2016 Baseball Hall of Fame Discussion

The Tariff King

The Tariff King

Trade War Deadline Winner
Staff member
According to current tracker (early public votes)

Griffey at 100%
Piazza at 86%
Bagwell at 77.8%
Raines at 76.7%
---
Hoffman at 62%
Schilling at 58%
Mussina at 52%
---
Bonds at 51%
Clemens at 50%
Tramell at 45%

Other Notables, Kent 18%. Mcgwire at 13%, Sosa at 9%.

Former Braves: Garret Anderson at 1%, Sheffield at 12%, Wagner at 9%

I hope Griffey gets 100%, because if he doesn't, I have a feeling the Hall will wait for 2019 to make Jeter the first.

Been reading Bagwell and Raines may miss barely this year. Official results are in at 3 today.
 
Forgot this was coming out today. Hopefully Bagwell and Raines get in. Griffey won't get 100% even though he should. Will be intersting to see where Bonds and Clemens end up. They both ended up in the mid 30's last year. Anything close to 50% would be a signifigant jump for them.
 
thewupk said:
Forgot this was coming out today. Hopefully Bagwell and Raines get in. Griffey won't get 100% even though he should. Will be intersting to see where Bonds and Clemens end up. They both ended up in the mid 30's last year. Anything close to 50% would be a signifigant jump for them.
Click to expand...

I'm interested to know if it's a difference between writers putting in new guys to vote for those two later, or if this is just downright going downward for both. McGwire started low and he's been trending low. Sosa could be his last year.

The ballot is going to be loaded for the next few years. When it does look like it clears up, will be interesting to see what happens to Bonds and Clemens.
 
Is that Ken Griffey, Sr.? It would be great to get another former Brave in the HOF!

25516-513621Fr.jpg
 
Here's my hall ballot.

Bonds
CLemens
Griffey
Mussina
Schilling
Bagwell
Walker
Trammell
Piazza
Edmonds

We need to ditch the steroid bull****. Let Bonds and Clemens and Bagwell in, they're clearly HOF worthy andif you make everything a steroid witchhunt, then you're ****ed. McGwire and Sosa aren't good enough IMO. I wouldn't normally vote for players liek Edomonds or Piazza based on their stats, but they played CF and C which aren't offensive rich positions. What's gonna happen otherwise is when we hit the rich inductee years coming up we'll have a log jam. Just get the guys who're questionable but still great in. Stop dicking around and stop the witch hunt. We didn't hold out guys from the 60s for taking amphetamines.
 
The Don said:
Bagwell has never been tied to PED though.
Click to expand...

But he's been suspicious of them cause of his collapse. People will keep throwing questions at anyone and it's dumb. Because anyone could have taken steroids who's played baseball since the 1940s. Just stop the witch hunt, and start the healing.
 
zitothebrave said:
But he's been suspicious of them cause of his collapse. People will keep throwing questions at anyone and it's dumb. Because anyone could have taken steroids who's played baseball since the 1940s. Just stop the witch hunt, and start the healing.
Click to expand...

Collapse?

I'm looking at his numbers and his decline looks like a normal age decline to me.

He had a bad shoulder injury where he could barely throw anymore. It was brutal watching him not being able to throw the ball to 2nd or to the pitcher covering first. I'm just sad the year he finally made it to the Series he was barely able to play even as a DH.
 
The Don said:
Zito thinks he was on "The Stuff" or maybe Zito thinks he was "The Stuff". Good to know you were a WCW fan 50. I'll never fully turn to the darkside (WWE). WCW FOREVER.
Click to expand...

WCW was about one million times better than WWE. Four Horsemen were the sh*t! Wooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

horse04.jpg
 
The Don said:
Collapse?

I'm looking at his numbers and his decline looks like a normal age decline to me.

He had a bad shoulder injury where he could barely throw anymore. It was brutal watching him not being able to throw the ball to 2nd or to the pitcher covering first. I'm just sad the year he finally made it to the Series he was barely able to play even as a DH.
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing with you at all. I don't think he was on steroids. I'm just explaining the rationale some voters are likely having.
 
There will never be a guy who gets 100%, at least until the current group of voters is gone. I don't know why people don't understand this.

There are certain voters who literally refuse to vote for a guy on his first ballot solely to ensure that no one gets 100%. It is their goal, so no one will get 100%. It won't be Griffey and it won't be Jeter.
 
smootness said:
There will never be a guy who gets 100%, at least until the current group of voters is gone. I don't know why people don't understand this.

There are certain voters who literally refuse to vote for a guy on his first ballot solely to ensure that no one gets 100%. It is their goal, so no one will get 100%. It won't be Griffey and it won't be Jeter.
Click to expand...

in our ERA, if Maddux didn't get 100% then no one will until those douche bags who do what you say are dead or no longer have a vote. I have heard this about a few voters who I guess feel superior to others because they have the privilege to vote on HOF..
 
bravesfanMatt said:
in our ERA, if Maddux didn't get 100% then no one will until those douche bags who do what you say are dead or no longer have a vote. I have heard this about a few voters who I guess feel superior to others because they have the privilege to vote on HOF..
Click to expand...

Their rationale is that if guys like Babe Ruth, Ted Williams, and Ty Cobb didn't get 100% then no one should. They believe that a current guy who gets in at 100% would always be promoted as a more 'certain' HOFer and thus somehow better than guys like Ruth, Williams, Cobb, etc.

I don't really agree with their reasoning, but that's why they do it. They view it as protecting the history of the game, not of trying to appear superior to others.

It's not a secret, there are absolutely voters who do exactly this.
 
Maybe they ought not to disclose the percentages. Just announce whether a guy got in or not.

The way it is now, they just come off looking incredibly, incredibly stupid when a Pedro or Maddux or Griffey isn't 100 percent.
 
bravesnumberone said:
Maybe they ought not to disclose the percentages. Just announce whether a guy got in or not.

The way it is now, they just come off looking incredibly, incredibly stupid when a Pedro or Maddux or Griffey isn't 100 percent.
Click to expand...

Correct. I liked the rule someone proposed of no reentry. You get unlimited votes and one shot. You're in or you're out. No bull**** about first ballot or anything like that. You get one ballot. If you're not HOF quality to get elected the first time why bother a second time? Much less the 20th time?
 
smootness said:
There will never be a guy who gets 100%, at least until the current group of voters is gone. I don't know why people don't understand this.

There are certain voters who literally refuse to vote for a guy on his first ballot solely to ensure that no one gets 100%. It is their goal, so no one will get 100%. It won't be Griffey and it won't be Jeter.
Click to expand...

The BBWAA tried to curtail some of that, by only allowing someone to be eligible if they've covered the sport in the last 10 years.

This was why one guy only voted for Jack Morris and refused to vote for Maddux. I think he may be out since he hadn't covered baseball in 20 years. So altogether there's much less voters in the pool now.
 
The Don said:
The BBWAA tried to curtail some of that, by only allowing someone to be eligible if they've covered the sport in the last 10 years.

This was why one guy only voted for Jack Morris and refused to vote for Maddux. I think he may be out since he hadn't covered baseball in 20 years. So altogether there's much less voters in the pool now.
Click to expand...

I'll still be shocked if anyone in the next 30 years gets 100% of the vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top