2017 HOF Vote

grote15

With almost half the HOF ballots now recorded (43.7%), Raines has surged ahead of Bagwell at 91.6% to 91.1%.  Both are now virtual locks for induction this year.  The only other player presently over the 75% threshold is Pudge at 80.5% but my guess is that he will wind up short of the necessary votes for induction this year.  Vlad is at 74.2% and Hoffman is at 73.2%.  Both Bonds and Clemens have dropped to 64.7% and 64.2%, respectively, after being up over 70% early on, and will likely wind up with less than 60% when the finally ballots come in. 

https://onedrive.live.com/view.aspx?resid=F2E5D8FC5199DFAF!8063&ithint=file,xlsx&app=Excel&authkey=!AAAsz3uDsmqy_Vw

galaxy27

I had been looking for this -- thanks, Tim. Really interesting stuff, with a few things jumping out at me:

First, my boy VG hanging tough at 74.3%. He'll in all likelihood come up short this year, but this portends favorably moving forward. And for the record, I would not have voted for him on the first ballot. There's some objectivity for ya.

Sammy Sosa @ 9.9%. Second to last. Basically voters are saying, "Without illicit help, you were nothing. Please go away."

Tim Raines @ 91.6%. Ridiculous it has taken this long. Arguably the second-greatest leadoff hitter and base stealer of all time. 69.1 wins above replacement -- ahead of 15 (out of 19) HoF left fielders. I know Henderson + Montreal did an admirable job of removing him from the spotlight, but come on, man. 10 years to finally receive his just due?? More like comeuppance at this point.

dallasactuary

I did a very quick and dirty analysis to determine who were the most "dominant" hitters not in the HOF. Since I wanted to confine this to hitting only, I didn't look at catchers or infielders, other than first basemen. I defined "dominant" solely by reference to OPS+, and where the hitter ranked in that stat in their 10 best seasons - 10 points for 1st, 9 points for 2nd, etc. Ranking 11th or 111th were both worth zero points. By way of reference, I calculated the stat for a sample of the best hitters of the past 50 years: Mays, Schmidt, Frank Thomas, and Pujols:

Mays: 93
Schmidt: 92
Thomas: 79
Pujols: 79

Of the eligible hitters not in the HOF (I considered Bonds etc. to be ineligible), the runaway leader is Dick Allen, with a score of 74. We've discussed him enough so I'll just leave it at that.

After Allen there is a huge dropoff down to Frank Howard, with 45 and Minnie Minoso with 44.

After Howard and Minoso there is a small dropoff to a large pack of hitters between 31 and 41:

41 Ken Singleton
40 Pedro Guerrero
39 Jack Clark
37 Boog Powell
36 Vlad Guerrero
36 Norm Cash
35 Will Clark
35 Babe Herman
34 Dwight Evans
34 Tony Oliva
33 Don Mattingly
33 Larry Walker
32 Rocky Colavito
31 Reggie Smith

Of this group, only Pedro Guerrero and Reggie Smith ever led the league in OPS+, and each did it only once. Were these "dominant" hitters? Maybe, maybe not. Were they HOF level hitters (none has anything besides hitting in their HOF case)? Maybe, maybe not. Does it make any sense to pick Vlad Guerrero out of this pack and put him in the HOF while leaving out the others? No, it doesn't. I've always thought Howard and Minoso should be in the HOF, but I don't see any HOFers below them on this list. You may see more HOFers than I do, which is fine, but I don't understand what the argument is for picking just one; all of these players were roughly equivalent.

But Amen and Hallelujah for Tim Raines, if he finally makes it. He isn't the best hitter not in the HOF, but he is by far the best eligible player not in the HOF.

P.S. I did these calculations as names popped into my head; I may well have overlooked someone.

galaxy27

I like what you did there. So much so that I had a thought come to mind and decided to steal your grading scale. I think we do these guys a disservice when we fail to come at them from many different angles. After all, being enshrined is the pinnacle of a ballplayer's legacy.

With that said, I took your OPS+ barometer and substituted it with MVP voting. Top 10, 1-10, everything the exact same. I grabbed Allen, Howard and Minoso from up above, and tossed in Vlad and Pudge for comparitive purposes:

40 *Vladimir Guerrero (6 times)
31 Minnie Minoso (5 times)
21 *Dick Allen (3 times)
18 Frank Howard (4 times)
13 *Pudge Rodriguez (4 times)

*named league MVP once

Justacommeman

I saw the following on the list play. The only one whoever immediately crossed my mind as a sure fire HOF was Pudge.

Ken Singleton
Pedro Guerrero
Jack Clark
Boog Powell
Vlad Guerrero
Will Clark
Dwight Evans
Don Mattingly
Larry Walker
Reggie Smith
Pudge Rodriguez

Singleton, Pedro, Clark, Powell, Evans ( My favorite as a kid), Mattingly, Reggie Smith and Walker never crossed my mind as a HOFer.

mark

dallasactuary

Pudge is a HOFer, but it sure isn't for being a dominant hitter; he scores 1 on the OPS+ scale I made up. I left out catchers for a reason. Johnny Bench is thought of as a dominant hitter, but he wasn't either (he scores 16). No catcher ever has been a dominant hitter.

And galaxy, we're all free to make up stats and it's fun. But using MVP votes just begs the question whether the person receiving the votes deserved them. VG got lots of MVP votes because he drove in lots of runs and that's what a lot pf people believe makes a hitter valuable. They're wrong, and the mistake that MVP voters make is then compounded when HOF voters base their votes on how the MVP voters voted. In other words, I don't study statistics to determine who won MVP awards or got in the HOF; those are just facts I can look up. I study statistics to determine who deserved to win MVP awards or get in the HOF. VG was a great player, as were Minnie Minoso, Frank Howard, Norm Cash, etc. MVP voters thought he was better than all of these others, and I think they were wrong.

grote15

No catcher ever has been a dominant hitter.

Dallas, you wouldn't classify Piazza as a dominant hitter, at least for the better part of his career?

dallasactuary

I paused before typing "ever", and I should have paused a little bit longer. Piazza did have a very dominant stretch at the plate, and Posey could have one, too. As I said, I did that post off the top of my head (other than the actual calculations of the "dominance" stats) and names from the 80s and earlier pop into my head much more readily than later names. Thanks for the correction.

I think it's interesting, though, that you think of Piazza as a dominant hitter "for the better part of his career". Other than a single 8th place finish in OPS+ a few years later, Piazza's dominant stretch lasted for just 5 years, from 1993 to 1997; the first five years of his career. I certainly sold him short with my "ever" comment, but you may be overselling him a bit. He, like Bench, Berra, Pudge and several others, was a very good hitter for a long time, but he, like Bench, Berra, etc., was one of the very best hitters for only a short time.

I also think it's interesting that Piazza, unlike Bench, Berra, etc., wasn't a very good catcher. Had I said that no good catcher has ever been a dominant hitter, I may have been correct.

grote15

Definitely agree regarding the good catcher part, but I would assert that, hitting wise, Piazza was arguably the best hitting catcher of all time.

dallasactuary

The three best hitting catchers of all time are Bench, Berra and Piazza, in some order. They played in vastly different circumstances (parks, eras, etc.) so I don't know if there's a definitively correct answer, but I would rank Piazza first, mostly due to his peak.

DIMEMAN

I think Bench is the best of the 3. He hit for power and pretty good average and was the best at throwing out runners.

galaxy27

Dallas, I'm not going to attempt to get into the minds of MVP & HOF voters, because that's an effort in futility waiting to happen. I'll let you do that if you so desire. It was merely a fun little exercise using your grading scale -- but tweaking it to include the highest accolade that can be bestowed upon a player while he is still active. I do get what you are saying, however. When it comes to the science of voting, there is nothing exact about it. Hell, by most statistical measures (both traditional and advanced), Guerrero's 2000 season (when he finished 6th) trumps his MVP year in 2004.

As far as his candidacy is concerned, here's my impartial take....

If you're a non-sabr kinda guy, his case is very robust. Being a career .318+ hitter plus 400+ taters has only been accomplished by 6 retired players -- Ruth, Foxx, Williams, Gehrig, Musial, and Guerrero. That's some pretty stout company to be in, and I'm sure there's a portion of the 74.4% that see things like that and feel no need to dig deeper. Even with him being my favorite player of all time, I personally choose to delve much further.

When you get to the advanced stage, things start to get a little hazy. I have often times asked myself wtf happened when I have utilized more complex metrics. Case in point: things that happened when he didn't have a bat in his hands. Despite having a bazooka attached to his shoulder that resulted in a number of assists, Vlad had limited range and committed a overabundance of errors. A career dWAR of -10.7 may be discounted by many, but not by me. It matters. So does the fact that he was an inefficient base stealer and poorly rated base runner by just about every measure, even though he finished with almost 200 swipes.

The eye test, the fondness by which most people remember him and the sheer entertainment he brought to the game during his playing days tilt things back in his favor. How he became such a proficient and feared hitter with such a liberal interpretation of the strike zone is one of life's great mysteries, but it's this type of idiosyncrasy that only enhances his aura and really puts voters -- who might be riding the fence -- to the test.

I had Vlad at 55-60% for his first rodeo, but it appears as if he is going to exceed that and eventually walk through the doors if not this year. Is that fair to a guy like Dick Allen who is rubbing elbows with Willie Mays at a career 156 OPS+, with Hank Aaron (155) reading the bottom of his shoes? You can make a strong case that it is not, but then again, a very subjective and inexact process this is.

dallasactuary

@DIMEMAN said:
I think Bench is the best of the 3. He hit for power and pretty good average and was the best at throwing out runners.

I agree that Bench is the best overall player among catchers, but Piazza was the best hitter.

@galaxy27 said:
Is that fair to a guy like Dick Allen...

Allen is in a class by himself, in a number of ways, so comparisons to him are always complicated. But is Guerrero getting in the HOF fair to Frank Howard? To Minnie Minoso? To Jack Clark, Pedro Guerrero, Norm Cash, etc.? I don't see how it is. HOF voting is, as you say, a subjective and inexact process, but if being in the HOF is to continue to be an honor it has to at least make sense. Plucking VG out from among a substantial group of very similar players and honoring only him with HOF membership doesn't make sense, it's just random. And "honors" distributed randomly are no longer honors. If membership in the HOF were determined by tossing coins, would anyone care who got in and who didn't? That's the risk that the HOF voters are taking with VG (and Jim Rice before him) - that after awhile nobody will care any more.

Skin2

Vlad is getting extra attention because he is probably the best slugger type(non-defensive value type) from his era that isn't a known steroid user.

The only other 'clean' guy ahead of Vlad from his own era based on hitting alone is Edgar Martinez, but he was a DH, so that rules him out in the minds of many.

Plus Vlad also has the throwing arm reputation.

So really, he is the Dave Parker of his era. Parker would have gotten the attention too if the Murray's, Stargell's, Brett's, Winfield's, and Schmidt's of the world were banned for steroid use like Vlad's slugging contemporaries were.

Isn't too surprising to me.

What is surprising still is how the writers pick and choose who was 'clean' when in reality, it is impossible to know for sure, and most likely they were all pretty much as guilty as everyone else from the era.

dallasactuary

Yep, I did forget to put somebody on my list - Dave Parker. He scores 33 on the OPS+ dominance stat, and he also led the league once. And I agree that he and VG make a good, and close, comparison.

garnettstyle

How could you forget about the Cobra?

No love for dale Murphy?

galaxy27

Dallas, I admire your passion for the numbers and you are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I don't think Guerrero's candidacy is nearly as cut and dry as you make it out to be. I have clearly understood your position from your very first post on this thread. Up above you said that "plucking VG out from a substantial group of very similar players and honoring only him with membership doesn't make sense, it's just random." You're essentially saying that if guys like Howard and Minoso aren't in, Vlad doesn't deserve to be either. I get it. Moreover, I have taken what you've said into consideration.

But allow me to flip the narrative via a traditional & advanced statistical comparison to a first-ballot Hall guy who was also a one-time MVP. Keep in mind that Vlad and Player B (whose name I will reveal at the end of this post) were separated by a mere 32 plate appearances over the course of their careers:

Advanced

VG: 59.3 WAR, 140 OPS+, 136 wRC+, .390 wOBA, .235 OSO
Player B: 57.5 WAR, 147 OPS+, 145 wRC+, .387 wOBA, .247 OSO

Counting

VG: 2,590 hits, 449 home runs, 1,496 runs batted in, 250 intentional walks
Player B: 2,232 hits, 475 home runs, 1,540 runs batter in, 227 intentional walks

Slash

VG: .318/.553/.931
Player B: .282/.529/.889

One additional stat......strikeouts

VG: 985
Player B: 1936

Personally, I have a difficult time saying one player distances himself from the other, primarily because their numbers are so eerily similar. But the point I'm trying to make to you is, you say Frank Howard and I say..................Willie Stargell.

And again, this is not me being a homer because he was my favorite player. Anyone who truly knows me will tell you I'm as objective a sports fan as you'll ever find. Remember, in my initial post I stated that I wouldn't vote for Vlad on the first ballot. I am part of the (now) 25.5%, right along with you. But do I think he's worthy? Yeah, I do. And when I say that, I'm not just taking traditional, advanced, offense and defense into consideration. There are a slew of intangibles that shine down favorably upon him. I can say that how? Because I'm very confident that I watched him play more times and kept up with every single aspect of his career more closely than anyone reading this.

Bottom line: it's often times not easy trying to determine if/when to open the door for some of these guys. I can sit here and tell you that Vlad grounded into 277 double plays and was an alarmingly poor postseason hitter, but then I can turn right around and tell you that his OPS+ was higher than Ken Griffey Jr.'s and his slugging percentage was higher than Mike Piazza's. Round and round we go, like a dog chasing its tail. But it sure is fun breaking it down, isn't it? I don't know about you, but if the only two definitive outcomes were 100% or zilch, I'd get bored quickly.

Peace, I'm outtie. Time to start "preparing" for the football games.

breakdown

I just looked at the spreadsheet that grote15 posted at the top of this thread. How does Jon Heyman vote for Barry Bonds and not Roger Clemens? Those two should be tied at the hip, as far as I am concerned. If you can't vote for a person that took steroids, then don't vote for them but otherwise they are both in no question. Also not sure why Sosa gets so few in comparison but I guess it can be argued that without steroids, Sosa is just an average player, whereas Bonds is still a HOFer.

Also interesting how many votes Schilling lost from last year, likely for being such a loon on his Twitter account. [And no, I am not asking to go into political debate here, thanks].

Finally, I am a little surprised at Bagwell's vote count. And Raines for that matter. Both were fine players and compiled some nice stats but they don't jump off the page as HOFers. JMO.

dallasactuary

@galaxy27 said:
Personally, I have a difficult time saying one player distances himself from the other, primarily because their numbers are so eerily similar. But the point I'm trying to make to you is, you say Frank Howard and I say..................Willie Stargell.

I'll start by noting that Stargell's score on my dominance stat is 56; he's not part of that substantial group of similar players, he's better. You listed several "traditional" stats, but I'm going to ignore those; since they aren't era adjusted they don't mean anything. Of the stats that are adjusted, Stargell wins the ones that matter easily. He's losing WAR, but he wins offensive WAR, so that difference is entirely defense. Just an opinion, but I think defensive WAR is crap and don't put any weight on it. What I see, looking at their career stats, is that Stargell was clearly better. The one thing that hasn't been addressed is situational hitting, so I checked that, too, and Stargell beats VG by 20% in WPA.

Better at peak, better for career, better when it mattered - Stargell was better than Guerrero. And while I agree that it would be boring if there was simply a line to draw and we could calculate who was over and below that line, I don't think Stargell is near that line. Guerrero (both of them), Howard, Parker and so on, I think, are near that line.

Justacommeman

Bagwell, Raines and Pudge in

mark

ernie11

Trevor Hoffman just barely missed, getting 327 votes, 74%.

Justacommeman

@ernie11 said:
Trevor Hoffman just barely missed, getting 327 votes, 74%.

Ouch.

Bookends

Pudges first year and Raines last year on the ballot

mark

SDSportsFan

Hoffman missed by 5 votes, and Guerrero missed by 15

Steve

orioles93

I wish Guerrero and Hoffman would have made it this year just to clear out the ballot a little bit more.

Estil

This is so stupid that the Mr. October of pitchers is once again not in the HOF. Purely because of political prejudice on the part of the writers/voters :P What does ones political views have anything to do with his career as a baseball player?

orioles93

@Estil said:
This is so stupid that the Mr. October of pitchers is once again not in the HOF. Purely because of political prejudice on the part of the writers/voters :P What does ones political views have anything to do with his career as a baseball player?

Jeff Kent seems to be suffering as well due to the prejudice of writers.

Estil

That's different, Jeff Kent certainly had respectable numbers but as far as HOF caliber, I don't see anything special that jumps out in that department.

Tabe

@Estil said:
That's different, Jeff Kent certainly had respectable numbers but as far as HOF caliber, I don't see anything special that jumps out in that department.

All-time home run leader among second basemen - 25% ahead of #2.

Tabe

@dallasactuary said: Piazza's dominant stretch lasted for just 5 years, from 1993 to 1997; the first five years of his career.

152, 135, 155, 148 - Piazza's OPS+ numbers from 98-01, during which he averaged more than 36 homers per year, and WAR of 4.8. Those are dominant numbers.

cecropiamoth

@SDSportsFan said:
Hoffman missed by 5 votes, and Guerrero missed by 15

Steve

Heartbreaking. Guerrero for sure will make it in the next year or two, hopefully Trevor's support doesn't back up.

Skin2

Bagwell and Irod...two poster boys for PED's sail right in.

orioles93

I love how people hate the PED guys so much but don't seem to care at all about guys who used greenies, threw spitballs, doctored baseballs, etc.

Skin2

@orioles93 said:
I love how people hate the PED guys so much but don't seem to care at all about guys who used greenies, threw spitballs, doctored baseballs, etc.

The writers care a lot...but they just put two PED poster boys in, and I find that kind of hilarious.

Justacommeman

Pudge was a Tiger during the PED purge. During the season of the purge and prior he looked like Vin Diesel. The following season after the purge he looked like Vin Scully.

mark

53BKid

@dallasactuary said:

@galaxy27 said:

Better at peak, better for career, better when it mattered - Stargell was better than Guerrero. And while I agree that it would be boring if there was simply a line to draw and we could calculate who was over and below that line, I don't think Stargell is near that line. Guerrero (both of them), Howard, Parker and so on, I think, are near that line.

Agreed. The other thing none of the stats cover are Stargell's contributions to two World Series Championships for the Pirates and his leadership. It all doesn't distill down to numbers, though he clearly was very strong in that category.

orioles93

I don't know about anyone else, but when I think to myself whether or not someone is a hall of famer, I try not to compare them to other players from different eras. The game is different overall, played differently, coached differently, players themselves are different. For example, starting pitchers from the 2000s to present can't be compared to pitchers from the 60s statistically. They were used differently (more starts per season, higher pitch counts,more complete games, less relying on relievers, etc.) So of course career stats are going to look different. Same goes for relievers. Relievers are used differently today than in years past and of course stats will be different. Hitters are the same way to. They can't be compared to others from other generations. An example is how modern hitters sometimes have 4 at bats in a game, and face 3 different pitchers, 2 of which are late inning specialists who throw 100 mph and have specialty pitches. In comparison to hitters from the 50s who most of the time had 4 at bats and faced the same pitcher all 4 times, or occasionally 3 times in a game.
Essentially I try to look at each player individually along with the era they played in. If you do that, then players like Guerrero, Hoffman, Edgar Martinez, Kent, Mussina, Schilling all belong in the hall of fame. Guerrero was one of the best sluggers in the 2000s hitting for both high average and power, Hoffman was probably the second best relief pitcher in the league throughout his career, Martinez was the top DH in the league when he played, Kent was the best hitting second baseman of his era, Mussina put up great career numbers while pitching in the AL East his entire career and during the steroid era, and Schilling may be the best postseason pitcher of all time.

Skin2

@Justacommeman said:
Pudge was a Tiger during the PED purge. During the season of the purge and prior he looked like Vin Diesel. The following season after the purge he looked like Vin Scully.

mark

Plus Canseco says he personally injected and gave Irod steroids. Canseco is the only player that told the truth about PED's. Every single other player denied, denied, denied...lied, lied, lied....and only 'unknowingly' took steroids. They were all full of crap.

When Irod was asked if he was on a positive PED test list his answer was, "Only God knows that."

Bagwell also pulled an incredible shrinking man act too.

Justacommeman

@Skin2 said:

@Justacommeman said:
Pudge was a Tiger during the PED purge. During the season of the purge and prior he looked like Vin Diesel. The following season after the purge he looked like Vin Scully.

mark

Plus Canseco says he personally injected and gave Irod steroids. Canseco is the only player that told the truth about PED's. Every single other player denied, denied, denied...lied, lied, lied....and only 'unknowingly' took steroids. They were all full of crap.

When Irod was asked if he was on a positive PED test list his answer was, "Only God knows that."

Bagwell also pulled an incredible shrinking man act too.

The vantage point from our seats at Commerica offer us a unique view and I always like watching the on deck hitter ( especially Miggy). The season following the purge we barely recognized Pudge it was like how isn't anybody taking about his transformation! It was startling.

mark

Justacommeman

Sweet article on Raines and baseballs new way of thinking

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/news/how-the-internet-helped-get-tim-raines-voted-into-the-hall-of-fame-041816589.html