The 2011 Election

[DoubleX]

Unless something changes, both Sammy Sosa and Rafael Palmeiro will be eligible in 2011, and who knows, Barry Bonds could join them. That election will certainly be interesting and will rekindle everything that's happened in the past few years.

[Chadwick]

Due to the nature of unannounced "retirements," it's a little premature to speculate on the 2011 election. However...

Palmeiro is practically a given. I find it difficult to conceive of a Major League team that would overappraise his remaining playing skills enough to overlook his shameful public image from last summer.

Sosa I could see someone taking a stab at. Though he is looking increasingly like a "classic" steroid-enhanced performer given the sudden nature of his 1998 power increase coupled with his quick decline after the implementation of random testing.

Clemens is the real question mark for me. Every year that Clemens' puts off retirement makes his 2nd-place rank in career strikeouts that much more impassable for Randy Johnson (or anyone else); not that that would effect his Hall-worthiness. Were he to come back (for Houston, Texas, Boston, whomever) in 2006, however, it would give Bert Blyleven's election a push if he's still on the ballot. Blyleven will be the best starting pitcher on the ballot until Clemens (or Maddux, or Johnson) retires. On the other hand, that could effect the first-year election of a Tom Glavine type pitcher, being a freshman to the ballot the same year as Clemens.

Bonds will play in 2006 (though he's said this is his last season.) Unless he finishes close to Aaron and changes his mind, Bonds will almost certainly join the ballot in 2012, not 2011.

More interesting than the 2011 ballot, I think, is the 2010 BBWAA election, where Edgar Martinez will be eligible along with Roberto Alomar and Barry Larkin.

[Tigerfan1974]

Due to the nature of unannounced "retirements," it's a little premature to speculate on the 2011 election. However...

Palmeiro is practically a given. I find it difficult to conceive of a Major League team that would overappraise his remaining playing skills enough to overlook his shameful public image from last summer.

Palmeiro may make it eventually, but not first ballot!

Sosa I could see someone taking a stab at. Though he is looking increasingly like a "classic" steroid-enhanced performer given the sudden nature of his 1998 power increase coupled with his quick decline after the implementation of random testing.

Clemens is the real question mark for me. Every year that Clemens' puts off retirement makes his 2nd-place rank in career strikeouts that much more impassable for Randy Johnson (or anyone else); not that that would effect his Hall-worthiness. Were he to come back (for Houston, Texas, Boston, whomever) in 2006, however, it would give Bert Blyleven's election a push if he's still on the ballot. Blyleven will be the best starting pitcher on the ballot until Clemens (or Maddux, or Johnson) retires. On the other hand, that could effect the first-year election of a Tom Glavine type pitcher, being a freshman to the ballot the same year as Clemens.

Glavine in the Hall??? Not IMO!

Bonds will play in 2006 (though he's said this is his last season.) Unless he finishes close to Aaron and changes his mind, Bonds will almost certainly join the ballot in 2012, not 2011.

Bond can join the ballot and will probably get elected. Might even be a first ballot. I hope not!

More interesting than the 2011 ballot, I think, is the 2010 BBWAA election, where Edgar Martinez will be eligible along with Roberto Alomar and Barry Larkin. Martinez and Alomar are on the bubble for me. Probably NOT first ballot guys.
Larkin should make it also, maybe even first ballot.

All this is contingent on Clemens. It may be thought he deserves to go in by himself, and it wouldn't surprise me to see him beat Seaver's percentage.
Maybe even 100%???

[Chadwick]

1. Clemens won't break Seaver's percentage record on account of their being some sportswriters who (a) don't like Clemens, personally, (b) don't think anyone should get in on the first ballot, and (c) are complete idiots.

2. After doing some fact checking, apparently Sammy Sosa has called it quits now, and Kevin Brown announced his retirement. Hmm...

[Dontworry]

Due to the nature of unannounced "retirements," it's a little premature to speculate on the 2011 election. However...

Palmeiro is practically a given. I find it difficult to conceive of a Major League team that would overappraise his remaining playing skills enough to overlook his shameful public image from last summer.

Sosa I could see someone taking a stab at. Though he is looking increasingly like a "classic" steroid-enhanced performer given the sudden nature of his 1998 power increase coupled with his quick decline after the implementation of random testing.

Clemens is the real question mark for me. Every year that Clemens' puts off retirement makes his 2nd-place rank in career strikeouts that much more impassable for Randy Johnson (or anyone else); not that that would effect his Hall-worthiness. Were he to come back (for Houston, Texas, Boston, whomever) in 2006, however, it would give Bert Blyleven's election a push if he's still on the ballot. Blyleven will be the best starting pitcher on the ballot until Clemens (or Maddux, or Johnson) retires. On the other hand, that could effect the first-year election of a Tom Glavine type pitcher, being a freshman to the ballot the same year as Clemens.

Bonds will play in 2006 (though he's said this is his last season.) Unless he finishes close to Aaron and changes his mind, Bonds will almost certainly join the ballot in 2012, not 2011.

More interesting than the 2011 ballot, I think, is the 2010 BBWAA election, where Edgar Martinez will be eligible along with Roberto Alomar and Barry Larkin.

" Sosa I could see someone taking a stab at. Though he is looking increasingly like a "classic" steroid-enhanced performer given the sudden nature of his 1998 power increase coupled with his quick decline after the implementation of random testing. "


HOFer Eddie Mathews last played a major league baseball game at age 36.

HOFer Harmon Killebrew's last full season was at age 36

HOFers Mike Schmidt, Billy Williams - 37
HOFer Frank Robinson 38

Sammy Sosa,37, is hardly alone in history of being a great player whose career ended in his mid to upper 30s.

I find it near hilarious that people claim that Bonds' amazing numbers at a late age are a sure sign of " steroid use", AND Sosa's "early" demise is a result of the same drug.

I mean either it lengthens careers or it shortens them, pick a side and stick to it.

To be clear, I don't know, or care, whether or not Sammy Sosa in particular took steroids.

It's entirely possible. And entirely beyond the point.


He's just as guilty as every other player since the drug was created. No more or less than whoever your favorite player is or was.

At the end of the day, he was one of the top players of his era, and he'll be inducted into Cooperstown. And rightfully so.

[johnny]

" Sosa I could see someone taking a stab at. Though he is looking increasingly like a "classic" steroid-enhanced performer given the sudden nature of his 1998 power increase coupled with his quick decline after the implementation of random testing. "


HOFer Eddie Mathews last played a major league baseball game at age 36.

HOFer Harmon Killebrew's last full season was at age 36

HOFers Mike Schmidt, Billy Williams - 37
HOFer Frank Robinson 38

Sammy Sosa,37, is hardly alone in history of being a great player whose career ended in his mid to upper 30s.

I find it near hilarious that people claim that Bonds' amazing numbers at a late age are a sure sign of " steroid use", AND Sosa's "early" demise is a result of the same drug.

I mean either it lengthens careers or it shortens them, pick a side and stick to it.

To be clear, I don't know, or care, whether or not Sammy Sosa in particular took steroids.

It's entirely possible. And entirely beyond the point.


He's just as guilty as every other player since the drug was created. No more or less than whoever your favorite player is or was.

At the end of the day, he was one of the top players of his era, and he'll be inducted into Cooperstown. And rightfully so.

Why are you offering us a false alternative here? Either one or the other as if each is mutually exclusive? Don't make me drag you to Judge Wapner again

Why is it so hard to puzzle out that steroids can enhance a players performance and that one of the side effects can be an injury?

[DoubleX]

" Sosa I could see someone taking a stab at. Though he is looking increasingly like a "classic" steroid-enhanced performer given the sudden nature of his 1998 power increase coupled with his quick decline after the implementation of random testing. "


HOFer Eddie Mathews last played a major league baseball game at age 36.

HOFer Harmon Killebrew's last full season was at age 36

HOFers Mike Schmidt, Billy Williams - 37
HOFer Frank Robinson 38

Sammy Sosa,37, is hardly alone in history of being a great player whose career ended in his mid to upper 30s.

I find it near hilarious that people claim that Bonds' amazing numbers at a late age are a sure sign of " steroid use", AND Sosa's "early" demise is a result of the same drug.

I mean either it lengthens careers or it shortens them, pick a side and stick to it.

To be clear, I don't know, or care, whether or not Sammy Sosa in particular took steroids.

It's entirely possible. And entirely beyond the point.


He's just as guilty as every other player since the drug was created. No more or less than whoever your favorite player is or was.

At the end of the day, he was one of the top players of his era, and he'll be inducted into Cooperstown. And rightfully so.

Huh? A lot of these ages aren't correct (well I guess it depends on what you mean by full season, but given that Mathews played just 52 games at age 36, I'm guessing that counts as a full season since you listed 36 as his age)...

Killebrew: 39
Robinson: 40
Schmidt: 39
Williams: 38

Plus, most of these players didn't benefit from modern medicine and conditioning, and thus their bodies broke down earlier from wear and tear. It's much easier now to have a longer career and be productive in your mid-late 30s.

[Bothrops Atrox]

Glavine in the Hall??? Not IMO!



Glavine will probably win 300 games, or very close to it with a very good .600 W% (.630 since 1991) to boot. Any notion that he is "Suttoning" his way to 300 wins is absurd.

5 20-win seasons (led league all five times)

120 career ERA+ (128 since 1991)

4,000 innigs pitched (Top 10: 12 times)

Top 10 Games started: 12 times

Top 10 ERA: 8 times

Top 10 ERA+: 9 times

Top 10 wins: 10 times

Top 10 W%: 8 times

Top 10 complete games: 8 times

Top 10 shutouts: 10 times

2 Cy Youngs (top 3 in voting on six occasions)

9 All- Star appearances

Almost 300 Win Shares

Glavine is in the top 25 all-time in RSAA.

Glavine scores a 157 on the HOF monitor, or good for 37th ...and still climbing.

Over the past 15 years, Glavine's ERA+ has been has been under 105 once, and under 118 only three times. 8 times Glavine's ERA+ has been over 130. 5 times over 140.

World Series MVP and career 2.50 World Series ERA.

4 Silver Sluggers

Glavine would have won numerous Gold Gloves if Maddux wasn't around.

Glavine was the cornerstone of the greatest pitching staff of all-time. Remember, it was Glavine who was the staff ace, two-time 20 game winner, and two-time All-Star Game starter for the first two Braves World Series teams before Maddux was a Brave.

People complain about the 1.30 WHIP, but remeber, Glavine's XB/9 rate is very low, and is afforded to give up more singles. Especialy when you have one of the greatest double plays induced rates ever. (even higher than Maddux, who is much more of a ground ball pitcher.) Glavine's total bases per 9 innings rate is very good, and his slugging % against is lower than the likes of Schilling, Mussina and many, many others with much superior WHIPs. That .7 HR/9 ratio and a 1.30 WHIP is just as effective as a super low WHIP and a 1.0 HR/9 ratio.

1.5 GB/FO ratio. (Many of those FO are harmless nubbers off of right hander's bats trying to pull a change-up)

By the way, did I mention that Glavine's WHIP is better than everybodies favorite, Bob Feller? It is also almost as low as Lefty Grove's!

Glavine is very effective holding runners, preventing hit batsmen, wild pitches, and balks. All of these things add up to a lot of extra bases over the course of a season. if "secondary" average is important for batters like Biggio, than why does nobody talk about the little ways to keep runners from advancing bases?

I do believe that some pitchers such as Glavine do have some control over where the ball is hit, and if an out is produced, and he is also very good at this skill.

I wish I had the stats, but I know for a fact that Glavines BAA w/ ROB and K w/ROB are far superior to his normal rates. His BAA w/RISP and K w/RISP are superior to that. This is a good indication of how Glavine pitches: pitch to contact to avoid high pitch counts (which increases WHIP with little singles), then throw harder with more movement (which causes the high double play ratio) if somebody does get on base.

There are three ways in which a pitcher's team can drasitcaly effect his stats. The team's defense, offense, and bullpen. It has widely been regarded that Glavine has had a lot of support in these areas however...

Glavine's career run support is 102. Only 2% higher than league average. In fact, 102 is lower than the average Hall of Famer.

Glavine has recieved good (not Jim Plamer good) defensive support. His all-time adjusted NRA is 3.82, and his DERA is 3.85. Hardly earth shattering support.

Glavine has the sixth worst bullpen support of any starter with 2000 IP since WW2. (I read this is a recent report. I wish I saved it.) Glavine went from being on horrible bullpens through the late 80's to a mediocre bullpen through most of the 90's, to horrible bullpens with the Mets again. I am sure Glavine would have loved to have had Reardon, Rivera, and Lidge in his bullpen.

The notion than Glavine (Maddux) is a by-product of the Braves' success is rediculous. The exact opposite is true.

Glavine should without a doubt be a first-ballot Hall of Famer. (I have him ranked 39th all-time as did BBF in last years top 50 polls.) It is time that all of us Glavine fans unite and supress this silly notion of Glavine not being a Hall of Famer. Where are you all?

[Chadwick]

Glavine should without a doubt be a first-ballot Hall of Famer. (I have him ranked 39th all-time as did BBF in last years top 50 polls.) It is time that all of us Glavine fans unite and supress this silly notion of Glavine not being a Hall of Famer. Where are you all?

What should happen and what will happen are two very different subjects when discussing Hall of Fame elections. Bert Blyleven "should" have been elected this year (to say nothing of Goose Gossage). Tom Seaver "should" have received unanimous support; didn't happen. Glavine should be admitted to the Hall of Fame, whether he will or not is up to the voters. Hopefully, by the time Glavine reaches the ballot, more than 75% of the voters will concur that he is a Hall-of-Famer. He's certainly got my vote. At this point in Glavine's career, someone would have to make a pretty good argument to exclude him from the Hall of Fame. I stand by my statement that if Clemens and Glavine enter the ballot in the same year, there's almost no way that Glavine gets 75% of the votes.

[Bothrops Atrox]

I don't see Glavine retiring until he gets 300 wins. It is very important to him. Even if he doesn't get it, I don't see him retiring after this season. Likewise, I don't see Clemens pitching 2007. I don't think Glavine will ever face Clemens on the ballot. Johnson or Maddux? Much more likely. Being on the ballot with Maddux might help Glavine. A lot of people will like the nestalgia factor.

[Dontworry]

Why are you offering us a false alternative here? Either one or the other as if each is mutually exclusive? Don't make me drag you to Judge Wapner again

Why is it so hard to puzzle out that steroids can enhance a players performance and that one of the side effects can be an injury?

LOL, obviously you didnt understand my post.

I just find it amusing how " fans " have this theory that any elder declining player is an obvious juicer, but also believes any player who gets better as he ages is an " obvious juicer ".

[Dontworry]

Huh? A lot of these ages aren't correct (well I guess it depends on what you mean by full season, but given that Mathews played just 52 games at age 36, I'm guessing that counts as a full season since you listed 36 as his age)...

Killebrew: 39
Robinson: 40
Schmidt: 39
Williams: 38

Plus, most of these players didn't benefit from modern medicine and conditioning, and thus their bodies broke down earlier from wear and tear. It's much easier now to have a longer career and be productive in your mid-late 30s.

You get my point, many players have retired at 36-38 range. To suspect someone of using steroids because of that is ridiculous.

[DTF955]

I brought this up in a different thread but it was ignored, so I will here again.

Why does nobody pay attention to the expansion effect in 1998?

[DoubleX]

You get my point, many players have retired at 36-38 range. To suspect someone of using steroids because of that is ridiculous.

Because of what? Because of going from very skinny to absurdly huge and then hitting balls out of a park like no one has done before? And then when steroids testing is implemented, to totally drop off the map, and not just gradually decline? This is not just about any one factor, suspicion is related to several pieces being put together.

[DoubleX]

I forgot that Larry Walker will also be eligible in 2011, which will undoubtedly raise the Coors Field debate (and perhaps steroids speculation). Thoughts on Walker?

Others that are looking to be eligible in 2011 include Kevin Brown and Tino Martinez. Don't think either stands a chance, especially Martinez.