HOF locks - Pedro & Randy

[steveringo]

It'll be interesting to see who got the higher percentage of votes....

Pedro is the obvious choice, but there are still voters that look at Wins and RJ got to 300... Will they emphasize longevity, or rate stats?


My guess...

Martinez - 96%
Johnson - 94%

 

[msgkings322]

It'll be interesting to see who got the higher percentage of votes....

Pedro is the obvious choice, but there are still voters that look at Wins and RJ got to 300... Will they emphasize longevity, or rate stats?


My guess...

Martinez - 96%
Johnson - 94%

I always laugh at how the rock solid no doubt LOCKS don't even get 100% of the ballots. Who is leaving guys like that off? And should they have their vote taken away?

 

[Mondo Jay]

I think Smoltz and Biggio will get in too. Pedro and Randy should be slam dunks.

 

[Cyder]

I always laugh at how the rock solid no doubt LOCKS don't even get 100% of the ballots. Who is leaving guys like that off? And should they have their vote taken away?

Some idiots refuse to vote for anyone the first time around. I agree, take their vote.

 

[Cyder]

I think Smoltz and Biggio will get in too. Pedro and Randy should be slam dunks.

Agree about SMoltz, not sure on Biggio. I'd like to see Piazza get in too. The roid rumors about him were never substanciated, no evidence has ever come up and he badly faded in his later years as a catcher should.

 

[calsnowskier]

I always laugh at how the rock solid no doubt LOCKS don't even get 100% of the ballots. Who is leaving guys like that off? And should they have their vote taken away?

There are guys who just make a mockery of this process, but that is nothing new.

Ruth and Mays were not 100%. Schmidt was not 100%. Bonds and Clemens are still not in (deeper discussion, granted). Robinson was not 100% (again, deeper discussion).

There are voters who simply NEVER vote for first-timers and voters who play strategy (trying to keep certain voters on the ballot) and some who play clear favoritism by throwing their buddy a vote (this should automatically revoke their vote, IMHO).

I think that anyone who votes for a player who appears on less than 3% of the ballots (that number can be changed, not the point) should have their credentials looked at and they should have to defend their vote. At the same time, I think that the bar for expulsion should be quite high, but they should have to stand up and defend their odd votes.

 

[calsnowskier]

Agree about SMoltz, not sure on Biggio. I'd like to see Piazza get in too. The roid rumors about him were never substanciated, no evidence has ever come up and he badly faded in his later years as a catcher should.

To be fair, roid-rumors about most of these guys were never substantiated. Bonds never failed a test. Neither did Clemens. Neither did Sosa. Do you doubt any of them used?

 

[steveringo]

Speaking of voters... I was just reminded that once you get to vote (after 10 consecutive years w/ BBWAA), your vote is never taken away...

You can cover baseball for 11 years, vote for the HOF, then move to Guam and cover spear-fishing - and you'll still get a MLB ballot every year....

I think they said this was the only sport that did that...

 

[steveringo]

Interesting how RJ got 97% and Pedro got only 91%...

Was it just bad timing with the PED testing that Pedro couldn't extend his career like Randy did?

And how could RJ get so many votes and Clemens less than half? Is it because Clemens name was on the Mitchell report and Johnson's wasn't?

Some people have all the luck....

 

[calsnowskier]

Interesting how RJ got 97% and Pedro got only 91%...

Was it just bad timing with the PED testing that Pedro couldn't extend his career like Randy did?

And how could RJ get so many votes and Clemens less than half? Is it because Clemens name was on the Mitchell report and Johnson's wasn't?

Some people have all the luck....

I don't understand how there are (apparently) 4 voters who feel Clemens if deserving while Bonds is not deserving. How could anyone POSSIBLY vote for one while not voting for the other?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I don't understand how there are (apparently) 4 voters who feel Clemens if deserving while Bonds is not deserving. How could anyone POSSIBLY vote for one while not voting for the other?

I agree with you, unfortunately these media types vote for the people they like... and although both players are epicly hated, Bonds is hated more solely because he broke beloved records...

 

[steveringo]

I agree with you, unfortunately these media types vote for the people they like... and although both players are epicly hated, Bonds is hated more solely because he broke beloved records...

I suspect Bonds is hated more just becasue he is a selfish prick... Clemens is just a moron...

 

[jete02fan]

There are guys who just make a mockery of this process, but that is nothing new.

Ruth and Mays were not 100%. Schmidt was not 100%. Bonds and Clemens are still not in (deeper discussion, granted). Robinson was not 100% (again, deeper discussion).

There are voters who simply NEVER vote for first-timers and voters who play strategy (trying to keep certain voters on the ballot) and some who play clear favoritism by throwing their buddy a vote (this should automatically revoke their vote, IMHO).

I think that anyone who votes for a player who appears on less than 3% of the ballots (that number can be changed, not the point) should have their credentials looked at and they should have to defend their vote. At the same time, I think that the bar for expulsion should be quite high, but they should have to stand up and defend their odd votes.

here is one guy's pretty honest reason for his vote process......A Minnesota Twins beat writer said he held off on voting until the last day, and once he was sure Pedro and Unit were in for sure, he used those votes to try to bump Raines and Piazza.

 

[calsnowskier]

here is one guy's pretty honest reason for his vote process......A Minnesota Twins beat writer said he held off on voting until the last day, and once he was sure Pedro and Unit were in for sure, he used those votes to try to bump Raines and Piazza.

And that, IMHO, is a bastardization of the process.

On the radio yesterday, I heard a thought process that I 100% agree with...

"Vote as if your ballot were the only one that counted."

If a player falls off the ballot, then he was, by definition, not one of the elite of his generation. There were clearly more than 10 other players on the ballot that were viewed as more worthy. 5% is not hard to gather for anyone who has a legit argument to at least table the discussion.

 

[broncosmitty]

I suspect Bonds is hated more just becasue he is a selfish prick... Clemens is just a moron...

It'll be interesting to see which of them gets in first.

Kinda lessens my interest in the HOF when they don't elect one(several)of the games greatest players because they ASSUME he (they)did something that wasn't even against the rules at the time.

 

[calsnowskier]

It'll be interesting to see which of them gets in first.

Kinda lessens my interest in the HOF when they don't elect one(several)of the games greatest players because they ASSUME he (they)did something that wasn't even against the rules at the time.

While the vote counts are different, I suspect they will remain close enough to either stay out together, or get in together.

And while I agree 100% with your stand, I do understand the counter argument with them.

 

[jete02fan]

And that, IMHO, is a bastardization of the process.

On the radio yesterday, I heard a thought process that I 100% agree with...

"Vote as if your ballot were the only one that counted."

If a player falls off the ballot, then he was, by definition, not one of the elite of his generation. There were clearly more than 10 other players on the ballot that were viewed as more worthy. 5% is not hard to gather for anyone who has a legit argument to at least table the discussion.

i can get on board with that..

 

[Lemon Harang Pie]

Some idiots refuse to vote for anyone the first time around. I agree, take their vote.

I'm not exactly a stat guy and only recommend this half heartedly but maybe the HOF should do away with voting altogether and come up with some kind of points system. Assign X amount of points for HRs, Y for RBIs, etc. then add them up and if the total surpasses a certain threshold then they're automatically inducted 10 years after retirement and I get a signed baseball from them.

Clearly that's not exactly a great (or even good) system but these voters go out of their way to be assholes most years.

 

[Rex Racer]

I think Smoltz and Biggio will get in too. Pedro and Randy should be slam dunks.

Biggio had no business being inducted to the HOF.

 

[StanMarsh51]

Biggio had no business being inducted to the HOF.

Almost as dumb as your claim that Maddon's Rays teams were 'stacked'...almost.