Monday Morning Manager…Hall of Fame vote

All right…have the Hall of Fame balloting sitting in front of me, one of the privileges of doing this for a long, long time. Too long, in fact, and where is that winning lottery ticket.

We have a list of 26 names on here, one more than you need for an actual Major League team. Actually you could have a great Major League team here – no kidding, it’s a Hall of Fame ballot – but there are no catchers.

Monday_Morning_Manager.jpgWell actually there is Todd Zeile and Dale Murphy but they were switched early in their careers from behind the plate.

Two things are true about the Hall of Fame ballot….

1. Everybody has their opinion who should be in the Hall of Fame

2. If somebody who doesn’t have a ballot disagrees with your vote, he’ll call you everything from a complete idiot to a fat old sports writer who knows nothing about baseball. Or sabremetrics.

My opinion? Baseball writers do a much better job than football writers. Cooperstown may be in upstate New York but it’s not stuffed with a bunch of AFL players who had no chance to play in the NFL.

The biggest drama concerning the NFL Hall of Fame every year is what ex-Buffalo Bill is going to get inducted.

Billy Shaw? What about Jerry Kramer?

Still, the Baseball Hall of Fame will never been complete without Ron Santo? That’s just ridiculous. Anybody who doesn’t think Ron Santo is a Hall of Famer is a complete idiot.

All right, here is your chance to be called a complete idiot!! Sorry, no Buffalo Bills on this ballot but no doubt Elbert Dubenion will soon be on his way to Canton…

1. I am voting for Mark McGwire….are you?

2. Starting pitchers…Jack Morris and/or Bert Blyleven? Yeah or nay?

3. The middle infielders…Roberto Alomar and Barry Larkin are new this year. Alan Trammell is a holdover. Any of those appeal to you?

4. Big bats…Edgar Martinez and Fred McGriff are new. Don Mattingly and Dave Parker are holdovers. Which ones do you vote for?

5. The outfielders…Tim Raines, Ellis Burks, Dale Murphy and Andre Dawson. More on Dawson later. Any outfielders on your vote?

6 Lee Smith: He set an all-time record for saves. Now he is third behind Mariano Rivera and Trevor Hoffman.

7. Ex-Rangers: Harold Baines, David Segui, Todd Zeile, Andres Galarraga.

8. The rest of the ballot: Kevin Appier, Pat Hentgen, Mike Jackson, Eric Karros, Ray Lankford, Shane Reynolds, Robin Ventura.

I will reveal my ballot later this week to give people an opportunity to call me a complete idiot…

But anybody who doesn’t have Andre Dawson on their ballot is a complete idiot…

So there!





1. I know how you think o this TR but no I won’t vote for McGwire. Maybe later when this whole steroid thing dies down some I can do it. But to me…if I could vote for McGwire then I could vote for Rose and for Jackson.
2. Both great pitchers but not Hall.
3. No thank you.
4. Donnie Ballgame belongs in the Hall.
5. Ho Hum.
6. Lee Smith belongs in the Hall.
7. Good Lord NO!
8. I would consider Ventura’s image in the Hall if it’s a picture of Nolan Ryan giving him a noggie… Otherwise no to all of them.

An uninspired group to vote for. Ron Santo for the Hall! No one does more for juvenile diabetes…ot me (Sorry Mr. Banks) Ron Santo is Mr. Cub.

1. I like Mark McGwire as a baseball player. He did alot to get baseball fans back after the strike. Say what you want about what he said to congress or didn’t say when I think of a hall of famer I think of Mark McGwire being in the hall. He did play the game the right way.
2. I think both Morris and Blyleven are both hall of famers.
3. Both Barry Larkin and Roberto Alomar are hall of famers in my book.
4. Donnie baseball should be in. Edgar and Fred are borderline maybes. I don’t know Dave Parkers numbers well enough I would say no.
5. Tim Raines is very close. Dale Murphy is also close. Ellis Burks I don’t think of a hall of famer. When I think of Andre Dawson I think of a hall of famer.
6. Lee Smith I have to think of about but at one time he was the all time leader in saves. He might take a while like Goose Gossage did.
7. Todd Zeile and David Segui no not happening. Harold Baines might get some consideration Bat get will get some votes too. But of these former Rangers Big cat will have the best chance.
8. When I think of this group I think the were good players but not great players. Good players aren’t hall of famer you have to have a little more than these guys offer to get in the hall of fame.

1. Yes to McGwire
2. Yes to Jack Morris
3. Yes to Alan Trammell–better than Ozzie except on backflips
4. No to the “bats”
5. Yes to Tim Raines, Dale Murphy and Andre Dawson
6-8 No to some decent, but not outstanding, players
9. Yes to your take on Ron Santo. He should have been in years ago. One of many HOF slights.

1. I’m still on the fence about Big Mac. I’d give it a few more years to let the whole roids thing subside a bit more.
2. Jack Morris, yes. Bert Blyleven, YES!
3. I’d say no on Trammell and barely no on Larkin. Yes to Alomar.
4. Martinez and Parker are no for me, but Mattingly and McGriff are a very big yes.
5. Dawson deserves to be in it more than anyone else on this list.
6. Lee Smith is a yes.
7. I would say Baines is the closest, but still a no to me.
8. The rest will stay impressive and at the top for a year or two, but never dominant or Hall of Fame worthy.

1. Yes. Tremendous power and OBP. I’m not convinced that there weren’t more players using PED’s than not during that era, including pitchers, and don’t get me started on the hypocrisy of the old school guys who were chowing down amphetamines like candy in their day but condemn steroids now.

2. Morris, no. Blylevin, yes. I think I gave my detailed stance on these two at this time last year. To me Morris is a watershed guy. If you’re better than him, you should be in. Blylevin is better by a lot.

3. Roberto Alomar should be a lock, shouldn’t he? I don’t really see him as debatable. 12 All-Star team, 10 gold gloves, he’s the prototype of everything you’d want in a secondbasemen/2 hole hitter, (though he had the skills to hit lead off or third and did quite a bit), hitting for average, getting on base at a high rate, stealing 450+ bases at a good rate of success, decent power for a table setter, very good post season performer…. I guess you could say he never was an MVP or that he didn’t get 3,000 hits, but a .300/.371/.443 career line out of an elite defender looks like Hall of Fame credentials to me. What else do you need? A period of dominance? He hit .316/.391/.489 over 9 years from ’93 to ’01.

Larkin. Phew……I don’t know. He’s going to be an interesting case. I lean toward yes, but I think his relative lack of power (though he was above average for **** in his era) compared to other superstars of the early days of the steroid era will hurt him. I tend to think that if you made 10 or more All-Star games, you’re clearly an elite player at your position. Larkin made a dozen, won an MVP award and garnered 3 gold gloves because he happened to play in the same era and league as Ozzie Smith. His stat line looks a lot like Alomar’s but he played less and had about 400 fewer hits. The more I look at him compared to Alomar, the more I think he should be in, but I could say the same about Lou Whitaker/Ryne Sandberg. Most, if not all the praise I heaped on Alomar could apply to Larkin. In an era when good hitting shortstops were still the rarity, rather than the norm, Larkin was a standout offensive player and, despite the comparative lack of hardware, a great defender.

Trammell was a really, really good player, but like his outstanding double play partner, not quite Hall worthy.

4. McGriff is possibly a comparative victim of the PED era, but he was very good for a long time and never really great. 493 home runs used to mean a lot more than it does now. He’s a little like Trammell; not an all time great, but there’s not a manager born that wouldn’t want either of those guys on their team.

Edgar’s slash line looks like a Hall of Famer at .312/.418/.515 but for a DH to make the Hall he’s probably going to have much closer to 3,000 hits than Edgar’s 2247. I think he falls short and becomes the best pure hitter not in the Hall of fame.

No one can deny Mattingly’s greatness, but injuries kept him from remaining the dominant force that he was in the mid 80’s.

If you could pair Parker’s period of dominance (mid to late 70’s) and McGriff’s consistency, you’d have a Hall of Famer.

5. Dawson is a watershed guy I could go back and forth on (feel free to call me a complete idiot). The sabermetrics crowd will tell you he didn’t get on base enough. What he did was play difference making defense, hit for power and steal bases. I have to feel like those last 4 years would’ve been more productive if it weren’t for the horrible playing surface in Montreal. Tim Raines deserves a lot more consideration than he gets. Burks and Murphy fall short. Too many mediocre seasons, too few great ones.

6. There was a time when I would’ve said definitely to Lee Smith, but the more time passes, the less sure I am. I still say yes, just not as sure of myself as I was before.

7. Baines has a ton of RBI, but suffers from Fred McGriff Syndrome. Really good for a long time, but never truly great. The rest of that crew doesn’t really belong in a Hall of Fame discussion. David Sugui almost made me laugh.

8. No. That is all.

Santo belongs. I don’t understand how he never really got close in the voting. Hopefully the veterans committee will eventually rectify this oversight.

1. Mark McGwire should be because “everybody was doing it.” He played the game the right way and I think actually had some reverance for the record he broke (unlike someone else who’s head is bigger than his body). If you recall there was talk of an * at the time Maris broke it due to more games in the season.
2. Yes to both Morris and Blyleven.
3. Alomar is a yes.
4.McGriff and Parker, yes. Why isn’t Mattingly there already? Absolute yes!
5. Murphy and Dawson definitley.
6. Lee Smith, YES!
7. Neither hot nor cold on any of them.
8. Ventura as was stated previously by another post only if Ryan is in the picture.
9. Yes to Ron Santo.
And just for shucks and grins no to Rose “Thou Shalt Not Bet On Baseball”!

Alomar, Larkin, Trammell–yes, yes, probably yes

Edgar, McGriff, Mattingly, Parker–No, No, No, No (I’d like McGriff and Edgar to hang around on the ballot for a few years to debate them more, though).

Raines, Dawson–yes, yes

Burks, Murphy–no, no

Lee Smith–No (but not completely convinced on this)

Former Rangers?– No to all.

All the rest?–No to all, but I’m still sad that Appier got hurt. He was really great before the injury.

I want to preface my response with this. I respond as a fan. I’m not crunching stats or looking at anything really. I ask myself one question. Was this guy “special”? There have been hundreds of great baseball players throughout the ages. But, in my opinion, only the “special” ones go in the hall. Therefore, from the list you provided, I’m looking for those “special” players.
1. Mark McGwire, NO NO NO. What if we manufactured a baseball superstar to “save the game”. We could get all pitchers to groove him pitches on a regular basis. Yes he would need some talent to do something with the pitches, but with that extra help, he could do something special to those pitches and that’s not the kind of “special” I’m looking for.
2. Morris – No. Blyleven YES YES YES. His longetivity and the fact that he played for so many bad teams yet he pitched great. He was special. (Maybe this is a little sentimental for the former Ranger who lost many 1-0 and 2-1 games while here. But, it was like that for him everywhere.) Bert, Bert, Bert, Bert!!!!!!!
3. Alomar-NO, Larkin-NO, Trammell-NO
4. No one “special” here.
5. No one “special” here. Sorry Dawson fans…I’m an idiot!
6. No to Lee Smith.
7. No.
8. No to the rest.

Blyleven, Santo, Dawson.

I’ll leave McGuire and the rest of GenerationRoid to the veterans committee. If I’m a sportswriter I’m using my vote as a proxy on behalf of fans who feel that cheating should have consequences. That applies to all confirmed cases. At the end of the day their peers can decide to overlook their transgressions or not.

First off I would like to say, if I was a writer, I would vote for the ten most deserving every year. You can vote for up to ten, so that’s what I would vote for.

1. Mark McGwire – yes

2. Jack Morris – yes
Bert Blyleven- yes

3. Roberto Alomar – yes
Barry Larkin – yes

4. Edgar Martinez, Don Mattingly and Dave Parker

5. Andre Dawson – yes

6 Lee Smith – yes

7. NO.

8. NO.

I’m not sure if everyone who doesn’t vote for Andre Dawson is an idiot, but they definitely don’t appreciate the all-around player he was. How can a guy who is one of three players to a mass 400 HRs / 300 SBs / 2,500 hits not be in the Hall? Ruth, Mantle, Williams, and Aaron can’t claim to that.

Andre Dawson for the Hall of Fame

1. No on McGwire. Let him squirm for a few more years. I don’t vote for him unless steroids become a non-issue, and then only if Palmeiro also gets votes.
2. Blyleven is a yes, Jack Morris, no.
3. I think Trammell should have been in years ago, but I’d have to say no for Alomar and Larkin. Maybe a few years down the road I reconsider…
4. I think Edgar is a yes, and McGriff at some point, but no on Mattingly and Parker.
5. The Hawk is a no doubter, Tim Raines is borderline, and the others are a no.
6. Lee Smith? tough one, but no.
7. A no on Baines, a Hell No for those other guys. David Segui, really? How the hell did he even get on the ballot?
8. And No again. Mike Jackson? see David Segui…

1. Mac in the Hall? Tough one. If viewed by his contributions and acceomplishments against his contemporaries then, yes. If evaluation clouded by hindsight and politics of today, still yes. Mac and Sosa kicked MLB down the road of an incredible wave of new fans and money for the teams. Anyone who does not recognize that has blinders on.

2. Blyleven, yes

3. Trammel, yes, Alomar, no way. I guess I have never gotten over the spitting on an umpire incident. Larkin, let it ride.

4. Mattingly should be a no brainer. I believe Edgar should be in. The whole DH thing is going to not let it happen but the “Closer” role was finally recognized and the guys who defined that role are gaining big traction for induction. A couple are already there. Martinez defined the DH. Guys in that role will always be compared to him. Face it the DH is here to stay as part of baseball so the guy who defined the role should be in the HOF.

5. I agree on Dawson, that guy would do anything it took to help his team win, Raines was pretty close too.

6. Why is there even a debate on Lee? Guys would ask for pinch hitters to keep from facing him. Isn’t that the definition of domination among your contemporaries? Every guy who strolls out to the mound with Hells Bells, Metallica , or whatever loud or intimidating blaring away and tries to be some menace on the mound can trace it all back to one guy. Just like Edgar with the DH, this guy was one of those that defined and shaped the role of the closer. Vote him in.

7. Sorry guys, not seeing anything here. Good careers but not HOF.

8. Same as #7 some good careers but HOF???

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s