11% of ballots collected, no one on track to be elected to HOF

[Chacon]

http://www.baseballthinkfactory.org/...ng_gizmo/P300/

69.7 - Biggio
68.2 - Bagwell
65.2 - Raines
62.1 - Piazza
62.1 - J. Morris
51.5 - Clemens
50.0 - Bonds
33.3 - L. Smith
33.3 - Schilling
33.3 - Trammell
30.3 - E. Martinez
18.2 - D. Murphy
16.7 - McGwire
16.7 - McGriff
15.2 - Raffy
13.6 - L. Walker
12.1 - S. Sosa
6.1 - Mattingly
———————————
3.0 - D. Wells
3.0 - Bernie Williams
3.0 - Lofton
3.0 - P. Rose

Bit of a small sample but this is interesting. I went into the voting thinking that Biggio would be the only candidate elected but it doesnt seem like a sure thing. It is hypocritical though for writers to keep Piazza out for steroid suspicion but not Biggio. They both had the same amount of evidence against them, zero, but one was a power hitter and the other wasn't so Piazza gets unfairly targeted.

Voting will be released Wednesday

EDIT: My bad, it's 20 percent of ballots

[kan_t]

The ballots are going to be a mess in the next few years. I feel bad for Moose. He's the kind of pitcher who would likely be overlooked.

[False1]

The ballots are going to be a mess in the next few years. I feel bad for Moose. He's the kind of pitcher who would likely be overlooked.

If Piazza doesn't get the votes without any evidence of steroid usage it's another ding against voter credibility. Raines should get in, as should Biggio and Bagwell.

[kan_t]

If Piazza doesn't get the votes without any evidence of steroid usage it's another ding against voter credibility. Raines should get in, as should Biggio and Bagwell.

Piazza will get enough votes but just not this year. He's getting the Bagwell's treatment. The voters have 15 years to get the things right and normally they get it. The problem is that there are so many top tier HOFers on the ballots in the next few years. I'm afraid that the middle tier HOFers won't get enough votes to stay on the ballots. Kent and Moose may be the victims there.

[Yankee Tripper]

It is hypocritical though for writers to keep Piazza out for steroid suspicion but not Biggio.

I could be wrong but I thought the circumstantial evidence against Piazza was a lot higher than Biggio. That is I thought there were actual rumors from sportswriters on Piazza back in the 90s and I don't recall any direct ones against Biggio. Biggio & Bagwell were both tainted but association with admited user and teammate Ken Camaniti if I remeber right.

Either way I think the evidence against either is very flimsly and shouldn't keep either out but by the same token someone mentioned the writers have 15 years to get it right and since you can't kick someone out once elected I don't have a problem with erring on the side of caution either.

[False1]

Piazza will get enough votes but just not this year. He's getting the Bagwell's treatment. The voters have 15 years to get the things right and normally they get it. The problem is that there are so many top tier HOFers on the ballots in the next few years. I'm afraid that the middle tier HOFers won't get enough votes to stay on the ballots. Kent and Moose may be the victims there.

I get that, but if he's not a first ballot HOF on his bat alone, let alone his positional value (even with poor D) just once again calls into question the credibility of this process and the voters.

[Ram Man]

Biggio & Bagwell were both tainted but association with admited user and teammate Ken Camaniti if I remeber right.

That is a flimsy, flimsy excuse. You can't choose your teammates in major league baseball. I've suspected that Biggio and Bagwell (especially Biggio) might benefit from the class of tainted/suspected players in this year's class, but I also could see the "not on the first ballot" phenomenon affecting Biggio this year. In my view, he's clearly a Hall-of-Famer, but not a slam dunk in the same way as players such as Aaron, Mays, etc. Clearly some writers take that into account when they consider voting for "second tier" Hall-of-Famers on the first ballot.

[Yankee Tripper]

That is a flimsy, flimsy excuse. You can't choose your teammates in major league baseball. I've suspected that Biggio and Bagwell (especially Biggio) might benefit from the class of tainted/suspected players in this year's class, but I also could see the "not on the first ballot" phenomenon affecting Biggio this year. In my view, he's clearly a Hall-of-Famer, but not a slam dunk in the same way as players such as Aaron, Mays, etc. Clearly some writers take that into account when they consider voting for "second tier" Hall-of-Famers on the first ballot.

I totally agree. Especially with Biggio. At least with Bagwell there were some physical questions with body type and late career injuries that supposedly could have been steriod related though no "hard evidence" linking that. Plus I think Bagwell & Cameniti were more than just teammates, I think they were close friends and off season workout partners. Again I could have the details wrong on that I'm going on about a 15 year old meomory without looking it up and I can't say I followed the Astros closely in the 90s. I don't think Biggio was as closely linked with Cameniti.

Again I think Piazza, Bagwell & Biggio should and will all get in barring an admision of guilt or credile accusations that arise against them at some point. Though each of the 3 may get in on a different time line with Biggio & Piazza both sooner than Bagwell in all likelyhood.

[False1]

If these writers had any credible evidence of steroid use for any of these guys, it would be in print. So I'm assuming they don't, which makes selectively guessing who used and who didn't preposterous. I don't think players that fit a mold of suspected use but where not a shred of evidence links them should get a "first ballot" penalty. Do what you will with Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, etc... but Piazza? C'mon.

[Yankee Tripper]

If these writers had any credible evidence of steroid use for any of these guys, it would be in print. So I'm assuming they don't, which makes selectively guessing who used and who didn't preposterous. I don't think players that fit a mold of suspected use but where not a shred of evidence links them should get a "first ballot" penalty. Do what you will with Bonds, McGwire, Sosa, etc... but Piazza? C'mon.

Some of these writers covered teams and may have more knowledge or suspicuon based on being in locker rooms. But I tend to agree, absent a test, credible accusation or first had knowledge I wouldn't hold it against a guy because he "might have been a user".

[rajah]

I disagree with you, False1. I don't see why players who were part of the same culture and escaped being proven users by imperfect or even non-existent drug tests should get into the HOF, while those who did not should be barred. We do not even know all the players who tested positive. I think it was obvious that certain players, like Sosa and McGwire and some others who were never caught, were users. You can have your own opinion.

I think that the only way to be fair is not to exclude any player for PEDs, except perhaps those, like Manny and Melky, who tested positive after the formal plan with penalties was put into effect.

[JL25and3]

Somehow, PED suspicions didn't matter so much to MLB in 1998, when all they could see were the marketing opportunities of the home run race. Their attitude was somewhere between willful ignorance and actual complicity.

Read what the Mitchell Report has to say about Brian Sabean. As long as he still has a job, I have trouble feeling too punitive towards the players involved.

[awy]

cheaters!!!!!!!!!!!! burn in hell etc

[sweet_lou_14]

Just want to say that I completely called it on Piazza. His case is going to get some national media attention.

[Hitman23]

The ballots are going to be a mess in the next few years. I feel bad for Moose. He's the kind of pitcher who would likely be overlooked.

I feel for a lot of players. It is so skewed because of PEDs that it's a mess. Some players with zero link to taking anything put up numbers that may have gotten them in if not for the bloated numbers by those who have used. I have no issues with PEDs but since many do who have a vote, much discussion will ensue.

[RenoHightower]

This is the beginning of the end for the BBWAA. With so many members taking ostentatious, self-righteous "stands" against steroids by refusing to elect anyone with big muscles, you're going to have this huge glut of worthy candidates and there won't be enough votes to go around. As a result, more good players are going to be hanging around longer, and that's going to exacerbate the problem further. We're going to see a lot of really outstanding players miss getting into the hall of fame for absolutely no discernible reason. I am glad to see that my boy Timmy Raines is getting some love, though.

[JL25and3]

This is the beginning of the end for the BBWAA. With so many members taking ostentatious, self-righteous "stands" against steroids by refusing to elect anyone with big muscles, you're going to have this huge glut of worthy candidates and there won't be enough votes to go around. As a result, more good players are going to be hanging around longer, and that's going to exacerbate the problem further. We're going to see a lot of really outstanding players miss getting into the hall of fame for absolutely no discernible reason. I am glad to see that my boy Timmy Raines is getting some love, though.

And how is this going to be the beginning of the end for the BBWAA? What's going to happen to them?

[Yankee Tripper]

I am glad to see that my boy Timmy Raines is getting some love, though.

Which is kind of ironic given his nick name was Rock.

[Hitman23]

And how is this going to be the beginning of the end for the BBWAA? What's going to happen to them?

It seems possible it may highlight the shortcomings of the current voting system. At least that's how I took it. It is very flawed and I'd like to see it change.

[False1]

I disagree with you, False1. I don't see why players who were part of the same culture and escaped being proven users by imperfect or even non-existent drug tests should get into the HOF, while those who did not should be barred. We do not even know all the players who tested positive. I think it was obvious that certain players, like Sosa and McGwire and some others who were never caught, were users. You can have your own opinion.

I think that the only way to be fair is not to exclude any player for PEDs, except perhaps those, like Manny and Melky, who tested positive after the formal plan with penalties was put into effect.

I don't disagree with your last comment purely. That would be better than what appears to be just guesswork. However, once again my premise is that the writers are voting. Their job is to break stories and the doggedly pursue inside information. If they can't get enough information to out someone, I think you have to cast your vote giving the player the benefit of the doubt. The most inequitable solution is to have voters guess. Does anyone that had muscles and played reasonably well past their peak get kept out?

[BronxYanks45]

in the end I think Clemens and Bonds get in on a veterans committee

[BRNXBMRS]

When I was a kid Jack Morris was the best pitcher in the league. I hated when the yanks used to play the Tigers. I dont know how he cant get in?

[effdamets]

I say this all the time.

Who cares?

The Hall of Fame has become a joke anyway.

[RenoHightower]

When I was a kid Jack Morris was the best pitcher in the league. I hated when the yanks used to play the Tigers. I dont know how he cant get in?

Because kid you was wrong, and Jack Morris was never the best pitcher in either league.

[35Knucklecurve]

Some of these writers covered teams and may have more knowledge or suspicuon based on being in locker rooms. But I tend to agree, absent a test, credible accusation or first had knowledge I wouldn't hold it against a guy because he "might have been a user".

Some writers have also admitted (anonymously) that if a player has given them a hard time in the past, he will not vote for him right away or maybe not even at all, which IMO, is inexcusable. They've got enough headaches with the steroid era without adding on petty crap. It's time to find a different group to serve on the HOF committee. I don't know if the answer is a mix of the Veteran's committee and former players or MLB analysts and players or a lotto drawing, but the BBWAA has shown me they are not worthy or capable of making unbiased, informed and intelligent decisions. The current "ritual" that some of them have of not ever voting a player in on his first year of eligility is ludicrous at best.