General Forum

Vvvergeer wrote:

...with only two votes per voter, none will get in this year...

Each of the 16 voters actually gets 4 votes.  In order to be enshrined, a player will need 12 of the 16 committee members to vote for them.

That being said, I agree with you...I don't think anyone gets in (though I would love it if Donny Baseball did) 

From the link below: 

"In order to gain enshrinement, candidates need at least 12 votes. Each voter only gets to vote for two....."

https://www.cbssports.com/mlb/news/baseball-hall-of-fame-announces-modern-baseball-era-ballot-for-2018/

Trammel would have been if he played in a big media market to start with. Miller should be a lock due to his impact on the game.

Sources are conflicting, it appears. https://sports.yahoo.com/let-debate-begin-baseball-hall-fame-unveils-10-names-modern-era-ballot-194859252.html says 4 votes. 

Either way, 2 votes or 4, no one gets in. I suspect the votes will be pretty evenly spread, actually. 

v3

OCHawkeye wrote:

Vvvergeer wrote:

...with only two votes per voter, none will get in this year...

Each of the 16 voters actually gets 4 votes.  In order to be enshrined, a player will need 12 of the 16 committee members to vote for them.

That being said, I agree with you...I don't think anyone gets in (though I would love it if Donny Baseball did) 

Did my own research by going to the actual Hall of Fame website. Each voter may vote for zero to four candidates. 

v3

Alan Trammell, Jack Morris, and Dale Murphy get my votes.

I say Miller gets in.  Most deserving player on the list, to me, is Morris, and he got as high as 67% on the writers ballot before dropping off.  All deserve a look.  I would have no problem with Parker or Trammell either.  Tiant has possibly hurt his chances by complaining that he isn't already in.  Not sure how voters will react to that.

Funny this comes up right after our thread about the non-HOFers that some of still collect. Several of these players are there for me. Murphy, Morris, & Mattingly. I collected Parker at one point, but put them back in the commons (my commons boxes have some nice cards). ince others took the time to discuss each player, I think it's ok if I do too.

Steve Garvey - Played on a really good team, probably the best of the starting 8. Never dominated, even as a 1B. The one MVP is nice, and the .294 lifetime BA is very good. The 16 intentional walks (IBB) in 1979 (most he had in any year) is a telling sign he wasn't the feared hitter others were. Verdict: No.

Tommy John - His 288 wins only came from the longevity of his career, helped by the revolutionary surgery that now bears his name. He was having a solid career before the surgery (124-106 record, 2.97 ERA), but the ERA went up a little over time (3.34) while the winning percentage actually increased. The 11 wins per season average is that - average. Verdict: No.

Don Mattingly - Played 5 less years than Garvey, won 5 more Gold Gloves, had 23 more IBB, and both had one MVP. Led the league is several good offensive categories for a couple seasons and finished with a lifetime .307. His 238 hits in 1986 still is tied for 18th all-time. If Koufax can be in based on his shortened career, no reason to deny Mattingly. Verdict: Yes.

Marvin Miller - Because of revolutionizing the game, he belongs. I don't like the idea that a non-player is on the same ballot as players. I think there should be a separate voting/induction for non-players, but do feel they belong. Verdict: Yes.

Jack Morris - Hittable? At times. When it mattered? Not really. Three time WS champ with 3 teams. Never got the CY love, but was in the running 7 years. Led the league in wins twice, once at age 37. Led in good categories as well as bad categories. Had a 3.73 ERA before the last 2 brutal seasons. He is the most borderline player I know. One of the toughest pitchers through the 80s. Only because I watched him pitch, do I knopw how tough he was. Verdict: Yes.

Dale Murphy - 1982-1987 - no one else was more feared (except maybe Mike Schmidt). Two MVPs, 2 HR, 2 RBIs (different years!), and 5 Gold Gloves. Rough start to career as catcher, move to OF and was an all-star almost immediately. A little shaky end. But 1980-1987 - averaged 33 HRs per season - and that included the 1981 strike-shortened season (he only hit 13 that year). Verdict: Yes.

Dave Parker - MVP, many GGs, feared arm!, led league in several "good" categories, feared hitter. .297 BA in the NL (bulk of the career).  Verdict: Yes.

Ted Simmons - Long career, very good BA (.285), but nothing outstanding. Verdict: No.

Luis Tiant - Decent W/L record, but led the league in losses once while never leading in wins. Led in ERA and Shutouts twice. Very up and down career. Verdict: No.

Alan Trammell - Led the league is sacrifices twice, 4 Gold Gloves, 3 Silver Sluggers, and WS MVP. Cracked .300 7 times (1 time would not qualify for batting crown, not enough PAs). Verdict: No.

So CBSSports owes me one and my mea culpa. Here it is from the HOF Site

Voting - The Committee shall consider all candidates and voting shall be based upon the individual's record, ability, integrity, sportsmanship, character and contribution to the game. Electors may vote for as few as zero (0) and as many as four (4) eligible candidates in the Early Baseball, Golden Days, Modern Baseball and Today's Game Era Election. Write-in votes are not permitted.

https://baseballhall.org/hall-of-fame/eras-committees

I'm changing my vote on Parker and replacing him with Morris. After looking at Parker's numbers I was underwhelmed. 

Garvey reminds me of Bagwell in many ways. Neither was a rah-rah type and led by example on the field and made good decisions on the base paths.