2010 Hall of Fame Results: Blyleven Out, Dawson In
by Jesse on Jan 6, 2010 2:04 PM EST
in News
Email
PrintKnowing what we knew, this is a shock.
In his 13th year on The Ballot, former Minnesota Twins great Bert Blyleven has been snubbed again. He received 74.2 of the votes; he missed by a total of five votes. With the way voting goes, Blyleven will likely make the cut in 2011.
To quote Peter Gammons live on MLB.com: "This is a disappointment." The lack of support for Barry Larkin is a bit surprising, but as late as an hour ago certain sites had Robert Alomar checked on 88% of the ballots that were made public. But the biggest shock comes from the results of Blyleven, not just because he's earned this recognition but because he was within 0.8% of making the grade. I'm frustrated for him.
Over at BWAA.com, you can read the entire story, but Blyleven's narrow miss wasn't unnoticed:
Blyleven’s five-vote margin was the fifth fewest in history, trailing only Nellie Fox (1985) and Pie Traynor (1947), who each missed by two votes, and Billy Williams (1986) and Jim Bunning (1988), who each missed by four. All were eventually elected, Traynor in 1948 and Williams in 1987 by the BBWAA and Bunning in 1996 and Fox in 1997 by the Veterans Committee.
Congratulations to Andre Dawson, who was the only player who makes the cut. Five ballots were left blank, but this should take nothing away from Dawson who did have a great career. He was the 1977 Rookie of the Year, and won MVP honors in '87 after hitting .287/.328/.568 (49 homers) for the Cubs. An eight time All-Star ('81-'83, '87-'91) and a six time Gold Glove winner ('80-'85, '87-'88), Dawson also finished with MVP votes nine times ('79-'83, '87-'88, '90-'91). He was Awesome Dawson, and he'll be inducted into Cooperstown on July 25, 2010.
The following players did not receive enough votes to stay on the ballot for next year: Andres Galarraga, Robin Ventura, Ellis Burks, Eric Karros, Kevin Appier, Pat Hentgen, David Segui, Mike Jackson, Ray Lankford, Shane Reynolds and Todd Zeile.
41 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
So unfortunate for Bert.
The guys on MLB Network are saying Bert will get in next year for sure, but that’s insane. He should have been in years ago. Alomar also being snubbed is ridiculous. And Larkin. Argh.
"You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the damn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all." -Earl Weaver
Unbelievable
"Is it normal to wake up in the morning in a sweat because you can't wait to beat another human's guts out?" -Joe Kapp
by less cowbell, more 'neau on Jan 6, 2010 2:08 PM EST reply actions
Bummer
.8%! 5 more votes! That is crazy! Next year Bert for sure! But I was shocked by Alomar not getting in either, but he will be next year, too.
2011 Ballot Newbies
Rafael Palmeiro
Jeff Bagwell
Larry Walker
John Franco
Juan Gonzalez
Benito Santiago
Kevin Brown
John Olerud
Bret Boone
Bagwell should be an easy pick but you never know, they might expect 500 HR from this error of sluggers. Palmeiro will ballot below McGwire. Gonzalez isn’t that much different from Rice or Dawson but his reputation hasn’t aged well (and both Rice & Dawson went through years of balloting). Brown is actually a very good candidate, but like Edgar Martinez he’s more about rate-stats than milestones so he won’t ballot that well.
Anyhow, other than Bagwell, not too many candidates to steal votes from Bert. the 2012 class looks even weaker (Bernie, JavyLopez, Salmon).
Five blank ballots
WTF?
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
I could see it, if someone has such a high bar for entry
that no one is good enough in a particular year. At least it’s logical.
How someone can vote for a Dave Parker but not Bert makes much less sense to me.
by Adam Peterson on Jan 6, 2010 2:46 PM EST up reply actions
In principle, yes
But this is a year in which there are at least four candidates who ware in the upper third of the existing HOF players in relevant statistical categories. To say that none deserved it this year is to say that two thirds of existing HOFers don’t belong.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
Parker didn't steal votes from Bert
You get to vote for as many as ten guys. I don’t many Bert-free ballots had the 10-player maximum on it.
I think the BBWAA is far too miserly, but even I don’t think I’d fill out the full 10 each year.
My point is that I have a much bigger problem
with anyone (hypothetical, I don’t know if anyone actually did this) who would submit a ballot with Parker but not Blyleven, compared to someone submitting a blank ballot.
by Adam Peterson on Jan 7, 2010 11:58 AM EST up reply actions
Prepare to be annoyed
Jon Heyman voted for Parker, but not Bert.
"So [Kouzmanoff]’s going to make decent monkey, but he’d be affordable." - Jesse
by what_would_gil_thorp_do on Jan 7, 2010 12:12 PM EST up reply actions
Not my favorite BBWAA members, there
Mariotti is probably the most hated sportswriter in America, a role he embraces to the fullest. At this point, I basically assume everything he writes or says is schtick, and I don’t know whether he actually believes any of it.
Heyman, meanwhile, is among the most prominent of the anti-sabermetric crowd – he openly professes his lack of knowledge and refusal to bother learning about it. My favorite of his moments was when he coined the derisive/hilarious term “VORPies”, which Fire Joe Morgan wrote a wonderful post about.
"There are only two things that are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." - Albert Einstein
His [Heyman's] explanation for why he didn't vote for Bert is just maddening.
“He didn’t have enough wins!” “He was never a Cy Young winner!” “He didn’t make many All Star teams!”
Yes, let’s punish Bert now for something that your people punished him for while he played. Ridiculous. Heyman needs to embrace the 21st century…or maybe just logic, where it resides that pitchers often have very little control over their wins and losses. And that the Cy Young winners are also voted for…by the same people. Just so frustrating.
"You can't sit on a lead and run a few plays into the line and just kill the clock. You've got to throw the ball over the damn plate and give the other man his chance. That's why baseball is the greatest game of them all." -Earl Weaver
No one has ever been unanimous
Some writers just pride themselves on maintaining that. There will be blank ballots the year Maddux is eligible.
Wasn't Aaron unanimous?
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
Absolute crap
It’s nice to know that the people that get to vote have their heads up their ass, Bert should have been in long ago. I also find it interesting that five ballots were left blank. If people are going to leave them blank then they should have the honor of being able to vote revoked, thanks for wasting everyone’s time baseball writers of America, once again you show that the quality of your work is more focused towards rumor and gossip and less toward reality. I’m sure that your next body of work will contain meaningful things like basbeball fashion, and what the top five pitchers eat for breakfast at IHOP. No class, no quality, no passing grade for the baseball writers.
I agree with you that Blyleven should have been in a long time ago,
but I also support their right to not vote for anyone. They shouldn’t be forced to vote for somebody.
They can vote in their choice
but the ones who didn’t vote at all shouldn’t be allowed to vote again
But that's basically forcing them to vote for somebody,
even if they believe nobody is deserving. This isn’t the NFL, where a minimum number of players have to get in. It sucks, I intensely disagree with their decision, but forcing them to vote is just a bad idea.
On the other hand
I think a blank ballot shows that they are utterly ignorant or completely contemptuous of the sport and don’t deserve to have a vote.
The only stat that counts is W
Even though it sucks for Bert
it’s part of what makes the MLB HOF so special. I would rather have the frustration than have every decent player get in with no problem (a la NFL). I think he really deserves to be in the Hall and I would think he will get in next year.
It sucks
And I have no idea why we should think he’ll get in next year “for sure” As many have said, he should already be in the HOF. It really sucks for Bert, he must have dropped a few f-bombs when he got the news.
I wish all living HOFers had a vote along with the writers. If you are a HOFer why shouldn’t you have a vote on who gets to join you?
They might be more biased than the writers
They probably think even more guys should be in than are deserving. Alternatively, it puts them in a compromising position from a personal relations standpoint (What? You didn’t vote for me? I guess you weren’t my friend after all!).
If I were a player in the HOF, I wouldn’t want to vote.
No
players voting is not a good idea. First, I actually think they would vote for very few, even less than the writers. Second, players are not the best judges of themselves or their peers in my opinion.
The writers, as a whole, do an OK job, I think. Blyleven should obviously be in, and there are a few other mistakes (IMO, obviously). But what has really confused the issue and made the standards unclear is the horrible job done by a few of the earlier iterations of the veterans committee, who cronyied in a bunch of undeserving players.
Nonetheless, the BBWAA shouldn’t be the only arbiter, and their process is not good.
by Eric in Madison on Jan 6, 2010 7:43 PM EST up reply actions
I wouldn’t have a problem with even less players being voted in the HOF.
I wouldn’t want the HOFers to be the only voters but I would want them to have a vote along side with the writers. The current living HOFers may not be the best judges but I think they would provide an alternate voice that could change issues like Bert’s.
The latest example I’ve read was on this site where George Brett thought Bert deserved to be in. I think this comes from the fact that he knows that while Bert might not have 300 wins, he had possibly the best curve ball in baseball… on top of all the other accomplishments he does have.
But a (the?) current vets committee
is players, I believe, and they never elect any players.
One of the things I’ve noticed is that before players are in the HOF, they think more players should be in; once they get it, they want the door shut behind them.
by Eric in Madison on Jan 7, 2010 7:23 PM EST up reply actions
Blank votes
It’s a strange process. How many of the guys voting have actually seen all the players play, or at least play in their prime? Qualifications?
I guess you CAN leave your ballot blank if you don’t find a deserving candidate.
Just like you can vote for 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 candidates…but not 10. No one says you have to vote for 10 candidates. So I guess no one says you must vote for at least one.
Be waiting to see what happens in 2011.
Now if the Hall of Fame can get the Veterans Committee figured out.
Visit www.TwinsCards.com and check out "rosters" to see my collection!
Sheesh
They can’t round up to the nearest whole number?
Half the 2011 guys are on roids so Bert should get in then.
The beard abides.
by Jason Kubel's Beard on Jan 6, 2010 5:23 PM EST reply actions
My condolences to Bert and his fans
I’ve been arguing his case to anyone who’ll listen for years, and I thought this was finally his year.
I understand and respect the voter’s right to select who they see fit, but I feel they’ve repeatedly gotten this one wrong.
Go Cubs Go and SKOL Vikings!!!
by HectorVillanueva on Jan 6, 2010 7:50 PM EST reply actions
Now that I've had a day to reflect
I feel much better about yesterday’s voting. Sure, I’d prefer that Blyleven made the cut, but he jumped over 10% compared to last year. Which meant he really gained momentum and is very likely to make the cut next year. My biggest concern coming into yesterday was that Bert may fall back down into the 50% range, which would have meant little chance of making it in next year…
Not that arguing logic for the BWAA makes sense,
but I can’t imagine anyone voting for a guy one yeat and then not voting for them the next season.
True
Anyone who got over 15% in 2009 increased their vote total this year. I guess the real concern with Bert was that his increase would be minimal and he’d remain in the low 60s.
by Adam Peterson on Jan 8, 2010 9:23 AM EST up reply actions
Having said that,
I just learned that dumbshits like Jay Mariotti WILL vote for a guy one year, and then not the next. I just KNEW that asking for logic from the BWAA was foolish!
Yeah, if you look at Bert's curve, he's gone down a couple of times
It’s by no means certain that his total will go up next year.
What the BWAA lacks is accountability. Jay Mariotti should be banned from future votes after his comments this year.
"You're thinking too much. Just have fun." -- Bennie "The Jet" Rodriguez in Sandlot
Not as angry
I was angry and disappointed that Blyleven didn’t make the Hall this year. After a couple days of thought, I am a bit more philosophical about him not making it. I think he is more elite than Dawson and should have gotten in before him.
However, Bert did gain 11.5% and is now on the cusp of election. Also, I think he is being punished for some of his off-color history—practical jokes, “I love to fart” shirt and such and the double-barreled one finger salute before he was traded by the Twins. I think there are five or more that think that “that guy shouldn’t be honored”.
by Alexi Casilla All-Star on Jan 9, 2010 12:58 AM EST reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
