This is a fun exercise to me even though I don't have a real ballot. If I'm going to critique (or approve of) someone's else's actual ballot I think it's helpful to go through the process like they do ... at least the ones who take it seriously. So before I get to the ballot itself, here are a few things to keep in mind regarding my thought process:
- I am including the PED guys on my ballot because I'm as sure as I can be without seeing failed drug tests that we've already put PED users in the Hall of Fame. If there are already users in the Hall, why would I exclude others who did the same thing and were even better in many cases? Also, Bud Selig is in the Hall despite his inaction on PED's over at least a 10-12 year period where the person in charge of the sport should have been aware of what was going on. I know he couldn't unilaterally impose drug testing but he could have made a bigger deal about it himself instead of waiting for Congress to get involved and spur action.
- I don't compare generations to one another. I compare players to the other players of their generation because that's the only logical way to do things. Babe Ruth's era was different from Mickey Mantle's era which was different from Ken Griffey, Jr's era which was different from Mike Trout's era. Looking at players within the context of their era comes first for me.
- I also consider where someone ranks all-time at the position they play. If you're one of the 10 best of all time at a particular position, you're a Hall of Famer whether you hit the "counting number" milestones or not. In addition to that, if you were one of the best players in the sport for an 8-10-12 year window you're a Hall of Famer to me. Longevity matters to me but what matters more is a player's dominance.
- I don't care much about counting numbers, batting average, wins or any of the old school statistical categories that don't mean what previous generations thought they did. We have better numbers now, ones that tell a more complete story, and those are the ones I focus on primarily. Now, I don't completely ignore hits, home runs, strikeouts (for pitchers), etc. because to get a lot of those you have to be really good for a really long time. 3,000 hits tells you a story and you don't get there without being great for a long time but I'll also say there aren't many guys with 3,000+ hits who don't measure up in other ways too.
- Defense matters to me. Base running matters to me. All-around players deserve more recognition than they've gotten over the years. An elite defender does not have to be an elite hitter to make it on to my ballot...but they do probably need to be somewhere around average offensively.
Related
I think that covers it so let's get down to business...
(ranked in alphabetical order)
Barry Bonds
There is no need to go to the numbers with Bonds. His career totals are top 2-3 of all-time but we know he used PEDs so there has to be some discount, right?
This story from Dec 10, 2021 used Dan Szymborski's ZiPS projection system to look back at Bonds' career (and Roger Clemens' too, more on that later) in an effort to figure out what their numbers might have looked like if they didn't take PEDs.
The result was a projection of 551 HR, 128.7 career WAR (which places him 9th all-time just ahead of Stan Musial) and his 8 Gold Gloves.
That's a Hall of Famer there. So even if you don't give full weight to his actual numbers, which is fine, the lesser version of him was HOF worthy too.
Roger Clemens
Once again, I'll refer back to the ESPN story referenced above. The ZiPS system projects that even without PEDs Clemens would have wound up with 298 wins, more than 4,000 K and 111.8 pitcher WAR which would put him just below Greg Maddux and Randy Johnson all-time.
In other words, still a Hall of Famer even with the PED discount.
Todd Helton
Jeff Bagwell, Edgar Martinez, Vlad Guerrero and Orlando Cepeda are 4 of the 5 most similar hitters to Helton according to www.baseball-reference.com. They're all Hall of Famers.
I know the argument against him is "COORS FIELD!!!!!" but when you use the ballpark adjust numbers he's a Hall of Famer. For example, his 133 career OPS+ places him dead even with Cepeda and ahead of HOF first basemen like Eddie Murray and Joe Torre. The average JAWS score (JAWS is created by Jay Jaffe, it's a version of WAR meant to compare players to those already in the Hall of Fame) for a Hall of Fame 1B is 54.2. Helton's JAWS score is 54.2.
So, his career is dead average...for a Hall of Famer!
Andruw Jones
Jones is one of the best defensive outfielders of all-time. He has 10 Gold Gloves and the most defensive WAR in baseball history - 30% more defensive WAR than the next closest CF, Paul Blair - and he was a massive offensive producer. Conservatively I could argue that he was one of the 4-5 best defensive CF of all-time and then I toss on top of that he was an above average offensive player (111 OPS+) over a 17 year career. He's a Hall of Famer.
The argument here is similar to the argument for Molina. If you're truly one of the all-time greats defensively at your position and you were average or above offensively you should be seen as a Hall of Famer. Only five CF have more HR than Jones (434), he's in the Top 15 in RBI amongst CF and he was at or near the top of the group defensively.
Related
David Ortiz
The case for Ortiz basically comes down to a comparison to Edgar Martinez. Neither was a defensive contributor so let's stack up how they compare...
Edgar: 147 OPS+, .933 OPS, 309 HR, 1261 RBI, 68.4 bWAR
Papi: 141 OPS+, .931 OPS, 541 HR, 1768 RBI, 55.3 bWAR
So Edgar wins on WAR and slightly on OPS+ but Papi wins on HR and RBI. Since both were DHs that's all we really need to worry about. To me they're similar enough that if one of them is in then the other should be too.
Manny Ramirez
Look, Ramirez was one of the best hitters in the history of the game. He was 54% better than league average for his career and hit .312 with a .411 OBP and .585 SLG which gives him a .996 OPS for his career. That is 12th in MLB history regardless of position. To rank in the Top 12 all-time in a sport that goes back to the 1800's is unreal.
That's his case. He was a bad defender and a poor base runner but his bat was elite. Even if you put a PED discount on him (like I mentioned with Bonds above) he'd still be a Hall of Famer.
Alex Rodriguez
Same case here as for Barry Bonds. Even if you apply the PED discount, there is no argument against him unless you're excluding PED guys across the board, which I am not. The players he is most similar to according to www.baseball-reference.com are Willie Mays, Albert Pujols, Ken Griffey, Jr., Frank Robinson, Barry Bonds and Hank Aaron. Honus Wagner is the only SS who had more WAR or a higher JAWS score. Every counting stat is there for those who want that: 3,000+ hits, 696 HR, 2,086 RBI, 329 SB and a couple of Gold Gloves.
Related
Scott Rolen
The case for Rolen is a simple one: he's one of the 7-8 best 3B in the history of the sport when you combine offensive and defensive achievements...
- Gold Gloves (8) - only Brooks Robinson, Mike Schmidt and Nolan Arenado have more at 3B
- WAR (70.1) - 10th all time at 3B if you include Paul Molitor who served as DH most of his career
- Defensive WAR (21.2) - 6th best in MLB history
- Only 3 HOF third basemen have a better career SLG (Chipper Jones, Mike Schmidt, Eddie Mathews)
- Only 5 HOF third basemen have a better career OPS (Jones, Schmidt, Mathews, George Brett and Wade Boggs)
- Only 5 HOF third basemen have more career HR (Jones, Schmidt, Mathews, Brett and Ron Santo)
- Only 4 HOF third basemen have more extra base hits (Jones, Schmidt, Mathews and Brett)
Even if we concede that he ranks behind Schmidt, Jones, Robinson, Mathews, Brett and Boggs (I'd concede on all but Boggs), Rolen is either the 7th or 8th best 3B all-time depending on how you'd compare him to Santo.
That's a Hall of Famer.
Gary Sheffield
His 140 OPS+ (40% better than MLB average during his career) ranks him right next to Larry Walker, Vlad Guerrero and Reggie Jackson. Combine that with the fact that he had slightly more career WAR than Ichiro Suzuki to go with 500+ HR and 250+ SB and nearly 2700 hits and it's hard to argue against the analytics or the counting stats.
Curt Schilling
A player's off-the-field politics or personality should not come into the equation with HOF voting. I'm including Schilling because I think he deserves to be there, though barely. He'd be near the bottom of my list based on his numbers but the one thing I can't get past is how similar he is to a Hall of Famer from his own ERA.
Schilling:
127 ERA+ (ERA 27% better than MLB average)
3.23 FIP (Fielding Independent ERA)
8.6 K/9
3,261 IP
.597 win %
Player X:
125 ERA+
3.24 FIP
8.0 K/9
3,473 IP
213 wins
Player X is John Smoltz. Now, Smoltz has the edge because he was also a dominant closer for three seasons and posted 154 saves but their careers overlapped entirely. Both came up in 1988 while Smoltz retired in 2009 and Schilling in 2007. As similar as those guys are - and they both had extensive playoff success too - I can't justify having one guy in and the other guy out.
Related
© 2021 KMOX (Audacy). All rights reserved
LISTEN on the Audacy App
Follow KMOX
Facebook | Twitter | Instagram