HOF Ballot Released

[R.J. MacReady]

Yeah what we should be doing is retroactively punish players for breaking a rule that had no punishment nor testing. Makes sense.

Not getting rewarded is a far cry from a punishment.



.

 

[soxfan1468927]

Not getting rewarded is a far cry from a punishment.



.

Not electing them to the HOF when they are two of the greatest players of all-time is certainly a punishment. A hypocritical one at that.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

Not electing them to the HOF when they are two of the greatest players of all-time is certainly a punishment. A hypocritical one at that.

They knew they were cheating. Cheaters have no honor and they don't deserve to be in a place of honor.



.

 

[soxfan1468927]

They knew they were cheating. Cheaters have no honor and they don't deserve to be in a place of honor.

"Cheating" when the league does nothing to stop players from using and has 0 punishment for using. Take out Hank Aaron too right?

 

[R.J. MacReady]

"Cheating" when the league does nothing to stop players from using and has 0 punishment for using. Take out Hank Aaron too right?

So if you are a cheater and those in charge look the other way at your cheating ...you are now an angel who has done no wrong?


Do me a favor and type "using steroids was not cheating"

I just want to have a record of it.

 

[calsnowskier]

Yeah what we should be doing is retroactively punish players for breaking a rule that had no punishment nor testing. Makes sense.

And better yet, let’s punish arbitrarily.

 

[soxfan1468927]

So if you are a cheater and those in charge look the other way at your cheating ...you are now an angel who has done no wrong?


Do me a favor and type "using steroids was not cheating"

I just want to have a record of it.

I'll answer your question since you seem to have a problem answering mine.

No, I didn't say they were angels nor did I say they did nothing wrong. Now, will you answer mine?

If the people in charge spend decades ignoring the supposed "cheating", never write any rules to punish players for "cheating", don't even try to CATCH people "cheating", should we turn around a decade later and punish those players? How about the fact the players they were supposedly getting a competitive advantage against wouldn't allow testing? How about the fact that if we want to consistently look back at players who were trying to gain an advantage, we would then have to throw out Hank Aaron and Gaylord Perry?

 

[soxfan1468927]

Oh and one more thing. Show me the rule they broke please.

 

[DragonfromTO]

how can you leave 2 of the top 10 players of all time off your list if not solely because of steroids??

your not going to name 8-9 guys over them and then be like, hey, there is nobody else... NOW let me put in a steroid guy... you would leave them off...

They don't double check the logic at the Hall, they just count the votes

 

[R.J. MacReady]

Oh and one more thing. Show me the rule they broke please.

We don't live in a world where there is no wrong doing because no rule exists.

Besides, what does the rules of MLB have to do with acceptance in the hall?
I was under the impression that the hall is a separate entity apart from MLB

Steroids users of that era kept what they were doing a very big secret.
Because they knew what they were doing is wrong.

 

[soxfan1468927]

We don't live in a world where there is no wrong doing because no rule exists.

Besides, what does the rules of MLB have to do with acceptance in the hall?
I was under the impression that the hall is a separate entity apart from MLB

Steroids users of that era kept what they were doing a very big secret.
Because they knew what they were doing is wrong.

1. Well that's an asinine statement. So a player is a cheater even if he doesn't break a rule, as long as we as society deem what he did to be wrong?

2. It has to do with the idea they were cheating. I never said the Hall had to elect them. I understand they are separate entities.

3. Oh yeah people had NO idea they were using steroids. Mark McGwire didn't have it in his locker or anything for the whole media to see.

What's going to be awesome, is the fact that they will get elected. And the tears will be glorious.

 

[soxfan1468927]

Oh and you still haven't answered the question of whether or not we should throw out Hank Aaron.

 

[R.J. MacReady]

Oh and you still haven't answered the question of whether or not we should throw out Hank Aaron.

I have no idea what is going on with Hank Aaron ..honestly.

 

[StanMarsh51]

I have no idea what is going on with Hank Aaron ..honestly.

He admitted to using amphetamines.

 

[soxfan1468927]

I have no idea what is going on with Hank Aaron ..honestly.

He used amphetamines. Not against the rules, but obviously a use of a drug to try to make himself better. So throw him out right?

 

[soxfan1468927]

50 ballots in

Thome: 98% (3/3 new voters)
Chipper: 96% (3/3 new voters)
Guerrero: 92% (6 votes gained, 3/3 new voters)
Edgar: 82% (8 votes gained, 2 votes lost, 2/3 new voters)
Hoffman: 80% (2 votes gained, 3 votes lost, 3/3 new voters)


Clemens: 74% (3/3 new voters)
Mussina: 74% (4 votes gained, 2 votes lost , 1/3 new voters)
Bonds: 72% (1 vote lost, 2/3 new voters)
Schilling: 68% (5 votes gained, 1 vote lost, 2/3 new voters)
Walker: 40% (10 votes gained, 1/3 new voters)
Vizquel: 38% (1/3 new voters)
Manny: 32% (2 votes gained, 2 votes lost, 2/3 new voters)
McGriff: 18% (3 votes gained, 1 vote lost, 1/3 new voters)
Rolen: 16% (0/3 new voters)
Sosa: 16% (3 votes gained, 1 vote lost, 2/3 new voters)
A. Jones: 10% (1/3 new voters)
Sheffield: 8% (0/3 new voters)
Wagner: 8% (2 votes lost, 0/3 new voters)
Kent: 4% (3 votes lost, 0/3 new voters)

Estimated 12% of ballots known as of now.

 

[soxfan1468927]

Also of note, 50 ballots by 12/15 is ahead of the pace last year where there were 42 by this time. Last year there were over 100 ballots tallied between now and the end of the year.

 

[soxfan1468927]

12/16 was when they hit 50 ballots last year, here are the numbers for returning players last year through 12/16. Technically it was 53 ballots as there were multiple on 12/16 that got the total over 50. I'm not going to figure out time of day for those to see what the actual 50 first were.

Guerrero: 75.5%
Hoffman: 75.5%
Bonds: 64.2%
Clemens: 64.2%
Edgar: 64.2%
Mussina: 60.4%
Schilling: 47.2%
Manny: 39.6%
McGriff: 18.9%
Walker: 17.0%
Kent: 15.1%
Sosa: 9.4%
Wagner: 9.4%
Sheffield: 7.5%

So Guerrero, Hoffman, Bonds, Clemens, Edgar, Mussina, Schilling, Walker, Sheffield, and Sosa are ahead of the pace they were at last year.

Manny, McGriff, Kent, and Wagner are behind

 

[soxfan1468927]

Odds of election this year based on math and stuff:

Thome: >99%
Chipper: >99%
Guerrero: 96%
Hoffman: 43%
Edgar: 41%
Schilling: 0.4%
Mussina: 0.3%
Bonds: 0.02%
Clemens: <.01%

At least 3 elected, I'm guessing there will be 4 and Hoffman will get in. This will be the 4th time in 5 years that the HOF has elected 3+ people. Prior to 2013, it had happened 4 times in the previous 53 election years.

 

[calsnowskier]

Odds of election this year based on math and stuff:

Thome: >99%
Chipper: >99%
Guerrero: 96%
Hoffman: 43%
Edgar: 41%
Schilling: 0.4%
Mussina: 0.3%
Bonds: 0.02%
Clemens: <.01%

At least 3 elected, I'm guessing there will be 4 and Hoffman will get in. This will be the 4th time in 5 years that the HOF has elected 3+ people. Prior to 2013, it had happened 4 times in the previous 53 election years.

How did you get these values? And how do you figure Bonds has a higher chance than Clemens even though in the published ballots, Clemens is doing better in new voters, lost votes and gained votes?