Are You @#%&ing Kidding Me?!?!?! (and some other thoughts on today's MLB Hall Of Fame vote)

Here are the results of today's Major League Baseball Hall Of Fame vote (75% required for induction):

Andre Dawson
RF/CF 1976-1996 77.9%
Bert Blyleven
SP 1970-1992 74.2%
Roberto Alomar
2B 1988-2004 73.7%
Jack Morris
SP 1977-1994 52.3%
Barry Larkin
SS 1986-2004 51.6%
Lee Smith
RP 1980-1997 47.3%
Edgar Martinez
DH/INF 1987-2004 36.2%
Tim Raines
LF 1979-2002 30.4%
Mark McGwire
1B 1986-2001 23.7%
Alan Trammell
SS 1977-1996 22.4%
Fred McGriff
1B 1986-2004 21.5%
Don Mattingly
1B 1982-1995 16.1%
Dave Parker
OF/1B 1973-1991 15.2%
Dale Murphy
OF 1976-1993 11.7%
Harold Baines
DH/RF 1980-2001 6.1%
Andres Galarraga
1B 1985-2004 4.1%
Robin Ventura
1B 1989-2004 1.3%
Ellis Burks
DH/OF 1987-2004 0.4%
Eric Karros
1B 1991-20040.4%
Kevin Appier
SP 1989-2004 0.2%
Pat Hentgen
SP 1991-2004 0.2%
David Segui
1B 1990-2004 0.2%
Mike Jackson
RP 1986-2004 0%
Ray Lankford
LF 1990-2004 0%
Shane Reynolds
SP 1992-2004 0%
Todd Zeile
C 1989-2004 0%

So, first things first: I am absolutely overjoyed for Andre Dawson! This was the Hawk's 9th year on the ballot and finally these ass clowns did the right thing and put Dawson in. Why he had to wait nine years is a complete mystery to me. He won an MVP, finished second in MVP voting twice, won 8 gold gloves and is one of 3(!) players ever to hit 400 home runs and steal 300 bases. The other two? A couple of guys named Willie Mays and Barry Bonds. I'm not saying that Dawson was as good as either Bonds or Mays, but if you can tell a person by the company he keeps...

Now, onto the injustices:

The worst of which is clearly the lack of sufficient support for Roberto Alomar. Alomar is at worst the 2nd best second baseman since WWII. Only Joe Morgan is considered better and you can make a great argument in favor of Alomar if you compare the two. Alomar retired with a .300 batting average, 210 homers, 1134 RBI's, 2724 Hits, 1508 runs scored, 474 stolen bases, 10 Gold Gloves, and was clearly the best player on two World Series winners. So what in the world crack pipe were the 26.3% of sportswriters smoking when they left him off their ballot? In a word, the reason is spit. Because Roberto Alomar lost his mind once in an otherwise unblemished career, and spat on umpire John Hirschbeck after being called out, he was punished by the sportswriters. It's funny how well they remember this one (admittedly awful) moment but are apparently completely unaware that not only have Alomar and Hirschbeck made up, but that Alomar has contributed time and money to Hirschbeck's cancer fundraising organization that he set up in the name of his son who died of the disease. And really, even if Alomar hadn't done those things, so what?!?! How many of that 26.3% would like to be judged by the worst moment of their lives? Not many I'm betting. If I were Alomar, I'd be mad enough to spit today too. Alomar didn't cheat, didn't kill, or maim anybody. Case closed.

While Bert Blyleven fell short once again in his 13th year on the ballot, he did get some good news. No one that has ever gotten as high a percentage (74.2) of the vote as Blyleven has ever not been voted in. Blyleven is 5th all time in strike outs and an astounding 9th all time in shutouts. Did you know that Blyleven has more career shut outs than Tom Glavine and Greg Maddux combined? I'm not saying he's as good as those two, but once again, the company you keep...

I was glad to see Jack Morris' percentage come up by 8.3%. It gives me hope that this pitcher who defined the term "horse," might actually get in some day. Morris was the most winningest pitcher of the 80's and the absolute best "big game" hurler of his era. I know the voters like to hold his 3.90 ERA against him, but I know that over a (roughly) 12 year period, if you were to pick one guy to throw one game for you, you would pick Morris. And that should be enough.

My personal favorite on the ballot this year was former Red's shortstop Barry Larkin. While Larkin didn't get very close to the needed percentage, he did start out with a higher vote total than a lot of former players who were eventually inducted (including Dawson, Sandberg, and Rice). I did some research on the shortstops already in the Hall Of Fame and found that only six of those inductees had a quality argument for being superior to Larkin. If I'm right (and I am), then how in the world does the seventh best shortstop of all time not get in on the first ballot? I think one of the main reasons is that some voters believe that not all hall of famers are worthy of first ballot induction. So, while on one hand this is comforting---I'm sure that Alomar and Blyleven will get in next year, and Larkin eventually---it is also maddening. It's not like Alomar or Larkin are going to hit any more home runs or Blyleven is going to strike out any more batters between this year and next. To me, either you're a Hall of Famer or you not. Now, I do agree that as time passes, a player who was once short on votes can begin to look better with age. I think for example, players who are thought to be clean of performance enhancing drugs will grow in stature over the next several years. Which brings me to Tim Raines, Fred McGriff, and Alan Trammell.

Raines is unquestionably the second best lead-off hitter of his era after Rickey Henderson. I think as voters spend more time poring over his numbers, his vote total will continue to increase (he was up 7.8% this year). I think Fred McGriff's 493 homers during the steroid era (without a whiff of controversy), will continue to look better and better. I do however, worry for Alan Trammell. This was Trammell's ninth year on the ballot, and while he did increase his vote number by 5%, he still sits at only 22.4% after nearly a decade on the ballot. Remember when I said that Larkin was at worst the 7th best shortstop ever? Well than Trammell is at worst the 8th. If you compare Trammell to Larkin, you can barely slide a thin sheet of paper between them. Larkin was clearly a better base stealer, but in nearly every other category, the differences between the two are negligible. Whether it's hits, runs, homers, RBI, batting average, gold gloves, etc., they are nearly the same player. I was sincerely hoping that if Larkin got in this year, it would improve Trammell's chances down the road. My last point about Larkin-Trammell is this: If Hall Of Fame shortstop Ozzie Smith were in his prime, would either the Tigers or the Reds have traded their guy straight up for the "Wizard?" Not in a million years. And I mean this as no offense to Ozzie, who certainly belongs in the Hall as the greatest fielding shortstop of all time, but you get the point.

Now, I have to get to my truly hopeless cause, the candidacy of Dave Parker. He and Trammell are clearly the two most underrated players on the ballot. Parker was an MVP and finished second once and third twice in MVP voting in other years, he won two batting titles, three Gold Gloves, led the league in slugging twice, hits and RBI once, won a World Series with the Pirates, made it to seven all-star games, and drove in 1493 runs over his stellar career, and only garnered the support of 15.2% of voters. The Cobra has almost no chance, and it's a damn shame.

The worst news for guys like Morris, Raines, Trammell, and Parker can be summed up by one year, 2013. In 2013 there will be no less than six potential Hall of Famers added to the ballot. Bonds, Clemens, Piazza, Sosa, Schilling and Biggio all hit the roll in 2013. Even worse, 2014 will add Maddux, Frank Thomas, Glavine, Jeff Kent, and Mike Mussina. See what might happen here? Voters are only allowed to put ten names on their ballot and if some of these guys on the current ballot don't get in before 2013, they will either have a long wait (veterans committee), or no chance at all.

Now, you may feel that my referring to the sportswriters who didn't vote for Alomar as crack smokers, to be overly harsh. But let me make you aware of the biggest travesty of all: Not who they didn't vote for, but for who some of them did. At least two of these massive tools looked at the careers of Ellis Burks and Eric Karros and said (probably not out loud), that these two good (but certainly not great) players had Hall Of Fame mojo. And if that isn't bad enough, at least one of them thought the same of Kevin Appier, Pat Hentgen, and David Segui. That's right, David fucking Segui got a vote for the Hall Of Fame. A solid professional hitter with nowhere near elite numbers and an admitted steroid user, got a vote. Are you fucking kidding me?!

There is one solution for this, make all of the sportswriter's votes public. Can you imagine someone having to defend their ballot if it included the name David Segui? Getting spat on might be the least of their concerns.

Sumo-Pop
January 6, 2009