It finally happened. We knew it was going to happen with this weak ballot. A hugely unworthy player was elected to the Hall of Fame. I could see why Larkin would get a lot of support from a certain subtext of BBWAA voters, as he was a 12-time All-Star. In the minds of a lot of people that is an indication that he was a dominant player in his era. But with some of the dumbass moves that voters have made in selecting All-Stars it doesn't resonate much with me. Now we have elected a player with a batting average lower than .300, less than 2,500 hits, less than 200 home runs, and less than 1,000 runs batted in into the Hall of Fame. Who's next?
We shouldn't be at all surprised by Larkin's election. Without a surefire first-ballot Hall of Famer on the ballot the next-closest guy was probably going to get elected. Based on percentages from 2011, that player was Larkin. He finished third last year behind 2B Roberto Alomar and RHP Bert Blyleven (who were both elected) with 62.1 percent of the votes. But I have to admit that I was a bit surprised by the significance of the jump. He went from 62.1 percent to 86.4 percent in one year, a 22.3 percent jump. I didn't think the ballot was thin enough that that many of the writers would vote for Larkin as the only viable candidate, which is what appeared to have happened. I also thought, and I will always contend, that there were many other more deserving candidates on this ballot, and on any other ballot, than Barry Larkin.
Who were some of those players? Well, let's start with the obvious and the most controversial. The most impressive player statistically is undoubtedly 1B Rafael Palmeiro, who finished his career with over 3,000 hits and over 550 homers. The second-most impressive candidate is probably 1B Mark McGwire, who hit over 550 home runs in his career. But both of those players have been directly linked to the performance-enhancing drug scandal, with Palmeiro being labeled as a PED user by former teammate DH Jose Canseco, failing a steroid test in 2005, and being named in the Mitchell Report, and with McGwire being caught using a then legal and over-the-counter but now-illegal PED, failing a steroid test in 2001 having his name leaked by the New York Times in 2009, being named by Canseco, being named in the Mitchell Report, and eventually admitting to using in an interview with Bob Costas. Those two players haven't gotten much support and most of the writers don't want to vote for them, I get that. I disagree with them on both cases, but I get it.
But what about some of the other players? 1B Jeff Bagwell, who hit over 400 home runs in his career, got a fairly-impressive 56 percent of the vote. Bagwell wasn't ever considered to be a first-ballot Hall of Famer and I expected that he would have a long wait in store, but compared to Larkin I thought he was much more deserving. RHP Lee Smith had over 450 saves in his career and should have been a first-ballot Hall of Famer a long time ago, but he only got 50.6 percent of the vote. OF Tim Raines stole over 800 bases in his career, but he only got 48.7 percent of the vote.
Those were the top-of-the-line, scandal-free candidates in my opinion (although Raines was known to use cocaine at times in his career). But what about the mid-level, but still-worthy candidates? Well DH Edgar Martinez retired with a career .300 batting average and over 300 home runs, but he only got 36.5 percent of the vote, probably due to the fact that he was "only a DH." 1B Fred McGriff hit 493 home runs - that's seven short of 500 for those of you who can't do basic math - and he only got 23.9 percent of the vote. OF Larry Walker retired with a career .300 batting average and over 300 home runs to go along with eight Gold Gloves in the outfield, but he only got 22.9 percent of the vote. I know that Martinez is being penalized for being a DH, and Walker will be slighted for years to come because he spent the ,majority of his career in Colorado, but I honestly can't come up with any reason about why McGriff is getting so little support.
McGwire got 19.5 percent of the vote and Palmeiro came in with 12.6 percent of the vote. OF Dale Murphy, who finished his career with 398 home runs, was sandwiched between them with 14.5 percent of the vote. In my opinion, a player like Murphy is a tertiary player who would have to wait for many years (possibly a full 15) to be elected but still a Hall of Famer nonetheless.
The only returning player voted off of the ballot was OF Juan Gonzalez, who hit over 400 homers in his career but has been linked to PEDs, though nothing concrete has ever developed. I guess that doesn't matter anymore.
I viewed Larkin as being less-worthy than all of the above-mentioned players, although I refuse to fault the BBWAA for not voting for either McGwire or Palmeiro. Larkin would not have been able to crack my top ten. But if I didn't vote for McGwire or Palmeiro he would have. So I realize how he could have garnered more than 22 percentage points in additional votes from last year.
There weren't many worthy newcomers to the ballot this year. 3B Vinny Castilla, OF Tim Salmon, 3B Bill Mueller, RHP Brad Radke, C Javy Lopez, 2B Eric Young, OF Jeromy Burnitz, OF Brian Jordan, LHP Terry Mulholland, 3B Phil Nevin, OF Ruben Sierra, and SS Tony Womack were all voted off of the ballot on their first try. Burnitz was a nice player with a ton of power, but he failed to get to 1,000 RBIs in his career in spite of his tremendous home run production. Castilla and Sierra were probably worthy players, but they didn't crack the top ten on my ballot or on many others. The rest were completely undeserving altogether.
And then there's the other bonehead support for players like Larkin, but even less-deserving than him. RHP Jack Morris jumped up 13.2 percent to top out at 66.7 percent on this year's ballot. Morris finished his career with less than 300 wins, less than 3,000 strikeouts and nowhere near 300 saves (to his credit he was never a relief pitcher) with a career ERA of 3.90. That's a pretty good ERA to retire with, but is that alone worthy of Hall of Fame consideration. I say no. And think about this for a second. How many pitchers with ERAs of 3.90 do you remember winning a CY Young Award? Probably not many right? Right. SS Alan Trammell somehow managed to get 36.8 percent of the vote and 1B Don Mattingly amazingly garnered 17.8 percent of the vote once again. Mattingly is getting the benefit of the doubt because he played for the Yankees, however obscene it might be. I don't know where Trammell's support is coming from.
OF Bernie Williams got 9.6 percent of the vote, the only newcomer to the ballot who didn't get voted off on his first try. Williams doesn't deserve any support at all, either, but, like Mattingly, he played for the Yankees and is getting the benefit of the doubt.
I have good news and bad news. The good news is that next year's ballot is set to include 2B Craig Biggio (3,000 hits), OF Barry Bonds (700 home runs, 500 stolen bases), RHP Roger Clemens (300 wins, 4,000 strikeouts), OF Kenny Lofton (600 stolen bases), C Mike Piazza (.300 batting average, 400 home runs), RHP Curt Schilling (3,000 strikeouts), and OF Sammy Sosa (600 home runs), and is easily the best ballot the BBWAA will have seen in years. The bad news is that it will be especially tainted with Bonds (federal conviction), Clemens (federal indictment), and Sosa (failed test and Canseco allegations) all linked to PED use. The other bad news is that with a ballot this packed with worthy players - especially untainted players like Biggio - is that players like Bagwell and Smith will probably lose support as opposed to gaining it.
No comments:
Post a Comment