Up to the Minute HOF Results
markj111
Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭
in Sports Talk
With 15% of the precints reporting:
The 2014 HOF Ballot Collecting Gizmo!
Updated: Dec. 31 - 1:00 ~ 85 Full Ballots ~ (14.9% of vote ~ based on last year)
100 - Maddux
98.8 - Glavine
88.2 - F. Thomas
81.2 - Biggio
———————————
74.1 - Piazza
63.5 - Bagwell
63.5 - Jack (The Jack) Morris
56.5 - Raines
45.9 - Bonds
44.7 - Clemens
41.2 - Schilling
32.9 - Mussina
23.5 - L. Smith
22.4 - Trammell
17.6 - E. Martinez
16.5 - McGriff
12.9 - Kent
11.8 - McGwire
10.6 - L. Walker
8.2 - S. Sosa
7.0 - R. Palmeiro
The 2014 HOF Ballot Collecting Gizmo!
Updated: Dec. 31 - 1:00 ~ 85 Full Ballots ~ (14.9% of vote ~ based on last year)
100 - Maddux
98.8 - Glavine
88.2 - F. Thomas
81.2 - Biggio
———————————
74.1 - Piazza
63.5 - Bagwell
63.5 - Jack (The Jack) Morris
56.5 - Raines
45.9 - Bonds
44.7 - Clemens
41.2 - Schilling
32.9 - Mussina
23.5 - L. Smith
22.4 - Trammell
17.6 - E. Martinez
16.5 - McGriff
12.9 - Kent
11.8 - McGwire
10.6 - L. Walker
8.2 - S. Sosa
7.0 - R. Palmeiro
0
Comments
Any voter that doesn't vote for a guy that gets at least 85% should have his or her voting rights revoked.
<< <i>I want to know who the 11.8% are that do not think Frank Thomas is a HOFer. Just proves the stupidity of this system. >>
That's almost as stupid as 25% of the voters who think Thomas is worth a vote, but Jeff Bagwell is not
Even more absurd is people voting for Jack Morris but not Schilling or Mussina
Maddux----360 wins, 4 CY's, WS Champ, gazillion time all star, no link at all to PED's, one of the most respected players of his generation........old crusty racist vote..... "NO"
Great System...WTF
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.
Seriously. I was just thinking the same thing.
Bagwell had great career numbers also, but he was no Frank Thomas.
Not sure about using 85% as the bar, but I agree with voters in the vast minority explaining their reasoning for not voting for an overwhelming inductee(90%+)
<< <i>
Bagwell had great career numbers also, but he was no Frank Thomas. >>
You're right, Bagwell was better than Thomas. The difference between a career OPS of .945 compared to .974 is about 10 to 11 hits per 162 games. Adjust for Bagwell playing half his career in the Astrodome and Thomas was a better hitter by about seven singles per year. The defensive value between a Gold Glove winner and a DH is more than that
(Thomas did play longer so easy to see why a lot of voters would think he was better. But it's also so easy to see that they are so close voting for one but not the other is hugely inconsistent)
<< <i>
<< <i>
Bagwell had great career numbers also, but he was no Frank Thomas. >>
You're right, Bagwell was better than Thomas. The difference between a career OPS of .945 compared to .974 is about 10 to 11 hits per 162 games. Adjust for Bagwell playing half his career in the Astrodome and Thomas was a better hitter by about seven singles per year. The defensive value between a Gold Glove winner and a DH is more than that
(Thomas did play longer so easy to see why a lot of voters would think he was better. But it's also so easy to see that they are so close voting for one but not the other is hugely inconsistent) >>
I think the lesser support for Bagwell has far more to do with PED suspicion than stats. He can thank Ken Caminiti for that..
Bagwell
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.
<< <i>Any voter that doesn't vote for a guy that gets at least 85% should have his or her voting rights revoked
Not sure about using 85% as the bar, but I agree with voters in the vast minority explaining their reasoning for not voting for an overwhelming inductee(90%+) >>
90% means it was an obvious choice. 85% at least leaves room for some objectivity.
I just want the idiots gone that actually cast a vote for players like Aaron Sele, Brad Radke or Pat Hentgen. I mean seriously, why does an idiot like that even get to vote?
I don't want to acknowledge a 'Hall of Fame' which has a guy like Biggio in but REAL stars, REAL baseball players like the ones I mentioned are out.
<< <i>It's disgusting that a player like Biggio, who muddled through mediocrity for an extended period of time is likely to see hall induction for hanging around for 3 years too long and hitting that 3,000 hit plateau, while WORTHY players like Clemens, Bonds, McGwire, Piazza and Rose are forced to sit out due to the some self-annoited writers feeling it's their duty to play judge, jury, and executioner.
I don't want to acknowledge a 'Hall of Fame' which has a guy like Biggio in but REAL stars, REAL baseball players like the ones I mentioned are out. >>
1999-2000 Clemens has 2 of his worst seasons statistically. Suddenly in 2001 at age 38, his ERA drops, his strikeouts go up and his innings pitched goes up. Before that season, he had 260 wins. He's done. He gets a little medical help and wins 94 games over the next 6 seasons.
McGwire was just another Dave Kingman without the juice.
Even though there is suspicion around Piazza, there is no proof and I think he belongs.
<< <i>
<< <i>It's disgusting that a player like Biggio, who muddled through mediocrity for an extended period of time is likely to see hall induction for hanging around for 3 years too long and hitting that 3,000 hit plateau, while WORTHY players like Clemens, Bonds, McGwire, Piazza and Rose are forced to sit out due to the some self-annoited writers feeling it's their duty to play judge, jury, and executioner.
I don't want to acknowledge a 'Hall of Fame' which has a guy like Biggio in but REAL stars, REAL baseball players like the ones I mentioned are out. >>
1999-2000 Clemens has 2 of his worst seasons statistically. Suddenly in 2001 at age 38, his ERA drops, his strikeouts go up and his innings pitched goes up. Before that season, he had 260 wins. He's done. He gets a little medical help and wins 94 games over the next 6 seasons.
McGwire was just another Dave Kingman without the juice.
Even though there is suspicion around Piazza, there is no proof and I think he belongs. >>
McGwire was an infinitely better player than Kingman. His HR/AB numbers are top 10 all time, he was an elite level defensive 1B (despite it being the easiest position to field, it was still where he played), and Kingman's OBP/OPS split of .302/.780 doesn't come close to touching McGwire's .392/.982. No, sorry, but McGwire and Kingman aren't even in the same universe when it comes to performance.
1999 was Clemens' worst season, but was just a year removed from a dominant 1998 campaign in which he won the Cy Young. 2000 was a bounce back season, and he still finished sixth in Cy Young voting. That being said, if you want to say that's when he started juicing, until that point:
260 wins. 5 Cy Youngs (and 2 other top 3 finishes). MVP. Even if you want to suggest that he was 'done' in 2000, he'd still be a sure fire, no doubt about it hall of famer. Let's also not forget that (a) he never failed a drug test, and (b) he was acquitted in a court of lying about said steroid use. Now I am not so naive as to think he (along with nearly every other MLBer in that era) used something, but to sit there and try to ignore an entire era of the best baseball players is only doing a disservice to the history of baseball.
<< <i>It's disgusting that a player like Biggio, who muddled through mediocrity for an extended period of time is likely to see hall induction for hanging around for 3 years too long and hitting that 3,000 hit plateau, while WORTHY players like Clemens, Bonds, McGwire, Piazza and Rose are forced to sit out due to the some self-annoited writers feeling it's their duty to play judge, jury, and executioner.
>>
The final three years of his career did absolutely nothing to change Biggio's viability as a Hall-of-Fame candidate. The bulk of his Hall-of-Fame case came from 94-99, the years when he was a star, years when he was nearly as valuable to his team as Rose and McGwire were. Can you name anyone in history other than drug users and Rose who have reached that high a peak for that long with an additional eight years or so above average and fell short of the Hall-of-Fame?
<< <i>
<< <i>It's disgusting that a player like Biggio, who muddled through mediocrity for an extended period of time is likely to see hall induction for hanging around for 3 years too long and hitting that 3,000 hit plateau, while WORTHY players like Clemens, Bonds, McGwire, Piazza and Rose are forced to sit out due to the some self-annoited writers feeling it's their duty to play judge, jury, and executioner.
>>
The final three years of his career did absolutely nothing to change Biggio's viability as a Hall-of-Fame candidate. The bulk of his Hall-of-Fame case came from 94-99, the years when he was a star, years when he was nearly as valuable to his team as Rose and McGwire were. Can you name anyone in history other than drug users and Rose who have reached that high a peak for that long with an additional eight years or so above average and fell short of the Hall-of-Fame? >>
You honestly think so? You think that if he didn't plod on and break that 3,000 hit barrier he has anywhere near 50%?
No top 3 MVP finishes, only 2 top 5 which means he wasn't even dominant among his peers, let alone an all time great.
2 top 5 finishes in WAR in a 20 year career? Unacceptable.
He didn't have as high a peak as his defenders wish him to have had, and I'm sorry, but this guy isn't a hall of famer. He'll get in, but it will only diminish and further wash out the already sliding standards of the hall. Baseball's 'guardians' are turning off fans by their refusal to admit the steroid era existed, and their continued insistence on plunging their heads in the sand and wanting those players to go away is only taking history away from future baseball fans.
<< <i>n,
No top 3 MVP finishes, only 2 top 5 which means he wasn't even dominant among his peers, let alone an all time great.
2 top 5 finishes in WAR in a 20 year career? Unacceptable. >>
In 1997 the average second baseman in the league had a .734 ops. Biggio was .916, while playing all 162 games and half of them were in the Astrodome. That is dominate. That is worth about 75 runs over average, let alone replacement level. McGwire's best was only 58 runs above average and that was the only time he was in the top five in WAR, yet somehow two times for Biggio is unacceptable.
Another point since you like WAR so much: he was in the top three in the league in offensive WAR four times. Again, that absolutely is dominant among his peers. He falls outside of the top five a few times because of the defensive metrics used. He was also winning Gold Gloves those years. So it's pretty clear the lack of MVP votes should be seen as completely meaningless to someone who believes in WAR, because adjusted for position he was one of the three best hitters in the entire league, while the voters also believed he was the very best defensive player in the league at his position
<< <i>
In 1997 the average second baseman in the league had a .734 ops. Biggio was .916, while playing all 162 games and half of them were in the Astrodome. That is dominate. That is worth about 75 runs over average, let alone replacement level. McGwire's best was only 58 runs above average and that was the only time he was in the top five in WAR, yet somehow two times for Biggio is unacceptable. >>
If you want to equate 3000 hits with 583 home runs, go ahead. Biggio's production as a sub .800 OPS guy is pretty easily replaceable, whereas McGwire's .982 CAREER OPS (which is better than any single YEAR of Biggio's career) is not. Sitting there and saying 'gee willickers Biggio was such a swell guy!' doesn't take away from the facts that a light hitting, middle infielder who stuck around forever shouldn't be in the hall of fame. Whereas a MONSTER who defined a decade and, along with Sosa, saved baseball from itself is the very definition of a hall of famer.
<< <i>Another point since you like WAR so much: he was in the top three in the league in offensive WAR four times. Again, that absolutely is dominant among his peers. He falls outside of the top five a few times because of the defensive metrics used. He was also winning Gold Gloves those years. So it's pretty clear the lack of MVP votes should be seen as completely meaningless to someone who believes in WAR, because adjusted for position he was one of the three best hitters in the entire league, while the voters also believed he was the very best defensive player in the league at his position >>
Four times out of a 20 year career, and he couldn't even sniff an MVP award? No, sir, that is not dominance. Gold gloves? That's hilarious. You know who also won a gold glove? Rafael Palmeiro. He won a gold glove at first base in a year he played fewer than 30 games at the position. So please, if your argument rests on gold gloves, then you've already lost the debate.
The only people who think Biggio rightfully belongs in the hall are those who feign outrage that players would dare to push their bodies to the absolute limit to WIN, and want to reward guys who hung around for years after they were done as productive players to selfishly pursue a plateau.
<< <i>Four times out of a 20 year career, and he couldn't even sniff an MVP award? No, sir, that is not dominance. Gold gloves? That's hilarious. You know who also won a gold glove? Rafael Palmeiro. He won a gold glove at first base in a year he played fewer than 30 games at the position. So please, if your argument rests on gold gloves, then you've already lost the debate. >>
The people who vote for MVP are the same ones voting for Gold Gloves. Saying that lack of votes in one area shows he wasn't good enough, but sufficient votes in the other area is meaningless shows just how silly your position is.
If you agree WAR is a reasonable measure, then you most certainly agree Biggio was one of the best offensive weapons. His OPS was consistently around .150 higher than the average for his position, which is worth far more runs to his team than McGwire provided. The other side of WAR is defense where Biggio does not look as hot. But the voters thought he was very good. Then you say those voters don't mean anything. But then you say they do mean something because he wasn't getting MVP votes
You dismiss the part of WAR that says Biggio was dominant while focusing on part that says he wasn't great, then you dismiss the times the voters said he was great while focusing on the times he fell short. If you take that approach there is no debate, there is just you being a fool
(Also, as pointed out to you previously, Biggio is in the top 100 WAR of all eligible players since 1900. If you think the Hall-of-Fame should honor fewer than 100 players over the past 108 years, that's one thing. But the stat you like to use so much does show Biggio as one of the very best in history)
<< <i>
<< <i>Four times out of a 20 year career, and he couldn't even sniff an MVP award? No, sir, that is not dominance. Gold gloves? That's hilarious. You know who also won a gold glove? Rafael Palmeiro. He won a gold glove at first base in a year he played fewer than 30 games at the position. So please, if your argument rests on gold gloves, then you've already lost the debate. >>
The people who vote for MVP are the same ones voting for Gold Gloves. Saying that lack of votes in one area shows he wasn't good enough, but sufficient votes in the other area is meaningless shows just how silly your position is. >>
Are you sure you want to put that out there, that you think the same people voting for the gold glove are the same voters for MVP? You cannot possibly be this entrenched in your position, can you?
The MVP, since 1931, it has been awarded by the Baseball Writers Association of America. Gold Gloves, presented since 1957 by St. Louis-based Rawlings, are voted on by managers and coaches before the end of the regular season. Would you like to try that statement again?
<< <i>If you agree WAR is a reasonable measure, then you most certainly agree Biggio was one of the best offensive weapons. His OPS was consistently around .150 higher than the average for his position, which is worth far more runs to his team than McGwire provided. The other side of WAR is defense where Biggio does not look as hot. But the voters thought he was very good. Then you say those voters don't mean anything. But then you say they do mean something because he wasn't getting MVP votes >>
Again, since the idea that MVP voting and gold glove voting aren't done by the same folks (an assumption you made which I already have proven to be false) this statement means exactly nothing.
<< <i>You dismiss the part of WAR that says Biggio was dominant while focusing on part that says he wasn't great, then you dismiss the times the voters said he was great while focusing on the times he fell short. If you take that approach there is no debate, there is just you being a fool >>
No, being a fool is suggesting MVP voting and gold glove voting is done by the same people. Try again.
<< <i>(Also, as pointed out to you previously, Biggio is in the top 100 WAR of all eligible players since 1900. If you think the Hall-of-Fame should honor fewer than 100 players over the past 108 years, that's one thing. But the stat you like to use so much does show Biggio as one of the very best in history) >>
Biggio's prime is easily replicated - the only thing that has him getting hall consideration is this 3000 hit plateau. If he ends at 2700, you and I and everyone knows he doesn't make it past the first year of eligibility. Period. Now, go back and review who votes for what awards, then come back.
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.
Biggio is the only player in MLB history with 3,000 hits, 600 doubles, 400 steals, and 250 home runs. 2,850 games and 12,504 plate appearances with one damn team over a 20-year career. CLASS PERSONIFIED. What else do you want? Oh, that's right, you wanted him to retire three years earlier. That's your beef with him. He supposedly hung on for too long and his stats naturally eroded because he didn't roid up like your boy who is (once again) going to be looking up at virtually everyone else on the ballot. Thank the good Lord above you don't have a real say; you'd single-handedly set the game back even further with that malfunctioning brain of yours.
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
<< <i>1985fan, some days you actually come across as knowledgeable. Then there are other days (like today) when Dimeman has nothing on you. Here you are, the self-professed omniscient one, wanting to leave Craig Biggio out and add a guy like McGwire in his stead. Are you still drunk from last night? Thanks for giving everyone who is reading this thread a chuckle. >>
Sorry, but it's the hall of FAME, not the hall of very good. Biggio had a very nice long career, but to sit there and suggest he's among the game's elite is laughable. McGwire, on the other hand, DOMINATED his era. Yes, he used PEDs, but here's a hint - so did everyone else.
<< <i>Biggio is the only player in MLB history with 3,000 hits, 600 doubles, 400 steals, and 250 home runs 2,850 games and 12,504 plate appearances with one damn team over a 20-year career. >>
Who cares? Who cares about these arbitrary numbers you or some random guy pulled out to try to prop up his case. When he's measured against his contemporaries, his numbers come up sorely lacking. Oh, he played with one team his whole career! Because nobody else would pay him what Houston did. Throw in his SELFISH (yes, you read that right) desire to play three more years when he should have retired, all in a vain attempt to hit that 3,000 his threshold that his entire HoF case rested upon.
<< <i> CLASS PERSONIFIED. What else do you want? Oh, that's right, you wanted him to retire three years earlier. That's your beef with him. He supposedly hung on for too long and his stats naturally eroded because he didn't roid up like your boy who is (once again) going to be looking up at virtually everyone else on the ballot. Thank the good Lord above you don't have a real say; you'd single-handedly set the game back even further with that malfunctioning brain of yours. >>
Class? Was it class that he held the Astros organization hostage to get him enough plate appearances hit that 3,000 hit plateau? Was it 'class' that had him earning millions in dollars AND inhibiting the team to move forward from his career? I hardly think either of those are 'classy' moves. Class would have been his retiring three years before he actually did, and hoping his case would have been made for the hall without 3,000 hits (here's a hint: he'd have NO support without that plateau).
As far as 'setting the game back'? I'd love to hear what the hand-wringers suggest how the game would be set back if the real hall of famers like Bonds, McGwire, Clemens and the others were inducted. Would it finally make MLB, the commission, and its fans realize they were all complicit in the steroid era? Would it make the same holier-than-thou writers look in the mirror and remember the unending pieces they wrote about these same PED users they are trying to turn their back on?
No, if anything, it would give closure to the entire era. We'd stop trying to pretend it didn't happen, and the game would be allowed to move on. As it is, the PED 'controversy' (which is only in effect because MLB won't pull its head out of the sand to acknowledge what actually happened) is going to hang over baseball for eternity. Future generations of fans won't be allowed to learn from the mistakes of the era, and there's going to be an entire generation of players (like Piazza) who aren't given their fair due because some idiotic writer thinks he might have used something despite having no evidence whatsoever.
The pearl-clutching, feigned 'outrage' of fans like you is the most disingenuous part of the entire PED era. While you were busy rooting on PED users like Bagwell, and they were saving the game from the death sentence MLB owners imposed on the game itself, little did they know these same hypocrites would one day turn their back and say 'tsk tsk'.
<< <i>There actually are some reasonable and intelligent arguments for why Biggio doesn't deserve to be in the Hall-of-Fame. Calling him mediocre is not one of them. Everyone else can clearly see that just isn't true >>
While OPS is hardly a single way of determining a hitter's value, it does give a lot of insight, and Biggio ranks #470 all time. OPS+? #600. OBP? #363. He simply wasn't the force at the plate his supporters make him out to be.
As far as the PED talk goes, how are we supposed to automatically assume Biggio didn't take anything? Because he didn't bulk up like other PED users? Let's not conveniently ignore Houston was quite the center of PED use in MLB. First Caminiti (a self-professed user), then Bagwell (who goes from hitting no more than 20 HRs even in the minors to 39 and up), and Bagwell wonders why people assume he used? Just because he didn't hit 50+ HRs doesn't mean he didn't use (and the rumors about his use are wide-spread). Let's also not forget Clemens rolling in to town at age 41 and most certainly using something at that point. We're supposed to look the other way when Biggio hits his career high in HR at age 38, which just coincidentally happens the year Clemens arrives? Then ups that number even more at age 39 when he's slipping even further?
You can claim innocent all you want, but for a guy who was clearly in decline to suddenly out of nowhere hit career highs in HRs in back to back years the SAME YEAR that Clemens arrives? Well, that just sounds far too coincidental to me.
<< <i><< Biggio is the only player in MLB history with 3,000 hits, 600 doubles, 400 steals, and 250 home runs 2,850 games and 12,504 plate appearances with one damn team over a 20-year career. >>
Who cares? Who cares about these arbitrary numbers >>
Numbers are what gets all non cheaters into the Hall. One of the dumbest things I have ever seen you post.
Don't know why I'm surprised that you are arguing with this. You would argue against any popular opinion posted on this board just to argue. I think you have a mangina.
<< <i><< Biggio is the only player in MLB history with 3,000 hits, 600 doubles, 400 steals, and 250 home runs 2,850 games and 12,504 plate appearances with one damn team over a 20-year career. >>
Who cares? Who cares about these arbitrary numbers
Numbers are what gets all non cheaters into the Hall. One of the dumbest things I have ever seen you post. >>
What I meant was who cares about this single particular grouping of numbers. He was never a dominant hitter in his era, and for all we know, he juiced just like Caminiti, Bagwell, and Clemens did as well.
<< <i>Don't know why I'm surprised that you are arguing with this. You would argue against any popular opinion posted on this board just to argue. I think you have a mangina. >>
Plenty of people who have ACTUAL VOTES agreed with me and didn't elect Biggio last year. Just because I go against the grain and don't want to further dilute the hall to include the likes of Biggio doesn't mean anything, actually, except that there's quite a few more deserving players who should be in the hall ahead of this guy.
<< <i>
The people who vote for MVP are the same ones voting for Gold Gloves. Saying that lack of votes in one area shows he wasn't good enough, but sufficient votes in the other area is meaningless shows just how silly your position is. >>
And I'm still waiting for an admission of 'I don't know what I was talking about here' from nvbaseball.
<< <i>except that there's quite a few more deserving players who should be in the hall ahead of this guy. >>
Name one non juicer not named Rose or Shoeless Joe.
I think the lesser support for Bagwell has far more to do with PED suspicion than stats. He can thank Ken Caminiti for that..
I agree.
Also, not sure why people are so sure he didn't use PEDs. Clemens, Caminiti, Pettite - all admitted users. Bagwell, Finley, Gonzalez - all widely suspected users. Biggio had career highs in HRs his late 30s... you do the math.
That said, I don't care about the PEDs - I think he falls just short. IMHO, WAR tends to overrate defense and baserunning and so Biggio looks better via WAR than he actually was.
Also, there is no argument against McGwire other than PEDs. An excellent defensive player who hit a ton of homers? He's a no-brainer.
<< <i>I think the lesser support for Bagwell has far more to do with PED suspicion than stats. He can thank Ken Caminiti for that..
I agree. >>
Maybe if he's healthy for the last 4 years of his career, he is a no brainer. Maybe (more than likely) it was the juice that made his shoulder break down.
<< <i>Galaxy 27 throwing some fastballs! Swing and a miss by 1985fan.....and you can put dat on yo toast! >>
Thanks for your contribution as always. What a compelling post. The forum is richer for your input. Thank you again!
<< <i>Fact is, Biggio was an average or below-average player the last eight years of his career. >>
And he wasn't that far ahead in the prime of his career.
<< <i>Also, not sure why people are so sure he didn't use PEDs. Clemens, Caminiti, Pettite - all admitted users. Bagwell, Finley, Gonzalez - all widely suspected users. Biggio had career highs in HRs his late 30s... you do the math. >>
But he was such a good guy! He spent his entire career with one team so that automatically eliminates him from potential PED use! Seriously, though, like I said before and you said here, there was no shortage of PED users (both admitted and highly suspected) that conveniently overlapped his time in Houston. Then, Clemens arrives in 2004 and Biggio just magically hits his career high in HR, then goes above that the next year, all at the age of 38? And we're not supposed to put 2 and 2 together? The more I think of it, the more it seems like a no doubter that Biggio used PEDs to extend his career and get to 3000 hits, because there's no way anyone is sticking up for Biggio as a HoFer is he doesn't hit that 3,000 plateau.
<< <i>That said, I don't care about the PEDs - I think he falls just short. IMHO, WAR tends to overrate defense and baserunning and so Biggio looks better via WAR than he actually was. >>
I don't care about PEDs either, but even with them he's not a HoFer in my book.
<< <i>Also, there is no argument against McGwire other than PEDs. An excellent defensive player who hit a ton of homers? He's a no-brainer. >>
The only people who want to keep him out try to compare him to Kingman but instead they should just say 'I'm a hypocrite who once cheered for PED users and monster home runs and now my delicate sensibilities won't allow me to admit they deserve to be in the Hall.'
<< <i>
<< <i>except that there's quite a few more deserving players who should be in the hall ahead of this guy. >>
Name one non juicer not named Rose or Shoeless Joe. >>
Why would I exclude deserving PED users?
Bonds - all time HR king, should have been a first ballot, 100% hall of famer. The best hitter any of us ever watched.
Clemens - 7 time Cy Young, should have been a first ballot, 100% hall of famer. The best pitcher any of us ever watched.
Rose - all time hit king, admitted to gambling on baseball as a manager, which doesn't take away from his accomplishments on the field. A 20+ year sentence is overkill. Put him in.
McGwire - saved baseball after ownership plotted to kill player salaries and cancelled a world series. Along with Sosa, saved baseball with a magical 1998 HR chase that any of us who was watching baseball will remember forever.
These are four of the most dominant players any of us have ever watched, yet the all time hit and HR king, and the pitcher with the most cy young awards are not in the hall. It's a travesty against the HISTORY of baseball to not include these players in the HISTORY of the game. Sitting there and stomping your feet and plugging your ears isn't going to make the PED era go away. Stop taking your cues from Bud Selig (who oversaw and engineered the steroid era to begin with) and demand the HISTORY of the game be preserved and these players be inducted into the hall.
<< <i>And we're not supposed to put 2 and 2 together? The more I think of it, the more it seems like a no doubter that Biggio used PEDs to extend his career and get to 3000 hits, because there's no way anyone is sticking up for Biggio as a HoFer is he doesn't hit that 3,000 plateau. >>
How the hell would we ever manage without you and your Scooby Dum magnifying glass. Based on your logic, I sure hope my best friend doesn't jump off a cliff.
So now that you've convinced yourself that Biggio is a juicer, he's a more attractive Hall candidate in your eyes, right? Isn't that how your bizarro world works?
you'll never be able to outrun a bad diet
<< <i>
How the hell would we ever manage without you and your Scooby Dum magnifying glass. Based on your logic, I sure hope my best friend doesn't jump off a cliff.
So now that you've convinced yourself that Biggio is a juicer, he's a more attractive Hall candidate in your eyes, right? Isn't that how your bizarro world works? >>
What's the matter? I hit at one of your precious martyrs in Biggio? Wake the hell up, Houston was a hotbed of PED activity, and I'm not alone in thinking there's a connection. As far as more attractive, you couldn't be more wrong. No, even with his PED use, he's not a hall of famer in my eyes.
And I am hardly 'convinced', but looking at the dates of certain known PED users (most notably Clemens arriving in Houston the very same year Biggio at age 38 starts hitting career highs in HR), it's not hard to make the conclusion *something* was going on.
<< <i>
<< <i>
How the hell would we ever manage without you and your Scooby Dum magnifying glass. Based on your logic, I sure hope my best friend doesn't jump off a cliff.
So now that you've convinced yourself that Biggio is a juicer, he's a more attractive Hall candidate in your eyes, right? Isn't that how your bizarro world works? >>
What's the matter? I hit at one of your precious martyrs in Biggio? Wake the hell up, Houston was a hotbed of PED activity, and I'm not alone in thinking there's a connection. As far as more attractive, you couldn't be more wrong. No, even with his PED use, he's not a hall of famer in my eyes.
And I am hardly 'convinced', but looking at the dates of certain known PED users (most notably Clemens arriving in Houston the very same year Biggio at age 38 starts hitting career highs in HR), it's not hard to make the conclusion *something* was going on. >>
Don't feel like debating today, but Ax, if you are saying Biggio's increase in HR's that year is due to Clemens arriving with steroids, then that would make Biggio a non user all his other years...which are all the years before he 'played too long and was washed up'. That would make his case more compelling, because then that would mean he was a clean player all those years in his prime(competing against a league of users).
<< <i>
<< <i>
<< <i>except that there's quite a few more deserving players who should be in the hall ahead of this guy. >>
Name one non juicer not named Rose or Shoeless Joe. >>
Why would I exclude deserving PED users?
Bonds - all time HR king, should have been a first ballot, 100% hall of famer. The best hitter any of us ever watched.
Clemens - 7 time Cy Young, should have been a first ballot, 100% hall of famer. The best pitcher any of us ever watched.
Rose - all time hit king, admitted to gambling on baseball as a manager, which doesn't take away from his accomplishments on the field. A 20+ year sentence is overkill. Put him in.
McGwire - saved baseball after ownership plotted to kill player salaries and cancelled a world series. Along with Sosa, saved baseball with a magical 1998 HR chase that any of us who was watching baseball will remember forever.
>>
Bonds - HOFer before he "allegedly" started juicing. Don't like the guy but still think he belongs but doubt he ever makes it in.
Clemens - Not the best pitcher I have ever seen. That would be Maddux.
Rose - I said name someone not named Rose. Broke a cardinal rule of the game. He knew he was doing it when he did it. That's why he lied about it forever. Got busted and decides to come clean. He deserves to be banned.
McGwire and Sosa - Loved the summer of '98. It was my generations summer of '61. Doesn't change the fact that they were roided up and like Rose, they both lied about it.
<< <i>n't feel like debating today, but Ax, if you are saying Biggio's increase in HR's that year is due to Clemens arriving with steroids, then that would make Biggio a non user all his other years...which are all the years before he 'played too long and was washed up'. That would make his case more compelling, because then that would mean he was a clean player all those years in his prime(competing against a league of users). >>
I'll say it again, he wasn't a HoFer without PEDs, and even with likely using them, he's still not. Even in his prime he wasn't putting up HOF numbers.
<< <i>
<< <i>n't feel like debating today, but Ax, if you are saying Biggio's increase in HR's that year is due to Clemens arriving with steroids, then that would make Biggio a non user all his other years...which are all the years before he 'played too long and was washed up'. That would make his case more compelling, because then that would mean he was a clean player all those years in his prime(competing against a league of users). >>
I'll say it again, he wasn't a HoFer without PEDs, and even with likely using them, he's still not. Even in his prime he wasn't putting up HOF numbers. >>
That still doesn't explain the quandary that your statements tied you in(as I quoted above). If he didn't use until his HR jump(as you proposed), then he played clean all those years against a league full of users, thus making his rankings among his peers even higher than his numbers currently show, which would mean his already HOF numbers would be even better.
You have presented some confusing statements. When talking about Ichiro, you rail how the HR is overrated. Now in this debate, you are doing the opposite with McGwire/Biggio.
It is not always easy comparing a middle infielder to a corner...because there is wiggle room in the positional adjustment. However, lets take that step out, and use only second basemen...and since you brought up statistics, why not use one of the most precise measurement on a batters impact in terms of winning, Win Probability Added(based on the actual play by play data, and the context of each event).
So forget what one 'thinks' about what a HR or 1B or any other stat is worth, because below, each offensive event is given its proper context and win value of what they actually did.
Name.......Career WPA
Biggio.......31.5
R. Alomar..27.5
Utley........25.5.....he turns 35 this year(and has averaged about 1.6 his last three years), so he may catch him, may not.
Kent.........22.9
Soriano.....13.6....and he was only a 2B for a little while
Cano.........11.9....he turns 31 this year. He has averaged 3.3 his last three years, so he may end up close to Biggio, depending how he ages.
R. Durham...9.5
Baerga........5.6
So offensively, his "numbers," Biggio is at the top for the second base position in his era of the 90's-2000's.
We can dip to the era before to see if another 2B eclipses him(even though cross era comparisons draw more problems).
Whitaker.....29.7
Sandberg....27.6
So it looks like we will have to go back to Carew and Morgan to find two 2B that were certainly better offensively.
Currently, your entire argument has been to deny him based on his offensive statistics, his numbers. However, the reality is that his numbers are better than any other 2B until we get back to Morgan/Carew.
Cano and Utley probably have 50/50 chances to catch him...and if they do, they won't get far at all ahead of him.
How about comparing him to another 'non home run hitter' for some perspective:
Ichiro....14.7
<< <i>
You have presented some confusing statements. When talking about Ichiro, you rail how the HR is overrated. Now in this debate, you are doing the opposite with McGwire/Biggio. >>
But McGwire didn't just hit home runs, he got on base at an astounding clip, and while 1B is not the premium defensive position 2B/C are, McGwire was much better at fielding his position than Biggio was.
<< <i>It is not always easy comparing a middle infielder to a corner...because there is wiggle room in the positional adjustment. However, lets take that step out, and use only second basemen...and since you brought up statistics, why not use one of the most precise measurement on a batters impact in terms of winning, Win Probability Added(based on the actual play by play data, and the context of each event).
So forget what one 'thinks' about what a HR or 1B or any other stat is worth, because below, each offensive event is given its proper context and win value of what they actually did.
Name.......Career WPA
Biggio.......31.5
R. Alomar..27.5
Utley........25.5.....he turns 35 this year(and has averaged about 1.6 his last three years), so he may catch him, may not.
Kent.........22.9
Soriano.....13.6....and he was only a 2B for a little while
Cano.........11.9....he turns 31 this year. He has averaged 3.3 his last three years, so he may end up close to Biggio, depending how he ages.
R. Durham...9.5
Baerga........5.6
So offensively, his "numbers," Biggio is at the top for the second base position in his era of the 90's-2000's. >>
Jack Morris was widely regarded as the best pitcher of the 80s. That doesn't mean he's a hall of famer, just that he pitched in an era where there was little pitching competition. The same holds true with Biggio. He may have been the best 2B in this 10 year run, but that doesn't mean he's earned hall eligibility.
<< <i>We can dip to the era before to see if another 2B eclipses him(even though cross era comparisons draw more problems).
Whitaker.....29.7
Sandberg....27.6
So it looks like we will have to go back to Carew and Morgan to find two 2B that were certainly better offensively. >>
And your point is? We need to elect the best at each position in a 10 year run? Or can we just realize he had a very nice career, but his numbers simply don't merit HoF induction, no matter where on the 2B totem pole he resides.
<< <i>Currently, your entire argument has been to deny him based on his offensive statistics, his numbers. However, the reality is that his numbers are better than any other 2B until we get back to Morgan/Carew. >>
I am not denying his numbers based on other 2B, I am denying them based on a league as a whole. Sorry, he doesn't get to be compared just against other 2B.
<< <i>Cano and Utley probably have 50/50 chances to catch him...and if they do, they won't get far at all ahead of him. >>
Cano is already at 45 WAR in 9 seasons. Biggio took TWENTY to accumulate 65 WAR. Cano is already a better hitter than Biggio ever was, and infinitely less replaceable.
<< <i>How about comparing him to another 'non home run hitter' for some perspective:
Ichiro....14.7 >>
Ichiro's defense and the fact that his WAR is nearly equal to Biggio's despite having 7 less seasons than Biggio more than makes up that gap. Ichiro lost prime seasons to his Japanese teams, and despite that loss, has nearly as many hits (2742 vs. 3060) as Biggio does.
1) If you accuse Biggio of doing PEDs, then so did Maddux, Thomas, Piazza, Glavine, and everyone else. If you don't like it, too bad, your rules.
2) If you say Biggio was easily replaceable, then you don't understand the concept of team sports.
That is all.
Biggio's offensive 2B run isn't for a ten year period. In the WPA measurement, it is closer to 30 years.
Your argument against the WPA measurement is that Ichiro's WAR is nearly equal to Biggio....yet Biggio had a higher WAR than McGwire!!
You go back and forth too much. That is the kind of stuff that destroys your arguments.
Your m/o is that if something props up one of your heroes, that you use it...but when that same thing is used for somebody else, you discount it.
That is the kind of stuff you did with the Aroid/Selig stuff. You want to burn Selig at the stake for 'over-seeing' the steroid era...yet you want to give a free pass to the guys who actually did them! You can't have it both ways. Either they are all worthy of your scorn, or none of them(including Arod and Selig).
WPA is a far more accurate offensive measure than the offensive portion of WAR. BIggio destroys Ichiro. Biggio did more for winning games than Ichiro did. The play by play data doesn't lie. You may not like it, but that is what happened. So if you are going to take the stance that it isn't just about being the best 2B, then Ichiro is waaaay off the HOF curve, much further than Biggio.
If you then try to use WAR to discount the WPA(and BIggio's HUGE lead over Ichiro), then that means BIggio is ahead of McGwire.
You have painted yourself in a quandary.
WAR is a faulty measurement, with a subpar offensive portion, and a voodoo like defensive/positional adjustment portion. Run Expectancy for the 24 states, and WPA give a far more accurate offensive portion.
Run Expectancy from the play by play data:
Biggio 372
Ichiro 179
So BIggio has HUGE leads in the two most accurate offensive measurements!
See what you don't realize is that ALL of your arguments that degrade Biggio against McGwire, also degrade Ichiro(and degrade him more because he was far less than Biggio). As pointed out above, you can't have it both ways.
PS Also, I went over the Ichiro stuff with you before. A career that started in the states could just as easily have been a career where he was never even drafted, as easily as it could have been where he had a few more good years. Most likely, he would not have become a MLB starter until age 23 or 24, and he would not have just walked in like he did. He may very well have had NEGATIVE WPA seasons. But alas, that is all a guess, and anyone's guess is as good as anyone's. What we do know is that Ichiro was inferior to Biggio....the play by play data tells us that.
Not my rules but it sure is an easy game to play.
WAR................the Offensive portion is not as accurate as the two measurements below, and the defenisve/positional adjustment has error problems(but there does need to be some position allowance).
BIggio 64.9
McGwire 62
Ichiro 58.5
Win Probability Added(play by play data)
McGwire 53
Biggio 31.5
Ichiro 15
Run Expectancy Created(play by play data)
McGwire 578
Biggio 372
Ichiro 179
Career OPS+
McGwire 163
Biggio 112
Ichiro 111
Bill James Career Win Shares
Biggio 411
McGwire 342
Ichiro 300(I estimated his last couple of years, so this isn't exact)
Ax, you can't have it both ways. If we played a game of "who doesn't belong"...hmmmm.
Then the topper! You have the nerve to bring 'hit totals' into the Ichiro portion of the argument. Forget the fact that hit totals is probably one of the most inaccurate forms of measurement...but the fact that you completely scoffed at that point in the Biggio/McGwire debate just shows that you change stances based on what props up your hero or not. When it came to Ichiro, you have always bashed the HR, saying it was overrated...now you do the opposite.
None of those events(HR, 1B, 2B, etc..) are overrated, because the play by play data gives their exact value. THere is NO NEED to guess or have an opinion on their value, the play by play data shows its value based on what actually occured in MLB over millions of plays.
If someone wants to talk about a players 'numbers' as Ax did, then the Run Expectancy and Win Probability Added, are really the only numbers needed to ascertain a players offensive value. Then Batting Runs/wins and OPS+ come next. Hit totals is at the Kindergarten level.
PS. You are not allowed to trumpet Cano...because you have done nothing but bash Yankee players for years on end. Even so, when he is finished, he is looking to be about as equal as Biggio, if he ages well.
Also, you used to say that Jose Lopez was better than Cano. The only reason you made that claim is because he was on the Mariners. You have to get rid of your homer bias, especially in regard to Ichiro(who is way overrated), and Griffey(who is just as likely to have used roids as Biggio)
PSS: I would also like to see some strong evidence of Ichiro's defensive prowess, and how it can overcome such a large gap between him and Biggio offensive output(as measured by the most precise measurements). This evidence should include isolating HIS defensive contributions from that of his pitchers/evironment, and compared to league mates. Keep in mind the stuff you have said about Ozzie Smith, because that will make Ichiro's case even worse
<< <i>
While OPS is hardly a single way of determining a hitter's value, it does give a lot of insight, and Biggio ranks #470 all time. OPS+? #600. OBP? #363. He simply wasn't the force at the plate his supporters make him out to be. >>
There have been five middle infielders voted in by the Writers since the turn of the century. In ops, OPS+ and ops, Biggio compares very favorably with them. Behind, Larkin and Alomar, ahead of Ripken, Smith and Sandberg. But based only on their peak years, Biggio is ahead of all of them.
For his seven year run as a truly great player, Boggy missed only 14 games, had an ops of .870 an OPS+ of 132 and an obp of .397. Alomar's best six year run: .869, 128 and .394, while missing 102 of his teams games. Larkin's best (91-98, but ignoring 1997): .878, 134 and .392 -- virtually equal to Biggio, but missed 143 of his teams games. Ripken obviously never missed a game, but using the stats you choose to highlight, he falls well short of Biggio for his best seven years (83-91 while ignoring 1989): .825, 129 and .356. Sandberg (84-92 ignores 86): .845, 128 and .358, while missing 74 games. Won't even bother with Ozzie
So using ops, OPS+ and obp for only their peak years Biggio was better than all other recent middle infield choices for the Hall-of-Fame. You can go ahead and do it for their best five years, six years, eight years or whatever, but the results don't change much.
Interesting that his supporters are the ones who will use facts to show exactly what sort of force Biggio was at the plate: his best years are better than the best years of the other players who set the standards for the Hall-of-Fame
<< <i>Two things:
1) If you accuse Biggio of doing PEDs, then so did Maddux, Thomas, Piazza, Glavine, and everyone else. If you don't like it, too bad, your rules. >>
False. Biggio was at ground zero of PED use. Atlanta, Chicago, LA were not the hotbed of PED activity that Houston was. I'm sorry this hurts you (as it's your favorite team), but facts are facts man. Look at the FACTS of PED use in Houston: Caminiti started it, Bagwell was a widely known user, Clemens and Petite...then in 2004 (just as Clemens arrives) Biggio hits career highs in HR at age 38? Sorry, sir, but that's just far too many 'coincidences' for there not to be more there. What I don't like are fans like YOU who can't see the forest for the trees. If you can't grasp the idea that a guy at age 38 hitting career highs in HR then going even higher at age 39 *just* as Clemens arrives opens him up to suspicion, well, I can't help you there. There are guys with a lot less evidence being convicted in the court of public opinion.
<< <i>2) If you say Biggio was easily replaceable, then you don't understand the concept of team sports.
That is all. >>
His PRODUCTION was easily replaceable. Try reading AND comprehending next time. The fact that his hitting was surpassed by literally hundreds of players in baseball history is proof of this.