8 Players on Contemporary Era HOF ballot announced.

[SaveMeTheGum]

Originally Posted by VinnyH

I'd like to throw out my feeling on peds with a visual.
We have all watched full seasons of our favorite teams and players, for years. Think about how many balls are caught on the warning track as the fans sigh. Then think how a stronger healthier player with peds is adding 3 feet to all those warning track outs. How many times did Cal Raleigh fly out to the track this year?

The fans who enjoy stats now have to deal with all the screwed up numbers. Sammy Sosa hit 60 homeruns 3 years. Was Sosa greater than Ruth, Aaron, Maris, Judge, etc.?

Peds messed up the sport and it's history,
Vinny

If we just want to talk pure stats, I always wonder what the stats of guys would look like from the 20's to the 50's if there were integration. Things probably would have been slightly different if those guys had to face Smokey Joe Williams, Bullet Rogan, and Martin Dihigo. You can just as easily argue those stats are screwed up too. Heck, Bonds, Griffey, Frank Thomas and Sosa wouldn't even exist in the stat books if we hadn't evolved as a people.

[Handsome Wes]

Originally Posted by mfw13

The problem is that there is no rhyme or reason as to what gets on these ballots in the first place. As I noted upthread, Dave Parker got on FOUR ballots before eventually getting elected, whereas Dwight Evans has only gotten on ONE ballot. Keith Hernandez hasn't been on ANY vet committee ballots!

So IMHO, the bigger issue is the need for a more open and consistent process for determining who gets on these veteran's committee ballots in the first place.

What's funny about the Dave Parker selection is that he was on an "Early Baseball until 1980" ballot, and the consensus seems to be that he was elected as a way of honoring a living player (and he passed away a few months after getting the Hall Call)...

...but if they wanted to induct someone alive, why even put him on a ballot with players who debuted in 1920?

I thought that the format they had prior to the revision was the best one, where you had:
- Early Baseball (1871–1949) (voted on once every ten years)
- Golden Days (1950–1969) (voted on once every five years)
- Modern Baseball (1970–1987) (twice in five years)
- Today's Game (1988–present) (twice in five years)

I would like them to go back to that format, with a few changes:
- Have these ballots be Players Only - managers, pioneers, owners, etc. would have a separate ballot, being voted on every five years.
- The voting committee can vote for as many candidates as they want (and the ballot is restored to ten), but only the top two vote-getters get inducted
- Keep the "if you fail to receive X votes (i'd say 4), you are removed from ballot consideration for a time).

[rats60]

Originally Posted by Handsome Wes

What's funny about the Dave Parker selection is that he was on an "Early Baseball until 1980" ballot, and the consensus seems to be that he was elected as a way of honoring a living player (and he passed away a few months after getting the Hall Call)...

...but if they wanted to induct someone alive, why even put him on a ballot with players who debuted in 1920?

I thought that the format they had prior to the revision was the best one, where you had:
- Early Baseball (1871–1949) (voted on once every ten years)
- Golden Days (1950–1969) (voted on once every five years)
- Modern Baseball (1970–1987) (twice in five years)
- Today's Game (1988–present) (twice in five years)

I would like them to go back to that format, with a few changes:
- Have these ballots be Players Only - managers, pioneers, owners, etc. would have a separate ballot, being voted on every five years.
- The voting committee can vote for as many candidates as they want (and the ballot is restored to ten), but only the top two vote-getters get inducted
- Keep the "if you fail to receive X votes (i'd say 4), you are removed from ballot consideration for a time).

The 2026 ballot was players who made their greatest impact 1979 or earlier. Parker was MVP in 1978, World Series Champion in 1979, won batting titles in 1977 & 1978 and gold gloves in 1977, 1978 and 1979. He was on the correct ballot. He wouldn't fit on the 1980 to present (current) ballot. It is unfortunate that 19th century, prewar and Negro League players are lumped in with 50s, 60s and 70s guys. It makes it very difficult for any more players from the game's early years.

[Skipscards]

Originally Posted by rats60

The 2026 ballot was players who made their greatest impact 1979 or earlier. Parker was MVP in 1978, World Series Champion in 1979, won batting titles in 1977 & 1978 and gold gloves in 1977, 1978 and 1979. He was on the correct ballot. He wouldn't fit on the 1980 to present (current) ballot. It is unfortunate that 19th century, prewar and Negro League players are lumped in with 50s, 60s and 70s guys. It makes it very difficult for any more players from the game's early years.

100% on all of this. The pre-1980 Era ballot is a joke. We could have a ballot that looks like this: Bob Howsam, Vic Harris, Bill Freehan, Bill Dahlen, Tommy John, Jim McCormick, Steve Garvey, and Roger Maris.

That ballot would make zero sense.

[PeteD]

I'm 100% against letting any juicers in...what's stopping players from juicing when there's no punishment besides a 90 game suspension? Sheesh...give me a break.

[mozzie]

Nobody that ever watched Don Mattingly play could doubt he is HOF caliber. He has nearly identical stats to Kirby Puckett and both retired due to injuries. Also, I hear a lot of support for Kenny Lofton but none for Jim Edmonds. I find this odd. Compare their numbers and it is obvious Edmonds was the better player... not to mention Andruw Jones.

[mfw13]

Originally Posted by mozzie

Nobody that ever watched Don Mattingly play could doubt he is HOF caliber. He has nearly identical stats to Kirby Puckett and both retired due to injuries. Also, I hear a lot of support for Kenny Lofton but none for Jim Edmonds. I find this odd. Compare their numbers and it is obvious Edmonds was the better player... not to mention Andruw Jones.

The reason Puckett is in and Mattingly isn't is because Puckett was the key player on two World Series champs. It's that simple.

And while Mattingly and Puckett have similar stats, a better comp for Mattingly might be Keith Hernandez (who also isn't in), another good defensive 1B with good, but not great, offensive stats.

[WillBaseball]

Originally Posted by jkampis

You probably shouldn’t post after drinking.

Have you ever been there? It’s awesome. And people here are saying things like, for example “Schilling’s sock is there, so he should be too”. I’m stone sober.

[hxcmilkshake]

Originally Posted by mfw13

The reason Puckett is in and Mattingly isn't is because Puckett was the key player on two World Series champs. It's that simple.



And while Mattingly and Puckett have similar stats, a better comp for Mattingly might be Keith Hernandez (who also isn't in), another good defensive 1B with good, but not great, offensive stats.

And there was no social media or Kirby getting handsey with Waffle House waitresses (and other such transgressions) would take him down a peg.

Sent from my SM-S928U using Tapatalk

[duwal]

Originally Posted by mozzie

Nobody that ever watched Don Mattingly play could doubt he is HOF caliber. He has nearly identical stats to Kirby Puckett and both retired due to injuries.

Puckett also was a lot more consistent for his career. His final season he had 23 hrs, 99 rbis and batted .314 with slugging over .500. Mattingly had some awesome seasons at the very start of his career but then flattened out to not even be all-star good enough seasons. After his 6th full season at 28 he only had 2 seasons getting into double figures in homeruns out of 6 with the peak being 17. After the age of 26 his highest OPS season was a .828 with others being in the .700's and one in the .600's. His final 6 seasons he had a total WAR of 9

[jkampis]

Originally Posted by WillBaseball

Have you ever been there? It’s awesome. And people here are saying things like, for example “Schilling’s sock is there, so he should be too”. I’m stone sober.

Yes, I’ve been to the HOF. I loved it. May have loved Cooperstown itself even more. It’s such a lovely place.

[daveyc1]

Originally Posted by duwal

Puckett also was a lot more consistent for his career. His final season he had 23 hrs, 99 rbis and batted .314 with slugging over .500. Mattingly had some awesome seasons at the very start of his career but then flattened out to not even be all-star good enough seasons. After his 6th full season at 28 he only had 2 seasons getting into double figures in homeruns out of 6 with the peak being 17. After the age of 26 his highest OPS season was a .828 with others being in the .700's and one in the .600's. His final 6 seasons he had a total WAR of 9

This has most to do with Puckett being in HOF and Mattingly not. Puck was still producing at a high level when he retired, Don had been on a long steady decline for years.

to add, Pucketts injury was a sudden one. He actually went to spring training and played well, then the weekend before the season ended could not see out of one eye. within 2 or 3 months he was retired.

Dons injury was not one that forced immediate retirement, but sapped him of his power and allowed him to play at a much reduced level for the entire second half of his career. I think that if he had a major career ending injury, like Puckett (and somewhat like Koufax) his career may be viewed differently.

[sauceboy]

I loved Delgado and believe that he should've lasted more than just one year on the ballot, but I don't think he has the numbers to get the nod.

Bonds and Clemens will both eventually get inducted, but next year won't be it.

Kent should be in, no question.

[SethMurphy]

Originally Posted by PeteD

I'm 100% against letting any juicers in...what's stopping players from juicing when there's no punishment besides a 90 game suspension? Sheesh...give me a break.

Just a 90-game suspension???? Are you familiar with the rules. Players have a lot at stake, third offense and lifetime ban is on the table.

Suspension Rules for PED Violations
First Offense: An 80-game suspension without pay. A player suspended for a first offense is also ineligible for the postseason that same year, unless the penalty is reduced on appeal.
Second Offense: A 162-game suspension without pay (equivalent to a full season, including the postseason). This results in a loss of 183 days of pay.
Third Offense: A permanent lifetime ban from Major and Minor League Baseball. A player who receives a lifetime ban can apply for reinstatement after one year, but cannot be eligible for reinstatement sooner than two years after the ban began

[Handsome Wes]

Originally Posted by rats60

The 2026 ballot was players who made their greatest impact 1979 or earlier. Parker was MVP in 1978, World Series Champion in 1979, won batting titles in 1977 & 1978 and gold gloves in 1977, 1978 and 1979. He was on the correct ballot. He wouldn't fit on the 1980 to present (current) ballot. It is unfortunate that 19th century, prewar and Negro League players are lumped in with 50s, 60s and 70s guys. It makes it very difficult for any more players from the game's early years.

I mean, that's my point. Yes, Dave Parker was on the correct ballot. But the ballot itself was stupid.

[Handsome Wes]

Originally Posted by PeteD

I'm 100% against letting any juicers in...what's stopping players from juicing when there's no punishment besides a 90 game suspension? Sheesh...give me a break.

Scalding hot take from 2006

[daveyc1]

as far as the known/admitted PED users are concerned, lets keep in mind that there was no collectively bargained PED rule for MLB until the 2005 season. there was the 1991 memo, but that was nothing more than a guidance by the then commish.

Shy of a player admitting/hard evidence or a positive drug test, all other "allegations" are simply conjecture.

Both Bonds and Sheffield admitted. there are rumors around Kent, but that is all they are. there was no hard evidence/admission/failed test with him. There was also no hard evidence/admission/failed test with Clemens. there was a disgruntled former employee with an axe to grind who implicated him. Keep in mind, that the Federal Government, with all of the resourses/money in the world, couldnt convict Clemens of perjury when they alleged he lied about not using PED.

Regardless, until the 2005 season, it really doesnt matter if they all used. there was no rule against it.

[Handsome Wes]

Originally Posted by sauceboy

I loved Delgado and believe that he should've lasted more than just one year on the ballot, but I don't think he has the numbers to get the nod.

Bonds and Clemens will both eventually get inducted, but next year won't be it.

Kent should be in, no question.

I don't think there is an eventuality to the Bonds & Clemens candidacies.

The Hall itself has basically changed its rules for induction, seemingly with those two in mind. And I'm sure if they get close they'll do it again.

[fabiani12333]

Originally Posted by Handsome Wes

I don't think there is an eventuality to the Bonds & Clemens candidacies.

The Hall itself has basically changed its rules for induction, seemingly with those two in mind. And I'm sure if they get close they'll do it again.

I had to learn this lesson years ago -- the Hall of Fame is an exclusive club that gatekeeps its members; it's not for the fans. When the late Joe Morgan came out years ago and said he and many other members of the Hall of Fame didn't want players like Bonds or Clemens in their club, that put an end to their chances of getting in. They were still on the ballot at the time, but there are a certain number of older voters that do whatever the Hall of Fame members want, preventing certain players from getting enough votes to get elected.

[PeteD]

Originally Posted by SethMurphy

Just a 90-game suspension???? Are you familiar with the rules. Players have a lot at stake, third offense and lifetime ban is on the table.

Just curious...is it 80 games 'cause that's how long it takes to leave your system? Anyway, i suspect majority of juicers would rather gamble and cash in on a huge contract. I mean you get 2 shots before the lifetime ban and some won't get a shot at the HOF anyway. $$$$$ > HOF.

[DetroitTN]

Put them all in. Stop with the petty votes

[robert0629]

There’s no reason to keep Bonds and Clemens out. Players from earlier decades were taking amphetamines or “greenies”. Amphetamines are PEDs. The use of amphetamines was rampant in baseball after WWII. Hank Aaron once admitted that he tried them once, but never again because it made him feel like he was having a heart attack. He was probably telling the truth, but it’s interesting that fans don’t seem to care about this. If Albert Pujols came out and said he tried steroids once, his career would be flushed down the toilet.

I googled “why did MLB ban amphetamines?” One piece of information I got was - “amphetamines mask fatigue and increase alertness, aggressiveness, and reaction time, creating an unfair advantage”. The same fans who are overly critical of players like Bonds and Clemens, likely hold in high regard Hall of Fame players who also cheated by taking “greenies” during their careers.

A few examples of some recent players who benefitted from the use of amphetamines are Chris Davis and Aubrey Huff. Davis received a therapeutic-use exemption from baseball which allowed him to take Adderall for ADHD. Davis had two big home run seasons during this time, hitting 53 in one and 47 in another. He likely benefitted from a PED which led to him signing one of the worst contracts in MLB history. Aubrey Huff who also took Adderall under MLB’s therapeutic-use exemption helped lead the San Francisco Giants to a World Series victory. Huff has been very open about his addiction to Adderall in his book - “Baseball Junkie: The Rise, Fall, and Redemption of a World Series Champion”. About Adderall, Huff said, “I think in a lot of ways, Adderall is more potent than any steroid you can take because, as you know, baseball is a game of mental toughness, and Adderall gets into your head and makes you feel invincible”.

[PeteD]

yeah...i guess the whole juicer issue is a mute point since Big Poppy got in.

[abaseballjunkie]

Originally Posted by daveyc1

Both Bonds and Sheffield admitted.

Bonds admitted PED use? Where? You might be confusing him with Big Mac or Sosa?

[Handsome Wes]

Originally Posted by DetroitTN

Put them all in. Stop with the petty votes

funny how no other sport deals with this

they've inducted far more scallywags who've committed far greater sins than baseball players on the outside of Cooperstown and no on bats an eye

it's only the baseball scolds who sniff their own farts that have a problem