The 2010 Hall Of Fame?

A couple of weeks ago, Jon Heyman of Sports Illustrated decided he was going to announce his Hall of Fame ballot in a tweet. For anyone not aware, Heyman voted for Roberto Alomar, Barry Larkin, Jack Morris, Dave Parker, Don Mattingly, and Andre Dawson. The next few hours consisted of dozens of sabermetric-friendly baseball analysts and fans, on Twitter, attacking Heyman and his ballot. Heyman, to his credit, responded to these tweets, something I can’t say most writers would have done. Although his arguments were generally weak and lacked any objective basis (in most cases) the fact that he was willing to try and back them up was admirable. So I decided to review the 2010 hall of fame ballot, and determine who I thought deserved a vote.

Let’s start with the guys Heyman voted for:

Roberto Alomar is probably going to get in. Although second base is not considered a particularly important defensive position, many will give him credit for outproducing many of his contemporaries who also played second base. I’m on the fence here. On one hand, he was a good hitter, and his .300 batting average and 116 OPS+ are impressive, compared to others at his position. They are great though, and he never led the league in much of anything, aside from runs in 1999. Many people will point to his defense as putting him over the top, but statistically, Alomar was nothing special, with a -21.5 Total Zone ratting for his career. I’d probably end up voting for him, because I do believe he was the best hitting second baseman in baseball for many years, ran the bases well, and so many people rave about his defense that I can’t imagine they were all that wrong. But he’s borderline.

Barry Larkin however, is not borderline at all. If he doesn’t get in (which is certainly possible) it will be a major disservice to baseball fans in Cincinnati and around the country. Larking was a better defender than Alomar, and was actually one of the best fielding short stops in the league. He also played a much more important position, putting up the same career OPS+, and running the bases equally if not better. He played longer, and had a better prime.

Jack Morris is a definite no, at least for me. Guys with career 105 ERA+s don’t usually get my support, and while Morris pitched for a long time and won a lot of games, he was never quite one of the best pitchers in baseball. He never led the league in ERA or ERA+, and only finished in the top-5 twice.

Andre Dawson is another guy I just simply don’t think is a Hall of Famer. He hit a lot of homers, stole bases, and played defense, and because of that, he’s likely to get in at some point in the near future. But his all around offensive game – specifically his ability to get on base – was quite lacking, and much like Morris, he was never among the best in the game, even in his MVP season.

Dave Parker is actually an interesting case in my opinion, as although his final career rate stats don’t look too good, he was among the best hitters in baseball in the late 70s, could steal bases, and played great defense. He played a while and sprinkled in a few good seasons after 1980, but his play really dropped off, and he posted enough bellow average seasons to drag down his career numbers significantly. Still, in his prime, one of the best in baseball, and I might be inclined to vote for him as well.

Do Mattingly's 1984 to 1989 seasons make him a Hall of Famer?

Don Mattingly is in a similar boat as Parker, although the decline wasn’t nearly as steep, and the career wasn’t nearly as long. From 1984 to 1989, he hit almost .330, averaged almost 30 homers a year, and played gold glove defense. He walked more than he struck out and drove in a ton of runs ever year. He was one of the best players in the game. However, his play dropped off in the 90s due mostly to injuries, and he retired before his 34th birthday. I’ll always think of him as a great, HOF caliber player, and would probably give him a vote, but it’d be close, like Parker and Alomar.

And the players he said no to:

Tim Raines absolutely has to get in. Probably one of the top-100 or top-75 greatest players to ever play the game. He hit over .290 for his career with an impressive 123 OPS+, averaging more than 50 steals per 162 games. In his prime, he could get on base 40% of the time, hit well over .300, and steal 70+ bases. A poor man’s Rickey Henderson, he was always overshadowed, but deserves a place in the hall.

Bert Blyleven should also be in the Hall, but enough has been said about him, so I’ll keep it short. It’s unprecedented for a player with his career numbers not to make it, and if he’s a compiler, well then so was Nolan Ryan (who had a lower career W%, worse ERA+, and also didn’t win a Cy Young).

Edgar Martinez is one of the greatest right handed hitters of this or any generation. Yes, he didn’t play the field. Get over it. His career OPS+ is equal to that of Alex Rodriguez and Willie Mays. Are you telling me Arod and Mays aren’t good enough hitters to get in on their bat alone? I didn’t think so.

Mark McGwire’s offensive numbers are simply too good to not make the Hall in my mind. I understand he took steroids, but Andro was NOT against the Major League drug policy in 1998, and either way, he was just too good to keep out. He gets my vote as well.

Alan Trammell is the final player on the ballot I would give serious consideration to. A good fielder and very good hitting short stop, his career OPS+ is a little low because of how long he stuck around, but in his prime, he was one of the greatest hitting short stops of all time, and an all around offensive contributor better than Alomar, and at least equal to Larkin.

To review, I would likely vote for Alomar, Larkin, Blyleven, Raines, Martinez, McGwire, Trammell, and possibly Mattingly and Parker, although I know many will disagree on the last two.