The result of this year’s Hall of Fame voting was a disappointment to so many people on so many levels. It was a disappointment to the fans, especially those of such players as Craig Biggio and Jack Morris, who both seemed to stand a good chance of receiving the minimum 75 percent of the vote needed to gain election. It was such a disappointment to people inside that game that both Commissioner Bud Selig and Players Association Executive Director Michael Weiner were compelled to release statements. It certainly had to be a disappointment to the merchants and residents of Cooperstown, who count on the induction ceremony to generate a large amount of revenue for the village. And, despite putting up a brave front, it had to be a disappointment to Hall of Fame President Jeff Idelson because induction weekend plays a large part in supporting the non-profit foundation.
Being one of the 569 people who took part in the Hall of Fame voting this year, I feel kind of guilty to have let so many people down. However, not to pass the buck, it is guilt by association rather than anything I did wrong. I checked nine names on my ballot, more than in any of the other 14 elections that I participated in, and did not shy away from players who have been tied to PEDS, such as Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens.
Despite the uproar over the voting results that were announced Wednesday—I was afraid the great Casey Stern was going to have a stroke live and on the air on MLB Network Radio on SiriusXM—I still believe the Baseball Writers Association of America should continue to be the solo proprietors of the Hall of Fame voting. However, I also believe it is time for the BBWAA and Hall of Fame to reform the process.
The requirements to be eligible to vote for the Hall of Fame are that someone must either be, or had been, a member of BBWAA for 10 continuous years. There is nothing wrong with that on the surface, but there is a problem once you dig deeper and find that a number of 10-year members haven’t written about baseball regularly for years. Furthermore, some haven’t stepped foot in a ballpark in years and others don’t even follow the game anymore. They continue to vote because they see receiving a ballot every December as a status symbol.
The BBWAA has spent a great deal of time in the last year in examining its rolls in an effort to weed out those who it feels no longer meet the guidelines for admission to the association. With that in mind, it is time for the BBWAA to begin weeding out the list of Hall of Fame voters. The association needs to figure out a way to make sure the right people are voting on the highest individual honor that a baseball player can ever receive.
Secondly, the BBWAA and the Hall of Fame need to change the rule in which members of the electorate can vote for no more than 10 candidates in a given year. The 10-man limit was never an issue for me before but it was this year. While I stopped at nine, there were 15 players to whom I gave strong consideration. The ballot will become even more crowded next season when Tom Glavine, Jeff Kent, Greg Maddux, Mike Mussina, and Frank Thomas become eligible for election for the first time. The limit should be raised to at least 12 players, and perhaps 15.
To say the Hall of Fame voting process is broken is too strong of a statement. However, it is need of some repairs, which can be made with a little bit of willingness to change a system that has been in place since 1936.
—
Yankees third baseman Alex Rodriguez is scheduled to have left hip surgery next Wednesday, which is a rather unique way for A-Rod to celebrate my birthday. It will be the second time Rodriguez has had hip surgery, as he had the right one repaired during spring training in 2009. Rodriguez returned to action in May that season but won’t be back until after the All-Star break this time because of the torque placed on the left hip when he rotates it during his swing.
Yankees general manager Brian Cashman has downplayed the idea that Rodriguez’s career could go into further decline following this surgery. Perhaps that is wishful thinking, since Rodriguez has five years and $114 million left on his 10-year, $270-million contract and the Yankees have been acting like a small-market team in their quest to reduce their payroll to under the $189-million luxury tax threshold by 2014.
One American League scouts says he doesn’t see the Yankees getting much of a return on the rest of their investment in Rodriguez. The numbers certainly support that idea, as Rodriguez’s WARP has gone down every season since 2007, from 8.3 to 6.7 to 5.0 to 4.9 to 2.8 to a career-low 1.2 in 2012.
“He hasn’t been a superstar for four years now,” the scout said. “He’s still an above-average third baseman, but that is mainly because it’s a weak position throughout the industry. To think he’s going to come back and be the A-Rod of his prime after having major surgery is ludicrous. The Yankees, if they really admit it, will be happy if he is still just a decent player for a few more years.”
—
The Nationals won their stare down with Adam LaRoche, re-signing the first baseman to a two-year, $24-million contact with a club option after he had held out for two months in hopes of three guaranteed years. La Roche had a career-high 3.6 WARP last year and a .303 Total Average.
LaRoche is one of the “victims” of the new free-agent compensation system that is part of the latest collective bargaining agreement. Any other team signing LaRoche would have been required to give up a draft pick after he declined the Nationals’ $13.3-million qualifying offer. One AL front-office type from a team that “kicked the tires” on LaRoche believes the Nationals made a good deal with the 33-year-old.
“He’s a reliable run producer in the middle of the lineup who plays good defense,” the FOT said. “I think two years is just the right amount for length of contract. You go beyond two years and I’d worry that he would be a drag on the payroll.”
The re-signing of LaRoche leaves Michael Morse without a spot in the lineup, and the Nationals are trying to trade the first baseman/outfielder for a left-handed reliever after failing to retain Sean Burnett as a free agent. However, one NL scout says it is buyer beware for anyone trying to trade for Morse, who can become a free agent at the end of the season.
“He’s a heckuva hitter, but he can’t play defense and he’s become very fragile, so you can only pencil him in for about 120 games a year,” the scout said. “Considering you’re only going to have him one year, I wouldn’t give up a frontline player or a top prospect for him. I think the best thing the Nats can hope for is an OK lefty reliever and some salary relief, which would give them some more money to play with if they need to make a move sometime during the season.”
—
That the Rangers guaranteed Lance Berkman $11 million on a one-year contract with a club option raised many eyebrows inside the game. Berkman will be 37 on Opening Day and is coming off a season with the Cardinals in which he had 97 plate appearances and two knee surgeries. While it’s tough convincing front-office types or scouts that the price is right, a surprising number of them do believe Berkman can have a very good 2013 for the Rangers.
“They are doing the right thing by DHing him,” an NL scout said. “They shouldn’t play him in the field at all with the shape his knees are in. If they keep him at DH and make sure he’s rested, he could do very well. He’s always been a good hitter, and the ballpark in Texas will only help him. I don’t know if he’ll have the kind of year he had with the Cardinals (in 2011), but I could see him having a good year … but $11 million is a lot of money to risk.”
Berkman had a .341 TAv and produced 4.0 WARP two years ago, though his Fielding Runs Above Average was an ugly -10.9 when the Cardinals won the World Series. His career TAv is .317.
—
The Indians are going to see if they can resurrect left-hander Scott Kazmir’s career after signing him as a free agent. The two-time All-Star will be given the chance to win a spot in the rotation even though he pitched just 1 1/3 innings in the major leagues in 2011 with the Angels, then spent last year in the independent Atlantic League with the Sugar Land Skeeters. (He was a rotation mate with sideshow act Roger Clemens late in the season for a franchise that brought back the bullpen cart.)
While it’s a little hard to believe because he seems to have been around forever, Kazmir will turn just 29 on Jan. 24. However, that is not enough to give hope to an AL scout who watched Kazmir pitch three times last summer.
“He doesn’t have anything left,” the scout said. “He’s just one of those guys who peaked very early in his career and flamed out. He hasn’t been a good pitcher since 2007.”
Thank you for reading
This is a free article. If you enjoyed it, consider subscribing to Baseball Prospectus. Subscriptions support ongoing public baseball research and analysis in an increasingly proprietary environment.
Subscribe now
And at least a few writers will add Morris next year because its his last on the ballot.
I don't see this clusterf ending anytime soon, even Maddux may find it tough in his first year (which is preposterous).
I also agree with the 1st poster. If they voted players in, this wouldn't be an issue. At some point in the future, maybe even 15-20 years from now, the ballot will probably shrink back down to normal size, and then we'll be arguing that 15 votes is too many.
I've never had a problem with the process. I actually think it works. My problem has been with the explanation given my some of the writers for their votes. MLB.com listen some of their writers' ballots, and one only voted for Morris with this explanation: "I've been swayed by evidence presented this year about his complete games and innings. Moreover, the Giants' postseason pitching last year reminded me of Morris' brilliant performance against the Braves in Game 7 of the 1991 World Series."
So in other words, he's saying that the San Francisco Giants pitched well in the World Series this year, so he's voting for Morris. And I'm glad we can now find innings totals and complete games online, because apparently those haven't been available for the previous 13 years. THIS is the problem. Not the process.
For the next several years, more hall of famers are coming onto the ballot than going off of it (assuming the BBWAA doesn't elect more than a few guys a year, likely because of vote splitting and sanctimony), so the need for more than ten ballot slots will only grow.
Moreover, at least some of the non-votes this year were punitive, and I'd hope that a significant percentage of voters who did not this year, will in the next few years, cast them for Bonds and Clemens, again increasing the number of slots needed.
A writer is not the sole authority on a sport, but you will certainly see a lot of articles written this week claiming they are.
I'm not arguing that they always make good choices, mathematically someone with just the minimum 10 years experience as a baseball writer probably never saw Tim Raines play. If active participation (i.e., observation) is one way to achieve "good" voting, how is that person better suited than the retired writer to determine whether Raines' should be in?
will go. Add that to the growing disgust towards the Hall by the everyday fan. The HOF really is in trouble.
Once a player becomes eligible, he should be on the ballot only one time, with no limit on how many players the elector can vote for. The voters would have to choose whether to vote for him or not. After all, the players career doesn't change from years 5 to 6 to 15.
Voters would no longer be able to rationalize that the player will still have 14 more chances, so what the heck does it matter if they are wrong, paying off a grudge, or just being totally lazy this year?
Each year's ballot becomes extremely important.
This should curtail the foolishness of "punishing" an unpopular but but historically great player, who one expects to vote for eventually. It would also eliminate the nonsensical practice of withholding a vote in the belief that only a few players should ever be first year Hall-of-Famers.
Some might complain that under this method, no one, or very few, would ever get enshrined in Cooperstown. If that is the case, then it reveals that the voting system and its voters are fatally flawed and need to be discarded completely.
I am sure it would not be difficult to come up with a system that eliminates much of the politics and pettiness that is now rampant.
"If that is the case, then it reveals that the voting system and its voters are fatally flawed and need to be discarded completely."
If you're unhappy with their decisions, NOT talking about them is probably the best course of action - the BBWAA will change its ways when, and only when, it realizes the fans no longer care what they say.
1. Nobody may vote for the Hall of Fame that no longer actively covers or demonstrably associates with the game of baseball.
2. Writers may vote for as many candidates in a given year as they feel are worthy.
3. All ballots must be made public. All writers must explain their selection in a column that will run on the Baseball Writer's Association website and on their own paper/website/magazine.
Major League Baseball and players have agreed to ramp up the battle against illicit performance-enhancing drugs by instituting in-season testing for human growth hormone.
The timing of the announcement comes the day after the National Baseball Hall of Fame announced that no former players were selected for induction from a ballot that included some stars who have been linked to performance-enhancing drugs.
Oh, the drama, Craig Biggio did not get in on first ballot!
Berra-got in ballot #2, Sandberg first ballot, 49%, Killebrew first ballot, 59%, Biggio 68%. Nothing is broken here guys-the HOF voting has been like this forever. I don't know what the real agenda is, but nothing is broken. Unless there is evidence Biggio did PED, he should make it in within 2-3 years.
And if any did do PEDs? Put someone in the HOF who you find out cheated to get great mumbers or make great numbers even better? Cheated on the clean players in the game! Wow, the ends do justify the means. Cheat the game, the fans, your fellow players and go into the hall of FAME! Rose and Shoeless Joe come on in, you had great numbers before you did bad stuff. If you care about baseball as a sport, for its history, for its opportunities for wholesome youth play, you will not celebrate people who knowingly cheated the sport. Sort of like voting someone father of the year for a list of good deeds when you know he cheated on his wife.
He "cheated on the clean players in the game! Wow, Do the ends justify the means? Cheat the game, the fans, your fellow players and go into the hall of FAME!"
OMG.
Each BBWAA member having a personal "locked in" ballot would serve the function of satiating the voter's ego, allowing each one to grandstand with a branded opinion of who deserves enshrinement. Each voter would also be held more accountable for his or her individual ballot.
This sounds like a pretty solid compromise to fit the interests of all parties, and it would accomplish several key elements relating to the overcrowded ballot, from the lack of annual entrants to the players that get squeezed. The only issue I see is that it's a one-way door, so voters might be reticent to commit to players if they know that they can never go back, causing the plan to backfire.
I would give you a round of applause, but the best I can do alone is to start a slow clap.
(*clap*)
(*clap*)
Isn't that kind of why they have people on the ballot for 15 years, to allow writers to evaluate them?
Or something, no less.
I would never condone beating a woman, or even a man. In fact, used to work as a woman's therapist at a domestic violence shelter. But it sure seems to me that you have jumped the shark here.
Do you believe that Kirby Puckett should be evicted from the Hall of Fame because a woman took out a restraining order against him for pushing her? And because another woman accused him of false imprisonmeent, assault, and fifth degree criminal sexual behavior?
How many people did Ty Cobb beat and stab, for the simple offense of being black? Do you believe Cobb's got to go, too?
Also, yeah, I saw "Cobb" but there are arguments that most of it was made up by Al Stump. Some argue he wasn't racist and that the media only portrayed him as racist after he died.
http://chronicle.augusta.com/stories/2004/05/21/let_416281.shtml
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/43506-ty-cobb-was-not-a-racist
http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/07/19/legacy-of-a-jerk-full-transcript/
I'd like to ask the 40% of the voters who passed him by: if the greatest hitting catcher of all-time isn't a Hall of Famer, who is?
The baseball writers are really losing this battle, whether they see it or not.
But, obviously, some writers are dead set against voting anyone into the Hall who is rumored to have had back acne.
Or maybe having the audacity to marry a Playboy Playmate jezebel is sufficient evidence to judge that Piazza is a flawed human being under the "character" clause in the HOF criteria.
When you guys get your vote right, and when you're not causing a ballot pile up, you can ask for more votes with a straight face. Especially if the ask is coming from someone who only used 9 this year.