2007 Baseball HOF class

gregmo32 · October 13, 2006 7:51AM

Okay baseball fans, who gets in? What percent of the vote do you think the candidates will get? And who would you vote for?

stevek · October 13, 2006 8:14AM

Ripken of course gets in close to unanimous. Gwynn gets in with about 85% - 90%. Some guy named Mark something misses getting in with about 65% of the vote.

Writer11 · October 13, 2006 8:30AM

Ripken and Gwynn only. Rice will be 3rd on the ballot with 67 to 70 per cent. McGwire just below him.

Writer11 · October 13, 2006 8:32AM

Oh and I would vote for the following guys:

Ripken
Gwynn
Gossage
Blyleven
Jack Morris

Barndog · October 13, 2006 9:02AM

My wishful thinking HOF class includes Jim Rice. He did it all without juice (he's still a huge man).

ziggy29 · October 13, 2006 9:39AM

Ripken and Gwynn are no-brainers. McGwire seemed to be for a while with almost 600 homers until recent events have cast a lot of question on his accomplishments.

I'd vote for Blyleven and Gossage over McAndro. Hell, I'd vote for Santo too, except that's the Old-Timers committee now.

Lothar52 · October 13, 2006 10:01AM

what about freakin GIL HODGES....

RickyHendersonSD · October 13, 2006 10:07AM

What about freaking Jim Kaat? 283 wins and a record breaking 16 consecutive Gold Gloves?

Lothar52 · October 13, 2006 10:09AM

What about Don Mossi?? Ugliest guy to ever play bball lol

RickyHendersonSD · October 13, 2006 10:11AM

Got Dam It. Put Mossi in too!

Writer11 · October 13, 2006 11:43AM

What about Tommy John 289 career wins and a surgery named after him?

gregmo32 · October 14, 2006 2:10AM

It is possible that Ripken will get the highest percentage ever for an inductee, near 100%. Someone might not against and say he had too many subpar years during the streak, I suppose. Gwynn will likely be 93 % or more too. Mcgwire doesn't get in. I do hope one of the perennial candidates gets in, maybe Gossage is the most likely?

onlyanumber · October 14, 2006 2:28AM

<< It is possible that Ripken will get the highest percentage ever for an inductee, near 100%. Someone might not against and say he had too many subpar years during the streak, I suppose. Gwynn will likely be 93 % or more too. Mcgwire doesn't get in. I do hope one of the perennial candidates gets in, maybe Gossage is the most likely? >>

I doubt Ripken will get the highest total for exactly the reasoning you said. I mean, Seaver was the highest with 425/430 votes followed by Ryan who got 491/497. You will always have that writer who will use his vote to make a statement. And you will have that writer who will look at the .250 seasons. he'll get 95% of the votes though...

Gwynn should get high 80% I figure. One or two from the list of Rice, Blyleven, Dawson and Gossage may get in if anything as a statement against McGwire and the tainted generation. Depends on how many more years of eligibility they have left

gregmo32 · October 14, 2006 2:52AM

You are right about the vote as statement concept. That makes me wonder if Rice or Dawson may get in, maybe not this year, but eventually. Rice in particular seems to be likely. The fact that Sutter is in points to Goose also getting in as well. I guess if there are people who did not vote for Willie Mays and Hank Aaron it is hard to imagine being disappointed with 95% of the vote...

Is it possible that Mcgwire does not get in at all?

Estil · October 14, 2006 4:47AM

I'm HOPING Mr. Ripken will get in unanimously (I thought for sure Ryan would, but fell six votes short), but it won't be easy with almost 500 guys voting now. I mean, just the 3,000 hits alone is an automatic first ballot election. Plus he's one of only seven players with 3000 hits and 400 taters, most homers among shortstops AND Orioles. 20 All-Star games, two MVPs, two all-star game MVPs, 1983 championship. Oh yeah, then there's that whole streak thing... Boy, his plaque's gonna be hard to read...

Mr. Gwynn will get around 90-95%, Mr. McGwire will be around 75-78% (remember, you're innocent until proven guilty, and hopefully the writers will respect that. Assuming McGwire is guilty because he pleaded the Fifth Amendment is a blatant violation of one of our most important constitutional rights).

Okay, that takes care of the three easy ones. But I really hope this year will finally be Bert Blyleven's turn. I mean, all he did was get 3,701 strikeouts and 287 wins. I don't think it's fair that all the hitters with 3000 hits automatically get in on the first ballot and pitchers do not receive the same treatment, even though there's not even half as many 3000 K pitchers. I also agree that Mr. Kaat with his 16 gold gloves belongs in the HOF too, along with Mr. Rice. I really hope Donnie Baseball gets in someday, but his chances seem to be dimming every year. Maybe he'll have better luck with the Vets Committee.

As for my fellow Pete Rose in the HOF supporters, I wouldn't count on him getting reinstated as long as Mr. Selig is still in the commish's chair. Maybe he'll have better luck with the next commissioner. Maybe...

Axtell · October 14, 2006 4:55AM

If all time greats like Ryan aren't 100% vote getters, then no one will ever be.

That of course would change if the votes were made public, then those clowns who don't vote for them can be crucified.

onlyanumber · October 14, 2006 4:58AM

<< If all time greats like Ryan aren't 100% vote getters, then no one will ever be.

That of course would change if the votes were made public, then those clowns who don't vote for them can be crucified. >>

Good points.

Estil · October 14, 2006 4:59AM

I thought the reason even the greatest don't get in unanimously is because there are still some writers who believe that under no circumstances should they vote for someone on the first ballot. That was very much true until Jackie Robinson and Bob Feller in 1962 became the first players since the "Original Five" of 1936 to get in on the first ballot.

SDSportsFan · October 14, 2006 6:01AM

Regarding Ripken...

First off, I firmly believe he belongs in the Hall of Fame, and he should be a unanimous choice.

However comma don't forget that in addition to the reasons some have stated above, there is also that group that holds Cal at least partly responsible for the Orioles fall from power, in that he kept his streak going when he "should have sat out a few games" when he wasn't playing so well.

They're idiots, but they are there

Steve

Axtell · October 14, 2006 6:14AM

<< I thought the reason even the greatest don't get in unanimously is because there are still some writers who believe that under no circumstances should they vote for someone on the first ballot. That was very much true until Jackie Robinson and Bob Feller in 1962 became the first players since the "Original Five" of 1936 to get in on the first ballot. >>

If that is indeed the mentality of some voters, they need to have their voting rights removed immediately.

SDSportsFan · October 14, 2006 7:41AM

<< 

<< I thought the reason even the greatest don't get in unanimously is because there are still some writers who believe that under no circumstances should they vote for someone on the first ballot. That was very much true until Jackie Robinson and Bob Feller in 1962 became the first players since the "Original Five" of 1936 to get in on the first ballot. >>

If that is indeed the mentality of some voters, they need to have their voting rights removed immediately. >>

If I remember correctly, Bill Conlon in Philadelphia (and used to be on ESPN's "The Sports Reporters"), is one of them who thinks this way.

Steve

Writer11 · October 14, 2006 10:41AM

<< If all time greats like Ryan aren't 100% vote getters, then no one will ever be.

That of course would change if the votes were made public, then those clowns who don't vote for them can be crucified. >>

Good points. Babe Ruth - if you can believe it - didn't even get 100%.

80sJunkie · October 14, 2006 10:46AM

mark my words bid mac gets in this year.

Estil · October 14, 2006 2:43PM

<< 

<< If all time greats like Ryan aren't 100% vote getters, then no one will ever be.

That of course would change if the votes were made public, then those clowns who don't vote for them can be crucified. >>

Good points. Babe Ruth - if you can believe it - didn't even get 100%. >>

Think that's hard to believe, Ty Cobb actually got more votes than Ruth.

Estil · October 16, 2006 12:13PM

<< mark my words bid mac gets in this year. >>

He'd better get in, and for God's sake the Cardinals should retire his number too, unless of course they wish to wait until Mr. McGwire becomes a HOF-elect.

Innocent until proven guilty. That's my motto.

ToppsCo1lector · October 17, 2006 4:43AM

Ripken
Gwynn
Big Mac

Estil · October 17, 2006 5:23AM

<< Ripken
Gwynn
Big Mac >>

Stop taking the easy way out.

What about the other potential candidates? You don't think even my main man, Mr. Blyleven gets his turn this coming year?

ToppsCo1lector · October 17, 2006 5:33AM

Estil-Byleven should've been in long before now. I hope that Tommy John will get in as he did something next to impossible and had an amazing career. I'd also put in Goose and Kaat. I'd like to see all 7 get in, but I'd rather see Byleven, Goose and Kaat get in before the questionable Big Mac. Any SP with over 260 wins should be considered a HOF quality pitcher, depending on how long and how effective they were(era, innings pitched, and Whip being determining factors imo) over their career.

Ripken, although a def shoo-in isn't my favorite for highest vote getter. Gwynn was simply the most sound hitter I got to see in my years growing up, a guy that was always underrated but if you needed a hit; there isn't many from his generation I'd consider on his level of consistency. He's one of the best, and my personal favorite of this (to be) HOF class.

Estil · October 17, 2006 5:56AM

<< Estil-Byleven should've been in long before now. I hope that Tommy John will get in as he did something next to impossible and had an amazing career. I'd also put in Goose and Kaat. I'd like to see all 7 get in, but I'd rather see Byleven, Goose and Kaat get in before the questionable Big Mac. Any SP with over 260 wins should be considered a HOF quality pitcher, depending on how long and how effective they were(era, innings pitched, and Whip being determining factors imo) over their career.

Ripken, although a def shoo-in isn't my favorite for highest vote getter. Gwynn was simply the most sound hitter I got to see in my years growing up, a guy that was always underrated but if you needed a hit; there isn't many from his generation I'd consider on his level of consistency. He's one of the best, and my personal favorite of this (to be) HOF class. >>

While I do believe everyone you mentioned (even Mr. John) belongs in the Hall, I disagree that Mr. Gwynn should get more votes than Mr. Ripken. Don't get me wrong, Mr. Gwynn is every bit as great of a person and goodwill ambassador to the game that Mr. Ripken is, but I just think Mr. Ripken is more "loaded" on the credentials. I mean, he's gonna have his 2,632 consective games obviously, but don't forget his 8,293 consective innings, being one of only seven players with BOTH 3,000 hits and 400 taters, all time home run leader among shortstops, all time home run leader among Orioles, 16 consecutive All-Star game starts, 1982 ROY, 1983 and 1991 MVPs, 1991 and 2001 All-Star Game MVPs, 1983 World Series Championship, eight Silver Slugger Awards, 1991 and 1992 Gold Glove awards, all time leader in All-Star ballot votes (over 36 million), shall I go on? You'll probably need a microscope to read his plaque.

gregmo32 · October 17, 2006 5:59AM

There is at least an outside shot that Cal will be the first unanimous selection...

Estil · October 17, 2006 6:01AM

<< There is at least an outside shot that Cal will be the first unanimous selection... >>

I'd say he's got the best chance since Mr. Ryan in 1999. I thought at the time for sure he'd go in unanimously, but fell six votes short. Wasn't there an article from one of the writers who explained why he was one of the six who chose not to check off Mr. Ryan's name on his ballot?

ToppsCo1lector · October 17, 2006 6:07AM

<< While I do believe everyone you mentioned (even Mr. John) belongs in the Hall, I disagree that Mr. Gwynn should get more votes than Mr. Ripken. Don't get me wrong, Mr. Gwynn is every bit as great of a person and goodwill ambassador to the game that Mr. Ripken is, but I just think Mr. Ripken is more "loaded" on the credentials. I mean, he's gonna have his 2,632 consective games obviously, but don't forget his 8,293 consective innings, being one of only seven players with BOTH 3,000 hits and 400 taters, all time home run leader among shortstops, all time home run leader among Orioles, 16 consecutive All-Star game starts, 1982 ROY, 1983 and 1991 MVPs, 1991 and 2001 All-Star Game MVPs, 1983 World Series Championship, eight Silver Slugger Awards, 1991 and 1992 Gold Glove awards, all time leader in All-Star ballot votes (over 36 million), shall I go on? You'll probably need a microscope to read his plaque. >>

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm a lifelong Marylander; trust me I know his impact on the game. He could run for governor and win by 30-50% easy. He was by far one of the greatest ambassadors of the game and still is(check out him and his brothers aberdeen baseball fields and programs by his hometown). I know Ripken will get more votes, he's loved by true baseball fans as he was the consumate professional and realized how he could help the game. I'm not knocking him in anyway, but I'd hope that people realize more than Cal deserve to shine at the next inductions. Cancel my original statement of him not being the top vote getter, that was asinine to say. Also, Cal's underlooked at bringing back the fans post-strike. His streak was broken a season before the steroid run of Mac and Sosa if I remember correctly.

Estil · October 17, 2006 6:10AM

<< 

<< While I do believe everyone you mentioned (even Mr. John) belongs in the Hall, I disagree that Mr. Gwynn should get more votes than Mr. Ripken. Don't get me wrong, Mr. Gwynn is every bit as great of a person and goodwill ambassador to the game that Mr. Ripken is, but I just think Mr. Ripken is more "loaded" on the credentials. I mean, he's gonna have his 2,632 consective games obviously, but don't forget his 8,293 consective innings, being one of only seven players with BOTH 3,000 hits and 400 taters, all time home run leader among shortstops, all time home run leader among Orioles, 16 consecutive All-Star game starts, 1982 ROY, 1983 and 1991 MVPs, 1991 and 2001 All-Star Game MVPs, 1983 World Series Championship, eight Silver Slugger Awards, 1991 and 1992 Gold Glove awards, all time leader in All-Star ballot votes (over 36 million), shall I go on? You'll probably need a microscope to read his plaque. >>

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm a lifelong Marylander; trust me I know his impact on the game. He could run for governor and win by 30-50% easy. He was by far one of the greatest ambassadors of the game and still is(check out him and his brothers aberdeen baseball fields and programs by his hometown). I know Ripken will get more votes, he's loved by true baseball fans as he was the consumate professional and realized how he could help the game. I'm not knocking him in anyway, but I'd hope that people realize more than Cal deserve to shine at the next inductions. Cancel my original statement of him not being the top vote getter, that was asinine to say. Also, Cal's underlooked at bringing back the fans post-strike. His streak was broken a season before the steroid run of Mac and Sosa if I remember correctly. >>

You're right about Mr. Ripken practically saving baseball from the 1994 strike; I completely overlooked that. The importance of that cannot be overstated. Geez, for that he ought to get 110% of the votes.

onlyanumber · October 17, 2006 6:15AM

You will also have those writers that figure since Ripken will get in regardless of if they vote for him, they'll use their vote (they only get to pick ten players to vote for) for someone else. It's a kick in the pants, but it might keep a hometown favorite on the ballot an extra year.

ToppsCo1lector · October 17, 2006 6:15AM

A lot overlook it, but in Maryland that's all us kids talked about that post-strike. It was HUGE, and more important in my opinion than the home run derby of 98. It brought the old fans back as well as the real fans of the game. The 98 HRD was a media fest that was/is overhyped; I actually watched less that season b/c I already knew steroids had taken over(See; Brady Anderson 50 HR season lol).

gregmo32 · October 17, 2006 6:45AM

We used to joke in the bleacher seats that it was obvious that Brady was on the juice, among other things. And everyone just laughed about it then. It is funny how big the whole thing has become. But 50 from a decent player is very different from 70 or 73 from a superstar that became the lead story on the (non sports) news every night....

ToppsCo1lector · October 17, 2006 7:07AM

<< We used to joke in the bleacher seats that it was obvious that Brady was on the juice, among other things. And everyone just laughed about it then. It is funny how big the whole thing has become. But 50 from a decent player is very different from 70 or 73 from a superstar that became the lead story on the (non sports) news every night.... >>

Hey I hear you there Greg. Us kids on the eastern shore joked about the same stuff. Thing is, the ppl who the media was in love with got on it(along with MANY MANY more) and the owners on down knew the gig was up.

Axtell · October 17, 2006 7:18AM

The media was serving the fans who ate up every home run...to blame the media and/or owners alone is ignoring the facts of the situation.

Don't you remember the 'chicks dig the long ball' ad campaign? The fans were as much to blame for blissfully overlooking the rampant steroid use as anyone.

The fans loved watching Sosa and Mac chase 60, then 70. The fans loved watching Barry hit 73. The fans packed stadiums wanting more and more and more home runs, not even questioning the fact that 2 men in the history of baseball prior to 98 had hit 60 more home runs, and now it was happening every year.

Yes, the owners knew what was happening and are to blame. But so, too, are the fans who ate it up.

ToppsCo1lector · October 17, 2006 7:23AM

<< The media was serving the fans who ate up every home run...to blame the media and/or owners alone is ignoring the facts of the situation.

Don't you remember the 'chicks dig the long ball' ad campaign? The fans were as much to blame for blissfully overlooking the rampant steroid use as anyone.

The fans loved watching Sosa and Mac chase 60, then 70. The fans loved watching Barry hit 73. The fans packed stadiums wanting more and more and more home runs, not even questioning the fact that 2 men in the history of baseball prior to 98 had hit 60 more home runs, and now it was happening every year.

Yes, the owners knew what was happening and are to blame. But so, too, are the fans who ate it up. >>

I hear you, but I know the majority of those fans were simply bandwagon fans who don't appreciate the game. That's my opinion, just like the hordes of "yankee fans" of today who have no idea who Leyritz, O'neill, or Tino is even tho that run was so recent. Also, I'm not that big a fan of the new home run craze; more a fan of small ball old school play where base-running and onbase IQ has a huge effect on the outcome of the game. I think thats because, through all my years playing I never hit one out lol.

2007 Baseball HOF class

Comments