Home › The Cardinal Nation Forums › Open Forum › 2018 Hall of Fame ballot
- This topic has 45 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 1 month ago by BlackHillsCard.
-
AuthorPosts
-
November 19, 2017 at 11:10 pm #38027
Here are the potential candidates for the regular Hall of Fame vote, carryovers from 2017 plus new additions for 2018, with the ballot to be announced on Monday.
November 20, 2017 at 12:41 pm #38060Carpenter, Izzy and Rolen made the ballot for the first time, joining Larry Walker, who is among the 14 holdovers.
November 20, 2017 at 12:50 pm #38061Oddly, the Hall of Fame board reportedly rejected the Baseball Writers’ proposal to make public the results of all voters’ ballots.
November 21, 2017 at 9:43 am #38115Chipper looks to be the one lock on the 2018 ballot. Several guys with the ‘roid stigma are worthy based on their careers, but a lot of voters put a penalty on the ‘roid effect, either from a moral standpoint or uncertainty as to what their numbers would have been without the “superman” effect.
Personally I think the hitters benefitted more than pitchers. Perhaps Roger Clemens would not have held up the last two or three years of his career, but I do not think steroids played as big a part in skewing pitcher’s numbers. The main impact it had was in home runs, which is the sexy stat everyone likes to look at with hitters.
Thus it can be a tough call. I tend to think Barry Bonds would be a Hall of Famer without the steroid use, whereas Sammy Sosa probably would not have been. If given a vote, I would have Barry on my ballot but not Sammy. I’d vote for Roger as well. But I am sure there is a lot of disagreement on that.
November 21, 2017 at 9:43 am #38116In an open letter to Hall of Fame voters, Joe Morgan comes down hard against steroid users.
https://www.facebook.com/kenrosenthalsports/posts/1569492223116503
November 21, 2017 at 11:01 am #38125How can the HOF BOD tell the BBWAA what they can and can’t do? If the BBWAA wants their members to publicly reveal their ballots why is the BOD stopping it? What a disgusting travesty. Voters should be held accountable as their are too many voters who abuse their privilege.
November 21, 2017 at 5:28 pm #38129As I understand it, the Hall recruits the BBWAA to do the vote, but it is their rodeo and they could always change their mind.
November 23, 2017 at 8:25 am #38170Tracy Ringolsby, who covered Larry Walker in Colorado, puts forward a Hall of Fame case for the outfielder.
https://m.mlb.com/news/article/262359040/why-larry-walker-merits-hall-of-fame-entry/
November 24, 2017 at 12:23 pm #38211That is an impressive and passionate letter from Joe Morgan. It really makes me think. He mentioned the gray areas. The toughest part of voting I would think, is when dealing with a couple of guys I mentioned earlier, Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens. Both guys were HOF caliber players before the steroids.
But I can see the point Morgan is making, in that those guys still should not be voted in as they tainted their careers, even though they were on track for the Hall before making the deal with the devil.
I used to think Mark McGwire should be voted in, but have changed some on him as he stated that steroids kept him on the field. He went through a couple of years where injuries hampered him. Without steroids he may not have played enough to continue his career at the level he had over his early seasons. He denied that steroids helped him hot more homers, but time as shown that home runs were skewed during that era, and it no doubt helped everyone who used them.
As for Walker, he should be in. At a recent SABR gathering someone pointed out that his 1997 season was in the top 10 all-time of any single season in history. It’s his “1948 Stan Musial” year. That could be point number 10 in Ringolsby’s list of reasons why he deserves enshrinement.
November 24, 2017 at 12:40 pm #38215November 25, 2017 at 8:56 am #3822014NyquisTParticipantThis is a comment from the kenrosenthal story on Morgan’s statements on the cheaters.
Ray Kessler:
Another casualty to steroids may have been those players who didn’t use and may have lost honors like batting titles, home run titles etc. We can’t be totally sure of much. Players like. Greenwell, Baines, Murphy, Joyner, Mattingly, Will Clark and others may have been slighted for not using.
********************************************************************************
This is the part of steroid usage that makes me cringe. THE CHEATERS CHEATED THE PLAYERS THAT DIDN’T CHEAT. The band of losers indirectly took money away from the honest ones, think about that.None of the cheaters should be voted into the HOF. What part of cheating isn’t understood? The steroid users should form a line behind Pete Rose because they altered the game of baseball… the Ws and Ls and the record books.
The Hall of Fame is for winners not losers. If you let the cheaters in you might as well put an asterisk under the sign on the building itself…. *enter at your own risk, we now accept cheaters.November 25, 2017 at 9:46 am #38222The difference between steroids and “greenies” is huge. Greenies do not stimulate muscle growth or help in recovery from injuries. There is no statistical blip that can be traced to greenies. It is about like comparing having a couple of cups of coffee to taking heroin.
As for Pete Rose, there is no way he can be voted in. He was a Hall of Fame player, but rule 21 is clear and until the Hall changes its stance on known gambling within the ranks, he will be outside looking in. If Morgan has lobbied for Pete, then yes, that is hypocritical.
November 25, 2017 at 11:46 am #38223He has lobbied for Pete on numerous occasions. And greenies and amphetamines are PEDs. Its hypocritical to say one PED is okay but this other one is really bad. That’s a hypocritical argument. And if the substances the players used were not banned, how can it be called cheating. I love the whitewashing of an entire era of baseball. And more than likely roid users have already gotten into the Hall which makes the whole “keep the cheaters out” rants hilarious. No one really knows all of the players who used roids which makes the argument about keeping roid users out nonsensical.
November 25, 2017 at 7:23 pm #38231New rub on the Joe Morgan controversy. His email to the baseball writers came from a Hall of Fame email address, leading to the suggestion the Hall itself is behind the anti-steroids plea.
Jeff Passan of Yahoo is so fed up, he is giving up his vote.
https://sports.yahoo.com/giving-hall-fame-vote-joe-morgans-letter-144738128.html
November 26, 2017 at 11:07 am #38250Buster Olney, another writer who has stopped voting for the Hall, explains his concern over Scott Rolen potentially receiving less than five percent of the vote, and falling off the ballot after one year.
The reason is the confusion about what to do with the steroid users. Whether you think they should be in or not in, is not the issue. The problem is no clear guidelines one way or the other are hurting others’ chances of getting in.
Definitely worth a read, in my opinion.
November 26, 2017 at 11:29 am #3825214NyquisTParticipantThere are 1,383 comments to the Passan article. Most were against voting for the cheaters. BH should read how so many fans are making hilarious, nonsensical and hypocritical comments.
November 26, 2017 at 11:40 am #38253Yes because internet comments is what you should trust for a consensus. What a joke.
November 26, 2017 at 11:49 am #38255If you can’t prove which with a 100% certainty which guys used PENs and which guys didn’t it is nonsensical to have a ban. It’s also hypocritical to make the argument that one PED is okay but these other ones are bad. And it’s hypocritical to have guys with major character flaws to be in the hall and then use the same thing to ban guys. The whole system is a joke. Anonymous ballots. Ballot limitations. On and on the clown show continues.
November 26, 2017 at 12:29 pm #38256BBWAA HOF voter Murray Chase is campaigning for the BBWAA to sever its ties with the HOF and cease voting.
November 26, 2017 at 2:43 pm #38258This is one of the few times in recent years, I understand where Chass is coming from. However, turning the vote over to someone less qualified than the writers is likely to lead to more chaos and more deserving candidates losing out. Or perhaps (and this would probably be the best case), the threat of losing the BBWAA might jolt the Hall into more of a partnership, rather than the dominant role it continues to play.
November 27, 2017 at 10:55 am #38285And greenies and amphetamines are PEDs. Its hypocritical to say one PED is okay but this other one is really bad.
You may think it is hypocritical, but society makes these sort of choices all the time. We draw the line at a point where we think society benefits the most, based on the impact of the relative choices. In most states, alcohol can be legally consumed at age 21, but not age 20. Legal limits are also set for driving under the influence of alcohol, or driving “sober”. Many pain killers are legal to purchase over the counter, others require a prescription. Many drugs are legal, many illegal.
In life, we are constantly presented decisions between relative alternatives. Hypocrisy is not applicable in choices between what is considered acceptable and unacceptable. Hypocrisy is when a person says one thing, and does another. And thus if Joe Morgan is saying the steroid users should not be in the Hall because they cheated, but Pete Rose, who also cheated but in a different way, should be in, that is hypocritical thinking.
November 27, 2017 at 11:15 am #38286And along the lines of what to do about the steroid issue, a good point is made that if PEDs were not illegal at the time these guys used them, but became illegal later, then a good point can be made to cast a vote for a suspected ‘roid user as technically he did not cheat.
One can question a person’s moral fiber when making the choice to use steroids. Using steroids was making a deal with the devil in a way; sort of a Joe Hardy decision (for anyone familiar with the classic play “Damn Yankees”). But if doing so was legal, that really muddies the waters.
Bottom line, I think Olney is on target and the Hall needs to amend the rules so that voters can make their choices based on who they feel deserves a vote, while not limiting other candidates. The veteran’s committee, or whatever it is called these days can amend some of that. But the Hall can do some things itself to give a better framework for voters and potential Hall of Fame players.
Perhaps entirely doing away with the year limits and percentage requirements is the best way to go. Any player retired for five years or more is fair game in other words.
December 3, 2017 at 9:46 am #38632Another interesting idea about opening the Hall a bit more. This proposal is about considering an international player’s full career, not just his MLB part.
https://nypost.com/2017/12/02/why-a-better-baseball-hall-of-fame-would-include-hideki-matsui/
December 9, 2017 at 10:18 am #39102IMO, the term “classy” has been so overused/misused in sports, it now lacks significance for me. However, it was refreshing to see Larry Walker’s appreciation from fans for his Hall support from them.
Regardless of what happens with HOF voting, I just wanna say THANKS for all the support I just finished reading on Twitter! Takes me awhile to figure this social media stuff out! But was taken back by all the kind words. Very grateful!!! Cheers
https://twitter.com/Cdnmooselips33/status/939165605118271494
December 9, 2017 at 8:13 pm #39147The worst HOF ballot so far this year goes to Bill Livingston who only voted Thome and Vizquel. He’s the same guy who submitted a blank ballot last year. Juan Vene also turned a horrid ballot.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.