Part of

« Amaro says Phils are done, then changes his mind | Main | Former Phillies prospect suspended 50 games »

Wednesday, January 09, 2013


repost: I bet the townsfolk of Cooperstown are pissed. No induction ceremony is probably a huge blow to the local economy.

Aaron Sele got 1 vote...which shows that at least 1 HOF voter is functionally retarded.


"Iceman: I'm on the other side about jroll, i think he'll be solid again and maybe even improve slightly. He had a .260 BABIP last year compared to a .290 career - altho i'll admit his IFF% was egrigious enough to explain that.

I see Schilling is one of those guys who floats around 70% for a good 5-6 year span. He'll be the new Jack Morris.

I think it's laughable. Regardless of how you feel about the steroid guys (Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa), I don't really understand why you would punish Piazza, Bagwell, and Biggio because other people did steroids.

My ballot (not that anyone cares) would be: Bonds, Clemens, Biggio, Bagwell, Piazza, Raines, Schilling.

I can understand votes against Bonds and Clements (steroids) and Raines and Schilling (if you're really into elite players only). But Biggio, Bags, and Piazza? Really? No evidence of steroids for any of them, and clear HOF performance. I've yet to see a valid argument for leaving any of them off ballot.

It took Morris until his 7th year of eligibility to get over the 38% mark. He was around 20% until then.

The BBWAA is a joke. Half of the writers don't even cover baseball anymore. The voting process needs to be revamped if this is going to happen over the next few years.

Eff the collective group of BBWA. I am pissed that Piazza and Biggio weren't elected. I would have cast my ballot for some others too.

I know its a stupid reason, but Biggio and Piazza are first time ballot guys. They automatically lose out on a handful of voters who feel others in the past have been denied 1st ballot entry and therefore do the same to others.

They'll get in.

Like NEPP said, we got a guy voting for Aaron Sele.

lorecore is right on the money. Stupid tradition bullsh!t gets in the way of actual reasonable voting.

Like the fact that there has never been a unanimous election to the HoF. How is that even possible? I mean, what writer in their right mind could have NOT voted for Aaron or Mays, for example?

The whole process has always been bordering on ridiculous, and now it's just over the top.

I can't believe Kenny Loften is falling off the ballot. He's the new Lou Whitaker. Borderline HOFer that gets almost zero support.

Sele benefited from another tradition which is the hometown sportswriter casting a vote for a guy who was terrible but played for the team he covers.

Like the fact that there has never been a unanimous election to the HoF. How is that even possible? I mean, what writer in their right mind could have NOT voted for Aaron or Mays, for example?

The whole process has always been bordering on ridiculous, and now it's just over the top.

Posted by: Fatalotti | Wednesday, January 09, 2013 at 02:42 PM

But Babe Ruth wasn't a unanimous selection, so there can NEVER be one. That just makes sense.

It can be argued that Lofton had a Hall of Fame career. To not even get 5% is f'n nuts.

lorecore: But Piazza got only 57 percent, compared to Biggio's 69. That has to do with people playing pure guessing games on steroids, not first ballot issues.

I guess if writers are left to be totally arbitrary with regards to a player's performance, they can also be arbtirary with regards to who they think used steroids or not. But it seems an awfully unprincipled way to do it, and one designed to result in innocent and worthy players being denied admission for the sake of ensuring no guilty player receives a free pass. That seems a backwards way of doing things.

I actually was talking with some students today and predicted no one getting in this year. Sadly, I was right.

Biggio and Piazza deserve to be in. On some level I can understand the PED issue making voters reluctant on certain guys, but those two are the very definition of Hall of Famers. They redefined the positions they played and there may be whispers about them in one form or another but nothing substantial like on Bonds.

The guy I feel for is Jack Morris. Next year is his last year on the regular ballot and Glavine and Maddux are first time eligible. He ain't getting in next year either.

Maybe that's because Morris isn't good enough to be a HOFer?

Yes, he was a great post-season is Andy Pettitte.

GM: Wait till next year. Mike Mussina will be the same way. Borderline HOF performance (certainly a better pitcher than Jack Morris), and he's likely to fall off the ballot.

Lofton came up just a tad late. Rookie year as a 25 year old. If he could have got in a couple years earlier, he'd be in the high 2,000 hit category with over 1,000 walks. He'd be in much more serious contention.

Actually, he hit .296/.367/.414 with more BB than K as a 40yr old - so maybe instead of starting earlier he could have just hung around a few extra.

I wouldn't vote for the Babe either, I heard he ate hotdogs in the dougout!

I'm actually ok with Jack Morris not getting in. If there was a Hall of Very Good, he would be there. Hall of Fame is for the best of the best.

Meh, I'm not broken up about Morris. Personally, Id on't think he's HoF material.

Jack Morris (3.90 ERA, 1.296 WHIP, 105 ERA+, 56.9 WAR in 18 seasons) received 10% of the vote more than Mike Piazza (.308/.377/.545/.922, 143 OPS+, 66.8 WAR in 16 seasons- almost 400 HR from the catcher position).

Piazza didn't get in because he had backne. It's nauseating that something like the baseball HOF- which is a big f'ing deal to millions of people- has been completely hijacked by a group of people that are, by and large, comprised of complete morons.

I don't like making blanket statements like that, but yeah, just looking at the difference between Morris (a guy that was not even close to being a great pitcher) and the greatest hitting catcher of all time...they are complete morons.

"The whole point is just to get better. There's been a whole line of argument this entire offseason about whether they should have targeted offense, or bullpen, or outfield, or starting pitching, or defense.

All that matters is getting better. No segment of this team is good enough where you can say "oh, no work to be done there." They could've gotten better by adding Zack Grienke or Anibal Sanchez. Or by adding Mike Adams and other relievers. Or by adding Nick Swisher or Josh Hamilton. Or by adding Ben Revere. On and on and on. It really doesn't matter how they were going to do it, you just needed to add more talent. Score more runs, or give up less. It doesn't matter (or ideally, both).

On that front, I think they got a little bit better. I would've liked to see them do more. We'll see if they're good enough. I have my doubts, but there is certainly enough that could go right for the team to consider itself a contender entering the season."

Jack~ And enough could go wrong to where this team has 50 losses by the AS break again. Point in for whatever reason(s), RAJ didn't get the offensive help that was/is needed. I've been saying this for 2 years. People are now finally starting the see. The lineup that they currently have as a whole is not a playoff team caliper lineup. And it very possibly is going to show. RAJ will have to be held accountable at some point if this team falters. Hate to say it, but .....

I love the way the vote came down. That's exactly what I would've done. Only slam dunk, completely obvious, 100% best players in the game deserve to be "first ballot" guys. Stupid or not, there is a distinction that comes with being "first ballot". None on this list (other than ones kept out for PEDs) are "first ballot". Not Piazza. Not Biggio. Not Bagwell.

Piazza and Biggio will get in. And I think they should, but not on the first ballot.

Morris wasn't even a great postseason pitcher. He has a career 3.8o ERA in the postseason.

I don't really get worked up one way or the other, but the idea that Jack Morris would be in the Hall of Fame but not the rest of the guys on that ballot makes you kind of wonder what the Hall of Fame is even trying to do.

More ridiculous self-righteousness and moral indignation by a bunch of middle-aged white guys.

I find it very hypocritical for the writers to not vote for players who used steroids or are perceived to have used them for the HOF. These are the same writers who were with all these players and covering them on a daily basis who never said a word about PED's while this was going on in front of their faces. So now after they did NOTHING about the use of PED's while it was going on they are going to make up for that by not letting any of these players into the HOF. That is Bush League!

Now I am not saying that it is only the writers fault, MLB and the players association are just as much to blame for the use of PED's in the sport, but they don't vote for the members of the HOF. PED's are a major part of the history of baseball now and should be a part of any museum about the sport. So for these writers to now say they are standing up against cheaters is just plain stupid. They should have taken this stance years ago, now that they are doing it means they are a day late and a dollar short.

Mussina will do better than you think. I personally dont see him as a HOF level guy but lots of other people do. He'll probably do nearly as well as Schilling.

In case you haven't guessed by my above post, I'm a bit of a HOF snob. Hell, you could probably throw out half the guys in there and I wouldn't be all that broken up about it. As others have said, it's not the Hall of Very Good, which it unfortunately seems to be sometimes.

Anyone know how to search which HoF'er began his career the latest? There can't be many who weren't playing by at least 23, right? Not only do you need a lot of longevity to build up counting stats, but its pretty rare to have such ability that you can't force your way into the MLB eventually.

RBill: so you basically are saying that no Catcher in MLB history can be a first ballot HoF - because Mike Piazza is the best to ever play the position, period.

Jack: Piazza, Bagwell and Biggio have all been rumored to be steroid tainted, fairly or unfairly.

If I were building a team from scratch, I'd probably say that Piazza would not be my first choice for catcher.

He WAS NOT the best catcher ever to play the position. He was the best OFFENSIVE catcher to ever play the position though.

MG: Does Howard Bryant count as a middle-aged white guy? What a racist thing of you to say.

RBill, I'm all for exclusion of players based on concepts like talent and results.

What bugs me are the extraneous considerations that seem to take precedence over the measurements that ought to matter.

I don't really have a problem with using PEDs as a sort of tie-breaking knock against someone. Like, I wouldn't vote for Raffy Palmiero, who was a borderline HOF candidate, partly because he tested positive. I could see the same thing for McGwire or Sosa.

But I think it makes a mockery of the Hall of Fame to say that guys like Barry Bonds, Roger Clemens, and A-Rod (that will be fun) don't belong. All are among the 25 greatest players of all-time. I just don't understand how it can be the Hall of Fame at all without them.

R. Billingsly - Why the arbitrary delineation between "first-ballot" and not? If a player deserves to be a HOFer, why wouldn't you vote for him 1 year but then you would the next? He's either a HOFer or he isn't, wouldn't you think?

Clout: Biggio? Really?

lorecore: better than Johnny Bench?!?!!?

ARod can go in...but his plaque has to have a picture of him as a Centaur.

Morris had two outstanding complete postseason performances (1984 & 1991). No disputing that.

But his other two were awful, and his numbers for the 7 playoff series he played in are pretty close to his career norms.

Using the Morris standard, Hamels is one more outstanding postseason performance away from being a borderline HOF.

Jack: Palmeiro is one of what, 3 guys with 500+ homeruns and 3,000 hits. Minus PEDs, he's an obvious choice, kinda like Sosa & McGwire.

so you basically are saying that no Catcher in MLB history can be a first ballot HoF - because Mike Piazza is the best to ever play the position, period

I don't even know where to begin with that comment. I just...I'm just at a loss.


"I bet the townsfolk of Cooperstown are pissed. No induction ceremony is probably a huge blow to the local economy."

I bet the townsfolk of Cooperstown are relieved. It is a small place, and during the tourist season it is overrun with visitors. Induction weekend must be a complete zoo. I expect business owners catering directly to the baseball tourist trade are unhappy, but my guess is that surrounding towns are likely hurt more, as there won't be induction weekend people spilling over across the countryside.

I visit for a few days every year in April. The businesses are open, but the tourists don't take over until the schools are out. In April it is a lovely small town with lots of good places to eat. I much prefer this over visiting in the summer. Just be prepared for its being colder that you would expect, with a possibility of snow.

If Jack Morris gets in so should Dave Steib, Kevin Appier, David Cone, and maybe Dave Stewart. And that's just off the top of my head.

Chris in VT: I agree that it's a silly distinction (as I said in my initial post). Because the HOF has let in so my "Hall of Very Good" players over the years, it is another barometer of how these guys were thought of as players, especially for people who have never seen them play. Getting 98% of the vote on the first ballot is very telling about how great someone was. It is equally as telling to get 76% of the vote on the 12th ballot.

Again, it's silly, but to me it matters.

Dave Stewart's already in the Hall of Bada88es.

Piazza wasn't a great defensive catcher, but his offense value heavily outweighs that, more than any other catcher's combination in my opinion.

I'm glad none of the steroid guys got in. Got what they deserve. As far as Schilling goes, I never thought he was a HOFer. Good postseason player, but his regular season stats are pedestrian.

I think some evaluation has to be the old "eyeball test"; how did a player look when you watched him play? For me, I never felt Schilling was a HOFer. Same with Morris. I never thought he was that good, or dominant; All-Star sure, but not HOF.

On the contrary, I feel guys from the '80s continuously get the jack. Their numbers don't look as gaudy as the guys in the '90s or later, because the parks were bigger, pitching wasn't as watered-down (there were fewer teams) and the fences were higher.

Mattingly was one of, if not, the best players in the game in the '80s. He was dominant. He got hurt in the '90s and his career tailed off. But for a time, he was one of the best. Is that not worthy of the HOF? When people argue that Bonds is a HOFer before the steroid use, then can't you vote for Mattingly based on his pre-injurty years?

Same with Dale Murphy. This guy, along with Schmidt, was one of the most feared hitters in the NL in the '80s. Every year, it was either him or Schmidt leading the league in HRs and RBIs, and he won back to back MVPs, was a great fielder and had a tremendous arm.

Same can be said about Tim Raines.

The players from the '80s just don't get enough respect; the game was different then - 36 hrs could lead the league. ERAs would be in the low 2.00s. I think it's time to give these guys their due, but now it's too late. The HOF voting process is seriously flawed.

Richard: I live in a town that has a few huge events every year. I know a lot of people who take those weeks to rent out their homes for several thousand dollars while they take a "free"vacation, hotels are full for miles around, restaurants are pumping, local businesses from tchotchke shops to boat rental shops count on those weeks to make up for the slow winter months, and local government counts on the sales, hotel, and business receipt taxes as well as paid parking in garages, etc. Events like that are big, big deals for local economies.

jbird: Eh. Palmiero has those numbers because he stuck around for a long time. He was a good player who had a long career, and played during the best offensive era the game had ever seen. I'm not sure he was ever one of the best in baseball at his position. Bagwell and Frank Thomas were both contemporaries and better. He's Fred McGriff if Crime Dog had declined a little more gracefully (and draw your own conclusions as to how Palmiero stayed so good to age 40).

I'm not convinced I would vote for him regardless of PEDs, but definitely not with them.

Does anyone have an idea as to how Greg Maddux is not a unanimous first-ballot Hall of Famer?

4 Cy Young Awards (5 other Top 5 finishes)
355 wins (8th most all time, for those who care)
99.4 career PWAR (8th best all-time among P)
101.6 career WAR (25th best all-time)
3371 strikeouts (10th all time)

He also pitched in 35 career postseason games to a 3.27 ERA, including a 2.09 ERA in 5 World Series starts.

So why wouldn't he get a vote?

Mussina is an interesting case.

Objectively, he should ger the bizarre, widespread support Morris is getting. He's right on the borderline.

Using Morris's vote totals as a standard-bearer, though, it's a slam-dunk. He was even a better overall postseason pitcher than Morris. Mussina, from age 22-34, never had an ERA+ under 100. He was consistently very good for a very long period of time, and even sprinkled in some very good years after age 34.

I don't know if I'd vote him in, but he sure as hell deserves to be in over Jack Morris.

Piazza wasn't a great defensive catcher, but his offense value heavily outweighs that, more than any other catcher's combination in my opinion.

lorecore: Please do not take this the wrong way, as it is not meant to be snobby, but I think you're relatively alone in your opinion on this issue. While I disagree with your overall point, I agree that Piazza was a fine player. HOF caliber, even (as I have stated). But I haven't read any credible source, ever in the history of my following and reading about baseball, that place Piazza at the top of the list for all-time greatest catchers. If you can find one, I'd happily read it and reevaluate my stance.

I have been reminded that the headline to this post is inaccurate. Three people are being inducted into this year's class: Hank O’Day, Jacob Ruppert, and Deacon White. No living person, it is true, is in this year's class.

In addition, they are going back and having an induction ceremony for twelve players already in, but who didn't have a ceremony due to wartime conditions. These include Lou Gehrig and Rogers Hornsby.

Jack: but I'd vote for the McGriff.... Harold Baines & Edger Martinez played for forever too, but they didn't put up 500 homeruns and 3000 hits. I wouldn't vote for Palmeiro because of PEDs, but if you remove them from the equation, he's definitely in.

KAS, Greg Maddux should get 101% of the voting. He will certainly get in first ballot, but that any voter would have the stones to NOT vote for him boggles the mind.

Jack sez: "I have my doubts, but there is certainly enough that could go right for the team to consider itself a contender entering the season."

DPat responds: "Jack~ And enough could go wrong to where this team has 50 losses by the AS break again."

Sure, DPat, anything can happen. Duh?

Unikruk: I just "liked" your comment in my mind.

I'm not as convinced about Palmeiro's inclusion either. He never finished in the top 4 in the MVP vote. His league leader list consists of: hits, doubles and runs (each only once).

The only reason he got to 3000 hits is because he hung around four two years in which he amassed a 0.4 WAR combined and got 240 hits while hitting .261 (finished career with 3020 hits).

There's little doubt PEDs helped extend his career, even if there is doubt of how much it helped him as a hitter.

jbird: Ok, well I'm disagreeing with "he's definitely in."

I just don't think that's true. I think he'd be a close call without PEDs. I can understand a vote for him, but I can just as easily understand a vote against him (or a vote for or against McGriff).

I don't think Palmiero would "definitely" be in, is all.

Edgar Martinez was a better hitter than Palmiero.

R. Billingsly: Mike Piazza is the greatest hitting catcher of all time, and some consider him among the best catchers period, but Johnny Bench is still considered the best catcher of all time by most.

Mussina was a significantly better pitcher than Morris. Its not even a close comparison.

Would have thought Piazza was a first-ballot guy unless he's linked to steroids and I completely missed it.

Outta Here: i agree about the '80's getting screwed. Raines should be in. Trammel should be in. Whitaker should at least be in the debate. Mattingly & Murphy however suffer from too short a peak.

Schilling- another interesting case. His prime/peak was longer than most (age 28-37) and he posted a 140 ERA+ during that span. 9.5 K/9, 5.30 K/BB during that span. 64 CG and 13 SOs during that span. Just an outstanding 10 years.

And the fraudulent argument about Morris being a "great playoff pitcher" can legitimately used about Schilling. In 12 playoff series (19 games) he did this:

133.1 IP, 11-2, 2.23 ERA, 0.968 WHIP, 8.1 K/9, 4.90 K/BB, 4 CG (2 SO)- only had an ERA over 2.00 in 4 of 12 series

I think those numbers are so outstanding, they have to be taken into consideration. I don't know if he's a first-ballot HOF, but I think he should be in there when all is said and done.

Glad Dale Murphy didn't make it. I didn't even think he qualified as on the fence.

I'm agnostic on steroid era players being inducted into the HOF but Jack's rejection of any links to steroid rumors to Piazza is wrong. A couple years ago, Murray Chass went public to say that his NYT editors blocked his reporting on Piazza in the Mets' locker room.


Mike Mussina 123
Jack Morris 105


Mike Mussina 7.1 (2813 in career)
Jack Morris 5.8 (2478 in career)


Mike Mussina 1.192
Jack Morris 1.296

Postseason starts

Mike Mussina 21 (3.42 ERA)
Jack Morris 13 (3.80 ERA)

Postseason starts that are among the game's lore to be passed down from generation to generation

Mike Mussina 0
Jack Morris 1

I think Schilling should get in. He's one of those guys that had the misfortunate of having his peak years at the same time as another inner circle HOF pitcher (Randy Johnson) so he ended up never winning a CY or being the Ace of his team (outside of that first year in Boston). He was runner up for the CY 3 times in 4 years.

JJG: supposedly his "proof" was backne.

"Anyone know how to search which HoF'er began his career the latest?"

Hoyt Wilhelm(knuckleballer) didn't pitch in the majors until he was 29, without looking much further, thats got to be the latest any HoF has ever started his career.

Kind of ruins my search since he played independent ball early, then served in WWII, and back to independent ball all before ever coming back to the Majors.

Just from looking at a bunch, the average age of HoF in their rookie year is probably right around 21.

R. Billingsly: Mike Piazza is the greatest hitting catcher of all time, and some consider him among the best catchers period, but Johnny Bench is still considered the best catcher of all time by most.

I don't agree with this, either.

What I said earlier should not be taken as me advocating for Morris, although I know it sounds that way. On some HOF scales he is in and on others he is out. Definition of a borderline guy.

My statement was more- a borderline pitcher like him not getting in this year means he won't next year with Maddux and Glavine coming onto the ballot.

JJG: I know the rumors. He was never linked to anything beyond rumors.

And I find it interesting, and maybe a little bit sad, that reporters are willing to vote (and discuss their vote publicly) based on reporting that couldn't pass muster to be published.

KAS: K/9 is such a hard stat to use. Without a K/9+ to adjust for league averages, its basically a irrelevant measure.

Satchel Paige is in the Hall and didn't play MLB until he was 41...

JJG- I almost always agree with what you post here, but I'm not sure why whatever Chass had to say (and I've read what he's said on the issue) should have any effect on HOF voting. It's complete speculation.

I know a lot of times where there's smoke, there's fire, especially when it comes to PEDs. But it's irresponsible, in my opinion, to completely erase the accomplishments of a guy that, for a long time, was at the top of his profession, because he had backne.

Satchel Paige also had an ERA+ of infinity at age 58.

rbill: so no on Bench and Piazza... who ya got? Yogi? Fisk? Black Mickey Cochrane? Ol Roy Campy?

You could use SO/BB...something that Schilling routinely led the league in and is 2nd all time in baseball history.

jbird: Voted in by BBWAA

Pudge Rodriguez is probably in there among the top 6 catchers of all-time. Bench, Yogi, Pudge, Piazza, Campanella, and Fisk, in some order or another.

It'll be interesting to see if Yadi Molina can keep his hitting of the last two seasons going for a few more years. If guys like Ozzie and Mazeroski can get in based mostly on defense, I would think you could make a case for Molina in 10-15 years. I know everyone hates him (and I confess he bothers me too), but the guy is hands-down brilliant defensively.

Jack: Yep. Biggio's age 37-39 seasons were much better than his age 34-36 seasons and they came right at the peak of steroid use.

But as far as I know, it was just rumors. He never failed a test.

Clout: Other than you, right now, I've never heard rumors. Can you post a link?

Never said "no" on Bench or Piazza. I don't think either is the greatest catcher of all-time, though. They're both outstanding players. Hall of Famers. One first ballot, one not.

For my money, Yogi Berra is the greatest catcher of all-time. Bench would be second. Piazza would be in the top ten, but closer to ten than one most likely. So, if it took Berra two ballots, Piazza can wait until the second ballot, too.

R.Billingsly: Care to be more specific about what you disagree with?

"...but Johnny Bench is still considered the best catcher of all time by most."

Roy Campanella would get my vote. He got no chance when he was younger because of WWII and segregation. Broke in a year after Jackie at the age of 26. In his era he did everything with the bat that Bench did in his, and he was a terrific defensive catcher. 57% (no not a typo) CS for his career, 2/3 his first five years in MLB, and was noted to be a good receiver. 3 MVP awards.

For me the best ever was Campy.

The next tier down are Bench, Berra and, because of his offensive dominance, Piazza.

If you could change the HOF voting procedure, how would you change it? Give members in the hall a vote? Current ball players and/or managers? (Please don't say "the public." We all know what idiots they are.)

KAS: See my 3:49.

I admit that I misread your initial post. I read it as Piazza was the best catcher of all-time, when you clearly wrote "best offensive catcher of all time". I apologize for that. I still, however, disagree with both statements, just not as adamantly as I would have had you said the former.

Jack: The Maz got in by the Veteran's Committee after he didn't get voted in.

Here's my quick and dirty list:

1. Berra
2. Bench
3. Cochrane
4. Campanella
5. Dickey
6. Gibson (obvious, non-MLB issues)
7. Fisk
8. Piazza
9. Rodriguez
10. Carter
[Honorable Mention]
11. Zimmer (for his contributions to the evolution of the game, mainly)

Iceman: Schilling deserves to be in. What holds him back are the 216 wins. The problem, for a starting pitcher whose career essentially began in the 1990s, is that is when bullpen specialization became all the rage. Many wins that used to go to SPs wound up going to relievers, either because the SP left without a lead or the bullpen vultured him.

I thought Pudge Rodriguez would be hands down a better all around catcher than Piazza, I was surprised his OPS+ was so low though, 106. Played for a long time in his post-peak with sub-100 OPS+'s.

"KAS: K/9 is such a hard stat to use. Without a K/9+ to adjust for league averages, its basically a irrelevant measure."

lorecore, yes.

KAS, would you vote for a pitcher with a career K/9 of 3.4?

If your answer is "No" then you would have voted to keep Cy Young out of the HOF.

Just sayin'...

Jack: A link to rumors from 8 years ago? Sorry. But the stats speak for themselves and it was an issue at the time.

Clout: Um, I follow baseball pretty closely, and have never head any of that. But ok, if you say so.

And as to pitcher wins, that's an issue, but eventially it's going to have to be less of an issue. Pedro Martinez has only 219 wins. If he doesn't get in, they should just shut the place down.

"A couple years ago, Murray Chass went public to say that his NYT editors blocked his reporting on Piazza in the Mets' locker room."

Murray Chass has his own web page:

He had this to say about this year's voting, Jack Morris, and steroids:

Jack: Familiarize yourself with Google. It took me about 10 seconds to find this:

The comments to this entry are closed.

EST. 2005

Top Stories


Rotoworld News

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Facebook

Contact Weitzel