First, some interesting news... Rich Lederer at
Baseball Analysts has evidently managed to convince Tracy Ringolsby to vote for Bert Blyleven:
Quote:
|
Between the information you provided and the constant conversations I have had with Blyleven's contemporaries, I became convinced that I had slighted him in the past. He is the first guy I can remember that I have ever failed to vote for on the first time and then added later.
|
Leaving aside the merits of the decision itself (although I think Blyleven is more than qualified for the Hall), this is exactly the way I want to see HOF voters making their choices. Actual investigation, open-mindedness, and serious thought, not just the gut feelings and stubbornness that seem to characterize a lot of ballots. Bravo, Tracy.
My votes, by the way: Ripken, Gwynn, Blyleven, Trammell, Gossage, Saberhagen, Murphy, Belle. The first five, I think, are no-brainers.
Saberhagen in the Hall feels weird to me, but statistically, he passes the bar. The bar, by the way, is lower than a lot of people seem to think; if we assume that about 30% of HOFers should be pitchers (which, if memory serves, is pretty close to the actual number), then there ought to be 60-65 pitchers in the Hall. I have Sabes ranked at #42, excluding the not-yet-eligibles (Clemens, Maddux, RJ, etc). Blyleven comes in at #18; in other words, he would rank comfortably among the top half of HOFers. Should be an easy call.
I can see an argument against Murphy or Belle; it's the classic peak vs. career debate. I try to give them equal weight, but I don't pretend that my chosen spot on that continuum is more legitimate than any other.
I'm leaving off McGwire for now, due to steroid concerns (he's got lower-tier HOF numbers, making him the perfect example of a guy who belongs in the HOF if clean, and probably doesn't if not) - there's enough doubt there that I see no reason to jump the gun and vote him in ASAP.
Rice and Mattingly are as borderline as it gets. I wouldn't argue too much if you wanted to put them in as well.