« Take My Left Fielder... Please | Main | If It Says Libby, Libby Libby On The Indictment.... »
October 30, 2005
Baseball Hall of Fame, 2006: The Curmudgeon Votes
Because baseball season is over and I have nothing to fuel my obsession until pitchers and catchers report the second week of February (right about the time I'll start obsessively preparing for our fantasy baseball draft, currently slated for April 1, 2006), I have decided to share with you my votes (were I to ever have any) for this year's class in the baseball Hall of Fame. I'll preface this by saying that none -- zero -- of the players appearing on the ballot for the first time will get my vote; I just don't think that anyone HOF-worthy is arriving this year. Many have shared that thought -- and so the feeling is that perhaps some great players who've been overlooked in past balloting might have their best last shot this year.
Here are this year's nominees, with the Curmudgeon votes bolded: Rick Aguilera, Tim Belcher, Albert Belle, Bert Blyleven, Joe Carter, Will Clark, Andre Dawson, Kevin Elster, Alex Fernandez, Gary Gaetti, Dwight Gooden, Goose Gossage, Ozzie Guillen, Juan Guzman, Keith Hernandez, Orel Hershiser, Greg Jefferies, Doug Jones, Tommy John, Lance Johnson, Roberto Kelly, Jim Leyritz, Mike Maddux, Don Mattingly, Kent Mercker, Mickey Morandini, Hal Morris, Jack Morris, Dale Murphy, Randy Myers, Jaime Navarro, Dave Parker, Luis Polonia, Jim Rice, Lee Smith, Bruce Sutter, Alan Trammell, Walt Weiss, John Wetteland, Mark Whiten.
Click through to read my reasoning behind my voting.
First, my dead lock cinches.
Jim Rice is a Hall of Famer, and it's hard to understand why he's not already in. An 8-time all-star, Rice hit 389 home runs in an era when 300 was an accomplishment; he won three home run titles, two RBI titles, led the league in total bases four times, racked up 2,452 hits and hit .298 for his career in a pitchers' era, and -- most importantly -- for a stretch was the most feared slugger in baseball. Rice was AL MVP in 1978, and could have been in 1983 (led the league in both HR and RBI, just played for a 98 pound weakling sixth place Red Sox team that year, while Cal Rpiken took his team to a World Series title). He seems victimized by two things: one, his career dropped off dramatically toward the end, after 1986 he was pretty bad; and two, he was not good to or wth the media -- and the writers make the picks. But for his time and compared to his peers, he absolutely belongs.
Goose Gossage was simply dominant, the most feared pitcher -- not just reliever, but pitcher -- of his time, and was a key reason the Yankees of the late 70s and early 80s won. (He then was closer on the 1984 Padres team that went to the World Series too -- not a coincidence, I don't think.) He also pitched two or three innings when he was brought in to close a game.He led the league in saves three times and was second three more times, but the numbers don't tell it all with this guy, though. It was the dominance with which he did his job. If Dennis Eckersley is in due to his run from 1988-1992 or so as A's closer, then Gossage should go in for his run from 1978-1982.
Bruce Sutter was the National League's dominant closer during the late 70s and early 80s; he led the league in saves five times, was the 1979 Cy Yong Award winner as a reliever, and revolutionized the game -- the league's first dominant closer, he made hitters' knees buckle with his split-fingered fastball (which he invented, by the way... the splitter's a part of many pitchers' arsenals now, but Sutter invented the pitch). And anyone arguing "relief pitchers shouldn't be in the hall of fame" should have his/her favorite team be forced to go a season without a relief pitcher in order to remind them of the importance of their role in the modern game.
As for the guys who get weaker, more tentative votes from me...
I admit it, Andre Dawson looks a lot better after the steroid scandal; being a 400 HR guy and a 300 SB guy is impressive enough on its own, and he won eight Gold Gloves in the ten seasons of the 1980s. 2,774 hits and 1,591 RBI are also hard to sniff at. But his numbers look so much better now that I know what fueled so many that came after him. I've never voted for him before, and I could list reasons not to now (he never won a batting title, only finished in the top 5 in home runs four times in a 21 year career, and only finished in the top five for RBI twice in that 21 year span), but in hindsight and in comparison to his peers, I think I'm going to say he belongs.
Jack Morris is admittedly a weaker choice; he never won a Cy Young, he led the league in strikeouts only once, no pitcher in the Hall has an ERA higher than Morris' 3.90. But the man won 162 games in the 1980s, more than any other pitcher -- averaging 16 wins per year. He was in the top five in wins nine out of ten years that decade. And anyone making the argument that "he just played on good teams, that's why he won" should take a long hard look at whether they plan to vote for Andy Pettite or Tom Glavine someday. More than his numbers though, Morris was an intense figure who not only knew how to win, but how to bring out the best in teammates. He was the ace of three separate staffs for three separate World Series champions (1984 Tigers, 1991 Twins, 1992 Blue Jays). And his 10-inning shutout performance in Game 7 of the 1991 World Series is the stuff of which legends are made. Out of deference to his position as the winningest pitcher of a decade, and of his ability to win, I'm voiting Morris in.
Close but no cigar: Albert Belle had a stretch there where he was the most feared hitter in the game because of his skills. Of course, during this same time he was also the most feared player in the game, because he was an unstable psycho. Wasn't around long enough, and he was too big of a jerk to get the Kirby Puckett sympathy vote. Don Mattingly was great for four seasons and very good for another two, but injuries just cut him out too soon. Besides, too many Yankee fans keep insisting he belongs, simply for being a Yankee -- not realizing that anyone with Mattingly's stats not playing in New York wouldn't be getting even this level of consideration. Others in the "close but..." category: Bert Blyleven, Joe Carter, Tommy John, Dale Murphy, and Alan Trammell.
What about you, baseball fans? What do you think?
Comments
Two persuasive arguments for Blyleven: http://www.all-baseball.com/richbeat/archives/011878.html
http://www.all-baseball.com/richbeat/archives/016874.html
Besides, he had the best curveball I've ever seen.
Posted by: Linkmeister at October 30, 2005 03:40 PM
the Goths are rooting for Blyleven. And Jack Morris, one of the best big-game pitchers anywhere, anytime.
Posted by: the Goths at October 30, 2005 06:30 PM
Just so you both know, I came *this close* to putting Blyleven on my list; he was the last one I eliminated.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at October 30, 2005 07:11 PM
Twenty-three of the top 25 pitchers in career shutouts are in the Hall of Fame.
Luis Tiant is #25, and marginal at best (though he was much better than, say, Catfish Hunter).
Bert Blyleven is #9 of all time in shutouts. He should be an absolute, no doubt, lead-pipe cinch for the HOF.
Posted by: N in Seattle at October 31, 2005 08:05 PM
Oh, for all his "psycho" actions, Albert Belle never beat up his wife. But he *was* a vastly superior baseball player than Kirby "Overrated" Puckett.
Posted by: N in Seattle at October 31, 2005 08:08 PM
I'll meet you halfway on Blyleven - like I said, I'd almost voted for him, so I see all the arguments. But saying Joey Belle was a "vastly superior baseball player" than Puckett? First of all, no matter what ugly stuff we learned about Puckett after he retired, he never attacked a fan, chucked a baseball at anyone in the stands, all the things that Joey Belle did.
On the field... Puckett was hands-down a superior defensive player, Belle wasn't even in his league. As for offensive stats, Belle was a 'roided up freak who used corked bats. Yes, he had better power numbers than Puckett. But Puckett was a better pure hitter, and didn't need chemical enhancement to get his numbers. And with a game or a World Series on the line, I would much rather have had Puckett at the plate.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at November 1, 2005 09:13 PM






