Options
joey votto HOF chances
lwehlers
Posts: 868 ✭✭✭✭✭
i was looking through my rookie card plastic tote that i have all of my graded rookies that are not on display and i forgot i had a joey votto bowman chrome rookie. does he have enough numbers to be considered for the hall of fame. he is getting up in age so he really does not have alot of years in him. votto has been putting up some great numbers this year and in the last month.
0
Comments
I was just thinking about that and had just looked up his career stats. His lifetime BA is .303, he's had 314 HRs, and will soon have 2,000 hits. But, he has fallen on hard times the last few years with BAs well below .300.
Always looking for Mantle cards such as Stahl Meyer, 1954 Dan Dee, 1959 Bazooka, 1960 Post, 1952 Star Cal Decal, 1952 Tip Top Bread Labels, 1953-54 Briggs Meat, and other Topps, Bowman, and oddball Mantles.
He's been on fire this month!
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.
kind of late starter in his career. last year did not help his career numbers as did alot of veteran players on the end of there careers. he might have to wait for maybe a veteran committe.
If voters look at triple crown stats and stop there, his chances aren't very good. But, if they look at the stats they should look at, his chances are very good. Votto led the league in OBP 7 times and he's a top 50 all-time hitter in Win Probability Added, OPS+, OBP, Batter Runs, and several other categories. He has no fielding value, but he's one of the top 100 hitters of all-time, and probably one of the top 100 players of all-time. The HOF is a lot bigger than that, so he should get in.
I agree with the gist of what dallassanctuary wrote there. It all sort of depends on what the voting pool looks like when he becomes eligible. That's 5+ years down the pike, so that's hard to gauge. TheBBWAA group gets a little younger each year and his rate stats (which lots of younger writers prize) are elite. His counting stats, which older writers tend to value, are short.
If Votto were being voted on based on his production from the past week, he'd be a slam dunk first-ballot player! Overall, though, the power just dropped too far too fast for him to make the HOF. Definitely an excellent player, though.
Lifetime 300/400/500 player with a .946 OPS and a 148 OPS+.
Bet on it!
Good chance. Might have to wait a while.
I think he will get in, but he will have to wait a long time.
The thing is, the BBWAA can be very difficult unless you're a dominating superstar (for example, the superior Lou Whitaker and the far superior Bobby Grich didn't even earn a second ballot), and the various committees are extremely unpredictable. There are at least fifty starting pitchers who should have gone in before Jack Morris was considered. Most of them, like Jon Matlack, Camilo Pascual, or Steve Rogers, have no business there, either. You can make the same argument for corner infielders/outfielders and Harold Baines.
He's one of the very, very few current players I like enough to keep track of and consider picking up some RC's. Best season since 2017. Upper 30's though so who knows when he hits the cliff for good. He's got a shot after he's off the regular HOF ballot, but, he's really similar to a lot of backlogged guys on the various Vet ballots. He has no shot in my opinion right now of going in by regular vote.
Just off of the top on my head Dave Parker and Dwight Evans belong in before Votto in my opinion.
Votto has had a really nice career but 315 homers is a really low number for a 1B in the modern era. 30 homers only twice but 29 three times. I dunno, just doesn't "feel" like a HOFer to me.
maybe al oliver, tommy john too
I don’t think he ever gets in the HOF. Not enough of any one milestone like 3k hits or 500 homers in either category that are shoe in stats. A nice career average. He is a very good MLB, but not hall worthy.
Votto is far, far better than Oliver, John, or Parker ever were, though I think John belongs in the builders wing. Evans is a much closer case, though I prefer Votto. I don't think Votto would be close to the worst omission, I think he's far more deserving than those two. Oliver should be compared to the likes of Lenny Dykstra, not Votto.
I don’t think Votto is a far better than Parker. Parker has about 800 more hits, 20 homers and a .290 avg.
No doubt about it. Parker played longer than Votto has so far. 730 more hits in 2818 more at bats. 20 more home runs in 2818 at bats is embarrassing, not a reason to support Parker. I'm not a fan of using raw numbers to compare players on different teams, much less across eras, but even raw numbers don't support Parker. .290 batting average to .303 but .339 OBP to .418 and .471 slugging percentage to .519. A "one size fits all" number is OPS+, which isn't determinative but it is indicative. Parker's was 121, Votto's 148. Have to be an awful lot better at an awful lot of other things to close that gap. Neither was a good baserunner, but Votto appears to be a better fielder than Parker was. So a vastly superior hitter, slightly better fielder, and about equal baserunner. That says far, far better to me.
Batting average measures something, but what it measures isn't terribly important. In on-base percentage, Votto absolutely destroys Parker, .418 to .339. .339 is about average, .418 is the 24th best of all time. They're closer in slugging but Votto still wins handily, .519 to .471.
Dave Parker would not be anywhere near the worst player in the HOF, and he is, by far, better than the other 1978 MVP who is already in the Hall. It wouldn't bother me at all if Dave Parker got in. Joey Votto was far better.
The free swinging Puerto Ricans I played with used to justify swinging at everything by saying “you can’t walk your way off the island.” With what may end up being a relative lack of triple crown stats, I’m not sure Votto is going to be able to walk his way to the Hall of Fame, but it will be an interesting test case for how newer voters are going to look at players. I would put him in.
He's a stone cold lock for the HOF.
The newer voters aren't going to worry souch about the same types of counting stats as the older generations.
Go look at the top 25 career leaders in obp and there's only a few pictures on baseball reference that are in color. Votto being one of the top 25.
Hall of Very Good
Shane
Terrific player. He needs more stats/time.
In an alternate universe, there's a solid argument for that. But the HOF we have in this one has more first basemen in it who weren't as good as Votto than first basemen who were better than Votto.
On the JAWS list, the only first basemen above Votto who aren't in the HOF are Pujos (HOF lock), Cabrera (HOF lock), and Palmeiro (would have been a HOF lock except for the cheating). Below him are McCovey, Murray, Greenberg, Sisler, Killebrew, Perez, Cepeda, and most of the old-timers.
Yes, a lot of Votto's value is in his walks and he'll probably have to wait awhile because of that. But as the voters who don't understand how valuable walks are retire and get replaced by more knowledgeable voters I think his chances are very good.
@dallasactuary all that may very well be true but they (BBWA) don't look at it like that. His raw glamour stats just won't jump off the page. Andrés Galarraga has as good if maybe better glamour stats then Votto. I don't think Votto will get over 50% of the vote his first few years of eligibility.
m
Fellas, leave the tight pants to the ladies. If I can count the coins in your pockets you better use them to call a tailor. Stay thirsty my friends......
I think he gets in. Not first ballot most certainly, but eventually. As Dallas mentioned above, it really does all come down to how much value you place on walks when looking at his numbers. While walks definitely play a bigger role in the new age stats compared to the old, Votto’s case is somewhat extreme. His OBP and Slugging are just too good to be denied. Not to mention that he has the career .300+ BA to which is very impressive even by old school standards.
Doesn’t everyone now get in the Hall?
Agree. I look at batting average and then immediately look to slugging percentage. If BA is around .300 and SLG is around .500 you have a superior hitter. His OBP is superb and he bats third in the order, so if he doesn't get a good pitch to drive, he gets on base for the clean up guy. Scores and drives in 95 and 90 runs per 162 games and that's as much as Al Kaline.
The concern here (for me) is that Votto has about 8 fantastic years and from 2018-2020 his SLG really dropped. He seems to have made a nice comeback this year. A lot of hitters seem to be done by age 39 and Joe is going to be 38 this year.
I didn't realize he didn't get to the majors full-time until he was 24, that's going to hurt him.
He needs to finish this year strong and have a couple more real nice years (or several good ones) to merit HOF inclusion.
1900 games played is a little low. If he can play a while longer and not have his numbers drop significantly he should be a LOCK!
The DH position could be a key.
It’s a pretty solid argument. But I don’t think Ferris Fain or Max Bishop should be in the Hall either. Both also top 25.
Votto is a really good player. Really, really good. Better than several in the Hall already. I’m just annoyed that the bar has gotten so low. I’m one of the biggest Sox fans on this board and I cringe whenever I hear Dwight Evans. I mean, we aren’t talking about all time greats here.
But walking was the only skill Fain or Bishop had. Add that skill to being a significantly better slugger than Dave Parker and the result is an all-time great hitter.
In OPS+ - always the first, often the only, stat you should be looking at - Votto is 44th all-time. He ranks between Bagwell and Stargell and he's tied with Schmidt.
In Win Probability Added - a measure of clutch hitting - he's 39th all time, sandwiched right between Brett and Murray and well ahead of Reggie!, Duke Snider, Junior Griffey, and most of the rest of the HOF.
The dinosaurs who still vote for the HOF don't understand how walks lead to runs, and how runs lead to wins. The younger voters do understand. When the dinosaur ratio gets low enough, or later when Votto gets voted on by a committee of non-dinosaurs, he'll get in the HOF. He deserves it.
"I’m one of the biggest Sox fans on this board and I cringe whenever I hear Dwight Evans. I mean, we aren’t talking about all time greats here."
From a Jay Jaffe article in 2019...
Even taking full careers into account, Evans’ 127 OPS+ is one point below Rice, equal to Henderson, and ahead of Puckett (124), Raines (123), Molitor (122), Baines (121), Dawson (117), Fisk (117), Gary Carter (115), Ryne Sandberg (114), Alan Trammell (110), and Ozzie Smith (87), the enshrined contemporaries with whom his career overlapped significantly.
Once players like Harold Baines are let in, you have already watered down the Hall, you might as well let the others like Dale Murphy and Dwight Evans in too.
One factor that hasn't been brought up in the thread is the "Face Of The Franchise" factor. Votto has been the face of the Reds for over a decade and has never played anywhere else. That helps with the voters. Is it logical? Maybe not, but since when has HOF voting been strictly logical lol.
Personally, when it's all said & done I think he gets in.
Some of those who have got in recently is a huge and needless cruel slap in the face to those like Tony Oliva. A Class act and Hit raker. Hoping for both him and his family that he gets in before he passes.
Not everyone has a multiple DUI [Factual and PUBLIC RECORD] offender (2007 and 2020) of a manager railing for them to get in like Mr. Baines did.
"I'm hall of famer" cries pathetic Larussa: https://wgntv.com/news/wgn-investigates/a-hall-of-famer-dashcam-footage-of-tony-la-russas-dui-arrest-obtained/
He embarrassed both MLB and the HOF, but yet he gets to Judge decent human beings with great for their time stats as being hall worth our not .
Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.
^ Disclosure: I'm not a Twins fan and Oliva career long over before my time. I own a single Oliva card with a value of about $40 i could not care less if it were to go up even 10 fold in value which it never will. The only reason I even picked up the card was because I like the original Yankee Stadium background behind him.
I simply feel the guy deserves to be in the Hall.
Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.
I saw him play, I was a Killebrew fan, but Oliva was a stud. He hit the ball HARD HARD HARD!
Does that really help when your franchise hasn't been successful and you haven't won even a single playoff series?
My question is more about his cards.
Which would be more desirable? His draft or his RC?
Just curious.
Maybe in Cincinnati, but not nationally.
I think your bias against Rice is unreasonable. Rice was noticeably, if not significantly, better than both Parker and Oliva. None of the three was as good as, say, Jack Clark, who also belongs no where near the HoF. All four are good players, not great. Dozens of better players outside and comparatively few worse inside.
It's time to realize that, while Rice doesn't belong in the HoF, he's not the gross mistake that Morris or Hunter, to name two, are. He's probably not even in the bottom 10%.
One hopes that LaRussa's bad judgment when drinking (i.e. to get behind the wheel of a car) doesn't invalidate his baseball judgment. I'm not about to excuse the selections of the various committees lately and again say that they simply provide more evidence that they should be shut down, with the exception of one meeting every five or ten years solely to consider builders. This said, the embarrassments caused by the various committees lately are absolutely nothing compared to the era when Frisch ruled the (one) Veterans Committee.
I’d agree Rice wouldn’t have gotten my vote either (again, Sox fan here) but he’s nowhere near the floor that’s been set with Baines, etc. I think some voters are swayed by peak dominance, like Rice in 78, but that wouldn’t explain why Dale Murphy is out, so really who knows.
And can we not use Ozzie Smith’s OPS+ as a benchmark for anything. The Wizard deserves to be in the Hall, but it has nothing to do with what he did at the plate. Votto should be compared to 1b/ corner outfielders. The fact that he has a better OPS than 2 of the greatest catchers ever, or the greatest defensive shortstop ever, is irrelevant.
When apples to apples are compared Evans’ 127 OPS+ is one point below Rice, equal to Henderson, and ahead of Puckett (124), Raines (123), Baines (121), Dawson (117).
Also, using the Ozzie Smith fielding arguments let's all remember 8 Gold Gloves for Dewey also.
I'll grant you that Hunter and Morris are next-level travesties. But Rice is still a travesty, and very possibly the least deserving hitter in the HOF elected on the regular ballot. At this point there probably are enough Veteran's Committee picks of less deserving players to lift Rice out of the bottom 10%, which is the greatest travesty of all.
Re Dwight Evans from another poster, you are correct and in fact there is no reasonable argument to be made that Rice was better than Evans. If anyone can't see that, I'd be happy to teach you how baseball works if you ask nicely.
FWIW, career rankings in Win Probability Added:
40 Votto
77 Clark
88 Parker
94 Evans
109 Baines
161 Oliva
180 Rice
OPS+ is a horrible stat to compare dis-similar players who played at different times and even leagues. You're also only measuring offense, there's more to the game.
Puckett got brought up and while his OPS+ isn't that great, he was a tremendous player in pretty much every aspect of the game. Certainly a much better all-around player than Rice! His leadership on those Twins teams was a big reason for their success, you can't measure that!
Kirby was not good at taking the base on balls, so his OPS and OPS+ numbers are a little low. When asked about it he simply said "I ain't up there to walk, I'm up there to hit".
I also don't get the Rice hatred. He was another guy up there who didn't like to walk, but the guy finished with a SLG of over .500 for his career. His career was too short though and he only had 6 HOF (?) years and his final three seasons were pretty bad, that's where he should be "punished".
Puckett's last two years were very good and his injury was what derailed him.
Just out of curiosity, where do you OPS+ guys want to "draw the line" so to speak? 130? 140?
Evans is under rated!
OPS+ is a great stat, as long as it's used properly. First and foremost, as you say, OPS+ only measures what it measures. It only measures offense, obviously, but it also only measures part of offense. It doesn't measure base running, it doesn't measure grounding into double plays, it doesn't measure clutch hitting, and it doesn't measure dodging lefties. Jim Rice's OPS+ vastly overstates his offensive value, as you can see easily if you look into all of these other things.
Assuming we're talking about someone who is "average" in all of the things OPS+ doesn't measure, and assuming we're talking about a 1B/OF with no great fielding value, I want to see a peak over 140 and the shorter the peak the higher over 140 that peak needs to be. Oliva has an 8 year peak of exactly 140, which doesn't do it for me. Orlando Cepeda, who I have often cited as my HOF floor, has a 10 year peak of 142. Dick Allen had an entire career of 156. Joey Votto has an entire career, so far, of 148. What happens outside of that peak is relatively unimportant to me, although it is of great importance to HOF voters.
None of which is to say that a lengthy peak over 140 is a requirement, for me or for HOF votes. But players who don't have that, IMO, should have "something else" that is HOF worthy. Fielding value is the most common "something else" that lowers the OPS+ bar, sometimes for an Ozzie or a Mazeroski it becomes entirely moot, but clutch hitting, setting records, and other things can do it, too. The names that are being discussed in this thread, for the most part, have no "something else", just hitting.
Sounds reasonable.
Trout's is very high too. But that translates into 0 playoff wins and lots of last place finishes. Jeter, Mantle and Reggie J, played in big games and lived up to hype. I'm not a Yankee fan, but give the devil his due.
My travesty list - since 1989:
Jim Rice - yes he was good but it's not a hall of above average. In effect gets rewarded for playing out a final 3 dismal seasons producing very little. Otherwise his career would have been too short. Sheesh if Oliva had been wheeled out for 3 more years to hit .230-.240 guess he would have a Cooperstown Plaque now. While Rice is best of the worst on my list, Dwight Evans possessed a 35% higher WAR and he ain't in as neither him or Rice should be.
Harold Baines - yes he was good but it's not a hall of above average. Come-on this guy gets in for long career where he compiled only slightly better than average numbers. Yaz the epitome of long playing compiler at least tallied 3400+ hits and 1 MVP. At least Baines was smart enough not to get in a car while Larussa was driving.
Jack Morris - yes he was good but it's not a hall of above average. Say what you want about Catfish but Morris' WAR was a mere 2.6 points higher and he played a bunch more years.
Bill Mazeroski - it this bizzaro world? Seriously a barely .260 hitter. Guess a WS winning home run get you in. If it had been against any team but the Yankees I seriously doubt he gets in. Yes Ozzie's BA only slight higher but Ozzie had 110% higher War
Red Schoendienst - yes he was good but it's not a hall of above average.
Unless otherwise specified my posts represent only my opinion, not fact.