2022 Baseball HOF ballot

[Dbacksbaseball]

Personally excited that next year Rolen and Helton have a real shot.

[Gatorsmld]

Originally Posted by Silent George

The full results for anyone who hasn't seen: 394 total ballots it looks like.

David Ortiz: 307 votes, 77.9%
Barry Bonds: 260 votes, 66% (final year on ballot)
Roger Clemens: 257 votes, 65.2% (final year on ballot)
Scott Rolen: 249 votes, 63.2%
Curt Schilling: 231 votes, 58.6% (final year on ballot)
Todd Helton: 205 votes, 52.0%
Billy Wagner: 201 votes, 51.0%
Andruw Jones: 163 votes, 41.1%
Gary Sheffield: 160 votes, 40.6%
Alex Rodriguez: 135 votes, 34.3%
Jeff Kent: 129 votes, 32.7%
Manny Ramirez: 114 votes, 28.9%
Omar Vizquel: 94 votes, 23.9%
Sammy Sosa: 73 votes, 18.5% (final year on ballot)
Andy Pettitte: 42 votes, 10.7%
Jimmy Rollins: 37 votes, 9.4%
Bobby Abreu: 34 votes, 8.6%
Mark Buehrle: 23 votes, 5.8%
Torii Hunter: 21 votes, 5.3%
(Players receiving less than 5% will drop off future ballots)
Joe Nathan: 17 votes, 4.3%
Tim Hudson: 12 votes, 3.0%
Tim Lincecum: 9 votes, 2.3%
Ryan Howard: 8 votes, 2.0%
Mark Teixeira: 6 votes, 1.5%
Justin Morneau: 5 votes, 1.3%
Jonathan Papelbon: 5 votes, 1.3%
Prince Fielder: 2 votes, 0.5%
A.J. Pierzynski: 2 votes, 0.5%
Carl Crawford: 0 votes, 0%
Jake Peavy: 0 votes, 0%

A piece of crap like Omar Vizquel can actually get a vote but they keep out Bonds, Clemens, and Schilling? So beating your wife and assaulting an autistic kid in the shower means you get votes but let’s keep out two suspected steroid users and a high profile conservative?

[Dbacksbaseball]

Originally Posted by JRX

That would be me. Its well known that WAR doesn't value relief pitchers highly, but being 34% higher than anyone else at the position does count for something. Also why Edgar got in, though that took how long? Maybe he should have sucked up to the media more. Ortiz was a DH because he sucked at fielding and that should be held against a player when comparing them to others that can actually field.

The is the most common and flawed argument made against DH’s. If you were hired to hit and not play the field you should be punished.

That’s like punishing the waitress for the cook being bad.

[Silent George]

Originally Posted by Silent George

The full results for anyone who hasn't seen: 394 total ballots it looks like.

David Ortiz: 307 votes, 77.9%
Barry Bonds: 260 votes, 66% (final year on ballot)
Roger Clemens: 257 votes, 65.2% (final year on ballot)
Scott Rolen: 249 votes, 63.2%
Curt Schilling: 231 votes, 58.6% (final year on ballot)
Todd Helton: 205 votes, 52.0%
Billy Wagner: 201 votes, 51.0%
Andruw Jones: 163 votes, 41.1%
Gary Sheffield: 160 votes, 40.6%
Alex Rodriguez: 135 votes, 34.3%
Jeff Kent: 129 votes, 32.7%
Manny Ramirez: 114 votes, 28.9%
Omar Vizquel: 94 votes, 23.9%
Sammy Sosa: 73 votes, 18.5% (final year on ballot)
Andy Pettitte: 42 votes, 10.7%
Jimmy Rollins: 37 votes, 9.4%
Bobby Abreu: 34 votes, 8.6%
Mark Buehrle: 23 votes, 5.8%
Torii Hunter: 21 votes, 5.3%
(Players receiving less than 5% will drop off future ballots)
Joe Nathan: 17 votes, 4.3%
Tim Hudson: 12 votes, 3.0%
Tim Lincecum: 9 votes, 2.3%
Ryan Howard: 8 votes, 2.0%
Mark Teixeira: 6 votes, 1.5%
Justin Morneau: 5 votes, 1.3%
Jonathan Papelbon: 5 votes, 1.3%
Prince Fielder: 2 votes, 0.5%
A.J. Pierzynski: 2 votes, 0.5%
Carl Crawford: 0 votes, 0%
Jake Peavy: 0 votes, 0%

I think I can give my ballot for next year already! (Where's the new thread???)

Rolen
Beltran
KRod
Kent
Sheffield
Wagner
Ramirez
Jones
Helton
Abreu

[Silent George]

Originally Posted by marl1220

That's why it needs to change.

There are 7 new Hall of Famers this year. The Hall of Fame is currently very happy with this process.

[mfw13]

It's honestly getting to the point where I don't really care any more.....the HOF has become a joke.

Bug Selig is an HOFer....Bonds & Clemens are not.....case closed.....

[JRX]

Originally Posted by Dbacksbaseball

The is the most common and flawed argument made against DH’s. If you were hired to hit and not play the field you should be punished.



That’s like punishing the waitress for the cook being bad.

Then why arent we inducting great middle relief pitchers, I mean if that's what they were hired to do. Rolen and Jones were far better ball players than Ortiz. Keith Hernandez was a better all around player. Just waiving off not being able to even be serviceable at the easiest defensive position is not fair when comparing to other players. Why not just waive off other guys not hitting 500 hrs since they had to actually field and throw and dive for balls getting banged up more etc.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Cavaliercards]

Originally Posted by NHRonin

For those claiming Ortiz is a known steroid user, that’s incorrect. He is reported to have failed one test and that was from a leaked report that even MLB said may have been a false positive. Never tested positive again while maintaining the same stats. Never suspended like Manny or ARod.

Get over it.

When the Commish comes out in support of you and your background that is a massive boost, Clemens and Bonds did not qualify for that.

[pewe]

Originally Posted by JRX

His slg was

age 32 .507
age 33 .462
age 34-40 .562
career .552

Not to mention .620 at age 40. He did roids, he's in the hall and its because he played nice with the media that's it. If he was a jerk to the media he wouldn't have been voted in.

Remember: what is the SLG formula? The denominator is “at bats”. And what is included in “at bats”? Strike outs.

2009-2010, 33-34 years old, his k% increased by 25% vs the rest of his career before and after… all of his SLG deviation (and more) is purely described by his hugely deviant k% those two years.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cavaliercards]

Originally Posted by aschade

Please find me any report where Barry Bonds failed any tests.

And fyi you will be looking for a long time because he never failed one test.

Find me where the Commish has come out publicly and said he did not.

You will be looking for a longer time.

[NHRonin]

Originally Posted by Silent George

I think the sham part is that Manfred beclowned himself exonerating Ortiz, and only Ortiz, and the writers - who know Manfred is a wicked human being anyway - were all to happy to take the excuse to vote for their boy.

It's total hypocrisy.

This thread is filled with a thorough and interesting conversation on the topic, but:

Sosa is a pariah in the game with the exact same evidence against him Ortiz has.

Sosa was a better overall payer.

Ortiz was a better postseason player.

Add it all up and you do not get a 1st ballot HOF, and a 10 time low support guy now kicked off the ballot.

(I know newbies to the thread will argue some of this. I'm not going to restate the clear evidence of the above. It's all there.)

My question is why was Ortiz Manfredi’s “boy?”

[pewe]

Originally Posted by xbignick

Can't imagine being one of the people that still value this process.

What process would you value more?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mfw13]

Originally Posted by Dbacksbaseball

The is the most common and flawed argument made against DH’s. If you were hired to hit and not play the field you should be punished.

But nobody is "hired" to become a DH....you become a DH once it becomes evident that you are so bad defensively that your team would be worse off if it let you play defense.

The Red Sox would have been much happier had Ortiz been good enough defensively to play 1B on a regular basis.

[Silent George]

Originally Posted by JRX

Then why arent we inducting great middle relief pitchers, I mean if that's what they were hired to do. Rolen and Jones were far better ball players than Ortiz. Keith Hernandez was a better all around player. Just waiving off not being able to even be serviceable at the easiest defensive position is not fair when comparing to other players. Why not just waive off other guys not hitting 500 hrs since they had to actually field and throw and dive for balls getting banged up more etc.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

The issue with judging DH defense is that the defensive WAR that comes from it is nothing more than a measure of the value they provided - not the value that they could have provided if given a chance.

Take for example if a team had Nolan Arenado and Ke'Bryan Hayes on the same team. Many people say Hayes is the better fielder. We KNOW Arenado is one of the best in the game. But on this team, what if he's the DH for half or more games because both are worthy of the lineup? His defensive value plummets, but it's not like he's any worse of a player. So does he not get Hall consideration because he played DH?

MLB made DH a position, and as a result it opened up debates like this. If the DH was abolished, Ortiz still has a HOF career because the Sox, or another team, are still happy to put up with his shoddy defense to get his bat in the lineup. And just by going from DH to 1B improves his position rankings by +5. That's a lot, of course, and enough to suddenly make Ortiz look like he's a better player immediately.

Now there's give and take for everything - if he's playing 1B there's a higher chance of injury/exhaustion. He has to focus more on fielding and less on hitting. Maybe all of these diminish his total offensive stats. I don't know. But DH doesn't automatically mean "this guy isn't worthy of taking the field" and so the fact that there might be more nuance to the argument must be considered.

[Browns1981]

Originally Posted by xbignick

Can't imagine being one of the people that still value this process.

It’s been a joke for a long time since writers love to use it to grandstand and get clickbait hot takes.

[pewe]

Originally Posted by Silent George

Sosa was a better overall payer.

To be more accurate: Sosa was a better defender. But nowhere close to Ortiz offensively. And that is in-season, let alone playoffs. Ortiz was worth 33% more than Sosa every at bat in season. And infinitely more in playoffs and team leadership


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gonzagacubs]

These idiots made a name for themselves, a career and a lot of money covering Bonds and others. Shameful day for baseball.

[Silent George]

Originally Posted by NHRonin

My question is why was Ortiz Manfredi’s “boy?”

Manfred went on his little retirement tour. His reasons are easy to understand, but they are his own. Ortiz was very popular. It was publicity for baseball, and Manfred honoring him helps people have warm fuzzy feelings about Ortiz, Manfred, Boston, baseball, etc. He certainly doesn't go on every retirement tour. But he chose Ortiz, and he was asked about steroids.

And then Manfred has a choice, because here we have the commissioner seemingly honoring and supporting a steroid user. Does Manfred forgive him? Thus opening up the door of why we aren't forgiving the rest of this is the COMMISSIONERS point of view?

Or does he condemn him which leads to the question, ok pal, why exactly are you here in the first place then?

The answer is neither.

Manfred....exonerates him. By claiming that you can't count the test against him. Because 10+ of the tests were not scientifically cleared. Now you will read this is a false positive, but that's not the same thing. They weren't false positives. They just weren't CONFIRMED positives.

So we have 104 tests, and around 10 of them weren't confirmed.

And thus we can't judge David Ortiz. For the 10% chance that his test was one that wasn't a confirmed positive.

Here's the beautiful quote:

“Even if your name was on that (anonymous) list,’’ Manfred said, “it’s entirely possible that you were not a positive.

“I don’t think anyone understands very well what that list was.’’

Except he's the commissioner of baseball. And he and the last commissioner of baseball have done absolutely nothing to clear the names of anyone who was on the list until a commissioner had to save his own skin during Ortiz's retirement party.

Now, there are leaked names - 104 that are believed to be a fake list. REGARDLESS, if the MLB commissioner doesn't think fake or real that those names should be judged against, find a quote from MLB that says that! You won't find one.

Sammy Sosa was on that list. Sammy Sosa has gone through years of Hall of Fame ballots with every article quoting his 2003 failed drug test. Where was the commissioner of baseball to step in and say "whoa whoa whoa, we don't know he was actually positive! Don't judge him!"

When he says he doesn't think people understand what that test was, well he allowed a lot of players to be thrown under the bus for years without bothering to explain it didn't he?

Once of those players happened to be David Ortiz. Who did live with those test results for 7 years. And this false positive don't judge him stuff only came up with Manfred wanted to save himself from an uncomfortable position.

104 players tested positive.

upon scientific verification, 10ish didn't pass the first go round. Not a big shock at all. Not scientific verification that they were actually negative.

The next step of confirming those tests didn't happen because it didn't matter. 5% of positive tests still happened, so there was no need to retest.

So maybe there are 10 false negatives, maybe 5, maybe 0. Best case scenario there's only a 90% chance Ortiz deservedly failed that drug test.

Which personally makes me roll my eyes. In the land of suspicious back acne we're deciding Ortiz was OK because maybe some of those 10 tests were false positives? and maybe one of those was him?

And we find out about this when? When Manfred happens to be questioned during his retirement celebrations? So if Manfred really believes this - and doesn't get questioned. What then? Does Ortiz not make the hall this year because he's a known PED user and Manfred just stays quiet about all those bad tests? Ridiculous. Manfred went to save himself, and only himself. It's clear as day. And reporters, who know what a wicked liar Manfred is, happily went along in article after article buying Manfred's story and not voting for Sosa.

I'm STILL happy Ortiz is in the hall of fame. But I still hate Manfred and the media. They are still hypocrites, even if I like the result of it.

[Silent George]

Originally Posted by pewe

To be more accurate: Sosa was a better defender. But nowhere close to Ortiz offensively. And that is in-season, let alone playoffs. Ortiz was worth 33% more than Sosa every at bat in season. And infinitely more in playoffs and team leadership


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was accurate. You just have to remove your Wally head gear to acknowledge it.

[pewe]

Originally Posted by Silent George

I was accurate. You just have to remove your Wally head gear to acknowledge it.

I’ve used actual stats… what disproves them?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[epatmythes]

The results are really all you need to know about the state of the Baseball Writer's Association of America. Scott Rolen, the best untainted player on the ballot, falls short. Bonds and Clemens, the best hitter and pitcher of their generation, fall short and drop off the ballot on their 10th and final look. David Ortiz, with more on-paper ties to PED's than the other 2, makes it on his first ballot. The BBWAA is a joke.

[Silent George]

Originally Posted by pewe

I’ve used actual stats… what disproves them?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

the actual stats that are already a large part of this thread.

You're not going to come up with enough to close a 9 WAR gap between the two. Even if you gave him back 4 runs a year every year of his career - which would be assuming Ortiz would be a league average 1B - and is way too many runs to give him considering the amount of time he did actually spend at 1B - that's still makes up only 8 WAR. And Ortiz wasn't an average 1B. throwing steroids and peaks and all that stuff out the window, on the whole Sosa was just a better player. AND I SPENT MY YOUTH HATING SAMMY SOSA. But the math is there. I can't help it.

[JeremyNick]

So how’s does Big Papi get in being a known PED abuser but Bonds and Clemens are persona non grata.

Goodness the MLB HOF is a joke

[awz50]

Ortiz is a hof

Yayy

[pewe]

Originally Posted by Silent George

the actual stats that are already a large part of this thread.

You're not going to come up with enough to close a 9 WAR gap between the two. Even if you gave him back 4 runs a year every year of his career - which would be assuming Ortiz would be a league average 1B - and is way too many runs to give him considering the amount of time he did actually spend at 1B - that's still makes up only 8 WAR. And Ortiz wasn't an average 1B. throwing steroids and peaks and all that stuff out the window, on the whole Sosa was just a better player. AND I SPENT MY YOUTH HATING SAMMY SOSA. But the math is there. I can't help it.

Ortiz generated 408 wRAA on offense, Sosa managed 300.5.

The entire fWAR difference between the two is defensive. Where Sosa gets -7 and Ortiz gets -247. Thus, yes, net Sosa has 140 more wRAA across offense + defense. But it is purely a defensive swing for him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk