MLB Hall of Fame 2015

[The Brain]

Despite the below zero temperatures outside today is one of my favorite days on the baseball calendar. It's Hall of Fame day. Even though this day has brought me great frustration over the past few years I still look forward to it more than almost anything else. Let's take a look at this year's results.

The Electees

Randy Johnson
Pedro Martinez
John Smoltz
Craig Biggio

Unit was the most obvious electee on this year's ballot. No surprise there. Pedro wasn't as much of a lock but was still a pretty safe bet. Smoltz is absolutely a hall of famer but with the crowded ballot among other factors I was a little worried he would come up short. I'm glad he made it. Biggio should have gotten in two years ago and after coming up just two votes short last year it's nice to seem him take his spot.

Getting close

Mike Piazza
Jeff Bagwell
Tim Raines

Piazza went from 62.2% last year to 69.9% this year. In case you don't know, a player needs 75% of the vote to be elected. This is a great sign for Piazza and based on this trend I think he will get in next year. Bagwell didn't jump as much going from 54.3% to 55.7%. The good news for Bagwell is next year's class has only one lock as a first ballot hall of famer (Ken Griffey Jr.). Each of the past two years have produced three first ballot hall of famers so with a less crowded ballot next year might be the time for Bagwell. I don't see Tim Raines as a hall of famer. Just about every analyst I listen to on MLB Network says he should be in but I'm not convinced. He did make a pretty significant jump going from 46.1% to 55% which is a great for him but he only has two years left on the ballot. I think MLB Network is helping Raines a lot and his supporters are only going to speak louder as he gets closer to falling off. I wouldn't be surprised to see Raines get in but I wouldn't vote for him.

Trending Up

Curt Schilling
Mike Mussina

Schilling made a nice jump from 29.2% to 39.2%. Still a long way to go but jumping ten percentage points has to make him feel good. Mussina went from 20.3% to 24.6%. Not as impressive and still a very long way to go but with five of the best pitchers ever getting in over the past two years Mussina was kind of overshadowed. Now that the stiff competition is out of the way I expect Mussina to make a significant jump next year.

The PED Guys

Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Sammy Sosa
Mark McGwire

Bonds and Clemens went up by a slim margin but Sosa and McGwire went down. With the new rule keeping a guy on the ballot for ten years instead of fifteen (don't tell me it wasn't done to phase these guys out) it's becoming obvious Sosa and McGwire are never going to make it. Bonds and Clemens still have a chance but I'd be a lot more optimistic if they had fifteen chances instead of ten.

The Disrespected

Fred McGriff
Gary Sheffield
Carlos Delgado

The lack of support McGriff gets every year continues to baffle me. I shouldn't be surprised anymore but I am disappointed. 12.9% is too low for the Crime Dog. I think he should be in but his low vote totals don't look very promising for him. Sheffield got 11.7%. Not a good sign but this was his first year on the ballot. He has time to go up. Maybe he was overshadowed by other first timers. I expect his vote total to grow over the next few years. I don't know that I would have voted for Delgado so I can't really fault anyone that didn't vote for him but I'm disappointed that he received only 3.8%. That means he will not return to the ballot next year. In the end either you're a hall of famer or you're not so it doesn't matter if Delgado falls off this year of in ten years but I would have liked more opportunities for people to think about him. He was too good to just be one and done.

The Rest

Lee Smith
Edgar Martinez
Alan Trammell
Jeff Kent
Larry Walker
Don Mattingly
Nomar Garciaparra

These guys all had great careers but I don't think I'd vote for any of them for the HOF. Walker and Martinez are both favorites of mine and I'm on the fence with both but injuries hurt them as I feel both missed too much time to make the cut. Mattingly was great for about five years but that's not good enough. This was his final year on the ballot. Trammell, like Raines, receives a lot of support from the MLB Network analysts but I never saw him as a hall of famer. I keep trying to talk myself into Lee Smith but then I realize if I have to talk myself into it he probably doesn't belong in. I feel Kent is overrated. Some say he's the best offensive second basemen but he was not a very good fielder. He seemed like a first basemen playing second. Good career, not a hall of fame career. Garciaparra is similar to Mattingly. He was great for a short time until injuries ruined him.

The Brain's Ballot

Randy Johnson
Pedro Martinez
John Smoltz
Craig Biggio
Barry Bonds
Roger Clemens
Mike Piazza
Jeff Bagwell
Sammy Sosa
Fred McGriff


I can't believe I would actually vote for ten guys. Normally it's two or three. I would have actually voted for Sheffield and Mussina too and I'm on the fence with Schilling, but I'll follow the rules and limit myself to ten votes. If the voters would have put some of these guys in when they deserved it we wouldn't be in this situation and Carlos Delgado could return to the ballot next year but this is where we are now.

Next Year

Ken Griffey Jr.
Trevor Hoffman
Billy Wagner
Jim Edmonds
Garret Anderson

As I mentioned above Griffey is the only first ballot lock. This should help the guys who didn't make it this year, especially Piazza and Bagwell. Hoffman also has a chance and I see him getting in but I'm not sure if he'll make it on the first ballot. Wagner was one of the best closers of his era but he doesn't seem to have the name recognition as Hoffman and Mariano Rivera. I doubt he gets in. Edmonds is an interesting case. He has very good offensive numbers but is best known for his defense and gold gloves. Neither his offense of defense is good enough alone to get him in but the combination might give him a chance. My gut says Edmonds is not a hall of famer. Anderson isn't either and probably won't even get 5% but I wanted to give him a shout out because I always liked him and thought he was underrated.

Sorry for rambling but this is one of my favorite topics. I hope a few people care enough to read and respond. What are your general thoughts about the MLB HOF results and who would be on your ballot?

 

[TheICChampion]

Well, a few years down the road I'd like to see some former Blue Jays such as Pat Hentgen (if he's not already in) and Roy Halladay (guy's gotta be a lock in the near future). I know I'm biased but it's not like these guys haven't done anything to be deserving of HoF. Halladay has won multiple Cy Young awards, for starters. Both of these guys have been on World Series winning teams. I also don't think there is any doubt that when he's retired Jose Bautista will be going in at some point.

 

[ScreaminNormanSmiley]

I am curious as to why you don't see Raines as a hall of famer. He is one of the best ever at stealing bases(top five both in career and single season) and had an impressive 385 on base through out his career. Being one of the five best at an aspect of an over century long sport is enough for me to get recognition, especially while being being more than solid in most of the other aspects of the game.

 

[Akhilleus]

I am not a fan of the Baseball Hall of Fame. Just in general. I think it's a flawed system, and I usually end up disappointed with the results every year. Take last year for example...how you can have a year where no one gets elected. Then there's the controversy with guys like Bonds and Sosa. I can understand the debate about that, but there are so many aspects to it that I see flaws with. And yeah, I am on the side to have Bonds and Clemens in the Hall. Specifically Clemens, the guy didn't even cheat. Bonds was just a great all around player with or without PEDS.

I would really like to see Jeff Kent in there too. Ken Griffey is going to be passed through for sure next year there's no doubt about that. As far as this year I'm a big fan of Randy Johnson. He's Hall material for sure, as well as Pedro Martinez...he actually reminds me a lot of Carlos Martinez, and I hope that Carlos has the same potential. By that I mean a solid bullpen guy who makes the transition to starter and actually becomes better. More often than not it's the opposite. Sadly I didn't like what I saw from Carlos Martinez last season, hoping he bounces back.

I went to the Baseball Hall of Fame a couple of summers ago up in Cooperstown, New York. I don't know what it was...I just didn't enjoy it as much. It was something I had to do at least once in my life, and so I knew I wanted to go. Yet I think comparing just the trip and what to see I enjoyed the Football Hall of Fame up in Canton, Ohio much more. It seemed like that Hall of Fame just had a lot more to offer, and they have a much better system of electing players in as well.

I'm still a little youthful though with a lot of these things. I think I'll find the Hall of Fame elections a lot more interesting in twenty or so years whenever the players I actually watched are going in.

 

[Papa Pillman]

This would have been my voting ballot this year:

Unit (no brainer in my eyes)
Pedro (no brainer too)
Smoltz (no brainer "three")
Biggio (highway robbery that he wasn't a first ballot guy)
Raines (narrowly a hof'er)
Schilling
Mussina

The case of Schilling/Mussina is an interesting one for me as a guy who was able to see the entirety of both men's careers. To me, without digging, Schilling was a fairly clear HOF'er; while I would've classified Mussina as the "very close but maybe not quite" type. But a look at the metrics shows no negligible differences. In fact their Jaffe ratings show them as the number 27 and 28 starting pitchers of all time, each with JAWS scores of nearly 3 points higher than the average HOF starter. So if Schilling is in(and to me he must be), than Mussina is in too, and I really don't have a problem with that, as the eye test showed him as borderline Hall quality in my eyes.

As for the rest:
For the steroid bunch- Bonds, Rocket, Mac, Sosa, and I now add Scheff top their ilk; I love the adjusted ten year rule, these guys can't get off the ballot fast enough IMO. They have already sullied the record books, I prefer they don't do the same to the Hall.

Bags and McGriff are narrow misses in my eyes, and disastrous defense at a premium position and my own suspicions of "enhancement" disqualify Piazza for me.

The rest of the first ballot and holdover names, while having great careers, were clearly not Hall quality.

Now with my assessments out of the way, I have a couple of quick questions for you Brain...

You said:

I don't see Tim Raines as a hall of famer. Just about every analyst I listen to on MLB Network says he should be in but I'm not convinced. He did make a pretty significant jump going from 46.1% to 55% which is a great for him but he only has two years left on the ballot. I think MLB Network is helping Raines a lot and his supporters are only going to speak louder as he gets closer to falling off. I wouldn't be surprised to see Raines get in but I wouldn't vote for him.

and later:

The lack of support McGriff gets every year continues to baffle me. I shouldn't be surprised anymore but I am disappointed. 12.9% is too low for the Crime Dog. I think he should be in but his low vote totals don't look very promising for him.

I'd like to know what makes McGriff a HOF'er in your eyes, while leaving Raines out?

The career award and recognition accomplishments are very close.

Also the offensive statistics for both men show nearly identical players:

The ratio numbers are negligibly different.

The counting numbers also wash when considering more strong similarity aside from McGriff's power stats(HR and RBI) vastly outpacing Raines while Raines' speed and plate discipline(SB and K total/BB total/K%/K-to-BB) vastly outpace McGriif.

The advanced offensive stats are all also negligibly different.

What's not comparable?
Their glove work. While neither man played a premium defensive position, the eye test and traditional fielding stats showed Raines as an average to slightly above average defensive LF'er; while the advanced metric show him as just below average. Meanwhile for McGriff, the eye test and traditional metrics showed him as a slightly below average defensive 1B; while advanced metrics show him as pathetically and historically bad at fielding his position.

These defensive shortcomings line up to separate them on an overall quality scale, and WAR proves it*:
McGriff career WAR: 52.4
Raines career WAR: 69.1

*These numbers are determined using baseballreference WAR stats(rWAR) instead of Fangraphs WAR stats(fWAR) as rWAR is a more accurate calculator for players who competed the majority of their careers prior to 2002. fWAR does show these two players as closer on the career WAR scale, however Raines still leads comfortably.

It is also reflected in their Jaffe assessments- as McGriff has a JAWS score of 44.1, ranking 27th all time at 1B(a position that boasts 19 HOF'ers) just over 10 points lower than the average of the HOF'ers at the position.

While Raines has a JAWS score of 55.6, good for 8th all time at LF(better than 12 of the 19 HOF'ers at that position) and just over two points higher than the average HOF'er at the position.

Another easier to sink your teeth in stat is Raines' 3 career World Series rings, superior to the one won by McGriff.

To me the numbers show a statistical impossibility for McGriff to be a HOF'er, while Raines is left on the outside looking in.

I have no problem with anyone voting for McGriff, to me he is as borderline as it gets and has a very strong case, missing for me by the narrowest of margins. But what I do take offense to is considering McGriff a HOF'er while stating that Raines does not belong. A vote for "Crime Dog" should make Raines a lock as well.

Aside from Homeruns and RBI, is there any other justification you can provide to me for feeling that McGriff deserves a spot over Raines??

 

[JMobile]

I think with the numbers Piazza put up with the Dodgers and Mets is good numbers for a catcher. He is multiple time All-Star appearance and I know he has one MVP's before as well too.

I would select Edgard Martinez. Why not? He has put DH numbers and I believe he has a high record in MLB for hitting doubles.

 

[The Brain]

I am curious as to why you don't see Raines as a hall of famer.

I'd like to know what makes McGriff a HOF'er in your eyes, while leaving Raines out?

I am a die hard baseball fan but for as much of a fan I am I admit I'm not the best student of the game. People smarter than I am will dig deep and bring up numbers that favor guys like Raines. Of course I will research the numbers a little but for the most part the HOF is a gut feeling. Tim Raines was a great player and it is by no means a knock on someone when I say he's not a hall of famer. To even be considered is a great compliment. I just don't see him as one of the very elite of his time. Raines was great for about eight or nine years and it's fair to say that might be enough to earn election but great isn't the same as HOF elite. I was shocked to see he played for 23 years and his last year was in 2002. I would have guessed he retired around 1995. He had a good year or two with the White Sox but Raines really wasn't relevant after leaving Montreal after 1990.

I thought McGriff was a difference maker everywhere he went. Maybe bouncing around so much hurt him but whenever he moved to a new team he became the best player there. We'll never know for sure who was clean and who wasn't but most people agree McGriff was clean. He was at 30-40 homers every year for a long time. He was a model of consistency and one of the dominant players in the 90s. He would probably get a lot more votes if not for the strike of 94/95 because if not for that he would have over 500 home runs.

I respect and appreciate the research and arguments supporting Raines. I admit I'm not an expert but when you say the name Fred McGriff I think Hall of Famer. When you say the name Tim Raines I don't.

 

[Papa Pillman]

I totally respect the argument that McGriff's nearly 500 homeruns achieved while being clean, in an era where basically every other man putting up comparable numbers was either strongly suspected of being "enhanced" or downright proven to be, gives him a warranted boost in perception.

Its the same argument that cements Griffey as the number one offensive player of the era for me.