Jump to content

2022 Hall of Fame


MaybeACoordinator
 Share

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

Can't find an official ballot.

Put in Bonds, Clemens and Schilling. All asshole class, so that we may move on.

David Ortiz-500

Alex Rodriguez-150

Curt Schilling+250

Barry Bonds+500

Roger Clemens+500

Jimmy Rollins+700

Scott Rolen+1000

Omar Vizquel+1000

Manny Ramirez+1500

Mark Teixeira+1500

Billy Wagner+1500

Todd Helton+2000

Gary Sheffied+2000

Joe Nathan+2000

Jonathan Papelbon+2000

No one gets inducted to the MLB ~ HOF+1000

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_2022.shtml

This is 99% accurate in terms of what the ballot will look like.  

I have to admit, I'm warming up to the idea of just having "The Asshole, Cheaters Class" and getting it over with.  Everything associated with 2020, 2021, and 2022 is gonna have a shitstain on it, why not Cooperstown?  

Edited by Lobo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Lobo said:

https://www.baseball-reference.com/awards/hof_2022.shtml

This is 99% accurate in terms of what the ballot will look like.  

I have to admit, I'm warming up to the idea of just having "The Asshole, Cheaters Class" and getting it over with.  Everything associated with 2020, 2021, and 2022 is gonna have a shitstain on it, why not Cooperstown?  

This is a good idea. 

Before their PED involvement, Bonds and Clemens were working toward HOF careers.  It's possible that Bonds would have gotten in if he had retired instead of juicing.  Bonds was extremely productive in Pittsburgh and his pre-PED days in San Francisco.  Clemens was tapering off in Boston and rebounded in Toronto, which is where his PED use allegedly started.  He won ~160 games after he left Boston and was a 20 game winner 3 times in the final 11 years of his career.

IMO, Schilling should not be in the HOF.  His body of work does not support it.  He won only 215 games in his 20 years.  And, 71 of those wins came from 2001-2004, the PED era.  He's never been on the PED list, but...  Last, and this should not matter very much, he's an embarrassment to baseball.  He's a meathead.  His vote count keeps climbing each year.  That's either because of complacency or limited real choices.  He should not get in.

My "support" for Bonds and Clemens in the Hall makes me less of a purist, but baseball really did not care about this at all.  If they did, they would have acted.  It was great for the business of baseball.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bonds and Clemens should be in.

If you took some uppers to be game ready, that’s a performance enhancing drug. Maybe even illegal. My guess is many of those old timers would have taken the juice if readily available.

If baseball didn’t give a damn, why should the players?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those odds that I posted are perplexing. Why are Ortiz and, especially, Arod favorites to go in 1st ballot when both are admitted steroid users?  I’m with those who are suggesting that 2022 be an asshole and cheater class. Clemens, Bonds, Schilling, Ortiz and Arod, all as inductees, would be hilarious and fascinating. Just slash and burn and start fresh. 

Edited by TonyTexas
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, TonyTexas said:

Those odds that I posted are perplexing. Why are Ortiz and, especially, Arod favorites to go in 1st ballot when both are admitted steroid users?  I’m with those who are suggesting that 2022 be an asshole and cheater class. Clemens, Bonds, Schilling, Ortiz and Arod, all as inductees, would be hilarious and fascinating. Just slash and burn and start fresh. 

Piazza kicked in the door, I guess. It took a media darling to do it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, boilerhorn said:

 

IMO, Schilling should not be in the HOF.  His body of work does not support it.  He won only 215 games in his 20 years.  And, 71 of those wins came from 2001-2004, the PED era.  He's never been on the PED list, but...  Last, and this should not matter very much, he's an embarrassment to baseball.  He's a meathead.  His vote count keeps climbing each year.  That's either because of complacency or limited real choices.  He should not get in.

 

At some point we are going to have to reassess HoF standards for SPs. I think Schilling's numbers are sufficient* for the current standard of "300 wins and you're in" even though it seems nobody will ever do that again and more than enough under whatever new standard we come up with. I think 200 games with some degree of dominance and post-season success should be enough. 

Or are we just gonna not have any SPs going in for the next few decades? Lots of great starters have already fallen off the ballot while relievers continue going in because the standards we set for them now seem kind of low. (Probably in 20 years some old timers committee will go hogwild and put in a few deserving guys (Brown, Cone, Sabathia) but then they won't stop until guys like Mike Buehrle are Brad Radke are going in. 

I'd hate for Schilling to be the guy who leads that parade just because he is such a dick -- and fuck the bloody sock; it wasn't like he was pitching with a broken leg. I hate it, but his numbers should get him in. 

 

*At first I put borderline, but as with every other time I review his numbers, they are much better than I remember. It's like I really want them to be worse than they are. Shit, a composite of WARs/JAWS has him the 18th best pitcher of all time.

PS: Tiant should be in.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, MaybeACoordinator said:

At some point we are going to have to reassess HoF standards for SPs. I think Schilling's numbers are sufficient* for the current standard of "300 wins and you're in" even though it seems nobody will ever do that again and more than enough under whatever new standard we come up with. I think 200 games with some degree of dominance and post-season success should be enough. 

Or are we just gonna not have any SPs going in for the next few decades? Lots of great starters have already fallen off the ballot while relievers continue going in because the standards we set for them now seem kind of low. (Probably in 20 years some old timers committee will go hogwild and put in a few deserving guys (Brown, Cone, Sabathia) but then they won't stop until guys like Mike Buehrle are Brad Radke are going in. 

I'd hate for Schilling to be the guy who leads that parade just because he is such a dick -- and fuck the bloody sock; it wasn't like he was pitching with a broken leg. I hate it, but his numbers should get him in. 

*At first I put borderline, but as with every other time I review his numbers, they are much better than I remember. It's like I really want them to be worse than they are. Shit, a composite of WARs/JAWS has him the 18th best pitcher of all time.

PS: Tiant should be in.

I agree that I am using anachronist criteria for Schilling.  Probably because he is universally unlikeable.  Bonds and Clemens were fairly surly during their playing years, but do not stand out as unrelenting jackasses after they retired.

Baseball reference has these rankings for lifetime WAR: #3 Clemens; #26 Schilling; #44 Tiant.  I am a huge fan of Tiant think he should get in.  It's purely an emotional opinion at this point.  He was entertaining and could be dominant at times.  Not many guys can win 21 games one year and follow it with losing 20 the next year :) - and lose 20 games and have under a 4 ERA.  What's even more amazing is that, at 9-20, his WAR was 3.3.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, irishtexan said:

If you let in Ortiz or A-Rod you have to let in Bonds and Clemens and Palmeiro and McGuire and Sosa and all those dudes.

Piazza already opened the barn door to get Bagwell in, and now we have to pick and choose among the rest.

Bagwell and Piazza two were guys "everybody knew" were juicing but somehow managed to stay out of the fray. 

Per WAR, Piazza, Sosa, Sheffield, Abreu, Edmonds and McGwire are in a range (around 60) where there induction would not be controversial in a vacuum, but that is also the territory of the "critical darling" players like the Evanses, Lou Whitaker, Sal Bando, and Buddy Bell.

And that is a tier below guys like Manny and Beltran, whose career spanned the 'roid era into the sign-stealing witch hunts and probably won't ever get in. And might not have even w/o the scandals at the end -- he just played for too many teams, and the Hall likes things simple and stupid in that regard. 

But good lord. I've been an Astros fan for 43 years now and in that half-season we had him back in 2004, he was the best position player the Astros have ever had. In my experience. I didn't get to see prime Cedeno, back when it was looking like he was Willie Mays II, Dominican Boogaloo, but good god Beltran that year -- clutch easy-swing bombs; stole 28 bags w/o getting caught / and man, watching him patrol center was to see a great and gifted artist at work. I don't think any center fielder in baseball history was playing better than Beltran was that year. He didn't sustain it as long as the true greats, but he was just sheer perfection out there. 

Regular season stats don't really show that -- esp the old-school ones -- but everybody who was paying attention remembers the playoffs that year. When he'd step in the box you were as certain of a huge hit as you were VY pulling out a third and 12 against Okie State.  Failure was not conceivable. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just have to say motherfuck the bloody sock game. Most overrated sports event ever possibly. It was one tiny splotch of dried up blood the camera had to super-zoom to see. There were probably 5 other players on the field that game playing through more severe pain/injuries. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Helobious said:

Just have to say motherfuck the bloody sock game. Most overrated sports event ever possibly. It was one tiny splotch of dried up blood the camera had to super-zoom to see. There were probably 5 other players on the field that game playing through more severe pain/injuries. 

Imagine dealing with the constant pain( and imbalance) of hydrocephalus...

uv0o6g5xvbc01.jpg

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Helobious said:

Just have to say motherfuck the bloody sock game. Most overrated sports event ever possibly. It was one tiny splotch of dried up blood the camera had to super-zoom to see. There were probably 5 other players on the field that game playing through more severe pain/injuries. 

MLB player Adam Duvall was diagnosed with type 1 diabetes (T1D) during Spring Training in 2012 at the age of 23. Instead of letting T1D stop him, Adam continued to pursue his dreams, and has played for the San Francisco Giants, Cincinnati Reds, and currently plays for the Atlanta Braves

Adam Duvall led the NL in RBIs and won a World Championship in 2021...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
15 hours ago, Lobo said:

^
I agree with all three of your sentiments and would cast my ballot for your ballot. 

since we can't remove some of the undeserving players from Cooperstown...the least we can do is put the right people in it no matter their uniform or their media status. 

yep.  Whitaker not in and Harold Baines DH 38.7 WAR in is just fucking awful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got nothing against Baines.  We were a Cubs household, but I loved any and all baseball so we'd see White Sox games on TV/at Comiskey; and he was fun to watch.  But when I read he got into the Hall of Fame, all I could think was, "Harold Baines?  The journeyman DH guy?  In fucking Cooperstown?"  

I'm sure it will illicit some neg reps and crush some childhood memories, but I'd be curious to read some of y'all's starting lineup/starting rotation of least deserving Hall of Famers.  Not because of drug use or cancelling them because they were assholes from a different era.  Just...which guys do you think, based on stats, really shouldn't be in Cooperstown?  It's really hard to gauge across eras of the game as well because some of those guys, at the time, were at the top of the heap for their respective positions.  But there are some guys that, even across eras with the benefit of decades of hindsight, were not worthy of induction.  Full disclosure, I'm a sucker for longevity in the game.  If a guy didn't have some 5-7 year absolute peak of dominance, but was all-star caliber (or thereabouts) for 15+ years, I give a lot of weight to that.  

Starting rotation of least deserving pitchers:  Catfish Hunter and then about 30 other guys I got a beef with

Relievers---fuck Gossage, fuck Sutter, fuck Hoyt Wilhelm, fuck Fingers.  I realize at the time, they needed to put some relievers in because of how the game was changing but these guys didn't have the dominance nor the longevity.  Ten years with 30 saves? Whoopeee! 

Fielders-Phil Rizzuto (absolutely no way he's in if he's not in pinstripes), Mazeroski being in is a joke (great glove though), Lou Brock in the OF, and I hate to say it---but in RF either Puckett or Dawson shouldn't be in there, certainly not both.  

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TonyTexas said:

It shouldn’t be but sportswriters these days are petty as shit and tend to have other agendas besides putting the best players in. 

… which goes to show us that sportswriters, fans, and BBS posters include a fair share of meatheads.

With few exceptions, HoF should be judged on what happens inside the lines IMHO.  I just don’t think politics or shitty personalities qualify as exceptions.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I get bumping a guy up a bit for stuff outside the lines like great clubhouse leader (Todd Helton got helped by this), all-around super nice guy (Tom Seaver was at the time the highest vote-getter because of this), media darling (Griffey got extra 1st ballot votes for this), or because of some illness or sympathetic situation (Puckett or Clemente).  But I'd leave politics and personal issues aside.  Shit, half the guys in the first few decades of the Hall were racist, wife-beating drunks.  

But we'll always be torn on the drug use issue.  I think most people are fine with taking uppers, or speed, or coke or whatever they needed to get up for a particular game after a grueling road trip or something.  There's been some form or fashion of that since the 1910's in the game.  But it was the habitual use, over the course of a season or career, of steroids and HGH that we'll just never get past.  It changed the game more than the DH, lowering the mound, night games, all ever could. 

I'm coming around, as stated above, to the idea of just ripping the band-aid off and just putting in the asterisk class.  Guys lost a lot of games to make progress towards milestone records in '94 and '95 with the strike.  Guys missed a lot of games in '20 & '21 with Covid-19.  If you wanna choose to acknowledge the Asterisk Class as part of Cooperstown, you can.  If you don't want to, don't.  But maybe let's just get it over with all at once during this already challenging time for baseball.  There's already four different selection committees for induction.  There's guys in there under all kinds of different circumstances.  Cooperstown has endured, as has the game, we can probably absorb this bullshit and move on.  Some of those guys were just too good a players regardless of substance abuse, they should be enshrined.  Others were so obnoxiously helped by steroids and other substances that even though they have eye-popping numbers, they can go fuck themselves.  Let some experts come to a consensus. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


But we'll always be torn on the drug use issue.  I think most people are fine with taking uppers, or speed, or coke or whatever they needed to get up for a particular game after a grueling road trip or something.  There's been some form or fashion of that since the 1910's in the game.  But it was the habitual use, over the course of a season or career, of steroids and HGH that we'll just never get past.  It changed the game more than the DH, lowering the mound, night games, all ever could. 



Should we be ok with this?

Within this context of baseball, I’ll never be ok with it. For one, many of those dudes, if provided the opportunity to take some juice, they would have done so especially as salaries began to escalate. Secondly, it gave them advantages over those who followed the rules/law. Lastly, baseball didn’t care and allowed the practice to happen. The uses differ, but the objectives for usage are very similar.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Lobo said:

Yeah, I get bumping a guy up a bit for stuff outside the lines like great clubhouse leader (Todd Helton got helped by this), all-around super nice guy (Tom Seaver was at the time the highest vote-getter because of this), media darling (Griffey got extra 1st ballot votes for this), or because of some illness or sympathetic situation (Puckett or Clemente).  But I'd leave politics and personal issues aside.  Shit, half the guys in the first few decades of the Hall were racist, wife-beating drunks.  

But we'll always be torn on the drug use issue.  I think most people are fine with taking uppers, or speed, or coke or whatever they needed to get up for a particular game after a grueling road trip or something.  There's been some form or fashion of that since the 1910's in the game.  But it was the habitual use, over the course of a season or career, of steroids and HGH that we'll just never get past.  It changed the game more than the DH, lowering the mound, night games, all ever could. 

I'm coming around, as stated above, to the idea of just ripping the band-aid off and just putting in the asterisk class.  Guys lost a lot of games to make progress towards milestone records in '94 and '95 with the strike.  Guys missed a lot of games in '20 & '21 with Covid-19.  If you wanna choose to acknowledge the Asterisk Class as part of Cooperstown, you can.  If you don't want to, don't.  But maybe let's just get it over with all at once during this already challenging time for baseball.  There's already four different selection committees for induction.  There's guys in there under all kinds of different circumstances.  Cooperstown has endured, as has the game, we can probably absorb this bullshit and move on.  Some of those guys were just too good a players regardless of substance abuse, they should be enshrined.  Others were so obnoxiously helped by steroids and other substances that even though they have eye-popping numbers, they can go fuck themselves.  Let some experts come to a consensus. 

serious question. what do we do about guys who get popped for it after we have the asterisk class or guys who got popped after the hammer fell and are now off the HOF list?

if we let them in what is the cutoff date for new guys?

I think there are 2 options 

1. the steroids doesn't matter only numbers and everyone(like Palmeiro) gets a chance again IF THEY ADMIT to it.  If they get in they get no "enshrinement day" and they are in their own area.

2. you hold the line and let these guys drop off as a warning to all future players.  these roid guys fucked up a lot of the historical baseball numbers for short term gain.  they made the money, got the glory, and will now have to deal with the consequences.

If Ortiz gets in, you might as well just say fuck it and go with #1.  They can be the steroid class and be known as such.

Edit: and Schilling isn't part of this.  If these douchbag media voters want to vote in David Ortiz, Bonds, Clemens, etc before Schilling because they don't like him fuck them.  they are part of the problem.

Edited by dcar00
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schilling is like Harold Baines to me. Yeah, they were pretty good. But, the hall shouldn’t be for pretty good players.

Bonds, Clemens, Arod however could be argued for as the best to ever play their position.

No one is having a Schilling vs Walter Johnson argument, but I could make a winnable case for Clemens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Fastbreak said:

Schilling is like Harold Baines to me. Yeah, they were pretty good. But, the hall shouldn’t be for pretty good players.

Bonds, Clemens, Arod however could be argued for as the best to ever play their position.

No one is having a Schilling vs Walter Johnson argument, but I could make a winnable case for Clemens.

Harold Baines is likely the worst player to go into the hall in the last 50 years.  Schilling is head and shoulders above him.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to make an argument for Timothy Leroy Lincecum, to the Hall Of Fame.  I'm 100% serious instead of electing cheaters and assholes, how about:

2 Time Cy Young award winner

2 No hitters

3 World Series Championships

29 games with 10+ K's

4 time all star (started once)

I know the counterargument is he does not have a body of work to get in.  I think people forget how dominating the lad was.  I was lucky to see him pitch for UW so I might a tad biased.

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, petscii said:

I would like to make an argument for Timothy Leroy Lincecum, to the Hall Of Fame.  I'm 100% serious instead of electing cheaters and assholes, how about:

2 Time Cy Young award winner

2 No hitters

3 World Series Championships

29 games with 10+ K's

4 time all star (started once)

I know the counterargument is he does not have a body of work to get in.  I think people forget how dominating the lad was.  I was lucky to see him pitch for UW so I might a tad biased.

 

It's a Koufax case but not as long or quite as dominant. Close, but no cigar. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, petscii said:

I would like to make an argument for Timothy Leroy Lincecum, to the Hall Of Fame.  I'm 100% serious instead of electing cheaters and assholes, how about:

2 Time Cy Young award winner

2 No hitters

3 World Series Championships

29 games with 10+ K's

4 time all star (started once)

I know the counterargument is he does not have a body of work to get in.  I think people forget how dominating the lad was.  I was lucky to see him pitch for UW so I might a tad biased.

 

basically a 4 year career but never won 20 games.    Koufax still had 2400K's and won 165 games.  

Lincecum was excellent for 2 years and pretty dam good for 2 more but Koufax's 4 years were mercurial and he had couple of excellent seasons before those.  Koufax's WHIP is crazy.

Also, I'd put in Guidry before I put in LIncecum.  Guidry was a great fielder also.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2021 at 5:11 PM, dcar00 said:

this is easy.  schilling should be in.  If Tiant was a yankee he'd be in. 

Whitaker not being in is a crime that baseball must correct. 51 all time WAR

Baseball Reference lists Sweet Lou's WAR at 75.1

Other notable WAR:

Bobby Grich 71                                                                                                              
Willie Randolph 65.9
Jeff Kent 55.5

Kenny Lofton 68.4
Dwight Evans 67.1
Andruw Jones 62.7
Jim Edmonds 60.4

3rd Basemen (horribly underrepresented in Cooperstown)

Scott Rolen 70.1
Graig Nettles 67.9
Ken Boyer 62.8
Catcher (also badly underrepresented)

Thurman Munson 46.1
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dcar00 said:

basically a 4 year career but never won 20 games.    Koufax still had 2400K's and won 165 games.  

Lincecum was excellent for 2 years and pretty dam good for 2 more but Koufax's 4 years were mercurial and he had couple of excellent seasons before those.  Koufax's WHIP is crazy.

Also, I'd put in Guidry before I put in LIncecum.  Guidry was a great fielder also.

And the Yankees mishandled Guidry's early career - he should have been in their rotation 2 years earlier.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/24/2021 at 3:51 PM, Had Enough said:

 


Should we be ok with this?

Within this context of baseball, I’ll never be ok with it. For one, many of those dudes, if provided the opportunity to take some juice, they would have done so especially as salaries began to escalate. Secondly, it gave them advantages over those who followed the rules/law. Lastly, baseball didn’t care and allowed the practice to happen. The uses differ, but the objectives for usage are very similar.

 

First, show your work regarding many of those dudes... would have done so (too).  Unless you're Nostradamus, you're speculating without evidence.  Secondly, taking speed keeps you awake and upright, it doesn't do much for physical ability and coordination.  Bat speed and arm strength aren't improved on greenies or any rail of anything.  This whole debate about any PEDs are all the same, they've always been the same is specious nonsense.  Having said that, I'll side with twat Joel Sherman and draw the steroid line on people who got popped after they were explicitly banned by MLB and testing was instituted.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, cafe society said:

Baseball Reference lists Sweet Lou's WAR at 75.1

Other notable WAR:

Bobby Grich 71                                                                                                              
Willie Randolph 65.9
Jeff Kent 55.5

Kenny Lofton 68.4
Dwight Evans 67.1
Andruw Jones 62.7
Jim Edmonds 60.4

3rd Basemen (horribly underrepresented in Cooperstown)

Scott Rolen 70.1
Graig Nettles 67.9
Ken Boyer 62.8
Catcher (also badly underrepresented)

Thurman Munson 46.1
 

#51 all time position player WAR.  in other words if someone uses WAR as a somewhat defining metric he's basically a top 50 position player of all time.  and he has decent career numbers for a 2nd baseman as well.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dcar00 said:

#51 all time position player WAR.  in other words if someone uses WAR as a somewhat defining metric he's basically a top 50 position player of all time.  and he has decent career numbers for a 2nd baseman as well.

I watched him play and when he was done I never doubted that he would be in the HOF.  I guess the post office lost my BBWAA ballot! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, cafe society said:

taking speed keeps you awake and upright, it doesn't do much for physical ability and coordination.  Bat speed and arm strength aren't improved on greenies or any rail of anything.  

Mmmmmm…amphetamines can improve reaction time, I believe, especially in times of fatigue. Not sure how big of an effect that may be (probably small but significant) but it certainly seems like it could be meaningful in baseball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share



×
×
  • Create New...