2007 Hall of Fame ballot

[Hard Rock Fan]

About McGwire, I'd vote him in, in a heartbeat. He would either be #2 or #3 on my list with Ripken being #1 and Gwynn being whichever one McGwire wasn't.

 

As for the whole 'roids issue, let me ask this: what did he do that was illegal? If I'm not mistaken, there's no rule, especially 10 years ago, that made 'roids illegal. Granted, they're morally wrong, but not illegal. And besides, didn't he hit like 49 homers his rookie year? He was about as big around as a baseball bat, yet still crushed the ball. So it's not like he "had" to have them.

[Automatic]

Ripken was my favorite player growing up. When he retired, in jest, I asked my Dad if we could go to Cooperstown when Cal gets enshrined, and he said yes. A few weeks ago I reminded him of this deal, still not thinking he was serious about it. To my suprise he is gung-ho about going. He might be a bigger baseball fan than me, and he has always wanted to go. I'm already looking forward to spending a some time with just my dad and baseball.

[cshs81]

If you believe the HOF is for the "best of the best" there are only a few that even deserve consideration:

 

Gwynn, Garvey, Ripken, Orel, Lee Smith, and Goose.

[mexitucky]

Understand your point, but most fans and viewers only suspect the "larger" framed, size HR hitters for performance enhancements and not the leaner style bodies, including pitchers which have been confirmed positive in recent tests the last few years.

 

So if the HOF selection process, is based off size and power, several may get excluded who are worthy, some overlooked but nothing to confirm either.

 

The selection process is the subjective vote of sports writers. There are no set credentials, only unwritten rules like 500 home runs, 300 wins, and 3,000 hits. Now, you have a generation of pitchers who strike out batters at near record rates, and middle linebackers hitting home runs 470+ feet. Steroids have been shown to be in the game, some of the greatest players of the steroid era choked in front of Congress, and more names are linked every year. The Hall of Fame voters are going to be skeptical of almost everyone who is associated with power, either as a pitcher or a hitter, due to the misconception that steroids only help with power. In terms of the leaner players, the voters will not come down as hard on them, but Palmeiro showed everyone that you do not have to look like Tony Atlas to be using.

[mexitucky]

If you believe the HOF is for the "best of the best" there are only a few that even deserve consideration:

 

Gwynn, Garvey, Ripken, Orel, Lee Smith, and Goose.

 

Was Orel good enough for long enough, or was '88 such an impressive year with the streak, Cy Young, and World Series that it curves up his other years? If I recall, he was not a consistent 20 game winner. I could be wrong. Blyleven's numbers a better than Orel, and they both have the same number of world series rings.

[mexitucky]

Ripken was my favorite player growing up. When he retired, in jest, I asked my Dad if we could go to Cooperstown when Cal gets enshrined, and he said yes. A few weeks ago I reminded him of this deal, still not thinking he was serious about it. To my suprise he is gung-ho about going. He might be a bigger baseball fan than me, and he has always wanted to go. I'm already looking forward to spending a some time with just my dad and baseball.

 

If you've never been there then let me tell you, you are in for a treat. The coolest little city up in the mountains. Take in a game at Doubleday field while you are there. See the Babe's locker, the Big Red Machine's display, it's all just awesome.

[STRIKE3]

The selection process is the subjective vote of sports writers. There are no set credentials, only unwritten rules like 500 home runs, 300 wins, and 3,000 hits. Now, you have a generation of pitchers who strike out batters at near record rates, and middle linebackers hitting home runs 470+ feet. Steroids have been shown to be in the game, some of the greatest players of the steroid era choked in front of Congress, and more names are linked every year. The Hall of Fame voters are going to be skeptical of almost everyone who is associated with power, either as a pitcher or a hitter, due to the misconception that steroids only help with power. In terms of the leaner players, the voters will not come down as hard on them, but Palmeiro showed everyone that you do not have to look like Tony Atlas to be using.

Valid points and I understand the HOF selection process, I meant more of a perception on the voters behalf, regarding size and power numbers.

 

I think many will be skeptical of McGwire, Sosa, Canseco, Bonds when they are being considered. At the same time, many will vote for them and say no proof has been provided, so until then....It will be an interesting process and from the list that LBBC provided, some no-doubters and others, who may be near a last chance, selection process.

 

Was Orel good enough for long enough, or was '88 such an impressive year with the streak, Cy Young, and World Series that it curves up his other years? If I recall, he was not a consistent 20 game winner. I could be wrong. Blyleven's numbers a better than Orel, and they both have the same number of world series rings.

Some quick comparison numbers

 

Blyleven

Won - 287

Lost - 250

K's - 3,701

22yr career

 

Hershiser

Won - 204

Lost - 150

K's - 2,014

18yr career

[Hard Rock Fan]

Like I said before, McGwire hit 49 homers his first full season. He hit 217 over his first 6 seasons. That wasn't done with 'roids. He didn't need to get bigger in order to have big numbers. He was hitting a lot of homers before he got big. And besides, like I said earlier, HE DIDN'T BREAK ANY RULES!!! There was nothing in the rules about using performance enhancers in '98.

 

If we start questioning whether or not he used them, then we should go back through history and start to question whether or not Ruth used them, since he hit more homers in one year than most of the teams combined for. How do we know he didn't do something? How do we know he didn't cork his bat? After all, his bat was huge compared to even today's biggest sluggers. I don't think you can keep him out just on speculation that he did something that wasn't even illegal.

[ladiesbballcoach]

If you believe the HOF is for the "best of the best" there are only a few that even deserve consideration:

 

Gwynn, Garvey, Ripken, Orel, Lee Smith, and Goose.

As shown later by S3, Blyleven's stats are better than Orel's.

[JumperPride]

Now this will heat up the airwaves and the Internet with debate.

 

Who would you cast your votes for?

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/news;_ylt=AgNYP5Sxj57_9XSKbHpO3fERvLYF?slug=ap-halloffameballot&prov=ap&type=lgns

 

The complete ballot:

 

Harold Baines, Albert Belle, Dante Bichette, Bert Blyleven, Bobby Bonilla, Scott Brosius, Jay Buhner, Ken Caminiti, Jose Canseco, Dave Concepcion, Eric Davis, Andre Dawson, Tony Fernandez, Steve Garvey, Rich "Goose" Gossage, Tony Gwynn, Orel Hershiser, Tommy John, Wally Joyner, Don Mattingly, Mark McGwire, Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, Paul O'Neill, Dave Parker, Jim Rice, Cal Ripken Jr., Bret Saberhagen, Lee Smith, Alan Trammell, Devon White, Bobby Witt.

 

I believe the writer's get to name 10. So let's go with that. What ten would you vote for?

 

Mine in order are:

1 Tony Gwynn

2 Cal Ripkin Jr.

3 Lee Smith

4 Mark McGwire

5 Goose Gossage

6 Jim Rice

7 Dave Parker

8 Bert Byleven

9 Davey Concepion

10 Andre Dawson

 

I am curious to see if S3's choices are all starting pitchers.

 

I would put Ripken in front of Gwynn thats about it though.

[Hard Rock Fan]

Here's an interesting article for all you anti-McGwire people. I think it's very nicely written and explains why he SHOULD be in the HOF.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/offbase/061129

[cshs81]

Valid points and I understand the HOF selection process, I meant more of a perception on the voters behalf, regarding size and power numbers.

 

I think many will be skeptical of McGwire, Sosa, Canseco, Bonds when they are being considered. At the same time, many will vote for them and say no proof has been provided, so until then....It will be an interesting process and from the list that LBBC provided, some no-doubters and others, who may be near a last chance, selection process.

 

Some quick comparison numbers

 

Blyleven

Won - 287

Lost - 250

K's - 3,701

22yr career

 

Hershiser

Won - 204

Lost - 150

K's - 2,014

18yr career

 

That's what happens when you're going off the top of your head.

 

In that case, they're both off my ballot of potenential HOFers.

 

However, the precedent for rewarding players who did well over a long period of time but did not dominate for a long period of time has been set with Don Sutton getting in. I'd still not vote for them though.

[cshs81]

Here's an interesting article for all you anti-McGwire people. I think it's very nicely written and explains why he SHOULD be in the HOF.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/offbase/061129

 

The article stated he should be in because writers are hypocrites. It did not say he deserved to be in.

 

Its a tough time to be a voter. In order to not vote for Mac or Bonds, you are going to have to make an assumption without hard proof that they used illegal substances. While you may be , and most likely are, right you really do not know for sure. How do you balance that in your voting process?

[STRIKE3]

That's what happens when you're going off the top of your head.

 

In that case, they're both off my ballot of potential HOFers.

 

However, the precedent for rewarding players who did well over a long period of time but did not dominate for a long period of time has been set with Don Sutton getting in. I'd still not vote for them though.

I was too surprised, at Blyleven's loss total and remembered he wasn't always on teams, that had stellar records and his 287 wins, are that much more impressive.

 

Hershiser was very good, had an amazing scoring streak but his win totals just don't qualify to me, in the modern time as being enough for HOF election.

 

These two pitchers, are certainly an interesting debate.

[cshs81]

I was too surprised, at Blyleven's loss total and remembered he wasn't always on teams, that had stellar records and his 287 wins, are that much more impressive.

 

Hershiser was very good, had an amazing scoring streak but his win totals just don't qualify to me, in the modern time as being enough for HOF election.

 

These two pitchers, are certainly an interesting debate.

 

What about Glavine when his time comes?