SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
Bags and a Rock; Buy Bonds & you may get a Rocket - HOF 2017
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Dec 16, 2016 17:16:09 GMT -5
Ryan Thibs is again doing a great job of tracking the HOF voting and the early returns are fascinating. (I can't seem to get the link to post but Google it. It's easy to find.) In particular I'm struck by the jump Bonds and Clemens have made so far. With 52 votes on the board, they're each at 67 percent, far higher than the 45 percent or so they each got last year. It's important to point out that candidates do not fare as well in the final and official tally as they do on the Thibs worksheet. That's because the official tally includes many writers who do not disclose their votes beforehand and those voters tend to be stingier about checking off boxes. Still, Bond and Clemens look to be in line for a significant jump. Interestingly, they're gaining ground with returning voters. They've each gained six new votes from that group and each lost one for a net of plus five. They're both long shots to get to 75 percent before their eligibility is up, but it's not outright impossible. Jeff Bagwell and Tim Raines have been running neck and neck and each is at 88 percent. That's encouraging for them, as Bagwell lost 6.1 percent when all the votes were counted last year compared to where he was in the publicly disclosed ballots, and Raines lost 5.6 percent. Expect to see induction speeches from those two this summer. Vlad Guerrro (first time on the ballot) and Trevor Hoffman (second time) are at 73 and 75 percent respectively. Based on that, each is an underdog at this point but they're setting themselves up for election in a future year. Then there's our 2004 hero Curt Schilling, who can't get out of his own way when it comes to getting two things he needs: money and HOF votes. His habit of saying or tweeting every thought that comes into his head is costing him both. He's lost jobs because of rantings that many consider bigoted and his pronouncements appear to be costing him HOF votes. He's at 52 percent, which is right where he finished last last year. What's hurting him is that eight voters who supported him last year have dropped him and he's picked up only four votes from that group for a net of minus 4.
"Thibodaux already counts eight writers—from among just 44!—who have changed their vote on Schilling from yes to no. With only five years remaining on the ballot, it’s going to be nearly impossible for Schilling to overcome this kind of broad and deeply-rooted hostility."
A lot of columnists tend to write about their ballots just before and after Christmas because they need copy for a quiet news period, so we should know a lot more in a couple of weeks.
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 18, 2016 22:19:01 GMT -5
There was a great article the other day in the Globe (by Alex Speier, of course) about the PED bias against Bagwell and what amounts to its superficiality/dependence on innuendo. Short version: Bagwell got a 70 power grade **as a collegian** from the Astros scout who advocated for his acquisition. Personally, I was a HUGE Bagwell fan before the trade, because he was a local kid, Sox fan, who absolutely DESTROYED EL pitching back when the EL was the ultimate pitcher's league, and the ballparks (Beehive especially) were just flyball graveyards. He only hit 4 HR, but he slugged almost .500 and had an OBP well, well over .400. I think keeping Bagwell out of the HOF would just be criminal. He was terribly slow, but a **superb** baserunner, and had (as the article says) off-the-chart instincts for the game. www.google.com/amp/s/www.bostonglobe.com/sports/redsox/2016/12/16/scout-report-saw-jeff-bagwell-potential-back-college/Xf6vMYy6LQS37mzozT4aOP/amp.html?client=safari
|
|
|
Post by telson13 on Dec 18, 2016 22:21:10 GMT -5
Also, Tim Raines is the best leadoff hitter who doesn't self-refer as "Rickey." The guy was just a lot of fun to watch, at a time when offensive excellence was much more rare than it is today.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 19, 2016 8:55:58 GMT -5
Jeff Bagwell had a .408 career OBP. If you can roid that those are special roids.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 19, 2016 10:24:37 GMT -5
Jeff Bagwell had a .408 career OBP. If you can roid that those are special roids. Let's turn it into a verb. What can't be 'roided is probably the pitch recognition and selectivity. He was such a power hitter in his prime, that surely had an impact on how he was pitched to. Was that power a function of doping? Who cares, MLB had given everyone the green light. Personally, I don't think it was, but what do I or anyone else know? What I do know is that he stood out in an era of great hitters, a great offensive player, and a very good defensive one as well. He deserves serious consideration. Raines should have been a first ballot lock. That he wasn't tells you more than you want to know about the voters.
|
|
|
Post by rangoon82 on Dec 19, 2016 11:07:28 GMT -5
Barry Bonds age 39 OBP of .609 suggests you can roid OBP.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 19, 2016 13:46:22 GMT -5
No, it suggests he's the greatest hitter I ever saw and that you probably shouldn't intentionally walk someone 200 times a year.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 19, 2016 16:39:01 GMT -5
No, it suggests he's the greatest hitter I ever saw and that you probably shouldn't intentionally walk someone 200 times a year. Well, when one's OPS is over 1.000, you're better off walking him every time. But I do think steroids help players recover better and let them play at a high level without wearing down at the very least. That's why athletes use them.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 19, 2016 17:21:33 GMT -5
No, it suggests he's the greatest hitter I ever saw and that you probably shouldn't intentionally walk someone 200 times a year. Well, when one's OPS is over 1.000, you're better off walking him every time. But I do think steroids help players recover better and let them play at a high level without wearing down at the very least. That's why athletes use them. Nope.
|
|
|
Post by jimed14 on Dec 19, 2016 17:34:36 GMT -5
Well, when one's OPS is over 1.000, you're better off walking him every time. But I do think steroids help players recover better and let them play at a high level without wearing down at the very least. That's why athletes use them. Nope. Thanks for the explanation. Their OPS drops when they're walked.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 19, 2016 18:20:42 GMT -5
That's just a failing of OPS. A point of OBP is worth significantly more than a point of SLG.
To put it another way, you're basically saying Ted Williams should have been intentionally walked in every single AB he ever took.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 19, 2016 18:56:53 GMT -5
Thanks for the explanation. Their OPS drops when they're walked. No it doesn't. Their OBP rises and their slugging isn't changed. Also, what FTHW said.
|
|
|
Post by rangoon82 on Dec 19, 2016 19:38:20 GMT -5
No Yes, it suggests he's the greatest hitter I ever saw and that you probably shouldn't intentionally walk someone 200 times a year. FTFY. Seems like we agree.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hatfield on Dec 20, 2016 8:46:11 GMT -5
bit.ly/hof2017Updated count has 62 of 435-ish ballots in. Bagwell, Raines, Pudge, Hoffman (barely) would be in; Bonds, Clemens, Vlad just off the pace
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 20, 2016 9:42:42 GMT -5
Raines is (finally) picking up voters, and he's doing so at a pretty remarkable clip. Of the 66 voters voted, 18 did not vote for Raines last year - 10 of those 18 have flipped to yes this year. I'd bet on him making it. Hoffman is at 76% right now, but he's not necessarily in great shape for induction. He's only netted +2. He still needs to pick up 36 votes from the ones that are outstanding, which would be a higher rate than what he's picked up among the counted votes. So, not impossible but I think it will be at least one more year for him. I don't get Ramirez getting votes from people who left Bonds and Clemens off the ballot, at all. Manny actually failed tests! If you're not going to vote for Bonds, there's no justification for voting Manny, at all. The 2018 ballot is interesting. Chipper Jones is a slam dunk, and Jim Thome is very, very likely. After that there is Scott Rolen, Andruw Jones, and Johan Santana. I'd vote for Rolen and Santana and consider Jones but I know I'm in the minority. Rolen got a lot of his value from defense and wasn't super-beloved, so he has an uphill battle. Jones also got a ton of his value from defense, and he also has the added issue of having a lot of his value loaded early in his career. It's been 12 years since he was really good and frankly it feels like longer. Santana I know I'm pretty close to alone on. The Hall of Fame values durability, and it's created a real asymmetry - there are a lot more position players in the Hall than pitchers. And that makes sense - great hitters tend to stay great, while great pitchers often get hurt, winnowing the candidates. With that in mind, I think I've become more open to pitchers like Santana and Dwight Gooden (and Jose Fernandez) who were extraordinary for short stretches. Here is the 2018 Hall ballot sorted by WAR7: Santana ranks seventh, well within the group I'd consider to be Hall of Fame worthy: www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_2018.shtml#hof_ballot::8
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Dec 20, 2016 9:43:13 GMT -5
HOF voters are the worst. Let's take away from people because we don't like them... How does one vote for Rodriguez but not Clemens or Bonds and changing your vote on Schilling because your a Liberal and he's not is a silly as it comes. It's unfortunate the HOF is a joke.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 20, 2016 11:33:44 GMT -5
I agree that saying stupid, vile stuff should not preclude players from consideration. But his case was always more marginal. That said, it probably is about politics.
Raines' case is also about politics: lobbying. The knowledgeable writers and analysts have taken it on themselves to inform those who live in the dark and like it that way, what Tim Raines was really worth as a player.
|
|
|
Post by Oregon Norm on Dec 22, 2016 16:13:09 GMT -5
I agree that saying stupid, vile stuff should not preclude players from consideration. But his case was always more marginal. That said, it probably is about politics. Raines' case is also about politics: lobbying. The knowledgeable writers and analysts have taken it on themselves to inform those who live in the dark and like it that way, what Tim Raines was really worth as a player. Here's one guy who's been working it hard.
|
|
|
Post by James Dunne on Dec 22, 2016 23:43:32 GMT -5
Update: Raines continues to pick up support - with about 20% of the ballot shown, he has already netted 16 of the 20 votes he was shy. Bagwell is in strong shape too, at 4 of the 12.
While there are some with bigger gaps, it looks like the gap between publicly revealed ballots counted by Ryan and the final vote percenage was, on average, about 4%. Meaning that, if he shows someone at 55% I'd guess he'd end up around 51%. So, at 84%, Ivan Rodriguez is looking solid. If he starts to drop below 80% there's a real chance he'll have to wait another year. Hoffman's at 76% of the voters currently tallied, but he's still only at a net +2. I still say he's less than 50/50 to get there.
Vlad Guerrero is at 73%, which is running ahead of similarly statistically-qualified candidates like Manny, Sheffield, Sosa, and Larry Walker. And, of that group, he does seem like the one I feel strongest about supporting. He was just so... unique isn't quite the right word here, but maybe immediately identifiable? The way he seemed to be able to punish any pitch no matter where it was, that violent swing from his heels, the way he seemed to love showing off his arm (and effectively so in his younger days).
Behind Raines, the player who has picked up the biggest chunk of votes is Edgar Martinez. Part of that, I'm sure, is people taking a longer look at his career being a simple case of him continuing to be on the ballot. But I do really think there's an Ortiz effect here in reducing an anti-DH stigma in the voters.
|
|
|
Post by FreeJBJ on Dec 30, 2016 19:51:15 GMT -5
The knowledgeable writers and analysts have taken it on themselves to inform those who live in the dark and like it that way, what Tim Raines was really worth as a player. There's some serious groupthink going on regarding Tim Raines. Just because he was Jonah Keri's favorite childhood player doesn't make him a Hall of Famer. Here are some of the arguments that get made in favor of his candidacy: -More times on base than Tony Gwynn (also can be said of Rusty Staub and Bobby Abreu, don't think anyone is calling those guys Hall of Famers) -Career WAR of 69.1 (though most voters couldn't tell you how defensive WAR is calculated for a guy who played from 1979-2002. Here's a hint - it's a guesstimate). That WAR is lower than Lou Whitaker, who didn't get near the support Raines has gotten, probably because he wasn't a national writer's favorite player. Kenny Lofton had nearly the same WAR (68.2, in 6 fewer seasons) and was a superior defender at a more important position. Off the ballot in one year. -JAWS score - based largely on the same flawed WAR data that many voters are taking as gospel. Raines was an excellent player and the Montreal years of his career are probably HOF worthy. But the same can be said of Bernie Williams' prime or Dale Murphy's prime. You can be plenty knowledgeable and think the guy is borderline or not quite a Hall of Famer.
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Dec 31, 2016 18:40:50 GMT -5
The story of this election is the huge shift in the way the voters view steroid guys and steroid suspects. The election of Piazza - a suspect - has changed everything. Now Bagwell, another suspect, is making big gains and will get in. Pudge Rodriguez, another suspect, is either going to get elected in his first year of eligibility or come close and set himself up for next year. I didn't expect that.
But most shockingly, look at Bonds and Clemens, two confirmed big-time users. They're both hovering at about 70 percent and will end up above 60 in only their fifth year of eligibility. You'd have to say they're better than 50-50 to make it in the next three years or so. What a media circus that induction ceremony will be.
The guys who aren't gaining are those the writers perceive as having built entire careers out of using steroids or who flunked a test post-2003. Manny Ramirez is at 29 percent and Sosa is at 11 percent. Sheffield never flunked a test but nobody knows how much of his production was due to juice. He's at 11 percent.
Two big winners who fall outside the 'roids conversation are Mussina, who's at 64 percent after getting 43 percent last year, and Edgar Martinez, who's at 71 percent, up from 43 percent last year. Edgar will have two years of eligibility left after this year. He'll have a good shot at reaching 75 percent.
The two HOF elections and the amateur draft are the non-game BB events I love every year.
|
|
redsox04071318champs
Veteran
Always hoping to make my handle even longer...
Posts: 15,684
Member is Online
|
Post by redsox04071318champs on Dec 31, 2016 18:52:57 GMT -5
The story of this election is the huge shift in the way the voters view steroid guys and steroid suspects. The election of Piazza - a suspect - has changed everything. Now Bagwell, another suspect, is making big gains and will get in. Pudge Rodriguez, another suspect, is either going to get elected in his first year of eligibility or come close and set himself up for next year. I didn't expect that. But most shockingly, look at Bonds and Clemens, two confirmed big-time users. They're both hovering at about 70 percent and will end up above 60 in only their fifth year of eligibility. You'd have to say they're better than 50-50 to make it in the next three years or so. What a media circus that induction ceremony will be. The guys who aren't gaining are those the writers perceive as having built entire careers out of using steroids or who flunked a test post-2003. Manny Ramirez is at 29 percent and Sosa is at 11 percent. Sheffield never flunked a test but nobody knows how much of his production was due to juice. He's at 11 percent. Two big winners who fall outside the 'roids conversation are Mussina, who's at 64 percent after getting 43 percent last year, and Edgar Martinez, who's at 71 percent, up from 43 percent last year. Edgar will have two years of eligibility left after this year. He'll have a good shot at reaching 75 percent. The two HOF elections and the amateur draft are the non-game BB events I love every year. I suspect the real catalyst for the sudden increase in votes for Bonds and Clemens is that Bud Selig is going to be inducted into the HOF, and Selig is a figurehead, to them, of somebody who was looking the other way when all this was going on, so they figure if Bud is in, why keep Clemens and Bonds out? I think this will help "suspected" guys like Bagwell, Pudge Rodriguez, and Sheffield as well, guys who'd be in quickly if not for the suspicions - in Sheffield's case, correct me if I'm wrong, but he said he unknowingly used some sort of cream he shouldn't have used? And in David Ortiz's case, he might become a first ballot HOFer instead of a second ballot HOFer. Rob Manfred all but exonerated him saying that you have to throw away the results of the first test because nobody knows if his test was positive or a false positive or what he even tested positive for as it could be something that wasn't illegal. Unfortunately for Manny, my memory is that he wanted that huge contract so bad in 2008 that he was going to do whatever it took. I remember he had a pedestrian injury plagued year in 2007 (by his standards) and he wanted to make sure that he hit like crazy in 2008 to get that 4 year $100 million contract he and Boras were looking for so - and this is totally my speculation - he started juicing in 2008. I'd like to think that legitimately he was genuine as a hitter in his prime with the Indians and Red Sox. I remember reading the stories about how much he hated needles. But regardless if he started cheating in 2008, a debatable point given that his name also shows up in the controversial 2003 testing, or whether he was doing it all along he got caught TWICE after testing became mandatory, so he will not sniff the Hall of Fame. I think the standards will be lessened to if you get caught cheating (for steroids, not amphetamines) after mandatory drug testing you blow your chances for the HOF. Otherwise anything less than that will be tolerated and not stop the player from being in the HOF, as long as their numbers weren't totally generated by the steroids (as it would seemingly be for Sosa and McGwire.)
|
|
TearsIn04
Veteran
Everybody knows Nelson de la Rosa, but who is Karim Garcia?
Posts: 2,837
|
Post by TearsIn04 on Dec 31, 2016 19:02:41 GMT -5
I agree with just about everything Champs just said and should have remembered the Selig factor and included it in my own post. And yes, the bright side to all of this is that it makes Papi's election more likely.
Sheffield had a cream applied to his knee and said later he didn't know the stuff contained steroids. He was also named in the Mitchell report.
I think Schilling is getting screwed. To me, he's two things: a bigot and a HOFer. I'd vote for him even though I find him disgusting.
|
|
|
Post by fenwaythehardway on Dec 31, 2016 19:21:03 GMT -5
The story of this election is the huge shift in the way the voters view steroid guys and steroid suspects. The election of Piazza - a suspect - has changed everything. Now Bagwell, another suspect, is making big gains and will get in. Pudge Rodriguez, another suspect, is either going to get elected in his first year of eligibility or come close and set himself up for next year. I didn't expect that. But most shockingly, look at Bonds and Clemens, two confirmed big-time users. They're both hovering at about 70 percent and will end up above 60 in only their fifth year of eligibility. You'd have to say they're better than 50-50 to make it in the next three years or so. What a media circus that induction ceremony will be. The guys who aren't gaining are those the writers perceive as having built entire careers out of using steroids or who flunked a test post-2003. Manny Ramirez is at 29 percent and Sosa is at 11 percent. Sheffield never flunked a test but nobody knows how much of his production was due to juice. He's at 11 percent.
Two big winners who fall outside the 'roids conversation are Mussina, who's at 64 percent after getting 43 percent last year, and Edgar Martinez, who's at 71 percent, up from 43 percent last year. Edgar will have two years of eligibility left after this year. He'll have a good shot at reaching 75 percent. The two HOF elections and the amateur draft are the non-game BB events I love every year. The thing with those guys is that they're all more borderline to begin with. You can ding Bonds 30% of his career and he's still an easy HOFer, but if you discount Manny at all he starts to get into marginal territory. And the type of voter who's more likely to not see PED use as automatically disqualifying is also probably the type of voter to consider things like defensive value instead of just auto-voting for anyone with more than 499 home runs.
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Dec 31, 2016 21:51:21 GMT -5
Manny Ramirez is a borderline HOF?
That's news to me if the steroids weren't a issue. Manny was one of the best right handed bats that I have ever seen.
|
|
|