Effectively Wild: A FanGraphs Baseball Podcast - Effectively Wild Episode 1463: The Hall of Fame’s 2020 Hindsight

Episode Date: November 27, 2019

Ben Lindbergh and Meg Rowley banter about the artifacts from the 2019 season that will be preserved by the Hall of Fame, and then (32:25) Ben talks to FanGraphs’ Jay Jaffe about the 2020 Hall of Fame induction cycle, including the shrinking of the ballot backlog, first-timers Derek Jeter and Bobby Abreu, whether Jeter will […]

You're holding on to me like a keepsake, holding on to me like a keepsake. Why won't you give my heart a break and just let me go? Oh, oh, baby let me go. Hello and welcome to episode 1463 of Effectively Wild, a Fangraphs baseball podcast brought to you by our Patreon supporters. I'm Meg Rowley of Fangraphs, and I am joined as always by Ben Lindberg of The Ringer. Ben, how are you? I am doing all right. Happy Thanksgiving. Happy Thanksgiving.

And happy Thanksgiving to everyone listening. We are pre-recording, so we are inauthentically wishing each other Happy Thanksgiving a few days before Thanksgiving. I guess it's not inauthentic. Yeah. I am authentically wishing you a Happy Thanksgiving just prior to Thanksgiving. Yeah, I still hope you have a good time. Thank you. You too.

So because we'll be doing stuff and traveling and seeing family and a lot of you will be also and will have travel and'll need things to plug into your ears or put on the car stereo we are doing this a little bit early and most of the episode will be a conversation with fan graphs jay chaffee about the hall of fame we like to talk to jay just about every year because he is constantly breaking down hall of fame stuff around this time of year so we'll get into all of that and unfortunately unfortunately, you had some urgent managing editor business come up right before that conversation. So it's just me and Jay. But before we bring him on, one thing I wanted to bring up, so we're hoping to have Jeff on at some point this offseason, subject to approval. He has to get the go-ahead to do that, but hoping he will.

And one thing that I was thinking maybe we could do with him was talk about this year's Hall of Fame artifacts, the things that were saved from the 2019 season and sent to the Hall of Fame, because very memorably, I went over last year's Hall of Fame artifacts with Jeff on, I think, the first episode of this year, episode 1316 on January 2nd. And we just went line by line on a list of things that were sent to the Hall of Fame. And Jeff was incredulous about most of them, particularly an Eduardo Nunez bat that was sent to the Hall of Fame, presumably because the Red Sox won the World Series. So they just took a bat that Eduardo Nunez had swung at some point,

and Jeff thought that was just ridiculous. But even if we do have Jeff on, it is probably safer for us to steer away from talking about active players. I don't know if it could be construed as tampering if Jeff were to pass judgment on the Hall of Fame worthiness of an artifact that was sent to the Hall. But just to be safe, not going to do that with Jeff. But the list is out.

There is a list of things that were saved from the season and sent to the Hall. And I've looked it over, and frankly, it's not that bad. There aren't that many egregious choices or choices that just make you wonder why they thought that thing was worth preserving at cooperstown but because this is a hall of fame centric episode i thought it might make sense to run these by you see what you think so there's a longer list of regular season artifacts and then a shorter list of post-season artifacts so the things that were saved from the nationals from the world series that i think have already maybe been

displayed at the hall or soon will be in an artifact about that series or this postseason we've got a davy martinez hoodie which uh i don't know not not a huge draw probably but if it was the hoodie he was wearing in that epic tantrum after the interference play then uh maybe if it's got like spittle on it from when he yelled at the umpires i could see that i don't think he was wearing a hoodie when that happened though because weren't they uh weren't they in houston for that oh okay yeah huh all right that where that took place so it's's probably a non. But maybe it's another key moment. Maybe it's a moment where he called for an intentional walk. Yeah, sure.

Right. He probably made some momentous decision while he was wearing this hoodie. So, hey, kids, there's the hoodie that Davey Martino's is wearing. Not the best, but then there's some other good stuff here. Steven Strasburg, Game 6 jersey. That's pretty good. Howie Kendrick, Game 7 home run ball. I mean, if you had to choose one artifact from that series,

it probably would be that. That's one of the biggest hits in baseball history. And it's even cooler because it's got the Hall of Fame PR person tweeted a picture of it, and it has a little stripe of yellow on it from where it hit the foul pole, which is even better. I mean, it tells a story. I mean, that is the best possible artifact. And then you've got Max Scherzer's Game 7 cap, which is pretty good. Just the whole story of Max Scherzer being out there at all in that game.

You've got the Juan Soto game one home run ball. All right. You've got Anthony Rendon's bat. I don't know if he was using that same bat the whole series, but obviously he had some big hits. Then you've got Kurt Suzuki spikes, which, you know, I don't know. He was on the team and the spikes appeared in that series. So, yeah, I guess. team and the spikes appeared in that series so yeah i guess i mean he had he had a couple of uh

i don't know important blocks little blocks and balls yeah sure he was there hit some home runs he participated yeah well did he he he did something good he he threw out i distinctly remember him throwing out josetuve right at third base. I think that was Kurt Suzuki. And I don't know. He did have hits or a hit. He entered that series, I think, over the postseason. But then he did ultimately get on base at least in that series.

He had a two-hit game in Game 2, right? Yeah, that's true. All right. But yes, you're right. An 18 WRC plus for the postseason in Toto does not suggest that he went on a chair. No. And then Fernando Rodney's glove,

which again, if we're talking about big contributions to the series, it's not really up there. But the fact that Fernando Rodney was in that series at all and wasn't it like the longest drought between World Series appearances

for a player or something like that? It was somewhat historic in nature for him to be at that age in that series and having not pitched in a World Series in a long time. It's fine. Whatever. Fernando rodney's cool we like him yeah we do yeah oh and they also saved one of her outer paris baby sharks

gotta keep a baby shark that's essential so that's the the world series stuff that they saved and then there's a bunch of regular season stuff that they saved which uh some of it definitely historic significance and it's kind of cool to look back at the list because you recall some of the historic firsts that happened this year, even if it wasn't like a statistical milestone or something. Just, you know, there were some cool things that happened in baseball this year amidst all the not so cool stuff. So, for example, like a ball used during the march 20th game in tokyo between the a's and the mariners you know that was a it was a fun event that that happened and then there

some in that category which we'll get to but you know then you go from that to the spikes worn by the twins jorge polanco on april 5th when he hit for the cycle against the Phillies. Yeah, I don't know about that. I assume you said April 5th? Yes. So I assume that that was the first cycle of the season probably. That's what merits that. I guess, yeah.

Maybe. It's not the only cycle thing preserved because Kevin Biggio's gloves, his batting gloves, when he hit for the cycle in September are also there, which he is half of the second father-son duo to hit for a major league cycle because Craig Biggio hit for the cycle. And I think it was what it was like Daryl Ward and Gary Ward, I think maybe both hit for the cycle. And so they weren't even the first father son duo to both hit for the cycle, but well, whatever. It's better than the typical cycle. So I don't know. I mean the cycle in general,

it's like I didn't even remember that jorge polanco hit for the cycle so that's news to me i guess yeah it's not like that's a memory that stands out about the 2019 season that my trip to the hall would feel incomplete if there were not something marking the historic occasion of jorge polanco's cycle. Anyway, that's there. Then there is the first pitch ball from the Angels' April 10th game against the Brewers when Albert Pujols became the 10th player in history to appear in 1,000 games for two different MLB teams. Okay. See, it's the first pitch ball, though.

It's like, it's not even I mean Albert Pujols isn't a leadoff hitter So it's not even like a pitch That he saw like if you had Like it's I mean 10th player in history to appear in a thousand Games for two different teams I guess it's a cool accomplishment

It's the 10th but probably All 10 are pretty good I guess but If you're gonna save something like give me his glove from that game. Yeah. At least give me like the first pitch he saw in that game. Why wouldn't we just include his bat? Yeah, or his bat. Sure.

Why wouldn't we just include his bat? Yeah. Have it be a him thing. A thing that's his. That ball's not his. Yeah. Or like the first base bag that he was standing on if he was even playing first base that day so yeah i i mean borderline even to include something

about pujols and the 1000 game for two teams thing but if you're going to include something like make it pujol specific give me his cap or something at least especially because you know he had some some home run moments that were especially right meaningful this year yeah so you could include i mean i know that you can't get those balls back all the time and sometimes players don't want to give them up even when they are able to bribe their way back to them right yeah but uh yeah i bet he's like this cap sure i wore that cap that take this one yeah yeah anyway then we've got a ball used during the april 13th game in monterey mexico between the reds and the cardinals just in that same genre of game played in unusual place so save something from that game that's it's fine

i don't mind that sure a jersey worn by the yankees cc sabathia on april 30th during the game against the arizona diamondbacks where he struck out his 3,000th career batter, along with a ball thrown by Zabathia to record his 3,003rd career strikeout on May 6th. So on the one hand, I think that those, you know, I'm sympathetic to wanting to have CeCe-related things in the hall. On the other hand, you even just describing it was sympathetic to wanting to have cc related things yes in the hall on the other hand you even just describing it was hard to say yes you just had a hard just had a hard time even saying that which makes me think it's not good oh i made a i made a very bad cycle joke related to jorge polanco on twitter what was it i don't know if this is too crude or effectively wild. No such thing. I screenshotted breaking news.

First cycle of 2019 belongs to Jorge Polanco. And I responded, now all the other cycles will sync to his. Which is a joke about ladies and menstruation. Put that tweet in the Hall of Fame. I'd rather see that tweet. Yeah. Yeah. You get a lot of little kids asking questions.

Their parents might not be ready to answer. So, CeCe, like the jersey when he got his 3,000th, that's fine. Yeah. I don't know about the 3,003rd strikeout. I don't know about that. I mean, it wasn't his last strikeout. It wasn't the 3,000th strikeout. It's just. Did that strikeout push him past some important historical figure, right?

Did that make him the, I don't know. I don't know. It doesn't even make him the most strikeoutedness. That's not a word. You know what I'm trying to say. Does that represent a milestone of some sort? It seems like it must if they're taking it. Or am I giving them?

I don't know. They took the cycle ball. Yeah, they take a lot of things. So I probably shouldn't give them credit. Yeah, they take a lot of things. So let's see. Is that something? So CeCe now ranks 16th all-time with 3,093. That's pretty good. And yeah, 3,003, that's nothing. Yeah, that is nothing. There's no one between Jim Bunning at 2855 and Justin Verlander, who right now is at 3006, or John Smoltz at 3084. So, no, 3003, that's nothing. I don't know if that was like his last strikeout of the game where he went over 3000 or something. But no, that's not near the top of the list of things that I would save even related to 3,000 strikeouts. But they want to have artifacts of historical significance, right?

But those are also hard to procure. I would think, you know, when they're ones that go into the stands or what have you, people are going to sit there and say, I'm going to keep this home run ball. Or if it's a pitcher, they might say, no, I especially want this one because it marks an important milestone in my career. Won't you let me have it? And so I guess we need to have some amount of sympathy to the fact that like maybe the one they could get was his 3,000th and third. That's just really hard to say.

I know. Man, that's hard to say. They asked him for 3,000 and he said, no, that's pretty special to me. I'm going to put that in my home. And then they said, well, how about 3,001? No, that's pretty close to 3,000. Can we do 3,002? Oh, gee, I really would like to help you out.

But, you know, that's only two away from 3,000. And then they said, all right, 3,003. And he said, OK, I guess I can part with that. Yeah, but Cece was like, you know what, guys? That's really hard to say. I'd rather not have to ever point to that ball in my home and say what strikeoutout it symbolizes so you take it on your way i bet that's what happened all right the spikes worn by the mets noah cinder guard on may 2nd when he pitched a shutout against the reds and hit a home run to account for the game's only run true win noah cinder guard they saved the spikes

from the true win i think that as a nod to effectively wild and the wonderful conversation that this moment generated between you and sam that they should absolutely put it in but they should add a little a little audio button and they should play your conversation about it and only if they do that am i supportive otherwise i think they're missing important context and uh it's just another good outing from noah that's what i think about that. All right. The athletics cap worn by Mike Fiers and a game ball from Fiers is no hitter against the Reds on May 7th. Sure. Yeah, fine. Sure.

Whatever. No hitter. It was a second no hitter, right, which is somewhat unusual. So, okay, I guess. Yeah, because I guess the first one came right after that trade from Milwaukee. Yeah. all right. The funny thing about that is that of all the things that Mike Fiers has done in this major league season or not long after it,

one could argue that the no-hitter is the least memorable thing that he has contributed to the broader course. Save the facial hair. Yeah, save the facial hair, save his on-the-record quotes about the Astros. Mike Fiers, you know, there's an argument to be made that he's had some of the most meaningful impact to the course of baseball history to emerge out of this season of any player in the league, which is hilarious for a guy who had that facial hair. All right. The batting gloves worn by the Rangers' Joey Gallo on May 8th when he became the third fastest player in history to reach the 100 home run mark.

Yeah. Yeah, no. So here's my question that I have about acknowledging those sorts of milestones in a display, which is how often do they switch them out? Because after a while, you're like, he's the 15th fastest player to do a thing you're like all right yeah it might just be like for a month or two after the season or something which is fine you know pretty low bar i guess there you could say it's just uh even if this is the best we could get it's not up to our standards it's not hall of fame worthy like you

know batting gloves third fastest player to reach the 100 home run mark. It doesn't do much for me. I like Joey Gallo. But yeah. But yeah. I mean, if it's just a temporary thing. But like, does it tell a story about the 2019 season? Not particularly.

Yeah. So. All right. The Blue Jays cap worn by Edwin Jackson on May 15th when he became the first player to appear for 14 different big league teams. Absolutely. Yes, that's a first ballot. Put it in there. I wonder if they can go back and get all the other.

Ooh, yeah. Can they get a cap, an actual? I mean, it could be from any day. It doesn't have to be from a specific day. Can they go back and get one from every org he's played in? I wonder if he's kept them. Yeah, be nice yeah all right the first pitch ball from the june 13th game between the tigers and royals in omaha marking the first regular season mlb game played in nebraska that's you know one of those uh playing somewhere we haven't played before sure but it's okay i guess

but it's nebraska yeah right you don't have to change currency no and it's it's Nebraska. Yeah. Right? You don't have to change currency. No. And it's the Tigers and the Royals, you said? Yep. All right. So put this in a very small corner of the room, I guess, is my takeaway. You didn't need a passport to go there. It's just Nebraska.

Yep. The spikes worn by the Yankees' Aaron Hicks on June 29th when he hit the first home run in a regular season MLB game on European soil. And also in that same category, there is the bat used by the Yankees' DJ LeMayhew on June 29th when he recorded the first hit in a regular season MLB game on European soil. So same genre there, but you do have to change currencies honestly i think it would be more impressive for them to collect all of the balls and bats that didn't go for home runs or facilitate them because as i recall those games were quite high scoring yes definitely that first one yeah so and oh also in that same category the jersey worn by the red sox is

christian vasquez when he caught the first pitches of the yankees versus red sox game in london on june 29th oh and also home plate from the two london series games couldn't you just do that couldn't that be the because what you're what you're marking is the is the location the people who are involved in the players involved in these specific actions are sort of incidental what's interesting is the place and the the strongest and most obvious marker of the place is home plate yep that's yeah that makes sense i don't know take like an air sample or something just uh here's some air from that game. I don't know. Then we've got the bat used by Futures Game MVP and Rangers prospect Sam Huff on July 7th. So I guess Futures Game MVP, Sam Huff.

Okay. The cap worn by All-Star Game Most Valuable Player Shane Bieber on July 9th. You know, I guess the same genre there The caps worn by Angels pitchers Taylor Cole and Felix Pena During their combined no-hitter on July 12th Along with a ball from that game Thrown by Pena and autographed by

Cole, Pena, and catcher Dustin Garneau And a jersey worn by the Angels Andrew Haney for that game When the Angels all wore jerseys honoring the late Tyler Skaggs. Oh yeah. Yeah. Yes. Okay. The spikes

worn by Tony Thomas of the Southern Maryland Blue Crabs of the Atlantic League on July 13th when he became the first player to steal first base quote unquote under the new rules being tested. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

I'm in favor of that. Man, I wonder what the commentary surrounding that looks like. Yeah. There's also got the earpiece used by home plate umpire Fred DeJesus in the Atlantic League game between the New Britain Bees and Long Island Ducks on July 25th, the first regular season game that made use of the automated ball strike system in the Atlantic League. So same genre. That's fine. I wonder if it's like a waxy earpiece that they clean it off first or that they keep the earwax as a historic memento.

I don't know. But either way, that seems deserving, I think. I guess probably, right? When you see artifacts of long ago battles in a museum, sometimes they're blood spattered and whatnot, right? Yeah, sure. The Orioles cap worn by Stevie Wilkerson on July 25th when he became the first position player to earn a save since the save rule was introduced in 1969 along with the final ball from that game. Sure. Yeah, I guess. with the final ball from that game um sure yeah yeah i guess i i have a hard time marking

fun facts like that for stat that we have just collectively decided we don't care about yeah right so i'm like why are we why are we i mean i i appreciate the novelty of it coming from a position player, but I don't care about saves. Yeah. Meh. Meh. Barely. Barely. A game-used ball signed by the four Astros hurlers Aaron Sanchez, Will Harris, Joe Biagini, and Chris Davensky,

who combined to pitch a no-hitter against the Mariners on August 3rd, along with a cap worn by Sanchez in the game. Where was the game played? I don't recall. You don't have to look. People can just assume that I was going to make a sassy sign-stealing joke. I was going to make a joke about sign-stealing. Yeah.

It's more of an accomplishment on the road. Yeah. I mean, they're pitchers so i don't know i know it doesn't have anything to do with it it was poorly constructed well yeah that's the other thing it's like i don't need really any help yeah it was a poorly constructive joke ben it wasn't my best well i mean no hitters againsters, first of all, I don't know if that's even historic anymore. And a combined no-hitter is just always that loses some of the luster of a no-hitter. And it's not like the first combined no-hitter.

It's not even the only combined no-hitter in this season that they're saving stuff from. No, and it's certainly, as you've noted, it is not the only no-hitter the Mariners suffered. Yep. They were sort of on a no-hitter tear for a moment there. Yeah, that's a no from me. All right. The bat used by the Reds' Aristides Aquino on August 10th when he hit three home runs in his 10th big league game. And that was in the midst of that, like, well, he's hit more homers in his first X big league games than anyone else streak. Yeah, I'm okay with that.

Because I think it tells a story not only about him. Well, maybe it doesn't tell a story about 2019 because he just hits a bunch of home runs. It might tell us. I mean, I don't know if he'll turn out to be a very good player or not, or if he'll just be someone we look back on and say, well, this was a product of the ultra-juiced reduced drag ball year. So I don't hate it. I don't hate it. I don't love it, but I don't hate it. No.

All right. A ball thrown by the Astros' Justin Verlander during his no-hitter, the third of his career against the Blue Jays on September 1st. So it's Verlander, but it's his third no-hitter, and we're saving multiple Astros no-hitters artifacts here. I mean, I'd rather have this one than the combined no-hitter. Yeah, I'd rather take this one than the combined, especially since it came in a Cy Young year, right? True, yes. So it sort of speaks to the overall quality of the season that he had. So I'm okay with it. I'm shaky on no-hitter balls,

especially for guys who have thrown them previously than I am for, I mean, like, clearly if there were a perfect game ball, we would want one of those in just because of the the relative rarity but yeah of all the no hitter balls i suppose one that belongs to a guy who would go on to win the cy young is probably defensible all right a few more here we've got the bat used by the orioles jonathan vr on september 11th when he hit the 6106th home run of the MLB season, a new record. I would argue that this is perhaps the most important. If we are judging the worthiness of these objects by the degree to which they tell the story of the season,

I would argue that this might be the most important one of all, unless they can get, I don't know, email printouts from the Astros for some other nonsense, but that didn't even take place in this year. So, well. Well, we'll see. We'll see. The ones we know about weren't for this year, I should say. So I would argue that this might be the most important one because I can't think of anything that we talked about more this season than the ball. Yeah, that was the most emblematic thing. And I like that it's Jonathan VR too. Yeah.

It's not some big slugger. It's like the type of hitter who hit more home runs this year because of the ball. Jonathan VR hit 24 home runs this year. Exactly. Yeah. No, it is good both for the significance of the object absent the context of the player.

And then when you add in the context of the player and then when you add in the context of the player to that moment it just is pretty perfect yeah all right that may be the best one this may be the worst one i don't know this is that the helmet used by the royals whit merrifield throughout the 2019 season when he became the second right-handed batter in history to lead the majors in hits for two straight seasons no absolutely not terrible this that is offensive candidly it's offensive yeah i mean apologies to mitt like you had a nice year i guess not as good as the previous one but like sam and i talked about how he led the league in hits uh on previous episode. Yeah. That's nice.

But second right-handed batter to lead the majors in hits for two straight seasons. Terrible. No. Get out of here. Get out of here. All right. A fan giveaway transistor radio commemorating 2004 C-Frick Award winner Marty Brenneman's last game in the booth with the Cincinnati Reds.

This is the sort of one that my initial impulse is to say, eh. But I think upon brief further reflection that I would be inclined to include it because this is the sort of thing that matters a great deal to the people in that specific market. And baseball is nothing if not a local game primarily. And I think that while that means it is sometimes subject to myopia, it is also subject to us celebrating small moments that mean a great deal to us that other people don't know about.

And this is emblematic of those. So I think this tells a story not only of 2019, but of all of baseball. How about that? Yeah. Pretty good for a giveaway. They should have saved like the last time marty brenneman said that joey vato doesn't swing the bat enough or he walks too much or something that would be nice but yeah sometimes our local heroes do disappoint

us a bat used by the white socks tim anderson during the 2019 season when he led mlb with a 335 batting average yeah sure yeah it's fine it's aB with a 335 batting average. Yeah, sure. Yeah, it's fine. It's a batting title. It's batting average. But it was a historically notable batting title in that I think he walked the least of any batting title winner or had the lowest OBP or something like that. Yeah.

Yeah. So, okay. And he had a historically significant season in some ways. Yeah. And, you know, if you're going to talk about the 2019 season, you should probably mention Tim Anderson somewhere in there. Agreed. And the last one, a jersey worn by the Rangers' Elvis Andrews on September 29th in the last game played at Globe Life Park. Sure.

Sure. Yeah. sure sure i think it only matters if they have it next to a jersey from the first game played at globe life park so that you could very clearly see that so little time had passed between those two events because you'd look at the first one and say, that looks close to the same sort of uniform they would wear today. And then maybe you could have a picture of a baby born one day and that same baby now a grown person on the last day and be like, hey, look at how these still are young people. Could do that.

Yeah, okay. I like a little sass in, this is what we have. I like a little sass in my museums is what we're learning about this. Well, that's the end. I think it's probably a better list than last year's. I remember there being even more head scratchers last year, or maybe it was just Jeff being more of a head scratching person. I don't know.

But I am sympathetic to the conundrum of, well, of museums generally, I suppose, but the Hall of Fame in particular, because baseball generates so many bits of information. There are so many potential things that matter. And I imagine that your impulse would be to be overly acquisitive so as to not look back 10 years later and say, oh, man, I really wish we had that thing. That thing ended up meaning so much and we don't have it anymore. We had that Whitmerryfield batting room. Yeah, now it's in a goodwill in Kansas City and we'll never find it again, right? So I am sympathetic to how they have the impulse to acquire and I am curious what their procedure is for culling because I imagine they have to have one.

Maybe we should find a hall person to ask this question to because at some point you're like, wow, we got to, you know, it's not so dissimilar from your own basement or attic or front storage closet. I'm trying to pick a thing that might be relatable to you, Ben, as a person who has neither a basement nor an attic. At some point you have to be like, oh, gosh, I got too much stuff in here. I got to get rid of some of this stuff. I haven't used that broken coffee maker in like four years. Why do we still have it? Right? Yeah. All right. Well, we've gone through that exercise again and now we can take a brief break and I will be back with Jay Jaffe. So you and I will speak again next week. That sounds good. I'm very glad that we're not going to have to inadvertently inspire Jeff to commit baseball crimes.

I know. I would not want to get him fired unless that meant he could podcast, but then we'd have to have a four-person rotation and I don't know how that would work. I don't know. We could never possibly make that work. I'm twirling a mustache I don't have. All right. Talk to you all right talk to you soon talk to you soon It gets abused It gets abused Traveling down the road that leads to fame and glory To fame and glory It's an important story They want you, they want you

I wish I didn't have to let you Jay Jaffe has been breaking down Hall of Fame ballots every year at various outlets dating back to 2004 When he started doing that for Baseball Prospectus, that is 15 years ago Which means that his Hall of Fame ballot breakdowns would have exhausted their own Hall of Fame eligibility If we were still working with the 15-year ballot. He has resumed his annual labor, and he is churning out the player profiles for Fangraphs, of course, this year, and we like to have him on every year if we can to get the latest on the returning candidates and the new candidates and how the ballot looks overall. So he's just a few players into this year's ballot breakdown, and hopefully he's not too tired of talking Hall of Fame yet.

Jay, how are you? Hey, I'm good, Ben. Thanks. Good to be here. Yeah, so I guess the big picture, and you've been breaking down both the new ballot, the returning players, and just the BBWA ballot candidates, as well as what are we calling the Veterans Committee now? This is the Modern Baseball Era Committee ballot. Modern Baseball, right. And I will actually – I also need to correct you on one thing. I started doing ballot analysis in the 2002 ballot at Futility Infielder. It was two well-read posts there, two well-read series there that were what led to the invitation from BP to start doing this stuff there.

So that's how this all began was at Futility Infielder. So I guess this is my 18th year? Wow. It's old enough to be drafted. Yeah. And that led to JAWS and that led to the Cooperstown Casebook. And every year it adds some new wrinkles. So you are eligible to vote next year, and I got into the BBWA a year after you, so I'm two years away from my first ballot. And if I were looking at the ballot as a voter this time around, which I'm not quite yet, but I think this might be the first time in a while that I might not have 10 names checked off on my ballot. So we seem to be finally getting past that

giant backlog that built up in the PD candidate era. Yeah, I did my annual five-year outlook piece for Fangraphs last January 28th, and I called it Closing the Floodgates, the next five years of BBWA Hall of Fame elections. And, you know, that showed that really, I think that, you know, the boom times were over. We've seen 20 candidates elected by the writers over the past six years, the largest swell of candidates in the institution's history. And I believe it's two of the four times that we've seen four candidates elected in a single slate. But yeah, we've thinned out the herd. There's still some holdovers that are on the ballot that have been languishing for too long.

But they're going to get more scarce for the next few years. I think it's not necessarily just a commentary on the quality of players so much as we've just had kind of an embarrassment of riches over the last few years. And you're right, it's, you're not necessarily going to be able to go to 10 in the same way that I think that most voters have expected to, the majority of voters in a lot of years over the past half decade have expected to, although that kind of leaves a little bit more room for a little bit of personal preference and desire to keep discussing some of these guys rather than consigning them to the one and done category.

Yeah. So the new class is kind of weak. There's Derek Jeter, who's a shoe in, but then the best of the rest is really Bobby Abreu, probably, who I love Bobby Abreu, and I'm probably in the demographic of voter who would be most likely to vote for Bobby Abreu, and I'm probably in the demographic of voter who would be most likely to vote for Bobby Abreu. And even so, I'm not sure that I would bring myself to vote for Bobby Abreu. So I assume he's going to be one and done, or at least that he'll maybe get over the threshold but won't make any serious run at it. And I guess that means that the big question about this year's fresh faces are, will Jeter be unanimous,

which is sort of a silly question because who cares? Every deserving player probably deserves to be unanimous if it's not a year where you have more qualified candidates than spaces. And it's just a matter of, well, Rivera was unanimous last year. And so does that mean that finally voters who would refuse to vote for any first-time candidate because there was no history of candidates getting in unanimously will now not be able to say that and so won't make that case? Yeah, Abreu is definitely at the top of the list among the rest of them. I think he's below the Jaws line in terms of being the standard at the position, which is the highest of any position because of the top heaviness of having five guys

with 100 war, Ruth, Aaron, Musil, Ott, and Frank Robinson kind of skewing the ratings a bit. But he's above 50 Jaws, which is really about the threshold where, you know, I think it's perfectly reasonable to talk about it, to understand that a guy may not be, you know, exactly an above average candidate, but is really hardly, you know, a definitively below average candidate. I believe he's above the median at the position, for example. We've got 26 Hall of Famers there, and I'm trying to remember exactly how many he's ahead of but uh he's about at the halfway point uh he is sandwiched between dave winfield and vlad guerrero uh vlad obviously just elected a couple years ago uh very comparable career and peak numbers uh to vlad uh slightly ahead on both so but uh much less much less well rewarded in his career only a two-time All-Star. I believe it's one gold glove.

We certainly saw a lot of his defensive shortcomings when he played here with the Yankees. He got pretty lousy late in his career. But, you know, he was an on-base machine for all of his career. And outstanding power-speed combination that I think was really, yourecognized. He's got some things in common in that regard with Dwight Evans, who's on the modern baseball ballot. Evans was only a three-time all-star. Different skill sets. Evans was an outstanding defender who couldn't really pair his best defensive seasons with his best offensive seasons with great frequency. But just guys who have high

on base percentages, I think have traditionally been very underappreciated in terms of how that has an impact on their total value. And both of those guys fit that bill. And it's hardly the only dimension of their game. Yeah. So we've already seen one prospective voter say that he will be voting for only Derek Cheater. So I think it's two. I believe it's two now. I think we had two on the same day. Okay. So it's not to sully Cheater's induction with any less.

Just gross. Yeah. So, I mean, that is obviously very silly, but I wonder whether that speaks to just the esteem that Jeter's held in or whether just the continued acknowledgement of advanced defensive stats that paint him in a more negative light not in a he shouldn't be in the hall of fame light but just he's not an inner circle hall of fame guy necessarily if you count the defense certainly a deserving one so would you wager that he will be elected unanimously and follow Rivera? That's a good question. I don't know. You've just given a lot to unpack there.

So, you know, I think Jeter, because of the success that he had and because of the team for which he had it, is a polarizing player. People feel extreme in one direction or another about him. You know, he was the centerpiece of a five-time champion. He is in the top 10 all-time in hits. He was what, like 14-time all-star, something like that. You know, he was very, very good hitter for the position. He was also what we know was a kind of a lousy defender, perhaps historically so. And, you know, kind of, I think because he was such a face of the game type guy, I think he was, you know, he was maybe a bit overexposed thanks to the three-tier playoff

format. I think, you know, a certain segment of fans got rightly sick of Jeter. I think though, you distinguish between what the bystanders to this process feel, which includes also, the bystanders to this process feel, which includes also maybe some justifiable anger towards his tenure with the Marlins so far, maybe just some of the persona stuff in general, versus what the average media member feels towards him. And I think those are two different things. And I think from a voter standpoint, I don't see that he did anything that would justify from a voter standpoint, I don't see that he did anything that would justify leaving him off even the first ballot. No. You know, this is a guy who got 3,000 hits. Guys who get 3,000 hits get voted in first ballot almost invariably unless they have a PED allegation attached to their name and he doesn't.

Yeah. You know, just because Willie Mays and Hank Aaron didn't get unanimous doesn't mean that dumb tradition has to carry forward. We saw it end last year, justifiably taken out behind the barn and given a good whack. And I think, you know, I would much rather see whether it's Derek Cheater or Ichiro Suzuki or whomever, you know, just stop the nitpicking. And just, you know, these guys all deserve 100icking and just, you know, these guys all deserve 100%. I mean, you know, Greg Maddox deserved 100%, you know, a lot of these guys did and Chipper

Jones deserved 100%. And there was a time when I put down in print that I thought Chipper would be the first just because at that point, it appeared that, you know, the will of the BBWA electorate was to publish all ballots. And then that transparency was probably going to lead to a unanimous decision even before Mariano Rivera came along. But I think that if they couldn't go unanimous for Ken Griffey Jr., maybe it's unreasonable to expect that they're going to go unanimous for for for derrick jeter but i don't think that anybody who doesn't choose him is going to reveal himself and it's definitely a him um so i i i can i can just i can i i i don't say that to you know refer to the fact that they're you know the the electorate is is 100 male it's not um but but

anybody who does is almost invariably going to be somebody who's grandstanding, you know, a grandstanding man, just as much grandstanding as somebody who only chose Jeter on his ballot. Yeah. And you wrote, Rivera benefited from a perfect storm of voter accountability, transparency, consensus on his status as the best ever within his niche and universal respect throughout the industry. And maybe Jeter has some of that universal respect. I mean, I guess Rivera's- You've got to spell it with a two though.

Yes. Rivera's reputation was probably more spotless a year ago before the White House visit and the Trump comments. But as a player and as a competitor, certainly he had a great reputation and still does. And Jeter did too. And I think people look at him as like he's the clean player in that era of tainted players. Of course, we don't know who was doing what, but he's never been connected to anything. But he doesn't have that best ever within his niche. And you could still say that he was a more valuable player than Marion Rivera, certainly going by regular old war. He would be, maybe not if you count postseason, but he doesn't have, you know, best shortstop ever to prominence, it was as part of that shortstop trinity that also included Alex Rodriguez and Nomar Garcia Parra. And there were certainly years when all three were going concerns that he might have been the third best of those. You know,

so in some ways, he kind of suffered by comparison to them, but he outlasted them at the position for reasons that are perhaps not always necessarily the most wholesome reasons. But the reality is that he had the staying power and had amassed the right to stave off that kind of move, which might have hastened his exit from the stage. And I think it's all kind of complicated, but the reality is sixth all-time in hits and no reason to doubt the veracity of his accomplishment. I mean, there are 19,000-plus players who've played baseball over the past 150 years, and most of them did not get anywhere close to what he accomplished.

That's a hall of favor. So in the absence of other strong first-time candidates besides Jeter and possibly Abreu, who is poised to take advantage of that, the holdovers who might see a boost, I guess the big one that everyone will be paying attention to because he's in his final year of eligibility is Larry Walker. So can he make another big leap and get to 75%? Yeah, Walker would have to essentially equal last year. He gained 20.5% percentage points last year. He'd have to get 20.4% this year. To me, that's probably a tall order. But in just the same way that we've kind of seen this on the field, and as you have been one of the primary documenters, this, you know, malleability in terms of trajectory and improvement through, you know, because of

the age that we live in with the technological input and maybe a more open-mindedness. We've seen that to some extent within the Hall of Fame voting too, you know, going back all the way to Burt Bly-Levin's recovery from a slow start, the rallies of Edgar Martinez and Tim Raines before him to overcome the loss of five years of eligibility and the slow starts to their candidacy. We've seen a lot of very, you know, nearly unprecedented stuff, if not fully unprecedented stuff in the last few years. So I wouldn't say never for Walker. You know, I think that at the very least, he has positioned himself to almost certainly enter the Hall of Fame sometime in the not too distant future,

because he's already above 50%. And almost certainly will get above 60%, maybe even 70% of the vote. But it's still a tall order to get to 75% here, especially because he's been so unsupported on the private ballots, which are generally, you know, retired voters and voters who, you know, for one reason or another are more or less beyond accountability. They're not publishing their ballots. They're maybe not doing a lot of deep research into, you know, into the candidates. They're just, you know, going on memory and triple crown stats and whatever, and probably levying too hard or too high an impact on, a too high a discount on his time and Coors Field. But I think that he's

going to benefit from the less crowded ballot to some extent, maybe Curt Schilling will. Although if you do a comparison in the Ryan Thibodeau tracker over which guys were listed as if I had more than 10 spots, you know, and could add additional names. Walker and Scott Rowland were well ahead of Schilling, who I think had one writer who said that. They had, I think Rowland was tops with 12. Walker, I think maybe he had about 10. So, you know, I think that, you know, he'll add some and we've already seen a couple people add him of the less than 10 voters who've sent in their ballots. He's already picked up a couple. So I think it's a good trend, but I'm not holding my breath that he'll be elected.

So let me read you something Joe Sheehan wrote this week about Walker. He said, my resistance has always been about Walker's short career. In those 17 seasons, he had just over 8,000 plate appearances. The writers have rarely put in a player with that few plate appearances who played since the schedule went to 162 games. There was Kirby Puckett, but of course he was forced to retire early, and there was Mike Piazza, but he's a catcher. And then he continued, as with Edgar Martinez, however, the recent induction of Trevor Hoffman puts Walker's low PA totals in context. Hoffman faced 4,388 batters in his career, and even giving him some leverage credit doesn't make up nearly 4,000 plate appearances.

If we're going to put low-volume relievers in, then the standard for hitters, especially hitters who were Hall of Famers on a rate basis, has to move accordingly. So I wanted to ask you about that argument because, of course, Jaws is set up such that players are compared to players at their own position because catchers get different playing time than right fielders or whatever, so you want to look at different standards. So should we compare relievers to relievers and say, well, reliever, it's a job, it's specialized reliever, that's a staple in baseball now. So if you're the best at that, you should get in. Or should we say, well, yeah, but relievers just

aren't as valuable as a group as these other position players? I mean, I tend to side with the, let's try to keep the apples compared to apples and oranges to oranges. But I think philosophically, it's worth appreciating what Joe's saying. to oranges, but I think philosophically it's worth appreciating what Joe's saying. You know, and I think one reason why I think it's worth turning to advanced statistics is because they help to illustrate that, you know, playing time isn't the only thing. You know, Larry Walker did more in 8,000 plate appearances than, you know, say Dave Winfield did in 10,000 plate appearances. You know, guys who were routinely lauded for reaching major, sorry, Winfield did in 10,000 plate appearances. You know, guys who were routinely

lauded for reaching major, sorry, Winfield had 12,000 plus plate appearances. You know, guys who are routinely lauded for sticking around to get 3,000 hits or 400, 500 home runs turned out to be less valuable over the course of their careers because they didn't have all the dimensions in their games that Walker had. You know, it's not just his hitting stats that we're voting on or his hit total we're voting on. You know, this guy was an elite defender. He was an outstanding base runner, you know, despite the fact that he didn't look like he had, you know, great speed. He was, you know, was a very smart base runner as well. And just the all-around impact of his game. I mean, you know, we hear so much, you know, you know, beyond the numbers, you know, beyond the numbers, this guy does the little things.

Larry Walker did the little things, and it shows up in his war. In fact, the baseball reference, within war, there's a combination of base running and double play avoidance stat that B-Ref calls little things, literally. And he ranks very high for his era, added an extra five wins that way just on the on in that facet alone so i think what what these metrics can help us you know show is that perfect attendance is not mandatory you know it's like the guy who doesn't study but but still aces the test uh larry walker did enough for his teams in the 8 000 plate appearances he made or the 140 games a year or 130 games a year that he had a greater impact than guys who were there for all 162 sometimes. You know, it's like a catcher in some ways. I mean, you've got to pick your spots. You couldn't play Larry Walker every day. I mean, playing at high altitude exacts a physical cost. Playing on AstroTurf as he did during his time in

a limbic stadium exacts a physical cost. I mean, those things need to be appreciated when you're talking about, oh, he only played more than 143 games once or whatever. You got to look at the context within which that occurred. He also, you know, two of his seasons were cut into by the strike. Yeah, right. And then the rest of the players on the ballot who might stand to gain from this year's small new class,

you've got the problematic trio of bonds and clemens and shilling problematic for different reasons many reasons they each have multiple reasons maybe right and then you've got the other pd tainted players you've got manny and you've got sheffield and sosa and giambi and on and on. And then you've got Roland, who you briefly touched on, who I would vote for if I could now and will a couple of years from now, but may have trouble gaining a huge amount of support. So do you see anyone else making a serious run at it? I mean, I think just about everybody is going to benefit from this in some way or another, some more than others. I don't see Bonds and Clemens gaining a ton of support by the looser ballot. Again, going back to the self-reporting voters in terms of who they would add if they had more than 10.

Schilling had one voter. I think Bonds and Clemens each had two. People have more or less made up their minds about them. more or less made up their minds about them. Although maybe there are some people who feel like, you know, they would be willing to include them if it weren't, you know, at the expense of, let's just call it a more wholesome player. But, you know, I think it's guys that not – you know, guys that I favor will benefit.

I think some guys that I'm not so wild about, you know, from a Hall of Fame standpoint will gain. I think Jeff Kent, you know, there's Hall of Fame standpoint will gain. I think Jeff Kent, you know, there's no reason that Jeff Kent won't gain some ground or Andy Pettit, you know, as well as Scott Rowland and Todd Helton. Omar Vizquel. Yeah, Omar Vizquel will certainly gain ground, although I don't get the sense that there are, I mean, you know, he's such a different case and he's also one who is really kind of right in the middle. Among returning candidates, we go from Walker at 54% to Vizquel at 42.8% to Kent at 18%. There's a big middle ground there. Billy Wagner's one I think will benefit.

I actually kind of ballot managed him onto my virtual ballot last year. And I get the sense that there are a lot of people who would like to, you know, like to find room for him. I think there just could be a lot of, you know, I think there's maybe if you're inclined to vote for Bonds and Clemens, you could probably easily go eight or nine deep and you've maybe got a vote for personal preference there beyond that, if you feel like going to 10. And if you're not inclined to vote for those guys there. Beyond that, if you feel like going to 10 and if you're not inclined to vote for those guys, you've still got some room to play with if you want to recognize somebody, whether it's Pennant or Kent or whatever, who you feel like the numbers that I'm using don't do them justice. Do you have any kind of, I guess,

less obvious picks if you were to be voting this year? I don't know if you've made up your mind yet about what your virtual ballot will look like, but is there anyone who is, you know, not just a straight, yes, he satisfies the Jaws criteria? Yeah, I think about Sheffield a lot. Yeah, me too. Because, you know, the extent to which those defensive stats just hammer him. Yeah. And my concern about outliers in any form, Jeter as well, that we're not necessarily doing them justice because if it's justifiable to apply a more delicate and regressed measure for fielding, then he doesn't need to get hit nearly as hard. Billy Wagner, because I've kind of turned away from just using straight jaws when it comes to

relievers. Those are two that I take the longest look at. Todd Helton, because his peak is well above the standard, even if his jaws is a little bit below, is one that's an easy yes for me. Likewise with Andrew Jones. Yeah. Who I think I've had that. He's kind of the opposite of the Sheffield case, I guess. Yeah, he is. He is. You know, there are multiple ways to look at these guys. Defensive metrics, I think we have to acknowledge

there's a lot of uncertainty there. You know, even over the course of careers, there's some uncertainty. But I think we, you know, when you've got competing methodologies and, you know, that could change our point of view, it's worth acknowledging that. And, you know, the fact that we don't have a magic bullet answer. I mean, like the work of Chris Dial, you know, who's involved in the gold glove voting and the statistical component, which includes his forerunner to UZR called Runs Effectively Defended or RED.

runner to UZR called Runs Effectively Defended or RED. You know, he has some interesting things to say about the merits of the gold gloves won by Vizquel and Jones. Worth tracking down those extended threads in Twitter, some of which I've quoted in my articles or at least summarized. So yeah, it's, you know, I'd like to think that I, you know, I might surprise you if all you're looking at is the baseball reference table and seeing who's exactly above the line in Jaws and who isn't. Yes, I think my virtual ballot will end up surprising you. If you read my series, you'll probably get an idea of or listen to me talk about it in other contexts.

You'll probably get an idea that, yes, even I do deviate from my own system to a small degree here and there. saw Yadier Molina and Brian McCann and Russ Martin playing in the postseason. And McCann, of course, retired. So he started his Hall of Fame clock. And by that point, five, six, seven years from now, whenever it is that all of these guys are eligible, we might see every version of war incorporating catcher framing. We might see more understanding and acceptance of that. On the other hand, maybe robot umps will be more of a reality by then and people won't want to retroactively credit catchers for something like that at that point. So do you have any idea how that's going to go? I don't have it. I certainly don't have a crystal ball.

I wrote about these guys, particularly McCain and Martin, when uh fangraphs added catcher framing you know i know that that uh their version of defensive run saved uh that includes catcher framing is on baseball reference although it's not included in the official war totals right i have had uh i i'm kind of curious you know i know we've we've we've seen a pretty credible version of what we call retro framing done done a baseball prospectus which I think still to me has the gold standard of the framing metrics because it goes so far back. And I have talked to the purveyors of both that and the Fangrass version about, you know, is there any signal to be picked up if we move prior to 1988 and are just looking at the with you, without you strikeout rates

and walk rates of pitchers, could we ever get even the slightest approximation of what a Johnny Bench or a Gary Carter or a Carlton Fisk might have added or subtracted with regards to framing? I think looking back, I keep thinking of the Mike Piazza example. Piazza was slagged for having such a low caught stealing percentage, but it turns out he was very good at pitch blocking and outstanding at pitch framing. And we now have that data on, well, it's not, you know, it didn't keep him from the hall of fame.

I think it makes his overall case, it strengthens his overall case, you know, and our understanding of where we place him within the Pantheon, you know, knowing that and knowing that, yeah, not every catcher who's good defensively is good according to the numbers we have. So who knows if we had his whole career. But yeah, then that gets into that whole debate about, well, is it fair to evaluate today's catchers completely differently from yesteryear's catchers? I mean, I think – right. No, to some extent, I think you're going to have to go on at least starting with a sense of where they ranked within their era you know and and we see that that uh you know mccann and martin in a framing inclusive way and to a lesser extent melina or maybe to a greater extent i don't i'm forgetting exactly what the rankings say but like yes that those guys are significantly ahead of the pack you know because of the combination of longevity and excellence and at least you know some some least some amount of two-way contribution,

which for Molina was maybe more batting average centric and for McCann was more power centric and for Martin more on base percent. But that's pigeonholing each one and they all had their merits. But I don't think it's an absurd argument that if – especially if Yaday Molina is going to skate into the Hall of Fame based on the consensus of the little things that we couldn't capture with war, that we think about Martin and McCann in those same ways. Because the numbers certainly uphold the idea that they were every bit as good in the framing department. Yeah, it's a complicated thing, which I know you've experienced because you base Jaws on war and war changes in some way every year i mean depending on which war you're using things are added things are recalculated there are new

baselines the catcher framing addition that's you know the big one because that can really change certain guys value but if you add value to catchers then maybe that takes it away from pitchers and you know there's a And there's a constant reaccounting that goes on, which is good because hopefully we're getting closer and closer to an accurate appraisal. But it can be tricky if you have a system based on it and that system is not static. So- Yeah. It's something I think about. I was reading that great piece about the Universal Music Group Fire a few months ago by Jody Rosen in the New York Times and talks about the existence of master recordings and how technology allows us to go back and preserve more of it with each generation.

We get better fidelity, able to, like know, like wider dynamic range, you know, obviously with the right tools, you know, we're able to improve the versions that we get to hear. And I think, you know, baseball statistics, especially wins above replacement with all that we've got and with all that we, you know, continue to add to it by learning, you know, by researching and learning, you know, we enhance that. We're getting more clarity out of these older careers. You know, we also can acknowledge that there's more uncertainty in certain spots. But, you know, I think on the whole, they enhance our appreciation when we know,

oh, you know, this guy from 20 years ago was doing a lot more than we gave him credit for at the time. And, you know, and we can incorporate that into our judgments here when we're thinking about his all-time standing. Yeah. And just as music publishers can keep releasing remastered box sets every few years and you can release a remastered Cooperstown casebook and get more sales again. God, what I really need to do is formally start pitching a new version of the book because we've already got, what, four or five guys that I profiled have been elected and we've got a bunch more up for election this year and hope that at least one or two of them get in.

Lou Whitaker, Ted Simmons are on the ballot. I mean, it's inevitable that Curt Schilling is going to get in and knock on wood, hopeful that Minnie Minoso and Dick Allen next year via the Golden Days Committee. And yeah, and suddenly you turn over the whole slate the first book and things that I've thought of since then and things that are kind of updating or contrasting certain trends. And yeah, I certainly have more to say on this subject. And I think people want to read more about the subject. Finding the right audience and all that is still the challenge. But yeah, I'd like to think that

there will be eventually a you know, a second case book somewhere. So you've already finished writing about the modern baseball era ballot. And I wanted to talk about this. I'm kind of conflicted, I guess, about the continued just re-airing of candidacies because there are certain eras that have just been picked over so many times that if you're not in by now, maybe that's that. Maybe you've had your chance.

And historically speaking, those kind of secondary ways to get into the hall have produced a lot of the more questionable choices. On the other hand, I want Lou Witherker to get in. There are certain guys every year who really have a strong chance, and for whatever reason, they just didn't get their due when they were first on the ballot. So on the one hand, we get this kind of as a way to just get Jack Morris in somehow

or, you know, to put Harold Baines in because a bunch of people on the committee liked Harold Baines. And it's sort of strange to have this one system with hundreds of people voting and then this other with, you know, just a little more than a handful of people voting and yet both get you into the Hall of Fame. But on

the other hand, there are still some deserving players who got passed over who should get another shot, it seems like. Yeah, look, for as much as I can have and will continue to criticize the Hall of Fame. I do think that the current era committee system was reasonably well thought out in terms of the varying frequencies with which eras are re-evaluated. I think we have largely picked over the early baseball candidates, and so considering them once every decade seems appropriate. We've learned a lot about Doc Adams in the last decade, thanks to the work of John Thorne, for example. I think, you know, war has given us a better appreciation of, say, Bill Dolan and Jack Glasscock. And there's maybe a couple other guys in there that, you know, some 19th century pitchers. I know there's a guy who's

banging the drum endlessly for Jim McCormick, you know. And so, look, I think it's fine to look at, you know, to reevaluate those and, you know, once in a while and see, hey, did we miss anything? You know, do these new methodologies and our new research add anything to our understanding? Sure, that seems fine. But we just don't have to do that every year or every other year. On the other hand, you know, the 70s, I think, 70s and 80s are still kind of underrepresented within the hall. And I mean, if Lou Whitaker getting only one chance

compared to the dozens of times some of these Veterans Committee guys were up in the past, or Gil Hodges with a full 15-year run on the ballot. I don't know how many times on Veterans Committee ballots. There's an inequity there. And I think having this, I mean, you could draw up two very strong slates of the modern baseball that have no overlap and still create a backlog of candidates or still find a way to get a ballot where you've got four slots, but maybe five guys worth voting for. I mean, if we're talking about that era, I mean, imagine a ballot that has Keith Hernandez on it and Billy Martin and George Steinbrenner and Charlie Finley, not necessarily the most savory guys, but guys whose footprint on baseball history is huge. And they're comparable to guys who are in the Hall of Fame and are worth considering in that context.

And then, you know, Bill Frian, 11-time All-Star who just went one and done in the early 80s. I mean, there's just a whole lot there, you know, from that era. And, you know, I think reevaluating some of these eras with more frequency is the right thing to do. That said, I'm not very comfortable with the 16-member format or before at times it was down to as few as 12. much rather see these electorates double in size and maybe even triple, you know, and have some way that, you know, if Harold Baines is up for election on a small committee ballot, then, you know, anybody who was the owner or the GM or the manager during his tenure has to recuse himself from that vote. They can stay there and they can testify on his behalf, but they don't get to put their thumb on the scale and the hall doesn't get to handpick an all-star lineup of witnesses for each guy or for certain guys and give the appearance that they are gaming this process because that's certainly what seemed to happen last year with Harold Baines.

And I'm sure it's probably, you know, we're not beyond the possibility that it could happen again, either for a candidate or against it. You know, I can't, I mean, I don't think if Joe Morgan, who's on the Hall Board of Directors and who wrote that letter about the PED, you know, keeping PED candidates out, if he can go join a committee when he so chooses, of course, he's going to join the committees that can have an impact on, on, you know, when PED related candidates are up for election. And that, you know, that's kind of, I don't know, that's smacks of a conflict of interest. So yeah, anyway, that's a big spiel. And there are cases where maybe one player getting in helps another player get in because you say, well, this guy's in. And if you look at it, this other player is not actually different from that player. And maybe you could do that with like, you know, Vlad Guerrero got in and maybe Larry Walker is just as good a player, if not a better player, and they were contemporaries. So that's the kind of case

where you might see that effect, but there's probably not going to be a Harold Baines effect, right? Like, cause you could play the, well, if Baines is in, this guy should be in game with everyone. Well, I mean, from the writers, from the BBWA perspective, I think there's a lot of distaste for the election of Baines. Not for Baines personally, but for the fact that he had five times on the ballot and got no more than 6 point whatever percent. I mean, overwhelmingly rejected. No, no, no, no, no. And that was overturned by today's game committee. So I think there's a discomfort there.

But I think with that, and I don't think we're going to – we're not seeing Harold Baines used as a bar for other candidates because then you've got 18 guys on this ballot or whatever it is. He's 75th among right fielders. So going down the list, obviously a Braves, yes, and not only that, but hey, have you considered Sheffield and Jeff Kent at his position or whatever? You can go way over the line with that. Jeff Kent at his position or whatever, you know, you can go way, you know, way over the line with that. But with the the impact of those votes on the small committees, I think we just have to acknowledge that we don't know what the hell is going to happen. Especially because the you know, there's there's just such a there's even more trans, there's even less transparency in the process now, with we, you know, with us not knowing who's on these panels beforehand and

at least having some ability to report that and disseminate it in a way that has an impact on things than before. Because it used to be when the panel was announced, when the ballot was announced, the voters were announced. And that's with the move to this new iteration of the era committees, that's no longer the case this new iteration of the era committees, that's no longer the case. So I'll ask you about Marvin Miller in a second, but the players on this modern baseball ballot, there are some good ones and some probably deserving ones. So even though we think of this as the body that got Jack Morris in or that got Harold Baines in, there are players with pretty strong cases here. So you've got Lou Whitaker, you've got Ted Simmons, you've got Thurman Munson, you've got Dwight Evans.

And, you know, then there are lesser guys like Steve Garvey, who is certainly more famous than Harold Baines, but probably not a better player or at least not significantly so. And then you've got, you know, Mattingly and Murphy, who are beloved but don't quite make that bar. And Tommy John, who kind of has a dual legacy going for him. But I think you have made cases at least for Whitaker and Simmons and Munson and maybe Evans too, or at least have explained that case. So can you lay those out? Yeah, sure. I mean, Whitaker, you know, Whitaker is, I think he's got the highest war of just about anybody outside the Hall of Fame except for Bonds and Clemens. Yeah. Career war that is.

Bobby Gritch is a little higher on peak. There's another guy who you put on an era committee, that 70s ballot, and you're going to produce a similarly strong slate. Whitaker is ahead of him on career, lower on peak, but just an outstanding two-way second baseman in a way that I don't think we really appreciated enough at the time. Five-time All-Star. The fact that the Tigers only won one World Series and only made it to two playoffs, you know, I think has hurt him. But, you know, he was right there with Alan Trammell. Both of those guys did a lot to, you know, prevent the runs that Jack Morris is credited with preventing because he was not a high strikeout pitcher. I think he belongs in, I think Ted Simmons, who was an offensively elite

catcher for most of his career, but kind of got lost in the shadows, first behind Johnny Bench, then behind Gary Carter, is a guy who should be, and he's another guy with a very strong peak at his position. Dwight Evans, high on base, good, you know, very good defense. Just didn't pair them quite enough. He's a little bit more borderline for me. He's kind of the, it's a career versus peak argument versus him, between him and Thurman Munson, who only played 11 years, of which two were partial and did it all awards-wise.

He's Rookie of the Year, MVP, catcher for two championship teams plus another pennant winner, outstanding in the postseason, you know, gold gloves, did all these things. All-stars versus Evans, who was only three-time all-star, and besides the gold gloves, didn't really get the same kind of attention. To me, it came down to those two for the last spot, and I went with Munson with the fourth slot reserved for Miller, who I think really, you know, it came down to those two for the last spot. And I went with Munson with the fourth slot reserved for Miller, who I think really, you know, it's just an absurdity that he's not in and unfortunately kind of a tragedy too. Yeah. Well, so with Miller, I mean, the only

question really is whether you should put in someone who said toward the end of his life that he didn't want to be in, in his 90s, you know, because it had taken so long and because he had been passed over so many times, he said, no thanks, you know, I don't want to be a member of this body. And his children have said that they don't want it, that they wouldn't show up. So on the one hand, you have that. On the other hand, you have the fact that he's just a giant of the game who changed baseball as much as or more than anyone. And it's hard to say that the museum is complete or representative without having him in there. Yeah, it's, you know, it's, I think Red Barber had it right when he said that the three people,

the three most influential people in baseball history were Babe Ruth, Jackie Robinson, and Marvin Miller. You know, and other variants of that have Branch Rickey as the fourth on what you might call a Rushmore. But yeah, he had the most impact of any non-player in the game's history. And the list of rights that he won for the players and the effect of them is massive, maybe not always to everybody's liking. I mean, you know, free agency is kind of a double-edged sword in terms of what, you know, what it does to team continuity and to, you know, fans' connections to players. But, you know, basically it was an argument for workplace rights and a very convincing one at that. I think while I respect and appreciate the wishes of the family, you know, with regards to Marvin Miller's desire not to be in the Hall of Fame, I think, you know, when I spoke to him in 08, I guess it was, and, you know, you read the interviews and he was, you know, this is a guy who was listed in the phone book.

You could call him up, you know, a level of accessibility that we don't get these days anymore. him up, you know, level of accessibility that we don't get these days anymore. You know, the signals were, you know, we're not without their occasional ambiguity. But I think, you know, as much as we can appreciate his wishes and those of his families, our greater duty, you know, is to baseball history. And personally, I love the idea that if you put Marvin Miller in the Hall of Fame, his plaque is going to be glaring at that of Bowie Kuhn and all the other small men who tried to keep him out. And it's going to bug the hell out of some people on the Hall of Fame board every time they walk past it. You know, it's a giant middle finger there, and that's why it has to be there.

Yeah, right. Sometimes you get these candidates who, for whatever reason, people just think of them as closer to Hall of Famers than their war would say or their jobs would say. Maybe Garvey is an example of that. But I saw a tweet from Tyler Kepner of The Times earlier this month, and he said, Paul Conurco's career is laughably undervalued by war. He had 27.7 baseball reference war, which is fewer than Von Hayes, Martin Prado, Rondell White, et cetera. War is useful to me as a general guideline, but sometimes it just feels way off. And I guess the question there is, does that mean that war is way off or does that mean that your perception of the player is way off? I think it's a perception. I mean, look, Paul Conurco had 400 something home runs, 439 home runs, but a 118 OPS plus from a first baseman, it's not anything special.

And then you look at the little things that chip away at his value. I mean, he's extreme, minus 36 in base running runs. Wow. Minus 40 in double play runs. That's massive. I mean, without looking, I'd have to say that's probably almost easily a top 10 total for the years that we have coverage. Minus 52 in fielding runs. Double digits below average, you know, in both 2010 and 2012. I mean, that's below DH caliber. That's like the point at which, God, you know, you're really doing your team a disservice by playing him in the field. That's like the point at which, God, you know, you're really doing your team a disservice by playing him in the field. You know, I know Adam Dunn was there and boy, he's a terrible fielder too. But there were, you know, there were just, Canerco did not have the little things that added up. I mean, he had good triple crown stats and that's really, you know, four above 40 home runs, uh, a couple of times and above 30, uh, you know, a bunch of times, seven times, seven or eight times above of 30 home runs or more lots of hundred RBI seasons, lots of 300 batting average seasons. Uh, but you know, there's just, there was less to it than, than meets the eye. Once you, uh, start accounting for the broader context of his career and all that. You know, I understand that, you know, it's not fun to rain on the parade of those who, you know, thought Paul Konurka was an outstanding representative for the White Sox and for baseball

in general and who have fond memories of his career. But it doesn't mean we have to honor them with cooperstown you know i think we just you know we owe baseball history and you know and an honest accounting and you know if he's this generation's steve garvey or or whatever then uh you know fine i mean this is a guy who didn't finish higher than fifth in an mvp voting yeah you know it wasn't I mean, this is a guy who didn't finish higher than fifth in an MVP voting. Yeah. You know, it wasn't really even thought of along the lines of a Garvey. So I'm not particularly sympathetic to the idea that he's somebody who deserves a lot of Hall consideration because, you know, Garvey at least had that kind of fame going for him. Canerco, you know,

didn't even have that. Yeah. And some of his big years came in high scoring years and years when there were very high standards for offensive first baseman. I mean, there are other guys on the ballot, Giambi, Helton. Granted, Giambi has PD stuff and Helton has course field, but those guys were better players and better hitters than Paul Conurco. And even they probably aren't quite at that level. Yeah. Well, even you adjust for the era stuff. And I mean, yeah, you know, they've got they've each got 15 points or more on him in terms of OPS plus.

And Helton was a legitimately excellent defender. Giambi had on base percentage for days, you know, and yeah, it's it looks different once you move beyond the triple crown stats. Right. And war should surprise you sometimes. If it never surprised you, then there wouldn't be any value to it. Yeah. And war and jaws.

I mean, look, I said this something to the effect of my chat. You know, even when we're using like, you know, pre-batted ball directional, whatever you want to call it, advanced fielding stats, even the crude method, a crude method like total zone that comes up with Roberto Clemente, Brooks Robinson, Mark Belanger slash Ozzie Smith, and Willie Mays as the number one defensive players at their position probably can't be that far off. You know, when you're talking about its view, you know, its view of other players where they don't always square, you know, square with perception, sayizkel you know i i

like the fact that jaws will surprise me at some times i think that's you know if it's getting it if if it's obvious 80 of the time but surprises you 20 of the time that seems like it's about a good ratio um you know you do want to you know you do want to realize that we don't get everything right the first time around and uh there are things we miss miss that new stats help to illuminate yeah yeah not that we need to just vote straight war or jaws and as you said you you don't do that and won't do that but it's a it's a good guideline it's probably better than just eyeballing it based on what you thought at the time when we knew less about player value so right all right well We will of course be monitoring all this Throughout the rest of this month the next month

Ballots are due December 31st And of course they must be mailed via Snail mail because it's the hall of fame And we'll all be looking At Ryan Thibodeau's ballot tracker And you can read Jay's breakdowns Of all the players on both Of the ballots and we'll link to the ones

That are already up but those will be appearing pretty steadily for the next month or so. So as always, we thank you for your Hall of Fame service, and everyone can go check out the Cooperstown Casebook, which is missing only the most recent few inductees. Thanks, Jake. All right. Sure thing, Ben. Thanks a lot. All right, that will do it for today and for this week thanks for listening we are

very thankful for your continued support especially if you are a Patreon supporter and you can become one by going to patreon.com slash effectively wild and signing up to pledge some small monthly amount to help keep the podcast going and get yourself access to some perks the following five listeners have

already signed up David Whitcomb Nick Corsetti Dutch Lombrowski Jeremy Tice and Zachary Bartley thanks to all of you. You can join our Facebook group at facebook.com slash group slash effectively wild. You can rate, review, and subscribe to Effectively Wild on iTunes and other podcast platforms. Send us your questions and comments via email at podcastwithvanagraphs.com or via the Patreon messaging system if you are a supporter. Thanks to Dylan Higgins for his editing assistance. We hope you have a nice post-holiday break and safe holiday travel. And we will be back to talk to you early next week. Yes, baby, say that you'll forgive me

And in this misery You know I'll keep on begging Till you come back to me Don't leave me here in shame In the fool's hall of fame Don't leave me here in shame In the fool's hall of fame Don't leave me here in shame

In the fool's hall of fame