Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine Batter's Box Interactive Magazine
It's that time again ... the 2003 Hall of Fame inductees will be announced tomorrow. There are 33 eligible candidates on this year's ballot, ranging (alphabetically speaking) from Bert Blyleven to Todd Worrell. Who gets in? Or, more specifically, who gets your vote?

Don't want to re-hash the flood of arguments about who should get in, or the watering down of Hall quality, or (god forbid) Pete Rose. Just want to share my ballot as it would look if the Hall came to its senses and gave me a vote.

No explanations offered ... just a ballot. Remember, you can only vote for 10; and yes, I am pretty liberal in that I think there are more than 10 worthy candidates. Please note, though, that I do show some discrimination -- even as a New York guy, neither Mattingly nor Hernandez get in through my gate. Two of these guys might well go in as Expos, incidentally.

Again, listed alphabetically:

Bert Blyleven

Gary Carter

Andre Dawson

Tommy John

Jim Kaat

Jack Morris

Eddie Murray

Ryne Sandberg

Bruce Sutter

Alan Trammell

As soon as Sutter gets in:

Rich Gossage

Lee Smith

Not quite makin' it, so says me:

Brett Butler

Vince Coleman

Dave Concepcion

Darren Daulton

Mark Davis

Sid Fernandez

Steve Garvey

Keith Hernandez

Rick Honeycutt

Danny Jackson

Darryl Kile

Don Mattingly

Dale Murphy

Dave Parker

Tony Pena

Jim Rice

Danny Tartabull

Murphy, Parker and Rice were the toughest "no" votes. And I wish I could vote for Ron Santo.
What the Hall? | 15 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Craig B - Monday, January 06 2003 @ 11:16 AM EST (#33696) #
MED... agreed on Santo.

My ballot is


My Internet Hall of Fame ballt this year was slightly different, but this is how I would vote today, with disinct misgivings about John and Kaat.
Coach - Monday, January 06 2003 @ 11:30 AM EST (#33697) #
Carter, with apologies for the insult that it took so long. Ryno, though I like Alomar better. Murray without hestitation, then a long pause and a deep breath.

OK, Blyleven. (Exhale.)

I might eventually decide in favour of Parker, Dawson and Trammell but today it's no. I would vote for both Gossage and Sutter or neither, and it was close, but not this year. In an indefensible bit of fan-aticism, I seriously consider two personal faves, Mattingly and Hernandez, certainly ahead of Kitty and especially TJ, who's somehow getting credit for the name of a surgical procedure. Morris would beat either one in a seventh game, every time, but he's not quite a HoF-er either.
_Sean - Monday, January 06 2003 @ 12:07 PM EST (#33698) #
Who I'd vote for:

Craig B - Monday, January 06 2003 @ 12:21 PM EST (#33699) #
Morris would beat either one in a seventh game, every time

Interesting. I'll put Jack Morris and Tommy John's career postseason numbers up here, everybody guess which one is which. (Answers, as always, at

Pitcher A : 14 starts, 6-3, 2.65 ERA
Pitcher B : 13 starts, 7-4, 3.80 ERA

You'll probably be as surprised as I was.
_Jordan - Monday, January 06 2003 @ 02:21 PM EST (#33700) #
The STATLG-L/Baseball Prospects hall of Fame Results have now been released. The Internet voters elected Eddie Murray and Gary Carter (the Kid for the second time), while Blylven and Sandberg fell just short.

My BP HOF ballot was:


And I'll ask once again: what is Danny Tartabull doing on the Hall of Fame ballot?
Craig B - Monday, January 06 2003 @ 02:54 PM EST (#33701) #

You strain at the gnat of Danny Tartabull, but swallow the camel of Mark Davis?


Seriously, the ballot committee puts on nearly everyone who played ten years and was a regular for 6-7. It would be almost unheard of for a player to play 1,000 major league games and not get on the ballot.

Tartabull would actually have been a fairly strong candidate if he had managed to stay a little more healthy; his hitting stats were really superb. He has to be the worst defensive player in the last 30 years to get a serious trial at shortstop... (I mean worst defensive player overall, not worst shortstop). Tartabull was, especially early in his career, a horrible defensive outfielder.
Craig B - Monday, January 06 2003 @ 02:57 PM EST (#33702) #
Interestingly, one of the ten "most-similar" to Tartabull is popular candidate Roger Maris.
_jason - Monday, January 06 2003 @ 03:13 PM EST (#33703) #
Gary Carter
Eddie Murray
_Jordan - Monday, January 06 2003 @ 03:19 PM EST (#33704) #
You strain at the gnat of Danny Tartabull, but swallow the camel of Mark Davis?

Nice Matthew reference! My favourite quote from this part of the gospel, not surprisingly, is:

Woe to you lawyers! For you laden men with grievous burdens, and yet lift not one of your fingers to help them. ... Woe to you lawyers! For you have taken away the key of knowledge, and hinder those who could enter in, but have not enetred in yourselves.

I'm thinking of having that put into the masthead, just to see if anyone notices.

Agreed, Mark Davis is a more egregious example of pointless HOF nominations ... but somehow, I always disliked Tartabull more. I think it was actually his utter indifference to playing defence that got to me, or the sense of unfulfilled potential. But having looked closely at his numbers and his career .864 OPS, I should cut him some slack. It'd be nice if they'd change that nomination system, but c'est la guerre....
_Scott Lucas - Monday, January 06 2003 @ 04:49 PM EST (#33705) #
Easy choices for me: Murray, Carter, Sandberg

Tough choices, but "yes": Blyleven, John, Gossage (I'd take Gossage over Smith and Sutter, barely. Sutter was better when healthy but pitched almost 800 fewer innings, an awful lot for a reliever.)

Just can't decide, so "no" as of today: Trammell

Good but not good enough: Kaat, Morris, Dawson, Parker, Hernandez, Murphy, etc.
Craig B - Monday, January 06 2003 @ 10:02 PM EST (#33706) #
Jordan, I like the inclusive ballot, since it minimizes the possibility of massive error... the 5% rule ensures that the ballot is never too cluttered. After all, there are those who thought of Lou Whitaker as a sure-fire Hall of Famer, and those who thought he was as far away as Danny Tartabull. I'd rather give Whitaker at least a chance to get in, rather than see him not even make the ballot.

Oh yes, thanks for the aspersions of woe from Our (well, not my) Saviour. Hard to believe I get excoriated for lading men with intolderable burdens, for taking away the key of knowledge, and even get lumped in with the Pharisees for crying out loud, and yet Gord Ash gets off scot-free for letting go of Tony Batista on irrevocable waivers... not even a mention. It's hard to catch a break... maybe the Lord really is a Yankee fan.

Christ/Luke/the KJV authors *really* knew how to turn a phrase, though. Man, Luke's gospel is heady stuff... Luke's Jesus is a stone-cold revolutionist on one of the all-time Power Trips, living on heavily mortgaged time.

I seem to have veered somewhat from my original point. Oh well.
_Kent - Tuesday, January 07 2003 @ 09:48 AM EST (#33707) #
I'm thinking of having that put into the masthead, just to see if anyone notices.

I hope Jordan means his magazine's masthead, not our little Web site. Woe to old coaches surrounded by lawyers.

Strangely enough, Craig, as I'm not inclined to mark a lot of X's, I agree that the ballot should be wide open. At this time of year, my memories include guys of extreme fame and/or accomplishment (Maris, Valenzuela, Guidry, Fidrych, Mark Davis) whose careers didn't warrant election, and I wish there was also a Hall of Temporary Genius, a way to honour great seasons by players whose longevity didn't match their talents. There are probably folks who wonder if Koufax belongs in Cooperstown, but there's no question among those of us who saw him pitch.

I know for a fact that Craig never played with the Pharisees; they picked him up years ago via Rule 5 but returned him to his former team when they realized he was a clubhouse lawyer. You've got me wondering; if Jesus drives his SUV to Yankee Stadium, does he use valet parking? By the way, his Father apparently roots for the Angels.
_Scott Lucas - Tuesday, January 07 2003 @ 02:03 PM EST (#33708) #
It's Murray and Carter. No one else.
_Jordan - Tuesday, January 07 2003 @ 02:19 PM EST (#33709) #
Well, I'm happy for Carter, who deserves it ... and if nothing else, this will cork his incessant whining on the subject. And I'm pleasantly surprised that Steady Eddie made it in on his first try, considering how much animosity developed between him and numerous sportswriters. Maybe there's hope for the BBWAA yet.

Kent, I was indeed thinking of the magazine's masthead -- it would be interesting to see whether lawyers actually do read the fine print. And anyway, I've always wanted to be the legal profession's resident prophet, a fire-and-brimstone Jeremiah for this generation of legalists. Too bad the job's already taken, and done pathetically, by Claire Hoy.

Craig, Luke is indeed an aggressive Gospel, but I've always found John's rendition to be the real sit-up-straight version. Had Gordo been around during John's time, he wouldn't have lasted past the Carlos Garcia trade. Oh, and in case anyone unfamiliar with the texts in question thinks I'm actually dissing my legal colleagues, fear not: the lawyers to whom woe is directed in the Gospels were of the scribes and chief priests variety. I'm actually very positive towards lawyers, at least in theory; in practice, they're a little exasperating. Woe to the billable hour, the unreturned client phone call, and the uncivil litigator.
Coach - Tuesday, January 07 2003 @ 02:32 PM EST (#33710) #
Here's the HoF announcement from MLB -- it looks like the voters, despite some of their individual foolishness, collectively did the cautious thing. The distinction between choosing Murray as a first-ballot HoFer (the 38th so honoured) and making Sandberg wait must have occurred to many. Good for the Kid.
What the Hall? | 15 comments | Create New Account
The following comments are owned by whomever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.