Ripken and Gwynn are in...

[hudsonharden]

more details to come...

[anjo25]

5 minutes ago, Cal Ripken, Jr. and Tony Gwynn were inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame! Any thoughts or opinions?

[W_Marone]

yep, just watched it, man goose was close....I would have thought Jim Rice would have gotten more votes this time around...guess not.

[anjo25]

You beat me to it-I think Gossage should have been inducted. Mark McGwire got 25%...Where's Andre Dawson?

[KCGHOST]

Ripken 537 98.53%
Gwynn 532 97.60
Gossage 388 71.2
Rice 346 63.5
Dawson 309 56.7
Blyleven 260 47.7

As usual, the BBWAA can pick the obvious ones.

[KCGHOST]

You would have thought that after all the flack the voters took for selecting Sutter over Gossage they would have got it right this time.

[Go Stros]

Ripkin 98.5% (3rd highest) :clapping
Gywnn 97.6% :clapping



---------------75%-----------------




McGwire 23.5% :eek:

[W_Marone]

It's official now however, I'm a full blown Bert Blyleven supporter....I think Ruthmaybond is the other guy who advocates his induction...but I may be wrong....as I usually am.:D :crazy


When do they announce more negro leaguers who are getting in...I.E. Buck O'Neil???

[Jermz]

I am very happy for the two of them. It's now officially countdown to my Hall of Fame Election Day BBQ Party, celebrating Cal's induction (something I have been talking about doing since I was a kid)

[Ubiquitous]

Goose is pretty much a lock now. AT 71% he will probably get in next year.

[hudsonharden]

2007 BBWAA Hall of Fame Voting Results

Candidate Votes % of Votes
Cal Ripken Jr. 537 98.5
Tony Gwynn 532 97.6
Rich Gossage 388 71.2
Jim Rice 346 63.5
Andre Dawson 309 56.7
Bert Blyleven 260 47.7
Lee Smith 217 39.8
Jack Morris 202 37.1
Mark McGwire 128 23.5
Tommy John 125 22.9
Steve Garvey 115 21.1
Dave Concepcion 74 13.6
Alan Trammell 73 13.4
Dave Parker 62 11.4
Don Mattingly 54 9.9
Dale Murphy 50 9.2
Harold Baines 29 5.3
Orel Hershiser 24 4.4
Albert Belle 19 3.5
Paul O'Neill 12 2.2
Bret Saberhagen 7 1.3
Jose Canseco 6 1.1
Tony Fernandez 4 0.7
Dante Bichette 3 0.6
Eric Davis 3 0.6
Bobby Bonilla 2 0.4
Ken Caminiti 2 0.4
Jay Buhner 1 0.2
Scott Brosius 0 0.0
Wally Joyner 0 0.0
Devon White 0 0.0
Bobby Witt 0 0.0

*ineligible for future ballots or last year on ballot

[tearforamariner]

It's official now however, I'm a full blown Bert Blyleven supporter....I think Ruthmaybond is the other guy who advocates his induction...but I may be wrong....as I usually am.:D :crazy


When do they announce more negro leaguers who are getting in...I.E. Buck O'Neil???

I've been a Blyleven supporter for years. His stats speak for themselves. He is the best pitcher not in the Hall of Fame.

[Captain Cold Nose]

I'm a little disappointed Blyleven slipped, as he got over 50% last year. Andre Dawson also took a step back.
There are no solid first-year candidates next year, so Gossage's wait will be over, with four years time less on the ballot than Sutter and only one more than Wilhelm. He did jump almost 7 percentage points while holdovers generally suffer with multiple first-year locks. Rice did pretty well, too, so I'm holding to my earlier prediction of 2008 for him.
Hershiser and Belle are now off the ballot, and Baines barely made it. A player better have done something at some point really special to gain election. A single record, like 59 scoreless innings or a monster season like Belle's 1995 season won't do it.

[Dravecky43]

I've been a Blyleven supporter for years. His stats speak for themselves. He is the best pitcher not in the Hall of Fame.
Yeah, Tommy John is pretty close, too.

[hudsonharden]

Goose is pretty much a lock now. AT 71% he will probably get in next year.
...especially with the weak upcoming HOF classes. It was, however, sad to hear Goose say that his mother passed away this September and that she won't have the opportunity to see him get in. No one has gotten that high of a vote and not gotten in eventually.

[tearforamariner]

Yeah, Tommy John is pretty close, too.

I like Tommy John, but I definitely want to see Blyleven in first.

[dgarza]

Albert Belle 19 3.5

*ineligible for future ballots or last year on ballot


Another one for the VC?

Why do the BBWAA think it's OK for themselves to play games, but not cut the players any slack?

[ChrisLDuncan]

Rice Over Blyleven!!!!

[Brian McKenna]

When do they announce more negro leaguers who are getting in...I.E. Buck O'Neil???

I think they are done with that. I don't think the veterans committee is electing every year anymore.

Next topic should be 19th century ballplayers.

Shame about Blyleven - the relievers I understand.

[Captain Cold Nose]

It's official now however, I'm a full blown Bert Blyleven supporter....I think Ruthmaybond is the other guy who advocates his induction...but I may be wrong....as I usually am.:D :crazy


When do they announce more negro leaguers who are getting in...I.E. Buck O'Neil???
As far as I know, the special election for Negro Leaguers in 2006 was a onetime and final time deal. The VC will meet again in February (http://www.baseballhalloffame.org/hofers_and_honorees/veterans/2007/index.htm).

19th Century would be the next logical step, I believe. If they bother.

[hiddengem]

I want to know the idiots that didn't vote for Ripken and Gwynn. How did they not get 100%? If I'm understanding the process correctly, there are x amount of voters and they have a set amount of votes they can give? The fact that not all of them voted for Ripken and Gwynn tells me that the ones that didn't had an adjenda and have no buisiness even voting.

[brewcrew82]

I want to know the idiots that didn't vote for Ripken and Gwynn. How did they not get 100%? If I'm understanding the process correctly, there are x amount of voters and they have a set amount of votes they can give? The fact that not all of them voted for Ripken and Gwynn tells me that the ones that didn't had an adjenda and have no buisiness even voting.

There was an article I read yesterday that mentioned a couple of writers submitted blank ballots because of the "wide spread steroid use" in baseball and how nobody is above suspicion. I wish I could find the article. :lookitup

[Dodgerfan1]

Dang! Bobby Witt is ineligible for future ballots! What a travesty! Oh well, maybe the VC can vote him in. Along with John Boccabella.

[Go Stros]

I'm not sure how Ripken got more votes than Gywnn (not to say one is better than the other), and I'm really not sure why neither were unanimous. I know its never happened before, and one voter said he's not voting for any steroid era players (so it won't happen as long as he's voting).

Some people probably didn't vote because they didn't think the player was worthy of a "first ballot induction." I think some of that is so strange. If you know a guy is going to get in and deserves to be in, why not just vote him in? Outside of the "cast no vote" guy, I'd be interested in why Ripken and Gwynn didn't get votes.

[SamtheBravesFan]

I'm not sure how Ripken got more votes than Gywnn (not to say one is better than the other), and I'm really not sure why neither were unanimous. I know its never happened before, and one voter said he's not voting for any steroid era players (so it won't happen as long as he's voting).

Some people probably didn't vote because they didn't think the player was worthy of a "first ballot induction." I think some of that is so strange. If you know a guy is going to get in and deserves to be in, why not just vote him in? Outside of the "cast no vote" guy, I'd be interested in why Ripken and Gwynn didn't get votes.

There are two reasons the three (I think) writers submitted blank ballots:

1) In protest of steroid use
2) Because no player has gotten a unanimous selection, so there should never be one.

I kid you not.

[DTF955]

Some people probably didn't vote because they didn't think the player was worthy of a "first ballot induction." I think some of that is so strange. If you know a guy is going to get in and deserves to be in, why not just vote him in? Outside of the "cast no vote" guy, I'd be interested in why Ripken and Gwynn didn't get votes.

The "not on first ballot" makes sense if you believe in a 2nd tier to the HOF, that being that those who are the greatest of the greats deserve to be voted in in their first year, while others should wait. THere is a great deal of logic to that, but there are good arguments against that as well.

However, that being said, I don't see how you *can't* consider Ripken for that. Gwynn, maybe; he was your normal all-time great, but I doubt anyone puts him in their top 5 RF of all time. However, while I'm one of those who believes that the greatest of the great might deserve that kind of honor (1st ballot), I also believe that someone like Gwynn is deserving of it. And I *certainly* think Ripken was. He's not the best SS of all time in my mind, but he's awfully close. His streak, in a way, overshadows just what he did in the era in which he did it, from a position that is so often primarily defense. I would say that even the most diehard "first ballot for first teir only" people should have voted for Ripken.

[dgarza]

I'd be interested in why Ripken and Gwynn didn't get votes.
I'm sure some people vote for players who need the support, figuring Gwynn and Ripken don't need their help, but Parker, Dawson, Hershiser, etc. do.

[cardsfanatic]

At least there was one baseball writer with a brain capable of thinking both freely and logically: http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/hof07/columns/story?columnist=stark_jayson&id=2724114&lpos=spotlight&lid=tab1pos1

[DTF955]

Good article. Even before the steroid issue came to light, I wans't sure about putting McGwire in on the 1st ballot, but I probably would have voted for him anyway. To me, he's like Harmon Killebrew, except Killbrew played 3rd for half his career, so he gets more points defensively in my book. He also put up his power numbers in a much tougher era.

Killebrew took what, 3 ballots to get in? McGwire played in an easier era for hitters even without steroids, but also put up monster numbers and broke records, while playing in a very tough, then a neutral, home run park. (I think Busch was pretty neutral in the late 1990s, but I'm not sure.)

So, I consider them to be about equal, and would not have been surprised before the steroid thing if his move toward the ballot took the same path as that of Killebrew, though I would have been somewhat disappointed.

However, now I'm concerned he might have trouble. And, truth be told, since what he took wasn't illegal at the time, and since he is not just one of 4-5 but one of probably dozens who took them, I think he should make it in. I only hope his numbers start to rise next time. What's the lowest a player has been at and then wound up making it in eventually?

[plask_stirlac]

I guess the Wally Joyner article on MLB.com didn't help much, lol.

[ReignInBlood]

Gwynn, maybe; he was your normal all-time great

You're kidding right?

[DTF955]

You're kidding right?

That was actually not just a joke, but the comment was a joke I read somewhere else. Bill James used the term - possibly in his book "Whatever Happened to the Hall of Fame" but I don't know for sure - to describe players who are not Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, etc.; In other words, people you would say, "Yes, they're Hall of Famers," but on the other hand, you don't say, "He's among the best ever."

There is only one place for great players, though - the Hall of Fame. So, what James was saying was that even though it sounds like a paradox - it is possible to use "normal" and "all time great" in the same phrase.

Which actually is one of the better arguments *for* an upper tier of the Hall of Fame, which is how some people view the first ballot. (And which is also where the comment came from - saying I could see some not putting him in on the first ballot.) Gwynn won quite a few batting titles, was excellent in numerous areas, the best player on his team - sometimes by far - pretty much throughout his career. A certain Hall of Famer. But yet, being only a *normal* all-time great in some peoples' eyes, it would therefore make them unwilling to vote for him till the 2nd ballot.

(Obviously, this is fallacious because if everyone did that, it's possible nobody would get in. The way to solve that, if enough people truly felt this was a good thing, would be to have a spot on the ballot where you mark, "save my vote for this man for next year" when they first become eligible.)

That being said, obviously enough people felt that he was among the greatest of the great that they voted for him; my hunch is that even those who believe in this 2nd tier felt he was a first tier, "automatic" Hall of Famer. And, I suspect there are quite a few who believe this. Why else would some players' votes rise so much over the years?

Don't you wish you hadn't asked after that ramble? :-)

[west coast orange and black]

hiddengem: I want to know the idiots that didn't vote for Ripken and Gwynn.
paul ladewski of the chicago daily southtown and associated press freelancer bill shannon of the sports press service each claimed that because ripken and gwynn were sure locks, they voted for other players.
ladewski and shannon are 2 of 8 voters who did not vote for ripken and 2 of 13 not voting for gwynn.
of those voters, 2 submitted empty ballots as protest against the steroid era.

How did they not get 100%?
seaver*, brett, mays, schmidt, aaron, ruth...

The fact that not all of them voted for Ripken and Gwynn tells me that the ones that didn't had an adjenda and have no buisiness even voting.
you got that right, brother.

*seaver holds the record for highest percentage, 98.84 in 1992. five voters left his name off the ballot.
three submitted blank ballots to protest that pete rose was excluded from the ballot.
one guy stated that he never voted for a player in his first year of eligibility.
as you stated, h-g: those guys ought to have their pens taken away.

[hiddengem]

hiddengem: I want to know the idiots that didn't vote for Ripken and Gwynn.
paul ladewski of the chicago daily southtown and associated press freelancer bill shannon of the sports press service each claimed that because ripken and gwynn were sure locks, they voted for other players.
ladewski and shannon are two of six voters who did not vote for gwynn and ripken.

(of the six who did not vote for ripken and gwynn, two voters submitted empty ballots as protest against the steroid era.)

How did they not get 100%?
seaver*, brett, mays, schmidt, aaron, ruth...

The fact that not all of them voted for Ripken and Gwynn tells me that the ones that didn't had an adjenda and have no buisiness even voting.
you got that right, brother.

*seaver holds the record for highest percentage, 98.84 in 1992. five voters left his name off the ballot.
three submitted blank ballots to protest that pete rose was excluded from the ballot.
one guy stated that he never voted for a player in his first year of eligibility.
as you stated, h-g: those guys ought to have their pens taken away.


Like I said, the almight adjenda comes into play everwhere. If a great player was bad with the media or treated a specific writer in a way that he didn't like, who knows if that write leaves him off his ballot because of it. Don't mind what he did on the field.:grouchy

I hate to say it such a brash, up front kind of way but most of the folks doing the voting have never put on a jock in their life and don't really know what it takes to play this game at the level these players did.

In my opinion, the people doing the voting should be people that have gone in the same trenches as the players. But whatever you do, adjendas will always exist.

[EvanAparra]

Like I said, the almight adjenda comes into play everwhere. If a great player was bad with the media or treated a specific writer in a way that he didn't like, who knows if that write leaves him off his ballot because of it. Don't mind what he did on the field.:grouchy

I hate to say it such a brash, up front kind of way but most of the folks doing the voting have never put on a jock in their life and don't really know what it takes to play this game at the level these players did.

In my opinion, the people doing the voting should be people that have gone in the same trenches as the players. But whatever you do, adjendas will always exist.

Bingo, there will always be agendas. If we had ex-players doing the voting, they would be voting up their buddies, teammates, or just players from the same franchise. even if they didn't play I think since Babe nor Cobb got in on a 100% rate, writers think that no player can get in like that. I dont like that at all.

[cardsfanatic]

There are four crimes in this HOF vote.

1) Ripken and Gwynn have been overshadowed by steroids -- seriously, can people [stop talking] about steroids?
2) Blyleven snubbed yet again.
3) Jim Rice getting 64% of the vote? Get real. He should've been rubbing shoulders with the 20% guys.
4) Big Mac being totally railroaded.

Then again, I don't plan to ever go to the HOF so it's hard to get too worked up about it.