Breaking Down the 2015 Hall of Fame Ballot, Part 1: The Holdovers

It’s time for that annual holiday tradition wherein I take 34 famous baseball players and analyze their careers and chances at enshrinement them for your observing pleasure. (Down from 36 last year – that’s what happens when players actually get voted in, you see…) Once again, there’s a multitude of interesting discussions, a few near certainties (more on them in Part II), and several candidates who will most likely get their ray of sunshine through simply being on the ballot before falling off and into obscurity/trivia answers. (Did you know that somebody actually voted for Jacque Jones last year?)

This year’s ballot is interesting because we’ll start to see if a new rule change will affect the candidacies of any of the players listed below. As of last summer, players may only remain on the ballot for ten years instead of fifteen. This rule change was made (ostensibly) to:

• Speed up the pace of getting elected for certain fringe candidates
• Prevent the ballot from getting cluttered with players who stick around for years and years getting the smallest margin of votes (See: Murphy, Dale; Concepcion, Davey; Trammell, Alan)
• Decrease support for other candidates by forcing writers to make quicker decisions on whether a person is or isn’t a Hall of Famer (See: Morris, Jack; Rice, Jim; Blyleven, Bert)
• Getting steroid users/suspected users off the ballot quicker (See: Palmeiro, Rafael, others from below)

Whether this is a good thing or not is probably best prescribed on an individual basis. For some, it should hasten their eventual/inevitable enshrinement. For others, it might force a rushed decision that errs on the side of keeping players out, an unfortunate tendency of the Baseball Writers Association of America. Worse yet, for fringe candidates, getting in might be even tougher – the Veterans Committees aren’t exactly proving themselves to be the best way for candidates to make it in. Beyond the trio of managers from last year (Torre, Cox, and LaRussa), they’ve elected exactly zero (0) living Hall of Famers in this decade. (Woe to the members of the Golden Age ballot, several of whom are already dead, and many of whom might be dead by the time that particular body gets around to electing anybody of that era.)

Without further ado, let’s get down to brass tacks. This is Part One of the Hall of Fame breakdown – the holdovers from last year’s ballot. Please note that, simply by virtue of garnering enough votes to stick around, most (if not all) of these players have arguments as Hall of Fame caliber players. I’ll be looking mostly at their likeliness of being inducted, not in their qualifications…for the most part. (Note: All statistics gathered from Baseball-Reference.com)

Alan Trammell (received 20.8% of the vote last year)

This is Trammell’s 14th year on the ballot (he, Don Mattingly, and Lee Smith were grandfathered into the new 10-year rule – all three may remain on the ballot for 15 years) and his enshrinement seems…well, it ain’t gonna happen. In spite of being one of the best shortstops of the 80’s and early 90’s and a key player on Detroit’s 1984 World Championship team, Trammell has never engendered much love amongst the voters, peaking in the mid-30’s in terms of voting percentage. Due to the overstuffed ballot of last year, Trammell lost 38% of his voting support, a number that’s reflective amongst all of the candidates. I don’t think he’ll drop much more – all but two of the candidates below lost votes last year (except for two newcomers), and I don’t think that trend will repeat itself. Nevertheless, despite being comparable to Barry Larkin (who coasted in during his third year on the ballot), Trammell will probably have to wait for the Veterans Committee to decide his fate. (Maybe he can go in with Lou Whitaker, his double play teammate who fell off ludicrously early!) Does he deserve it? Yes – I voted for him on my IBWAA ballot. However, deserve ain’t got nothing to do with it. This is the BBWAA we’re talking about here – only the (insert your own curmudgeon term here) get in! Verdict: Not getting in

Barry Bonds (34.7%)

Perhaps the best thing that can be said for the all-time home run leader is that his voting percentage only dropped 1.5%, less catastrophic than many others. Unfortunately, this means that the writers who feel he deserves to get in are voting for him, and those who feel that he represents an asterisk on the game for his alleged/near-certain PED usage will not be voting for him. He’s going to be waiting a long time to get in. Verdict: When pigs fly

Craig Biggio (74.8%)

Two votes! He missed by two god damned votes! One of the best, grittiest, most compelling players of all time missed election by two votes! How much does that suck? (LOTS) He was a better second baseman/catcher/center fielder than far too many, and while he declined to a shell of himself as he stuck around to get 3,000 hits, he still represents one of the best to ever play the game. I’m sure at least two people will feel guilty for not having voted him in and switch their votes. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if multiple people did. Verdict: Elected with 79% of the vote

Curt Schilling (29.2%)

Mr. Schilling, one of the most dominant pitchers of his era (when healthy), is facing brutal discrimination because his win total sits at only 216, not the nice round 300 that seems to have become the standard bearer for starting pitchers in the HoF. That being said, while his percentage dropped by 9.6% (almost 25% of his supporters fled!), I think that the election of a newcomer this time around bodes well for his future chances (more on that in part II). However, he needs to build support this year to make up ground – he’s only got 8 years to win over 45% of the voting body. Verdict: Not this year

Don Mattingly (8.2%)

This is Donnie Baseball’s last year to grace the ballot with his sideburns. Having declined in votes for two years, he would normally be at risk of falling off the ballot, which at this point would be a mercy. Fortunately, he’s got better things to do at the moment – like play with all of the new toys the Dodgers just traded for. Verdict: Happy trails to Manager Mattingly

Edgar Martinez (25.2%)

Edgar’s votes dropped by 10% from his last ballot. He’s one of the best hitters of the late 90’s/early 00’s, and while the election of Frank Thomas might start to set a standard for future DH’s (hola Big Papi), I don’t think Martinez has near enough time to make up the votes he needs – he’s in his sixth year, and needs 50% more votes. Verdict: As likely to get in this year as the AL is to give up the God Damn DH rule

Fred McGriff (11.7%)

Crime Dog! Poor Fred McGriff, who couldn’t stick around long enough to belt seven more homers to join the 500 home run club. As I’ve said before, he was never that dominant of a player. His style was more of the consistently good – 30 homers, 100 RBI, almost 90 runs and 90 walks a year. By advanced stats, he’s merely good. Which isn’t good enough for the Hall of Fame. There’s a chance he falls off the ballot this year. Verdict: Nope

Jeff Bagwell (54.3%)

Bagwell is one of two very interesting candidates. He’s essentially regarded as a future Hall of Famer, though his votes dropped by 5% from the previous year. The question isn’t “if” one of the best first basemen ever to play the game gets in – it’s when. The steroids buzz around Bagwell has faded into the breeze, but will always crop up – he was an admitted andro user back when the substance was still legal. With the ballot remaining crowded, I think it takes him two to three more years to build up enough support to make it in. Having said that, he needs to rise into the low 60’s if he wants to start gaining momentum. Verdict: A vote total of around 62%

Jeff Kent (15.2%)

For the all time leader in home runs by a second baseman to arrive on the ballot with only 15.2% of the votes, you have to believe that the guy was pretty damn unlikable. I don’t fully buy into the description of “the ultimate in trailer park trash” that I read on one website, but I don’t think it’s far from the truth. Shoot, this guy was even more unlikable than Barry Bonds – which is saying something. That being said, he is the all time leader in home runs by a second baseman…though he’s got a lot of work to do to make up ground. Verdict: Cracks 20% of the vote this year

Larry Walker (10.2%)

There are only 21 players in Major League history who have a .300/.400/.500 slash line (batting average, on-base percentage, slugging percentage), one way to mark a truly effective all around hitter. All but seven are in the Hall of Fame. One is banned for life for gambling on baseball (Shoeless Joe Jackson). One is still active, and a future Hall of Famer (Albert Pujols). One is technically still active…but not playing again because of steroids suspensions (Manny Ramirez). Two are retired and awaiting their turns on the ballot (Chipper Jones and Todd Helton). The other two are Edgar Martinez…and Larry Walker. Helton and Walker ‘s membership can either be attributed to playing in the sky-high offense inducing Coors Field in Denver…or that they were terrific hitters and deserve more consideration than they’ve received. Also, Larry Walker played in Canada for the early part of his career, which did nothing to help overall awareness of his greatness. The former MVP is likely to fall off, unfortunately. Verdict: Not this go-around

Lee Smith (29.9%)

Lee Smith has a truly unfortunate case. Unfortunate because he retired as the all-time saves leader, but has since been passed twice, once by the greatest closer to yet play the game. More unfortunate because at this point, he’s not going to gain any more support, but won’t lose enough to fall off the ballot. He lost 17.9% in the last go round, which made up 37.4% (!) of his support. To gain election, that has to turn around quick. Verdict: It won’t

Mark McGwire (11.0%)

Here we come to another steroids-era hero. McGwire has declined in support for years now, a product of his having admitted his PED-use. While that may not be entirely fair, it’s a testament to how much ill will the writers have towards the players who…made them look bad? Seriously, it’s getting to the point where the self-righteousness of the writers in not voting for players active during this time is hurting players who didn’t use. (Seriously, look at Craig Biggio.) All that the grandstanding and turning in of blank “protest” ballots represents is just an effort by those writers active in the 90’s to absolve themselves of blame for turning the other way while baseball ran semi-rampant with drug use. The failure of many baseball writers to openly admit the somewhat hypocritical viewpoints they’ve taken irks me greatly. It’s no longer about whether Mark McGwire deserves to be in the Hall of Fame – it’s about atoning for past mistakes. In the writer’s case, it’s keeping the Hall clean. (Because, you know, the Hall is a pure place.) Verdict: *

Mike Mussina (20.3%)

Mussina falls into the Schilling camp. He stands at 18th on the all time strikeouts list with 2,800, won 270 games in an era where it’s increasingly hard to win 200 (let alone 300), and by Baseball-Reference.com’s numbers was the 28th most valuable pitcher of all time. And yet, 20.3% in his debut. I believe he’s a Hall of Famer (I voted for him – I’ll disclose my ballot for the IBWAA in Part III, by the way), but, much like Schilling, he’ll need to start building support sooner rather than later. Verdict: Up to 25% this time around

Mike Piazza (62.2%)

Only two players have gained vote totals in the 60% range and not been elected. One is Jack Morris, the counter-argument to the Bert Blyleven advanced-stats movement. The other is Gil Hodges, who finds himself the star crossed candidate on every ballot he’s ever been on. Piazza was one of two players (along with Biggio) to make gains on this ballot, climbing 4.4% points on this ballot. That bodes well for the election chances of the best hitting catcher to ever play the game. (Best defensive? Pudge Rodriguez. Best all around? Still Johnny Bench.) He’s probably not getting in this year, and like Bagwell, he faces questions about PED-use. (Because nobody ever got back acne without taking PEDs…) I think this year’s ballot is too crowded, but I think he holds strong and gains election within the next two years. Verdict: ….soon

Roger Clemens (35.4%)

See Bonds, Barry. The only reason Clemens’ percentage is higher than Bonds is because Clemens didn’t break any “hallowed” records. Verdict: Not in this climate

Sammy Sosa (7.2%)

Picture this: You are born a poor child in the Dominican Republic. You don’t have money. You can’t really afford many of the things we take for granted in this country. Things like, you know, shoes. And food. You grow up playing baseball because that’s what everyone around you does. You develop a shred of talent for the game. You spend your entire lifetime refining, training, and developing your talents to play baseball at a professional level because…what else is there to do?

You are signed by a major league team. You scuffle for a bit, honing your skills against some of the best to ever play the game. You develop into a superstar. Meanwhile, around you, others are taking PEDs to maintain their physical edge. You notice that many/none of the PEDs being taken are illegal in the game – if anything, it seems like taking them is the only way to success, and since you’ve worked your whole life trying to garner success to make a better life for yourself, you go along for the ride. You become one of the biggest superstars in the game, beloved by fans around the country and especially in your city, starved for baseball success and for heroes. Your adoptive country loves you…and you love your adopting country.

As your career winds down, you stand fifth all time in home runs, but the script has changed. People now hate you for what you’ve done to earn their respect. You become a pariah, brushed over, forgotten about. The rules of the game have changed, and you are now reviled for what you have done, which is to have played by the rules that were established when you came of age and talent. You’ve done nothing wrong…and yet everything you’ve done is wrong.

Congratulations – you are Sammy Sosa.

Verdict: Falling off the ballot

Tim Raines (46.1%)

Of all the candidates most hurt by the reduction from 15 years on the ballot to 10, Raines suffers the most. One of the best leadoff men of the past sixty years, Raines is hurt because he played in the shadow of Rickey Henderson and he played many of his best years in the relative obscurity of Montreal. He’s been building an impassioned block of voters for the past seven ballots, and with fifteen years would very likely wind up being elected…but now only has three more chances to break 75%. It doesn’t help that he lost 6.1% of the vote in the last ballot (12% of his support). For Raines to make any impact at all, he needs to jump by at least 10% this time around, almost a 25% net increase in support. It’s not unfathomable, but it’s far from likely. As with Trammell, Walker, and many other deserving candidates, he may well be forced to wait for a turn on the Veterans Committee carousel in order to gain enshrinement. If he doesn’t break 50%, he’s as good as done on the ballot. Verdict: No…but his percentage bears watching

That does it for the holdovers. Stay tuned for Part II: The Newcomers.