Baseball Hall of Fame Adds No New Members

[klunderbunker]

http://espn.go.com/mlb/story/_/id/8828339/no-players-elected-baseball-hall-fame-writers

The main story of this year's class was the first time on the ballot for Sammy Sosa, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, three players widely considered guilty in the public (but not legal/official) eye for using steroids. While none of these three were inducted, other players such as Mike Piazza and Craig Biggio, who were never accused of PED usage, also failed to be inducted. While not without precedence, it's very rare to see a year go by with no inductions.

What are your thoughts on this? Will Clemens, Bonds and/or Sosa ever make it? Is it fair to leave people out of the Hall of Fame on suspicion alone? Who should have made it in this year and who will make it in later?

Please add in any other questions or things you want to talk about and don't limit yourself to just these questions.

 

[Megatron]

I think it's voters getting on their high horse and it shows the BBWAA needs some adjustments. So Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, etc. are all punished for steroid using (although Clemens has never been found guilty) while guys like Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Mike Schmidt, and Mickey Mantle can all get by using methamphetamines (aka greenies) which was a performance enhancer. Just hate that logic. Gaylord Perry made himself a HOF career by using an illegal pitch (spitball) yet there's no outcry over that. Just a load of crap.

There's much more I could rant on about the joke that is the BBWAA HOF voting, but I don't want to write a novel. So I'll leave with my ballot that I would have sent in (in no order):

Bonds
Clemens
Piazza
Biggio
Trammell
Bagwell
(and after reading a bit more on the other two and seeing some comps) Raines
Schilling

 

[hatehabsforever]

I realize there is a precedent for a year to come and go with no Hall of Fame inductees into Cooperstown, but I still think its ludicrous. I think Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, and possibly Sosa all deserve induction at some point. I also think that Biggio and Piazza definitely deserve the honor as well. There are a few other guys too: Morris, McGriff, Trammell, and Raines. Obviously they can't all go in in one year, bu I cannot believe that out of all of the above guys, none of them deserve to be honored.

 

[shattered dreams]

Bonds not being in is stupid. No one getting in this year is ridiculous. I would vote for Bonds, Clemens, Biggio, Raines, Bagwell, Edgar Martinez, Piazza and I am undecided on Trammell although I vaguely remember thinking he deserved it in the past. It really isn't hard to differentiate between the guys that don't deserve it like Sosa, Palmeiro, McGwire etc. and those that do. Then again sports writers are paid to be stupid so I guess this shouldn't be surprising.

 

[AndThat'sTheBottomLine]

I understand Bonds, Clemens and Sosa not getting in. I honestly don't know enough about the other nominees to comment. If those three get in for basically cheating then Pete Rose should get in as well. Fair is fair.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

I think it's voters getting on their high horse and it shows the BBWAA needs some adjustments. So Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, etc. are all punished for steroid using (although Clemens has never been found guilty) while guys like Willie Mays, Hank Aaron, Mike Schmidt, and Mickey Mantle can all get by using methamphetamines (aka greenies) which was a performance enhancer. Just hate that logic. Gaylord Perry made himself a HOF career by using an illegal pitch (spitball) yet there's no outcry over that. Just a load of crap.

There's much more I could rant on about the joke that is the BBWAA HOF voting, but I don't want to write a novel. So I'll leave with my ballot that I would have sent in (in no order):

Bonds
Clemens
Piazza
Biggio
Trammell
Bagwell
(and after reading a bit more on the other two and seeing some comps) Raines
Schilling

Don't forget Babe Ruth only played against other white guys. Every era of baseball is filled with arbitrary reasons to keep guys out, yet they are overlooked. If we are gonna overlook the things you mentioned, you have to overlook steroids as well.

Nice to see Tim Raines get some love. Sad that his off the field issues will probably keep him out.



How the hell did Craig Biggio not get in though? 3,000 hits should be a first ballot induction plain and simple. You do something only 20 something other people have done, you go in first ballot, that is the way I see it. Palmerio has the steroid cloud above his head, but not Biggio. Save Palmerio and Pete Rose, Biggio is the only guy with 3,000 hits who didn't get in on his first chance.

 

[Harthan]

I don't object to any of them. I thought Jack Morris would get in, but unfortunately, he just isn't quite a Hall of Famer to me. His numbers don't hold up when put under scrutiny; I know he was the winningest pitcher of the '80s and all, and you don't get there without being a good pitcher, but Morris was really just a very good pitcher. An ace, even. But not a Hall of Famer. I thought he'd get in this year, and he still might next, but I'd have no qualms with withholding the honor from him.

I didn't think anyone had a chance at being a first ballot guy. This is a group of writers that denied Roberto Alomar that honor; obviously, Craig Biggio wouldn't get it. He'll almost certainly get in next year. Mike Piazza had a good first year that should see him into the Hall in a few years, though the strong upcoming classes might hold him back a few years.

The steroid guys come in two groups - Bonds and Clemens, and the rest. The rest will never get in, nor do they deserve to. The fact is that Sosa and McGwire were only good because they took steroids, and the vote reflected that. They will never get in. Everyone knows that Bonds and Clemens are different cases, and would be Hall of Famers easily if they'd both retired before they took steroids. I'm surprised the vote was as low as it was for those two, and it may mean that they never get in. But it's a unique case - they could see huge leaps next year. We won't really know whether they will be in the Hall until we see next year's returns. I think they both should be in, personally.

I'd vote for Tim Raines, personally, but I haven't seen enough of the total argument for him to really defend that position. I think Lee Smith deserves the honor; I think Trevor Hoffman will get into the Hall no doubt, and I think Smith is better than Hoffman. I know a lot of people wanted Fred McGriff to get some more traction, but I just don't think he is quite at the level of the Hall of Fame. Very close, but not quite.

Also, Jeff Bagwell needs to be in the Hall. This whole steroid suspicion thing just isn't fair to him; he's never been proven of doing anything, and there's really no founding for suspicion on him the same way there is for Bonds or Clemens. His strong gains this year are a good sign, and I hope he gets there eventually. It'd be a shame if he didn't.

Curt Schilling is a Hall of Famer to me, as well. People look at his win total and dismiss him as a guy who lives by his postseason reputation, but I don't buy it. He's one of the best. Should be in.

I'd have voted for Biggio, Piazza, Raines, Smith, Bagwell, and Schilling. Of the first years, none of them had to be first years for me to be happy, though I am worried about Schilling's vote total. Frankly, if anyone should have been a first ballot guy, it should have been Schilling. He has a long way to go. I think the best outcome for me would have to see Smith, Raines, and Bagwell been inducted, and maybe Schilling too.

EDIT: I took another look at Trammel, too. He's really borderline to me. Maybe I could have voted for him, but I'm not 100%.

EDIT2: Addressing next year's class, fortunately we have some slam dunks on the ballot. Maddux is AMAZING, one of the all time greats, should be a unanimous first ballot guy. Frank Thomas is almost certainly going in too. I think there's a ton of hype on Tom Glavine - 300 win guy - but I have some reservations. I might not vote for him, but he'll probably get in anyway, with that 300th win and all.

 

[hatehabsforever]

I understand Bonds, Clemens and Sosa not getting in. I honestly don't know enough about the other nominees to comment. If those three get in for basically cheating then Pete Rose should get in as well. Fair is fair.

There is no logical reason for Bonds, Clemens, or McGwire to not be inducted into Cooperstown. Their career numbers speak for themselves. To exclude them is both senseless and unfair. And while we're on that topic, Pete Rose should absolutely positively be there as well.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

Bonds not being in is stupid. No one getting in this year is ridiculous. I would vote for Bonds, Clemens, Biggio, Raines, Bagwell, Edgar Martinez, Piazza and I am undecided on Trammell although I vaguely remember thinking he deserved it in the past. It really isn't hard to differentiate between the guys that don't deserve it like Sosa, Palmeiro, McGwire etc. and those that do. Then again sports writers are paid to be stupid so I guess this shouldn't be surprising.

I think Palmeiro should get in, steroids or not. He is a member of the 500 home run club, the 3,000 hit club, and won multiple gold gloves.

McGwire though I can see an argument for not getting in. He ended up with 1,626 career hits, and 583 home runs. The power is impressive, but look at those numbers. Roughly a third of his career hits were homers. Plus, of every player with 5,000 career at bats, he only has 6 triples, the least of any player with 5k at bats. He also had 1,596 strikeouts. He had 30 more hits in his career than strikeouts.

 

[shattered dreams]

To me the key is adjusting the standards based on an era where offense was more prevalent not just blindly saying no to everyone. Bonds was a first ballot hall of famer before he ever thought about steroids.

I suppose you could make a case suggesting Palmeiro shouldn't get in but Martinez should is a little opportunistic.

 

[Slyfox696]

To borrow a phrase from Mike Krzyzewski, I think it's time we do a little surgery. How else are we going to pull heads from collective asses?

This is absurd. Barry Bonds is a Hall of Fame baseball player, even if you discount his steroid years. The same goes for Clemons, who has maintained his innocence the whole way through and never once been proven otherwise. These are two of the greatest to ever play the game, steroids or no, and to say they don't deserve the Hall of Fame is simply asinine.

The more I've gone over this in my head over the years, the more I've come to realize these guys deserve their spot. If you want to put a so-called asterisk by their name, go ahead, but don't deny them the place they earned. Baseball isn't pure, it's never been pure. Whether it was racial segregation, war time, amphetamines or steroids, baseball has always had its black marks. To say Bonds and Clemons don't deserve their spot is ridiculous.

 

[hatehabsforever]

There's no reason for any asterisks. Clemens was an elite pitcher who failed no drug test and has consistently denied any steroid use. You cannot exclude him from the Hall or diminish his accomplishments with asterisks because some people think he might have done something which wasn't even against any specific rule for most of his career. Barry Bonds has hit more home runs in MLB than anyone else, and the last time I checked, he didn't fail any drug tests either. Both of these guys should be slam dunks for the MLB Hall of Fame, and there's no need to place any qualifiers or apologies along the way.

 

[shattered dreams]

Even pretending Clemens wasn't doping his ass off is at least as dumb as these writers. He obviously was using for a long time and it does make his case less clear. He probably wasn't HOF when he started juicing but he would have been even with a few more years of decent pitching which he could have done without performance enhancement.

 

[Slyfox696]

There's no reason for any asterisks. Clemens was an elite pitcher who failed no drug test and has consistently denied any steroid use. You cannot exclude him from the Hall or diminish his accomplishments with asterisks because some people think he might have done something which wasn't even against any specific rule for most of his career. Barry Bonds has hit more home runs in MLB than anyone else, and the last time I checked, he didn't fail any drug tests either. Both of these guys should be slam dunks for the MLB Hall of Fame, and there's no need to place any qualifiers or apologies along the way.

Well, Bonds is a little different because he admitted to using the cream and the clear, which even if he maintains he didn't know what they were, still is admitting to using PEDs.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

Bonds did admit to unknowingly taking steroids. Now personally I think Bonds knew what he was doing. Clemens, I'm not so sure. The case against him was so over the top though, that I think he deserves to get in for sitting through that and not going on a shooting spree after. They never failed a test, but they are guilty in the court of public opinion, and history has shown it is next to impossible to change that.

I think they should both be in. They are great players, and even before Bonds started to see his head grow to the size of a small planet he was putting up numbers that would have gotten him in. At the time steroids weren't on the banned substance list. That would be like giving me a ticket now because I sent a couple texts while driving when I was in high school.

 

[The Brain]

I used to think 15 years was too long for someone to be on the ballot but now I’m glad that’s the case. Time heels all wounds and I hope that by the time some of these guys’ time on the ballot is up the holier than thou BBWA will lighten up and move on from the steroid discussion. I’m just afraid that some deserving players will fall of the ballot due to not receiving the minimum 5%. Rafael Palmeiro is in great danger of falling off the ballot soon. Realistically he’s never going to get in and that’s a shame. Same goes for Sammy Sosa. There’s usually one or two guys I think should go in every year but lately with so many worthy candidates being kept out I find my list growing and growing. I think the following should be in.

Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Rafael Palmeiro
Sammy Sosa
Mike Piazza
Jeff Bagwell
Fred McGriff
Craig Biggio

I’m on the fence about Mark McGwire, Curt Schilling, and Larry Walker. I’m leaning toward yes on McGwire, no on Walker, and I really am torn on Schilling. I keep going back and forth on him.

Regarding next year’s class, Maddux, Glavine, and Thomas should be obvious first ballot choices but there’s no telling what the so called experts are going to decide. Mike Mussina is very interesting to me. I could really see him going either way. He's always been one of my favorites so I'm a little biased. I'd like to see him get in but I'm not sure if he should. I don’t see Jeff Kent as a hall of famer. I wouldn’t be shocked if he eventually got in but not on the first ballot, and not at all in my opinion. What’s confusing to me is the analysts on MLB Network are confident in saying Frank Thomas will get in on the first ballot next year after seeing what happened this year. I know Thomas has never been connected to steroids but neither has Biggio. Is Thomas going to benefit by being on the ballot a year after Bonds, Clemens, and Sosa?

 

[The Brain]

The steroid guys come in two groups - Bonds and Clemens, and the rest. The rest will never get in, nor do they deserve to. The fact is that Sosa and McGwire were only good because they took steroids, and the vote reflected that. They will never get in. Everyone knows that Bonds and Clemens are different cases, and would be Hall of Famers easily if they'd both retired before they took steroids.

You can't say the fact is Sosa and McGwire were only good because they took steroids. We don't know that at all. You may think that but it is certainly not a fact.

Also, Jeff Bagwell needs to be in the Hall. This whole steroid suspicion thing just isn't fair to him; he's never been proven of doing anything, and there's really no founding for suspicion on him the same way there is for Bonds or Clemens.

I don't see how Bagwell is any different than Sosa. You could easily replace the name Jeff Bagwell with Sammy Sosa in that paragraph. It seems you're giving Bagwell a pardon while throwing Sosa under the bus. Why?

 

[Richard Blonoff]

I think Bagwell should get in, but he was a fairly muscular power hitter in the steroid era, and I'm not sure people can get around that. I don't think Bags was a roider, but it doesn't take much to get people against you.

 

[Harthan]

You can't say the fact is Sosa and McGwire were only good because they took steroids. We don't know that at all. You may think that but it is certainly not a fact.



I don't see how Bagwell is any different than Sosa. You could easily replace the name Jeff Bagwell with Sammy Sosa in that paragraph. It seems you're giving Bagwell a pardon while throwing Sosa under the bus. Why?

I'll give you that "fact" is too strong a word here. But you can see the difference between Bagwell and Sosa if you look at a couple of things. Sosa plays four years in which his ISO never rises above .171. Then, his ISO jumps to the mid to high .200s - not unreasonable, considering he was a young player coming into his own. Then his ISO screams way above .300 for five consecutive years, and hits over .400 for one year - the years that would make him a Hall of Famer. Sosa as a 30-40 home run guy isn't unbelievable. Sosa as a consistent 50-60 guy, having that kind of a jump in his 30s? Couple this with the fact that he failed a drug test in 2003, and I'd say we have relatively conclusive evidence that Sosa took PED's and that they were largely the reason why, by the numbers, he has a Hall of Fame career.

Bagwell doesn't profile the same way. He has three seasons in which his ISO is under .200, then explodes to an ISO of .383. That happens in his age 26 season - not an unreasonable time for a young man to find power he didn't have before, the same way that Sosa had a reasonable uptick in ISO at around the same age. But his ISO drops from there - just .205 the next season, and then between .200 and a little above .300 for the rest of his career. There's not a lot of reason to suspect consistent steroid use there - he has a reasonable increase in power that could easily be explained by the maturation process of a young hitter, and then remains at a relatively consistent, and not unreasonable, power level. Bagwell never failed a drug test - admittedly, he only played a few years during which testing was really happening, the same as Sosa, but he never failed one.

At the end of the day, Sosa has a failed drug test and Bagwell doesn't. Sosa has incredibly suspect numbers and Bagwell doesn't. Do I know that Bagwell never took steroids? No, I don't, and I think only he does. But I don't have any reason to suspect it - at least, not as much as I do of Sosa, or McGwire, who flat out admitted it. There's no reason to hold this suspicion over Bagwell's head, just because of the era he played in, and just because of what we know, or have strong reason to suspect, what his contemporaries did.

EDIT: Just in case you guys don't know what ISO is, it's just slugging percentage minus average, and I'm using it to demonstrate overall power, to avoid complications over how many games were played in a given season by comparing HR totals.

 

[Papa Pillman]

I am one of the few still on the list of people who wants to see every one of the known PED users kept out. If Rose isn't in, then guys like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, Mcgwire etc. shouldn't be in.

But, there still should have been inductees this year, especailly Biggio.

Biggio has 3,000 hits. When was the last time a guy with 3,000 hits didn't make the hall on the first ballot? In the '40s!

It was inevitable that we would get to the day where 500 homerun guys didn't get in automatically(even if we didn't use PEDs as an excuse) due to swelling power numbers, but 3K hits is still 3K hits. Biggio being kept off the first ballot is unacceptable.

All I can imagine is that some voters didn't want some of these guys to have the stigma of being connected to this asterisk class, having it always be noted that they were inducted the first year that Bonds/Clemens were eligible and made an example of.

 

[Slyfox696]

I am one of the few still on the list of people who wants to see every one of the known PED users kept out. If Rose isn't in, then guys like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, Mcgwire etc. shouldn't be in.

But what if we believe Rose deserves to be in? Does that not change the dynamic?

 

[Papa Pillman]

But what if we believe Rose deserves to be in? Does that not change the dynamic?

Trust me, even without Rose being thrown into the equation, I see the side that you and others are coming from wanting to just put these guys in.

Especially how seeing as its a shame that a guy like Bagwell isn't getting a fair shake when there is no evidence at all to link him to steroid use, beyond conjecture about the era.

Putting these guys in though is just such a slap in the face to the guys like Griffey, or Frank Thomas for example. Those guys did it clean. And because they did it clean it devalued how people saw them at the end of their careers. When they hit their mid-30s they started to decline, age and injuries took their toll and people looked at them in a light that was below what they were deserving of. Why? Because you had guys like Bonds roided out of their senses. When their bodies hit decline, they hit the juice harder to heal up. They were balooning up and looking like Superman while staying healthy and inflating their chemically enhanced power numbers until they reached forty or later.

Leaving the known users out will allow the hall visitors in the future to really appreciate the guys who were able to put up hall of fame numbers in this era while staying clean when so many others were content to take the easy route.

But to your point... Yes I wouldn't feel nearly as bad about those guys getting in in spite of the Hall's prerequisite to honor the game if that also meant Pete got his deserving place.

 

[Slyfox696]

Putting these guys in though is just such a slap in the face to the guys like Griffey, or Frank Thomas for example. Those guys did it clean.

Sure, they did. That must be why Ken Griffey Jr. was such a fit and injury free player. That's why Frank Thomas suffered a gradual decline in power numbers and was not hitting nearly 40 home runs when he was 38.


Look, I'm always a fan of innocent until proven guilty. I even made the same argument for Clemons earlier in this thread. But I think it's rather naive to accuse one "innocent" of being a cheater while propping up another "innocent" with so many suspicions as a shining beacon of purity.

 

[shattered dreams]

I don't see how Bagwell is any different than Sosa.

Bagwell career BA and OPS .297 and .948 vs Sosa .273 and .878. In spite of Sosa's fungo bat Bagwell still had an OPS that was 70 higher for their careers. To me that is noticeably different.

Upon further review it appears some of these guys we are wondering about may have missed out on that first ballot caveat. I have less of a problem with that even if it seems silly.

 

[The Brain]

Bagwell career BA and OPS .297 and .948 vs Sosa .273 and .878. In spite of Sosa's fungo bat Bagwell still had an OPS that was 70 higher for their careers. To me that is noticeably different.

I wasn't referring to stats when I said Bagwell isn't any different than Sosa. I was referring to speculation of PEDs. It seemed that Harthan was giving a free pass to Bagwell for some reason but not doing the same for Sosa. He went on to explain himself pretty well and even mentioned that Sosa did fail a drug test in 2003. I was shocked that I did not know that, espcially living in Chicago. I looked it up and it turns out that information didn't come out until 2009. Most likely I did know it but just forgot because it did not surprise me and by 2009 I did not care. Either way I think both Sosa and Bagwell belong in the Hall.