And Bagwell not getting in pretty much confirms that there's no way Frank is getting in on the first ballot. I know he's got the 500 HRs. But they'll definitely use the fact he was a DH for most of those against him.

 

It's not the DH. It's the speculation that Bagwell used PED's. Frank was the best pure hitter of the 90's. And plus HOF voters like garbage terms like "feared" which Frank surely was.

 

That being said I think Bagwell should be in the HOF. Personally I don't need the self righteousness of the voters concerning PED's.

 

I'm happy for Blylevin, but Morris was every bit his superior, IMO

 

I disagree but that game 7 WS game against the Braves was one of the best ever seen.

It's not the DH. It's the speculation that Bagwell used PED's. Frank was the best pure hitter of the 90's. And plus HOF voters like garbage terms like "feared" which Frank surely was.

 

That being said I think Bagwell should be in the HOF. Personally I don't need the self righteousness of the voters concerning PED's.

 

I might go with Bonds as the best. Prior to the steroid use he still could do everything with the bat. It would be a toss up between the two IMO.

It's not the DH. It's the speculation that Bagwell used PED's. Frank was the best pure hitter of the 90's. And plus HOF voters like garbage terms like "feared" which Frank surely was.

 

That being said I think Bagwell should be in the HOF. Personally I don't need the self righteousness of the voters concerning PED's.

 

Has there ever been one legitimate link to Bagwell and PEDs? Other than the fact he was big and strong? I honestly don't remember.

Has there ever been one legitimate link to Bagwell and PEDs? Other than the fact he was big and strong? I honestly don't remember.

 

i think it's kind of like the Magglio PED connection. There is no sure link but everyone in baseball pretty much knows they did. There is enough talk and enough people talking about it to cast a large doubt in the minds of the voters. Plus there is the type of injuries in his injury plagued history that lends itself to PED use.

 

Has there ever been one legitimate link to Bagwell and PEDs? Other than the fact he was big and strong? I honestly don't remember.

I think he was on some list that leaked. But I'm not 100 percent sure to be honest.

Anyway, Bagwell was a hell of a player and until I see something legit connecting him to steroids I won't believe it. I loved watching him and those late 90's, early 2000's Astros teams.

I think he was on some list that leaked. But I'm not 100 percent sure to be honest.

I think that was the fake mitchell report list that came out 2 hours before the real one.

The idea that Alomar was a "negative" defender statistically really puts a damper in how I value statistic defensive metrics.

Edited January 6, 201115 yr by Pale Sox

Has there ever been one legitimate link to Bagwell and PEDs? Other than the fact he was big and strong? I honestly don't remember.

Not that I can recall. But have you seen what he looks like now? I remember watching a Cubs/Astros game when Bagwell was the hitting coach. He looked NOTHING like his playing days. It's like a Sosa thing to some voters. There hasn't been any substantial "proof" but some people really suspect it. Personally I really don't think Bagwell did nor do I care.

 

It's weird though how those late 90's to early 2000's Astros teams are viewed nationally. Like I have talked to people who don't think Biggio should be in the HOF and it shocks me.

Jeff Bagwell did reasonably well in the voting at 41.7% — that’s exactly what Hoyt Wilhelm got his first year (it took him eight years), and better than the first year percentages of Hall of Famers Billy Williams (six years), Luis Aparicio (six years), Duke Snider (11 years), Eddie Mathews (5 years), Ralph Kiner (13 years — Kiner got 1.1% his first year on the ballot) and Early Wynn (4 years) among others.

 

Bagwell’s first year percentage suggests that he is on pace to get in four or five years down the line, but of course he faces the same issue as Morris and Raines, only more so: The ballot is about to get swarmed with a bunch of hitters with remarkable numbers. He’s no lock to get in.*

 

*Brilliant reader Barry asks this question — before Pujols, was Jeff Bagwell the best first baseman in National League history? It’s kind of a trick question because the best first basemen — Gehrig and Foxx in particular — were American Leaguers, and so was Frank Thomas, Eddie Murray, Harmon Killebrew, Hank Greenberg and, for most of his career, Mark McGwire. I’d say the top contenders would be Johnny Mize – granting him the three years he lost to World War II – Willie McCovey and, going way back, Cap Anson. But Bagwell has a case.

Posnanski

I just read that Pete Rose received 3 write-in votes. Wonder if that was the first time or not? Just found it kind of interesting.

I just read that Pete Rose received 3 write-in votes. Wonder if that was the first time or not? Just found it kind of interesting.

 

People have written him in for years. Its nothing new.

The idea that Alomar was a "negative" defender statistically really puts a damper in how I value statistic defensive metrics.

 

Really? Yeah, at that point I would quit giving those stats any value at all. The guy is the best second baseman I have EVER seen with my two eyes.

Larry Walker, to me, was an incredible player. I'm stunned he got such a low percentage of the vote. Strong arm, true 5 tool player, and with the help of Coors had a few year stretch where each year him and Gwynn were trying to get that .400 mark. His 1997 through 1999 seasons were freaking ridiculous.

 

Again, completely Coors aided and I realize his overall numbers aren't Hall worthy. But this was one of the best players in the game during that stretch of time. He was a dominant offensive player.

 

He might have been roiding too for all I know.

Tim Raines gets no love and it makes me angry.

The idea that Alomar was a "negative" defender statistically really puts a damper in how I value statistic defensive metrics.

 

Darn statistical evidence getting in the way of the actual truth.

Tim Raines gets no love and it makes me angry.

 

This. I dont get it either.

This. I dont get it either.

is it possibly because he played in the same era as Ricky Henderson? Rock's numbers are great and I agree, he should get more attention for the hall, but Henderson was a similar player who was so completely dominant that with Rock playing in Montreal for a long time he just gets overshadowed

is it possibly because he played in the same era as Ricky Henderson? Rock's numbers are great and I agree, he should get more attention for the hall, but Henderson was a similar player who was so completely dominant that with Rock playing in Montreal for a long time he just gets overshadowed

Probably. He was incredible as a player and especially a lead off hitter.

Probably. He was incredible as a player and especially a lead off hitter.

 

He's arguably the second greatest leadoff hitter ever.

Tim Raines gets no love and it makes me angry.

 

Raines should be a slam dunk.

I've come around on Raines. Maybe it's because he wasn't that good the last 6-7 years of his career, when he was mostly a role player. But the Montreal years were awesome, and he had some good years with the Sox, too. He belongs.

Posnanski

 

It's awesome to see Frank mentioned in there as one of the greatest 1B's ever.

It's awesome to see Frank mentioned in there as one of the greatest 1B's ever.

 

Posnanski is definitely a Frank Thomas fan. There's an article somewhere of Posnanski making the case that Frank should be a slam dunk first balloter.