2015 HOF Vote tomorrow

WaxPax · Jan 5, 2015

With the official vote coming out tomorrow, here's a list of where balloting stands from public ballots as of 1/5/15

Piazza hanging in there, very close to the 75% requirement.

The 2015 HOF Ballot Collecting Gizmo!

Updated: Jan 5:* 5:10 ~ 148 Full Ballots ~ (25.9% of vote ~ based on last year) ~ As usual…BBWAA ballot digging is welcome!

99.3 - R. Johnson*
98.0 - P. Martinez
87.1 - Smoltz
82.4 - Biggio
77.0 - Piazza
————————————
66.2 - Bagwell
66.2 - Raines
54.1 - Schilling
43.2 - Bonds
43.2 - Clemens

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Freedom Card Board mobile app

D-Lite · Jan 5, 2015

Hopefully it's a big class this year. So many deserving guys on that list. Those top 5 should get in easily and Bagwell and Raines too. Mussina deserves better, at least 50+% this year.

All that said I like the stance Buster Olney is taking. The Hall needs to stand up and define something about the process because the BBWA clearly can't agree on what a HOFer is.

gmarutiak · Jan 5, 2015

Over the last couple of years, I have started siding with the voters who ignore the steroid rumors/facts and vote for the guys like Bonds and Clemens.

Hell, I have even gained a little respect for the voters who send in the blank ballots. At least they're admitting that they have no idea who did what.

If Bagwell and Piazza get in, aren't the voters sending the message of "We don't care what you did, as long as you didn't get caught doing it"?

If Raines gets in, aren't the voters sending the message of "Steroids are bad, but cocaine is ok"? (Of course, this message was already sent when Molitor got elected).

I guess my main point is that none of us have any idea of who took what. Those who think The Mitchell Report even begins to scratch the surface are being foolish.

I'm fairly confident that there are a couple steroid users already in the Hall. I just with they'd have the (shrunken) balls to come out and admit it.

Enfuego79 · Jan 5, 2015

gmarutiak said:
Over the last couple of years, I have started siding with the voters who ignore the steroid rumors/facts and vote for the guys like Bonds and Clemens.

Hell, I have even gained a little respect for the voters who send in the blank ballots. At least they're admitting that they have no idea who did what.

If Bagwell and Piazza get in, aren't the voters sending the message of "We don't care what you did, as long as you didn't get caught doing it"?

If Raines gets in, aren't the voters sending the message of "Steroids are bad, but cocaine is ok"? (Of course, this message was already sent when Molitor got elected).

I guess my main point is that none of us have any idea of who took what. Those who think The Mitchell Report even begins to scratch the surface are being foolish.

I'm fairly confident that there are a couple steroid users already in the Hall. I just with they'd have the (shrunken) balls to come out and admit it.

I agree on every aspect...

seitas · Jan 5, 2015

Does anyone really care about the HOF anymore? It's too convoluted for me. It's turned in to an opportunity for writers to grandstand. I really don't care what a bunch of bitter, jealous writers think about baseball players. If character were really such an issue some of the greatest players in history of baseball wouldn't be voted in. Can you imagine if Ty Cobb were around today? He'd of been vilified for being a racist, a bully, etc. and he probably wouldn't have been considered. The HOF is irrelevant to me.

MansGame · Jan 5, 2015

I would be happy with the top three there... I'm not in the Biggio or Piazza camp just yet...

D-Lite · Jan 5, 2015

gmarutiak said:
If Bagwell and Piazza get in, aren't the voters sending the message of "We don't care what you did, as long as you didn't get caught doing it"?

If Raines gets in, aren't the voters sending the message of "Steroids are bad, but cocaine is ok"? (Of course, this message was already sent when Molitor got elected).

These are the points I can't understand in general.

Suspicion has no place here. Please, if that was a voting criteria how many people would get into the Hall? There is absolutely no link for either Bagwell or Piazza and their careers were steady from the get go, no spikes like a Bonds or McGwire when it became obvious they were using. Does that mean they (Bagwell and Piazza) didn't from very early on? Of course not, but throwing this argument out there is bogus.

Regarding Raines, I find it hard to believe that the same voters that put other known drug users in the Hall can have a reasonable argument against Rock. The guy had the numbers, didn't beat his wife, didn't cheat.

The Hall of Fame is a museum. One that has many characters in it. As a result of the holier-than-thou approach many members of the BBWAA are taking we see a lot of borderline guys get in instead of the guys that defined the game through its eras.

D-Lite · Jan 5, 2015

MansGame said:
I would be happy with the top three there... I'm not in the Biggio or Piazza camp just yet...

You gotta explain the Piazza thing to me, bud. Biggio I can almost understand, but Piazza?

MansGame · Jan 5, 2015

D-Lite said:
You gotta explain the Piazza thing to me, bud. Biggio I can almost understand, but Piazza?

I mean I could go either way and I guess at some level I'm going against my own feelings that you're either a HOF or you are not a HOF because I think he will get in eventually.

tpeichel · Jan 5, 2015

gmarutiak said:
Over the last couple of years, I have started siding with the voters who ignore the steroid rumors/facts and vote for the guys like Bonds and Clemens.

Hell, I have even gained a little respect for the voters who send in the blank ballots. At least they're admitting that they have no idea who did what.

If Bagwell and Piazza get in, aren't the voters sending the message of "We don't care what you did, as long as you didn't get caught doing it"?

If Raines gets in, aren't the voters sending the message of "Steroids are bad, but cocaine is ok"? (Of course, this message was already sent when Molitor got elected).

I guess my main point is that none of us have any idea of who took what. Those who think The Mitchell Report even begins to scratch the surface are being foolish.

I'm fairly confident that there are a couple steroid users already in the Hall. I just with they'd have the (shrunken) balls to come out and admit it.

Though he was my favorite player growing up, I've long suspected Kirby Puckett as a steroid user.

In 1984 and 1985 at Age 24 and 25 he had 1250 at bats with 4 HR and .350 SLG%
In 1986 at Age 26 he had 680 ABs with 31 HR and a .537 SLG%

Sure you'd expect some power growth as you get older, but that is ridiculous...

homerun28aa · Jan 5, 2015

MansGame said:
I mean I could go either way and I guess at some level I'm going against my own feelings that you're either a HOF or you are not a HOF because I think he will get in eventually.

He will get in sooner rather than later - he's my favorite player on my favorite team so of course I have bias but he's likely the greatest hitting catcher of all-time. He was pretty poor defensively but that won't take HOF votes away from him I don't believe. The steroid suspicion is just that, suspicion and has no place amongst HOF voters. I can't really think of a more worthy catcher to be in the HOF from the modern era, can you? Pudge is a good argument of course but beyond that I'm not sure anyone is close.

D-Lite · Jan 5, 2015

homerun28aa said:
He will get in sooner rather than later - he's my favorite player on my favorite team so of course I have bias but he's likely the greatest hitting catcher of all-time. He was pretty poor defensively but that won't take HOF votes away from him I don't believe. The steroid suspicion is just that, suspicion and has no place amongst HOF voters. I can't really think of a more worthy catcher to be in the HOF from the modern era, can you? Pudge is a good argument of course but beyond that I'm not sure anyone is close.

Wasn't Piazza considered a decent catcher though, at least as far as calling a game and framing?
Also, Pudge is a PED guy and if he has an easier time I have to wonder why.

gmarutiak · Jan 5, 2015

I've said it before and I'll say it again...I would LOVE it if someone admitted to taking PEDs right in the middle of his HOF induction speech.

Heads would explode!

gmarutiak · Jan 5, 2015

D-Lite said:
Wasn't Piazza considered a decent catcher though, at least as far as calling a game and framing?
Also, Pudge is a PED guy and if he has an easier time I have to wonder why.

Whoa! When was Pudge ever proven to be a PED user?

You say that suspicion has no place here, but I don't remember the guy ever testing positive, or being in any confirmed report.

D-Lite · Jan 5, 2015

gmarutiak said:
Whoa! When was Pudge ever proven to be a PED user?

You say that suspicion has no place here, but I don't remember the guy ever testing positive, or being in any confirmed report.

I guess proven isn't the word, but Canseco noted him in the book and hasn't been wrong yet. And he didn't deny being one of the 104 positive tests.

EDIT: Point being there is way more suspicion around Pudge than Piazza.

gmarutiak · Jan 5, 2015

D-Lite said:
I guess proven isn't the word, but Canseco noted him in the book and hasn't been wrong yet. And he didn't deny being one of the 104 positive tests.

EDIT: Point being there is way more suspicion around Pudge than Piazza.

Got it. I agree.

I'll never forget watching a particular spring training game on tv several years ago. This was the spring after a lot of the PED stuff went down. Pudge was running wind sprints in the outfield, and the tv announcers were laughing their butts off, commenting on how much weight he had lost. They did everything in their power not to come out and say that it was blatantly obvious that he had finally stopped juicing.

homerun28aa · Jan 5, 2015

D-Lite said:
Wasn't Piazza considered a decent catcher though, at least as far as calling a game and framing?
Also, Pudge is a PED guy and if he has an easier time I have to wonder why.

Maybe decent in those terms, he had a pretty notably weak arm in throwing to second, and was somewhat error prone, but like I said IMO that's not something that will have any bearing on his HOF legitimacy.

Pudge was a better defensive catcher and arguably a better teammate. In terms of hitting he had way more hits I think he got pretty close to 3,000 and Piazza was only slightly over 2,000. However Piazza with almost 450 HRs and over .300 career BA I think is far more impressive for a catcher. It's worth noting Pudge played 5 extra season than Piazza, if Mike played as many seasons he'd be in the 500 HR club and have similar amounts of hits most likely.

Welcome to our community

Be apart of something great, join today!

2015 HOF Vote tomorrow

WaxPax

Active member

D-Lite

New member

gmarutiak

Active member

Enfuego79

Well-known member

seitas

Member

MansGame

Active member

D-Lite

New member

D-Lite

New member

MansGame

Active member

tpeichel

Well-known member

homerun28aa

Active member

D-Lite

New member

gmarutiak

Active member

gmarutiak

Active member

D-Lite

New member

gmarutiak

Active member

homerun28aa

Active member

Similar threads

Members online

Latest posts