

        So, you’re saying because Thomas was outspoken against PED use he didn’t do it? Right. You know you else said they didn’t use? Every other player right before they tested positive. If Piazza is suspected and never failed a drug test, why is Thomas not a suspect? Go further, why not Glavine or Maddux? If Piazza is a suspect then every player who succeeded during the steroid era needs to be.
        Also, from a statically stand point, it’s much more impressive to hit 427 as a catcher then 521 as a DH. Being the greatest hitting catcher of All-Time is much more impressive then being the greatest hitting DH of all time. Especially when the numbers are similar.

        • Steven 1 year ago

          Thomas was outspoken against ped testing and usage long before the league did anything about it. Piazza going from a 62nd round pick to such a feared slugger raises skepticism as well. Back acne, admitting to use of substances later banned by the MLB, and mutliple sources of anecdotal evidence don’t send a positive message to hall of fame voters that he was clean. Also, if you want to use the catcher argument, Piazza was awful behind the plate and would certainly be a 1B/DH had he been in the American League.

    • Jonas Salk 1 year ago

      Piazza was a horrible catcher, so let’s not use that argument. It’s also pretty widely accepted that he was a PED user. Plus, even without that Thomas was easily the better hitter.

      • Brandon Lee 1 year ago

        I always hate when people say Piazza wasn’t a good catcher. He didn’t have a good arm. There’s a big difference. Plus, pitchers pitched better with him behind the plate then other catchers and he didn’t allow many passed balls. He was a good catcher was a bad arm. And Thomas is not easily better, he just played longer. If you look at their average season they are very similar, Thomas with the slight edge.
        And I suspect Thomas of being a PED user, because why not? If you suspect Piazza off the grounds that he was a good hitter during the steroid era but never failed any drug test, why is Thomas not thought of in the same light?

        • Steven 1 year ago

          Frank Thomas is 14th all time in career OPS, Piazza is 47th. Nobody has connected Thomas to peds usage and he was the only player to voluntarily comply with the mitchell investigation. Thomas is 11th all time in walks, 20th all time in OBP (piazza is 199th), Thomas is 22nd all time in slg%, piazza is 30th

        • Jonas Salk 1 year ago

          First of all, Piazza admitted to using androstenedione, which is a steroid and banned from baseball. Not to mention an ex-ball player named Reggie Jefferson said he knows for a fact Pizza was a PED user throughout his career (same source supplied both of them). Secondly, he was horrible as a defensive catcher. He finished 1st 4 times in his career with the most errors by a catcher in a season and finished in the bottom five 9 times out fo the 12 years he played behind the plate. You all ready addressed his inability to throw anyone out as well.
          The reason Thomas isn’t lumped in with the rest is because he looked the same when he came into baseball as when he left (he played football at Auburn with Bo Jackson and was a huge football prospect coming out of HS). So he was simply just a big powerful guy. He was also outspoken against PED’s and steroids way before the whole Sosa/McGuire stuff happened. He always felt baseball should be testing players.

    • Jonas Salk 1 year ago

      Piazza was a horrible catcher, so let’s not use that argument. It’s also pretty widely accepted that he was a PED user. Plus, even without that Thomas was easily the better hitter.

    • $3513744 1 year ago

      you have to be able to think critically to understand it while not being oblivious to the obvious.

  53. Zak A 1 year ago

    Jeff Kent > Craig Biggio. His stats compiled in 14.18 full seasons vs. 17.59 seasons. Kent had a lot More HR, RBI, better AVG, SLG, and OPS and if you gave him the same amount of time played he’d factor out to 8 less Hits and 31 more 2Bs and ggiven 3+ more seasons he’d be even further ahead in HRs and RBIs.

  54. AceRuby 1 year ago

    Piazza and Biggo will get in within the next 2 years I imagine, congrats to Maddox , Glavine , and Thomas though well deserved entries to the Hall of Fame for them.

  55. Fat, Ugly Inner-City Sweathog 1 year ago

    There is no valid argument to be made against Greg Maddux getting 100% of the vote. Of course, I said the same thing about Rickey Henderson years back as well. HoF voting loses its credibility more every year.

  56. Fat, Ugly Inner-City Sweathog 1 year ago

    There really should not be any “borderline” Hall of Famers who eventually get in on attrition. To me, if it takes 14 years, you were never a Hall of Famer to begin with.

  57. BobMarley22 1 year ago

    What why? Do you think Benitez should have made than. He definitely deserved it.

  58. $3513744 1 year ago

    no, i don’t know why you think benitez deserved it. my point is it just sheds some hope for most of the voters, which is surprising.

Leave a Reply