HOF Voters continue to just not get it
Maybe it’s something that just comes over you once you are named, chosen, or whatever it is that makes it happen, to be one of the voters on the baseball Hall of Fame ballot. Perhaps a sense of gravitas and responsibility overcomes you, driving you to, in your mind, protect and serve the grandeur and history of the game of baseball as vanguards. How noble!
Fred ‘Crime Dog’ McGriff was unanimously voted into the HOF on Sunday by a committee of his peers as well as baseball executives and cognoscenti (i.e. informed media). Good for McGriff. My podcast co-host son and I believe there is ample room for more players in Cooperstown. McGriff was an excellent player but as I see it, should not have made it over some of the other names on the Contemporary Baseball Era Players Committee ballot this year.
More than 20,000 players have graced the fields of Major League Baseball in its history, with the addition of Fred McGriff the number of players (excluding managers, umpires, and baseball executives). The Hall of Fame is now comprised of 340 elected members. Included are 268 former major league players (1.3% of all who ever played), as well as 40 executives/pioneers, 22 managers and 10 umpires.
The committee included six Hall of Famers (Greg Maddux, Jack Morris, Ryne Sandberg, Lee Smith, Frank Thomas and Alan Trammell), seven Major League executives (Paul Beeston, Theo Epstein, Derrick Hall, Arte Moreno, Kim Ng, Dave St. Peter and Ken Williams) and three media members, (Steve Hirdt, LaVelle Neal, and Susan Slusser).
To be voted in on this committee a player needed to receive 12 of 16 votes. Each of the 8 voters had three votes. The tabulations went like this:
· 16 votes: McGriff
· 8 votes: Don Mattingly
· 7 votes: Curt Schilling
· 6 votes: Dale Murphy
· Fewer than four votes: Albert Belle, Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, Rafael Palmeiro
A couple of things that strike me. I watched all of these players play in the prime (and otherwise) for their entire careers. Some more than others of course but enough to gain a sense of their careers and contributions. When Fred McGriff retired after the 2004 season I did not feel he was a shoo-in for the HOF and I doubt many people did. He played most of his games at 1st base (only 7% of his games played were as a DH), and he was a less than average defensive 1st baseman with a career dWAR of -17.3 (that’s bad) which hurts his career bWAR of 52.6. He was an even better hitter than you might have thought. McGriff was and remains liked by his peers. He somehow has gotten better as a baseball player after his career was over. This seem to happen when peers are voting. McGriff’s postseason play was excellent with a 10 HRs and a .303 BA in 50 games, and he helped the Braves win the 1995 World Series. That counts in my book.
Don Mattingly is now tracking on a similar arc with many feeling he’s next for induction by the Contemporary Players Era Committee. While I am an avowed Met fan and feel Keith Hernandez should go in before Don Mattingly, Keith had some off-the-field issues during his career while ‘Donnie Baseball’ got unlucky playing mostly for less than great Yankee teams as well has having injuries prematurely end his career. Like McGriff, in the eyes of his peers, Mattingly too has improved as a player over the years. Not unlike former Met great David Wright, Mattingly was an excellent player who has always been further back in line given the relative brevity of his career even if that brevity was not his fault.
By shunning Bonds, and Clemens, Palmiero, and Belle the committee was as transparent as a bay window. Yay for the good guys and boo on the bad guys. It’s a bit unfair to lump Belle in with this group since he was not associated with PEDs in the way the others have been, although there was talk of a corked bat in 1994, but throughout his career Belle was definitely not seen as a good guy. In the end, being voted into the HOF these days — and for all baseball history, is all about being a great player AND being a ‘Good guy’. That Curt Schilling (bad guy) received 7 votes is as surprising as Dale Murphy (good guy) receiving only 6.
Just last week we noted the passing of HOFer Gaylord Perry who had legit HOF stats with 300 wins and 3,000 strikeouts and Cy Young awards in both leagues. Perry also was the author of ‘Me and the Spitter’. You might think his bold admittance of using foreign substances on the baseball for much of his career seemingly would make him a ‘bad guy’. The spitball was outlawed in baseball in 1920. Yet apparently Perry’s ‘cheating’ is less egregious than Bonds or Clemens neither of whom admitted anything to anyone ever about using PEDs back when it was still not outlawed by MLB. It’s impossible to believe that if either Bonds or Clemens were to write a tell-all book detailing their involvement with PEDs that voter sentiment would change someday.
It all makes little sense to me. On Gaylord Perry’s HOF plaque at most a veiled reference is made to his chicanery: ‘Achieved Pitchers’ Magic Numbers With 314 Wins AND 3,334 Strikeouts. Playing Mind Games With Hitters Through Array Of Rituals On Mound Was Part Of His Arsenal.’… Huh?
Why weren’t Gaylord Perry’s voters on the BBWA incensed that he ‘cheated’ by using foreign substances on the baseball to get hitters out? Why weren’t his peers equally upset that they were taken advantage of and hurt their careers much as we hear regarding Bonds, Clemens, and Palmiero?
I think Gaylord Perry belongs in the Hall of Fame. I also think that his being the author of a book detailing his cheating should be on his plaque. Bonds and Clemens, and even Schilling all belong in Cooperstown, and I’ve said before if it’s in a ‘Corridor of Controversy’ section of the HOF so be it. But not having the greatest players in history part of the Hall of Fame is simply a travesty.
The only good thing I take away is, good for Fred McGriff. And as long as voters make their view of character the THE driving issue, maybe David Wright has a chance to get in someday after all.
