“Harold Baines was on the ballot as recently as 2011 and received 4.8% of the vote. It was his fifth straight year with a vote total below 10%. Why, just seven years later, do 16 people get to decide that he's now a Hall of Famer when 95.2% of the voters didn't think he was one?“
- Aaron Gleeman, editor-in-chief, Baseball Prospectus
I couldn’t have said it any better myself, Aaron. While both of these players were very good, neither belongs among the legends of the game. Just because other very good players have unfortunately made it in doesn’t mean we have to let them all in now.
@TNP777 said:
“Harold Baines was on the ballot as recently as 2011 and received 4.8% of the vote. It was his fifth straight year with a vote total below 10%. Why, just seven years later, do 16 people get to decide that he's now a Hall of Famer when 95.2% of the voters didn't think he was one?“
- Aaron Gleeman, editor-in-chief, Baseball Prospectus
I couldn’t have said it any better myself, Aaron. While both of these players were very good, neither belongs among the legends of the game. Just because other very good players have unfortunately made it in doesn’t mean we have to let them all in now.
Yes, neither Baines nor Smith will be the worst player in the Hall, but that shouldn't be the criteria.
@TNP777 said:
“Harold Baines was on the ballot as recently as 2011 and received 4.8% of the vote. It was his fifth straight year with a vote total below 10%. Why, just seven years later, do 16 people get to decide that he's now a Hall of Famer when 95.2% of the voters didn't think he was one?“
- Aaron Gleeman, editor-in-chief, Baseball Prospectus
I couldn’t have said it any better myself, Aaron. While both of these players were very good, neither belongs among the legends of the game. Just because other very good players have unfortunately made it in doesn’t mean we have to let them all in now.
Well stated.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Smith was number 1 in saves when he retired, so yes he deserves. The inclusion of Baines shocks me. Zero 200 hit seasons, Zero plus 30 HR seasons, 3 100+ RBI Seasons out of 20 seasons, never led the league in anything except SLG once, -19.5 Defensive WAR, cracked an offensive WAR of 4+ once. Maybe the committee thinks they have to put someone in, even if their is no worthy or borderline candidate?
@phelda said:
Smith was number 1 in saves when he retired, so yes he deserves. The inclusion of Baines shocks me. Zero 200 hit seasons, Zero plus 30 HR seasons, 3 100+ RBI Seasons out of 20 seasons, never led the league in anything except SLG once, -19.5 Defensive WAR, cracked an offensive WAR of 4+ once. Maybe the committee thinks they have to put someone in, even if their is no worthy or borderline candidate?
He’s a longevity HOF’er I guess. He hit 20 plus dingers in 12 different seasons and squeezed out 20 plus doubles 14 times. He’s the perfect example of why Mattingly a player who had much more impressive seasons for a short spell isn’t in. He got big time hurt. Baines didn’t.
Probably opens the door for a lot of players. Next year the Modern Baseball Era comes up again for Veteran's Committee election, players on the Modern Baseball Era from 2017 that didn't get elected include: Don Mattingly, Steve Garvey, Dave Parker, Ted Simmons, Tommy John, Luis Tiant and Tommy John. If you're a fan of one of these players, you have to feel good about their chances (assuming they get put on the ballot again).
@phelda said:
Smith was number 1 in saves when he retired, so yes he deserves. The inclusion of Baines shocks me. Zero 200 hit seasons, Zero plus 30 HR seasons, 3 100+ RBI Seasons out of 20 seasons, never led the league in anything except SLG once, -19.5 Defensive WAR, cracked an offensive WAR of 4+ once. Maybe the committee thinks they have to put someone in, even if their is no worthy or borderline candidate?
I gotta be honest, I think both of these are terrible selections. Bruce Sutter was better than Smith and HE was a bad selection. And Baines? Am told he's a super, super-nice guy. And that's wonderful. And he was a nice player. And played a long time. But c'mon - no one thought they were watching a great player when they were watching Harold.
Lee Smith was long over due. I would have to agree with Softparade regarding Smith. He was the pioneer of the modern closer and did retire as the all-time saves leader. With Harold Baines, I believe the voters were thinking something similar. He was a pioneer of the modern DH role.
This does not mean that the floodgates are open and even more players will get in. We have to look at the context of baseball history. The numbers are one part of it, but there is also the historical significance of a player and other nuances that do not get realized until long after a player retires. Lee Smith defined the modern closer's role. Harold Baines defined the modern DH role as a legitimate position on the team and not an ad hoc role for aging veterans or injured players.
"So many of our DREAMS at first seem impossible, then they seem improbable, and then, when we SUMMON THE WILL they soon become INEVITABLE "- Christopher Reeve
"Baines defined the modern DH role as a legitimate position on the team and not an ad hoc role for aging veterans or injured players."
No actually if we are degerming one player it is Edgar Martinez (next year? I think so) .. The role is named after him now.
I can faintly see Smith getting in. Baines....well the limbo pole jus got lowered to earthworms.
I found a RC of him in a PSA 8 in my PSA junk pile so I at least don't have to waste any money for my RC set.
Collecting PSA... FB,BK,HK,and BB HOF RC sets 1948-76 Topps FB Sets FB & BB HOF Player sets 1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
these two, coupled with Morris last year are not good looks for the hall of fame. I have to say, it seems, Simmons, Mattingly, Hernandez, Mcgriff and some others should all be getting in now.
for me, Belle and Clark would have both been better choices.
@phelda said:
Smith was number 1 in saves when he retired, so yes he deserves. The inclusion of Baines shocks me. Zero 200 hit seasons, Zero plus 30 HR seasons, 3 100+ RBI Seasons out of 20 seasons, never led the league in anything except SLG once, -19.5 Defensive WAR, cracked an offensive WAR of 4+ once. Maybe the committee thinks they have to put someone in, even if their is no worthy or borderline candidate?
I gotta be honest, I think both of these are terrible selections. Bruce Sutter was better than Smith and HE was a bad selection. And Baines? Am told he's a super, super-nice guy. And that's wonderful. And he was a nice player. And played a long time. But c'mon - no one thought they were watching a great player when they were watching Harold.
Rivera obviously makes it, and I'm alright with Eckersley being in too. Take the middle group of Fingers, Wilhelm, Trevor Hoffman and Goose out of your mind for a bit, and I feel like there's a pretty far gap between Rivera/Eck vs. Sutts/Smith
@craig44 said:
these two, coupled with Morris last year are not good looks for the hall of fame. I have to say, it seems, Simmons, Mattingly, Hernandez, Mcgriff and some others should all be getting in now.
for me, Belle and Clark would have both been better choices.
Yes, Baines was very good. His longevity helped him get in.
Yes, there more deserving, more talented, more dominant players not in the Hall.
I'm not making an argument for why he should be in, I'm just not as disappointed as it seems most are. Some of his stats for reference, taken from whitesox.com:
Baines ranked among major-league leaders in numerous categories from 1980-2001, including third in RBI and total bases (4,604), fifth in extra-base hits (921), sixth in hits and tied for sixth in doubles. The only other player to rank in the Top 6 of all these categories during that span was Hall-of-Famer Cal Ripken Jr.
The left-handed Baines is the only player in major-league history to make 1,000 appearances as a designated hitter and play at least 1,000 games at another position. He ranks all-time among designated hitters in games (2nd, 1,643), hits (2nd, 1,690), runs (3rd, 771), RBI (3rd, 981), doubles (4th, 293) and home runs (4th, 236). Baines is a two-time Designated Hitter of the Year Award winner (1987-88), now called the Edgar Martinez Award.
Baines ranks sixth in the American League since 1974 with 197 game-winning RBI and 401 go-ahead RBI. He owns a career .306 (1,398-4,573) average with runners on base, 31 points higher when batting with the bases empty (.275) in his career. His 1,398 hits with runners on base are the 10th-most in baseball since 1974.
From 1980-99, Baines ranked in the Top 5 in RBI (2nd, 1,583), total bases (3rd, 4,474), extra-base hits (4th, 896), hits (5th, 2,783) and doubles (5th, 474). The only other players to record more hits than Baines during that span were Hall-of-Famers Tony Gwynn, Wade Boggs, Ripken Jr. and Paul Molitor. In his first 20 major-league seasons, Baines recorded at least 115 hits 17 times.
"Imagine if we now had to put every player better than Harold Baines in Cooperstown. Well, not Cooperstown… they wouldn’t all fit in Cooperstown.
— Matthew Pouliot (@matthewpouliot)"
""""Baines defined the modern DH role as a legitimate position on the team and not an ad hoc role for aging veterans or injured players."
"No actually if we are degerming one player it is Edgar Martinez (next year? I think so) .. The role is named after him now.
I can faintly see Smith getting in. Baines....well the limbo pole jus got lowered to earthworms.
I found a RC of him in a PSA 8 in my PSA junk pile so I at least don't have to waste any money for my RC set.""""
Edgar Martinez was arguably the best DH (though David Ortiz fans may disagree) which is why there's an award for outstanding DH named after him but he wasn't the one that defined the modern DH role as a legitimate position. That was Harold Baines.
It's no different than the best relief pitcher awards are named after Mariano Rivera and Trevor Hoffman even though Rollie Fingers, Goose Gossage and Bruce Sutter helped define the modern closer role.
@waxman2745 said:
This should (hopefully) open the door for Vada Pinson, an outstanding player who was overshadowed by the superstars of his era.
To me, this is exactly why letting guys like Baines, Trammell, Whitaker and others in is such a bad thing. Pinson, like the aforementioned three players, was very good. Transcendent? Not. Even. Close.
Baines, in the five years he was on the ballot before fell off, never received more than 6.1% of the vote. But now he's worthy of baseball immortality? Hell to the no.
Let me repeat that for the people in the back of the room: HAROLD BAINES NEVER RECEIVED MORE THAN 6.1% OF THE VOTE FROM THE BBWAA BEFORE HE FELL OFF THE BALLOT IN JUST FIVE YEARS.
There's a reason that guys like Pinson, Mattingly, Gil Hodges Garvey, Dave Parker, and yes, even Dale Murphy, aren't in the Hall of Fame. They simply weren't good enough. I mean, if Mattingly hadn't been a Yankee, but toiled his entire career in San Diego - would there ever have been a conversation about him?
eta: understand that I'm not picking on Pinson here. He was mentioned, so I went off of that. For reference, though, he was on the BBWAA ballot for 15 years - he never received more than 15.7% of the vote.
Steve Garvey: 15 ballots, highest vote total 42.6%
Dale Murphy: 15 ballots, highest vote total 23.2%
Gil Hodges: 15 ballots, highest vote total 63.4% (his last year on the ballot)
Don Mattingly: 15 ballots, highest vote total 28.2% (his first year on the ballot)
and to prove a point:
Alan Trammell: 15 ballots, highest vote total 40.9% (his last year on the ballot - elected by Veteran's Committee)
""""@waxman2745 said:
This should (hopefully) open the door for Vada Pinson, an outstanding player who was overshadowed by the superstars of his era.
To me, this is exactly why letting guys like Baines, Trammell, Whitaker and others in is such a bad thing. Pinson, like the aforementioned three players, was very good. Transcendent? Not. Even. Close.
Baines, in the five years he was on the ballot before fell off, never received more than 6.1% of the vote. But now he's worthy of baseball immortality? Hell to the no.
Let me repeat that for the people in the back of the room: HAROLD BAINES NEVER RECEIVED MORE THAN 6.1% OF THE VOTE FROM THE BBWAA BEFORE HE FELL OFF THE BALLOT IN JUST FIVE YEARS.
There's a reason that guys like Pinson, Mattingly, Gil Hodges Garvey, Dave Parker, and yes, even Dale Murphy, aren't in the Hall of Fame. They simply weren't good enough. I mean, if Mattingly hadn't been a Yankee, but toiled his entire career in San Diego - would there ever have been a conversation about him?"""""
I'd argue that there's a reason that guys like Pinson, Mattingly, Gil Hodges, Garvey, Dave Parker, and Dale Murphy aren't in the Hall of Fame and it's the Baseball Writers stringent voting process (which makes sense for a candidate's first go around).
The veteran's committee is different. Benchmark statistics and sabermetrics have never been used as the sole model for determining their candidates and who gets elected which is why the players listed above may eventually get inducted (otherwise what's the point of the veteran's committee to begin with)? Just as players like Satchel Paige, Sam Crawford, Freddie Lindstrom, Larry Doby, Jack Chesbro, Amos Rusie and Kid Nichols who never received more than 6.1% from the BBWAA were eventually inducted through the veteran's committee.
@miwlvrn said:
I saw this comment reposted in an article today:
"Imagine if we now had to put every player better than Harold Baines in Cooperstown. Well, not Cooperstown… they wouldn’t all fit in Cooperstown.
— Matthew Pouliot (@matthewpouliot)"
Same pencil pusher that probably voted against Griffey. Why would Griffey not have be 100 percent ?
Why wont Mariano Get 100 percent ? Why is there always a dimwit....
Here are two widely-mentioned sentimental fan favorites ballot results:
Ted Simmons: he was on the ballot ONCE, getting 3.7% of the vote, meaning he couldn't get on the ballot the next year
Lou Whitaker: on the ballot once, getting 2.9% of the vote - see note on Simmons above
If they couldn't muster more than the necessary 5% of the vote to get on the next ballot - in their first year of eligibility - maybe, just maybe, they don't belong.
Look, I get that people want "their guy" in the Hall. The sentimental Dodgers fan in me would LOVE to see Garvey and Hodges get in. Trouble is, they just weren't good enough. If they were, they'd already be in.
@rbsalezman said:
I'd argue that there's a reason that guys like Pinson, Mattingly, Gil Hodges, Garvey, Dave Parker, and Dale Murphy aren't in the Hall of Fame and it's the Baseball Writers stringent voting process (which makes sense for a candidate's first go around).
I haven’t checked Parker, but those other guys didn’t have just one go-around. They had 15 of them. And as mentioned above, Ted Simmons and Lou Whitaker couldn’t even muster 5% on their first ballot, yet people still clamor for their inclusion.
Poppycock.
And now excuse me while I go outside and yell at that damn cloud.
"Here comes Roger Maris. And they're standing up, waiting to see if Maris is going to hit number sixty-one. Here's the windup, the pitch to Roger, way outside, ball one. And the fans are starting to boo. Maris only has, including this time, three times at bat, and unless the Yankees get a rally, that's all he'll have to try and get number sixty-one on the year. The windup, the pitch, low, ball two. That one was in the dirt. And the boos get louder. Two balls, no strikes on Roger Maris. Here's the windup, fastball, HIT DEEP TO RIGHT, THIS COULD BE IT, WAY BACK THERE, HOLY COW, HE DID IT, SIXTY-ONE for Maris! They're having a fight for the ball out there. Holy cow."
Kiss me once, shame on you. Kiss me twice.....let's party.
Comments
Sadly, the HOF has become the hall of pretty good.
“Harold Baines was on the ballot as recently as 2011 and received 4.8% of the vote. It was his fifth straight year with a vote total below 10%. Why, just seven years later, do 16 people get to decide that he's now a Hall of Famer when 95.2% of the voters didn't think he was one?“
- Aaron Gleeman, editor-in-chief, Baseball Prospectus
I couldn’t have said it any better myself, Aaron. While both of these players were very good, neither belongs among the legends of the game. Just because other very good players have unfortunately made it in doesn’t mean we have to let them all in now.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
I’d take Hershiser, who was also on the ballot, over either one of them.
Yes, neither Baines nor Smith will be the worst player in the Hall, but that shouldn't be the criteria.
Well stated.
Collecting 1970s Topps baseball wax, rack and cello packs, as well as PCGS graded Half Cents, Large Cents, Two Cent pieces and Three Cent Silver pieces.
Lee Smith was a pioneer at his position as a early modern day closer. He belongs. Harold Baines was a very nice hitter in a sea of them. Meh.
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
Definitely an inner and outer ring. Tommy McCarthy clapping and George Van Haltren still rolling in his grave.
Smith was number 1 in saves when he retired, so yes he deserves. The inclusion of Baines shocks me. Zero 200 hit seasons, Zero plus 30 HR seasons, 3 100+ RBI Seasons out of 20 seasons, never led the league in anything except SLG once, -19.5 Defensive WAR, cracked an offensive WAR of 4+ once. Maybe the committee thinks they have to put someone in, even if their is no worthy or borderline candidate?
He’s a longevity HOF’er I guess. He hit 20 plus dingers in 12 different seasons and squeezed out 20 plus doubles 14 times. He’s the perfect example of why Mattingly a player who had much more impressive seasons for a short spell isn’t in. He got big time hurt. Baines didn’t.
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
"I wasn't expecting this day to come," the six-time All-Star said.
"Shocked"
Both are quotes from Harold Baines himself
https://www.google.com/amp/s/articles.newyorkupstate.com/sports/2018/12/lee_smith_harold_baines_elected_to_baseball_hall_of_fame.amp
buying O-Pee-Chee (OPC) baseball
Neither was anyone else, Harold.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
Wow! I do not even know what to say. Time to rethink these new committees.
Does this open the door for Donnie Baseball?
Thanks,
David (LD_Ferg)
1985 Topps Football (starting in psa 8) - #9 - started 05/21/06
Probably opens the door for a lot of players. Next year the Modern Baseball Era comes up again for Veteran's Committee election, players on the Modern Baseball Era from 2017 that didn't get elected include: Don Mattingly, Steve Garvey, Dave Parker, Ted Simmons, Tommy John, Luis Tiant and Tommy John. If you're a fan of one of these players, you have to feel good about their chances (assuming they get put on the ballot again).
I gotta be honest, I think both of these are terrible selections. Bruce Sutter was better than Smith and HE was a bad selection. And Baines? Am told he's a super, super-nice guy. And that's wonderful. And he was a nice player. And played a long time. But c'mon - no one thought they were watching a great player when they were watching Harold.
So it's come to this?
Lee Smith was long over due. I would have to agree with Softparade regarding Smith. He was the pioneer of the modern closer and did retire as the all-time saves leader. With Harold Baines, I believe the voters were thinking something similar. He was a pioneer of the modern DH role.
This does not mean that the floodgates are open and even more players will get in. We have to look at the context of baseball history. The numbers are one part of it, but there is also the historical significance of a player and other nuances that do not get realized until long after a player retires. Lee Smith defined the modern closer's role. Harold Baines defined the modern DH role as a legitimate position on the team and not an ad hoc role for aging veterans or injured players.
BST: Tennessebanker, Downtown1974, LarkinCollector, nendee
Maybe add Munson to the possible list too....
They're almost as bad as the college football playoff committee
IT CAN'T BE A TRUE PLAYOFF UNLESS THE BIG TEN CHAMPIONS ARE INCLUDED
"Baines defined the modern DH role as a legitimate position on the team and not an ad hoc role for aging veterans or injured players."
No actually if we are degerming one player it is Edgar Martinez (next year? I think so) .. The role is named after him now.
I can faintly see Smith getting in. Baines....well the limbo pole jus got lowered to earthworms.
I found a RC of him in a PSA 8 in my PSA junk pile so I at least don't have to waste any money for my RC set.
1948-76 Topps FB Sets
FB & BB HOF Player sets
1948-1993 NY Yankee Team Sets
and yet Gil Hodges is STILL not included in the HOF.
That’s a disgrace.
Dave
Harold Baines and not Fred mcgriff? And while were at it lets get Keith Hernandez in there already and stop the nonsense
these two, coupled with Morris last year are not good looks for the hall of fame. I have to say, it seems, Simmons, Mattingly, Hernandez, Mcgriff and some others should all be getting in now.
for me, Belle and Clark would have both been better choices.
Harold Baines though..... Ugh.
George Brett, Roger Clemens and Tommy Brady.
Tony Oliva over Baines as well!!!!
Well, Baines getting in sure makes all the discussion over Trammell & Morris seem relatively silly now, doesn't it?
Rivera obviously makes it, and I'm alright with Eckersley being in too. Take the middle group of Fingers, Wilhelm, Trevor Hoffman and Goose out of your mind for a bit, and I feel like there's a pretty far gap between Rivera/Eck vs. Sutts/Smith
Good point about albert belle
Yes, Baines was very good. His longevity helped him get in.
Yes, there more deserving, more talented, more dominant players not in the Hall.
I'm not making an argument for why he should be in, I'm just not as disappointed as it seems most are. Some of his stats for reference, taken from whitesox.com:
Baines ranked among major-league leaders in numerous categories from 1980-2001, including third in RBI and total bases (4,604), fifth in extra-base hits (921), sixth in hits and tied for sixth in doubles. The only other player to rank in the Top 6 of all these categories during that span was Hall-of-Famer Cal Ripken Jr.
The left-handed Baines is the only player in major-league history to make 1,000 appearances as a designated hitter and play at least 1,000 games at another position. He ranks all-time among designated hitters in games (2nd, 1,643), hits (2nd, 1,690), runs (3rd, 771), RBI (3rd, 981), doubles (4th, 293) and home runs (4th, 236). Baines is a two-time Designated Hitter of the Year Award winner (1987-88), now called the Edgar Martinez Award.
Baines ranks sixth in the American League since 1974 with 197 game-winning RBI and 401 go-ahead RBI. He owns a career .306 (1,398-4,573) average with runners on base, 31 points higher when batting with the bases empty (.275) in his career. His 1,398 hits with runners on base are the 10th-most in baseball since 1974.
From 1980-99, Baines ranked in the Top 5 in RBI (2nd, 1,583), total bases (3rd, 4,474), extra-base hits (4th, 896), hits (5th, 2,783) and doubles (5th, 474). The only other players to record more hits than Baines during that span were Hall-of-Famers Tony Gwynn, Wade Boggs, Ripken Jr. and Paul Molitor. In his first 20 major-league seasons, Baines recorded at least 115 hits 17 times.
Please add Dale Murphy to the list of same era, better players not in HoF
if Baines was a Yankee with 2866 hits , we would not be having this conversation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_from_Panama
lol Truth and I'm a Yankee fan
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
Let em all in. The hall of the not so great
I saw this comment reposted in an article today:
"Imagine if we now had to put every player better than Harold Baines in Cooperstown. Well, not Cooperstown… they wouldn’t all fit in Cooperstown.
— Matthew Pouliot (@matthewpouliot)"
This should (hopefully) open the door for Vada Pinson, an outstanding player who was overshadowed by the superstars of his era.
buying O-Pee-Chee (OPC) baseball
""""Baines defined the modern DH role as a legitimate position on the team and not an ad hoc role for aging veterans or injured players."
"No actually if we are degerming one player it is Edgar Martinez (next year? I think so) .. The role is named after him now.
I can faintly see Smith getting in. Baines....well the limbo pole jus got lowered to earthworms.
I found a RC of him in a PSA 8 in my PSA junk pile so I at least don't have to waste any money for my RC set.""""
Edgar Martinez was arguably the best DH (though David Ortiz fans may disagree) which is why there's an award for outstanding DH named after him but he wasn't the one that defined the modern DH role as a legitimate position. That was Harold Baines.
It's no different than the best relief pitcher awards are named after Mariano Rivera and Trevor Hoffman even though Rollie Fingers, Goose Gossage and Bruce Sutter helped define the modern closer role.
To me, this is exactly why letting guys like Baines, Trammell, Whitaker and others in is such a bad thing. Pinson, like the aforementioned three players, was very good. Transcendent? Not. Even. Close.
Baines, in the five years he was on the ballot before fell off, never received more than 6.1% of the vote. But now he's worthy of baseball immortality? Hell to the no.
Let me repeat that for the people in the back of the room: HAROLD BAINES NEVER RECEIVED MORE THAN 6.1% OF THE VOTE FROM THE BBWAA BEFORE HE FELL OFF THE BALLOT IN JUST FIVE YEARS.
There's a reason that guys like Pinson, Mattingly, Gil Hodges Garvey, Dave Parker, and yes, even Dale Murphy, aren't in the Hall of Fame. They simply weren't good enough. I mean, if Mattingly hadn't been a Yankee, but toiled his entire career in San Diego - would there ever have been a conversation about him?
eta: understand that I'm not picking on Pinson here. He was mentioned, so I went off of that. For reference, though, he was on the BBWAA ballot for 15 years - he never received more than 15.7% of the vote.
Steve Garvey: 15 ballots, highest vote total 42.6%
Dale Murphy: 15 ballots, highest vote total 23.2%
Gil Hodges: 15 ballots, highest vote total 63.4% (his last year on the ballot)
Don Mattingly: 15 ballots, highest vote total 28.2% (his first year on the ballot)
and to prove a point:
Alan Trammell: 15 ballots, highest vote total 40.9% (his last year on the ballot - elected by Veteran's Committee)
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
While we are at it .... Why is Tim Raines in the HOF? I mean ...... good career. Stole a ton of bases. Rickey stole 598 more.
But HOF? Man ...
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
""""@waxman2745 said:
This should (hopefully) open the door for Vada Pinson, an outstanding player who was overshadowed by the superstars of his era.
To me, this is exactly why letting guys like Baines, Trammell, Whitaker and others in is such a bad thing. Pinson, like the aforementioned three players, was very good. Transcendent? Not. Even. Close.
Baines, in the five years he was on the ballot before fell off, never received more than 6.1% of the vote. But now he's worthy of baseball immortality? Hell to the no.
Let me repeat that for the people in the back of the room: HAROLD BAINES NEVER RECEIVED MORE THAN 6.1% OF THE VOTE FROM THE BBWAA BEFORE HE FELL OFF THE BALLOT IN JUST FIVE YEARS.
There's a reason that guys like Pinson, Mattingly, Gil Hodges Garvey, Dave Parker, and yes, even Dale Murphy, aren't in the Hall of Fame. They simply weren't good enough. I mean, if Mattingly hadn't been a Yankee, but toiled his entire career in San Diego - would there ever have been a conversation about him?"""""
I'd argue that there's a reason that guys like Pinson, Mattingly, Gil Hodges, Garvey, Dave Parker, and Dale Murphy aren't in the Hall of Fame and it's the Baseball Writers stringent voting process (which makes sense for a candidate's first go around).
The veteran's committee is different. Benchmark statistics and sabermetrics have never been used as the sole model for determining their candidates and who gets elected which is why the players listed above may eventually get inducted (otherwise what's the point of the veteran's committee to begin with)? Just as players like Satchel Paige, Sam Crawford, Freddie Lindstrom, Larry Doby, Jack Chesbro, Amos Rusie and Kid Nichols who never received more than 6.1% from the BBWAA were eventually inducted through the veteran's committee.
Same pencil pusher that probably voted against Griffey. Why would Griffey not have be 100 percent ?
Why wont Mariano Get 100 percent ? Why is there always a dimwit....
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_from_Panama
ELECT MINNI MINOSO
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_from_Panama
Here are two widely-mentioned sentimental fan favorites ballot results:
Ted Simmons: he was on the ballot ONCE, getting 3.7% of the vote, meaning he couldn't get on the ballot the next year
Lou Whitaker: on the ballot once, getting 2.9% of the vote - see note on Simmons above
If they couldn't muster more than the necessary 5% of the vote to get on the next ballot - in their first year of eligibility - maybe, just maybe, they don't belong.
Look, I get that people want "their guy" in the Hall. The sentimental Dodgers fan in me would LOVE to see Garvey and Hodges get in. Trouble is, they just weren't good enough. If they were, they'd already be in.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
Tim Raines was a white SOx for 5 years
The white sox are getting all their guys in.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_from_Panama
there is Hope for Carlos Lee
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Major_League_Baseball_players_from_Panama
I haven’t checked Parker, but those other guys didn’t have just one go-around. They had 15 of them. And as mentioned above, Ted Simmons and Lou Whitaker couldn’t even muster 5% on their first ballot, yet people still clamor for their inclusion.
Poppycock.
And now excuse me while I go outside and yell at that damn cloud.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
Freddie Patek belongs
ISO 1978 Topps Baseball in NM-MT High Grade Raw 3, 100, 103, 302, 347, 376, 416, 466, 481, 487, 509, 534, 540, 554, 579, 580, 622, 642, 673, 724__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ISO 1978 O-Pee-Chee in NM-MT High Grade Raw12, 21, 29, 38, 49, 65, 69, 73, 74, 81, 95, 100, 104, 110, 115, 122, 132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 151, 153, 155, 160, 161, 167, 168, 172, 179, 181, 196, 200, 204, 210, 224, 231, 240
Bert Blyleven had a vote for Smith and Baines. If there was one guy I could kick out of the Hall, it would be Bert.
+1
buying O-Pee-Chee (OPC) baseball
Dan, not before Mario Mendoza.
I would maybe change it to the Hall of He Played A Long Time.
Dodgers collection scans | Brett Butler registry | 1978 Dodgers - straight 9s, homie
So you're saying Chris Speier has a chance?
ETA: *** rapidly stocking up on high grade 72T Speier RCs ***
"Here comes Roger Maris. And they're standing up, waiting to see if Maris is going to hit number sixty-one. Here's the windup, the pitch to Roger, way outside, ball one. And the fans are starting to boo. Maris only has, including this time, three times at bat, and unless the Yankees get a rally, that's all he'll have to try and get number sixty-one on the year. The windup, the pitch, low, ball two. That one was in the dirt. And the boos get louder. Two balls, no strikes on Roger Maris. Here's the windup, fastball, HIT DEEP TO RIGHT, THIS COULD BE IT, WAY BACK THERE, HOLY COW, HE DID IT, SIXTY-ONE for Maris! They're having a fight for the ball out there. Holy cow."
Kiss me twice.....let's party.