Hall of Fame Voting
By Bruce Marshall
We have long wondered about some of the voting patterns displayed by the "knights of the keyboard" (as Ted Williams used to refer to the baseball writers) in the annual Hall of Fame elections. Although we believe they got it right with the two new electees to the Hall, we still wonder about voting patterns, and which players continue to get respect on the ballot...and which don't.
As for the 2011 ballot, the BBWA finally got it right with Bert Blyleven. We just wonder why "Rik Aalbert,"' originally from Zeist, Holland (as former Phillies' announcer Andy Musser used to remind listeners every time Blyleven faced the Phils), had to wait 14 years to make it. Blyleven always met every criteria for the Hall, including one that is rarely mentioned...he was a dominant performer for long stretches of his career, especially in the '70s, when he ranked alongside Ryan, Carlton, and Seaver as the decade's most dominant. The writer's predilection to honor stats, and in pitchers' case, wins, above all else often misses the mark; Don Sutton broke the 300-win barrier but was never a great pitcher, while Blyleven fell just short of 300 wins but was a great pitcher for a good part of his career. Moreover, Blyleven was eventually featured on two World Series winners with the Pirates ('79) and Twins ('87), pulling workhorse duty late in his career.
In Blyleven's case, some believed the writers probably wanted to do no favors for Rik Aalbert, who was not one of their favorites during his playing days. Ironically, Blyleven made the switch to the media side after his career, and now rates as one of MLB's best color analysts on Twins broadcasts along with play-by-play man Dick Bremer. Whatever made the writers delay Blyleven's entry, we have to say that they finally got it right.
As they did with Roberto Alomar, who only had to wait two years to get elected. We wonder, however, why Alomar even had to wait that long; he should have been a first-ballot HOFer much like Cal Ripken and others. The fact he didn't get in on his first try last year was a bit of a surprise; perhaps the New York writing contingent stuck it to him for an extra year due to his mostly-disappointing work late in his career with the Mets.
But we have always wondered about some of the others and their vote totals, especially some truly deserving sorts that haven't tallied enough to get included in future balloting, or those that consistently come up short.
Like Dale Murphy.
I was hoping that at least on this year's ballot, Murph would get a little more respect and rise above recent tallies after dropping a bit, 11.9% to 11.7%, a year ago, Murph did reverse the trend slightly in 2011, up to 12.6%, but with only two more elections to go, we've resigned ourselves to the fact that only the Veteran's Committee is going to have a chance to right this long-standing wrong of the BBWA, sometime down the road.
For a period between 1982-86, and maybe '87, Murphy was the premier player in the game. Shouldn't that be the ultimate definition of greatness, and HOF worthiness? A couple of MVPs, 5 Gold Gloves, 7 All-Star selections. Versatility. All-around player. Numerous league-leading stats throughout his career (comparing favorably with some HOFers). In those prime years, Murph was at or near the top in every meaningful NL category, including hits, runs, OBP, OPS, runs created, power/speed, etc. Not to mention being something of an ironman in his prime years (played in all 162 from '82-86, and 160 in '87). He also spearheaded the only back-to-back Braves contending teams (his MVP years of 1982-83) between 1965-92.
Like always, I don't know that Murph gets in (his .265 career BA probably doesn't help, too many Ks, and his 398 HRs probably don't get the writers very interested, either), but to see him continue to get such little respect from the writers is blasphemous. And not playing on a championship team shouldn't hurt Murph that much; after all, Jim Rice wasn't on a World Series-winner, either (maybe the writers forgot that the Sox hadn't won the Series in 80+ years until '04, and never did when Rice was playing), and Rice did not play much defense, either, yet was elected a few years ago. Let's also not forget that Murph was "clean" and preceded the steroids era, although his best years compare favorably with several "juiced" stars in subsequent seasons. And, for what it's worth, we think that Murphy's clean image and LDS affiliation might in a strange way have worked against him with many writers, who for whatever deluded reason, seem to downgrade those characteristics while elevating anyone who ever got in some trouble or caused the same.
For the record, as far as all-around players are concerned, we rate Murphy over Rice and on a par with several others in the Hall, including last year's deserving honoree, Andre Dawson.
Lee Smith continuing to get more respect from the voters than Murphy? Say what! Smith's tally at least decreased slightly this year (down to 45.3% of ballots, compared to last year's 47.3%) but the fact that Smith continues to get over 40% of the vote (47.3% this time, up from 44.5% a year ago) is an indictment of the writers who continue to vote for him. Smith was never great, he was simply in the right place at the right time, when the save was cheapened and closers were no more than 3-out specialists, not firemen. We still blame Smith for blowing the '94 All-Star Game for the AL, too. Smith had nowhere near the impact that a true fireman such as Goose Gossage (elected a few years ago) had in his heydays out of the pen. Present-day closers should get less consideration than full-time DHs, which is why we're wondering how Smith can get 45% of the vote and Edgar Martinez seems to be stuck in the mid-30% range (32.8% this year, down from 36.2% last year). Why?
It also perplexes how Fred McGriff (on 17.9% of the ballots in his second try this year) gets almost twice as much respect as Murphy. McGriff posted superb power numbers and deserves to stay on the ballot, but was suspect with the glove at 1B (especially in his last few years with the Rays), struck out an awful lot, and was not a truly feared clutch hitter. Like Murphy, McGriff will garner enough votes to stay on the ballot for the next 14 years, but I doubt he ever gets the call. Dave Parker (15.3%) also continues to get more respect from the voters than Murph, which is also a bit of a shame considering how Parker basically disappeared in the early '80s, and helped wreck the Pirates franchise for several years with his drug use. Parker, however, has run out of chances on the ballot, and will also be thrown to the Veteran's Committee for any future consideration. Murphy, by the way, stays on the big ballot thru 2013.
Middle infielders continue to be underappreciated in the voting. Dave Concepcion, whose HOF eligibility has expired and now must await a call from the Veteran's Committee, had more range than Ozzie Smith (if not the acrobatics), plus speed, reach, a gun arm, and more power than Ozzie as well. Willie Randolph was an outstanding leadoff man who never got the proper respect in the voting. Neither did Frank White, who was a glove wizard with the Royals and hit with occasional power when the Royals needed it. Tony Fernandez never played a full season on a team with a losing record, and his teams were in constant contention with him at SS. Although we suspect that Barry Larkin (on 62.1% of the ballots in this, his second year) figures to get in soon enough.
I am glad Alan Trammell continues to get some respect from the voters and has a sizable number of votes (24.3% this time), but I have always wondered why Sweet Lou Whitaker never made ANY impact with the writers, who didn't give Sweet Lou enough votes to even stay on the ballot when he became eligible! Whitaker's numbers are all comparable to Trammell's: hits, LW's 2369 vs. AT's 2365; homers, 244 vs. 165; RBIs, 1084 vs. 1003; OBP, .363 vs. .352; games, 2390 vs. 2292; Gold Gloves, 3 vs. 5; All-Star Games, 5 vs. 6. Trammell made better showings in the MVP voting, and deserves the respect he gets from the HOF voters, but that doesn't explain why Sweet Lou was so overlooked. I could someday see the Veteran's Committee correcting this egregious wrong by the writers. Don Mattingly (on 13.6.% of this year's ballots) has been getting bit short-changed like Murph, as the writers are probably forgetting he also won 9 Gold Gloves in his career. Although the Mattingly record might get a bit more attention in the next year as he steps into his new role as Dodgers' manager.
As for pitchers, Jack Morris (on 52.3% of this year's ballots) has similar credentials to Blyleven and like Bert will probably eventually make it, although he's going to have to wait a few more years.
Other random thoughts on the voting. Tim Raines, the best leadoff man after Rickey Henderson in the past fifty years, should have gone in the first ballot two years ago, because he did what a leadoff man should do. Get on base and score runs, and he fielded above average, and stole a ridiculous number of bases, too. At 37.5% this time around, Raines is gaining ground, but we're not sure he will eventually make it. Really, he was a better player than Lou Brock, who lost fly balls in the moon, struck out too much and was the worst fielder on many Cardinal teams he played upon, although his ignition factor was special. Indeed, Raines was a much better situational hitter than Brock or Henderson, which is why the White Sox and Yankees batted him third to drive in runs in many first-place seasons. The aforementioned Edgar Martinez was bypassed in the voting by Raines in 2001, and will remain an interesting test case for many years, doing most of his damage as a DH. .
Then, of course, there's Mark McGwire, whose recent admission of banned substance use didn't seem to help (down to 19.9% from 23.7%) and provided a road map for other suspected abusers in the near future, including Rafael Palmeiro, who got only 11% in his first year on the ballot. Don't expect Palmeiro to fare any better than McGwire. Of the first-year candidates next year, none figure to get too close, although ex-Yankee Bernie Williams figures to make a respectable showing. The year we're waiting for, however, is 2013; Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens both will make their first appearances on the ballot in two years. That's when the fireworks will really begin.