My folks are offering (threatening, really, as they've been wanting to do this for years) to take us on a cruise in the Gulf of Mexico next year -- and since Amalie is now in public school, we plan on taking her spring break week in March, though if she had to miss a week of kindergarten I really wouldn't worry too much. Anyway, the plan is underway, and thanks to a bunch of idiots a few years ago coupled with way too much bureaucratic overreaction, even our children now need passports. Ah, brave new world, indeed.
And the lead time takes longer than ever before too. Gotta love that "smaller government" that the Bush administration claimed it would deliver.
We visited the AAA office last week and got the kids' portraits shots taken, which was a much longer experience than it should have been, but finally completed. Then I picked up the forms at the post office -- and promptly dropped them in a puddle later that day. sigh. Picked up new ones a few days ago, and filled them out this morning. Despite being six pages long, only two pages actually require information, and even then it's pretty basic stuff -- name, addy, DOB, parental info, the usual drivel. I did have to stand up the kids and measure their heights, which was about as far afield as the data collection went.
Off to the local USPO, where the hours are soooo convenient: 10:00 am to 1:00 pm, and 1:30 pm to 3:00 pm. Apparently, these are State Department requirements, though how these insanely restrictive windows serve the public good is a complete mystery. We had to wait for another customer to finish, and finally got our turn.
Now, remember, the passport application is six pages long, four pages of which are rather dense instructions, caveats, warnings, and the rest of the typical legal blather. With so many trees laying down their carbon dioxide-converting lives for this cause, wouldn't one think that all details, at least the fairly common ones, would be covered? Sure, but that's because we're rational people and don't work for the government.
Missing detail #1: Val, being a working mom, couldn't attend this little paper-processing ceremony, but the DOS is good enough to allow for a notarized statement of permission to cover this matter. Yesterday I had her type up a simple, two-line statement, print it out at work, and have the in-house notary take care of the legal bit (many large employers have an in-house notary). Even printed and notarized two copies just to be sure, with the kids' full names, in CAPITALS. The agent read the statement, and expressed concern that, since we hadn't included Amalie's and Carson's dates of birth, their might be delays. Um, okay, but... well... since the application did not mention, anywhere, exactly what information this notarized statement should include, how the hell important could that be? "Well, it could cause delays..." -- this really was not helpful. I decided to take the risk rather than waste more time on our end re-doing this little statement, as our kids have quite distinctive names that would be hard to confuse. But why the fark cannot the entire State Department bother getting this little detail -- dates of birth -- on this massive form? Thanks a lot, Condi. Medal of Freedom coming up for you, girl.
Missing detail #2. I had smartly brought along the kids' Social Security cards and birth certificates. The agent said I had to include the certificates in the application package. Um, what? Those are the only copies I have! "Not to worry, you'll get them back, separate from the passports of course." There was no choice in this matter, and again, surrender of birth certificates is mentioned nowhere on this huge, six-page portfolio. Why isn't this mentioned, State Department? Why are we paying these peoples' salaries? Oh, right -- in the Bushist government, incompetence is a virtue.
Feh.
But wait! The crowning touch -- thankfully I was allowed to pay by personal check. Actually, by three checks -- two different checks, each for $52, made out to "Department of State", one for each application, and another for $60 to the US Postmaster, some mandated service fee (at least I got to cover this with one check, as it does break down to $30 per application).
I don't see where anyone, ever, gets the notion that government can be run like a streamlined corporation. Well, other than through outright lying, always popular in political circles. Government isn't intended to be a for-profit enterprise, and no one yet has ever offered a servicable plan for limiting the bloat. It probably could be done in limited circumstances, but no one much in position to do something about it finds it in their interests to do so. And so, we have six-page forms and need three different checks.
I hope this cruise is worth the preparatory nonsense.
Friday, December 21, 2007
Monday, December 03, 2007
The Hall's New Veterans Committee -- The Results
The Hall Of Fame has announced the results from the two ballots considered by different delegations of the revamped Veterans Committee. Electors are limited to no more than four votes among the ten candidates per ballot. Different electorates vote on each ballot.
Managers & Umpires (12 of 16, 75%, needed for election)
Interesting that the Hall now uses a "less than" mimimum return, which I suppose is a face-saving gesture for the bottom down-ballot candidates, as a return of zero really is very dismissive. Looking at the votes, and noting that each elector was limited to four votes maximum, 58 of a possible 64 votes on the M&U ballot, and 44 of a possible 48 votes on the Executives ballot, are accountable. If every vote was cast, that leaves six votes for the four M&U candidates and four votes for the three Executives candidates who went indeterminately reported. So there's a good chance someone, or more than one, did get zero votes. I think it is irresponsible of the Hall not to specify those downballot returns, but I suppose it isn't that important. Maybe this "less than three votes" notation is a way of backhandedly indicating that these candidates won't be on the ballot again any time soon (and reviewing the seven names, I don't think this sort of unofficial relegation would be a bad thing, at least for one cycle of the ballots).
Congratulations to the five newest Hall Of Famers, of whom only Williams is alive to appreciate the honor. I supported Southworth and (wanly) O'Malley already, so those are, to me, sound selections. I have no real objections to the elections of Williams and Dreyfuss. And among my choices not elected, I feel little disappointment for Harvey, Murtaugh, Johnson, or Kauffman.
The election of Kuhn does nothing to improve the Hall's execution of its mission. His administration was lengthy and effected some good changes to the great game, but he had more liabilities than assets. The Hall was not a lesser repository and chronicler of baseball history without him.
The omission of Marvin Miller is a sore point, though I cannot summon genuine outrage because the composition of the voting committee was so obviously stacked against his candidacy. The Hall does suffer for Miller's absence; among off-field personnel, he is one of the two or three biggest influences across all of baseball history. Not honoring the person responsible for that sort of enormous impact is detrimental to the entire institution. Perhaps the Hall board, when appointing the voting committee for executives next time (2009), will take this into consideration and compose a more equitable electorate.
An update -- the Executives ballot was composed by the same committee members who ultimately voted on that ballot. The Hall hadn't made this readily apparent before, or if so I simply missed it. This strikes me as somewhat fishy (although the Hall can, and does, charter these things however it wants), as one thing the final vote does is shine brighter light on the election agenda of some subset of the committee -- the entire process appears to be for show. The Hall board should know better -- and in fact, it does -- and I'd rather not go down the pathway of conspiracies, but electing Kuhn does help pave the way for eventually electing sitting Commissioner Selig, and right now I'm not at all sure if I'd support his candidacy. But, no doubt, he's got friends. Such a two-iterative ballot process should use separate delegations.
Managers & Umpires (12 of 16, 75%, needed for election)
rank candidate...........votes..percentage
1t. Billy Southworth* (M)...13 81.3% -- ELECTED
1t. Dick Williams (M).......13 81.3% -- ELECTED
3t. Doug Harvey* (U)........11 68.8%
3t. Whitey Herzog (M).......11 68.8%
5. Danny Murtaugh* (M).......6 37.5%
6. Hank O'Day (U)............4 25.0%
7t. Davey Johnson* (M)......<3 ≤12.5%
7t. Billy Martin (M)........<3 ≤12.5%
7t. Gene Mauch (M)..........<3 ≤12.5%
7t. Cy Rigler (U)...........<3 ≤12.5%
* Candidates for whom I would have voted.
Executives (9 of 12, 75%, needed for election)
rank candidate.....votes..percentage
1t. Barney Dreyfuss....10 83.3% -- ELECTED
1t. Bowie Kuhn.........10 83.3% -- ELECTED
3. Walter O'Malley*.....9 75.0% -- ELECTED
4. Ewing Kauffman*......5 41.7%
5. John Fetzer..........4 33.3%
6t. Bob Howsam..........3 25.0%
6t. Marvin Miller*......3 25.0%
8t. Buzzie Bavasi......<3 ≤16.7%
8t. John McHale........<3 ≤16.7%
8t. Gabe Paul..........<3 ≤16.7%
Interesting that the Hall now uses a "less than" mimimum return, which I suppose is a face-saving gesture for the bottom down-ballot candidates, as a return of zero really is very dismissive. Looking at the votes, and noting that each elector was limited to four votes maximum, 58 of a possible 64 votes on the M&U ballot, and 44 of a possible 48 votes on the Executives ballot, are accountable. If every vote was cast, that leaves six votes for the four M&U candidates and four votes for the three Executives candidates who went indeterminately reported. So there's a good chance someone, or more than one, did get zero votes. I think it is irresponsible of the Hall not to specify those downballot returns, but I suppose it isn't that important. Maybe this "less than three votes" notation is a way of backhandedly indicating that these candidates won't be on the ballot again any time soon (and reviewing the seven names, I don't think this sort of unofficial relegation would be a bad thing, at least for one cycle of the ballots).
Congratulations to the five newest Hall Of Famers, of whom only Williams is alive to appreciate the honor. I supported Southworth and (wanly) O'Malley already, so those are, to me, sound selections. I have no real objections to the elections of Williams and Dreyfuss. And among my choices not elected, I feel little disappointment for Harvey, Murtaugh, Johnson, or Kauffman.
The election of Kuhn does nothing to improve the Hall's execution of its mission. His administration was lengthy and effected some good changes to the great game, but he had more liabilities than assets. The Hall was not a lesser repository and chronicler of baseball history without him.
The omission of Marvin Miller is a sore point, though I cannot summon genuine outrage because the composition of the voting committee was so obviously stacked against his candidacy. The Hall does suffer for Miller's absence; among off-field personnel, he is one of the two or three biggest influences across all of baseball history. Not honoring the person responsible for that sort of enormous impact is detrimental to the entire institution. Perhaps the Hall board, when appointing the voting committee for executives next time (2009), will take this into consideration and compose a more equitable electorate.
An update -- the Executives ballot was composed by the same committee members who ultimately voted on that ballot. The Hall hadn't made this readily apparent before, or if so I simply missed it. This strikes me as somewhat fishy (although the Hall can, and does, charter these things however it wants), as one thing the final vote does is shine brighter light on the election agenda of some subset of the committee -- the entire process appears to be for show. The Hall board should know better -- and in fact, it does -- and I'd rather not go down the pathway of conspiracies, but electing Kuhn does help pave the way for eventually electing sitting Commissioner Selig, and right now I'm not at all sure if I'd support his candidacy. But, no doubt, he's got friends. Such a two-iterative ballot process should use separate delegations.
Sunday, December 02, 2007
The Hall's 2008 Writers Ballot -- Wrap-up
A link set so one can read the entire ballot review without a lot of scrolling down and up again.
The Hall's 2008 Writers Ballot
Introduction
Candidates Part 1 (Anderson, Baines, Beck, Blyleven, Concepcíon, Dawson)
Candidates Part 2 (Dunston, Finley, Fryman, Gossage, John, Justice)
Candidates Part 3 (Knoblauch, Mattingly, McGwire, Morris, Murphy, Nen)
Candidates Part 4 (Parker, Raines, Rice, Rijo, Smith, Stottlemyre, Trammell)
Chipmaker's votes: Blyleven, Gossage, McGwire, Murphy, Raines.
Predictions
Anderson -- below 5%, relegated.
Baines -- below 5%, relegated.
Beck -- below 5%, relegated.
Blyleven -- over 60%.
Concepcíon -- slightly over 20%, and his writers ballot candidacy expires.
Dawson -- over 68%.
Dunston -- below 5%, relegated.
Finley -- 9%.
Fryman -- below 5%, relegated.
Gossage -- 79%, and elected!
John -- around 25%.
Justice -- 6%.
Knoblauch -- below 5%, relegated.
Mattingly -- 14%.
McGwire -- 29%, but this is a complete guess. Has enough blood been spilled?
Morris -- 46%.
Murphy -- 15%.
Nen -- below 5%, relegated.
Parker -- 15%.
Raines -- 35%, though I hope I aimed low.
Rice -- over 70% but just not enough.
Rijo -- two votes, relegated.
Smith -- 45%.
Stottlemyre -- zero or one vote, relegated.
Trammell -- 19%.
That's it, baseball fans. The writers ballot results are announced Tuesday, January 8, at 2:00 pm Eastern. Check back then to see how we did.
The Hall's 2008 Writers Ballot
Introduction
Candidates Part 1 (Anderson, Baines, Beck, Blyleven, Concepcíon, Dawson)
Candidates Part 2 (Dunston, Finley, Fryman, Gossage, John, Justice)
Candidates Part 3 (Knoblauch, Mattingly, McGwire, Morris, Murphy, Nen)
Candidates Part 4 (Parker, Raines, Rice, Rijo, Smith, Stottlemyre, Trammell)
Chipmaker's votes: Blyleven, Gossage, McGwire, Murphy, Raines.
Predictions
Anderson -- below 5%, relegated.
Baines -- below 5%, relegated.
Beck -- below 5%, relegated.
Blyleven -- over 60%.
Concepcíon -- slightly over 20%, and his writers ballot candidacy expires.
Dawson -- over 68%.
Dunston -- below 5%, relegated.
Finley -- 9%.
Fryman -- below 5%, relegated.
Gossage -- 79%, and elected!
John -- around 25%.
Justice -- 6%.
Knoblauch -- below 5%, relegated.
Mattingly -- 14%.
McGwire -- 29%, but this is a complete guess. Has enough blood been spilled?
Morris -- 46%.
Murphy -- 15%.
Nen -- below 5%, relegated.
Parker -- 15%.
Raines -- 35%, though I hope I aimed low.
Rice -- over 70% but just not enough.
Rijo -- two votes, relegated.
Smith -- 45%.
Stottlemyre -- zero or one vote, relegated.
Trammell -- 19%.
That's it, baseball fans. The writers ballot results are announced Tuesday, January 8, at 2:00 pm Eastern. Check back then to see how we did.
Saturday, December 01, 2007
The Hall's 2008 Writers Ballot -- The Player Candidates, Part 4
Finishing up the player candidates on the writers ballot.
19. Dave Parker
Years on ballot: 11.
Peak return: 24.5% (1998).
2007 return: 11.4%
Career: 19 seasons (1973-91) with the *Pittsburgh Pirates, Cincinnati Reds, Oakland Athletics, Milwaukee Brewers, California Angels, and Toronto Blue Jays.
Peak season: 1978 -- 102 runs, 194 hits, 32 doubles, 12 triples, 30 HR, 117 RBI, 20 stolen bases, .334/.394/.585, 166 OPS+, 134 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1975, 1977, 1979, 1985.
Primary position: right field, though he finished up (3 1/2 seasons) as a designated hitter.
Honoraria and claims to fame: seven All-Star selections (four starts), 1978 NL MVP, 1979 All-Star Game MVP, three NL Gold Gloves for Outfield, three Silver Sluggers (two NL for Outfield, one AL for DH), two NL batting championships, led the NL in slugging twice, hits once, RBI once. Member of two World Series champions, the 1979 Pirates and the 1989 Athletics.
Parker's peak was fantastic, but it was over quickly -- he fell off a cliff between 1979 and 1980, and except for one resurgent season (1985) never saw those heady heights again. Maybe it was the cocaine, which Parker was known to have a problem with at the time. The Cobra was, for those late-70s seasons, a stunningly powerful hitter, and if he deprived us the fans of seeing all he could have done because of drug abuse, well, I'm not very sympathetic. Bad choices can have bad consequences.
Parker is one of the few players, perhaps the only player, to win an All-Star Game MVP because of his defense. He made two brilliant throws from deep right field in 1979, nailing Rice at third trying to stretch a double, and Downing at home, who would have scored the go-ahead run. A sterling performance, but one game does not make a career Hall-class.
Very good fielder and, for a short time, a fantastic hitter. But the last 2/3 of his career was league average; when we should have been blown away, he blew it.
Utterly irrelevant to his Hall candidacy, but I've always loved this Sports Illustrated cover, the 09-April-1979 issue, with the defending MVPs standing back to back. Rice is a big guy, 6'2", and the way he is looking up at Parker was, to me, an indelible image. Rice is big, but Parker is huge.
Chipmaker's vote: No.
Prediction: 15%, but he's going nowhere.
20. Tim Raines
Writers ballot rookie.
Career: 23 seasons (1979-99, 2001-02) with the *Montréal Expos, Chicago White Sox, New York Yankees, Oakland Athletics, Baltimore Orioles, and Florida Marlins.
Peak season: 1987 -- 123 runs, 175 hits, 34 doubles, 18 HR, 68 RBI, 50 stolen bases (against five caught steals!), 90 walks, .330/.429/.526, 149 OPS+, 132 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1984, 1985, 1986, 1989, 1993.
Primary position: left field. Leadoff hitter.
Honoraria and claims to fame: seven All-Star selections (two starts), 1987 All-Star Game MVP, one NL Silver Slugger for Outfield, one NL batting championship, led NL in on-base percentage once, runs twice, stolen bases four times. Career 84.7% stolen base success rate is the highest for anyone with 300+ SB; 808 career SB ranks fifth all-time, with no one threatening passing any time soon. One of only two fathers to play alongside his son in a major league game (the other being Ken Griffey, Sr., and I'm not yet counting out Roger Clemens doing it). Member of the 1996 and 1998 World Series champion Yankees. Jersey #30 retired by the Expos.
Bonus baseball points: Raines was a coach for the 2005 World Series champion White Sox. There's only so much credit one can appoint to a coach, but he was there.
Esoteric baseball bonus points: Raines was the last active player (thanks to grandfathering players active before 1983) to wear a batting helmet without the ear flap. (Yes, Julio Franco is still active, but he has always worn flap-style helmets.)
Rock was one of the most brilliant leadoff men in baseball history, though it's hard to appreciate that since he played exactly contemporary with the greatest leadoff man in history, Rickey Henderson. His peak was masterful, and realize that his 1987 season didn't begin until May 2, since the Collusion conspiracy prevented him from signing elsewhere, and the silly re-signing regulations prevented him from returning to the Expos until May. But when he did, he picked right up and stormed the NL all season (Raines played 139 games). He had a long, slow decline, being a useful player for the rest of his career and an above-league average one for all but two seasons, one when he was suffering from lupus (and missed the next season altogether) and his last, tired gasp in Miami. Raines played like 93% of Henderson his entire career, and that definitely deserves the eternal bronze plaque.
Besides, Rock and Dawson are the last chances for an Expos cap logo to adorn a plaque.
Chipmaker's vote: Yes! And proud to cast it.
Prediction: Raines is a tough candidate to forecast. Some writers will like him, others will not (there's usually a small "never on the first ballot, never unanimous" faction), still others simply won't yet have seen the light. I think he gets elected eventually, but not this year, so I'll go with 35%, and I truly hope I've aimed low.
21. Jim Rice
Years on ballot: 13.
Peak return: 64.8% (2006).
2007 return: 63.5%
Career: 16 seasons (1974-89) with the *Boston Red Sox.
Peak season: 1978 -- 121 runs, 213 hits, 25 doubles, 15 triples (!), 46 HR, 139 RBI, .315/.370/.600, 406 total bases, 157 OPS+, 147 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1977, 1979, 1983, 1986.
Primary position: left field. Those who claim he DH'd a lot should know that he was a primary DH in only four seasons -- his little cuppa coffee in 1974; 1977, when he was injured; 1988, his last full season, and badly faded; and 1989, his last year, when he played only 56 games, or 1/3 of a season. He wasn't a great fielder -- league average, mainly -- but he was legitimately a fielder, playing LF for 3/4 of his career games.
Honoraria and claims to fame: eight All-Star selections (four starts), 1978 AL MVP, two AL Silver Sluggers for Outfield, led the AL in slugging twice, home runs three times, RBI twice, games played once (1978, the full 163 including the playoff game, still the AL record).
Rice had a great peak and fully deserved that MVP Award. In some ways it's not fair what happened to him -- the fast fade after age 33; the injury that kept him out of the 1975 postseason (what would the World Series have been like with Rice swinging away?); having to play one of the toughest fields in the majors, left in Fenway; following a Hall-class act, Yaz, who had his own Hall-class act to follow, Williams, so there was a tradition to uphold; that he was a shy, soft-spoken, black southern man in a very, even notoriously, white, northern city. No matter how much his bat said, the media wanted more.
I'm a Red Sox fan, and for all that Rice delivered, I still see more above-average to good performances (nice to have, certainly) than Hall-class great ones. Had he a longer, more graceful cruise to retirement; had the 1981 season been played in full; had he finished the 1975 season healthily... such what-ifs tantalize, but no credit can be given for things not done. Rice had a great peak and a good career, but it falls short for me.
Chipmaker's vote: No, and I'm not happy about it, but it is honest.
Prediction: with only two ballots left, Rice surpasses 70%, leaving a huge cliffhanger for the December 2008 ballot. Look for the Summer 2008 bestseller, Rice For The Hall?, co-written by Willie Makit and Betty Wont. (This is, yes, a very bad pun.) If the writers elect him, I will consider that a happy day, a plaque not only earned on the diamond, but also with agony throughout the electoral process.
22. Jose Rijo
Years on ballot: 1.
Peak return: 0.2% (2001).
Career: 14 seasons (1984-95, 2001-02) with the New York Yankees, Oakland Athletics, and *Cincinnati Reds.
Peak season: 1993 -- 14-9, 2.48, 227 K, 163 ERA+. And he hit a home run, one of only two in his career.
Other outstanding seasons: 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994.
Primary position: RH starting pitcher.
Honoraria and claims to fame: one All-Star selection. 1990 World Series MVP for an absolutely brilliant performance. Led NL in winning percentage once,WHIP once, strikeouts once. Member of the 1990 World Series champion Reds.
Rijo is an odd case. After he last played in the majors in 1995, he qualified and was selected for the December 2000 (2001 Induction) writers ballot, where he received one vote. He then made a comeback for two seasons, which has reset his Hall eligibility. Whether he is allowed another 14 years, counting off his one previous ballot appearance, or the full 15 restarted, is not to my knowledge a resolved question, but it is certainly an irrelevant one. Those two additional seasons were nothing to change more than a handful of opinions, if any. To his credit, he was absolutely masterful in the 1990 World Series against a frightfully strong Athletics team, and he sat them down with authority, allowing one run and nine hits in 15.1 innings as the Reds stunningly swept to the championship.
But we've already seen his Hall ballot destiny -- relegation, again.
Chipmaker's vote: No.
Prediction: two votes; relegation redux.
23. Lee Smith
Years on ballot: 5.
Peak return: 45.0% (2006).
2007 return: 39.8%
Career: 18 seasons (1980-97) with the *Chicago Cubs, Boston Red Sox, St. Louis Cardinals, New York Yankees, Baltimore Orioles, California Angels, Cincinnati Reds, and Montréal Expos.
Peak season: 1991 -- 6-3, 47 saves, 2.34, 67 K (to 13 walks), 157 ERA+.
Other outstanding seasons: 1982, 1983, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1994.
Primary position: RH relief pitcher / closer.
Honoraria and claims to fame: seven All-Star selections, three Rolaids Relief Awards (two NL, one AL), led NL in saves three times and AL once. Held the career record for saves from 1993, when he passed Reardon, to 2006, when Hoffman surpassed him, and Smith is still second all-time.
Smith was great fun to watch. When he trundled out of the bullpen and ambled toward the mound, he always gave the impression that he'd just woken up from a relaxing nap. He entered the game at his own lazy pace, but on the mound he was all business. He'd pound in that monster fastball, strike out a few guys, get his outs, end the game, and amble off toward the dugout.
And yet, he bounced around a lot, and it's not certain why this was. He didn't lose his stuff until his last, partial season with the Expos, though he'd lost his closer job the year before. Sometimes a reliever is just that bit more valuable as a trading chit than as an in-game pitcher, though some of the talent he was traded for suggests that his present team never valued him appropriately highly. He did his job and did it very well for a long time, in a role that is notorious for burning out even the best and toughest. Smith endured and excelled, and for that, he held the career record for well over a decade.
Coming off their 1986 AL championship and heartbreaking World Series, the 1987 Red Sox seemed brimming with promise, but it quickly fell apart. One reason -- there were many -- was the terrible bullpen. They picked up only 16 saves all season. The entire 1987 season was painful, outside of Clemens' starts. So when Smith was picked up over the winter, there was rejoicing; no longer would games be blown! I was in the Fenway bleachers that rainy Opening Day 1988, and when the relievers strolled out to the bullpen before the game, we gave Lee Arthur a standing ovation. He tipped his cap -- and later blew the game by serving up a tenth-inning HR to Alan Trammell, but we didn't care that much. Boston had a real, ace closer again, and (after that day) he delivered.
For all that, I'm not a big Smith proponent for the Hall. I could see him getting in, and the writers are sort-of leaning toward that someday, but right now there are better relievers (hint: Goose) waiting ahead of him. All good men in turn, I suppose. Right now, I let him wait, but with strong hopes.
Chipmaker's vote: No.
Prediction: 45%, but after Gossage gets in this time, he takes a bigger leap next year.
24. Todd Stottlemyre
Writers ballot rookie.
Career: 14 seasons (1988-2000, 2002) with the *Toronto Blue Jays, Oakland Athletics, St. Louis Cardinals, Texas Rangers, and Arizona Diamondbacks.
Peak season: 1991 -- 15-8, 3.78, 116 K, 112 ERA+.
Other outstanding seasons: 1998. It's pretty slim pickings, fans.
Primary position: RH starting pitcher.
Honoraria and claims to fame: Member of the 1992-93 World Series champion Blue Jays. Technically a member of the 2001 World Series champion Diamondbacks, but he was injured and on the DL the entire season. Son of Mel Stottlemyre.
sigh. I try to find positive things about everyone on the Hall ballot, and for most candidates that's pretty easy (and for some, the raft of accomplishments and honors needs to be edited judiciously). These men played the great game at the highest level; they were, at the minimum, good.
Todd Stottlemyre throws a huge wrench into that approach. The best -- really, the best -- that can be said about him is that he pitched pretty good innings totals. A team needs about 1400 IP a year, someone's gotta throw them, and Stottlemyre was good for 150-200 for the bulk of his seasons. Not especially good innings, mind you, but he'd get the outs eventually.
I cannot imagine what one or more nominators were thinking when they offered up this name, unless they were thinking more about his father, because aside from the name, there is nothing whatsoever to suggest a Hall-class career. I don't like to dismiss anyone as "ballot filler" but there's no other worthwhile conclusion here.
Chipmaker's vote: No.
Prediction: either zero or one vote, and relegated.
25. Alan Trammell
Years on ballot: 6.
Peak return: 17.7% (2006).
2007 return: 13.4%
Career: 20 seasons (1977-96) with the *Detroit Tigers.
Peak season: 1987 -- 109 runs, 205 hits, 34 doubles, 28 HR, 105 RBI, 21 stolen bases (against 2 caught steals), .343/.402/.551, 155 OPS+, 137 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1983, 1984, 1988, 1990, 1993.
Primary position: shortstop.
Honoraria and claims to fame: six All-Star selections, 1984 World Series MVP, four AL Gold Gloves for Shortstop, three AL Silver Sluggers for Shortstop. Member of the 1984 World Series champion Tigers.
Trammell no doubt was a very good player, but as a shortstop, he suffers in comparison to two of his contemporaries -- Ripken, who proved a big man could play short and was a better hitter, and Smith, who earned his nickname, The Wizard, for his sparkling defense. Trammell was more of a median, good at offense and defense but not as extreme as either of his HOFer peers, and so simply doesn't stand out. (Watch for Barry Larkin to run into this same scenario when he reaches the ballot in a few years.) Had as many below-league average seasons, offensively, as he did above-league average ones, though overall he ended up above. A nice peak for a shortstop, but not a brilliant one.
I'm torn, though from his ballot returns, the writers have not been. Trammell put up a very good career, but not a great one like the Hall seeks to honor. Servings of greatness leavened with equivalent amounts of mediocrity. Nothing here stands up and proclaims Hall-worthiness. I might change my mind next time, but for now, I go with the conservative, status-quo choice, and leave him out.
Chipmaker's vote: No.
Prediction: 19%, a new high, but not giving much hope to Tigers fans.
And that's it for the players on the writers ballot. A short summary will follow.
19. Dave Parker
Years on ballot: 11.
Peak return: 24.5% (1998).
2007 return: 11.4%
Career: 19 seasons (1973-91) with the *Pittsburgh Pirates, Cincinnati Reds, Oakland Athletics, Milwaukee Brewers, California Angels, and Toronto Blue Jays.
Peak season: 1978 -- 102 runs, 194 hits, 32 doubles, 12 triples, 30 HR, 117 RBI, 20 stolen bases, .334/.394/.585, 166 OPS+, 134 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1975, 1977, 1979, 1985.
Primary position: right field, though he finished up (3 1/2 seasons) as a designated hitter.
Honoraria and claims to fame: seven All-Star selections (four starts), 1978 NL MVP, 1979 All-Star Game MVP, three NL Gold Gloves for Outfield, three Silver Sluggers (two NL for Outfield, one AL for DH), two NL batting championships, led the NL in slugging twice, hits once, RBI once. Member of two World Series champions, the 1979 Pirates and the 1989 Athletics.
Parker's peak was fantastic, but it was over quickly -- he fell off a cliff between 1979 and 1980, and except for one resurgent season (1985) never saw those heady heights again. Maybe it was the cocaine, which Parker was known to have a problem with at the time. The Cobra was, for those late-70s seasons, a stunningly powerful hitter, and if he deprived us the fans of seeing all he could have done because of drug abuse, well, I'm not very sympathetic. Bad choices can have bad consequences.
Parker is one of the few players, perhaps the only player, to win an All-Star Game MVP because of his defense. He made two brilliant throws from deep right field in 1979, nailing Rice at third trying to stretch a double, and Downing at home, who would have scored the go-ahead run. A sterling performance, but one game does not make a career Hall-class.
Very good fielder and, for a short time, a fantastic hitter. But the last 2/3 of his career was league average; when we should have been blown away, he blew it.
Utterly irrelevant to his Hall candidacy, but I've always loved this Sports Illustrated cover, the 09-April-1979 issue, with the defending MVPs standing back to back. Rice is a big guy, 6'2", and the way he is looking up at Parker was, to me, an indelible image. Rice is big, but Parker is huge.
Chipmaker's vote: No.
Prediction: 15%, but he's going nowhere.
20. Tim Raines
Writers ballot rookie.
Career: 23 seasons (1979-99, 2001-02) with the *Montréal Expos, Chicago White Sox, New York Yankees, Oakland Athletics, Baltimore Orioles, and Florida Marlins.
Peak season: 1987 -- 123 runs, 175 hits, 34 doubles, 18 HR, 68 RBI, 50 stolen bases (against five caught steals!), 90 walks, .330/.429/.526, 149 OPS+, 132 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1984, 1985, 1986, 1989, 1993.
Primary position: left field. Leadoff hitter.
Honoraria and claims to fame: seven All-Star selections (two starts), 1987 All-Star Game MVP, one NL Silver Slugger for Outfield, one NL batting championship, led NL in on-base percentage once, runs twice, stolen bases four times. Career 84.7% stolen base success rate is the highest for anyone with 300+ SB; 808 career SB ranks fifth all-time, with no one threatening passing any time soon. One of only two fathers to play alongside his son in a major league game (the other being Ken Griffey, Sr., and I'm not yet counting out Roger Clemens doing it). Member of the 1996 and 1998 World Series champion Yankees. Jersey #30 retired by the Expos.
Bonus baseball points: Raines was a coach for the 2005 World Series champion White Sox. There's only so much credit one can appoint to a coach, but he was there.
Esoteric baseball bonus points: Raines was the last active player (thanks to grandfathering players active before 1983) to wear a batting helmet without the ear flap. (Yes, Julio Franco is still active, but he has always worn flap-style helmets.)
Rock was one of the most brilliant leadoff men in baseball history, though it's hard to appreciate that since he played exactly contemporary with the greatest leadoff man in history, Rickey Henderson. His peak was masterful, and realize that his 1987 season didn't begin until May 2, since the Collusion conspiracy prevented him from signing elsewhere, and the silly re-signing regulations prevented him from returning to the Expos until May. But when he did, he picked right up and stormed the NL all season (Raines played 139 games). He had a long, slow decline, being a useful player for the rest of his career and an above-league average one for all but two seasons, one when he was suffering from lupus (and missed the next season altogether) and his last, tired gasp in Miami. Raines played like 93% of Henderson his entire career, and that definitely deserves the eternal bronze plaque.
Besides, Rock and Dawson are the last chances for an Expos cap logo to adorn a plaque.
Chipmaker's vote: Yes! And proud to cast it.
Prediction: Raines is a tough candidate to forecast. Some writers will like him, others will not (there's usually a small "never on the first ballot, never unanimous" faction), still others simply won't yet have seen the light. I think he gets elected eventually, but not this year, so I'll go with 35%, and I truly hope I've aimed low.
21. Jim Rice
Years on ballot: 13.
Peak return: 64.8% (2006).
2007 return: 63.5%
Career: 16 seasons (1974-89) with the *Boston Red Sox.
Peak season: 1978 -- 121 runs, 213 hits, 25 doubles, 15 triples (!), 46 HR, 139 RBI, .315/.370/.600, 406 total bases, 157 OPS+, 147 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1977, 1979, 1983, 1986.
Primary position: left field. Those who claim he DH'd a lot should know that he was a primary DH in only four seasons -- his little cuppa coffee in 1974; 1977, when he was injured; 1988, his last full season, and badly faded; and 1989, his last year, when he played only 56 games, or 1/3 of a season. He wasn't a great fielder -- league average, mainly -- but he was legitimately a fielder, playing LF for 3/4 of his career games.
Honoraria and claims to fame: eight All-Star selections (four starts), 1978 AL MVP, two AL Silver Sluggers for Outfield, led the AL in slugging twice, home runs three times, RBI twice, games played once (1978, the full 163 including the playoff game, still the AL record).
Rice had a great peak and fully deserved that MVP Award. In some ways it's not fair what happened to him -- the fast fade after age 33; the injury that kept him out of the 1975 postseason (what would the World Series have been like with Rice swinging away?); having to play one of the toughest fields in the majors, left in Fenway; following a Hall-class act, Yaz, who had his own Hall-class act to follow, Williams, so there was a tradition to uphold; that he was a shy, soft-spoken, black southern man in a very, even notoriously, white, northern city. No matter how much his bat said, the media wanted more.
I'm a Red Sox fan, and for all that Rice delivered, I still see more above-average to good performances (nice to have, certainly) than Hall-class great ones. Had he a longer, more graceful cruise to retirement; had the 1981 season been played in full; had he finished the 1975 season healthily... such what-ifs tantalize, but no credit can be given for things not done. Rice had a great peak and a good career, but it falls short for me.
Chipmaker's vote: No, and I'm not happy about it, but it is honest.
Prediction: with only two ballots left, Rice surpasses 70%, leaving a huge cliffhanger for the December 2008 ballot. Look for the Summer 2008 bestseller, Rice For The Hall?, co-written by Willie Makit and Betty Wont. (This is, yes, a very bad pun.) If the writers elect him, I will consider that a happy day, a plaque not only earned on the diamond, but also with agony throughout the electoral process.
22. Jose Rijo
Years on ballot: 1.
Peak return: 0.2% (2001).
Career: 14 seasons (1984-95, 2001-02) with the New York Yankees, Oakland Athletics, and *Cincinnati Reds.
Peak season: 1993 -- 14-9, 2.48, 227 K, 163 ERA+. And he hit a home run, one of only two in his career.
Other outstanding seasons: 1988, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1994.
Primary position: RH starting pitcher.
Honoraria and claims to fame: one All-Star selection. 1990 World Series MVP for an absolutely brilliant performance. Led NL in winning percentage once,WHIP once, strikeouts once. Member of the 1990 World Series champion Reds.
Rijo is an odd case. After he last played in the majors in 1995, he qualified and was selected for the December 2000 (2001 Induction) writers ballot, where he received one vote. He then made a comeback for two seasons, which has reset his Hall eligibility. Whether he is allowed another 14 years, counting off his one previous ballot appearance, or the full 15 restarted, is not to my knowledge a resolved question, but it is certainly an irrelevant one. Those two additional seasons were nothing to change more than a handful of opinions, if any. To his credit, he was absolutely masterful in the 1990 World Series against a frightfully strong Athletics team, and he sat them down with authority, allowing one run and nine hits in 15.1 innings as the Reds stunningly swept to the championship.
But we've already seen his Hall ballot destiny -- relegation, again.
Chipmaker's vote: No.
Prediction: two votes; relegation redux.
23. Lee Smith
Years on ballot: 5.
Peak return: 45.0% (2006).
2007 return: 39.8%
Career: 18 seasons (1980-97) with the *Chicago Cubs, Boston Red Sox, St. Louis Cardinals, New York Yankees, Baltimore Orioles, California Angels, Cincinnati Reds, and Montréal Expos.
Peak season: 1991 -- 6-3, 47 saves, 2.34, 67 K (to 13 walks), 157 ERA+.
Other outstanding seasons: 1982, 1983, 1987, 1988, 1990, 1994.
Primary position: RH relief pitcher / closer.
Honoraria and claims to fame: seven All-Star selections, three Rolaids Relief Awards (two NL, one AL), led NL in saves three times and AL once. Held the career record for saves from 1993, when he passed Reardon, to 2006, when Hoffman surpassed him, and Smith is still second all-time.
Smith was great fun to watch. When he trundled out of the bullpen and ambled toward the mound, he always gave the impression that he'd just woken up from a relaxing nap. He entered the game at his own lazy pace, but on the mound he was all business. He'd pound in that monster fastball, strike out a few guys, get his outs, end the game, and amble off toward the dugout.
And yet, he bounced around a lot, and it's not certain why this was. He didn't lose his stuff until his last, partial season with the Expos, though he'd lost his closer job the year before. Sometimes a reliever is just that bit more valuable as a trading chit than as an in-game pitcher, though some of the talent he was traded for suggests that his present team never valued him appropriately highly. He did his job and did it very well for a long time, in a role that is notorious for burning out even the best and toughest. Smith endured and excelled, and for that, he held the career record for well over a decade.
Coming off their 1986 AL championship and heartbreaking World Series, the 1987 Red Sox seemed brimming with promise, but it quickly fell apart. One reason -- there were many -- was the terrible bullpen. They picked up only 16 saves all season. The entire 1987 season was painful, outside of Clemens' starts. So when Smith was picked up over the winter, there was rejoicing; no longer would games be blown! I was in the Fenway bleachers that rainy Opening Day 1988, and when the relievers strolled out to the bullpen before the game, we gave Lee Arthur a standing ovation. He tipped his cap -- and later blew the game by serving up a tenth-inning HR to Alan Trammell, but we didn't care that much. Boston had a real, ace closer again, and (after that day) he delivered.
For all that, I'm not a big Smith proponent for the Hall. I could see him getting in, and the writers are sort-of leaning toward that someday, but right now there are better relievers (hint: Goose) waiting ahead of him. All good men in turn, I suppose. Right now, I let him wait, but with strong hopes.
Chipmaker's vote: No.
Prediction: 45%, but after Gossage gets in this time, he takes a bigger leap next year.
24. Todd Stottlemyre
Writers ballot rookie.
Career: 14 seasons (1988-2000, 2002) with the *Toronto Blue Jays, Oakland Athletics, St. Louis Cardinals, Texas Rangers, and Arizona Diamondbacks.
Peak season: 1991 -- 15-8, 3.78, 116 K, 112 ERA+.
Other outstanding seasons: 1998. It's pretty slim pickings, fans.
Primary position: RH starting pitcher.
Honoraria and claims to fame: Member of the 1992-93 World Series champion Blue Jays. Technically a member of the 2001 World Series champion Diamondbacks, but he was injured and on the DL the entire season. Son of Mel Stottlemyre.
sigh. I try to find positive things about everyone on the Hall ballot, and for most candidates that's pretty easy (and for some, the raft of accomplishments and honors needs to be edited judiciously). These men played the great game at the highest level; they were, at the minimum, good.
Todd Stottlemyre throws a huge wrench into that approach. The best -- really, the best -- that can be said about him is that he pitched pretty good innings totals. A team needs about 1400 IP a year, someone's gotta throw them, and Stottlemyre was good for 150-200 for the bulk of his seasons. Not especially good innings, mind you, but he'd get the outs eventually.
I cannot imagine what one or more nominators were thinking when they offered up this name, unless they were thinking more about his father, because aside from the name, there is nothing whatsoever to suggest a Hall-class career. I don't like to dismiss anyone as "ballot filler" but there's no other worthwhile conclusion here.
Chipmaker's vote: No.
Prediction: either zero or one vote, and relegated.
25. Alan Trammell
Years on ballot: 6.
Peak return: 17.7% (2006).
2007 return: 13.4%
Career: 20 seasons (1977-96) with the *Detroit Tigers.
Peak season: 1987 -- 109 runs, 205 hits, 34 doubles, 28 HR, 105 RBI, 21 stolen bases (against 2 caught steals), .343/.402/.551, 155 OPS+, 137 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1983, 1984, 1988, 1990, 1993.
Primary position: shortstop.
Honoraria and claims to fame: six All-Star selections, 1984 World Series MVP, four AL Gold Gloves for Shortstop, three AL Silver Sluggers for Shortstop. Member of the 1984 World Series champion Tigers.
Trammell no doubt was a very good player, but as a shortstop, he suffers in comparison to two of his contemporaries -- Ripken, who proved a big man could play short and was a better hitter, and Smith, who earned his nickname, The Wizard, for his sparkling defense. Trammell was more of a median, good at offense and defense but not as extreme as either of his HOFer peers, and so simply doesn't stand out. (Watch for Barry Larkin to run into this same scenario when he reaches the ballot in a few years.) Had as many below-league average seasons, offensively, as he did above-league average ones, though overall he ended up above. A nice peak for a shortstop, but not a brilliant one.
I'm torn, though from his ballot returns, the writers have not been. Trammell put up a very good career, but not a great one like the Hall seeks to honor. Servings of greatness leavened with equivalent amounts of mediocrity. Nothing here stands up and proclaims Hall-worthiness. I might change my mind next time, but for now, I go with the conservative, status-quo choice, and leave him out.
Chipmaker's vote: No.
Prediction: 19%, a new high, but not giving much hope to Tigers fans.
And that's it for the players on the writers ballot. A short summary will follow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
