Hall of Fame Results

Congratulations are in order for Rickey Henderson and Jim Rice, who were elected today to the National Baseball Hall of Fame. Neither selection is unexpected, although the decision on Rice -- who was on the ballot for the last time -- could have fallen on either side of the 75% line. Here are some thoughts on newsworthy topics from the results:

Henderson's Vote Total
A commenter on my predictions post (where I predicted that Henderson would get 96% of the vote) clearly thought I was overstating Henderson's likely support. While I did go a bit high, Henderson received 94.8% of the vote. That's close enough that I think it justifies my prediction; the point was that Henderson was a well-respected player whose credentials would be clear. I think that's borne out by his total.

Rice's Vote Total
I also overstated Rice's eventual total (this will be a recurring theme). I thought Rice would get 78%, while he ended up with just 76.4%. Nonetheless, that keeps the trend alive -- if you get to 70%, you're going to be elected the next year.

Dawson Next in Line
Andre Dawson reached 67% in this year's election. With no dominant players coming onto the ballot next year, that should put Dawson into a good position to get the 8% bump he needs to get elected next year (the list of players who are eligible starting next year is discussed at the bottom of this post). Dawson should benefit from Rice's election, because they are often discussed as similar players. Just as Bruce Sutter opened the door to Goose Gossage, I suspect Rice will open the door for Dawson.

Blyleven Gains -- But Not Much
I wish the news on Blyleven was a little better. On the plus side, he went from 61.9% to 62.7%, which is at least in the right direction. But he remains over 12% away from election, and he has just three years of eligibility remaining. Still, Blyleven is probably in pretty good shape -- two years ago, Jim Rice was at 63.5%. That means that as Blyleven gets onto his last few years on the ballot he's more likely to be considered. Also, 2010, 2011, and 2012 all seem to be good years for veterans like Dawson and Blyleven -- there aren't dominant players like Henderson to brush the veterans off to the side a bit. It might take a couple more years, but I am now pretty confident that Blyleven will get into the Hall.

No Bump for John
At least not much of one. Tommy John, in his final year of eligibility, garnered 31.7% of the vote. That's up from the 29.1% he received last year, but was obviously nowhere near enough to get him elected. His only shot now will be through the horribly broken Veteran's Committee -- a fate I wouldn't wish on anyone.

Stingy Voters
Somewhat surprisingly, both Tim Raines and Mark McGwire lost support from a year ago. Raines fell from 24.3% to 22.6%, while McGwire went from 23.6% to 21.9%. I suspect that Raines lost some support because a few voters compared him (somewhat unfairly) to Rickey Henderson, and so didn't check him off this year. I don't know why McGwire lost support, after staying steady in his first two years. Neither lost enough support to worry about dropping off the ballot, however, and they still have many years for people to consider their candidacies. A few other players, including Alan Trammell, Dave Parker, Don Mattingly, and Dale Murphy also lost support this year. Harold Baines bucked the trend at the bottom of the ballot, gaining slightly from 5.2% to 5.9%.

Other First Timers
Aside from Rickey Henderson, the voters didn't much care for the new candidates. All of them were booted off the ballot, with Mark Grace (4.1%) and David Cone (3.9%) coming the closest to sticking around. I thought both Grace and Cone would last another year, and that Matt Williams would come close -- guess I was wrong on that count!

New Next Year
Here's the list of eligible players, most of whom will probably end up on the ballot (only to be quickly ushered off after one cycle): Roberto Alomar, Kevin Appier, Andy Ashby, Ellis Burks, Dave Burba, Andres Galarraga, Pat Hentgen, Mike Jackson, Eric Karros, Ray Lankford, Barry Larkin, Edgar Martinez, Fred McGriff, Mark McLemore, Shane Reynolds, David Segui, Robin Ventura, Fernando Vina, Todd Zeile.

There are some interesting names on the list -- I expect to look hard at Roberto Alomar, Andres Galarraga, Barry Larkin, and Edgar Martinez when I think about it next year. But none of these players have the "without question" quality to them of a Rickey Henderson, Tony Gwynn, or Cal Ripken, Jr., to name a few from the past couple of years who have been obvious. That could make things interesting next year -- and I hate to say it, but it seems entirely possible that no one could get elected next year. I sincerely hope that's not the case!

Hall of Fame Predictions

The results of this year's Hall of Fame voting will be announced Monday, so it's time to make my predictions. Last year, I correctly predicted that Goose Gossage would get in, but I also thought Jim Rice would sneak in and so missed that call. I had a few solid percentage predictions for the guys that didn't make the list, but also missed big on a few guys (like Blyleven -- I didn't see his dramatic increase in votes coming). We'll see if I can do better this year. If you're interested in reading about who I would vote for if I had a vote, you can click here.

My projections are largely based on general impressions from articles I've read along with trends from the past few years of voting and some educated (I hope) guesses as to what could happen given this year's particular dynamics. As a quick refresher, a player must receive at least 75% of the vote to be elected to the Hall, and a player must receive at least 5% of the vote to remain on the ballot next year. Also, a player has only 15 years of eligibility on the ballot, so any player failing to reach 75% in his 15th season on the ballot will not be back next year. Players who I am predicting will be elected are in bold, and players who will not be on the ballot next year either for failing to reach the 5% threshold or because they've run out of years of eligibility will appear in italics. My predicted vote total appears right after a candidates name, with the totals for the previous five years following in parentheses -- most recent listed first.

Ricky Henderson - 96%
Jim Rice - 78% (72.2/63.5/64.8/59.5/54.5)
Andre Dawson - 70% (65.9/56.7/61/52.3/50)
Bert Blyleven - 67% (61.9/47.7/53.3/40.9/35.4)
Jack Morris - 46% (42.9/37.1/41.2/33.3/26.3)
Lee Smith - 42% (43.3/39.8/45/38.8/36.6)
Tommy John - 35% (29.1/22.9/29.6/23.8/21.9)
Tim Raines - 32% (24.3)
Mark McGwire - 24% (23.6/23.5)
Alan Trammell - 21% (18.2/13.4/17.7/16.9/13.8)
Don Mattingly - 17% (15.8/9.9/12.3/11.4/12.9)
Dave Parker - 17% (15.1/11.4/14.4/12.6/10.3)
Dale Murphy - 12% (13.8/9.2/10.8/10.5/8.5)
Mark Grace - 8%
David Cone - 6%
Harold Baines - 5% (5.2/5.3)
Matt Williams - 4%
Jesse Orosco - 2%
Mo Vaughan - 0.8%
Jay Bell - 0.4%
Ron Gant - 0.2%
Greg Vaughan - 0.2%
Dan Plesac - 0%

My 2009 Hall of Fame Ballot

It's coming a day earlier than I had originally announced, but here is the ballot that I would cast if I were a voter for the National Baseball Hall of Fame. The format is the same as last year -- first, I'll list the players that I would cast a vote for if I had a chance, then the players who I would consider to be possibilities for the future, and finally I will name those players who I would remove from the ballot entirely. Also, just so you're aware, I've plagiarized the comments that I made last year on many of the names who are still on the ballot.

Hall of Famers

Bert Blyleven (12th Year) -- 61.9% in 2008
Despite some difficulties with Blyleven's candidacy, I think the scales come down on the side of Bert being a Hall of Famer. Whether this determination is colored by my Twins bias and my enjoyment of his color commentary for the Twins - well, that's for others to decide. On the plus side, Blyleven is 5th in career strikeouts (3,701) and no one is going to catch him anytime soon (with the retirements of Greg Maddux and Mike Mussina, Jamie Moyer is the closest active player with 2,248). He also struck out 2.8 batters for every batter he walked - that puts him miles ahead of all-time K leader Nolan Ryan (just over 2.0), in the neighborhood of Roger Clemens (2.96), and well below Randy Johnson (3.2). Looking at the pitchers near Blyleven on the K list, he's better than the majority of the top 20 - Fergie Jenkins beats him, as does Greg Maddux, and Pedro Martinez utterly blows everybody out of the water with about a 4.2. But Blyleven is clearly amongst the best in terms of K-BB in the history of the game.

Blyelven is also 9th All-Time with 60 shutouts - the man liked to finish what he started. The amazing thing about this stat is that it is incredibly predictive of Hall of Fame pitchers. Other than Blyleven, the top 23 pitchers in this category are in the Hall of Fame. Luis Tiant, at 24, is the first guy besides Bert who isn't in the Hall. Standing alone, that means nothing - but it is another indication that Blyleven's stats are in the same league as other Hall of Famers.

As for ERA, Blyelven's career 3.31 ERA isn't great by Hall of Fame standards - but it's better than quite a few players (Early Wynn, Fergie Jenkins, Dennis Eckersley, and Lefty Grove for example). In other words - I'm neutral on ERA.

The most oft-heard argument against Blyleven is that he won just 287 games, and this doesn't meet the magic number of 300. But that number didn't prevent Fergie Jenkins (284), Juan Marichal (243), or Jim Palmer (268), amongst others, from getting into the Hall. Bert pitched a couple more years than Jenkins, so one argument could go that someone with 22 years in the game should have crested 300 - but with his other numbers being so solid, I find it hard to argue that the lack of wins is entirely Blyleven's fault.

Perhaps more compelling is the argument that Blyleven was never a truly dominant pitcher - he finished 3rd in the Cy Young voting twice, and that was as good as it got - and he was an All-Star just twice. He also never led his league in ERA, Wins, or even K/9. Nevertheless, that doesn't take away from the fact that he put up some brilliant numbers in his career, not all of which were dependent simply on longevity (as his 3.31 ERA shows). Bert belongs in the Hall, and with last year's roughly 14 point jump in his vote total, I'm hopeful that he'll make it in one of his last four years on the ballot.


Andre Dawson (8th Year) -- 65.9% in 2008
After putting Dawson in my maybe category in 2007, I moved him into my "yes" category last year. Nothing has changed my mind since I made that decision. Dawson was a career .279 hitter with 438 HR's over 21 years. In that time, he also picked up 8 Gold Gloves and 4 Silver Sluggers, Rookie of the Year honors in 1977, an MVP award in 1987 (along with 2nd place finishes in 1981 and 1983) and topped it all off with 8 appearances as an All-Star. His 2,774 hits in 21 years are a litter lower than I would expect from a Hall of Famer, but the total package is outstanding, and I'm now convinced.


Ricky Henderson (1st Year)
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. He is the best base stealer of all time with 1406 steals, and with the changes in the game is likely to forever be so. He revolutionized the lead-off position, hitting 297 homers primarily from that spot. He won an MVP and finished second and third in the voting two other years. He made 10 All-Star teams in his 25 year career. It's almost irrelvent to add that he also had 3,055 hits and 2,190 walks (second most all time). If he didn't have the steals, maybe there would be a little bit of doubt in my mind (I'd probably vote for him anyway). But the steals are there, and they are relevant -- don't forget that in the era he played, the stolen base was a much more vital part of the game. There is absolutely no question in my mind that Henderson belongs in the Hall.


Jim Rice (15th Year) -- 72.2% in 2008
Last chance on Rice, and boy is this one tough. Rice's numbers (.298/382/2452) are actually fairly close to Hall of Famer Al Kaline's (.297/399/3007) - except for the hits, but Rice played 6 fewer seasons than Kaline. Last year, I said the difference between Kaline and Rice was Kaline's greatness in the field -- he won 10 Gold Gloves, and Rice never won one. However, Rice won an MVP award and finished in the top 5 of the MVP voting 5 other times. To me, that shows that Rice was an extremely respected hitter for a sufficiently long stretch of time to justify a Hall of Fame vote. Having fully considered the issue, I'm now convinced -- Rice belongs in the Hall. The sportswriters are likely to agree with me this year, as he's likely to retain the support he picked up last year while gaining a few last chance votes.


Hold-Overs (a.k.a. the Maybe's)

David Cone (1st Year)
A Cy Young winner in 1994, twice a twenty-game winner, five times an All-Star -- Cone is not a shabby candidate. I had planned to place Cone in my "no" list straight out, but he had some sustained success and I would want another year to consider his candidacy if I were a voter (yes, I understand that voters don't actually get to choose a "hold him for a year" option when voting). His 194 wins in 17 seasons are probably not enough, but this is not the shut and dried case it would appear. Next year, I'll probably say no flat out (assuming he hits the 5% mark and makes it onto the 2010 ballot) -- but for now I'm putting him in my Maybe column.


Don Mattingly (9th Year) -- 15.8% in 2008
This one is fairly difficult for me. His .307 career batting average fits comfortably in with the current Hall-of-Famers, and he hit 222 HR, so he wasn't a slouch in terms of power. He also won 9 Gold Gloves, 3 Silver Sluggers, and an MVP Award. But I just can't pull the trigger - his BA/Power numbers are more in line with a Hall of Fame 1B from the 1910's than with one from the 1980's. This is closer than I originally thought it would be - I'd put him in the top 5 of the "best of the rest" on my ballot - but in the end I have to leave him off, at least for this year.


Mark McGwire (3rd Year) -- 23.6% in 2008
The McGwire saga in the Hall of Fame voting remains one of the more intriguing things to watch each year. After a year in which the question of performance enhancing drugs first exploded and then seemed to disappear (who was talking about it in August, September, or October?), will McGwire benefit? Or will voters continue to keep the issue alive and shun him in large numbers? It seems likely that McGwire has polarized the electorate -- he won 23.5% in 2007 and 23.6% in 2008, so voters don't seem to be very willing to change their minds on him. I've stated before that I wouldn't base my decisions on PED use, but my stance has changed slightly -- if there was a fair amount of proof (and I'm not talking the amount or kind of proof that would be necessary to convict in a court of law; I just want something more than a wink and a nod allegation) that McGwire used PED's for a significant part of his career, I would at that point likely exclude him. If he's only linked to use late in his career, or for only limited periods of time, I would be more inclined to vote for him. Part of the reason I put him on my maybe list, then, is because I just don't know where he fits on that spectrum -- and after all, there's nothing wrong with using those 15 years of eligibility to fully consider his candidacy.

Of course, there's also the issue of his performance on the field and whether it's enough to get him in. Last year, I stated that a player with a career batting average as low as McGwire's (.263) was to me a dubious Hall of Famer. I'm going to stand by that as a general proposition, but I've largely been swung around to the view that great performance in another area can compensate for a low batting average. That's why I am now convinced that Harmon Killebrew (.256 career BA) is still Hall of Fame worthy -- because 573 HR's for the era he played in was a remarkable number. Do McGwire's 583 HR's measure up?

For now, that's the question I can't answer. McGwire hit a bunch of homers, to be sure, but he did it in an era when homerun numbers have become inflated. It's also the statistic that would benefit the most from juicing. More than likely I would eventually support McGwire's inclusion in the Hall as one of baseball's great sluggers, but there are just far too many questions about his candidacy to say that I would support his election this year.


Jack Morris (10th Year) -- 42.9% in 2008
Another close one - but Morris' 3.90 career ERA is a bit too high, and his 1.78 K-BB ratio is a bit too low to earn him consideration for his control. He did win 254 games - which I don't think disqualifies him at all, since he has a .577 winning percentage. His failure to ever win a Cy Young (like Bert, he finished 3rd twice) is another strike against him, because unlike Bert he doesn't have a dominant category to boost his candidacy. Borderline, but probably not quite a Hall of Famer. In the last five years of his candidacy (starting next year) my focus as a voter would be on whether Morris should get in as one of the great pitchers of the 1980's and early 1990's -- but again, the fact that he doesn't have a Cy Young to back that up is problematic.


Dale Murphy (11th Year) -- 13.8% in 2008
His .265 batting average is a concern, but his 398 HR, 5 Gold Gloves, 2 MVPs, and 4 Silver Sluggers make him a serious candidate. I have reservations about Murphy having just 2111 hits in 18 seasons, though. If I had to make a final decision on Murphy right now, I'd vote no -- but I'm willing to reconsider.


Dave Parker (13th Year) -- 15.1% in 2008
No glaring weakness, like Murphy's batting average. Parker hit .290, with 339 HR and 2712 hits in 19 seasons, while picking up an MVP award, 3 Gold Gloves, and 3 Silver Sluggers. But, while those numbers are very nice, what exactly makes him a Hall of Famer? He was a very good, but not great hitter. He had very good, but not great, power. He could field pretty well. In the end, I think he misses the cut - he's a great player, but not a Hall of Famer.


Tim Raines (2nd Year) -- 24.3% in 2008
Raines played for 23 years and compiled a .294 batting average, 170 homers, and 808 stolen bases (good for 5th all time). He was basically the National League version of Ricky Henderson, and while he's nowhere close in terms of stolen bases, he has a much better batting average than Henderson and was a more patient hitter (Henderson walked a lot, but he struck out a ton, too). Raines also went to 7 All-Star Games, picked up a Silver Slugger award, and had one top 5 finish in the MVP voting. I'm inclined to put him in the "great, but not Hall-worthy" category for now, but as with the rest of those players I'm sticking him in my "Maybe" list in case I later change my mind on him.


Lee Smith (7th Year) -- 43.3% in 2008
Smith picked up 478 saves in his 18 years, which was the record until Trevor Hoffman passed him in 2006 and kept piling on in 2007 and 2008. His career ERA is also solid -- but when you compare Smith with the dominant closers of this era (Mariano Rivera, Hoffman, Billy Wagner) he doesn't quite match up ERA-wise. His 2.57 K's per BB is also a bit low. My biggest problem with Smith last year was that he has 21 more losses than wins, but it was a mistake for me to focus on that category because it's pretty meaningless for closers (heck, it's pretty meaningless for all pitchers). I think Smith is stuck between era's a bit -- he was a closer as far back as the early 80's when the position was first starting to evolve into what it is today, and he closed games out into the 90's when that evolution was pretty much complete. I lean towards a no vote for Smith, but he's close enough that I reserve the right to change my mind in future years.


Alan Trammell (8th Year) -- 18.2% in 2008
Solid career numbers (.285/185/2365) and awards (4 Gold Gloves, 3 Silver Sluggers). But like Parker, Trammell is a really good player who I just don't quite consider to be a Hall of Famer right now. If someone can come up with a compelling argument in his favor, I would certainly consider it.


Mo Vaughn (1st Year)
Mo Vaughn doesn't exactly scream "Hall of Famer!" to me, but I find his numbers and his career interesting enough to include him on my "Maybe" list. He finished with a .293 career average and 1620 hits in 12 seasons (lower than I would like, but he didn't play for all that long). More interestingly, he had a four-year stretch in which he won and MVP and finished 4th and 5th in the voting two other years. If you ask why I put Vaughn in my "Maybe" list and banish Harold Baines to my "No" list, it's that four year stretch that I'd point to. Baines never was considered one of the top players in his league -- Vaughn clearly was. Vaughn also contributed by playing first base, and I'm a bit biased against DH's in that regard (although you could fairly ask whether it actually HURT his teams to have Vaughn at first base -- but I don't remember him being a complete and total farce at the position). If push came to shove I would say no on Vaughn, but it's also not quite clear cut.


Matt Williams (1st Year)
I'm not thrilled with his batting average (.268) or total hits (1878 in 17 seasons). However, he was a consistent power hitter (378) who won 4 Gold Gloves and finished in the top 6 in MVP voting 4 times. As with Vaughn, if push came to shove that wouldn't be enough for me, but he's also not a categorical no. I would want to continue considering his candidacy.


Off the Ballot

Harold Baines (3rd Year) -- 5.2% in 2008
Baines was in my "maybe" category two years, but I've thought about him some more and decided that I can make a firm decision on him. His .289 BA and 384 HR's are arguably suitable -- but he spent most of his career as a DH, played 22 years and only picked up 2866 hits, never finished higher than 9th in the MVP voting, and won just 1 Silver Slugger award. In the end, that's not good enough.


Jay Bell (1st Year)
He's a career .265 hitter who picked up just 1963 hits in 18 seasons. Bell had solid power for a guy who spent a large chunk of his career as a shortstop (195 HR's), but those numbers aren't enough to compensate for what is an otherwise extremely lackluster Hall of Fame resume.


Ron Gant (1st Year)
Open and shut case in my book. He was a career .256 hitter who had only one season where he even made it into the top 5 in the MVP voting. His 321 homeruns aren't shabby, but you don't build a Hall-of-Fame worthy career on 321 homeruns and not much else.


Mark Grace (1st Year)
In my head, I associate Mark Grace with Don Mattingly. Looking at Grace's numbers, though, he just doesn't stack up to the comparison. Grace had a .303 average and hit 173 homeruns (to Mattingly's .307 and 222), never won an MVP award or even finished in the top 10 in voting (Mattingly won an MVP), made the All-Star game just 3 times (which stunned me when I looked it up -- Mattingly doubled that, by the way), and won 4 Gold Gloves compared to Mattingly's nine. While these two have long gone together in my mind, it's clear that Grace's credentials fall short of Mattingly's. For that reason, he falls short of even my "Maybe" category.


Tommy John (15th Year) -- 29.1% in 2008
John is not a bad Hall of Fame candidate. His 288 wins are over 26 Major League seasons (although he didn't win many games over those last few years), and he has a 3.34 career ERA. He also finished 2nd in the Cy Young voting twice. Basically, John is Bert Blyleven without the strikeouts. In the end, that's not enough - Bert's Hall credentials are largely dependent on his strikeout and control numbers, and John can't compare in that regard. I've had John in my "maybe" category for a couple of years, but 2009 is his last year of eligibility so an up-or-down decision on his candidacy is appropriate. I would not cast a vote for Tommy John. He was a very good pitcher who doesn't quite rise to Hall of Fame levels.


Jesse Orosco (1st Year)
Looking only at Orosco's early career, the Hall of Fame might not seem like such a far-out suggestion. From 1983-1987 he picked up 102 saves with an ERA as low as 1.47 and usually in the mid-2.00's. After that, he became the situational lefty most of us remember. His career 3.16 ERA isn't bad, but there's just nothing in his career that would lead me to believe that it was Hall-worthy.


Dan Plesac (1st Year)
The poor-man's Orosco. Like Orosco, Plesac started off getting saves and posting solid ERA's. He then transformed, just like Orosco, into a situational lefty. His career 3.64 ERA shows that he wasn't as effective, as does the fact that his career was 6 years shorter. If Orosco isn't Hall-worthy, Plesac certainly isn't either.


Greg Vaughn (1st Year)
Vaughn finished fourth in the MVP voting in 1998 and 1999, laregly because of his power (50 and 45 homers respectively). Other than that and his 355 homers, he has virtually nothing on which to hang his Hall candidacy. He finished with just 1475 hits and a .242 batting average in 15 seasons. In no way does that measure up.

Hall of Fame

One of my favorite events of the off-season is the announcement of the new Hall of Fame inductees, which this year will be made on January 12. Today, the process started in earnest with the announcement of the official 2009 Hall of Fame ballot. These ballots are never exactly surprising -- thanks to the requirement that a player be retired for five years before being eligible, we know well in advance which players will be appearing on which year's ballot. Still, it's a blast seeing the names made official and knowing that the process has begun.

As has been my custom for the past couple of years, I'm not going to post my thoughts on the nominees just yet. With 42 days before the announcement, I want to draw things out a little bit. Here's the calendar for my anticipated Hall of Fame related posts:

December 19: Who I'd vote for.

January 9: Predictions of actual vote totals.

January 12: Reaction to the official announcement.

Until then, if you're interested in my thoughts on how to evaluate a player's Hall of Fame credentials, you can check out this post that I originally wrote in November 2006. My thoughts are essentially the same now as they were then.

The Tragedy of the Blank Ballot

Rick Telander of the Chicago Sun-Times wrote a column today declaring that he chose not to mail in his Hall of Fame ballot as a protest against the steroid era. From the moment I read his column, I felt the need to write some sort of response.

At first, I wanted to call Telander a fool. I wanted to strip him of his ballot. Several hours have passed since I first read the column, however, and I no longer think that way. Instead, I'm sad for him -- sad that he's given in to such a deep level of paranoia about performance enhancing drugs that he no longer is willing to cast a vote for a player like Goose Gossage, or Andre Dawson, or Bert Blyleven, or Andre Dawson . . . and so on. I'm sad that a man who obviously has contributed so much as a writer has now lost the will to even try to carry out his responsibilities as a Hall voter.

I understand Telander's anger and frustration with the players who used, with the trainers and coaches and management figures who looked the other way or even participated, with Bud Selig and Donald Fehr for pretending there was no problem for so long. Further, I have no good solution for how to deal with players from the modern era, although I'm inclined to push forward and elect players based on the numbers they put up, with an understanding that the whole era is tainted and the numbers are not comparable to those of previous eras. Heck, I'm even willing to consider the possibility of completely excluding a player who is proven to have used for a long period of time (and even though I'm on my way to becoming a lawyer, I wouldn't require the kind of proof necessary in a court of law).

Telander's choice -- to vote for no one, presuming that everyone was dirty as the worst amongst them -- would kill the Hall of Fame. We could close the doors forever on new members, and voters like Telander could be pleased to know that no steroid era members were included. This is not a solution, however. In fact, it's the opposite of a solution -- it's simply giving up. I understand Telander's arguments for not voting, but I reject them. I can only hope that someday, he will remember why he loves this sport, and opt back into the process.

Hall of Fame Results

Goose Gossage was elected to the National Baseball Hall of Fame today by the Baseball Writers of America. For the full results, you can click here.

My predictions were close in some areas, not so close in others. My biggest success was in predicting upward movement across the board. Of the returning players to the ballot, only one (Harold Baines) failed to improve on his total from last year. That was exactly what I thought would happen, with writers taking a closer look at guys they had previously supported following a stingy 2007 when a lot of players lost support. I was incorrect in suggesting that there would be enough support for Jim Rice to get in this year -- but he was just 14 votes shy, and when he comes up for the final time next year I think that he will get in.

Elsewhere, the best news was Bert Blyleven's surge this year. After steadily increasing for several years (from 29.2% in 2003 to 53.3% in 2006), Blyleven fell last year to 47.7%. This year, he made a big jump to 61.9% -- and while that does not guarantee his eventual election, it does bring him closer than he's ever been and restores my hope that he can get elected. Andre Dawson also is in a comfortable range, at 65.9% -- also his highest total ever.

At the bottom end of the list, Harold Baines surprised me by hanging on with 5.2% of the ballot, so he'll be back next year. On the downside, as I previously mentioned, Baines was the only returning player on the ballot to lose votes from last year, although he dropped only 0.1%. The vast majority of the newcomers received barely a sniff, with only Tim Raines (24.3%) staying on the ballot for next season. The highest vote total for the other newcomers was just 2 votes, or 0.4% of the ballot (Rod Beck, Travis Fryman, and Robb Nen). I didn't think that this class would do very well, but I thought a few guys would get a couple of percentage points. That indicates that there aren't as many foolish writers as I thought there were -- but anyone who voted for Todd Stottlemyre or Chuck Knoblauch or Shawon Dunston (each received 1 vote) should have their right to vote immediately revoked.

Looking ahead to next year, Ricky Henderson will get his first crack at the Hall and should be an easy first ballot Hall of Famer. The rest of the new class will include Steve Avery, Jay Bell, Mike Bordick, John Burkett, David Cone, Ron Gant, Mark Grace, Charles Nagy, Denny Neagle, Jesse Orosco, Dean Palmer, Dan Plesac, Rick Reed, Greg Vaughn, Mo Vaughn, Matt Williams, and Mike Williams. Guys like Cone and Grace may have enough support to stay on the ballot for a few years, but I don't see them getting elected, and certainly not on the first ballot. That means the smart money will be on Henderson and Rice going into the Hall together in 2009, and hopefully Andre Dawson and Bert Blyleven will continue to move closer to their rightful election as well.

Hall of Fame Predictions

The results of this year's Hall of Fame voting will be announced tomorrow, so it's time once again to make my predictions. Last year, I was right on who was going to get elected -- but honestly, last year was pretty easy in that regard. Unfortunately, my percentage predictions weren't that impressive. We'll see if I can do better this year. If you're interested in reading about who I would vote for if I had a vote, you can click here.

My projections are largely based on general impressions from articles I've read along with trends from the past few years of voting and some educated (I hope) guesses as to what could happen given this year's particular dynamics. As a quick refresher, a player must receive at least 75% of the vote to be elected to the Hall, and a player must receive at least 5% of the vote to remain on the ballot next year. Also, a player has only 15 years of eligibility on the ballot, so any player failing to reach 75% in his 15th season on the ballot will not be back next year. Players who I am predicting will be elected are in bold, and players who will not be on the ballot next year either for failing to reach the 5% threshold or because they've run out of years of eligibility will appear in italics. My predicted vote total appears right after a candidates name, with the totals for the previous five years following in parentheses.

One final comment before I give the totals. Last year, the voters were particularly harsh, dropping a substantial number of players down percentage-wise. I'm predicting almost the exact opposite this year, with gains for almost every player on the list. The reason is the lack of new players on the ballot who are likely to get substantial support. I think most of the voters will be looking for players to support this year. I believe, as others have said, that voters want to support a player or two for the Hall. As a result, I think that many of the players who lost support last year will gain it back again this year. Of course, it's also possible that the desire to support someone will focus on one or two more obvious candidates, resulting in no bounce for the players lower on the ballot. We'll find out tomorrow -- now, here are my predictions:

Goose Gossage - 84% (71.2/64.6/55.2/40.7/42.1)
Jim Rice - 78% (63.5/64.8/59.5/54.5/52.2)
Andre Dawson - 65% (56.7/61/52.3/50/50)
Bert Blyleven - 55% (47.7/53.3/40.9/35.4/29.2)
Lee Smith - 42% (39.8/45/38.8/36.6/42.3)
Jack Morris - 40% (37.1/41.2/33.3/26.3/22.8)
Tim Raines - 35%
Mark McGwire - 25% (23.5)
Tommy John - 24% (22.9/29.6/23.8/21.9/23.4)
Dave Concepcion - 18% (13.6/12.5/10.7/11.3/11.1)
Alan Trammell - 15% (13.4/17.7/16.9/13.8/14.1)
Dave Parker - 14% (11.4/14.4/12.6/10.5/10.3)
Don Mattingly - 10% (9.9/12.3/11.4/12.9/13.7)
Dale Murphy - 8% (9.2/10.8/10.5/8.5/11.7)
Harold Baines - 4.5% (5.3)
David Justice - 4%
Robb Nen - 3%
Chuck Knoblauch - 2%
Rod Beck - 1%
Travis Fryman - 1%
Brady Anderson - 0%
Shawon Dunston - 0%
Chuck Finley - 0%
Todd Stottlemyre - 0%

My 2008 Hall of Fame Ballot

As promised, here is the ballot that I would cast if I were a voter for the National Baseball Hall of Fame. The format is the same as last year -- first, I'll list the players that I would cast a vote for if I had a chance, then the players who I would consider to be possibilities for the future, and finally I will name those players who I would remove from the ballot entirely. Also, just so you're aware, I've plagiarized the comments that I made last year on many of the names who are still on the ballot.

Hall of Famers

Bert Blyleven (11th Year) -- 47.7% in 2007

Despite some difficulties with Blyleven's candidacy, I think the scales come down on the side of Bert being a Hall of Famer. Whether this determination is colored by my Twins bias and my enjoyment of his color commentary for the Twins - well, that's for others to decide. On the plus side, Blyleven is 5th in career strikeouts (3,701) and no one is going to catch him anytime soon. He also struck out 2.8 batters for every batter he walked - that puts him miles ahead of all-time K leader Nolan Ryan (just over 2.0), in the neighborhood of Roger Clemens (2.96), and well below Randy Johnson (3.2). Looking at the pitchers below him on the K list, he's equal to or better than the majority of the top 20 - Fergie Jenkins beats him, as does Greg Maddux, and Pedro Martinez utterly blows everybody out of the water with about a 4.2. But Blyleven is clearly amongst the best in terms of K-BB in the history of the game.

Blyelven is also 9th All-Time with 60 shutouts - the man liked to finish what he started. The amazing thing about this stat is that it is incredibly predictive of Hall of Fame pitchers. Other than Blyleven, the top 23 pitchers in this category are in the Hall of Fame. Luis Tiant, at 24, is the first guy besides Bert who isn't in the Hall. Standing alone, that means nothing - but it is another indication that Blyleven's stats are in the same league as other Hall of Famers.

As for ERA, Blyelven's career 3.31 ERA isn't great by Hall of Fame standards - but it's better than quite a few players (Early Wynn, Fergie Jenkins, Dennis Eckersley, and Lefty Grove for example). In other words - I'm neutral on ERA.

The most oft-heard argument against Blyleven is that he won just 287 games, and this doesn't meet the magic number of 300. But that number didn't prevent Fergie Jenkins (284), Juan Marichal (243), or Jim Palmer (268), amongst others, from getting into the Hall. Bert pitched a couple more years than Jenkins, so one argument could go that someone with 22 years in the game should have crested 300 - but with his other numbers being so solid, I find it hard to argue that the lack of wins is entirely Blyleven's fault.

Perhaps more compelling is the argument that Blyleven was never a truly dominant pitcher - he finished 3rd in the Cy Young voting twice, and that was as good as it got - and he was an All-Star just twice. He also never led his league in ERA, Wins, or even K/9. Nevertheless, that doesn't take away from the fact that he put up some brilliant numbers in his career, not all of which were dependant simply on longevity (as his 3.31 ERA shows). Bert belongs in the Hall, and up to last year when his numbers suddenly took a downward turn, I had hoped he would get there some day. I'm starting to resign myself to the likelihood that, in the eyes of most HOF voters, he doesn't measure up.


Andre Dawson (7th Year) -- 56.7% in 2007

Last year, I put Dawson in my "Maybe" category, and promised to think hard about his candidacy. I have done so, and decided that he's a Hall of Famer. Dawson was a career .279 hitter with 438 HR's over 21 years. In that time, he also picked up 8 Gold Gloves and 4 Silver Sluggers, Rookie of the Year honors in 1977, an MVP award in 1987 (along with 2nd place finishes in 1981 and 1983) and topped it all off with 8 appearances as an All-Star. His 2,774 hits in 21 years are a litter lower than I would expect from a Hall of Famer, but the total package is pretty darn good, and I'm now convinced.


Goose Gossage (9th Year) -- 71.2% in 2007

Gossage was around forever (22 years), and put up some solid numbers as almost exclusively a reliver. With Bruce Sutter and Dennis Eckersley now in the Hall, so goes the thought, the Goose should also get in as one of the originators of the modern closer position. First, you need to take Eckersley out of the equation - the man had 361 starts and racked up 100 career complete games and 20 shutouts, putting up 197 wins in his career to go with 390 saves. Those numbers dwarf Gossage's, who put up 310 saves, 124 wins, and a career ERA of 3.01 - but those numbers also can't fairly be compared to Eckersley because of the Eck's incredible dual starter/reliever career.

But Sutter - well, the two were made for comparison. They pitched in an overlapping timeframe (Sutter from '76 to '88; Gossage, as a closer, from '75 to '88), and when you look at their careers in that light, it's hard to argue that Gossage isn't Sutter's equal. He saved 10 more games than Sutter (which translates to slightly less per season as a closer), and his ERA is 18 points worse than Sutter's (3.01 to 2.83) - but he also won 56 more games. For a modern closer, Gossage probably wouldn't be a Hall of Famer - but considering the era he pitched in and the role he performed for his teams, he is. If Sutter is a Hall of Famer, then Gossage should be as well.


Hold-Overs (a.k.a. the Maybe's)

Tommy John (14th Year) -- 22.9% in 2007

John is not a bad Hall of Fame candidate. His 288 wins are over 26 Major League seasons (although he didn't win many games over those last few years), and he has a 3.34 career ERA. He also finished 2nd in the Cy Young voting twice. Basically, John is Bert Blyleven without the strikeouts. In the end, that's not enough - Bert's Hall credentials are largely dependent on his strikeout and control numbers, and John can't compare in that regard. I'd put him in the maybe category because he's not a cut-and-dried no, but to be honest I probably would not change my mind on his candidacy.


Don Mattingly (8th Year) -- 9.9% in 2007

This one is fairly difficult for me. His .307 career batting average fits comfortably in with the current Hall-of-Famers, and he hit 222 HR, so he wasn't a slouch in terms of power. He also won 9 Gold Gloves, 3 Silver Sluggers, and an MVP Award. But I just can't pull the trigger - his BA/Power numbers are more in line with an 1910's era Hall of Fame 1B than with one from the 1980's. This is closer than I originally thought it would be - I'd put him in the top 5 of the "best of the rest" on my ballot - but in the end I have to leave him off, at least for this year.


Mark McGwire (2nd Year) -- 23.5% in 2007

It will be absolutely fascinating to see what happens with McGwire when the voting is announced this year. Will the fact that more and more big names are being linked to performance enhancing drugs cause some voters to change their mind on whether he should be punished for his alleged use? Or will the furor over PED's drive his numbers down further this year? I've stated before that I wouldn't base my decisions on PED use, but my stance has changed slightly -- if there was a fair amount of proof (and I'm not talking the amount or kind of proof that would be necessary to convict in a court of law; I just want something more than a wink and a nod allegation) that McGwire used PED's for a significant part of his career, I would at that point likely exclude him. If he's only linked to use late in his career, or for only limited periods of time, I would vote based solely on his numbers. Part of the reason I put him on my maybe list, then, is because I just don't know where he fits on that spectrum.

Of course, there's also the issue of his performance on the field and whether it's enough to get him in. Last year, I stated that a player with a career batting average as low as McGwire's (.263) was to me a dubious Hall of Famer. I'm going to stand by that as a general proposition, but I've largely been swung around to the view that great performance in another area can compensate for a low batting average. That's why I am now convinced that Harmon Killebrew (.256 career BA) is still Hall of Fame worthy -- because 573 HR's for the era he played in was a remarkable number. Do McGwire's 583 HR's measure up?

For now, that's the question I can't answer. McGwire hit a bunch of homers, to be sure, but he did it in an era when homerun numbers have become inflated. It's also the statistic that would benefit the most from juicing. More than likely I would eventually support McGwire's inclusion in the Hall as one of baseball's great sluggers, but there are just far too many questions about his candidacy to say that I would support his election this year.


Jack Morris (9th Year) -- 37.1% in 2007

Another close one - but Morris' 3.90 career ERA is a bit too high, and his 1.78 K-BB ratio is a bit too low to earn him consideration for his control. He did win 254 games - which I don't think disqualifies him at all, since he has a .577 winning percentage. His failure to ever win a Cy Young (like Bert, he finished 3rd twice) is another strike against him, because unlike Bert he doesn't have a dominant category to boost his candidacy. Borderline, but probably not quite a Hall of Famer.


Dale Murphy (10th Year) -- 9.2% in 2007

His .265 batting average is a concern, but his 398 HR, 5 Gold Gloves, 2 MVPs, and 4 Silver Sluggers make him a serious candidate. I have reservations about Murphy having just 2111 hits in 18 seasons, though. If I had to make a final decision on Murphy right now, I'd vote no -- but I'm willing to reconsider.


Dave Parker (12th Year) -- 11.4% in 2007

No glaring weakness, like Murphy's batting average. Parker hit .290, with 339 HR and 2712 hits in 19 seasons, while picking up an MVP award, 3 Gold Gloves, and 3 Silver Sluggers. But, while those numbers are very nice, what exactly makes him a Hall of Famer? He was a very good, but not great hitter. He had very good, but not great, power. He could field pretty well. In the end, I think he misses the cut - he's a great player, but not a Hall of Famer.


Tim Raines (1st Year)

I'll be very curious to see where he winds up this year in the voting, because he Raines presents an interesting resume. He played for 23 years and compiled a .294 batting average, 170 homers, and 808 stolen bases (good for 5th all time). He was basically the National League version of Ricky Henderson, and while he's nowhere close in terms of stolen bases, he has a much better batting average than Henderson and was a more patient hitter (Henderson walked a lot, but he struck out a ton, too). Raines also went to 7 All-Star Games, picked up a Silver Slugger award, and had one top 5 finish in the MVP voting. I'm inclined to put him in the "great, but not Hall-worthy" category for now, but as with the rest of those players I'm sticking him in my "Maybe" list in case I later change my mind on him.


Jim Rice (14th Year) -- 63.5% in 2007

Rice's numbers (.298/382/2452) are actually fairly close to Hall of Famer Al Kaline's (.297/399/3007) - except for the hits, but Rice played 6 fewer seasons than Kaline. So why do I think Kaline is a Hall of Famer while Rice isn't? Simple - Kaline won 10 Gold Gloves, and Rice won none. Rice did win an MVP award, while Kaline never did. However, like Dave Parker, Jim Rice is a great player who doesn't quite make the cut. Rice is probably more likely than Andre Dawson to make it into the Hall this year, but I would support the Hawk over Rice.


Lee Smith (6th Year) -- 39.8% in 2007

Smith picked up 478 saves in his 18 years, which was the record until Trevor Hoffman passed him in 2006 and kept piling on in 2007. His career ERA is also solid -- but when you compare Smith with the dominant starters of this era (Mariano Rivera, Hoffman, Billy Wagner) he doesn't quite match up ERA-wise. His 2.57 K's per BB is also a bit low. My biggest problem with Smith last year was that he has 21 more losses than wins, but it was a mistake for me to focus on that category because it's pretty meaningless for closers (heck, it's pretty meaningless for all pitchers). I think Smith is stuck between era's a bit -- he was a closer as far back as the early 80's when the position was first starting to evolve into what it is today, and he closed games out into the 90's when that evolution was pretty much complete. I lean towards a no vote for Smith, but he's close enough that I reserve the right to change my mind in future years.


Alan Trammell (7th Year) -- 13.4% in 2007

Solid career numbers (.285/185/2365) and awards (4 Gold Gloves, 3 Silver Sluggers). But like Rice and Parker, Trammell is a really good player who I just don't quite consider to be a Hall of Famer right now.


Off the Ballot

Brady Anderson (1st Year)

Anderson played for 15 years, but he's clearly no Hall of Famer. His .256 batting average alone would be enough to exclude him in my book, because he has no category that counterbalances it. His 210 HR's, 1661 hits, and 787 OPS certainly aren't enough, and neither are his 3 All-Star appearances.


Harold Baines (2nd Year) -- 5.3% in 2007

Baines was in my "maybe" category a year ago, but I've thought about him some more and decided that I would not change my mind on his candidacy. His .289 BA and 384 HR's are arguably suitable -- but he spent most of his career as a DH, played 22 years and only picked up 2866 hits, never finished higher than 9th in the MVP voting, and won just 1 Silver Slugger award. In the end, that's not good enough.


Rod Beck (1st Year)

Beck played for 13 years, picking up a 3.30 ERA and a 3.37 K/BB ratio. His 286 saves and 3 All-Star appearances are nice, but he wasn't good enough for long enough to justify his inclusion in the Hall.


Dave Concepcion (15th Year) -- 13.6% in 2007

This is Concepcion's last chance to get into the Hall through the regular balloting process, and based on his percentage last year, it doesn't look good. I had him on my "Off the Ballot" list last year as well, and haven't changed my mind. I can ignore his low HR total (101) because he was a middle infielder. However, he didn't hit that well in general (.267 career average, 2326 hits in 19 seasons), and his candidacy is largely based on his 5 Gold Gloves. To me, that's not enough to overcome his mediocre offensive numbers.


Shawon Dunston (1st Year)

Dunston played for 18 years in the big leagues, but his numbers are not Hall-worthy. He hit .269 with 1597 hits and 150 HR, and was invited to 2 All-Star games. Not a lot there to separate him from a lot of other guys who played in the big leagues.


Chuck Finley (1st Year)

Finley pitched for 17 years and picked up 200 wins with a career 3.85 ERA. His K/BB ratio of 1.96 is nothing special, however, and he was never much more than a solid but unspectacular starter -- as evidenced by the fact that his best finish in the Cy Young voting was 7th.


Travis Fryman (1st Year)

Fryman played for 13 years, compiling a .274 career batting average, 223 homers, and 1776 hits. He also won a Gold Glove and a Silver Slugger award and went to 5 All-Star games. Nice numbers and a solid career, but not worthy of the Hall of Fame.


David Justice (1st Year)

Justice's single best number from his 14 years of pro ball is his career 878 OPS. Aside from that, his batting average (.279), hits (1571), and homers (305) are ok but nothing great. He had three All-Star appearances and won the 1990 Rookie of the Year in the National League -- but that's hardly enough to qualify him for the Hall.


Chuck Knoblauch (1st Year)

Knoblauch is sort of similar to Justice -- he made it into 4 All-Star Games and won the 1991 AL Rookie of the Year, and he also picked up a Gold Glove and 2 Silver Slugger awards. His career .289 BA and 407 Stolen Bases aren't too shabby. There's just not much here that shouts out "Hall-of-Famer."


Robb Nen (1st Year)

This one threw me for a bit. In his 10 years, Nen posted a very solid 2.98 ERA and a 3.05 K/BB ratio. He also made it to 3 All-Star games and finished 4th in the Cy voting one year. Finally, he picked up 314 saves before his career ended abruptly. But is that enough to get in the Hall? He's closer in my opinion than Beck, but in the end I couldn't even justify leaving him in the "maybe" category -- it was a close call, but I decided that it was very unlikely I'd ever support his candidacy. I do suspect that he'll pick up at least 5% of the vote and stay in consideration for next year, but I wouldn't think he'd get much over that.


Jose Rijo (1st Year)

After appearing on the 2001 ballot, Rijo made a brief comeback in '01 and '02. Looking at his numbers, there's not a lot there to justify a Hall vote. His 3.24 ERA is very nice, but he won just 116 games in 14 years and made it to just one All-Star game. His 2.4 K/BB ratio is also reasonable but nothing great. He's not a Hall of Famer.


Todd Stottlemyre (1st Year)

14 years, 4.28 ERA, 138 wins, 1.94 K-BB ratio. Nope.

Hall of Fame

The National Baseball Hall of Fame released the official 2008 ballot today. As I did last year, however, I'm not going to break down my thoughts just yet -- we are, after all, well over a month from the announcements. Instead, here's the breakdown of when I'll be posting on various Hall related topics:

December 20 -- Who I'd vote for

January 7 -- Predictions of what the voters will do

January 8 -- Reaction to the announcement

As for today, I'll just direct you to the post that I wrote last year on this topic, covering the criteria that I use to evaluate my position on a candidate's worthiness. My positions on the major issues that I address in that post haven't changed appreciably in the past 12 months, so pretty much everything in the post still applies.