2012 BJOL HOF Results

January 7, 2012
 
First, the results, tallied from the sixty-two ballots submitted by BJOL readers:
 
Players
Votes
Percentage
Edgar Martinez
47
75.8%
Andre Dawson
32
51.6%
Larry Walker
31
50.0%
Rafael Palmeiro
30
48.4%
Fred McGriff
22
35.5%
Kevin Brown
15
24.2%
John Olerud
11
17.7%
Bernie Williams
11
17.7%
Dale Murphy
9
14.5%
Lee Smith
9
14.5%
Jack Morris
8
12.9%
 Dave Parker
7
11.3%
Jim Rice
4
6.5%
Don Mattingly
3
4.8%
Brad Radke
0
0.0%
Tim Salmon
0
0.0%
Brian Jordan
0
0.0%
Javy Lopez
0
0.0%
Bill Mueller
0
0.0%
Jeromy Burnitz
0
0.0%
Eric Young
0
0.0%
Vinny Castilla
0
0.0%
Phil Nevin
0
0.0%
Ruben Sierra
0
0.0%
Terry Mulholland
0
0.0%
Tony Womack
0
0.0%
 
Edgar Martinez enters as the sole member of the 2012 class, joining Rickey Henderson, Tim Raines, Bert Blyleven, Alan Trammell (class of 2009), Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Mark McGwire, (2010), and Jeff Bagwell (2011). For this accomplishment, Mr. Martinez will receive a certificate of merit and the 1963 edition of Encyclopedia Britannica, volumes ‘D’ and ‘H’, purchased at a flea market in Wilmington, Vermont last summer.
 
Andre Dawson, Larry Walker, and Rafael Palmeiro each received robust support from BJOL readers. Despite a late surge of support, Don Mattingly will fall off the ballot next year.
 
We’ve been running this vote for four years now…it’s been interesting to see how different players are doing year-by-year. Just looking at a few:
 
Player
2009
2010
2011
2012
Dale Murphy
17%
27%
15%
15%
Jack Morris
10%
10%
22%
13%
Dave Parker
5%
15%
7%
11%
Jim Rice
6%
--
10%
7%
Don Mattingly
10%
12%
12%
5%
Kevin Brown
--
--
22%
24%
 
These six players have generally received a steady, low level of support from BJOL readers: their year-by-year percentages haven’t swing drastically, and despite some impassioned arguments made on the message boards, our community has generally not supported these candidates as Hall-of-Famers. It’s too early to tell if Kevin Brown will see his support build in the coming years, or if he falls off when players like Maddux, Clemens, Smoltz, Schilling, Pedro, and Mussina start showing up on ballots.
 
Don Mattingly has gradually lost ground; as a huge Mattingly fan, I’m sad about this. He was a really great player for a few years. Dale Murphy and Jim Rice are two players with big reputations, created in part by their home parks…their value was probably overstated during their careers (though Murphy was extremely good in his peak). It is interesting that Dave Parker, objectively better than Murphy and Rice, hasn’t ever out-voted Murphy, and has lagged behind Rice most years.
 
Player
2009
2010
2011
2012
Andre Dawson
21%
25%
18%
52%
Larry Walker
--
--
23%
50%
Rafael Palmeiro
--
--
33%
50%
John Olerud
--
--
5%
18%
 
On the other hand, these four players experienced dramatic spikes in support in 2012. Andre Dawson and Larry Walker both more than doubled their tallies, and Rafael Palmeiro got a ‘yes’ from half of our voters. Most interestingly, John Olerud went from clinging tenaciously to the ballot to passing over 15%.
 
Player
2009
2010
2011
2012
Fred McGriff
--
18%
25%
36%
 
The Crime Dog, alone among the players on our ballot, has received steadily improving support from BJOL voters, doubling his percentage between 2010 and 2012. This is altogether in keeping with his excellent-but-unassuming career; people are gradually coming around on Crime Dog.
 
Player
2009
2010
2011
2012
Lee Smith
14%
35%
40%
15%
 
Lee Smith has been all over the map: after three years of increases, Smith dropped down to fifteen percent. I’ve voted on Smith in the past; I am less sold on him as a deserving candidate now that I was years ago. I think his window for election is rapidly closing.
 
Prognosticating forward: I think that the ten-player limit will force some of the stragglers off the ballot in the coming years: I think that Dawson, Walker, Palmeiro, and McGriff will hang on the BJOL ballot through the boom period….I’d be worried if I was a supporter of Smith and Olerud. Ditto for the 80’s Superstars: Murphy, Parker, Rice, and Morris…some of them are going to drop off.
 
We now have nine Hall-of-Famers in four years; enough to make a team. Stretching a few positions:

 
P
Bert Blyleven
1B
Mark McGwire
2B
Roberto Alomar
3B
Alan Trammell
SS
Barry Larkin
LF
Tim Raines
CF
Rickey Henderson
RF
Jeff Bagwell
C/DH
Edgar Martinez
 
Not a bad team…if Piazza gets elected soon, we can move Edgar off the plate. This team would have little trouble winning pennants, even if Blyleven had to pitch underhand most days.
 
We’ve paralleled the BBWAA vote for four years now. Here’s who the two groups have elected:
 
BJOL Voters
BBWAA Voters
2009
2009
Rickey Henderson
Rickey Henderson
Tim Raines
Bert Blyleven
Alan Trammell
 
2010
2010
Roberto Alomar
Jim Rice
Barry Larkin
Mark McGwire
2011
2011
Jeff Bagwell
Roberto Alomar
Bert Blyleven
 
 
2012
2012
Edgar Martinez
???
 
We were a little ahead of the BBWAA on two candidates: Blyleven and Alomar. The BBWAA was ahead on Jim Rice’s candidacy, and it seems likely that they will stay ahead: BJOL readers are not convinced of Rice’s merit. It remains to be seen if the BBWAA will come around to our takes on Larkin, Trammell, McGwire, Bagwell, or Edgar.
 
Well, that about wraps it up for this year. Congrats to Edgar Martinez, and thanks to all of you who voted. We’ll see you again next December, when the real fun starts.
 
Dave Fleming is a writer living in Wellington, New Zealand. He welcomes comments, questions, and suggestions here and at dfleming1986@yahoo.com.
 
 

COMMENTS (19 Comments, most recent shown first)

DaveFleming
Good question, cderosa. I'd say my hopes are:

1) To create a 'seperate' discourse around the subject of the Hall-of-Fame....to have a space to discuss the players that our weird little community is most interested in discussing.

Take Barry Larkin...I don't think many of us really had to debate Larkin's candidacy for the Hall-of-Fame. I think the vast majority of us just know he was an extremely good player.

On baseball-centered sites that parallel the BBWAA vote, they've been writing about Larkin for three years...saying the same thing over and over again. I'm very glad that other sites are doing that....I think it's important for websites and writers to convince whoever needs convincing that someone like Barry Larkin is a rare player...but I don't really want to have that discussion.

The BJOL HOF thing is a way to channel our discussion to the subjects that are interesting to us; to the audience we have here....I wanted to know: who are people like you and I, who are sabermetrically inclined and/or fans of Bill's work, on the fence about? Who gets us talking?

So that's number one...having a fake, parallel HOF lets us talk about the players we want to talk about.

Where it's going....well, I think it's clear that a few folks would like to go backwards, and talk about guys like Will Clark and Dwight Evans and Darryl Strawberry. So...I'm tempted to do something about that.

But...I also don't want to crowd other things out...I sort of like having a month of HOF talk, and then I like moving on the coming season.

So; how does one create a space to talk about guys like Will Clark, without distracting attention from the other topics of the day? Hmm...
3:26 AM Jan 12th
 
cderosa
By the way, Dave, would you say the intent of this project is:

1) to make our own Hall of Fame,

2) to chart our alternative history of the HoF since 2009, or

3) to examine our votes against those of the actual voters on a year-by-year basis?

Though #3 appeals to me the most, it seems like we're more after #2 here. Knowing for certain what you want to do would help clarify what you might want to do with the ineligible players (Will Clark et al.) down the road.

Chris DeRosa



1:14 PM Jan 11th
 
metsfan17
I look at the PED issue this way. Was the guy a Hall of Famer without the help of steroids. Guys like Barry and Clemens would have been Hall of Famers without the steroids. Its a shame that they tarnished their own legacies. Sosa, McGwire and Palmeiro just weren't Hall of Fame talents before steriod use turned them into Babe Ruth. I can't really look at it any other way. However, it wasn't just steroids. I'll bet you the ball was juiced, parks became smaller and the strike zone became very small in the interest of increasing offense. These were definitely other factors.
8:33 PM Jan 10th
 
ChitownRon
A DH in the Hall of Fame. I guess it was/is bound to happen.


11:51 AM Jan 10th
 
chuck
Thanks for doing this each year, Dave. I know you're jesting about sending Edgar a certificate of merit, but I wonder if it's possible for you all to actually send something of this sort to the players that get elected by the readers here each year.

Edgar probably wasn't sitting by the phone yesterday in case the Hall called; but I think he would appreciate knowing that he was enshrined by at least one group of people.
10:17 AM Jan 10th
 
MarisFan61
Agree with Ventboys: Please keep doing this!
Even if the results annoy me. :-)
12:37 AM Jan 10th
 
ventboys
Thanks Dave, this is one of the coolest BJOL features. I look forward to it every year.

What's next? It's well into January, so I hope that you will continue your "X" players articles. Those are fantastic. I'll leave you alone from now on, and limit my own opinions to the reader posts section.​
11:18 PM Jan 9th
 
DaveFleming
Blyleven appearing as a BJOL vote-in in 2011 is just a funky excel/word, cut/paste issue...he was originally listed on the other side.
9:27 PM Jan 9th
 
Chihuahua332
I completely agree with you Maris and you actually highlight some of my points. We need to separate the PEDs which are clearly unsafe or untested from those which are considerred acceptable but I do realize how idealistic and simplistic this comes across. We do operate in the real world and the current policies are getting better. However, there is still too much of a witch hunt mentality.

On that note, big kudos to Larkin for getting into the Hall today!
3:19 PM Jan 9th
 
MarisFan61
Chihuahua: Nice post.
But, let me say..... :-)

Anabolic steroids and HGH *aren't* approved for any such use, and I extremely doubt they will be any time soon. Plus, they're NOT safe, and IMO there's essentially no chance that'll happen any time soon either. I think it would be a huger medical jump than (say) finding a cure for all cancers.

What you said about letting it be OK for the stuff to be used if prescribed by an approved doctor is good in theory, but....a couple of things:

-- That won't happen any time soon either, because -- see above. The stuff isn't safe, and won't be regarded medically as safe or appropriate for such use, unless someone has a "deficiency" which is a whole other thing.

-- While having it prescribed by an approved doctor is good in theory, realize that such things are very prone to wink-wink types of abuse. Dunno if you remember the sudden escalation of players being diagnoses with "Attention Deficit Disorder" after amphetamines were prohibited, to allow them to take Ritalin. But anyway this idea that you suggested is (IMO) just a small footnote right now, because of the above things.
1:43 PM Jan 9th
 
Chihuahua332
I don't find it unusual that member of this site have a more lenient attitude about players attached to PEDs considering the views that Bill has expressed on the subject.

My overall view is that MLB is just as responsible as the players are for the Steroids era. For years the league turned a blind eye as the money came in and the players were acting equally irresponsibly. I believe that this falls in the category of "The league made its bed and now they need to sleep in it."

Going forward my view is that we need to get over the blanket stigma attached to PEDs. The issue should not be whether or not players are taking suppliments to boost their performance or prolong their careers. Atheletes of all kinds are supposed to enhance their performance. That's what competition is all about.

The issue should be focused on the health risks of those enhancements to the players and to those who may emulate those players. If a PED is deemed safe by the FDA whether over the counter or under the guidance of a physician then it should be allowed. If it is a controlled substance requiring a physician then there should be a list of league sanctioned physicians who are approved to perscribe the suppliments AND monitor their use by the players. If players go outside of these boundaries then they should receive stiff penalties. If an approved doctor is shown to over-perscribe then he loses his standing as an approved physician for the league.

Obviously there would be a lot of details to work out but the end result is that the league, the players, the media and all of us need to end this mob mentality and find a way to responsibly push the envelope of performance. It can be done.
1:04 PM Jan 9th
 
MWeddell
In the chart at the end of the article, in 2011 Bert Blyleven's name should be listed under the BBWAA column. Sorry if this is nitpicking.

Even with that correction, it's clear visually that the BJOL readers are inducting candidates more quickly and will be less affected by the 10 person ballot limit when the influx of fantastic candidates starts next year.
9:26 AM Jan 9th
 
cderosa
To address MarisFan61's question: I would note that being into sabermetrics has traditionally put one at odds with moralizing old fart sportswriters.

For example, when I was reading the Baseball Abstracts, I was a NY baseball fan in the age of Don Mattingly, Rickey Henderson, and Darryl Strawberry. The NY press often cast Strawberry and Henderson as underachievers and malcontents, and Mattingly as a representative of all things virtuous. This had something to do with these guys' personalities, and it might have had something to do with race, but it also had a lot to do with their batting averages. My friends and I who were into sabermetrics said, "these sportswriters, with their pompous moralistic pronouncements, don't have a clue. They're missing the Rickey Henderson show! Darryl is the Mets' MVP!"

A few years down the road, the sabermetric community reflexively took the part of walk-drawing sluggers and self-improved players against the moralizing old fart sportswriters, because we'd established that it was a sound percentage move.

By the time it became obvious that this was a major problem in the game, that we'd told a generation or two of players that they had to do something illegal to give themselves the best chance at success, many in the community were locked into their positions.

Speaking only for myself, I voted for steroid suspects because I think it is wrong for me to say, "After twenty years I've achieved some clarity in my mind on this issue, and so now I'm going to hold you retroactively to my new standards."
5:33 AM Jan 9th
 
MarisFan61
P.S. re the post below: I know it LOOKS an awful lot like moral indignation. :-)
It's just huge surprise and befuddlement -- and truly being interested to understand the (apparent) disparity between here, and out there.
2:10 AM Jan 9th
 
MarisFan61
I'd love someone to offer a view on why it is that the membership of this site is less hesitant to enshrine players whose performance was almost certainly enhanced by PED use than is the world-at-large, or at least than is the BBWAA membership, which I'm guessing does sort of reflect the world at large.

For example, we're giving 48% to Palmeiro, which I'm guessing is more than double what the BBWAA will give him, and perhaps triple or quadruple.

I myself don't have any guesses at all for this, and in fact I've been quite flabbergasted to see this inclination of our membership. I would have figured that the kinds of things that make someone a sabermetrics devotee would in several ways tend to incline him/her against artificial things that distort the game and players' performance -- but obviously I'm wrong.

BTW, when I've said this in the Reader Posts, it has often been taken as a moral judgment. It is nothing of the sort.
12:41 AM Jan 9th
 
mvandermast
Thanks, Dave!
5:19 PM Jan 8th
 
evanecurb
Thanks again Dave. This is always fun.
1:16 PM Jan 8th
 
tigerlily
Thanks for running this Dave. Good Job!
8:09 AM Jan 8th
 
Trailbzr
Mattingly, Murphy, and Martinez might have been better candidates if they had led championship teams, but they never played in a World Series. Mattingly played five post-season games in his career (in his final season), which must be some kind of post-1920 Yankee record.

7:09 AM Jan 8th
 
 
©2019 Be Jolly, Inc. All Rights Reserved.|Web site design and development by Americaneagle.com|Terms & Conditions|Privacy Policy