HOF Ballot Released

[msgkings322]

Bonds and Clemens fading. Such bullshit.

 

[calsnowskier]

Bonds and Clemens fading. Such bullshit.

Pompous pillars of virtue.

 

[soxfan1468927]

35 ballots in

Thome: 97.1%
Chipper: 94.3%
Guerrero: 88.6% (4 votes gained)
Hoffman: 80.0% (2 votes gained, 2 votes lost)
Edgar: 80.0% (6 votes gained, 2 votes lost)


Clemens: 68.6%
Mussina: 68.6% (2 votes gained, 1 vote lost)
Bonds: 65.7% (1 vote lost)
Schilling: 62.9% (2 votes gained)
Vizquel: 48.6%
Walker: 28.6%
McGriff: 25.7% (3 votes gained, 1 vote lost)
Ramirez: 25.7% (1 vote gained, 2 votes lost)
Rolen: 20.0%
Sosa: 17.1% (2 votes gained, 1 vote lost all presumably because he's white now)
A. Jones: 14.3%
Wagner: 8.6%
Kent: 5.7% (3 votes lost)
Sheffield: 5.7%

 

[MilkSpiller22]

35 ballots in

Thome: 97.1%
Chipper: 94.3%
Guerrero: 88.6% (4 votes gained)
Hoffman: 80.0% (2 votes gained, 2 votes lost)
Edgar: 80.0% (6 votes gained, 2 votes lost)


Clemens: 68.6%
Mussina: 68.6% (2 votes gained, 1 vote lost)
Bonds: 65.7% (1 vote lost)
Schilling: 62.9% (2 votes gained)
Vizquel: 48.6%
Walker: 28.6%
McGriff: 25.7% (3 votes gained, 1 vote lost)
Ramirez: 25.7% (1 vote gained, 2 votes lost)
Rolen: 20.0%
Sosa: 17.1% (2 votes gained, 1 vote lost all presumably because he's white now)
A. Jones: 14.3%
Wagner: 8.6%
Kent: 5.7% (3 votes lost)
Sheffield: 5.7%

Unfortunately, this is what I was expecting when it came to steroid players... again, I doubt they get in until the veterans committee...

Surprised and disappointed that Johan Santana is going to be a one and out...
still surprised that Mussina gets more votes than schilling(I get that mussina is a Sabre darling)

 

[soxfan1468927]

Unfortunately, this is what I was expecting when it came to steroid players... again, I doubt they get in until the veterans committee...

Surprised and disappointed that Johan Santana is going to be a one and out...
still surprised that Mussina gets more votes than schilling(I get that mussina is a Sabre darling)

They still have 4 years left after this one. I still say they get in 2021. They are still both higher than what they got last year pre-full results. Also not included in the gained voters is the amount of new voters who voted for them. Last year, over half of their gained votes was from new voters. This year we only have 2 confirmed new voters in the tracker.

 

[soxfan1468927]

Another thing to keep an eye on. Any first year player getting over 40% of the vote. Only two players that I can find have received 40% of the vote on their first ballot and didn't get in eventually. Lee Smith in 2003 and Steve Garvey in 1993.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

They still have 4 years left after this one. I still say they get in 2021. They are still both higher than what they got last year pre-full results. Also not included in the gained voters is the amount of new voters who voted for them. Last year, over half of their gained votes was from new voters. This year we only have 2 confirmed new voters in the tracker.

we've talked about this earlier in this thread... i think... but your logic makes no sense to me... why should a weaker class of candidates effect 2 of the top 10 players of all time... they would be on the top of EVERYBODY'S list... not the bottom... the only way they will make it to the HOF is if the new cast of voters vote differently than these old-school schmo's...

 

[soxfan1468927]

we've talked about this earlier in this thread... i think... but your logic makes no sense to me... why should a weaker class of candidates effect 2 of the top 10 players of all time... they would be on the top of EVERYBODY'S list... not the bottom... the only way they will make it to the HOF is if the new cast of voters vote differently than these old-school schmo's...

Which they have. And the weaker class of players affects them because voters compare players on the ballot. If they can fill a ballot of 10 while leaving Bonds/Clemens off, they will. As the ballot clears, the spotlight turns to Bonds/Clemens.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Which they have. And the weaker class of players affects them because voters compare players on the ballot. If they can fill a ballot of 10 while leaving Bonds/Clemens off, they will. As the ballot clears, the spotlight turns to Bonds/Clemens.

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...

 

[soxfan1468927]

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

You're asking me to explain human nature of the voters. But we've already seen this happen with plenty of voters that the explanation really falls on them. I'm just sharing the results. Does it make logical sense for Chris Bahr in 2016 to vote for 10 guys, not vote for Bonds/Clemens but give a vote to Piazza/Trammell and then turn around and fill his ballot with Bonds/Clemens in 2017 once those two were off the ballot? No. It doesn't logically make sense, but it happens.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

You're asking me to explain human nature of the voters. But we've already seen this happen with plenty of voters that the explanation really falls on them. I'm just sharing the results. Does it make logical sense for Chris Bahr in 2016 to vote for 10 guys, not vote for Bonds/Clemens but give a vote to Piazza/Trammell and then turn around and fill his ballot with Bonds/Clemens in 2017 once those two were off the ballot? No. It doesn't logically make sense, but it happens.

no, it doesn't make sense... And sure, people may change their views... but that will be individuals...the mob doesn't change as easily though... a weak class wont be the reason for the change...

 

[soxfan1468927]

no, it doesn't make sense... And sure, people may change their views... but that will be individuals...the mob doesn't change as easily though... a weak class wont be the reason for the change...

I specifically said in there that it doesn't make sense, but it happens.

You don't think that, by human nature, enough voters will look at incoming classes, realize there aren't as many guys they'd vote for, and fill out there ballot with guys they have dismissed in the past?

Not to mention, the psychology of the anti-Bonds/Clemens voters being officially in the minority after last year. How many players do you think have gotten over 50% by their 5th time on the ballot and not gotten in?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

I specifically said in there that it doesn't make sense, but it happens.

You don't think that, by human nature, enough voters will look at incoming classes, realize there aren't as many guys they'd vote for, and fill out there ballot with guys they have dismissed in the past?

Not to mention, the psychology of the anti-Bonds/Clemens voters being officially in the minority after last year. How many players do you think have gotten over 50% by their 5th time on the ballot and not gotten in?

sure, guys they have dismissed in the past... But not the players that would have been in already if not for a certain reason...

 

[soxfan1468927]

sure, guys they have dismissed in the past... But not the players that would have been in already if not for a certain reason...

If that were the case, we wouldn't see an increase at all in returning voters. Last year they each netted at least 27 new votes among returning voters, and received votes from 13/15 new voters. So +40 just last year and they are about 90 votes short.

You don't think there is an aspect over the last couple years of "I'm not voting for Griffey or Randy Johnson or Chipper Jones and Bonds/Clemens on the same ballot because I don't want those guys who I perceive as clean to share the stage with players I don't"? And in the future, I bet there are guys who think "I'm not voting for Mariano or Halladay or Jeter, on the same ballot as Bonds/Clemens" for the same reason.

In 2021, the ballot clears up at the top. That excuse is gone and I truly think human nature will cause enough voters to give in. Especially as we continue from here on out with the knowledge that the anti-Bonds/Clemens voters are the minority.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

If that were the case, we wouldn't see an increase at all in returning voters. Last year they each netted at least 27 new votes among returning voters, and received votes from 13/15 new voters. So +40 just last year and they are about 90 votes short.

You don't think there is an aspect over the last couple years of "I'm not voting for Griffey or Randy Johnson or Chipper Jones and Bonds/Clemens on the same ballot because I don't want those guys who I perceive as clean to share the stage with players I don't"? And in the future, I bet there are guys who think "I'm not voting for Mariano or Halladay or Jeter, on the same ballot as Bonds/Clemens" for the same reason.

In 2021, the ballot clears up at the top. That excuse is gone and I truly think human nature will cause enough voters to give in. Especially as we continue from here on out with the knowledge that the anti-Bonds/Clemens voters are the minority.

I hope you are right... no, really i hope they are just voted in ASAP... as they are the greatest... I just don't see it, and i think it is human nature to vote against them more than it would be to vote for them...

 

[soxfan1468927]

I hope you are right... no, really i hope they are just voted in ASAP... as they are the greatest... I just don't see it, and i think it is human nature to vote against them more than it would be to vote for them...

Well that's proven incorrect now as the majority have voted for them.

 

[soxfan1468927]

Larry Walker has already gained 10 votes out of the 46 votes cast so far. Probably too little too late for him, but could set him up nicely for a possible 2022 Veteran's Committee ballot when he'll be eligible under "Today's Game Era"

 

[soxfan1468927]

46 ballots revealed

Thome: 97.8% (3/3 new voters)
Chipper: 95.7% (3/3 new voters)
Guerrero: 91.3% (6 votes gained, 3/3 new voters)
Hoffman: 82.6% (2 votes gained, 3 votes lost, 3/3 new voters)
Edgar: 82.6% (8 votes gained, 2 votes lost, 2/3 new voters)


Clemens: 73.9% (3/3 new voters)
Mussina: 73.9% (4 votes gained, 2 votes lost, 1/3 new voters)
Bonds: 71.7% (1 vote lost, 2/3 new voters)
Schilling: 67.4% (4 votes gained, 1 vote lost, 2/3 new voters)
Vizquel: 39.1% (1/3 new voters)
Walker: 39.1% (10 votes gained, 1/3 new voters)
Manny: 28.3% (2 votes gained, 2 votes lost, 2/3 new voters)
McGriff: 19.6% (3 votes gained, 1 vote lost, 1/3 new voters)
Sosa: 17.4% (3 votes gained, 1 vote lost, 2/3 new voters)
Rolen: 15.2% (0 new voters)
A. Jones: 10.9% (1/3 new voters)
Sheffield: 8.7% (0 new voters)
Wagner: 8.7% (2 votes lost, 0 new voters)
Kent: 4.3% (3 votes lost, 0 new voters)

 

[R.J. MacReady]

Bonds and Clemens fading. Such bullshit.

It really is.

Why can't you just take drugs that make you better than everyone else and get rewarded for it.

People just make a big deal about everything.

.

 

[soxfan1468927]

It really is.

Why can't you just take drugs that make you better than everyone else and get rewarded for it.

People just make a big deal about everything.

.

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