Baseball HOF Predictions

[Breeze]

Anyone want to take a stab on predicting the outcome of the HOF votes due out Monday...

I think Larkin and only Larkin gets in...

I think Morris jumps up to the mid 60% range and gets in striking distance of making it in...

I think Trammell and Raines increase in votes, but are still a ways away...

I think all of the newcomers to the ballot fail to get the 5% needed to stay on the ballot for 2013 except Bernie Williams...he'll be back on it again.

I think no one else makes any significant change....

[Pumpy Tudors]

I don't even know who was nominated, but I predict that the player with the highest WAR will not get in, and people are going to lose their freakin' minds.

[oykib]

Originally Posted by Pumpy Tudors

I don't even know who was nominated, but I predict that the player with the highest WAR will not get in, and people are going to lose their freakin' minds.

2012 Baseball Hall of Fame Hopefuls

[Jas_lov]

I think you're right on the money, Larkin gets in and no one else. Bagwell might get closer but not in. Next year is more interesting- Bonds, Clemens, Piazza, Biggio, Schiling, Sosa on for the 1st time.

[oykib]

I think Larkin gets in. The more interesting question is whether Morris or Raines gets into the 65+% range. The writers are going to feel pressure to push one of them through because of the aforementioned, controversial powerhouse class next year.

I think Raines gets into the mid-60s. Morris is looking worse and worse compared to the guys who came after him in much bigger hitting eras. Schilling, for instance, absolutely blows him away. I think he finishes within a few points of last years 53.5%.

[ntndeacon]

I am not even sure how many of the the first year nominees get the 5% they need to stay on the ballot. (If I had to be generous... 3?)

[JediKooter]

Sixto Lezcano

[molson]

Originally Posted by Jas_lov

Next year is more interesting- Bonds, Clemens, Piazza, Biggio, Schiling, Sosa on for the 1st time.

It's interesting how that's considered a "powerhouse class", but at the same time, I don't think any of them are slam dunk. I don't think Bonds, Clemens, or Sosa get in, based on the votes McGwire got (McGwire doesn't have the credentials of those 3, but damn, he was just killed by the voters.) Biggio has the numbers but not the fame. He's not a big part of baseball history, and he was never an MVP, or even top-3 in MVP voting. Schilling is kind of the opposite deal - he doesn't have the numbers but he's got a ton of huge moments, he's a big part of baseball history. Piazza seemed like a slam dunk at one point in his career, but now I have no idea.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by molson

It's interesting how that's considered a "powerhouse class", but at the same time, I don't think any of them are slam dunk. I don't think Bonds, Clemens, or Sosa get in, based on the votes McGwire got (McGwire doesn't have the credentials of those 3, but damn, he was just killed by the voters.) Biggio has the numbers but not the fame. He's not a big part of baseball history, and he was never an MVP, or even top-3 in MVP voting. Schilling is kind of the opposite deal - he doesn't have the numbers but he's got a ton of huge moments, he's a big part of baseball history. Piazza seemed like a slam dunk at one point in his career, but now I have no idea.

I think Piazza is a lock. Biggio will be interesting since he should get in, but I wouldn't be surprised if he falls short his first year. I think Schilling gets in on his first try.

Bonds, Clemens, and Sosa don't have a chance. I've explained on here before that I believe Sosa's case is iffy even without the steroid cloud.

[cougarfreak]

I think Schilling is way overrated for a guy that didn't win 220 games, and never won a Cy Young.

[molson]

Originally Posted by cougarfreak

I think Schilling is way overrated for a guy that didn't win 220 games, and never won a Cy Young.

He did finish 2nd 3 times in 4 years. His peak was pretty good. And in the playoffs he's 11-2, 2.23 ERA, 0.968 WHIP, and he was in 3 World Series in which he won a game for the winning team. Certainly a lot of sizzle that might make up for the career stats.

[cougarfreak]

Originally Posted by molson

He did finish 2nd 3 times in 4 years. His peak was pretty good. And in the playoffs he's 11-2, 2.23 ERA, 0.968 WHIP, and he was in 3 World Series in which he won a game for the winning team. Certainly a lot of sizzle that might make up for the career stats.

I don't disagree. His peak was pretty good. I just don't see him as a lock. I guess it's me.

[CrimsonFox]

I thought Mattingly was better than that.

[CrimsonFox]

and am I missing something? What's so great about Larkin?

(And I was even a Cincinnatian during their WOrld Series run and at his peak)

[molson]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

I thought Mattingly was better than that.

I thought Dale Murphy was better than that too. There was a bunch of guys in the 80s that seemed like HOFs when they were playing, and then just faded somehow. Their power numbers just don't look the same anymore.

[oykib]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

and am I missing something? What's so great about Larkin?

(And I was even a Cincinnatian during their WOrld Series run and at his peak)

He was a multiple gold glove SS with an MVP and 9 silver sluggers. His OPS+ was 116 and he had a 30-30 season (which wasn't even his MVP year). Overall, he stole 379 bases and was only caught 77 times (83%). He ranks 67th all-time in offensive WAR (Baseball Reference). A very good to excellenty fielding SS who is the 67th best offensive player in MLB history should have been a first-ballot inductee.

19 Seasons	2180	9057	7937	1329	2340	441	76	198	960	379	77	939	817	.295	.371	.444	.815	116	3527	178	55	59	67	66		
162 Game Avg.	162	673	590	99	174	33	6	15	71	28	6	70	61	.295	.371	.444	.815	116	262	13	4	4	5	5		
	G	PA	AB	R	H	2B	3B	HR	RBI	SB	CS	BB	SO	BA	OBP	SLG	OPS	OPS+	TB	GDP	HBP	SH	SF	IBB

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by oykib

He was a multiple gold glove SS with an MVP and 9 silver sluggers. His OPS+ was 116 and he had a 30-30 season (which wasn't even his MVP year). Overall, he stole 379 bases and was only caught 77 times (83%). He ranks 66th all-time in offensive WAR (Baseball Reference). A very good to excellenty fielding SS who is the 66th best offensive player in MLB history should have been a first-ballot inductee.

19 Seasons    2180    9057    7937    1329    2340    441    76    198    960    379    77    939    817    .295    .371    .444    .815    116    3527    178    55    59    67    66        
162 Game Avg.    162    673    590    99    174    33    6    15    71    28    6    70    61    .295    .371    .444    .815    116    262    13    4    4    5    5        
    G    PA    AB    R    H    2B    3B    HR    RBI    SB    CS    BB    SO    BA    OBP    SLG    OPS    OPS+    TB    GDP    HBP    SH    SF    IBB

good answer

[Breeze]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

good answer

I think another reason why he doesn't stand out like he should it the emergence of SS like AROD, Jeter, Garciaparra, and Tejada at the end of his career (this hurts Trammell too). Before the influx of these offensive SS the only one that was better offensive in Larkin's/Trammell's time was arguably Ripken. Put back in context of his peers, he was far superior.

I think Mattingly and Murphy suffer a bit - the marginalizing of the homerun in the Steriod Era makes their accomplishments seem less compelling. But the bigger issue is both were dominating in their peak but washed up quickly. Had either had a couple more good seasons (I don't think they even needed to be great, just good) they are probably in.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

good answer

The only knock I think people can make against Larkin is his health. He missed a TON of games over the course of his career. Probably a conservative estimate at 750 games missed due to injuries which is around 4.5-5 seasons worth of games. He would have ended up with 3000 hits pretty easily.

That's not to say durability shouldn't count. It just puts into perspective that he really was an outstanding shortstop. I think it was a real shame that he and Alomar both didn't go in on their first tries. They both were worthy enough.

I find it even more of shame though that Alomar got in on his second and Larkin didn't. It's unbelievable how close their numbers are, both great defensive players at their positions -- with Larkin playing the tougher position.

[Breeze]

Originally Posted by rowech

The only knock I think people can make against Larkin is his health. He missed a TON of games over the course of his career. Probably a conservative estimate at 750 games missed due to injuries which is around 4.5-5 seasons worth of games. He would have ended up with 3000 hits pretty easily.

That's not to say durability shouldn't count. It just puts into perspective that he really was an outstanding shortstop. I think it was a real shame that he and Alomar both didn't go in on their first tries. They both were worthy enough.

I find it even more of shame though that Alomar got in on his second and Larkin didn't. It's unbelievable how close their numbers are, both great defensive players at their positions -- with Larkin playing the tougher position.

If you think Alomar and Larkin's number are similar...look at Trammell's and Larkin's. Much closer than many would expect.

I think it is a shame Trammell isn't getting more support...

[CrimsonFox]

Originally Posted by rowech

The only knock I think people can make against Larkin is his health. He missed a TON of games over the course of his career. Probably a conservative estimate at 750 games missed due to injuries which is around 4.5-5 seasons worth of games. He would have ended up with 3000 hits pretty easily.

That's not to say durability shouldn't count. It just puts into perspective that he really was an outstanding shortstop. I think it was a real shame that he and Alomar both didn't go in on their first tries. They both were worthy enough.

I find it even more of shame though that Alomar got in on his second and Larkin didn't. It's unbelievable how close their numbers are, both great defensive players at their positions -- with Larkin playing the tougher position.

didn't ozzie smith primarily get in on his defense and longetivity? I don't recall Ozzie having outstanding offense overall.

[rowech]

Originally Posted by Breeze

If you think Alomar and Larkin's number are similar...look at Trammell's and Larkin's. Much closer than many would expect.

I think it is a shame Trammell isn't getting more support...

I think Trammell loses support because he's tied to Whitaker. Fairly, or unfairly, people see those two as a duo and if one goes in, they know the screams will be for the other to go. So, I think guys vote to keep them both out because they don't believe Whitaker should get in.

Another thing about Trammell is he was probably not ever the best SS in the AL because of Ripken. Larkin was the best SS in the NL for a period of 5-7 years.

[Breeze]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

didn't ozzie smith primarily get in on his defense and longetivity? I don't recall Ozzie having outstanding offense overall.

Yeah...Ozzie's offense was pretty pedestrian. I haven't looked it up, but I think he was south of 30 HR for a career and his lifetime BA was around .265. I think the only offensive category that he could be considered a + was SB...

[Breeze]

Originally Posted by rowech

I think Trammell loses support because he's tied to Whitaker. Fairly, or unfairly, people see those two as a duo and if one goes in, they know the screams will be for the other to go. So, I think guys vote to keep them both out because they don't believe Whitaker should get in.

Another thing about Trammell is he was probably not ever the best SS in the AL because of Ripken. Larkin was the best SS in the NL for a period of 5-7 years.

Agreed. Plus the there was a short time that Fernandez was arguably better in the AL as well...

[CrimsonFox]

So why don't we whip up a quick HOF vote ourselves and see how WE would vote?

[Pumpy Tudors]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

So why don't we whip up a quick HOF vote ourselves and see how WE would vote?

shitstorm warning in effect for fofc county

[korme]

My favorite player of all-time, any sport. I'm pumped!

[CrimsonFox]

20 minutes til announecment!

[CrimsonFox]

4 minutes!

[CrimsonFox]

MLB.com/LIVE | The Baseball Channel | MLB.com: Multimedia

[Breeze]

Originally Posted by CrimsonFox

MLB.com/LIVE | The Baseball Channel | MLB.com: Multimedia

thanks for the link

[spleen1015]

Grats Barry Larkin!

[oykib]

Congratulations to Barry Larkin!

[CrimsonFox]

YAYYYYY!!!!! Pity Morris and Raines didn't get in.

[CrimsonFox]

I want a pimp hat like Eric Davis.

[Crapshoot]

Larkin is a great call. He's an all time great at SS.

Others:

- why on earth do people keep voting for Jack Morris? He's an above average pitcher, but Dave Steib is more of a HOF than Morris ever will be. All this BS about "pitching to the score" is just that

- Tim Raines and Jeff Bagwell, are no-doubt HOF's by any rational metric - shocking to see them out, because voters are either playing chickenshit (in Bagwell's case) or just unaware of Raines. Raines wasn't Rickey Henderson, but no one else was - Rickey is inner-circle HOF.

[Butter]

FUCKING AWESOME. Barry Larkin totally deserves it.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Larkin is a great call. He's an all time great at SS.

Others:

- why on earth do people keep voting for Jack Morris? He's an above average pitcher, but Dave Steib is more of a HOF than Morris ever will be. All this BS about "pitching to the score" is just that

- Tim Raines and Jeff Bagwell, are no-doubt HOF's by any rational metric - shocking to see them out, because voters are either playing chickenshit (in Bagwell's case) or just unaware of Raines. Raines wasn't Rickey Henderson, but no one else was - Rickey is inner-circle HOF.

Quoted for truth.

[oykib]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Larkin is a great call. He's an all time great at SS.


- Tim Raines and Jeff Bagwell, are no-doubt HOF's by any rational metric - shocking to see them out, because voters are either playing chickenshit (in Bagwell's case) or just unaware of Raines. Raines wasn't Rickey Henderson, but no one else was - Rickey is inner-circle HOF.

I totally agree on these points. There was an article about Bagwell's situation a little while ago.

[CrimsonFox]

Next year I think Bagwell, Schilling get in.

Biggio and Piazza will get in later.

The rest never.

[dawgfan]

It will probably take close to the maximum time on the ballot, but I think Edgar will eventually get in. His results are tracking reasonably well in that regard, and he's the type of candidate that is likely helped by the continuing SABR-metric evolution of the HOF voting base.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Larkin is a great call. He's an all time great at SS.

Others:

- why on earth do people keep voting for Jack Morris? He's an above average pitcher, but Dave Steib is more of a HOF than Morris ever will be. All this BS about "pitching to the score" is just that

- Tim Raines and Jeff Bagwell, are no-doubt HOF's by any rational metric - shocking to see them out, because voters are either playing chickenshit (in Bagwell's case) or just unaware of Raines. Raines wasn't Rickey Henderson, but no one else was - Rickey is inner-circle HOF.

Most definitely this.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Dave Steib is more of a HOF than Morris ever will be.

I actually kind of want Morris to get in just so I can get all indignant about this indisputable fact.

[JediKooter]

Originally Posted by JediKooter

Sixto Lezcano

This is bullshit he didn't make it!!!

[molson]

I'm always fascinated by the guys at the bottom that, someone, somewhere, thinks is HOF worthy:

Tim Salmon 5 0.9%
Bill Mueller 4 0.7%
Brad Radke 2 0.3%
Javy López 1 0.2%
Eric Young 1 0.2%

It was last year or the year before that some ESPN writer cast the single for somebody - it was Benito Santiago or maybe david Segui. He had this whole explanation that I couldn't follow.

Edit: ESPN's Pedro Gomez voted for Bill Mueller. Interesting to hear him defend it on Twitter (he calls it a "favored son" vote to honor someone who won't be on the ballot again), but kind of disturbing how so many people are freaking out over it, like the vote is a greater sin then molesting little boys. It is amusing though. Last year, ESPN's Barry Stanton voted for B.J. Surhoff and Tino Martinez, but not Roberto Alomar.

[korme]

Man all my Cincinnati childhood friends are so stoked about it on Facebook. Universally everyone's favorite. It's really a storybook tale, the guy was born & raised in the city that drafted him and he stayed for his entire career, opting for retirement over a few extra paychecks (in Washington) at the end.

[korme]

Originally Posted by molson

Last year, ESPN's Barry Stanton voted for B.J. Surhoff and Tino Martinez, but not Roberto Alomar.

If you're a baseball editor at ESPN, how do you literally not consider that grounds for firing?

[Crapshoot]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

I actually kind of want Morris to get in just so I can get all indignant about this indisputable fact.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here - but I'm not being facetious about it. Steib was a significantly better pitcher than Morris with a significantly better peak (4 6WAR+ seasons - Morris didn't even have one), significantly higher career value despite 900 less innings (53 WAR vs 380), and just all around better. Steib's 5th best season is probably better than any single season that Morris had.

Hell even using old fashioned stats, Morris never had an ERA below 3 in his career - not once, in a significantly lower run scoring environment. His career high in ERA+ is 133, and that was in a year where he pitched less than 200 innings.

This mystique of Morris bit is the ultimate in "I'll vote for the guy first, justify it later" bit - he made 5 AS games in his career, which is low for someone who they now assure us was considered as one of the "best pitchers in the game."

[Jas_lov]

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

I know I'm preaching to the choir here - but I'm not being facetious about it. Steib was a significantly better pitcher than Morris with a significantly better peak (4 6WAR+ seasons - Morris didn't even have one), significantly higher career value despite 900 less innings (53 WAR vs 380), and just all around better. Steib's 5th best season is probably better than any single season that Morris had.

Hell even using old fashioned stats, Morris never had an ERA below 3 in his career - not once, in a significantly lower run scoring environment. His career high in ERA+ is 133, and that was in a year where he pitched less than 200 innings.

This mystique of Morris bit is the ultimate in "I'll vote for the guy first, justify it later" bit - he made 5 AS games in his career, which is low for someone who they now assure us was considered as one of the "best pitchers in the game."

Morris had a career ERA+ of 105. A current day comparison with a career ERA+ of 105 - AJ Burnett.

Mike Mussina better get in when he comes up in 2 years if they're gonna give Jack Morris 66%. He most likely will not get in on the 1st ballot but Mussina pitched during the steroid era and in the AL East his whole career and still has better numbers.

[CrimsonFox]

internet fight! great article

The Worst Thing Ever Written About Barry Larkin - Baseball Nation