And so this was Christmas, 2008

When I was growing up, my family had a tradition of sorts, more like an appeasement really, that the kids got to open one gift on Christmas Eve. I've been amenable to continuing that with my kids, and Val has gone along with it so far. But this past 24th, Carson crashed around 7:30 pm and stayed asleep (which was amazing -- he stayed down over 12 hours), so neither he nor Amalie opened anything on Christmas Eve. (It wouldn't have been fair to let just Amie open a gift, but honestly, we simply forgot about it once Carson went down.)

The wrapping, it was finished, at last. I did miss one gift, but with the birthdays coming up in January and February, it won't stay stashed for long.

I woke up early, like I always do -- and was making an earnest effort to go back to sleep for a while, but then Amalie wandered in, and there was no chance at faking somnolence for another hour or so. Carson followed soon after, and we were all on our feet a little after 8 am. The coffee was put on, and Val was ready to make breakfast at the start, but the kids could not be denied, so we went for the stockings first.

Amalie has her own stocking -- two of them, really, though only one was packed -- which I hand-labeled for one of her first Christmases. So she knows which one to pull down. Valerie has a hand-labeled one, as well, but she was content to wait.

Carson doesn't have his own, personal stocking -- or didn't until now. A new stocking was hung by the chimney with care, bedecked with pictures of Lightning McQueen. Carson immediately determined that this was his stocking, and a few Hot Wheels cars inside proved it beyond all doubt.

The first two cars of many. Note supercool Lightning McQueen stocking.

The kids ripped through their stockings and small, adjacent stockpiles of gifts, and then decided Mommy and Daddy had to open theirs as well. Coffee brewed and at the ready, Amie handed Val her stocking, then took the last loaded one and gave it to me. Carson was concerned -- it didn't have my name on it, so maybe it should be for him! No, I said, we each get one, and this one was for me. He wasn't sure, and observed me closely in case sanctions needed to be imposed for ransacking someone else's stocking.

I assured him it was for me, and pulled out the first item -- a chocolate bar. Proof of nothing, really, as everyone got some chocolate. Then I extracted a gold pouch and proclaimed it -- coffee! Carson glowered, took it from me, and no-look passed it to Val, known to all as the fondest coffee-drinker in the household. Now look, I told the boy, this is my stocking, and I can get coffee! Carson still wasn't sure it wasn't meant to be for him, but I (a) pointed out there were no cars within, and (b) pulled out several packs of baseball cards. That did it; Carson resigned that it was indeed Daddy's stocking and I wasn't stealing it from him. I shook out all the packs from my stocking, and that was that. Val then upended her stocking, and let the kids open everything but the last gift, which turned out to be her annual Iditarod medallion.

And then a pause for semi-organized breakfast. Val whipped up scrambled eggs, bacon (from a gift pack from her parents), and toast. I poured up more coffee and got juice for the kids, and we crowned the feast with a tiny snack loaf that also came in the breakfast gift pack. Ten minutes later, everyone had eaten what they were going to eat, and we cleared plates and closed in on the tree and its hoard.

We got a Noble Pine this year, again, picked up from the local Lowe's -- we have given up on living trees since the three replanted in the yard died off (there's still one, more recent, left). This way the tree either gets recycled by the city or tossed onto our big compost, and all is well. The pine this year was amazingly aromatic -- the front room smelled wonderful for weeks (it is fading at last). Strangely, the tree drank very little water, and so has dried out and dropped needles badly, and the branches are even drooping in some parts (not to worry, the lights are cool LEDs, fire risk negligible). I cannot recall the last time I had a tree that didn't make it at least to the new year, but this one will not. Oh well. It served us well, and guarded the kids' Christmas treasures proudly.

Amalie took the point, picking and distributing gifts, as she is the newest reader in the house. Carson did his best, making a game effort to look for the capital "C", but I had to point out that not every gift was to him, as some were from him, so the "C" alone didn't mean a particular gift was for him -- but he was right more often than not. Huge drifts of torn paper and bows piled up, the kids exulted with each new toy or game or book or movie discovered, Val scored books and movies, I got a spice rack (very nice). Val had a moment of trepidation when, unwrapped, she found a pink Victoria's Secret box -- which contained but a pair of pajamas, nice and warm but not remotely risque. Hey, I know my wife.

I inspect the spice rack while Amie uses some of the packing material to angelic effect.

The scorecard? Each kid got a scooter. Carson got fleets of toy cars, two radio-controlled big cars (one that turns into a robot), a bumper cars game (which is painfully loud; electronic toys should always, always have volume control), a few Pixar Cars books, some clothes, a hat and gloves, some sport balls, a door-mounted rack to hold over 100 toy cars, and his own Rubik's Cube; boy stuff. Amie got books, clothes, games, a Barbie from Carson, her own manicure kit, a digital camera (pink, of course); girl stuff. Val got a nice pullover sweatshirt, a Taos tee shirt, the pajamas, shoes and socks (hand selected; her right foot has really been bothering her lately), books, a steering wheel cover suspiciously similar to the one I got last year, and a Willows statuette of a man and woman (nicely complementing the ones she got a year ago, a mommy and daughter and mommy and little boy). Mommy stuff. Me, I got the spice rack, a shower seat (I was certain I was going to get that), some books, a robe, pair of jeans, a GPS from my folks (cool!), and a toy wind-up buffalo. Dad stuff. And everyone got some movies.

Test drives.

We did it. I love Christmas, but am glad it comes around only once a year, because it can be so exhausting.

Still only Christmas Eve

O, the holidays are a great, muzzy miasma.

The day began with the usual flood of spam email -- but one from Sears actually got me to look at it twice. "Shop The After Christmas Sale -- Starts Christmas Eve At Noon". What? Now, this is just another clear sign how bad the economy is, but the dissonance makes one goggle. They didn't even have the decency to call it the Pre-After-Christmas Sale.

Had one errand run to make today, a quick grocery run. At the local supermarket, crowded though I've seen it worse, the endcaps -- the best, most visible ones, right by the checkouts -- were already re-stocked with New Year's Eve merchandise. Okay, I can understand that, get a leg up on necessary work that doesn't need to wait until the 26th. Even the cold case had switched from egg nog to sparkling wines. But in my shopping, I noticed the holiday stock aisle was now only half-Christmas -- and half Valentine's Day! Oh now come on, that's jumping a bit too far. Let the calendar roll over at least.

Home, the wrapping awaited. I slogged on through it, finishing in mid-evening, with one excursion to get more gift tags -- a minor last-minute crisis, as last-minute holiday crises go. The last items wrapped and stashed or stuffed under the tree, I cleaned up, folded camoflage blankets, piled up the rolls of paper -- whew, always good to be finished, and much better than finishing (or giving up) around 6:00 am on the 25th, which was the status a few years ago (that was miserable, though the day got a lot better). Oh heck, one last gift, unearthed from a near-forgotten cache -- but no matter, it is small. That's the last thing I have yet to do.

Amie wanted to make cookies for the jolly ol' elf, so we did, chocolate-peppermint style. We took the standard Toll House recipe off the back of a bag of Nestle's semi-sweet chips, added 3/4 cup of cocoa, and switched peppermint bits for the chips. They came out quite good.

Carson zonked out early, we don't know if he'll stay down or not. Val has been in one of her cleaning dervish modes, during which I just step back and take the occasional order. The house is delightfully clean and organized; she really overdoes it, but no complaints. Carson's room alone was a Herculean feat to clean. Amie will be off to bed soon.

I gotta wrap one, little gift. And then a midnight ride.

Merry Christmas, y'all.

Joy

A little girl, six approaching seven, after school lets out on a December Friday, running down a wooded hillside, generally toward the parked car but to nothing in particular, arms spread wide, proclaiming "airplane!", blonde hair streaming, full speed.

Watching this fills me with pride and joy.

The Veterans Committee Post-1942 Players Electorate

The results of the latest Baseball Hall Of Fame Veterans Committee ballots was announced on Monday, and no one was elected from the post-1942 players ballot. Ron Santo, once again, was the top vote getter, with a promisingly high percentage but short of election.

Who votes on this ballot, anyway?

After the 2007 VC ballots (one for former players, one for non-players) elected no one for the third consecutive voting cycle, the Hall revamped the Veterans Committee. The VC's purview was divided into four ballots. Three of these -- managers & umpires, executives, and pre-1943 players -- are voted on by different selected committees of 12 or 16 individuals, some of whom are HOFers, others associated with baseball (writers, executives, historians...). The fourth ballot addresses players who debuted in 1943 or later, and this ballot has by far the largest electorate -- the living Hall Of Fame honorees. This year, the population is 64, almost completely former players.

Standing before an electorate almost entirely composed of his peers -- fellow players -- Santo still fell short.

Here's Santo's VC returns since the 2003 revamp (as always, 75% is necessary for election; no one was elected during the 2003, 2005, or 2007 voting cycles), and remember that the 2009 electorate is constituted differently (though largely similar):

year -- votes (of ballots) -- percentage -- rank
2003 -- 46 (of 81) -- 56.8% -- #3 (behind Hodges & Oliva)
2005 -- 52 (of 80) -- 65.0% -- #1 (tied with Hodges)
2007 -- 57 (of 82) -- 69.5% -- #1
2009 -- 39 (of 64) -- 60.9% -- #1

Wow. Santo lost 18 votes in 18 fewer ballots. That's a tough pill to swallow. (Note, I recognize that other candidates on this VC ballot have their vocal proponents. I'm using Santo as my case study because (a) he's the one I do support and (b) he's been the top finisher for three straight ballots. But I'll talk about other candidates in due course, particularly Hodges. I won't discuss Torre because I consider him best served when he gets someday placed on the managers ballot, which he will, and from which he probably will be quickly elected. And deserve it.)

So, who are these electors? First, the 2007 VC college, which was composed of four groups:
1. Living Hall Of Fame Honorees -- Hank Aaron, Sparky Anderson, Luis Aparicio, Ernie Banks, Johnny Bench, Yogi Berra, Wade Boggs, George Brett, Lou Brock, Jim Bunning, Rod Carew, Steve Carlton, Gary Carter, Orlando Cepeda, Bobby Doerr, Dennis Eckersley, Bob Feller, Rollie Fingers, Carlton Fisk, Whitey Ford, Bob Gibson, Monte Irvin, Reggie Jackson, Fergie Jenkins, Al Kaline, George Kell, Harmon Killebrew, Ralph Kiner, Sandy Koufax, Tommy Lasorda, Lee MacPhail, Juan Marichal, Willie Mays, Bill Mazeroski, Willie McCovey, Paul Molitor, Joe Morgan, Eddie Murray, Stan Musial, Phil Niekro, Jim Palmer, Tony Perez, Gaylord Perry, Phil Rizzuto, Robin Roberts, Brooks Robinson, Frank Robinson, Nolan Ryan, Ryne Sandberg, Mike Schmidt, Red Schoendienst, Tom Seaver, Ozzie Smith, Duke Snider, Bruce Sutter, Don Sutton, Earl Weaver, Billy Williams, Dave Winfield, Carl Yastrzemski, Robin Yount (61).
2. Living Ford C. Frick Award winners (for announcing excellence) -- Marty Brennaman, Jerry Coleman, Herb Carneal, Gene Elston, Joe Garagiola, Ernie Harwell, Milo Hamilton, Jamie Jarrin, Harry Kalas, Felo Ramirez, Vin Scully, Lon Simmons, Bob Uecker, Bob Wolff (14).
3. Living J. G. Taylor Spink Award winners (for baseball writing excellence) -- Murray Chass, Charley Feeney, Peter Gammons, Jerome Holtzman, Jack Lang, Hal McCoy, Ross Newhan, Tracy Ringoslby (8).
4. Members of the pre-2003 VC whose term had not expired -- John McHale (1).

That's a total of 84 voters, and in 2007, 82 ballots were returned (we don't know who did not vote). Of the 82 who voted, 57 supported Santo. There were 27 candidates on the ballot, which had no time restrictions for qualification.

Of the 61 HOFers, 57 were former players, three were managers (Anderson, Lasorda, and Weaver, though Sparky and Tommy had been major league players briefly), and one was an executive (MacPhail). Among the 14 announcers, three had also been players (Coleman, Garagiola, Uecker). And for good measure, McHale had been a player as well, back in the 1940s. Of 84 electors, 63 were former major league players (although that distinction is not what got all of them into the electorate). If all 84 had voted, 63 votes would have granted the 75% needed for election to the Hall.

Moving to the 2009 electorate, McHale's term had expired (immediately after the 2007 vote), and the Frick and Spink Award winners had lost the voting franchise, so that accounts for -23 voters immediately. Among the HOFers, Rizzuto had died, and four new living members had been elected -- Goose Gossage, Tony Gwynn, Cal Ripken, and Dick Williams (as a manager, but he also was a player for a while). A total of 24 votes removed and four added, a net of -20 and a final count of 64 -- of which 62 were, most primarily but each at least to some degree, former major league players.

And Santo lost 18 votes in the process. It was worse for Hodges -- he lost 22 votes.

Wow. Did the writers and announcers in the 2007 election account for that much of the support behind Santo and Hodges?

Or did many of the voters in both elections change their votes, deny Santo their support this time? That's actually quite fair, but that sort of inconsistency is annoying. (Or, some voters may simply have forgotten how they voted in 2007. It happens.)

I cannot explain it, other than that some of the voters who cast ballots in both elections changed their votes against Santo. It's either that, or he had near-unanimous support amongst the bloc of voters who were removed -- possible, sure, but the less likely option, it seems to me. Occam's razor.

Note also that the ballot was much smaller, 10 candidates on the 2009 ballot versus 27 on the 2007 ballot. Voters in 2009 were limited to four votes maximum, but still, the smaller ballot should have concentrated votes. But not so; Santo's percentage dropped along with his raw vote total.

The electorate had a net turnover of -20. A total of 24 voters were removed -- the writers, the announcers, Rizzuto, and McHale -- and four were added -- Gossage, Gwynn, Ripken, and Williams.

And Santo lost 18 votes. And Hodges lost 22!

I can accept that the living HOFers are exclusionary, tight-fisted elitists who don't want to expand the Hall's roster and dilute (however slightly) the honor they hold, and hold dearly. But that's not universally true -- Santo got 39 votes, a majority. Kaat and Oliva also got majorities. Most of the votes were cast (213 of a possible 256). There simply was insufficient agreement, despite (a) the smaller ballot and (b) the more concentrated, peer-biased electorate.

It's not a new thought, but there is really little reason to think that the living HOFers are a particularly well-chosen or well-qualified electorate. It's a feel-good method, but given the obvious consensus reluctance to open the doors to anyone else, it might be in the Hall's broader interests to dump this particular VC subcommittee. A committee that elects no one, and does this consistently, is serving the same purpose as having no committee at all, and having no committee is the easier and more economical option.

Further, if this committee will not elect Santo (or Hodges), then there likely is no potential candidate qualified for the post-1942 ballot who could be elected. From this I draw three possible next actions -- drop the electorate constituting this committee; drop this ballot category; or drop candidates from future consideration. The Hall loathes ever taking this last choice, and probably isn't going to do anything, certainly not soon (this VC format is still quite young), about the first two.

So we're stuck with this state of affairs for now -- a post-1942 ballot classification, a stingy and/or fractured electorate, and a likely repeat of this apparently pointless exercise in late 2010.

Some electors, almost certainly more than one, changed their minds between the 2007 ballot and the 2009 ballot. And I wonder why.

Rob Neyer has similar thoughts.

The Hall's 2009 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 2009 Writers Ballot
Candidates Part 1 -- Baines, Bell, Blyleven, Cone, Dawson, Gant, Grace, Henderson.
Candidates Part 2 -- John, Mattingly, McGwire, Morris, Murphy, Orosco, Parker, Plesac.
Candidates Part 3 -- Raines, Rice, Smith, Trammell, Greg Vaughn, Mo Vaughn, Williams.

Chipmaker's votes: Blyleven, Henderson, McGwire, Murphy, Raines, Rice.

Predictions
Baines -- 3 votes above the 5% relegation cutoff.
Bell -- under 5%, relegated.
Blyleven -- over 70% but below the 75% election minimum.
Cone -- 15%
Dawson -- elected with 76%.
Gant -- under 5%, relegated.
Grace -- 18%.
Henderson -- elected with a scorching 93%.
John -- 30%, and his candidacy expires.
Mattingly -- 18%.
McGwire -- exactly 128 votes a third straight year.
Morris -- 45%.
Murphy -- 15%.
Orosco -- 10%.
Parker -- 15%.
Plesac -- under 5%, relegated.
Raines -- 35%, I hope I hope I hope.
Rice -- elected by a narrow margin, above 75% but below 80%.
Smith -- 51%.
Trammell -- 20%.
Greg Vaughn -- under 5%, relegated.
Mo Vaughn -- 7%.
Matt Williams -- 20%, but this is probably very high.

That's it, baseball fans. The writers ballot results will be announced Monday, January 12, probably at 2:00 pm Eastern. Check back then to see how it went.

The 2009 Hall Of Fame Veterans Committee Ballots -- The Results

The Hall today announced the results of the 2009 Veterans Committee ballots.

Congratulations to Joe Gordon, a worthy electee.

Pre-1943 ballot (9 of 12, 75%, needed for election)

rank candidate......votes..percentage

1. Joe Gordon* ...... 10 83.3% -- ELECTED
2. Allie Reynolds .... 8 66.7%
3. Wes Ferrell ....... 6 50.0%
4t. Mickey Vernon .... 5 41.7%
4t. Deacon White* .... 5 41.7%
6. Bucky Walters ..... 4 33.3%
7. Sherry Magee* ..... 3 25.0%
8t. Bill Dahlen ..... <3 ≤16.7%
8t. Carl Mays ....... <3 ≤16.7%
8t. Vern Stephens* .. <3 ≤16.7%

* Candidates for whom I would have voted.

Post-1942 ballot (48 of 64, 75%, needed for election)

rank candidate....votes..percentage

1. Ron Santo* ..... 39 60.9%
2. Jim Kaat ....... 38 59.4%
3. Tony Oliva ..... 33 51.6%
4. Gil Hodges ..... 28 43.8%
5. Joe Torre ...... 19 29.7%
6. Maury Wills .... 15 23.4%
7. Luis Tiant ..... 13 20.3%
8. Vada Pinson .... 12 18.8%
9. Al Oliver ....... 9 14.1%
10. Dick Allen* .... 7 10.9%

* Candidates for whom I would have voted.

Post-mortem.

I don't have a lot of argument with the pre-1943, olde-tymers ballot result. I strongly supported Gordon and am delighted to see him elected. I was in favor of White, Magee, and Stephens, but them missing out is no disappointment. (Though I really wonder what the deal with Stephens is. Apparently he was never on the BBWAA ballot, and this is the first time he's been placed on a VC ballot. And he got totally dismissed, finishing in the Hall's ambiguous "less than a quarter" category, which I suppose is used to prevent the embarrassment of a complete zero. He was a good player, but to get this badly trounced? Is this still lingering resentment for briefly jumping to the Mexican League? I do not get it.)

I am surprised Reynolds almost got elected, as he really wasn't good enough to be on the ballot. This is probably a practical example of the Yankees Effect, the notion that the pinstriped uniform confers greatness simply by being buttoned up. I disagree with that premise. But, he did not get elected, so let's move on.

Popular opinion on the Web is that Dahlen was the best candidate on the ballot. I don't see it, though I'm willing to be convinced. The electorate, however, clearly didn't believe it.

One thing that the Hall should consider is implementing some relegation mechanism, some method for keeping candidates with sufficiently low ballot returns from getting back into consideration for at least one cycle. Perhaps the guys in the "less than 3 votes" ghetto could be treated thusly, removing them from consideration for a while and opening slots for other potential candidates. There's just no point in recycling ballot deadwood too often.

Joe Gordon has been elected. I consider this a happy outcome. It proves that the system, although flawed, does work. So that's a good thing.

Moving on to the post-1942 ballot....

No one was elected, and while I agree with most of this, I am sorely disappointed (and am nowhere near alone) that Ron Santo did not make the cut. I'll have more to write about Santo and this particular electorate in a separate post.

As for the other nine candidates, I only supported Allen, who finished dead last -- and this didn't surprise me. He was never popular, and carries an enduring reputation as having been a serious troublemaker. That sort of aura is extemely difficult to disspell no matter how unworthy and unfair it may be.

The others, well, this is not exactly the same electorate which considered all of them (yes, all ten candidates were also on the 2007 VC ballot) just two years ago, but it is largely similar, and everyone did worse. Again, this is mostly a topic for a follow-on post, but here are the vote totals for each.

2007 VC election == 82 ballots
2009 VC election == 64 ballots

player, 2007 votes, 2009 votes, delta
Santo, 57, 39, -18
Kaat, 52, 38, -14
Oliva, 47, 33, -14
Hodges, 50, 28, -22
Torre, 26, 19, -7
Wills, 33, 15, -18
Tiant, 15, 13, -2
Pinson, 16, 12, -4
Oliver, 14, 9, -5
Allen, 11, 7, -4

Whoof. The electorate shrank from 84 (only 82 ballots were received in the 2007 player election) to 64. Santo lost 18 votes in a net reduction of 20 -- and Hodges lost 22! Again, I have more to say, but later.

And that's it. One new Hall honoree, and I consider Gordon most worthy.

The writers' ballot results will be announced on 12-January-2009.

The Hall's 2009 Writers Ballot -- The Player Candidates, part 3

Finishing off the ballot candidates.

17. Tim Raines (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 1.
Peak return: 24.3% (2008).
2008 return: 24.3%

Career: 23 seasons, 1979-99 & 2001-02 -- *Montréal Expos 1979-90 & 2001, Chicago White Sox 1991-95, New York Yankees 1996-98, Oakland Athletics 1999, Baltimore Orioles 2001, Florida Marlins 2002.
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 (and this, after missing all of April due to the collusion conspiracy).
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. Member of the 1996 and 1998 World Series champion Yankees. Jersey #30 retired by the Expos.

Esoteric baseball bonus points: Raines was the last active player to wear a batting helmet without the ear flap, and only the second man to play alongside his son (after the Griffey family).

Rock was an excellent leadoff man who had the awkward timing to play exactly concurrently with the greatest leadoff man in history, Rickey Henderson. Raines' peak was masterful, truly great.

Raines and Dawson are the last real chances for a Hall plaque to show off an Expos cap logo.

Chipmaker's vote: Yes!

Prediction: In hoping that his 2008 return was depressed in part due to a "not a first-ballot guy" notion, I say he bumps up to 35%. That would be pleasingly encouraging.


18. Jim Rice (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 14.
Peak return: 72.2% (2008).
2008 return: 72.2%

Career: 16 seasons, 1974-89 -- all 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. He did not play designated hitter as much as his detractors think, seeing majority playing time at DH in only four seasons -- his 1974 cuppa coffee; 1977, when he was injured; 1988, his last full season; and 1989, his final season, when he played only 56 games. He was a league average fielder -- 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, an AL-record 163).

Rice had a great peak. What happened to him almost seems unfair -- the rapid fade after age 33; the injury that kept him out of the 1975 postseason; 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 notoriously white, northern city. No matter how much his bat said, the media wanted more.

Like with Morris, fans can see the shining greatness if they want to see it. I see more above-average to very good seasons than Hall-class great ones in Rice's career. If he had had a longer, more graceful career tail to retirement; a full 1981 season; a healthy late-1975 season and postseason... but no, and no credit is given for things not done. Rice had a great peak and a good career. For me it has always fallen short -- but not this time.

The vast amounts written in both defense and denunciation of Rice's Hall candidacy come to an end this year; it is his 15th, and final, time on the BBWAA ballot. In 2008 he fell just short, 2.8 percentage points; ten votes would have unlocked the door. Well, enough, I think. That sort of tease needs consummation and closure this year. If Rice were to get a higher percentage and still fall short, that would be the most ungracious kick in the teeth the writers ever have delivered to a Hall candidate. And Rice doesn't deserve that. It's not rational, but enough is enough. Give him the votes. Give him the plaque. Let's finish this the good way, and move on. The Hall surely has lesser players upon its walls. It doesn't need Rice, and Rice doesn't need it, but I say let's have the happy ending.

Chipmaker's vote: Yes. This is my only vote I have changed among the 2008 holdover candidates, and I've done it for a narrative reason. Had the writers delivered a clearer message about Rice during his stay on the ballot -- kept him much lower, or not kept creeping up -- I'd probably still be against him. No longer. Let's get this one over with.

Prediction: Squeaks in, over 75% but below 80%.


19. Lee Smith (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 6.
Peak return: 45.0% (2006).
2008 return: 43.3%

Career: 18 seasons, 1980-97 -- *Chicago Cubs 1980-87, Boston Red Sox 1988-90, St. Louis Cardinals 1990-93, New York Yankees 1993, Baltimore Orioles 1994, California Angels 1995-96, Cincinnati Reds 1996, Montréal Expos 1997.
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 always looked like he had just woken up from a nice nap, and then he'd slam that fastball, get a few strikeouts, and end the game. He moved between teams a lot, and it's not clear why. He put up good numbers until his last season. Teams treated him as being a bit more valuable in trade than on the field, though the trade returns were never impressive. Many closers burn out quickly; Smith endured, and excelled.

I'm not a big Smith proponent for the Hall. Gossage got in last year, and that's a good sign for Smith, but I'm not ready for him.

Chipmaker's vote: No. But I'll vote for Smith before I vote for Orosco.

Prediction: After Gossage helped sharpen the Hall definition for closers, Smith will get an increase to 51%, and over half is very good.


20. Alan Trammell (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 7.
Peak return: 18.2% (2008).
2008 return: 18.2%

Career: 20 seasons, 1977-96 -- all 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 suffers due to two contemporary shortstops -- Ripken, who was a superior hitter, and Smith, who provided excellent (even legendary) defense. Trammell was good at hitting and good at defense but not as extreme as either of his peers, and so doesn't stand out. Some seasons he was well above league-average, others he was below.

I'm still torn. Trammell had a very good career, but not a great one.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: 20%.


21. Greg Vaughn

Writers ballot rookie.

Career: 15 seasons, 1989-2003 -- *Milwaukee Brewers 1989-96, San Diego Padres 1996-98, Cincinnati Reds 1999, Tampa Bay Devil Rays 2000-02, Colorado Rockies 2003.
Peak season: 1998 -- 50 HR, 119 RBI, .272/.363/.597, 112 runs, 156 hits, 28 doubles, 156 OPS+, 128 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1993, 1996.
Primary position: left field.
Honoraria and claims to fame: four All-Star selections, one NL Silver Slugger for outfield.

Vaughn was a good outfielder but not the sort that could elevate a team to a championship. There is nothing rare nor Hall-class about his career. Good slugging, corner outfielders are not too hard to find. Vaughn had a good career, but not a Hall-worthy, great one.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: With 1475 hits and a .242 career batting average, the writers won't show him much love. One and done, under 5%, relegated.


22. Mo Vaughn

Writers ballot rookie.

Career: 12 seasons, 1991-2000 & '02-03 -- *Boston Red Sox 1991-98, Anaheim Angels 1999-2000, New York Mets 2002-03.
Peak season: 1996 -- 44 HR, 143 RBI, .326/.420/.583, 118 runs, 207 hits, 29 doubles, 150 OPS+, 158 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1993, 1994, 1995, 1997, 1998.
Primary position: first base.
Honoraria and claims to fame: 1995 AL MVP, three All-Star selections (one start), one AL Silver Slugger for first base. Led AL in RBI once.

Mitchell report: claimed to have purchased human growth hormone.

Mo was a better hitter than his cousin Greg, and had six seasons that can be considered Hall-worthy from a hitting perspective. He was good defensively. Left Boston in a mess -- dodged a DUI ticket, bickered in the media, signed a huge deal with Anaheim, got injured on Opening Day, missed an entire season (which, coincidentally, I predicted, 13-November-1998*), and was essentially deadwood during his brief Mets tenure. Geez, that's a sloppy way to spend the second half of one's career.

* You can click through, but here's the money quote: "Should Vaughn sign with Anaheim, you'll enjoy two productive seasons (zero postseason appearances), followed by four increasingly poor years with at least one half-season DL stay, and end up praying for the end of the albatross that is the Vaughn contract. " I'd say I nailed it.

But all of that isn't completely germane to his Hall candidacy. Yes, he hit great for six seasons, but not historically great -- I look for OPS+ stats of 140 or higher, and Vaughn wasn't much higher -- and he had a short career. After Boston, he was much less a player, and ended up a train wreck. It just doesn't proclaim Hall worthiness to me, and I cannot support him.

For what it's worth, I'd have voted for Edgar Martinez for the 1995 AL MVP Award, and Albert Belle was a better choice too.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: Mo just avoids relegation with 7%, but I'm probably aiming high and he won't be back on the 2010 ballot.


23. Matt Williams

Writers ballot rookie.

Career: 17 seasons, 1987-2003 -- *San Francisco Giants 1987-96, Cleveland Indians 1997, Arizona Diamondbacks 1998-2003.
Peak season: 1994 -- 43 HR, 96 RBI, .267/.319/.607, 74 runs, 199 hits, 141 OPS+, 83 RC, in 112 games. This of course was a strike-shortened season, but if we project his numbers -- 43 HR, 483 plate appearances, 112 of 115 team games played -- he comes out very close to 61 home runs. And had he reached that, tied Maris or broken the record, how exciting would the McGwire-Sosa chase have been a mere four years later? Maris' mark was 37 years old; Williams' would have been only four, a show seen recently. Just something to think about.
Other outstanding seasons: 1991, 1993, 1995, 1996.
Primary position: third base.
Honoraria and claims to fame: five All-Star selections (three starts), four Gold Gloves (three NL, one AL) for third base, four Silver Sluggers (again three NL, one AL). Led NL in home runs once, RBI once. Member of the 2001 World Series champion Diamondbacks, and four other postseason teams.

Mitchell report: claimed to have purchased human growth hormone.

Williams was one of the premier third baseman in baseball during his career, a position which has produced fewer HOFers except designated hitter or relief pitcher (both of which are much newer roles; 3Bmen have been around forever). He had a couple of very good years (1995 was a half-season) but otherwise was around league average, and had some injury issues over the years. Williams couldn't take a walk -- his career high was 43 -- and that kept his OBP unpleasantly low. A good player at a tough position (one he played well), but not the sort around which to build a contender team outside of his very best seasons.

Completely irrelevant to his candidacy, but a touch of C-list celebrity always entertains: Williams was married to actress Michelle Johnson for a few years, and if you were a red-blooded male in the right age range to see Blame It On Rio in theaters, you'll always think fondly of Michelle Johnson. I do.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: Williams will get some respect for being good at the hot corner to the tune of 20%. I'm probably very high here. The Hall doesn't need him, but if he ends up getting elected ten years from now, I won't feel at all upset about it.


Summing up.

I support Blyleven, Henderson, McGwire, Murphy, Raines, and Rice for election. If I could vote for only one -- I couldn't. I gotta vote for Henderson, he's easy, and Blyleven, because he deserves it.

Results of the BBWAA ballot are scheduled to be announced on Monday, 12-January-2009, at 1:00 pm Central (because I live in that time zone; if you live elsewhere, do the math).

The Hall's 2009 Writers Ballot -- The Player Candidates, Part 2

Onward through the ballot.

9. Tommy John (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 14.
Peak return: 29.6% (2006).
2008 return: 29.1%

Career: 26 seasons, 1963-74 & '76-89 -- Cleveland Indians 1963-64, Chicago White Sox 1965-71, *Los Angeles Dodgers 1972-74 & '76-78, New York Yankees 1979-82 & '86-89, California Angels 1982-85, Oakland Athletics 1985.
Peak season: 1968 -- 10-5, 1.98, 117 K, 161 ERA+.
Other outstanding seasons: 1974, 1977, 1979, 1981. But his most important season was 1976, as no one ever expected him to pitch at all.
Primary position: LH starting pitcher.
Honoraria and claims to fame: four All-Star selections, three coming after 1975. Led the AL in shutouts three times, winning percentage once. First baseball player to undergo ligament replacement surgery, a procedure which now informally bears his name: Tommy John surgery.

John was a good pitcher for a very long time, but being best known as the answer to a trivia question is not what the Hall seeks to honor. John didn't have any great seasons (maybe 1968, but every pitcher rocked that year), and 26 seasons gave him ample opportunity to put up a few.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: last-ballot sympathy nets him 30%, and then it's on to the Veterans Committee.


10. Don Mattingly (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 8.
Peak return: 28.2% (2001).
2008 return: 15.8%

Career: 14 seasons, 1982-95 -- all with the *New York Yankees.
Peak season: 1986 -- 238 hits, 117 runs, 31 Hr, 113 RBI, 53 doubles, .352/.394/.573, 161 OPS+, 150 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1984, 1985, 1987.
Primary position: first base.
Honoraria and claims to fame: six All-Star selections (one start), 1985 AL MVP, nine AL Gold Gloves at First Base, three AL Silver Sluggers at First Base, 1984 AL batting champion, 1986 AL slugging champion, led AL in hits twice, doubles three times, RBI once. Set the major league single season record for grand slams with six in 1987 (and never hit another in his entire career). Tied the ML record for consecutive games with a home run, with eight. Tied the ML record for most putouts in a game, with 22. Jersey #23 retired by the Yankees.

Donnie Baseball was one of the few Yankees bright spots of the 1980s. Teammate Dave Winfield is in the Hall, and Rickey Henderson is going to storm the gates from this ballot. That's already lot of Hall-class talent from a team that never won its division. Mattingly was one of the hottest players in baseball in 1984-87, but he was league-average after the back injury, and a first baseman isn't going to earn the plaque that way.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: 18%, but that's noise in the signal, not the start of a seismic shift. Legends may grow but the player's career stays the same.


11. Mark McGwire (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 2.
Peak return: 23.6% (2008).
2008 return: 23.6%

Career: 16 seasons, 1986-2001 -- *Oakland Athletics 1986-97, St. Louis Cardinals 1997-2001.
Peak season: 1998 -- 130 runs, then-record 70 HR, 147 RBI, then-NL record 162 walks, .299/.470/.752, 216 OPS+, 193 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1987, 1990, 1992, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1999, and 2000 even though he played only 89 games.
Primary position: first base.
Honoraria and claims to fame: 12 All-Star selections (six starts), 1987 AL ROY, one AL Gold Glove at First Base, three Silver Sluggers at First Base (one AL, two NL), led his league in OBP twice, SLG four times, home runs four times, RBI once, walks twice. Rookie record 49 HR. Record 70 HR in 1998, since surpassed once. Member of the 1989 World Series champion Athletics. Member of the 500 Home Runs Club (583 career).

People dismissive of McGwire like to claim he was "one-dimensional", though if you ask them about this they never have a firm definition of what that means. What they really want to say is that they think he was a steroid-fueled, Godzilla-class slugger who had the mobility of a concrete block.

McGwire's name is all over the Mitchell Report, but all it really says about him is (a) McGwire used androstenedione, a then-legal and MLB-permitted steroidal precursor, and it was no secret, and (b) teammate Jose Canseco says he introduced Mac to 'roids, and was a user. Well, Joser's credibility is garbage no matter that he's been right sometimes. To the point, I do not at all care what anyone was using prior to the ban enacted in 2003. Baseball is a competitive enterprise that attracts competitive people, and they all love to gain an edge so they can play better and win more. I'm strict on things like rule-breaking, and prior to the ban there were no rules to break.

And we don't know what McGwire was using, if anything, besides androstenedione. Suspect, think, imagine, but not know. And that is an important distinction. The voting writers probably factor in their suspicions. I do not.

Chipmaker's vote: Yes.

Prediction: McGwire got the exact same vote total, 128, in both 2007 and 2008, so clearly the writers' embargo was not a one-time thing. He's probably going to get trashed again, so I'll predict, what the heck, he gets exactly 128 votes a third straight time, and that works out to whatever percentage it does. Unless Mac gets a significant increase, say +20 votes, he clearly will be doomed with only one hope -- that after Palmeiro gets demolished on the 2011 ballot, the writers will think they have at last shed enough blood. That's not at all a strong hope, but it's the only one out there -- unless new evidence (of anything) comes to light.


12. Jack Morris (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 9.
Peak return: 42.9% (2008).
2008 return: 42.9%

Career: 18 seasons, 1977-94 -- *Detroit Tigers 1977-90, Minnesota Twins 1991, Toronto Blue Jays 1992-93, Cleveland Indians 1994.
Peak season: 1986 -- 21-8, 15 CG, 6 ShO, 223 K, 3.27, 267 IP, 127 ERA+.
Other outstanding seasons: 1979, 1981, 1987, 1991, 1992.
Primary position: RH starting pitcher.
Honoraria and claims to fame: five All-Star selections (three starts), 1991 World Series MVP, led AL in wins twice, strikeouts once, shutouts once. Pitched a no-hitter in 1984. Member of three World Series champion teams, the 1984 Tigers, the 1991 Twins, and the 1992 Blue Jays. A good postseason pitcher, going 7-4, 3.80 in 13 games, 92.1 IP, with one legendary night.

Morris was a good pitcher, but he never delivered a great season. His ERA and WHIP never led the league, rarely in the top five. One game does not make a career Hall-worthy. The greatness is there if the viewer really, really wants to see it; I don't squint that hard.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: 45%. (If he cracks 50%, the tease will gain Tiger teeth.)


13. Dale Murphy (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 10.
Peak return: 23.2% (2000).
2008 return: 13.8%

Career: 18 seasons, 1976-93 -- *Atlanta Braves 1976-90, Philadelphia Phillies 1990-92, Colorado Rockies 1993.
Peak season: 1983 -- 131 runs, 36 HR, 121 RBI, 30 stolen bases, 90 walks, .302/.393/.540, 149 OPS+, 131 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1980, 1982, 1984, 1985, 1987.
Primary position: center field.
Honoraria and claims to fame: 1982 & 1983 NL MVPs, seven All-Star selections (five starts), five NL Gold Gloves for Outfield, four NL Silver Sluggers for Outfield, led NL in slugging twice, runs scored once, home runs twice, RBI twice. Jersey #3 retired by the Braves.

I consider Murf similar to Dawson -- he'd look good on a plaque, but the Hall is not wanting without him. I won't dispute any voter on how he views Murphy, I can go either way (and have), but I genuinely am stunned at how little consideration he gets when the returns are announced. Under 14% (and he slipped below 10% recently)? Ouch.

Chipmaker's vote: Yes. I supported him last year and I'll do so again, but clearly I'm in the minority opinion.

Prediction: climbs up to 15%, but is going nowhere.


14. Jesse Orosco

Writers ballot rookie.

Career: 24 seasons, 1979 & 1981-2003 -- *New York Mets 1979 & '81-87, Los Angeles Dodgers 1988 & 2001-02, Cleveland Indians 1989-91, Milwaukee Brewers 1992-94, Baltimore Orioles 1995-99, St. Louis Cardinals 2000, San Diego Padres 2003, New York Yankees 2003, Minnesota Twins 2003.
Peak season: 1983 -- 13-7, 17 saves, 110.0 IP, 84 K, 1.47, 247 ERA+, 1.036 WHIP.
Other outstanding seasons: 1982, 1984, 1986, 1989, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998.
Primary position: LH relief pitcher.
Honoraria and claims to fame: two All-Star selections, led AL in games pitched once. Member of the 1986 World Series champion Mets and three other postseason teams. Major league record for most games pitched (1252) and most games pitched in relief (1248 -- geez, why'd he ever start four?).

Orosco was used as a closer early in his career and racked up 100+ innings in 1982 and '83, but after leaving the Mets he shifted to a middle-inning LOOGY -- a lefty one-out guy, tasked with getting out one or two tough LH batters, and that'd be it. The last time Orosco pitched more innings than games was 1990 (though he came close in a few later seasons). Not a lot was asked of him (though what was asked of him, tended to be critical work), and he delivered more good than damaging performances. He picked up saves here and there, career total 144, but that's not a big part of his pitching credentials. Career ERA+ of 125 is very good. He retired at age 46, mostly just tired of the long slog of the season, but he could have kept going (though his last season wasn't very good).

No, teams wanted Jesse to get one, maybe two outs, and even with specialization being a real part of roster construction, I'm not sure today that being excellent in such a tightly defined role merits election to the Hall. The BBWAA electorate has only recently begun getting a worthwhile grasp on what makes a great closer; I'm certain they won't know what to do about a middle reliever (even though Orosco probably represents the best, strongest case for starting to build a Hall-worthiness framework), and right now I don't either. So I'm going to take the conservative, status-quo approach and vote No this time.

Chipmaker's vote: No. But I'll be quite willing to change this next year. This isn't very logical, no, but Orosco may have to pioneer for middle relievers, so bizarre, irrational, non-linear thinking is appropriate.

Prediction: No idea, so let's say 10%. I hope he gets enough to stay on the ballot.


15. Dave Parker (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 12.
Peak return: 24.5% (1998).
2008 return: 15.1%

Career: 19 seasons, 1973-91 -- *Pittsburgh Pirates 1973-83, Cincinnati Reds 1984-87, Oakland Athletics 1988-89, Milwaukee Brewers 1990, California Angels 1991, Toronto Blue Jays 1991.
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, finished as a designated hitter.
Honoraria and claims to fame: 1978 NL MVP, seven All-Star selections (four starts), 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.

Excellent peak but when it ended, it ended quickly, falling off a cliff instead of making a slow decline. Probably blown away by cocaine, though he had one last noteworthy season in him, 1985. I'm not sympathetic, and I do not give credit for things not done. Bad choices can have bad consequences. Parker should have put up more 1979-ish years.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: 15%, just dragging along until the 15 years are up.


16. Dan Plesac

Writers ballot rookie.

Career: 18 seasons, 1986-2003 -- *Milwaukee Brewers 1986-92, Chicago Cubs 1993-94, Pittsburgh Pirates 1995-96, Toronto Blue Jays 1997-99 & 2001-02, Arizona Diamondbacks 1999-2000, Philadelphia Phillies 2002-03.
Peak season: 1988 -- 1-2, 30 saves, 52.1 IP, 52 K, 2.31, 165 ERA+, 1.108 WHIP.
Other outstanding seasons: 1986, 1987, 1989, 2000.
Primary position: LH relief pitcher.
Honoraria and claims to fame: three All-Star selections. Sixth all-time in games pitched (1064), fourth when he retired.

Very similar to Orosco, really -- Plesac was used as a closer early in his career but soon moved to being a LOOGY, last pitching more innings than games in 1995. Recorded 158 career saves, with 124 coming in his first five seasons. I don't know what to add that I didn't already write about Orosco -- Plesac had an identical, tightly-defined job description, and did it pretty well. Orosco did it better, and I don't mind being hierarchical when two very similar candidates are on the ballot, particularly when they are both first-timers. If either is Hall-worthy, it would have to be Orosco, who was the somewhat better pitcher -- so he'd have to go first.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: Below 5%, and relegated. If the voters don't know what to do about Orosco, they're not going to give Plesac any bigger love.

Part 3 soon.

The Hall's 2009 Writers Ballot -- The Player Candidates, part 1

While we await the Veterans Committee ballots results on Monday, let's get to the BBWAA's 2009 ballot candidates, in the popular alphabetical order. There are 23 candidates, so three posts breaks it up well. Thirteen candidates are returning from last year's ballot, so I will have little to say about them, except in the one case where I have changed my vote. Links to career stats and previous reviews included.


1. Harold Baines (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 2.
Peak return: 5.3% (2007).
2008 return: 5.2%

Career: 22 seasons, 1980-2001 -- *Chicago White Sox 1980-89, '96-97, & 2000-01, Texas Rangers 1989-90, Oakland Athletics 1990-92, Baltimore Orioles 1993-95 & '97-2000, Cleveland Indians 1999.
Peak season: 1984 -- 29 HR (career high), 94 RBI, .304/.361/.541, 142 OPS+, 109 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1989, 1991, 1996.
Primary position: right field for seven seasons, then designated hitter.
Honoraria and claims to fame: six All-Star selections (one start), one Silver Slugger, led the AL in slugging average in 1984. Good postseason hitter (.324/.378/.510 in 31 G, 102 AB). Jersey #3 retired by the White Sox (while he still was an active player). His 1628 RBI currently grant Baines the title of "Most RBI Not In The Hall", a distinction which eventually got Tony Perez in.

Baines was good, but not great. As primarily a DH, he has negligible defensive value to support his candidacy; his hitting is all he's got, and while good, it's not Hall measure. He has twice now just dodged the relegation bullet, and the relatively weak ballot might let him skirt by one more time, but he's never going to adorn a plaque.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: Just escapes the cutoff, again, by +3 votes.


2. Jay Bell

Writers ballot rookie.

Career: 18 seasons, 1986-2003 -- Cleveland Indians 1986-88, *Pittsburgh Pirates 1989-96, Kansas City Royals 1997, Arizona Diamondbacks 1998-2002, New York Mets 2003.
Peak season: 1999 -- 38HR, 112 RBI, .289/.374/.557, 131 OPS+, 127 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1993. 1997.
Primary position: shortstop.
Honoraria and claims to fame: two All-Star selections (one start), one NL Gold Glove at shortstop, one NL Silver Slugger, led NL in sacrifices twice. Member of the 2001 World Series champion Diamondbacks, and four other postseason teams (1990-92 Pirates, 1999 D'backs).

A league-average hitter for the most of his career, Bell was also a very good fielder, which is important particularly at his position. His one superlative season came during the steroids era, and if he was a higher-profile candidate, there'd probably be a lot more noise about this. Good player, but his offense was not Hall class, and defense only gets a player in if there is some legendary component involved. And there's no legendry here.

This marks the first year wherein I've been consulting the Mitchell Report when considering new candidates. Jay Bell is not mentioned in it.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: This will be Bell's first and last ballot. Under 5%, and relegated.


3. Bert Blyleven (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 11.
Peak return: 61.9% (2008).
2008 return: 61.9%

Career: 22 seasons, 1970-90 & 1992 -- *Minnesota Twins 1970-76 & '85-88, Texas Rangers 1976-77, Pittsburgh Pirates 1978-80, Cleveland Indians 1981-85, California Angels 1989-90 & '92.
Peak season: 1973 -- 20-17, 2.52, 258 K, 158 ERA+.
Other outstanding seasons: 1974, 1977, 1984, 1989.
Primary position: RH starting pitcher.
Honoraria and claims to fame: Two All-Star selections, led AL in strikeouts once and shutouts three times. Fifth highest career strikeout total, third highest when he retired. 287 career wins (which, alas, is just short of 300). Member of two World Series champion teams, the 1979 Pirates and the 1987 Twins, and contributed well to both -- excellent postseason pitcher, 5-1, 2.47 in 8 games, 6 starts, 47.1 IP, 36 K, 8 BB.

The worthiest pitcher not in the Hall. Delivered a great deal of on-field value. Bert's 60 career shutouts ranks 4th, behind HOFers Spahn (63), Ryan (61), and Seaver (61), in the post-WWII era, so he's in good company.

Chipmaker's vote: YES!

Prediction: Surpasses 70% but falls short of election, thus entering the Promised Land in 2009 and the Hall proper in 2010.


4. David Cone

Writers ballot rookie.

Career: 17 seasons, 1986-2001 & 2003 -- Kansas City Royals 1986 & '93-94, New York Mets 1987-92 & 2003, Toronto Blue Jays 1992 & '95, *New York Yankees 1995-2000, Boston Red Sox 2001.
Peak season: 1994 -- 16-5, 2.94, 132 K, 170 ERA+.
Other outstanding seasons: 1988 (20-3), 1993, 1996, 1997, 1999.
Primary position: RH starting pitcher.
Honoraria and claims to fame: 1994 AL Cy Young Award, three other Top Five finishes, five All-Star selections, led AL in wins once, NL in winning percentage once, NL in strikeouts twice, and NL in shutouts once. Many other Top Five finishes in good stats in both leagues. Member of five World Series champions -- the 1992 Blue Jays and the 1996 & 1998-2000 Yankees -- and three other postseason teams. Two 20-win seasons. Pitched a perfect game in 1999, only the 16th in major league history.

An excellent pitcher (194-126, .606, 3.46, 120 ERA+, 2668 K, 1.256 WHIP), Cone could produce some brilliant games (crowned, of course, by his perfecto). It took him some years to find himself on the mound, and his best seasons benefited from some devastating offenses (and the 1994-95 strike probably robbed him of some peak stats, though he still took home the Cy Young). But outside of that trophy season, he was never the best -- he'd be among the leaders, but rarely lead, in purely pitcher stats. Cone was a valuable asset and an ideal starter to have in a winning rotation, but not quite Hall class.

Chipmaker's vote: No. I may change this in the future as more 1990s-era starters walk off the diamond and stand before the electorate.

Prediction: 15% -- stays on the ballot, but gives no indication if he'll stay in the low end or build momentum.


5. Andre Dawson (reviewed for the 2008 ballot)

Years on ballot: 7.
Peak return: 65.9% (2008).
2008 return: 65.9%

Career: 21 seasons, 1976-96 -- *Montréal Expos 1976-86, Chicago Cubs 1987-92, Boston Red Sox 1993-94, Florida Marlins 1995-96.
Peak season: 1981 -- 24 HR, 64 RBI, .302/.365/.553 in 103 games (the Expos played only 108 games in the strike-split season, which was the most of any NL East team), 157 OPS+, 83 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1980, 1983, 1987, 1988, 1990.
Primary position: center field early, right field later.
Honoraria and claims to fame: 1987 NL MVP, 1977 NL ROY, eight All-Star selections (seven starts, five at CF and two at RF), eight NL Gold Gloves for outfield, four NL Silver Sluggers for outfield, led NL in hits in 1983, home runs and RBI in 1987, and in hit-by-pitch four times (ouch!). Career 438 homers, 1591 RBI, 2774 hits. Jersey #10 retired by the Expos.

Dawson would look good on a plaque, but the Hall is not wanting for his absence. If elected, his .323 career OBP would be the lowest (by about 20 points) by a primary outfielder, which says a lot about how he played his game.

Chipmaker's vote: No. But I could go either way, really, and if he crosses 70% but falls short of election, I'll support him next year.

Prediction: Elected with 76%.


6. Ron Gant

Writers ballot rookie.

Career: 16 seasons, 1987-93 & '95-2003 -- *Atlanta Braves 1987-93, Cincinnati Reds 1995, St. Louis Cardinals 1996-98, Philadelphia Phillies 1999-2000, Anaheim Angels 2000, Colorado Rockies 2001, Oakland Athletics 2001 & '03, San Diego Padres 2002.
Peak season: 1990 -- 32 HR, 84 RBI, .303/.357/.539, 139 OPS+, 109 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1991, 1995, 1996, 2002.
Primary position: left field
Honoraria and claims to fame: two All-Star selections (one start), one NL Silver Slugger for outfield, member of six postseason teams.

A good outfielder but not a great one, Gant was a useful piece to have when he was healthy. He always seemed more talent than production, part of which was due to being on the Braves during the 1990s, when they ascended first to miracle status, then to perennial contenders, and seemed to have the magic touch of turning anyone in the Atlanta uniform into gold -- which was hype. Gant played 150+ games only four times (and 139+ only two other seasons), and missed the entire 1994 season with a leg injury -- health was often an issue with him. Good-hitting outfielders are not too hard to find, and many stay off the DL more than Gant did.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: one ballot and gone, under 5%, relegated.


7. Mark Grace

Writers ballot rookie.

Career: 16 seasons, 1988-2003 -- *Chicago Cubs 1988-2000, Arizona Diamondbacks 2001-03.
Peak season: 1995 -- 16 HR, 92 RBI, .326/.395/.516, 141 OPS+, 115 RC.
Other outstanding seasons: 1989, 1993, 1997, 1998.
Primary position: first base.
Honoraria and claims to fame: three All-Star selections (one start), four NL Gold Gloves at first base, led NL in doubles once and sacrifice flies once. Member of the 2001 World Series champion Diamondbacks, and three other postseason teams -- including two Cubs playoff teams, and there weren't many other guys since the 1930s who could claim that. Career .303 batting average. Most hits in the 1990s decade (1754), which I do not at all find significant, but this factoid is out there so readers will get annoyed if I don't include it.

Grace was a very good hitter who drew enough walks to maintain excellent on-base percentages. He was an excellent defensive player, but at the least-demanding defensive position. And he didn't have a lot of power, even playing in Wrigley Field for nearly half his career. First basemen just cannot get away with that. He was an above-average hitter but not a great one.

Grace did have a brilliant 1989 National League Championship Series, batting .647/.682/1.118 in the five games, but this got largely ignored because (a) the Cubs lost and (b) NLCS MVP Will Clark actually hit slightly better.

Chipmaker's vote: No.

Prediction: popularity will grant Grace 18%, so he'll stay on the ballot, but he's not going anywhere.


8. Rickey Henderson

Writers ballot rookie.

Career: 25 seasons, 1979-2003 -- *Oakland Athletics 1979-84, '89-95, & '98, New York Yankees 1985-89, Toronto Blue Jays 1993, San Diego Padres 1996-97 & 2001, Anaheim Angels 1997, New York Mets 1999-2000, Seattle Mariners 2000, Boston Red Sox 2002, Los Angeles Dodgers 2003.
Peak season: 1990 -- 28 HR, 61 RBI, .325/.439/.577, 188 OPS+, 137 RC. Even for Rickey, that's a Yow! season.
Other outstanding seasons: 1981, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1987, 1992, 1993... this gets a little tedious.
Primary position: left field.
Honoraria and claims to fame: ...where to start? 1990 AL MVP, ten All-Star selections (seven starts), one AL Gold Glove for outfield, three AL Silver Sluggers. Led AL in on-base percentage once with many other Top Five finishes, runs five times, hits once, walks four times, stolen bases twelve times. Member of the 3000 Hits Club (3055). Major league record holder for runs scored (2295) and stolen bases (1406, with a huge margin, +468 over Brock), and single season stolen bases (130, 1982). Held the ML record for walks for three seasons (2001-03), taking it from Ruth, until Bonds walked past. Member of two World Series champions, the 1989 Athletics and the 1993 Blue Jays, and six other postseason teams.

Rickey was not only supremely great a player, he was entertaining as wildfire. Someone, probably Bill James, once wrote that if you could split Rickey in two, you'd have two Hall Of Fame players. Rickey is best known by his first name, a rare public distinction. Rickey destroyed, destroyed the Blue Jays in the 1989 ALCS. Rickey spoke of himself in the third person more often than not. Rickey made snatch catches in the outfield. Rickey posted a .401 career OBP, which ranks 13th over his career seasons, and is behind a bunch of HOFers or future HOFers (in order, Bonds, Thomas, Edgar Martinez, Giles, Giambi, Boggs, Manny Ramirez, Bagwell, Thome, Abreu, Chipper Jones, Olerud -- and if some of these guys play to age 44, they'll probably drop a good bit). Rickey not only stole by the bushel, he rarely got caught, 80.8% successful. Rickey proclaimed himself "the greatest" when he stole third to break Brock's career mark (a quote largely taken out of context, but for Rickey, it fit). Rickey was Ryan's 5000th strikeout victim. Rickey picked up his 3000th hit on the last day of the 2001 season, teammate Gwynn's last game, and Rickey asked if he should sit out and not possibly upstage the day (Gwynn told him to play). Rickey did this, Rickey did that... I'm sure I'm leaving out a lot of entertaining bits that probably only Rickey ever could have done.

Rickey Henderson could beat you in many ways, and often did. He was an electric player to watch on the diamond, a giver of good and confounding quote in the papers, and you never knew what he might do next, but it would help his team win.

I look forward to the most perplexing acceptance speech in Hall history next summer. God Bless Rickey Henderson. We need another like him in uniform -- but he was a one-and-only.

Chipmaker's vote: Yes.

Prediction: This will be Rickey's only ballot, as he storms in with 93%.

Part 2 soon.

The Golden Anniversary Road Trip -- part 7 & last

Day 7 (Mon. 12/01)

Lubbock to Austin -- home!

The Lubbock sunrise again greeted us with squadrons of sandhill cranes; Val loved it. And again the La Q fed us well. Everyone showered, we packed quickly, and were off for the final push home by 10:30. We decided to follow the same roads home we had taken to reach Lubbock -- which was not the route I mapped out, but was easier (if a bit longer), driving Route 87 all the way to Brady, then 71 to Austin.

Last minute edit #1: this is a fairly new La Quinta, less than a year old, and every bed has a memory-foam style mattresses, a material which was developed by NASA. A clerk told me this is the only hotel in the chain with only these beds. They are quite comfy, but it's easy to sleep without ever rolling, thus cramping an arm, and the mattresses have no "give" at all -- no springs to feedback bounce, so the recumbent individual has to do all the work, scooching over or getting up. It takes getting used to. I'd tried them in stores but never had slept on one before.

South of Lubbock -- well, north as well, really -- is cotton country. I waited for an opportunity, and finally a tiny rest pullover appeared, and we stopped for a bit. We took pictures of the cotton fields and closeups of the cotton bolls. We even picked two small branches with cotton blooming, something I normally do not condone, but this was for Amalie's show and tell so it's educational. It was fun, and a short break from the road is always welcome, but we got dozens of sticker burrs on our shoes and pants.

Amalie stands in not-very-tall cotton.

Puffy!

The sparse towns rolled by -- Tahoka, Lamesa, Big Spring. We pulled over here for lunch, which was pleasant if unmemorable. Off again, we were this time prepared and eager to see the wind farm in the daylight. Sure enough, we soon saw the giant turbines come into view. One row stretched right across the highway, the nearest tower maybe 100 yards to the west (it's hard to estimate the distance, there's nothing for comparison or scale). We stopped for pictures, and just to admire these spinning giants. I couldn't hear them at all. Not only are the turbines efficient and effective, they are majestic. We saw many more for many miles, mostly along a ridge to the west but some eastward.

I love these things.

More power to you.

Last minute edit #2: In addition to the giant turbines, there were plenty of oil pumps, some running (the summer's price hike had made turning on just about any well profitable again, and even with prices down, some are still worth keeping in operation, apparently). So, within just a few acres, it was possible to witness industries from the 19th (cotton), 20th (oil), and 21st (wind) centuries. Cool.

More miles ticked past. Sterling City, then San Angelo. We stopped to tank up, gas below $1.50/gallon. The day was getting long and we wanted to give the kids a stretch. I managed to spot a schoolyard about two blocks off our main road, and found it without too much doubling back. It had a big playscape and a large athletic field. The kids got plenty of air time, running about, Amie doing the monkey bars, Carson finding his treasures -- beads, bits of plastic, and so forth. Val took a stroll down the field, then told me to as well. It was a good stretch, get some blood pumping, and the skies were clear and sunny, though it was still windy. We rounded up the kids after more than a half-hour, and got back in the Civic.

We passed through Eden, and at Brady we turned on to Route 71, which would take us all the way back to Austin. The sun went down, and the evening skies gave us a spectacular show -- the waxing crescent moon riding near to Venus and Jupiter. While astronomically insignificant, it was a delightful show, and gave a good sense of interplanetary scale. (And although it looked like a "frowny face" here, it appeared as a smiley face Down Under.)

Llano appeared just before 7:00, and hurray! Cooper's was still open. Both kids had dozed off, so I placed a take-out order -- beef ribs, brisket, pork ribs, potato salad, and an ear of corn for Carson. We were underway again within minutes, seventy-five miles from home.

We reached the Travis County line, then Austin's city limits. We stopped for cash. We stopped for milk. We didn't need anything else immediately. We turned into our neighborhood, our street, our driveway. It was around 8:30. Home at last, a really great trip, but glad it was over and we were back.

The barbecue was fantastic.

The Golden Anniversary Road Trip -- part 6

Day 6 (Sun. 11/30)

Angel Fire to Lubbock

Busy packing-up morning. I was up early, like usual, and used the time to remount the roof rack, which I had taken off and stashed in the garage so it wouldn't get soaked by the snow. Most of the cleaning-up was done, but there was breakfast to serve, so we weren't quite done yet. After I had eaten, I went down to our room, and walked in with a "time to get up, sleepyheads!" Val roused first, and the kids slowly surfaced as well. Val had wanted to have a quick walkabout with me, so we bundled up and headed out, over the walkway, down the slope, through the gate and into the lane. At the drive, I noticed the last of Jenny's signs, taped to a rock and almost completely covered in snow, so I collected that. Val wanted to show me the fish hole in the pond ice that she and the kids had observed the day before, but it had frozen over completely. The morning was sunny, the snow bright on the trees, a good time to take some fresh air. Back to the lodge, and Val stopped by the kitchen for coffee while I went down to get more packing done.

The Wright Family Lodge really is a showcase.

Looking down into Angel Fire.

It was time to leave and head for home. We have one distinct disadvantage -- all the other cousins are older. Tell 'em to pack up, and they do. Not so with young'uns, they have to be packed for, so it takes us a good bit longer to be ready to leave. But, in bits and pieces, Val and I got items packed and zipped, and I got most everything out into the garage in one convenient pile. Some things went up in the roof rack, other items into the trunk, fitting together like a puzzle. Some stuff gets parked in the back seat, mostly blankets and pillows and toys and games, and a few things go by Val's feet in the passenger well, including a supply of leftover-turkey sandwiches, courtesy of Jenny, who made several dozen for everyone. After the biggest things were stowed, Val took over, and assorted family members helped haul everything out to the car to expedite our final departure. Just before 11:00 am, I pulled out of the drive and began poking down the snowy mountain road.

We are outta here!

Driving wasn't slick, the snow crunchy, but with only front-wheel drive and the kids aboard, I took it exceptionally easy, pulling over to let the last three vehicles of our caravan pull ahead. About halfway down, we regained the paved road, and the driving was all the clearer, the snow more melted here. Before we reached the town proper, both kids found the Christmas cards Uncle John had secretly stashed, each loaded with two $20 bills. Arriving at the mountain bottom and town, we caught up the others, who were placing the last loads of our trash into a municipal dumpster (we were told this was standard practice in Angel Fire, no collection up the mountains); even burning paper trash in the fireplace, we had many bags of rubbish, but we responsibly did our part and left the lodge clean. We pulled to, and the kids cried out a "Thank you!" to John.

Val wanted to see a bit of the actual town, maybe get some souvenirs, so I turned north on the main road toward a store I had seen while riding to Taos. Unfortunately, being a Sunday, the store was closed, drat. Just as we were about to turn south, the others drove by, Mike giving a two-handed wave (despite being the driver), so that was our final farewell to the extended family.

We headed out of Angel Fire, admiring the snow-covered ski slopes along the way, beautiful tall pine country.

About ten, fifteen miles along, I realized I had completely forgotten something. I told Val what it was, and after discussing it for a few minutes, she sagely advised that, if I was still dithering about whether or not to turn back, it was important enough to turn back. So we did.

Through Angel Fire once again, we turned onto Route 64 toward Taos, and a mile further along, reached my special destination -- a classic National Forest Service sign for, yes, really, Carson National Forest. We took pictures. It was cold and windy, but Carson was a great sport about it, even when I perched him high atop the sign (Val stood behind, helping steady him, though he was at little risk of falling).

Everyone needs a place in the world.

Back through Angel Fire one last time, my mental miscue had cost us not quite an hour; not painful, but not very efficient either. Ah well, onward. The weather delivered us some snow flurries as we motored through the valley, but nothing challenging. Finally 434 twisted back into the tight canyon, but this time we got to see it in fully lit splendor, and it is a gorgeous drive. We started out high on the western side but were soon, without it being at all obvious, down near the canyon bottom, a rocky creek alongside or under us. A bank of very rude huts -- basically shacks with a door and a window -- must be, we reasoned, a fishing camp, because they were the most basic and utilitarian design, for people who are there to sleep and fish. We spotted a beaver dam hard by the road, backing up the creek so much that it swelled and overflowed almost onto the pavement. The canyon eventually gave way to wider valley and tiny towns, but along that stretch, was simply stunning, a driving delight.

Pastoral, frosty canyon creek (Coyote Creek, apparently).

"It's the second week of deer camp, and all the guys are here,
We drink, play cards, and shoot the bull, but never shoot no deer,
The only time we leave the camp is when we go for beer,
The second week of deer camp is da greatest time of year!"

If this is not a beaver dam, it's one huge clump of debris.
Note water foreground, almost flowing on to the road.

The day stayed cold through Mora and Las Vegas, with scattered flurries, and the wind picking up as we left the higher lands and got back to prairie driving. On I-40 we stopped at the lone Stuckey's along our way. I remember this roadside chain mainly from the east coast, where they popped up frequently along I-95 between Connecticut and Florida, during my childhood. My mom loved the coconut patties, but alas, none were to be found here. Carson spent some (too much, in my opinion) of Uncle John's gift on a toy car, because this is what he does at his age, and it is his money. We passed around the turkey sandwiches, which were a treat compared to standard road food, and were back on the road.

Reaching Ft. Sumner, the Valero we had fueled at during the drive up was closed, their computers down (according to the signs), so the gas station across the street was having a boom night. As I fueled up, I listened to fellow drivers; one was complaining that he had enjoyed tee-shirt weather in Albuquerque (we were in jacket-class cold and wind) but was heading east. The other mentioned that there was snow in Clovis, the last town in New Mexico heading east, and she was glad to be heading the other way. This wasn't the happiest news to me, as that was our route for the night (it was almost sunset), but there was nothing for it. Gassed up, and with road snacks to sustain us, we resolved to push on, Lubbock our night's goal.

Carson soon drifted off, assuring we would follow our plan of not stopping for an evening meal.

Approaching Cannon AFB and Clovis, we did run into snow -- flurries again. Heavier at times, but not sticking or accumulating at all. We crossed into Texas, and our road, Route 84, promptly turned to the southeast. The flurries were soon behind us; they were only a nuisance, but one I didn't miss.

We pushed on through the Texas landscape, the cold and wind unabated. Little towns -- Muleshoe, Sudan, Littlefield, Shallowater, mostly cotton country. And then, Lubbock. We took our custom to the La Quinta again (much easier to find this time, just one exit down the loop). We checked in at a robust 9:00 pm (rather than midnight, as on the way up), and I went out to forage for late dinner, which a burger joint provided. At rest for the balance of the evening, appetites satisfied, we one by one fell over, one day still to home.